Is Sony's PS3 Really a Sinking Ship?
- Thread starter oasisboy
- Start date
- Status
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='pochaccoheaven']that decrease in ps3 sales may mean a migration of ps3 owners to 360 owners or ps3 owners buying 360.[/QUOTE]
I'm going to go with "people weren't willing to spend $500-600 on a console when the economy was good, and they sure as
aren't willing to spend $400-500 two years later with the shittiest economy since the great depression" for $100, Alex.
[quote name='thrustbucket']He started it!!! :lol:
No, really, it's just that whenever bluray enters the discussion (and with the PS3 it has to) and someone doesn't kneel down before it and suck it's big blu cock as the replacement for DVD for the next 10 years, people accuse you of having shrines to Toshiba in your basement and HD DVD logos tattooed on your ass, apparently.[/QUOTE]
Well, to be fair, you *were* one of the folks I remember from the great old HD/BD battles of yore, so he's not technically *incorrect*.
BD is an interesting point for gaming, not from a movies standpoint, but looking forward. Will the next gen (and let's be fair, we'll be seeing early information on the next Xbox within the next 12 months if they want it out in 2010/2011) try to go digital only? Will they try to stick with DVD? Or will they shoot for their own proprietary format? I'm not capable of saying. But going with BD technology is absolutely an option that is on the table for all three. Sony, undoubtedly. I'm curious to see how it turns out for MS; now, I'm not interested in companies going out of business or staying in business - and Sony means more to me as a company that makes games than as a company with massive quarterly profits. But they may end up with a victory of sorts if BD is adopted as a format for the next generation of consoles. And I don't think there's a very convincing reason, for me, why it shouldn't be.
Unless you favor digital only; which should be reserved for game publishers and those who fervently hate, hate, hate gamestop.
I'm going to go with "people weren't willing to spend $500-600 on a console when the economy was good, and they sure as
aren't willing to spend $400-500 two years later with the shittiest economy since the great depression" for $100, Alex.[quote name='thrustbucket']He started it!!! :lol:
No, really, it's just that whenever bluray enters the discussion (and with the PS3 it has to) and someone doesn't kneel down before it and suck it's big blu cock as the replacement for DVD for the next 10 years, people accuse you of having shrines to Toshiba in your basement and HD DVD logos tattooed on your ass, apparently.[/QUOTE]
Well, to be fair, you *were* one of the folks I remember from the great old HD/BD battles of yore, so he's not technically *incorrect*.
BD is an interesting point for gaming, not from a movies standpoint, but looking forward. Will the next gen (and let's be fair, we'll be seeing early information on the next Xbox within the next 12 months if they want it out in 2010/2011) try to go digital only? Will they try to stick with DVD? Or will they shoot for their own proprietary format? I'm not capable of saying. But going with BD technology is absolutely an option that is on the table for all three. Sony, undoubtedly. I'm curious to see how it turns out for MS; now, I'm not interested in companies going out of business or staying in business - and Sony means more to me as a company that makes games than as a company with massive quarterly profits. But they may end up with a victory of sorts if BD is adopted as a format for the next generation of consoles. And I don't think there's a very convincing reason, for me, why it shouldn't be.
Unless you favor digital only; which should be reserved for game publishers and those who fervently hate, hate, hate gamestop.
HeadRusch
CAGiversary!
[quote name='Teh Nitwit']Both are standard def. It means that consumers are not very interested in graphics in video games.
[/QUOTE]
No, it means that children and old people are not particularly interested in graphics in videogames. These are, oddly enough, the same groups of people who buy 1-2 games a year, tops. To a software development group this is anathema.
Unlikely they will be "sufficient" for the next 2 years, forget the next 10. The systems are essentially tapped out at 720p resolution with limited AA and visual effects available. While games still look good, anyone who owns a 1080p television or projector is already seeing a softened, scaled image because fixed-pixel displays never look their best unless they are being fed their native resolution. Scaling hurts, no matter where its happening in the video chain.
Absurd statement, flat out absurd.
You sir, are nuts. The original xbox was all licensed hardware and microsoft dropped it because it was unprofitable. Rumors suggest the 360 was fast-tracked to production NOT to get a jump on Sony, but to get a jump on discontinuing the unprofitable xbox systems. In the end, nobody was really broken up that the xbox died so quickly.
Xbox 360 will get shrunken down and will remain for sale the same way the PS2 continues to make money, with a substantial game library available for it it wont compete with any new microsoft product that is pushing 1080p/60 with a likely BD drive available for movie viewing. This will be the go-to system to buy when you finally can't stand looking at PS2 SD graphics on your 47" 1080p set anymore.
But nobody will own a PS3 as a BD player because Sony wont have the PS3 into the $200 range anytime in the forseeable future, and guess what..BD drives are already less than $200. By this time next year they'll be $99 or less.
