I used the official company goals/projections. Unofficially Nintendo may have 6 million availible by January, and Sony may fall short of 6 million in March. It seemed unobjective to factor such things in.
6 million for Nintendo is not bad at all, seeing as how the Xbox 360 has been out for almost a year now and has only recently crossed the 6 million mark. The rate at which they produce new consoles in their projections is quite steady and reasonable.
What concerns me are the PS3 forecasts. If taken in two month segments, Sony is practically calling for their production to double or triple itself twice over (.5 + 1.5 + 4.5 ~ 6). Given their continuing supply problems, I'm not certain of how reasonable their 6 million March 07 projection is. If they can manage to succeed in that goal it will be a good thing for them, but I remain skeptical.
Population of Japan: 127.42 million Previous Japanese Market Volume: 30.31 million (Dreamcast + Gamecube + PS2 in Japan) Number of PS3s per person: 1 per 1593 Number of PS3s per gamer: 1 per 379 Potential Market Share at Launch: 0.26% (Allotment / Previous Volume)
Population of America: 300.00 million Previous American Market Volume: 70.8 million (Xbox + Gamecube + PS2) Number of PS3s per person: 1 per 750 Number of PS3s per gamer: 1 per 177 Potential Market Share at Launch: 0.56%
The difference being that the DS Lite and GBA SP weren't more powerful hardware-wise, but were simply sleeker and slightly better screenwise (backlit and brighter).
What you're proposing is a second iteration of the Wii which is actually functionally different. That sounds to me like a surefire way of pissing people off. Not to mention the problems with supporting a split user base across low end and high end versions (an issue that plagues MS and Sony).
480k is a lot of people, but I don't think those preorders were for the Blu-ray player aspect.
To put it in perspective, 400k (the US allotment) is less than 1/600th of the US population. Even were we to get 1m, that's still only 1/300th. In order for Blu-ray or HD-DVD to be successful, they need to be far more ubiquitous than that.
The real problem is that most people still do not have an HDTV. If HDTVs were truly ubiquitous and at or beyond 50% of the market, Blu-ray and HD-DVD would probably be able to take off. As it stands, somehow Blu-ray and HD-DVD need to convince people to buy HDTVs to be truly effective. While 10% of our population means they have a potential 30m install base to market to, even were they to saturate that potential Sony would only be at 1/3rd of the shipments for the PS2.
While for some the Blu-ray player aspect will be an advantage, ultimately the system will have to win by being a gaming device.
For all that rant, there is a good point to consider in there. Namely, what if there are defective PS3s?
Microsoft got a good lashing last year when a fair number of their consoles had issues. Not a very significant number, but enough that word got around the net fast. You can argue that perhaps we were looking for reasons for the 360 to fail, but you can make that same argument now for the PS3.
If the launch is anything short of perfect, we're going to hear about it. Seeing as how only the hardcore, internet competent gamers will have managed to snag one of these at launch it's only going to take one failure out of 480k systems for there to be a huge todo about it.
If there's only one failure, it'll be FUD. One in 480k is pretty good. However, people will assume there are more failures and the FUD will spread and it will be generally bad for Sony until it get cleared up.
However, if there are a much more sizable number of failures the damage that could be done to Sony's brand is enormous. If they can't launch a year after Microsoft without repeating all of the same mistakes (low launch numbers, faulty systems and not that many interesting games) it does not reflect well on them. That isn't the kind of launch a market leader should have.
Honestly, I'm not sure if Sony can "win" when it comes to this launch. I suspect that barring a miracle we'll be bombarded with negative press, some true and a good amount of FUD, against Sony. The hardcore gamers are the ones in control of the internet media, and they are also largely the ones pissed off at Sony (sometimes to a shocking degree of irrationality). Those who were unable to, or unwililng to, get a PS3 will pounce instantly on any mistake and blow it out of proportion.
I hate to break it to you, but the editors don't look for news. They only can post what other people submit. Zonk happens to be the editor who posts most of the stuff related to video games, which includes a lot of anti-Sony stuff.
And also, it isn't meaningless. Even without the PS3, a huge company like Sony being investigated is news. They may just be another company in the queue, but that doesn't meant that it is insignificant.
This investigation is poorly timed for Sony because they are already struggling against everything else that's gone wrong for them. Topping it off with a "Hey guys, guess what? We're next up for being investigated for price-fixing! Ain't that good news?" certainly doesn't help their position.
The point the grandparent is making is that Apple works on just about every layer of the OSI model. It's their software running on their OS, working with their hardware. The suggestion would tear that end to end user experience apart.
