Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

In Wake of Price Drops, Further PS3 Doubts

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the clouding-the-issue dept.

PlayStation (Games) 424

Sony fans undoubtedly cheered the news of a $100 drop in price for the 60GB PS3, but even with the price drop there are several issues surrounding the console. 1up reports that the 80GB PS3 is following the lead of the EU-released PS3s by removing the Emotion engine and relying on software emulation for backwards compatibility. In an effort to decrease costs Sony continues to reduce features and develop their product. Meanwhile, Konami executive Kazumi Kitaue doesn't see much impact from the cut ... and in fact told Reuters that they're seriously considering a multi-platform release for Metal Gear Solid 4. "Kitaue said Konami may need to expand the target hardware for its blockbuster fighting game Metal Gear Solid, which has so far been developed for Sony's PlayStation machines, to other consoles in the future to recoup development costs ... The release of the latest version of Metal Gear Solid series is expected to help lure hard-core gamers to the PS3 and alleviate concerns over scarcity of strong PS3 titles. Underscoring sluggish PS3 sales and robust demand for the Wii, Nintendo shot past Sony in market value last month and bumped the Tokyo-based electronics conglomerate off the list of Japan's 10 most valuable companies."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Sweet! (1, Funny)

KillaBeave (1037250) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814223)

I was really hoping to get MGS4 for my Wii60 :)

Foot, meet Mr. Shotgun (-1, Flamebait)

Detritus (11846) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814353)

Sony certainly has developed a talent for screwing things up. At what point do they write off the PS3 and try again? I'll keep my PS2 until Sony offers a better console at a reasonable price with solid backwards compatibility.

Re:Foot, meet Mr. Shotgun (2, Insightful)

anotherone (132088) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814607)

What have they screwed up besides the unreasonably high price? I wouldn't want them to scrub the PS3 and start over, the replacement would just be MORE expensive.

Re:Foot, meet Mr. Shotgun (4, Insightful)

Kelbear (870538) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815049)

Screw-up is harsh term for the PS3 thus far. I wouldn't ding them that harshly. Once the price issue is removed, it isn't a catastrophe, it's just...not the best. It's got online and it's free, but it's just not as good. Interface has a few nice features like internet browsing, but overall, it's not as tight of an experience as Xbox360 with relation to gaming, and this is a gaming console. On the other hand, the Wii is far worse, so I wouldn't say the PS3 is doing terribly here, just not as well as the Xbox360.

Games and lost exclusives, it is indeed Sony's job to make sure the games are in place, this is their biggest problem IMO. They didn't have enough of the right games, and have lost exclusivity on some of their better ones. But this is very much a matter of opinion, and I don't see them doing terribly here, just not as good as the Xbox360 or Wii in targeting the seperate markets. The Xbox360 is a direct competitor to the PS3 in terms of the games being fielded, and it's winning, while the PS3 can't compete at all with the Wii for obvious reasons.

So while there are no catastrophic mistakes aside from the price added by packing in Blu-ray, coming in 2nd-place in all categories leaves this console without a clear picture of what it's good for and who should buy it.

If I were to pick the worst part of the PS3's performance, I would have to stretch to include the marketing. It has been pure CRAP. Truly terrible. You would almost think that they have intentionally been sabotaging themselves. Have you seen the "This is Living" campaign? Soccer fanatic lying naked except for a jockstrap masturbating to a soccer game on TV? A busty-blonde pooping in a toilet telling stories about her mother? The mercenary's clip had a superb performance by the actor, really good stuff, and unfortunately, the message was that you should go and buy a bar of chocolate. However, this was a European campaign.

The U.S version was not that much better, though it had improved later on to actually show some clips of a game (Resistance). However, it had kicked off with a plastic baby crying blood to the sounds of Armageddon in a white room. Apparently they're trying to tell you that the PS3 kills babies and will bring about the Eschaton.

But as I have said, the PS3 isn't that bad of a package aside from the pricing. The games will happen someday, and when they do the PS3 will pick up some momentum. I don't think it has any chance of catching the Xbox360 or Wii. However, the PS3 has successfully established the next media format. HD-DVD is dead in the water since there are so many more blu-ray players in the wild. And releases will go to the format with the most people who can play them. And people will buy the format with the most releases on them...etc. etc. So Sony has that at least. Whether that translates into PS3 sales later on due to Blu-ray's lead on HD-DVD is questionable though.

Re:Foot, meet Mr. Shotgun (4, Informative)

ivan256 (17499) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815579)

not the best. It's got online and it's free, but it's just not as good. Interface has a few nice features like internet browsing, but overall, it's not as tight of an experience as Xbox360 with relation to gaming, and this is a gaming console.


This sounds like the commentary of somebody who hasn't spent much time with a PS3.

I used to think exactly what you just said, but my console experience this generation was limited to the 360, and the Wii. I had only played with store demo PS3s. I recently picked up a PS3, though, because I needed a new DVD player, and I wanted the upscaling and the BluRay support, and I must say that i'm generally impressed with the interface; even the online parts. "Tight" is exactly how I would describe it, and everything about the system. It's the first console I've ever owned that doesn't feel like a toy. I was also surprised to find that the downloadable content for the system far surpassed what was available for the Wii, which basically only has "classics" (read: old games; only some are truly classic). I haven't even turned my Wii on since I bought the PS3. I was also surprised by how open the system is. Standard memory card formats, many codecs playable from standard media servers, the ability to upgrade the hard drive, the controller being a HID compliant USB games controller.... Very un-Sony-like, but also very good.

I do agree that the marketing for the system is terrible though. And the game selection is still mediocre. The price was a little steep for me, which would mean that it was really steep for a college kid, or a parent, but with the price cut it'll hurt a little less.

Re:Foot, meet Mr. Shotgun (0, Troll)

AbuBamsry (1112687) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815569)

1) High Price
2) Forcing Blu-Ray down people's throats (Beta-Max, plus HD-DVD has the porn industry behind it)
3) Lack of solid supporting games
4) Hack Job of a "Motion-sensitive" Controller (Wii-mote rip-off)
5) Cell Processor Issues (some Cells do not have all 8 cores functional, and will not be noticed until further games utilize/require all parts of the Cell)
6) Development Difficulty
7) Loss of most "exclusives" Third-Party games
8) False Sony claims (PS3 = PC replacement; PS3 will last for multiple decades; PS3 will bring massive damage to the enemy's weakspots
9) Focusing on graphics means worse game play (usually)
10) Slow sales for the start is spelling disaster already. Developers canceling Games, and moving to Wii and the 360.
There are plenty more reasons too.

Re:Foot, meet Mr. Shotgun (1)

Seumas (6865) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815545)

I was going to go buy a PS3 this week after the price drop, but then I remembered that the only game of any interest available on the PS3 is some car racing game that I can already play on the XBOX 360.

I'm happy to buy a PS3 as soon as they manage to get at least a few PS3-only games that I absolutely want to play.

