I realize this article is about games, but I was responding to an assertion that "most consoles are sold at a loss". This isn't the truth, and regarding the PS3, there's not enough evidence to support a strong argument either way.
Personally, I think that Sony (based on past actions) will not sell the machine at a loss. However, there are some things that definitely point in the other direction. Namely, their desire for Blu-ray to succeed. Of course, this whole conversation is almost all conjecture. We'll see how it plays out.
"Niche" does not always mean "small". It can also mean "the role an organism fills in an ecosystem". The Halo series fits this definition. How? Well, it fills the role of the "standard Xbox FPS". This means that those who have Xboxes, and those who like FPS, will probably own it.
Now I realize that the crossover between "Xbox owner" and "FPS player" is, at the moment, pretty large. But if the Xbox is to grow, it must reach outside this audience. The OP that I responded to claimed that Sony had "no answer" to Halo 3. I claim that Halo 3 is not a silver bullet that will somehow magically elevate Microsoft to the top of the console pile, for the reasons listed in this post.
So let me get this straight. You're saying that a PS3 contains all the chips that a standalone Bluray player has, plus the Cell and the GPU and everything?
Maybe you haven't realized this, but modern consoles are powerful computers designed to push stuff as fast as possible onto your screen. The Cell and nVidia GPU can definitely replace a lot (if not all) of the processing chips that a stand-alone Bluray player requires. Then add in the fact that the unit you link to probably suffers from some early-adopter gouging, and your agument becomes pretty tenuous.
The results for Sony's game division during the current fiscal year will not be good however, as the company ramps up investments for the PlayStation 3, which launches worldwide this November. Sony expects the segment to hemorrhage 100 billion yen ($871.6 million) in operating losses during the business year as it prepares the PS3 for launch.
Note the wording. They do not say "Sony will lose $X on each PS3 sold", but merely that they will be sinking a lot of money into "preparing the PS3 for launch". This is a key difference, and conflicts with your assertion that "Sony said so", as they have not. The article I cited earlier also noted that Sony sunk a bunch of money into PS2 development, yet they still made money on every one sold.
Yeah, I also heard that the demo was pretty crappy, but others claim that the demo is not representative of the game at all. So that gets me back to "I'll rent it first".
I was thinking the same thing, only along the lines of movies. Most people don't watch movies in 15-minute sessions. The difference comes when you look at how seriously people take it.
Billions of people watch movies, but there are a lot less who fit the definition of "movie geek" or (to borrow the gaming term) "hardcore". These are people who maybe know more about film or drama, or just really love movies. These people don't necessarily spend more time watching movies than the average person, especially considering the people (like you mention) who watch hours of TV a day.
The same goes for games. Lots of people play board, card, or video games, but there's a smaller segment who enjoy delving into the strategy and mechanics of the games, or maybe the design elements. Again, a super-geeky gamer may not play as much as a bored middle-schooler, but that does not deny his geekiness.
In the end, I think equating "session length" with "casualness" is a pretty bad idea. On some level, it might be accurate, but that is a level that doesn't really correspond to reality.
Considering they will be selling the PS3 at a loss, as is the case with most any console
Consoles are not, as a rule, sold at a loss. As for the PS3, we have yet to hear anything official from Sony as to whether they will be taking a hit on the system or not. My guess, following past evidence, is that they won't.
I don't think you understand. The Market always provides the most efficient and best ways of doing things. If you just leave it to The Market, everything will be fine.
I doubt this is true. Police officers nearly always say things that are not true or semi-true, or word things in funny ways. If you are in a public place, court decisions have affirmed that you cannot expect privacy.
Sony has stated they have no real answer for Halo 3.
Halo 3 is not an "answer" to Sony, or anything else for that matter. This is one game series here, and a pretty niche one at that. Did Halo 1 & 2 make the Xbox profitable? No. Did they break new ground in the FPS genre? Not really.
Even Microsoft, who seemed to enjoy rising with Sony to the top during the last console generation
Let's look at the numbers. Microsoft moved a few more Xboxes than Nintendo did Gamecubes, yet they lost billions of dollars. I would not call that "rising to the top".
The thing that's usually turned me off from FF games (and other series, like Dragon Quest) is all the random battles. The new battle system in FF 12 certainly has its detractors, but I think it's a good thing. Maybe I'll rent it first...
