The PlayStation 3 is being packed full of
bleeding-edge, next-gen technology. It promises 1080p gaming, HD movies, TiVo functionality,
iTunes-like content distribution, and an Xbox Live-killing online
service. BusinessWeek is running an article titled, "This PlayStation May Play Too Much," covering the fear
that, with a glut of admittedly expensive features, consumers may be intimidated by the PS3. He compares it to a
similarly ambitious Sony project that met just such a fate upon its release: "Exhibit A: the PSX. Released in Japan in 2003, it was designed to appeal to a broader audience than the hard-core gamers attracted to the PS2. It comes with a 250-gigabyte hard drive and a simple Web browser and plays games, movies, and music. But the PSX bombed as consumers were confused by the hybrid and put off by its $800-plus price tag."
There is a fear that the system may prove more popular as a multimedia device, like the PSP, resulting in a lower attach rate for games, then lower licensing income. With the expected cost of the console, that could prove disastrous. "But since the PSP also plays music and movies, fewer people are buying games designed for it. In the PS2's initial year on the market, players bought more than three games for each machine that was shipped. For the PSP, that ratio slipped to 2 to 1."
More reading:
Engadget points out that BusinessWeek's writer reveals that the PS3 "boasts a huge hard disk to store photos, music, and TV shows." Although the bundling of a hard drive has not been announced, it was widely considered to be an optional feature.
BusinessWeek has a companion story about Sony Computer Entertainment chief Ken Kutaragi, titled "Can Sony's Kutaragi Score Big?" It covers his rise to the top of Sony, his subsequent return back to the games division, and what's at stake with the PS3.
[Thanks for all the tips]
_thumbnail.jpg "i am 8-bit: 2008")
(Page 1) Reader Comments
PS2 plays movies and CDs. Xbox also plays Mp3s. Xbox 360 plays all that and more. Did people buy a lot less games for them, and a lot more media? No. The PSP just lacks games, that's all.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
To get it out of the way, I HATE Sony and would LOVE to see them fail! Harrharhahrhar!
But, let's be rational; it's quite obvious that Sony, with it's PlayStation brand, wields the most power in the gaming industry. Spreding themselves too thin, as the article implies, is quite possible I suppose...but I believe there are more factors outside of price + functionality.
I think the PSX comparison isn't very fair. There was the original PS2 that was well known and much cheaper back then. There wasn't much a demand for high end entertainment equipment just a couple years ago either. For those reasons alone it isn't hard to see why it tanked. This time around, there really isn't any other option but to buy into the full deal (assuming Sony doesn't pull a 360 marketing disaster).
I personally think it'll simply come down to sheer entertainment. If Sony has software that is "must have"...they'll push PS3s like crazy. Simple as that.
Reply
I believe m3mnoch made mention of article this a few days ago. It was a good read then, with other supporting articles as well.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Anything over $500, and you're gonna have a tough time with sales after the early adopters. I get the impression Sony is preparing us for a high introductory price or accessories (such as a hard drive) that push the price to new highs.
If the PS3 doesn't sell as well as the PS2, Sony is hurt. And Blu-Ray becames the new betamax.
Nintendo certainly has the right idea. Concentrate on gaming and make it afforadable.
Reply
The PS3 will be very expensive...for Sony to make. They won't pass the entire cost to the consumer though.
Reply
To the average consumer/gamer it doesn't matter what kind of high-end stuff Sony puts in the PS3. Give them some pretty trailers and recognized games such as GTA(regardless if it comes to the Xbox 360 at the same time), MGS, FF, etc. and the PS3 will not be beat.
Reply
Reply
Reply
I hope Sony fails, yes. What have they done for the video game industry? For one, they made gaming relatively more mainstream. Secondly, their marketing has been second to none. Thirdly, they humbled Nintendo and prevented a monopoly(they sure were bad back then weren't they).
None of those I think are anything of note. Very few of their games are exclusive (except when they beg and pay off developers to make it exclusive like GTA).
All this happened during the PS1 and early PS2 era. Now Microsoft has entered the scene. They are playing exactly the same ball. They are a bigger company, and they are a software company. They introduce Xbox Live. Already, they have matched Sony in all their contributions to the industry, and have now surpassed them.
I can't understand Sony fanboys. Except for God of War and ICO/Shadow of the Colossus, Sony has not contributed anything to the gaming industry, other than to provide a platform and charge licensing off of it, which Microsoft is doing as well now. Nintendo continues to set the bar on innovation, and MS has MS Live. What has Sony done? Please, dont give me all the games on the PS2, if they weren't made by Sony it doesn't count.
