Sony, can do no wrong?

CiDeRmAn

With all the talk of the next gen machines and much talk of the PS3 and Sonys unstoppable dominance of the whole industry, producing a brand that is as much videogames and hoover is to vacuuming, but I reckon Sony could well be repeating a previously made mistake with their new console.
Most industry folk and an awful lot of gamers out there believe that Sonys pricing is way out of whack, charging far far too much for what is, after all, a games console.
Yet this error was already committed by Sony a couple of years back and it surprises me that no one has mentioned it.
With the PSX Sony tried to create a multimedia machine capable of networking, media player and games machine all rolled into one. The machine contained a harddrive so you could use it as a PVR machine too.
It introduced the world to the cross media bar interface too.
And yet this fully loaded console fell flat on its face.
For two good reasons.
Firstly it offered little to gamers over what already existed on the market for less money.
Secondly, and more importantly, it cost a fortune compared to everything else on the market.
These facts coupled with a lack of mainstream enthusiasm for the multimedia features of the machine meant that it got only a small number of sales in Japan and no release in either the US or European territories.

So, does this bode ill for the PS3?
Have Sony created the PSX2 rather than the PS3, seems so in the surface anyway.

Maybe they would be better stripping the console down, taking a lot of the expensive features, like the Blu-ray player, out and making it as affordable as possible, getting the console into as many households as possible instead of pushing their own HD media agenda and forcing consumers to purchase a HD player using a format that may not exist outside of the PS3 in a couple of years, anyone remember Sonys previous media formats? Betamax, Minidisc, UMD, how many movies or music do you own on these?

mathias

I would agree except that you are forgetting one hugely important fact , the PS3's main competitor is the Xbox 360 , which is already a resounding success , the PS3 is going to have to at least match this console for features if its going to sell against it.
The
PSX didnt take off at the time , but now the 360 is a success with a lot of the media capabilities that the PSX had , it even works as a media extender for Windows Media Centre edition , so obviously the time is now right for those features.

Thats the bottom line , Xbox 360 has a tiered approach , whereby you can buy less expensive versions , maybe Sony will consider that approach , however there is no way Sony can afford to have less functionality that the 360 or the PS3 is a dead duck.

mickoneill30

I think Blu-ray is either going to make or break the machine. Either the format catches on big time and Sony will be ahead of the pack with a console that supports the format. Or the HD-DVD / Blu-ray battle will continue for a couple of years and HD-DVD will be the victor or people will stay with DVD. With current Xbox360 games averaging out about 3GB per game (on a DVD capable of 9GB) I think the extra Blu-ray cost for not much advantage is going to be an achilles heel.

CiDeRmAn

I get the impression from the 360 that while it may have extended multimedia functionality, as does my modded Xbox, they are merely ways to expand the core purpose of the console, the playing of games.
Downloading new content, wallpapers etc.
Playing with fellow gamers online.
Purchasing whole games online and downloading them to the harddrive.
This last point has to be the most crucial as it points the way that games retail is going, as networks get faster and faster, a console without a drive bay at all can be only a gen away, with no physical presence of the media outside of your console or PCs desktop.
The reliance on a next gen media format to go along with a next gen console suggests that Sony forsee a need going forward for physical sales of software, a path that could well be very short sighted.
Essentially by the time software reached a complexity that demands the capacity if Blu-ray, we will be buying and downloading the software direct from the publishers website and bypassing the expense.
Games machines are all about what and how you can play games, a feature known for years by Nintendo and now realised by Microsoft, everything else is just windowdressing.
You would have to believe in the notion that one box under the TV will fulfill your every need, PVR, Web Browsing, Gaming, Watching TV, Shopping, etc. but I don't see it as the future, I think there are limits to what people can accept, otherwise we would all have TV/DVD combis at home, but how many of us do as our primary TV? Very few.
Sony may well spend the coming gen in 2nd place, a place where they can do as others have done, pondered their errors and make the PS4 or PSP2 even better.

stevenmu

There have been rumours going around that some PS3 games have already gone above the 9GB offered by DVD9 (Resistance 22GB).

Either way the next-gen 'war' won't be won over the next year or so, it'll be over the next 4 to 5 years. By incorporating future technologies right from the start, Sony are producing a machine which will still pack a decent punch in 4-5 years time. In that time frame, many people are going to start wanting it's advanced features, HD media, 1080p output etc, making it better value to buy an all-in-one device now than seperate stand-alones later on. Then there's the other features too, such as a copy of linux being installed and keyboard/mouse support, allowing the PS3 to act as a home PC too.

