Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
PlayStation (Games) Portables (Games) Entertainment Games

Sony - PS2 Until 2010, First PSP Game Demo? 59

Posted by simoniker from the stringing-it-out dept.
ack154 writes "Reuters has a good article from the Game Developers Conference in San Jose, explaining how Sony is planning to milk PS2 sales until 2010. They see a lot of potential still down the road. Also mentioned at the conference was that Sony has no plans to speed up PS3 development based on the next Xbox system. There was also an emulated demo of a game for the upcoming PSP handheld." Elsewhere, GameSpy has a more detailed write-up of the same GDC keynote, and 1UP.com has in-depth information on programming the PSP from another GDC lecture. Update: 03/26 14:31 GMT by S : 1UP has added a streaming movie of Death Jr., the PSP game demonstrated, to its coverage of the keynote.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sony - PS2 Until 2010, First PSP Game Demo? More

Sony - PS2 Until 2010, First PSP Game Demo?

Comments Filter:

  • Sony still has the power for this upcoming round. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by dealsites ( 746817 ) on Friday March 26, 2004 @07:24AM (#8678470) Homepage
    Sony does certainly hace the hype machine in the thier court. If Microsoft starts to release the Xbox next before Sony releases the PS3, then all Sony has to do is start leaking rumors that they will be releasing the PS3 at about the same time Xbox next is going to be released. Then all the people more interested in Sony will wait it out, instead of buying an Xbox next in the short run.

    I do believe that this round backward compatability is key, as well as network multi-player games. In addition to those, the console that adds the most multi-media functions as an easy side-task will get my dollars. I'd love to have a game machine for fun, as well as a HTPC for DVD playback, video/music streaming, PVR functions. I want an all-in-one box at a low price, and I don't want to have to hack it to get that.

    --
    Real time updates from Slickdeals, Techbargains, Bens Bargains, Got|Apex and more! [dealsites.net]
    • If Microsoft starts to release the Xbox next before Sony releases the PS3, then all Sony has to do is start leaking rumors that they will be releasing the PS3 at about the same time Xbox next is going to be released. Then all the people more interested in Sony will wait it out, instead of buying an Xbox next in the short run.

      Hey, it worked for cripping the Dreamcast...

      • The problem with that analogy is that the DC wasn't that much of an improvement over the PS1. It was still CD-driven, it didn't have that much more horsepower, and it didn't have must-have titles.

        The PS2 on the other hand was promising dual functionality of dvd playback, must-have titles, and noticeably more horsepower than the DC.

        If rumors of more horsepower within a year were enough by themselves to wipe out a 1 year head start, then the XBox would've hampered PS2 sales -- which it didn't at all. Even

        • Re:Sony still has the power for this upcoming roun (Score:5, Informative)

          by hambonewilkins ( 739531 ) on Friday March 26, 2004 @02:21PM (#8682529)
          The problem with that analogy is that the DC wasn't that much of an improvement over the PS1. It was still CD-driven, it didn't have that much more horsepower, and it didn't have must-have titles. The PS2 on the other hand was promising dual functionality of dvd playback, must-have titles, and noticeably more horsepower than the DC.

          I'm sorry, but that is just completely wrong, and you're buying into Sony's hype machine. I'm curious if you've ever compared the three:

          The PSone (or playstation):
          Has a 33 MHz, 32 bit processor, with 2MB of RAM.

          The dreamcast:
          Has a 128-bit, 200 MHz main processor, with 16 megs of system RAM, 8 megs of dedicated video RAM and 2 megs of audio RAM.

          The ps2:
          Has a 128-bit, 294 MHz main processor, with 32 megs of system RAM and 4 megs of video RAM.

          According to the specs, the PS2 has a faster clock (though different processor) and more RAM. Unfortunately, it has far less video RAM, which is very important. Want to see great graphics? Take a look at the DC Soul Calibur.

          The DC kicked the pants off of the PS1 and was very competitive with (besides DVD playback many would say better than) the PS2. Play a DC and PS1 game back to back and you'll see (because you would have never said they were comparable if you've ever used a Dreamcast). Play a DC and PS2 game side-by-side and I think you'll be hard pressed to tell the difference. The dreamcast was ahead of its time.

          • MOD PARENT UP! (Score:1, Interesting)

            by Anonymous Coward
            Play a DC and PS2 game side-by-side and I think you'll be hard pressed to tell the difference

            Actually, DC games look way better than PS2 games, I even think the image quality looks as good as the Xbox.

            The PS2 triangle rasteriser is an absolute piece of shit. It supports about two blending modes - and doesn't even support anti-aliasing, bilinear filtering or MIP mapping. A 3Dfx Voodoo 1 graphics accelerator was more technically advanced.

