Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Entertainment

Playstation 3 In the Works 368

Posted by CmdrTaco from the bring-me-my-gta4 dept.
Kredal writes "The Independent is running a story about Sony's work on a new console, being built around online games, such as Everquest Adventures and Final Fantasy 11. No word on backwards compatability, but expect it to be the X-Box killer if it is." FF11 already has me lusting.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Playstation 3 In the Works More

Playstation 3 In the Works

Comments Filter:

  • Old PS2 Commercial (Score:3, Funny)

    by 1WingedAngel ( 575467 ) on Wednesday May 01, 2002 @09:34AM (#3442342) Homepage
    Only 6 more versions 'till the PS9 with inhalable spores that make you hallucinate the game!

    Tim

  • enough already! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by xirtam_work ( 560625 ) on Wednesday May 01, 2002 @09:36AM (#3442358)
    why can't people play on the systems that are out already and get on with their gaming lives.

    Speculation like this killed the Dreamcast. Oh.. the PS2's gonna be sooo good.

    Then you get lame kiddies saying stuff like "I don't want an Xbox. I'm getting a PS3, it will wipe the floor with the Xshite" ... yeah, in about 2 years! What are you going to do until then, keep playing your N64?

    Eventually people nned to buy a current system. The best time to do so is now. Once a console has been released and then discounted (to rip off the earlier adopters) it's worth buying.

    I rate the Xbox as better than the PS2, but not enough software is out there yet. People are still going nuts for MGS2 on the PS2, but it takes like a day to finish it on your first time out.

    Buy an Xbox/PS2 and be done with it.

    The news of the PS3 is cool, but christ, don't wait for it!

    • Old cliche (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Wingchild ( 212447 )
      Speculation like this killed the Dreamcast. Oh.. the PS2's gonna be sooo good.

      Then you get lame kiddies saying stuff like "I don't want an Xbox. I'm getting a PS3, it will wipe the floor with the Xshite" ... yeah, in about 2 years! What are you going to do until then, keep playing your N64?

      This is much like an old urban legend, made popular through Scott Adams' Dilbert books. Once upon the time there was a company trying to sell some hideously expensive piece of hardware. Prospective clients were wary, so the salesteam tells them "Hey, Every single concern you have will be fixed by Version 2 of this hardware!" The clients then do not buy version 1, and bide their time.

      Just about the time Version 2 comes out, the clients come back, and the salesteam says "Here's Version 2! ..but man, Version 3 is *really* gonna rock!" Clients then hold off to wait till Version 3 is ready because of the raw cost of the hardware and the legacy nature of the product.

      Meanwhile, the company goes bankrupt because everybody's locked in a holding pattern.

      This tired old legend doesn't really fit in right with the console market, as these toys are tools for entertainment -- not legacy hardware that you're expected to keep and maintain for five or ten years, such as cars and houses. Sure, some of us gamers do, but it's not the expectation.

      • Re:Old cliche (Score:3, Informative)

        by Enry ( 630 )
        Heh. Microsoft pulls this stunt all the time, except doing it against their competitors. Remember all the hype about waiting for the Xbox as it would clean the PS2's clock? How many fewer PS2s do you think Sony sold as a result of this? Sony is just using MSFT's playbook against them. And I say "go for it". But then again, I still have my original PS and have little intention to upgrade. Unless GTA3 doesn't come out for the PC soon *grumble*.

      • Re:Old cliche (Score:4, Interesting)

        by SDF-7 ( 556604 ) on Wednesday May 01, 2002 @10:02AM (#3442550)
        Yeah, because heaven knows that stuff like this _never_ happens in the computer biz...

        I mean, what if oh, say -- Microsoft announced it was upgrading the 16-bit GUI on top of it's operating system with amazing features and a wonderful new interface... and hyped it so much that people thought they needed to buy it for their toasters... that wouldn't hurt a rival (better) operating system for the year or two it took them to ship something, now would it?

        Nah... never happen...

    • Re:enough already! (Score:2, Insightful)

      by NorthDude ( 560769 )
      Yeah, I came to the same conclusion whn I bought my digiCam. Canon/Nikon and the like are releasing new model every 8 months! after 1 year of waiting, I tried a few one and decided that what was mattering the most was to actually take pictures, not wish to. It should be the same for everything, but you know how it is, people don't want something usefull, they want something to show to there friends/familly/neibor and look superior. Like my uncle who calls me twice a year to tell me he just got a new PC which is just so hot! 4000$ a year on PC to do the same ol' shit on it, type letters/browse the web/check mail and play the latest Flight Simulator. The same goes on for the Playstation etc etc. At least, the marketing departement of all those company can be proud, they have succeeded in making us dependant of totally useless toys. (Useless in the sense of not being essential to an enjoyable life).
    • You have no choice but to wait for it since it's not out yet.


      Speculation like that is not what killed the Dreamcast. Sega killed the Dreamcast, just like they kill all of their systems. Which is unfortunate, because I like the DC, it doesn't compare to the PS2, but there are some really fun games on it.

      • Well, let's be fair: Sega has killed all of their post-Genesis systems.
      • their systems. Which is unfortunate, because I like the DC, it doesn't compare to the PS2, but there are some really fun games on it.

