Sony Console the Worst Launch Ever 193
No, not that one. 1up set out to see if the PlayStation 3 had the worst launch of any modern gaming console, and found that another Sony console held that title. The original PlayStation's launch was pretty dreadful, with Warhawk's average of 89.4 being fairly low for most launch title leaders. The worst launch lineup of the 'next-gen' systems is actually the Wii, which has averaged only a 71.3 over its 20 launch titles. The PS3 is next up, with 73.4, and the 360 has the overall best of the three consoles, having scored an average of 77.3 over its 18 titles last year. From the article: "Averages are just that, though, and don't tell you much about the best games that accompanied the launches. And the best of the batch wasn't a surprise, but it wasn't a Nintendo game either. Soul Caliber for the Dreamcast, with an average of 96.4 just barely squeaks out the win over the Legend of Zelda: The Twilight Princess for Wii. At the other end of the spectrum, both Wii and PS3 share the worst stinkers with Happy Feet for Wii coming in at a 45 and Gundam: Crossfire at the very bottom with its 34.8."
Not exactly the most scientific (Score:5, Insightful)
That would be because the THQ [thq.com] conversions from the previous gen are dragging them down. Not to mention the Vivendi (Ice Age) and Ubisoft (Open Season) titles that are similar conversions. Most launches put their best foot forward, but Nintendo allowed a few tag-alongs to immediately fill out their software library. The result is that there's a lot of great stuff for the Wii, but there's also plenty of so-so conversion stuff that appeals to a very specific market.
Of course, life would be better if movie and TV conversions were done better to begin with. Anyone remember when Capcom did the Duck Tales and Chip and Dale games for the NES? Now THOSE were great games first, but with quality TV tie-ins that tried to be true to the source material. Alas, once Capcom started chucking out unsuitable tie-ins of The Little Mermaid and other Disney properties, it was all over.
Back on topic, these numbers don't really mean anything. If a store sells 2 HDTVs a year, but 3,000 DVDs, the averages will still say that the HDTVs are making them more money. For that sort of situation, you need a weighted average to find the profits compared to the number of units sold. It's the same thing here. A smaller launch lineup is going to have a better average than a larger, more varied lineup. Something which 1Up themselves admit when discussing the N64.
So I wouldn't take these metrics as anything more than a cutsie invention. They certainly have little to do with the success or failure of a console launch.
Average Scores (Score:5, Insightful)
One obvious fact from this... (Score:5, Insightful)
One obvious fact from this list is that it bears zero correlation to anything useful. Also, I thought the main complaint with the PS3 is that almost all the games are available elsewhere (resistance being the exception) ... not that they are bad.
And Soul Caliber beating Zelda TP, is probably mainly due to gamespot not wanting "another" Zelda ... and it's upto 96.4 anyway (higher than the above article).
If anyone wants the sure fire way to know which of the current "next-gen" consoles is going to win ... wait 12 months, maybe 18-24 to be sure.
Interesting but. (Score:5, Insightful)
Just wondering if the greater number of titles for the Wii is dragging down the average?
Of course the real question is how many PS3 where bought by people that are going to play them?
From what I have seen on like Sony is selling only 1.2 games per PS3 sold while Nintendo is around 3 games per Wii.
If they are not counting Wii sports I would say that more people are buying the Wii to play than the PS3.
Sony: the End of an Empire (Score:4, Insightful)
By the start of the 21st century, Honda continued to be synonymous with affordable top-notch quality.
However, Sony's star began to fade as Sony slapped a price premium on all its products. The quality is still quite good, but is it worth the price premium? Increasingly, people say, "No way, you arrogant SOB!"
The sun has set on the Sony empire. The customer has stopped worshipping at the altar of the Sony ripoff artist.
A new champion has arisen. It is Matsushita, which includes the Panasonic brand. This past week, I perused some old issues of "Consumer Reports". Interestingly, according to various customer surveys, Panasonic's quality is almost identical to Sony's quality. Yet, Panasonic's prices are typically 20% lower than Sony's prices.
Here's the rub. The Panasonic product is typically (but not always) "Made in Japan", but the Sony product is typically (but not always) "Made in a Nation of Desperate Slave Labor". Why is the Sony product so expensive when its labor costs are so low?
How about average of top 100 (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Average Scores (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Not exactly the most scientific (Score:3, Insightful)
The Wii had 1 game at 90% or higher, 5 games that were 80%-89%, 7 games that were 70%-79%, 4 games that were 60%-70% and 3 games below 60%; I may have made a mistake with the handful of virtual console games mixed in the Gamerankings list.
The PS3 5 games that were 80%-89%, 5 games that were 70%-79%, 1 games that were 60%-69%, and 2 games below 60%.
Between the 2 I would say that the Wii had 13 games that were playable (70% or better) whereas the PS3 only had 10 that were playable; the Wii also had 7 crappy games (below 70%) whereas the PS3 had 3 crappy games. The Wii's average is lower even though it had more playable games.
Funny because the wii actually has the best. (Score:5, Insightful)
ON the other hand the Ps3 has the worse. Nothing feels innovative, there's only three or four games that isn't on the 360 in some form already. And the ones that used motion control were poor (ridge racer and tony hawk both felt laggy in their responsiveness). That being said their "break out hit" Resistance, felt like a FPS, and only a FPS. Seeing as insomniacs record that was a low.
