Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
PlayStation (Games)

In Wake of Price Drops, Further PS3 Doubts 424

Posted by Zonk
from the clouding-the-issue dept.
Sony fans undoubtedly cheered the news of a $100 drop in price for the 60GB PS3, but even with the price drop there are several issues surrounding the console. 1up reports that the 80GB PS3 is following the lead of the EU-released PS3s by removing the Emotion engine and relying on software emulation for backwards compatibility. In an effort to decrease costs Sony continues to reduce features and develop their product. Meanwhile, Konami executive Kazumi Kitaue doesn't see much impact from the cut ... and in fact told Reuters that they're seriously considering a multi-platform release for Metal Gear Solid 4. "Kitaue said Konami may need to expand the target hardware for its blockbuster fighting game Metal Gear Solid, which has so far been developed for Sony's PlayStation machines, to other consoles in the future to recoup development costs ... The release of the latest version of Metal Gear Solid series is expected to help lure hard-core gamers to the PS3 and alleviate concerns over scarcity of strong PS3 titles. Underscoring sluggish PS3 sales and robust demand for the Wii, Nintendo shot past Sony in market value last month and bumped the Tokyo-based electronics conglomerate off the list of Japan's 10 most valuable companies."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

In Wake of Price Drops, Further PS3 Doubts

Comments Filter:
  • PS3 fans happy? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ShadowsHawk (916454) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @12:11PM (#19814359)
    I doubt I'd be all that pleased. To me, it would seem that I payed $100 too much since they're dropping the price so soon after launch.
  • Article is FUD (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Dr Kool, PhD (173800) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @12:14PM (#19814397) Homepage Journal
    Software emulation on the PS3 works just as well as the hardware emulation!! Software emulation as been in the Euro consoles since release over there. No features are being taken away at all. This is a gaming console we're talking about, not a PC. There is no disadvantage of emulating in software rather than hardware. There are no background apps that will be starved for CPU time because the emulation is in software rather than hardware!

    What's with all the anti-Sony FUD lately?
  • by kannibal_klown (531544) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @12:15PM (#19814405)
    It's kind of like a Catch-22, with Sony stuck in the middle.

    Price flamewars aside, the main issue with the PS3 is its library isn't really spectacular. Without a decent library (either general or exclusive titles) it is not going to sell well, even if it was the exact price of an XBox 360.

    So, Konami is thinking about not making MGS exclusive to the PS3 because the sales have been poor.

    But the sales won't increase without publishers hitching their star to the PS3 as exclusive titles (even if it's just exclusive for a year or so).


    Then again, I don't see why 3rd party publishers go exclusive anymore. If you can increase sales by 50% by simply recoding an existing product then go for it. Note: I'm a software developer and I know very well that's not as easy as it sounds. But it's obviously possible asince it's being done now (even across the Wii and the 360, which are as different as you can get).
  • by Dr Kool, PhD (173800) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @12:19PM (#19814459) Homepage Journal
    The game library of the PS3 is small compared to the 360 because it shipped a year after the 360. Compare the library of the PS3 to what the Wii has for a fair comparison -- PS3 has far more games. This "problem" with the PS3 will be fixed shortly, there are a bunch of great exclusives just around the corner. MGS, Gran Turismo, Heavenly Sword, Hot Shots Golf, Little Big Planet, etc, etc.

    PS3 is doing just fine for a console that shipped only seven months ago.
  • by Alaren (682568) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @12:19PM (#19814463)

    As I noted in the "price drop" discussion, this is an awfully funny way to drop the price. As the PS3 was available at launch for $499, it might be better to call this a "model upgrade." You get a few more features now than you would have on launch, but you still can't go out and buy a PS3 for any cheaper than you could on launch day. I remember reading something around the time Sony announced their pricing that showed $200 or $250 as the historic "sweet spot" for console launches and adjusted for inflation found that the sweet spot was around $400.

    Which means Nintendo came in below target, Microsoft managed to subsidize (initially) enough to keep under target, and Sony has announced a "price drop" that would have put their 20GB model about where it needs to be... except that it's no longer offered, so you still have to pay $499 to get the cheapest PS3 available.