        The timeline goes like:

        • Master System Flopped in the US, somewhat popular in europe.
        • Genesis/Megadrive Successful in the US, flopped in Japan.
        • SegaCD/32X Flopped in the US because expensive add-ons don't sell.
        • Saturn Flopped in the US, successful in Japan.
        • Dreamcast Somewhat successful in the US and Japan, but Sega ran out of cash and forced its exit from the market.

        From a US point of view, Sega hasn't had much luck with home hardware. But worldwide and in the arcade, it's not quite as ugly as it looks.

        • You forgot the GameGear (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Kombat ( 93720 )

          GameGear was one of the coolest handhelds I've ever seen. Way ahead of its time, IMHO. It was a portable, full-colour handheld gaming system with a backlit LCD. You could play the thing in full colour in a pitch dark room, out of the box. What systems, even today, can make such a claim?

          It's drawbacks were lack of games, pretty pricey, and it ate batteries like Oprah goes through Twinkies.

          • Of course, in the portable market, nothing has been successful in challenging the Gameboy (including the Lynx, Game Gear, Neo Geo Pocket, Nomad, Wonderswan, etc. etc.) and so it's not very interesting to mention. Even though nearly every portable has been technically superior to the lowly Gameboy (at least until the GBA's arrival), lack of battery life or meager title selection have killed them all.

            And I won't mention the ill-fated Virtual Boy ;)

    • Eventually people nned to buy a current system


      I disagree, but not for the reasons that you might think.


      I have yet to buy a system at it's launch. Never. I don't see the point in buying this hardware that can only play games when the price will most likely drop almost half in 18 months or so. That's about the time I usually buy. Granted, this hasn't happened with the Playstation 2 yet but it has to eventually (especially with a PS3 in the works). This way I already know what key titles to get for the system, and the system still has life in it for new surprises.

    • I rate the Xbox as better than the PS2, but not enough software is out there yet.

      So what exactly is your judgement criteria for a gaming console?

  • Hardly surprising (Score:2, Insightful)

    by moonbender ( 547943 )
    PS2 is hardly a new console, and I doubt anybody is surprised that, to quote, they're in "advanced stages of developing PlayStation 3". MS briedly talked about Xbox2, what, a month after the Xbox was out?
    Anway, the article is really quite boring, nothing yet unknown is revealed, and of course there is not even a vague release date for the PS3.

  • Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Wednesday May 01, 2002 @09:36AM (#3442363)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • This just in... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Drakino ( 10965 ) on Wednesday May 01, 2002 @09:39AM (#3442385) Journal
    ...companies around the world work on new products, and many focused on the same market as previous products. More news on this odd occurance as we get more.

    But seriosuly, if noone expected Sony to do anything to move to the PS3 some day, they don't understand buisness much. And online is the future by what everyone is saying, so makes sense.

    With more and more gamers playing consoles, expect some expectations of faster upgrades and such to start occuring.
    • I can see it now,

      the PS4 will be fully modular so that you can swap out an old part with a newr faster and better one. isn't that one of the cool things abot the Xbox? the Video card is removable?
    • It's obvious they would make the PS3, but it's still nice to have details. On the other hand, the comment about being an X-Box killer is just plain stupid - if I were paying for this I'd expect the editors to at least point out that since the PS3 will arrive a few years later than the X-Box, it would be pretty hard to NOT be far superior.
    • Most companies announce an impending new product to spread FUD about current competing products. But when you are already #1 in your market then the FUD will mostly impact your own product. So the only way this move makes any sense is if Sony cuts the price on their current console and guarantees that the PS3 will be backward compatible with PS2 games.

      Then people will buy the PS2 because it's cheaper than it was before and rest assured that their investment in games will carry through to the next generation platform.
  • do you know what I had to go through to get my Wife to let be buy a PS2?

    I told her that the console market is not like the PC market. Consoles stay around for a few years. I then pointed to the fact that the PS1 had been around since the early 90's.

    now what the hell am I going to say to get this sucker!!!!

  • Backwards Compatability (Score:4, Insightful)

    by foondog ( 87662 ) <mat.321@net> on Wednesday May 01, 2002 @09:41AM (#3442393) Journal
    I sure hope that Sony continues to make systems that are backwards compatable. I think that really gave Sony a major edge over the Nintendo Game Cube. Games are really expensive and it's nice to be able to continue playing the games on newer systems. Otherwise you either don't play the older games anymore or you have several systems connected in a giant mess to your TV. It might prevent Sony from using media that has more data on it, but I think they would be more successful keeping with a backwards compatable system.

    FoonDog
    • Backward compatability becomes and impediment to innovation over time. It's the same problem MS has had for years. Problems that existed in earlier architectures must be maintained in future version if the designers wish to maintain full backward compatability.

      Microsofts endeavor to improve Windows over time was saddled with the problems that existed in the original MS DOS. Only by abandoning technologies of the past at some point can the designers expect to move forward with real innovation.

      The way around that of course is to run virtual machines that abstract the software from the hardware. But using a virtual machine architecture has its own caveats, like adding additional complexity.

