Slashdot Log In
PS3 Apparently A Computer
Posted by
Zonk
on Thu Jun 08, 2006 05:04 PM
from the oh-ken dept.
from the oh-ken dept.
Rinzai writes to mention an article on Gamasutra, noting a statement by Ken Kutaragi where the CEO states that the PS3 is a computer, not a console. From the article: "He went on to outline a scenario where many parts of the PS3 were upgradeable, much more like a PC, noting: 'Since PS3 is a computer, there are no models but configurations', and continuing (though talking in the theoretical): 'I think it's okay to release a [extended PS3] configuration every year'. It's clear from the comments that Sony is indicating that it will be possible to upgrade hard drives and perhaps even other components easily."
Related Stories
[+]
Why Sony Needs a 'Major Nelson' 84 comments
Microsoft's 'Major Nelson' and executive Peter Moore have been visible representatives of the 360 console for well over a year now. 'Grandfather of Gaming' Shigeru Miyamoto and asskicking Reggie Fils-Aime have have preached the Wii concept through good writeups and bad name jokes. Sony ... well, Sony has Ken Kutaragi, Phil Harrison, and Kaz Hirai. They say helpful things like 'we don't care', and 'disks won't matter', and (my personal favorite) 'the PS3 is a computer'. RPG Site has a compelling argument stating that Sony needs a Major Nelson to cut through this crazy executive talk, and reconnect the company with real gamers. From the article: "While it's not something that appeals to every group of people that play games - the casual market and kids, for example, the existence of these people allows the part of the market that is most opinionated - the core gamers, those who have a very clear opinion on what they want and what is good and bad - to interact with somebody who can actually bring about change. Hell, on a lesser note, it even gives the fanboys someone to worship."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
So... (Score:5, Insightful)
'Luck with that one guys.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Argh. What arrogance and stupidity. What's next, the executives of Sony all line up and moon us?
Parent
Re:So... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:So... (Score:4, Insightful)
That's not to say I'm in favor of this... but having those standards in place, I feel, would greatly help PC developers.They'd be shooting for a 2008b hardware configuration when developing their game rather than shooting in the dark. I realize I haven't really explained this too well and if somebody cares to elaborate further then feel free. I also realize that this would require a certain level of honesty and cooperation among hardware manufacturers that likely won't be happeneing any time soon, just a thought.
Parent
Already exists (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Already exists (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:Already exists (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Already exists (Score:4, Insightful)
- Macs are now using bog-standard Intel CPUs, graphics subsystems, and can even run Windows [apple.com].
- Sony, in no way, is providing an "open standard" that other manufacturers can leverage. Hmmm, sounds like that would be proprietary by definition. The PC platform has a "standard" that everyone has to walk lockstep on, courtesy of the Microsoft DirectX APIs. Older equipment can't support the new APIs and is not supported. Of course, with Microsoft as the sole provider of the APIs, well... that's a standard only in the sense that Microsoft is a 900 lbs. gorilla making the standard.
- Finally, given the need for hardware vendors (such as NVidia and ATI in the graphics card market) to differentiate themselves, it's entirely possible that when one leapfrogs the other, there can be a signficant difference between the vendors' products regardless of API compatbility. So there is not market pressure to provide such a standard.
That said, it'd be nice from a developer's standpoint, but keep this in mind -- game developers are extremely resilient and seem to handle the differentiation on the PC platform well. And when they don't, the gaming community seems to spend the $$$ to upgrade and build new systems to run the games.Parent
Re:So... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So... (Score:3, Insightful)
I look at it this way (Score:3, Interesting)
For example, look at a typical home stereo. It's built of several individual components, a tuner, an amplifier, a cd player / dvd player, etc.
What if the gaming console went the d
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
If Sony could produce a device which some or all of those things, that they could score a major coup. After, all most people only have so many plug points and space by their TV. If this thing can play discs, then why not store them too. They could sweeten the deal for themselves by having a built-in movie download service for $$$.
The system has the potential, but it remains to be seen if Sony being Sony will cut off its nose to spite its face. Again.
Parent
Re:So... (Score:3, Informative)
Where would you like to freeze today?
Re:So... (Score:3, Insightful)
Translation: We don't need Microsoft
Re:So... (Score:5, Informative)
I dislike Sony as much as the next guy, but come on
Parent
Re:So... (Score:3, Informative)
Well... (Score:5, Funny)
Makes sense (Score:5, Interesting)
So if the PS3 is basically a computer, why not get a computer?
