Post by: Dirk Temporo on December 29, 2006, 04:18:09 PM
View This
A brand new 60GB PS3, and the auction ends for less than retail price. This, along with the fact that my store has PS3s just hanging out in the back, tells me that demand for PS3 is right around the demand for a system that's been out for a couple years, which says to me that Sony has failed their launch.
Thoughts?
Post by: Arbok on December 29, 2006, 04:31:27 PM
Post by: Hocotate on December 29, 2006, 04:45:32 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on December 29, 2006, 05:04:23 PM
Post by: capamerica on December 29, 2006, 05:23:02 PM
Its funny Sony's only hope for survival lies with two games that will most likely not see the light of day till later 2007 early 2008.
Post by: Kairon on December 29, 2006, 06:25:57 PM
Everything a Nintendo fanboi like me wants to hear!
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: segagamer12 on December 29, 2006, 06:29:27 PM
Post by: Kairon on December 29, 2006, 06:38:49 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: segagamer12
I was at target and the guy who worked there was telling me he listed his on ebay three times and it didnt sell and now he has to sell it at a loss or keep it.
One more PS3 happily settled in the hands of a satisfied customer. Sony couldn't be prouder!
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: ShyGuy on December 30, 2006, 06:58:30 AM
Post by: UERD on December 30, 2006, 08:33:48 AM
I sure hope this 'second-mortgage super-luxury do-everything game console' trend dies out this generation.
Post by: segagamer12 on December 30, 2006, 09:25:32 AM
Playstation has always focused on its multimedia aspects, PS1 made a big deal out of the cd playback capabilities,
Sega Cd boasted it could play Cd+g karaoke disks and audio cds,
Ngage was a cell phone/gameplayer/
Cd-i played educational media along with a few rare video games and some vcds also.
Psp is an mp3 player that happens to also play movies and occassional a game or two,
its not a new trend, they always tout the non game features to attract non gamers to the system. Its just never been a real factor before Ps2.
Sadly I dont think it will ever go away I think non game companies will always try and push nongame features on thier so called game players.
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on December 30, 2006, 01:46:49 PM
If the games are being put onto DVD's and the system can read a standard DVD, then why not allow DVD movie playback?
The Wii uses DS cards for storage, and what do people use SD cards for? Music, Pitures, videos and general data storage. So why not let the Wii access & playback those things since they are likely to be on the SD cards people use anyway.
All the new systems access the internet for whatever reason, so why not let you access that internet and whatever it may have to offer?
Sometimes those extra non-gaming features just make sense. But when they start forcing extra's down our throats *cough*sony*cough*. thats where I hope the trend dies.
Post by: couchmonkey on January 02, 2007, 04:43:34 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1
Sometimes those non-gaming feaures just make sense, so why not include them.
If the games are being put onto DVD's and the system can read a standard DVD, then why not allow DVD movie playback?
The Wii uses DS cards for storage, and what do people use SD cards for? Music, Pitures, videos and general data storage. So why not let the Wii access & playback those things since they are likely to be on the SD cards people use anyway.
All the new systems access the internet for whatever reason, so why not let you access that internet and whatever it may have to offer?
Sometimes those extra non-gaming features just make sense. But when they start forcing extra's down our throats *cough*sony*cough*. thats where I hope the trend dies.
I think you hit the nail on the head here - Sony is making us pay for Blu-ray, but we want video games. If Blu-ray was cheap or in high demand it would be a good idea, but instead Sony's charging a premium for an extra feature that's not in high demand.
Clearly, the price is starting to come into play. I'm actually a little surprised at just how early it became a factor - I figured Sony would easily grab up a few million customers even at this price.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 02, 2007, 05:54:41 AM
I agree. I think the difference is often on the intentions of the feature. It made sense for the Playstation to use CDs. It was good game console design. So naturally if the CD player is already in there why not let it play CDs as well? Sony didn't say "hey let's put a CD player in our console to encourage CD sales". It was never part of the plan. I wonder if DVDs for the PS2 was even intentionally a non-gaming feature. It seemed like a logical medium for the console to use. They probably thought of the idea and then thought "hey we could make it play movie DVDs as well and thus attract some sales as a budget DVD player!"
The PSP is the first time I've seen a blatant attempt to force extra stuff into a system. They didn't design a game system and then included non-gaming features that were more or less already there. They had the plan of a multi-feature machine from the beginning. Same with the PS3. That's never been successful so I don't think that will remain the trend. That's what console makers that have either forgotten how to make a good console or never knew how in the first place do.