But hey, it's only been nine months. You can't expect a company to release at least one good game in only nine months, right?

PS3 fans happy? (3, Insightful)

ShadowsHawk (916454) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814359)

I doubt I'd be all that pleased. To me, it would seem that I payed $100 too much since they're dropping the price so soon after launch.

Re:PS3 fans happy? (1)

Viv (54519) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814409)

OTOH, I bet they'd be less happy if Sony fails to do anything to try to increase the install base; without a bigger install base, game support will melt away, and they'll end up with an expensive brick that can play a few crappy titles.

Re:PS3 fans happy? (1)

Jaqenn (996058) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814901)

...and they'll end up with an expensive brick that can play a few crappy titles.
I've been keeping my fingers crossed that the console will tank so that I can pick one up on the cheap and make it a Linux box. I have no clue what I'm doing, so I'm unwilling to pay $X99.99 to tinker with it...but $50 for a used console from an angry ex-Sony fan? Sign me up!

Re:PS3 fans happy? (2, Insightful)

Ykant (318168) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814511)

Personally, I think it would be a great gesture on Sony's part if they comped all the early adopters controllers with the vibrating feature restored (you know it's coming).

Re:PS3 fans happy? (4, Insightful)

eln (21727) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814583)

Early adopters always have and always will pay inflated prices. You paid extra to get the PS3 at launch. If you were concerned about a hundred bucks, you should have waited until a year after launch to buy. Sure, this price cut comes a little earlier than usual, but price cuts are by no means unprecedented. As with any new technology, the prices start out very high and decrease over time.

The best case scenario for manufacturers is for price cuts to happen because economies of scale start to kick in causing manufacturing costs per unit to drop. However, it is certainly not unheard of for new technology (or any other product for that matter) to get a price cut because the sales numbers are disappointing. Next you'll be complaining that Dole owes you 10 cents because you bought a can of peaches the day before it went on sale.

Re:PS3 fans happy? (2, Funny)

GrayCalx (597428) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815183)

Dole peaches are on sale? Son of a...

Re:PS3 fans happy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19814611)

Early adopters pay the premium price. Get over it, it's always been like this for all products. If $100 is that much to you, maybe you shouldn't buying game machines in the first place. Most people spend that on beer a month FFS, or a decent family meal.

Re:PS3 fans happy? (1)

Kohath (38547) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814991)

Because usually electronics don't go down in price as time goes on?

Re:PS3 fans happy? (1)

FroBugg (24957) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815121)

It's indirectly good for the early adopters. When they lower the price, sales should go up. If sales go up, it has the potential to attract more developer attention. More developer attention means more games being released.

Re:PS3 fans happy? (1)

Applekid (993327) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815513)

PS2 had a price drop 8 months from launch. PS3: 7 months.

Of course, doesn't mean early adopters ought to be cheering in the streets... unless you consider that a price drop may mean more sales of the console. A bigger install base means there's a wider audience for your game to develop for PS3. And that's good for everyone with a PS3 including early adopters.

Nintendo Shot Past Sony? (1)

FreeKill (1020271) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814385)

For some reason that kind of surprised me. Sony is such a huge company with their music label, movies, consumer electronics, computers, video games while Nintendo is pretty much only in the gaming market. The Wii must be really selling a huge number of consoles to climb over Sony like that...

Re:Nintendo Shot Past Sony? (4, Insightful)

nelsonal (549144) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814645)

The stock markets are all about where you are going. If a company can't sell a story or concept to investors it typically trades at a fairly low multiple of earnings (these are classified as value companies). When they can they trade at a much higher multiple of earnings. As examples Apple is trading at 38x it's earnings. Dell trades at about 20 times it's earnings this year. Investors believe that Apple is more likely to grow its earnings faster than Dell will so they pay a higher price now.

The other factor that impacts market value is the total size of your profitablity. It's likely that Sony's other businesses earn less money (per dollar of sales) than consoles (in good times), so Sony's other businesses don't add as much as you might expect to its market value.

Re:Nintendo Shot Past Sony? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19814707)

Nah, its not how good the Wii is (its a great console though) but more that Sony is destroying itself.

Music, batteries, consoles, electronics.. they cant do anything right any more. The people who could have kept things going are being driven out by greedy suits.

I'm just glad I dumped all my Sony shares before the real troubles start. I know most big companies use creative accounting to hide problems but Sony is in real trouble and I seriously doubt they will survive when the Feds get involved.

Re:Nintendo Shot Past Sony? (1)

buffer-overflowed (588867) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814851)

Sony's been in decline for a while. About the only thing really keeping them in good health was the release of a Spiderman movie, their gaming division, and oddly enough their financials/insurance division. Media divisions were being buyoed for a while, but I think they're in the black now.

They're getting kicked around in consumer electronics, computers, and more recently video games... and the media divisions aren't compensating for it.

The company isn't going to fold or anything, but I'd be interested in seeing the logic behind someone ranking their stock as a "BUY".

Re:Nintendo Shot Past Sony? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19814963)

Keep in mind that Sony's other divisions are not necessarily PROFITABLE... like their TVs, Laptops, and Walkmen aren't making much bucks lately.

Second, some Nintendo properties are extremely lucrative. Pokemon is a billion dollar industry alone.

Third, speculators drive a stock price. If lots of people are wagering that nintendo will continue to do well, while other people bet that Sony will fail, they will buy and sell stock accordingly. So the market cap is decided by money managers, who are PAYING HIGHER STOCK PRICES for similar assets (office buildings, etc) at Nintendo vs Sony.

You forget... Nintendo owns Pokemon... (4, Insightful)

Fallen Kell (165468) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815041)

That is all you need to know. Think of how many billions they have made on that simple fact. It isn't like it costs $8 to print 10-20 cards. You are seeing pure profit in the card game. Not to mention the millions in TV franchise rights, movie revenues, and finally video game sales (which also happen to require requisite video game consoles which also sell at a profit unlike competitors). It has been a cash printing machine for the last 10+ years. It makes more money at less risk then any music business can.

You also forget that Nintendo owns a LOT of different IP which they license to many other entities. Their entire business model is based such that even if console tanks, they have enough cash to continue onwards. They keep their development costs low as well as their production costs and make sure they always are making a profit on each and everything they sell so they do not have to rely on future revenue from game sales to make a profit. They have had several systems which have flat out tanked in the past, but have always been able to continue through the market ups and downs (unlike some competitors, Atari, Activision, NeoGeo, SEGA... who couldn't last a single bad console release).

Re:You forget... Nintendo owns Pokemon... (2, Funny)

PixelScuba (686633) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815309)

That's not true... Atari and SEGA had numerous bad console releases they couldn't recover from from.

