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!

EA Says 'Next-Gen' Is 'Now-Gen'

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the didn't-know-they-were-the-official-scorekeepers dept.

181

Via GamesRadar, a Reuters report noting that the 'next generation' consoles are now more-or-less broken in. Sales for the PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, and Wii have transitioned to the point where software sales are going to be well worth the effort for development houses. "'[Black] Friday marked one of those points where you can say something's changed," [EA CEO Riccitiello] said. 'Around the world, based on the data I've got, it was pretty clear that the transition is now over. Key to that was Sony Corp's recent price cut for its PlayStation 3, which should ensure the struggling console hits the company's fiscal-year sales target of 11 million units.'"

cancel ×

181 comments

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

Yay EA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21561879)

EA wants you to think they think outside the box. EA wants you to think they're on the cutting edge. EA wants to be more relevant. Any surprise EA is trying to assess "what everyone thinks" ?

Yeah, keep trying Sony (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21561905)

Cheapest Xbox360: $280
Cheapest PS3: $400

Cheapest Wii: $565 (it's sold out, and that's the cheapest offer Amazon.com found!)
Cheapest Wii if they were in stock: $250

In any case, Sony's got quite a bit further to cut the price if they intend to compete with the Wii and the Xbox 360.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (4, Interesting)

Roskolnikov (68772) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562145)

ok, playing fanboy for a second, you list the cheapest wii available at 565 to make the 360's price look good.

Why not also mention that the 360 has the best warranty? Why not mention why (hint, red rings for the holidays)?

If not for Nintendo's amazing understanding of their audience the WII would not be able to compete, graphically, computationally its inferior, but that doesn't matter, its fun.

The XBOX360 would be a great system if not for the continual doubt as to the longevity of the hardware and the perpetual noise, also, Microsoft should be including a HDDVD-Rom capable drive in the mid and high end versions, it would be cheaper than that damned external $200 dollar optional 'player' and it would turn the box into the media center that Microsoft so desperately desires.

Sony should drop their bottom pricepoint to $300 but really, looking at the hardware specs and cost I don't see how.

and yeah, I own a PS3; when I find a WII in stock I suspect I will own one of those as well, the only thing on the 360 that I find attractive is the Halo franchise but it isn't enough to make me drop coin.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562275)

Why not also mention that the 360 has the best warranty? Why not mention why (hint, red rings for the holidays)?
Such a massive failure rate. Estimated to be 33%, informally out of everyone i know who has bought one 100% of them have replaced it at least once with several on their 3rd and 4th.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

The PS3 Will Fail (998952) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562831)

"informally out of everyone i know who has bought one 100% of them have replaced it at least once with several on their 3rd and 4th."
Hello. My name is Tom. You now know me. I have a 360 and it has not been replaced. You just lost your magical 100% "statistic".

Anecdotal evidence is meaningless. People need to stop mentioning it on Slashdot.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (2)

Doctor_Jest (688315) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562967)

Don't worry. It will.

Microsoft admitted to it... every console out "now" (at the time of the statement) had the potential to go T.U. Do you think they added a 3 year warranty _FREE_ for the RRoD issue (only) out of the goodness of their pea-pickin' hearts? That's RECALL protection... Unfortunately for them, it's still not _class_action_ protection.

Anything over 10% is a problem... so people need to stop defending Microsoft for uber craptacular harwdare. (And yes, I own one... it's a nice console.. when it works.) They may have designed a good console... they MANUFACTURED a shitty one.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

SQLGuru (980662) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563049)

The big key to anecdotal evidence is that your circle determines your likelihood of purchase at any one point.

I'm sure that almost 100% of his 100% purchased their systems within 1 to 2 months of each other and quite likely from the same stores (or at least from the same regional shipment). So, while 33% of *ALL* XBox360's have the problem, I would expect it to be near 100% of those shipped in the first X months, 75% of those shipped in the next X months, etc. to such as point where any being shipped now should be pretty close to 0% failure rate (never 0, but closer to 0 than 100).

I, on the other hand, am still getting by with my XBox and don't have too many friends that have invested in next gen yet (I'm thinking mid-March when retailers start trying to weasel us out of our tax refunds). So, I know of exactly 0 people that have had to have their XBox360's replaced (much less multiple times).

Layne

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (-1, Flamebait)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563619)

Hello. My name is Tom. You now know me. I have a 360 and it has not been replaced. You just lost your magical 100% "statistic".

Anecdotal evidence is meaningless. People need to stop mentioning it on Slashdot.
You missed the part where several major retailers including EB/gamestop re-affirmed the ~33% stat.

As well I prefaced that section with a "informally" meaning it is anecdotal and people can take it however they want. Failures tend to group together. Although my cohort of 360 buyers didn't get their's at the same time (one guy got it at launch another got is 3 months ago), the route the 360's take to get here is the same so they all share some environmental conditioning. As an aside the actual stat is 15/15 have replaced their 360; 1 person is on his 4th; 2 people are on their 3rd. The one on his 4th was partially due to usage. We always used to hang out at his house, so his 360 saw heavy use (he is also the guy who got it at launch). If you got any version aside from the most recent 65 nm, there is good chance you too will turn it in before the 3 year RROD warranty expires. It's a fairly substantial design flaw.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (3, Insightful)

The PS3 Will Fail (998952) | more than 6 years ago | (#21564219)

"You missed the part where several major retailers including EB/gamestop re-affirmed the ~33% stat."
How could I have missed "the part" when you did not mention EB/Gamestop in your original post? Also - you'll need to cite a statistically valid study that shows 33%, not some manager from an EB. I'll also thank you very much for losing the fucking tone with me. Seriously - I missed the part of your post where you mentioned EB/Gamestop? I'm still missing it because it's not fucking there asshole.

But honestly, and here's where you really failed - my point was that your anecdotal evidence has no fucking place in any discussion. The fact that you said "informally" only underlines the fact that you already understood that your anecdotal evidence was completely fucking worthless but still chose to bring it up. That means you're not a moron but instead, just an asshole. Too bad, I would have liked you better if you were a moron. Now fuck off and die, asshole.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

BillOfThePecosKind (1140837) | more than 6 years ago | (#21564315)

whoah...

