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

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Entertainment

Gamers Don't Know Their Own Consoles 303

Posted by Zonk from the you-paid-up-now-pay-attention dept.
deadmantyping writes "Ars Technica reports on a survey of 6,260 responses which indicates that only 40 percent of PS3 owners knew that their console included Bluray. Apparently a large portion of gamers aren't aware of the non-gaming capabilities of their systems. Ars speculates that this might help explain Nintendo's apparent dominance in the console market since their introduction of the Wii."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Gamers Don't Know Their Own Consoles More

Gamers Don't Know Their Own Consoles

Comments Filter:

  • What? (Score:5, Funny)

    by lattyware ( 934246 ) <gareth@lattyware.co.uk> on Thursday August 09, 2007 @03:26PM (#20174395) Homepage Journal
    They bought a PS3 without realizing it had blu-ray?

    Dear god... They must be mad.

    • Re:What? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by evil agent ( 918566 ) on Thursday August 09, 2007 @03:28PM (#20174435)
      Yeah, wtf? It's almost as if they bought it to just play video games...
    • I know someone who bought a PS3 without realizing it had...

      well...

      anything other than hype.

      I'm not kidding. I swear to God, this kid brought the PS3 home, plugged it in, hooked it up to his standard-definition TV, and used it to play a PS2 version of Tomb Raider. At least, I think it was PS2 -- it might have been PS1. He was crowing about his "next-generation game console" experience, but hell, he wasn't even using the "internal memory card" (store PS2 savegames on the hard drive) because he didn't know how

      • Re:I know someone... (Score:5, Funny)

        by LKM ( 227954 ) on Friday August 10, 2007 @01:19AM (#20179427)
        I bought mine because it looks kinda like the monolith from 2001. Same size, too. It's a real conversation starter. True story.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by HalAtWork ( 926717 )
        I bought one 'cause way back they were saying the PS3 was going to have the next Katamari Damacy game, and the Wii one was cancelled. I had no choice but to get one! Yes, Katamari was going to be on 360, but I already didn't want one of those. Plus, on 360, they were saying it would be a download through Live! arcade, and I know I wanted to own a hard copy of the game. The PS3 also had Virtua Fighter 5 as an exclusive (at the time there was no sign it would come out on any other console) so I had to buy

  • Of course not (Score:5, Insightful)

    by GeckoX ( 259575 ) on Thursday August 09, 2007 @03:26PM (#20174411)
    Blu-Ray isn't ubiquitous, no HD format is yet. There's nary a Blu-Ray market out there at this point, not something most people even know exists unless they go looking for it.

    If blockbuster all of a sudden is half full of Blu-Ray disks, people will become very aware of the PS3's capabilities, just as they did with the PS2.

    PS2 was a huge driving factor in the final surge of DVD uptake...but DVD's were known to all by that point.

    People certainly read on the box that the PS3 supports Blu-Ray, but it means nothing except to very few. The HDDVD addon for the 360 is in a worse boat as that is it's ONLY function.

    Me, I'm just waiting for Blu-Ray to catch on (or not). If it does, I'll buy a PS3, and it'll be my HD player of choice...just as my PS2 has been my sole DVD player for years now.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by ssewell ( 733858 )

      If blockbuster all of a sudden is half full of Blu-Ray disks, people will become very aware of the PS3's capabilities, just as they did with the PS2.
      Well... Blockbuster is about do just that [engadget.com].
    • "There's nary a Blu-Ray market out there at this point"

      How in tarnation did those 30 Blu-Ray movies get on my bookshelf?

      • Re:Well Gosh Darn It All... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by mr_mischief ( 456295 ) on Thursday August 09, 2007 @04:40PM (#20175343) Journal
        A handful of early adopters is not a sizable market. You're just subsidizing manufacturing line refreshes and ramp-up that will give the rest of us the same stuff for half as much in two years or so. Thanks for that, BTW.

        • "A handful of early adopters is not a sizable market."

          Well, perhaps not huge, but it's out of the box now. Didn't 300 sell an estimated 250,000 hi-def copies?
          • Yeah, about 65% of that being Blu0Ray, and 35% HD-DVD. I can't seem to find the regular DVD numbers.

            By comparison, The Matrix sold 750,000 DVD copies in the same timeframe. So Blu-Ray and HD-DVD combined still have a way to go I think. Neither format is the improvement over DVD that DVD was over VHS, so slower uptake I think should be expected.

