News

Comment by: lxhotboy (Feb 25, 2009 22:02)

Its too late to remove the Blue-ray drive. Once games are released on BR there is no going back but it is something that i felt sony should have thought about. I know that add-ons have not been that successful in the past but if the PS3 is a ten year console i think they could have release the PS3 initially without a BR drive. After maybe 3 or 4 years of games they could have then made a cost efficient add BR drive but they were eager to try and establish BR as the next media of choice so they were in a hard spot. I wonder if they will make the Wifi optional and maybe regular controllers instead of wireless. I heard someone say the PS3 has to have the HD to play games but is that really true. Is it absolutely necessary to have a HD to play games. If it is necessary to play any game then how bout just putting in enough memory to play games and not the big HD. Maybe just 1 gig to allow play of games if necessary.

Whatever they do i am ready for a PS3. I want to play resistance 1 and 2, uncharted, etc... I will probably have to wait till this christmas though b/c i am concentrating on going back to school. Bring on the pricedrop sony!! IAME!!

Comment by: gnovak1 (Feb 25, 2009 22:13)

Sony is probably regretting their strategy of an 'Entertainment Device' rather than just a game machine which is why we buy these things in the first place. Blue Ray has not hit any kind of peak yet and the demand isn't as high as was anticipated by Sony.

They shouldve released 2 versions from the very beginning giving people a choice to go with "expensive and entertaining" or "cheaper and just for games". Ones that are financially secure wouldve bought the expensive version and people tighter on cash would have bought the cheaper version.

Comment by: core2kid (Feb 25, 2009 23:28)

Put B/C back. I don't get how that makes the system $100 more (see price difference b/w b/c Model and non b/c model back in the day)

Comment by: Morreale (Feb 25, 2009 23:32)

Originally posted by core2kid:

---

Put B/C back. I don't get how that makes the system $100 more (see price difference b/w b/c Model and non b/c model back in the day)

---

Buy another PS2 if it's that important... Why would you buy a new console to just play old games?

I can get a PS2 brand new for 69$ CAD... Not much...

Comment by: core2kid (Feb 25, 2009 23:38)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by core2kid:

---

Put B/C back. I don't get how that makes the system $100 more (see price difference b/w b/c Model and non b/c model back in the day)

---

Buy another PS2 if it's that important... Why would you buy a new console to just play old games?

I can get a PS2 brand new for 69$ CAD... Not much...

---

That's not the point, I have 3 PS2's. It's just more convenient to have 1 system hooked to the TV instead of 2. The PS3 also upscales the PS2 games. It does look better, I have done it on mine 80GB.

When I say put back B/C, I'm not talking about for me, I'm talking about the general public. I had a survey online some time ago where I asked if PS3 B/C was important. 90% of results said yes. There were about 500-1000 responses.

Comment by: CNDLG (Feb 25, 2009 23:58)

Originally posted by lxhotboy:

---

I heard someone say the PS3 has to have the HD to play games but is that really true. Is it absolutely necessary to have a HD to play games. If it is necessary to play any game then how bout just putting in enough memory to play games and not the big HD. Maybe just 1 gig to allow play of games if necessary.E!!

---

Not only do you need a hard drive for most games, 3-5gb of free space worth for some !!

Comment by: emugamer (Feb 26, 2009 00:26)

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by core2kid:

---

Put B/C back. I don't get how that makes the system $100 more (see price difference b/w b/c Model and non b/c model back in the day)

---

Buy another PS2 if it's that important... Why would you buy a new console to just play old games?

I can get a PS2 brand new for 69$ CAD... Not much...

---

That's not the point, I have 3 PS2's. It's just more convenient to have 1 system hooked to the TV instead of 2. The PS3 also upscales the PS2 games. It does look better, I have done it on mine 80GB.

When I say put back B/C, I'm not talking about for me, I'm talking about the general public. I had a survey online some time ago where I asked if PS3 B/C was important. 90% of results said yes. There were about 500-1000 responses.