Reply
1. Gamers - Oviously, and as a bonus you're getting a high def player and a tivo bundled.
2. High Def TV Owners - Here's the cheapest Blu-ray player on the market and you get a Tivo built in if you dont already own one. Games for them are side perks.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Wow, even though this is probably your most intelligent post yet, you still manage to post a rather ignorant claim. "Son(y) have done the hard yards like any other business & have always been synonomous with quality products..." I beg to differ. PS2's were probably the most error prone, flimsy console of this generation and definitely the 2nd pick as far as graphics power. A quick tear-down of the Xbox, Gamecube and PS2 will show you the basic build quality. The Xbox was a tank (both in size and build quality), the GC was small and durable and the PS2 was frail to say the least. I never bought one, so some may call me a fanboy, but I had REASONS not to buy one. Every friend I have that bought a PS2 ended up either with a paperweight, or trading it in for an Xbox. Everyone I know who bought a Gamecube liked it, but it collected a lot of dust due to the lack of titles. The Xbox owners? Happy and still gaming. Everyone has their own experiences, and mine are not indicative of the mass market, but I don't think any informed person would claim the name Sony has always been synonomous with hardware quality, hence why their electronics division is in the red. The best offering I've seen from Sony in a long time is their SXRD displays, which I must admit, look stunning. However just because of the brand name, I've been leery of them. I'll wait another 4-6 months before making my decision and see how they do. But in most electronics divisions, Sony is outclassed by a number of other companies.
As for hoping Sony goes bankrupt, I agree, competition is good and I wouldn't want that to happen. However, I would like to see the race a little more even, so I'd like MS and Nintendo to get more market share. I like to root for the underdogs.
Reply
I'm sure some fanboys will come soon enough barking about how sony is so glorious and awesome because the have all the best games. Don't forget one thing...that's not anything that sony did. If there systems weren't the highest sellers, the games would simply be made for another system.
I think the biggest reason sony has excelled is that they entered the market at a time when Sega was in a downward spiral with the Saturn, and people were tired of the 2D graphics of the SNES. Sony came in and took the market at a point in which they had no competition. The jaguar and 3DO were FLOPS, The saturn was almost an IMMEDIATE failure, and the SNES had been out for 4 years. Sony essentially enjoyed the luxury of being the ONLY system on the market from the time the launched in 1994 until the N64 came out in June of 1996...almost 2 years later. I don't care who made the system If microsoft had come into the picture then and released a console, they'd be in the same position as sony. Or, had the N64 been released in 1994 like it was originally intended to, they wouldn't be in the picture. Nintendo lost almost all of there 3rd party support over that two year span, because gamers were buying up the PSX at the time because it was the first system to produce real, 3D graphics. The quality of the unit was crap, the video outputs broke, and had to be redesigned, the CD drive motor went bad and the console had to be turned upside down, but people had NO OTHER choice for a new console for TWO YEARS. They followed this release with the PS2, and not only had they now established themselves as a big-time console manufacturer, they also once again, released shortly after the almost DOA dreamcast, and once again...for an entire year, it was them...and no one else. The XBOX and Gamecube launched, and they could never catch up...towards the end the XBOX started to see a rise in sales, and this time around for the first time ever, sony will have TRUE competition from other consoles, they've never launched against competition before, this is the exact reason why the industry reign of sony is over. The PS3 has no chance of selling the number of units the PS1 and PS2 had. This is what MS was refering to when they meant "launch first".
Will the PS3 sell? Yes. Will it sell at the same 4:1 ratio as the PS2 and PS1? Hell no. This time around we're going to see alot more even 3rd party support. Capcom already has 2 original 360 exclusives in the works, plus RE5, and the innovation of the revolution will attract almost EVERY developer in the industry to make at least one game for it...most will probably be original titles too.
Reply
Sony, for the love of God, just cut all the shit out of the unit, give me a damned thing that plays games, and don't charge me an arm and a leg. That is the best way to kick Microsoft's ass. Just give me the base unit, hard drive standard, and nothing else, then charge me $300 for it. The 360 won't know what hit it.
Reply
That said though...Condemned looks and sounds like a fun game. Maybe I will cave in if it doesn't show up for the ps3. =D
Reply
Reply
Please somebody throw the Sony case designers out!
Reply
IMO all it takes is a few missteps for a company to fall (not completely, but a fall nonetheless)
...it looks like Sony is making at least a few missteps.
