What are on screen buttons? Is this just touch screen with buttons on the screen? DS and 3DS are touch screen too, and many games use the touch screen as a button pallet. yea but i'm talking about making buttons on screen for different functions. the stylus is the main point when it comes to touch screens on 3DS. on PSV you make the buttons if need be. 3DS you can't make buttons its just a touch screen with a stylus pen. and the fact that the buttons perform independently from the touch screen makes them an innovative first.

You don't have to agree PSV and 3DS will follow a similar sales pattern to PSP and DS. You're a smart person, and you clearly have reasons to believe future sales patterns will fall the way they do. yea but even so time will tell and we can laugh about it in 2 to 5 yrs lol.

For FPS... I get where you are coming from, but I just don't see FPS's working well for online play. PSV might be able to play FPS's as well as the consoles do, but I can't imagine seeing some of my crazier multiplayer friends holding the screen. FPS players are very figidy. To hold a screen and play a FPS, you need to be very calm, get excited and the screen shakes, making it harder to aim. Also I can't picture FPS players who want to play a FPS anywhere, but their couch. agreed.

I think FPS's on handhelds will be limited to campaign based games. Online multiplayer will be there, but I don't see CoD taking off on PSV. For single player FPS's, you don't need a second analogue stick either. The best FPS I have ever played on a handheld would be Metroid Prime Hunters, and to play, you actually use the bottom touch screen with the stylus to aim. This gives you Wii-mote like accuracy with the shooter, and is fun to play. Only drawback is zooming with the sniper (have to use your pinky to click the other shoulder button, while holding the stylus). Two analog sticks will definatly be an improvement, Resistance plays no better then a gamecube shooter, but the DS with two screens is actually just as good. the ds with to screens is a handheld computer with a pen and stylus. the pen is your mouse lol. i agree that most gamers are not going to want to play against PS3 owners online with Vita playng COD. 

For controls, what about my buts? I did use one! It's better sentance construction when you don't make run on sentances. Anyway, I agree with you, there will be games that require touch controls only (games like little deviants). However these games will not sell in large numbers, and won't exactly be system sellers. Bulletstorm for PS3 had terrible sames. I mean, picture a game like Pikmin for Gamecube. Was that a system seller? It's a well appreciated game, but definatly not something that makes people think " I must get a gamecube now." If it pushed systems, it only helped during launch, and that's it. i know but i was talking about real buts lol. a little humor goes along way. we can wait and see on the touch screen only games.

For Microsoft's profit. MS made a loss with the original X-Box in order to make a name for itself. I remember reading something way back that Microsoft has been profitable for wuite some time now. They are just greedy bastards, and you know it. It's really a matter of national values. Most American companies (Nike, Chevrolet, Apple, Microsoft) build their products under the cheapest conditions possible. Apple, and Nike both make products in sweat shops, and charge a ridiculous amount of money for higher profit margins. GM used to make cars which would work perfectly for 3 years, then all the parts would break down, forcing you to buy a new car every 3 years (planed obselence, back in the 60's when GM's still looked good), and now they save money by implementing cheap building techniques (which I still consider planned obselence). Wall-Mart also has some really nasty neoliberalistic marketing strategies which force more and more people to work under mimimum wage or slave labour considtions, while driving out small buisnesses and generation billions of more dollars for CEO's (message me and I'll explain this one). I could go on... thats ok i'm a business major so i know.

Japanese companies are very different, they care about what the customer wants. Nintendo for instance won't build consoles in factories which don't have the capability to build their product up to their high reliability standards (but they still employ slave labour, everyone does), and both Nintendo and Sony have given away free games in the past, when they feel that have not met up with peoples expectations (PSN down gave free games, 3DS mega price cut ditto). However I know the price of a Sony console is usually not much above costs. agreed, but i'm still trying to find my free LBP download.

For Sony and Nintendo, public image, quality, and overall sales are more important then profit and fairness. MS is opposite. agreed

I can say all this bad stuff about Microsoft because I always defend MS on this website. hehehehe For once, I can say something harsh without getting ripped apart by 10 users. rip lol.

For inflation, what are you basing your arguement on? Most average consumers have not been playing games for 10 years or longer. So $200 to a person now is different to a person 10 years ago. It's not some magical price tag that promotes sales. People make xx dollars an hour, and they judge their purchases based on their income. If people made $50 an hour, and everything cost 5x more, everything would sell just the same. Making $10 an hour and charging $200, versus making $50 an hour and charging $1,000 makes no difference. I would imagine this is how housing works. In major cities, houses cost more, but income is also generally higher, so it's sustainable. Otherwise people would all move out to rural areas. This happens to an extent, suburbs, but my point is if people make more, they are willing to spend more. Sorry about the terrible analogy. your analogy is ok. i was just saying that consumers see things by pricetage not inflation. most consumers don't even now wht that means but i know why your saying. some consumers don't know $1 may be $5 do to inflation.

