Jay520 said:
Mr Khan said:
SecondWar said:
PlaystaionGamer said:
Wii 2.0 - 2012/13
Xbox 3 - 2013/14
PS4 - 2015-17
|
Im not sure it will work like that because then the PS4 will be years behind (or ahead in terms of tech) the other consoles. Theyre all likely to launch with about 18 months of each other
|
Not even matters of "being behind" technically. You're not going to let Nintendo and Microsoft define the terms of the new console game for two to five years while you're still sitting around with the PS3. PlayStation Move won't make the PS3 live that long in the face of new competitors, quite frankly nothing would, and i'm not directing that just at Sony or Microsoft supporters, it's just a bad idea in the video game market to let the competition launch before you, unless they launch altogether too early (3DO, Jaguar, Saturn, Dreamcast), but Microsoft and Nintendo learned a bitter lesson from launching a year after the PS2, and Sony really took a beating from being a year behind the 360, and that's 1 year. Now they're going to give the competition two to five whole years?
No.
|
The PS3 didn't take a beating for releasing a year late. It took a beating because of the high price, lack of good games (compared to other systems), and difficulty to develop for.
|
Aye, and that last one was a loss due to their late release. If they had released concurrently, PS3 would have had third party parity with 360 from the beginning, or very soon after. Instead, with this comparatively easier system that they had a whole extra year to learn about, 360 was able to hold the 3rd party edge for quite some time. 360's large lead in sales also crippled PS3 in that many brands that were known for being PS brands, even early on like GTA or Devil May Cry, went multiplat
PS3 launching a year earlier would've come with its own problems, but it would've solved the early software problems that plagued PS3
