Hatrack River Forum: Wow, I can't believe that Sony is charging...

This is topic Wow, I can't believe that Sony is charging... in forum Books, Films, Food and Culture at Hatrack River Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.hatrack.com/ubb/main/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=042878

Posted by andi330 (Member # 8572) on :

...$500-$600 for the new PS3.

And yet, even though I won't be shelling out half a grand for the system, I sort of get it.

No really. Yes, It's more expensive than most people were hoping for and a lot of people are already comparing the cost to the Xbox360. Remember though, that the Xbox 360 didn't come with an HD or BluRay drive in it. If you want the HD DVD drive you'll have to buy it separate and it's not going to play your games for you. The PS3 will.

So just out of curiosity, is anyone here planning on buying the PS3 when it comes out? [Hail]

Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :

I'm finally thinking about buying a PS2 now.

Posted by andi330 (Member # 8572) on :

Not to mention the HD DVD for the Xbox 360 will probably cost $200 or so making the Xbox 360 the same price as the PS3.

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :

If you buy the $399 package of the 360 it DOES come with the HD. Among other things.

Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :

I bet the price drops a hundred bucks ~6 months after the release.

Posted by pfresh85 (Member # 8085) on :

I have no intention of purchasing the PS3. I watched the conference last night with mild interest, and I expected a price point around $500. Still to see the price point at $500 for the 20GB HD version and $600 for the 60GB HD version, it was just bad. Particularly when Sony didn't really even show off anything impressive game-wise for PS3. Such a sad thing.

Nintendo's conference this morning on the other hand was pretty exciting. It was all about the different games and the different uses of the Wii-mote. I'm now more than ever full enthused about the Wii. I just wish Nintendo would have announced the low price point that everyone knows is coming and have it as a final blow to Sony.

Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :

I only recently got a PS2 (I previously had a roommate who had one, so didn't need my own) and this news makes me glad I did that instead of waiting for the PS3.

In other console news, my new fear with Nintendo is that the games for there next system will follow the naming trend of so many Nintendo 64 games; I hope we don't end up playing Mario Wii, Zelda Wii, etc. [Wink]

--Enigmatic

Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :

TEAM SONY!

No.

I no longer purchase Sony products, if I can help it. I'm wanting the new Nintendo. In the meantime, I'm trying to decide between a Sega Genesis and a PS1. Because really, all I want to do is play Sonic and Crash Bandicoot and maybe Spyro.

-pH

Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :

quote:
Originally posted by andi330:

So just out of curiosity, is anyone here planning on buying the PS3 when it comes out?

No, this goes against all their previous business practice, and common sense as far as I'm concerned.

These companies always lose money on the introduction of the system, because they sell below the mark they need to make up the development and manufacturing costs. They used to do this because they knew that the systems would sell for years, and eventually they would make it up with volume. Also they used to sell you system for less so they could bone you on the games and liscencing. If their still losing money on the system and selling it at 600 bucks, then the games are going to pretty expensive. It seems like a bad investment for me right now.

Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :

You never know anymore if something Sony is going to implant a deadly virus in your household appliances. [Angst]

-pH

Posted by pfresh85 (Member # 8085) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Enigmatic:
In other console news, my new fear with Nintendo is that the games for there next system will follow the naming trend of so many Nintendo 64 games; I hope we don't end up playing Mario Wii, Zelda Wii, etc.

--Enigmatic

Eh, no need to fear (although I know you were just joking anyways). The Mario game for Wii is called Super Mario Galaxy. There isn't a Wii-only Zelda yet, but the first Zelda on Wii will be Twilight Princess.

Posted by Stan the man (Member # 6249) on :

Nope, I'm not going to get a PS3. I don't even own a PS2 or an XBOX360. I have always been partial to Nintendo and Atari. Sometimes I like playing the old Commodore 64 games when the dang thing decides to work.

Posted by Eldrad (Member # 8578) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Orincoro:

quote:
Originally posted by andi330:

So just out of curiosity, is anyone here planning on buying the PS3 when it comes out?
No, this goes against all their previous business practice, and common sense as far as I'm concerned.

These companies always lose money on the introduction of the system, because they sell below the mark they need to make up the development and manufacturing costs. They used to do this because they knew that the systems would sell for years, and eventually they would make it up with volume. Also they used to sell you system for less so they could bone you on the games and liscencing. If their still losing money on the system and selling it at 600 bucks, then the games are going to pretty expensive. It seems like a bad investment for me right now.

While it's generally true that console manufacturers lose money on consoles straight off the bat, I believe that Nintendo has initially made profit off all of its hardware at launch, including the GameCube. That changes with price drops, of course, but it's possible that since Wii is less technologically oriented than the 360 or PS3, Nintendo will be able to price it affordably and still initially make profit off the hardware.

Posted by pfresh85 (Member # 8085) on :

Indeed. At launch, Nintendo was making a roughly $50 profit on each GameCube sold. Wii may be similar if a $200-$250 price point is announced.

Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :

I wonder if that wasn't just marketing spin. For example, they might make 50 more than the cost of manufacture, but what about the advertising budget, the research, etc. I bet they were still in the hole considering the overall cost of the release, divided by units sold in the initial run. If not, then wow.

Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :

Business perspective:

(disclaimer: this is on the subject of the hardware woes, as of right now. As always, the final judgement on starting games linup can change quite a bit)

PS3D0

Sony's price woes, put summarily, are the fault of terrible prioritizing. It was none other than Merrill Lynch itself that launched an investigation team that determined that the Blu-Ray drive, alone, costs an absolute minimum of $350 to manufacture for the Playstation 3. This figure is separate from installation.

Merrill Lynch was snooping around on account of investment jitters. Further investigation put the raw cost for manufacturing a fully functional PS3 at over a thousand dollars. This is absurd.

The end result is that a fully functional Playstation 3 is $600. Add a quick and dirty incorporation of sales tax in total, and that's about $650.50.This means that Sony's mismanaged development directives have left their offering at a price range formerly expected of introductory computing platforms. Even at $600, Sony is absorbing over $400 in losses for each PS3 sold. This is the very moment where they find themselves in dire straits: they know the price point is a killer, but they also know that they simply cannot absorb launch adopter sales below $600. They are stuck where they are, and they've nobody to blame but themselves.

Once you factor in retailers, we will easily have a PS3, two games, and controller at $800+.

Playstation 3's presence at E3 has as of right now revealed the end of tenable hype and hubris, and Sony's obviously forced reaction has led to the revelation that they are shamelessly copying and re-engineering whatever perks they can get their hands on, which leads us to

PSthWii

Ok, ok, yes, we know -- Sony is attempting to pull a blatant ripoff of the Wii's innovations. Totally all over it, we got the memo. It's so blatant that I will leave it to others to make fun of, and I needn't gloss over the obvious details. Even the presenters at E3 were visually uncomfortable whenever they talked about Sony's motion-sensor 'innovations,' since it is forced lies. That's bound to be well-discussed elsewhere. But -- but -- if they are going to knock off Nintendo's innovations and try to pawn them off as their own, why are they doing it so half-hearted?