Metal Gear (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19814391)

The release of the latest version of Metal Gear Solid series is expected to help lure hard-core gamers to the PS3 and alleviate concerns over scarcity of strong PS3 titles.
I have to say, speaking not only as a hardcore gamer but also as a total Metal Gear fanboy who loves the story at least as much as the gameplay over the series so far, who has spent a pile of money on assorted MGS software, comics, artbooks, and other swag over the years, and who would probably do upsetting things requiring a restraining order should I ever meet Kojima in person... there is no freaking way I'm buying even a price-cut PS3 any time soon just for Metal Gear. If the new Metal Gear is really all that Sony exclusive, there's a shop enarby that'll rent me out a console for however long it takes to play through. I might even buy the PS3 disc just to fill in a spot on the shelf. But there is no other attraction at all for this particular hardcore gamer to buy a PS3.

Article is FUD (5, Insightful)

Dr Kool, PhD (173800) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814397)

Software emulation on the PS3 works just as well as the hardware emulation!! Software emulation as been in the Euro consoles since release over there. No features are being taken away at all. This is a gaming console we're talking about, not a PC. There is no disadvantage of emulating in software rather than hardware. There are no background apps that will be starved for CPU time because the emulation is in software rather than hardware!

What's with all the anti-Sony FUD lately?

Lately? (4, Insightful)

Tony (765) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814609)

What's with all the anti-Sony FUD lately?

There's been anti-PS3 FUD from day one. I don't know why. Microsoft has contributed with their multi-million dollar "grass-roots" PR campaign, but I don't think they are the sole reason. Sony *has* screwed up in a few ways (like shipping sixaxis controllers with no rumble), but considering how even a *price drop* causes the FUD to fly, it's hardly all due to their mis-steps.

I don't know why everyone is Sony-hating, but they've been doing it for a long time.

Re:Lately? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19814861)

My guess is that Microsoft and Nintendo's own "grass roots" campaigns have simply been far more successful. Anyway, the PS3 is shaping up to mimic the PS2 almost exactly. Early on a small number of games, with lots of developers complaining about the difficulty in programming for the platform, and low sales. It takes a couple of years for things to get going and developers to figure it out, but with the amazing horsepower inside the PS3, I fully expect to see Sony kicking some serious ass in the next couple of years as the XBOX360 and the Wii start to creak due to their fundamentally lacklustre architectures.

Re:Lately? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19815393)

LOL. We have an AC complaining about the Microsoft and Nintendo astroturfing (never mind that there isn't any evidence that either company has an astroturf campaign) who's clearly a Sony astroturfer - and there is evidence that Sony has been astroturfing [google.com] . Remember the "all I want for Christmas is a PSP" blog? And that UK Sony astroturf blog? Then there's this Sony astroturfer on Slashdot [slashdot.org] . (Seriously, go through his comment history, it should remove any doubt.) That Google search I linked lists tons more Sony astroturf attempts.

What's the saying? You always expect your enemies to do what you'd do or something like that?

And to response to the Sony astroturfer that started this thread, software emulation will never be as good as running the original hardware. NES emulators have had a good 25 years or more of development, and they still fail to completely emulate the original NES. SNES emulators, even 10 years after the last SNES game was released, still fail to emulate the entire SNES catalog. And that's on relatively simplistic hardware like the SNES!

Imagine how long it'll be until software emulation manages to properly emulate the PS2. It'll never do as good a job - it simply can't. It's not FUD, it's reality.

Re:Lately? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19815027)

I don't know why everyone is Sony-hating, but they've been doing it for a long time.
* Lik-Sang
* Rootkit
* Poorly built products (Especially compared to the quality of products they were producing in the 80's)
* Still charging high prices for the poorly built products. If Sony's quality was still top notch, they could charge those prices with no problem. Now they're still charging more for poor quality products, riding on the reputation that they built a few decades ago.
* Arrogance (People will buy the PS3 even without any games available, People don't know what a rootkit is so it doesn't matter to them, etc...)

Re:Lately? (0)

ivan256 (17499) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815117)

* Plays4Sure
* Windows Monopoly
* Funding the SCO lawsuit
* Bullying hardware vendors to not allow dual booting
* Windows Genuine Advantage
* Patent trolling (Funding immersion's suit against Sony, amongst dozens of others)
* Charging high prices for poorly built products
* Advertising in a for-pay online service
* Red ring of death

And speaking of not knowing what a rootkit is, you're one to talk, seeing as you're spouting the same nonsense from back (5 minutes after the story broke) when people changed "Used rootkit-like technology to hide their DRM software" to "Rootkit".

Pot, meet kettle.

In contrast, Sony has opened up the PS3 to Linux installations and non-proprietary memory formats, standard DLNA media services, user upgradeable storage, etc... But people are willing to forgive Microsoft their decades of (and continued) abuse of the consumer and are unwilling to forgive Sony their recent missteps. Funny, really.

Re:Lately? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19815203)

And all this changes what sony has been doing... how? Just because MS does stupid this as well does not mean that sonys PS3 and company image does not suck latly.

Re:Lately? (1)

ivan256 (17499) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815693)

It doesn't change what Sony has been doing. It merely frames the question.

Clearly the original poster was wondering why everybody is hating Sony, and this forum has simultaneously turned into a Microsoft love-fest.

My point was that, yes, there are plenty of good reasons to be upset with Sony, but that doesn't mean we should hop in bed with Microsoft instead.

(Yeah, yeah, Nintendo, etc... I have a Wii, and it's great, but it's like a toy you have along side your real next-gen gaming system. Other than going on sale around the same time as the 360 and the PS3, it's really not in the same league. Both in terms of graphics and network functionality. The answer to "What system do you have?" is going to be "I have a Wii and [insert other system]". Which one becomes the other system is the interesting question.)

Re:Lately? (4, Insightful)

_xeno_ (155264) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815433)

[List of evil things Sony has done]
[List of evil things Microsoft has done]

Gee - I wonder if this might be why I currently own a Wii, and not a PS3 or an Xbox 360[1]. Of course, Nintendo has been evil in the past, but they seem to have moved beyond that after having it blow up in their face.

It's not this is a war between only the Xbox 360 and the PS3 - there is another console to consider.

[1] Actually, it's not. The Wii has the games I'm interested in, and neither the Xbox 360 and PS3 do. But in any case...

Re:Lately? (1)

mrchaotica (681592) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815165)

I don't know why everyone is Sony-hating, but they've been doing it for a long time.

The PS3 isn't the only thing Sony screwed up. Remember the rootkit?

Personally, I was hating Sony before it was popular -- the company's infatuation with stupid proprietary formats (MemoryStick, UMD, MiniDisc, etc.) was enough to do it for me.

Re:Lately? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19815743)

Idiots like you were probably moaning about Sony doing a 3.5" diskette, when we have perfectly good 5.25" diskettes, and 8" offerings before them. Morons like you probably thought that CD was pointless too. Just because some new formats fail on what is generally budget products, it doesn't mean companies shouldn't keep trying new things. People like you probably moaned at Philip doing compact cassettes, as they're clearly inferior to every other magnetic tape system around at the time too. Portable cassette players? Nah, Sony Walkman was a failure too and didn't set of a massive portable music device drive, indirectly saving Apple from oblivion.

