News

Comment by: Zero4 (May 19, 2006 16:24)

ZIppyDSM

The PS3 has no potential. It offers nothing new to GAMING. That is why we buy these machines...to play games. I do not buy Gaming machines to watch movies...or to cook food or to design homes. I PLAY GAMES. Wii and 360 has shown us that is what their intentions are...and PS3 is just giving us a bunch of Hardware we do not need. I am not spending 600 bucks for a Blu-ray machine. The HD-DVD players cost 200-300 now. So...in a few months it will be less...and buy the time PS3 comes out...HD-DVD players will be much less....and I can buy a Wii and HD-DVD for less than the PS3 console (Games and Movies included).

Comment by: Jasper44 (May 19, 2006 17:14)

@flyingv

Quote:

---

Let all not forget, the price is for the system when it gets released- it hasn't been, and won't be released, for several more months and by then the price could drop a little.

---

That doesn't make sense. The price if for the release like you said, so why would the price drop before it gets released.

@Zero4

Quote:

---

I PLAY GAMES. Wii and 360 has shown us that is what their intentions are...and PS3 is just giving us a bunch of Hardware we do not need.

---

I get what your saying about the Wii, but what has Microsoft shown us that the PS3 hasn't.

Comment by: flyingv (May 19, 2006 18:42)

Jasper44:

Sorry, what I meant was that after it is released and on the market for a few months, the price will drop. My bad. I spend too much time typing and not always thinking correctly. I just think that in order for the PS3 to become sucessful, they'll have to drop the price after it has been released within a few months to gain consumers' trust and to get "us" to run out and buy one. They'll keep the price up thru the "Holidays" of course, but I think it'll taper off sooner than later (lets hope!!!) Thank-you for bringing this to my attention.

Comment by: ZippyDSM (May 19, 2006 19:11)

flyingv

So ture this is the final price qute befor it lauchs but far from the final price drop,as well they are probly going to shave 50 off of it at launch 0-o

Zero4

I just luv the logic of you fanboys

400+200-300 is 600-700 >< its fing more than the 360,right now we know the max of the PS3 600 it will no go over that and they will shave of more any time....Besides if you realy palyed games you'd get all the systems for me its

1.Wii

2.PS3 leaning but meh

3.360 leaning but meh

the PS3,360 are even untill they have been out a year and I can tell whitch has the games I want more,but even befor all that I am gettign a Xbox to fill out my collection.

If you are a 360 fan tell us and tell us why you dont like the PS3 no need tob ash it under the clock of palying al ames and such,be like soem of out other chatters here like handsom a 360 Fan,simpley likes the 360 games more and dosent overly bash the PS3,

Comment by: Zero4 (May 19, 2006 20:48)

ZIppyDSM

What is the world are you talking about? Wii will be cheaper than the damn PS3. I am not buying the PS3. That is that. I like 360 and I know the Wii is gonna be wicked. PS3 doesn't do it for me....Final Fantasy looks boring...and I am interested in exciting new games (with a few sequels..Zelda..Halo3) PS3 is expesive and you get NOTHING other than Blu-ray (Blu-Ray will not take off...so it has companies behind it...it is TOO EXPENSIVE TO PRODUCE...HD-DVD will come out on top..so what then a PS3 with an Blu-ray drive that no one uses...wow) At least 360 has innovative games. PS3 doesn't. Focus on the games...the flashy extras mean nothing.

Comment by: handsom (May 19, 2006 20:51)

@ NINVIN

-I used to work in a game store, and I had to quit. Not because it was difficult, not because I don't love games. Because I had to endure statements like "Halo 3 might be on PS3"

Did you even think as you typed that?

Honestly. This is M$ cashcow. They will NEVER release it on a competing system so long as they have their own console. I will go so far as to say NEVER. Anybody who tells you otherwise is full of crap. There are no if's and's or but's. That is bullcrap. And passing rumors like that around is proof that you are an ingorant fanboy. That is no more true than to say that Sony is pondering God of War for the XBox. It will NEVER happen. It is not a matter of which company or system is better, it is a fact of image. These companies work very hard to create associations with these characters and their consoles, and would sooner give away their winter quarter earnings, than support their competitor's system in any way shape or form.

