Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Console wars, who is winning?
Options
-
03-03-2007 12:45am#1
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
BlitzKrieg wrote:Yes, and I feel my point still stands, that was why I didnt quote you fully just the point I was addressing which was the strength of Sony's own publishers to carry the ps3 even with lacklustre 3rd party support.
But that support is not lacklustre..BlitzKrieg wrote:i havnt shifted anything, that has actually been a comment made numerous times that sony's recent feck ups and apparent lack of touch with the reality of the changes in the game industry is reminisicent of latter day nintendo.
You were referring to an imagined, almost pure reliance on first party support, not 'feck ups' etc., which is what I took issue with.BlitzKrieg wrote:And yes I do not believe the PS3 will lack 3rd party support, but to win the 'console wars' as the OP put it, one does not have to have 3rd party support...but lead in it. the titles must hit their console first or have more features on their console which is why the next few months will be interesting because if 3rd party games continue to get better support via xbox live then it will damage the ps3's credibility
Some third party games have had better online support, but not all, and I don't expect it will be a trend that establishes itself in the longer term (at least in that I expect third party games will make as full use of the PSN as they do Live). But regardless, better online didn't help Xbox win the console wars last time around.
Also, funny that we dropped the Wii comparison here. I wonder why :rolleyes: If Sony was in Nintendo's boots with regard to online at the moment, I've no doubt we'd have a 10-pager here with crucifixions all round.BlitzKrieg wrote:6 titles, 1 of which is part of one of the most successful game series of all time , and the fact that many similar popular nintendo franchises are confirmed for release *within* this year, compared to the tight lipped approach on the detail of many of sony's big names.
Perhaps Sony should have stuck to sequels so we'd have a better idea of what to expect then
Boo! Original IP! Bad!
(Seriously though, I do agree Sony could open up on the PR side here, but all in good time I guess)BlitzKrieg wrote:On the downloadable front, while its value can be called into question there is no doubting that there is appeal in the virtual console on the Wii which has had a constant stream of quality (and not quality) classics pouring into each week, many of which are nintendo classics so the number of nintendo titles (if we are to include as you have downloadable content) on the wii has been quite high.
VC titles are not Wii titles though. They're NES/SNES/N64 etc. titles. PS3's DLC games (the ones I counted) have been developed for PS3.BlitzKrieg wrote:1. We've had 1 project turned into a demo (gran turismo)
GT5 is still coming, you know.BlitzKrieg wrote:and 1 that was going to be a killer launch title, then a AAA title showcasing the potential of sixaxis, finally being cut down into a DLC multiplayer only game.
Warhawk was never announced as a launch title, and there's nothing stopping it still making a good use of Sixaxis. The truth of the matter there is that the single player component was not coming along well. Better to release the part of it that is good than not at all, right? Without DLC the whole project might have been canned, but this way they can at least salvage part of it.
As for your history lesson, I take the point that it has been a rougher ride with PS3, but I don't think things were quite so clearly rosy at the time as you suggest. PS2 had its share of bad PR initially (not as much as PS3, but still a fair bit), surrounding everything from average launch games, to stock problems to 'jaggies' to BC problems (yes!) etc. And people were already talking about the threat from Microsoft and a revitalised Nintendo with it's "anti-N64" and high profile exclusive announcements (RE, Capcom, Namco etc.) At the time you'd have been laughed at if you suggested Sony would match the success of PSone, let alone exceed it.
Now, I'm not saying things aren't any different this time around. I'm just pointing out that it's easy to think in hindsight that Sony's success to date was as obvious as a blue sky, but that was not the case back in 1995 or 2000.BlitzKrieg wrote:And while the PS3 appears to be following the same formula the difference is sony has spent the months coming up to its launch not building up excitement but playing damage control
Yeah, but as others have said here, most of this will dissipate once the system is out. Most of the clouds over PS3 relate to things that are transient, once the system is out an established it will just come down to the software mix as usual. The one big exception is price, but even that won't be quite permanent. I think to a degree there's an issue of perception here also. All of the systems have their share of issues and challenges, not just PS3. And there's many things Sony has done right that, relative to apparent mis-steps, seem to go overlooked. But I guess that comes with the territory when you are the market leader (i.e. the 'build them up to knock them down' psychology).
Eep! This thread of conversation is getting rather unwieldy. I hope I've expressed myself decently enough.0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Advertisement