Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
E3 Entertainment Games

Preview of Sony vs. Microsoft at E3 146

Posted by Zonk
from the ready-set-fight dept.
kukyfrope writes "After Sony stole the show last year with their dazzling game trailers, will actual hands-on impressions of the PS3 stand up to all the hype, or will Microsoft's second wave of Xbox 360 games (HALO 3 anybody?) show Sony why 360 is not Xbox 1.5." From the article: "While the Xbox 360 is off to a great start, Sony is not stupid. The company knows that the PlayStation brand name is extremely powerful, and that a lot of hardcore and casual gamers are waiting on the PlayStation 3 before deciding on a next generation console. In addition, if you want a cheap Blu-Ray player, the PlayStation 3 will be the only way to go. Stand alone units are looking to run $1500 or more, but it's unlikely the PS3 will release at anything higher than $500."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Preview of Sony vs. Microsoft at E3

Comments Filter:
  • Given the choice (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Threni (635302) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @11:52AM (#14716224)
    > Given the choice between a $400 Xbox 360 and a $400 PS3 that doubles as a next
    > generation DVD player, consumers will flock to the PlayStation 3 in droves.

    Surely most of the people hanging on to see the PS3 have already made up their minds. They want a PS3 and will only get the Xbox if the PS3 really disappoints. Presumably Sony are going to make sure that it won't.
    • I agree, if they haven't gotten an Xbox by now I doubt they will.

      But I see two exceptions to this (not including your exception):
      1. XBox undergoes a Price reduction before or at the same time the PS3 releases. This could sway a few fence sitters.

      2. Nintendo's Revolution really wows at E3 and follows through on rumors of being under $300.
      • Re:Given the choice (Score:3, Informative)

        by RoadDoggFL (876257)
        2. Nintendo's Revolution really wows at E3 and follows through on rumors of being under $300.
        Uhh... rumors of under $300? I've heard (convincing) rumors of $100-$150. Yes, $100-$150 is less than $300, but it's still a more noteworthy claim.
        • I'd be shocked if the sticker price is under $299. The PS2 was what, $199 when it was released? Prices generally go up, not down, thanks to inflation. If anything, the increased popularity (demand) means they can charge even more. It would be a good strategy if they were concerned about marketshare, but I don't think that's a valid concern for the PlayStation at this point.
          • It's a good thing I wasn't talking about the PS3...

            Really, Sony could charge $700 and there are enough idiots out there convinced that the Playstation is what console gaming's all about that they'd still succeed.
    • But it's in all of our best interests that neither Sony nor Microsoft "WIN" this console war, at least not conclusively. It's better for us that any "win" be press-only, hotly disputed, and that in a few years we repeat this whole argument with the XBox3 and PS4. For that matter, it's best the Nintendo remain a player, too.

      Having "a winner" in the conclusive sense, no matter who it is, is the worst option.
      • > But it's in all of our best interests that neither Sony nor Microsoft "WIN" this
        > console war, at least not conclusively

        I'm not a shareholder in Sony or Microsoft, so I don't care who wins. If it means I get to buy one console and effectively have all the choice I would have had if I owned all the consoles available to me then that seems pretty cool. And if that console was free from the tedious tax and approval requirements of Sony/MS etc then it's good for developers. Perhaps it's time for a Linu
        • yeah, but then youd pay an outrageous fee for games. add to that, whoever produces the console wouldnt have any incentive to ever sell at a loss, and you are talking about your basic gaming pc...
          • > yeah, but then youd pay an outrageous fee for games.

            If anyone could produce games for a console without paying the manufacturer of the console for the pleasure, why would that increase the price? Common sense suggests the price would be reduced.

            > add to that, whoever
            > produces the console wouldnt have any incentive to ever sell at a loss,

            Clearly selling at a loss makes little sense if you're not going to make the money back on software sales, but in the scenario I've described they wouldn't be d
        • Imagine for a moment that Microsoft WINS, though the situation would no doubt be similar if Sony were to WIN.