Actually, when you've got competitors like McAffe and Symantec to complain for you, it's definitively cheaper to keep quiet, sit back, relax, and watch the show. All the legal fees and work can be done by the big dogs, while at most you'll just need to sign a paper or two saying "Yeah, we're with them on this stupid API thing, go go lawsuit" and "Yes please, we'd like to be on the list of important AV companies to get the API".
In the meantime, they can be more focused on improving their security to compete with the big guys.
Actually, I was going to say it was more along the lines of Staples brand paper only allowing you to write on it with Staples brand pens, pencils, or other branded writing implements.
We all like music, we all like bands, but unfortunately for bands who may be interested in making a name for themselves through video games they might as well buy lottery tickets.
Games like Tony Hawk feature many different bands and great talent. I've beaten a good number of games with music straight from bands. Do I have any more idea about these bands when I started? No. In my mind, the music is now associated with the game, not the band even if their name and label are displayed.
Barring people like Nobuo Uematsu who get to do the entire soundtrack for many games, there isn't fame to be had. The video game industry is notorious for doing very little to promote the people who are responsible for its great works. Instead, the studio name gets the credit. There isn't a Will Wright or a Shigeru Miyamoto for WoW or Halo. There's a Blizzard or a Bungie, but can you actually name someone who's in charge of either?
Maybe, in the far future, where not only companies but individuals get some attention bands could get a break through a video game. As it is now, very few people care where the music came from even when it is top notch.
I'm not saying he's wrong, it's opinion. Opinions can be wildly inaccurate, stupid, and silly but they aren't wrong unless they're attempted to dispute know facts. I.E It's my opinion Abraham Lincoln was the First President.
That said, his opinion is highly contestable.
The Brand
I would have thought that his comparing the ubiquitous association of Sony's brand now to Nintendo's ubiquitous association then would have given him reason to say why Sony won't repeat Nintendo's failure. He failed to account for it at all.
Nintendo had a greater than 60% market share with the SNES, with the rest divided between the Turbo Grafix 16 and the Sega Genesis. The next generation they barely managed 20%. They had as much if not more brand at the time than Sony, a console that was cheaper than the others, and innovations to boot. They were destroyed rather thoroughly.
Microsoft (somewhat) Squandered its Lead
Microsoft did squander their lead a bit. With more volume at launch they'd probably be further ahead. The point he makes is that Microsoft's Xbox 360 has had a somewhat "Meh" reception. However, that reception is as likely caused by a general "Meh" at HD stuff in general that will burn Sony as much as Microsoft as it is a pure Microsoft bias. Only time will tell.
Japan is Ripe for the Taking
That it is. He makes a good argument for why Japan is anyone's game. Unfortunately I can't really find much worth in his arguments as to how the PS3 is going to take Japan. While there will surely be more than the 100k initial launch shipments as time passes, that's hardly enough to secure a lead in Japan. This is downplayed by the author, nothing some very desireable games that the Japanese will want. The possibility that Japanese and other gamers may be at all discouraged by the difficulty in getting PS3s isn't even addressed.
There's a token paragraph for the Wii, and I call it token rightly. To assume this a largely Xbox vs PS3 a article does not seem far off, or perhaps Xbox vs anyone else. It may be that the Wii just isn't worth commenting on because no one has any doubts as to how well it will do, while Sony breeds skepticism with each new press release. It's hard to tell.
Regardless, there is no mention of the vastly greater Wii supplies, the far cheaper price, or the general thrashing the PSP got at the DS's twin screens. This leads into a statement that skirts the possible competition between the two Japanese companies. If you're going to write an article about why Sony isn't going to lose to Microsoft, specify that in your title. Otherwise, glossing over Nintendo seems fishy.
Blue-ray Will Matter
A good point to be made here is that if Blue-ray takes off, it's likely to make the manufacturing of PS3s cheaper. With more people working to make Blue Lasers, they'll be understandably cheaper. The opposite being true if the format fails as a movie format.
Bringing up the current and forecasted adoption rates for HDTV probably wouldn't have aided the article any, but again Nintendo seems glossed over in favor of Microsoft vs Sony. I realize Nintendo has intentionally put themselves out of direct competition for HD gamers, but that doesn't mean they aren't competing this generation.
Free Online
Good, minus no mention (good or bad) of Nintendo's online services. Again, if this is about Microsoft vs Sony specifically, the title should have reflected that.
Final Thoughts
Firstly no one said winning three in a row was "impossible". The issue is historically, no one's lasted more than two generations without other A) completely destroying the industry or B) Dropping from near Monopoly to near Obscurity and Ridicule. There appears to be a red button labeled "Retarded" which gets pressed sometime before Launch #3.
If Sony manages to dominate again, good for them. They'll have earned it through games and services that make us happy, possibly reearning the trust they've burned these p
I believe actual comparisons of profit between Nintendo and Sony's game division would show that overall, Nintendo makes more. Comparing Nintendo to the entire company, Sony definately rakes in more cash. However, profit for profit Nintendo beats out the games division of Sony.
