Jo21 said: slowmo said: Jo21 said: Graves said: Jo21 said: both the n64 and the gamecube and the first xbox had it worse actually it have a chance of outselling snes. getting close nes. what i dont want though its microsoft getting second, they would charge for online and don't make a high quality hardware.   I don't love the idea of paying for online play, but its not that big of a deal. Lifelock cost me $10 a month. My phone is $50 a month. Sirius Radio is $15 a month. Now my Xbox Live account was $40 for the year and that comes out to $3.33 a month. It's one of my cheapest expenses and it also gives a me a ton of entertainment. Free is great but if I can pay a few bucks for a better service I will gladly do that. As far as quality hardware goes. The original 360 used the Xenon motherboard which had the RRoD issue. The Falcon motherboard had the E74 problem. Now they use the Jasper board. I haven't heard any problems with that board yet and hopefully it will stay that way. i dont consider it a better service or at least to pay 50$ a  year. for ingame voice chat (since we have a voice chat in the full XMB) and a party system. and there is not proof jasper it's as reliable as the wii/ps3/Ds/PSP (currect generation consoles) reliable either, it produce less heat. RRod and E74 can still happen.   This is in the Sony forum and the topic isn't in about the 360 so why are you deliberately posting flame bait? For the record the original xbox was a fantastic piece of hardware that was both more powerful and more reliable than the PS2.  In other words your statement regarding them being incapable of making good hardware is wrong anyway, yet you'll no doubt ignore this point and continue on your agenda.  If you don't agree with a paid for online service thats fine, I'm sure Sony will always offer you an alternative for free . On the actual topic it's not like third or second this time round is the same as previous generations.  All 3 current consoles have a sufficient enough userbase and good enough software sales to secure third party support for the rest of this generation.  If the PS3 were to finish in last and provided Sony have made whatever they need to off the console to launch a successor, then it will be fine for gamers.  I want choice when it comes to gaming as each of the current consoles offers me something a little different.   tell that to grave i just reply to him, and the original xbox power source was prone to burn. i bought my gamecube first =). and the ps2 when it was reliable.

 

There was an instance by which if you frequently plugged and unplugged the socket over time it could weaken.  The number of units affected by this potential fault were miniscule yet Microsoft offered free RCA power cables to anyone with affected models.  This wasn't a wide scale issue but one that the company dealt with responsibly in the interests of public safety.  The actual unit would crackle and spark before it got to the igniting stage too, also this isn't anywhere near as severe as the Sony battery problem where some batteries actually exploded yet you do not taint Sony with that unreliable image for something that was also a tiny problem.  Although there was large scale recalls it was for safety not due to all the batteries being faulty.

On the point of who said what first, you raised the negatives first and he corrected you from his viewpoint.  You baited him into his response.  I don't have a issue with your stance on pay to play online but making a claim like MS cannot build quality hardware is wrong.

Jo21 said: Graves said: Jo21 said: both the n64 and the gamecube and the first xbox had it worse actually it have a chance of outselling snes. getting close nes. what i dont want though its microsoft getting second, they would charge for online and don't make a high quality hardware.   I don't love the idea of paying for online play, but its not that big of a deal. Lifelock cost me $10 a month. My phone is $50 a month. Sirius Radio is $15 a month. Now my Xbox Live account was $40 for the year and that comes out to $3.33 a month. It's one of my cheapest expenses and it also gives a me a ton of entertainment. Free is great but if I can pay a few bucks for a better service I will gladly do that. As far as quality hardware goes. The original 360 used the Xenon motherboard which had the RRoD issue. The Falcon motherboard had the E74 problem. Now they use the Jasper board. I haven't heard any problems with that board yet and hopefully it will stay that way. i dont consider it a better service or at least to pay 50$ a  year. for ingame voice chat (since we have a voice chat in the full XMB) and a party system. and there is not proof jasper it's as reliable as the wii/ps3/Ds/PSP (currect generation consoles) reliable either, it produce less heat. RRod and E74 can still happen.

Live tends to get more content than PSN so that's a benefit of paying for online play. Also MS doesn't bother publishers to pay for bandwidth.

Did I say there is proof of how reliable it is? Do you have proof the current model isn't as reliable as the "wii/ps3/Ds/PSP"?