          Right now, Microsoft is subsidizing the XBox with other revenues, and I don't mean just game sales. If they were unfettered by competition, they'd bring their games division back to at least break-even. They'd be nuts to do anything else. They'd probably also cut development resource to the minimum - just enough to keep competition from forming. (Or they'd cut below that, and restaff once it became a
      • Nintendo's hardly in a "losing" position - they're the only company right now that's turning a consistent profit. They're not going anywhere, and people will still have lots of hardware to choose from in the future.
    • by Anonymous Coward
      Surely most of the people hanging on to see the PS3 have already made up their minds. They want a PS3 and will only get the Xbox if the PS3 really disappoints. Presumably Sony are going to make sure that it won't.

      You're assuming everybody is a video-game fanboy who immediately buys one system, which isn't the case. There's plenty of people who don't buy video game systems the day they come off the shelf. That's especially true when the game system is still sold out everywhere you go.

    • That's an incorrect assumption. As a current XBox owner, I'm more interested in the XBox 360, but am waiting to see if Sony can really swing me. I'm also still content with my XBox, and not really interested in shelling out $4-500 for a new console today.

      So, I am happy to wait, see if Sony can produce a system that I like better than the 360, and watch the price wars begin.

      What does Sony need to do to sway me? They have to have an online component that can compete with XBox Live. A hodge-podge some game
      • believe it or not, i can relate to you. i own both current consoles, but i like my ps2 better. the xbox is great; dont get me wrong. ive been too cheap to upgrade my pc, so im happy to have been able to play through halflife2. =)

        im probably your polar opposite in this regard. i am probably going to go with the ps3, but i am desperately waiting on that first killer x360 title that makes me want to hop the fence and get a x360 too. maybe i have to wait for gears of war, or maybe i have to wait for halo3, but
  • Pricing... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by softspokenrevolution (644206) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @11:54AM (#14716244) Journal
    That has been one of the foremost questions on my mind, how do they rationalize charging $500 for a gaming platform/blue-ray player but $1500 for the stand-alone blue-ray player. I mean, if the job of a cheap console is to recoup the money on games, can't it be the job of a cheap DVD player to recoup money on DVD sales?
    • Re:Pricing... (Score:2, Interesting)

      by EMH_Mark3 (305983)
      Unlike with games, DVD Player manufacturers don't get a cut off of the DVD sales.
      • Re:Pricing... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by apoc06 (853263) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @12:24PM (#14716506)
        well, considering that sony also owns the patent and licensing for blu-ray media, its in their best interest to take a loss on the player to ensure that blu-ray movies catch on. every blu-ray disc made will line sonys pockets just like dvd sales did, since sony had a part to play in dvd tech as well.

        one of the major reasons why the xbox and the gamecube did not natively allow for dvd playing capabilities is so that they wouldnt have to pay sony a licensing fee for each xbox or gamecube they manufactured.
    • Re:Pricing... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by szembek (948327)
      This is because of licensing. Any company can make a DVD player, DVD sales don't have to kick back licensing fees to a DVD player manufacturer. However only Sony can make PS2s, and game developers must pay to be able to make a PS2 game. Therefore Sony gains cash-flow from game sales, where DVD manufacturers obviously don't get DVD sales income.
    • DVDs don't cost the $50 that most games seem to cost.
    • Players are so expensive when released because their prices are artifically controlled--the manufacturers can get a certain percentage of the population to overpay for the privilege of being an early adopter. If the format is to catch on as the ubiquitous successor to DVD, Blu-ray players won't be $1500 for very long.

      PS3's Blu-ray playback capability will probably be somewhat crippled, as was the PS2's DVD playback.

    • I suspect the PS3 Blu-Ray player will be braindamaged like the PS2's DVD player.
  • Nintendo? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Shadow Wrought (586631) * <shadow.wrought@gma[ ]com ['il.' in gap]> on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @11:54AM (#14716247) Homepage Journal
    Wasn't it at E3 last year that Nintendo dropped the bombshell that is their controllers? I wonder if they something upt heir sleeves again to take some of the spotlight away from Sony and M$...
    • Tokyo Game Show (Score:2, Informative)

      by Omega697 (586982)
      Nope. That was the Tokyo Game Show.
    • Re:Nintendo? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by dividedsky319 (907852) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @12:11PM (#14716393) Homepage
      I wonder if they something upt heir sleeves again to take some of the spotlight away from Sony and M$...