1. It's a poorly designed freehand controller. Oldie, not goodie. Inelegant adaptation in an attempt to replicate Nintendo's motion and tilt sensors. The PS3 prototype will have a fraction of the motion sensibility, apparently.

2. Sony claimed to ditch rumble pak functionality on account of a 'bluetooth interference,' which is a lie. The rumble drop is actually on account of the lawsuit over that particular issue. Nintendo controllers will maintain force feedback.

Spruce Goose

The $500 'skinny' version is a terrible one. The skinny 360 was simply toned on the bells and whistles and can be upgraded to the full capacity of the higher-priced unit; the $500 is simply "broken" flavor. The smaller hard drive is not the issue -- the goosed PS3 lacks WiFi and HDMI output, meaning that it cannot create the much-touted 1080 dpi: your $350 Blu-ray drive can only output resolution equivalent to a DVD drive. Unable to run in hi-def, much of the power of the reduced version PS3 will simply go forever untapped, in what equates to the most counter-intuitive price-reduction techniques I've ever seen: they kept the expensive graphics production gear inside, but bottlenecked it completely on the video output.

It's absurd.

They've dropped the ball with the PS3. They had terrible development strategies, worse development priorities (blu-ray penetration inclusion), and they relied on an arrogant affect that wasn't really connected to the market reality. PS3 is going in as a flop strictly business-wise and it will leave Sony vulnerable for this game generation, straight up through to PS4. They're victims of their own hype, too, to an extent. It will be lost ground for them, especially considering that you can buy both other consoles and some games for less than it will cost to get hooked up for a PS3. Especially considering that Microsoft now smells the blood in the water, and you can venture to guess that we'll have $300 or $200 full-blown 360's in stores right around Sony's presumable launch time. It depends on how daring Microsoft is, but they've certainly got the room: they can sell full 360's for $200 and lose less on each unit than Sony will be losing with the manufacture of each PS3 for their initial price point (A 360 is manufactured for about $525).

The PS3's total sales projections could go anywhere, mostly dependant upon price point eligibility, but the video game demographic likes to buy a lot of consoles. The PS3 could drift comfortably on the backs of fanboys alone, or it might not.

But Sony has lost ground, lost uncontested market dominance; they have bungled with Blu-Ray, and they are doubtlessly making mistakes. The company is also a whole package issue for PS3's market success.

To compare to Nintendo: Nintendo doesn't lose money and sticks nearly entirely (minus Virtua Boy, I think) to profitable enterprise. The Revolution ... sorry, Wii ... merely only has to hold its own weight to be a market success and keep the company in good stead.

Sony, though, will drag on the PS3's heels like an affixed corpse. The PS3 can't just carry itself, it's got to carry a whole flagging company around on its back, support it, and be hedged as a market penetration gimmick for Sony's whole multimedia package, and be a front for Sony's format war. The PS3 has bigger, more ridiculous hurdles than its competitors just to stay in the game.

Sony needs deep market penetration early on just to absorb the losses from the console sale slowly over time, so ... the PS3 could paradoxically still manage to hold largest market share this time around (i.e., minimal market share atrophy) versus Microsoft and Nintendo .. and still end up doing the worst of the three consoles.

I think the most important thing to note is that the PS3 was certainly a huge gamble. A daring one, if not shortsighted. Investors seem to be concluding that they're losing something out of that bet.

I'd like to sound more neutral, but I can find very little for Sony's case until they can manage to pitch a strong opening lineup. Best news that anyone's got for them is that the 360 hasn't sold well in Japan. Microsoft is just going in while holding all the cards in this particular confrontation.

Nintendo, as always, will do just fine on the sidelines. They don't lose money (barring the virtua boy) and they don't seem poised to lose ground.

Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :

The price sounds about right to me for the hardware you are getting. HD DVD player, 20 gig hard drive, and a game system. About $500 out of the price range I can afford, but it sounds right to me.

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :

Once again, the base price of the package deal for the 360, including all of that, is $399. That's the price at Gamestop, I believe.

I specifically asked about the hard drive package.

Posted by Zeugma (Member # 6636) on :

My husband and I are wanna-be gamers, we own a PS2, but we've just never been able to get excited about actually playing any of the games, they get boring so fast. Still though, it seems like something we'd enjoy if we could just find games that held our interest, and the Wii stuff looks *really* cool. All the stuff about getting to stand up and swing the controller around physically, actually swinging a bat or hacking at something with a sword, looked really appealing, and we liked the message that this is going to be targeted at *everyone*, not just hard-core gamers. [Smile]

Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Zeugma:
My husband and I are wanna-be gamers, we own a PS2, but we've just never been able to get excited about actually playing any of the games, they get boring so fast. Still though, it seems like something we'd enjoy if we could just find games that held our interest, and the Wii stuff looks *really* cool. All the stuff about getting to stand up and swing the controller around physically, actually swinging a bat or hacking at something with a sword, looked really appealing, and we liked the message that this is going to be targeted at *everyone*, not just hard-core gamers.

My wife and I are in the same boat. I think the problem with the ps2 is the lack of non-sports multi player games. I'm not talking about all the "battle mode" options either, but good old Mario and Luigi style. It gets boring just watching one or the other person playing.

Posted by Zeugma (Member # 6636) on :

Yeah, I know! Although we did really love the Mario 64 game, it was fun both for whoever was playing and for whoever was backseat dri... er, "watching". [Big Grin]

We're very excited about this Mario in Space game, it looks exactly like Mario 64, but in Space!

But yeah, even better are the real multi-player games, like Super Mario Kart! The tennis and golf games they showed off looked like a lot of fun, I could see us swinging invisible racquets around in the living room. [Smile]

Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :

Wow, I think I'm the only staunch Sony supporter left anywhere.

quote:
Once again, the base price of the package deal for the 360, including all of that, is $399. That's the price at Gamestop, I believe.

And once again, Kwea, they're talking about High Definition DVD, not a hard drive. Also, the 360 doesn't play DVDs out of the box - not with either package.

Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :

I didn't know there were any left.

*puts Ersomniac in a zoo and plans a forced breeding program*

Posted by sweetbaboo (Member # 8845) on :

Ero, we're sony at our house, but I have to admit that it's basically my husband and my kids that play. We just replaced our PS2 after it got pulled off the tv stand and so I'm pretty sure we won't be "investing" in the PS3 though...especially at that price.

However, we did get another guitar for guitar hero at the Sony store and that is really fun to play with/against another person!

*breaks Ero out of the zoo and away from the nasty breeding program!

Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :

I can't figure out why anyone wants to play DVDs on their game console.

Then again, as someone who has his PC hooked up to his TV, I can't figure out why anyone wants to play games on their game console.

Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :

quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
I can't figure out why anyone wants to play DVDs on their game console.

Then again, as someone who has his PC hooked up to his TV, I can't figure out why anyone wants to play games on their game console.

I do it on occasion when I am copying a show on my dvd player/recorder and I want to watch a dvd.

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :

Yes, it does play DVD's out of the box. The package I was looking at did, anyway.