      Personally, I would prefer that designers of game systems just avoid backward compatability issues. If there is some game from an older system that I want to play, it is likely that I have that older system to play it with anyway. I would rather designers focus on innovation than on life support for aging technology.
      • If the generation gap between machines is large enough (and console life cycles generally are), then you generally only really have to be backwards compatible with the media. Anything else you can probably accomplish with emulation. If your machines use a standard media like CD or DVD, this isn't a huge undertaking.
      • Part of why the PS2 is backwards compatible is that it wasn't hard to impliment. The PS2 has a chip that the PSX used, so it isn't all software based emulation.

        Moreover, in a previous slashdot article it was stated that the PS3 is basically 4 PS2 units smashed into one case. Again, backwards compatability will be trivial to impliment.
    • I don't quite get it, myself. Both Atari and Sega, 2 of the video game giants of the past, released consoles with backwards compatibility.

      Both failed miserably (in the case of the Genesis the otherwise cheap add-on failed), and for the most part I remember people not bothering, because at that point, who in their right mind would play the "old" games when you had this new and powerful system in front of you?

      Have video gamers really changed that much? If the old games are still that much fun for gamers, why buy the new console in the first place - most new games, especially on a system like the PS2, are just graphical updates of existing genres.

      • Both failed miserably (in the case of the Genesis the otherwise cheap add-on failed), and for the most part I remember people not bothering, because at that point, who in their right mind would play the "old" games when you had this new and powerful system in front of you?

        Me, for one. I never had a PSx (also didn't have a DVD player), so when the PS2 came out I was all over the ability to play all of those old classic games I missed while I was in school, like Final Fantasy Tactics (translated by team All Your Base), or Bushido Blade. The emulation isn't perfect unfortunatly (Bushido blade had a minor graphics glitch) and the high speed disk spin option tends to break cutscenes on some games (Legend of Mana for instance). The texture smoothing feature is kind of nice, except I play mostly sprite based games. :/

  • I hope it works ;-) (Score:4, Funny)

    by Linux Freak ( 18608 ) on Wednesday May 01, 2002 @09:44AM (#3442415) Homepage

    I hope it works better than the PS/2 Linux kit I just got and have to RMA back to Sony. ;-)

    My tongue-in-cheek experiences are available her [angrymoose.org] for your reading enjoyment.

  • They key to competing with Microsoft will be to continue concentrating on the game performance while allowing enough expandability for the user to add on features to make the PS3 compete with full fledged home computers. I'm sure the final design of the PS3 is going to have a hard drive, a decent amount of RAM, and an Ethernet port. However, it doesn't need to compete with the latest and greatest offering from Intel as long as it plays games great. All the other stuff an average computer user needs to do (word processing, surf the Internet, etc.) can be handled easily by the PS3's hardware. Just give the "hackers" a way to beef it up if the need arises (and it will). FireWire ports, standard HD interface, empty ram slots... In short, embrace the hacker, don't shun him/her away by making the BIOS run only Sony approved applications. Just as long as Sony can make a profit on the hardware (and get good apps on Linux), they can beat MS.

    • Re:Keeping costs down and still beating Microsoft. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by k_187 ( 61692 ) on Wednesday May 01, 2002 @10:06AM (#3442575) Journal
      So in other words, make a cheap computer that you can use as a set-top box?? The beauty behind the consoles, is that they work. Developers don't need to worry about system specs. They can design a game, and everybody with the playcubebox, can play it. No questions asked. If Sony puts slots for extra RAM, or whatever, developers are just going to turn the market into the mess that is the PC games market.

      I think consoles are so sucessful because they are simple. Users don't need to worry about how much RAM they have, or how big their hard drive is. Plug in the game and it works.

      Nintendo is still around because they realized that people buy the games. While Sony was out hyping the graphics power of the PS2, Nintendo was showing off the games. Games are how systems make money. Either by selling tons, and generating licence money, or by being great, and forcing people to buy the system to play it.

      I should also add that NO add on for consoles has ever been sucessful. Why should Sony waste resources to cater to a very small percentage of the people that would buy it?(blah blah blah, Linux kit. I know about the linux kit. However, its what? $400?? that brings the cost of a PS2 and the linux kit to $700! that's just silly. For $700 I could have a full PC with a TV card to hook up.)
      • I thought the PS2 Linux kit was $200 [playstation.com].

        If it's an honest mistake, then, okay--just check the numbers better next time.

        If you are presenting misinformation as a FUD tatic, then just go home, stick your head in the toilet, and blow bubbles until you pass out.
      • I should also add that NO add on for consoles has ever been successful.


        That's the common wisdom, like "consoles are always sold at a loss," but it's really not true.

        Some examples of successful add-ons:
        • Playstation Analog Controller
        • Playstation Dance Pads (not as successful as the analog controller, but they've carved out a healthy niche market for themselves).


        With the exception of the analog pads, which were eventually made the new standard, it's more accurate to say that add-ons tend to be at least an order of magnitude less successful than the parent console. So you need a big enough consumer base to support your niche markets. The current playstation 2 has a big enough market to support an online adapter as long as the hardware works. It's been proven by the Dreamcast that enough gamers will sign up for good online games to make it profitable, and the Dreamcast market was much smaller than PS2's.

        I agree with the rest of your post, though. Especially that it's really all about the games.

        Jon Acheson
    • They key to competing with Microsoft will be to continue concentrating on the game performance while allowing enough expandability for the user to add on features to make the PS3 compete with full fledged home computers. I'm sure the final design of the PS3 is going to have a hard drive, a decent amount of RAM, and an Ethernet port.

