ChichiriMuyo said: Well, yes, if the price goes up so too should the value. And if you like pretty graphics and good music then the quality has gone up a lot w/ the PS3. I'm not a graphics whore and even I see it as added value. Of course, I don't think the game is worth $50 with the upped graphics, let alone $60, so I'll just wait 'til it can be found used at a price I do like. And I'm pretty much the same situation as you on time. I really only got as much time into AWDS as I did because I could play it for 15-20 minutes a day while I was in the bathroom. I have as many WII games as DS games and the usage times between the two is staggeringly different.

Oh me too.  I love my DS and PSP, and I use both of them more than any of my home consoles.  I have about 20 more games on my DS, but I use my PSP for purposes other than just games so it gets nearly as much use.  I also use the PSP to play roms of my old games (because i don't really have room in my apartment to carry my SNES, NES, Genesis, etc. with me).  I can keep my DS in my pocket at work though and grab some time with New Super Mario Bros. during break.  I love my Wii, but I doubt even with all the amazing games comming out I'll ever use it as much as my handhelds.

Bodhesatva said: dallas said: The article was well-written and of its 2 main points 1. That the PS3 is becoming less focused on games, the main reason that people buy it in the first place & 2. That Sony hasn't concentrated enough on the early adopters, to its detriment with respect to the PS3. I disagree with both. I agree with you, Dallas. It's interesting that we seem to have already forgotten about E3, where it seemed like Sony was the one who got it -- games, games, games -- and Nintendo seemed to be focusing on market share and theoretical market expansion. It's odd to hear that Sony went away from the "Games! Games! Games!" tactic for Liepzig, but a single expo does not a market strategy make. I think this article is wrong -- or, at worst, I reserve judgement for a time when one can better view what Sony's marketing strategy is (or was).

Yeah, but did Sony really not concentrate on games as well? That's the question. Sony announced a deal with FIFA/EA in regards to FIFA 08, Konami displayed PES on the PS3 and gave a live demo on MGS4, Epic ran UT3 on the PS3, Sony showed Uncharted, GT5 Prologue and many more games.

The only bad part about Sony's Leipzig presentation was everything said by David Reeves, the guy is a fool. He dropped more negative press on SCEA, he tok cheap jabs at MS and EA, he mislead the public about the PS3 sale figures and it took all the attention away from all the positive things that Sony bought to the conference. What David Reeves showed at Leipzig was a total lack of professionalism and a complete lack of class and dignity. 

Sony as a company though did deliver with the games that matter to the EU public. They didn't show everything because they also need to deliver at TGS which has a wider audience and bigger focus. 

ssj12 said: elendar said: Dead Sqrl, I understand you are asking yourself which HD console to purchase. The ps3 or wii? I know its going to be hard to shrug off the sony loyatly but I assure you the grass is greener on the other side. Buy a 360. Thanks, Elendar  yea it might be greener, but he will have to watch out for those red rings.

Least ill have games to play on those red rings

 

jhlennon1 said: Bodhesatva said: dallas said: The article was well-written and of its 2 main points 1. That the PS3 is becoming less focused on games, the main reason that people buy it in the first place & 2. That Sony hasn't concentrated enough on the early adopters, to its detriment with respect to the PS3. I disagree with both. I agree with you, Dallas. It's interesting that we seem to have already forgotten about E3, where it seemed like Sony was the one who got it -- games, games, games -- and Nintendo seemed to be focusing on market share and theoretical market expansion. It's odd to hear that Sony went away from the "Games! Games! Games!" tactic for Liepzig, but a single expo does not a market strategy make. I think this article is wrong -- or, at worst, I reserve judgement for a time when one can better view what Sony's marketing strategy is (or was). Yeah, but did Sony really not concentrate on games as well? That's the question. Sony announced a deal with FIFA/EA in regards to FIFA 08, Konami displayed PES on the PS3 and gave a live demo on MGS4, Epic ran UT3 on the PS3, Sony showed Uncharted, GT5 Prologue and many more games. The only bad part about Sony's Leipzig presentation was everything said by David Reeves, the guy is a fool. He dropped more negative press on SCEA, he tok cheap jabs at MS and EA, he mislead the public about the PS3 sale figures and it took all the attention away from all the positive things that Sony bought to the conference. What David Reeves showed at Leipzig was a total lack of professionalism and a complete lack of class and dignity. Sony as a company though did deliver with the games that matter to the EU public. They didn't show everything because they also need to deliver at TGS which has a wider audience and bigger focus.

Well, I kind of disagree and kind of agree.  I don't think Sony has really stopped trying to drive home the idea that games are their focus, but I think that they are having trouble balancing between the media things and gaming things, and I think that's hurting them.  I think the problem with the PSP and PS3 is that they went a little too far into the media side of things, and lost a lot of the PS2 owner interest.  The PS2 didn't do anything other than games.  Yes, it had a DVD player, but the DVD players all stopped working so no one really bought their systems to do that (I know I didn't).  The problem is, when you are trying to market all this media stuff along with games, you are going to simply confuse the casual consumer.  There was a report not too long ago on Kotaku that said less than half of PS3 owners even know their systems have Blu-ray.  I think this shows that not only are the media factors not important in system sales, but they aren't even important to all the people who already own the system. 

ROFL @ thread.

I can't believe i just read this whole thread.

I'm a fucking loser!

