DVD Talk
Could the Playstation 3 Kill Sony? [Archive] - DVD Talk Forum
 
Best Sellers
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
The Longest Day
Buy: $54.99 $24.99
9.
10.
DVD Blowouts
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Alien [Blu-ray]
Buy: $19.99 $9.99
8.
9.
10.

PDA
DVD Reviews

View Full Version : Could the Playstation 3 Kill Sony?


mrpayroll
02-10-06, 11:35 AM
http://www.ehomeupgrade.com/entry/2100/could_the_playstation

Category: Industry Buzz - February 09, 2006
By David Walker


As we quickly approach E3 in May, many people are eagerly anticipating more details on the Sony PS3. Since Sony burst onto the gaming scene with the original Playstation, they have been the company to beat in the console wars. As a matter of fact, while the rest of Sony has struggled, the Playstation division has been a cash cow that the rest of the company has relied on. With Microsoft having already launched the Xbox 360 to overwhelming demand, many are wondering what the counter from Sony will truly look like (http://www.ehomeupgrade.com/entry/2078/here-s_hoping_that), hype set aside. It wouldn't be exaggerating to say that Sony is betting a large hand on the Playstation 3. It's not just the Playstation division that's making the bet, either. With the next-gen Hi-Def format war still raging, Sony is betting a substantial portion of it's future on Blu-Ray. While most analysts agree that HD-DVD will not likely win, some analysts are openly wondering whether Blu-Ray will as well. If it doesn't, Sony could be in serious trouble.

Isn't This Thing Supposed to Play Games First?

In order for Sony's Trojan Horse strategy with Blu-Ray to work, the Playstation 3 has to succeed as a gaming console. As a game console, the Playstation 3 has to deliver on several fronts. In pure horsepower and graphical ability, there's little doubt that the console will impress. There are serious reservations as to Sony's online strategy (compared to Xbox Live) and we'll cover that in a bit. However, one aspect of gaming that is often ignored, but can become a major issue is load times. Ask any Sony PSP owner what annoys them most about the portable console and you are sure to hear about it's dreadful load times. Gamers are an impatient breed and if Sony frustrates hardcore gamers - and developers, for that matter - it could greatly damage it's reputation with the group that will comprise PS3 early adopters.

Until now, it's been widely assumed that the Blu-ray drive that will make it's way into the PS3 will be single-speed. If true, this choice could be disasterous. Blu-ray single speed transfers data at a constant rate of 36Mbps (Megabits per second) or 4.5 MBps (Megabytes per second). Sound impressive? Think again. DVD single speed is rated at a little over 1.32MBps max. A 12X DVD, such as the one in the Xbox 360, transfers data at rates between 8.2 and 16.5 MBps for an average of around 13MBps. This article (http://www.gamespot.com/pages/profile/show_blog_entry.php?topic_id=23916169&user=skektek) from Gamespot provides all the details on transfer speeds, but simple math should show that there are some serious concerns looming with a single speed Blu-Ray drive. So, all things being equal, a 20 second load-time on the Xbox 360 would equate to just under 60 seconds on the PS3!

In order for Sony to bring load times into the same range as the Xbox 360, it would have to use at least a 2X drive (which would transfer a little faster than a 12X DVD's minimum speed) or a 3X drive (which would closely resemble a 12X DVD's average transfer rate). Since Blu-ray is a new technology, it's a certainty that the faster speeds will increase the base cost of the PS3, which leads into the next point.

Money Doesn't Grow on Trees

The Playstation 3 will lose money for at least a few years. How much and for how long is key, and recent projections (http://technology.guardian.co.uk/weekly/story/0,16376,1683932,00.html) from Merrill Lynch Japan suggest that the PS3 could lose a tremendous amount of money for Sony in the first few years. Merrill Lynch is projecting losses of 1.18 billion in year 1, 730 million in year 2 and 457 million in year 3. By comparison, Sony's profits in the past three years has been about 1.86 billion. If the PS3 doesn't start turning a serious profit in year 4, Sony's bank accounts could start drying up. There's no indication if these losses also anticipate the costs involved with setting up the massive infrastructure for an Xbox Live competitor, which most people think Sony will provide. If not, Sony's losses could skyrocket even more as it looks to create a brand-new online presense.

Sony could try to offset these losses by launching the PS3 with a higher price point, but anything above $500 is considered too high for wide adoption. Will consumers agree with Ken Kutaragi's assessment that you will want to work an extra job to have one? Kutaragi has even lamented (http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24968) that "…the PS3 can't be offered at a price that's targeted towards households."

Additionally, Sony is stil having to compete with HD-DVD, which is getting significant backing from Microsoft (and their 37 billion in cash). Whereas Microsoft has little to lose if HD-DVD fails, Sony has everything to lose. Additionally, recent announcements at CES in January indicate that the least expensive Blu-Ray drives will start at $1000 while HD-DVD is hitting the market with players starting at $500. Many analysts saw these changes as giving HD-DVD a second-wind that could ultimately hurt Sony more than it helps HD-DVD, which leads to another point.

Tell Me Why I Need Blu-Ray More Than DVD?

Unless you have an HDTV set, you'll never see the difference between Blu-Ray and DVD. And considering that Hi-Def adoption is currently at 24% and more than half of consumers are waiting for price drops, the target market for Blu-Ray is not as lucrative as one might believe. When DVDs hit the market, there were several reasons to purchase them. For one, the quality far surpassed VHS. Additionally, menus and extra features made DVD content easier to access and gave it more value. Also, DVDs don't degrade in quality over time, making them a better long-term investment. The jump from DVD to Blu-Ray (or HD-DVD) is not as significant, unless you're an HDTV owner. Even then, the question remains: Is Blu-Ray content going to be compelling enough to make me say "I have to have it?"