      Any semblance to a PC is a prime reason for me NOT to buy a console. I hate PC gaming, and have hated it since the games went to hardware 3d. I've spent more time chasing bugs in drivers that create odd artifacts in games (or lock the whole machine) than I have actually playing games in the last few years. Anything that will allow console game developers to get away with the stupid 'wait for the next patch' crap is a step in the wrong direction.
      • Sorry, nothing beats multiplayer games. Artificial Intelligence is lightyears away from Human Intelligence. Unless Sony or Nintendo offer me the experience that multiplayer Medal of Honor does, I consider consoles inferior.

        I don't need simplicity and my ATI Radeon works flawlessly (and I hear nVidia is even better).
        • Artificial Intelligence is lightyears away from Human Intelligence.

          Have you ever actually PLAYED Everquest?

          Steeeve shouts, 'DING! Level 2!'
          Baddaz shouts, 'HELP'
          Luzer shouts, 'SOW plz!!!'
          Zippyshorts shouts, 'We can't help you if you don't give us your LOC'
          Luzer shouts, 'SOW PLZ!!!'
          Regdum shouts 'WTS Spiderling Silk'
          Splattt shouts 'What Level are Kodiaks?'
          Luzer shouts, 'I NEED SOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!'
          Splattt shouts 'Can Anyone help me find my corpse?'

    • I'm sure the final design of the PS3 is going to have a hard drive, a decent amount of RAM, and an Ethernet port.

      You mean like the X-Box does already?

      Hardware doesn't sell consoles, GAMES do. And that's why the X-Box is currently failing. That, and an overwhelming desire from anyone with the slightest bit of technical savvy to see Microsoft fail.

      Just wait for Linux to be available on the X-Box, and it'll fly off the shelves. Look at how popular the Dreamcast is now, even after it's been discontinued. A cheap bundle of PC hardware makes for a good hackers toy.

  • Broadband & Backward Compatability... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by redragon ( 161901 ) <codonnell AT mac DOT com> on Wednesday May 01, 2002 @09:48AM (#3442440) Homepage
    I've heard people say that, "not many people have broadband." However, the people buying these systems most often do. I suspect that the percentage of Xbox owners with broadband is much higher than average.

    Also, the issue of backward compatability? It's cool, but if you're going to make a new gaming system, don't worry about the old stuff. If the gaming world has taught people anything it's, "don't worry, I'll buy anything just to play that." How many people have bought new graphics cards because of ONE game?

    Sure, a developer would love to see their PS2 games run on the PS?, but would they rather do more with their new titles? You betcha. Game developers love their work, and seeing it fully realized is a better feeling than knowing that it is more compatable, but you had to sacrifice the vision of the game. Remember, we're not making a word processor here.

    Cheers.
  • Sony has courted alliances with some of the technology industry's biggest hitters in an effort to "soundly beat whatever our rivals produce next''. IBM and Toshiba are jointly designing the central chip that will control the PlayStation 3 at a top-secret technology lab in Austin, Texas. The project, which aims to create the ultimate graphics and sound processor, is believed to cost around $1bn (£650m).

    How much will MS have to spend to develop the XBox2? Well, let's see... Get a faster mobo, fast gpu, and faster cpu. Done! And it is backwards compatible with the old one already! And the development tools won't require learning some fancy new architecture. MS has stumbled out of the gate, but long term who really has the advantage here?

    • Re:XBox 2,3,4,5..... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by pubjames ( 468013 )
      How much will MS have to spend to develop the XBox2? Well, let's see...

      You seem to suggest that Microsoft won't have to spend much to develop the next XBox, because they can just use off-the-shelf PC components. I'm afraid if they take that approach then they really will be a failure.

      Using off the shelf components to create Personal Computers has been the norm up until now. But the domestic product market is different. Firstly, in this kind of business it is really important to keep the cost per unit down as low as possible. Really really low. You're talking about selling tens of millions of units, which are all identical. That often means custom built chips and boards. Secondly, how the unit itself looks is really important. This is something that Microsoft has yet to learn. It may not be a deciding factor in the US if a domestic product is big and ugly, but it is in the rest of the world, and it certainly is in Japan. Finally, system stablity is really important with domestic products. PC users are used to the things screwing up, but domestic users aren't. Microsoft has already discovered the expense of trivial problems with domestic products with CDs being scratched. I'm sure Microsoft aren't used to people returning their products to stores and demanding refunds. With domestic goods, that happens, and it's extremely costly.

      So if Microsoft doesn't heavily invest in developing XBox2 then they won't be in the consumer appliance market very long. Different rules apply there.

      Do you know who the world's largest consumer electronics maker is? Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. Sony are second to them (although rapidly catching up). And my point is? The consumer electronics market is different to the software market. Substantially different. And the XBox is a consumer electronics product. Microsoft has entered a whole different arena than where they are used to playing. They have already made some serious mistakes with the XBox, and don't seem to understand the consumer electronics market when they declare things like the next version of the XBox will be the centre of entertainment in a home. The big electronics manufacturers learnt long ago that combining different functions into a single consumer product (e.g. TV with integrated DVD, combined TV and Hi-fi) isn't as sensible an idea as it sounds.