  • Re:PS3 fans happy? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Ykant (318168) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @12:21PM (#19814511)
    Personally, I think it would be a great gesture on Sony's part if they comped all the early adopters controllers with the vibrating feature restored (you know it's coming).
  • Re:PS3 fans happy? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by eln (21727) * on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @12:26PM (#19814583) Homepage
    Early adopters always have and always will pay inflated prices. You paid extra to get the PS3 at launch. If you were concerned about a hundred bucks, you should have waited until a year after launch to buy. Sure, this price cut comes a little earlier than usual, but price cuts are by no means unprecedented. As with any new technology, the prices start out very high and decrease over time.

    The best case scenario for manufacturers is for price cuts to happen because economies of scale start to kick in causing manufacturing costs per unit to drop. However, it is certainly not unheard of for new technology (or any other product for that matter) to get a price cut because the sales numbers are disappointing. Next you'll be complaining that Dole owes you 10 cents because you bought a can of peaches the day before it went on sale.
  • Whether or not (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Bullfish (858648) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @12:26PM (#19814585)
    People think the PS3 is trash or the best thing ever, it is plain that the Sony braintrust has to do a serious rethink as to their marketing, packaging, partnerships and PR in regards to their console. A $100 price drop isn't going to help their cause much. They gave Nintendo a lesson back in PS1 vs N64 days, a lesson they seem to have forgotten.
  • by SparkyFlooner (1090661) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @12:27PM (#19814599)
    Last generation, the XBox was my "Don't WANNA" console. I didn't want to buy it, but I had to for Ninja Gaiden. So I basically spent hundreds of dollars for one game, and I only played Halo 2 on it after that. (Actually, my computer was my primary game machine, but out of the consoles, my PS2 got used the most, primarily as a DVD player.)

    I'm not doing that ever again. (Especially now that I'm married and my wife would kill me.)

    So this generation the PS3 has become my "Don't WANNA" console. I don't wanna have to buy it, and I probably won't, even if Final Fantasy XIII remains exclusive to it. There are no games that will make me spend the ungodly amount of money I'd have to drop on the PS3.

    I have the HD-DVD add-on for my 360, and in retrospect I think it was a bad purchase. Thanks to the HD war, not all the movies I want to see are available for HD-DVD, and I find that when I'm forced to resort to regular DVD...I don't really care. I'm just as happy either way, to tell the truth (with my 1080p tv). I could've and should've waited, and I can tell you from experience, HD movies aren't worth a 200 dollar player right now...and they CERTAINLY aren't worth a 500 dollar player.
  • by anotherone (132088) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @12:28PM (#19814607)
    What have they screwed up besides the unreasonably high price? I wouldn't want them to scrub the PS3 and start over, the replacement would just be MORE expensive.
  • Lately? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Tony (765) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @12:28PM (#19814609) Journal
    What's with all the anti-Sony FUD lately?

    There's been anti-PS3 FUD from day one. I don't know why. Microsoft has contributed with their multi-million dollar "grass-roots" PR campaign, but I don't think they are the sole reason. Sony *has* screwed up in a few ways (like shipping sixaxis controllers with no rumble), but considering how even a *price drop* causes the FUD to fly, it's hardly all due to their mis-steps.

    I don't know why everyone is Sony-hating, but they've been doing it for a long time.
  • by alvinrod (889928) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @12:28PM (#19814621)
    I think people really like to rag on the PS3 for not being vary successful, but it seems to me that it's not doing terribly bad. If you look at sales numbers [vgchartz.com] and align the launches of the PS3 and the Xbox 360, the PS3 is more or less on the same track that the Xbox 360 was on.

    If you check Amazon [amazon.com] you can see that the PS3 moved up to the number one selling item in the video game section. I think it was substantially lower (If I recall correctly it was 28th) before this from what I've been reading on other sites.

    With E3 and the possibilities of some big ticket games being shown, It's possible for Sony to pick up even more steam. They've done a lot to shoot themselves in the foot, but I think they can still make a decent showing this round. Right now it's outpacing the Gamecube and the original Xbox, both of which were wonderful systems with great exclusives. I think Sony is given a lot more crap than they deserve.

