By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Sony - The Confusion

dallas said:

I really doubt that a device that has playing movies as its next to most popular usage, would be so easily breakable, especially from a company that has practically invented electronics.  With PC's, of course you have the ability to watch movies, but most pepple dont watch that many movies from their computer, and instead prefer a DVD player, because that hooks up to a living room TV.  Well,  the so does the PS3 =)


Surely you're not talking about the same company that was sued for PS2 optical drives failing left and right, are you? The BD drive seems to be more reliable but after killing my Xbox drive (original 'box) and suffering through my PS2's drive slow spiral of death (it won't read sometimes, loads super-slow, and makes horrible noises), I won't be using a console as a movie player ever again.




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

Around the Network
rocketpig said:
dallas said:

I really doubt that a device that has playing movies as its next to most popular usage, would be so easily breakable, especially from a company that has practically invented electronics.  With PC's, of course you have the ability to watch movies, but most pepple dont watch that many movies from their computer, and instead prefer a DVD player, because that hooks up to a living room TV.  Well,  the so does the PS3 =)


Surely you're not talking about the same company that was sued for PS2 optical drives failing left and right, are you? The BD drive seems to be more reliable but after killing my Xbox drive (original 'box) and suffering through my PS2's drive slow spiral of death (it won't read sometimes, loads super-slow, and makes horrible noises), I won't be using a console as a movie player ever again.


Exactly.



There were several issues with what Sony Europe done at Leipsig.

David Reeves dropped SCEA in the crap regarding the price drop which was not a smart thing to do when the mainstream press in the US is already hammering SCEA. Reeves doesn't need to throw more logs on the fire to cover his own ass...

I think that Sony feel that games like FIFA 08, PES, Killzone 2, Metal Gear Solid 4, GT5 Prologue, Uncharted: Drakes Fortune which all received a lot of hype from Sony at Leipzig is enough focus on games and they want to show what else the system can offer.

I personally don't think trying to turn the PS3 into a replacement entertainment centre is the right way to go about things. Sony need to drop the price and release games that Europe want to play. That will sell their systems, nothing else.



@ rocketpig

would much rather have had the ability to buy a PS3 sans Blu-ray for $400 and then in 2008 or 2009, purchase a Blu-ray/HD-DVD player(s) for $150 or less.


I think many people are misinformed by the media and maybe some XBox 360 fans. Blu-Ray in the PS3 is very desirable as a games media, even multi-platform games developers have complained about the lack on storage available on DVD for the XBox 360. And with regard to the PS3 we are talking about games which will deliver 1080p visuals combined with 7.1 quality audio and probably for Sony games often include regional localizations. That's going to use up huge amounts of data, developers think 50 GB will even be limiting for the future. Some games won't be suited to span over multiple discs.

And in addition to the storage benefit, have you read the thousands of XBox 360 user complaints of having trouble with scratched discs (even European investigations and such)? Well, that's pretty much a non-issue with protected Blu-Ray discs, also the sustained (predictable) reading speed of Blu-Ray players can potentially aid software development.

And judging by sales of the PS3, it's painfully obvious that I'm not the only one who thinks this way.


According to VGChartz data the PS3 outperformed the XBox 360 the last month despite a higher entry price. And this is actually quite extra-ordinary as XBox 360 sales should accelerate considerably for the console's second year on the market (bigger library games available, games pushing the hardware better, etc).

XBox 360 vs Playstation sales for the last 4 weeks according to VGChartz:

29 July:

1) PS3 - 106,760
2) PS2 - 102,835
3) X360 - 61,762

4/5 August:

1) PS2 - 99,791
2) PS3 - 99,126
2) X360 - 61,899

11/12 August

1) PS2 - 100,126
2) PS3 - 99,026
3) X360 - 78, 441 (North American price drop at end of week)

18/19 August

1) PS2 - 102,289
2) PS3 - 97,183
3) X360 - 85,533



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales

Mikeb according to NPD Julys Sales = PS3 @ 159,000 & 360 @ 170,000

I also disagree with your statement, Blu-Ray in the PS3 is very desirable as a games media. The funniest thing is, if a game begins to large.. You switch a dvd 1/2 way through. That takes a whole 20 seconds. Blue Ray = hd movies lets not joke about it.



Around the Network

Why compare the PS3 to a PC? PC gaming market isn't in very good shape so that doesn't bode well for a multipurpose console like the PS3. PCs also have Windows (or Mac OS for Apple). Linux is a technophile OS and Joe Schmoe isn't going to start using his PS3 as a PC because he can use Linux.
What worked for the PS2 isn't working for the PS3 because it placed the price WAY too high. While the PS2 made DVD players cheap, blu-ray made the PS3 expensive. I don't purchase multipurpose devices as a habit and I've used a PS2 as a dvd player all of 6x only because my DVD player was at college while I was at home (so I would steal my brother's PS2 out of his room).
The last experience I had with one of these things was a home theater receiver with a DVD player that died after 3 months just after the warranty ran out (receiver itself kept working for about 3 years until 2 months ago). And that was an LG, not some offbrand unknown.