Rootkit? Who gives a fsck! They got slapped for a huge fine, and hardly anyone was affected. Bitch about MS and their fscking pathetic security model that allows spambot flood the net, costing home users and business billions each year trying to combat the crap.

Re:Lately? (4, Insightful)

SydShamino (547793) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815233)

The first anti-Sony rants specifically concerning the PS3 that I saw on Slashdot were in March-April 2006, when Sony announced the price for the PS3, and SCEI president Ken Kutaragi made multiple brash statements to support its price. Posters mocked the hubris.

http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/05/12/ 1738239 [slashdot.org]

Articles like this followed:
http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/05/15/ 1745252 [slashdot.org]

Before that time, most of the PS3 posts I remember regarded how cool the cell processor was supposed to be, and how great it would make PS3 games look and feel.

This of course ignores the rootkit fiasco, and the general hatred of Sony that resulted from it, as Sony stepped out from behind the cover of the RIAA to be in the spotlight as a big bad music label. And it ignores people upset about the Blu-Ray / HD-DVD war and how Sony's 30-year plan to own its own formats has screwed consumers time and time again. And how Sony's content divisions have taken control of the company, rendering products made by their (previously high-quality) hardware divisions crippled, like my otherwise very nice Sony plasma TV that can't play Sony Pictures' movies released on Sony Blu-Ray discs in a Sony Blu-Ray player without downscaling the graphics, because I "might try to copy them".

Re:Lately? (3, Insightful)

MeanderingMind (884641) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815249)

It's a fundamental issue of respect. Sony's PR department has been incompetant, and displayed on a consistant basis the attitude that we, the loyal gamers were sheep for them to shear at their leisure. Over time they improved somewhat, but there was a long period following E3 2006 where nothing that came out of Sony's marketing department was anything but an insult to the intelligence of those reading.

Gamers, apparently, have a strong ability to bear grudges. While at this time Sony has definately improved their PR, that means diddly squat to a lot of gamers who are still angry about how they were treated last year.

It doesn't help that Sony hasn't explicitly stated they screwed up their PR, although at this point I'm not sure that would be enough to calm many people.

Re:Article is FUD (1)

ulysses38 (309331) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814623)

the disadvantage is loss of backwards compatability with ps2 games. just like the xbox 360. this can be solved with firmware updates, but software can't get the same level of compatability as the actual hardware on board.

Re:Article is FUD (1)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815055)

software can't get the same level of compatability as the actual hardware on board

That's right. Hardware is fashioned from semi-sentient fairy dust.

In our world, though, hardware is an expression of an algorithm, said algorithm being implementable in software as well. Haven't you ever used Qemu or any number of video game emulators? It's quite possible to get exact emulation down. It may not be easy and I'd hate to be the one that had to do it, but that doesn't mean it can't be done.

Re:Article is FUD (1)

Khisanth Magus (1090101) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815269)

I have yet to find a video game console emulator that can emulate 100% of the games on that console to 100% their normal performance. There is always SOMETHING that isn't quite right. Some of these have been developed for over a decade, and still they aren't perfected. If all the games for a system were made exactly the same way, it would be easy. But until you are able to get all game developers to do things exactly the same, it will require constant tweaking to get compatability through software emulation.

Re:Article is FUD (1)

ravenshrike (808508) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815657)

However, this isn't because the emulator doesn't run according to spec. This generally is because various developers used programming tricks to generate effects that were outside of spec.

Re:Article is FUD (1)

JordanL (886154) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814687)

Lately? Anti-Sony orgies are one thing that both Slashdot and Digg do with equal prepubescent ferver, and have for months.

Re:Article is FUD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19814863)

Soo... screw the PS3 with software emulation for PS2 and 1 titles, I'll buy a 360 that has software emulation for Xbox games instead..

Seems like more FUD to me, no real mention as to the fact that (for now) the PS3 is #1 on amazon.com:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/videogames/re f=pd_ts_vg_nav/104-3196751-9419921?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKI KX0DER&pf_rd_s=left-1&pf_rd_r=1Y0CG236NWPTM8FF9HH1 &pf_rd_t=2101&pf_rd_p=221591101&pf_rd_i=home [amazon.com]

Sure it won't last forever like that, but they sure as hell ain't end of the world.

Software emulation as good as hardware? Yah right. (5, Informative)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814881)

Software emulation on the PS3 works just as well as the hardware emulation!!

Not according to Sony's own compatability list for the EU PS3 [playstation.com] . While many games work fine, there are also a significant number in the lowest-score "noticeable issues" category. Also note the caveats, like how you should skip optional FMV sequences and how you shouldn't use network modes due to graphical corruption.

The fact is without even the specifics it should be obvious that software emulation will not work just as well as hardware emulation. Which isn't emulation at all, it's hardware compatability, it's physically utilizing the original PS2 hardware that the game was originally designed to run on. With the hardware "emulation", you basically have an actual PS2 to run your PS2 games on. The Emotion Engine is not simple, and creating a perfectly compatible software version that exactly matches not only every bit of functionality but also the relative timing of operations which many games depend on is very difficult and not something that is going to be made perfect. They will necessarily have to go on a case-by-case basis finding games that depend on a particular quirk of the Emotion Engine and fix them and issue patches.

I'm not saying the software emulation is crap, and if the games you want to play are well supported according to the compatability list then you should be good to go. I am saying that the switch from hardware compatability to software emulation has hurt backward compatability. That's not FUD, it's a fucking fact. Which should be obvious, because before the EU PS3 release they didn't even have a compatability list because there was no point.

The models with the chip are using software emu... (1, Informative)

ivan256 (17499) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815025)

Since the 1.8 firmware, even the models that have the hardware emulation have been using the software emulator if you enable upscaling. Yet the emulation is still better than acceptable. Certainly, I prefer it to my non-upscaled actual PS2.

But you should swear about it, and turn it into a huge issue, and pretend that it's worse than the competition, etc... Go right ahead. It's what we expect from the Slashdot 360 Fanboy, er.... Slashdot Games section.

Re:Software emulation as good as hardware? Yah rig (1)

crossmr (957846) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815275)

Heck, Legend of Dragoon is a PS1 title and is given their lowest rating for playing in software mode.

Re:Article is FUD (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19815057)

It's called Nintendot. Are you new here or something?

This might not help (0)

Jaaay (1124197) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814401)

outside of Japan it seems most people prefer the 360 with the online services but it's going to end up as a question of who can lose more money for years on end with both consoles posting huge losses. I really doubt a 20% drop is going to make people who would otherwise buy a wii/360 buy a ps3. It's still a lot of money and for some reason people who might spend $500 on a phone like to get up in arms and principled about consoles that cost this amount of money.

