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!

LittleBigPlanet Could 'Move Consoles' For PlayStation 3

Zonk posted about 7 years ago | from the need-a-bit-of-a-jump-start dept.

PlayStation (Games) 122

The always popular Michael Pachter offered up the opinion last week that LittleBigPlanet may be the title the PlayStation 3 needs to have breakout success. In a report pointing out failings on Microsoft and Sony's part to appeal to 'family gamers', Pachter said: "After seeing LittleBigPlanet at TGS, I believe it could be a console mover. The game is really innovative, and I think it adds a family element that is so far missing from both the Xbox 360 and the PS3. If they can accompany that game's launch with a price cut (or a lower priced SKU), I think we'll see a spike in sales." The game is really innovative, and I'm looking forward to it a bunch ... but I think I agree with the folks at Ars when they say the pricetag is still too high to appeal to family gamers.

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

Good luck with that (-1, Redundant)

pembo13 (770295) | about 7 years ago | (#20813865)

I wouldn't buy a PS3 for that game, but I do not consider myself typical by any means - I play Super Mario World, Wii Play Mario Party on my Wii.

Interesting idea, but they are ignoring the Wii (2, Interesting)

jimstapleton (999106) | about 7 years ago | (#20813879)

being both cheaper, and having plenty of family-friendly titles, I think it'll make it harder for the PS3 to have a one-title-wonder breakout in this sector, like the XBox had it's one-title-wonder breakout with the Halo series.

Simply put, hardcores (Halo) will spend more money than families (this game), and the Wii will certainly provide a lot of competition in that arena. Plus, the Wii has many games (even if you count all the [animal]z games as just one game) that seem to excel in this arena, rather than just one.

Re:Interesting idea, but they are ignoring the Wii (1)

samkass (174571) | about 7 years ago | (#20814447)

Perhaps... but families like to watch movies, too. If the rumors about them hyping the Blu-Ray aspect is true, it could dovetail nicely. The PS3 is a really nice movie, streaming media, gaming, etc., box. It could sell to families as an HD movie player. Sony could keep the price at its current level but package two controllers, the Blu-Ray remote, a movie and LittleBigPlanet and move a LOT of systems.

Re:Interesting idea, but they are ignoring the Wii (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | about 7 years ago | (#20814865)

"Perhaps... but families like to watch movies, too. If the rumors about them hyping the Blu-Ray aspect is true, it could dovetail nicely."
DVDs look great on an HDTV. Yes a vidoephile will notice the difference but for most of use DVDs are still good enough.
Unless you have a really big high end HDTV then and HD-DVD is just a "That is nice but not worth the money" item for most people. My wife and I are in the wait and see mode. Until there is only ONE format I am not buying.

Re:Interesting idea, but they are ignoring the Wii (1)

Nazmun (590998) | about 7 years ago | (#20815807)

I have to respectfully disagree. Having a family game isn't enough. It needs to be on a family budget too, $299 or less. I'm sure at $399 the ps3 will move quite a bit of systems (unless that version is severely hamstrung) but it won't be for simply family entertainment. They need more enticing titles, I don't remember what is coming out for the ps3 this holiday but without a combination of A-List titles and a nice price drop they won't be moving many systems.

However if there is a price drop in japan and White Knight comes out over there this could boost sales significantly in that country.

Re:Interesting idea, but they are ignoring the Wii (1)

renegadesx (977007) | about 7 years ago | (#20820229)

1) Look at the price
2) Look at the price
3) DVD's are much cheaper
4) DVD's look good enough
5) Nobody who doesnt have a DVD player will be interested in Blu Ray
6) Look at the numbers of HD penetration
7) Look at the price
8) Wii appeals to the family audience much better
9) Their marketing guys have been on a slump since E306
10) Look at the price

Re:Interesting idea, but they are ignoring the Wii (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20821237)

I was going to make a point-by-point rebuttal of your post, but i'm just going t ocut my losses and call you an clogged ass pipe.

Re:Interesting idea, but they are ignoring the Wii (2, Interesting)

Lally Singh (3427) | about 7 years ago | (#20815707)

Couple of things:
  1. That assumes you can get a Wii. Only reason I bought one at all was b/c they had one in stock and I was gift shopping. (It turned out the gf didn't want it, so I kept it).
  2. I've got both the PS3 and the Wii. The Wii's got maybe 2-3 good games on it, and one of those comes with it. It's really not useful for me now beyond keeping guests happy. The PS3 games I enjoy more (regular ones, Resistance, Warhawk, etc) than the Wii stuff. IMHO people who played a lot of games on the PS2 will (and do) want more depth than the Wii offers in the area it excels in.
  3. With LBP, the PS3 could fit in as a good fit for everyone. LBP to keep the kids/girlfriend/etc happy, and Metal Gear 4 for the hardcore gamers. This is how it played out with the PS2.
  4. For those of us who really get turned off by the Halo set: not the gameplay per se, just all the 14 yr old kids humping fallen opponents, etc. the 360 has no appeal. IMHO it, like its predecessor, is set up for an FPS shooting game by far. It's really not my thing. God of War 1 & 2, all 6 hrs of Heavanly Sword, etc are more interesting. FPSs are fun, but they're not enough.

I know the PS3 doesn't have the best game selection, but then again no console does for what I want. I looked at the 360, but I don't care about Halo the way most 360 lovers seem to. It's a fun FPS, but eh, I don't care nearly that much. The PS3 does have the most interesting selection coming up for me, and the games it does have so far, I enjoy. Motorstorm, resistance, warhawk, heavenly sword, etc. are fun plays for me (and that little rubber ducky game), and frankly, the only game I've wanted this generation is MGS4. Everything else is nice on top, but it's the only thing on any platform that interests me at all.

Re:Interesting idea, but they are ignoring the Wii (2, Insightful)

jamie(really) (678877) | about 7 years ago | (#20819201)

So, this is a story about LBP moving PS3's because of its family appeal and you got modded up to 4 for saying that you, who is neither married nor has kids, would rather have a PS3 than a Wii. And the only game you've wanted this generationis MGS4.

Errrr, ok. Nice modding everyone.