            Sure, higher def audio and video makes a big difference, but with DVD vs. VHS there was random/sequential, digital/analog, optical/magnetic, thin and flat/bulky, rigi

    • Re:Of course not (Score:5, Interesting)

      by yaphadam097 ( 670358 ) on Thursday August 09, 2007 @05:36PM (#20176107)
      My local Fry's had a gigantic sign over the blu-ray section the other day that said, "Blu-Ray discs require a Blu-Ray player." If there is enough confusion to justify that sign (Which just appeared there despite the fact that the Blu-Ray section has been there since late last year) then it is not surprising that many PS3 owners might be confused as well.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tgibbs ( 83782 )
      I've been renting Blu-Ray disks at Blockbuster. The selection is a bit thin, but not that different from what it was in the early days of DVDs.

      Still, I'm not sure just how quickly the market penetration will go. I can definitely see the improved resolution on my 42" TV, and it's enough to persuade me to rent BR disks when they're available, but it's not nearly as dramatic as the jump from 480i to 480p. I don't think that I would have been inclined to buy a standalone BR player--and I'm certainly not interes

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by MikeBabcock ( 65886 )
      When I go to Blockbuster and rent Blu-Ray movies they stop me at the desk and confirm that I have a Blu-Ray disc player every time (please add it to my customer profile). The one person I told I had a PS3 then replied "but you need a Blu-Ray disc player" which precipitated my explaining that the PS3 in fact included one.

      I'm not surprised by the findings at all from my experience. Sony needs a better marketing campaign, not a new price tag (although I'm all for cheaper).

  • Don't know, or don't care? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by AKAImBatman ( 238306 ) <[moc.liamg] [ta] [namtabmiaka]> on Thursday August 09, 2007 @03:28PM (#20174441) Homepage Journal
    One of the interesting quirks of the market is that if you position a device as a game machine, people will buy it as a game machine. Thing like the media it takes are secondary to the function the device is being sold for. So if you sell your machine as a game machine, expect that people will treat it as such and compare it to other game machines. Secondary features like the BluRay drive will only matter if the device compares favorably on its primary function.

    Now if you position a device like the PS3 as a Sony's PlayStation Media Center, suddenly it looks like a good deal. It can play BluRay, PS1 games, PS2 games, and games "designed for the BluRay format". All for less than competing BluRay players.

    It's too bad that Sony didn't do this. They might have had a better response if they had.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Just Some Guy ( 3352 )

      Don't care. I bought a Wii so that my wife and I could have a fun console that we could both enjoy. It's on the el-cheapo 19" TV in our bedroom, so HD is completely useless to me. We already have a DVD player. I specifically do not want BluRay. Nintendo's concentrating on quick, fun games instead of hard-core appeal (although Resident Evil 4 is incredibly great).

      Despite all those reasons, Ars must be right: we bought a Wii because we just didn't know what the 360 or PS3 could do. Yeah, that's it.

    • Re:Don't know, or don't care? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by *weasel ( 174362 ) on Thursday August 09, 2007 @03:45PM (#20174675)

      It's too bad that Sony didn't do this. They might have had a better response if they had.

      I don't know how much more they could've said it. Every time their PR people open their mouths it's "Blu-ray" this and "computer in your living room" that.

      Trick is, it's a Playstation. Playstation is now synonymous with 'games' they way Nintendo is. You could print in big block letters "THIS THING DOES NOT PLAY GAMES" and people would still buy the PS3 to play games and nothing more.

      It goes back to the 'don't care' portion of your rhetorical. They simply don't care. Regardless of how you position these boxes, gamers just want to play games.

      Similarly: Nintendo isn't winning because they stayed away from HD and next-gen disc formats. They stayed away last-gen and that didn't help them any. The Wii is selling like gangbusters because it provides a social game experience that's unmatched anywhere else. Nintendo focused on what gamers were focused on: the fun. If the Wii did HD video it'd still be selling like gangbusters: and their HD cables would be just as under-utilized as those of the 360 and PS3.

      • Trick is, it's a Playstation. Playstation is now synonymous with 'games' they way Nintendo is. You could print in big block letters "THIS THING DOES NOT PLAY GAMES" and people would still buy the PS3 to play games and nothing more.

        That's the crux of it all right there, branding.

