How the HELL is this flamebait? I just don't see it. I'm simply correcting, what I thought was a fairly flippent analogy. This is the second time in two days that a post of mine has been marked as flamebait, and the last one was purely statistical analysis. I'm starting to think that someone's going around marking a bunch of random posts flamebait. I've been on Slashdot for over 2 years, and I've only been marked flamebait ONCE before (it's going to happen every so often to all of us), but this is rediculous. Someone please explain how anything I said is baiting, in the slightest?
Never-the-less... standing up a date is an assholic thing to do. I've been pretty hurt by it a few times. Maybe you haven't, but it's not only hurtfull, but incredibly cowardly. What apple did, as much as I like them as a company, was very cowardly, and Cisco is just pointing that out. What are you suggesting, they "take it like a man?" if every company spouted that kind of machismo mantra, we'd never get anywhere.
The point is, it's good to see company's negotiate... which is why Apple dragged Google, Yahoo, and Cingular execs up on stage with them. Sure, it was a publicity stunt, but the execs wouldn't have agreed to be there if they didn't feel it was a good thing, which is a positive step. Suddenly hearing that while they cow-towted their negotiations with these companies, but totally stood up Cisco Sys, really puts a black eye on their whole "working together" mantra.
Cisco has a right to be pissed, and they have an equal right to complain.
I'm a huge apple fan, I'm writing this from an old titanium power book, and since buying it, I've only become a bigger and bigger fan of the company... but the iPhone has some really big problems, and while at first I was drooling over the thing, it's reception among the masses has been very confusing. It's being hailed as a great gadget that noone wants to buy. This thing reeks of a PS3-type mentality. I just wish there was some hope of them drastically making some alterations before June, but once Apple makes an announcement, they hardly ever back down... especially from something this huge.
I'm not sure I agree that it has gotten worse. Their original "all in one" (with no alternatives) mantra was pretty bad. But then they changed it, and now many of their computers allow for external monitors.
The fact is, it is VERY hard to ensure compatability to a computer open to 3rd party addons. It's a give and take sorta thing. They openned it up to 3rd party monitor usage, and PCI compatability, but then they chose to crack down on other areas, to make up for the loss in consistancy. In many ways, by going Unix, it was a big step away from lock-in vending.
You want to see atrocious lock-in vending? Go back and use a corporate Windows computer again (like I have to do at my job). Our engineers won't allow us to turn off our computers at night, because then they can't recieve windows updates. Every time I download a new piece of software, a big insidious message pops up telling me that it is not a program directly endorsed by microsoft, and therefor could destroy my computer. Layers upon layers of OS gimmicks have made it "unncessary" (and more difficult) to access my programs directory. Not to mention, the newest version of Windows Media Player, has completely removed any media conversion features. A coworker (actually the head boss) had accidently saved a bunch of audio files as WMAs, which were incompatable with some of the software I was using... and I was fucked. Thanks for the "upgrade" Microsoft... fuckin assholes.
Sorry, I'm very bitter, right now. Excuse me if I'm not exactly going to jump on board this arguement of how Apple is just as bad as Microsoft. Try using windows for a few weeks, it'll bring you to your senses, they're nowhere close. It just reeks of lock-in, everywhere, and it wont let you forget about it for a second.
I agree, but the 6 would have had to be very tightly worked out before hand.
For one thing, either Anakin or Luke would have had to not been refered to as "Skywalker", probably Luke, since it's very easy to explain why he has a different last name (all a part of his mothers plan to hide him away).
Secondly, Anakin couldn't have been Obi Wan's only pupil, and the only Jedi trainee depicted in the first 3 episodes. I think this could have been very effective... having Anakin not so much as a main character, but one out of a few jedi trainees... the one who eventually turns to the dark side, and kills the others. This would have made Obi-Wan's "Darth Vader killed your father" statement that much more complicated in the 4th movie. The audience could have been partially lead to think that Luke is the son of one of the other students instead. I'm not talking "Star Wars Acadamy" style storyline, or a high-school drama (a trap it could fall into quite badly), but maybe that there are 3 or 4 students, though Anakin and one other student are taken under Obi-Wan's wing and eventually Anakin kills the other.