I've got a wife and 2 kids. We play Wario Ware, Rabbid Rabbits, and Wii Sports on the Wii, and my 4 yr old likes to play LEGO Star Wars with me on the 360. If a family doesn't already have a PS3, there is no f***ing way a single game is going to cause them to spend $499 on a console just to play it. Period. If they don't have a Wii, they'd spend their $250 on that, and if they do, why would they buy a PS3?

Re:Interesting idea, but they are ignoring the Wii (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20819279)

I'm not a Halo fan but I love my 360 - if you feel that all the 360 has to offer is Halo and fps you are sorely mistaken.

Gears of War, Bioshock, Viva Pinata, Crackdown, Dead Rising, Forza, Condemned, Eternal Sonata, Blue Dragon, all the EA sports/racing games that run better than any other console, and dozens of arcade games from Super Puzzle Fighter to Uno and Texas Hold Em to old classic arcade games - most with updated HD graphics, add in FPS (Tom Clancy stuff, Call of Duty) and now include everything being included upcoming games - Mass Effect, PGR 4, Assassins Creed, Army of Two, Alan Wake, Too Human, and Lost Odyssey to name some of the bigger ones...

I've played my 360 more than any console I've ever owned - and that's saying quite a bit...

Re:Interesting idea, but they are ignoring the Wii (1)

DDLKermit007 (911046) | about 7 years ago | (#20819305)

Dude, seriously. Take the Sony dick out of your mouth. You lost me when you said you don't like Halo (you know theres a pretty decent game besides the OPTIONAL online play right?) yet enjoy Resistance more than anything else on the Wii. LBP will not be the game the PS3 so fervently needs to capture the family crowd. It's been done already. Nintendo owns that crowd lock, stock, and barrel. Whatever of that demographic is left is on the 360 playing UNO, and Bejeweled.

Re:Interesting idea, but they are ignoring the Wii (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20821035)

Ha HAH HA you bought your girlfriend a video game machine for Christmas? Maybe this year you can spring for a "Dr. Who" boxed set!

Sony needs to revisit their golden age of movers (2, Interesting)

kevin.fowler (915964) | about 7 years ago | (#20813927)

My roommate bought a PS2 when GTA III came out. This is one of the best examples of a console mover that I can remember. Sure the game had tons of hype, but it seems like a lot of people agreed that it delivered... and it was also a bit different nearly every game released. The problem now is that with genres being flooded with clones of clones of clones, and multiplatform releases... there are fewer console movers. It's going to take an game that has takes a COMPLETE departure from games that exist now and will only ever be on one console, to be the kind of mover that GTA 3 for the PS2 was in my eyes.

Re:Sony needs to revisit their golden age of mover (1)

BlowHole666 (1152399) | about 7 years ago | (#20813977)

Sort of like Final Fantasy 7 did for the PS one.

Re:Sony needs to revisit their golden age of mover (1)

kevin.fowler (915964) | about 7 years ago | (#20814041)

I had FF7 for PC (late adopter), so I missed it as a PS1 mover. But this is another perfect example. Now there are 4,000 FF games for 17 different systems, and an infinite number of very similar games on the remaining systems. I'm a Wii60DS person, and even if there is a Shadow of the Colossus (my personal favorite VG) game that comes out for PS3, I'm not likely to buy the system for it. If I feel too bad about not playing it, I'll just start another game of Oblivion (which is also SUPER cross platform).

Re:Sony needs to revisit their golden age of mover (1)

jimstapleton (999106) | about 7 years ago | (#20814105)

Not really - there were dozens of RPGs before FF7, it was hardly a complete departure.

You had Final Fantasy 1-6 + Mystic Quest, Chrono Trigger, Dragon Warrior, Inindo, and quite a few others

And that's just the "pure" menu based RPGs.

Re:Sony needs to revisit their golden age of mover (1)

BlowHole666 (1152399) | about 7 years ago | (#20814173)

On the PS1? I remember FF7 being all the hype on the Play station 1.

Re:Sony needs to revisit their golden age of mover (1)

jimstapleton (999106) | about 7 years ago | (#20814289)

no, not on the PS1 (although I believe WildArms may have been pre-ff7)

Regardless, the OP suggested that the game should be unique in comparison to what is already out there, and not just what is already out there on that system only.

Re:Sony needs to revisit their golden age of mover (1)

cthellis (733202) | about 7 years ago | (#20814829)

Wild Arms was indeed pre-FFVII, and the first RPG I got on the PS1, purchased in advance pretty much FOR FFVII, but obtained enough in advance to play Wild Arms first. But Wild Arms, while good, certainly wasn't a system mover. (Xenogears came well after FFVII.)

Vandal Hearts also came before VII, but was more of a tactical RPG, so really the only other "classic JRPG" of consequence to hit the PS1 before VII was Suikoden.

Re:Sony needs to revisit their golden age of mover (1)

FishWithAHammer (957772) | about 7 years ago | (#20815363)

Suikoden kicked FFVII's ass up and down the street. An RPG with a real story! Hot damn!

But no. It wasn't THREE DEE, so it tanked.

Re:Sony needs to revisit their golden age of mover (1)

kevin.fowler (915964) | about 7 years ago | (#20814273)

I hate to be so vague about FF7, but it really had this kindPokemon wasn't a huge departure (save for being a highly simplified RPG) and it's definitely the biggest console mover ever by unit. I think FF7 had some sort of similar iconic difference that gave it similar status. of iconic difference that I felt

Re:Sony needs to revisit their golden age of mover (1)

kevin.fowler (915964) | about 7 years ago | (#20814303)

DOES NOT COMPUTE:

I meant to write this: Pokemon wasn't a huge departure (save for being a highly simplified RPG) and it's definitely the biggest console mover ever by unit. I think FF7 had some sort of similar iconic difference that gave it similar status.

Re:Sony needs to revisit their golden age of mover (1)

jimstapleton (999106) | about 7 years ago | (#20814541)

FFVII had 3D and Materia. If Wild Arms came first, than all FFVII had was Materia.

Oddly enough, I thought that was the one *REALLY* nice thing about the game. I wish Square had played with that one more.