        Sony's could have changed the name, but didn't. The Playstation name, and the clout it carried, was probably too alluring. However, as is self-evident from your comment, this move was actually more destructive to what they hoped to a

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by cowscows ( 103644 )
          I don't know. If they had called this thing something else, would more people really have bought it for bluray? Anyone who's interested in Bluray can easily do a minimal amount of research and discover that the PS3 plays them, and is one of the cheapest players out there. And in addition to a bluray player, you get this game console that does a bunch of other stuff. If I was in the market for a Bluray player, I'd have probably purchased a PS3 already. People aren't getting scared away from this bluray playe

  • Too much. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Pojut ( 1027544 ) on Thursday August 09, 2007 @03:29PM (#20174451) Homepage
    While I LOVE all the things I can do with my 360 and my PS3 in terms of extra stuff beyond gaming, gaming is why I bought a GAMING CONSOLE. Yes, I do use them for things other than gaming, but honestly I would be very very happy if Microsoft and Sony had spent more money and R&D time in making their systems better gamingconsoles, and less of a multi-use piece of hardware.

    It raises the functionality of the consoles, but I would much rather be paying less for less functionality. The less I shell out for the console, the more I can spend on the games...which is exactly why I want a gaming console in the first place.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by vhold ( 175219 )
      I have heard before that Sony does it, especially in regards to being able to install and run Linux on the PS3, because they want to be taxed as a "Computer" and not as a "Video Game" in Europe, where countries apparently differentiate the two?

      Also notice they call that business unit "Sony Computer Entertainment" and the system itself the "PLAYSTATION 3 computer entertainment system"

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Pojut ( 1027544 )
        Whooptydoo. Until I can go to my local computer shop or goto new egg and do something other than upgrade it's hard drive, it's still a gaming console regardless of it's other capabilities.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by vhold ( 175219 )
          There have been many laptops that are less upgradeable than the PS3. Are they not computers? I don't think that's a very useful criteria.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by joggle ( 594025 )

      I don't think there's too much extra functionality in the Xbox 360. The hard drive is great for saving games and enabling backwards compatibility. It's also nice to be able to download game demos. The fact that it can also be used to download movies or TV shows is just a perk. I can't think of a single hardware feature in the 360 that games can't make use of. Most of the extra functionality is simply implemented in software (such as the ability to be a media center, etc.). I don't find anything wrong with a

  • HD Capability (Score:4, Insightful)

    by lonechicken ( 1046406 ) on Thursday August 09, 2007 @03:33PM (#20174493)
    Of the three current "next gen" consoles, it's kind of ironic that the most popular one with the party gamers is the one that *doesn't* do HD. Considering that the Wii's the one most geared towards groups of people standing in front of a large TV screen.

    • Honestly... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Cyno01 ( 573917 )
      Mario Party 8 and Rayman look pretty damn good on my 30" 1080i CRT, this however has everything to do with the "art" and not the "graphics". Not to mention after everyones had a few drinks they could be sprites and it would still be just as fun. Super Paper Mario looks gorgeous, especially at 480p, and its all thanks to the artwork. Really though, i'm playing a GAME, if i want realism i'll go outside. Do we really want all games to be photo-realistic? Resident Evil 4 for the wii looks pretty damn good, expe

  • Justification of the expense (Score:3, Insightful)

    by another_fanboy ( 987962 ) on Thursday August 09, 2007 @03:33PM (#20174497)
    one thing interests the majority of consumers: games

    Of course games are the primary reason people buy gaming system.

    not only are people not using these functions, they're not even aware of them.
    the higher cost of entry may be helping the PlayStation 3 in this respect.

    Considering many games are cross platform, the PS2 is still on the market with new titles, and the PS3 is the most expensive system available, there is little justification to buying one at the moment.

    the higher cost of entry may be helping the PlayStation 3 in this respect.

    Since when does higher cost mean higher quality, regardless of what it can do?

    • the higher cost of entry may be helping the PlayStation 3 in this respect.
      Since when does higher cost mean higher quality, regardless of what it can do?

      It doesn't. However, it does mean that the buyers are researching their purchases more carefully before shelling out for such a high price tag. Which means that they're more likely to know their system's capabilities.
    • the higher cost of entry may be helping the PlayStation 3 in this respect.

      Since when does higher cost mean higher quality, regardless of what it can do?


      Seeing as I haven't had one ring of death [1up.com] or scratched disc [engadget.com] on my PS3, I'd say it's a pretty high quality machine.