            The DC used a hybrid tile rendering system that severly helped deal
            • While I don't disagree with you (PS2 being crap), I think this generation of PS2 games is finally starting to take advantage of the hardware. I went back and played Soul Calibur on the Dreamcast while a friend was playing Soul Calibur 2 on the PS2 and there is definately a difference in the two games (PS2 is better).

              Of course, Soul Calibur 1 came out on Dreamcast as a *launch* title 1 year before the PS2 launched and Soul Calibur 2 is a 3rd gen (4th?) PS2 game...

              Overall, the PS2 really is a tad more powe

          • Not only all of the points you raised, but the DC also was much easier to program games for and thus was cheaper to develop games for.

            The DC lost because of lack of EA games and the Sony hype machine. They were saying it was some sort of super computer in your house when that was a total lie.
          • The dreamcast: Has a 128-bit, 200 MHz main processor, with 16 megs of system RAM, 8 megs of dedicated video RAM and 2 megs of audio RAM. The Dreamcast's SH-4 is actually 32-bit, which is confirmed by Hitachi's website: http://www.renesas.com/eng/products/mpumcu/32bit/s h/sh7750s/index.html (Apparently the SuperH series was merged with another company, so that's why it's not on Hitachi's website.) So where did Sega come up with the 128-bit figure?

        • Re:Sony still has the power for this upcoming roun (Score:1, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward
          " The problem with that analogy is that the DC wasn't that much of an improvement over the PS1. It was still CD-driven, it didn't have that much more horsepower, and it didn't have must-have titles."

          You are the bane of my existence. The Dreamcast was a generation ahead of the PS1. All the late-generation Dreamcast games (and even some earlier ones, notably Soul Calibur) blew the lid off the PS2 competition. For 2001, games like Shenmue 2 was astounding. Forget the PS1, the Dreamcast was easier to develop

  • 6 years in computer time is ages in real life time (Score:5, Insightful)

    by LordJezo ( 596587 ) on Friday March 26, 2004 @07:26AM (#8678482)
    6 years ago was 1998.

    I was using a 200 mhz pentium, playing games on my Playstation 1, and surfing the internet on a 28.8 baud modem, and I think I had a Voodoo 2 graphics accelerator card.

    6 years from now.. who knows what I will be doing. But there is no way I will be sitting around playing a PS2.

    Like my subject says.. 6 years is a really really long time in terms of technology. If Sony sits on their PS2 for that long they are going to be left behind.

    • Re:6 years in computer time is ages in real life t (Score:4, Interesting)

      by PainKilleR-CE ( 597083 ) on Friday March 26, 2004 @07:38AM (#8678533)
      6 years ago was 1998.

      I was using a 200 mhz pentium, playing games on my Playstation 1, and surfing the internet on a 28.8 baud modem, and I think I had a Voodoo 2 graphics accelerator card.

      6 years from now.. who knows what I will be doing. But there is no way I will be sitting around playing a PS2.

      In 1998 I had a 400MHz P2 and was within a few months of stripping my Voodoo 2 cards out of my system (and had already replaced one that fried from the heat of the SLI setup). I had cable internet access, and had only been using 28.8 before that because my parents' ISP didn't support 33.6.

      On the other hand, I still play PS1 games almost as much as PS2 games, though I play them on a PS2. I've probably bought more PS1 games since the PS2 was released, but I can't say for sure because I sold a lot of my PS1 games with my PS1 (most of them were pretty horrible games).

    • Re:6 years in computer time is ages in real life t (Score:5, Insightful)

      by gl4ss ( 559668 ) on Friday March 26, 2004 @07:38AM (#8678535) Homepage Journal
      some ps1 titles still get sold.

      consider that.

      they can still continue to milk ps2 line after they make ps3.
      .

      • Re:6 years in computer time is ages in real life t (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Ayaress ( 662020 ) on Friday March 26, 2004 @09:40AM (#8679316) Journal
        Sold? Heck, the still get made, too, you know.

        Nintendo still made profit selling the Famicom and Super Famicom in Japan until September 2003. Not much, but they didn't mass produce the console.

        I didn't see anywhere where Sony said they'd sell the PS2 in the US six years from now, and Japanese gamers aren't as vain as US gamers. FDS games are still developed and sold there. Try selling an 8-bit game in the US and see how fast you get laughed out of the country.
        • Another thing that Nintendo is doing right now is just re-releasing their old NES and SNES games on the Game Boy Advance. Example, the Super Mario Advance games, The re-release of Zelda: A link to the past, etc. Companies can still sell their games long after the console is rendered obsolete. Just look at all of the games for the PS1, PS2, and Xbox that have old intellivision and atari 2600 games. I'm not sure how well they sell, but I have a couple of them for my PS1, and they are pretty nostalgic to me. S
      • True some PS1 titles still get sold, but look at what games are sold. Either they are Greatest Hits games or they're worthless games Cat in the Hat which aren't even mentioned or even listed on some video game review sites.