Reply
Reply
Wireless capabilities / online capabilities... relatively cheap to implement. It'll probably cost them like $5... negligable- therefore won't affect price.
So what the f___ are you people worrying about? The price will probably be about the same as the xbox360... it'll probably still be $399. And since they've dragged this on for a while, i would guess it's cheaper to produce the parts now.
Speculations are speculations. Just because you find multiple sources, doesn't mean its true either. Don't be so gullible.
Reply
they just make you look like an idiot who can't form a complete
sentence.>vAs for dsub, as I mentioned above, your opener
says all about your intellectual status..... Sony created PS & all
great games followed... So in actual fact Sony did everything & made
a lot of developers rich & got them more recognition than ever
before... You really show how ignorant you are with
the PS2 comment.Keep trying to slam sony guys.... it just proves your all very interested in their product..... <
No, it proves they think there's a flaw in the product. And *criticising* the PS3 is not the same as slamming the company who makes it.
>And Sony
fanboys....please don't mention obvious facts.. like PS products have
attracted the very best games (& some of te worst)
Reply
Reply
Sony should implement a half-assed BluRay player in PS3, so people will play games instead of watching movies.
Reply
The Playstation 2 has sold about 100 million units. No matter what the competition fan base may say, this is number that can’t be ignored. Sony has had two consecutive successful console generations, and some of their fan base only knows of a gaming system called the “Playstation”.
But isn’t that what this topic is about? Rather than Sony creating a gaming system to fulfill the need of the next generation of gamers, they will be using their well established Sony “Playstation” brand, and large fan base, to capitalize on what the company is well known for; home electronic devices.
Before Sony had invented the Playstation, they were probably best known for their Walkman, Television sets, and CD players. They have always pushed the latest technology in their products, and now that they have taken hold of the gaming community, why not push their latest technology onto them?
The problem is that not everyone wants all the other stuff. Some people just want a gaming system specifically made for gaming, just like how the Ipod is made specifically for listening to music. If it’s going to make the system cost less by excluding all the other stuff, then wouldn’t you agree that most people would be all for that?
I like to think of it like buying a new car. You’re tired of your old one and you’re looking for a new one. You’ll probably give the old one to your little brother. You’ve finally settled down to two cars, one is of a domestic brand and the other is an import.
What you like about the domestic car is that it’s a lot faster than your older one, it looks a whole lot better, has features like 18 inch rims, a sunroof and a navigation system. What is also great about it is that it’s around your budget and uses regular unleaded gasoline.
Then there is the import car. It hasn’t been released here yet but what’s interesting about it is that it has a new technology gas tank that allows you to drive for weeks without refilling; the problem is that it takes premium fuel and due to the large capacity, those fills at the gas station are going to be expensive. The import car has 18 inch “spinner” wheels, a DVD player, and thumping powered subwoofer in the car and they are thinking of having a navigation system and a sunroof because its competitor has it.
Finally, the import arrives at the dealers. It turns out that it’s about as fast as the domestic car. The included navigation system was not as great as the domestic car, and they offered the sunroof as an option. From reviews, the DVD player wasn’t all it was cracked up to be, but the sound system was okay. It finally came down to the cost. The cost of the import car was about $25,000, while the domestic one was $20,000. You end up throwing your budget to the wind and purchase both because you love cars. How did you like that?
Reply
If anyone believes that the PS3 is going to cost $299 at launch, you're delusional. The R&D for the Cell and the blu-ray DVD drive demand a price tag of at least $450. Don't forget the custom GPU being produced by Nvidia and the other components and such. I say $600 easy. Ken Kutaragi is an idiot. He publicly stated that he wants people to want to work overtime so they can afford the PS3. Bite me, I'll work overtime for things that matter, not some game console trying to be high end. Then he looks the consumer in the eye and tells them that he wants them to buy a PSP which is overpriced and buy UMD's for it that are overpriced and have no special features. In order to truly enjoy the great "features" of the PSP you have buy Memory sticks that will eventually cost more than the PSP itself.
Is this an example of great engineering? How is this benefiting the gamer? Sony is putting a lot of tech into the PS3 that the average gamer is going to look at and go "huh?" PS3 can run games at 120FPS? So what? current TV's can't handle it and current HD-TV's can't display it either. PS3 has 7 USB ports. And? Why should we care when 4 player-split is dead in the water anyway? Are we supposed to play 7 player split-screen now? PS3 can output two separate HD signals to two HD-Tvs. So, what? Most people can't afford 1 HD-TV and Sony is charging me to have the tech to output to two of them?