Okay inflation. Sorry if I lose you, I'm really good with math and economics (take it in school, but it's not my subject post). ok. i like math but i'm better at business and politics which i hate the ladder.

I'm saying if people make more money, they are willing to spend more money. A price cut is a very sharp cut in price, of course sales rise. That case you mention is a sharp cut in price, while people still make the same amount of case. ok i understood that.

Inflation is a gradual process. Say we were going into recession again, and the average income dropped in half in 10 years (extremly unlikely, this would actually create a depression, but this is hypothetical). If Nintendo launched a new console at $200, it would not sell as well as it does now. That new system would sell significantly less because people have less money. However if they sold a new console at $100, sales in this hypothetical future would mimic sales of a new console, priced at $200 now. uh thats wht i was saying.

In reality, we are always going through inflation. Inflation encourages spending (because stored money depreciates in value since you can buy less with it in the future), and this helps the economy. dito. economic's 1o1

One thing which I do know from economics, is that general market trends heavily depend on the amount of expendable income the average person has (How much money people have after they pay their rent, bills, and other living costs). So if the cost of living (food, rent, bus fair/gas, heat, electricity, etc) remains constant, but the average income a person makes increases (or the price of goods decreases), then people spend more. The philosophy is "I have more, so I can afford more, so I'll spend more." This is why there is always a jump in sales after a price cut (goods dropped in price), so it becomes more affordable to people. i say that everyday

However if the cost of living and income have increased proportionatly, then in order to maintain the same level of retail sales, prices must increase proportionatly too. Basically, this is my point, if people make more they are willing to spend more. So $200 in 2001 translates more like $250 in 2011. i say that everday aswell

Just as an example, if $3,000 means $3,000 to a consumer, regardless of era, then how come per capita, automotive sales are not drastically higher now then they were in the 1960's? You can't buy a new car for $3,000 like you used to, so why are cars even selling at all? This is the same logic you present me under a shorter timeline. Televisions also follow this trend, the average price of a purchased tv now is a lot higher then in used to be in the 60's. well cars are a big ticket items so i wouldn't have even said that. its all about how the consumer preceives price but eveything you just said ties into that rendering that traditional cost to costly for purchase leaving the consumer to say " i'll wait for the price to drop". this is just something else we agree on and didn't know it.

How does the touch screen buttons behave independantly of the touch screen? I don't understand. Also 3DS is finger sensitive too. I'll have to read up on this. my friend just go to the offcial vit thread and watch the Resistance burnning skies demo.

Oh I get the butts comment now! It's spelled Butts, with two t's. That's where I was confused. ok. 2 many t's lol.

You didn't download LBP? Did you download any free games? One of my friends had two separate PSP and PS3 accounts, both with a PS3 and PSP registered to it (the same systems), so he got 4 free PS3 and 4 free PSP games. What a loophole. My PS3 broke, so when this online issue happened I was borrowing my friends PS3. If memory serves correctly, you just to to the Playstation Store, and the first tab is titles "Welcome Back." Click it, and it brings you to a menu with 4 free downloads. Click the download PS3 Game 1, then pick LBP. When you download it it goes to your games tab (where downloaded demos are), and just install. LBP was one of the 2 i chose and i hated deadnations. i'm about sick of zombie games. really? 4 games! that's awsume. wht a lucky dog. its not there, or maybe i missed something. 

i don't know man. i got dead nations as my second and LBP first.

As for prices, most people would have been lost with that. LOL, glad to see someone smart here. I agree most people see $200 as $200, but people who bought games 10 years ago also know that $200 isn't $200 anymore, it's $250. Also most products don't drop to $200, and when I look around, kids are buying $300 iPods, and $500 iPads, thinking they are a great deal for the price. What the heck? smart? ok i'll take the complement, but i'd say i'm very observant although Seece would likely disagree. agreed consumers are nuts, and kid's are worse.

Anyway when you look at the PS360 price drops of the past, the one down to $300 was most beneficial ($250 isn't anywhere nearly as volume pushing as $300 was, and even when the holidays start, the PS3 will never see a fall as strong as 2009). So old gamers, who have waited this long for a price drop, will likely flock at a higher price then $200, and parents buying their kids 3DS's know that a 3DS now isn't really that much more espensive then a GBC back in the day. yea i'll stick with the average consumer is stupid whether they know that info or not lol. i think the 2 models balance out but definatly the $300 model is definatly more benefcial. 

