READ THIS, you slack-jawed idiots, or THE NEW CONSOLE WARS, z0MG!

[Mike McC]

Originally Posted by Bamboozehound

So, they've literally made a game that is so complicated it's stupid and it's probably only going to be released on the most expensive console ever?

SIGN ME UP FOR SOME OF THAT

They're still making games for the Neo-Geo, The 3DO, and the CDi?

Seriously, those three systems had higher release prices than Sony's complete PS3 bundle. The more you know (star with rainbow goes here).

And, let's not mention Pioneer's short-lived LaserActive. That cost nearly $1000 when it came out in 1993, plus several hundred more for each module to add onto it.

[Bamboozehound]

Yeah, well, if I ever get reincarnated as a little Japanese boy born into a moderately wealthy family I'll be sure to make use of that information.

[ZERO.]

With Sony right now it's just one punch in the balls after another.

EDIT:Some are self-inflicted.

[Bells]

You guys are really after sony arent ya?

About the warhawk... please.... reade the story before talking about it, they amde tests using the processing capabilities of the PS3, and found out that it had more power then it was needed.... but that dosent mean it will be useless potencial... the same power they can use to fill a screen with 100 so enemies they can use to add extras, more customization options, bigger and better scenarios, better sounds effects... its a lot of stuff...

And is sure as hell good to know that developers arent needing to find ways to get around the system limitations just so they can fill their visions and gamming ideas...

[ZAKtheGeek]

the same power they can use to fill a screen with 100 so enemies they can use to add extras, more customization options, bigger and better scenarios, better sounds effects... its a lot of stuff...

Really? Because it sounds like a GPU issue...

[bananarama]

Now I'm no PS3 fanboy myself; I am a Wii man (Oh Christ). But you guys seem to be writing Sony's obituaries way before the console is even released. Wait and see; Sony may surprise you.

[ZERO.]

Thing is, way back before any of the new consoles were spawned, people knew the storm was coming, people already had sides picked.

All consoles have their nay sayers all consoles have in the past, we will just have to wait for things to play out.

Right now a little more people are saying nay to Sony.

I can understand that because of Sonys current “marketing plan”.

[Mirai Gen]

A really great write-up on the Playstation 3.

This guy's simply genius.

It now appears all that wasn't good enough for Sony. With the PlayStation 3 the company is going after the high-end power user. It is almost as if Coca-Cola not only decided to go with a new formula, but also decided to exit the low brow soft drink business to go into high-end wines. Of course, there is a market for high-end products but it is 1) a very different consumer type and 2) not nearly as big as the blue collar mass market. Wal-mart sells more toys than FAO Schwartz and McDonald's sells more beef than Ruth's Chris Steak House.

I'm glad that someone notices that everyone in this new Console War is going to 'revolutionary' stuff. Wii with, well, everything, and the PS3 with it's aim to the hardcore consumer instead of the family.

Problem is, the PS3 may not make it out alive. It's just speculation, but this article believes they could become bottom of the barrel.

[Krylo]

He doesn't seem that bright to me...

The problem is that is only one factor in our forecasting matrix. Furthermore, with the competition having features like Xbox Live and the Nintendo Wii controller, the PS3 may not have that much of an advantage in the elusive "Wow Factor."

The PS3 is going to have an advanced model of an internet service that outdoes X-box Live in most every conceivable way if they stick with their current plans. More closely related to the one Nintendo will have.

With a Linux based OS and the ability to download patches/add-ons for games, and the ability for indie developers to upload entire games onto the server, thus allowing for people who don't have the money to produce and sell in the normal way to still get into the production biz on the PS3 (note: the Wii is also doing just about all of this).

X-Box live has very little 'Wow' power in comparison.

And allow me to expand on the quote you have...

The secret to the PS2's success was more in the wide range of product offerings: all kinds of sports games, racing games, RPGs, action titles, big name licenses, kid friendly products, RPGs with Disney characters, etc. Japan had Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest, Europe had EyeToy and SingStar. In all markets, the PlayStation2 was a complete entertainment system for the family priced under $300.

It now appears all that wasn't good enough for Sony. With the PlayStation 3 the company is going after the high-end power user. It is almost as if Coca-Cola not only decided to go with a new formula, but also decided to exit the low brow soft drink business to go into high-end wines. Of course, there is a market for high-end products but it is 1) a very different consumer type and 2) not nearly as big as the blue collar mass market. Wal-mart sells more toys than FAO Schwartz and McDonald's sells more beef than Ruth's Chris Steak House.

In context, it's actually pretty goddamn stupid.

It's more like comparing Sony to Hardee's really. Sony is still giving you all that diversity that the other two simply DO NOT HAVE, but it's also upgraded its formula.

Back in the day Hardee's was a pretty decent place, but its burgers were no better than the competition. Sure it had a variety, but they didn't stand out. Then Hardee's was all like "How about if we make the burgers out of Black Angus Beef, flame broil them, and just, generally, make the best damn burgers on the market--INCLUDING most sit down burger joints?"

Besides that, the PS3's price really ISN'T that insane when you look at the price of consoles in the past.

Oh sure, it's fun to compare it to the Neo-Geo and what have you... which charged about twice as much than the figure the president said games would NEVER REACH, quite a few years back when that price was even higher than it looks, thanks to the fact that the value of the dollar HAS gone down since then.

However, that, and most of the others, is simply a flawed analogy. One that has been used to beat on Sony for no good reason.