Re:Sony needs to revisit their golden age of mover (1)

TriezGamer (861238) | about 7 years ago | (#20817183)

The Final Fantasy series has never rehashed the same ability system that I can recall -- I might be wrong. In any case, the Materia system was hampered by it's own flexibility, and I really hated it. It was too flexible and so far off balance that it wasn't even funny -- it made what was initially an easy game even easier. Killer materia combinations were found even by casual gamers, and the hardcore tweakers? Well, as a result we know that a level 7 Tifa can solo Emerald Weapon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4gVcNMlsto [youtube.com]

Revisiting the Materia system might be interesting, but I'd rather not see it if it'll be that unbalancing.

Re:Sony needs to revisit their golden age of mover (1)

Zero_DgZ (1047348) | about 7 years ago | (#20818129)

You haven't looked back far enough. The Final Fantasy series' base "job class" model has been used quite a number of times. It was fairly inflexible in the first game, but FF3 pretty much hit the modern incarnation dead center. It was used again in FF5, and to very good effect in FF Tactics and FF Tactics Advance.

FF1 - D&D Style "pick it and you're stuck with it" job class system
FF2 - Story driven fixed abilities/classes
FF3 - Flexible job class system
FF4 - Story driven fixed abilities/classes
FF5 - Flexible job class system
FF6 - Esper system with fixed character abilities thrown in
FF7 - Materia system
FF8 - GF junction system
FF9 - Story driven fixed classes, "equip to learn" ability system
FF10 - That funky grid system

FF Tactics/Advance - Flexible job class system
FF Mystic Quest - That funky, simplified weapon switching system

I haven't played the rest yet.

Re:Sony needs to revisit their golden age of mover (1)

TriezGamer (861238) | about 7 years ago | (#20818837)

Ah, yeah, thanks for the clarification. I wasn't including XI (MMORPG) and non-numbered games in my thinking, but I haven't played FF II or III, so wasn't completely certain. In any case, since VI, the system hasn't replicated, though some contained a lot of similarities.

And of course, Materia is still a broken system.

FFXII, since you haven't played it, utilizes a grid system that is somewhat reminiscent of FFX's sphere grid. It still has more differences than similarities though, IMO.

Re:Sony needs to revisit their golden age of mover (1)

jimstapleton (999106) | about 7 years ago | (#20821533)

Actually #2 (JP) is battle-driven/use-driven abilities.

FFXII is again the funky grid system, but possibly worse than FF10...

Re:Sony needs to revisit their golden age of mover (1)

LordVader717 (888547) | about 7 years ago | (#20817037)

Umm, Pokemon was actually quite a huge departure. Sure, there were certain vague similarities with some elements from other games, but the whole capture/build team/choose Pokemon fighting system was something new.

Re:Sony needs to revisit their golden age of mover (1)

Runefox (905204) | about 7 years ago | (#20822225)

Megami Tensei [wikipedia.org] / Shin Megami Tensei [wikipedia.org] / Majin Tensei [wikipedia.org] has (have) been doing that for years (nearly a decade) before Pokémon was, with the added ability to fuse them together. And it does it with demons.

I guess it could... (2, Funny)

seebs (15766) | about 7 years ago | (#20814073)

I dunno. I mean, I already HAVE a PS3, and I don't see why I'd want this.

Re:I guess it could... (1)

king-manic (409855) | about 7 years ago | (#20814301)

I dunno. I mean, I already HAVE a PS3, and I don't see why I'd want this.

Ahh just wait until the hype machine convinces you it's greatest thing since the pill.

Re:I guess it could... (1)

PhoenixOne (674466) | about 7 years ago | (#20817057)

Which pill? The one that makes you smaller? One that makes you tall? Or the one that keeps you from being a mom?

How Sony could actually sell PS3s (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20814277)

People might consider buying a PS3 if it came with a Wii bundled.

One small problem with that idea... (4, Insightful)

Rimbo (139781) | about 7 years ago | (#20814361)

"Family gamers" don't spend $300 or more on a console.

Re:One small problem with that idea... (2, Insightful)

kevin.fowler (915964) | about 7 years ago | (#20814529)

Considering how entrenched the PS2 is as a family gaming console (and how you can get it for $100), it's likely even harder to sell a "new one" for $600.

Think about inflation and the $250 NES (2, Interesting)

Paktu (1103861) | about 7 years ago | (#20815503)

The original NES was $200 or $250 (depending on the bundle) in 1985. If you add in inflation, that $200 becomes $375 in 2006 dollars, and the $250 is roughly $468. How many units of the NES did Nintendo sell at that price, anyway?

Re:Think about inflation and the $250 NES (1)

king-manic (409855) | about 7 years ago | (#20815655)

The original NES was $200 or $250 (depending on the bundle) in 1985. If you add in inflation, that $200 becomes $375 in 2006 dollars, and the $250 is roughly $468. How many units of the NES did Nintendo sell at that price, anyway?

Your factoring the average value for inflation. Don't forget the huge dip the US dollar took recently and the fact inflation is often under estimated. that 250$ buys about 600$ buys now for many things. So it's even more of a bargain these days.

Re:Think about inflation and the $250 NES (1)

ElleyKitten (715519) | about 7 years ago | (#20815913)

The original NES was $200 or $250 (depending on the bundle) in 1985. If you add in inflation, that $200 becomes $375 in 2006 dollars, and the $250 is roughly $468. How many units of the NES did Nintendo sell at that price, anyway?
Yeah, and? Think of other electronics back in 1985. How much did 64k of RAM cost then? More than what you can find a gig for today. Game consoles have generally been the same price at launch - $200 to $300 - every generation. The Wii costs $250, and there was a 360 for $300 at launch. The PS3 is priced out of the market. Though, since Microsoft has actually managed to raise the price of the 360 since launch (they started with consoles at $300 and $400, then got rid of the Core so now the cheapest is $350) so Sony might have some company. But, the customers have spoken, they want a cheap Wii, not an overpriced PS3. Seems they don't like your math that says consoles should cost more now because of inflation.

Re:Think about inflation and the $250 NES (1)

dank zappingly (975064) | about 7 years ago | (#20817727)

You do not understand inflation. The people who modded you up also do not understand inflation. The poster you tried to correct was correct. When you buy electronics you are spending currency. The value of that currency is judged by how much it would cost to buy a set basket of goods(differs somewhat depending who you ask, but never includes 64k of ram). The fact that electronics go down in cost has to do with better manufacturing techniques, not the changing value of the dollar. The idea is that in 1985 to buy a game console, a person had to give up other things which in fact cost more today than they used to due to inflation.