  • by nelsonal (549144) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @12:30PM (#19814645) Journal
    The stock markets are all about where you are going. If a company can't sell a story or concept to investors it typically trades at a fairly low multiple of earnings (these are classified as value companies). When they can they trade at a much higher multiple of earnings. As examples Apple is trading at 38x it's earnings. Dell trades at about 20 times it's earnings this year. Investors believe that Apple is more likely to grow its earnings faster than Dell will so they pay a higher price now.

    The other factor that impacts market value is the total size of your profitablity. It's likely that Sony's other businesses earn less money (per dollar of sales) than consoles (in good times), so Sony's other businesses don't add as much as you might expect to its market value.
  • by Silentknyght (1042778) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @12:34PM (#19814689)
    Wasn't the emotion engine supposed to be the next thing since sliced bread? How will removing something powerful make your system sell more? Sure, it will cut down in price, but Sony already took the "Expensive System, sure, but look at the power!" stance. If they buckle on it, I predict they'll continue to crumble.



    At any rate, for myself, selling me a crappier system for $100 less is worse than selling me the real deal for the original price.

  • by Sciros (986030) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @12:35PM (#19814703) Journal
    It's doing "alright," but the Wii was launched at the same time and it's doing MUCH better.

    The sheer number of games doesn't matter. The quality of the games (and marketability, etc. of course) is what makes the difference. A console can have only 10 games and still be fine if those 10 games are so awesome that everyone buys all 10. Halo 3 for MS is better than 20 crap RPG games for Sony that will barely sell. Likewise FFXIII and FFXIII Versus will do more for PS3 than 20 rubbish sports games on 360. Indeed, you are 100% correct when you mention "great exclusives," because those are key to a console's success and legacy.

    And nowadays, doing "alright" for a console just isn't good enough because when these "exclusives" end up costing as much as they do, the potential sales on that console simply aren't enough to make the game profitable. Selling as many units as the PS2 did in 7 months, or even a bit more, just isn't good enough considering how much more expensive PS3 games are to produce than first-generation PS2 games were.
  • by SparkyFlooner (1090661) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @12:57PM (#19815023)
    I'm not saying a 1080p movie isn't impressive looking. I'm saying that at some point I forget to notice how 'crisp' it looks and start paying attention to the events unfolding in the movie.

    When you first get an HD player, you get HD movies just to see how they look. Hell, I would've watched The Adventures of Hanna Montana in HD if it was the only thing available at the time. But as time passes, you stop being hyper-aware of how it looks and start going back to just watching a movie.

    I guess my ultimate point is that the difference between HD and standard def doesn't change my enjoyment of a movie. A good HD movie would've been just as good in standard def.
  • by Fallen Kell (165468) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @12:58PM (#19815041)
    That is all you need to know. Think of how many billions they have made on that simple fact. It isn't like it costs $8 to print 10-20 cards. You are seeing pure profit in the card game. Not to mention the millions in TV franchise rights, movie revenues, and finally video game sales (which also happen to require requisite video game consoles which also sell at a profit unlike competitors). It has been a cash printing machine for the last 10+ years. It makes more money at less risk then any music business can.

    You also forget that Nintendo owns a LOT of different IP which they license to many other entities. Their entire business model is based such that even if console tanks, they have enough cash to continue onwards. They keep their development costs low as well as their production costs and make sure they always are making a profit on each and everything they sell so they do not have to rely on future revenue from game sales to make a profit. They have had several systems which have flat out tanked in the past, but have always been able to continue through the market ups and downs (unlike some competitors, Atari, Activision, NeoGeo, SEGA... who couldn't last a single bad console release).
  • by Kelbear (870538) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @12:59PM (#19815049)
    Screw-up is harsh term for the PS3 thus far. I wouldn't ding them that harshly. Once the price issue is removed, it isn't a catastrophe, it's just...not the best. It's got online and it's free, but it's just not as good. Interface has a few nice features like internet browsing, but overall, it's not as tight of an experience as Xbox360 with relation to gaming, and this is a gaming console. On the other hand, the Wii is far worse, so I wouldn't say the PS3 is doing terribly here, just not as well as the Xbox360.