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (-1, Flamebait)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21564629)

How could I have missed "the part" when you did not mention EB/Gamestop in your original post? Also - you'll need to cite a statistically valid study that shows 33%, not some manager from an EB. I'll also thank you very much for losing the fucking tone with me. Seriously - I missed the part of your post where you mentioned EB/Gamestop? I'm still missing it because it's not fucking there asshole.

But honestly, and here's where you really failed - my point was that your anecdotal evidence has no fucking place in any discussion. The fact that you said "informally" only underlines the fact that you already understood that your anecdotal evidence was completely fucking worthless but still chose to bring it up. That means you're not a moron but instead, just an asshole. Too bad, I would have liked you better if you were a moron. Now fuck off and die, asshole.
well thats what i get for feeding the trolls. ohh well.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

The PS3 Will Fail (998952) | more than 6 years ago | (#21564689)

You refuted nothing I said.

Your anecdotal evidence served no point in this discussion. It had no place here.

I may have resorted to personal attacks but at least I had content to go along with those attacks. You just launched a personal attack against me with no discussion of the valid points I raised.

Since we've previously established that you're not a moron, it appears you realize that you are beat but still want the last word. Sorry asshole, you lost. Shut the fuck up.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (-1, Flamebait)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21564717)

You refuted nothing I said.

Your anecdotal evidence served no point in this discussion. It had no place here.

I may have resorted to personal attacks but at least I had content to go along with those attacks. You just launched a personal attack against me with no discussion of the valid points I raised.

Since we've previously established that you're not a moron, it appears you realize that you are beat but still want the last word. Sorry asshole, you lost. Shut the fuck up.
You need not refute juvenile drivel. Only acknowledge the child lest they throw a bigger tantrum.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

The PS3 Will Fail (998952) | more than 6 years ago | (#21564805)

"You need not refute juvenile drivel. Only acknowledge the child lest they throw a bigger tantrum."
Are you saying that I should just ignore your personal attacks?

Seriously - your anecdotal evidence had no place in the discussion. It is meaningless and caters to the weak-minded. The fact that you knew it was worthless only underlines the fact that you were being intellectually dishonest in bringing it up.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21565671)

Are you saying that I should just ignore your personal attacks?
Remember who threw the first Ad hominem before bemoaning of mis treatment.

Seriously - your anecdotal evidence had no place in the discussion. It is meaningless and caters to the weak-minded. The fact that you knew it was worthless only underlines the fact that you were being intellectually dishonest in bringing it up.
Well now that we're done with the profanity.

Note the word estimates in the original post, also note when I referred to a EB/gamestop I did not specify it was in the original post. The 30-33% estimates come from several retail insiders not just one. here are some links:

here [gizmodo.com]
here [smarthousenews.com.au]
some [technabob.com] here
and here [pcworld.com] .

An Analysis [gamepolitics.com] .

It is accepted that the true failure rates is greater then the 3-5% MS publicly claimed. It's estimated to be ~33%, many pundits from many media agencies accept that is a reasonable estimate given the evidence. There was such a flurry of media attention on it I was surprised you had "missed it", the media flurry.

As for my anecdote, I assume anyone who isn't new to slashdot will take any anecdote with a grain of salt. As your lack of machine failure represents a data point of 1 case, while my anecdote of 100% machine failure represents a data point of 15 cases. This is 16 data points/11 million possible; non-random/self selected data points. I prefaced it with a verbal warning.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 6 years ago | (#21564811)

Failures tend to group together.

Which explains most internet forum userbases.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (2, Funny)

Poltras (680608) | more than 6 years ago | (#21564545)

Tom? Is that really you? Dad?!?

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

p0tat03 (985078) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563501)

Ain't anecdotal evidence great? I know at least 10 people with Xbox 360's, and not one of them have had to have it replaced. It's no secret that the 360 has comparatively high failure rates, but 33%? Please link to the publication where you got that number, otherwise you're just spreading FUD.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563771)

Ain't anecdotal evidence great? I know at least 10 people with Xbox 360's, and not one of them have had to have it replaced. It's no secret that the 360 has comparatively high failure rates, but 33%? Please link to the publication where you got that number, otherwise you're just spreading FUD./quote>

here [gizmodo.com] is [smarthousenews.com.au] some [technabob.com] more and yet more [pcworld.com] .

They do have a small base to draw their numbers from. However the 1.3 bil they allocated for RROD warranty replacement is enough to replace 1/3 of all 360's out there if the replacement cost is retail. More if it isn't. So the figure seems to make sense if the failure rate is close to 33% [gamepolitics.com] .

There seems to be a consistent number offered by at least 3 independent sources (many of the articles quote from each other). This estimate conforms with the money allocated. thus it's reasonable to assume the number is a fair estimate.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

jamie(really) (678877) | more than 6 years ago | (#21565613)

None of the articles you reference provide any direct evidence. Even PCW says "Anecdotal evidence suggests the Xbox 360 failure rate may be as high as one of every three machines according to retailers." Not "EB COO states return rate was 2.9m consoles", but "Anecdotal evidence" from and EB "Employee". Your evidence is pretty paltry.

I do find it interesting, however, that the source of these stories will happily sell you a warranty for it.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563569)

The Wii or the 360?

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

Bobartig (61456) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563949)

My anecdotal tally is that they have over 100% failure rate over the course of a year. This is from a poll of about 35 people who have collectively gone through more than 50 x360s, with some individuals going through 3-4.

The X360 has awesome games, but it also has the life expectancy of a Ferrari Enzo in the hands of a coke snorting CEO.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

Vouchers (1193843) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562299)

Sony should drop their bottom pricepoint to $300 but really, looking at the hardware specs and cost I don't see how.
I was thinking that they might be able to sell the console at a loss like the Xbox 360 did, but it seems that they're already doing that. I think that they're losing more per console than the Xbox and Nintendo is actually making a profit off their Wii sales. It seems highly unlikely that the price can drop much lower.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

Tulisin (1197733) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563611)

They're still banking on the hope that hardware prices will continue to fall, especially the price for Blu-Ray players. If Blu-Ray wins the format war, we might see a $300 PS3.