Recent announcements also suggest (http://www.ehomeupgrade.com/entry/2096/sony_sets_blu-ray) that Blu-Ray disc prices will come at a significant premium over existing DVD prices. With broadband adoption growing rapidly, one also has to ask if a physical format has a long life ahead of it. Bill Gates has publicly stated that he thinks the format war is the last we'll see, because hi-def content will be soon be delivered over the Internet instead. HD-DVD may not win the war, but it doesn't mean that Blu-ray will.

Games, Games, Games

The Playstation 3 has wide support right now. However, rumblings have been surfacing that the PS3 is hard to develop for, due to the complexity of a brand new processor with multiple cores. Similar criticisms arose with the PS2, and while Sony was able to overcome the same hurdles then, there is one major difference now that may keep history from repeating itself: the Xbox 360.

Since the original Xbox came into the game a good bit later than the PS2, developers had to stick with Sony because it was the clear market leader. This afforded Sony liberties that it may not have had otherwise. Now, Microsoft has the head start. Additionally, the Microsoft unit has already been praised by the likes of John Carmack (creator of Doom, Quake, etc...) for it's great development environment, while Hideo Kojima of Metal Gear Solid fame has expressed some concerns (http://ps2.boomtown.net/en_uk/articles/art.view.php?id=8293) that development for the PS3 could be more difficult than for the Xbox 360. Sony must have strong 3rd party support so that licensing fees will help recoup the costs of putting the PS3 into the market. Just being Sony may not be enough anymore.

Conclusion

While I don't think we'll see Sony close it's doors for good, I have some concerns about the affect the PS3 could have on Sony's financials over the next few years and into the future. Microsoft has created an impressive console with the Xbox 360 and while Sony has a strong history in the Playstation line, there are key components for concern. Blu-Ray, an online service like Xbox Live and a hard development environment create additional areas for financial loss that may not be recouped. For the sake of competition and a strong market, let's hope Sony can address these concerns adequately and while there is still time.


Since we don't have an active PS3 thread, I had to start this one.

Chris

Michael Corvin
02-10-06, 12:31 PM
I agree on most counts. I have to disagree about the 360 head start. It would be different if they actually shipped enough to get a jump on the PS3 but a half million consoles is a blip on Sony's radar.

I'm indifferent about Sony, but I think the PS3 will be their N64. Sitting way up on top of the game industry they think they can do no wrong and every decision is the right one, but I think this gen will be a stumbling block. Mostly for some of the reasons above. The whole "game system? This is our way to beat HD-DVD" mentality bugs me.

sracer
02-10-06, 12:45 PM
It took Sega 4 losing consoles (Sega CD, 32X, Saturn, Dreamcast, each one better than the one before, each one lost it's console war) to die. So no, PS3 can't kill Sony.
I think it is a bit inaccurate to call the CD and 32X add-ons, "consoles". Since it is an optional add-on, you can't measure its success like a console. Sega CD add-on was hardly a "failure". The 32X was a technical success, but a commercial failure. And part of that failure was poor timing.

The lessons to take way from the Sega story is that timing is key and a fall in popularity can happen literally overnight.

kakihara1
02-10-06, 12:46 PM
I agree with you guys I don't think it will kill Sony. That being said I think it will damage them badly, MS will level the playing field a bit, even if Sony wins this console war (which they will) MS will make up alot of ground this time around setting up an even larger console war for the next generation (PS4 Vs. xbox whatever). All the while Nintendo will be making the same old good time games they've been making for a couple decades.

I'm a huge Xbox fan but I have owned all three current gen consoles and it would be pretty small minded to think that Sony will die due to this console, but I hope it makes them think twice about the way the build a console next time.

sracer
02-10-06, 01:00 PM
I agree with you guys I don't think it will kill Sony. That being said I think it will damage them badly, MS will level the playing field a bit, even if Sony wins this console war (which they will) MS will make up alot of ground this time around setting up an even larger console war for the next generation (PS4 Vs. xbox whatever). All the while Nintendo will be making the same old good time games they've been making for a couple decades.

I'm a huge Xbox fan but I have owned all three current gen consoles and it would be pretty small minded to think that Sony will die due to this console, but I hope it makes them think twice about the way the build a console next time.
I don't think that Sony's dominance with the PS3 is a given. The stakes are far higher now that ever before. Sony has allowed various rumors and buzz about what the PS3 is going to be. It is unrealistic to think that they will be able to produce a console with the specs being talked about with a Blu-Ray drive at the target pricepoint. On top of that, unveil an online service that will be able to compete with a seasoned service.

I believe that the next round is Microsoft's to lose. If they drag their feet on expanding capabilities of Live and multimedia support of the 360, they will be squandering the lead they have. Having said that, I do believe that Microsoft will be a bit too conservative and lose it.

fujishig
02-10-06, 01:07 PM
On the one hand the other divisions of Sony are not doing all that well, and they do seem to be relying more and more on the revenue the games division makes. On the other hand, because of this, it's certainly a very important division to the company, and one where they can ill-afford to make huge mistakes, so I see them being very careful to ensure the success of the PS3.

Unless MS can up the production of 360's quickly, I agree that the headstart doesn't matter that much... I love my 360, but the games currently out are not going to change PS2 fanboys into Xbox fanboys, since it's just more of the same.