---

Not to discredit your survey, but I'd be interested to see the results if it was given today. I used to be of that mindset. Ask me about B/C now and I couldn't care less. I've boxed up my PS2 as I've become more immersed in the PS3 games over the past year.. No interest in firing up any new PS2 games. Just would be interesting to see if the numbers and attitudes have changed over time for some.

Comment by: PantherM (Feb 26, 2009 00:37)

Originally posted by gnovak1:

---

Sony is probably regretting their strategy of an 'Entertainment Device' rather than just a game machine which is why we buy these things in the first place. Blue Ray has not hit any kind of peak yet and the demand isn't as high as was anticipated by Sony.

They shouldve released 2 versions from the very beginning giving people a choice to go with "expensive and entertaining" or "cheaper and just for games". Ones that are financially secure wouldve bought the expensive version and people tighter on cash would have bought the cheaper version.

---

I gotta disagree a bit.

I own two PS3's, and it is rare that I play games on them. But I use them all the time as entertainment machines. The ability store all of my movies, pics, and music on the upgradable HDD is awesome. The fact that I can wirelessly stream or copy movies from my computer to my PS3's is icing on the cake. Being that this this can all be done at a 1080p level with 7.1 sound makes this a great entertainment system. While this could still be accomplished without a blu-ray drive, it would seem a lot less cutting edge. It would just be a PS2+ instead of a PS3.

Honestly, the X-Box is a better "pure" gaming system. But I don't game enough to want the "look" of an X-Box console in my living room and bedroom.

Comment by: windsong (Feb 26, 2009 00:40)

I dont have a PS3..yet. I would gladly buy one if there were at least 10 must have exclusive games for it. In the meantime, I have just upgraded my PC to a 3.6 wolfdale with a Radeon 3850 to play Dragon Age, Mass Effect 2, and Alan Wake (among hundreds of others coming down the pike which will require hefty cpu speed). I would have gotten the PS3 IF the games were there..but there are not. Where is the next Shadow of the Colossus? And God of War 3..is that the ONLY must have game coming for ps3?

Sony is f$cked.

Comment by: H08 (Feb 26, 2009 03:02)

Originally posted by windsong:

---

I dont have a PS3..yet. I would gladly buy one if there were at least 10 must have exclusive games for it. In the meantime, I have just upgraded my PC to a 3.6 wolfdale with a Radeon 3850 to play Dragon Age, Mass Effect 2, and Alan Wake (among hundreds of others coming down the pike which will require hefty cpu speed). I would have gotten the PS3 IF the games were there..but there are not. Where is the next Shadow of the Colossus? And God of War 3..is that the ONLY must have game coming for ps3?

Sony is f$cked.

---

have you heard of game called Killzone 2??? I dont see how sony is "f$cked".

Comment by: lxhotboy (Feb 26, 2009 03:23)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by gnovak1:

---

Sony is probably regretting their strategy of an 'Entertainment Device' rather than just a game machine which is why we buy these things in the first place. Blue Ray has not hit any kind of peak yet and the demand isn't as high as was anticipated by Sony.

They shouldve released 2 versions from the very beginning giving people a choice to go with "expensive and entertaining" or "cheaper and just for games". Ones that are financially secure wouldve bought the expensive version and people tighter on cash would have bought the cheaper version.

---

I gotta disagree a bit.

I own two PS3's, and it is rare that I play games on them. But I use them all the time as entertainment machines. The ability store all of my movies, pics, and music on the upgradable HDD is awesome. The fact that I can wirelessly stream or copy movies from my computer to my PS3's is icing on the cake. Being that this this can all be done at a 1080p level with 7.1 sound makes this a great entertainment system. While this could still be accomplished without a blu-ray drive, it would seem a lot less cutting edge. It would just be a PS2+ instead of a PS3.

Honestly, the X-Box is a better "pure" gaming system. But I don't game enough to want the "look" of an X-Box console in my living room and bedroom.