    Games and lost exclusives, it is indeed Sony's job to make sure the games are in place, this is their biggest problem IMO. They didn't have enough of the right games, and have lost exclusivity on some of their better ones. But this is very much a matter of opinion, and I don't see them doing terribly here, just not as good as the Xbox360 or Wii in targeting the seperate markets. The Xbox360 is a direct competitor to the PS3 in terms of the games being fielded, and it's winning, while the PS3 can't compete at all with the Wii for obvious reasons.

    So while there are no catastrophic mistakes aside from the price added by packing in Blu-ray, coming in 2nd-place in all categories leaves this console without a clear picture of what it's good for and who should buy it.

    If I were to pick the worst part of the PS3's performance, I would have to stretch to include the marketing. It has been pure CRAP. Truly terrible. You would almost think that they have intentionally been sabotaging themselves. Have you seen the "This is Living" campaign? Soccer fanatic lying naked except for a jockstrap masturbating to a soccer game on TV? A busty-blonde pooping in a toilet telling stories about her mother? The mercenary's clip had a superb performance by the actor, really good stuff, and unfortunately, the message was that you should go and buy a bar of chocolate. However, this was a European campaign.

    The U.S version was not that much better, though it had improved later on to actually show some clips of a game (Resistance). However, it had kicked off with a plastic baby crying blood to the sounds of Armageddon in a white room. Apparently they're trying to tell you that the PS3 kills babies and will bring about the Eschaton.

    But as I have said, the PS3 isn't that bad of a package aside from the pricing. The games will happen someday, and when they do the PS3 will pick up some momentum. I don't think it has any chance of catching the Xbox360 or Wii. However, the PS3 has successfully established the next media format. HD-DVD is dead in the water since there are so many more blu-ray players in the wild. And releases will go to the format with the most people who can play them. And people will buy the format with the most releases on them...etc. etc. So Sony has that at least. Whether that translates into PS3 sales later on due to Blu-ray's lead on HD-DVD is questionable though.
  • by hardburn (141468) <hardburn@wumpus-cav e . n et> on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @01:08PM (#19815185)

    PS3 worldwide sales are so far following the sales trends of the GameCube [vgchartz.com], with the PS3 getting a small boost from the EU launch. It also follows pretty close to the worldwide XBox sales, which only had a large market share in the US and ignored everywhere else. For US numbers only [vgchartz.com], the PS3 is selling slightly below the GameCube--the also-ran of the last generation in terms of market penetration.

    The PS3 is competing against a console with a year's head start to break 10m units, and another console that has a wicked upwards surge and will probably break 10m units within the next few months. Sony has a lot of work to do to avoid becoming the also-ran of this generation. With the number of exclusives moving multiplatform, it may already be too late to retake momentum.

  • Re:Lately? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SydShamino (547793) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @01:12PM (#19815233)
    The first anti-Sony rants specifically concerning the PS3 that I saw on Slashdot were in March-April 2006, when Sony announced the price for the PS3, and SCEI president Ken Kutaragi made multiple brash statements to support its price. Posters mocked the hubris.

    http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/05/12/ 1738239 [slashdot.org]

    Articles like this followed:
    http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/05/15/ 1745252 [slashdot.org]

    Before that time, most of the PS3 posts I remember regarded how cool the cell processor was supposed to be, and how great it would make PS3 games look and feel.

    This of course ignores the rootkit fiasco, and the general hatred of Sony that resulted from it, as Sony stepped out from behind the cover of the RIAA to be in the spotlight as a big bad music label. And it ignores people upset about the Blu-Ray / HD-DVD war and how Sony's 30-year plan to own its own formats has screwed consumers time and time again. And how Sony's content divisions have taken control of the company, rendering products made by their (previously high-quality) hardware divisions crippled, like my otherwise very nice Sony plasma TV that can't play Sony Pictures' movies released on Sony Blu-Ray discs in a Sony Blu-Ray player without downscaling the graphics, because I "might try to copy them".
  • Re:Lately? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by MeanderingMind (884641) * on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @01:12PM (#19815249) Homepage Journal
    It's a fundamental issue of respect. Sony's PR department has been incompetant, and displayed on a consistant basis the attitude that we, the loyal gamers were sheep for them to shear at their leisure. Over time they improved somewhat, but there was a long period following E3 2006 where nothing that came out of Sony's marketing department was anything but an insult to the intelligence of those reading.