And I thought it was common knowledge that every company loses money on consoles at release, but make up for it with accessory and game sales? Is it just that the thinking is that sony will deliver this too far under cost?

Groucho
02-10-06, 01:10 PM
By the end of the year, Sony will have gone the way of Sega.

mrpayroll
02-10-06, 01:13 PM
By the end of the year, Sony will have gone the way of Sega.

:lol:

Chris

kakihara1
02-10-06, 01:18 PM
I don't think that Sony's dominance with the PS3 is a given. The stakes are far higher now that ever before. Sony has allowed various rumors and buzz about what the PS3 is going to be. It is unrealistic to think that they will be able to produce a console with the specs being talked about with a Blu-Ray drive at the target pricepoint. On top of that, unveil an online service that will be able to compete with a seasoned service.

I believe that the next round is Microsoft's to lose. If they drag their feet on expanding capabilities of Live and multimedia support of the 360, they will be squandering the lead they have. Having said that, I do believe that Microsoft will be a bit too conservative and lose it.

I don't necessarily think it's a given either but you have to aknowledge the fact that sony's following is rediculously huge and I'd be willing to bet that if you repackaged the PS2 in a different case and slapped "PS3" on it with a pricepoint of $500 a large percentage of sony fans would be climbing over each other to get thier hands on it, regardless of the fact that it can't play next gen games.

I am going to buy a PS3 for sure. What's not sure is whether or not I'll buy one at launch or wait a few months till the craze dies down, I really hope they put together a kick ass console; and I know they will sell a metric shit ton of them, even if it sucks.

sracer
02-10-06, 01:25 PM
I don't necessarily think it's a given either but you have to aknowledge the fact that sony's following is rediculously huge and I'd be willing to bet that if you repackaged the PS2 in a different case and slapped "PS3" on it with a pricepoint of $500 a large percentage of sony fans would be climbing over each other to get thier hands on it, regardless of the fact that it can't play next gen games.

Ok, ok... y'got me on that one! :toast: :lol:

I am going to buy a PS3 for sure. What's not sure is whether or not I'll buy one at launch or wait a few months till the craze dies down, I really hope they put together a kick ass console; and I know they will sell a metric shit ton of them, even if it sucks.
The XBox 360 is my first NEW console since the Atari VGS (before it was called the 2600) and the first one since my used Sega/32X/CD combo. So I'm not really in-tune with the game console industry.

If MS does not increase its support for non-gaming features and Sony DOES with the PS3, I would consider buying a PS3.

gabeon
02-10-06, 01:50 PM
It was a good read, but I don't think this will kill Sony.

It definitely won't help them since they seem to be trying to spend too much time killing two birds with one stone.

The Bus
02-10-06, 01:54 PM
Since Sony burst onto the gaming scene with the original Playstation, they have been the company to beat in the console wars.

They didn't establish their dominance until the PS2 was released.

As a matter of fact, while the rest of Sony has struggled, the Playstation division has been a cash cow that the rest of the company has relied on.

The rest of the company does not need to rely on the games division. Consumer electronics still vastly outsell it in dollar terms, but Sony Pictures and their financial services are just as profitable, especially recently.


With Microsoft having already launched the Xbox 360 to overwhelming demand...

I like the 360 as much as the next guy but the demand has only been overwhelming because the supply has been so constricted.


Ask any Sony PSP owner what annoys them most about the portable console and you are sure to hear about it's dreadful load times. Gamers are an impatient breed and if Sony frustrates hardcore gamers - and developers, for that matter - it could greatly damage it's reputation with the group that will comprise PS3 early adopters.


My understanding is that what annoys PSP owners is that there are no games.


So, all things being equal, a 20 second load-time on the Xbox 360 would equate to just under 60 seconds on the PS3!

Maybe, maybe not. It depends much more on the programming than the speed of the drive, especially these days.


The Playstation 3 will lose money for at least a few years. How much and for how long is key

Wait, I thought the games division was a "cash cow"? Which is it?


Sony's bank accounts could start drying up.

Sony has US$7.2BN in cash and cash equivalents.


There's no indication if these losses also anticipate the costs involved with setting up the massive infrastructure for an Xbox Live competitor, which most people think Sony will provide. If not, Sony's losses could skyrocket even more as it looks to create a brand-new online presense.

It already has an online presence. Sony Connect was launched in 2004.


Even then, the question remains: Is Blu-Ray content going to be compelling enough to make me say "I have to have it?"

This is actually a strong & solid point - it all boils down to ease of use, and DVDs provided a big jump in ease of use (arguably (http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=176819&cid=14679152)). BluRay and HD-DVD won't.


I have some concerns about the affect the PS3 could have

I have concerns over the author's drivel.

Josh H
02-10-06, 02:01 PM
No, they have too big a lead and too much brand name recognition to die this gen. They could lose some ground, but as long as it launches at the price of the 360 and has some good exclusives at launch and in the first year it should easily be the top system again, though it may not dominate as much as the PS2 did.

MS really missed a golden chance to build up a big lead by not having many units out at launch or the holiday season when they were the only next gen system out.

Breakfast with Girls
02-10-06, 02:41 PM
I don't think that Sony's dominance with the PS3 is a given.No, it is.

Microsoft will occupy about the same place as they did in the current (er, last?) generation.

The real question is what will happen with Nintendo, position-wise. The Revolution looks like it will be aggressively marketed towards non-gamers, with the remote control-style controller. Obviously if that controller fails to take off they'll introduce a "normal" controller, but it will significantly affect their positioning if the thing doesn't do that well at launch.

Michael Corvin
02-10-06, 03:08 PM
No, they have too big a lead and too much brand name recognition to die this gen.

Exactly. They will still come out on top but not reach PS2 sales in the least. They have that MTV Cribs & Pimp my Ride crowd marketing their products for free to the easily influenced pre-pubecent children(which includes those up to around 21 or so). Like I said before, I think the PS3 is going to be a stumbling block because they have their priorities all fucked up just like Nintendo did putting together the N64. Not enough to kill them, but it will be a bump in the road.

I'm with BWG, Microsoft will sell about the same and Nintendo is a big wild card. With the DS being such a huge success it shows there are new gamers to be had than the typical demographic. Also seems to show that gameplay trumps pretty graphics any day of the week. Nintendo could be on the brink of something big. Live Arcade game sales seems to back up those assumptions as well. I'm just wondering if Microsoft didn't beat them to the punch on the virtual console.

kakihara1
02-10-06, 03:13 PM
I'm just wondering if Microsoft didn't beat them to the punch on the virtual console.

Are you saying that white box on My A/V rack is just a figment of my imagination? :hairpull:

Michael Corvin
02-10-06, 03:17 PM
Are you saying that white box on My A/V rack is just a figment of my imagination? :hairpull:

Well I was thinking more or less it being old hat by the time Revolution hits.

PixyJunket
02-10-06, 03:17 PM
Are you saying that white box on My A/V rack is just a figment of my imagination? :hairpull:He is referring to Xbox Live Arcade which is similar to Nintendo's upcoming Virtual Console aspect of its new system.

kakihara1
02-10-06, 03:23 PM
He is referring to Xbox Live Arcade which is similar to Nintendo's upcoming Virtual Console aspect of its new system.

I'm thinking for the type of games on Live Arcade, Nintendo is going to kick much ass in that department. Geometry Wars and the like are great fun but Nintendo will do it better IMO.

Supermallet
02-10-06, 03:36 PM
A few points:

1. More people come in every day to where I work asking about the PS3 than the 360, and this started when the 360 was first announced. Also, all of these people fully expect the PS3 to be $500, and STILL want to pre-order it on the spot.

2. Developers are not complaining about the PS3. What some of them are complaining about is that they can no longer develop a game for all three platforms, as the consoles this generation are three entirely different pieces of machinery. Sony just announced 30 confirmed launch titles. Many of them are third party. They have massive third party support. And a larger fan base than Microsoft.

3. Microsoft shot themselves in the foot with the 360. Launching with massive shortages worked to create hype during Christmas, but two weeks into January, everyone but the hardcore gamers moved on. And considering only one (one!) title has been released since launch, with no new titles even coming in until next week, Microsoft really bungled the release (Just to note: I own a 360, so this isn't me bashing Microsoft, this is based on customer response that I see every day). Furthermore, Microsoft's Japanese third-party support is almost nil. And with American companies taking so long to release games, the system may actually live or die based on the marketplace offerings.

4. Nintendo is a much bigger threat this time than Microsoft. The Revolution is getting huge buzz, and Nintendo isn't even pulling out a hype machine. That means the buzz is being generated by gamers and, even more devastatingly to Sony, developers. Almost every major developer, from whole companies to well-known individuals, has expressed an intense interest in making games exclusive to the Revolution, solely to use the controller. I think the Revolution will blindside everyone.

5. Nintendo's virtual console will not be overshadowed by the 360's marketplace. Why? The games, pure and simple. With Nintendo potentially offering every game through the N64, it's going to be gamer heaven. Older gamers will download the games they grew up with, and the ones they always wanted to try. Younger ones will probably try out big name titles like Mario and Metroid and find out why they're such important games. By contrast, Microsoft can offer a few good arcade classics, and some updates on older games, but they cannot begin to touch what Nintendo has.

5. I've been hearing the blu-ray drive is going to be 2X anyway, so I guess that point is moot.

mrpayroll
02-10-06, 03:39 PM
Live Arcade game sales seems to back up those assumptions as well. I'm just wondering if Microsoft didn't beat them to the punch on the virtual console.

As I said in the XBox 360 thread, XBox Live Arcade games account for 80% of my playing time. They have good graphics, simple gameplay and are verrrrrry addictive.

And once I get my Philips 60" back from being fixed, these games are going to look great in HD (which hasn't been working properly for almost 6 months).

Chris

Supermallet
02-10-06, 03:41 PM
I was just playing some Marble Blast and Bejeweled 2 last night.

Josh H
02-10-06, 03:42 PM
I'm just wondering if Microsoft didn't beat them to the punch on the virtual console.

I don't think that will matter. It comes down to the games, and what MS is able to offer on their can't touch having at least all the first party NES, SNES and N64 games available, and probably a lot of third party games, and maybe even Genesis games.

Decker
02-10-06, 03:42 PM
I disagree with a lot of that article. For one, I think blu-ray will be a HUGE selling point. People will be anxious to get their hands on the latest in home entertainment and given a choice of a $1000 HD-DVD player and a $500 PS# that both plays games and BR discs, I think most would opt for the latter (in the same way many were able to swallow the $300 PS2 price because they didn't have a DVD player yet). Additionally, I disagree that people won't notice any difference between DVD and BR if they lack a HDTV : I saw a nice BR demo last month at the CES and the BR has TONS of cool interactive features (instant downloads, live online video commentaries, much more interactive menues, etc) that will certainly be appreciated by even those without a HD set. In addition, the ability to watch an entire TV season on one disc will be a very popular thing. And of course, if a person doesn't have a HDTV, how much could they possibly be getting out of a 360, anyway (according to EGM, without HDTV, the differences between it and an XBOX are minimal at best for most games).
Now I certainly don't think the PS3 is a slam-dunk champ yet, but it would be foolish to expect them to fumble too badly. After all, for all the negative press the PSP gotand it's high price point, it still sells very well. Figure major PSP-PS3 interactivity (like the ability to download progams to watch on-the-go) and you've got a huge built-in market for your new system already. It may or may not be the best system. It may be hard to program for and load time may stink. Still it'll sell like hotcakes.

Supermallet
02-10-06, 03:45 PM
Also, Sony announced a nice list of first-run Blu-Ray titles, so people will have movies to play on their PS3 right away (including the remastered version of For A Few Dollars More that was never released in America!).

PixyJunket
02-10-06, 03:50 PM
I honestly don't think there will be many changes as far as "position" goes. I do have a hard time believing the PS3 will be as big as the PS2 was.. while I won't be surprised either way.. I have a feeling the last few years were probably a peak for home gaming and will slow down a bit in the coming years. Microsoft will probably feel the most hurt but I don't see it being big enough to do send them "the way of Sega." Nintendo will probably stay right where they are, which of course will remain the constant target of "analysts" and uninformed "gamers" predicting doom & gloom every month, but they'll do exactly what they want to do and make a lot of money doing it.

Decker
02-10-06, 04:12 PM
Why do we all try to figure if a console will thrive or bomb before it's even released? I wasn't a big gamer until the PS1, but since then, every console I've seen launched well. The Dreamcast launch (famously on 9/9/99) was a very big deal (cover of Newsweek, I believe). The N64 was impossible to find despite the fact that the system launched with a grand total of TWO games. The GBA, DS, PSP ; None were in any store the week after their launch. Ditto the Xbox and GC, which inexplicably launched the same week.
Why did people line up to buy the 360? Because of the amazing system reviews? I didn't see any. Because of the must have games for the system? Perhaps, but there certainly wasn't a Halo-type world beater at launch. The bottom line is that with any system (or at least any not named N-Gage), demand will ALWAYS exceed supply at launch.

Supermallet
02-10-06, 04:14 PM
That's why we're not talking about launch numbers. We're talking about how the system does in the long term.

Decker
02-10-06, 04:27 PM
That's why we're not talking about launch numbers. We're talking about how the system does in the long term.
I don't see anything in that article that states the PS3 will sell well initially, but then sales will fall off becuase of these concerns. Additionally the article references the success of the 360, a system that still is in very short suppy due to slow production rates more than phenominal consumer demand. I don't think it's really possible to fairly speculate on the sytem based on the very limited info we've been given so far, but if one had to bet on a system's success or failure at this juncture, I'd suspect the PS3 will be a big hit with consumers.

Supermallet
02-10-06, 04:29 PM
Well, the article is poorly written and skirts on getting their facts wrong. Not to mention focusing on all the wrong things. But the rest of the conversation in here is a little more on point.

Michael Corvin
02-10-06, 09:17 PM
In addition, the ability to watch an entire TV season on one disc will be a very popular thing.

I'm interested in seeing how this plays out. Sure they could fit an entire season on one disc, but that would be at the same quality as standard dvd. What is the point of repurchasing? Just to save some shelf space? If they go back and remaster shows in HD it will take more space on the disc keeping the episode to disc ratio about the same as it is now.

But the rest of the conversation in here is a little more on point.

I agree. It's actually all been pretty civil and unbiased so far.

Supermallet
02-10-06, 09:50 PM
I'm interested in seeing how this plays out. Sure they could fit an entire season on one disc, but that would be at the same quality as standard dvd. What is the point of repurchasing? Just to save some shelf space? If they go back and remaster shows in HD it will take more space on the disc keeping the episode to disc ratio about the same as it is now.

They may offer both versions. All the shows on one disc, at regular DVD quality, for $20. The whole season on multiple discs in HD for $50.

mrpayroll
02-10-06, 11:43 PM
I agree. It's actually all been pretty civil and unbiased so far.

And I hope it stays that way! :D

Chris

JM
02-11-06, 11:29 AM
2. Developers are not complaining about the PS3. What some of them are complaining about is that they can no longer develop a game for all three platforms, as the consoles this generation are three entirely different pieces of machinery. Sony just announced 30 confirmed launch titles. Many of them are third party. They have massive third party support. And a larger fan base than Microsoft.


From the accounts I have seen, you are wrong about this one. It would come as no surprise since there were certainly many complaints about how hard it was to develop for the the PS2. This is one area where Microsoft has a clear advantage over Sony. Microsoft is a software company. Its Visual Studio development environment and tools are the standard for Windows programming and are very mature and developer friendly. Sony, on the other hand, has far less experience in software and their development tools (from what I have read) just aren't very good by comparison. Now, that fact didn't hurt them much with respect to the PS2 and may not with the PS3 either.

An interesting component of the difficulty of programming for the PS3 versus the Xbox360 may be the fact that the PS3 processor only has ONE core (PPE) but has 8 (only 7 useable) SPEs whereas the 360 has THREE cores (PPEs) and no SPEs. For a somewhat technical overview of the difference between a PPE and an SPE, see http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/power/library/pa-cbea.html . The bottom line is that PPEs are what developers are used to coding for both in single and multiple processor scenarios on a PC. It is unclear how well the PS3's SPEs, which sound good on paper, will translate to real world performance and whether only having one PPE (versus the 360's three) will ultimately cause the PS3 problems.

If you believe one report recently posted on the TXB forums, developers are finding that the SPEs don't add a lot of performance. Now this could be just a rumour, or there could be some truth to it. I tend to believe the latter, but the real question is whether it is just a matter of the developers not knowing how to take advantage of these SPEs yet. Due to their respective designs, it would seem there will definitely be a much steeper learning curve with getting max performance out of the PS3 than with the 360.

Terrell
02-11-06, 12:01 PM
More people come in every day to where I work asking about the PS3 than the 360, and this started when the 360 was first announced. Also, all of these people fully expect the PS3 to be $500, and STILL want to pre-order it on the spot.

With all due respect, this is anectdotal evidence akin to the "most of my friends are more interested in movie A than movie B" comments seen in box office discussion. You may be telling the truth, but it has little relevance on the rest of the gaming world.

Nintendo is a much bigger threat this time than Microsoft. The Revolution is getting huge buzz, and Nintendo isn't even pulling out a hype machine. That means the buzz is being generated by gamers and, even more devastatingly to Sony, developers. Almost every major developer, from whole companies to well-known individuals, has expressed an intense interest in making games exclusive to the Revolution, solely to use the controller. I think the Revolution will blindside everyone.

I disagree here as well. I have not seen any "huge buzz" for the Revolution. One, there's literally no games being show. It's specs are underwhelming when compared to the PS3 or Xbox360, so graphically it can't compete. Even though the games matter, the power of a console matters to many gamers and developers, or so it seems. Graphics are talked about more than any aspect on the gaming boards I've been too. I personally see the Revolution dragging up the rear again, and losing market share in the console wars. Looks to me like Nintendo dropped the ball again. I just don't think Nintendo can continue to release underpowered consoles and compete. The fact that the PS3 and Xbox360 will have a head start only makes matters worse for Nintendo.

Nintendo's virtual console will not be overshadowed by the 360's marketplace. Why? The games, pure and simple. With Nintendo potentially offering every game through the N64, it's going to be gamer heaven. Older gamers will download the games they grew up with, and the ones they always wanted to try. Younger ones will probably try out big name titles like Mario and Metroid and find out why they're such important games. By contrast, Microsoft can offer a few good arcade classics, and some updates on older games, but they cannot begin to touch what Nintendo has.

I don't know much about this either. I'm sure some gamers love to play those old games. A good game is a good game, no matter what. But when a newer, more powerful consoles come out, how many gamers continue heavily playing their older consoles? Some, but I can't see many. When I bought my Playstation 2, I had absolutely no desire whatsoever to go back to those old, pixelated, blocky games. What do Xbox360 gamers play more of, 360 games or the older backwards compatible Xbox games? Sort of like that expensive toy mom bought you for Christmas that you played for 6 weeks, then moved on to something else. We've all done that. Gamers want to play the latest and greatest games.

Grimfarrow
02-11-06, 12:45 PM
4. Nintendo is a much bigger threat this time than Microsoft. The Revolution is getting huge buzz, and Nintendo isn't even pulling out a hype machine. That means the buzz is being generated by gamers and, even more devastatingly to Sony, developers. Almost every major developer, from whole companies to well-known individuals, has expressed an intense interest in making games exclusive to the Revolution, solely to use the controller. I think the Revolution will blindside everyone.


I agree. Once again, everyone's underestimating Nintendo. Same thing happened when the Nintendo DS came out - and look at how well it's selling. Their technology may be considering a bit "dated" compared to the other two, but there's no question no one innovates as much as they do either - and for a reasonable price that people can buy on impulse. Look at the sales ratio of Nintendo DS games versus the PSP and you'll know what I mean.

I have a feeling that Microsoft will be the third wheel in the race by the end 2008.

Josh H
02-11-06, 12:54 PM
I don't know much about this either. I'm sure some gamers love to play those old games. A good game is a good game, no matter what. But when a newer, more powerful consoles come out, how many gamers continue heavily playing their older consoles? Some, but I can't see many. When I bought my Playstation 2, I had absolutely no desire whatsoever to go back to those old, pixelated, blocky games. What do Xbox360 gamers play more of, 360 games or the older backwards compatible Xbox games? Sort of like that expensive toy mom bought you for Christmas that you played for 6 weeks, then moved on to something else. We've all done that. Gamers want to play the latest and greatest games.


You missed the point. He's not saying the Nintendo virtual console will be more popular, or even remotely able to compete, with the 360 or other next gen games.

He's comparing the X-box 360 marketplace Arcade feature where you can play old arcade games, versus Nintendo's virtual console where you can download NES, SNES and N64 (as well as probably genesis games and maybe some other old systems).

This came up as someone pondered that maybe MS beat nintendo to the
punch here by having the 360 arcade out now. And people were saying that this wouldn't matter as more people would want the old nintendo and other console games, that what you can get on the 360 marketplace.

And I agree wholeheartedly with that. But of course neither the 360 Arcade or Revolution Virtual Console will make or break the systems success as most gamers just want to play the newest, greatest looking game.

As for your other question, I prefer older games. I'm playing my DS almost exclusively, and have wasted hundreds of dollars on GC, PS2 and X-box games this gen that were hyped that I just didn't like. I've learned my listen and buy much more selectively now. I'll probably just pick up a revolution and mainly use the virtual console next gen. The direction gaming has taken the past 5-10 years has just largely gotten away from the types of games I like to play.


As for revolution hype, it's getting a lot among developers who say they can't wait to develop games for the controller (which will obviously be exclusives) and it's getting a quit a bit of talk online and in magazines for a system, that as you say, they've not even showed a screen shot of any games.

I still think Nintendo will be third, but they'll continue to make a lot of money doing things there way, just like they always have. They don't need Sony's marketshare to be successful as they don't take huge losses on consoles or in other areas of the company.

Supermallet
02-11-06, 01:13 PM
With all due respect, this is anectdotal evidence akin to the "most of my friends are more interested in movie A than movie B" comments seen in box office discussion. You may be telling the truth, but it has little relevance on the rest of the gaming world.

Well, considering I spend 40 hours a week working in a video game store, I think it's a little more relevant than "all my friends like movie A more than movie B." This is the video game buying public, pure and simple.



I disagree here as well. I have not seen any "huge buzz" for the Revolution. One, there's literally no games being show. It's specs are underwhelming when compared to the PS3 or Xbox360, so graphically it can't compete. Even though the games matter, the power of a console matters to many gamers and developers, or so it seems. Graphics are talked about more than any aspect on the gaming boards I've been too. I personally see the Revolution dragging up the rear again, and losing market share in the console wars. Looks to me like Nintendo dropped the ball again. I just don't think Nintendo can continue to release underpowered consoles and compete. The fact that the PS3 and Xbox360 will have a head start only makes matters worse for Nintendo.

You clearly haven't heard just about every developer under the sun express intense interest in making games for the Revolution. Again, your view of Nintendo isn't terribly uncommon, which is why I said the Revolution will blindside people. They just aren't expecting it.



I don't know much about this either. I'm sure some gamers love to play those old games. A good game is a good game, no matter what. But when a newer, more powerful consoles come out, how many gamers continue heavily playing their older consoles? Some, but I can't see many. When I bought my Playstation 2, I had absolutely no desire whatsoever to go back to those old, pixelated, blocky games. What do Xbox360 gamers play more of, 360 games or the older backwards compatible Xbox games? Sort of like that expensive toy mom bought you for Christmas that you played for 6 weeks, then moved on to something else. We've all done that. Gamers want to play the latest and greatest games.

As Josh Hinkle mentioned, I'm not saying the virtual console will take out the entire 360. Just that the 360 marketplace arcade will not overshadow Nintendo's virtual console. Which would you rather play, Wik & The Fable of Souls or your choice of Metroid, Zelda, and Mario games?

Outlaw
02-11-06, 01:46 PM
I don't think the PS3 will kill Sony, in fact I think things will stay pretty similar for Sony despite them taking their time, the Playstation brand is still quite a powerful brand, and if Sony can get the PS3 out at $400 it will be popular. Heck, seeing the Metal Gear Solid 4 trailer got me more interested than everything I've seen so far on the 360, though I don't think I can afford a $400 console. Microsoft really shot themselves in the foot with the supply issue, they could have gotten a huge lead, which is one of the biggest reasons they cut the original X-box life short, but no one can walk into a store and buy it, even this long after christmas. As game information PS3 and Revolution info starts to trickle out more people are going to wait and see what the other options are. I think this E3 will be very interesting, hopefully we'll see some playable PS3 games (MGS4!) and I think Nintendo has already stated that the Revolution will finally be revealed, so that means we will be seeing the first games for it.

Ralph Wiggum
02-11-06, 03:51 PM
I'd be stunned if, at a minimum, MS didn't make big gains in NA and Nintendo in Japan.

Michael Corvin
02-11-06, 04:28 PM
I don't know much about this either. I'm sure some gamers love to play those old games. A good game is a good game, no matter what. But when a newer, more powerful consoles come out, how many gamers continue heavily playing their older consoles?

Like Grimfarrow said, look at the DS vs. PSP. the PSP has the power, amazing graphics, and a myraid of other features, yet the less powerful, gameplay friendly DS mops PSP in sales.

A few points:

1. More people come in every day to where I work asking about the PS3 than the 360, and this started when the 360 was first announced. Also, all of these people fully expect the PS3 to be $500, and STILL want to pre-order it on the spot.

Well sure. That's like saying more people go in CompUSA looking for Windows software. When you own 95% of the market that is what you are going to see. Sony has the market, Nintendo has the buzz.


You clearly haven't heard just about every developer under the sun express intense interest in making games for the Revolution. Again, your view of Nintendo isn't terribly uncommon, which is why I said the Revolution will blindside people. They just aren't expecting it.

Exactly. Nearly EVERY major developer is blown away with what Nintendo has and has expressed interest DESPITE having to make a console specific title vs. a port. That is a huge hurdle and it seems the game companies have no issues jumping it. (other than the Duke Nukem and Unreal camps, who haven't actually seen the system) Nintendo needs to take the buzz and turn it into sales.



As Josh Hinkle mentioned, I'm not saying the virtual console will take out the entire 360. Just that the 360 marketplace arcade will not overshadow Nintendo's virtual console. Which would you rather play, Wik & The Fable of Souls or your choice of Metroid, Zelda, and Mario games?

That is what I was getting at. The virtual console won't compete with 360 games, that is just silly. Live Arcade games will compete with Nintendo's, with the possibility of titles like Street Fighter on both systems. With[unconfirmed] numbers like 600,000 Geometry Wars sales the virtual console will be huge this generation. It shows a strong support for gameplay friendly games which is what the Rev. is all about. Like the others mention, Nintendo has a stronger back catalog, but third parties could easily go with Live instead.