Sony needs to remember what made the PS a success in the first place. The games. PSP would be doing a lot better if it had original developer support instead of constant PS2 ports and garbage. Expect the same treatment for the PS3.
Reply
But now there is Microsoft, and as i have said before, they are playing the same game as Sony. Almost the same marketing, the same market, almost the same hardware.
When the PS1 did well there was no MS, only Nintendo. The Xbox came out a year after the PS2. Now Nintendo looks like they have got their act together, and Microsoft is out of the blocks already. What is there to differentiate between the Xbox and the PS3? The Xbox has Live. What does the PS3 have? Blu Ray? Better graphics? Their online service?(They will try their darnest to try and emulate Live thats for sure) This is exactly what i mean when i say Sony has done basically jack all for this industry other than making it mainstream. If they want to survive to PS4, PS5 and so on, they need to really do more than that, because Microsoft can do everything Sony can, and on the software side they are a league apart.
BTW Katamari is made by Namco i believe. Unless i missed out on the news that Sony acquired Namco, that is not a first party game, although it is true that it is exclusive to the PS2.
Reply
"Another intellect..... If it was nothing sony did, genius... then who made the console.... "
that wasnt his point. from what I gather from his post, his point was that if the games werent made for the playstation, then the developers would have made them for the saturn or the n64. but your right, the playstation was the cheapest and most accessible unit to produce games for. thats why the out sold the saturn, a simular product for a lower price.
"Nintendo were just not willing to evolve into different formats & technologies"
I guess thats why nintendo had sony make the super disc add on for its snes. the project was scrapped but sony modifed the super disc and made the playstation. still nintendos idea though.
"Then MS fanboys (like you) cannot lay claim to halo (bungie) or anything made by rare..."
both companies are microsoft owned, so I dont see your point.
"As for you spartacus....to their smarts & knockers stupidity. "
This is just character assassination with no point or real rebuttal to spartacus's comment.
"They have struggled, spartacus with quality on all fronts recently, as samsung & the likes have forced them to cost cut, moves production to 3rd world countries...."
You should add that these companies accomplished this by makeing good quality products that were either better or as good sonys more expensive offerings. That said your right, its not cool to wish failure on a company. but didnt sony just fire a guy for voiceing his disappointment in the performance of the ps3. recently they also cut thousands of jobs and put many of the very people you mention out of work.
lets see more character assassination. oh " As explained above, until recent years... sony has made some of the best products available" I believe your exact words were They have struggled, spartacus with quality on all fronts recently. you go on to write that you purchased a cheaper set of equal quality, using the same technology, for less from samsung. nuff said
"You really show how ignorant you are with the PS2 comment... look at all the probelms with 360's mate, no different"
Big difference actually. not only were the problems not as widespread (less than 10%) but microsoft fixes the problems. even if the warranty is out. Thats called standing behind your product buddy. Sony had to be threated with a class action lawsuit before they did anything about the very widespread problems. your own post says that " a few million". At the time, I dont think that many units were defective but the fact stands that about 35 percent of the early ps2 would give dics read errors and eventually crap out. and thats not even mentioning the silver slim ps2. I understand that your experience with the ps2 was a good one. Probably because you live an australia and didnt get one of the first ps2s. but thats just my assumption.
I like what the ps3 is suppose to offer. my bet is that it will outsell but be on par with the 360.
Try to respond without makeing personal attacks
Reply
Reply
WHO CARES?? Buy the one you like. Both have multi-media cababilites, both feature stunning HD graphics, and both play games. I find it hilarious that people who like one system or the other will go out of their way to try and put the other down.
Being a consumer today is about choice. If you like PS3 buy a PS3. If you're an XBox person, then by all means buy a 360. To be arguing over which console is supreme, well.... you guys need a girlfriend in the worst way...lol...NERRRDS
Reply
Reply
http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/2006/20060210.jpg
Reply
look it up, there is a clear difference between sold and shipped.
people could have bought a ps2, had it repaired, refurbished, or simply had another one shipped out. my friend did that 3 times actually. does not mean he bought it three times.
if sony is trying to impress me with numbers they have failed. when 360 drops when ps3 is released (which is when by the way) is the perfect time to buy. and since revolution won't break my wallet either those are the two im going to go for.
think about it, anything good sony produces is bound to end up in ports to either of those two. think GTA3 when it came to xbox.
btw, if anybody else read that "hands on", theyn also staterd something along the lines that the final box will be bigger.
"I think to fit everything that Sony wants in there AND leave space for a 2.5 inch hard drive," explains one senior developer working on a final kit, who will be our guide for much of this report, "the machine would have to grow. The models they're showing off are way too small for what they want."
bigger? where will i fit it? oh thats right, next to my desktop computer. which one is which again?
Reply
>Whats wrong with 1st party & inhouse titles like god of war, mark of kri, primal, ghosthunter,we love katamari, siren, rise of kasai, twisted metal, GT, war of the monsters, WRC, Killzone, socom, jet x20, kinetica, rise of honor, the getaway, ratchet & clank, jak & daxter, I-ninja, shadow of the collossus, ico, atv offroad fury & the ones I forgot like singstar, eyetoy & whatever else. Now lets mention a few exclusive 3rd party titles (do you even know the difference between 1st party & 3rd?),<
Do you? WLK is a Namco game. I-Ninja was made by Argonaut and Published by Namco. The Jak and Ratchet series were both only published by Sony. ATV was made by a THQ subsidiary.
1st party: Made by the company who makes the console. 3rd party: made by anyone else.
>Then theres the ones that might not even be around if it weren't for sony's 2 consoles like, ssx, burnout, tony hawk, tomb raider, vigilante 8, driver & the lsit goes on..<
Tomb Raider was tri-released for the PC, PSX, and Saturn.
>And strider, your another person that misconstrues things..... I don't believe even your quote says that ken said "YOU WILL HAVE TO WORK OVERTIME TO AFFORD IT", he simply says that he want's people to think that... In other words he want's people to think the product is worth owning.....<
Wait, what? In what bizarro universe did *you* learn reading comprehension?
>Yes & sony put all the money into it's development, only for nintendo to want most of the returns... when sony said fuk that.. nintendo went behind their back & had meetings with panasonic or someone. Nintendo's own greed & not wanting to let go of their own catridge proprietry, that they were ripping developers off to use, is what got them to this stage.<
Your beloved Sony ripped off Nintendo's analog sticks for the PSX. After ripping off the SNES controller, that is. You do realize that Sony wanted a quarter of Nintendo's profits on the add-on, which is why Nintendo broke off, right? You do know the add on was going to be called the PlayStation, right? You do know that since it was Nintendo's console, they were fully justified in seeking the lowest cost, best alternative, a good business practice, right? No? You didn't? Really?
>MS found that sony were no pushover like sega & dropped xbox1 like a hot rock after a billion loss & 360 launched. <
Microsoft knew, going in, that they would be losing money. They were planning for a new console from the beginning.
I find it amusing that you're faulting Microsoft for creating a new console for the sixth generation, and pushing it. Gee, what, pray tell, should they do? Keep the XBox for another five years while the PS3 and Rev walk all over them in big stompy boots?
>I get your point, but comon, companies like namco may as well be owned by sony, as all there best titles come to sony & the rest get the dreggs.<
Best third party titles, yes.
>Sorry ozy, your points thereafter are of little sense, read some forums from disgruntles 360 owners who have had problematic consoles replaced with re-worked consoles that had the same problem supposedly fixed & had to do it all over again.<
Also known as a "standard console launch". This stuff happens every time a system launches. Even the early PS2s kept reporting Disc Read Errors. And it wasn't your aforementioned "small percentage". The lawsuit is expected to reach court this summer. Point?
>As for your 360 comment that they fix them even when out of warranty.... you an idiot... how can this be?
Isn't the warranty 1 yr (12mths), not the end of the yr you bought it....... It's only been out for fukkin 4mths in the US..... So how do they honor warranty after its expired when the product has not been in marekt for the warranty expiration time.<
I also like how you continue to spell in the fashion to best make yourself look like an idiot.
Reply
Reply
Don't people like him realize that not only are they making themselves look bad, but the product they adore as well. Who wants to be associated with lunatics?
I'm sure the PS3 will have some great games found nowhere else, but there is no need to start swearing and calling people names just because you are insecure about the competition. None of the big three are going anywhere for a while, and all three next-gen systems will have amazing exclusives.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Posted at 6:07PM on Feb 10th 2006 by aparrish 0 stars"
Don't listen to the wannabe wine drinkers. Reds are drunk at "european" room temp, which is typically around 65 farenheit. so, yes- you do chill red wine when in warmer environments. AMATEURS!
Reply