Post by: JonLeung on January 02, 2007, 06:52:22 AM
I think the CD-based game systems that could play CDs, okay, that's a natural fit, sure. I think DVD was a bigger deal; the PS2 was probably helped along by the fact that DVDs, depsite being around for a few years previous, was still new to many people, however, it was already established as the definite standard. People wanted a DVD player and they wanted a PS2 so it worked well.
But using the PSP to introduce UMD and the PS3 to try to bring the unproven Blu-Ray to the masses are certainly much more chancy. And has been mentioned so many times before, it's not the jump from VHS to DVD. Blu-Rays are digital discs that hold more - so you can get more quality or more features or less disc-swapping, big whoop. There's next to nothing in terms of actual new features like chapters, subtitles, special features, web content, etc. that DVDs introduced. Plus it's competing with HD-DVD. Then in the UMD's case you're paying more for a smaller disc that has less features. That's a pure recipe for disaster...tell consumers to pay more to get less. Sheesh.
I suppose it's too late for Sony to release a Blu-Ray-less PS3 that would be at a decent price. Ah, well, let them screw themselves up. Not just because they may deserve it, but so that people will remember that the best-selling product may not always be the best thing out there forever. I weep (not really, but I do feel sorry) for kids that "grew up" on the PlayStation. I don't just say that because I'm a Nintendo fanboy(well, maybe I do), but I get the impression that those kids didn't know any better and just went with what's "cool". If Wii's momentum continues and Nintendo is cool again, how confused will the PlayStation fans be? (Assuming they were really fans to begin with, or just simply never tried the competition.)
Sure, I'm hard on Sony. But it's not just me. I had actually assumed that the PS3 would do a bit better this holiday season. The interest level in the PS3 may be sinking faster than I thought it would. If this keeps up, we can pretty much bet on FF XIII and MGS 4 to be non-exclusives.
Post by: KDR_11k on January 02, 2007, 07:06:25 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on January 02, 2007, 07:13:42 AM
All my life I have dreamed of a car that felt a certain way: powerful like a gorilla, yet soft and yielding like a Nerf ball.
Don't forget that the Homer is also an incredibly hideous car that would probably bomb even if it was low priced. Though I think it would be cool to have one.
"I suppose it's too late for Sony to release a Blu-Ray-less PS3 that would be at a decent price."
Well the problem is that games can be made on Blu-Ray discs. To remove the functionality would make certain games unplayable. But are there any Blu-Ray games yet? Maybe Sony could redesign it without the Blu-Ray player and ensure that there never are any Blu-Ray games. They would probably piss off some third parties that want to use the format but it would let them make a cheaper PS3 that still played all PS3 games (and with old PS3s still being able to play everything). Hell even if there are Blu-Ray games out I would recommend just ditching it and use a DVD based PS3. Not that many people own a PS3 yet anyway and the lower price could potentially sell enough consoles to make up for the few people that would be pissed off. It would better than the console failing outright because of the high price.
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 02, 2007, 07:22:45 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane Well the problem is that games can be made on Blu-Ray discs. To remove the functionality would make certain games unplayable. But are there any Blu-Ray games yet? Maybe Sony could redesign it without the Blu-Ray player and ensure that there never are any Blu-Ray games. They would probably piss off some third parties that want to use the format but it would let them make a cheaper PS3 that still played all PS3 games (and with old PS3s still being able to play everything). Hell even if there are Blu-Ray games out I would recommend just ditching it and use a DVD based PS3. Not that many people own a PS3 yet anyway and the lower price could potentially sell enough consoles to make up for the few people that would be pissed off. It would better than the console failing outright because of the high price.
In one Medacast, I made the best analogy about Sony's current situation that I could: watching what Sony is doing now is like watching a man wearing an expensive tuxedo crawling on his stomach into a lake of sewage, all the while shouting, "Oh, this is WONDERFUL! This is just great! I'm LOVING this!"
Sony started believing their own press releases and, as a result, would prefer to drown at the bottom of that lake rather than accept the reality of their mistakes.
Post by: vudu on January 02, 2007, 07:47:25 AM
However, doing that would be admitting defeat. Ken Kutaragi would sooner commit Seppuku.
Post by: hudsonhawk on January 02, 2007, 08:01:02 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: vudu
Thus far there are no BRD games.