That's not to invalidate the point that both methods are viable and even wise. However, it is a clarification I felt necessary.
I'm not impressed with current review metrics. The numbers are almost always irrelevant to me. Dead Rising scored less than Perfect Dark Zero. Playing both games, I've found the difference between them staggering. Dead Rising looks far, far better, plays far, far better and the story is far, far better. Perfect Dark Zero doesn't really look or feel good, and the controls are klunky.
Reviewers are far easier on console games at launch than they are later. You could argue that this is because launch titles aren't going to be as polished as second wave titles due to time constraints and familiarity with the system's development. I don't buy that argument personally because it defeats any attempt at making the reviews scalable. If a launch 9 is a second wave 7.5, how the hell am I supposed to understand the numbers?
On top of this, there's the blatant "We're bought out by the industry and won't drop scores less than 6 unless the game is blatantly bad and from a studio no one ever heard of".
Under normal circumstances, I would wish all the consoles well. I did so last generation, and the generation before.
This generation, Sony appears to feel entitled to our money and loyalty, as though such things are defaults they can abuse. Their actions and words both have left a bad taste in my mouth. Quite simply, it will take some truly fantastic games to change this.
I still wish the Xbox 360 and the Wii well, but I'd like Sony to learn some humility much as Nintendo did with the N64.
[quote]I don't think either are for sale, and Nintendo's unit will be $300, but yes.[/quote]
Nintendo's is $250 in the US. If you're boosting the number because of potential bundles or the need to buy games/peripherals, you should be fair and do the same for the PS3 numbers.
The only other place I can see you getting $300 from is the USD value of the price of the Wii in Australia, which is $400 Australian currency.
The point is that Sony didn't have to. Sony could easily have said to Lik-Sang, "We're within ourtlegal rights to request that you not import PS3. We ask that you cease and desist. Legal action will not benefit either of us, but it may become necessary if this can not be resolved between the two of us."
That's a nice, but firm, way of doing things. You're not shaking a legal fist at them, you're giving them the opportunity to talk with you, discuss it, and reach a resolution without expensive court fees.
This is what Sony did. Sony said, "Lik-Sang, here are a dozen or more simultaneous lawsuits in different languages for the same thing. Good luck hiring a team of competent lawyers in every nation in the EU and flying back and forth like crazy between all the hearings, trials, and judgements. We know you can't afford it."
I don't know if you've ever seen the Monty Python skit where they use machine guns and rocket launchers to hunt a mosquito, but that is a good analogy for what Sony did here. They didn't have to put Lik-Sang out of business to stop them from importing PS3s to the EU. They could even have come out of this looking like a decent company that regrettably, but not selfishly, protected their interests.
What they did was unnecessary to stop Lik-Sang from importing. What they did was necessary to put Lik-Sang out of business.
Given the largely uninformative nature of reviews these days, the only options left to figure out if a game is any good are as follows:
1) Try it yourself 2) Read the box cover and judge from that 3) Force a brother/friend/slave to buy/rent the game. 4) Pester the Gamestop people about it incessantly until they ban you from the store for harassment.
Obviously 1 and 3 are related, while 2 and 4 are suboptimal. Quite simply, I'm far more inclined to buy games I have experience with beforehand. It took me about 5 minutes of actually play to realize I liked Ninja Gaiden on the Xbox, while it can take a day's worth of review and opinion browsing to even get a feel for some of the basic mechanics of a game, let alone finer points.
Because of that, I really enjoy demoing and renting games first. It's far more time efficient and worthwhile.
[quote]"'I think the caveat to that statement always has to be based on the fact that when we make a pad, we're making maybe 150, 200 million of them,' Harrison explains. 'So it has to be done at a price, and it has to be done at a volume that fits our production requirements. I think the decision that we've made to build in the SIXAXIS functionality, and Bluetooth wireless, and great battery life, and all the other functionality that comes with it, far outweighs the chatter that we're getting on vibration. And, it's incredibly light! Just pick it up!'"[/quote]
When Sony was first asked why rumble was missing, they told us it was technically impossible/too difficult to do with the new tilt sensing. That wasn't infeasible, but highly disappointing. Then the lid was blown off of that.