Re:Makes sense (Score:5, Insightful)
Because a hot-shit graphics card will run you $400; You can get the PS3 for the price of a graphics card, DVD-ROM, case, and a decent power supply, and you still don't have motherboard, cpu, memory, hard disk, or a game controller.
Also because the PS3 is supposed to play PS1, PS2, and PS3 games, as well as Blu-Ray movies (FWIW). PC plays PS1 games, and not necessarily all that well.
Parent
Re:Makes sense (Score:4, Informative)
The PS3 has top-end console graphics. I think it's only fair to try to spec high on the PC.
More than a PowerPC with 8 cell SPEs behind it?
PS3's hard disk drive is upgradable.
This is your one correct point.
PS2 (by design - the linux kit) and the PSX, Dreamcast, and Xbox all do this (through hacking, and linux)
If they can successfully market it as both, then it's a nice second computer/set top box, and a nice gaming console, and (if anyone cares) a Blu-Ray player.
The memory is kind of serious but not at all a show-stopper. You can get quite a bit done in linux in 64MB, especially if you're willing to forego KDE and GNOME. Doing so greatly reduces the value of using it as a primary computer, but is fine for a terminal or set top box. This unit has 256MB, which is completely usable, even with KDE or GNOME, and which is quite spacious if you forego them.
So, I completely disagree with all of your points except for the memory thing, and only half-agree with that.
Parent
Re:Makes sense (Score:3, Interesting)
It's unlikely that Sony's going to present you with a stock GNOME desktop. They'll probably some sort of launcher for specific tasks (e-mail, web-browsing, photo editing), which can be fit into the PS3's memory, and will be enough to serve most users.
Re:Makes sense (Score:5, Interesting)
Personally, I'll probably get a Wii. Why? Wii knows what it is. It is the thing I bring out when I have a few friends over and we want to screw around playing whatever insane game Nintendo has brought to the table. Wii is also priced such that it recognizes that it is not the center piece of my entertainment. Wii looks like it is going to be cheap, fun, and just the sort of things to waste some time with when the friends are over without pissing off my girlfriend for being anti-social.
If I want FPS, play on line, or do anything that requires graphical power to run, I would rather just use a computer. I don't tie want to tie up the TV to play an MMORPG or waste hours on some online FPS. Further, the controls on a computer are many times more satisfying then those game pads for the type of games it takes a computer to run.
Personally, I think the PS3 is a grievous mistake. Wii is going to clean up the casual gamer market and hardcore gamers are going to take one look at the PS3 price tag and decide to go do themselves a favor and just buy a new computer. The only people I can think who are really going to get much functionality out of a PS3 that they won't get out of a Wii or a computer will be sports games fans. Even then, the X-box 360 will put up a good fight for even those folks. What the x-box lacks in slightly worse graphics it will make up for by selling at less then half the price of a PS3 (by the time the PS3 hits).
The PS3 wants to be the centerpiece of a home entertainment system. I don't think that this is a bad idea in theory, I just think that it is premature. In another consol generation or two I think that consoles might be accepted enough to start blazing trails into other areas of entertainment, but I don't think that the time is right yet.
Of course, I suppose we will see. It seems like common sense that the PS3 is a mistake, but I figure Sony is paying someone 6 figures to do a proper market analysis. You would HOPE that that person has a better understanding of the market then we do. Only time will tell at this point. Personally though, my money is going to stay in my wallet until Wii comes out. If I decide to drop 600 dollars, it will probably be on a new computer, not the PS3 entertainment center of d00m.
Parent
Re:Makes sense (Score:3, Funny)
You had me at 'apparently' (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, is there any distinction anymore? Does being easily upgradeable magically make it a "computer"? I still consider my original NES - having a processor, input interface, and the ability to read instructions on ROMs and provide output - "basically a computer".
This sounds more like a change in marketing strategy than anything else (compare "hey, the PS3 is twice the cost of these other consoles" to "hey, this PS3-computer-thingy is only half the cost of my desktop computer!") Either way, I wouldn't be pleased knowing that after shelling out $600 I will have the option to pay more next year to keep the thing updated.
Disclaimer: I'm a Nintendo fanboy and have never had any interest in PlayStation consoles.
Re:You had me at 'apparently' (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:You had me at 'apparently' (Score:5, Funny)
Thank you, Sony, for simplifying my life!
If you excuse me, I must be off to make a phone call and chop some celery at the same time with my PS3. We'll see how that goes.
Parent
Worst. Idea. Ever. (Score:5, Informative)
Intellivision: Mattel promised from day 1 that the Intellivision would be able to be turned into a full computer by adding a special keyboard component. Unfortunately, the component [webcom.com] proved too expensive to manufacture. When Mattel was finally forced to release the product due to an FTC fine, nearly every unit was returned as broken or defective. Mattel then shifted gears in a hurry and released the Entertainment Computer System [webcom.com], a quick hack produced by a secret project that was intended to get Mattel out of hot water. Predictably, it flopped in the market.