    Gamers, apparently, have a strong ability to bear grudges. While at this time Sony has definately improved their PR, that means diddly squat to a lot of gamers who are still angry about how they were treated last year.

    It doesn't help that Sony hasn't explicitly stated they screwed up their PR, although at this point I'm not sure that would be enough to calm many people.
  • by trdrstv (986999) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @01:25PM (#19815423)

    No, it's a price cut. The vast majority of PS3 buyers chose the 60GB version because of the (incorrect) assumption that the 20GB was a gimped console. New buyers will now save $100. Smart buyers will still be able to buy a 20GB console, which are selling for around $400 new or $350 second-hand on Ebay right now.

    A price cut is a price cut, even if you cover your eyes and plug your ears and scream "la-la-la-la-la I can't hear you".

    Ok, Sony Started out with 2 versions selling at $499 and $599. Now they have 2 versions selling at $499 and $599. The feature spec is now different, but how is that a price cut? For the sake of comparison let's take Sony out of the picture and compare Cameras.

    Last year you could buy a 5.1 Megapixel camera solo for $199, or a 5.1 Megapixel camera with a bag, & extra batteries for $249.

    This year you can get a a 5.1 Megapixel camera with a bag, & extra batteries for $199, or you can get a a 5.1 Megapixel camera with a bag, extra batteries and a memory card for $249 and they no longer sell the 5.1 Megapixel camera by itself.

    You are getting more for your money, but at the core you're buying a camera at the same price as was offered last year.

  • Re:Lately? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by _xeno_ (155264) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @01:26PM (#19815433) Homepage Journal

    [List of evil things Sony has done]
    [List of evil things Microsoft has done]

    Gee - I wonder if this might be why I currently own a Wii, and not a PS3 or an Xbox 360[1]. Of course, Nintendo has been evil in the past, but they seem to have moved beyond that after having it blow up in their face.

    It's not this is a war between only the Xbox 360 and the PS3 - there is another console to consider.

    [1] Actually, it's not. The Wii has the games I'm interested in, and neither the Xbox 360 and PS3 do. But in any case...

  • by Rolgar (556636) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @01:57PM (#19815845)
    The GP did say Sony, and I know I've read many comments, many previous to launch, where people were planning on not buying because of the PC root kit fiasco. They've also been severely trashed for not having rumble in the controller. I hear their isn't much to their library, and nothing you couldn't get on the 360 so why spend the extra cash.

    I suppose all of the other PS3 issues relate in some way to the price of the console. When Sony first announced the price of the console, the executives acted very aloof like they were giving customers the privilege of being able to buy a PS3 at $600 (Apple has managed to do the same thing with a phone that also requires a $40 service plan and get adored for it), made statements about how the next generation didn't start until they launched, and generally acted like they didn't care what the customers thought and people should be lining up to give them money just because they're Sony. That's not a very customer friendly attitude to have, and has made everybody that felt condescended by Sony look at their product and decide that there isn't enough of a difference between the PS3 and the 360 to warrant the higher price, so they'll get the 360 since most games will be ported anyway.

    Sony also has not paid attention to the history of consoles, and how no $500 console has ever done well. Further, all of the tens of millions of people that bought the last system are now about 2-6 years older than when they bought a PS2. For the twenty and thirty somethings in that group, many are now married, have kids, and the $700 or $800 (because you want games with that console right?) commitment is not as feasible that the $400 or $500 of the PS2, and many have also decided "been there, done that" for most of the games, and decided not to ante up for the newer model when they older one does just fine, or they've moved to the 360 for a better online experience, or to the Wii to try something new.

    The last round, the Xbox was the hard core system, the PS2 was mainstream system with the GameCube. It's like Sony decided they wanted to switch roles with Microsoft, and go after the higher end market. HELLOO!!! You guys kicked the crap out of the Xbox last time because they were the high end system, and you were more affordable, and you decided to go after their part of the market, and left the core open for Microsoft and Nintendo to swoop in and take it away from you.