The PS3 is going to have to do something it hasn't had to do in the past 2 years of its existance: Survive in the market as a game machine and only as a game machine, and frankly...KZ2, GOW3 and GT5 "due for release in 2011" ain't gonna cut it.
LBP, Ratchet and Clank, and other cute "Are these people mixing Booze and Prescription Painkillers again?" game decisions that Sony is relying on (or short-changing licenses by making them downloadble or multiplayer-only games) are only digging its hole
deeper.
Nintendo wont release a HD version of the Wii until their customer base demands it. Since their customer base is largely young children and non-gamer relatives, I think there wont be much incentive for them to do that in the short term.
But If and when they do, you can rest assured that there will be millions upon millions of people lining up to buy this device with a new MARIO or KART game to play on it......
You are, quite possibly, the most out of touch poster I've yet read in this thread
[/QUOTE]
No, it means that children and old people are not particularly interested in graphics in videogames. These are, oddly enough, the same groups of people who buy 1-2 games a year, tops. To a software development group this is anathema.
Unlikely they will be "sufficient" for the next 2 years, forget the next 10. The systems are essentially tapped out at 720p resolution with limited AA and visual effects available. While games still look good, anyone who owns a 1080p television or projector is already seeing a softened, scaled image because fixed-pixel displays never look their best unless they are being fed their native resolution. Scaling hurts, no matter where its happening in the video chain.
Absurd statement, flat out absurd.
You sir, are nuts. The original xbox was all licensed hardware and microsoft dropped it because it was unprofitable. Rumors suggest the 360 was fast-tracked to production NOT to get a jump on Sony, but to get a jump on discontinuing the unprofitable xbox systems. In the end, nobody was really broken up that the xbox died so quickly.
Xbox 360 will get shrunken down and will remain for sale the same way the PS2 continues to make money, with a substantial game library available for it it wont compete with any new microsoft product that is pushing 1080p/60 with a likely BD drive available for movie viewing. This will be the go-to system to buy when you finally can't stand looking at PS2 SD graphics on your 47" 1080p set anymore.
But nobody will own a PS3 as a BD player because Sony wont have the PS3 into the $200 range anytime in the forseeable future, and guess what..BD drives are already less than $200. By this time next year they'll be $99 or less.
The PS3 is going to have to do something it hasn't had to do in the past 2 years of its existance: Survive in the market as a game machine and only as a game machine, and frankly...KZ2, GOW3 and GT5 "due for release in 2011" ain't gonna cut it.
LBP, Ratchet and Clank, and other cute "Are these people mixing Booze and Prescription Painkillers again?" game decisions that Sony is relying on (or short-changing licenses by making them downloadble or multiplayer-only games) are only digging its hole
deeper.
Nintendo wont release a HD version of the Wii until their customer base demands it. Since their customer base is largely young children and non-gamer relatives, I think there wont be much incentive for them to do that in the short term.
But If and when they do, you can rest assured that there will be millions upon millions of people lining up to buy this device with a new MARIO or KART game to play on it......
You are, quite possibly, the most out of touch poster I've yet read in this thread
Teh Nitwit
CAGiversary!
[quote name='thrustbucket']Lol. Ok. As I continue to collect Blu-Ray titles..... 
As an AVser, I want the highest quality HD for the money. Anyone watching technology close enough would agree with what I said. As a Blu-Ray/Sony fanboy, of course you wouldn't like them writings on the walls.
It's funny that you can't invalidate anything I say or argue against it, you just flat out don't like it and have to stereotype me because of it. But alas, I remember where I am posting....[/quote]
It's not that couldn't argue against what you were saying. It's that I believed your claims were so ridiculous, that it wasn't worth the effort. For one thing, there are plenty of people who are hddvd fanboys and still collect blurays. One does not preclude the other. hddvd fanboys are those who sided with toshiba and were hoping that hddvd would win (and are bitter about its loss). You seem to harbor a strong dislike of Sony and preach doom and gloom about bluray. The notion that DD will overtake bluray (in any timeframe that matters) is laughable and you believing it is only supports my suspicions about you.
As an AVser, I want the highest quality HD for the money. Anyone watching technology close enough would agree with what I said. As a Blu-Ray/Sony fanboy, of course you wouldn't like them writings on the walls.
It's funny that you can't invalidate anything I say or argue against it, you just flat out don't like it and have to stereotype me because of it. But alas, I remember where I am posting....[/quote]
It's not that couldn't argue against what you were saying. It's that I believed your claims were so ridiculous, that it wasn't worth the effort. For one thing, there are plenty of people who are hddvd fanboys and still collect blurays. One does not preclude the other. hddvd fanboys are those who sided with toshiba and were hoping that hddvd would win (and are bitter about its loss). You seem to harbor a strong dislike of Sony and preach doom and gloom about bluray. The notion that DD will overtake bluray (in any timeframe that matters) is laughable and you believing it is only supports my suspicions about you.
thrustbucket
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 7 (100%)
[quote name='mykevermin']
Well, to be fair, you *were* one of the folks I remember from the great old HD/BD battles of yore, so he's not technically *incorrect*.[/quote]
Your memory serves you well. You are correct. It's just that since then I have adopted a PS3 and now I support blu-ray. So for the price of my soul () I think I should be allowed to have an opinion on HD movies without being accused of wanting a format I now support to fail.