Sony are gambling that people are willing to pay extra for the extra features included, but it's not all that big a gamble. They were in a similar position with DVD on the PS2, a new format with expensive stand alone players, costing roughly the same as the console itself. Many people's introduction to DVDs was through the PS2, some even credit Sony for a lot of the success of the format, and this is what Sony is trying to repeat, it's essentially using it's playstation brand to create a whole new market for itself, and with the size and loyalty of the brand it has a good chance of succeeding.

Dont be at yourself

Sony, for the time being, can charge whatever they want for the PS3. It's gonna be rarer than hen's teeth in the run up to Christmas, and there is never a shortage of first-adapters to ensure sell-outs for a good 5 or 6 months. When supply outstrips demand, we'll undoubtedly see a price drop.

Royale with Cheese

Had a ps1 and a ps2 and was fully intending on getting a ps3, then I saw the price of the thing. It wasn't that I couldn't afford it but I just thought it was a ridiculous price too pay for a games console and I now own an xbox 360. I'm sure I'm not the only one who's done this either.

projectmayhem

CiDeRmAn wrote:

So, does this bode ill for the PS3?
Have Sony created the PSX2 rather than the PS3, seems so in the surface anyway.

no

and here's why ps3 is not psx2:

yes, sure, PSX fell flat on its arse, and was offering a lot of the same things the ps3 dows. but, the psx was, in essence, an expensive ps2. ps3 is not an expensive ps2. it has totally different games, technology which is being proven in medicine and government right now, along with in high-end IT (see IBM's "blade" server).

the argument could be made that psx is to ps2 as ps3 is to 360 though, right? same logic. a lot of the same games are coming to 360 and ps3 (i.e. GTA). hell, right now, a national treasure and religious icon, pro evo will be a 360 exclusive for this year.

well... not quite. see, as already mentioned, ps3 games are already breaking the size barrier (22G for a game still a few months off release.... resistence). in a few weeks time at TGS sony will showcase 27 playable games. i don't recall any previous launch console having this amount. and there's games for everyone in there. everything from the FPS games to racing games, and fighting games too. some quality software, something nintendo Wii doesn't really have yet IMO (Wii has interesting titles, but nothing i can see myself investing serious time to yet).

so, the €600 you spend on a PS3 is a lot, i know. but the same was said of PS2, and i remember my dad trying to convince me a V-Tech car game was just as good as the PS1 at the time. the xbox360 was expensive too, as was the Xbox when it launched. but here's how i justify it: my xbox360 was a 4 year (if even that, if talk of another xbox sooner then we think are true) investment. i'll enjoy halo3, gears of war and all the other goodies it throws at me. but my extra €200 for the PS3, that'll be a 6 or 7 year investment. €100 a year for an uncountable amount of entertainment? i am there.

ok you may say that too many titles are going out on all consoles, so the cost isn't really justified. but we all know, deep down, even the most evil of xbox360 fanboy will have to fess up and admit that, at some point, the ps3 will have a HUGE catalogue of games, exclusives at that, with loads to keep you, yes YOU, happy. PS1 has it, PS2 has it, PS3 will have it. 4,000+ devkits don't lie.

"but the ps3 doesn't really have the power, and 360 games will look the same"
i was of the same opinion. i'm sure you'll find posts on this very forum with me saying that. i'm going to back-track. crytek are working their engine for ps3. havok are working their engine for ps3. criterion are working their engine for ps3. and so on. what's missing there? 360. 360... the console that wont be able to do dx10 effects. ps3 uses psGL, which has been updated with a whole new library which can render dx10-esque effects.

long post, i know... but i saw other long posts and shot the wind

eezarthegreat

I work in a game shop in the city centre and you are a perfect example of the people I deal with everyday. Anybody who mentions the PS3 i mention the xbox 360. The ps3 is ridiculously over priced. I get people saying "Yeah but it's amazing!" I cleverly ask, "what's so amazing about it?" and I generally get the response "It's sony"....

Enough said there...

Honestly, I know what I'm talking about when it comes to games, you hear the horror stories of guys in game shops not having a clue(on of the guys I work with thinks HD stands for High Dimensions, and he claims I'm wrong)but I'm one of the obvious few that know what I'm talking about.