Xbox media center? (2, Insightful)

DingerX (847589) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562335)

Microsoft should be including a HDDVD-Rom capable drive in the mid and high end versions, it would be cheaper than that damned external $200 dollar optional 'player' and it would turn the box into the media center that Microsoft so desperately desires.
Who told you that Microsoft "desperately desires" to turn the box into a media center? I'm sure some people at MS do, but others are probably saying "if it's too good, it will cut into our Vista Media Center Edition market segment."

Re:Xbox media center? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21563151)

What exactly is the Vista Media Center Edition (doesn't actually exist; media center is built in to some/most versions of home vista) market? I mean there are some hardcore enthusiasts who are willing to drop $1000+ on an "HTPC", but by and large it seems one of the main uses of media center is to share music/movies/porn/whatever and use a networked XBox360 as a media extender.

Re:Xbox media center? (1)

SQLGuru (980662) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563263)

Not any more than XP Media Center already cuts into it...... :)

Layne

Re:Xbox media center? (1)

mabhatter654 (561290) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563579)

Xbox that they 100% control as a closed device they get all the cash from, or the version of their monopoly OS, but people might hack it or copy it.... it's a win-win for them no matter which one customers buy.

Re:Xbox media center? (1)

DingerX (847589) | more than 6 years ago | (#21565347)

They ain't "them." It's not win-win for "them". It's a win for the MCE folks if customers buy it, and a win for the Xbox division if that's the winner.

It's kinda like "We can't allocate forces to that battle, because if we capture Bin Laden, then the CIA wins, and not the DoD." Or, to quote the Ed209 Project Lead, Dick Jones, "You know what the tragedy is here Bob? We could have been friends. But you wouldn't go through proper channels."

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21562439)

nobody with a brain wants a 360 with an HD-DVD drive on it, or it would cost $200 more. the only people asking for it are using the lack of one as an argument against the 360, they are too stupid to know that not having one is a good thing.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (0, Troll)

insanius (1058584) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562505)

ummmm......yea, i'd mod you down if i had the points.....there should be -1 Fanboy mod.....you own a PS3, but the only thing you see on the 360 worth playing is Halo????....what about superior versions of all of the games PS3 has????.....the only *good* game that is PS3 exclusive is R&C....Uncharted, unfortunately, is a disappointment.....if it wasn't for the blue-ray player, my PS3 would never be used....

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21562755)

Resistance has phenomenal multiplayer, scaling up like Halo never could. Not to mention it's just damn pretty (that cathedral level is worth the price of admission). It's certainly worthy of being a PS3 flagship title.

Of course it's still a pretty much standard shooter, and god knows people are sick of those. The controller issue isn't so much of one -- the FragFX controller really does look like the best of both worlds (and won't be seen on the 360 thanks to Microsoft's exclusive lock on the wireless controller protocol)

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21564281)

You must be a fucking moron or way richer than the rest of us to think that a single level in a game is worth $460

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

Stevecrox (962208) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563037)

Yes a -1 fanboy moderation would be brilliant just like a -1 irony one would be too. He stated an opinion just because you disagree with it doesn't mean you moderate it negatively, you should reply as to why you think it's wrong. Moderating something down purely because you disagree is bad moderation.

what about superior versions of all of the games PS3

Oh in case you didn't understand the irony crack I found it ironic that an obvious flamebait post accusing someone of being a PS3 fanboy was made by a 360 fanboy.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

Sciros (986030) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563117)

Well if you like Halo then you also like Gears of War. Guaranteed. Ninja Gaiden 2's not looking too bad, either, but it's probably a year away from release. Another good argument for the 360 is a better controller for the cross-platform titles, I suppose. Oh and now there's Mass Effect.

So, the 360 has its share of good exclusives. I'm actually waiting until some good ones come out for PS3. Ratchet and Clank is cool but I need something more memorable like FFXIII before I really consider getting one.

And yes also kinda looking around for a Wii, will get one when I see it :-/

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

Tulisin (1197733) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563699)

Both Halo and Gears of War have gotten PC ports though, there are many rumors floating around about Mass Effect as well. This is actually a major point for me and one of the reasons the 360 is the "now-gen" console I'm least interested in. Excellent Xbox 360 games will likely be ported over to PC, so I'll just play them there.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

Sciros (986030) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563885)

Yeah the whole console vs PC argument is lost on me because I enjoy playing split-screen multiplayer games a lot (usually with my bro), and a controller across from a TV just feels better to me than sitting at a computer. Now, I'm a big PC gamer as well and the Elder Scrolls games on PC are some of my favorite, but if I had to choose to give up PC or console, I'd give up PC.

So basically, split-screen co-op for Halo and Gears is enough for me to not give a hoot about the PC versions.

Some 360 games will not be ported to 360, though, such as Ninja Gaiden 2. Also, you usually have to wait a LONG time for the other franchises. I mean, Halo 2 came out for PC just a little bit before Halo 3 hit shelves for the 360. You end up being a couple of years behind! By the way that also is something one can say to counter the "PCs have superior hardware" argument (among many other things).

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

Walpurgiss (723989) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563327)

Come to dekalb IL, the walmart supercenter here had 3 on shelf when I was grocery shopping there on saturday.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

mollymoo (202721) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563777)

Why not also mention that the 360 has the best warranty? Why not mention why (hint, red rings for the holidays)?

Perhaps because the 360 doesn't have the best warranty; the Wii has the best warranty (15 months if you register). Microsoft only offer the extension specifically for the red ring of death, the warranty for the whole device is 12 months.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

Planesdragon (210349) | more than 6 years ago | (#21565403)

If not for Nintendo's amazing understanding of their audience the WII would not be able to compete, graphically, computationally its inferior, but that doesn't matter, its fun.
Graphics or "amazing understanding" have nothing to do with it; the Wii succeeds because of the controller. Even with the craptacular ports, there are enough good wii-mote games that it's worth the purchase price.

and yeah, I own a PS3; when I find a WII in stock I suspect I will own one of those as well, the only thing on the 360 that I find attractive is the Halo franchise but it isn't enough to make me drop coin.
What the hell have you found on the PS3 that's worth the system + game purchase price? Right now, even if the systems and the games were equal in price, I couldn't see a point to buy a PS3 instead of a 360 or a Wii.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (2, Interesting)

p0tat03 (985078) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563527)

Look, I have a 360, I like it a lot, and I'm by most standards I'm a 360 fan. But really, those numbers are just BS.