Re:Think about inflation and the $250 NES (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20819789)

But inflation isn't uniform and it's erroneous to treat it as though it were, although all too often it is treated as though it were uniform. The cost of production of everything is changing constantly. You're treating the CPI basket as though it's some grand arbiter of value when it's just a bunch of items that have more slowly changing production costs.

The fact is, people develop certain expectations about how much things cost and one of those expectations is that brand new, top of the line consumer electronics items have nominal prices roughly the same as comparable, brand new, top of the line consumer electronics items did in the past.

Can't compare electonics based on Inflation. (1)

trdrstv (986999) | about 7 years ago | (#20815929)

The original NES was $200 or $250 (depending on the bundle) in 1985. If you add in inflation...

Stop there. Electronics aren't subject to inflation when comparing old models to new models, they get continually de-valued as time moves on. Hell a 286 cost over $2,000 at retail in the 80's not even "Adjusting for inflation..." what's the value now?

The only thing adjusting for inflation gives you is "back then they saw the value of X product was worth Y to them." It does NOT serve as a gauge to tell you what people are willing to pay on product H now.

Re:Can't compare electonics based on Inflation. (1)

powerlord (28156) | about 7 years ago | (#20817429)

Buying a 286 retail in the 80's still cost X dollars, that money had a purchase power separate from the object it purchased.

The product depreciates over time, but the cost can still be measured in terms of relative value, subject to inflation. That comparative buying power is what is being measured. (usually described as "it would cost X 2007 dollars to buy Y." Yeah, buying an NES for that amount of money now would be ridiculous, but you CAN say "People spent X% of their paycheck to buy it". That X% would be the equivalent of a certain amount today. It puts into perspective just how much people were willing to spend.

Re:Can't compare electonics based on Inflation. (1)

trdrstv (986999) | about 7 years ago | (#20818529)

The product depreciates over time, but the cost can still be measured in terms of relative value, subject to inflation. That comparative buying power is what is being measured. (usually described as "it would cost X 2007 dollars to buy Y." Yeah, buying an NES for that amount of money now would be ridiculous, but you CAN say "People spent X% of their paycheck to buy it". That X% would be the equivalent of a certain amount today. It puts into perspective just how much people were willing to spend.

The parent was stating how the original NES was worth "adjusting for inflation" ~$500 to buy. That's where the comparison needs to stop however, it means that in today's dollars they valued the NES at around $500 in 1985. That's an interestng factoid to come up in coctail parties, but the NES's relative value in 1985 has no bearing on any other system's value going forward, which is where these comparisons go.

Re:Think about inflation and the $250 NES (1)

pokerdad (1124121) | about 7 years ago | (#20818875)

How many units of the NES did Nintendo sell at that price, anyway?

Wiki says 60 million. Of course, there's more to it than that.

First of all, the NES had a three year head start over other third gen systems. Nintendo didn't have to worry about price comparisons because there were no other systems.

Second, in the 80s many things are now in almost every home were much less common (like PCs, like internet connections, like cable tv, like cell phones, like big screen tvs) allowing people to who wanted a game system to spend a greater relative amount on it.

So, as others have pointed out, the PS3 and NES really are apples and oranges.

Re:Think about inflation and the $250 NES (1)

Guppy06 (410832) | about 7 years ago | (#20820793)

"How many units of the NES did Nintendo sell at that price, anyway?"

Ultimately, half as many as the PS2, which debuted at a little more than half of your inflation-adjusted price. Coincidence?

Re:One small problem with that idea... (1)

IrquiM (471313) | about 7 years ago | (#20820425)

Remember that US is not the rest of the world.

I know alot of "Family gamers" that have already bought it, myself included. The "hard-core" gamers goes for 360 - all the other ones goes for PS3, and I don't know a single person that owns a Wii!

Re:One small problem with that idea... (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | about 7 years ago | (#20820893)

Anecdotes are not data. Sales data is data and that data clearly states the Wii is leading, the 360 a really close second and the PS3 far behind.

Why? (4, Insightful)

Kelbear (870538) | about 7 years ago | (#20814369)

I saw the demonstrations for Little Big Planet, and don't get me wrong, I would definitely like to get a crack at this game.

But it's not the kind of play that I'd throw down 600 bucks for. It's a seriously cool casual play game, but I mean casual play as in playing it when I don't have anything else to do. That kind of appeal doesn't make people throw down big bucks in a huge payout. It works /great/ getting a lot of people to spend a small amount of money repeatedly, but it's not the sort of thing that clears the huge mental hurdle of 600 bucks.

Re:Why? (1)

geeknado (1117395) | about 7 years ago | (#20814499)

I agree with you-- I think the problem with the PS3 having a single 'killer app' pull people into the console is its price point. $600(plus another $60 for the game) is a huge hit to the typical family budget. Basically, they've set the pricepoint so high that they're probably going to have to have a library in order to find buyers this generation.

Re:Why? (1)

moo083 (716213) | about 7 years ago | (#20814567)

I think we all know that by the time this game comes out, it won't be $600. Granted, it'll probably be $400 (especially if all these 40 GB PS3 October 12 rumors turn out to be true) which is still good hunk of change, but a lot of people have spent $400 on a console before. Also, while I don't really believe the console will last for 10 years, I think it might last more than the 5 year norm.

Re:Why? (1)

gamer4Life (803857) | about 7 years ago | (#20815769)

I don't see the logic in the "This game isn't worth spending $XXX" comments that are often associated with the PS3. No game is worth $600 - just like no game on the XBox 360 is worth $400.

It's cumulative - some people will want to buy it because it offers a better A/V experience, some for Linux, some because it's a solidly built machine, some because of free online gaming, bluetooth, blu-ray, or maybe just for looks. But most people will buy it for a combination of these reasons.

I don't understand how one person's preference can be modded insightful while you rarely see anything positive about the system modded insightful. It looks like the fanboys have taken control of the games section.