    Also, with the PS and PS2, Sony used misinformation and hype to bury their competition because everybody waited to see what Sony had to offer which made the Atari Jaguar, 3DO, Sega Saturn and Dreamcast suffer, and Sony managed to do well enough to beat those offerings plus the N64, GameCube, and Xbox. This time, they're competing with a 360 that is comparable to the PS3 on value basis and a Wii that wants to take away the casual gamers that Sony had last generation.

    The biggest thing of all has been the word of mouth. Sure, Sony kicked Nintendo's tail on launch week. But it didn't take long until word of mouth got around and demand for the Wii was through the roof. My wife reads lots of parenting magazines, and every one of them has had articles recommending a Wii for family friendly fun so that the family can spend time together while playing instead of junior hanging out in a corner of the basement alone, and they have the option of providing junior with active games so he'll be in a little better shape than he would be with any PlayStation game other than DDR or Guitar Hero. They also option of playing games that they played 10-25 years ago, and wouldn't mind playing again, with their kids.
  • Re:Lately? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jollyreaper (513215) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @02:10PM (#19816061)

    The first anti-Sony rants specifically concerning the PS3 that I saw on Slashdot were in March-April 2006, when Sony announced the price for the PS3, and SCEI president Ken Kutaragi made multiple brash statements to support its price. Posters mocked the hubris.
    This sort of thing always makes me stop and gape in wonder. A large, successful company run by people who have proven themselves with smart decisions in the past make a momentous decision with serious future ramifications and proceed to trip over their own dicks. What the hell? These sorts of slow-motion trainwrecks never should have happened. There are rules in place, people whose livelihoods depend on making the right call are in positions of power and have a vested interest in doing right and yet they all trip over their own dicks. And if the view from the outside isn't spectacle enough, just wait until the books get written about what happened on the inside.

    One can expect this sort of insanity from, say, a dot.com run by 20-somethings or the "Behind the Music" epic blowout of a drug-addled mega rockstar. It's more surprising still when you get institutional failures in old-line companies. You dig into the story, you've got people drinking some serious kool-aid. Charismatic personalities, leaders trying to work through personal psychological issues with Other People's Money, people who know better who are browbeaten into conformity or who are treated as Cassandra's, party-poopers to be voted off the island, it's the sort of story that's repeated time and time again but never seems to get old or go out of style.

    I'm reading Hubris right now, a book on the lead-up to war in Iraq. Hoooooooooly shit. Leaders decide on a course of action and look for the intelligence to back them instead of the other way around. Deliberately ignoring dissenting opinions, forcibly shutting down people who won't play ball, using every political trick in the book to then get themselves into a problem that nobody knows how to get out of. I bet the story of the PS3 is just like that but with less dead people. This isn't a specific Bush slam, this is a slam against poor decision-making in general.
  • by MaWeiTao (908546) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @02:40PM (#19816403)
    The PS3 still has a chance to be successful. In the end it may not be the dominant system, but it can still do quite well. However, it has one giant obstacle to overcome, even larger than it's price tag. And that's a lack of games.

    The PS3 is suffering from the same problem as the PSP, most games available for the system are crap. There are quite a few that are decent, for the PSP anyway, but virtually none that truly stand out. The cost of the console and questionable media format are mostly secondary factors driving people away from the system.

    It's crucial, of course, that Sony and third party developers are devoted to the console in the long run. I'm impressed by the broad appeal of the Wii. I've met people who I'd never expect to be interested in game consoles telling me they own one. However, I'm also discovered a recurring pattern amongst these people. Many of them own one game: Wii Sports. If they own a second game it's almost always Wii Play, and that's because the game comes with a second controller. Unless there's a somewhat informed gamer in the household I don't see these people buying anything else. And when they do own additional games everyone uniformly considers Wii Sports the most fun. That's the thing with casual and non-gamers. They aren't the most loyal of consumers, at least not in this segment. They're not going to be buying 10 games or more a year.

    So this is where the PS3 still has a viable future. Provided, of course companies start releasing some great games for the console. If the PS3 had phenomenal games people wouldn't be complaining about cost and Bluray. People have no problem paying for an iPhone which other than having a unique interface and the Apple brand image doesn't really do anything the competitors can't do. And on top of that it costs as much as a PS3!
  • Re:Lately? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by flitty (981864) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @03:47PM (#19817171)

    [rootkit]Create by First 4 Internet and removed by Sony BMG.