Resistance is on a Blu-Ray disc.
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 02, 2007, 08:26:10 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: hudsonhawk Resistance is on a Blu-Ray disc.
Yeah, but it's arguably not necessary.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on January 02, 2007, 08:29:46 AM
WHAT MUSHROOMS HAVE YOU BEEN JUMPING OFF?
Post by: Ian Sane on January 02, 2007, 08:45:23 AM
Post by: Louieturkey on January 02, 2007, 09:09:56 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
How big are the Blu-Ray PS3 games? Could they be ported to a DVD or turned into a multidisc game? My suggested change is huge no matter what and reissuing Blu-Ray games as DVD games would just have to be part of the process. I'm talking about a plan that may be needed to save the PS3 outright. Sony won't do it because their real goal is to establish Blu-Ray and having a successful PS3 videogame console without Blu-Ray support isn't what they want. And frankly I don't care because I don't care for them and would like it if they had to leave gaming. Hell I wouldn't even care if Sony the company folded outright. It doesn't really make a difference to me. Let their stubborness destroy them.
All PS3 games are BRD based. However, since all of them are available for the 360 sans 1 or 2, I believe they all could be put onto DVD. I think FFXIII may not be able to(unless you use multidiscs) and Gran Turismo 5 either (again unless you use extra discs). So essentially, they can ditch bluray and put everything onto dvd.
Post by: segagamer12 on January 02, 2007, 09:38:00 AM
Post by: Kairon on January 02, 2007, 10:52:38 AM
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Requiem on January 02, 2007, 11:01:18 AM
You don't know the whole story!
Post by: Requiem on January 02, 2007, 11:01:28 AM
Post
IGnore
If you can...
Post by: segagamer12 on January 02, 2007, 11:04:54 AM
Post by: MaryJane on January 02, 2007, 01:01:52 PM
I felt sorry for them, I also felt bad telling them that they received a soon to be dead system.
at the very least they want a 360 and games for b-day presents and not ps3 hopefully I can get my wii to their house b4 the 28th of this month.
Post by: MaryJane on January 02, 2007, 01:12:40 PM
With PS3's and 360's(to a lesser degree) collecting dust, and I still have to share a Wii with my brother until friday *cry*. I wonder how long it will take for Sony to bow out of the console race? Would they dare try to release another system? If so how soon would they have to do it, they would probably want to make it come out before Xbox720 (actually i'm betting they add a word this time, like revolution or something along those lines) rushing it before it's ready (just like last year (almost said this year 2007 is weird)) and failing miserably. I wonder if they would have the decency to bow out gracefully, or would they just keep throwing money at people.
Long live the Wii. Do your part people!! Spread the word, use myspace or whateverthehell to tell people of the defeat of the giant!
Post by: stevey on January 02, 2007, 01:36:26 PM
Quote
How big are the Blu-Ray PS3 games? Could they be ported to a DVD or turned into a multidisc game?
Well Resistance is technically "22GB" but in reality 17.75GB of it is padding. (blu-ray was supposed to be able to read over the entire disk without needing padding and just prove one more sony's lie about blu-ray/ps3.) Resistance can fit on a single layer dvd if garbage file is remove. Other ps3 games could fit on dvd if the game were compressed, so a dvd ps3 is possible but it's never happing.
Post by: Kairon on January 02, 2007, 03:04:12 PM
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Arbok on January 02, 2007, 03:32:21 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
I thought the 17.5 GB of padding was proven false, more like 200-300 MBs?
420MB per region, persay the people who initially reported the "17.75GB padding" tidbit:
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/11/26/resistance-17-75gb-of-garbage/
Post by: BranDonk Kong on January 02, 2007, 03:59:23 PM
Post by: couchmonkey on January 03, 2007, 03:02:10 AM
I don't think buying HD DVD is going to make a huge difference to Sony, I think both formats are screwed. But that's just my guess.
Post by: segagamer12 on January 03, 2007, 04:00:48 AM
Other than that gettign a 360 instead of ps3 which I wouldnt get a ps3 anywyas but gettign a 360 will screw them a bit cuz its one more sale for MS and thier games and one less sale for Sony and thier crap.
I already got the Wii and as its apparant that online isnt gonna happen anytime soon Ill get the 360 anbd play the awesome games I wanted for that already and play the offline Wii games as they trickle out.
Post by: KDR_11k on January 03, 2007, 04:29:13 AM
Post by: segagamer12 on January 03, 2007, 04:53:26 AM
I cant beleive I still have friends who want a a ps3.
