KZ2 said:
In 2006, Sony released the PS3 under heavy scrutiny by the media and gamers alike. The list of PS3 bashing just piled up. Out of the gate, the bashing started: HDMI wasn't needed...Blu-Ray wasn't needed...high price...lack of games...no rumble...hard to develop for...HDMI not included...inferior hardware...online sucks...Space not needed. Sony fails at format wars. Sony lies. Sony is arrogant. No choice. Bad backward compatability. 1080P not needed.
|
This isn't accurate. What people primarily said was:
- Doesn't really support 1080p like they said it would. Most games are 720p or lower. (True)
- BD increases cost drastically and it force-bundled with system. Sony using PS3 to win format war (this was true).
- Hard to develop for is true and still a complaint.
- HDMI cables not included isn't intended to save Sony $1 on the cable (which cost less than $2). It was to get users to buy Sony affiliated over-priced HDMI cables for like $30.
Sony did lie, and Sony was arrogant. Sony made a lot of promises with the PS3: 2-core cell instead of 1. They said it would be powerful enough to drive dual 1080p displays (it can't even drive one for gaming), dual HDMI ports, etc etc etc.
The PS3 is doing better than it was, but it isn't doing great yet. I think a lot more people will be ready to eat crow once the PS3 passes the 360. But I don't see that happening before 2010.