      Well, they haven't shown any actual Revolution games yet... so I'd be willing to bet that's their main strategy, reveal Revolution games at E3. And have a release date.

      Nintendo announced their controllers at the Tokyo Game Show in Sept '05. It was a fairly closed door affair, not shown to the public.

      I expect Nintendo to have the Revolution fully functional and usable by the public at E3. They stole the show at TGS just by their announcement, lets see if they can do the same at E3 when they actually show some games. The public being able to get their hands on a Revolution controller will be a pretty big deal.
  • Well.. (Score:5, Funny)

    by darkmonkeh (953919) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @11:54AM (#14716252)
    Sony is not stupid

    I beg to differ.
  • I am interested in what Sony will release about the PS3. I think a lot of PS fans are in for a big surprise. Sony is known for talking big and not delievering, Emotion engine anyone?

    While I don't see it happening, it would be funny if they release more than one version, just like the Xbox 360. Are we going to see a crippled PS3 unit in terms of blu-ray, one that can only play games but not movies. To play movies, that will add on extra money.

    With Sony's hype train show at E3, just trailers of games that
    • Sony is known for talking big and not delievering, Emotion engine anyone?

      "Emotion engine" is their name for the core CPU in the PS2. They've delivered about 100 million of them so far.
      • Maybe you were living under a rock or something. Sony toted the Emotions Engine as the next greatest thing. Talked it up, saying it could do things that I have yet to see. They also said it was so powerful, that they would be releasing graphic workstations to compete with SGI and Sun.

        Where are these graphic workstations based on the emotion engine? Oh, that is right, there are none because Sony talked big and couldn't deliever on their claims.
        • Maybe you were living under a rock or something.
          No, I was developing games at the time.

          Sony toted the Emotions Engine as the next greatest thing.
          Pretty standard marketing stuff.

          Talked it up, saying it could do things that I have yet to see.
          Such as? Before the PS2, I'd never seen anything quite as nice as SSX.

          They also said it was so powerful, that they would be releasing graphic workstations to compete with SGI and Sun.
          Maybe you've been living under a rock, but the specialty graphics workstation market has
          • The original poster was right. The hype around the Emotion Engine was spectacular even by Sony's marketing standards. Something about being able to convey emotions it was so painfully realistic. It wasn't as powerful as promised. The point isn't that it wasn't a successful chip by sales numbers, but rather that it was no where near worthy of the hype generated around it. Similar hype is being generated for the Cell chip, now.
        • youre right. this time is a bit different though. ibm has already started manufacturing servers and other tech using the cell. this one is catching on. like it or not, processors are going to evolve in this direction eventually anyways, so why not?

          i disagree with you. the emotion engine is just as powerful as promised. the problem is they relied on the emotion engine to do it all. just cant happen. it does a decent enough job given the proper development team, but since the ps2 didnt have a dedicated GPU, t
          • The thing I find funny about the cell, is that Toshiba is in on it. They are sharing a technology on one end, but fighting a bitter battle on the other. It is too bad they couldn't make a unified HD movie format. The cell is interesting and has potential, it will be interesting to see how it pans out down the road.

            i disagree with you. the emotion engine is just as powerful as promised. the problem is they relied on the emotion engine to do it all. just cant happen. it does a decent enough job given th
            • yeah, honestly i think they should just drop the hd-dvd deal altogether and rename blu-ray as hd-dvd. blu-ray /is/ the superior format. more costly, but superior... it has all of hd-dvds touted features, and then it has its own strengths [protective coating, size capacity etc...]

              sony never made the toy story comparision. microsoft made that claim about the first xbox. to this day everyone still claims it was sony. eleventh paragraph: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&c2 coff=1& [google.com]
              • yeah, honestly i think they should just drop the hd-dvd deal altogether and rename blu-ray as hd-dvd. blu-ray /is/ the superior format. more costly, but superior... it has all of hd-dvds touted features, and then it has its own strengths [protective coating, size capacity etc...]