    What!! yeah, Sony had NO idea that a rootkit was on their cd's. Completely someone elses idea. It's SOOO easy to slip that in a major record company's major releases.

    [lik-sang]Closed due to a decision made by the High Court of London.

    OMG. Yeah, that's a pretty far stretch. That's like saying that allofmp3 wasn't closed down by the RIAA or the US, it was shut down by a russian Judge. You win fanboy of the day.
  • by Doc Ruby (173196) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @04:00PM (#19817339) Homepage Journal
    The embedded PS2 chip in the original PS3s was one of the most glaring signs that Sony had rushed the PS3 to market before it was ready. The several firmware upgrades in the 7-8 months since its release (up to 1.82 or so now) are more signs that Sony's tech is catching up to its marketing rollout.

    The PS3 HW was always planned to offer PS2 support in SW emulation, not the chip. But they didn't finish the SW until the EU rollout, when they could finally drop the chip that was faster to design in than was emulation.

    So what has happened is that Sony is now dropping its PS3 price right as it's dropping the more expensive HW kluge. That alone doesn't raise any realistic doubts. If anything, it shows how skillful is Sony in mitigating its project management and marketing risks with alternate designs. Because users won't even notice the difference. All they'll notice is dropping prices and increased functions.

    But what I want to see is Sony actually change 2 basic PS3 limits that hold back Linux on it. First, Sony must offer a model with RAM expandable beyond the 256-500MB hardwired into current models. Without more RAM, the fast Cell rips through all the data in 2ms, then can rely on all its IO to get only enough data to keep the Cell about 2-5% busy.

    The other change Sony should make is to open the Hypervisor [wikipedia.org] to allow SW running on the Cell to call at least the 2D graphics functions on the RSX videochip. Otherwise, all video must be computed on the Cell. PCs all put all that graphics/video computation/rendering on the VGA coprocessor.

    If not, people will have to port Linux X drivers to the Cell SPEs. That could happen anyway, for even more interesting video processing than that built into the RSX. Once PS3 has video codecs ported to SPEs or RSX, MythTV will become a killer app, with a USB TV decoder feeding it, and a DLNA server [wikipedia.org] for archive.
  • by noidentity (188756) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @04:11PM (#19817455)
    That's the thing, this $200 sweet spot apparently doesn't psychologically adjust itself to inflation. So you can't get away with arguing "Yeah, $500 seems like a lot, but if you adjust for inflation, it's like you're getting a console that costed $200 many years ago. We're sure our logic will overcome your psychology without difficulty!" Except that electronics goods are constantly getting cheaper, so we expect them to cost the same or less in the future, using whatever the current dollar is.
  • Re:Lately? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by xero314 (722674) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @04:29PM (#19817707)

    Sony had NO idea that a rootkit was on their cd's.
    I'm not a Sony insider so I do not know what they did or did not know, but I have worked with contracted work where the client had no clue what was happening inside the product. This is not uncommon. The state of Washington didn't know the Tacoma narrows bridge was susceptible to high winds, this is after all why you higher outside contractors. I could have mentioned that it was an exploit of a flaw in the Windows Operating system that allowed the Rootkit to exist in the first place, so why is Rootkit not in the MS list of "evil things."

    I'm not actually defending Sony, just saying that they did rectify the issue and paid excessive fines (far above any damage actually caused) yet I'm not hearing any flack about the other companies involved, such as First 4 Internet, Microsoft, and any of those companies continued partners.

    That's like saying that allofmp3 wasn't closed down by the RIAA or the US, it was shut down by a russian Judge.
    First of all lik-sang was not shut down by anyone, they shut themselves down. Second they chose to shut down because they were not able to continue to hide behind the protection of Hong Kong law and instead had to contend with the laws of the countries of the citizens they conducted business with. Complain to, and about, the law makers if you have an issue with the law, not to the company that attempts to exercise their rights protected by those laws. And it's not like I didn't purchase from Lik-Sang since I have a number of Gundams and Gundam related products purchased through them.

    As for allofmp3.com, I think you are starting to understand how law works. You can can demand or make all the threats you want but in the end it is the law makers that make the decisions.