The Bus
02-11-06, 05:02 PM
With[unconfirmed] numbers like 600,000 Geometry Wars sales

That would mean everyone with a system has bought a copy. I believe the real number is somewhere north of 60,000, and those are the numbers Bizarre is giving. (http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/01/14/1838236)

Fandango
02-11-06, 06:45 PM
To be honest, Nintendo's handhelds are what's keeping them in the console business, without it I think they would have gone the way of Sega already.

Ralph Wiggum
02-11-06, 07:05 PM
To be honest, Nintendo's handhelds are what's keeping them in the console business, without it I think they would have gone the way of Sega already.

Nintendo made money on the Cube. They just announced they have $10 billion in cash. MS "only" lost ~$4 billion on the Xbox. Nintendo isn't going anywhere for a very, very long time.

Sega, on the other hand, was in the red for years.

Mr. Cinema
02-11-06, 07:56 PM
Like Grimfarrow said, look at the DS vs. PSP. the PSP has the power, amazing graphics, and a myraid of other features, yet the less powerful, gameplay friendly DS mops PSP in sales.

Wouldn't the $120 price difference be a key factor in the sales advantage for the DS? I'm sure little Timmy's parents are more likely to spend $130 on a DS rather than $250 on a PSP. If they were the same price, do you think sales would even out?

Josh H
02-11-06, 09:01 PM
Wouldn't the $120 price difference be a key factor in the sales advantage for the DS? I'm sure little Timmy's parents are more likely to spend $130 on a DS rather than $250 on a PSP. If they were the same price, do you think sales would even out?

And the same will be true with consoles. The 360 is $400 for the premium, the PS3 will be at least that, and all indications are that the Revolution will be no more than $200 in the U.S.

But games have a lot to do with the DS success. Most feel the PSP game library is lacking, and the DS has had killer games over the past year or so, probably more highly reviewed and beloved games than even any of the consoles.

If it's cheaper, and doesn't have the games, it won't sell. Just like the Gamecube was always $100 or so cheaper than the PS2 and X-box and still came in third as it was short on variety in games in a lot of people's opinion.

Decker
02-11-06, 10:03 PM
Wouldn't the $120 price difference be a key factor in the sales advantage for the DS? I'm sure little Timmy's parents are more likely to spend $130 on a DS rather than $250 on a PSP. If they were the same price, do you think sales would even out?
This is an important point. It's not just about price point, though the fact that one is TWICE the price of the other is a concideration. The markets for the two systems is different. The DS has broad appeal, but it's primarily a game system targeted at kids. The PSP is more of a media/gaming gadget that targets much older. The handheld market, by and large is a kid's market so it's no suprise that the DS is the much bigger seller. In fact, I'd have suspected that the PSP would be much more likely to "kill Sony" than the PS3. Still, if the game library improves and the price eventually drops, the PSP, though certainly flawed, still might end up being very sucessful. As I mentioned, I'm curious to see what sort of connectivity to the PS3 we'll end up seeing.

Supermallet
02-12-06, 12:28 AM
The DS is not primarily for kids. It has a range of games for all ages. Granted, it has more kids games than the PSP, but that was almost a given, anyway.

Considering that a good portion of adults rave about their DS systems all the time, including many people on this board, I think it's safe to say that the large sales are not simply due to the price difference.

Superboy
02-12-06, 02:01 AM
I'd like to know why there are SO many people who are cynical about Nintendo.

outer-edge
02-12-06, 03:45 AM
Well, considering I spend 40 hours a week working in a video game store, I think it's a little more relevant than "all my friends like movie A more than movie B." This is the video game buying public, pure and simple.

I've worked in a video game store as well, and more and more, the customers there are becoming less of a market share of video games. Age ranges are changing and gamers are becoming more diverse. I don't think customers of a dedicated store show the true intent of the gaming community as a whole as much as they used to. That said, I won't even speculate if you are right or wrong.

But, along the same lines as I was talking about, I think the desire for a console with great specs matters less to the gaming community whole than to core, long-time gamers. While pretty pictures may help sell a console in store, numbers, data and figures on console power mean increasing less to the growing populace of gamers. It's no longer teenage and college geeks playing games. It's your little/older brothers and sisters, moms and dads, aunts and uncles, and grandparents in some cases. And, what sells to SOME of these people are either the games, or the features, not power. Plus, it is not specs that bring in NEW gamers either.

The more gamers I meet, the more I realize everyone is looking for something different. Maybe it won't be this generation yet, but eventually companies will need to start meeting the needs of this community and go beyond the prettiest pictures or next iteration in a series. Nintendo is starting to do this, but whether or not their approach will work is left to be seen.

sracer
02-12-06, 06:57 AM
I'd like to know why there are SO many people who are cynical about Nintendo.
Because Nintendo doesn't feed propellerheads with hardware specs that make them drool. Because Nintendo doesn't offer the games that these same people think are "must haves". And lastly... because Nintendo is still around even though these same people have annually predicted their demise for the last 8+ years.

They're pissed off that the big "N" has proven them wrong. ;)

huh?
02-12-06, 07:35 AM
The DS has broad appeal, but it's primarily a game system targeted at kids.

Are you on crack? That is not true at all. Nintendo DS has games targeted at every demographic out there, and has more "must play games" than the more "mature" PSP. Do you even own a DS? Or are you too cool?

Back on topic, I think that there is no way that PS3 kills Sony. There is a better chance of the 360 killing MS's video game aspirations. Which isn't going to happen either. So I vote no way. That article was more heresy than anything else.