                The protective coating is because of a flaw in the disc design, they had to create it. It isn't a problem with HD-DVD because they didn't go the same route with the format as Blu-ray did. While is a "protective coating", it is
                • whether they had to or not, if it means i dont have to worry about another scratched movie again, im all for it. hell, can i get my current dvd movies coated in it now!?!?!? lol.

                  as for consumer savings due to factory retooling... im not much of a believer in trickle down economics. ill believe it when i see it. im all for saving on movies that are already too expensive, but i dont really see either format being more expensive than dvds were when they were released. but then again, what do i know?
    • well i think sony fans meant that better graphics dont mean much if the game is boring or blah, or if we've already played a superior version on our pc a year prior.

      due to the legion of third party developers, sony has the most good games available to people interested in most genres, except for maybe first person shooters. [thats why most console FPS players tend to favor the xbox] sony is keeping with tradition and moving ahead with that same legion.

      so this time sony will be late [not that late though, th
    • The big problem I see with sony for the next couple months is that ALL the attention is going to the PS3, leaving the PSP on the backseat. The current state of affair with this machine isn't pretty. There is barely any games and most of them are just half decent ports of PS1/2. There is an absolute lack of original title on that platform and despite UMDs doing better than expected I dont see that as a way to gain market share. People who buys a portable gaming machine expect to play games on it. They MUST m
  • by rAiNsT0rm (877553) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @12:06PM (#14716342) Homepage
    I wouldn't be so quick to say that E3 2006 will be a SONY Vs. MS battle only. More like a royal rumble. New information has come out to show that Zelda: Twilight Princess may be carrying a dual edged sword... litteraly.

    I covered this today in the article: A Plan Emerges [revolutioninsider.info] Nintendo may have the biggest ace up their sleeve of any console launch in history. Zelda may just be a final swan song for the Gamecube and a launch title of sorts for the Revolution... as well as a little of both! Fairly substantiated talk has surfaced showing the release date for Twilight Princess may also be pushed to November '06 and that it may feature the ability to control the action on the GC with the Revolution controller.

    We know the Revolution controller can work with the GC from the demo's in New York with Metroid Prime 2 on a GC. Even if not on the GC, the fact that the Revolution can play GC titles means it could grow new abilities by playing it on the Revolution. Either way this is an artful marketing move, and may prove to be the show stealer in May.
    • New information has come out to show that Zelda: Twilight Princess may be carrying a dual edged sword... litteraly.

      You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
      • Thank you friendly grammer nazi. I would be more upset with my horrible mangling of the spelling than the common misuse of the word. I think most folks understand the word and usage to convey my intended meaning. I have taken the poke with the pointy stick, and accepted it. Actually I kinda liked it, can I have another?
        • For most words, I really wouldn't mind. I understand that there are accepted ways to interpret things. However, for a word that means "Don't interpret this the accepted way, but rather exactly as it is written," I must protest.
          • for a word that means "Don't interpret this the accepted way, but rather exactly as it is written," I must protest.

            And according to whom does it mean only that?

            The OED gives citations going back to the early 19th century for "literally" being used "to indicate that the following word or phrase must be taken ... in its strongest admissible sense".

            In other words, "literally" has meant "figuratively" for at least 200 years. How long does a word have to have a particular meaning before you'll accept that norma
    • Twilight Princess may also be pushed to November '06 and that it may feature the ability to control the action on the GC with the Revolution controller. I've been wondering this as well... not only to work with the new controller, but have enhanced graphics. We all know that computer games have adjustable video settings... why wouldn't console games be able to as well? The game could detect which system it's in, Gamecube or Revolution... then choose its graphics settings accordingly.
      • by rAiNsT0rm (877553) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @01:04PM (#14716891) Homepage
        Most likely there will be graphic upgrades when played in the revolution. The truth is that the GC's graphics chip was insanely powerful (8 layers of texture per poly), but the system was not and it was never really utilized. With the Revolution's GPU based on the GC's you can be sure any graphic updates would be very simple and natural to implement.