The $280 Xbox 360 is so badly crippled it might as well not exist. It's a damned shame MS sells it at all. The cheapest Xbox 360 that even guarantees an acceptable gaming experience is the $400 one. Without a hard drive your Xbox is useless.

So really it boils down to... $400 vs. $400 vs. $250. Like it or not the PS3 is now very solid competition for the 360 price-wise. Now if only Sony can get some exclusives worth a damn that doesn't start with "F" and end in "antasy".

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (3, Informative)

IKnwThePiecesFt (693955) | more than 6 years ago | (#21564213)

FYI the 360 Premium (with HDD) is $350, not $400.

Crippling price-point (3, Insightful)

Tony (765) | more than 6 years ago | (#21564741)

The $280 Xbox 360 is so badly crippled it might as well not exist.

Actually, it's a shame it *does* exist.

Game developers have to target the *lowest common denominator.* That means they have to target the non-HDD 360. That meanst they can't count on streaming game data, or anything else. So, the non-HDD version not only is crippled itself, but it cripples the potential of the games themselves.

Same thing with the lack of HD-DVD. Game data is at the point where it fills a DVD to capacity. Game developers have to over-compress textures, reduce level complexity, reduce the amount of cinematic content, and whatnot. (Yes, this is already happening. Check out comments by some of the Unreal Tournament 3 devs.)

I think this is the 360's biggest weakness. It gives Microsoft an early advantage, but as you pointed out, the price advantage is essentially gone. Now we'll see if the early lead is enough to overcome the technical deficiencies in their most-crippled console.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 6 years ago | (#21564871)

The 400$ one is 350$ now AFAIK.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

im_thatoneguy (819432) | more than 6 years ago | (#21565309)

Crippled for you maybe but not for its TARGET AUDIENCE. That's like saying the Wii's hardware is so cripled compared to the 360 and PS3 that it's not even worth mentioning.

The Wii is 'living proof' that not everybody needs the uber-edition and just wants to play a simple game. The new 360 "arcade" is an excellent option for a large portion of the population.

There are almost no supply limitations right now. IF nobody was buying the Arcade edition, Microsoft would stop selling it. The fact that it still exists is proof that there are people buying it.

Re:Yeah, keep trying Sony (1)

Tulisin (1197733) | more than 6 years ago | (#21565433)

If lack of a hard drive makes the $280 360 an "unacceptable gaming experience" then lack of backwards compatibility has to put the $400 PS3 on the same level. The PS3 simply does not have a large enough game library to compete without access to the *extremely* extensive PS2 library (not to mention that of the many many great PS2 games, most are now being discounted as "last-gen" games).

Really? (3, Insightful)

coppro (1143801) | more than 6 years ago | (#21561921)

And so the number of sales is indicative how? I'd say that when you've got three consoles that were sold out immediately after release, you've made the transition. The market may not have been able to accomodate the demand, but three consecutive sell-outs - especially when followed continuously by extremely strong sales for the Wii and 360 - indicates that the transition to next-gen has been made. I mean, two years to decide that developing for the 360 is a good idea?

Re:Really? (5, Insightful)

Orange Crush (934731) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562079)

I mean, two years to decide that developing for the 360 is a good idea?

Around 120 million PS2s have been shipped to date. That's ~80 million more PS2s than all three next gen consoles combined. Granted many will have broken/been discarded/packed away/etc, but that still leaves a helluvalot of working PS2s out there. EA's mission is to sell games and customers don't typically buy games for systems they don't have.

What they're saying is that the new consoles finally have reached a total installed base large enough for EA to be comfortable devoting more resources to those platforms and moving away from the PS2.

Re:Really? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562143)

I think what he means is that now there are enough consoles in the market to make developing for the consoles actually viable for the studios. It was a given that the 360 would sooner or later replace the XBox 1.0, but so far, you could only push a title when you either got money from Nintendo, Sony or MS (or are part of their corporation anyway), or when you had a must-have title in the making, which will still sell after 2-3 years.

A game that's 2 years old is a dead weight on the shelves. SDKs get better, developers have more experience with the tools and they will crank out better looking games in the same development time. So usually, with a standard vanilla game, you have to sell it at release or you'll never sell it (unless you mark it down into the sales bin). The only thing you can still sell at prime time prices are must-have sequels of games. That's why you predominantly saw long running series released until now.

When you look back in their history again, you'll notice that their first appearance wasn't exactly at the market introduction of the console they ran on. There, too, they waited until market saturation set in so you could sell a "normal" game.

Darn (3, Funny)

Apple Acolyte (517892) | more than 6 years ago | (#21561945)

I just got a PS1 and I'm as mad as hell over this announcement.

Re:Darn (1)

mmxsaro (187943) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562449)

Yeah, well, my 2600 is officially a door-stopper.

No More "Last-Gen" EA Releases? (1)

Vouchers (1193843) | more than 6 years ago | (#21561967)

Does this mark the end of EA Sports games on the PS2 and other "Last-Gen" consoles? Madden NFL 2008, for example, seems to have been released on practically every console [ea.com] , as well as Windows and OS X. I think I've seen a few other new PS2 titles from other publishers too. When will these consoles cease to be worth developing for?

Re:No More "Last-Gen" EA Releases? (3, Informative)

Knara (9377) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562107)

I can't quote you a URL at the moment, but I recall that Sony announced they'll be endorsing developers to make games for the PS2 at least through 2010. Given the huge install base of the PS2, it seems likely that there will be titles released on the Ps2 for a least a few years. Sadly, I imagine they won't be anything terribly innovative, but rather just releases of the franchise sports titles and the like.

*sigh* (1)

nlitement (1098451) | more than 6 years ago | (#21561975)

EA Says 'Next-Gen' Is 'Now-Gen'
I wish they said that verbatim. I'm getting tired of the "next-gen" buzz word. If it's "next", then how come we already play it?

Re:*sigh* (1)

cowscows (103644) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562953)

I never really considered it that much of a buzz-word, but just more as a particular way to group together all the newer consoles. What other word would you have used? "The new consoles"?, "The next consoles"? I guess you could call them the current consoles, but sort of coming back to the point of the article, the PS2 is just as much a current console, because there are tons of them sitting in living rooms .