Now Sony has changed their tune. It's a matter of price. The cost of $.01 over 150 million controllers is non-trivial. That seems feasible, why didn't you say that in the first place? Why does your controller cost $50 when you're saving us money? How is it that Nintendo's more advanced controller that features rumble, motion sensing, and even a speaker is $10 less than your controller until you start buy an addon which also features motion sensing? (Microsoft, you've got some explaining to do too)
The waffling about this doesn't alleviate the suspicion that Sony remove the rumble because of the lawsuit against them. We're not convinced you're trying to save us money when you're charging $500 to $600 for your system, in excess of $60 for games, and $50 for controllers. The original suspicion, that you're too arrogant and sour to suck it up and pay someone else for their proprietary technology, sadly fits the facts far better than anything you've told us yet. Given that the settlement for the lawsuit was around $100 million for years worth of controllers and games it doesn't strike me that the cost of working with Immersion is really so terrible a thing.
This isn't a defense, it's an excuse. I've never gotten the impression from any Sony representative that they are actually sad to see rumble go. The words of Sony aren't the sad, but necessary statements that game and hardware designers make as reality defeats cool concepts and ideas. They are distractions and red herrings from a ugliness Sony had hoped we wouldn't see.
Honesty will get you a lot farther than lies "chatter"ing through your teeth.
That's why people still shell out tons of money on Textbooks, Encyclopedias, Dictionaries, Thesauruses etc. Information is valuable, and thus it makes sense that people charge for it.
However, no one's going to pay me $2 to find out what my favorite food is. There is information which is largely worthless, and information which is so close to worthless that it might as well be.
When information is worthless, charging for it makes people angry. This is one of those cases. Anyone who understands these tutorials is already a major football fan and unlike to get much out of them. Anyone who doesn't is going to look up the mumbo jumbo on the internet or from a friend and then find out how basic and silly it all is.
If these tutorials were extensive, explained the terminology, and even went as far as advanced strategies and possibilties (if you so disired) they'd be potentially worth paying for. As they stand they are blatant attempts to squeeze money out of us. It didn't cost them a million dollars to make the tutorial, so why are they charging like it did? If it really did cost that much, EA really needs to audit their accountants, fire some incompetant managers, and reevaluate their overgrown bureaucracy.
Fair point. I conceded that my comment on Zonk's bias was more witty retort than truth, but I don't think Zonk's bias is the cause of all the negative PS3 articles we see here (as some people would claim). He can't MAKE Kotaku, gamasutra, 1up and others write unfavorable articles on the PS3. XD
But yeah, if his comments are biased I could see that getting old fast.
Because 20 different stories saying exactly the same thing (i.e System is sexy and sweet but controller leaves much to be desired) don't warrant individual articles?
The bias comment was more of a failed witty retort than a truth. It is true that no one is unbiased, but it is untrue that Zonk's bias is the cause of all of the negative PS3 articles we see here.
You don't have to go elsewhere, given that it was not too long ago we got news that halogen lights, direct sunlight, and a number of other mundane things can interfere with the Wii's sensor bar. We've seen reviews here from both people who thought the Wii was retarded to people who thought it would cure cancer.
However, you can't blame Zonk for the largely negative comments slashdotters make whenever Sony does something remotely bad, and the defenses and general "It'll be okay"s you see when there's a bump in the road for Nintendo. You can blame ignorance, market perceptions, bad PR or any number of things but not Zonk.
There's also always the possibility that 90% of everyone who tries a Wii doesn't find obvious fault with the system, and that 90% of people who try the SIXAXIS do.
I'm making a lot of assumptions in my comments here, but I think my assumptions are fair. It seems a bit conspiracy theory-like to assume that Zonk is out to get Sony. When I go dig around the internet I find the proportion of negative and positive news stories for all the competitors to be in line with what we see here. The comments people make on that news here is a completely different story.
So take my word on it that I'm saying all of this with a straight face.:D
Because contrary to popular belief, Zonk isn't biased against the PS3?
This isn't the first and it won't be the last time Zonk posts news about the PS3 without bashing it. It's been stated before and I'll stated again that Zonk can only post what news on the PS3 there is, not what news there isn't. If 90% of that news is bad, which it was for a very long time, he's just the messenger. Shooting him doesn't change what other people report.
Attacking Zonk is as popular around here as predicting the "inevitable" death of Sony. Both are silly pursuits.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe you both meant "Give to seizure what is geezer's", in reference to the high tax on inheritence.
For those who don't understand Japanese, this is what the title says.
(the) Keyword (is) do! Game, do! Choice, do! Xbox 360 media briefing's (bunch of kanji I can't read)
So the slogan is probably closer to "The Keyword is do! Game, do! Choice, do!" than it is "do! Game, do! Choice, do! Xbox 360".
I used the official company goals/projections. Unofficially Nintendo may have 6 million availible by January, and Sony may fall short of 6 million in March. It seemed unobjective to factor such things in.
6 million for Nintendo is not bad at all, seeing as how the Xbox 360 has been out for almost a year now and has only recently crossed the 6 million mark. The rate at which they produce new consoles in their projections is quite steady and reasonable.