Now, as a precedent, Kelo is undeniably dangerous. I'm not arguing that. I'm saying that in the particular case of New London, it was the right choice to make.
And how many other Supreme Court decisions were the same type of situation? I have no idea, but I'm guessing it's more than a few.
Well, with this news, it sounds like the scopes of the claims were changed. You could say SCO was trying to monkey with them, a trial which IBM will hopefully, in the end, pass.
I see that there is a mention of Weird Al there, but it doesn't cite the case (meaning it's probably bogus). Nevertheless, the other cases cited would seem to cover the type of work he does.
Now it's your turn to cite actual court cases that back up your assertions.
I suggest you read up a bit on parody before you claim you know everything. Unless you can cite the statutes that would apply to what you are claiming, your assertions do not stand.
Oh, and thanks for insulting me, even though you're wrong.
I think that this is actually the reason that so many self-proclaimed "old-school" RPGers hate Final Fantasy VII so much: it made them look like total chumps and they resent Square for "abandoning" them... in favor of more exciting, playable games that more people than ever enjoy. Just goes to show, there's no pleasing some people.
FF 7 was not "more playable" than, say, Chrono Trigger. Both have annoying interfaces, unskippable inane dialogue, etc. I use CT as an example because I haven't played the SNES FF games.
Also, do you have any empirical data that suggests more people play RPGs now than before? Obviously, the absolute number of gamers has risen since then (but remains at about the same percentage of the population). So pointing to higher 2005 sales won't cut it; you'll need to show that a higher percentage of gamers now play RPGs. I really doubt this is true.
Slashdot Mirror
I realize this article is about games, but I was responding to an assertion that "most consoles are sold at a loss". This isn't the truth, and regarding the PS3, there's not enough evidence to support a strong argument either way.
Personally, I think that Sony (based on past actions) will not sell the machine at a loss. However, there are some things that definitely point in the other direction. Namely, their desire for Blu-ray to succeed. Of course, this whole conversation is almost all conjecture. We'll see how it plays out.
"Niche" does not always mean "small". It can also mean "the role an organism fills in an ecosystem". The Halo series fits this definition. How? Well, it fills the role of the "standard Xbox FPS". This means that those who have Xboxes, and those who like FPS, will probably own it.
Now I realize that the crossover between "Xbox owner" and "FPS player" is, at the moment, pretty large. But if the Xbox is to grow, it must reach outside this audience. The OP that I responded to claimed that Sony had "no answer" to Halo 3. I claim that Halo 3 is not a silver bullet that will somehow magically elevate Microsoft to the top of the console pile, for the reasons listed in this post.
So let me get this straight. You're saying that a PS3 contains all the chips that a standalone Bluray player has, plus the Cell and the GPU and everything?
Maybe you haven't realized this, but modern consoles are powerful computers designed to push stuff as fast as possible onto your screen. The Cell and nVidia GPU can definitely replace a lot (if not all) of the processing chips that a stand-alone Bluray player requires. Then add in the fact that the unit you link to probably suffers from some early-adopter gouging, and your agument becomes pretty tenuous.
The difference is that one costs $1000 and one costs $500. Unless you can cite actual component costs, the price difference means nothing.
Now everyone can be a smartass and make fun of movies.
tax information has to be updated every year.
So the Gub'mint should make it available in machine-readable form. This way, all you need to do is feed it into your program and everything works.
But hey, we don't live in a reality where stuff works in a sensible manner...
Note the wording. They do not say "Sony will lose $X on each PS3 sold", but merely that they will be sinking a lot of money into "preparing the PS3 for launch". This is a key difference, and conflicts with your assertion that "Sony said so", as they have not. The article I cited earlier also noted that Sony sunk a bunch of money into PS2 development, yet they still made money on every one sold.
Yeah, I also heard that the demo was pretty crappy, but others claim that the demo is not representative of the game at all. So that gets me back to "I'll rent it first".
I'm not sure, I seem to remember hearing they passed by Nintendo in worldwide sales, but only in the last year or two.
I was thinking the same thing, only along the lines of movies. Most people don't watch movies in 15-minute sessions. The difference comes when you look at how seriously people take it.