I think the 360, wii, PS3 will be referred to collectively as the next-gen consoles until we start hearing whispers about the next round of hardware. Then today's "next-gen" will turn into the "current-gen", there will be a new "next-gen", and the PS2 will just be referred to as the PS2, because it'll be the only older console that statistically significant.

Re:*sigh* (1)

Phisbut (761268) | more than 6 years ago | (#21564675)

I never really considered it that much of a buzz-word, but just more as a particular way to group together all the newer consoles. What other word would you have used? "The new consoles"?, "The next consoles"? I guess you could call them the current consoles, but sort of coming back to the point of the article, the PS2 is just as much a current console, because there are tons of them sitting in living rooms .

next gen is relative, and loses meaning as time passes. The absolute term to talk about the Xbox 360/PS3/Wii is seventh gen [wikipedia.org] .

Re:*sigh* (1)

Harlequin (11000) | more than 6 years ago | (#21564841)

Have you considered referring to them as the PS36Wii?

EA is crazy, Sony won't hit that target (4, Informative)

rbarreira (836272) | more than 6 years ago | (#21561983)

Bear with me for a little while here.

Sony's target is to ship 11 million PS3s during this fiscal year (April 2007 - March 2008). In the first half of the year (April - September) they shipped 2 million PS3s. Even with increased holiday sales, 9 million in the remaining 6 months is absolutely crazy - it's actually similar to Wii sales.

Let's look at it another way:

In the previous fiscal year, Sony shipped 3.6 million PS3s. 11 + 3.6 = 14.6. 14.6 million PS3s shipped by the 31st of March 2008, which means around 14 million sold to consumers. According to vgchartz (which may be a little off but for the purposes of this discussion is more than accurate enough), the PS3 is at 6.36 million sold (to consumers) as of the 25th of November. 14 - 6.36 = 7.64 PS3s that they need to sell in 4 months... That's 1.91 million PS3s per month, which is more than current Wii levels of production (1.8 million according to Nintendo themselves).

EA is delusional, and Sony won't hit their target. In fact, they'll probably reduce their forecast in the next quarterly report (out in January). Otherwise, massive egg will be on their faces when they do their fiscal year report in April.

Re:EA is crazy, Sony won't hit that target (1)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562243)

Sony's target is to ship 11 million PS3s during this fiscal year (April 2007 - March 2008). In the first half of the year (April - September) they shipped 2 million PS3s. Even with increased holiday sales, 9 million in the remaining 6 months is absolutely crazy - it's actually similar to Wii sales.

Let's look at it another way:

In the previous fiscal year, Sony shipped 3.6 million PS3s. 11 + 3.6 = 14.6. 14.6 million PS3s shipped by the 31st of March 2008, which means around 14 million sold to consumers. According to vgchartz (which may be a little off but for the purposes of this discussion is more than accurate enough), the PS3 is at 6.36 million sold (to consumers) as of the 25th of November. 14 - 6.36 = 7.64 PS3s that they need to sell in 4 months... That's 1.91 million PS3s per month, which is more than current Wii levels of production (1.8 million according to Nintendo themselves).

They had shipped 5.9 million in total by march [scei.co.jp] Not sure if they are aiming for a cumulative 11 mil or 11 mil in a single year. but cumulative it's not a hard target.

Re:EA is crazy, Sony won't hit that target (3, Interesting)

rbarreira (836272) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562347)

They had shipped 5.9 million in total by march Not sure if they are aiming for a cumulative 11 mil or 11 mil in a single year. but cumulative it's not a hard target.

That was before they changed their method of counting "shipped units". Before, they counted any manufactured unit as a shipped unit (as in shipped to their warehouses). After they changed the counting method, they reported that the shipped amount until March was 3.6 million. It's all in their financial reports.

Regarding whether the 11 million is cumulative or fiscal-year only, it's the latter for sure. Fiscal targets are always for the fiscal year, and you can easily find articles which confirm this:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/10/25/business/sony.php [iht.com]

Re:EA is crazy, Sony won't hit that target (1)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563209)

11 + 3.6 = 14.6. 14.6 million PS3s shipped by the 31st of March 2008, which means around 14 million sold to consumers
It means 14.6 million PS3s shipped to retailers. It's not unreasonable to expect that >> .6 million PS3s will be in wholesale/retail inventory as of 3/31. Don't forget that D-J-F are huge retail sales months for consumer electronics in the US.

Also don't forget that they have dropped/are dropping prices.

I'm not saying that the numbers don't appear wacky; but, those figures could be within the realm of what's really expected. I think once they get December sales results, they will adjust their figures accordingly... but they may also be counting on the Wii shortage to pump up their sales a bit.

Re:EA is crazy, Sony won't hit that target (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21563373)

So was EA paid to say that?

Translation: (1)

644bd346996 (1012333) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562025)

He thinks the Wii's sales will start slacking off any day now, and then most of the money will be spent on games, which means him. Of course, the market for the Wii is nowhere close to saturated, and Microsoft and Sony are very far from earning back the losses they incurred upon selling the hardware.

Re:Translation: (2, Informative)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562211)

Wii sales are still going crazy. Actually, it's hard to find a console (I've seen people fight over the last one). I recently got an offer of 400 bucks for mine. Check EBay, you'll notice people pay crazy prices for a used Wii, often more than you'd pay for a new one (provided you can find one, that is).

So I'd say the Wii has anything but reached market saturation. Ok, it's Christmas around the corner, so people are desperate to get some, but usually around Christmas, the shops have a few consoles lying around from throughout the year when people didn't buy them. This was not the case with the Wii, throughout the year sales were near output level and thus there is now no surplus of consoles (which would be usual for the Christmas sales).

The problem with the PS3 is simply the price tag. People do not buy a "game toy" for the price that is usually associated with a computer which can be used as much for games as the PS3, with the ability to run other stuff, too.

Re:Translation: (1)

derinax (93566) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563525)

The problem with the PS3 is simply the price tag. People do not buy a "game toy" for the price that is usually associated with a computer which can be used as much for games as the PS3, with the ability to run other stuff, too.
Like browse the web, plug in your camera's memory card and print out your favorite pictures, stream music throughout your home, watch a High-Definition Blu-Ray or standard DVD movie, shop online, contribute to Folding@Home, or run Linux? And oh yeah, play some video games too? Yeah, PCs are useful, aren't they?