All of what you just said is just as interesting to me as the console wars.
When HD DVD came out, and then Blu Ray, I actually never really felt it mattered a whole lot which one actually "won" the war, because I ultimately felt, and still do, that they are both going to be far more transient than it's predecessors. So I scoff a little when anyone makes statements like "Blu-Ray is here stay".
As you allude to above, the entire reason Microsoft is in this console war to begin with was because they saw over ten years ago that the next big battle was going to be for convergent devices in the living room, which Sony was moving towards unanswered. It's going to be very interesting to see how they answer blu ray in the next console. My bets are on they will never support blu-ray, which makes it all the more interesting. Is that suicide? Will that leave them behind? Or do they have something huge up their sleeve that will make people forget blu-ray?
Anywho, the next gen battle, imo, is going to be far more interesting for this reason. Especially since even in Sony's next console they absolutely need to continue to put all their might behind supporting blu-ray.
I think this whole discussion is relevant to this thread because it's important to point out that Sony truly placed all bets on Blu-Ray replacing DVD and repeating the PS2 trojan horse effect. Unlike Microsoft, or even Toshiba, Sony needs Blu-Ray to be relavent far more than anyone needed HD DVD to be. And that need has defined much of their choices in the PS3 and it's marketing.
Well, to be fair, you *were* one of the folks I remember from the great old HD/BD battles of yore, so he's not technically *incorrect*.
[/quote]Your memory serves you well. You are correct. It's just that since then I have adopted a PS3 and now I support blu-ray. So for the price of my soul (
) I think I should be allowed to have an opinion on HD movies without being accused of wanting a format I now support to fail.BD is an interesting point for gaming, not from a movies standpoint, but looking forward. Will the next gen (and let's be fair, we'll be seeing early information on the next Xbox within the next 12 months if they want it out in 2010/2011) try to go digital only? Will they try to stick with DVD? Or will they shoot for their own proprietary format? I'm not capable of saying. But going with BD technology is absolutely an option that is on the table for all three. Sony, undoubtedly. I'm curious to see how it turns out for MS; now, I'm not interested in companies going out of business or staying in business - and Sony means more to me as a company that makes games than as a company with massive quarterly profits. But they may end up with a victory of sorts if BD is adopted as a format for the next generation of consoles. And I don't think there's a very convincing reason, for me, why it shouldn't be.
Unless you favor digital only; which should be reserved for game publishers and those who fervently hate, hate, hate gamestop.
All of what you just said is just as interesting to me as the console wars.
When HD DVD came out, and then Blu Ray, I actually never really felt it mattered a whole lot which one actually "won" the war, because I ultimately felt, and still do, that they are both going to be far more transient than it's predecessors. So I scoff a little when anyone makes statements like "Blu-Ray is here stay".
As you allude to above, the entire reason Microsoft is in this console war to begin with was because they saw over ten years ago that the next big battle was going to be for convergent devices in the living room, which Sony was moving towards unanswered. It's going to be very interesting to see how they answer blu ray in the next console. My bets are on they will never support blu-ray, which makes it all the more interesting. Is that suicide? Will that leave them behind? Or do they have something huge up their sleeve that will make people forget blu-ray?
Anywho, the next gen battle, imo, is going to be far more interesting for this reason. Especially since even in Sony's next console they absolutely need to continue to put all their might behind supporting blu-ray.
I think this whole discussion is relevant to this thread because it's important to point out that Sony truly placed all bets on Blu-Ray replacing DVD and repeating the PS2 trojan horse effect. Unlike Microsoft, or even Toshiba, Sony needs Blu-Ray to be relavent far more than anyone needed HD DVD to be. And that need has defined much of their choices in the PS3 and it's marketing.
crystalklear64
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 7 (100%)
I like DVDs.
Teh Nitwit
CAGiversary!
[quote name='HeadRusch']
You are, quite possibly, the most out of touch poster I've yet read in this thread[/quote]
Could be. But I am not convinced by your arguments. We'll see. Ultimately, I wouldn't really mind being wrong. If xbox3 is reliable and has games I'm interested in then I will get it. Actually, I guess I was wrong about my predictions about xbox3. If it has xbox2 BC, then it would be very successful.