    You win fanboy of the day.
    If by "fanboy" you mean purveyor of facts, then I'll take that award.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @04:33PM (#19817747)
    So... you didn't say But you should swear about it, and turn it into a huge issue, and pretend that it's worse than the competition, etc... Go right ahead. It's what we expect from the Slashdot 360 Fanboy, er.... Slashdot Games section.?

    Newsflash: some people prefer flawless backwards compatibility over prettier pictures. You seem to be ignoring that. Sony themselves said the emulation isn't perfect. You may not have one of those games that isn't BC, but others might.

    Frankly, that alone was a dealbreaker for me on ever getting a PS3. I just don't like software emulation on a bulk scale. It's. Not. The. Same.

    So, yes, in my case, software BC IS a huge issue, and yes, I'm quite aware it's a personal feeling, but it's also my personal $500 that would get a PS3, so I think I'm entitled to my opinions on what is or isn't a huge issue about it.
  • by cbreaker (561297) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @04:38PM (#19817825) Journal
    I don't know about cross-platform games, but what that generally means right now is "Ports from the Xbox 360." Many developers will rework the game engine a little bit to make it run on the PS3 and release it. Games that actually had some work put into them, such as Oblivion, show that the PS3 is a better system then you make it out to be.

    More work to make the games work better on the system? Boo frickin' hoo. Game production ALWAYS gets more difficult as the years go on. Stop using that as an argument. It's not an impossible task to write PS3 titles properly; it's being done. I have no sympathy for developers that can't develop.

    About the memory thing, it should be noted that the CPU RAM is clocked at CPU speed. 3.2Ghz, no tricks.

    Only the Elite supports 1080p.

    Every single PS1/PS2 title I've tried from my friends' very large game collection have worked flawlessly. Out of the 10 titles I have for my Xbox, five gave me shit on the 360. Awesome.

    And don't give me shit about the PS3 controller. It's nearly perfect. Don't you think that Sony would have changed things around with it a little bit in the last decade if people didn't like it? And what, it's not HEAVY enough? Go dream up some new FUD and get back to us. (You don't even mention that the SIXAXIS in the SIXAXIS controller means it's motion sensitive, and it works well.)
  • by Panzergheist (609926) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @04:58PM (#19818049)
    If you really don't understand the difference between the 360 upscaling 720p content to 1080p, and the PS3 natively supporting 1080p output then try the following:

    Take two pictures with a digital camera: One at 1MP, and another at 2MP. Copy the photo files to your PC and then note the resolutions. Now, use a photo editor to stretch the image of the first photo to the same resolution of the second. Notice a difference between the two? The first photo lacks the detail of the second because it never had the additional detail in the first place.

    So sure, 720p games scaled to 1080p will look good, but the art assets (textures, etc.) were not created for the higher resolution.

    As for the media drives, I prefer the quitness and constant throughput of the PS3's drive, thanks. Last night, for shits, I loaded up Gears of War (gamertag: Ilidd, if you want proof) again after having not played my 360 in several months. The DVD drive is just as obnoxiously loud as I remember it.

    I don't buy 360 versions of games anymore and I'm seriously playing with the idea of selling my 360 because the system is unreliable and noisy. Yes, I know the 3RRoD is warranted for 3 years now. I don't care. A console shouldn't break that quickly in the first place.

    No matter what happens to the PS3 at this point (win, lose, becomes another Dreamcast story) I've already recieved lots of enjoyment from it. Yes, it was expensive but it was worth every penny. I can honestly see that system physically lasting for 10+ years because of the build quality. I can't say the same for my 360 and I won't replace it when it breaks.

    I guess my whole point is that if gamers were to sit down with a PS3 and play all the games it has, I think they would really enjoy it. Every person I've had play mine loves the system and the games, except for one guy, who as much as I like the dude, is a Xbox fanboy in the worst way. Some people are that way and it's honestly their loss. I hate Microsoft's shoddy products, but I still gave both their systems a chance. I didn't like the direction Nintendo went with the Wii, but I bought one. I sold it because it was boring to me, but I still see why some people go crazy over it.

    Peace.

Nothing is rich but the inexhaustible wealth of nature. She shows us only surfaces, but she is a million fathoms deep. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

Working...