What concerns me are the PS3 forecasts. If taken in two month segments, Sony is practically calling for their production to double or triple itself twice over (.5 + 1.5 + 4.5 ~ 6). Given their continuing supply problems, I'm not certain of how reasonable their 6 million March 07 projection is. If they can manage to succeed in that goal it will be a good thing for them, but I remain skeptical.
Japanese Allotment: 80k
American Allotment: 400k
Population of Japan: 127.42 million
Previous Japanese Market Volume: 30.31 million (Dreamcast + Gamecube + PS2 in Japan)
Number of PS3s per person: 1 per 1593
Number of PS3s per gamer: 1 per 379
Potential Market Share at Launch: 0.26% (Allotment / Previous Volume)
Population of America: 300.00 million
Previous American Market Volume: 70.8 million (Xbox + Gamecube + PS2)
Number of PS3s per person: 1 per 750
Number of PS3s per gamer: 1 per 177
Potential Market Share at Launch: 0.56%
Combined Potential Market Share: 0.47% (480k) [5.66% relative Market Share]
Current 360 Market Share: 5.93% (6 million) [70.07% relative Market Share]
Potential Wii Launch Market Share: 1.98% (2 million) [23.59% relative Market Share]
Projected March 07 Market Share: 5.93% (6 million) [27.28% relative Market Share]
360 March 07 Market Share: 9.89% (10 million) [45.46% relative Market Share]
Wii March 07 Market Share: 5.93% (6 million) [27.28% relative Market Share]
The difference being that the DS Lite and GBA SP weren't more powerful hardware-wise, but were simply sleeker and slightly better screenwise (backlit and brighter).
What you're proposing is a second iteration of the Wii which is actually functionally different. That sounds to me like a surefire way of pissing people off. Not to mention the problems with supporting a split user base across low end and high end versions (an issue that plagues MS and Sony).
480k is a lot of people, but I don't think those preorders were for the Blu-ray player aspect.
To put it in perspective, 400k (the US allotment) is less than 1/600th of the US population. Even were we to get 1m, that's still only 1/300th. In order for Blu-ray or HD-DVD to be successful, they need to be far more ubiquitous than that.
The real problem is that most people still do not have an HDTV. If HDTVs were truly ubiquitous and at or beyond 50% of the market, Blu-ray and HD-DVD would probably be able to take off. As it stands, somehow Blu-ray and HD-DVD need to convince people to buy HDTVs to be truly effective. While 10% of our population means they have a potential 30m install base to market to, even were they to saturate that potential Sony would only be at 1/3rd of the shipments for the PS2.
While for some the Blu-ray player aspect will be an advantage, ultimately the system will have to win by being a gaming device.
For all that rant, there is a good point to consider in there. Namely, what if there are defective PS3s?
Microsoft got a good lashing last year when a fair number of their consoles had issues. Not a very significant number, but enough that word got around the net fast. You can argue that perhaps we were looking for reasons for the 360 to fail, but you can make that same argument now for the PS3.
If the launch is anything short of perfect, we're going to hear about it. Seeing as how only the hardcore, internet competent gamers will have managed to snag one of these at launch it's only going to take one failure out of 480k systems for there to be a huge todo about it.
If there's only one failure, it'll be FUD. One in 480k is pretty good. However, people will assume there are more failures and the FUD will spread and it will be generally bad for Sony until it get cleared up.
However, if there are a much more sizable number of failures the damage that could be done to Sony's brand is enormous. If they can't launch a year after Microsoft without repeating all of the same mistakes (low launch numbers, faulty systems and not that many interesting games) it does not reflect well on them. That isn't the kind of launch a market leader should have.
Honestly, I'm not sure if Sony can "win" when it comes to this launch. I suspect that barring a miracle we'll be bombarded with negative press, some true and a good amount of FUD, against Sony. The hardcore gamers are the ones in control of the internet media, and they are also largely the ones pissed off at Sony (sometimes to a shocking degree of irrationality). Those who were unable to, or unwililng to, get a PS3 will pounce instantly on any mistake and blow it out of proportion.
I do not envy Sony's position.
I hate to break it to you, but the editors don't look for news. They only can post what other people submit. Zonk happens to be the editor who posts most of the stuff related to video games, which includes a lot of anti-Sony stuff.
And also, it isn't meaningless. Even without the PS3, a huge company like Sony being investigated is news. They may just be another company in the queue, but that doesn't meant that it is insignificant.
This investigation is poorly timed for Sony because they are already struggling against everything else that's gone wrong for them. Topping it off with a "Hey guys, guess what? We're next up for being investigated for price-fixing! Ain't that good news?" certainly doesn't help their position.