So people in summary GO WITH THE XBOX 360 IF YOU HAVE NOT YET DONE SO. It's an amzing machine, some great titles will be added soon and the fact that Microsoft and all the games company's that develop for the 360 have been developing for almost a year now it means they have their teeth well sunk into this mammoth of a machine. Sony on the other hand have a rocky road ahead of them.

Royale with Cheese wrote:

Had a ps1 and a ps2 and was fully intending on getting a ps3, then I saw the price of the thing. It wasn't that I couldn't afford it but I just thought it was a ridiculous price too pay for a games console and I now own an xbox 360. I'm sure I'm not the only one who's done this either.

eezarthegreat

Oh....and the whole "Did you SEE the killzone video!!?"

god people..get a grip...

projectmayhem

eezarthegreat wrote:

So people in summary GO WITH THE XBOX 360 IF YOU HAVE NOT YET DONE SO. It's an amzing machine, some great titles will be added soon and the fact that Microsoft and all the games company's that develop for the 360 have been developing for almost a year now it means they have their teeth well sunk into this mammoth of a machine. Sony on the other hand have a rocky road ahead of them.

in the words of mark rein of epic games, "ps3 is in a better position at launch then 360 was". granted, he's probably bias with ut coming to ps3 (i know gears of war is too, but UT is his baby), but his point was that while, sure, 360 devs have been mucking about for a year, ps3 devs have had about a year mucking around with alpha, beta and in may or june this year, final devkits.

eezarthegreat wrote:

Oh....and the whole "Did you SEE the killzone video!!?"

god people..get a grip...

so far no one's been an idiot in this conversation... then you came along and added an argument that hasn't been used in months. good work.

eezarthegreat

It's not an arguement funboy it's the kind of response I get from the general public. Trying reading my posts.

projectmayhem wrote:

in the words of mark rein of epic games, "ps3 is in a better position at launch then 360 was". granted, he's probably bias with ut coming to ps3 (i know gears of war is too, but UT is his baby), but his point was that while, sure, 360 devs have been mucking about for a year, ps3 devs have had about a year mucking around with alpha, beta and in may or june this year, final devkits.



so far no one's been an idiot in this conversation... then you came along and added an argument that hasn't been used in months. good work.

iregk

projectmayhem wrote:

but my extra €200 for the PS3, that'll be a 6 or 7 year investment. €100 a year for an uncountable amount of entertainment? i am there.

I love the way at times you pull figures out of your ass!!!

So how do you make out that a 360 is a 4 year investment but the ps3 is a 7 year?

Also of all the arguments to and fro my all time fav has to be one I heard in a HMV about 8 months back between two lads about 16:
Kid 1: "ps3 is way better than the 360"
Kid 2: "why is that then?"
Kid 1: "because its got a cell"
Kid 2: "you dont even know what that is"
Kid 1: "i do its a cell" - congratulations your are now sonys bitch!

40coats

projectmayhem wrote:

well... not quite. see, as already mentioned, ps3 games are already breaking the size barrier (22G for a game still a few months off release.... resistence)

This sounds like spin to me, have they used any compression yet?

projectmayhem wrote:

in a few weeks time at TGS sony will showcase 27 playable games. i don't recall any previous launch console having this amount

You may be right here, i don't know (nobody outside or maybe even inside Sony knows yet), but if you're saying they're all launch games I'm guessing you'll be disapointed.

projectmayhem wrote:

"but the ps3 doesn't really have the power, and 360 games will look the same"
i was of the same opinion. i'm sure you'll find posts on this very forum with me saying that. i'm going to back-track. crytek are working their engine for ps3. havok are working their engine for ps3. criterion are working their engine for ps3. and so on. what's missing there? 360. 360... the console that wont be able to do dx10 effects. ps3 uses psGL, which has been updated with a whole new library which can render dx10-esque effects.

Again, you may be right here, i can't remember if half the things i read are speculation or fact but i have seen all the above mentioned with the 360 in mind also. Didn't ATI come out about a week ago and say the 360 GPU can be upgraded to dx10 through firmware, even handier then "dx10-esque effects" I'd say.

40coats

projectmayhem wrote:

in the words of mark rein of epic games, "ps3 is in a better position at launch then 360 was". granted, he's probably bias with ut coming to ps3 (i know gears of war is too, but UT is his baby), but his point was that while, sure, 360 devs have been mucking about for a year, ps3 devs have had about a year mucking around with alpha, beta and in may or june this year, final devkits.