People specifically mentioned the memory (saying 20 gig), which ISN'T referring to High Def DVD. I know the difference, I really do. [Wink]

quote:
Watch Movies, TV, and Video

* DVD movies: No more Xbox DVD Movie Playback Kit required! Simply insert your DVD and use your controller or an Xbox 360 Universal Media Remote for full DVD control. DVD playback supports progressive-scan 480p for optimal viewing on HDTVs (requires an Xbox 360 Component HD AV Cable).

From here.

Posted by ricree101 (Member # 7749) on :

quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
I can't figure out why anyone wants to play DVDs on their game console.

For the most part, I'm guessing that it's people like me who don't have a separate dvd player, or people who have their game system hooked up to a tv without an extra dvd player.

Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :

quote:
I can't figure out why anyone wants to play DVDs on their game console.

1 device = cheaper than 2 devices, especially given the prices of DVD players when the PS2 first came out. Yes, it kills the motor for the laser track much more quickly, but most people don't know that.

quote:
Yes, it does play DVD's out of the box. The package I was looking at did, anyway.

My bad, my roommate just got one and when I wanted to watch Scrubs on it last night, he told me that you need the DVD playback kit.

quote:
People specifically mentioned the memory (saying 20 gig), which ISN'T referring to High Def DVD. I know the difference, I really do. [Wink]

I think you need to reread the posts: when someone says "HD DVD, 20 gig hard drive," they're talking about two different things.

Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :

I'd rather have a dedicated DVD player than have to deal with some clunky, overheated console. The controller makes for a shoddy interface and, if the PS3 is anything like the XBOX360, I'd have to deal with fan noise too.

The only other reason is performance. I remember, with the few PS2's I've messed with, the DVD playback is terrible. I know they fixed those problems with later versions, but that kind of crappy implimentation just pisses me off.

Posted by xnera (Member # 187) on :

That was a very informative and well-written post, Samprimary.

I knew the PS3 would have Blu-ray technology. I didn't know, though, that it would have a hard drive in it. What's the purpose of the hard drive? Is it for game saves, downloads...? I also hadn't heard that Sony has been trying to mimic Nintendo's innovations. Interesting, indeed.

I usually don't buy gaming consoles as soon as they come out. Heck, I just got my PS2 late last year. I'm leaning more and more towards getting a Revolution...oops, Wii... sooner rather than later. It really depends on what kind of games it has at launch, I think. If there's enough to interest me, then I'll get one. [Big Grin]

First, though, I have to play my backlog of PSX/PS2 games...

Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :

quote:
Yes, it kills the motor for the laser track much more quickly, but most people don't know that.

Unfortunately, I'm one of the people who knows that. And for the money I spend on a console, I don't want to burn it up watching DVDs. Something, I might add, even the best consoles are poorly equipped for.

Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :

Wow, I had a teeny tiny interest in this before, but had no idea it would be so expensive. Like Porteiro said, I do however actually plan to buy a PS2 this year. I figure the market will be flooded with used ones, they'll have to drop the price on them again, and even if they don't, I'll be able to pick up a good used one for cheap. The only system I have serious notions of buying is the new Nintendo. I skipped Game Cube, just didn't have the time or money, but Wii has me curious, Zelda with a motion sensor control sounds too interesting to let go.

I think this was an incredibly risky decision for Sony. Their video game sector is the only thing keeping them aboveboard right now, and to possibly hand over a large piece of marketshare to Microsoft, and some back to Nintendo because of an overpriced product just seems silly to me.

I think you're going to see a lot more competition in South Korea, the other big nexus of gamers, between the Xbox and Playstation, especially given the high price of the new PS3. Considering Xbox 360 production issues, I don't think lagging sales abroad are really an issue at the moment.

Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :

I have trouble seeing the logic of many people buying a $600 PS3 rather than a $250 Wii.

Finally, someone is actually coming out with NEW ideas for video games - rather than the same stuff we have been seeing for 10 years with incrementally better graphics. While graphics are good, games are pointless if they aren't that fun, as far as I'm concerned. Playing around with that "magic wand" controller just plain looks fun, in all the ways a magic wand would be fun!

I think Sony may be making a mistake by trying to copy it in their controller. It's like saying they admit it's a good idea, but then only offering a watered down version of it. I'm sure they'll sell well because of name recognition and because a lot of hard-core gamers do care about graphics a lot, but I can't imagine most people being that excited by it - any more so than they have been for the Xbox 360.

Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :

Many gamers will also be after particular games that Sony will be able to get through their connections and deals.

Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :

This is true.

Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :

Are there any videos of someone using the controller? I just keep thinking about the power glove and how crappy a piece of technology that was.

Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :

There's an article on CNN business where the reporter talks about using the controller. He said basically that it's a neat idea, but that Nintendo still has to do a bit of tweaking with the optimization, before it will truly reflect the movements being made.

But he seemed impressed with the new line of sports games coming out. Still, combat was a problem in the games due to the optimization issues. They have a few months to iron out the kinks.

Posted by Eldrad (Member # 8578) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Kwea:
Once again, the base price of the package deal for the 360, including all of that, is $399. That's the price at Gamestop, I believe.

I specifically asked about the hard drive package.

The base price for the 360 is $299, the one without the hard drive; the one with is $399, so if you buy a 360 package that comes with pretty much everything you'll need for it, it's still $100 cheaper than the least expensive Sony package.

quote:
Originally posted by Primal Curve:
Are there any videos of someone using the controller? I just keep thinking about the power glove and how crappy a piece of technology that was.

I think http://wii.ign.com/ or www.gamespot.com have Nintendo's E3 press conference available for download, and there are a few demonstrations of people using the remote.
I got a similar vision in my head of the power glove, but you have to remember that was a long, long time ago. Technology has come a long way since then.

Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :

Several reports have been favorable to the Wii controller.

-Bok

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :

quote:
Originally posted by erosomniac:

quote:
Yes, it does play DVD's out of the box. The package I was looking at did, anyway.
My bad, my roommate just got one and when I wanted to watch Scrubs on it last night, he told me that you need the DVD playback kit.

quote:
People specifically mentioned the memory (saying 20 gig), which ISN'T referring to High Def DVD. I know the difference, I really do. [Wink]
I think you need to reread the posts: when someone says "HD DVD, 20 gig hard drive," they're talking about two different things.

I know that, but in more than one of those posts people WERE talking specifically about memory issues, it looked to me that they weren't sure if it came with the 20 gig hard drive...particularily since the "core" model doesn't.

A lot of people don't realize that it does play DVD's out of the box, probably because the original XBox required additional hardware (the remote). [Big Grin]

Posted by the_Somalian (Member # 6688) on :

Meanwhile, I'm having loads of fun replaying "Yoshi's Island" after 11 years. That there, without all that fancy blue ray stuff, is videogaming at its finest.

Ah, simplicity...

Posted by Stan the man (Member # 6249) on :

Space Invaders

Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :

Space War.

I win. [Wink]

-Bok

PS- No, I've never played it [Smile]

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :

Pong.

Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :

Solitaire.

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :

I always knew you liked playing with yoursef, Bob. [Wink]

Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :

I have played Space War. Although not on a converted oscilloscope, I admit.

--Enigmatic

Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Kwea:
I always knew you liked playing with yoursef, Bob.