Im extreemly mad right now, especially on the first page. Wow some actual positive news srpings up about the psp, and most of you people attack the ps3 like a bunch of animals.

naznatips said: jhlennon1 said: Bodhesatva said: dallas said: The article was well-written and of its 2 main points 1. That the PS3 is becoming less focused on games, the main reason that people buy it in the first place & 2. That Sony hasn't concentrated enough on the early adopters, to its detriment with respect to the PS3. I disagree with both. I agree with you, Dallas. It's interesting that we seem to have already forgotten about E3, where it seemed like Sony was the one who got it -- games, games, games -- and Nintendo seemed to be focusing on market share and theoretical market expansion. It's odd to hear that Sony went away from the "Games! Games! Games!" tactic for Liepzig, but a single expo does not a market strategy make. I think this article is wrong -- or, at worst, I reserve judgement for a time when one can better view what Sony's marketing strategy is (or was). Yeah, but did Sony really not concentrate on games as well? That's the question. Sony announced a deal with FIFA/EA in regards to FIFA 08, Konami displayed PES on the PS3 and gave a live demo on MGS4, Epic ran UT3 on the PS3, Sony showed Uncharted, GT5 Prologue and many more games. The only bad part about Sony's Leipzig presentation was everything said by David Reeves, the guy is a fool. He dropped more negative press on SCEA, he tok cheap jabs at MS and EA, he mislead the public about the PS3 sale figures and it took all the attention away from all the positive things that Sony bought to the conference. What David Reeves showed at Leipzig was a total lack of professionalism and a complete lack of class and dignity. Sony as a company though did deliver with the games that matter to the EU public. They didn't show everything because they also need to deliver at TGS which has a wider audience and bigger focus. Well, I kind of disagree and kind of agree.  I don't think Sony has really stopped trying to drive home the idea that games are their focus, but I think that they are having trouble balancing between the media things and gaming things, and I think that's hurting them.  I think the problem with the PSP and PS3 is that they went a little too far into the media side of things, and lost a lot of the PS2 owner interest.  The PS2 didn't do anything other than games.  Yes, it had a DVD player, but the DVD players all stopped working so no one really bought their systems to do that (I know I didn't).  The problem is, when you are trying to market all this media stuff along with games, you are going to simply confuse the casual consumer.  There was a report not too long ago on Kotaku that said less than half of PS3 owners even know their systems have Blu-ray.  I think this shows that not only are the media factors not important in system sales, but they aren't even important to all the people who already own the system.

I dont think they went far enough with the media in terms of the ps3. What they needed or need to do right now is to fix up there ps store etc... make everthing look elegant and futurisitc(looks brings in custumers), but more importantly offer alot more content. What I dont get is that they have sony BMG(music studios), Sony movie studios etc... Why in the F arent arent they releasing movies or music? Look at XBL its competting with COMCAST. So sony needs to push the media area even more so people can actually care about pics,music,videos,and interent browsing(updated flash player would do). They are just now going to bring in the games, so the ps3 isnt "doomed" in th games department. Its just that they need to make the PSN more recognizable and BETTER than XBL.

 

When will people realize that the only reason for Sony including the Bluray drive with the PS3 was to market Blu-ray as a trojan horse. It is so obvious. Sony created this Blu-ray thing and needed a way to promote it. Since in their heads PlayStations would sell no matter what, they came with this brilliant strategy of including a Blu-ray drive with each PS3, and though it would give Blu-ray an enormous advantage. For games, the only thing that Blu-ray can offer is extra storage space, which translates into longer games, nothing more. It cannot help with better graphics, or better textures, because the PS3 VRAM memory is limited to 256MB, and all textures need to be in the VRAM to be rendered on screen (so all the talk about a possible XBOX360 version of MG4 using lower quality textures is pure BS, though it would eventually need more than a DVD). And it also cannot offer better transfer rates, because even though Blu-ray has better transfer rates in single (X1) speed, DVD drives used with video games (XBOX360 for example) spin faster, offering better final transfer rates.
The Blu-ray drive is just a bad idea in my opinion. It increases the PS3 price and doesn’t add much value game wise. It is completely different of the PS2 situation, which was the first to offer a DVD drive, but back then DVD players had been available for 3 years or more, and had already establish themselves as the de facto video format. So that was a win-win situation for users, because Sony was offering a game machine with DVD player at roughly no additional cost. Now they are trying to push an unproved format, which increase the price of the unit. You just need to realize that at this point most consumers aren’t interested on a HD player, and there isn’t a guarantee that they will be in the future due to the ongoing HD format war.
And if you ask me, Sony is well aware that they made a big mistake, which became very apparent when they fired the “PlayStation father” last year. Now they are desperately trying to find a niche market where consumers think that $500~$600 is a great value. The PS3 can be black, but for Sony it’s a huge white elephant…

If most people don't even know their consoles have those media functions Leo-j how would adding more help sell the console? Less than half of the 360, PS3, and Wii owners have even connected to the internet on their respective consoles. The fact is most people who buy game systems buy them just to play the games, and don't really care about anything else that it does.

That's why only two things REALLY determine the winner of the system war: Most games for the cheapest price. The Gamecube was always a little cheaper than the PS2, but it didn't have very many games at all. The Wii is much cheaper than either of the other systems and by the beginning of 2008 will have the most games (even if most of those games are crappy shovelware). That's all that really matters in sales. For us, as core gamers, we look for other things like media abilities and quality of the games available, but the mass market simply isn't that deep.

Sometimes the truth hurts.

Think about it for a long time everyone.

Think about it.