Sony needs to focus and faze out the 160g sku, when they have there next price drop and lower the 320g to $199. that would help them out alot.

Last point, the PS3 is old now, and there is talk of a sucessor in the works. Nintendo has already announced an 8th gen system, and 8th gen handhelds are coming out now. Most gamers who thought PS360 was expensive likely bought one when it hit $300. Now games are all becoming sequels, so even with a lower price point, there isn't as much appeal. Look how much more impactful the 3DS price cut was then the PS3 one. If people turned down the PS3 at $300 in 2009 with Uncharted 2 getting near perfect scores, I doubt too many people will get a PS3 at $250 with Uncharted 3, assuming it scores the same. Same goes with 360. agreed to a point. console war's will never be the same. it looks like the WiiU will have a 2 yr head start which i'm sure you'll disagree with, but thats how it looks right now. yea the consoles are old, but i'm not sure thats a factor.  i think MS and Sony are working on PS wht ever and 360 to the second power lol. i still don't think we'll see 360 to the 2nd power and PSwht ever until 2013 with there release dates in 2015.

now i know Sony and MS say that Ninty are not there comp and they release consoles based on Publisher and Developer's feed back but we both know thats a lie. the launch is likely to happen in 2013 cause 2015 is just to big of a head start, but the way consoles are released is changing.

while i do beleive Sony and MS are gearing up for the 8th gen the yrs are whats killing me. as a business major i look for competetive pricing, and the affective fase out of the 7th gen consoles(we both know PS2 and PS3 will be around for ever/although i'm leanning on an end to PS2 between 2013-2015) so WiiU is somewht of a surprise to me honestly. Ninty could have continued to kill Sony and MS this yr WW, but they killed Wii on purpose without regrets.

i'm struggling with PS3 and 360 price points being this high heading into next gen. if theres one thing you can count on is continued PS3 support, and 360 to a point but not from MS games wise unless its kinect. MS has next yr as the last yr for anything Halo so a surprise 2013 next box squared is set for E3 2013 with a release in the fall. i sware i just came up with that!

MS is going to either try and keep 360's price point high $199 (yes thaat high to me when your trying to introduce a new console)or dump the price to $150 in 2013 holiday season. thats it! i smell a break through. hey you just witnessed a prediction from Me, and it came out of nowhere or deducing a sentence.

the thing is though no matter wht, PS3 and 360 will sell until MS decides they nolonger want to support 360 which should be 2 to 3 yrs into the 8th gen.

Now I know what you mean by on screen buttons, but I see nothing special to that. If any 3DS or DS game needs a touch screen button, they will likely have it built in. I don't feel being able to make them at your leasure alters the experience. Also is this just a feature of the game, or can I make on screen buttons in my home menu and stuff? i guess its all in how you look at it but it looks like we'll have to let that one go to. i'm not sure if you can do it out of the game.

If you already downloaded LBP in the past, go to your "Games" tab and scroll down. It should be there in the form of a Install to play selection. Otherwise search your PS3's memory and see where you put it. If you haven't downloaded it by now, they may have removed the tab on PSN. Look where you system stores Demos and Arcade games. Google a solution if this doesn't help. alright i'll look into it.

For PS4/Next-Box release dates, yea I don't agree. It's just when I look at it, the Wii U is already announced and being launched next year. Microsoft only has map pack exclusivity on CoD titles up to and including treyarchs 2012 CoD. 1st party games are nearly all but becoming sequals, and many of those trilogies are coming to an end. Assassin's Creed 3 (and final) must release in 2012 otherwise it doesn't go with the story. Gears of War, Mass Effect, and Resistance (right?) trilogies are comming to an end, and I don't feel MS/Sony will release a 4th Forza, or Uncharted title on the current gen. The is also strong rumors of next gen games already in development, and most games are developed within 2 or 3 years. I've even read articles on who will be distributing the graphics cards and processors for the next gen systems, and I read that prototype Next-Box's already exist (in PC casing, but built with Next-Box parts). Sony have also stated that they expect the PS3 to have a 10 year life cycle. Including at least 3 years of secondary sales when PS4 is released, that would easily put the PS4 in a 2013 window. yea something i'm learning is that just because a product has a 10yr life cycle doesn't mean its successor won't release whith'n that time frame. 2014 still is the best cjoice IMHO but the logic points to 2013 now.

There are just so many reasons to believe that the next gen PS/Box will come in 2013. dito but well i'm sure i know Sony may start with a legend fom each gen and something new. a lessend learn'd, but whts MS going to do? time will tell and maybe i'll be a big supporter of nextbox but this gen it wasn't worth the purchase although i have one in my possetion.