Re:Why? (1)

Knara (9377) | about 7 years ago | (#20816155)

No, it's actually more likely that the general tenor of the console market is being accurately reflected by the comments in this thread. The PS3's market share is hurtin' for a variety of reasons, and it doesn't help that the "positive" comments you're speaking of are often trivial or, worse, contrived.

Re:Why? (1)

Spacezilla (972723) | about 7 years ago | (#20820097)

I agree with everything you said.

Can't Wait (4, Insightful)

dracocat (554744) | about 7 years ago | (#20814523)

This game is obviously on my must have list of games to buy. Don't get me wrong, Heavenly Sword was great, but thats come and gone.

What Sony really needs is more good games, not one blockbuster. My co-worker compares the PS3 to a sports car. Most of the time its sitting in the garage or somewhere collecting dust. Then every once in a while a fantastic game comes out and you get to take it out for a good drag-race.

To sell more PS3s Sony needs more than a killer game once every six months.

Re:Can't Wait (1)

_PimpDaddy7_ (415866) | about 7 years ago | (#20814757)

What the Sony needs is a price cut on the PS3...

PS3 needs more (better) exclusives and price cut. (1)

trdrstv (986999) | about 7 years ago | (#20816073)

What the Sony needs is a price cut on the PS3...

Ok. Playing Devil's advocate, if the PS3 were $249.99 right now what game(s) would you buy with it? (IE: on the shelf, right now not coming in 2008 ish)

Re:Can't Wait (1)

Brigade (974884) | about 7 years ago | (#20815001)

Not to be a hater, but Sony needs a killer game period. You said it yourself: "Heavenly Sword was great, but that's come and gone." Killer games stick around for a long time.

Gears of War is a great example. It dethroned Halo 2 on the Xbox Live usage charts, and even after a full year of release, it's still sitting up there. Halo 3 will probably do the same.

Wii owners are STILL playing Wii Sports, a game that was packed in with the console. I've been to parties where non-gamers just hang out, drink, and take turns (or run winners stay/losers pay arcade situations) on Wii Tennis all night.

That's why the 360 and the Wii are doing so well: They have games with staying power and appeal. Sony has shot themselves in the foot so many times this generation (PR/Hubris pre-launch, delays, big pricetag, rumble drama, pretty but short games with no replayability) that they hamstrug themselves before the machine even released. Add to that no real games worth owning (i.e. with Staying Power) and that's the bottom-line reason why the console is failing.

Re:Can't Wait (1)

dada21 (163177) | about 7 years ago | (#20815249)

So true. My wife and I still play Wii Sports for at least 30 minutes a day (usually Tennis, too). Lots of fun and decent exercise considering how much we plow into each other in the living room...

Had a PS3 for about 2 days. Boxed it up and gave it to a friend's teenage kids -- the games were just not enticing for us (30-somethings). We buy a new Wii game at least once a month (not huge spenders) and all our games get fairly equal time if you remove Wii Sports from the daily spin.

The only reason we have an X360 is for using it as a remote Media Center expansion, and for its HD capabilities which we now don't worry about since we got an HD-DVD to work with our MCE. I don't even think we have any games for X360 anymore.

Re:Can't Wait (1)

Crash Culligan (227354) | about 7 years ago | (#20815519)

dada21: Lots of fun and decent exercise considering how much we plow into each other in the living room...

Cool. Er, where does the Wii come into this again and when do you find the time to play it?

Re:Can't Wait (1)

dada21 (163177) | about 7 years ago | (#20816061)

Cool. Er, where does the Wii come into this again and when do you find the time to play it?

Funny you mention that, because the extra energy the Wii introduces into our entertainment (over just couch surfing to watch TV) has enhanced our sex life significantly. The weight loss also increases our mutual attraction towards one-another, something I think would be an advantage for the typical geek physique.

Re:Can't Wait (1)

nuzak (959558) | about 7 years ago | (#20817221)

> where does the Wii come into this again

If you need us to draw a diagram, I'm sure there's plenty of pictures on the internet that will suffice.

Re:Can't Wait (1)

marvelite (651734) | about 7 years ago | (#20817441)

The problem is a lot of the casual Wii owners are only playing Wii Sports, and not buying any other titles.

Re:Can't Wait (1)

danbert8 (1024253) | about 7 years ago | (#20818429)

Why is that a problem? If I remember correctly, Nintendo actually makes a profit on the Wii hardware unlike Sony and Microsoft, so they don't have to sell any additional games to post in the black. It also makes them that much more likely to impulse buy a Wii game, or a Virtual Console game because they already own the system.

Re:Can't Wait (1)

DrXym (126579) | about 7 years ago | (#20815089)

The PS3 is a year behind the 360 and probably has exactly the same number of games in its life as the 360 did this time last year. It is certainly well over the drought that traditionally accompanies new consoles. There are something like 30 or 40 titles being release in the US before the year end.

Re:Can't Wait (0, Troll)

qzak (1115661) | about 7 years ago | (#20815583)

This game is obviously on my must have list of games to buy. Don't get me wrong, Heavenly Sword was great, but thats come and gone.

What Sony really needs is more good games, not one blockbuster. My co-worker compares the PS3 to a sports car. Most of the time its sitting in the garage or somewhere collecting dust. Then every once in a while a fantastic game comes out and you get to take it out for a good drag-race.

To sell more PS3s Sony needs more than a killer game once every six months.
OK, I keep hearing this. Why does everyone start with the base assumption that the headline game is the only one coming out? Every good game comes out, it's "this is great, but I wouldn't spend $600 for it!" or comments like above. The only thing I can think of is that Sony's advertising dept sucks and nobody knows there are actually decent games coming.

I mean screw LBP; what I really want to play is Uncharted. I guess people don't know about it, but it looks awesome. Or Rachet and Clank, which looks like Pixar made it, but it's realtime. And, by accounts, it's FUN. Unreal Tournament III is coming as a timed exclusive, Haze as an exclusive, Singstar (if you're my wife, this is important), the RPG Folklore as an exclusive, and Gran Turismo 5 Prologue. And all I mentioned were the exclusives I'm interested in coming in the next 2 months. There's more coming, but much of it is probably crap, since I'm not interested in it.

Surely I'll be downmodded for sounding like a commercial or for owning a PS3, but damn. You really think this console is trying to ride just one horse?