This from the guy who brought up Pong. There are so many ways to go with that one, my friend. Let us not start throwing the proverbial stones [Smile]

-Bok

Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :

The Wii (silly name withstanding) will probably be the first game system I will purchase since the Super NES I bought when I was in middle school. I just lost interest in video games as they got more and more graphics-oriented and dependent on complicated button-pushing maneuvers. But with the new controller eliminating some of the button-pushing, PLUS the ability to download and play most of my old-school favorites, legally, I have pretty much decided to buy it.

quote:
Playing around with that "magic wand" controller just plain looks fun, in all the ways a magic wand would be fun!

I can't wait till game developers get ahold of Harry Potter !

Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :

PS3 All the way! Seriously, Sony == Final Fantasy Games, which == Pwnage.

I if I have the money will buy a PS3, probly a few months afterwards for the price to dip but will buy nonetheless because it is simply that cool.

And yes I am a loyal Sony fan and would never touch an XBox.

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :

There's been a bit of misinformation about the Xbox 360 in this thread. Since I own one (non-Core, so with the hard drive) and know what you actually get in and out of the box, I'll address them.

(1) The 360 does play DVDs out of the box. In fact, I watched The Way of the Gun on mine just last night. However, the picture quality isn't great. I don't plan to use it as a primary DVD player.

(2) The fans don't spin up while playing DVDs, nor when playing Arcade games or even original Xbox games. The 360 is only noisy when playing 360 games, at which time it sounds like an A320 taking off about a block away.

(3) The 360 does not have an HDMI output, which means that the HD-DVD add-on is of very questionable value (as an aside, the low-end PS3 also lacks HDMI). If any movie studios enable the image constraint token on their releases, those discs either won't play on the 360's add-on drive, or will play in 480p rather than 720p, which defeats the whole purpose of HD-DVD in the first place.

Having said all of that, I really like the 360. Microsoft have really hit the ease-of-use nail squarely on the head with the Dashboard/Live/Arcade design and they're making things easy for both mainstream and indie developers with their dev kit releases and support. Nintendo are taking a similar tack with their low-cost Wii dev kits, and I think it's going to help them.

I kinda figured the PS3 would be expensive. I'm only interested in it for exclusive quirky titles (like Katamari Damacy, Guitar Hero, and Shadow of the Colossus this generation), so I doubt I'll buy one until they're as cheap as PS2s are now. Sony seem to be emulating Microsoft with their online service plan and Nintendo with their motion-sensitive (non-rumbling!) controller; I know I'd trust Microsoft to deliver refined software way before I'd trust Sony. I'm not a Windows user at home, but as an example I have nothing but good things to say about the Windows and Mac OS X versions of Office (both of which I use on a near-daily basis).

I'm skeptical about the success of the PS3. Sony has a lot of inertia, but with all of the buzz about the Wii and its reportedly low price, a person could buy a Wii and an Xbox 360 for not much more than the "real" (US$600) PS3. I think that if HDTV adoption doesn't take off like a bat out of hell, Nintendo might make huge gains this generation. I know I'm interested in the Wii for Twilight Princess, even though I already have a GameCube (not to mention a PS2).

Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :

The Wii was made for Star Wars.

Imagine a game where you need to battle the Sith in a light saber duel. You press a button, and your controller rumbles and MAKES THE LIGHTSABER NOISE.

*joy*

-Bok

EDIT: Plus, we'll get "The Star Wars Kid", Part 2...

Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :

I'm definitely going to be buying a Wii, barring horrible reviews when it launches. I'll probably get an X-Box 360 at some point, but I've decided to make upgrading my computer a priority over getting a 360, so it'll be a while. I have no plans to get a PS3, but if I see a used one selling for next to nothing three or four years from now I'll likely pick it up.

Is the Wii going to be backward compatible with the Gamecube? There are several Gamecube titles that I would love to have a chance to sit down and play through.

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :

Yes, the Wii will play GameCube games. [Smile]

Added: Actually, last I heard, it was going to have four GameCube controller ports for just that purpose.

Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :

[Smile]

Great news!

Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :

I still plan on getting a 360 before the next year football games get released. I may also get a Wii sometime down the road, depending on prices and Zelda game releases.

Posted by solo (Member # 3148) on :

It looks like it is backwards compatible with the gamecube - link.

You will also be able to download games from all generations of Nintendo. That alone makes me want one.

Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :

umm guys, one thing alone makes the PS3 worth it.

*geekgasm*

Final Fantasy XIII, hands down mates.

Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :

We plan on getting a 360 by next Christmas, no sense in rushing as we haven't even purchased an HD tv yet.

But then, we sort of feel obligated to be loyal to Microsoft as my brother in law works for them and that company has been very good to him and his family. It is to our advantage too, he gets XBox games so cheaply from the company store that we get lots of them for Christmas presents. [Wink]

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Blayne Bradley:
Final Fantasy XIII, hands down mates.

That's a matter of taste. I didn't like FFVI or FFVII enough to finish either.

If you can't do without JRPGs, though, the 360 is getting some. Myself, I'm hoping for strategy RPGs. And Atlus, in case the Digital Devil Saga franchise is used again.

Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :

Did you ever get rolling on Oblivion, twink?

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :

So far, I've bought Oblivion, Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter, Call of Cthulhu: Dark Corners of the Earth (original Xbox game), and a couple of Live Arcade games for my 360. [Smile]

Oblivion is a great time. I think I may have to play through it more than once, though so far I'm 12 hours in and have only done one gate. [Razz]

Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :

How does Call of Cthulhu stack up against the Gamecube Cthulhuesq title you introduced me to, twink?

Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :

quote:
That's a matter of taste. I didn't like FFVI or FFVII enough to finish either.

If you can't do without JRPGs, though, the 360 is getting some. Myself, I'm hoping for strategy RPGs. And Atlus, in case the Digital Devil Saga franchise is used again.

Atlus, Konami, Capcom and SquareEnix are the reasons I will never own a 360 or a Wii, as they produce games almost exclusively for the PS2.

Re: Atlus - the Shin Megami Tensei franchise will likely be used again, but the DDS chapters of that series are most likely done.

Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :

Noemon, from the reviews, the difference between Cthulhu/i] and [i]Eternal Darkness is that the former has an actual Cthulhu license, and takes place in Innsmouth. It's a bit more of a shooter, I think. People thought it was decent.

-Bok

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :

Yeah, Dark Corners of the Earth is first-person, whereas Eternal Darkness is third-person. I haven't played much of the former yet, though, so I can't comment on how good it is. I've been kinda busy with Oblivion and Ghost Recon, both of which are awesome. [Smile]

quote:
Atlus, Konami, Capcom and SquareEnix are the reasons I will never own a 360 or a Wii, as they produce games almost exclusively for the PS2.