Re:This might not help (1)

Dr Kool, PhD (173800) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814577)

The price cut will definitely steal buyers away from the 360. Why buy a 360 for $400 (or $480) when you can get a PS3 with free online, HDMI (only 360 Elite has HDMI), Blu-Ray player, free online forever and a free MMO forever (Home). In addition there's no big quality problem with the PS3. Unlike the 360, the PS3 is well-engineered and doesn't suffer from widespread overheating problems. Yes, M$ upped their warranty, but sending your console away to get fixed is still downtime.

Re:This might not help (1)

MeanderingMind (884641) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815385)

This will help when it comes to anyone who hasn't bought a PS3 or 360 yet, I'm just not sure how much going to impact people who have already bought a 360. There isn't much reason to own both, as the exclusive are (for the most part) rather similar in genre and nature. Barring games like Dead Rising and MGS4, the exclusives are mostly analogous.

Re:This might not help (1)

Eponymous Crowbar (974055) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815465)

If you want to buy a console to play Blu-Ray movies, then your argument holds water. If you wanted it to play games, you'd happily buy a 360 and some games or extra controllers instead of the PS3. On top of that, expect lower prices for the 360 soon, and an improved manufacturing process that will help lower the defect rate. I am interested in adding a PS3 to my 360, Wii and older consoles but I honestly can't think of a single PS3 exclusive that I want to play. I will probably wait for the next price cut, in the hopes that some AAA titles will come out between now and then.

Catch-22 Sucks for Sony (3, Insightful)

kannibal_klown (531544) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814405)

It's kind of like a Catch-22, with Sony stuck in the middle.

Price flamewars aside, the main issue with the PS3 is its library isn't really spectacular. Without a decent library (either general or exclusive titles) it is not going to sell well, even if it was the exact price of an XBox 360.

So, Konami is thinking about not making MGS exclusive to the PS3 because the sales have been poor.

But the sales won't increase without publishers hitching their star to the PS3 as exclusive titles (even if it's just exclusive for a year or so).


Then again, I don't see why 3rd party publishers go exclusive anymore. If you can increase sales by 50% by simply recoding an existing product then go for it. Note: I'm a software developer and I know very well that's not as easy as it sounds. But it's obviously possible asince it's being done now (even across the Wii and the 360, which are as different as you can get).

Re:Catch-22 Sucks for Sony (2, Insightful)

Dr Kool, PhD (173800) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814459)

The game library of the PS3 is small compared to the 360 because it shipped a year after the 360. Compare the library of the PS3 to what the Wii has for a fair comparison -- PS3 has far more games. This "problem" with the PS3 will be fixed shortly, there are a bunch of great exclusives just around the corner. MGS, Gran Turismo, Heavenly Sword, Hot Shots Golf, Little Big Planet, etc, etc.

PS3 is doing just fine for a console that shipped only seven months ago.

Re:Catch-22 Sucks for Sony (2, Insightful)

Sciros (986030) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814703)

It's doing "alright," but the Wii was launched at the same time and it's doing MUCH better.

The sheer number of games doesn't matter. The quality of the games (and marketability, etc. of course) is what makes the difference. A console can have only 10 games and still be fine if those 10 games are so awesome that everyone buys all 10. Halo 3 for MS is better than 20 crap RPG games for Sony that will barely sell. Likewise FFXIII and FFXIII Versus will do more for PS3 than 20 rubbish sports games on 360. Indeed, you are 100% correct when you mention "great exclusives," because those are key to a console's success and legacy.

And nowadays, doing "alright" for a console just isn't good enough because when these "exclusives" end up costing as much as they do, the potential sales on that console simply aren't enough to make the game profitable. Selling as many units as the PS2 did in 7 months, or even a bit more, just isn't good enough considering how much more expensive PS3 games are to produce than first-generation PS2 games were.

Re:Catch-22 Sucks for Sony (1)

Dr Kool, PhD (173800) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814903)

I agree that AAA exclusives are very important for a console. So let's look at the AAA exclusives for PS3: Resistance, Motorstorm, Ninja Gaiden Sigma. Now the AAA exclusives for PS3: Zelda, Wii Sports(!?!), Wario Ware (?????). Those last two are reaches in my opinion, especially Wii Sports which is fun but isn't a full-length game.

If you look at the Wii library against the PS3 library you'll see the same number of great games, yet PS3 has a whole lot more okay to good games, and a whole lot more games period. So while people complain that the PS3 is lacking games, the Wii is starving for games. Yet people keep buying and praising the Wii, buyers don't seem to care.

I think in a few months the PS3 "no games" rap will have subsided once this next line of exclusives hits the market.

Re:Catch-22 Sucks for Sony (1)

Winckle (870180) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814995)

You missed off Super Paper Mario, and motorstorm isn't actually that good.

Re:Catch-22 Sucks for Sony (1)

Evanisincontrol (830057) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815153)

You don't think Mario Party 8 is an important exclusive for Ninetendo? 'cause I sure as hell do, and so do at least two other people I know who bought a Wii specifically to play Mario Party 8.

Re:Catch-22 Sucks for Sony (1)

ivan256 (17499) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815251)

I'd be excited about it if they got online play working.

Otherwise it's catering to the 9-12 year old market, and the College Drinking Game crowd. Nintendo will exhaust their sales potential in those markets very soon.

Regardless, the reviews are as close to awful as review sites are willing to give.

Re:Catch-22 Sucks for Sony (1)

SuiteSisterMary (123932) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815197)

So let's look at the AAA exclusives for PS3: Resistance, Motorstorm, Ninja Gaiden Sigma.

I keep seeing Ninja Gaiden Sigma referred to as a 'AAA exclusive,' or similar wording, when it is just a port of Ninja Gaiden Xbox, with a few new weapons and moves thrown in, and Rachel as a playable character.

Re:Catch-22 Sucks for Sony (1)

Sciros (986030) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815341)

Well, if you haven't played NG or NG Black and you're considering a PS3 for whatever reasons, then NG Sigma is most certainly a must-buy (I'd say just like Zelda: TP is a must-buy for Wii despite being on the Gamecube). It's a great game, despite not being new at all.

Though buying an original Xbox, NG Black, and a new set of tires makes more sense ^^

Re:Catch-22 Sucks for Sony (1)

buffer-overflowed (588867) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815551)

And why would you include Sigma in a comparitive list, but then not include the Wii RE4 port?

Re:Catch-22 Sucks for Sony (1)

Sciros (986030) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815283)

Ah, well I can't disagree on the lack of good games on the Wii right now. Wii sports is bundled and it's something I'd rather them take out so I could save some money when I *do* buy the system. Zelda is IMO better on GCN, and certainly not much worse (not $250 worse that's for sure).