      I'm not saying that Microsoft won't make it. They might. But their solid track record in the software world isn't going the help them much in this battle.

    • There are downsides to using computer parts instead of a custom design.

      One is that the total size of the console is significantly larger than its competitors, which makes it a pain to fit into an already crowded entertainment center.

      Also, the custom-designed PS2s and Gamecubes are apparently much cheaper to manufacture in bulk, because they have fewer parts.

      Lastly, I don't see how designing a new mobo, gpu and cpu is necessarily simpler than designing a new console-style console.

      Jon Acheson
      • Lastly, I don't see how designing a new mobo, gpu and cpu is necessarily simpler than designing a new console-style console.

        It's about the R&D dollars, son. Sony is apparently throwing what, a billion, 2 billion dollars into the PS3's development?

        Microsoft on the other hand can cimply take advantage of Nvidia's huge R&D budget, and buy chips (at a bulk rate). No manufacturing processes to build, no R&D work and hiring. So much easier! At the same time, they get a product guaranteed to be competetive and successful in today's graphics market.

        Same with a CPU and Motherboard - Microsoft again worked with NVidia, AMD, and Intel, and simply had those companies assemble a board with an AMD bus, an Intel processor, and an Nvidia chipset.

        At the same time there is a decent budget at Microsoft to make sure the board is 100% stable. Because it's a PC, it had a semblance of an operating system on it, in the form of stripped-down Windows 2000 with DirectX.

        All of the technologies come from other companies or parts of Microsoft, which means in the end R&D dollars are kept at a minimum.

        The hardware can then be sold at a loss, while Microsoft still makes enough money on game sales to keep up with Sony, who is $$$ in the hole until they sell enough PS2's.

        This strategy would work perfectly, of course, if all the good games actually came out for Xbox.... where is my Unreal Championship god damn it!
  • And this is news.... why? So the PS3 is in development... it will kick the Xbox's butt... it will offer things that aren't on the market yet... it will balance your checkbook and make you look years younger.... it will be on the DEA's schedule of controlled substances... right. If and when the consoles are released relatively close to each other (within 6 months or so) and you can play the same games on each of them, then we can compare them directly. Until then, the newest one will have the coolest features, the existing one will have the market/fanbase, and the one on the drawing board will make everyone drool.... This happens in consoles, cpu's, cars, everything.

    ....but I still want one.........

    sorry, lost my mind for a second there...

  • Classics? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by RoC MasterMind ( 576689 )
    I'll stick with my super nintendo.

    • Re:Classics? (Score:2, Funny)

      by vena ( 318873 )
      f your super nintendo, i'm rocking colecovision!

    • Might I point our lovely Slashdot community to a friendly site full of Emulation Software [zophar.net]? You can get an emulator for most any historical console system, under most any operating system you are presently running. I spent the better part of last night flipping between Donkey Kong Junior and Metroid on NESticle. (My, how much easier Metroid is with save states..)

      (And yes, I own the cartridges. heh.)

  • Er, didn't the X-Box do a pretty good job of that all by itself?

    (Wouldn't the PS2 be one, too?)

    - A.P.

  • This is not news. (Score:3, Informative)

    by supabeast! ( 84658 ) on Wednesday May 01, 2002 @09:55AM (#3442494)
    During the release of the Playstation 2, Sony badass Ken Kutaragi announced that the Playstation 3 would be released in 2005. If you want to get the details, check out these google results. [google.com]

  • this is a shock (Score:5, Funny)

    by tps12 ( 105590 ) on Wednesday May 01, 2002 @10:00AM (#3442541) Homepage Journal
    I had no idea they were planning on making yet another console! I thought the PS2 was going to be the last, best one, and now I find out it's going to be obsolete!

    I have been caught completely off guard by similar reports on slashdot in the past. Apparently, Apple is planning a G5 processor (as if the G4 weren't fast enough!), Microsoft is supposedly working on an operating system to replace XP, and the 2.5 branch will not be the last iteration of the Linux kernel.

  • Price Drop on PS2 (Score:4, Insightful)

    by thryllkill ( 52874 ) on Wednesday May 01, 2002 @10:00AM (#3442542) Homepage Journal
    Maybe I didn't see it anywhere in the realm of video gaming news, but they should really consider dropping the price of the PS2 here in America before they try getting people hyped for the next thing that is probably 3 years down the road anyways. Sure I shelled out $300 for the thing, but a lot of my friends who are not as "Hard core" a gamer as I have frequently complained about the price. They are just not willing the shell out that kind of cash, and rightly so.

    Also maybe Sony should take their time and develope a quality console that will meet the needs of the gaming public, even if it takes a few extra months to a year. They have already demonstrated their market dominence over the superior (hardware wise) machines of their competition. Points to consider, make it easier to program, anti-aliasing (!!!), ditch the 2 controller model (multi taps suck, four controller ports on board is great), for that matter peripherals on a console suck.

    I look forward to the PS3, but please, take you time and give me something remotely worth the ammount money I am going to have to drop on this thing (and the ammount of time I am going to have to spend in line to get the damn thing on launch day)...