I am not a fanboy for any of the systems. I own a 360. Why? Because I have a 42" HDTV and wanted to see real hi-def gaming. Do I plan to get another next gen console? Yes. In fact, I plan on owning all three, like I do with the current fading generation. They all have great titles that are fun, every major system out there. But when these companies purchase production studios to make games that will be their image, they spend a lot of time and money creating these images that gamers associate with their product, and selling them would be a bigger waste than you can even imagine.

So, when people go out making statements like "Halo 3 is going to be on PS3 too." it makes my brain hurt. Because it's so ignorant that it actually starts to make me feel dumber. And it's contagious, one person makes it up; because it 'sounds good' and then tells their friends, who on occasion are ignorant enough to believe him, and it becomes this cycle of ingnorance that spreads like a disease.

Among other dirty, ignorant, and bold faced lies I had to sit through working at a gamestore and blockbuster:

"Gears of War was originally a PS3 title; it looked a lot better on that system." -Gears of War is a title being produced by *Microsoft* it was never being made for anything else. The best part - This idiot somehow became a shift leader for a local gamestop.

"Sony already has the PS3 done, and they're just waiting to release it." -Heard every other day for two years, working in a Blockbuster Video

"Nintendo's new gameboy is going to have a 500Mhz processor, and comes with full wireless internet access, as well as backwards compatibility with the gamecube." -Yeah; some idiot actually fought me on this one. Look for the Gameboy Advance 2, Fall 2005.

Again, the system will be good; but can we please keep these threads to known facts, it would be so much simpler, rumors, tales, and blatant misinformation only serve to make people angry, and to hurt readers knowledge.

As for the price fairness; yes. It is fair, even if the technology goes nowhere. It is fair, because it is so much bleeding edge hardware. The bottom line for me though, isn't whether the price is fair. The bottom line for me, is whether or not I am ready to dump seven hundred fifty dollars into getting a new system with a couple games. Because, let's be honest, with the system price, the game cost (Which, if you aren't aware, next gen titles are to retail for $60-$70 each, EA is pushing for $70) and the necessary accessories, ie: extra controller.

The price is fair; but is this kind of investment really worth it for most gamers right now? Someone else posted in here, saying that five hundred isn't that much to invest. To whoever said that; you must be out of your mind. To the average individual, five hundred dollars is HUGE. No one goes, 'Hey, a new toy came out for $500, I think I'll buy one'. This is a big cost, and one that needs to be taken seriously. I'm really tired of little Johnny living with his parents telling me that it's not expensive. Little Johnny doesn't have to over $2200 in necessary bills to pay on a monthly basis, not including food. And quite frankly, I am assuming that little Johnny is not older, richer, Jim; because older richer Jim doesn't frequent boards like this, to talk about price. Little Johnny in school, because he's bored during computer class. Little Johnny tends to either brag about things he will never actually have; or be completely spoiled. Either way; nobody likes little Johnny.

Comment by: ZippyDSM (May 19, 2006 20:55)

handsom

brain is dead I have yet to read past the halo 3 comment,in the long run wouldnt it be best to ame it for both systems?Games sells trump all,altho by keeping as many games as they can 1 system it will boost sells for that system some >< bah I ansewered my own Q ><

Comment by: handsom (May 19, 2006 21:03)

Ish awright. I answer my own questions all the timez. It's more fun that way. The halo 3 comment was on the 3rd or 4th page back... I don't recall, it just really bugged me. Not because I'm a big Halo fan, but because it just seeped ignorance, and no one else bothered to eliminate the ignorance.

Comment by: Jasper44 (May 19, 2006 23:37)

Zero4, you should play the stock market since your so certain of your prediction that Blu-ray will lose.

Comment by: handsom (May 20, 2006 00:22)

@Jasper44

Lol. I love that one. No really. *Gasping for air* ROFL.

Woooooooo....... *sigh*

Sorry, I had to catch my breath......

Oh wow....... that was funny.....