Post by: KDR_11k on January 03, 2007, 05:16:41 AM
Post by: BranDonk Kong on January 03, 2007, 05:47:06 AM
Post by: segagamer12 on January 03, 2007, 06:17:35 AM
See how badly ps3 sucks when all its topics get turned into 360 discussions. stupid sony.
Post by: JonLeung on January 03, 2007, 06:42:06 AM
Sure, there's Dead Rising on the Xbox 360 but that's about all I'm interested in and it's not worth it for that. I always get a lot of "why wait another couple years for Halo 2 on Windows Vista when you could've played it last year?" kind of statements but I always think "why spend the money on another console now?", especially considering I'd be upgrading my PC down the line anyway? It's not like decent graphics cards cost more than consoles anymore. Microsoft is stupid when it comes to exclusives - at least towards people like me.
Not that I support Sony either. I'd more rather Sony goes down because they're number one and don't deserve to be. If Sony ever dropss out of the games market you can bet I'll totally make a bigger deal about Microsoft's genericity and non-exclusivity.
Post by: segagamer12 on January 03, 2007, 06:47:40 AM
Post by: vudu on January 03, 2007, 07:06:22 AM
QuotePerhaps not, but it seems you sure want to play them at least one a 360. Better Mech games are available on PC. Sonic for 360 is pretty horrible, from what I hear. FEAR and Quake 4 are both available for PC in better forms than on 360.
Originally posted by: segagamer12
for me its is all about Dead Rising and Chrome Hounds, and that new Mech game from Sega and the Sonic the Hedgehog I wont get on ps3. Oh and Halo 3 since I have been playing 2 a lot lately. And I still want fear and quake 4 and I dont upgrade my pc cuz I dont play pc games that much.
I'm not going to try to dissuade you from purchasing a 360, but I would like to point out that if those are the games you most want to play you might be able to play the same games for the same price (not to mention you'll also have an upgraded PC that can run Firefox 2.0 It has built-in spellcheck.) by buying a new video card/processor/RAM/whatever you need.
Post by: Requiem on January 03, 2007, 08:10:19 AM
It is by far the best soccer simulator to date, reviews be damned (I haven't read any reviews though).
Gears of War pales in comparison.
PALES IN COMPARISON.
Post by: segagamer12 on January 03, 2007, 08:37:02 AM
Post by: JonLeung on January 03, 2007, 08:59:51 AM
I don't really like the PC vs. Console gamer nonsense (I even made a thread of it somewhere here) especially since I play a lot of PC games that are also console games but don't play many PC-specific genres like RTSes or a lot of FPSes. So despite being in front of the PC fairly often I'd say I'm in the console camp (go Nintendo!), however, when comparing a PC to either Xbox specifically, a PC to me is an obvious choice. If the Xbox had more exclusive games, that'd be a different story, but geez, even Microsoft's own also come to the PC eventually.
Games were never hard to install on a computer - and thanks to Plug-and-Play and autodetection of settings and homogenizations and standards and other improvements in PC gaming in the past, I dunno, DECADE, it's really hard for me to believe it when people tell me it's so much easier to play games on a console. Yeah, it's easier, but it's not like playing the PC version is so difficult that it's not worth infinite saves, screenshot-taking, modability, etc. And console gaming isn't cheaper either...maybe it was, but you can get some decent (or at least decent-enough) video cards for less than an Xbox 360. Then there's the plethora of USB adapters that let you use any controller on a PC, and many video cards these days can output to a TV, etc.
Nintendo themselves make many of the best games for their consoles, so of course Nintendo gaming and PC gaming are different enough. But PC gaming and Xbox gaming? I guess there are some Live features but overall they're not different enough so you might as well upgrade your PC since you clearly have one (unless you're posting from a Mac I guess).
There I go ranting again.
The PS2 had exclusives, sure, but really it was more like developers never bothered to port or convert games for the less popular systems, not a loyal pledge to Sony themselves. Now that games are so pricey to develop, I think we'll see fewer exclusives, so the PS3 library, Xbox 360 library, and the PC library will become even more similar than the PS2/Xbox/PC that it won't even be funny. Everyone's expecting FF XIII and MGS 4 to lose exclusivity so I wouldn't be surprised to see them on the Xbox 360 and eventually the PC as well.
Post by: segagamer12 on January 03, 2007, 09:07:37 AM
oh and the burger king games are crazy and fun.