Biased or not, he's not doing Sony any favours saying you should compare PS3 1st gen titles to 360s 2nd gen.

Vegeta

I don't particularly like MS or Sony. I like Nintendo but that's a different arguement. You cant compare a 200 euro machine to a 600 euro one

Anyway Sony may have power on their side and a blue Ray player but the PSP has UMD and more power than the DS and yet the DS is a much better console.

Power does not equal victory, software does. Sony will sell a fair few consoles off reputation alone but there is no way in hell i'll buy a console just for a Blue Ray player and nice graphics.

Hands up who owns a blue ray disc???

Hands up who owns a TV capable of displaying 1080p not 1080i now true 1080p.

My girlfriends brother wants a PS3 cos it has better graphics yet he will be playing it on a portable 21 inch TV. Ignorance of the masses is bliss

If the PS3 is a good console i'll buy it, i will not pre-order one though as i have no clue what calibre of games will come with it.

Of the 27 launch titles, how many are japan only releases. Are all 27 definitely getting released in Europe, if so I will be impressed.

projectmayhem

oo i caused a stir... again.

eezarthegreat wrote:

It's not an arguement funboy it's the kind of response I get from the general public. Trying reading my posts.

i know... try understanding mine.

40coats wrote:

This sounds like spin to me, have they used any compression yet?

that's a valid point i hadn't thought of. i'm not sure tbh... maybe they don't need to use any compression with blu-ray, or maybe it is pure spin. either way, there's 22G of space used on a blu-ray disc somewhere, and it's only got a few weeks before it has to hit Beta

40coats wrote:

You may be right here, i don't know (nobody outside or maybe even inside Sony knows yet), but if you're saying they're all launch games I'm guessing you'll be disapointed.

the majority of them will be launch titles afaik. i'm sure some will slip, but chances are they'll all come out in the "launch window", as it were

40coats wrote:

Didn't ATI come out about a week ago and say the 360 GPU can be upgraded to dx10 through firmware

here's what ATi said

iregk wrote:

So how do you make out that a 360 is a 4 year investment but the ps3 is a 7 year?

because, like i said in my original post, there's a lot of muttering going on that the next xbox will appear sooner then we all think. hell, the 360 appeared 4 years after the xbox, breaking the usual "5 year" cycle the games industry goes through. and the ps3, well sony want to keep that going for 10 years, same as ps2 and ps1 (basically when it dies they'll stop supporting it). look at xbox now, microsoft have pretty much ditched the format altgoether!

iregk wrote:

Also of all the arguments to and fro my all time fav has to be one I heard in a HMV about 8 months back between two lads about 16:
Kid 1: "ps3 is way better than the 360"
Kid 2: "why is that then?"
Kid 1: "because its got a cell"
Kid 2: "you dont even know what that is"
Kid 1: "i do its a cell" - congratulations your are now sonys bitch!

well yeah you're going to get a lot of that... which is why sony pimp the thing like mad... same way microsoft pimp xbl. i'm sure just as many kids had the same argument ending in "yeah well xbox has live!" by someone who hasn't got broadband.

Narcissus

mathias wrote:

I would agree except that you are forgetting one hugely important fact , the PS3's main competitor is the Xbox 360 , which is already a resounding success....

I doubt that very much. While it has sold well in the US and Europe, it has had poor sales in Japan.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6141064.html
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/01/17/poor-xbox-360-sales-plague-japanese-market/

Despite the high price, you would expect the PS3 to sell well there.

Also, the xbox 360 has only sold 5 million units worldwide as of June 30 2006. 4 million PS3's will be shipped by the end of this year. So it won't be that far behind.

Just looking at previous sales figures, you can see how sony dominated the market:
ps2: over 100 million
xbox: 24 million
gamecube: 21million
playstation: 100 million
n64: 32 million

Sony must be doing something right.

Vegeta asked the questions:
Hands up who owns a blue ray disc???

Hands up who owns a TV capable of displaying 1080p not 1080i now true 1080p.

Obviously very few do, but 2 or 3 years down the line maybe I will have a tv capable of displaying 1080p (when the price comes down ) and own blu-ray discs and the ps3 will be there to use these things.


I don't think ps3 will sell as well as ps2 did at first, but I think it will still outsell xbox 360 and the wii.

savemejebus

quick question, if you're comparing like and like how much cheaper is the xbox 360 once you purchase the hd dvd drive (rumoured to be about €180), wireless network adaptor (€95) and 60gb hdd than the PS3?

projectmayhem

savemejebus wrote:

quick question, if you're comparing like and like how much cheaper is the xbox 360 once you purchase the hd dvd drive (rumoured to be about €180), wireless network adaptor (€95) and 60gb hdd than the PS3?