Okay, not really. Not at all. In fact not even remotely. You obviously have no idea of the technology Sony is trying to push in the pretty little envelope that is Blu-ray. The base idea is good. It is a HUGE format that will support LOTS of data, especially a few years from now; when they start making a lot more drives; and everyone can use it for their media storage purposes, and it becomes very publicly available. Oh; wait. That will never happen. Ever. Why? Because, like UMD, Sony actually owns, and collects royalties on each disc printed, not just on games, which use the PS3 format and programming language. But also on the actual movies and any other kind of disc that any company wishes to release. And ironically; the big major film companies decided that exclusive formats like this are highly unprofitable. On one hand; Sony is claiming much larger sales than anticipated, while on the other hand; film companies have come to the decision that it isn't a practical format; when they have to pay their own production costs, plus manufacturing, plus marketing, PLUS ROYALTIES FOR THE DISC THEY ARE PRINTING ONTO.

That is why Blu-ray will (Most likely) not work. It has nothing to do with the technology. Again, the tech is superb. But Sony's business practices with these 'Proprietary Formats' has proven that they have mastered the art of creating new technology that is bleeding edge.... And then running it into the ground.

I'm not here hating Sony. I'm here saying that they need to not create a format that is actually slightly useful; then killing it by actually believing that every other company will just get in line, and pay them to allow the use of their basic disc format.

For those who don't recall, a good example is the zip disc. Alright for a year or two... And then everyone realized that it was expensive, only partly reliable, impractical, and unreliable. Bringing back to mind that wonderful sound; the unbearably frustrating 'Click of Death'. This from iomega; the industry lead in media for over ten years; second only to verbatim.

Many other formats have come and gone; promising to be the 'next big one'. To add to the irony; it's very fun to look at Sony's track record in particular, relating to media formats.

In the past years, Sony has been on the bleeding edge of some fine formats which have re-shaped the market, I'm sure that even the biggest fans of PS3; and their new Blu-ray format, will recall these...

-Beta Max

-Laser Disc

-UMD

Not to mention how Sony recently fakely demo'ed their new high def format using none other than a DVD+R. I love that Sony quickly scrambled to come up with an excuse, which many spectators have confirmed to be bogus. Just like their "Actual game footage" demos from the PS2, and as many have spectated; the PS3(This is spectation, and cannot be confirmed or denied until the system sees launch, I don't want people from either side of the argument jumping on this opportunity. NO ONE KNOWS YET).

So........ Before cutting to the little quips to put one's money where their mouth is; consider that many of us posting here have already either done so or invested towards their choice. This race isn't going to kill Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft. This race IMO, is going to do something very different. It's actually going to create a rift in the gaming market; game companies are making a big decision between whether they want to continue investing in the same hardcore gaming market; or the newly formed niche market. Sony is attempting the middle line. That is why this will be a very interesting race to see. I want to see how each company strives, and what areas and choices bring them their successes. It will be rewarding for gamers, seeing how the game companies produce many products for this variety of products that are all very different; giving us all a variety.

Comment by: hot_ice (May 25, 2006 16:50)

I think more than anything, you peops like to delve in hypothetics. llol

In any event, I don't buy Sony's claim of justifying its prices. Let's face it, its not as if the Blu-ray is some extra option! ooohh what is this, ya right.

It is an essential to play games, the game will be on Blu-ray format, therefore, the Blu-ray reader is an essential component.

So right there, 1 down. The controller having a motion detector, is an interesting idea, however, there is no rumble effect. Not that it really matters, but the fact that it uses rechargeable batteries, is a big minus right there. Now the rest, I don't really care if my PS3 could open an event horizon and allow me to travel through time...

As long as it plays new, fresh, innovative games, I am good with the idea of a PS3.

However, I still disagree with the price, and I think the prices always reverberate around the same figures, because there are some of us, techno-gadget-freaks that would pay anything to get their hands on it. That's why these hideous prices, are always maintained no matter what decade you're in because some of us, are just too impetuous and excited with the idea of a new piece of hardware.

Comment by: handsom (May 26, 2006 16:46)

Quote:

---

Sony have built up a certain brand equity over time since the launch of PlayStation in 1995 and PS2 in 2000, the first five million are going to buy it, whatever it is, even it didn't have games.