  • Whaa?! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by morari ( 1080535 )
    How do they justify the price to themselves then? I mean, at least you have mediocre Blu-Ray movies to watch while the console stagnates and remains without games to play. Oh, I forgot, it's all marketing. People are sheep and like commercials. Sony doesn't even need current commercials, because all of the Playstation and Playstation 2 commercials already have it so ingrained in peoples' minds. They see a brand and feel the need to purchase it regardless of any factors.

  • Way to cherry pick quotes... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by the_skywise ( 189793 ) on Thursday August 09, 2007 @03:35PM (#20174529)
    How about even fewer gamers knew their 360 had HD graphics?
    "50 percent of gamers in the study knew the system [PS3] featured high-definition graphics, compared to the 30 percent of gamers who knew about the high-definition function of the 360."

    What does this also say about Blu-Ray only being successful because of the PS3? Only 40% of the PS3 owners account for all the Blu-Ray discs sold? What happens when the other 60% figure it out?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tgibbs ( 83782 )

      How about even fewer gamers knew their 360 had HD graphics?


      I wonder what fraction had HD TVs? If you only have a SD TV, then the HD capability of the PS3 or 360 is pretty academic.

    • Then they may rent or buy a Blu-Ray disc and notice that, honestly, it doesn't really add much unless you have a super high-end TV.

      DVD were so much better than video tape (easier to use, smaller, much better video and audio quality) but Blu-Ray isn't that much better than DVD. Yes, the picture is nicer if you have the hardware to back it up, but most people don't care that much.

      Blu-ray or HD-DVD will replace DVDs in time, but it is going to happen much slower than DVDs taking over video tape.

  • I know that the ps3 plays blue-ray... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by MarcoAtWork ( 28889 ) on Thursday August 09, 2007 @03:36PM (#20174547)
    ...however I sure would like to have more information about things like:

    - can the controller be used wirelessly to control the playing?
    - does the ps3 have an IR receiver so I can program my existing remote to control it like a stand-alone blue-ray player?
    - does the ps3 support blue-ray profile 1.1 (with dual decoding)?
    - how is the quality compared to a stand-alone player?
    - does the ps3 have a digital out to feed to my receiver? (coax? optical?)

    these are questions that right now have prevented me from purchasing one in favour of waiting for a combo blueray/hddvd player (if not I'd just get a ps3+x360 since they'd cost me the same in total and I'd have two consoles to boot). I have also found things like the following by perusing sites, things that should be made clear somewhere on sony's site

    - the ps3 does play dvd movies
    - the ps3 does NOT upscale dvd movies to 1080i/p
    - the ps3 supports 1080p/24 starting from firmware 1.9

    I think sony is trying hard to not position the ps3 as a blueray player with gaming capabilities, and holding back information like this is part of the game.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by thebluick ( 1140525 )
      - can the controller be used wirelessly to control the playing? +YES - does the ps3 have an IR receiver so I can program my existing remote to control it like a stand-alone blue-ray player? +NO-its bluetooth - how is the quality compared to a stand-alone player? +As good or better with constant firmware updates improving quality - does the ps3 have a digital out to feed to my receiver? (coax? optical?) +yes - the ps3 does NOT upscale dvd movies to 1080i/p +actually it does upconvert to 1080p it was in a
      • - have you heard of the
        tag? (shit key? punctuation?) -no

        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by Anonymous Coward
          Oh, that shit key. Always eluding people.

    • Re:I know that the ps3 plays blue-ray... (Score:5, Informative)

      by benzapp ( 464105 ) on Thursday August 09, 2007 @03:50PM (#20174727)
      - can the controller be used wirelessly to control the playing?

      Yes

      - does the ps3 have an IR receiver so I can program my existing remote to control it like a stand-alone blue-ray player?

      No

      - does the ps3 support blue-ray profile 1.1 (with dual decoding)?

      This standard isn't required for months. It's trivial to include support in a future firmware release.

      - how is the quality compared to a stand-alone player?

      You know about a future standard but haven't read any reviews of the PS3, the most popular bluray player? The quality is superb, and is considered to have better quality than many standalone players.

      - does the ps3 have a digital out to feed to my receiver? (coax? optical?)

      Sheesh, reading the box would answer this question. Of course it has optical output. That is the only way to receive surround sound with a bluray player.