Core PlayStation franchises like Grand Theft Auto, Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest and others are starting to appear on other systems.

Wait, when was DQ a Core PlayStation franchise? DQVIII sold a lot, yeah, but where's DQVII? I never even heard about it coming out? How about DQVI? DQV?

How does ONE game that came out near the end of their second console (thus having very very very little impact, if any, on console sales) make DQ a 'Core PS Franchise'? I guess maybe in Japan?

Let's go even further--the Wii and DS are getting a few, by comparison, INCREDIBLY shitty Final Fantasy games--that damn near require multiple players (therefore shooting for a very specific niche market that the PS has never been concerned with), while Sony continues to rake in the actual games, like FFXII and FFXIII (all three games), yet Sony is losing Final Fantasy as a 'Core Playstation Franchise'.

And what about the mentions of Devil May Cry or God of War, both very good franchises, both things that players are interested, and both games that have (or will have) multiple games exclusive to the PS, unlike DQ.

What is this guy smoking, and where can I get some? Seriously. He's obviously fucking high.

I mean, hell, he even ARGUES AGAINST HIMSELF if you pay attention.

Core PlayStation franchises like Grand Theft Auto [...] are starting to appear on other systems.

So Grand Theft Auto, and other core franchises, not being exclusive will hurt them... but... wait...

we think hit software is only one part of the equation. It is our view that the PlayStation systems have been successful not because of hit software but mainly because of software diversity and third-party support.

According to him, THOSE HIT FRANCHISES DON'T EVEN MATTER to Sony's success as a company.

What matters is continued third party support--which they have.

I mean, I know that bashing Sony is the in thing to do--but so long as their competition is the X-Box and Wii, they're still going to stay at or near the top.

Why?

The Wii isn't even a direct competitor anymore. The games will not be or play the same. They're going for something completely different.

That's a GOOD thing, and I'll sure as fuck buy one, but a Wii is not going to sate my need for gaming as God intended. Nor anyone else's.

And the X-box is like the retarded cousin of the PS that doesn't do anything but first person shooters and only has like three exclusive titles... maybe ten or fifteen if you don't count the fact that nearly all of them get ported to the computer, and play better there, anyway.

It's got FAR weaker third party support, very few exclusives, and a weaker system. And, most importantly, it doesn't 'do' RPGs. At least not really. Which is a significant problem because of how 'big' console RPGs have gotten.

Well, I'm done, you can get back to your orgy of Sony bashing.

[Mirai Gen]

Krylo, back up a moment.

It now appears all that wasn't good enough for Sony. With the PlayStation 3 the company is going after the high-end power user.

I'd like to see you disprove that.

I'm agreeing with you, because looking back at the article after I made the post I suddenly noticed his flawed point about the software of GTA and stuff. I still think it's worth noting that he says the PS1 and PS2's success was largely because it was a reliable game system that many people owned. Now they're going for the hardcore user that will manipulate every little thing in the PS3.

Really, I don't see how that's flawed logic at all. It's pretty accurate.

Let's go even further--the Wii and DS are getting a few, by comparison, INCREDIBLY shitty Final Fantasy games--that damn near require multiple players (therefore shooting for a very specific niche market that the PS has never been concerned with), while Sony continues to rake in the actual games, like FFXII and FFXIII (all three games), yet Sony is losing Final Fantasy as a 'Core Playstation Franchise'.

He probably doesn't know his games as well as we do, but Final Fantasy is not a PS exclusive - if Nintendo wants to make FF14, there's a pretty good chance they can. Sony lost GTA exclusivity, and I'm sure we all can ignore anything he's said about DQ8.

The point was that exclusivity is not nearly at the levels it used to be with SquareSoft and RockStar.

Besides that, the PS3's price really ISN'T that insane when you look at the price of consoles in the past.

It'd be nice if this 'Past Money' came back and bought a PS3 for me. That way the movement of inflation would catch up to my gaming needs.

That felt good.

The point is it's still overpriced compared to the competitors, and most consumers honestly will look at a PS3 and go, "that's...that's too expensive."

There's always going to be the hardcore Sony fanboy, well, no shit. Everyone's got their loyalists - Uwe Boll even has his.

we think hit software is only one part of the equation. It is our view that the PlayStation systems have been successful not because of hit software but mainly because of software diversity and third-party support.

According to him, THOSE HIT FRANCHISES DON'T EVEN MATTER to Sony's success as a company.
What matters is continued third party support--which they have.

Allow me to draw your attention elsewhere. He was talking about the fact that big-hit games coupled with a plethora of third-party was what made up the success of the PlayStation, with that third-party support heading the front.

Saying that he insists those big hit titles DIDN'T EVEN MATTER is ridiculous. Of course they mattered - he said so! The majority goes to the third-party.

He estimates (and I don't know where he got that number from, because I think it's wrong, too) 20% of the PS owners bought a GTA game. That's alot of GTA if you compare how many people own a PS2.

Well, I'm done, you can get back to your orgy of Sony bashing.

...you know what? When we start saying "OMG LOL SONY = $$$$" you'll have a reason to say that. Right now it comes off as an insult, and I'm getting tired of being called anti-Sony simply because I posted an article presenting an interesting angle.

I'm sure the guy's got some flaws in his logic, but I just liked his pointing of the fact that the PS1 and PS2 were wide-range games, and now the PS3, supporting a plethora of things casual gamers won't use, seems to be changing that aim.