The point the grandparent is making is that Apple works on just about every layer of the OSI model. It's their software running on their OS, working with their hardware. The suggestion would tear that end to end user experience apart.
Actually, when you've got competitors like McAffe and Symantec to complain for you, it's definitively cheaper to keep quiet, sit back, relax, and watch the show. All the legal fees and work can be done by the big dogs, while at most you'll just need to sign a paper or two saying "Yeah, we're with them on this stupid API thing, go go lawsuit" and "Yes please, we'd like to be on the list of important AV companies to get the API".
In the meantime, they can be more focused on improving their security to compete with the big guys.
Actually, I was going to say it was more along the lines of Staples brand paper only allowing you to write on it with Staples brand pens, pencils, or other branded writing implements.
Quite simply, no.
We all like music, we all like bands, but unfortunately for bands who may be interested in making a name for themselves through video games they might as well buy lottery tickets.
Games like Tony Hawk feature many different bands and great talent. I've beaten a good number of games with music straight from bands. Do I have any more idea about these bands when I started? No. In my mind, the music is now associated with the game, not the band even if their name and label are displayed.
Barring people like Nobuo Uematsu who get to do the entire soundtrack for many games, there isn't fame to be had. The video game industry is notorious for doing very little to promote the people who are responsible for its great works. Instead, the studio name gets the credit. There isn't a Will Wright or a Shigeru Miyamoto for WoW or Halo. There's a Blizzard or a Bungie, but can you actually name someone who's in charge of either?
Maybe, in the far future, where not only companies but individuals get some attention bands could get a break through a video game. As it is now, very few people care where the music came from even when it is top notch.
I'm not saying he's wrong, it's opinion. Opinions can be wildly inaccurate, stupid, and silly but they aren't wrong unless they're attempted to dispute know facts. I.E It's my opinion Abraham Lincoln was the First President.
That said, his opinion is highly contestable.
The Brand
I would have thought that his comparing the ubiquitous association of Sony's brand now to Nintendo's ubiquitous association then would have given him reason to say why Sony won't repeat Nintendo's failure. He failed to account for it at all.
Nintendo had a greater than 60% market share with the SNES, with the rest divided between the Turbo Grafix 16 and the Sega Genesis. The next generation they barely managed 20%. They had as much if not more brand at the time than Sony, a console that was cheaper than the others, and innovations to boot. They were destroyed rather thoroughly.
Microsoft (somewhat) Squandered its Lead
Microsoft did squander their lead a bit. With more volume at launch they'd probably be further ahead. The point he makes is that Microsoft's Xbox 360 has had a somewhat "Meh" reception. However, that reception is as likely caused by a general "Meh" at HD stuff in general that will burn Sony as much as Microsoft as it is a pure Microsoft bias. Only time will tell.
Japan is Ripe for the Taking
That it is. He makes a good argument for why Japan is anyone's game. Unfortunately I can't really find much worth in his arguments as to how the PS3 is going to take Japan. While there will surely be more than the 100k initial launch shipments as time passes, that's hardly enough to secure a lead in Japan. This is downplayed by the author, nothing some very desireable games that the Japanese will want. The possibility that Japanese and other gamers may be at all discouraged by the difficulty in getting PS3s isn't even addressed.
There's a token paragraph for the Wii, and I call it token rightly. To assume this a largely Xbox vs PS3 a article does not seem far off, or perhaps Xbox vs anyone else. It may be that the Wii just isn't worth commenting on because no one has any doubts as to how well it will do, while Sony breeds skepticism with each new press release. It's hard to tell.
Regardless, there is no mention of the vastly greater Wii supplies, the far cheaper price, or the general thrashing the PSP got at the DS's twin screens. This leads into a statement that skirts the possible competition between the two Japanese companies. If you're going to write an article about why Sony isn't going to lose to Microsoft, specify that in your title. Otherwise, glossing over Nintendo seems fishy.
Blue-ray Will Matter
A good point to be made here is that if Blue-ray takes off, it's likely to make the manufacturing of PS3s cheaper. With more people working to make Blue Lasers, they'll be understandably cheaper. The opposite being true if the format fails as a movie format.
Bringing up the current and forecasted adoption rates for HDTV probably wouldn't have aided the article any, but again Nintendo seems glossed over in favor of Microsoft vs Sony. I realize Nintendo has intentionally put themselves out of direct competition for HD gamers, but that doesn't mean they aren't competing this generation.
Free Online
Good, minus no mention (good or bad) of Nintendo's online services. Again, if this is about Microsoft vs Sony specifically, the title should have reflected that.
Final Thoughts
Firstly no one said winning three in a row was "impossible". The issue is historically, no one's lasted more than two generations without other A) completely destroying the industry or B) Dropping from near Monopoly to near Obscurity and Ridicule. There appears to be a red button labeled "Retarded" which gets pressed sometime before Launch #3.