---

- Sony's CEO David Reeves

For me, this is the end of my interest in Sony. I will not by their new playstation. Statements of this nature, and others made by the same individual as of late, have proven downright insulting to their customer base.

These statements are proving that Sony has lost touch, and truly feels that their customers are blithering idiots.

Comment by: borhan9 (May 26, 2006 17:34)

I said it once before and I'll say it again.

Ill stick with my PC's... They are flexible cost efectvy and again easily upgradable....

I don't know why people go with consoles anymore???

Mind you I have a PS2 but have not played it for years :)

Comment by: handsom (May 26, 2006 20:44)

Well; let's see here, exclusive titles, because we all know that the PC has (in comparison to consoles) a HUGE shortage of good commercial titles. And as good as some of it is; homebrew stuff can only carry me for so long. Consoles seem to put out such a huge volume of variety titles, in ways that PCs just can't keep up with.

I love computer gaming. But quite frankly, only about one game of good interest seems to come out every six months. I can't wait that long between. Besides, for $150, you can get an XBox, which isn't quite as nice looking as a pc; but the titles(Particularly used ones) are so much more available at good prices. For less than $90; I can get a used gamecube, which again, isn't as good looking as cutting edge PCs; but I'll get it with Metroid Prime and Smash Bros. Melee which are more than good enough, while still keeping the pricetag under $100. The only way computers can compare to that is through the not so cunning use of bargain bins. *Shudders*

Game companies have come to the conclusion that their is a bigger market for gaming on the consoles, not to mention a much lower issue with piracy, which runs much more rampantly on home computers, than it does on consoles. That's not to say that people don't chip, or even find workarounds for their consoles (They do)but it's much more common to see piracy issues with computer games. So they produce many games only on consoles, rather than PCs. Surely you noticed the huge decline in good pc games in the last five years or so, as the hardware gap started to close? I've been around a while, and I got to watch computer gaming come to the stage it's at. Their are a couple titles for the hardcore [CS, BF(1942 or 2), Quake, UT...], a few decent MMOs [WoW, CoH, and EQ(I or II)] and then some odd titles that glimmer a bit of temporary interest [The Sims, Black & White]. But aside from this, I much prefer a lot of console titles. There are many more quality titles available, and older, cheaper titles are much more viable than on the pc platform.

Quote:

---

I don't know why people go with consoles anymore???

---

.....That's why.

Oh; and how many pc games allow you to play in the same room with your friend, on the same screen? I'm not saying their aren't games that do that, but they are rare unless you do a LAN, which is a costly and time consuming ordeal.

Comment by: hot_ice (May 27, 2006 01:56)

@Handsome

Sony has become complacent, so much so, that they rely on fan based purchases to jump start their profitability margins.

In business, this is considered brand power marketability, however, in the customer's view, one that we assume is intelligent enough to realize that such assumptions entail or rather insinuate that we are blithering idiots, will lead to a loss of sales.

Hence, Sony can count me out of their expected projections. I will not buy their console.

Comment by: ZippyDSM (May 27, 2006 03:57)

Hansom

As always good thought provkieing posts ^^

Ah...if it were not for the royalties ,BR would win hand down?

I dont realy cout UMD as much of a format its mostly used or games ,and top moives are soemtiems put on it,I think sony missed the ball here if they used DVD and had a simple pull out thing to use full sized DVDs they could have added PSX compatabity and actualy foguht nintendo on evenground....insted they would rather push thier BS format......realyis nintendo the only visionary left?

..as it stands now the PSP is a intresting gadet that can paly some games,music and moives,while the DS has a few games that can out qauilty the consoles

borhan9

the trouble with that is PC gameing is dead stuff might get ported to it...but we are enar the end of PC gameing as we knew it we'll be seign alot more games ported over to the PC and not useing PC mouse and keybaord to its fullist............

Hot ice

I could handle the price if they didnt make the low end version and priced the high end PS3 at 500 or even 550,this 2 version crap is annoying.

Comment by: handsom (May 27, 2006 11:01)

Not to mention that the cheaper version has other snaffoos that can't be upgraded, like the whole wireless issue.