You are, quite possibly, the most out of touch poster I've yet read in this thread
[/quote]Could be. But I am not convinced by your arguments. We'll see. Ultimately, I wouldn't really mind being wrong. If xbox3 is reliable and has games I'm interested in then I will get it. Actually, I guess I was wrong about my predictions about xbox3. If it has xbox2 BC, then it would be very successful.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
Yup. MS needs to be concerned with the profitability of their consoles and games.
Sony needs to be concerned with that *and* make Blu-Ray the de facto standard for at least the next 5 years.
Their console efforts have shown that they are spreading their resources thin. And their marketing of the console, I argue, has been shit except for the few months they had the commericals with that awful Saliva "Ladies and Gentlemen" song. The moving videos on peoples' bodies stuff I've seen lately sucks my balls. I'm not a marketer, but could shit out a better ad campaign than that.
Sony needs to be concerned with that *and* make Blu-Ray the de facto standard for at least the next 5 years.
Their console efforts have shown that they are spreading their resources thin. And their marketing of the console, I argue, has been shit except for the few months they had the commericals with that awful Saliva "Ladies and Gentlemen" song. The moving videos on peoples' bodies stuff I've seen lately sucks my balls. I'm not a marketer, but could shit out a better ad campaign than that.
HowStern
CAGiversary!
The japan PS3 ads are even weirder.
http://www.psbeyond.com/news/Culture-Shock-Japanese-PS3-ads.1013.html
http://www.psbeyond.com/news/Culture-Shock-Japanese-PS3-ads.1013.html
HeadRusch
CAGiversary!
Sonys only hope for making the BD the standard is if DVD goes away. The chances of that happening in the next 3-5 years are..............remote would be an understatement of the highest order.
But see, it can't just stop there....Sony then needs for everyone who has built up a DVD library to now begin to convert that DVD library to BluRay. What are the odds that that will happen? Essentially zero when you are talking about mom and pops.
Plus now with Netflix and Blockbuster firmly established in the US zeitgeist, renting is a MUCh more plausable option than re-buying, which dooms Sonys format.
Sky high pricing doesn't help...most people wont buy a DVD until it hits $9.99 or less. You think these folks are going to pony up $23 to $35 bucks for a BD? Shinizzit no they wont.
So, Sony has one huge uphill battle. They'll eventually reach the top since its likely no new competing formats will take the place of blu ray discs, but a long, gradual climb will cripple the companies hopes because it gives time for that dreaded word...Digital Distribution...to perfect itself and change the worlds thinking on "building up an army of skinny plastic discs".
But see, it can't just stop there....Sony then needs for everyone who has built up a DVD library to now begin to convert that DVD library to BluRay. What are the odds that that will happen? Essentially zero when you are talking about mom and pops.
Plus now with Netflix and Blockbuster firmly established in the US zeitgeist, renting is a MUCh more plausable option than re-buying, which dooms Sonys format.
Sky high pricing doesn't help...most people wont buy a DVD until it hits $9.99 or less. You think these folks are going to pony up $23 to $35 bucks for a BD? Shinizzit no they wont.
So, Sony has one huge uphill battle. They'll eventually reach the top since its likely no new competing formats will take the place of blu ray discs, but a long, gradual climb will cripple the companies hopes because it gives time for that dreaded word...Digital Distribution...to perfect itself and change the worlds thinking on "building up an army of skinny plastic discs".
[quote name='HeadRusch']Hows about we wait to see the game in real-time motion, where you're sitting 5 feet from a 720p image to judge...and not use obviously super-high-rez renders with gobs of AA applied. I can't tell if any of those scenes are in game or from cutscenes. Uncharted for the PS3 looked good....but it didn't look as good as its screenshots when viewed up close and personal.[/QUOTE]
Really, Uncharted looked just as good as its screenshots, show me an old Uncharted screenshot that didn't accurately represent the way the game looked upon release. Look at the screenshots closely, there's some jaggies, its not perfect.
Really, Uncharted looked just as good as its screenshots, show me an old Uncharted screenshot that didn't accurately represent the way the game looked upon release. Look at the screenshots closely, there's some jaggies, its not perfect.
HowStern
CAGiversary!
[quote name='HeadRusch']Sonys only hope for making the BD the standard is if DVD goes away. The chances of that happening in the next 3-5 years are..............remote would be an understatement of the highest order.
But see, it can't just stop there....Sony then needs for everyone who has built up a DVD library to now begin to convert that DVD library to BluRay. What are the odds that that will happen? Essentially zero when you are talking about mom and pops.
Plus now with Netflix and Blockbuster firmly established in the US zeitgeist, renting is a MUCh more plausable option than re-buying, which dooms Sonys format.
Sky high pricing doesn't help...most people wont buy a DVD until it hits $9.99 or less. You think these folks are going to pony up $23 to $35 bucks for a BD? Shinizzit no they wont.