See what I did there?

The biggest surprise to me was how the PS3 really *is* a computer. How many *game consoles* print to a USB printer? Granted, the interface is much more guided, like an appliance, but that's okay in my book. Hell, it's cheap for what you get. My wife is amazed by its capability, and it's become the media hub for our home.

Re:Translation: (1)

Orange Crush (934731) | more than 6 years ago | (#21564299)

I'll admit I was surprised by the printer feature. I know Sony's been "everything but the kitchen sink-ifying" the PS3, but until now had no idea it had printer support.

For everything under the hood and everything it can be used for--yes, the PS3 is a great deal for its price.

The problem is, most people who want a device to print digital camera pics, surf the net, etc and can afford a $400-$600 purchase already have a computer so these features of the PS3 aren't really adding value to them. BluRay's nice, but that's not a big selling point in the middle of a format war since by the time it's over the winning format players will have come down in price considerably and there's no longer the risk of picking the wrong one after investing hundreds if not thousands in the player and video library.

That really only leaves the games and a lot of people just can't bring themselves to slap down that much for a video game system.

Re:Translation: (1)

BillOfThePecosKind (1140837) | more than 6 years ago | (#21564523)

yea... but can you fuck it?

Re:Translation: (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 6 years ago | (#21564967)

Do you really want to do your text editing in front of a TV? I don't know about yours but I'd go nuts if I had to work on a 50-60Hz screen, especially one that can only do 640x480 because anything reasonable costs way too much. For comparison, my PC CRT does 72Hz at 1280x960 (it can do more but that's what I'm using it at) and it cost me 150€.

Re:Translation: (1)

derinax (93566) | more than 6 years ago | (#21565187)

TV? Hertz? CRT?

The PS3 has an HDMI interface for a reason, and at 1080p and 720p is pixel-perfect on any LCD, DLP, or Plasma monitor-- certainly moreso than any analog VGA CRT connection from a PC; although you can do that too with an HDMI-->VGA adapter. I'll grant you, if you can't upgrade to a 200 monitor with a digital connection, you probably aren't in the PS3's target market.

So do I really want to edit text in front of my 103-inch 720p LCD projector screen? Yes; yes I do. I do most of my programming in front of it.

Re:Translation: (2, Insightful)

Diss Champ (934796) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563967)

The problem with the PS3 WAS the price tag. Considering that they are now cheaper than the going ebay cost of a Wii the verb tense is important there.

Re:Translation: (1)

PrescriptionWarning (932687) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562899)

Game sales for the Wii might be a tad difficult in the future, as most people I know who have one only need it for the 5 or fewer games they care to play. Sure the new Super Smash Bros game is most likely gonna tempt me to finally go out and buy one, the problem is that there's only about 5 other games I'd go for. The casual gaming market may indeed be a very big one, only problem is you just can't sell a casual gamer on too much.

Hold on (5, Funny)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562067)

So the last gen was the next gen, the generation before that was the superconsoles, and the next gen was going to be the HD era, but now the last gen is the old gen, the next gen is this gen, and the superconsoles are retro? Where does that put retro?

Re:Hold on (1)

Convector (897502) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562403)

Super-retro. It totally sucks there.

Re:Hold on (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21562463)

in the dumpster

Re:Hold on (1)

MaXMC (138127) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562507)

Who cares about the old-retro, what is the next gen systems going to be called when they become the current gen systems?

Re:Hold on (1)

Hellpop (451893) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562623)

Not sure where that leaves us... I'm gonna go play my Saturn.

Re:Hold on (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562751)

As always, retro is the future!

Re:Hold on (1)

SQLGuru (980662) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563163)

I think you can get retro on your watch now.....or at least in a joystick that plugs into your TV.

Layne

That's unfortunate. (2, Insightful)

Seumas (6865) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562429)

So what we have now is as good as it is going to get for the next five to ten years? That's unfortunate. That's where the PC gaming will always be superior. PCs were already outperforming consoles by the time the newest gen of consoles were released. And while my console systems will be performing about the same in five or ten years as they were last year, my PC will be performing perhaps twice as well next year as it is this year.

Console gaming companies need to come out with a different model. These are videogame systems; not car stereos toasters. Perhaps they need to introduce some sort of leasing model where gamers lease the consoles and then they come out with a more advanced console (or upgrade the current ones) after a year or two. It obviously isn't reasonable to release a $500 console every other year because gamers won't spend $500 every year (per gaming system) just for the hardware.

I really have a hard time wrapping my head around the idea that a gaming system that provides essentially the same experience and quality is sufficient for five or ten years. I mean, think about it -- would you want to have been gaming in 2000 on a rig that was built in 1995 or even 1990?!

Re:That's unfortunate. (1)

Detritus (11846) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562625)

There's always a learning curve for consoles. It takes a number of years for developers to learn how to fully exploit the console's hardware. That helps offset the increasing obsolescence of a fixed hardware configuration.

Re:That's unfortunate. (2, Interesting)

Seumas (6865) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562739)

And why is that even necessary? There isn't this massive learning curve for PC developers. Yes, they have to learn a few new tricks and features here and there to better optimize the juice from the newest gen of hardware, but it doesn't take them two or three years to get up to speed on the latest NVIDIA or ATI card.

Do console developers seriously need to re-invent every aspect of the wheel for each generation? They can't make them a bit more modular and just iteratively improve the existing systems throughout their lifespan?

There has to be some other model that can be used in console gaming that doesn't involve one fresh generation every decade, with a slowly deteriorating experience with each passing year (in comparison to other gaming options like a PC).

Re:That's unfortunate. (1)

Dogtanian (588974) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563219)

Yes, they have to learn a few new tricks and features here and there to better optimize the juice from the newest gen of hardware, but it doesn't take them two or three years to get up to speed on the latest NVIDIA or ATI card.
That's probably because PC gamers are expected to have a relatively new graphics card to get the best graphics anyway. I doubt PC developers worry about getting their games to look amazing on 3+ year old cards- and PC gamers who are bothered enough would probably have bought a new card anyway. It's open to question which is leading which- probably a bit of both.

But they can't do that with consoles. Also, there's only one basic hardware configuration for a given console, which no doubt makes it easier to learn and optimise.