        Just because Sony CAN milk the PS2 until 2010 doesn't mean they'll be making anything/much. It'll be like milking dead cow.

    • Re:6 years in computer time is ages in real life t (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 26, 2004 @08:15AM (#8678724)
      I don't think that they are planning to wait with the PS3 until 2010. They're just going to support the PS2 until then, very much like they did with PS1(PSX). Even now you sometimes see games coming out for that system. The Backwards compatibility of the PS3 will give them a certain advantage, even when the PS3 is out, they can still make PS2 games, and PS3 owners will be able to play them.

      It's clever, all those old PS2s need to go somewhere. They will probably go over to people that don't want to spend their money on an expensive console and are satisfied with something older. So next to the small PS3 start-up market after the release, they can continue to make money on the PS2, until enough people own a PS3.
      • Nintendo did this with the Super Nintendo and the N64 - for an example, take Donkey Kong Country 3, a major game that came out *after* the N64's launch but was still on the SNES. In fact, one of the characters in the game - Wrinkly Kong - could sometimes be found playing on an N64.
    • You do realize that its saying that Sony expects PS2 development to be active and profitable, meaning it will still have new games coming out for it, untill at least 2010 and not that they are waiting till 2010 to release the PS3. You do understand that right? Afterall, there are still new PS1 games being released.
    • I think the plan is that they're going to continue to milk PS2 sales until 2010 like they continue to milk PS1 sales now. There might not be anything new that's worth buying coming out, but the system and games continue to be availible. I don't think a system has ever lasted as long on the shelves after "death" as the PSOne is, actually.
      • The original gameboy supposedly "died" back in 1996 or so, and still sells games today. Once again backward compatibility is helping here. NES lasted for a good long while too (with games released up to 1995) probably because the SNES was just a higher colour/pixel count (much like the PS2 is just more polygons and better load times over the PS1--doesn't even have four controller ports).
        • Actually, my theory as to why the NES lasted as long into the SNES' time as it did is that the industry had not yet established the five-year "rythm" of upgrading consoles. The amount of support the NES had in the early 90's is far, far greater than what the PSX has gotten since 2000, so you can't really draw a paralell there. And portable systems have no such "rythm", at the moment, mostly because of the current state of the market (Nintendo's been a monopoly in the market basically ever since they entered

    • Ugh.. let me clarify (Score:1, Insightful)

      by LordJezo ( 596587 )
      In 6 years the PS2 will be as usefull as the PS1 is today.. as in not at all.

      You might like its legacy games and quaint graphics, but, its useless.

      What need to they have to keep around aging technology for so long?
      • I bought a PS1 well after the PS2 release. Why? I was interested in the (Console-style) RPGs on the system, and to be perfectly honest RPGs don't depend on graphics all that much; it's more the strategy depth/plotline that matter. Sooo...let's compare RPGs for the two systems.

        PS2 exclusive
        FFX, Disgaea: Hour of Darkness, Suikoden 3, Breath of Fire 5, Xenosaga, Arc the Lad 4, FFX-2, Grandia 2, .Hack, Legend of Legaia 2, Okage: Shadow King, Shadow Hearts, Unlimited SaGa, Wild ARMs 3.

        PS1 games
        FF1(r),

      • because it's cheap, and it still does what it was designed for. old technology won't have a wow-factor to it, but millions of people don't care about that. for them it's about affordable fun.
    • Just because they say they're going to milk the PS2 for another 6 years doesn't mean that they aren't going to be putting out the PS3. All it said was that they aren't going to speed up the PS3 release because of the XBox2.

      I still play PS1 games (and Genesis and SNES and so forth), and stores still sell PS1 games, and I'm pretty sure that there are a few PS1 games still being made (albiet rare). And I fully intend to continue playing the games I have on my PS2 (and the games still to be released) for ple

    • Nintendo 64 was released eight years ago. Nintendo is still milking profits from it--it was launched under a year ago in China as the iQue. My point is that while you, me and most enthusiasts will have no use for a PS2 in six years, some demographic probably will.

  • Really? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BigDork1001 ( 683341 ) on Friday March 26, 2004 @07:29AM (#8678495) Homepage
    I want an all-in-one box at a low price, and I don't want to have to hack it to get that.