If Sony manages to dominate again, good for them. They'll have earned it through games and services that make us happy, possibly reearning the trust they've burned these p
I believe actual comparisons of profit between Nintendo and Sony's game division would show that overall, Nintendo makes more. Comparing Nintendo to the entire company, Sony definately rakes in more cash. However, profit for profit Nintendo beats out the games division of Sony.
b .php
That's not to invalidate the point that both methods are viable and even wise. However, it is a clarification I felt necessary.
Source: http://nintendoinsider.com/site/EEEZuAypVuTuOJPzy
I know there are others, but as I'm only nitpicking an item largely irrelevant to your point I don't see finding them as necessary.
I'm not impressed with current review metrics. The numbers are almost always irrelevant to me. Dead Rising scored less than Perfect Dark Zero. Playing both games, I've found the difference between them staggering. Dead Rising looks far, far better, plays far, far better and the story is far, far better. Perfect Dark Zero doesn't really look or feel good, and the controls are klunky.
Reviewers are far easier on console games at launch than they are later. You could argue that this is because launch titles aren't going to be as polished as second wave titles due to time constraints and familiarity with the system's development. I don't buy that argument personally because it defeats any attempt at making the reviews scalable. If a launch 9 is a second wave 7.5, how the hell am I supposed to understand the numbers?
On top of this, there's the blatant "We're bought out by the industry and won't drop scores less than 6 unless the game is blatantly bad and from a studio no one ever heard of".
Meh.
Under normal circumstances, I would wish all the consoles well. I did so last generation, and the generation before.
This generation, Sony appears to feel entitled to our money and loyalty, as though such things are defaults they can abuse. Their actions and words both have left a bad taste in my mouth. Quite simply, it will take some truly fantastic games to change this.
I still wish the Xbox 360 and the Wii well, but I'd like Sony to learn some humility much as Nintendo did with the N64.
[quote]I don't think either are for sale, and Nintendo's unit will be $300, but yes.[/quote]
Nintendo's is $250 in the US. If you're boosting the number because of potential bundles or the need to buy games/peripherals, you should be fair and do the same for the PS3 numbers.
The only other place I can see you getting $300 from is the USD value of the price of the Wii in Australia, which is $400 Australian currency.
I believe this argument has been dealt with before, but far more prominent gamers than myself. Namely, Gabe and Tycho.
Start at the Fifth Paragraph:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/2006/09/15
In short, the idea that somehow spending an extra $250 (at the very least) somehow saves you money is rather ridiculous.
The point is that Sony didn't have to. Sony could easily have said to Lik-Sang, "We're within ourtlegal rights to request that you not import PS3. We ask that you cease and desist. Legal action will not benefit either of us, but it may become necessary if this can not be resolved between the two of us."
That's a nice, but firm, way of doing things. You're not shaking a legal fist at them, you're giving them the opportunity to talk with you, discuss it, and reach a resolution without expensive court fees.
This is what Sony did. Sony said, "Lik-Sang, here are a dozen or more simultaneous lawsuits in different languages for the same thing. Good luck hiring a team of competent lawyers in every nation in the EU and flying back and forth like crazy between all the hearings, trials, and judgements. We know you can't afford it."
I don't know if you've ever seen the Monty Python skit where they use machine guns and rocket launchers to hunt a mosquito, but that is a good analogy for what Sony did here. They didn't have to put Lik-Sang out of business to stop them from importing PS3s to the EU. They could even have come out of this looking like a decent company that regrettably, but not selfishly, protected their interests.
What they did was unnecessary to stop Lik-Sang from importing. What they did was necessary to put Lik-Sang out of business.
Given the largely uninformative nature of reviews these days, the only options left to figure out if a game is any good are as follows:
1) Try it yourself
2) Read the box cover and judge from that
3) Force a brother/friend/slave to buy/rent the game.
4) Pester the Gamestop people about it incessantly until they ban you from the store for harassment.
Obviously 1 and 3 are related, while 2 and 4 are suboptimal. Quite simply, I'm far more inclined to buy games I have experience with beforehand. It took me about 5 minutes of actually play to realize I liked Ninja Gaiden on the Xbox, while it can take a day's worth of review and opinion browsing to even get a feel for some of the basic mechanics of a game, let alone finer points.
Because of that, I really enjoy demoing and renting games first. It's far more time efficient and worthwhile.