Certainly, in the old days with computers, the exact same thing happened. The games coming out for (say) the Commodore 64 in the late 1980s were technically miles ahead of the ones released six or seven years earlier. Same goes for a lot of other (basically) fixed-capability 8-bit machines. I suspect the reasons for the improvements were (a) improved experience, (b) pressure from the newer 16-bit machines, (c) the ability to use nice tools running on those shiny new machines to make games running on the old computers... and (d) just the general upward pressure on standards.

Re:That's unfortunate. (1)

SQLGuru (980662) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563239)

Actually, I think it's there for the PC as well....you just don't feel it.

In the PC world, the highest of high end is available to only the few willing to pony up the cash. The software doesn't really target the new tech until "enough" people have bought into it. That doesn't mean that they aren't learning about it.

Also, the model is different because the platform is open. In the PC world, you have drivers for your card.....you might have to learn a new API, but the rest of the model stays the same. If ATI could come along and dictate the machine code and the memory model and all of that other stuff too, you'd have a much higher learning curve for each new level of tech. ATI controls only one small piece of the total picture.....that's the only piece you have to learn.

Layne

Re:That's unfortunate. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21563607)

The problem in the PC realm isn't that it takes the developers years to get up to speed on a video card, it's the consumers. Crysis is the current gem in the PC world that is demanding heavy upgrades from consumers. A while back, Tribes 2 was a game that required hardware that wasn't even on sale yet to play; visually pleasing, but computationally demanding.

In the console end, the consumers just have to buy once, except in the case where a company designs upgrades or new devices, such as the CD Rom drive systems in the 16-bit era. Some people purchase these upgrades, but it's a slim portion of the original selection.

Though this is easier for the consumers, it does make it hard for developers. In most cases, things just aren't portable from one system to the next, even from the same developer. Specialized calls to save time or take advantage of a feature have to be thrown out and re-discovered, simply because the hardware is not the same. In the computing world, it's the same as going from a PC to a Mac, then maybe to one of those new-design Amiga's; the code won't work the same, so you'll have to learn the way the computer is designed, how it operates, and usually how the OS on top of it limits or helps you. If you're fortunate, you can grab an engine that someone else researched and developed and ported; otherwise, it's R&D for you.

As a final note, Nintendo tried to entice developers by having the Wii having similar underlying hardware as the GameCube, so that there wouldn't be as much re-inventing of the wheel. At least the ones on the bottom; there is a new steering wheel unique in the console realm. But the underlying processing for video and code and the like is supposed to be similar.

Re:That's unfortunate. (1)

tao (10867) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562761)

At least I'm still happily playing games on my PS2, and it was released 2000. The big advantage of a console is that the game houses have a fixed platform to develop for. They don't need to worry about NVidia vs ATI, amount of RAM installed, OS-version, libraries installed, etc. They know the limitations from the start, and they can optimise for that hardware.

Re:That's unfortunate. (1)

Toonol (1057698) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562909)

You're criticizing the main advantage that consoles have over PCs. I would love it if the effective life stretched out even longer.

Re:That's unfortunate. (1)

cowscows (103644) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563041)

I play PC games all the time, on a machine that hasn't seen a single component upgrade since 2002. It's finally getting to the point where even some of the $5 clearance games won't run very well on it, so I'm thinking about upgrading.

But the point is, many people are not interested in worrying about keeping their hardware state-of-the-art, and there are also many developers who aren't interested in worrying about constantly having to learn how to exploit new hardware.

Take a look at the quality of the first year or so of PS2 games vs. the stuff that came out 5 years later. It takes developers a while to really learn how to take advantage of a particular piece of hardware, and the consistency across the entire installed base of that console allows them to really tune their games beyond anything you'll see in the PC world.

Re:That's unfortunate. (2, Interesting)

bevoblake (1106117) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563207)

Consoles have fantastic appeal to the masses and for good reason - you buy a game console that you know won't be obsolete (i.e. they are still making current games for it) for 5 years or so. The cost is around the same as a brand new, high-end graphics card, which is just one component of the PC rig. The PC rig will also be obsolete sooner because the PC game-makers push tech and innovation faster (although you can get decent lifespan out of a PC rig if you are willing to not always have the bleeding edge). Lastly, the consoles, in my experience are less buggy. Coding to the various configurations of PCs is much more difficult to get bug free than a single environment.

That said, I currently am a PC gamer because I had a computer around that was good enough that the purchase of an additional $200 graphics card got me a strong PC gaming experience. Plus, my good friend, the mouse, hasn't made the jump to consoles yet.

Re:That's unfortunate. (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563953)

Plus, my good friend, the mouse, hasn't made the jump to consoles yet.

Mario Paint. Or any of several titles for the DS that use the touch screen, which is not unlike a mouse in its application. But seriously, doesn't one of the Unreal games for one of the PlayStation systems use a USB mouse?

Re:That's unfortunate. (1)

bevoblake (1106117) | more than 6 years ago | (#21564511)

Very good point with the DS. I've only used a DS once and thought the interface was pretty interesting (pointing with the stylus on Zelda reminded of clicking in Diablo).

I think you're right that mouse peripherals were offered with the PS (or maybe PS2, can't remember), but I really mean that the mouse has not been adopted widescale as a control medium for consoles. So, a one-off game using the mouse on the console is cool, but when the vast majority of users don't have the input technology and it isn't available for most games, it doesn't ring true to me as having made a good leap from PC to console.

I also haven't used the Wii; so, it could be a perfectly able mouse-substitute, but I can't speak to it (although I look forward to trying one out soon).

Regardless, I'm an avid enough gamer I'd probably slap myself in the face if the UI of a good game called for it.

Re:That's unfortunate. (1)

p0tat03 (985078) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563673)

I used to be a huge PC gamer, but nowadays I game almost exclusively on consoles (except TF2, that game is massive win on a PC). Why? Because I hate upgrading. It costs a lot, and even a mid-high end video card is by itself worth a brand new console. I also hate futzing with my display settings, wondering "what else can I turn off to get this thing smooth and playable?", and updating video drivers, sound drivers, miscellaneous BS drivers... Installing, uninstalling... ugh.

I still do some PC gaming, but it's always on my laptop, which has good enough specs for work and some light media playing, but is never spec'ed out like a gaming rig (I like the battery life and mobility). This limits me, currently, to basically anything 2003 and before, though Half-Life 2 runs very well.

