Quote
Originally posted by: Dryden
Sony will be FINE, though lose market share.
You know, I think people are underestimating Sony. They'll come out fine.
1. They are a major multi-faceted corporation, with some of Hollywood in their pocket, or at least behind Blu-Ray.
2. The install base for the PS2 - which launched at a high price as well - is astounding. The PS3 is directly for that market.
3. Sony's a juggernaut advertiser.
4. Sony's console is more 'typical' - which means more movie to game adaptations, by a long shot. (Godfather + Wii-mote = 
)
5. Nintendo isn't known for realism in its games, nor will it be this generation - PS3 / XBox have this down.
6. The technology behind the good games - hitting a year after launch (read: LucasArts) is phenominal
Actually, lets talk about that quick: take a look at the LucasArts demo, with the PS3 powering new physics and AI enginges. For them, it was just a quick demo, showing the end of canned animations and the beginning of immersive, realistic environments. Apply it to any genre:
Fighting games with real-time muscle movements and realistic body reactions... (Bushido Blade becoming true-life, Fight Night reacting truly, no more juggling in Tekken)
Games with cars that crash / drive with perfect phsyics (Grand Theft Auto realtime accurate car damage, Gran Turismo control like we've never seen, explosions in Twisted Metal having nothing to do with a life bar, and everything to do with the car's mechanics)
FPS / Adventure games that have no scripted movements for enemies, only AI reactions (Bond missions would never be the same, enemies moving around)
And the big one for North America: Sports. Say goodbye to canned animations at EA in two years. Motion capture will only be a base for new sports games. A game of Madden will look like an NFL game, at least in physics. And the PS3 is capable of monitoring bone density in hockey players; combined with the weight, speed and angle, we've got an accurate injury simulator.
You get the point. Nintendo can't hope to have this kind of play. Control is great, but on the PS3, my hockey / football games aren't going to look like video games anymore.
I think you are overestimating Sony. The PS2 at $300 was only a $100 over the mainstream pricepoint of $200. The PS3 on the other hand is $400 above a mainstream price point. This will greatly hinder Sony. Most consoles are sold when a system hits a $200 pricepoint. It will take the PS3, three or four years to reach such a price point. Meanwhile, MS and Nintendo will have been long reached such levels. Sony's PS2 had a year head start to build a large userbase, leveraging that userbase with the Playstation name allowed Sony to hold on through significant game drought and go on to win this generation. The PS3 is giving the 360 a year head start and unlike the X-box and Gamecube, the PS3 is not meeting or beating the price point of the next gen market leader which is Microsoft by default. Most gamers will not be able to pay the $600 that Sony is asking, this will allow MS to continue to build its lead in the western markets until Sony can get its price to a reasonable level. Unlike the PS2, the PS3 has a extra feature in Blu-Ray that most of the public does not want or need. The PS2 leveraged the DVD playing aspect, a feature which most of the public (gaming and non gaming) wanted to get their hands on, to ensure a rapid growth of the PS2 userbase. Most people don't have HDTV's and not even all HDTV owners have the necessary HDMI support needed to take advantage of Blu-Ray.
Sony, like Nintendo with the N64, is overestimating their strength. They are leaving themselves open to defeat. The Wii is poised to crush the PS3 in Japan. The Wii is following in the steps of the DS and with a $400 price advantage and similar "non games" available for it, the Wii will is now almost guaranteed the number 1 spot in Japan. The Japanese gaming market had been eroding but the DS has been able to reach people that had previously never gamed or had given it up. The Wii has the same aim. Not having the number one position in Japan will weaken Sony's hold on Japanese based third party exclusives. In the West, Sony has left themselves open on two fronts. Nintendo is seeking to reach a similar market in West as it has had in Japan. In the US, that market does not seem as big. So, MS will likely reap the rewards of Sony's stupidity. I think MS will win the US market with Nintendo being a close second. Sony will repeat the N64 pattern, they will start off with a bang and slowly fade away. In Europe, I don't who will win. The DS is doing better in Europe than Japan so that would seem to indicate that the Wii's unique style will do better there than in the US. I think MS or Nintendo will take Europe. It depends on how fast Nintendo can grow the non gamer market and how much of the conventional market MS will usurp from Sony. In short, I think Sony will be last this generation. As for worldwide? I think MS will edge out Nintendo. The US market seems to buy the most consoles and I think MS's presence here will counteract their lack of presence in Japan.
The PS3 for a graphics standpoint is not better than the 360. The GPU in the 360 is actually more powerful than the RSX in the PS3 by all accounts. The RSX, GPU of PS3, from all the specs I have gathered seems to be a slightly modified GeForce 7800. The 360's GPU has more pixel and vertex shaders and a much higher bandwith. Sony has been displaying Cell specs where ever they can, but they have been giving more general specs on their GPU. The Cell processors single core seems near identical to one of the 360s cores from its three core CPU. The SPUs cannot operate seperately from the main core of the Cell which seems to be counter productive. The cores of the 360 CPU can operate independantly of each other. The Cell seems to be more of a general purpose processor. If its power can be harnessed it may be able to outstrip the 360 but I don't think it likely.
Sony should have used the extra year to ensure its chipset was superior to the 360s in all respects. Outside of having faster Main Ram. The PS3 seems to have devoted too much of its cost to its Blu-Ray drive. To MS' credit, most of if not all of the 360's technology seems to be focused on delivering the most technically impressive HD graphics possible. While not everyone can take notice of this because the majority of us have standard definition TV's, at least the 360's hardware is less media hub/movie player and more game console. The PS3 seems to be the console version of the PSP which is current going the route of the Sega Game Gear. Starting with a bang, and slowly fading into the background. Sony has given away their market leader ship in another failed attempt to force a proprietary medium on the public. Nintendo has taken the purest console approach. The Wii is just a games machine. Only this time, unlike the Gamecube, Nintendo has insured that the Wii is unique. The controller will be reason for the Wii's success. It will be interesting watching MS and Nintendo take down Sony. As usual, the gaming market leadership is never won by the underdog. Instead, the market leaders unbelievable arrogance always leads to their downfall.
Topic: The end of the Playstation Era? (Read 27705 times)