Billions of people watch movies, but there are a lot less who fit the definition of "movie geek" or (to borrow the gaming term) "hardcore". These are people who maybe know more about film or drama, or just really love movies. These people don't necessarily spend more time watching movies than the average person, especially considering the people (like you mention) who watch hours of TV a day.
The same goes for games. Lots of people play board, card, or video games, but there's a smaller segment who enjoy delving into the strategy and mechanics of the games, or maybe the design elements. Again, a super-geeky gamer may not play as much as a bored middle-schooler, but that does not deny his geekiness.
In the end, I think equating "session length" with "casualness" is a pretty bad idea. On some level, it might be accurate, but that is a level that doesn't really correspond to reality.
Could a peice of software be considered a "game" if it takes more than 15 minutes to play before you start to enjoy it?
Could a piece of video be considered a "movie" if it takes more than 15 minutes before you start to enjoy it?
Could a piece of text be considred a "novel" if it takes more than 15 minutes before you start to enjoy it?
Could a piece of metal be considered a "tool" if it takes more than 15 minutes before you learn how to use it in a way that makes it useful?
Considering they will be selling the PS3 at a loss, as is the case with most any console
Consoles are not, as a rule, sold at a loss. As for the PS3, we have yet to hear anything official from Sony as to whether they will be taking a hit on the system or not. My guess, following past evidence, is that they won't.
I don't think you understand. The Market always provides the most efficient and best ways of doing things. If you just leave it to The Market, everything will be fine.
I doubt this is true. Police officers nearly always say things that are not true or semi-true, or word things in funny ways. If you are in a public place, court decisions have affirmed that you cannot expect privacy.
Sony has stated they have no real answer for Halo 3.
Halo 3 is not an "answer" to Sony, or anything else for that matter. This is one game series here, and a pretty niche one at that. Did Halo 1 & 2 make the Xbox profitable? No. Did they break new ground in the FPS genre? Not really.
Even Microsoft, who seemed to enjoy rising with Sony to the top during the last console generation
Let's look at the numbers. Microsoft moved a few more Xboxes than Nintendo did Gamecubes, yet they lost billions of dollars. I would not call that "rising to the top".
The thing that's usually turned me off from FF games (and other series, like Dragon Quest) is all the random battles. The new battle system in FF 12 certainly has its detractors, but I think it's a good thing. Maybe I'll rent it first...
http://www.billywest.com/index4.htm
Now, as a precedent, Kelo is undeniably dangerous. I'm not arguing that. I'm saying that in the particular case of New London, it was the right choice to make.
And how many other Supreme Court decisions were the same type of situation? I have no idea, but I'm guessing it's more than a few.
Well, with this news, it sounds like the scopes of the claims were changed. You could say SCO was trying to monkey with them, a trial which IBM will hopefully, in the end, pass.
Ahem.
I see that there is a mention of Weird Al there, but it doesn't cite the case (meaning it's probably bogus). Nevertheless, the other cases cited would seem to cover the type of work he does.
Now it's your turn to cite actual court cases that back up your assertions.
Yeah, "peninsula"? Do they think we're stupid?
I suggest you read up a bit on parody before you claim you know everything. Unless you can cite the statutes that would apply to what you are claiming, your assertions do not stand.
Oh, and thanks for insulting me, even though you're wrong.
I think that this is actually the reason that so many self-proclaimed "old-school" RPGers hate Final Fantasy VII so much: it made them look like total chumps and they resent Square for "abandoning" them... in favor of more exciting, playable games that more people than ever enjoy. Just goes to show, there's no pleasing some people.
FF 7 was not "more playable" than, say, Chrono Trigger. Both have annoying interfaces, unskippable inane dialogue, etc. I use CT as an example because I haven't played the SNES FF games.
Also, do you have any empirical data that suggests more people play RPGs now than before? Obviously, the absolute number of gamers has risen since then (but remains at about the same percentage of the population). So pointing to higher 2005 sales won't cut it; you'll need to show that a higher percentage of gamers now play RPGs. I really doubt this is true.
Gates can give every Slashdot user $1000 and not feel it.
This sounds like a good idea. MS should do this.
Foobar2000 is not GPL'd, and is probably not considered Open Source either. Have you even read the license page?