A lot of people defend PC gaming with MMO's. But a lot of new MMOs are actually starting to look at the new consoles for their home, and I'm not just talking FFXI(Blegh.) Both Marvel and DC are doing their own MMOs to [try] and compete with City of Heroes. Both are looking at a console release as well. There have been rumors of a couple existent MMOs making the switch, depending on how long it takes for the business module to seem profitable enough to deal with people on these systems, and all the glitches that would have to be looked at and fixed. So, it will take time, but it's coming.

Oddly enough, in the last few months, my DS has seen so much more play time than my PSP. The DS has brand new ways to do things, it makes you feel more connected to your game, through the insignificant use of a touch screen that, while amounting to nothing in most cases, just makes you feel a little more involved in the game's process. Especially in Animal Crossing and Brain Age(A $20 title from day one). My PSP on the other hand has collected a lot of dust since much earlier this year, until I recently snagged up worms open warfare(I love the old school worms games) and lemmings (Who DOESN'T love lemmings!?!). But even with these titles, it becomes abundantly clear that I much prefer Nintendo's new way of playing, even on much lower end hardware, than Sony's better graphics; because once the graphical oos and ahhs where off; it's mundande, uninspired game after game. Nothing new. They need a more unique game for the lineup.

Sony's new PS3 doesn't look set to deliver any better experience, nothing new, nothing special. And I think the entire game industry can agree that the sensing controller Sony announced is the product of two things:

-A.) Sony is copying Nintendo, because there is public interest

-B.) Sony was scrambling to find something else to do with their controller; because they got sued and lost over rumble technology.

Sony wasn't PLANNING the motion sensor; it was a last minute decision. The game demos using it, make that clear. Not to mention the PR reps. They had info on the games, the 'batarang' controller, etc, but nothing on the motion sensor. Suddenly they've had it all along? I don't buy it Sony, much like your new console.

Quote:

---

the first five million are going to buy it, whatever it is, even it didn't have games.

---

I certainly hope this is wrong, five million units is a lot. And I hope more people read this, and get turned off, because Sony needs to learn that their customers are (Hopefully) not complete idiots. I still can't believe they said it.

Comment by: hot_ice (May 27, 2006 11:34)

Handsome

The worst part is, regardless of that insinuation by Sony's CEO, people will still blindly buy anyways.

This brings an interesting comparison: our world is dying, do you still pollute? In most cases, yes, regardless of that factoid. And yes, global warming is not some theory, it is an actual, feasible theory, that we are seeing polar icecaps melt and displacing slowly with time. What does this spell out? Oblivion, not Elder Scrolls, but the other kind.

Comment by: borhan9 (May 27, 2006 17:50)

@ZIppyDSM

It is true that PC Gaming is going down... but my point was more about the flexibilty of PC's comparred to gaming consoles whereas a console before mainlu could only play games and save and not much more.... Computers were multitasking machines that allowed a lot more things to be done with them.

I'm not competlley against consoles I'm a retro Sega lover. Also have a PS1 and PS2, but from what I have seen out there at the moment nothing really has tickled my fancy.. I think the clossest console that has taken my interest has been the new XBOX but thats about it...

As they say I'm going to watch this space and wait and see how things develop....

Comment by: handsom (May 28, 2006 00:16)

Speaking more on that point; I find it oddly intriguing, that consoles have finally started across that line. Particularly the PSP, which can surf the internet, play videos and MP3s, along with games. The 360 can do movie trailers, voice chat(Albeit only on M$ servers), and download (for free) full playable demos.

I find it odd to say that PSPs in general are closer to the multi-tasking of a pc; but as the 360 has now been cracked; I'm sure it's a short matter of time before someone get's a buffer overrun done with some 'signed' code, to make them do as one pleases. And at that time, I will have to consider getting a second one, for linux or windows. That wouldn't be a bad rig, after all. Especially if I could add some more memory, that would be a pretty good deal; although admittedly, I'm not a bit scared of soldering, so I might be somewhat biased to the idea.