---

I understand what you are saying but gnovak1 is right. That good that you enjoy using the PS3 but if they had offered more than one version, a cheaper version that what they initially released, as he stated they would have sold more units by now. The majority of my friends and I, who were all PS2 fans, now own xbox360 and didnot buy a PS3 specifically b.c of the steep price. Sony lost a lot of fans. Well no let me rephrase that b.c i plan to buy a PS3 eventually. Sony is holding off of lot of fans with the steep price. Some still playing PS2, others bought the Wii or Xbox360. You honestly have to ask yourself. Here is the million dollar question.

How is it that Sony had one of the most dominant video gaming console in history(PS2)with an unbelievable fanbase, and then ends up as a underacheiving next-generation console in the PS3. I know they had a late start in sales but if they had released a console initially with a price that was more comparable to competition most of their loyal PS2 fans would now be PS3 owners instead of buying a xbox360 or Wii. I can honestly say that, with including myself, i can remeber myself and others talking about the next-generation consoles before they were released. We had all talked of owning a PS3. Now of the 7 people including myself, 6/7 own a xbox360, 2/7 own both, and 1/7 own only a PS3. Even though sony has sold more consoles in a shorter span than microsoft. They could have passed microsoft in sales by now if they had the exact same price. The wii would have still outsold both b.c of the wii fit and the controller that brought a new experience to gaming.

Comment by: core2kid (Feb 26, 2009 03:25)

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by core2kid:

---

Put B/C back. I don't get how that makes the system $100 more (see price difference b/w b/c Model and non b/c model back in the day)

---

Buy another PS2 if it's that important... Why would you buy a new console to just play old games?

I can get a PS2 brand new for 69$ CAD... Not much...

---

That's not the point, I have 3 PS2's. It's just more convenient to have 1 system hooked to the TV instead of 2. The PS3 also upscales the PS2 games. It does look better, I have done it on mine 80GB.

When I say put back B/C, I'm not talking about for me, I'm talking about the general public. I had a survey online some time ago where I asked if PS3 B/C was important. 90% of results said yes. There were about 500-1000 responses.

---

Not to discredit your survey, but I'd be interested to see the results if it was given today. I used to be of that mindset. Ask me about B/C now and I couldn't care less. I've boxed up my PS2 as I've become more immersed in the PS3 games over the past year.. No interest in firing up any new PS2 games. Just would be interesting to see if the numbers and attitudes have changed over time for some.

---

I have a PS3 and 360 and I just played Jak X on PS2 for about an hour today. PS2 revolutionized gaming and there are some great games that I'd love to go back and play again. Many of these great games are not compatible on the 80GB PS3. This is why I think B/C is important, or at least a software update for the 80GB owners.

Comment by: lxhotboy (Feb 26, 2009 03:32)

Originally posted by windsong:

---

I dont have a PS3..yet. I would gladly buy one if there were at least 10 must have exclusive games for it. In the meantime, I have just upgraded my PC to a 3.6 wolfdale with a Radeon 3850 to play Dragon Age, Mass Effect 2, and Alan Wake (among hundreds of others coming down the pike which will require hefty cpu speed). I would have gotten the PS3 IF the games were there..but there are not. Where is the next Shadow of the Colossus? And God of War 3..is that the ONLY must have game coming for ps3?

Sony is f$cked.

---

I would not exactly say that. Sony has some good games from people i have heard who own PS3 and a like to read a lot of reviews,especially for the games that are all hyped up before they drop.

Quote:

---

[Not only do you need a hard drive for most games, 3-5gb of free space worth for some !!

---

Are you actually saying that PS3 has some games that will not work unless they are downloaded to HD. That sucks. They should give you the option to download it or not and still be able to play it.

Comment by: SProdigy (Feb 26, 2009 03:35)

What will they do without a Blu-Ray drive? Maybe downloads straight to hard drive? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that a PC?

Comment by: Morreale (Feb 26, 2009 04:13)

Originally posted by lxhotboy:

---

Are you actually saying that PS3 has some games that will not work unless they are downloaded to HD. That sucks. They should give you the option to download it or not and still be able to play it.