On the other hand, those AAA titles you listed for PS3 are spanked by 360's current lineup, which might be one of the biggest problems the lineup hasn't helped the PS3 much. Resistance was almost universally rated "good but worse than Gears of War." Motorstorm looks cool but racing folks probably look(ed) towards 360 for Forza 2 and Project Gotham Racing. And NG Sigma, while A MASTERPIECE (yes I love NG and consider it the best game of the last generation), is less of a jump from its predecessor (NG Black) than NG Black was from the original NG. So... it's *definitely* not worth the price of a new console.

So, the "no games" rap is deserved (for BOTH PS3 and Wii) I think. And I'm not so confused about why the PS3 isn't selling with regards to that, I'm actually more confused about why the Wii is impossible to find in stores when there's diddly squat to play on it. Though it's a bit cheaper than some of the competition (PS2 is still in the game), I can't see it as an investment from a gamer's perspective until something like Smash Bros hits shelves.

Too much concentration on the testosterone market (2, Interesting)

LordRobin (983231) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815317)

So let's look at the AAA exclusives for PS3: Resistance, Motorstorm, Ninja Gaiden Sigma. Now the AAA exclusives for PS3: Zelda, Wii Sports(!?!), Wario Ware (?????).
Note that all three of the PS3 titles listed appeal primarily to young adult males. While the Wii titles appeal to kids, older adults, and women.

This is why Nintendo is winning this war, folks. Sony and Microsoft have narrowed their focus to the testosterone-junkie market, leaving all the little kids, old folks, and females to be served by the DS and Wii.

My wife is the big gamer in our house. She owns almost console ever made. Yet until Ratchet & Clank comes out, there won't be anything on the PS3 to grab her attention.

------RM

Re:Catch-22 Sucks for Sony (1)

buffer-overflowed (588867) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815511)

I agree that AAA exclusives are very important for a console. So let's look at the AAA exclusives for PS3: Resistance, Motorstorm, Ninja Gaiden Sigma. Now the AAA exclusives for PS3: Zelda, Wii Sports(!?!), Wario Ware (?????). Those last two are reaches in my opinion, especially Wii Sports which is fun but isn't a full-length game.

Motorstorm is garbage. Excite truck, for all its warts(learning curve for it's control scheme is why it's scored so low) is a better arcade racer, and it includes colors other than brown. I don't see how I can take you seriously when you left off Virtual Fighter 5 in a PS3 list(it's exclusive for now...), and included Motorstorm. Especially when you pop in Sigma and then leave off RE4.

If you look at the Wii library against the PS3 library you'll see the same number of great games, yet PS3 has a whole lot more okay to good games, and a whole lot more games period. So while people complain that the PS3 is lacking games, the Wii is starving for games. Yet people keep buying and praising the Wii, buyers don't seem to care.

23 Wii to 20 PS3 > 70% (Good->Great) for all games with over 20 reviews.
30 to 26 PS3 @ > 60% (OK), same criteria.
34 to 29 PS3 @ > 50% (Playable), same criteria.

I'll give the PS3 +1 for Sigma. So 23 to 21.

If we knock off all the sports games(many of which, like Madden, scored better with motion controls) from the PS3 lineup, we're left with 10 games. 3 of which are FPSes. 2 are arcade racers. 1 is a fighter. 1 is Oblivion. 1 is Sigma. And the other two are Marvel Ultimate Alliance, and an almost straight port with some minor enhancements of a PS2 GTA clone(which the wii version is better than).

The Wii genre coverage is RIDICULOUSLY superior(there are things in there that don't even traditionally classify, like Elebits and Trauma Center), and it has far more exclusives.

You are, quite simple, very, very wrong.

Re:Catch-22 Sucks for Sony (1)

MeanderingMind (884641) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815523)

It's a matter of taste.

For someone like me Resistance, Motorstorm and Ninja Gaidin are dubious exclusives. They're either genres with entries spanning back into the depths of time, or the third iteration of a game I've beaten about 7 times. That's not how it is for you, hence we discover the obvious that people are different.

What we find is that what ultimately brings the most people to a given console are unique games. Katamari Damancy, Guitar Hero, and Wii Sports are these kinds of games. They are practically genres unto themselves. As polished and well made as Metroid Prime: Corruption, Halo 3, or Resistance might be, they don't bring the family/friends together the same way.

For now, all three consoles could stand to have larger libraries. When MGS4 and Brawl arrive on their respective platforms, we'll probably see the end of the library lethargy.

Re:Catch-22 Sucks for Sony (5, Insightful)

hardburn (141468) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815185)

PS3 worldwide sales are so far following the sales trends of the GameCube [vgchartz.com] , with the PS3 getting a small boost from the EU launch. It also follows pretty close to the worldwide XBox sales, which only had a large market share in the US and ignored everywhere else. For US numbers only [vgchartz.com] , the PS3 is selling slightly below the GameCube--the also-ran of the last generation in terms of market penetration.

The PS3 is competing against a console with a year's head start to break 10m units, and another console that has a wicked upwards surge and will probably break 10m units within the next few months. Sony has a lot of work to do to avoid becoming the also-ran of this generation. With the number of exclusives moving multiplatform, it may already be too late to retake momentum.

Re:Catch-22 Sucks for Sony (1)

harlows_monkeys (106428) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815355)

Compare the library of the PS3 to what the Wii has for a fair comparison -- PS3 has far more games

It does? Amazon lists more Wii games than PS3 games. Gamestop does list more PS3 than Wii games, but only about 10% more, not "far more".

Re:Catch-22 Sucks for Sony (1)

*weasel (174362) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814657)

Really, the only problem of the PS3 is the price. That's it.
There's just a limit to how many people are going to shell out 500/600 for a game console.
They sold a ton of PS3s at launch and they hit that limit.

That's why this price cut is so mind-boggling -- it just brings the current price back inline with what was offered at launch. To gamers, the difference between the original 500/600 dollar SKUs just wasn't relevant. If there was anyone out there who was willing to pay $500 for a PS3, they already have one.

The games library isn't a real big problem, because the PS3 will get all the major cross-platform titles anyway. People would buy the PS3 over the 360 simply because they likely have a ton of PS2 games and wouldn't mind a blu-ray player. They just won't do it while there's a $200 price differential.

Price Drop != Cheaper PS3 (5, Insightful)

Alaren (682568) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814463)

As I noted in the "price drop" discussion, this is an awfully funny way to drop the price. As the PS3 was available at launch for $499, it might be better to call this a "model upgrade." You get a few more features now than you would have on launch, but you still can't go out and buy a PS3 for any cheaper than you could on launch day. I remember reading something around the time Sony announced their pricing that showed $200 or $250 as the historic "sweet spot" for console launches and adjusted for inflation found that the sweet spot was around $400.

Which means Nintendo came in below target, Microsoft managed to subsidize (initially) enough to keep under target, and Sony has announced a "price drop" that would have put their 20GB model about where it needs to be... except that it's no longer offered, so you still have to pay $499 to get the cheapest PS3 available.