        I could not see any reason it would *not* offer graphical upgrades when played in the Revolution. This is a big move, and if my predictions and piecing of this puzzle are correct... could be a show stopper.
  • PS3 & HDCP (Score:4, Interesting)

    by jbeaupre (752124) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @12:14PM (#14716410)
    For a lot of folks, myself included, HDCP will negate the Blu-Ray. If you get downgraded content for not having the correct cables and TV, what's the point? Sure, next time I buy an HDTV it'll have more than component input. But by the time that happens players will be cheap and people will be looking forward to the PS4.
    • While I fully agree about Blu-Ray and HDCP, it was my understanding that HD-DVD will also make use of HDCP [wikipedia.org] (under 'Uses').

      Of course, I was also under the impression that not necessarily all HD discs will make use of this protection.

      • With Blu-ray, not sure about HD-DVD. The copy protection, using HDCP, is left up to the studio. It is just like CSS with DVDs.

        We won't be seeing any major releases without it. Only small time operations, that either don't have the time/money or don't know how to do it, will really only be the ones with out it.
        • Then.... I have a general question... like I have, and I am sure a lot of people have, I have a 'modded' dvd player. It removes the macrovision signal and other goodies... Why can't we have some modded blueray players? Or HD-DVD players in the future?
    • The studios really need a reality check. They are the reason why we are seeing all this DRM bullcrap. They are making piracy out to be way bigger than it really is. I wish they didn't have as much power as they did.

      I am not happy that by being an early HDTV adopter, I am being screwed, left high and dry because of this HDCP and DRM crap.

      Sure, I will be getting a new HDTV in about a year or so, but what about people that can't afford to get a new one. They are really limiting their market. If they want
    • For a lot of folks, myself included, HDCP will negate the Blu-Ray. If you get downgraded content for not having the correct cables and TV, what's the point? Sure, next time I buy an HDTV it'll have more than component input. But by the time that happens players will be cheap and people will be looking forward to the PS4.

      This is a US problem only. HDTV has been out in Japan and Europe since the last century.

      But, in a related question, is it likely that the PS3 release will coincide closely enough with the m
      • "This is a US problem only. HDTV has been out in Japan and Europe since the last century."

        That's wrong, from wikipedia

        "On January 19, 2005, the European Industry Association for Information Systems (EICTA) announced that HDCP is a required component of the European "HD ready" Label."

        • HDTV

          not

          HDCP

          Sorry, but both the PS3 and xBox360 will work with existing HDTV sets in Europe and Japan.
          • The issue isn't whether or not the PS3 and 360 will display correctly on the HDTVs since both will work just fine. The issue the OP is talking about is that your TV is required to have HDCP (High Definition Content Protection) since few/none of the original HDTVs that were sold in America support. This means that protected BluRay and HDDVD movies will not display the HD version of the movie and will instead fall back to the 480p version. Thankfully it looks like a conversion box that decodes the signal a
            • The issue isn't whether or not the PS3 and 360 will display correctly on the HDTVs since both will work just fine. The issue the OP is talking about is that your TV is required to have HDCP (High Definition Content Protection) since few/none of the original HDTVs that were sold in America support.

              And my point was this is perhaps a problem in the US, but not in Europe or Japan.

              Thanks for agreeing with me.
              • Then you should probably type out what the point you are attempting to make is. You never meantioned HDCP, and you said Xbox360 won't have HDTV problems where currently it can't play either BluRay nor HDDVD so of course it won't. Stating that HDCP is a requirement for the TVs to be called "HD-Ready" in Europe and Japan would help people reading your post understand the point your making.
              • Your point isn't that it's "perhaps" a US-only problem. You flat-out stated that. And this:
                "On January 19, 2005, the European Industry Association for Information Systems (EICTA) announced that HDCP is a required component of the European "HD ready" Label."
                Kinda proves you wrong.
                • "On January 19, 2005, the European Industry Association for Information Systems (EICTA) announced that HDCP is a required component of the European "HD ready" Label."