My biggest issue with the first 3 movies isn't with Jar-Jar, but with the decision to make Anakin a very unlikable character right off that bat. I didn't mind him as a little kid, as much as other people did... he was a bit bratty, sure, but he was still a kid, and some good people were brats when they were children. But then he's depicted as a hot-headed youth which makes rash decisions, and is generally fairly unlikeable. I would have liked to have seen the transition from a warmer, kinder Anakin, who was so intent on saving everyone, that he is seduced by the Dark Side, originally intending to use it for good (which was sort of implied, but completely unbelievable). The current story makes Obi-Wan's statement about "The man who was your father ceased to exist", a bit watered down... since Anakin is sort of made out to be "Darth Vader light" from the beginning, it just takes him getting pushed over the edge a bit. You didn't feel bad, at all, when he was turned, it was more of a "no shit" sensation.
I agree that those numbers seem extremely fabricated, but the "where's the multi-billionare porn pruducers?" arguement doesn't mean anything. The fact is, porn companies are small, but there are a LOT OF THEM. Damn, you got a hot chick who's willing to fuck you in your daddy's basement in front of a Canon GL2, and you have a reasonable distrobution system... you can be as big as any major porn producer. People aren't concerned with things in porn that cost money: acting, video editting, lighting, audio mixing, special effects. No, as Jeff Foxworthy says, "A guy just wants to have a beer, and see something Necked". I'm exadurating a little, to be sure (lighting makes a WHOLE lot of difference in porn), but until there are blockbuster porn videos, there are going to be no porn multi-billionares.
Good points. To tell the truth, no, I don't LIKE the sales data, of course, but more than that... I still don't buy it. It just doesn't add up. All the reports we've been hearing, shipping numbers, sales figures, the anecdotes, suggest a trend that this data isn't reflecting. It's like votes in an election that don't reflect the exit poles. I'm not suggesting that the slashdotter who posted these made it up, but there's so much more to data than raw points. It's so easy to inflate data one way or another, and we're seeing such data. The time period is a big ???, as it is possibly the most oddball sales week of the year, one expects very strange figures to appear. Secondly, here we have a fairly legitimate, and seemingly non-biased article suggesting that Wiis are outselling PS3s 3:1. Notice how there are no statements about how the PS3 is going to die, or how much it sucks, or how much the people who love PS3s are wrong. Now, look at the lonely slashdot post that suggests otherwise... no link, and includes an statement that is obviously biased on the matter, with a bit of a knock against popular opinion. It's more hotheaded... and thus leads me to believe that it is the one more likely to be erronious.
One is, I'm not expecting them to switch, I'm expecting them to go non-exclusive and release for both... which more and more game developers are doing anyway these days. There is little incentive to go exlusive these days, and no consumer will be pissed off. Secondly, FF12 and FF13 are not in the same generation. FF9 and FFX were pretty close together (about a year and a half), but they're not in the same generation, either.
Okay... I was wondering what broadband modems had to do with game consoles... I have yet to hear a DS Lite refered to as a "DSL" because of obvious confusion.
I notice you're from Alaska, and I can back that up (from Fairbanks). Here at the local Fred Meyers (Pacific Northwest Kroger-owned big box store), there have been the same 3 PS3s on the shelves for almost a week now (according to the sales clerks), they've been there every time I was there. I haven't even seen a Wii since I bought one there at launch. Hell, SIXAXIS controllers are danging on the racks, while even the Wii POINT GIFT CARDS are flying off the rack! I haven't seen a Wiimote, VCC, or Nunchuck since launch, and the clerks tell me they last a few hours at most.
This is one of the smallest markets in the contry. Neilson rates it 203 out of something like 211, and usually demand is much higher than supply (due to slow shipping), especially in electronics. If I hear that there are PS3s sitting on shelves in Times Square, and there are PS3s sitting on shelves in Fairbanks, Alaska, I think it's not too much to assume that they're pretty much sitting on shelves in most markets, as well. Oh, Fairbanks is full of rich fuckers too, with way too much time on their hands, and can't have any outdoor life. Video games are big here. PS3s still can't sell.
Ummmm, firstly, that data is completely pointless: the holidays are still pretty big in Japan, and that's directly after the Holidays, which are usually some of the most dismal and scued sales of the year.
Secondly, I don't believe that data for a second... 108 DSs? Every other study I've seen shows DSs outselling most of the large consoles almost 2:1, and by an even wider margin in Japan. How the hell do you explain the figure that shows the DS being outsold by the PSP by a 680:1 margin, when the DS has been selling about 40% more than the PSP? Hell, by that figure, the now dead GameCube is outselling the currently exploding DS 8:1. Anyone can cook up sales figures, and those are some of the most laughably unrealistic figures I've ever seen. So excuse me while I choose not to believe a single number in there.