Re:Price Drop != Cheaper PS3 (0)

Dr Kool, PhD (173800) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814527)

No, it's a price cut. The vast majority of PS3 buyers chose the 60GB version because of the (incorrect) assumption that the 20GB was a gimped console. New buyers will now save $100. Smart buyers will still be able to buy a 20GB console, which are selling for around $400 new or $350 second-hand on Ebay right now.

A price cut is a price cut, even if you cover your eyes and plug your ears and scream "la-la-la-la-la I can't hear you".

Re:Price Drop != Cheaper PS3 (1)

techiemikey (1126169) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814789)

And the glass is only half empty if you drank the water first, right?

Re:Price Drop != Cheaper PS3 (3, Insightful)

trdrstv (986999) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815423)

No, it's a price cut. The vast majority of PS3 buyers chose the 60GB version because of the (incorrect) assumption that the 20GB was a gimped console. New buyers will now save $100. Smart buyers will still be able to buy a 20GB console, which are selling for around $400 new or $350 second-hand on Ebay right now.

A price cut is a price cut, even if you cover your eyes and plug your ears and scream "la-la-la-la-la I can't hear you".

Ok, Sony Started out with 2 versions selling at $499 and $599. Now they have 2 versions selling at $499 and $599. The feature spec is now different, but how is that a price cut? For the sake of comparison let's take Sony out of the picture and compare Cameras.

Last year you could buy a 5.1 Megapixel camera solo for $199, or a 5.1 Megapixel camera with a bag, & extra batteries for $249.

This year you can get a a 5.1 Megapixel camera with a bag, & extra batteries for $199, or you can get a a 5.1 Megapixel camera with a bag, extra batteries and a memory card for $249 and they no longer sell the 5.1 Megapixel camera by itself.

You are getting more for your money, but at the core you're buying a camera at the same price as was offered last year.

Re:Price Drop != Cheaper PS3 (1)

MeanderingMind (884641) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815549)

The price of entry for the average Joe looking for a PS3 is still $500. While he's getting more for his money, the minimum amount of cash he needs hasn't changed.

Some people will get ebayed PS3s cheaper, but that isn't the primary method by which any console is bought (save for the first 24 hours after a launch).

Whether or not (1, Insightful)

Bullfish (858648) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814585)

People think the PS3 is trash or the best thing ever, it is plain that the Sony braintrust has to do a serious rethink as to their marketing, packaging, partnerships and PR in regards to their console. A $100 price drop isn't going to help their cause much. They gave Nintendo a lesson back in PS1 vs N64 days, a lesson they seem to have forgotten.

Re:Whether or not (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19815075)

You're right, a $100 price drop isn't going to help, so they should just never drop the price at all. ANY cut is good for people that are considering buying it, 100 isn't so insignificant (1/6). What do you expect them to wait until they can afford 150-250 drop?

But I don't WANNA PS3! (1, Insightful)

SparkyFlooner (1090661) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814599)

Last generation, the XBox was my "Don't WANNA" console. I didn't want to buy it, but I had to for Ninja Gaiden. So I basically spent hundreds of dollars for one game, and I only played Halo 2 on it after that. (Actually, my computer was my primary game machine, but out of the consoles, my PS2 got used the most, primarily as a DVD player.)

I'm not doing that ever again. (Especially now that I'm married and my wife would kill me.)

So this generation the PS3 has become my "Don't WANNA" console. I don't wanna have to buy it, and I probably won't, even if Final Fantasy XIII remains exclusive to it. There are no games that will make me spend the ungodly amount of money I'd have to drop on the PS3.

I have the HD-DVD add-on for my 360, and in retrospect I think it was a bad purchase. Thanks to the HD war, not all the movies I want to see are available for HD-DVD, and I find that when I'm forced to resort to regular DVD...I don't really care. I'm just as happy either way, to tell the truth (with my 1080p tv). I could've and should've waited, and I can tell you from experience, HD movies aren't worth a 200 dollar player right now...and they CERTAINLY aren't worth a 500 dollar player.

Re:But I don't WANNA PS3! (1)

goatpunch (668594) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814899)

I have the HD-DVD add-on for my 360, and in retrospect I think it was a bad purchase.
Buy 'Planet Earth' on HD-DVD, it's the reason 1080p TVs were invented.

Re:But I don't WANNA PS3! (2, Insightful)

SparkyFlooner (1090661) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815023)

I'm not saying a 1080p movie isn't impressive looking. I'm saying that at some point I forget to notice how 'crisp' it looks and start paying attention to the events unfolding in the movie.

When you first get an HD player, you get HD movies just to see how they look. Hell, I would've watched The Adventures of Hanna Montana in HD if it was the only thing available at the time. But as time passes, you stop being hyper-aware of how it looks and start going back to just watching a movie.

I guess my ultimate point is that the difference between HD and standard def doesn't change my enjoyment of a movie. A good HD movie would've been just as good in standard def.

Re:But I don't WANNA PS3! (1)

GrayCalx (597428) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815265)

Well I disagree with the point about a movie being just as good in either format. If you take a movie I love, lets say Batman Begins, I'd much rather watch it on HD-DVD than regular DVD (be it upconverted or not).

That being said I agree with your original point. I bought the hd add-on for my 360 (got a good deal, so theres that). But now I'll be watching some regular DVD that isn't out in HD, and I'll just stare at my tv stand, with my $100 hd add-on and my 5 hd-dvds and wonder if all of that was really worth the $260 or whatever I paid.

Re:But I don't WANNA PS3! (1)

goatpunch (668594) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815315)

I agree- once you get into a good movie you forget how fancy the picture looks- a good movie on a 12" Black & White TV is still a good movie.

But 'Planet Earth' in HD is different- every time you see a panoramic view of an African plain with clearly identifiable animals moving all over it, or a time lapse satellite shot of a weather system moving around the curve of the Earth, you're reminded how stunning the picture is.

I personally find that sport in HD, 360 games, and 'Planet Earth' are the three things my 1080p set does best- I bought a couple of movies on HD-DVD and as you said, I didn't really enjoy them any more than I would have on DVD.

Not so sure about that (1, Insightful)

alvinrod (889928) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814621)

I think people really like to rag on the PS3 for not being vary successful, but it seems to me that it's not doing terribly bad. If you look at sales numbers [vgchartz.com] and align the launches of the PS3 and the Xbox 360, the PS3 is more or less on the same track that the Xbox 360 was on.

If you check Amazon [amazon.com] you can see that the PS3 moved up to the number one selling item in the video game section. I think it was substantially lower (If I recall correctly it was 28th) before this from what I've been reading on other sites.

With E3 and the possibilities of some big ticket games being shown, It's possible for Sony to pick up even more steam. They've done a lot to shoot themselves in the foot, but I think they can still make a decent showing this round. Right now it's outpacing the Gamecube and the original Xbox, both of which were wonderful systems with great exclusives. I think Sony is given a lot more crap than they deserve.