Capcom, as an example, produced Resident Evil 4 and Killer7 (both of which I own and like) primarily for the GameCube; PS2 versions came later. What I want from Capcom is Resident Evil 5, which is coming to the 360. As far as RPGs and fighting games go, though, you're right. And DDR. I'm not much for fighters, and Microsoft has BioWare, my preferred RPG developer. You and I must like different clichés. [Razz]

I'm not totally sure that I'd count on those companies you listed to stay PS3-exclusive, though, even in the RPG arena. I suspect they'll go where the money is: i.e., they will ultimately make games for whichever console is the market leader in Japan. It probably won't be Microsoft, but I wouldn't rule out the possibility of Nintendo selling a lot more Wiis than Sony sells PS3s, especially if what happened with the DS and PSP is any indication. SquareEnix certainly has a formal relationship with Nintendo again nowadays; there were three GBA FF releases and there are going to be a couple more for the DS.

quote:
Re: Atlus - the Shin Megami Tensei franchise will likely be used again, but the DDS chapters of that series are most likely done.

I'm pretty much only interested in DDS, but of course the ending of DDS2 was final. Fantastic story, tolerable gameplay.

Posted by Lime (Member # 1707) on :

Final Fantasy XIII looks really interesting, and Metal Gear Solid 4 promises to be all shades of awesome.

But $600? Nottachance.

Microsoft is currently pointing out (with much glee) that consumers can purcahse a Wii and a 360 for LESS than it costs for a PS3.

ETA: Twinky - Capcom has announced a Resident Evil game for the Wii. There weren't any specifics (if it's RE5 or not), but there's gonna be one, at least.

Posted by ricree101 (Member # 7749) on :

quote:
Originally posted by erosomniac:
Atlus, Konami, Capcom and SquareEnix are the reasons I will never own a 360 or a Wii, as they produce games almost exclusively for the PS2.

Re: Atlus - the Shin Megami Tensei franchise will likely be used again, but the DDS chapters of that series are most likely done.

Personally, I'm hoping that the PS3 fails just so that those companies jump ship to a cheaper platform.

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :

Peter Moore, MS VP of interactive entertainment, thinks the Wii will do well at the expense of the PS3. Interesting that MS is seemingly making overtures toward Nintendo for some sort of mutual nonagression pact in their battle against Sony. [Razz]

[Edited for typos.]

[ May 11, 2006, 02:40 PM: Message edited by: twinky ]

Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :

quote:
I think I may have to play through it more than once, though so far I'm 12 hours in and have only done one gate.

You're ahead of me, then. I have 60 hours of game time, and haven't closed a single gate. I haven't even begun the main quest.

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :

[Big Grin]

Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :

That photo of Moore is positively Emperor Mingian.

Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :

quote:
Personally, I'm hoping that the PS3 fails just so that those companies jump ship to a cheaper platform.

It will never happen. Sony's support in Japan alone is WAY, WAY too strong. If the PS3 fails in the U.S., the worst that will happen is the developers in question will simply stop translating their games.

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :

Ten years ago, people were saying exactly the same thing about Nintendo. Never say "never." [Wink]

Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :

quote:
Capcom, as an example, produced Resident Evil 4 and Killer7 (both of which I own and like) primarily for the GameCube; PS2 versions came later.

Hence the "almost." Count the number of games in their library that were released exclusively on PS2. Also, Killer 7 was seriously one of the most underwhelming games in video game history. What a waste of time THAT was.

quote:
I'm not totally sure that I'd count on those companies you listed to stay PS3-exclusive, though, even in the RPG arena. I suspect they'll go where the money is: i.e., they will ultimately make games for whichever console is the market leader in Japan. It probably won't be Microsoft, but I wouldn't rule out the possibility of Nintendo selling a lot more Wiis than Sony sells PS3s, especially if what happened with the DS and PSP is any indication. SquareEnix certainly has a formal relationship with Nintendo again nowadays; there were three GBA FF releases and there are going to be a couple more for the DS.

The DS vs PSP isn't a fair comparison, since Nintendo has a VERY well established market dominance of portable consoles. People have tried and failed continuously to break into that sphere. Despite the lackluster PSP sales, though, note the completely inexplicable popularity of PSP movies (which I suspect is all that's keeping the console alive at this point). The PSP's greatest mistake was lack of a unique library: almost all the games are PS2 ports, where the DS had a library all its own. The PS3 will not have this problem.

Still, good points, and SquareEnix has shown themselves to be quite comfortable with backstabbing in the past.

Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :

quote:
Ten years ago, people were saying exactly the same thing about Nintendo. Never say "never."

What on earth are you talking about? Nintendo has released a single failed console to date and their recovery thereafter was phenomenal. Japan's support of Nintendo never died.

Edit to add: Not to mention that the only reason the console died was because it was physically damaging to use.

Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :

I pretty much stopped paying attention to console gaming when I got my C64, and have only recently taken an interest in it again, so I know almost nothing about the history between, say, the Colecovision and the PS2/XBox/Gamecube generation of consoles. What was the failed Nintendo console, and in what way was it physically damaging to use? Did the controllers tend to induce carpal tunnel syndrome or something?

Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :

Virtual Boy. It was a 3D semi-portable gaming system that you strapped to your head. Kind of cool in it's own way but it was found to be bad for your eyes.

Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :

I never tried that, but even being at a very impressionable age when it was released I thought that thing was teh suck.

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :

quote:
Also, Killer 7 was seriously one of the most underwhelming games in video game history. What a waste of time THAT was.

I can only assume from this that either you never played it or we have fundamentally different tastes. I found it very refreshing to play a game with an interesting and original story and style, which in my experience is a rarity on consoles (or, really, in gaming in general). Of course, given your list -- Atlus, Konami, Capcom, and particularly SquareEnix -- it's probably safe to say that our tastes are indeed very different, with a small amount of overlap.

quote:
The DS vs PSP isn't a fair comparison, since Nintendo has a VERY well established market dominance of portable consoles.

While this is true, the DS didn't take off immediately (as it would have if the Nintendo brand alone was strong enough to make a hit). It wasn't until the release of Nintendogs that DS sales skyrocketed -- in fact, in the week after Nintendogs' release in Japan, DS sales quadrupled.

quote:
Still, good points, and SquareEnix has shown themselves to be quite comfortable with backstabbing in the past.

I'm not sure "backstabbing" is the word I'd use, but yes, they've certainly switched platforms before.

quote:
What on earth are you talking about? Nintendo has released a single failed console to date and their recovery thereafter was phenomenal. Japan's support of Nintendo never died.

Recovery phenomenal? ~14% of the console market to Sony's ~69% isn't phenomenal (see below).

quote:
Edit to add: Not to mention that the only reason the console died was because it was physically damaging to use.

I'm not talking about the Virtual Boy. I'm talking about the N64, which sold 32 million units to the PS1's 100 million.

For this generation, as of March 2006, the standings are roughly 103 million PS2s, 24 million Xboxes, and ~20.5 million GameCubes. Wikipedia's figures in this case come straight from the annual reports of the companies in question.

My point in all of this is that if Sony could wrest market dominance from Nintendo in the space of one console generation, the same could easily happen to Sony. The PS3 isn't going to fail the way the Virtual Boy did, but it could put in a lacklustre performance compared to its predecessor. That's "could," not "will."

Added:

quote:
Originally posted by Primal Curve:
Virtual Boy. It was a 3D semi-portable gaming system that you strapped to your head. Kind of cool in it's own way but it was found to be bad for your eyes.

I don't know about the eyes, but bending over to look into the set (the stand was not adjustable) was definitely bad for your back. Not that I played one (or even heard about them) when it came out, or played one for very long at any time.

Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :

That's interesting. Thanks, Primal Curve!

[Edit--and twinky]

Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :

quote:
I can only assume from this that either you never played it or we have fundamentally different tastes. I found it very refreshing to play a game with an interesting and original story and style, which in my experience is a rarity on consoles (or, really, in gaming in general). Of course, given your list -- Atlus, Konami, Capcom, and particularly SquareEnix -- it's probably safe to say that our tastes are indeed very different, with a small amount of overlap.

I did play it. We probably have different priorities more than tastes: Killer 7 struck me as unplayable, despite the unique style and engaging storyline. I was excited about it for a long time, which probably also had something to do with how disappointed I was in the finished product.

quote:
While this is true, the DS didn't take off immediately (as it would have if the Nintendo brand alone was strong enough to make a hit). It wasn't until the release of Nintendogs that DS sales skyrocketed -- in fact, in the week after Nintendogs' release in Japan, DS sales quadrupled.

I'm pretty sure it was tripled, but you're right.

quote:
Recovery phenomenal? ~14% of the console market to Sony's ~69% isn't phenomenal (see below).

As compared to, say, Sega.

quote:
I'm not talking about the Virtual Boy. I'm talking about the N64, which sold 32 million units to the PS1's 100 million.

For this generation, as of March 2006, the standings are roughly 103 million PS2s, 24 million Xboxes, and ~20.5 million GameCubes. Wikipedia's figures in this case come straight from the annual reports of the companies in question.

My point in all of this is that if Sony could wrest market dominance from Nintendo in the space of one console generation, the same could easily happen to Sony. The PS3 isn't going to fail the way the Virtual Boy did, but it could put in a lacklustre performance compared to its predecessor. That's "could," not "will."

I understand your point here, but in my mind the problems were tied directly to the lack of support from very specific developers (notably SquareEnix). I think a huge part of why the N64 failed was the severe lack of planned title from developers customers had come to love and support (e.g. Capcom, SquareEnix, etc.). When the GameCube came out, these developers were less repulsed but didn't release enough of their games exclusively to GameCube to make up the difference.

The argument I'm seeing here is that if the PS3 fails, the developers will jump ship, and I can agree with that: if the PS3 failed, the developers probably would. But I don't see the PS3 failing without the developers jumping ship, which (thus far) they are not doing.

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :

quote:
I did play it. We probably have different priorities more than tastes: Killer 7 struck me as unplayable, despite the unique style and engaging storyline. I was excited about it for a long time, which probably also had something to do with how disappointed I was in the finished product.

That makes sense. I was excited about Killer7 for a long time too -- I followed its development pretty much from the first announcement. Ultimately I thought that the decision to put the player on rails was for the best because of the control it gave Capcom over the camera angles (control that I felt they used to excellent effect). I mean, sure, the gameplay was rote, but that was also true of Digital Devil Saga 1 & 2, and it didn't stop me from sinking more than 100 hours into them total. [Wink]

According to the Wikipedia article on Nintendogs (which references an IGN article I can't read from work), it boosted DS sales by a factor of 4.2. Either way, though, it was a lot. Myself, I'm thinking about a DS for the Age of Empires title, of all things. [Big Grin]

quote:
The argument I'm seeing here is that if the PS3 fails, the developers will jump ship, and I can agree with that: if the PS3 failed, the developers probably would. But I don't see the PS3 failing without the developers jumping ship, which (thus far) they are not doing.

Well, it isn't so much "fails" (in the Virtual Boy sense) as it is "fails to meet sales expectations." The PS2 was one of the fastest-selling consoles ever on launch; if the PS3 isn't, it might be taken as a sign of weakness (even if sales are still good overall).

For example, SquareEnix has already promised at least one RPG for the Xbox 360, and it won't be hamstrung by peripheral requirements the way Crystal Chronicles was on the GameCube. As you said, they're almost Sony-exclusive, but "almost" is a step change from the PS1 generation. It could be a sign that their confidence in Sony is slightly weaker, or it could just be opportunistic behaviour. Until the PS3 launch is well behind us, we won't really know.

Apparently, though, the playable PS3 games at E3 stand up, which is a positive sign for Sony after a year of hype and empty display cases.

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :

OK, this is straight from 3 places today....

The $399 XBox360 package IS HD DVD ready, and comes with the cabels and all; all it requires is a HD ready tv. If you buy just the core system you have to pay for additional hardware for HD DVD playback, but it will play regular DVD's out of the box.

For $399 it has both HD capacity AND a 20 gig Hard Drive (and HD cables).

Posted by andi330 (Member # 8572) on :

According to this article at CNN.com:

quote:
Sony said it is taking steps to avoid the widespread shortages consumers faced last holiday with the Xbox 360. The company plans to ship 2 million PlayStation 3s at launch and plans to ship another 2 million before the end of 2006. Kaz Hirai, president and CEO of Sony Computer Entertainment America, said the company also plans to ship an additional 2 million units in the first quarter of 2007.

"The next generation doesn't start until we say it does," said Hirai.

Excuse me? Why doesn't it start until Sony says so? I mean, you're charging $600 for your new console (at least the version most people are going to want) and Microsoft's 360 will have been out for a year before the PS3 will be released.

Is he saying this just because Sony currently sells the most console systems? If so, then maybe he should rethink his statement. Nintendo is starting to look like a serious contender (sp?) again and after all microsoft does have a year's head start.

It's a whole new ballgame with nextgen Sony. Maybe dropping the arrogance when half the gaming world is angry about the new console price is in order.

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :

I think that statement referred to how advanced their game system will be. I think they have a point. [Big Grin]

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :

That still isn't accurate, Kwea. The US$400 Xbox 360 (which is what I have) does not play HD-DVDs out of the box. Nor does the US$300 Core System. In either case you would have to buy Microsoft's add-on HD-DVD drive (an external drive) to play HD-DVDs. This add-on has been announced but isn't actually available yet.

Posted by andi330 (Member # 8572) on :

Yeah, but as Nintendo found out with the Game Cube most advanced does not equal most popular. Of the three systems that came out last time the GC was the most advanced system of the three, better graphics and better processor. Sony still left it in the dust.

Posted by andi330 (Member # 8572) on :

quote:
Originally posted by twinky:
That still isn't accurate, Kwea. The US$400 Xbox 360 (which is what I have) does not play HD-DVDs out of the box. Nor does the US$300 Core System. In either case you would have to buy Microsoft's add-on HD-DVD drive (an external drive) to play HD-DVDs. This add-on has been announced but isn't actually available yet.

And that drive will play movies only. No games.

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :

That depends on your definition of "advanced." The original Xbox had the best graphics, as evidenced by crossplatform titles such as the Splinter Cell franchise.

Added: To address your second post, if that's true, I'm not sure I see what difference it makes. I'm not really expecting game developers to use the full 30GB capacity of Blu-ray discs anytime soon.

Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :

i'm sorry but I see alot of generallities here, I think the PS3 is an excellent consol AFAIK and I WILL buy it if I have the money.

However, about the generallities, does anyone have hard facts in terms of statistics why the PS3 would do badly?

Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :

quote:
Excuse me? Why doesn't it start until Sony says so?