    • Also maybe Sony should take their time and develope a quality console that will meet the needs of the gaming public, even if it takes a few extra months to a year.

      ah, to live in a perfect world. i wish more companies took the time to design products/software/etc right the first time.

      sadly, i don't see it happening most of the time. time to market and bottom line pressures tend to mess with this ideal.

      although, i feel that sony is in a good position to take their time. with the market dominance of the ps2 and the new wave of 3rd and 4th gen games coming out, the lifecycle of the ps2 could be quite long. i had a feeling that the installed base and maturity of games was going to be a huge hurdle for the xbox to overcome.

      sony was prompted to ramp up work on the ps3 due to the power of the xbox, and now we see the xbox lagging behind. so the ps2 can hang with the xbox and the gamecube, and sony can do the ps3 right, here's to hoping.

      and yes, please, 4 controller ports, please.
    • Also maybe Sony should take their time and develope a quality console that will meet the needs of the gaming public, even if it takes a few extra months to a year. They have already demonstrated their market dominence over the superior (hardware wise) machines of their competition.

      Do you know why they beat the superior N64 with the original playstation? It's because they were first to market. Do you know why the PS2 is whumping the Gamecube and the X-box right now? It's because they were first to market. That's right. And you know why? Because little Jimmy will rush out and buy the first next-generation system that's available. And when the second comes out, he's a little hard up, and all his friends have a Sony anyway, and there are no good games for the second one yet.

      So while it'd be nice if Sony could be like Debian, and take just a little longer to get everything right, it's clear that the real world doesn't work that way. And if the PS3 doesn't come out 6 months before the Nintendo gamesphere and the Microsoft Y-box, then Sony lose their all their advantage.

      All this disregards the fact that it will take them as much time to design the PS3 with 4 ports as with 2 anyway. They don't come up with a design for 2 ports and then spend a couple of months tacking on the extra ones. What they are trying to do is meet a price point, and compromising on features where necessary. And I'm sure they are not unhappy that you have to spend more money on a multi-tap.

      take you time and give me something remotely worth the ammount money I am going to have to drop on this thing

      Since you have already professed you will buy this thing whether they give you 4 ports or not, why should they bother to add them? If it really matters to you, then bite the bullet and wait for the console that does have what you want. And no, they should not take their time, because then they would be in second place, regardless of technical merit.

      not_cub

      • You're forgetting games. There has to be a good collection of games for a console to be worth it. N64 = great hardware, hardly any games worth note. Zelda was kind of cool, Golden Eye was very popular, but I personally don't do console FPS (hence no XBOX for me, but I am eyeing Jet Set Radio Future and Yakuza Missions). And Super Smash Brothers, which is way over shadowed by it's sequal. I'm not going to address the cartridge based format/space problem, it has been talked to death. I am getting away from my point.

        The Playstation and the PS2 both had something the other's didn't, and that is a large library of games that matter to the mass market. That's where your going to make your money. XBOX appeals to graphics junkies and hardware l337 freaks, the GC to children, Nintendo Fanboys, and the both of them appeal to hardcore gamers. The casual gamer is not going to spend $300 on a console just because they might miss that one or maybe two games for that system that appeal to them, they are going to write it up as a shame and move on.

        As far the four port thing goes, well lets just call it my wishlist. I am not really expecting Sony to read my post on /. and say, "Holy Shit, this guy is right, we need to re-design the PS3 ASAP."

    • Maybe I didn't see it anywhere in the realm of video gaming news, but they should really consider dropping the price of the PS2 here in America before they try getting people hyped for the next thing that is probably 3 years down the road anyways.

      I'm afraid the laws of supply and demand just won't let them do that. You see, when you constantly outsell your competitors by large margins every month, even when your competitors may have newer hardware and a $100 lower price tag, you don't drop the price.


      As for the second point, I don't think PS2 hype damaged the PSOne that much, if at all. I don't think they're too worried about people not buying their current console. It's just the way the business works.


      I do hope that the new console will be backwards compatible.

  • Sony and RealNetworks in "strategic alliance" (Score:5, Informative)

    by dipfan ( 192591 ) on Wednesday May 01, 2002 @10:01AM (#3442547) Homepage
    More interesting is the news today that Sony and Real have announced a tie-up. They'd already announced an alliance to use Real software in the PS2 - this is a further development, with Sony buying a stake in Real with the aim of using its software in other consumer devices.

    Real has put out a press release here [realnetworks.com], which says: "Sony plans to adopt these combined digital distribution solutions in a variety of networked CE products such as Sony's networked audio products and Sony Computer Entertainment's PlayStation2 computer entertainment system."

    The Wall Street Journal notes that the deal brings together two Microsoft rivals - the WSJ story [wsj.com] requires $$$+registration, but the basics are:

    The companies didn't announce specific product agreements, but said their research and development groups will regularly collaborate on developing new technologies. Sony said it would adopt RealNetworks' media technologies broadly in a variety of consumer electronics devices with network connections to personal computers and the Internet, and RealNetworks will consider using a Sony antipiracy format in its software.

    While the financial side of the deal is small and RealNetworks is in no immediate need of cash, the investment gives Sony at least a symbolic stake in the future of RealNetworks. RealNetworks competes fiercely with Microsoft in the market for Internet audio and video software, and it has joined other companies in accusing Microsoft of anticompetitive practices that threaten their businesses. Sony and Microsoft, meanwhile, became archcompetitors in the videogame market with Microsoft's introduction late last year of the Xbox, a heavily promoted rival to Sony's market-leading PlayStation 2.