Re:Not so sure about that (1)

SuiteSisterMary (123932) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815141)

Ah, but don't forget, the 360 was launched in November, IIRC, and there were supply problems until at least March, if not all the way into summer, of the next year; PS3s seem to have been in easy supply since launch.

Platform Longevity (0)

rockmuelle (575982) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814627)


It's worth keeping in mind that the Wii and 360 are already maxed out from a development perspective (ignoring the Wiimote, of course). The (mostly) standard hardware matches the PC model, making it easy for developers to fully utilize the systems.

The PS3, on the other hand, is a radically different hardware platform that developers are only now starting to fully understand. The first generation games only scratched the surface of the PS3's potential. The second round of games will be much better, but the real fun will start once the developers have had a few rounds to learn the ins and outs of the Cell.

So, a slow start is fine for Sony as long as the developers continue to learn how to use the Cell. In 2 years, PS3 games will still look "cutting edge" while 360 games will starting showing the age of that platform.

Of course, Sony could still blow it on the online/casual games. But, at least the linux distro is giving everyone a chance to play around with the Cell.

-Chris

Re:Platform Longevity (1)

BoberFett (127537) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814853)

Bullshit. The Xbox was basically a PC, and compare the games from the beginning of it's life to the end. Vast difference in quality. I have no doubt that 360 games will continue to look better as time progresses. The PS3 may in fact have more grunt than the 360 (though from what I've read, the 360 sounds to have the better graphics subsystem while the PS3 seems to have a far more powerful CPU) but to say that the Wii and 360 have already maxed out on their graphics is asinine.

Re:Platform Longevity (3, Funny)

Floritard (1058660) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814893)

Yea guys. The Cell processor is pure chocolate magic. Don't forget that. Just like the Emotion Engine before it. Remember the raw emotion that little baby pumped out! It was crazy town. Wait, what?

Re:Platform Longevity (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19815135)

Do a bit of digging for the technical specs on the PS3 and 360. You'll find that the 360's graphics hardware is in fact superior to the PS3's, and its memory architecture is more flexible.

Developers will come to know the power of the PS3, true, but they'll also come to know its limitations. And in these days of tightening deadlines and limited budgets, it is unlikely that many developers will even complete the learning process.

The console death spiral: gamers aren't buying, so developers hold back. Devs hold back, so gamers hold back even more. And so on...

The PS3 has begun its descent already. It will take a lot of time, money, effort and random luck for Sony to dig it out. It's not impossible, but it's also unlikely. Good luck...

Re:Platform Longevity (1)

DeepHurtn! (773713) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815329)

One major flaw in your reasoning is that developers will have no incentive to invest the resources to "learn the ins and outs of the Cell" if there's not a huge install base. Those AAA titles are fuckin'*expensive*, especially on strange ass hardware no one's used before. So no, Sony can't really afford a slow start. Slow start = small install base = no return on expensive AAA titles. For example, in this very article Konami is talking about making MGS non-exclusive. Do you really think cross-platform games will be super-optimized for the Cell? Why would any company invest tonnes of money in developing for the system with by *far* the smallest install base and by *far* the lowest sales numbers?

And besides, the overwhelming success of the Wii should show that, despite what a certain type of elitist gamer would have everyone believe, *most people don't really care about "cutting edge graphics"*!!!

We get it already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19814651)

PS3 bad, 360 good, and Wii is mana from heaven. Did I miss anything slashdot?

Talk about pessimism... (-1)

amrust (686727) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814677)

Sony announces a $100 price drop on the PS3, and here's an article that *still* manages a way to see the negative side of it? Amazing.

But it did take them two days to write it up. Such slackers. They'll never get their free Wii, with that kind of attitude.

Less Incentive to Buy (2, Insightful)

Silentknyght (1042778) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814689)

Wasn't the emotion engine supposed to be the next thing since sliced bread? How will removing something powerful make your system sell more? Sure, it will cut down in price, but Sony already took the "Expensive System, sure, but look at the power!" stance. If they buckle on it, I predict they'll continue to crumble.



At any rate, for myself, selling me a crappier system for $100 less is worse than selling me the real deal for the original price.

Re:Less Incentive to Buy (2, Informative)

pl1ght (836951) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814971)

Today the PS3 is the #1 selling system on Amazon. Futureshop.CA reports they are sold out, and Best Buy.ca was also sold out at one point this morning. It may just be a quick jump following the Price cut and we may see Sony slip back down, but the 100$ off is obviously getting people pulling the trigger on it who otherwise wouldnt be.

Re:Less Incentive to Buy (1)

Applekid (993327) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815659)

I think it's helping that Amazon is offering it at $500 with a rebate for 5 Blu-Ray movies (of the buyer's choice) with it.

Re:Less Incentive to Buy (1)

Blackman-Turkey (1115185) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815019)

Wasn't the emotion engine supposed to be the next thing since sliced bread?

Yeah... seven years ago.

WTF? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19815045)

What are you talking about?

The emotion engine is the core of the PS2, it has nothing to do with the speed or quality of PS3 games, and the PS3 CPU is fast enough to easily emulate the PS2 and more. In fact, as the software emulator gets better I fully expect PS2 games will be better on the PS3 than they were on the PS2.

I don't get it. (1)

lancejjj (924211) | more than 7 years ago | (#19814987)

In an effort to decrease costs Sony continues to reduce features, and continue to develop their offering.
I don't get it. What features were removed from the console?

I understand that Sony has dropped the price of the PS3, and I understand that they've updated its internals for the sake of manufacturing expense.

But it seems to me that the feature set available to the user are identical. Am I missing something?

Re:I don't get it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19815653)

Well. They removed the hardware emulation, which means that a lot of previously backwards-compatible games don't work (Well... they still work with hardware emulation, but they don't work with the new emulation).

On the plus side, this means that BC games look better since they're upscaled and upsampled and all that fun stuff, but on the down side... a good chunk of the library that was only working because you crammed PS2 and PS1 hardware in there no longer works...

So. I suppose you could call it "Removing a feature", although it's more "changing the feature". Backwards compatibility is still there, but it's no longer as effective as it was, even though it now is shinier. Or something.

No (3, Interesting)

coren2000 (788204) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815109)

Sony fans undoubtedly cheered the news of a $100 drop in price for the 60GB PS3
No. Sony fans already bought the PS3 at the full price, those waiting for price drops will wait further.

Kazumi Kitaue is wrong about one thing (1, Redundant)

Kohath (38547) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815113)

He says: With $500, you can buy a personal computer.

No you can't. Not one that lets you play the new games at the same quality as the PS3 anyway.

The PS3 may or may not be too expensive still, but not for this reason.

Re:Kazumi Kitaue is wrong about one thing (1)

Life2Short (593815) | more than 7 years ago | (#19815507)

This two-year-old article [tomshardware.com] begs to differ.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?