---

No, for most games they only make you copy some content to the HDD for faster loading times. Now for some recent games, I can't remember which, they give you the option. And then there's the Metal Gear style downloading where after a certain part of the story you delete past info and copy new info. And it's only a couple gigs here and there. That's why off the bat Sony started with 60GB HDDs, thinkin' ahead ;)

Well except for the 20GB system but not too many of those were sold and some HDDs are like pennies today lol

Comment by: cmcjk (Feb 26, 2009 10:01)

Quote:

---

I dont have a PS3..yet. I would gladly buy one if there were at least 10 must have exclusive games for it

---

I can't understand this obcession with exclusive games. As far as I can tell exclusive content is nothing but bad for consumers. The only way I can see it being a good thing is if you are a fanboy and want your multinational corporation to win the console war (oooh.. Microsoft you make me feel all gooey inside).

I bought an x-box because it was much cheaper and I am so under the thumb I can't buy a pencil without clearing it through the wife first. Sony's argument of ...but the PS3 will last for 10 years... is rubbish. Buy an x-box now and then wait until the PS3 price hits rock bottom and then buy that too. This way you get both consoles for the same price as a PS3 now and you still get the 10 year lifespan.

Comment by: SamNz (Feb 26, 2009 19:57)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by windsong:

---

I dont have a PS3..yet. I would gladly buy one if there were at least 10 must have exclusive games for it. In the meantime, I have just upgraded my PC to a 3.6 wolfdale with a Radeon 3850 to play Dragon Age, Mass Effect 2, and Alan Wake (among hundreds of others coming down the pike which will require hefty cpu speed). I would have gotten the PS3 IF the games were there..but there are not. Where is the next Shadow of the Colossus? And God of War 3..is that the ONLY must have game coming for ps3?

Sony is f$cked.

---

have you heard of game called Killzone 2??? I dont see how sony is "f$cked".

---

just a little game called killzone 2, go have your pc

Comment by: xnonsuchx (Feb 26, 2009 20:28)

AD is running behind...Sony already said there will be no price cut anytime soon a day or two before this article was posted (apparently in response to this a$$wipe 'analyst' or some other claiming one was imminent).

People like Mike Hickey need to shut their moronic, ignorant (and/or biased?) mouths. PS3 reached 20 million units in faster time than the 360 did and Wii sales have plummeted by 1/3 due to lack of quality titles...is the 360 a failure for not being well above 30 million now and Wii becoming one to him too? (NOTE: I'm only pointing that out...NOT trying to start a stupid fanboy war.) He's just trying to get attention by 'making news' out of almost pure conjecture and some of the most wild and asinine rumors (e.g. BD-less PS3 and having NO evidence any publishers are about to drop PS3).

The ONLY things statements like this do are possibly hurt short-term sales, yield baseless fodder for anti-fanboys and as mentioned, give the idiot making the statement a little attention.

Comment by: Deadrum33 (Feb 26, 2009 21:07)

I'll buy my first one if the price goes down, hell I was gonna buy one when GOW 3 came out anyway...

Comment by: justme81 (Feb 26, 2009 21:47)

Originally posted by xnonsuchx:

---

AD is running behind...Sony already said there will be no price cut anytime soon a day or two before this article was posted (apparently in response to this a$$wipe 'analyst' or some other claiming one was imminent).

People like Mike Hickey need to shut their moronic, ignorant (and/or biased?) mouths. PS3 reached 20 million units in faster time than the 360 did and Wii sales have plummeted by 1/3 due to lack of quality titles...is the 360 a failure for not being well above 30 million now and Wii becoming one to him too? (NOTE: I'm only pointing that out...NOT trying to start a stupid fanboy war.) He's just trying to get attention by 'making news' out of almost pure conjecture and some of the most wild and asinine rumors (e.g. BD-less PS3 and having NO evidence any publishers are about to drop PS3).

The ONLY things statements like this do are possibly hurt short-term sales, yield baseless fodder for anti-fanboys and as mentioned, give the idiot making the statement a little attention.