    Dave Fester, a Microsoft general manager, said the alliance with Sony wouldn't affect the appeal of Microsoft's own media software to electronics companies, but adding that it could "drive a wedge between Real and other consumer electronics manufacturers."

    • I will never by a product that include technology from RealNetworks. Sony is probably wanting to license Real's techniques for tricking consumers into subscribing to their service.

      But seriously. RealNetworks is a terribly anticonsumer company. They make crap software and use deceptive practices to snare consumers into their subscription trap. And then they share your personal information with "selected partners." It's evil I tell you, evil.

      But sadly, it is the direction in which a lot of internet companies are heading these days. I respect the right to make a buck, but not through deceptive practices that take advantage of some consumers.

  • Xbox 2 In the Works (Score:3, Informative)

    by jfedor ( 27894 ) <jfedor@jfedor.org> on Wednesday May 01, 2002 @10:07AM (#3442579) Homepage
    No word on backwards compatability, but expect it to be the Playstation 3 killer if it is.

    (Of course it will be compatible - the Xbox is basically a PC.)

    Remember how ridiculously overhyped PS2 was?

    I expect the same with PS3. But why does it have to start now??

    As for me, I don't own a console. The only reason I'd get one would be the games, not the technical superiority of a particular console when compared to another or when compared to PCs (which is simply not happenning anyway).

    For example, there are no fighting games on the PC (Virtua Fighter, Dead or Alive, Soul Calibur etc.).

    But that's about it - I couldn't care less for the RPGs and the racing sims are comparable to what I get on the PC.

    The FPS genre is pretty much nonexistent on the consoles (it may be starting to change).

    Maybe I just don't get the console culture.

    -jfedor

  • *NO* NO NO NO *NO *NO* NOOOOO!!!!! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Monkelectric ( 546685 ) <[moc.cirtceleknom] [ta] [todhsals]> on Wednesday May 01, 2002 @10:21AM (#3442680)
    I will *not* play any game where I have to pay 50$ a monthly fee.

    Guys, MMORPG's are the thin end of the wedge of subscription software.

    MMORPG's are stupid, they're all designed to keep you playing forever doing inane tasks like character building, searching for stupid item X, *TO KEEP YOU SUBSCRIBING*. I want games with a discreet end. Play game, win game, game over.

    And my next question, I still play classic games like Monkey Island, DOTT, Sam 'N Max, umm, Quest for Glory, kings quest ... that I bought 10 years ago. 10+x years from now, how will I play PS3 games that require an online server?

    disgruntled gamer/game industry employee

    • 10+x years from now, how will I play PS3 games that require an online server?
      10+x years from now, if there are people still interested in playing said game online, then they'll be paying for it and the servers will stay up. If no one's interested in it, then the servers will shutdown and there wouldn't be any point anyways because you'd have no one else to play with =)
    • When Sega moved out of the console market, they decided to kill off their Dreamcast servers - so some of them are now pay servers (which have the added bonus of nobody being there) and I think some are flat out dead. So you buy a game that promises online play, and may be useless offline, and you're never sure how long you're going to be able to play it.

      It's a wonder no Sega fans started a class action lawsuit or tried to legally force them to keep the servers up.

      Damn it, I want legislation that makes it illegal to stop running servers like that unless either the cutoff date is divulged on the packaging, or the company makes the server configurable and makes the source public.
  • I've jokingly said for a while now that buy the time I can afford a PS2, I should just wait for the PS3. Would it be advisable to wait for the PS3 now or would the PS2 still be a wothwhile buy?
    • Supposedly we'll see a significant price drop in the US PS2 after E3 at the end of May. This is still just a rumor, but it seems plausible. I would wait to see.

      PS2 has enough good games out now to justify buying one, and more are on the way. Plus there are many games available used. That makes it a wise buy.

      Wait for PS3? Why not wait for PS4 while you're at it? IMHO, it's better to wait until after the first price cut for a console, then jump on board.

      Jon Acheson
  • about the ps3 can be found here [misinformer.com].
  • This has been blown out of proportion. For the facts, please have a look at: http://www.sonyweb.com/features/insidethecell.html

  • Ok (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Morgahastu ( 522162 )
    "...but expect it to be the X-Box killer if it is."

    Thats like saying the playstation 2 was a supernintendo killer. Of course its going to be better then the xbox. What, do you think its going to come out in a few months? This thing is atleast 2 years away. I am sure by the time the playstation 3 comes out microsoft will be right there with a new console too.