Well, FF12 was still only one disc (surprisingly), and we went up to four discs (FF8 & FF9), and noone really had any complaints at all about that (actually, I sorta miss the multi-disc days). FF13, even being HD, I can't imagine being more than 2 or 3 times the size of FF12. We've already started seeing 2DVD RPGs... even though I believe most of them to be due to incredibly bad organization on the part of the developer. Why the hell is Grandia III on 2 DVDs, when it has practically NO FMVs, while FF12 is absolutely immense, both in graphics and in physical size, and fits on only one. Hell, I remember playing Riven, in which you had to switch back and forth between one of 5 CDs, depending upon which era you were in... now THAT was obnoxious. But swiching discs once every 15 hours means nothing to anyone... that will not be a factor in determining which system to develop the game for.
An interesting side note: in every game, the entire game is stored on each disc, the only difference is the FMVs, which take up, preportionally a magnitude more space. The acceptions are the final discs of FF8 and FF9, in which they were forced to remove some dungeons (all, in the case of FF8), in a "point of no return" fashion, due to the incredibly lengthy (and amazing, I might add), ending FMV sequences.
Oh, I wouldn't doubt it in the least... in fact, I'm just sitting around waiting for a 360 announcement of FF13. The way I see it, it's pretty much inevitable.
Basically, where Square goes, Japan will follow, including the rest of the RPG-centered developers. They know that. The 360 is cheaper, which means that if it is successful, Square stand to sell a lot more units of their games. Final Fantasy is absolutely huge in the US, as well, which looks to be going totally 360. They don't have a lot to lose by it either. I very highly doubt that (as they did with Nintendo with FF7) they will pull their PS3 version, as that would piss off a lot of fans, and wouldn't really do them any good. They ditched the exclusivity of FF11 even after it was exclusively released for the PS2. Coding makes up about only 5% or so of the work that goes into an RPG, adding another 5% to possibly double their sales, would simply be common sense.
What do companies get out of exclusivity rights? Anyway? Obviously the hardware manufacturer's give them a better deal, but I can't imagine that it's all that much, especially when so many titles these days are released without exclusivity contracts.
Furthermore, the 360 is no longer the "meathead machine" that the original XBox is. It's stylish, even elegant, and seems to be aimed at a much wider variety of games (including some hard core Japanese RPGs). It might take some time to catch on, but like the iPod, the 360 could become the next hot item in Japan, virtually over night, if all the pieces fell into place.
I'm not up to date on what Microsoft is rumored to be up to, but doesn't this contradict Bill's current statement? Adding an HDMI port and harddrive capacity, while keeping the price the same, would ONLY compete with Sony, as it would only interest die-hard videophyles. Microsoft were (moderately) intelligent this time around, in that they added HD because they realized it could be a major draw down the line, but they didn't stake their entire wellbeing on it. If anything, Sony's current situation shows that people really don't care as much about the highest quality video, as much Sony wanted to believe... why would Microsoft go and add these things, when they have the opportunity to pull in A LOT more buyers in by lowering the price of their systems by $50. The incentives to add HDMI (which costs a pretty penny, mind you), just aren't there.
Neither Square nor Kojami have proven to be especially loyal to any one company (Square, especially, which already seems to be jumping ship). I'm just waiting for the day, 6 months down the line, when Square announces that they've been working on a 360 version of FF13. It would simply be Final Fantasy 7 all over again, with previews and press releases about it's exclusivity on the N64, only to freak out when Nintendo chose the wrong media format (sound familiar?) and switch providers.
Think about it, it would be really silly not to at least develop a game for two systems, if you have the resources. Then, you can take your pick as to which one will be more profitable. RPGs are about 95% artistry and design (especially FF13, which is going back to turn-based gameplay), and about 5% code. So, just tack on another 5% coding for a second version, and you're a lot safer. These companies are pouring millions into these projects, for one of them to not sell well simply because the console they chose to make it for didn't cash in, would be devestating. If this were Dragon Quest (which they have completely ditched Sony, btw), I'd be cautious, since DQ is much much bigger in Japan, where the 360 doesn't do very well, but America is a pretty big Final Fantasy stronghold. If they were to release FF13 for the 360, it could utterly destroy the PS3, but who cares? I have not heard of any other major projects announced specifically for that console... they seem to be mostly concentrating on the DS, anyway.
Nope, the actual numbers for PS3s sold by the end of the year (which were posted here about a week ago), were in the neighborhood of $750k, give or take a few $10k. At absolute most, $800k, but that's being very hopefull.