Next PS3 console mover? FF 13 (1)

erpbridge (64037) | about 7 years ago | (#20814793)

Final Fantasy 13 will be the next PS3 console mover. However, this will only happen IF the PS3 breaches the $199/console barrier.

Why do I choose that barrier? $249 and $199 seem to have been historically numbers to shoot for in the console market. The $249 barrier seems to be the barrier at which the console is perceived as accessible, and is purchased mostly by people with disposable income (usually, singles, married couples, college students, and some households with children.) The $199 barrier seems to be the barrier at which the console is percieved as affordable, and is purchase by all the above in addition to larger numbers of households with children.

The $249 barrier is usually hit about 6 months after the console is introduced. The $199 barrier is usually hit about 1-2 years after the console is introduced, and usually conincides with the holiday shopping season.

I would add $149 and $99 there. $149 is usually hit about 6 months to 1 year prior to a console's successor coming out, and $99 is usually hit right about when the successor is introduced.

None of these numbers are based on any official research, just my own observations of price points at gaming stores, big box stores, and the electronics dept of places such as Target, Wal-mart, and others. I'm basing this from what I've seen of each of the consoles since about Super Nintendo.

Right now, looking at Gamestop.com, the lowest priced barebones PS3 system (which appears to be a 20GB console with 1 wireless controller) is going for $449. This is about 1 year after release. At this point in time, they should have introduced the $249 price point for their least featured device.

I realize Sony is trying to push the PS3 to be a family entertainment center, focused around the BlueRay DVD player, but I believe that this is one of the biggest contributors to their current pricing issue.

Re:Next PS3 console mover? FF 13 (1)

benzapp (464105) | about 7 years ago | (#20815171)

My god have you ever heard of inflation?

Your analysis is fundamentally wrong simply for the reason that the $250 price point has been standard now for almost 20 years. In that time, household income has increased 50%. Why on earth would you believe that suddenly, and without any historical precedent to the contrary, people automatically expect video game consoles to become more affordable (as a percentage of household income) over time?

And, I feel you are discounting the importance of the blu-ray player. Sony rightly believes that compared to past consoles, theirs offers more value. Surely, having a blu-ray player must be worth something.

Re:Next PS3 console mover? FF 13 (3, Insightful)

ElleyKitten (715519) | about 7 years ago | (#20815657)

Why on earth would you believe that suddenly, and without any historical precedent to the contrary, people automatically expect video game consoles to become more affordable (as a percentage of household income) over time?
Because consoles have had similar prices each generation despite inflation. The NES was $200 at launch. The SNES was $200 at launch. The N64 and the Gamecube were $200, and the Wii was $250. The Xbox was $300 at launch, the 360 was $300 and $400. The PS1 was $300, the PS2 was $300, and the PS3 was $500 and $600 at launch. Do you see a bit of a difference? Every major console ever released has been $200 or $300, and the PS3 is twice that. Why on earth would you believe that a console could be priced high above what consoles have been priced before, even current gen consoles, and people would be fine with that?

And, I feel you are discounting the importance of the blu-ray player. Sony rightly believes that compared to past consoles, theirs offers more value. Surely, having a blu-ray player must be worth something.
Not enough. Few people have HDTVs, without which the blu-ray is pointless, and even people with HDTV are waiting and seeing which format wins before they plunk down hundreds of dollars for a new player. This isn't like PS2 with DVD at all. DVDs didn't have any competition for the most part, everyone was onboard with the evolution from VHS to DVD just like they had with cassettes to CD. DVDs also had plenty of features over VHS, in addition to graphical pluses they also killed the tedium of fast forwarding and rewinding, and they introduced "special features" that couldn't fit on VHS. Blu-ray offers graphical improvements over DVD only if you have an HDTV, and while it offers more special features we reached the limit on how many special features people care about back on DVD. People will watch a few deleted scenes, maybe a commentary, but beyond that most don't care. High definition video just doesn't have that big of a market yet, especially not until a winner is chosen between HD-DVD and BD, and Sony has been foolish to throw away this gaming generation for it.

Re:Next PS3 console mover? FF 13 (1)

cybereal (621599) | about 7 years ago | (#20817369)

Not enough. Few people have HDTVs, without which the blu-ray is pointless, and even people with HDTV are waiting and seeing which format wins before they plunk down hundreds of dollars for a new player.

Perhaps not entirely on topic but relevant none-the-less, I found myself with a PS3 after some certain temptations (and a cheaper price from being open-boxed) and naturally, had to give Blu-Ray a try.

I wasn't expecting much from the visuals really, simply because I lack a full HDTV (I have a 1024x768 res. projector that will downsample from 720p which looks pretty nice, with nice colors, but ultimately not much better resolution-wise). However, I do have a full surround system setup and my own little theatre in my living room essentially. So what I wasn't expecting to enjoy so much was the audio. The audio quality on most BR movies has improved so drastically over DVD that I actually will prefer BR over DVD despite the cost. Quite frankly, and I'm not sure if you've noticed this but, DVD audio quality is so horrible in many cases that you can't even hear the dialog of movies without turning the audio up ridiculously loud.

A friend of mine says the DVD audio quality comes from the need to fit more on a disc than there is space for. This friend works for a company that produces DVD's for major studios, so I trust them on this matter. The BR discs however, have more than enough space for all the video at 1080p plus uncompressed audio. Given this added space, there is no longer a need for compressing so much audio into such little space and no more need to sacrifice proper audio levels to give off a sense that surround sound is actually being used.

So to summarize, even though I don't have an HD output device, the immensely improved audio quality, offering for the first time ever in my home a believable theatre audio experience from existing, older surround hardware, is enough for me to pay up the extra money for BR discs and feel good about the feature adding to the cost of my PS3.

Re:Next PS3 console mover? FF 13 (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | about 7 years ago | (#20820941)

Dunno, I only have the stereo speakers on my TV so I wouldn't notice that.

Re:Next PS3 console mover? FF 13 (1)

Cadallin (863437) | about 7 years ago | (#20815493)

There are problems with your numbers, most relating to the fact that they're old. At least 5-10 years old in most cases. Inflation has resulted in the $200 Nintendo 64 of 1996 being much more comparable to the $300 XBOX 360 of 2006. Add into that the recent huge losses of the US dollar against most international currencies and it adds up to Americans better get used to paying more for things.