So, Sony has one huge uphill battle. They'll eventually reach the top since its likely no new competing formats will take the place of blu ray discs, but a long, gradual climb will cripple the companies hopes because it gives time for that dreaded word...Digital Distribution...to perfect itself and change the worlds thinking on "building up an army of skinny plastic discs".[/quote]
lolwut. Why would people need to replace their dvds? Blu-ray players will upconvert them. Sort of like the dvd/vhs combos they still sell. There's room for both.
digital distribution will fail terribly in the U.S. because of the snail speed internet. look at the U.S. internet speed compared to the UK or Japan or China.
Not to mention if you're HDD dies, everything you own is gone.
But see, it can't just stop there....Sony then needs for everyone who has built up a DVD library to now begin to convert that DVD library to BluRay. What are the odds that that will happen? Essentially zero when you are talking about mom and pops.
Plus now with Netflix and Blockbuster firmly established in the US zeitgeist, renting is a MUCh more plausable option than re-buying, which dooms Sonys format.
Sky high pricing doesn't help...most people wont buy a DVD until it hits $9.99 or less. You think these folks are going to pony up $23 to $35 bucks for a BD? Shinizzit no they wont.
So, Sony has one huge uphill battle. They'll eventually reach the top since its likely no new competing formats will take the place of blu ray discs, but a long, gradual climb will cripple the companies hopes because it gives time for that dreaded word...Digital Distribution...to perfect itself and change the worlds thinking on "building up an army of skinny plastic discs".[/quote]
lolwut. Why would people need to replace their dvds? Blu-ray players will upconvert them. Sort of like the dvd/vhs combos they still sell. There's room for both.
digital distribution will fail terribly in the U.S. because of the snail speed internet. look at the U.S. internet speed compared to the UK or Japan or China.
Not to mention if you're HDD dies, everything you own is gone.
[quote name='HeadRusch']Sonys only hope for making the BD the standard is if DVD goes away. The chances of that happening in the next 3-5 years are..............remote would be an understatement of the highest order.
But see, it can't just stop there....Sony then needs for everyone who has built up a DVD library to now begin to convert that DVD library to BluRay. What are the odds that that will happen? Essentially zero when you are talking about mom and pops.
Plus now with Netflix and Blockbuster firmly established in the US zeitgeist, renting is a MUCh more plausable option than re-buying, which dooms Sonys format.
Sky high pricing doesn't help...most people wont buy a DVD until it hits $9.99 or less. You think these folks are going to pony up $23 to $35 bucks for a BD? Shinizzit no they wont.
So, Sony has one huge uphill battle. They'll eventually reach the top since its likely no new competing formats will take the place of blu ray discs, but a long, gradual climb will cripple the companies hopes because it gives time for that dreaded word...Digital Distribution...to perfect itself and change the worlds thinking on "building up an army of skinny plastic discs".[/QUOTE]
Blu Ray may become the standard one day, but its going to take time and more BIG movies like Batman The Dark Knight. 25% of Batman TDK sales were on blu Ray (600,000) when the movie costs around 24.99 - 29.99, I figure once Blu Ray can come down in price, then the market may accept them as the new standard. The new blu rays do have a digital copy, so there's an incentive for owning the hard copy.
But see, it can't just stop there....Sony then needs for everyone who has built up a DVD library to now begin to convert that DVD library to BluRay. What are the odds that that will happen? Essentially zero when you are talking about mom and pops.
Plus now with Netflix and Blockbuster firmly established in the US zeitgeist, renting is a MUCh more plausable option than re-buying, which dooms Sonys format.
Sky high pricing doesn't help...most people wont buy a DVD until it hits $9.99 or less. You think these folks are going to pony up $23 to $35 bucks for a BD? Shinizzit no they wont.
So, Sony has one huge uphill battle. They'll eventually reach the top since its likely no new competing formats will take the place of blu ray discs, but a long, gradual climb will cripple the companies hopes because it gives time for that dreaded word...Digital Distribution...to perfect itself and change the worlds thinking on "building up an army of skinny plastic discs".[/QUOTE]
Blu Ray may become the standard one day, but its going to take time and more BIG movies like Batman The Dark Knight. 25% of Batman TDK sales were on blu Ray (600,000) when the movie costs around 24.99 - 29.99, I figure once Blu Ray can come down in price, then the market may accept them as the new standard. The new blu rays do have a digital copy, so there's an incentive for owning the hard copy.
HeadRusch
CAGiversary!
[quote name='HowStern']lolwut. Why would people need to replace their dvds? Blu-ray players will upconvert them. Sort of like the dvd/vhs combos they still sell. There's room for both.
[/QUOTE]
Uh, there wasn't room for VHS and DVD was there...? There wont be room for DVD and BD.
Well, I take that back..there will be room for both. And if there is room for both, Sony has failed.
Sony is counting on the world switching to BD as their primary format, so they can make licensing cash up the wazoo.
Now based on your statement above, if people are happy with upconverted DVD's...they wont be re-buying films on BluRay.....which means, Sony wont Makey The Sale. Fail.
Its 2008.
6 years ago the average High Speed connection was 2mbit. In 2006 it was 4mbit. Today in 2008 its somewhere between 6 and 12mbit. In another 3-5 years it will likely be somewhere in the 16-40mbit range.
Considering you can get HD delivered even over a standard copper cable connection today via CableTV, and get streamed HD to your set using that same 4mbit connection (albeit at 720p highly compressed), I wonder what having 6-12 times the bandwidth will allow...
The only thing holding back Digital Distribution is really availability of content, and changing the minds of people who want to "own shit". In an economic recession, people realize that buying BD's or even DVD's is stupid....just rent it for 4 bucks. Unless you're buying some film that your kids are going to wear out in 6 months cuz they watch it every 3 days...why do you need the disc? I like having discs, but if I knew that I could, say, watch Forbidden Planet or Battlestar Galactica reruns at the drop of a hat by going online? Why would I buy a disc for $20 if the rentals were $2 bucks a viewing?
Who says you're keeping them digitally....who said its a hard drive...maybe its solid state, or some other temporary storage format.....Digital Distribution could mean sending it to a hard drive device or it could simply mean sending it to a flash-drive based system that will get over-written the next time you download something......
The longer it takes for BD to ramp up, the less chance it has to succeed overall. The economy is going to hurt it badly....when rentals are an option over buying.
[/QUOTE]
Uh, there wasn't room for VHS and DVD was there...? There wont be room for DVD and BD.
Well, I take that back..there will be room for both. And if there is room for both, Sony has failed.
Sony is counting on the world switching to BD as their primary format, so they can make licensing cash up the wazoo.
Now based on your statement above, if people are happy with upconverted DVD's...they wont be re-buying films on BluRay.....which means, Sony wont Makey The Sale. Fail.
Its 2008.
6 years ago the average High Speed connection was 2mbit. In 2006 it was 4mbit. Today in 2008 its somewhere between 6 and 12mbit. In another 3-5 years it will likely be somewhere in the 16-40mbit range.
Considering you can get HD delivered even over a standard copper cable connection today via CableTV, and get streamed HD to your set using that same 4mbit connection (albeit at 720p highly compressed), I wonder what having 6-12 times the bandwidth will allow...
The only thing holding back Digital Distribution is really availability of content, and changing the minds of people who want to "own shit". In an economic recession, people realize that buying BD's or even DVD's is stupid....just rent it for 4 bucks. Unless you're buying some film that your kids are going to wear out in 6 months cuz they watch it every 3 days...why do you need the disc? I like having discs, but if I knew that I could, say, watch Forbidden Planet or Battlestar Galactica reruns at the drop of a hat by going online? Why would I buy a disc for $20 if the rentals were $2 bucks a viewing?
Who says you're keeping them digitally....who said its a hard drive...maybe its solid state, or some other temporary storage format.....Digital Distribution could mean sending it to a hard drive device or it could simply mean sending it to a flash-drive based system that will get over-written the next time you download something......
The longer it takes for BD to ramp up, the less chance it has to succeed overall. The economy is going to hurt it badly....when rentals are an option over buying.
HeadRusch
CAGiversary!
[quote name='Thomas96']Blu Ray may become the standard one day, but its going to take time and more BIG movies like Batman The Dark Knight. 25% of Batman TDK sales were on blu Ray (600,000) when the movie costs around 24.99 - 29.99, I figure once Blu Ray can come down in price, then the market may accept them as the new standard. The new blu rays do have a digital copy, so there's an incentive for owning the hard copy.[/QUOTE]
Thing is, Batman TDK is like the biggest film in many years....how often does a movie like this come out, once a year maybe? More like once every 3 or 4 years does a movie hit this big. LOTR...The Matrix...stand out films, not IRobot or IAmLegend (sorry Will)..these are good films, but not ones that necessarily move 500,000 copies in sales to end users (and not selling 10,000 copies to NetFlix to rent out).
I agree, if BD comes down in price then more people will buy in...because in this country we want to own stuff. We buy big cars and big houses to hold lots of shit that we accumulate....but thanks to our economy that may shift. In the 70's we went small....smaller cars, we went from houses to condos, we downsized.....that could very easily happen again.
Thing is, Batman TDK is like the biggest film in many years....how often does a movie like this come out, once a year maybe? More like once every 3 or 4 years does a movie hit this big. LOTR...The Matrix...stand out films, not IRobot or IAmLegend (sorry Will)..these are good films, but not ones that necessarily move 500,000 copies in sales to end users (and not selling 10,000 copies to NetFlix to rent out).
I agree, if BD comes down in price then more people will buy in...because in this country we want to own stuff. We buy big cars and big houses to hold lots of shit that we accumulate....but thanks to our economy that may shift. In the 70's we went small....smaller cars, we went from houses to condos, we downsized.....that could very easily happen again.
HowStern
CAGiversary!
People can and do rent blu-ray though. And I bet after the digital switch in feb, as older tv's start failing, a lot more people will be buying HDTV's and in turn buying blu-ray.
http://www.itwire.com/content/view/13184/1066/
That's from a year ago but nothing has changed really. Average american connection speed is 1.9 megabits a second. Japan = 61 megabits per second. The article states massachusetts as one of the fastest 5 states for ISPs and I can tell you if Mass is one of the fastest, it's dissapointing, because it takes me about 3 hours at least to get a HD movie off the PSN video store.
And even then it's not as good quality as blu-ray because it has been compressed like all digital streaming HD has.
http://www.itwire.com/content/view/13184/1066/
That's from a year ago but nothing has changed really. Average american connection speed is 1.9 megabits a second. Japan = 61 megabits per second. The article states massachusetts as one of the fastest 5 states for ISPs and I can tell you if Mass is one of the fastest, it's dissapointing, because it takes me about 3 hours at least to get a HD movie off the PSN video store.
And even then it's not as good quality as blu-ray because it has been compressed like all digital streaming HD has.
HeadRusch
CAGiversary!
Renting doesn't make a format succeed....Sony needs people building libraries to make a fortune on bluray. Everyone made money when people amassed DVD libraries, but the chances of that happening again so soon are unlikely, especially when you consider the jump from VHS to DVD was very significant, but the jump from DVD to BD, while significant on paper, isn't as significant in the real world, when the average HD set is still 40" or smaller.
There is a national bump in broadband happening now...it took a long time to go from 2-8mbps, which is where most cable systems are at now. Its going to take a VERy short time to double those speeds, with the DOCSIS 3.0 rollout happening nationwide on comcast, and with Verizon and UVERSE expanding, with other cable operators going faster as well......its a matter of time. We may not smoke like Japan or S.Korea, but we'll be fast enough to handle digital distro.
That is, assuming the caps dont get any lower...that also plays against DD right now.
As for quality, most people can't see a difference between BD and DVD unless you freeze frame, zoom and point....you're gonna tell me that people are going to notice quality issues or compression artifacts in a Cable HD feed compared to a $30 disc? Cmon man.......
There is a national bump in broadband happening now...it took a long time to go from 2-8mbps, which is where most cable systems are at now. Its going to take a VERy short time to double those speeds, with the DOCSIS 3.0 rollout happening nationwide on comcast, and with Verizon and UVERSE expanding, with other cable operators going faster as well......its a matter of time. We may not smoke like Japan or S.Korea, but we'll be fast enough to handle digital distro.
That is, assuming the caps dont get any lower...that also plays against DD right now.
As for quality, most people can't see a difference between BD and DVD unless you freeze frame, zoom and point....you're gonna tell me that people are going to notice quality issues or compression artifacts in a Cable HD feed compared to a $30 disc?
Cmon man.......
Paco
CAGiversary!
[quote name='HeadRusch']Renting doesn't make a format succeed....Sony needs people building libraries to make a fortune on bluray. Everyone made money when people amassed DVD libraries, but the chances of that happening again so soon are unlikely, especially when you consider the jump from VHS to DVD was very significant, but the jump from DVD to BD, while significant on paper, isn't as significant in the real world, when the average HD set is still 40" or smaller.
There is a national bump in broadband happening now...it took a long time to go from 2-8mbps, which is where most cable systems are at now. Its going to take a VERy short time to double those speeds, with the DOCSIS 3.0 rollout happening nationwide on comcast, and with Verizon and UVERSE expanding, with other cable operators going faster as well......its a matter of time. We may not smoke like Japan or S.Korea, but we'll be fast enough to handle digital distro.
That is, assuming the caps dont get any lower...that also plays against DD right now.
As for quality, most people can't see a difference between BD and DVD unless you freeze frame, zoom and point....you're gonna tell me that people are going to notice quality issues or compression artifacts in a Cable HD feed compared to a $30 disc? Cmon man.......[/quote]
I can tell the difference easily even on my 32 inch lcd tv. I have to take my glasses off on dvds to make them look even somewhat comparable on lcd. I have a huge dvd collection, but that isn't going to stop me from picking up blurays of the movies that I really love or when getting new movies.
There is a national bump in broadband happening now...it took a long time to go from 2-8mbps, which is where most cable systems are at now. Its going to take a VERy short time to double those speeds, with the DOCSIS 3.0 rollout happening nationwide on comcast, and with Verizon and UVERSE expanding, with other cable operators going faster as well......its a matter of time. We may not smoke like Japan or S.Korea, but we'll be fast enough to handle digital distro.
That is, assuming the caps dont get any lower...that also plays against DD right now.