Who knows what Gates is trying to accomplish by admitting this, but obviously, the statement wouldn't have been made if it didn't help microsoft. This statement only helps to legitimize the Wii as a successful console, which, at first glance, doesn't seem like something a "competitor" would want to have happen. The bottom line is, Nintendo is not Microsoft's main competition, simply because no competitor would help to legitimize his competitions accomplishments. Obviously, they don't view the Wii as much of a threat. Here are a few possible explanations:
The 360/Wii combo effect - Microsoft seems to be heavily pushing the idea of people buying both the 360 AND the Wii together. This way, if the Wii is a runnaway success, Microsoft, as the "supporters" of it, can come away with some more sales.
One possibility, is that, frankly, Microsoft isn't really as worried about Nintendo as they are about Sony. Microsoft figures that the psychographics are different enough between themselves and Nintendo, and similar enough between themselves and Sony, that Sony is still the main competition.
Other Areas - Microsoft may be so set on taking down Sony (due to competition from them in other areas outside of video games), that they are willing to "team up" a bit with Nintendo in order to bring Sony's reputation down. Even if their legitimization of the Wii hurts 360 sales in the end, they may well make up for it in other areas such as HD media (which Microsoft seems to have invested into HD-DVD to at least some degree), when Sony falls from grace.
Nintendo is easier to compete against - Nintendo is tinsy compared to Sony and Microsoft... but they have a hot product. If Microsoft can ensure Nintendo's success over Sony in this round, they'll make for much easier competition next round.
Bottom line is, this is pretty uncharacteristic of Microsoft and Mr. Gates to make any sort of possitive statement about any corporation or product not of their making. The first thing that comes to mind is, "what does he have up his sleeve?" This is too chivilrous a gesture to actually be taken at face value. And I doubt they really believe that being "good guys" is going to win them enough points to make it worthwhile.
Are you kidding me? At first, yes, I thought the PS3 looked cool, but Nintendo and Microsoft have come up with some very ELEGENT looking consoles. The PS3 doesn't scream quality, it simply screams for attention. Compared to the 360 and Wii, the PS3 looks clunky and frivilous. The curved surfaces are nice enough, but then there's the edges, which are blocky and off-putting. We are entering a renniassance of the "form follows function" mentality. The iPod, DS, Wii, and 360 all have taken similar design trends (besides the fact that they're all white)... they're all very non-threatening, while remaining elegant and utilitarian.
Consider the forms of the time:
We lived through the 70s and 80s, where silver was badass because of it's "heavy metal" flare. Then the 90s, in which all electronics went black as a way of seeming mysterious, and making their LEDs stick out more, looking more "high tech". But that was childish too. Now, everyone wants to play down their electronics, and are becoming so comfortable with them that they want to be able to fit them into their everyday lives without making a scene. The Wii fits right in on your bookshelf, and is very inconspicous. The 360 is a little less so, and shows off a little more character, but it is still a fairly simple geometric design with some subtle curves and subdued LEDs. The PS3, on the other hand, seems to scream for attention, and looks a little like the 1960s representation of a space ship: an "ominous toy." It has the negative impact of being a bit "toyish", while not gaining the "friendliness" that toyishness tends to carry with it. It's still stuck in the mid-90s "sleak, black, and high contrast" mentality. Even when shown in white or silver, the device's form is a bit too brash.
It's ironic that the LEAST toyish looking console is the Wii.
Heros, Lost, Office, CSI, Law & Order... those are Nielson biggies. Heros may be the only thing that can save NBC. I think it's fair to say that these (and others) are the biggest shows from the networks.
That's not fanyboyism in the slightest; it's the truth... and if you can't see otherwise, from our perspective 10 years in the future, than you're blind. Sega didn't start working on the 3D chipset until well into the Saturn's developement... and the other's? lLet's just say they had NO CLUE about what they were doing. Sony had the advantage of originally working hand in hand with Nintendo on what was supposed to become the SNES CD, so they were about as knowledgable as a seasoned video game hardware manufacture by the time they released the Playstation.
The Playstation 2 had no competition when it began (not much, the DreamCast was already floudering), and it did very well, so discussing the success of the previous two Sony consoles is neither stupid or fanboyism. Now, if you can't see that the PS3 is falling on it's face, on the other hand, is akin to halocost denial, as far as Slashdot is concerned.