With a console I'm always playing at "max" settings, it's always silky smooth, I can pop the disc in and start playing a game immediately, instead of waiting ages to install.

Not to mention the uniform equipment of consoles opens up a lot of possibilities. For example, on the 360 *everyone* who is online is guaranteed to have a headset (after all, it comes with the console), making it possible for developers to REQUIRE the use of voice chat in multiplayer. Even now, the prevalence of voice chat on 360 is far more than I see on the PC. Try *enforcing* voice chat outside of the most hardcore group of Counter-Strike players, and see how your players react to that.

Re:That's unfortunate. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21563803)

With the console, you just put the disc in, turn it on, and play. Every time a new console comes out, this is disrupted. Therefore, you don't want this to happen often. This is the advantage consoles have over computers. You have to upgrade your computer continuously to play the newest games. My console will let me play the newest games for years to come. Meanwhile, since I'm not using my computer for gaming, it has gone 5 or 6 years without a hardware upgrade. Why upgrade when it runs all of the programs I'm interested in with no trouble?

There's nothing inherently wrong with old hardware. You just want new for the sake of new. That's fine, but other people may care more about functionality than being cutting-edge.

Re:That's unfortunate. (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#21563993)

With the console, you just put the disc in, turn it on, and play
Why can't this be true of PCs as well? Don't PCs have DVD-ROM drives and (in newer models) larger RAM than the half GiB of an Xbox 360 or PS3?

Re:That's unfortunate. (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 6 years ago | (#21565017)

Sure but do you know how loud those drives get when the disc inside has some form of copyrestriction? Mine sounds like a chainsaw.

Re:That's unfortunate. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21563845)

So what we have now is as good as it is going to get for the next five to ten years?
 
Because the idiots in the gaming industry seem to be focused more on advancing graphics than on advancing AI. And now, neither graphics nor AI are going to see any significant, impressive improvements for another decade.

Re:That's unfortunate. (1)

Dutch Gun (899105) | more than 6 years ago | (#21564347)

And while my console systems will be performing about the same in five or ten years as they were last year, my PC will be performing perhaps twice as well next year as it is this year.
How the heck does your PC get faster and faster like that? Mine tends to perform about the same as when I first bought it. Yours must work out a lot.

Kidding aside, you're missing some of the point of consoles, and one of the reasons people actually enjoy using them (aside from the simplicity of use). I don't WANT a constantly moving target. I like to know that the rig I bought will work optimally with any new game for the next 5 years or so. The next... er, newest... uh, current consoles could perform on par with high-end PCs on release, and by the end of their life cycle, they'll be performing on par with the lowest end of gaming PCs. In other words, consoles start ahead of the curve, and end their lives behind it, and then the cycle repeats. Imagine a stair-step power curve that starts just above the smooth PC power curve and then dips below for the last 2/3s of it's lifetime.

PC gaming, from a purely technical standpoint, will always be superior, because you can simply outspend the console competition. But the difference with gaming is that given a fixed platform, there will be a gradual degradation of gaming performance as the curve moves above and farther away from your rig's performance level.

But in the end, I think the biggest point you're missing is that ultimately, there's much more to a quality gaming experience than technical superiority. I think that with the Wii outselling the PS3, that would be fairly obvious at this point.

Also, I want one of those car stereo toasters. That sounds cool.
 

Re:That's unfortunate. (1)

BillOfThePecosKind (1140837) | more than 6 years ago | (#21564881)

Since there were so many comments on this one I didn't really know where to put this. But I think we're all referring to two types of people. On the one side we have people who are merely looking for an entertainment system, "play my dvd's! COD 4 kicks ass! web shopping!!! ZOMG!!" (Hah, they're funny). On the other side we have those who want more of a hobby than entertainment can offer. I personally would rather have a PC because the upgrading, un-installing, re-installing, drivers, PROBLEMS... so on and so forth are more than half the fun of owning a PC. No matter how frustrating it is to fix them, it's half the fun. I'm not trying to make a point of whether I am better than a console owner, or all web shoppers shout ZOMG at the top of there lungs, I'm just trying to make a point that the two systems often give pleasure to two totally different people.

As far as gaming goes, and which system is better for it that's certainly a tough call. I like consoles for the "strategic button mashers", games like Ninja Gaiden and God of War, however I think PC's are much more suited for RTS games because of the mouse and keyboard. FPS's are a crap shoot, i feel as if the mouse is MUCH more accurate, but playing a game with a friend on a console is MUCH more fun. MMORGP's are really only on PC's right now (as far as I know of at least) so you can't compare there. And then of course there are the games that only come out on some consoles or PC and not on the other.

I bet as we head down the road we will see many more office apps on consoles as well as the integration of a mouse and keyboard (the controller will never die, or I'll have my way with whoever had a hand in it). PC's however will always be around for the "hard-core" users like me and of course the UBER /.ers who might read this and laugh at me.

In other news... (1)

Dues (786223) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562665)

The federal government has now concluded that "Yesterday's tomorrow is now today's today!"

Wow! (2)

F-3582 (996772) | more than 6 years ago | (#21562763)

That's what I call pretty low standards, then. Judging from the looks of the new Need For Speed: ProStreet they still seem to think that shoving unfinished games down our throats is next-gen, too. Even IGN gave it just a 6.8. Sorry, but EA would be the last publisher on whose opinion I'd give a crap. Period.

When next-gen becomes current-gen (1)

Targon (17348) | more than 6 years ago | (#21564141)

A big problem that people have with these comments is that the new games being released for the PS3 and Xbox 360 really are not so much better than what could be done on the previous generation of consoles.

Are PS3 and Xbox 360 games really THAT much better than the stuff for the Xbox and PS2? Graphics may be a bit better, but if you exclude the "HD" factor due to most people not having a screen that can do 1080p, then what is better about the new titles?

That is the key, when there is a substantial improvement in overall gameplay compared to previous generation machines. An advantage to the PC as a platform is that the idea of next generation is foolish because faster processors and more advanced video cards are released every three to six months. As a result, game companies are forced to aim at what will be available in 3-5 years, not at what is available currently. You want cutting edge, you get it from a PC game.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>