                  A new requirement for a label is not the same thing as "I can plug my PS3 or xBox360 into my HDTV if I live in Europe or Japan and it works".

                  Works. Not uses a new overlay of protocols.

                  Again, mountains made from molehills.
                  • Works. But in 480p, which is the point here. HDCP (also required in Europe, apparently), or lack thereof, will prevent some TVs from displaying HD (720p, 1080i/p, whatever) signal. So it'll work just fine in the US too, but it might not be worth it if the player won't send the higher def signal to your TV (or does the TV block it?), which apparently will happen at least in the US and Europe.

                    Any word on Japan?
            • Thankfully it looks like a conversion box that decodes the signal and outputs a non-encrypted signal will be available, but that doesn't mean people should need them.

              There is a slight problem with that, at least with Blu-ray, not sure on HD-DVD as of yet. Blu-ray is suppose to have a dynamic database that can be updated. They can tell it what it can send the signal to what can't. Meaning, they will find these devices and block them.

              I understand them wanting to protecto their property, but the HDCP
          • As others have aid, the problem is that HDCP is a DRM format that will be part of all...

            Actually forget it. You're right. Keep on insisting you know what the hell is going on while you miss out on the actual conversation.
      • I bought my last HDTV almost 4 years ago, it will be 4 in may. The year after mine, sets started coming out with DVI and also HDCP. Not all that had DVI had HDCP though. Another year after that, we say HDMI really hit a lot of TVs. HDMI has to have HDCP, it is part of the specs.

        However, if you have a DVI input with HDCP, you can get a HDMI to DVI converter. You can also go from DVI to a HDMI input. HDMI carries audio, so when you do something like that, audio is lost.

        There is yet one more evolution to
    • you will still be able to buy an adaptor to use hdcp on your component tv.
  • by Cutriss (262920) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @12:25PM (#14716522) Homepage
    After Sony stole the show last year with their dazzling game trailers

    Say what? I was at E3 last year. Sony was getting mocked for those same trailers, while Microsoft did have playable games.

    Seriously, even those without a historical perspective on E3 should be able to read this line and say "WTF?". Game trailers can be dazzling, but they *never* steal the show.
  • "After Sony stole the show last year with their dazzling game trailers, will actual hands-on impressions of the PS3 stand up to all the hype"

    That E3 show set Sony back. The trailors were nothing more than CGI movies of what Sony hoped their games would look like. The hardware no where near resembled what will really be in the PS3.

    Also the PS3 will not launch any less than $500 without absolutely massive losses per unit. The 360 at this point will have markdowns to around $250.

    The PS3 will w
    • by wift (164108)
      I agree whole heartedly on everything you said except the 360 markdown. I don't see one coming. Not with the PS3's price being so high.
    • Re:PS3 (Score:5, Interesting)

      by oGMo (379) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @02:32PM (#14717622)
      That E3 show set Sony back. The trailors were nothing more than CGI movies of what Sony hoped their games would look like.

      Then their hopes were pretty realistic. Compare Old Snake [ign.com] from MGS4 which we know to be realtime with the Killzone demo [ign.com] shown, and you'll find that if anything, MGS4 is looking better. (Compare the high polycount, beads of sweat, skin texturing, and hair on Snake to what's in the KZ shot.)

      And these are just the first-gen showings of the PS3.

      The hardware no where near resembled what will really be in the PS3.

      The... hardware? This is assuming you, a chronic Microsoft troll (mods: see poster's history), actually have inside information. Which is doubtful. This also assumes your statement makes any sense. What are you claiming? The specs Sony gave are false? That it won't have a Cell or nvidia GPU? That the box might look different? Seriously. If the games look like what Sony claimed (see Project Offset [ign.com] for some more impressive realtime videos), what else matters?

      Also the PS3 will not launch any less than $500 without absolutely massive losses per unit. The 360 at this point will have markdowns to around $250.