Post by: JonLeung on January 03, 2007, 09:13:20 AM
It's so easy to get caught up that when it's clear to me that I would never own an Xbox, my logic may not be the same as everybody else's.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 03, 2007, 09:27:35 AM
My problem has always been the cost. Keeping a PC up-to-date with the best hardware is just too expensive for me. And I just personally don't enjoy the genres popular on PCs as much as I like the genres more associated with consoles. But installing any program these days is usually easy as hell.
Post by: JonLeung on January 03, 2007, 09:38:23 AM
I still say it's not that expensive...you can get an ATi Radeon X800 (which was hot a couple years ago) for really cheap now wherever you can find it and you can still play the above games on it. It's really misleading how everyone thinks that every new PC game requires the absolute latest video card or processor to play.
Now, someone promised the PS3 could replace my computer. Probably Ken Kutaragi or someone else delusional over there. So far, that statement's still pretty ridiculous.
Post by: segagamer12 on January 03, 2007, 12:33:11 PM
Its because Nintendo will NEVER get all the games I want to play so I have to have something more than just a Wii and Ps3 is really out of the question. It was playign Halo 2 LAN with all my friends that sold me though, wii, and GC do not yet have anything like it to offer and likely wont till latter in the year or even next year. But liek my regular xbox I will be getting it and all the games used so I know I am not giving bill gates money.
Post by: IceCold on January 03, 2007, 05:48:40 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on January 03, 2007, 09:42:52 PM
With the rising cost of next-gen consoles PC upgrades may be expensive but still on par with the consoles...
But 360 has EDF3...
Post by: Spak-Spang on January 04, 2007, 01:29:10 AM
I was shocked when after a year of watching the Xbox 360 suffer, Sony makes the same mistake...only much worse, pricing themselves completely out of most buyers range.
Nintendo's Wii is doing so well partially, because they stayed within the normal price range of gaming, and offered something new and different. And Nintendo will continue to sell well through 2007 because of hype and buzz from all the media sources.
However, that doesn't mean Microsoft or Sony will fail...just struggle for the next year, specially Sony who is going to have a very hard first year and will be battling a huge uphill battle once pricing levels off.
To me what this shows is that the Next Generation systems came too early. If the systems could not have been manufactured at reasonable pricing for the traditional console prices then the time isn't right. Would it have hurt Microsoft to wait a year or two? How about Sony or Nintendo waiting one more year?
The answer I think is NO. And I think we are seeing the effects of jumping into a console generation too early.
Post by: JonLeung on January 04, 2007, 01:58:41 AM
Whether or not they mean to keep that consistent, I don't think Nintendo would've wanted to wait another year, even if Sony did. It's not like the GameCube has been all that hot. Sure, we'd be playing Twilight Princess on the 'Cube and probably that cancelled Kirby game and DK Bongo Blast and Super Paper Mario as well but after the Wii's successful launch in the non-hypothetical reality, I'm having trouble imagining it any other way. With all the buzz, some days it seems like the PS3 doesn't exist, but if the PS3 didn't come out this year (or 2006, I guess) I'm not sure how much stronger it could come out the year later. Many people aren't even aware of a product until it comes out and if they had to wait another year for a PS3 they'd be more likely be sold on a Wii. Sony probably wanted to get a product out now, evn if most people won't get one for another year if ever.
Of course that's all hypothetical rambling.
Post by: couchmonkey on January 04, 2007, 03:57:28 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
You know I think Microsoft's Xbox 360 would be in a much better place if they hadn't priced themselves out of the traditional arena of console prices. But, they did and several people waited because it was too expensive to get a 360.
I was shocked when after a year of watching the Xbox 360 suffer, Sony makes the same mistake...only much worse, pricing themselves completely out of most buyers range.
Nintendo's Wii is doing so well partially, because they stayed within the normal price range of gaming, and offered something new and different. And Nintendo will continue to sell well through 2007 because of hype and buzz from all the media sources.
However, that doesn't mean Microsoft or Sony will fail...just struggle for the next year, specially Sony who is going to have a very hard first year and will be battling a huge uphill battle once pricing levels off.
To me what this shows is that the Next Generation systems came too early. If the systems could not have been manufactured at reasonable pricing for the traditional console prices then the time isn't right. Would it have hurt Microsoft to wait a year or two? How about Sony or Nintendo waiting one more year?