      - the ps3 does NOT upscale dvd movies to 1080i/p

      This is false. Support for upscaling DVDs, PS1 and PS2 games was added in the 1.8 system software release in May. The quality of the upscaling is superior to my Yamaha DVD player that came with my 5.1 setup.

      - the ps3 supports 1080p/24 starting from firmware 1.9

      The ps3 has always supported 1080p output. The 1.9 release was relatively minor, with the only major component being support for Chinese text.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Wordplay ( 54438 )
        1080p != 1080p/24. The latter's for watching film at 24fps. 1080p is usually 30fps.

        The recent update allows output to be forced to 1080p/24. I think it was supported to some extent before, but there was a possibility for the PS3 to not realize it was supported by your display (I think it's if you had a pass-through receiver in the middle) and to not use it.
    • actually scratch the upscaling comment, supposedly this was fixed in firmware 1.8

  • Still think price dominates the explanation (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Chris Burke ( 6130 ) on Thursday August 09, 2007 @03:38PM (#20174579) Homepage
    If we assume that these figures apply to the population at large as Ars did when they speculated that this explains the Wii's dominance, then this means that 40% of the population is aware of PS3's BluRay capabilities. Yet they're not choosing to buy a PS3.

    Because knowing the PS3 has BluRay doesn't cause an extra $350 to spontaneously appear in your wallet.

    "Good value for what you get if you can/will use all of its features" does not translate into "I can afford to spend that much on a toy".

    It's not complicated.
    • I'd suspect that's partly because Blu-Ray isn't that important yet (as a disruptive techonology). It's not the same thing as when the PS2 had a DVD player when many folks had no other DVD player (but wanted to get in on this digital disc thing). Blu-Ray doesn't appeal to the masses in the same way that DVD did, at least while the price remains high. Sorry Sony, there's only one DVD (r)evolution.

  • See? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by MBCook ( 132727 ) <foobarsoft@foobarsoft.com> on Thursday August 09, 2007 @03:43PM (#20174643) Homepage

    I've been saying this all along. With many stories here on /. people say "But no one will care about the Wii because it can't do HD" and this kind of thing was my answer to that (although I'm surprised the numbers for HD game playing are THAT LOW). I submitted this myself yesterday (although this write-up looks better and sources Ars). I have a Wii plugged into my HDTV and love it. I don't have a 360 yet (thinking of getting one) and the PS3 doesn't have any games I care about yet (except for MGS4, but that won't be out for a while).

    This shouldn't be surprising. The TV ads for the 360 and PS3 don't mention HD, and Joe Bob buys an HDTV and watches over-the-air analog stations and thinks that's HD.

    Mostly, I'd say this is a failure of marketing. That said, it's a good shot against the "no one wants non-HD stuff" argument.

  • How about this instead? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by RichPowers ( 998637 ) on Thursday August 09, 2007 @03:43PM (#20174653)
    Microsoft and Sony don't know their customers.

  • Nintendo Wins for Another Reason (Score:4, Insightful)

    by MolarMass ( 808031 ) on Thursday August 09, 2007 @03:45PM (#20174671)

    I just found out a few days ago that my grandmother, who is in her 70s, used a Nintendo Wii at my brother's house. She is a golfer, and she played Wii Golf for her first time, and she proceeded to play extremely well, and easily beat my brother.

    So, Wii is full of win because my non-gaming grandmother can play, and succeed, at a video game without a bunch of hassle.

    It wouldn't matter to her if it could play movies or dispense kittens, and I'd imagine those things don't matter much to others, either. Though, kittens would be cute.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Sylver Dragon ( 445237 )
      Pretty much the exact same reason my parents bought one.
      My parents are not gamers. The last console they bought was an NES for my brother's birthday one year. The last system that one of them actually picked up a controller for was the Atari 2600 (not counting the hours my father spent with me playing PC flight sims). My brother brought over his Wii during Christmas and we all proceeded to play Wii golf until the wee hours of the morning, several days in a row. After that, my parents ended up buying a

  • Big news flash. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by LWATCDR ( 28044 ) on Thursday August 09, 2007 @03:55PM (#20174773) Homepage Journal
    Most iPod owners don't know that you can play games on their iPod.
    Most iPod owners don't know that you can load Linux on their iPod.

    The the primary function of a device is the the most important function for the people that buy that device.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by mehemiah ( 971799 )

      Most iPod owners don't know that you can load Linux on their iPod.
      Linux isn't a primary function of the iPod. Apple didn't add 100 dollars to the price tag of my ipod so i could put Linux on it.
    • Of course, there's a lot of models of iPod that can't play games, and Apple has never pushed the iPod as a linux device. It barely pushes the games aspect, really.