Because Sony says they get to say who says when it starts, obviously.

Seriously though, what are you asking? The quote is from a Sony representative at a Sony event hyping a Sony product. "Hype" being a very important word. Do you expect Sony to come out and say "Yeah, the XBox totally beat us to the punch this time out and we're going to have to play catch up later. Oh, and by the way we're totally trying to rip of Nintendo's controller idea, too."?

--Enigmatic

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :

quote:
i'm sorry but I see alot of generallities here

You haven't provided anything other than "I think the PS3 will be awesome because I love Final Fantasy games," so I dunno that you're in a position to criticise. [Razz]

quote:
Originally posted by Blayne Bradley:
However, about the generallities, does anyone have hard facts in terms of statistics why the PS3 would do badly?

In the last two generations, the company that got to market first (Sony) completely dominated. The PlayStation came out in Japan in December 1994, while the N64 didn't see release until June 1996. The PS1 sold 100 million units to the N64's 32 million.

Similarly, the PS2 (100 million units sold) came out in Japan in March 2000, while the GameCube (20.6 million units sold) didn't come out until September 2001. The Xbox (24 million) came out in North America first, in November 2001.

When the Wii and PS3 come out this fall, Microsoft will have had roughly a year to sell consoles. The Xbox 360 isn't selling as fast as the PS1 and PS2 did, but it's selling briskly; if Microsoft can come up with a "killer app" for the Japanese market (such as that exclusive RPG SquareEnix are working on for them), they may be able to hang on to the marketshare crown for a few years even if the PS3 flies off the shelves.

Obviously this is all speculation. What are you suggesting? That we shouldn't ever speculate about the potential of a product that isn't out yet? [Razz]

quote:
I WILL buy it if I have the money.

That's the kicker, isn't it? The PS3 costs 50% more than the Xbox 360.

The question, then, is how briskly the PS3 will sell at US$600 for the real system, particularly if Microsoft cuts the Xbox 360's price just in time for the PS3 release, and even more particularly if the Wii sells for less than US$250. How many people have HDTVs to take advantage of an Xbox 360 or PS3? Adoption rates aren't exactly staggering to this point. A year ago I figured Sony would sell a hojillion of whatever it was they put out with the PS3 label, even if it was an elephant turd with a little bow tie; now I'm not so sure. We'll see, I suppose.

Posted by andi330 (Member # 8572) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Blayne Bradley:
i'm sorry but I see alot of generallities here, I think the PS3 is an excellent consol AFAIK and I WILL buy it if I have the money.

However, about the generallities, does anyone have hard facts in terms of statistics why the PS3 would do badly?

Sure. Here is a list of things that I could do with $600:
-Pay one month rent.
-Buy at five to six months of groceries.
-Fill my gas tank 15 times.
-Buy a new sleeper sofa and have money left over.
-Pay several car payments.
-Put it in savings where it could earn interest.
-(Assuming the Wii will be $250 and the games $50) - Buy the Wii and about six games for it.

The early adopters will probably run right out and buy it but alot of gamers won't until the price drops - significantly. It's just too much expense and the $600 doesn't include any games. Sony and Microsoft have said that their games are going to average $60. So if you want to get a couple of games with the system you can tack on another $120. That's $720 at the start. Here in SC sales tax is currently 5% so add on another $36 for tax and you've hit $756 for the system and two games. I don't care how cool the system is, it's just not worth that much money to me or a lot of other gamers.

Sure, sony will keep the hardcore players but your average player, people like me, won't lay out that much cash for a system.

Although I must say, I am tempted to buy one then put it on Ebay. I could probably make 100-200% profit on it.

Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :

i'm the poor average gamer and I will shell out the money if I have the money to do so and I think we can all agree that playing FFXIII is alot more important then rent. pfft.

Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :

If this already been mentioned in the thread I've missed it, but...

Controllers. Do any of the prices floating around include even one controller? Back in my day a nintendo system came with two controllers and a Mario game included in the price. [/crotchety] But many more recent systems have not included controllers (IIRC), partially on the excuse that there were more style/color options available so you'd want to pick them out separately. I actually see this as being more of an issue with the Wii, since the controller may cost more to produce than a standard controller, and it has the plug in for controller peripherals, like the analog stick in addition to the Wii-mote (nunchucku-style). So andi's price estimate of $756 may not even have you able to play your PS3 yet.

And on a somewhat-related note, how the heck did they decide on seven-player maximum for the PS3? Bravo for the capability of "more than 4" but why arrive at a number that makes it impossible to have even teams or reasonably symmetric multiplayer arenas? Seven is terribly odd, if you'll pardon the pun.

--Enigmatic

Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :

Can you name a system that ships without a controller? I can't.

Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :

I'm pretty sure* the N64 and GameCube didn't when I bought them, but I bought my PS2 used so can't speak for that. Maybe that's just a nintendo trend then.

*Not 100% positive, it's been a while. That's why I asked in my previous post.

--Enigmatic

Edit: Checking out bestbuy.com shows that the GC is currently packaged with a controller, so perhaps my cynicism has gotten the best of my memory. Or I'm just too used to buying the extra one for multiplayer at launch. Feel free to ignore everything but the 7-player part, then. [Dont Know]

Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :

quote:
Yeah, but as Nintendo found out with the Game Cube most advanced does not equal most popular. Of the three systems that came out last time the GC was the most advanced system of the three, better graphics and better processor. Sony still left it in the dust.

Was it? I was distinctly dissapointed in the quality of the Game Cube. It's always seemed to have noticeably worse graphics, and the GC controllers are the worst I can ever remember using. Flimsy pieces of crap. It was worth it to get access to certain titles, but that's about it.

And I still don't understand the point of the mini-discs.

Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :

Supposedly uncopyable (disc to disc), right? I was under the impression that Nintendo owned/had an exclusive contract with the companies that made the discs and the readers - but that might just be hearsay.

Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :

I'm curious, if PS3 bombs, and Microsoft picks up a lot of the pieces, not to mention Nintendo regaining some marketshare....does Sega decide to pick up the gauntlet again?

Sega has stayed away from consoles since the Dreamcast bombed wretchedly. Hasn't even looked like they've had a chance recently. Anyone think they might take a shot at it again if Sony bombs out? It leaves everything fairly wide open.

Another note on the price of the PS3...For almost $800 including the system and a couple games, to say nothing of whatever else you want, I could get a pretty decent gaming computer from Dell, or could most certainly build one myself for that. Or buy an HDTV. That's something that hasn't been discussed a lot however, what is the percentage of Americans, Japanese and South Koreans (the Big Three markets for gaming) that actually HAVE HDTVs?

No way parents are going to buy that for their kids for Christmas, which has to be the aim considering the timing of the release. I think in fact, it makes XBox360 and Wii look all the more attractive at Christmas time.

Posted by Tarrsk (Member # 332) on :

For me, the PS3 isn't even on the map anymore. I've never liked the Final Fantasy games much, nor any of their other big franchises, and the machine itself is going to be too expensive to justify. No, it's really only a choice between Nintendo and Microsoft this time, and up until Monday, I was more or less convinced that I was gonna go Wii (ba-dump PSH!).