Who to Blame? Alan Greenspan. His policy of Fed Lending to get out of recessions has left the dollar hugely weaker than it was 15 years ago. He did at least as much damage as Richard Nixon's destruction of the gold standard.

Re:Next PS3 console mover? FF 13 (1)

king-manic (409855) | about 7 years ago | (#20815775)

Who to Blame? Alan Greenspan. His policy of Fed Lending to get out of recessions has left the dollar hugely weaker than it was 15 years ago. He did at least as much damage as Richard Nixon's destruction of the gold standard.

There is a huge fallacy in that statement. The Gold standard had so many drawbacks that it's hardly "damaging" to move to another system. Tying your currency to a commodity is foolish. The price of gold is artificial as it isn't useful for much and is precious only because it's precious. Sort of like the Paris Hilton of commodities. If a nation decided to flood the market with their reserves it drastically suppresses the currency. All nations using the gold standard now have a lower valued currency without any good reason for it. Moving away from the gold standard give syou many more options in manipulating the economy as well.

Re:Next PS3 console mover? FF 13 (1)

Cadallin (863437) | about 7 years ago | (#20816157)

You really need to research Bretton Woods. Also the argument that "Good isn't useful for much and is precious only because its precious" is just insane. The first part is dead wrong. Gold has myriad industrial uses. As for the second, its even more true of money, and I really fail to see how that's a criticism of the idea. Also, you're attacking a completely tangential part of my point, which is that (completely aside from the relative merits of gold back vs. fiat currency) the Fed is guilty of grossly mismanaging the money supply in the USA which has resulted in prolonged periods of very high inflation.

Re:Next PS3 console mover? FF 13 (1)

Knara (9377) | about 7 years ago | (#20816229)

What qualifies as "prolonged periods of very high inflation"? Post the 1970's stagflation, I don't believe I can recall "prolonged periods of very high inflation", unless you can inflation being between 4-5% as "very high".

Re:Next PS3 console mover? FF 13 (1)

king-manic (409855) | about 7 years ago | (#20816665)

What time span are you referring to? Since the abolishment of the gold standard or the last 8 years? the last 8 years I agree.

The gold standard is dead And there isn't a compelling reason to revive it.

Re:Next PS3 console mover? FF 13 (1)

Cadallin (863437) | about 7 years ago | (#20817103)

The last 8 years. Admitted, the Gold Standard is dead, but the US Dollar is anything but stable, and the Fed solution to recent economic woes (More Loans! Lower Rates!) is unlikely to do anything to change that.

Re:Next PS3 console mover? FF 13 (1)

king-manic (409855) | about 7 years ago | (#20817503)

A stable dollar isn't necessarily a sigh of economic health. The current admin has made a whole slew of bad financial choices. It's going to take some time to turn that around. Hopefully the next be financially responsible. Demo or repub I think it's independent of party.

Re:Next PS3 console mover? FF 13 (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | about 7 years ago | (#20820967)

I've seen a list of the change in national debt for each president (I think it was on Wikipedia or something), overall it looked like the dems are much better at handling that than the repubs, every time the presidency went dem->rep the rate of new debt went up and every time it went rep -> dem it went down.

Re:Next PS3 console mover? FF 13 (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | about 7 years ago | (#20820951)

Nice theory except the USD's value has no bearing on these prices apparently as the PS3 costs 600€ in Europe. If the low USD was the reason for the 600$ price surely the European price would be lower?

!News (1)

huckamania (533052) | about 7 years ago | (#20814923)

It's not news and it's not even original, in the slightest bit. When Sony first showed LBP, many of the commentators said pretty much the same thing. Yada, yada, yada, shows the potential of the PS3, yada, yada, may be a reason to get a PS3, yada, yada, just about anything now is good news for Sony compared to how bad things are, yada, yada...

Quick, someone post a cost comparison showing how the PS3 is actually cheaper then a 360 and inline with the Wii, cause that will change the fact that Sony is losing this generation.

Sony doesn't care. They still think they skipped a generation with their cell and bluray. They don't realize that alot of the people who are buying Wiis right now are never going to be in the market for a PS3, but now they might buy the next Nintendo console that improves on the motion controls and concentrates on being fun. Even when the PS3 drops in price and the 360 is being replaced, the 360 customers aren't going to want a 3-5 year old console. They're going to want Halo V or whatever MS is shilling.

Sony made some big bets this round. If bluray loses, and I have no clue about who will ultimately win, then they will have lost big time. If bluray wins, the PS3 is just icing on a very large cake. Even if bluray wins, I don't think it will make that much of a difference for the PS3.

How to move PS3s (1)

Alzheimers (467217) | about 7 years ago | (#20815741)

Price cut, 100 bucks across the board, and bundle LittleBigPlanet for free.

Re:How to move PS3s (1)

Telepathetic Man (237975) | about 7 years ago | (#20818249)

That's something I'd go for. It'd give me a batter excuse to buy a PS3 than simply blue ray and GTA.

I always buy a $500 console for breakout games (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | about 7 years ago | (#20815917)

Especially one that uses an HD format for a TV that I would need to shell out $2000 for, to pay $60 a game for, and twice the normal DVD movie rate.

Oh, wait, this isn't Bizarro World?

Re:I always buy a $500 console for breakout games (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20819859)

If you think the price range for HDTV's starts at $2000, I'm quite sure you are, in fact, in bizarro world.

it looks neat (1)

Allison Geode (598914) | about 7 years ago | (#20816273)

but it won't make me buy a console for just that.

Still won't work. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20816277)

The PS3 is still priced out of my market. The PS3 isn't competing against the Wii and the 360, it's competing against *my computer*, and it's going to lose that argument every time.

Fanboys, nothing. It's important to keep developers and publishers aware of the fact that *I won't buy a PS3*. Not for this game, not for that game. Doesn't matter what. Not until they release a game more important to me *than all other games coming out for the PC that year, combined*.

Re:Still won't work. (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | about 7 years ago | (#20821261)

What about releasing games that are combined better than the upcoming PC games combined?