Odyssey 2: Magnavox actually integrated a keyboard into this console, but gave no thought to an OS, tape drive, or printer. There was a BASIC kit released for the European version, but otherwise this console's potential as a computer was sadly underutilized.
Coleco Adam: Coleco had the bright idea of creating a computer that could play Colecovision games. Consumers couldn't decide whether or not it was a game machine or a serious "home computer" system. Combined with its odd design (the power was routed through the printer) it flopped in the market.
Atari 5200: This actually WAS a computer packed into a game system case. Unsurprisingly, no peripheral components were produced to prevent competition with the Atari 400/800 systems.
Atari 7800: Again, a keyboard component [atarimuseum.com] was created, but never marketed. With Nintendo deciding NOT to ship the Famicom Floppy Disk Drive in America, Atari may have finally realized that trying to make a game console into a computer wasn't such a good idea.
PlayStation 2: Sony tries to make the PlayStation into a generic computer with a keyboard/mouse attachment [linuxdevcenter.com], a harddrive, and a copy of Linux. Sony kills the product citing poor sales.
PlayStation 3: Sony tries to differentiate their console by claiming that "it's a computer". Welcome to the 1980s.
Re:Worst. Idea. Ever. (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, they were trying to make it into a generic game development workstation. It was basically a poor man's TOOL, or a second generation Net Yaroze. Very poor, but anyway... They weren't REALLY trying to make it a general purpose computer, or they would have added more memory.
The Dreamcast is actually the first console really usable as a computer; it has the low memory problem too, but it's considerably better documented than the PS2, whose internals are still mostly a mystery to anyone not gifted with a real dev kit. AND, they shipped a keyboard, mouse, ethernet adapter, and VGA adapter, and you could buy them one at a time. Of course, Dreamcast was murdered by a tag-team of Sony's Marketing Department, and ARRRR PIRATES. I mean, it was just so damned easy to copy the games, at a time when broadband was becoming prevalent and CD burners where everywhere. Anyone who says it wasn't a factor in the DC's demise is living in a fantasy world.
The PS3 is the first console really useful as a computer. It has plenty of ram, plenty of I/O, and plenty of horsepower. The Xbox is almost there, but has too little memory. (FWIW, I do run linux on my Xbox occasionally.)
If they can avoid fucking it up to the point where games don't work right on the various revisions of the console, and they give us a genuinely useful linux environment that can support all the latest eye candy, I think they could actually get some mileage out of a strategy like this. Certainly, a $600 Computer/Video Game System makes more sense than a $600 console.
Parent
They're technically all computers (Score:5, Insightful)
Ours is better! We swear! (Score:5, Insightful)
What else could be upgraded besides the hard drive? I really doubt you'll be able to swap in a new CPU or GPU. Maybe RAM like you could upgrade on the N64. (though I have my doubts) Or, does he mean that new PS3s will be more powerful than the old ones and that the old ones won't be upgradable?
What would be the point of continuing to call it a PS3 then? People who bought a PS3 for $600 in 2006 would be homicidal if a "PS3" game was released a couple years down the line that couldn't be played (or maybe it could only be played at a low resolution/framerate) on their old PS3. People expect a game for a console to just work in that console.
Also, wasn't the PS2's official title "computer entertainment system"? Look how that worked out.
Whoa there (Score:3, Insightful)
Please note that nowhere does it state that the CONSUMER will be able to upgrade hard drives or other components easily. In fact, what they are implying is that they will release a different "upgraded-from-core" model every year. I would assume that one would have to buy the entire thing to get any upgraded components. After all, I don't think Joe Sixpack is going to be comfortable swapping out a hard drive on a PS3 any more than on a "real" computer.
stupid. stupid, stupid... (Score:3, Insightful)
Limited, carefully-controlled upgrades can succeed (e.g. memory expansion for N64), but so far has only worked when distributed as a pack-in in a popular game. Significant console upgrades (e.g. every upgrade ever released for the Genesis) have all failed in the marketplace, for the reasons described above.
Sony owned the market. The PS3 was a guaranteed success. A license to print money. And now they seem fixated on painting a target on their feet, merrily humming away, completely ignoring what their potential customers actually want. Nintendo could easily leverage this into a return to first place in the market, if they play their cards right.
Missing the point (Score:5, Insightful)
Um, I thought the whole point of a console was to give everyone the same configuration so that developers can target a single stable platform without having to worry about configuration issues....