Then Bungie did that whole "announcing Halo 3" thing, and that changes everything. [Smile]

Call me crazy, but there's only one franchise that's really gripped my attention this past generation, and that's the one with the big green cyborg.

Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :

quote:
However, about the generallities, does anyone have hard facts in terms of statistics why the PS3 would do badly?

Aside from the price issue, I think this is pretty telling:

quote:
The wait to try out the Wii at E3 pushed past four hours on Thursday afternoon, while the wait for hands-on time with Sony Corp.'s PlayStation 3 was barely 30 minutes.

In short, if people are less excited about and having less fun playing the PS3 than the competition, fewer will pay the massive price tag.

Posted by Choobak (Member # 7083) on :

My girlfriend and i replay with her old Super NES recently. Waow !! Donkey kong country is fun !!!
and the terrible but untiredable Mario cart the first ! Totally nuts !

Why buying a so expensive gamebox whereas we have good old consoles ?

Next time : The Atari 2600 !!!!

[Big Grin]

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :

I was told by three people in two diffferent shops yesterday that it DID play HD DVD's out of the box....but only if you got a Premium Package that retails for $399.

See why I was confused? [Big Grin]

I asked very specifically, too, I made sure of it.

Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :

The confusion is that most sales folks at these places just hear buzzwords. A system has a DVD player, and can output an HD signal??? Must be able to play an HD DVD [Smile]

Doh!

-Bok

Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :

i'm pretty sure they'll have adapters out to allow more then 7.

Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :

also, is the xbox being released into Japan? I've heard that Japan held off from buying the Xbox 360.

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Blayne Bradley:
i'm pretty sure they'll have adapters out to allow more then 7.

Based on... what, exactly? If you look at the lights on the controller that identify whether you're player 1, 2, etc., those lights go from one to... four.

4 != 7

So what happened to the promise of support for 7 controllers, then? How about that router functionality? Dual HDMI outputs?

If gamers haven't learned to mistrust corporate hype machines by now (and Sony's in particular), maybe we never will.

Added: Additionally, given that the controllers are wireless, I don't see why you should need to buy an adapter to play with more than whatever the limit turns out to be. It's not like you need additional physical components to detect more clients on a wireless network.

Added:

quote:
Originally posted by Blayne Bradley:
also, is the xbox being released into Japan? I've heard that Japan held off from buying the Xbox 360.

Microsoft released the Xbox 360 almost simultaneously worldwide, so yes, it's out in Japan, and has been since last November. It isn't selling well over there so far.

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :

quote:
Based on... what, exactly? If you look at the lights on the controller that identify whether you're player 1, 2, etc., those lights go from one to... four.

I've seen many indicators that use the lights this way:

code:

              LIGHTS
Value        1 2 3 4
1            X
2              X
3                X
4                  X
5            X      X
6              X    X
7                 X X

Don't know if they're doing that or not.

Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :

well look at the PS1, didnt it have an adapter to allow 7+ players?

Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :

also, http://www.ps3portal.com/ps3/videos/32.html

the controller-gyro thingamajingy is pretty cool, I can become an ace pilot this way.

Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Dagonee:

quote:
Based on... what, exactly? If you look at the lights on the controller that identify whether you're player 1, 2, etc., those lights go from one to... four.
I've seen many indicators that use the lights this way:

code:
LIGHTS
Value 1 2 3 4
1 X
2 X
3 X
4 X
5 X X
6 X X
7 X X
Don't know if they're doing that or not.

Sony is trying to stealth teach us binary! They are turning us all into geeks!

EVIL!!!

-Bok

EDIT: Yes, yes, it's actually quadnary (???). That just shows that they want us to be uber-geeks using a number system even real geeks don't use!

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :

quote:
Don't know if they're doing that or not.

I agree that that's possible. [Smile]

quote:
well look at the PS1, didnt it have an adapter to allow 7+ players?

It did. But why would you need a physical adapter when the controllers are wireless? The controller limitation should be determined by the available wireless bandwidth.

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :

My desk fan has a timer implemented this way. It can set any time from one half our to 7.5 hours at half hour intervals.

quote:
Yes, yes, it's actually quadnary (???). That just shows that they want us to be uber-geeks using a number system even real geeks don't use!

I'm not sure what base it actually is. The value of each place doesn't go up by powers of a single number. It can hold numbers from zero to 10 in four places. Binary can hold, what, 0-15 in 4 digits?

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :

Er... isn't it just the sum of the assigned values for each space? I don't think such a system has a base as such, does it?

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :

quote:
isn't it just the sum of the assigned values for each space?

Yes.

quote:
I don't think such a system has a base as such, does it?

I don't know the right terminology.

Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :

They just sound like bitmasks.

Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :

In the interest of full disclosure, my home has multiple computers but only has a (13", non-HD) TV because my mother in law left one here. I'm an avid computer gamer but if I ever buy a console-style system, it'll more likely be a handheld than anythin else.

That said, here's my ignorant and potentially blasphemous statement...

How many people are really going to use a 1080p HD system?! Are there really that many people out there with enormous HD televisions? We are only now, slowly, getting to the point where people who look plausibly like real people can be generated by hardware in real time. The resolution of 1080p, not to mention the capacity of Blu-Ray, presently seems like so much overkill. I feel kind of like I do about people in computer games who sneer at systems that can't do everything at 1600 x 1200: at what point does it cease being about real gains in quality and just become a matter of bragging rights?

Not long ago, people were talking about how good DVD-quality video looked; frankly, I'm still there. Part of that may be a stingy unwillingness to jump on the new-shiny-biggest-and-best bandwagon, but a lot of it is just face value: DVD resolution still looks pretty good to me.

Posted by BaoQingTian (Member # 8775) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bokonon:
Sony is trying to stealth teach us binary! They are turning us all into geeks!

EVIL!!!

-Bok

EDIT: Yes, yes, it's actually quadnary (???). That just shows that they want us to be uber-geeks using a number system even real geeks don't use!

Well Bok, there are only 10 kinds of people in this world. Those who understand binary and those who don't [Wink]

Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :

quote:
Originally posted by BaoQingTian:
Well Bok, there are only 10 kinds of people in this world. Those who understand binary and those who don't

Gah! The geekiness, it's all over me! Get it off, get. it. off!

-Bok

Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :

Sony's New Marketing Strategy

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bokonon:

quote:
Originally posted by BaoQingTian:
Well Bok, there are only 10 kinds of people in this world. Those who understand binary and those who don't
Gah! The geekiness, it's all over me! Get it off, get. it. off!

-Bok

What do you mean, get it off? You are the one spreading it all over the place! [Wink]

If we get all the geekiness off of you there won't be anything left for Karen to hug! [Big Grin]

Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Dagonee:
My desk fan has a timer implemented this way. It can set any time from one half our to 7.5 hours at half hour intervals.

quote:
Yes, yes, it's actually quadnary (???). That just shows that they want us to be uber-geeks using a number system even real geeks don't use!
I'm not sure what base it actually is. The value of each place doesn't go up by powers of a single number. It can hold numbers from zero to 10 in four places. Binary can hold, what, 0-15 in 4 digits?

NERDSSS!!!!