---

So when Sony denied the last price drop were you shocked that they lied to you? You forget that Sony, Ms both denied price cuts till the day they happened and most analysts predicted price drops were coming this is what they do its called market forcasting they have access to data we do not. I ask you how do you know publishers are not getting ready to drop PS3? I would lean toward they arnt but then again I dont have the data they have and maybe they are unlikely as it is.

Comment by: xnonsuchx (Feb 27, 2009 00:37)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by justme81:

---

So when Sony denied the last price drop were you shocked that they lied to you? You forget that Sony, Ms both denied price cuts till the day they happened and most analysts predicted price drops were coming this is what they do its called market forcasting they have access to data we do not. I ask you how do you know publishers are not getting ready to drop PS3? I would lean toward they arnt but then again I dont have the data they have and maybe they are unlikely as it is.

---

There's a new 'analyst' or some other bonehead just about EVERY WEEK claiming a price cut it about to happen. EVENTUALLY a cut will happen right after someone predicts it and they'll somehow look 'informed' or a genius because they just happened to be the most recent person to predict it. One price cut for every 100 predictions made (exaggerated) is hardly noteworthy unless it's one specific person who's always right.

Comment by: bassdog69 (Feb 27, 2009 18:06)

Originally posted by xnonsuchx:

---

AD is running behind...Sony already said there will be no price cut anytime soon a day or two before this article was posted (apparently in response to this a$$wipe 'analyst' or some other claiming one was imminent).

People like Mike Hickey need to shut their moronic, ignorant (and/or biased?) mouths. PS3 reached 20 million units in faster time than the 360 did and Wii sales have plummeted by 1/3 due to lack of quality titles...is the 360 a failure for not being well above 30 million now and Wii becoming one to him too? (NOTE: I'm only pointing that out...NOT trying to start a stupid fanboy war.) He's just trying to get attention by 'making news' out of almost pure conjecture and some of the most wild and asinine rumors (e.g. BD-less PS3 and having NO evidence any publishers are about to drop PS3).

The ONLY things statements like this do are possibly hurt short-term sales, yield baseless fodder for anti-fanboys and as mentioned, give the idiot making the statement a little attention.

---

Now that is the most thought out, informative, spot on response I have read in a very long time. Well done xnonsuchx!

Comment by: handsom (Feb 27, 2009 18:17)

Let's be frank here. Sony and M$ always deny that price drops are coming, any time it's rumored, even when it does happen. If they admit "Hey, a price drop is coming", folks wait on buying the system, and it makes their sales look bad until the drop hits. Fluctuating sales like that don't exactly help stock prices.

And Janco aren't the only folks saying it's coming soon, lead analysts 'Pachter' has stated that a drop will likely come before the summer. A drop of, you guessed it: $100. If so many industry analysts and insiders are saying this, odds are there's some credibility behind it.

And in all seriousness, the economy just isn't supporting something so expensive right now. Many consumers want the price tag on these things to go down. Pachter also specualted that the 360 would see a $50 price drop, moving the 'pro' down to $249.99. The interesting thing here, is that this could start to hurt the Wii soon as well, now that the 'Wow' factor of the motion controls is wearing off, and some folks are beginning to feel less happy with it's accuracy. So, this may lead to a Wii decrease in the next six months as well -we'll see on that one. It's just conjecture.

But yes, Gameinformer published in their latest issue, that Pachter is predicting a price drop for the PS3 and the 360 before the beginning of March; and typically, they're pretty accurate.

Comment by: Locster60 (Feb 28, 2009 15:52)

I don't believe any of this about sony being in trouble or removing the BR. Sony sold 10Mil consoles last year while Xbox sold 10.8. And those are published numbers you can look it up. I think with the games coming out that sony will be just fine. The only thing I do believe is that sony is going to do a price cut to stay competitive.

Comment by: heraldsun (May 22, 2009 01:32)

Originally posted by Locster60:

---

I don't believe any of this about sony being in trouble or removing the BR. Sony sold 10Mil consoles last year while Xbox sold 10.8. And those are published numbers you can look it up. I think with the games coming out that sony will be just fine. The only thing I do believe is that sony is going to do a price cut to stay competitive.

---

so mis-informed