I agree with you about Nintendo. They could have easily pushed the Wii 1 year longer. They only had to make a little more software and localize some games in Americas, and to most that would have been enough. I guess they want to take advantage of the Wii name before Wii becomes unpopular. dito

I also agree with you about Sony supporting PS3 post-lifetime, and MS not supporting the 360. MS is an American corporation, you know how I feel about them. However I don't think Sony will support the PS3 any more then by releasing 1 or 2 games post-lifetime. They released God of War 2 post PS3 launch, and PS1 had some small hits like Twisted Metal: Small Brawl come out during the same fall PS2 released. However both will continue to support their online system. yea i think Sony may focus on more PS HD remakes for PS3 while PS4 will be backwards compatable. i also think we both can agree multiplatform support will continue on PS3 foe about the 3 yr's you mention'd unless PSe continues to be profitable for 3rd party then we'll see a continued focus on PS3 from 3rd party. i think PS3 will have real good sells as the yrs go on. not many think it will crack 100m but i think there miss-guided.

As for price, a $199 system when the PS4/Next-Box release is likely, and I think reasonable. Remember PS2 was $139 when the PS3 released (or just after), and with inflation, that translates to $170-$180. In a couple years that will be closer to $190. However if MS and Sony are smart they will drop the price of the PS360 to $149 just after the release of the PS4/Next-Box. With maybe a Move Bundle for $200, and an Elite 360 bundle for $220, that's not too expensive. agreed but a non bundle for $139 and a bundled for $179 would be a better option. i would want 7th gen consoles saying i'm still here. you want them to say i'm an great option for late/casual adopters for a casual price.

I'll miss the days consoles dropped to $100 when the next gen started, but unfortunatly gaming is getting more expensive, and these prices don't seem that unreasonable. I remember back in the day $200 was the price of a new console, now with inflation that bar is $300, so $150 for a 7th gen console isn't crazy. agreed. really all next gen consoles need is a focus on memory, functionality, price which we agree will be a factor, and less on graphic's which is something Sony will have to worry about for those who bragged about it this gen.

we bothknow they'll be no big leap in that department.

If you can't do on screen buttons outside of a game, then that's not really a system perk. To allow users to make buttons in a game is not hard. So 3DS gives you 3D, two screens and Virtual Console on a handheld, and PSV gives you good graphics, a rear touch pad, and two analogs on a handheld. Both have their perks. didn't say any of it was a perk. i'd be fine with the GBA lol. none of the features are special except maybe the rear touch pad on vita, and thats a big maybe! an analog on the right side and the D-pad on the left would work well for shooters but some features for the game would be sacrifised, but in saying that any feature that add's a feature to the game is welcome. wouldn't you agree?

considering theres still much i don't know about Vita! i'd say theres a chance you can add buttons out side of gamepaly, but not likely? 

For the PS4, even if it releases in 2013, that's still 7 years as a primary console on the market. It will get at least 3 years after that (both PS1 and PS2 have), and likely more. This is why I wouldn't be surprised if they made the PS4/Next-Box 2012 fall releases. It's unlikely, but I think possible. agreed. its highly unlikely but can happen.

Next gen, if it goes anything like this gen, I will get a PS4, but not first gen (every first gen Playstation I have owned broke. PS1-3), and I will get a Next-Box when they make a redesign. However I'll get the arcade mode because PS4 will be my main system. I saw arcade 360's last fall for $130, and I really like the exclusives 360 has gotten, but in general I like Sony more as a console manufacturer (Better reliability, free online, and built in chargers for controllers). I'm also likely going to sit out the Wii U. I just got a Wii, largely for Pikmin, and they delayed it. So I'll just get the next Nintendo which will be Wii U BC. How about you? everyone? wow that sucks. the 5th and 6th gens i was a late adopter. this the 7th gen i was a price adopter. in 2009 so still early and i plan to continue doing so. my PS2 fail 10X(not by me which makes it worse) before some body did something with a chair(i say something cause everytime it fail i wasn't in the room) and it still work'd until the next day. thats when i lost the only thing i loved. seriously my PS2 was the only thing i loved. now i only love my PS3 and continue to mourn the loss of my PS2.

its great to wait. 8th gen i may wait 5 yrs but buy the games during those yr's. yea i already see no value in nextbox only because of the lack of support shown from MS firstparty. for me to buy any console during the 7th gen they had to have 8 franchises that saw continued support that cattered to my intrust yet MS only has 2. next gen (if you haven't seen my post) it only gets harder and considering Vita has already come close to meeting the 8th gen purchasing mandate, i figured PS4, nextbox squared, and WiiU can meet those same requirements.

those requairements are 20 new and innovative IP. you gotta no wht you want. its all about support, and the games comes first.

wiiu BC you say. lol.