Anyways, I guess my point is that console developers are starting to see that people really care about e-mail; chat; video and music, and they're responding, making consoles feel more and more like computers. Vista is actually attempting to close that gap; supposedly integrating to some new conjoined 'live' service that works with PCs and xboxs together, or something crazy like that; it's all very complicated interop network stuff, that IMO leads to a problem with hackers on Live, which so far has been a fairly pure system without too much hacking going on to ruin it for me. Naturally, this progression concerns me.

Nonetheless, I think that developer's fous is shifting, because of the lower piracy issues, and more gamers are going to consoles for the lower investment (You buy a system what, every five years or so?) especially as they get closer to regular computers. If the PS3 can lauch ebaumsworld; it will sell like crazy, even if Sony prints the words "You are a retard for buying this." in big red letters, with a bright yellow background. I'm kind of hoping that Sony actually launches with the same attitude they have now; because as many people know; they lose money on the hardware, and hope to make it on the games(or Blu-ray movies that won't actually look any different on 99% of televisions, because out of the few that supposedly have 1080p, only a few have true 1080p input support. Which is retarded, because if you don't have the inputs for some resolution, you shouldn't sell a product claiming to be.) So, it would mean Sony having to make some quick decisions. M$ rakes it in from a lot of products and royalties. More big industry companies pay for Windows and Office than any other business software in the world. If the 360 were to pull a huge flop, M$ probably wouldn't care. Sony, however, has created a branding. They have created playstation as their product. It's their biggest money-maker. And the PSP sales are decent, but they won't hold that company afloat. By no means is an industry giant like Sony going down; but they'll certainly have to re-think things in the face of what could be an ugly launch.

Comment by: Gazbin (May 28, 2006 08:57)

PS3 WARRANTY IS ONLY 12 MONTHS.

THE Blu-ray ROM PLAYER IS MADE OF PLASTIC.

MANY OF THE SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS (EG: UBISOFT) HAVE BROKEN RANKS AND COMPLAINED PUBLICLY THAT THE CELL IS A MESS & MUCH LIKE PROGRAMNING FOR SEGA SATURN. ALL SONY WANTS IS FMV TO CHEW UP SPACE IN ORDER TO JUSTIFY Blu-ray. THE SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS KNOW CONSUMERS WILL BE DISAPOINTED AND ARE REALLY WORRIED IT WILL LEAD TO AN EVEN LARGER DECLINE IN SOFTWARE SALES. NINTENDO WII IS THE EXCEPTION - IT IS LOW COST TO DEVELOP FOR.

PS3 GAMES COST US$10-20 MORE THAN XBOX 360 & UP TO $40 MORE THAN PC RELEASES. WHY? THE CELL IS A FXCK UP. THE MAN WHO SIGNED OFF THE CELL AT SONY HAS BEEN DEMOTED.

Comment by: ZippyDSM (May 28, 2006 09:27)

Gazbin

the only thign I can fully agree with you on is the BR breaking down on most models in the frist 2 years,anything else meh it happen's

Comment by: megaBLS (May 29, 2006 01:55)

This is going to be a 60 gig internal hard drive. The 360's is external so it can be used like a memory card or if the system breaks you can take out the hard drive and have the same saves and profiles if you buy a new one. Also microsoft will probably come out with larger hard drives for consumers to buy so the amount that the system can hold will grow. The PS3 will always have 60 gig. But this is from a Sony hater.

______________________________________________________

Peace sells....but who's buyin'

Comment by: ZippyDSM (May 29, 2006 02:06)

megaBLS

the HD pops out and you can repalce it or upgrade it however you want to.

Comment by: elusiv1 (May 29, 2006 19:50)

No can do for that price, I'll stick to my X-360 for now. I can't forget to mention how tempting the Nintendo Wii really looks for $250, Nintendo has the right idea unlike Sony.. They can blow me if they think I'm going to fork out $600 plus tax for a format(Blu-ray) that might not last longer then the Betamax did. Here is some advice Sony, sell a core unit like Xbox 360 did for $299 and stop ripping people off with your cheap and crappy Blu-ray player. We all know how good the red laser DVD-ROM drives are in the PS2, they sucks ass to say the least. I can't imagine this Blu-ray player to be much better.......