Also, the Playstation, as well as the XBox, were each the company's first system, so there were no expectations of how well the systems would do. Now Sony and Microsoft have a very strong video game presence, and every time they falter, all eyes will be on them. There is an advantage to being a first-timer in the console industry, in that everyone knows that you can only go up from there (or just not take off at all). The PS3 is in a downward spiral, as far as I'm concerned; comparing it to the Playstation launch is completely silly.
Slashdot Mirror
How the HELL is this flamebait? I just don't see it. I'm simply correcting, what I thought was a fairly flippent analogy. This is the second time in two days that a post of mine has been marked as flamebait, and the last one was purely statistical analysis. I'm starting to think that someone's going around marking a bunch of random posts flamebait. I've been on Slashdot for over 2 years, and I've only been marked flamebait ONCE before (it's going to happen every so often to all of us), but this is rediculous. Someone please explain how anything I said is baiting, in the slightest?
Never-the-less... standing up a date is an assholic thing to do. I've been pretty hurt by it a few times. Maybe you haven't, but it's not only hurtfull, but incredibly cowardly. What apple did, as much as I like them as a company, was very cowardly, and Cisco is just pointing that out. What are you suggesting, they "take it like a man?" if every company spouted that kind of machismo mantra, we'd never get anywhere.
The point is, it's good to see company's negotiate... which is why Apple dragged Google, Yahoo, and Cingular execs up on stage with them. Sure, it was a publicity stunt, but the execs wouldn't have agreed to be there if they didn't feel it was a good thing, which is a positive step. Suddenly hearing that while they cow-towted their negotiations with these companies, but totally stood up Cisco Sys, really puts a black eye on their whole "working together" mantra.
Cisco has a right to be pissed, and they have an equal right to complain.
I'm a huge apple fan, I'm writing this from an old titanium power book, and since buying it, I've only become a bigger and bigger fan of the company... but the iPhone has some really big problems, and while at first I was drooling over the thing, it's reception among the masses has been very confusing. It's being hailed as a great gadget that noone wants to buy. This thing reeks of a PS3-type mentality. I just wish there was some hope of them drastically making some alterations before June, but once Apple makes an announcement, they hardly ever back down... especially from something this huge.
I'm not sure I agree that it has gotten worse. Their original "all in one" (with no alternatives) mantra was pretty bad. But then they changed it, and now many of their computers allow for external monitors.
The fact is, it is VERY hard to ensure compatability to a computer open to 3rd party addons. It's a give and take sorta thing. They openned it up to 3rd party monitor usage, and PCI compatability, but then they chose to crack down on other areas, to make up for the loss in consistancy. In many ways, by going Unix, it was a big step away from lock-in vending.
You want to see atrocious lock-in vending? Go back and use a corporate Windows computer again (like I have to do at my job). Our engineers won't allow us to turn off our computers at night, because then they can't recieve windows updates. Every time I download a new piece of software, a big insidious message pops up telling me that it is not a program directly endorsed by microsoft, and therefor could destroy my computer. Layers upon layers of OS gimmicks have made it "unncessary" (and more difficult) to access my programs directory. Not to mention, the newest version of Windows Media Player, has completely removed any media conversion features. A coworker (actually the head boss) had accidently saved a bunch of audio files as WMAs, which were incompatable with some of the software I was using... and I was fucked. Thanks for the "upgrade" Microsoft... fuckin assholes.
Sorry, I'm very bitter, right now. Excuse me if I'm not exactly going to jump on board this arguement of how Apple is just as bad as Microsoft. Try using windows for a few weeks, it'll bring you to your senses, they're nowhere close. It just reeks of lock-in, everywhere, and it wont let you forget about it for a second.
Don't ask... it's too painful to think about. ;)
I agree, but the 6 would have had to be very tightly worked out before hand.
For one thing, either Anakin or Luke would have had to not been refered to as "Skywalker", probably Luke, since it's very easy to explain why he has a different last name (all a part of his mothers plan to hide him away).
Secondly, Anakin couldn't have been Obi Wan's only pupil, and the only Jedi trainee depicted in the first 3 episodes. I think this could have been very effective... having Anakin not so much as a main character, but one out of a few jedi trainees... the one who eventually turns to the dark side, and kills the others. This would have made Obi-Wan's "Darth Vader killed your father" statement that much more complicated in the 4th movie. The audience could have been partially lead to think that Luke is the son of one of the other students instead. I'm not talking "Star Wars Acadamy" style storyline, or a high-school drama (a trap it could fall into quite badly), but maybe that there are 3 or 4 students, though Anakin and one other student are taken under Obi-Wan's wing and eventually Anakin kills the other.