So, if it's a "computer", does that mean that they'll let me in to hack to my hearts content without any sort of encryption key BS? Or are they still going to try to lock me out of my own "computer"?
Thats not an issue at all. (Score:3, Interesting)
Source: http://ps3.ign.com/articles/711/711688p1.html [ign.com]
So it seems as though all consoles will have the same base stats for all games. I'll be the only upgradeable stuff will be su
I didn't. (Score:3, Insightful)
If Sony want
Tax: Nothing Else (Score:5, Interesting)
They tried the same stunt with the Playstation 2 [theregister.co.uk].
Okay...So what? (Score:3, Informative)
What I still can't understand is why they refuse to talk about the OS in it. if they plan for it to be a "Computer" then how are they going to pull it off with a closed OS?
I've only heard them say "It will come preinstalled with Linux!" well big woop there, I could sell PC's preinstalled with linux, doesn't mean people will want to buy it if they find out that Linux is completly locked down with me owning the master account and not telling them what it is so they can't install, update or view hardly anything. Oh and I could access their computer at any point in time I would like when they are connected to the internet.
,br> so far the only thing's I know about the OS are, It's Linux.
Not exactly something that makes me want to rush out and buy this "Computer", especially when doing a search for "Linux OS" returns about 4,560,000 results, and having tried to use linux on 5 seperate occasians I know there are atleast 10 different versions of a "Linux OS" with god knows how many more.
So far they have said it will be Linux and then showed off THEIR web browser (which makes me wonder if it will be possible to even install an alternate browser on this Linux) yet that is all.
So we are basically paying $600 (cause the $500 model is pointless) for a locked down, nonuseable "computer" with a Blu-Ray drive. wow, just makes me all giddy to get one (and I used to be someone who would be waiting in line (and i HATE waiting in lines) to get this thing, till they announced $600 as the price and hardly anything else about it after that).
Why is the $500 model pointless? (Score:4, Informative)
Given all that, why must you spend $100 more when the only thing you gain is an unwelcome does of DRM with HDMI?
Parent
Different dog, same tricks (Score:5, Informative)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1003076.stm [bbc.co.uk]
Hey Kid! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Hey Kid! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Hey Kid! (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Do they want to fail? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's getting so bad that the more times Kutaragi shoots off his mouth, the more I think that he is purposely sabotaging the PS3 out of anger that he was not named CEO. I thought Nintendo requiring a $50 (?) upgrade to their $200 N64 was crazy. This is just ridiculous.
Come on, Ken. You are selling this idea to people who pay some goon at Best Buy to install their new sound card.
Watch, in two years $600 will get you a PS3 with BD-ROM with a decent speed, a HD big enough to actually give you some advantage loading your games, and enough RAM to actually play the new games.
There is absolutely no reason to buy a PS3 before Sony makes their plans perfectly clear in this regard. Fuzzy quotes about what you might need in the future to make your $600 paperweight playable again is an insult to any potential customers.
Re:Do they want to fail? (Score:4, Informative)
The N64 RAM upgrade was $30, and the N64 was around $120-$150 when it came out. The upgrade came bundled for free with Donkey Kong 64. It was required to play the 2nd N64 Zelda game, and Perfect Dark required it to play single player or to get more than 2 players in multiplayer. Those games all sold 4-5 million copies each, so the RAM upgrade was rather successful.
Parent
Yay (Score:5, Funny)
So.... (Score:5, Funny)
Really bad idea. (Score:3, Interesting)
All I can see from this is negative. <shrugs> Maybe the console people won't mind creating two seperate versions of the same game, one for the older PS3, and one for the newer PS3's... but something tells me that they won't spend the kind of time and money that that would require. The result will be that customers are going to get screwed.
It might as well be. (Score:4, Interesting)
That said, these market-tards from Sony need to get their act together. If you want to make a cheap, powerful computer, make a cheap powerful computer. (And for fuck's sake, open it up you morons. One Playstation 3, hold the DRM.) If you want to make an overpriced game console, make an overpriced game console. Clearly they're attempting to justify the high price of the machine, and make it look cheap by comparison to a personal computer. Silly question, Mr. Sony CEO, just how dumb do I look to you?
Oh, is that so? Well, you're a presumptuous asshole. Bite me.
for serious (Score:5, Funny)
We get it, we get it already: Sony = Evil, the console is awful and if you buy it the CEO of Sony will come to your house and shit on your children. Enough already.
Parent
Re:Remember kids... (Score:3, Funny)
"Winners don't use rootkits."
Oh, wait...