You can say many things about the ps3, but not that ''has been kind of a failure''. And that's it
You can say many things about the ps3, but not that ''has been kind of a failure''. And that's it
I would have to agree with the first sentiment, and disagree with the second sentiment. We all know the score as to what the PS3 did do, and failed to do in spite of enjoying certain advantages. Even with all of those advantages the console failed more often then it succeeded. So I think kind of is a pretty fair assessment. As for the comment to do with over engineering the console. That just isn't the case.
The console wasn't over engineered, but rather poorly engineered. In the case of over engineering it implies that it is the case that more parts were used then necessary to achieve the same result. In the case of the PS3 it was more a question of using the wrong parts, redundant parts, and unnecessary parts. That isn't over engineering, but just a bad design philosophy. It may be a fine line, but I honestly doubt that engineers who made the console you know actually work would have willingly made these design choices, and shouldn't have their workmanship be put in question.
Just call it what it is management meddling with something they ought not have. It wasn't over engineering that was the problem, but bad management that was the problem.
| DieAppleDie said: Blu ray is a failure, other than that PS3 just underperformed compared to its predecessor, which is bad, but not a failure. |
No, it's not lmfao.
HD-DVD is a failure.
Jay520 said:
Or better yet, why compare it to any console at all? Why not look at it's own install base, profitability, etc to determine if it's a success/failure. Using your advice, we'd only prove that the PS3 is the most successful failure. That's analogous to being the healthiest person with super obesity. |
All consoles have their successes and failures.
The Gamecube and Nintendo 64 sold very little yet were profitable for Nintendo. Does that makes those systems more successful than the PS3?
I don't think so. The PS3 has accomplished and overcome so much more. Will most likely end up 2nd for this gen of consoles.
| DieAppleDie said: HD-DVD and Blu ray are both failures. |
I'm guessing you only own an Xbox 360 or Wii?
Good luck with that.
Want a real failure? Look at UMD.
No, Blu-Ray adoption hasn't been as widespread as DVD, but that's why Blu-Ray requies HDTVs....DVDs were able to be played on the same TV you used for your VHS tapes. In the end, Blu-Ray will replace DVD.
Im guessing you are an extremist Sony fanboy?
You are blind if you dont see blu ray has no future.
VGKing said:
The Gamecube and Nintendo 64 sold very little yet were profitable for Nintendo. Does that makes those systems more successful than the PS3? I don't think so. The PS3 has accomplished and overcome so much more. Will most likely end up 2nd for this gen of consoles. |
| DieAppleDie said: Im guessing you are an extremist Sony fanboy? You are blind if you dont see blu ray has no future. |
Yea I never understood what the big deal with Blu-Ray was.
Movies and games are all heading towards direct download and streaming now that internet is more prominent, so even though Blu-ray is a 1up from DVD, its part of a dying breed. I think by over-engineered Pachter probably meant things like Bluray were not exactly a necessity on PS3 and Sony betted wrong on the technology.
Also Shane's quote is taken completely out of context. Before he said anything about "PS3 being a failure" he points out that Sony did everything right with the PS3, tons of quality exclusive games, a slim good looking powerful console and a very attractive price point yet people are still not buying it as much compared to the competition. Which leads him to make the point that the PS3 is somewhat of a failure when compared to its predecessor. I hate when stuff gets taken out of context because he wasn't exactly bashing the PS3.
PS3 is not a failure. As far as I'm concerned this has been a great generation.
Gaming Away Life Since 1985