The answer I think is NO. And I think we are seeing the effects of jumping into a console generation too early.
I think the reason console prices went up is mainly due to adding more technology. I've read that the hard-drive was a big obstacle for the original Xbox because the cost to manufacture it didn't decrease much compared to the other expensive components. That's why MS did two versions of the 360 - it's charging consumers for the hard drive this time around instead of subsidizing it, but it still offers a "budget" version in an attempt to look competitvely-priced.
Waiting an extra year or two might have been smart, but that would require everyone to cooperate. Nobody wants to let anybody else have 2-3 years on the market totally uncontested. Also, until Wii, the idea was that new home consoles sell because they are powerful - based on that reasoning, it wouldn't make sense to release something as "weak" as Xbox 360 in the year 2007.
Of course, while I'm debating the details, I agree with the basic notion that the prices are too high. Wii exposes a flaw in the way the industry has been going - better graphics are nice, but the return on investment is shrinking. Wii is capable of acceptable graphics - hardcore gamers may argue they're ugly, or point out that AI will never match up to the more powerful systems, but personally I have yet to see or play anything on the other systems that matches Wii in terms of new gaming experiences. For a much lower price, I'm getting a much more revolutionary game system.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on January 04, 2007, 05:10:28 AM
correct'd
Post by: segagamer12 on January 04, 2007, 02:58:37 PM
Post by: ThePerm on January 04, 2007, 03:03:44 PM
Post by: Kairon on January 04, 2007, 04:57:36 PM
Oh, and I personally believe that MP3 will NOT be online.
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Requiem on January 04, 2007, 05:48:13 PM
Quote
Nintendo is keeping other details, such as any information about the long-sought online multiplayer, under wraps.
But yeah...
Your probably right...
Post by: Darc Requiem on January 05, 2007, 01:24:27 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
I wonder just how long exactly it'd take MS and Sony to get their consoles down to a $200 price point?
Oh, and I personally believe that MP3 will NOT be online.
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
The 360 premium model will hit $200 by holiday 2008. MS will be able to sell the premium 360 for a profit at $300 this year. They could have sold the premium 360 for a profit at $350 this past holiday season, but with the PS3's ridiculos price they didn't have to. Sony cost a lot of people money last year because both the Wii and 360 would have been cheaper if the PS3 was reasonably priced.
As for the PS3, I couldn't tell you. The way the PS3 is constructed its going to be much harder for Sony to bring down its costs. They are losing well over $200 on the $600 model right now. I mean, for comparison purposes, if the MS would have launched the 360 at $600. They would have been selling it for at a profit. That tells you how bad of a pickle Sony has put themselves in. I mean they may be able to get it down toe $200 by 2009 but it would still be selling at a small loss most likely.
Post by: JonLeung on January 05, 2007, 01:58:54 AM
Halo as a single player game is kind of lacking. (I haven't played 2, but I hear that's not quite fulfilling either.) Its strength comes from multiplayer (duh). I have trouble imagining Metroid trumping Halo, but maybe that's just because Metroid has always been a single-player experience and Halo is the most-hyped multiplayer Xbox series. But the Wii is pretty hot, Hunters might not have been too bad, Retro Studios could potentially devote ALL of their time now to make a robust and interesting online multiplayer mode, so why the heck not? It's the closest thing to a Halo-killer, however much of an uphill battle it is. I'd say it's even a safer bet than making a new franchise from scratch.
I think it's stupid that people think a solid single-player game and a solid multiplayer game can't co-exist together. Sure, resources are usually devoted to one or another, but I think however big Super Smash Bros. Brawl is, Nintendo ought to have other killer apps of other genres in their online arena, and considering how FPS-happy America is, why not put that effort into MP3:C?
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on January 05, 2007, 03:18:37 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 06, 2007, 08:36:04 AM
Metroid is known for its single-player gameplay. Even if it was vastly superior to Halo 3 in every way, people would not take it seriously for those reasons.
I think that, shortly after MP3's release, Retro should get to work on a FPS using the same engine and control scheme but is a completely new franchise.
One of the reasons I liked the rumors about a game called "Xenias" was that it was a completely new franchise and would be judged as such.
Halo didn't become known for its singleplayer. It was the multiplayer which put it on the map. I firmly believe that Nintendo should allow Retro to develop a 1st person shooter of their own which can compete in that genre, not try to make one of their core franchises into something it isn't.