To cash in my CC rewards points for $300 in Circuit City gift cards to purchase a 360 or not: That is the question.

The truth is that people do prefer multifunction devices when given the option but they are rarely willing to pay more than they would for the "device" they are actually buying ...

As an exaple, I see value in a DVD player up to about $50, the value of a videogame system up to about $300, and the value of a Blu-Ray player up to about $300. If my DVD player breaks I'm not going to spend $300 on an videogame system to replace my DVD player; even though I would like a Blu-Ray player sometime in the future I'm unlikely to buy a videogame system for more than $200 as a Blu-Ray player.

The only exception to this is if someone is in the market for both devices and see the combined value of both devices being drastically higher than the multifunction device itself; basically, if you are in the market for a game console and a Blu-Ray player, you see the Blu-Ray player as being worth $400 and the game console being worth $400 then you may see the value in a $500 to $600 game console/Blu-Ray player.



I am starting to not really give a crap weather people by the PS3 or not. I mean even if Sony sells just as much as the Gamecube, but they have all kinds of services then this will be a very profitable platform for them. If people are happy with the 7 differant devices they have for 8k instead of the 500 dollars PS3 good for them. I will be content with the Best system for doing anything digital in the world.

Somehow people are missing out on the fact that the PS3 has more exclusive games than any of the other systems, along with the most third party support. Not only that but they have the Playstation store and Home which are all about games, community, sharing, and broadening of the market. Sony, MS, and Nintendo have never made a console more about games than the PS3. The reason Sony markets like they do is because after 13 years of Playstation being sunanomus with gaming people should know about that.

Also The PS3 is not 500 dollars because it does more than just gaming. It is because of the technology in Cell, Blu-ray, and RSX. Even if the PS3 did not do anything but play games with the same tech in it, it would still be 500 dollars. The reason this stuff is so expensive is because it is the most powerful technology in home consoles. Cell is the most powerful processor a average consumer can have in their home. Intel and AMD don't even make anything close to as powerful. If you were to pick up a proccessor from them at half the power it would be about the same price as the PS3.



Stop hate, let others live the life they were given. Everyone has their problems, and no one should have to feel ashamed for the way they were born. Be proud of who you are, encourage others to be proud of themselves. Learn, research, absorb everything around you. Nothing is meaningless, a purpose is placed on everything no matter how you perceive it. Discover how to love, and share that love with everything that you encounter. Help make existence a beautiful thing.

Kevyn B Grams
10/03/2010 

KBG29 on PSN&XBL

@ rocketpig

Surely you're not talking about the same company that was sued for PS2 optical drives failing left and right, are you? The BD drive seems to be more reliable but after killing my Xbox drive (original 'box) and suffering through my PS2's drive slow spiral of death (it won't read sometimes, loads super-slow, and makes horrible noises), I won't be using a console as a movie player ever again.


The PS2 was a much cheaper design, most reported PS2 deaths weren't really hardware failure like we see with the XBox 360. The lens easily got dirty and thus sometimes requires cleaning and in some cases a screw loosened due to drive vibrations which requires someone to fasten it again. These issues you can be taken care of by yourself if you wish, using one of the many online tutorials.

The PS3 was fully designed for doubling as a Blu-Ray movie player in mind, it won't matter if you watch Blu-Ray movies or play Blu-Ray games on it.



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales


When the PS3 finally hits $200 to $300 why will consumers choose the PS3 when the majority of the PS2 developers are on another platform?


$300 is a long, long way away for the PS3. The system simply costs a lot, and even as the technology ages and gets cost-reduced, it will still be /relatively/ expensive. New technology often trumps old technology because it costs less to produce -- newer chips can sometimes cost less to produce, or at least provide much more power for approximately the same cost many times. Keep an eye on Intel's costs. They fluctuate, but it often makes sense to push a processor out of the market because the manufacturing costs are higher than newer, faster, better processors.

This is why I don't think the PS3 is a 10 year product. The PS2's cycle has been significantly helped by the fact that it is so much cheaper than the PS3. However, it's very obvious that the PS3's costs will never approach the PS2's current costs, simply because of differences in hardware, amounts of hardware (spinning disks, for example), etc. So when the PS4 releases, it's unlikely the PS3 will cost less than $200. And what if Sony can release the PS4 for $300 on launch and it is many times more powerful than the PS3? What about the PS4, under that situation, cost reducing? I could see a circumstance where Sony would make a newer, better, much faster and more capable console that literally costs less to produce than the PS3 even 5 years into the PS3's life cycle. How does that product manage 10 years?