Dodece said: @richardhutnik I notice a lot of posters trying to see the bright side, and saying Sony can reevaluate their strategy, but will they honestly have a chance to mend the errors. Realistically you are looking at ten years to reintroduce backward compatibility alone. Not to mention rectify late market arrival. Plus resolve pricing issues. Basically it is easier said then done, and I am not entirely sure the market is going to allow Sony the time to do so. The competition is surely not going to stagnate, and let Sony get back into the mix. Microsoft has found a mountain of cash in live. Eventually they will be able to lock in most of the high end software market, and that is going to slow the recovery of Sony dramatically. We are not in the age anymore where the next console is a fresh start the competition will build upon its success, and make it much harder on Sony, and Sony has a mountain of problems to resolve. All I see in the long term prospects for their console business is them moving away from that business. Moving either towards portable devices, or moving towards the way Sega changed their model. Perhaps towards being a software only company, or a component manufacturer. I am not seeing Sony having the ability to both rectify its mistakes, and being able to compete meaningfully. I often wonder how people envisage Sony countering its failures, and being able to strongly compete it in the end will be very expensive. Without carryover Sony will have a powerful detractor to overcome against a very successful Nintendo with a great deal of financial assets, and Microsoft which could be looking at a billion dollars annually coming from their live service. With both having ample incentive to push Sony out of the market for good. They will have the capitol to do this, and Sony will have to fix at that point some serious design problems. Really Sony has penned itself into a corner. They cannot be cost effective while following the Cell architecture, and they cannot honor backward compatibility without that architecture. I know people sing the praises of emulation, but if that were such a possibility by now the PS3 would have an emotion emulator. Kind of like that epic line in the Bill and Ted movie. Where they need a great musician to be a great band, but they cannot get a great musician without being a great band first. Carryover as far it is concerned is like the insurmountable obstacle. Without it Sony is crippled. While trying to honor it will cripple Sony. So either way they are crippled going into the next generation against Olympic athletes. The only way I see out of the paradox where Sony doesn't get obliterated out of the market next generation is for them to perform a Nintendo, and have a radical departure which brings the masses to them.

I think you're creating a false dilemma here. Sony does have strategic strengths even now which it can leverage for a next generation of consoles. With the still strong Playstation brand, all they would have to do would be copy the offerings of one or both of their competitors and they would likely be assured a reasonable portion of the market in the next generation.  PSN locks in a fair proportion of their current userbase to their next generation games console as well. Their greatest weakness is Microsoft running away with things from the beginning with a quick entry into the next generation of consoles which they are unable to compete with. I.E if Microsoft targets the same userbase and hits a home run at the same time.

 

slowmo said: Jo21 said: slowmo said: Jo21 said: Graves said: Jo21 said: both the n64 and the gamecube and the first xbox had it worse actually it have a chance of outselling snes. getting close nes. what i dont want though its microsoft getting second, they would charge for online and don't make a high quality hardware.   I don't love the idea of paying for online play, but its not that big of a deal. Lifelock cost me $10 a month. My phone is $50 a month. Sirius Radio is $15 a month. Now my Xbox Live account was $40 for the year and that comes out to $3.33 a month. It's one of my cheapest expenses and it also gives a me a ton of entertainment. Free is great but if I can pay a few bucks for a better service I will gladly do that. As far as quality hardware goes. The original 360 used the Xenon motherboard which had the RRoD issue. The Falcon motherboard had the E74 problem. Now they use the Jasper board. I haven't heard any problems with that board yet and hopefully it will stay that way. i dont consider it a better service or at least to pay 50$ a  year. for ingame voice chat (since we have a voice chat in the full XMB) and a party system. and there is not proof jasper it's as reliable as the wii/ps3/Ds/PSP (currect generation consoles) reliable either, it produce less heat. RRod and E74 can still happen.   This is in the Sony forum and the topic isn't in about the 360 so why are you deliberately posting flame bait? For the record the original xbox was a fantastic piece of hardware that was both more powerful and more reliable than the PS2.  In other words your statement regarding them being incapable of making good hardware is wrong anyway, yet you'll no doubt ignore this point and continue on your agenda.  If you don't agree with a paid for online service thats fine, I'm sure Sony will always offer you an alternative for free . On the actual topic it's not like third or second this time round is the same as previous generations.  All 3 current consoles have a sufficient enough userbase and good enough software sales to secure third party support for the rest of this generation.  If the PS3 were to finish in last and provided Sony have made whatever they need to off the console to launch a successor, then it will be fine for gamers.  I want choice when it comes to gaming as each of the current consoles offers me something a little different.   tell that to grave i just reply to him, and the original xbox power source was prone to burn. i bought my gamecube first =). and the ps2 when it was reliable.   There was an instance by which if you frequently plugged and unplugged the socket over time it could weaken.  The number of units affected by this potential fault were miniscule yet Microsoft offered free RCA power cables to anyone with affected models.  This wasn't a wide scale issue but one that the company dealt with responsibly in the interests of public safety.  The actual unit would crackle and spark before it got to the igniting stage too, also this isn't anywhere near as severe as the Sony battery problem where some batteries actually exploded yet you do not taint Sony with that unreliable image for something that was also a tiny problem.  Although there was large scale recalls it was for safety not due to all the batteries being faulty. On the point of who said what first, you raised the negatives first and he corrected you from his viewpoint.  You baited him into his response.  I don't have a issue with your stance on pay to play online but making a claim like MS cannot build quality hardware is wrong.