Post by: segagamer12 on January 06, 2007, 08:57:23 AM
They can not please everybody, but it seams that the BEST solution is make the single player adventure top notch and the multi player modes secondary feature but still fun. That is what would make it a perfect game. Doom is more for Single player but the mulit player stuff can be fun too.
And wnhy cant they make more than one FPS? why does it have to be metroid or a new series but not both? Maybe they could try again with Geist. I never played it but always wanted to.
Post by: KDR_11k on January 06, 2007, 09:50:04 AM
I think they should let Metroid be Metroid and make the multiplayer shooter its own game. Look at hunters, the SP mode is pretty crappy and the weapons just feel out of place for Metroid while in Echoes the MP mode is pretty bad.
Post by: Requiem on January 06, 2007, 11:51:59 AM
That would actually be exciting to see.
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 06, 2007, 02:30:26 PM
Post by: Requiem on January 06, 2007, 04:01:15 PM
But then again, it would be fun to take up the challenge. Especially if you take into consideration that each player could have their own set of unique abilities.
Post by: BranDonk Kong on January 07, 2007, 03:10:26 AM
Post by: Ceric on January 07, 2007, 08:50:05 AM
Post by: utarefsoN on January 07, 2007, 09:10:54 AM
Post by: BranDonk Kong on January 07, 2007, 03:55:58 PM
Post by: Nemo on January 07, 2007, 05:18:38 PM
Post by: Nick DiMola on January 07, 2007, 11:26:11 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on January 08, 2007, 12:38:52 AM
Post by: WalkingTheCow on January 08, 2007, 10:19:40 AM
Things do not look good for Sony but I'm not going to be shocked if they bounce back. But no matter what exclusives they get or even if Blu-Ray does take off, it's pretty clear Sony isn't going to be an overwhelming market leader this time around. That and they might fail outright (but I'm not going to bet on it YET).
Post by: WalkingTheCow on January 08, 2007, 10:42:50 AM
WalkingTheCow's "How the PS3 could completely fail report"
COST: First off. No matter what Sony does they are not going to capture a mass market at this price. Ever. The PS2 flourished because it was cheap enough that those people who are only going to own Madden, Namco Museum and some random Frogger game were able to justify the price to themselves. This mainstream demographic will not buy a $600 or $500 system especially with cheaper and comparable alternatives at hand. Sony will have to lower the price quite a lot to have a chance at that market again and of course right now they're already losing tons of money on each unit. . . Significant price drops are a long way off.
EXCLUSIVES: From my armchair perspective it looks like Sony is about 2 or three exclusives away from miserable defeat. This is Sony's biggest threat! If Metal Gear Solid 4 gets a 360 port, it might not even require FFXIII to do the same. It might be Kingdom Hearts 3. That's right. I think that if MGS4 and KH3 go multiplatform the PS3 is nearly doomed. FFXIII is huge of course and if it stays exclusive it is going to sell systems. But at the same time Square is talking about developing more evenly for all three consoles. And while this might not mean FFXIII getting ported it means people will get some of their Square-Enix fix elsewhere. And yes Sony'll get some help from Killzone perhaps, maybe even God of War 3. But with the 360 and Wii sitting pretty with their own exclusives and a few of Sony's old staples joining their ranks, that extra cost fot the PS3 mentioned above isn't going to be worth it for a great deal of consumers.
That being said. . . it's still possible that XIII goes multiplatform and if that were to happen Sony's all but done.
But still. . . the PS3 isn't doomed yet. I still think Sony has a chance, but only if they play things near perfectly and have some luck on their side (which is becoming more and more doubtfull).
Post by: Rhoq on January 08, 2007, 01:49:42 PM
Anyways, I was talking to one of the employees and she was telling me how the Wii sells out as soon as they get new stock and they are having a hard time keeping accessories in stock as well. She then told me that nobody comes into the store looking for the PS3 and that they have 10 PS3s in the back which have all been sitting there, collecting dust since the week before Christmas.
Post by: segagamer12 on January 08, 2007, 03:57:10 PM
I never got a Ps2 but for a while wanted one just because of the hype and allt he exclusives it was getting. Ps3 just doesnt have anyhting to offer right now. In my town Sony is KING and thats all there is too it. Everyoen has Ps2 and PSp and nobody wants a DS or 360. BUT since Wii came out and PS3 sucks so badly everyonei s wanting Wiis now and looking at DS for their gaming on the go fix. That and they all have mp3 playing phones now so psp doesnt have anythign to offer.
