| HappySqurriel said: Another thing to consider is that even if it was true that the PS2 started out slowly there is enough differences between the PS2 and PS3 launches which makes this far more problematic. When the PS2 launched its only established competition was the Dreamcast and it had a full year (18 months in Japan) before any other competition arrived; the PS3 launches against an established XBox 360 which appears to be perfoming at a reasonable level (in North America and Europe) and faces competition from the Wii which launched immediately following it. |
Plus the PS2's competition have very few things the PS2 couldn't do.
The Dreamcast had nothing, except immediate online, but Sony embraced it fast enough that wasn't a problem.
The GC had texture compression (which would matter if consumers and developers were actually the graphics whores think they are), faster loading (which the carts vs CDs matter proved wasn't that vital either), and better sound mixing, (which served more for saving disc space than actually getting better sound).
The Xbox had texture compression (see above), better online (but still came out too late to overcome the PS2's lead), and the HDD (which mainly caused the Xbox to lose money, which is why all the systms this gen with HDDs cost over $300).
A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.
Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs
