Each week Ross Rubin contributes Switched On at engadget.com, a column about technology, multimedia, and digital entertainment, and guess what's up this week.
Sony has been under attack real hard for the past 1-2 years. And it is all Sonys fualt. The PS3 with DVD9 would have went over with gamers just fine. And they would have crushed the 360 in one month. The hype lies and rumors and mud sling Sony did to M$ in 2005 just to keep you away was not 360 owners or M$'s fualt it was Sony and the blind public who put Sony where they are today. The PS3 will pick up like crazy when they hit the $400.00 sweet spot but untill then it looks sad. I love PS2 but PS3 is a gamble like rolling dice with out shakin ya hand 1st.
The REAL problem has been the lies. -"PS3 is ready to ship Spring 2006." -"The "Boomerang" design is final- we won't be changing it." -"PS3 will not have a network to compete with Live." -"All launch games will ship in 1080p, running at 120fps." -"PS3 is a supercomputer 2-3x as powerful as 360." -"PS3 will have dual HDMI outputs and accept 7 controllers simultaneously." -"The Killzone demo was real gameplay running in realtime." -"HDMI is critical to the next generation." (before cutting HDMI out of 20gig and cables out of the 60gig) And the lies that continue to this day.... -"Cell is 3x more powerful than 360's processor." -"SIXAXIS doesn't implement rumble because it couldn't be done / too expensive / chose not to implement it." (they still won't own up to losing their lawsuit with Immersion) -"The PS3 is a computer, not a console." (invented only to get around European tax laws if you've missed that battle) ...the only reason MOST people (not all of course) bash PS3 is because of the absolute **** that keeps coming out of the mouths of their execs. If their execs would learn some basic humility, the whole industry would be better off. [As a side note- Downloadable TV shows and movies was promised for Xbox Live when Xbox 360 was first unveiled to the public- it's been an expected feature since a long time before launch. Microsoft didn't "suddenly" release it to combat Sony.]
$400? It will be a long time for this to happen. Sony is already taking a big lost, sooner or later they will need to become profitable and dropping $200 from it would just make things worst. Specially considering that blu-ray and the cell are not even stablished technologies. So, if microsoft is having a hard time reducing production cost on common hardware, one can only imagine how is going to be for Sony when the parts are produced by a small number of manufacturers. i.e. IBM does not need to lower the price on the cell, since Sony can't get it anywhere else. Do the math, why would IBM lower the price or the companies producing blu-ray diodes when the demand is high and there is no competition.
1. CELL was co-developed by IBM, Toshiba and Sony so the pricing is not 100% set by IBM. 3 companies invested billions so in the future they don't have to pay retail for it. Still has to cover manufacturing cost. 2. Blue laser diode. There are only 2 companies in the world manufacturing BL dioe:Nichia and Sony. 3. It is funny when somebody lists a 'delay' of product launch as lie. For example Microsoft has delayed almost every OS in past years. VISTA is late 1 year. Did MS lied? NO they delayed the launch.
...this guy thinks Motorstorm will be the Savior of the PS3. :o
pity party for Sony, ready?... 1,2,3, AWWWWWWW!
Because Sony will gain lots of money if it wins the format war. I mean it is always nice to have more space for games but there is a work around. In the end games must be fun. Playstation is about games, and once they stop the blu-ray talk then all will be well. I hope they learned that from the PSP project. Those disc are like 5 times bigger than the DS disc right. So with the same blu-ray logic the cames should be 5 times better than the DS's games. It's not just about tech and specs. Innovation comes from creativity. M$ has to learn this also. Remember the xbox1 had built-in HDD. 4 controller support, HD capabilities (limited) ,and ethernet. It was the same cost of the PS2. Now this would be like the PS3 being the same price of the 360. Gamers did not care about the xbox1's tech info, they cared about the games. BTW, motostorm looks good. I don't know how it plays though. Okay, back to work.
If you listen to the videogamejocks podcast (episode 16), they explain that they actually attended the event in New York. Their view of the crowd was much different than Ross Rubin's. They explained a crowd that didn't seem too "wow'ed" by what they were experiencing. Don't throw a bunch of sh1t in my face either! This is what they said, not me. Listen for yourself.
PS3 has Blu-ray Media cos its required for a True Nex gen console.DVD9 is so Last Gen.
So what you're saying is Gears of War is NOT next gen? My eyes never lie to me and you do on a regular basis. Who do I believe? Don't get me wrong, Blu Ray has its advantages, but being an integral part of the next gen experience isn't one of them.
gears is next gen. But Gameplay.. HELL NO! lol chumps.. enjoy gears hahah
I just ordered you a brand new shiny safety helmet w/ chin strap! And I just wanted to let you know that I scheduled the short yellow bus to pick you up tomorrow morning at 8:00 a.m.
...is great, but not a system seller. With a larger disc, it might've gotten more than 6 hours of gameplay and all the stuff. The beauty is achieved through lots of normal-mapping techniques and loads of lighting stuff, but if you try to find something polygonally explicit, like water interaction, procedural synthesis or other physics stuff...gears lack all of 'em. Its really next-gen visually but gametime, other-than-art technical stuff and innovation is not the theme of this game. So, its no big deal as a initiator to a person who can't decide what system he should get. A larger disc would certainly have helped !!!
I think it would have been a better strategy if Sony would have released their core version first and later introduced the premium, just to apease the more ignorant. For $100 more you get a blu-ray player and everything the xbox 360 premium offers plus free online gaming. Xbox 360 owners have already reached the $500 price point this year through xbox live($50 a year). So now what are you going to moan about? If anything I would wonder why microsoft's machine costs as much as it does compared to the PS3. Unlike Microsofts core system Sony's core is actually functional and not a waste of money. Since they have implemented the HDMI input there is virtually no reason to go for the premium unless its just personal prefrence. So if you get the Sony core and compare it with the microsoft premium there is nothing to moan about. And again every console loses money they make their money though volume, software, and accessories. And I think Sony has a bit of an advantage over microsoft in experience. Isn't Microsoft still losing money on the 360? I know it seems meaningless because micrsoft has such deep pockets, but how long will this continue? Something has got to give. Let's face it Microsoft is only popular here in the United States while Sony's consoles have popularity around the globe, so that means Sony isn't going anywhere and Microsoft is still playing catch up. There are many reason I choose to spend my money on the ps3 over the 360 some of it has to do with trust and loyalty and the other to do with future potential. However you put my reason are my own just like yours are so stop the bashing especially the fanboys, its aggravating and pointless since you can not form a constructive thought. That goes for Sony and Microsoft.
Because of great games and services. If you start looking at the facts and stop looking for excuses you will find truth. I read your post and you sound like a desperate housewife. And is it bashing if you tell the truth. I think not. Do not turn into a total fan boy.
Microsoft is "popular" because of Sony, and it's all due to PR blunders and Blu-ray (which effected the PS3's price). you argue great games and services in Microsoft's favor: thats arbitrary. 100 million people feel that Sony's more popular for the exact same reasons with the PS2--great games. we can sit here and argue until we're a plethora of different colors in the face, but the fact remains that the PS3's popularity is a reflection of it's $600 price. games have little to do with it either way.
...Right words there my friend, right words. PLUS MS has got no great games, there was only Midtown Madness and planne-simulator for PC, only Ninja Gaiden and Halo 2 the entire 4 years of Xbox and right now after a whole year 360 is having only gears of war, whose 6 hours gameplay time might be good for already owning 360 person, but it ain't a system seller !!!
Man, it’s funny how people only say that GOW is 360’s only good game. I have GRAW, Fight Night 3, Call of Duty 2, Oblivion, Project Gotham Racing, Dead Rising and Splinter Cell, and these games are all great. After reading about the rather lack luster games coming out for the PS3 with no online support and bad frame rate issues, I though fanboys might tone it down. But since you bring up GOW, yes, it is all it’s cracked up to be and graphically better than anything the PS3 is bringing out for a while. That being said, enjoy the choppy games and lack of online. That is only if the developers yet again don’t delay the release (trying to figure out why the games runs so choppy on 1st gen titles) or just out right drop the game outright (NBA Live). Your play that RFOM, cause the lastest word it ain’t groundbreaking and not that spectacular. But on a positive note, you can play this game online, considering you have to create a separate user account from your supposed unified service.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.