    This is as bad as those people who say the xbox killed the dreamcast. Of course it did, it came out 2 years later!
  • I don't want to sound like my grandpa (I'm only 23!), but back in the day, when I was gaming on a daily basis, the games were just so much more fun to play. With Nintendo you had the mega man, final fantasy, zelda, mario, and metroid, and on sega you had all the sports games. These games could be picked up and learned in a few minutes, but took hours and hours to master. And were fun all the way along. There are of course some exceptions, but games and systems today seem to be all about tech. bragging points and cinema scenes. The push to be the most high tech. and have the most titles has cause the gaming industry to accept quantity over quality. This brings me on topic...Playstation has to be the worst offender in these areas and seems to be dead set on continuing that trend. Thrid party licensees crank out sh*t games and Sony braggs about having so many titles. 50% of those games are basically racing games featuring different vehicles/settings. Ex. XXS snowboarding, it's fun to play for 20 minutes and looks pretty, but really, how much can you look at scenery when you're in the middle of a game! Meanwhile game developers are stumbling over themselves to make 'adult themed' games that may look pretty or gross sometimes but are an absolute bore to play. And last but not least, Nintendo all but turns it's back on older gamers when they sent the Gamecube controllers back to the drawing board to make them smaller b/c kids in their testing groups said they were too big...
    • I understand your point, but I think you're wrong overall. Most gamers have this nostalgia that you're describing, which is why there are so many emulation sites, and why so many people love them. However, it's impossible not to expect games to make progress, and to become more complex along the way.

      Maybe it's an exaggerated example, but do you really want Pong on your latest and greatest console? Of course not, you want it to take full advantage of the hardware, and not be the same old thing. While the games that you're talking about were indeed great, and probably easier to learn, their time is now unfortunately past. 3D is basically a requirement these days, and online capability will be as well in the next few years. Both of those things mean more complicated controls, and more time to master. But ultimately, the great games will always be worth their learning curves.

      You also can't just say that before games were all about quality and now it's more quantity. There were plenty of crap titles that were released in the past for all consoles, you just don't remember them b/c you only remember the great stuff. Similarly, it's easy to say now that all you see if a ton of crap when you look around, but a few years from now, we won't remember most of those titles.
  • I started playing the Ultima series way back when, because it gave me the opportunity to leave behind my mundane life and become a hero in another realm. Along the way, I've played most of the RPGs on the C64, PC, and game consoles, as well as others like Monkey Island and The Longest Journey. I played the hero. I directed the action (well, as far as you can in the storyline).

    I've put my time in a couple of MMORPGs, at one point putting in a good 10 hours a day for several months. For what? So I can be just another semi-powerful warrior among thousands of others all trying to accomplish the same quests? Running into the same people, who just like me are trying to escape our "real" lives for a few moments... why do I really want to talk to them? If I wanted to talk to them I could do so on ICQ for free, or head down to the local pub and meet with my friends.

    As much as I didn't like the story driven nature of FFX, it was fantastic. The conversations between Tidus and Yuna, Auron's mysterious demeanor, poor Lulu... that's why I bought and played FFX. Why I bought every other FF game. Why I play RPGs. Why I no longer play MMORPGs. I don't want to meet a group of heros and listen to how they had a miserable day at work, how the dog shit on the rug, how the car needs an overhaul. How there's a group of campers by the mystical sword each one of us needs for a quest and how we're going to have to get 6mil gold apiece to buy from the campers. I want to meet characters who were brought together by some epic destiny, not those who happen to live in the same time zone. I want to hear scripted conversations that took months of thought and use professional voiceovers, not the half-hearted attempts at role playing and old English phrases lifted from "Robin Hood".

    FF 11 online? No thanks.

  • The GameCube uses a variant of the PowerPC processor, named "Gekko", and IBM was responsible for R&D on that as well.

    IBM -- mercenaries of the gaming world?
  • In case it's not obvious, Sony are just doing what Microsoft have done to so many of their competitors - putting a bit of FUD about.


    Let's face it, so far the Xbox has been a disaster and Sony want to make sure it stays that way even with the recent price cuts. What better way to make sure of that than cut their own prices and drop heavy hints that a PS3 might be just around the corner?


    Of course realistically no PS3 is going to appear before Christmas 2003 unless its a revamped PS2 with a harddrive, but anyone thinking of getting an XBox is likely to think again.


    The XBox has a serious problem on its hands now. It's still the most expensive of the games consoles, and the games are expensive and boring. It's rapidly becoming the next Dreamcast.

  • Get it right (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Iron Chef Japan ( 531022 )
    I have said this many times over. So here we go. FF11 is in development for the PS2 not the PS3, as is EverQuest. The PS3 is not in development either. In fact I posted a previous comment about it:

    Well I was excited about all the Cell development and this PlayStation 2 stuff, but Ken Kutargai (the guy behind playstation and SCEI president) recently made some very grim statements at the South Korean PlayStation 2 launch. On the topic of PS3 Kutaragi-san said "Nothing has been started yet." He made some very grim statements about online gaming too saying; "If broadband connections capable of delivering 10Mb/s are affixed to game consoles, the industry as we know it will be over. By that time, perhaps 2005 or later, games would be available for download rather than sold in stores." This news [gamefu.org] came right after many analyst's came out saying how skeptical they were about Sony's online plans. This comes right after the Nintendo-Square and Nintendo-Capcom deals, which by the way Kutaragi mad, summoning top Square officials to the SCE headquarters to explain the deal, as he was out of town when the deal was made (the Square one) and had no prior knowledge about it. The memory card shortage doesnt help much either.
    There are all these links to this Sony stuff here [gamefu.org]. I mean comeon, get the facts straight.

Slashdot Top Deals

Solutions are obvious if one only has the optical power to observe them over the horizon. -- K.A. Arsdall

Close