    Really? I plan on buying something that'll play video games and do it well. I don't need any of that other stuff to take away from that. Don't need an iffy DVD player included(I already own one), I don't need it to play CDs(I have a stereo), I don't need it to record TV shows(I have a VCR)

    • (Score:10, Nintendo Fanboy)

  • Bad move... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Masem ( 1171 ) on Friday March 26, 2004 @08:53AM (#8678947)
    I don't have a problem if Sony wants to keep pushing the dev of PS2 *games* till 2010; there's still new PS1 games coming out, and they're still actually publishing new copies of these games in Greatest Hits format for easy access, and you have the PS1 unit. However, Sony shouldn't be dwaddling on the PS3 at this point, as in terms of system abilities, the PS2 is losing to the XBox and GC in terms of graphcis. Compariable games (e.g. titles released for all 3 platforms) just look so much better on the xbox and GC, typically thanks to more FPS and no slowdowns when the number of polys increases onscreen, and other aspects like that. (Sure, gameplay's important generally over graphics, but even as I play some PS1 titles I missed, I ache over how chunky everything looks).

    Even if Sony doesn't push the PS3 faster, they should consider a PS2.5 box, no change to the CPU or GPU hardware, but have a build in HDD, network adapter, multitap, and/or better memory card system. Maybe update the firmware to fix some of the DVD viewing problems that also exist (esp. with multilayer DVDs). Heck, if they use a good size HDD (60g+), they could build a PVR unit easily off the PS2 base, sell this PS2.5 for $200-250, drop the PS2 to $150, and stay competive on hardware for the Xbox(2) and GC. Just give the consumer something that shows maybe a taste of what the PS3 will have and work from there.

  • PSOne (Score:4, Informative)

    by Fred Or Alive ( 738779 ) on Friday March 26, 2004 @09:08AM (#8679049)
    The original Playstation / PSOne is coming up to ten years old, and a few games are still being produced for it, albeit not many, and the console is still available. So Sony thinking they can get their current console to 2010 isn't that stupid.

    Although the PSOne is getting rare nowadays, but Game (a UK games store) is selling PSOne + Official Screen for GB80 (only 30 more than the usual selling price of the PSOne on it's own), if only I had the money I'd get one and a car adaptor. :) I guess they're clearing stock, I don't think the PSOne has that much life left in it, although it might not get officially canned until a 'PSTwo' comes out.
  • Sony is planning to milk PS2 sales until 2010

    In your face non-biased journalism!

  • Reading through those articles i noticed a couple of things 1) Rumor that a psp and ps2 will be able to link up 2) gfx power is about equal between ps2 and psp 3) Porting to psp is very easy 4) PS2 sales are expected to extend into 2010 (don't worry, i am getting to my point here shortly) Basically what i am getting at is that Sony is going to use the psp to drive sales of the ps2 (although i doubt it will stay in its current form..they will probably redesign it like they did with the ps1). Why do i thi
  • Sony has no plans to speed up PS3 development based on the next Xbox system.

    Good.

    At least someone is learning from Sega's old mistakes.

  • Xbox when? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by GeneralCern ( 653651 )
    I am a huge Xbox fan, and even I can see that this strategy of overlapping systems and backwards compatibility is why Sony has dominated the market. I wonder, why can't Microsoft or Nintendo* see this? *I realize Nintendo uses this strategy with great success with the Gameboy(s), why can't they adapt it to their consoles as well?
    • Well, for the GCN it's probably because they went with a optical disk format and not cartridges. The cost of adding a cartridge slot just for backwards compatibility may have been prohibitive.

      For the older generations of Nintendo consoles... I am not sure. Partially it's probably because Nintendo seems to be much more willing to exploit different platforms (i.e. GPU's, CPU's, etc.) to suit its current generation console needs, and may make backwards compatibility too expensive. However, I think partially i
  • 6 more years without a new console? Considering the other players that would mean Sony skipping a generation in hardware. Bold move. Sure they will have proven hardware with a gigantic catalog while MS and Nintendo will be trying to sell expensive new hardware with a tiny catalog.

    But 6 years? PS2 is hardly the most advanced one out there. Are they not expecting HDTV to become more mainstream between now and then?

    Either they are betting on the PSP and then it better be a bloody good system or they are gamb

    • 6 more years without a new console?

      No, six more years of selling the PS2 (in some form) and it's games. Consider Sony still sells the PSOne and it's games; this article says nothing about not releasing the PS3 before 2010, just about continuing to milk the current platform in addition to it.
  • Sure thing, why not milk it? I mean, come on, it's not like you would be enjoying games that look like 3D Mark '03 anyday soon, anyway.
    I for one cannot think of what the games of the future can offer, besides more polygons. I can see it all here already! That's why they're milking it. They don't need more polygon horsepower, if I'm looking at the correct situation - since - the gaming's future is in the handheld's (not saying that set-top would be abandoned..).

    I can't see why Sony should rush out the PS3
  • ...about the PS2 thing: No duh. I'm just waiting for the PSTwo :-) ...about the PSP: It's AMAZING. Download the video. Now. It looks like a PS2 game, only arguably better, and its a) early in development for the game and b) before the system is released, much less "hit its stride." It's not some useless FMV tech demo, either. I want I want I want.

Slashdot Top Deals

You mean you didn't *know* she was off making lots of little phone companies?

Close