For PS3, after the PS4 is released, PS3 will definatly get some third party software, but no more then the 360. I mean PS2 is still getting new Maddens, I'm sure at the very least PS360 will get Maddens for the next 5 or 6 years. I don't think they will get much more then watered down Wii U games, but enough to keep current owners happy, and not needing of an upgrade right away. yea likely but i'm not counting on MS keeping 360 alive past 3yrs after the launch of 360 squared. i think they'll want to try and have one focus for the consumer to get an edge and try and win he 8th gen.

PS3 could crack 100 million, I agree, but I doubt it. I feel 90 million is a high value as it is. PS360 are over the hill, they aren't going to be selling over 10 million units annually in a year or two. By then end of 2012 they might get to 75 million, but getting another 25 million after that will be very very hard. yea i see your point, but i'm not counting out any possibilities. your talking  the next 2 yr's. PS3 will hit 75m or more in 2 yrs.(speculation only

For price, aren't PS2's $100 now? Gamecube finished off at $100 too. I wouldn't be surprised if they lowered the price of a 360 to $139 before they killed it, and maybe $169 for the Elite model and the basic PS3. well yea. gamecube was the first to hit $99 bucks in the 6th gen but resulted in a $1 loss. PS2 dropped to $99 just 3 yrs ago. yea i see 360 hitting the all famous $139 but only to clear stock 3 yrs after 360 x3 is released. theres still the possibility that Sony could release a slim2 model. hey consoles can only get smaller, and its already been rumur'd.

As for graphics....I disagree with you. You have seen Mass Effect and Crysis on max before haven't you? The jump to 1080p native resolution alone make a big difference. If you take a picture, side by side there might not be a huge difference, but the next gen will run everything much more realistically. For example, there is a method of lighting in 3D images called Ray Scattering. A computer which can play Crysis on max will take about a minute or two to perform it on a still image. However this will give you realistic lighting because what ray scatering is, is taking a light source, calculating it's path instantaneously, and showing the camera the result of a light source reaching the camera. This is what happens in real life. Right now, light in video games is non-existant. Video games calculate the shadow on objects, not the light, and even then they are very general.  i'm talk'n consoles. we won't get PC like consoles for sometime, maybe 3 gen's from now. i also think 60FPS will be the goal for every game next gen for home consoles. high RAM(8g)is wht dev's are asking for and they'll likely get it. i don't need better graphic's even as a PC gamer(eventhough i haven't been doing PC gaming much lately) i don't need it. all i need are better games and so do you and everyone else that games! 

ray scattering? light wht? i have no idea wht your talking about? are you cursing me out in some wierd language. don't bring that technical computing stuff to my boardroom or you'll be fired.

seriously though that all sounds good but consoles will likely not see Ray Scattering. i think that would take a big investment from Sony and MS. Nintendo wouldn't leap that far for atleast another 2 gens, but i'd like to see it happen. the more the better if it improves the games we play.

Another example is hair. Most games now have hair done in clumps. Characters will have at most 100 free hair clumps, which will have reasonably accurate movements, except they go through each other. There are more then 10,000 hairs on a human head. It won't be possible to make a model with 10,000 hair fibres per person, models which have the hair as solid objects, but the next gen should be able to do this noticably better. agreed. getting closer every gen. i'm sure you've seen this before but check this link out. this is also wht i'd like to see other then Ray Scattering. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlMCToxlt1c&feature=related

My philosophy for graphics in video games is that the next generation will look like CG in the current generation. Take the CG in a PS1 game, and most od the time it looks about as good as a PS2 game. Take the CG in a PS2 game, and it looks like a good PS360 game. So why will the PS4 not look as good as the CG in a PS3 game? I've heard that the next gen games will look like Avatar, and Epic has shown some clips from their next generation Unreal Engine. There will be a jump, a big one. PS360 did release at high price points, but they have also been on the market longer then prior gens. agreed, but do we need it? well i'm sure we do but it seems that gamers are starting to mistake great graphic's for great games which isn't always the case.  Epic's unreal engine is just that; unreal. i've seen the tech demos and frankly i don't think anyone can do better.

i guess i should start saving up money now cause in 2 to 4 gens (if we still have home consoles/games will likely be link'd to a web site stream'd through a tv or PC that you'll have to pay a monthly fee for) consoles will continue to have high pricepoints.