360+hd-dvd drive alone is more expensive then the ps3.

Ciaran500

360 + HD DVD drive = €580?

Ri_Nollaig

ms will have truely shot themselves in the foot if they release the hd-dvd so that its combined price will be dearer then a ps3. id expect them to reduce the price of the console, probably bring the premium down to 300eur and then sell a combo box of the console + hd-dvd for about 450eur or whatever (just a guess...)
ms also know full well (barring a miracle) that they are still not going to knock sony of the top spot but they will increase their position more for the next gen and maybe ...just maybe, sell a few consoles in japan too

im i the only one who is getting sick to death of hearing the word "cell" ? althought i will admit post E3 it did seem to die down afar bit. But the way some people carry on, they seem to think it will create hologram graphics... ps3 will be released and will probably look around the same as the 360 and most PC games (till the PC shoots off again) have people forgotten that other elements to a computer are also incredible important such as RAM ? both consoles have 512megs, and what about the GPU ? both consoles have gpus from equals gens form ati and nvidia. oh and sony also exegerated what the "Emotion Engine" could do too back in the day. But when it all comes down to it none of this matters as Sony have created a household name with playstation and it will sell by the bucket load because of this.

shortys94

Ny idea on figures for the amount of units for Ireland on launch yet?
Hope sony provide a console with real next gen gfx, oblivion and graw are the only things ive seen which are impressive on 360.

projectmayhem

shortys94 wrote:

Hope sony provide a console with real next gen gfx, oblivion and graw are the only things ive seen which are impressive on 360.

and both are better on PC (imo)...

FYI: more condoms have been sold in the Vatigan then 360's sold in japan

conzy

lol^

Im going to stick to my usual console buying scheme, wait a year or two then get it for Christmas

But I am going to buy a Wii...

P.s Why is everyone against Blu-Ray it has nearly twice the storage, both Blu-ray and HD-DVD films will be riddled with DRM, so when the prices even out a bit, wont the PS3 and its Blu-ray drive be superior?

Ciaran500

conzymaher wrote:

P.s Why is everyone against Blu-Ray it has nearly twice the storage, both Blu-ray and HD-DVD films will be riddled with DRM, so when the prices even out a bit, wont the PS3 and its Blu-ray drive be superior?

What people are against is that we are forced to buy it to help Sony forward their blu-ray domination with no real reason for it in a games machine.

LookingFor

Ciaran500 wrote:

What people are against is that we are forced to buy it to help Sony forward their blu-ray domination with no real reason for it in a games machine.

Lots of developers would disagree, and some have been quite open and vocal about that - which says something given that usually developers are careful not to say anything politically incorrect about the console makers.

Ciaran500

LookingFor wrote:

Lots of developers would disagree, and some have been quite open and vocal about that - which says something given that usually developers are careful not to say anything politically incorrect about the console makers.

Devs are quick to praise a console but are much less likely to speak ill of it.

LookingFor

Ciaran500 wrote:

Devs are quick to praise a console but are much less likely to speak ill of it.

Which is pretty much my point. Some (brave?) developers have been openly complaining about the DVD drive in 360. Yet some people - people who probably don't really know how games are made or what they'll require - presume that Sony's inclusion of a Blu-ray drive in games machine is unwarranted.

Ciaran500

LookingFor wrote:

Which is pretty much my point. Some (brave?) developers have been openly complaining about the DVD drive in 360. Yet some people - people who probably don't really know how games are made or what they'll require - presume that Sony's inclusion of a Blu-ray drive in games machine is unwarranted.

I just looked at the evidence and I can't see any reason at all for game sizes to jump suddenly in the next 5 years. Obviously Microsoft and Nintendo think the same.

LookingFor

Ciaran500 wrote:

I just looked at the evidence and I can't see any reason at all for game sizes to jump suddenly in the next 5 years. Obviously Microsoft and Nintendo think the same.

I think that's a dangerous presumption, and I'm glad Sony isn't making it.

Wii is hardly a good comparison with 360. It's a far less capable machine, with far less RAM - it can get away with smaller capacity discs. But even Nintendo did increase the capacity for Wii compared to Gamecube (from those little discs to DVD).