      You know this for a fact, do you? When it's already been confirmed long ago [ign.com] that the PS3 will launch at the same price-point the PS2 and PS1 did?

      The PS3 will win this generation only if they can convince the average family that the PS3 is worth 2x the price. The normal fanboys will buy it no matter what the price, but these sales will be limited.

      The PS3 will win this generation because they have all the games. That's what matters.

      • Compare Old Snake from MGS4 which we know to be realtime with the Killzone demo shown

        Well of course, when you show the whole power of the machine focussed on a single head & shoulders, it looks pretty nice. The individual faces in the Killzone demo may not have looked that good, but there was so much more going on (multiple fullbody characters, detailed outdoor environment, explosions etc), it's not really comparable. Regardless, neither of them were finished games running on final hardware, so it's s

    • by argent (18001)
      The hardware no where near resembled what will really be in the PS3.

      As opposed to Microsoft's demos last year, which used Powermac G5s pretending to be Xbox 360s?
  • I think the honor of 'stealing the show' at last years E3 went resoundingly to Will Wright and the rather stunning presentation of 'Spore'.
  • HALO 3 anybody?

    With the news that Halo 2 is going to be the flagship game for vista [slashdot.org] I would be surprised to see Halo 3 before Vista is released. And the way things are looking, that will be significantly after the PS3 is released.

    I can't imagine Microsoft wanting to remind PC gamers just how OLD Halo 2 is...it needs to appear to be 'sexy' and 'new' for the Vista release, not 2+ years old with a sequel already out...
    • Halo was released for the PC well after it was released on the Xbox during the lauch. I don't know the exact time frame, but Halo 2 is falling some where in line with it.

      If you want to play the newest Halo, it is plain and simple, you have to own a Xbox 360. Same as you needed a Xbox to play Halo and Halo 2 when they first came out.
  • by RyoShin (610051) <tukaro@@@gmail...com> on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @01:21PM (#14717042) Homepage Journal
    And before you ask, the Revolution is not included here because it wasn't really a factor last year and we're hearing that even with the console hitting this year, it won't be Nintendo primary focus at E3.

    Are you freaking kidding?

    You're telling me that the Revolution, Nintendo's stop gap console with a radically new controller, 20 years of backwards compatability, and easier developer programming (or so I've heard), which is coming out sometime this year is not going to be a primary focus?

    Can we revoke the gaming journalism liscense for these guys?

    The Revolution wasn't a focus last year because Nintendo like to keep things under wraps until the last possible moment. The used E3 last year to show off Twilight Princess and the GBM.

    Even Nintendo knows that you have to have a big showing before the release to get people fired up and interested (well, those that aren't already.) Nintendo's main focus will most likely be the Revolution. I'm sure we'll have some DS and GBA goodies, as well as TP, but the Revolution will be pretty much all anyone will be interested in, especially because they will have playable demos on E3.

    I'm sure that Sony wil have a big showing, but everyone will want to at least give the Revolution a try, just to see what it will be like.

    Here's hoping they have cover a good number of genres with their setups, even if the games are just demos. I think that, right now, getting people in on the idea of using the remote in different ways is really important.
    • You're telling me that the Revolution, Nintendo's stop gap console with a radically new controller, 20 years of backwards compatability, and easier developer programming (or so I've heard), which is coming out sometime this year is not going to be a primary focus?

      Of course not. The focus will be on the handheld Nintendo games, and plans to make them more wireless group compatible, with more cooperative local team games.

      Basically, so that people can play Nintendogs in a virtual dog park while waiting for th
  • Excuse me... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by CaseM (746707)
    But has anyone even SEEN a Blu-ray movie on the shelves at a single store?

    What's that? No??

    A standalone player even? Not yet.

    This is NOT the same situation that the PS2 was in when it was released in 2000. DVD's were out and had their first hot holiday in 1999...plenty of time for the PS2's DVD-playing capabilities to be relevant. Blu-ray is still, for all purposes, vaporware at the mass-consumer level. It is not going to be the reason people buy a PS3.

Arithmetic is being able to count up to twenty without taking off your shoes. -- Mickey Mouse

Working...