 

both are severe a baby die due a xbox power supply. also sony replace all batteries free of charge, also toshiba and panasonic have a similar problem with their batteries.

@Graves: PSN have Qore for that, they get demo early and exclusives contend, but i also don't pay for that, it's useless. and not worth 50$ a year.

the falcon units were over 16% failure rate,  10% being RRoD, if you have a study that shows jasper got that down to 1-2% like all currect generation consoles feel free to link me up.

It will be great if it wakes up Sony and their gaming division. Maybe serving them a bit of humble pie will bring back the magic of the origional PS.

Plus, yes, it keeps MS hungry for the top spot and in the game.

all this competition is the reason this is my second favorite console generation so far.

Non of you owned a gamecube i assume.

@ Jo21
Qore is lame. People aren't going to pay for that. That's not great exclusive content compared to Fallout and GTA expansions. And considering how successful Live has been its safe to say Sony will charge for online play with a future console.

Like I said you don't have proof how unreliable the Jasper board is. I don't have proof how reliable it is. But we aren't hearing anything so that's a good sign.

If Microsoft beats Sony, it means their business model will more likely be adopted next generation and for the future some time to come. I don't want to pay for hidden charges like online, wifi adapters, and hard drives, and (worst) then have advertisements pasted on the dashboard to top it all off. We'll see cheaper hardware in the place of lasting/quality hardware.

I really don't see why suckers like the 'get you in cheap' then hammer you with overpriced components later approach, it's disingenuous, deceptive, and bad for the industry as a whole.

Rob6021 said: If Microsoft beats Sony, it means their business model will more likely be adopted next generation and for the future some time to come. I don't want to pay for hidden charges like online, wifi adapters, and hard drives, and (worst) then have advertisements pasted on the dashboard to top it all off. We'll see cheaper hardware in the place of lasting/quality hardware. I really don't see why suckers like the 'get you in cheap' then hammer you with overpriced components later approach, it's disingenuous, deceptive, and bad for the industry as a whole.

Hidden charges? Xbox Live has been a pay service since day one. The Wifi adapter and Hard-drive are expensive but you aren't forced to buy them. A PS3 doesn't even function without a hard-drive might I add. The hardware problems of the 360 hasn't helped MS at all. Don't forget they lost over a billion dollars fixing the units. I never considered the ads being an issue. I actually look at them sometimes and I'm not forced to do that.

Granted the PS3 is cheaper in the long run. But the PS3 would be more expensive had it been successful. The Xbox 360 is successful so they can get away with over charging for some hardware. The Wii could probably be sold for $99 but it sells so well they don't have to drop the price.

@Squilliam

I am not sure it is a false dilemma, because I have heard nobody rationally explain how Sony can back its way out of its current position. They moved towards proprietary hardware in a gamble to dictate to the industry. That would have paid off if they had succeeded. Theirs would have been the standard. Now theirs will not be the standard, and they are hardly vested in the technology anymore. So they do not even enjoy the real benefit of selling to themselves. Cutting out a middle man.

They have put together an online plan that is free to their customers, but is a financial drag for Sony. Once again would have paid off if it had hurt Microsoft, but it did not. Now they are cornered if they were to begin charging many customers would become irate. Though they really need to charge unless they want to loss lead heavy yet again, and it is not as if the costs are not going to increase over time as more games will need support.

They have managed to botch developer loyalty out the window, and the earned reputation that went with that. So now they have to fight for what they used to have handed to them. There is another mountain of money they have to cough up. Basically they have to rebuild those relationships to have any real chance to stand out.

Then we have the failure of the loss leading model, and more importantly the fact that Sony probably cannot do that anymore. Which technologically speaking will handicap them out of the gate. Their machine cannot be high end. Hell I would not be shocked in the least if the next Nintendo console was stronger then the next Sony console, and that is something the fans on this very site would be sickened by.

Perhaps you could look to great marketing spinning straw into gold, but lets be real here. Sony marketing just isn't that good. In fact it has been downright awful as of late. More a running joke as they try to speak to consumers as investors. Rather then trying to play gamer lust.

I would just love to see a real concept for how Sony fixes all these things in a generation span. Which is what Sony needs to do. The answer at Sony this generation was to throw a lot of money at the problem, and honestly I do not see Sony being able to do that next generation, and they will be going in ass backwards. It is not as if their concepts need work. They are flat out wrong. Like they have been running the race backwards while the competition is running facing forwards.

Just want to know how Sony is supposed to do this. Nobody gives a really good explanation it just seems like hopeful wishes. Not that I think any competitor in this area past or present could run a full one eighty will deep in third place, and not slip farther generation over generation.