Would a PS3 price cut do it?

[HappySqurriel]

Stromprophet said: I would argue 64 might be the one system that lost on graphics. I mean comeon, it did have great games, but graphics wise it was horrid compared to a system that came out 2 years later? Who remembers the 64 Blocks that made up James bond in golden eye and the picture plastered on their flat faces? Also Sony moved to CD which was what PC devs were using which helped them on the developer side. Nintendo is always trying crazy formats 64Bit Cartrige? MiniDisc? Actually very few mainline gaming systems have failed. The Saturn, The Dreamcast, and NeoGeo come to mind. The Dreamcast sales were so much worse than even the PS3 sales its no secret to see why it died. How is SCEA not going to do first party support? Of course they are, SCEA is the 3rd biggest developer studio in the world behind Ubisoft and EA. I just don't think a price cut is as far away as you all do because of outside circumstances that are going to force a price cut.

In raw processing power (and in supported features) the N64 was dramatically more powerful than the Playstation or Saturn; the unfortunate thing is that certain limitations (cartridge size, maximum texture size ammount of available ram, etc.) caused a lot of trouble for most developers. The best looking games on the N64 looked far better than anything that was available for the playstation, but the majority of games were never able to come close to the potential of the system. The Gamecube on the other hand was designed less for maximum theoritical performance and Nintendo focused on maximum real-world performance and produced a system that had the best performance/cost ratio in the generation. Edit: A way to think about it would be, imagine that Sony cut all memory (including on-chip cache) by 75% and used UMD as their game format ... Their best games would look amazing but most developers would have trouble producing games that looked better than Wii games ...