Post by: nitsu niflheim on January 09, 2007, 01:20:13 AM
Post by: JonLeung on January 09, 2007, 01:50:14 AM
Because of their Wiiless Christmas, she bought a PS3 that she stumbled upon a few days before Christmas. They didn't open it and tried to sell it for more than they bought it for. By that time interest in the PS3 had already waned, the best offer they got was $500 Canadian, a lot less than what they paid for it, so she gave up and returned it to the store. Their hunt for the Wii continues.
Stories of people returning PS3s and looking for Wiis seemed nice, but it's somehow more interesting when you hear it from someone you know instead of taking so-and-so's word for it over the Internet where it can get blown out of proportion.
I plan on showing the Wii to a couple friends myself this upcoming weekend, as I did a couple weeks ago...good times. I'm not sure that if I had a PS3 that I would want to show it off, honestly. And with the few games that many (or any?) people would enjoy, I'm not sure I even could if I wanted to.
Post by: couchmonkey on January 09, 2007, 02:25:16 AM
I think PS3 will at least manage a sort of niche popularity along the lines of GameCube/Xbox. I think Sony has built up enough support that even if it lost MGS4 and Final Fantasy XIII, a decent number of fans would continue to play it. Even so, to go from PS2's popularity to GameCube is a huge fall, and I'm not sure Sony knows how to make much of a profit from such a "small" customer base anymore.
Post by: segagamer12 on January 12, 2007, 09:55:42 AM
Finally someone else got a Wii so mine doesnt have to tour as hard anymore so I can keep it home most of the time now. Once my friend dom gets a Wii then I can keep mine at home forever since his house is where we play the most and if he gets one I can keep mine and just take my games over.
We have 1 guy who MIGHT get a PS3 within the next couple weeks and that will be the deciding factor here, if they show that it is cool and worth buying then everyone else will follow like sheep. My influence is diminishing. We are having a Madden Tournament tonight on 360 maybe that will draw peoples attention away from Ps3.
So far the next gen count in our town is 4 total next gen systems, 2 Wiis and 2 360s. One buy claims he will be getitng a Ps3 soon and if he does others will too.
I hope MP3 can get some people over to Wii but not liekly as they all hated MP1 and 2. Wii play might get a few more grandmas but doubtfull it will sway anyone else around here. Damn ps3. I hate Sony more than ever now (considering I used to like Sony thats not good)
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on January 12, 2007, 10:19:24 AM
Post by: Kairon on January 12, 2007, 01:32:34 PM
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Sessha on January 12, 2007, 06:10:31 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on January 12, 2007, 06:13:29 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on January 12, 2007, 11:00:02 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
I don't think I've heard of anyone who owns a PS3, the only people who played PS3 games did so on their company's dev kits.
I'll most likey get a PS3 in a few months when the console bugs are worked out and there are some decent games for it.
Post by: WuTangTurtle on January 12, 2007, 11:18:36 PM
Post by: Spak-Spang on January 16, 2007, 05:49:01 AM
The Porn Star might look good, but once you start playing with her you realize she is dirty and diseased and psycho...completely not worth your time.
Yet, your wife is someone you have bonded with completely. She loves you and is completely worthy of your time and love. She may not be as pretty as that porn star, but she isn't fake.
To elaborate.
What I love about Excite Truck is that you can feel yourself get better, and the environment mostly reacts exactly how you expect it to when you drive over it...and in most cases it is more forgiving than you would expect. MotorStorm is exactly the opposite. Almost every little bump you expect to be able to drive over (with perhaps a little bump or jump) will actually just crash you out. It makes the game feel completely rigid and hard to play.
Post by: Khushrenada on January 16, 2007, 06:40:51 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 16, 2007, 07:27:04 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: VGrevolution
I'll most likey get a PS3 in a few months when the console bugs are worked out and there are some decent games for it.
You forgot to add "price drop" to that list.
And I think Spak's analogy is perfectly apt: the PS3 is all about looks, looks, looks to the point of forgoing gameplay.
I would have used a supermodel as an example instead of a pornstar as models carry less of a stigma, but the end result is the same: stick with your wife aka Wii, or use your Wii with your wife.
Give that statement as many entendres as you like.
Post by: BranDonk Kong on January 16, 2007, 03:22:44 PM
^Over 50% of stores polled have PS3s (one store has over 60 systems) in stock, ZERO have Wiis. PS3 = phailure.