[quote]"'I think the caveat to that statement always has to be based on the fact that when we make a pad, we're making maybe 150, 200 million of them,' Harrison explains. 'So it has to be done at a price, and it has to be done at a volume that fits our production requirements. I think the decision that we've made to build in the SIXAXIS functionality, and Bluetooth wireless, and great battery life, and all the other functionality that comes with it, far outweighs the chatter that we're getting on vibration. And, it's incredibly light! Just pick it up!'"[/quote]
When Sony was first asked why rumble was missing, they told us it was technically impossible/too difficult to do with the new tilt sensing. That wasn't infeasible, but highly disappointing. Then the lid was blown off of that.
Now Sony has changed their tune. It's a matter of price. The cost of $.01 over 150 million controllers is non-trivial. That seems feasible, why didn't you say that in the first place? Why does your controller cost $50 when you're saving us money? How is it that Nintendo's more advanced controller that features rumble, motion sensing, and even a speaker is $10 less than your controller until you start buy an addon which also features motion sensing? (Microsoft, you've got some explaining to do too)
The waffling about this doesn't alleviate the suspicion that Sony remove the rumble because of the lawsuit against them. We're not convinced you're trying to save us money when you're charging $500 to $600 for your system, in excess of $60 for games, and $50 for controllers. The original suspicion, that you're too arrogant and sour to suck it up and pay someone else for their proprietary technology, sadly fits the facts far better than anything you've told us yet. Given that the settlement for the lawsuit was around $100 million for years worth of controllers and games it doesn't strike me that the cost of working with Immersion is really so terrible a thing.
This isn't a defense, it's an excuse. I've never gotten the impression from any Sony representative that they are actually sad to see rumble go. The words of Sony aren't the sad, but necessary statements that game and hardware designers make as reality defeats cool concepts and ideas. They are distractions and red herrings from a ugliness Sony had hoped we wouldn't see.
Honesty will get you a lot farther than lies "chatter"ing through your teeth.
That's why people still shell out tons of money on Textbooks, Encyclopedias, Dictionaries, Thesauruses etc. Information is valuable, and thus it makes sense that people charge for it.
However, no one's going to pay me $2 to find out what my favorite food is. There is information which is largely worthless, and information which is so close to worthless that it might as well be.
When information is worthless, charging for it makes people angry. This is one of those cases. Anyone who understands these tutorials is already a major football fan and unlike to get much out of them. Anyone who doesn't is going to look up the mumbo jumbo on the internet or from a friend and then find out how basic and silly it all is.
If these tutorials were extensive, explained the terminology, and even went as far as advanced strategies and possibilties (if you so disired) they'd be potentially worth paying for. As they stand they are blatant attempts to squeeze money out of us. It didn't cost them a million dollars to make the tutorial, so why are they charging like it did? If it really did cost that much, EA really needs to audit their accountants, fire some incompetant managers, and reevaluate their overgrown bureaucracy.
Fair point. I conceded that my comment on Zonk's bias was more witty retort than truth, but I don't think Zonk's bias is the cause of all the negative PS3 articles we see here (as some people would claim). He can't MAKE Kotaku, gamasutra, 1up and others write unfavorable articles on the PS3. XD
But yeah, if his comments are biased I could see that getting old fast.
Because 20 different stories saying exactly the same thing (i.e System is sexy and sweet but controller leaves much to be desired) don't warrant individual articles?
:D
The bias comment was more of a failed witty retort than a truth. It is true that no one is unbiased, but it is untrue that Zonk's bias is the cause of all of the negative PS3 articles we see here.
You don't have to go elsewhere, given that it was not too long ago we got news that halogen lights, direct sunlight, and a number of other mundane things can interfere with the Wii's sensor bar. We've seen reviews here from both people who thought the Wii was retarded to people who thought it would cure cancer.
However, you can't blame Zonk for the largely negative comments slashdotters make whenever Sony does something remotely bad, and the defenses and general "It'll be okay"s you see when there's a bump in the road for Nintendo. You can blame ignorance, market perceptions, bad PR or any number of things but not Zonk.
There's also always the possibility that 90% of everyone who tries a Wii doesn't find obvious fault with the system, and that 90% of people who try the SIXAXIS do.
I'm making a lot of assumptions in my comments here, but I think my assumptions are fair. It seems a bit conspiracy theory-like to assume that Zonk is out to get Sony. When I go dig around the internet I find the proportion of negative and positive news stories for all the competitors to be in line with what we see here. The comments people make on that news here is a completely different story.
So take my word on it that I'm saying all of this with a straight face.
Because contrary to popular belief, Zonk isn't biased against the PS3?
This isn't the first and it won't be the last time Zonk posts news about the PS3 without bashing it. It's been stated before and I'll stated again that Zonk can only post what news on the PS3 there is, not what news there isn't. If 90% of that news is bad, which it was for a very long time, he's just the messenger. Shooting him doesn't change what other people report.
Attacking Zonk is as popular around here as predicting the "inevitable" death of Sony. Both are silly pursuits.