The Wii on the other hand had a truely unique controller so even ported hits couldn't be played the same way, yet the control has such tight controls that games which would be problematic with lag feel tight. What drags down the launch however is Ubisoft's titles, Red steel which was supposed to be the second best game at launch turns out to be a pretty big dud. The two racing games they released are budget titles at best. And the systems graphics are constantly dinged by Gamespot mostly.
Overall though the Wii has a great variety, improved by their unique controls. However the proper way to find out how good a launch is, isn't through scores, at least not averaging all the scores of the system. It's better to look at the uniqueness of the launch (AKA port city from the 360 and PS3), the variety available, and the quality of the top games. If there's 5 good games that come out, why should we care there's 10 crap games. We don't blame the Ps2 for having 50 good games and 200 crap games do we? Why does the N64 get high marks? EASY! they have 3 games at launch! That doesn't make it a great launch either.
Of course on the other hand 1up is about as worthwhile as a gaming source as crap is a painting source. They arn't biased, but they have awful reviews and complain about minor things while ignoring the best part of games. They post biased top 10s and such, or they'll back up their facts with flawed or weak math (aka let's take the average of all games launched). If you read the worst games at launch you'll probably notice you don't know many of them. So why are we averaging them in?
Re:Average Scores (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not exactly the most scientific (Score:5, Insightful)
Console launch? No, game title average.
Relivance? Console two generations ago was worst, but the time of the article makes you think otherwise.
Agreement with article? No, the title of the 1UP article makes clear it's about the games and that it's an open ended question answered in the text.
You can tell the truth just by reading further? Well yeah, but it's a not a main-page aritcle so you have to click-through first.
Do I care that the Wii was the worst of this gen? Not really, because it still has good games.
Do I think the PS3 sucks because Slashdot keeps wanting to tell me it does? Oh yes. I really don't care to think for myself.
Good day all,
TW
The parent isn't a troll (Score:1, Insightful)
The reason that I post this at all is that I agree with the parent. I've used Sony's professional equipment and it was first rate. Over the years I have bought their consumer grade stuff and ALWAYS been disappointed. If I were thinking of buying their game console, I would get someone to kick me in the the pants to remind me not to do so.
I suspect that lots of people are in the same boat with me and the parent. Sony's deteriorating reputation can only hurt the sales of their console.
Re:Slashdot headline worst ever (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Interesting but. (Score:4, Insightful)
That way the bigger library is an advantage "which I think it is" instead of a disadvantage.
Let's be fair. Someone will like SpongeBob.
Sony sucking people in... again. (Score:1, Insightful)
Every console maker is trying to make money, end of story. This is a great thing in that it leads to innovation and advancement. You have to love capitalism. The only thing better than capitalism to spur on new development is warfare. I prefer capitalism.
Cheers,
_GP_
Re:Really? Worse than Jaguar? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Why do people INSIST that one console is better (Score:4, Insightful)
I hate this kind of thinking. It ignores reality. It attempts to be politically correct and magnanimous over electronic devices. As if a PS3 can have a hurt ego.
Look, if there is anything we've learned from recent gaming history, it's that there are losers. The Dreamcast should have had a bigger chunk of market share. In my opinion, it didn't deserve an early death. And the GameCube should have had more games. However good Nintendo's first-party games may be, they didn't have a Guitar Hero or EyeToy equivalent. People wanting that stuff had to look elsewhere.
The bottom line is, some consoles falter, and when they do, sometimes developers kick 'em while they're down. And when that happens, customers get the shaft. So it is not only legitimate for customers to try to figure out the least shafty deal, but it's realistic, too. Right now, Sony is down. What's more, some customers (or ex-customers) want to kick Sony while they're down. It would be stupid to pretend that such thinking has no effect. Similarly, the Wii does have weaker graphics. It may be foolish to ignore that, especially if you consider what the console landscape may look like 2 or 3 years from now -- lots of very good looking and fun games on the PS3 and XBox 360. The Wii isn't going to corner the market on fun. So the question may be, do you want fun & good looks, or just fun? Are you willing to pay through the teeth?
The second we start to engage our critical faculties, we can see that there are already some clear indications of who is headed for loserville. And when you're about to put down $500 or so, you may want to be sure you're not investing in the losing team. If you do make that mistake, you may end up having to invest another $500 in a year or two. I'm not suggesting that the PS3 will die like the DreamCast, as Sony is too big and egotistical to let that happen. But we can already see a dearth of games for that system, and many of the games that do exist are already available (with better multiplayer) on the XBox 360. A year from now, will PS3 fanboys be asking Santa for an XBox 360, just to get a better selection of fun games? Why not avoid that mess, and pick intelligently from the start?
As for me, I've picked the Wii, because I believe three things. First, graphics have reached "good enough" level for enough people that sales won't be hurt. Second, the Wii controller isn't a gimmick, and will ensure good gaming for quite some time. Third, Nintendo has patched up relationships with third parties, and will see more games than the PS3 will. I could be wrong on all counts. But I want to put my money down on a system that will last me 4+ years, and so I did my best to determine who the losers would be, and steered clear.
Re:Zonk and the PS3 (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe Windows is rubbish, maybe office is bloated, maybe the Zune is appropriately brown in colour and maybe the XBOX is actually good.