All the Wii talk in this... (1)

bealzabobs_youruncle (971430) | about 7 years ago | (#20817211)

thread is kind of a joke. I bought a Wii, played WiiSports for 20 minutes and didn't feel blown away. I brought my wife in from the other room, a self-professed non-gamer who complains all new games are too hard and have too many buttons. After a half hour with Wii Sports she asked "does this get any more interesting/difficult/fun?" and left the room. Of course she commandeered my 360 for 2 hours yesterday playing Frogger, so who knows. But the point is, the Wii is mostly a gimmick at this point with the same people trying to rationalize their purchase with the same lame arguments ( the Wii changes how we play games!, Who needs high def visual for a game?, I'll take gameplay over eye candy, etc... ad nauseum).

The Wii lacks good games and no matter how cheap it is and how long Nintendo perpetuates their artifical shortage, lack of a killer games will drive gamers to other platforms. Now the PS3 likely isn't that platform with an equally weak game selection, and hi-def movie format war that shows no signs of subsiding and a high price tag (in many peoples eyes). With a killer line up for the next few months, a decent library, an outstanding content purchase system and the definitive online gaming experience the 360 is what even casual gamers will be drawn too.

Re:All the Wii talk in this... (1)

Telepathetic Man (237975) | about 7 years ago | (#20817437)

Sure. If the Wii is a gimmick, then it's a gimmick on the level of a pet rock. Pet rock sold millions in it's day, just like the Wii is selling millions now. Worldwide, Wii has outsold both PS3 and the 360. So, even if it is a fad or a gimmick, it's done it's job. Made Nintendo millions of dollars and given them back a dominating market share to play with.

Re:All the Wii talk in this... (1)

Ant P. (974313) | about 7 years ago | (#20817803)

If the 360 is so much better, why isn't it winning?

Re:All the Wii talk in this... (1)

bealzabobs_youruncle (971430) | about 7 years ago | (#20818841)

It is winning, soundly rapping the PS3 on the knuckles. The Wii isn't a next-gen console, it is proof that Nintendo plans to take what it learned in the handheld market and try to apply it to stationary gaming sytems.

Re:All the Wii talk in this... (1)

DrXym (126579) | about 7 years ago | (#20820791)

Sometimes the best don't always win. I think Nintendo pulled a con job, launching a "next gen" console which was essentially a Gamecube 2.0 with a new controller. The public simply didn't know or care enough to realise what they're getting is woefully underpowered compared to either the 360 or PS3.

It's possible that some of the hype is beginning to wear off. The Wii is still the best seller by a mile, but its lead is diminishing month by month. It's possible that price drops on the 360 and PS3 will nullify its lead altogether.

Re:All the Wii talk in this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20821355)

Define winning? Sure, for the manufacturer, units and profit are important, and the Wii is ahead. But it's not really competing in the same market.

For the consumer however, winning means having a vast array of good games available, and quite frankly at the moment I have more things I want coming out for the 360 over the next couple of months than I have time to play. Not exactly the case for the Wii is it?

Re:All the Wii talk in this... (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | about 7 years ago | (#20818677)

Sure, judge a console with only one simple game that's NOT supposed to be complex/complicated.

Go play Metroid Prime 3 (advanced controls) then come back and tell us how it's "only a gimmick".

OTOH, I seriously hope Sony gets their act together and drop the PS3 to the same price as the Xbox 360. I may not like Sony but I hate Microsoft even more.

Innovative? (1)

Aladrin (926209) | about 7 years ago | (#20817843)

It seems to be more gimmicky than innovative, to me. How many people are going to spend hours and hours building cardboard cutout tanks? -yawn-

Don't get me wrong, I think the game will be neat, and I look forward to the adventure, especially with a friend (it had BETTER have net play, damnit) and I've pre-ordered it... But it's not the 'killer app' of the PS3 by any means.

Re:Innovative? (1)

mweather (1089505) | about 7 years ago | (#20819637)

You can download what other people make. Do you not think an infinite supply of innovative levels is a selling point?

What is the deal with SKU? (0)

Neuticle (255200) | about 7 years ago | (#20818607)

Just wondering, why do people constantly use the term SKU? E.g. "Sony may release a new PS3 SKU"

All it means is "Stock Keeping Unit". It's a term for one of the (sometimes) bar-coded number systems on boxes, and is used for tracking inventory and billing.

It does not have anything to do with different "models" of a product, other than that each different model would likely have different SKUs. BUT, This is up to the whim of the companies: they can and often do change a model and keep the same SKU.

Additionally, a different SKU doesn't necessarily imply that the product is different, e.g. a 2-pack would have a different SKU than a single or 3-pack of the same item. SKUs don't even have to be physical items. Warranties and delivery charges can have SKUs.

Stock KEEPING Unit, got it? It's for tracking inventory and sales.

Universal Product Code (UPC) is fairly similar as an item tracking system, but with the difference that different UPCs DEFINITIVELY indicate different products (i.e. different models or pack-ins).

For some reason, we don't see people saying "Microsoft released 3 Xbox360 UPCs", even though that would be a more correct way of saying MS released 3 different Xbox360 packages (core, premium, elite IIRC). /Rant

For your edification:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Product_Code [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_Keeping_Unit [wikipedia.org]

Re:What is the deal with SKU? (1)

Aladrin (926209) | about 7 years ago | (#20821043)

Why do people complain about this? What's it hurt you when they say that? Why do you even CARE?

360 missing family element???? (1)

jamie(really) (678877) | about 7 years ago | (#20819263)

The game is really innovative, and I think it adds a family element that is so far missing from both the Xbox 360 and the PS3.

My eldest daughter is four. We play video games together. The games we play the most are:

  1. Feeding Frenzy (XBox Arcade) - or "Fishy game" as it is known in our house
  2. LEGO Star Wars 2 on 360 - she directed me to design a pink princess with pink lightsaber
  3. Wario Ware on Wii - she only plays the levels with girls faces on the map tho
  4. Wii Sports - my wife plays this too because she can beat me at bowling

This last one is interesting. It confirms that people play video games they can win. All it takes to get a woman to play a video game is to find a game she can beat her husband at :-)

More annectdotal evidence (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20820435)

I might buy one for it.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?