      It is in pretty stark contract to Sony, who has constantly pushed the PS3 as a "trojan horse" for Blu-Ray.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by llefler ( 184847 )
        If Sony really wants to push Blu-Ray, they should get a manufacturer like Apex on board pushing out sub $50 basic players. Though until HD TVs make it down into the lower price ranges, it probably won't matter.
    • There is a huge difference here:

      The PS3 is cheaper than other Blu-Ray players.
      The PS3 is probably still significantly more expensive than it could have been without a Blu-Ray player.

      That's sufficient to make it at least a dual-purpose -- primarily both a game console AND a Blu-Ray player. If I bought a Windows Mobile 5 phone, an iPhone, or OpenMoko for an extra $200 (compared to a Symbian or something simpler), you can be damned sure I'm going to know about its non-phone capabilities, because I'd have to be

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by brkello ( 642429 )
      Your analogy is terrible. This is more like iPod owners only getting songs off iTunes and not knowing they can pull the songs off their CD's as well. When I bought my PS2, I knew it could play DVDs. I find it surprising that people are ignorant of Bluray. It would be like Wii owners not knowing their console could use Wifi.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Kenshin ( 43036 )
      Most iPod owners don't know that you can load Linux on their iPod.

      Honestly, most PC owners don't know you can load Linux on their PC.

  • What do you mean apparent? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by oddman ( 204968 ) on Thursday August 09, 2007 @04:00PM (#20174841)
    Does anyone doubt that Nintendo is currently winning this generation console war? Saying that Nintendo is apparently dominant is like saying that the US is apparently occupying Iraq.
    • I believe it's "apparent" because there's no clear definition of what "winning" is, in relation to the Console War.
  • Most Wii developers don't even know that it supports progressive scan and widescreen!

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by 7Prime ( 871679 )
      WTF are you talking about? I own about 8 Wii titles, 4 of them launch titles, and every single one runs widescreen. I've yet to see one that doesn't.

      Wii Sports
      Zelda
      Excite Truck
      Rayman
      WarioWare
      Super Paper Mario
      Sonic & Secret Rings
      Resident Evil 4

  • I was shocked to learn recently that my Nintendo Wii has a wireless controller! And that my "Wii" game collection is actually just pirated Gamecube titles repackaged for the Wii! [nintendowiifanboy.com]

    I'm so embarrassed.

  • The PS3 plays games?!? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ibullard ( 312377 ) on Thursday August 09, 2007 @04:49PM (#20175455)
    I didn't know my Blue-ray player was also a game machine!!!
  • I'm a reasonable proficient geek, and I'm guilty of this.
    Does my Wii play MP3s?
    Does my Xbox 360 do JPEG photo shows?

    Answer: I don't care.

    Xbox 360 as a backup DVD player has come in useful, but I have enough multipurpose gadgets that I don't bother keeping track.
  • Actually, come to think of it, many DVD players do a ton of other things, from playing CDs to doing JPEG photo galleries to playing obscure video formats favored in Europe to doing MP3s, and most of the owners just don't care. So it's a mistake to think this is just about video games.
  • One of the biggest reasons for spending $500-$600 dollars on a PS3 is that it plays BluRay. Period. If there are poeple out there that would actually buy a gaming console for that much for no other reason that it says "Sony" on the box, without nearly as many refined games as the X-Box, or as fun as some on the Wii then they have far too much money on their hands, and they are too dumb to realize it.

    BluRay players alone are still around $500. That's the only reason to pay that much for a PS3.

    Seriously, t

  • Well, duh! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by seebs ( 15766 ) on Thursday August 09, 2007 @11:15PM (#20178753) Homepage
    I don't buy a gaming console to be all sorts of other crap; I buy it to play games.

    Nintendo's success comes from their decision to sell a good toy at a reasonable (albeit sorta high) price for a toy, while their competition is trying to sell a toy at a ludicrously high price, claiming that it's a really good deal for the incredible general-purpose computer and movie machine that it really is... But since the market is the toy market, that's sorta running into issues.

    Maybe they shoulda called it the MovieStation.

Slashdot Top Deals

As of next Thursday, UNIX will be flushed in favor of TOPS-10. Please update your programs.

Close