My biggest issue with the first 3 movies isn't with Jar-Jar, but with the decision to make Anakin a very unlikable character right off that bat. I didn't mind him as a little kid, as much as other people did... he was a bit bratty, sure, but he was still a kid, and some good people were brats when they were children. But then he's depicted as a hot-headed youth which makes rash decisions, and is generally fairly unlikeable. I would have liked to have seen the transition from a warmer, kinder Anakin, who was so intent on saving everyone, that he is seduced by the Dark Side, originally intending to use it for good (which was sort of implied, but completely unbelievable). The current story makes Obi-Wan's statement about "The man who was your father ceased to exist", a bit watered down... since Anakin is sort of made out to be "Darth Vader light" from the beginning, it just takes him getting pushed over the edge a bit. You didn't feel bad, at all, when he was turned, it was more of a "no shit" sensation.
I agree that those numbers seem extremely fabricated, but the "where's the multi-billionare porn pruducers?" arguement doesn't mean anything. The fact is, porn companies are small, but there are a LOT OF THEM. Damn, you got a hot chick who's willing to fuck you in your daddy's basement in front of a Canon GL2, and you have a reasonable distrobution system... you can be as big as any major porn producer. People aren't concerned with things in porn that cost money: acting, video editting, lighting, audio mixing, special effects. No, as Jeff Foxworthy says, "A guy just wants to have a beer, and see something Necked". I'm exadurating a little, to be sure (lighting makes a WHOLE lot of difference in porn), but until there are blockbuster porn videos, there are going to be no porn multi-billionares.
Or a priest saying, "The PSP, it's almost as good as little boys!"
They even rape each other, like what media division did to the gaming division with the PS3:
"You're gonna use BluRay, and you're gonna LIKE IT, Bitch! You like it mean and dirty like that, little girly! Oh yeah!"
More like, "She's there, she's naked, and probably wants to fuck every guy in the room BUT you."
Good points. To tell the truth, no, I don't LIKE the sales data, of course, but more than that... I still don't buy it. It just doesn't add up. All the reports we've been hearing, shipping numbers, sales figures, the anecdotes, suggest a trend that this data isn't reflecting. It's like votes in an election that don't reflect the exit poles. I'm not suggesting that the slashdotter who posted these made it up, but there's so much more to data than raw points. It's so easy to inflate data one way or another, and we're seeing such data. The time period is a big ???, as it is possibly the most oddball sales week of the year, one expects very strange figures to appear. Secondly, here we have a fairly legitimate, and seemingly non-biased article suggesting that Wiis are outselling PS3s 3:1. Notice how there are no statements about how the PS3 is going to die, or how much it sucks, or how much the people who love PS3s are wrong. Now, look at the lonely slashdot post that suggests otherwise... no link, and includes an statement that is obviously biased on the matter, with a bit of a knock against popular opinion. It's more hotheaded... and thus leads me to believe that it is the one more likely to be erronious.
Two things:
One is, I'm not expecting them to switch, I'm expecting them to go non-exclusive and release for both... which more and more game developers are doing anyway these days. There is little incentive to go exlusive these days, and no consumer will be pissed off. Secondly, FF12 and FF13 are not in the same generation. FF9 and FFX were pretty close together (about a year and a half), but they're not in the same generation, either.
Okay... I was wondering what broadband modems had to do with game consoles... I have yet to hear a DS Lite refered to as a "DSL" because of obvious confusion.
I notice you're from Alaska, and I can back that up (from Fairbanks). Here at the local Fred Meyers (Pacific Northwest Kroger-owned big box store), there have been the same 3 PS3s on the shelves for almost a week now (according to the sales clerks), they've been there every time I was there. I haven't even seen a Wii since I bought one there at launch. Hell, SIXAXIS controllers are danging on the racks, while even the Wii POINT GIFT CARDS are flying off the rack! I haven't seen a Wiimote, VCC, or Nunchuck since launch, and the clerks tell me they last a few hours at most.
This is one of the smallest markets in the contry. Neilson rates it 203 out of something like 211, and usually demand is much higher than supply (due to slow shipping), especially in electronics. If I hear that there are PS3s sitting on shelves in Times Square, and there are PS3s sitting on shelves in Fairbanks, Alaska, I think it's not too much to assume that they're pretty much sitting on shelves in most markets, as well. Oh, Fairbanks is full of rich fuckers too, with way too much time on their hands, and can't have any outdoor life. Video games are big here. PS3s still can't sell.
Ummmm, firstly, that data is completely pointless: the holidays are still pretty big in Japan, and that's directly after the Holidays, which are usually some of the most dismal and scued sales of the year.
Secondly, I don't believe that data for a second... 108 DSs? Every other study I've seen shows DSs outselling most of the large consoles almost 2:1, and by an even wider margin in Japan. How the hell do you explain the figure that shows the DS being outsold by the PSP by a 680:1 margin, when the DS has been selling about 40% more than the PSP? Hell, by that figure, the now dead GameCube is outselling the currently exploding DS 8:1. Anyone can cook up sales figures, and those are some of the most laughably unrealistic figures I've ever seen. So excuse me while I choose not to believe a single number in there.
...unbelievable
Well, FF12 was still only one disc (surprisingly), and we went up to four discs (FF8 & FF9), and noone really had any complaints at all about that (actually, I sorta miss the multi-disc days). FF13, even being HD, I can't imagine being more than 2 or 3 times the size of FF12. We've already started seeing 2DVD RPGs... even though I believe most of them to be due to incredibly bad organization on the part of the developer. Why the hell is Grandia III on 2 DVDs, when it has practically NO FMVs, while FF12 is absolutely immense, both in graphics and in physical size, and fits on only one. Hell, I remember playing Riven, in which you had to switch back and forth between one of 5 CDs, depending upon which era you were in... now THAT was obnoxious. But swiching discs once every 15 hours means nothing to anyone... that will not be a factor in determining which system to develop the game for.
An interesting side note: in every game, the entire game is stored on each disc, the only difference is the FMVs, which take up, preportionally a magnitude more space. The acceptions are the final discs of FF8 and FF9, in which they were forced to remove some dungeons (all, in the case of FF8), in a "point of no return" fashion, due to the incredibly lengthy (and amazing, I might add), ending FMV sequences.
Oh, I wouldn't doubt it in the least... in fact, I'm just sitting around waiting for a 360 announcement of FF13. The way I see it, it's pretty much inevitable.
Basically, where Square goes, Japan will follow, including the rest of the RPG-centered developers. They know that. The 360 is cheaper, which means that if it is successful, Square stand to sell a lot more units of their games. Final Fantasy is absolutely huge in the US, as well, which looks to be going totally 360. They don't have a lot to lose by it either. I very highly doubt that (as they did with Nintendo with FF7) they will pull their PS3 version, as that would piss off a lot of fans, and wouldn't really do them any good. They ditched the exclusivity of FF11 even after it was exclusively released for the PS2. Coding makes up about only 5% or so of the work that goes into an RPG, adding another 5% to possibly double their sales, would simply be common sense.
What do companies get out of exclusivity rights? Anyway? Obviously the hardware manufacturer's give them a better deal, but I can't imagine that it's all that much, especially when so many titles these days are released without exclusivity contracts.
Furthermore, the 360 is no longer the "meathead machine" that the original XBox is. It's stylish, even elegant, and seems to be aimed at a much wider variety of games (including some hard core Japanese RPGs). It might take some time to catch on, but like the iPod, the 360 could become the next hot item in Japan, virtually over night, if all the pieces fell into place.
I'm not up to date on what Microsoft is rumored to be up to, but doesn't this contradict Bill's current statement? Adding an HDMI port and harddrive capacity, while keeping the price the same, would ONLY compete with Sony, as it would only interest die-hard videophyles. Microsoft were (moderately) intelligent this time around, in that they added HD because they realized it could be a major draw down the line, but they didn't stake their entire wellbeing on it. If anything, Sony's current situation shows that people really don't care as much about the highest quality video, as much Sony wanted to believe... why would Microsoft go and add these things, when they have the opportunity to pull in A LOT more buyers in by lowering the price of their systems by $50. The incentives to add HDMI (which costs a pretty penny, mind you), just aren't there.
Neither Square nor Kojami have proven to be especially loyal to any one company (Square, especially, which already seems to be jumping ship). I'm just waiting for the day, 6 months down the line, when Square announces that they've been working on a 360 version of FF13. It would simply be Final Fantasy 7 all over again, with previews and press releases about it's exclusivity on the N64, only to freak out when Nintendo chose the wrong media format (sound familiar?) and switch providers.
Think about it, it would be really silly not to at least develop a game for two systems, if you have the resources. Then, you can take your pick as to which one will be more profitable. RPGs are about 95% artistry and design (especially FF13, which is going back to turn-based gameplay), and about 5% code. So, just tack on another 5% coding for a second version, and you're a lot safer. These companies are pouring millions into these projects, for one of them to not sell well simply because the console they chose to make it for didn't cash in, would be devestating. If this were Dragon Quest (which they have completely ditched Sony, btw), I'd be cautious, since DQ is much much bigger in Japan, where the 360 doesn't do very well, but America is a pretty big Final Fantasy stronghold. If they were to release FF13 for the 360, it could utterly destroy the PS3, but who cares? I have not heard of any other major projects announced specifically for that console... they seem to be mostly concentrating on the DS, anyway.
Nope, the actual numbers for PS3s sold by the end of the year (which were posted here about a week ago), were in the neighborhood of $750k, give or take a few $10k. At absolute most, $800k, but that's being very hopefull.
Who knows what Gates is trying to accomplish by admitting this, but obviously, the statement wouldn't have been made if it didn't help microsoft. This statement only helps to legitimize the Wii as a successful console, which, at first glance, doesn't seem like something a "competitor" would want to have happen. The bottom line is, Nintendo is not Microsoft's main competition, simply because no competitor would help to legitimize his competitions accomplishments. Obviously, they don't view the Wii as much of a threat. Here are a few possible explanations:
Bottom line is, this is pretty uncharacteristic of Microsoft and Mr. Gates to make any sort of possitive statement about any corporation or product not of their making. The first thing that comes to mind is, "what does he have up his sleeve?" This is too chivilrous a gesture to actually be taken at face value. And I doubt they really believe that being "good guys" is going to win them enough points to make it worthwhile.
Are you kidding me? At first, yes, I thought the PS3 looked cool, but Nintendo and Microsoft have come up with some very ELEGENT looking consoles. The PS3 doesn't scream quality, it simply screams for attention. Compared to the 360 and Wii, the PS3 looks clunky and frivilous. The curved surfaces are nice enough, but then there's the edges, which are blocky and off-putting. We are entering a renniassance of the "form follows function" mentality. The iPod, DS, Wii, and 360 all have taken similar design trends (besides the fact that they're all white)... they're all very non-threatening, while remaining elegant and utilitarian.
Consider the forms of the time:
We lived through the 70s and 80s, where silver was badass because of it's "heavy metal" flare. Then the 90s, in which all electronics went black as a way of seeming mysterious, and making their LEDs stick out more, looking more "high tech". But that was childish too. Now, everyone wants to play down their electronics, and are becoming so comfortable with them that they want to be able to fit them into their everyday lives without making a scene. The Wii fits right in on your bookshelf, and is very inconspicous. The 360 is a little less so, and shows off a little more character, but it is still a fairly simple geometric design with some subtle curves and subdued LEDs. The PS3, on the other hand, seems to scream for attention, and looks a little like the 1960s representation of a space ship: an "ominous toy." It has the negative impact of being a bit "toyish", while not gaining the "friendliness" that toyishness tends to carry with it. It's still stuck in the mid-90s "sleak, black, and high contrast" mentality. Even when shown in white or silver, the device's form is a bit too brash.
It's ironic that the LEAST toyish looking console is the Wii.
Ummmm, hello... NBC? ABC?
Heros, Lost, Office, CSI, Law & Order... those are Nielson biggies. Heros may be the only thing that can save NBC. I think it's fair to say that these (and others) are the biggest shows from the networks.
That's not fanyboyism in the slightest; it's the truth... and if you can't see otherwise, from our perspective 10 years in the future, than you're blind. Sega didn't start working on the 3D chipset until well into the Saturn's developement... and the other's? lLet's just say they had NO CLUE about what they were doing. Sony had the advantage of originally working hand in hand with Nintendo on what was supposed to become the SNES CD, so they were about as knowledgable as a seasoned video game hardware manufacture by the time they released the Playstation.
The Playstation 2 had no competition when it began (not much, the DreamCast was already floudering), and it did very well, so discussing the success of the previous two Sony consoles is neither stupid or fanboyism. Now, if you can't see that the PS3 is falling on it's face, on the other hand, is akin to halocost denial, as far as Slashdot is concerned.
Also, the Playstation, as well as the XBox, were each the company's first system, so there were no expectations of how well the systems would do. Now Sony and Microsoft have a very strong video game presence, and every time they falter, all eyes will be on them. There is an advantage to being a first-timer in the console industry, in that everyone knows that you can only go up from there (or just not take off at all). The PS3 is in a downward spiral, as far as I'm concerned; comparing it to the Playstation launch is completely silly.