As for quality, most people can't see a difference between BD and DVD unless you freeze frame, zoom and point....you're gonna tell me that people are going to notice quality issues or compression artifacts in a Cable HD feed compared to a $30 disc?
Cmon man.......[/quote]I can tell the difference easily even on my 32 inch lcd tv. I have to take my glasses off on dvds to make them look even somewhat comparable on lcd. I have a huge dvd collection, but that isn't going to stop me from picking up blurays of the movies that I really love or when getting new movies.
HeadRusch
CAGiversary!
Of course you can, because you're young and tuned into this stuff.......like we ALL ARE here. But most folks aren't or don't even care. A bunch of friends and coworkers have finally gone to HD sets....but none of them are buying BD's. one is renting, and the rest watch DVD's or they just watch HD over cable.
This isn't the huge cultural revolution in movie watching that DIGITALBITS would have us believe it is...trust me. Mom and pop don't care, and mom and pop don't scruitinize releases the way people like us do, and thats a problem for "mad success" to happen.
This isn't the huge cultural revolution in movie watching that DIGITALBITS would have us believe it is...trust me. Mom and pop don't care, and mom and pop don't scruitinize releases the way people like us do, and thats a problem for "mad success" to happen.
oasisboy
Banned
Wow, I didn't know this thread was going to explode with the article I posted. Here are my thoughts.
The PS3 has been a failure in the fact that Sony was #1 in the videogame market and they should have remained in that spot but I guess the price more than anything else hurt the PS3. Sony went from #1 to #3 in sales (behind Nintendo and Microsoft in that respective order).
The wii is this "cool" console that non-gamers are buying because anyone can play their games by moving your arms and body. Bravo to Nintendo 
for creating this image of "coolness" with their last-gen console with a motion sensor controller (ign.com stated that the wii is as powerful as the xbox 1). I think the Wii is the winner of this generation but it will suffer once the next generation of consoles come out. These non-gamers (my estimate is 40 - 50% of wii buyers are non-gamers) that buy the wii are the ones that also buy wii FIT. For these non-gamers, the console goes to the closet after a 3-6 months because reality hits of the limitations of the console (no blu-ray nor DVD functionality) and they go back to their normal non-gaming routines for entertainment. These people will learn from their experience and they will not buy the next console from Nintendo because they just bought the wii to be "cool" and to "exercise while playing" and it was only cool for a couple of months. If someone bought Wii Fit on launch day and they still play it, they are probably like 10% of the wii fit buyers... seriously.
Going back to the PS3. I noticed that most buyers of PS3 consoles buy it with the excuse: "It is a blu-ray player that also can be used for games". Just go to a best-buy and look at who is buying PS3 consoles. It is adults in their late 20s, mid 30s that are very casual gamers in the middle or upper income level. These people maybe played videogames in college and now they want a good blu ray player so they buy the PS3 because they can also play a game every now and then. Three of my neighbors bought a ps3 to play blu-ray movies but they buy kiddie games for their little ones or they might buy a cheap $20 - $30 game for themselves like Virtua Fighter or Motorstorm just to play once in a while.
The xbox 360 console is bought by consumers that just want to play games. When is the last time someone said: I am buying a 360 to watch movies? never.
Overall, these are my thoughts, wii are for non-gamers, PS3 is for blu-ray watchers and the 360 is the console for gamers.
The PS3 has been a failure in the fact that Sony was #1 in the videogame market and they should have remained in that spot but I guess the price more than anything else hurt the PS3. Sony went from #1 to #3 in sales (behind Nintendo and Microsoft in that respective order).
The wii is this "cool" console that non-gamers are buying because anyone can play their games by moving your arms and body
. Bravo to Nintendo for creating this image of "coolness" with their last-gen console with a motion sensor controller (ign.com stated that the wii is as powerful as the xbox 1). I think the Wii is the winner of this generation but it will suffer once the next generation of consoles come out. These non-gamers (my estimate is 40 - 50% of wii buyers are non-gamers) that buy the wii are the ones that also buy wii FIT. For these non-gamers, the console goes to the closet after a 3-6 months because reality hits of the limitations of the console (no blu-ray nor DVD functionality) and they go back to their normal non-gaming routines for entertainment. These people will learn from their experience and they will not buy the next console from Nintendo because they just bought the wii to be "cool" and to "exercise while playing" and it was only cool for a couple of months. If someone bought Wii Fit on launch day and they still play it, they are probably like 10% of the wii fit buyers... seriously.Going back to the PS3. I noticed that most buyers of PS3 consoles buy it with the excuse: "It is a blu-ray player that also can be used for games". Just go to a best-buy and look at who is buying PS3 consoles. It is adults in their late 20s, mid 30s that are very casual gamers in the middle or upper income level. These people maybe played videogames in college and now they want a good blu ray player so they buy the PS3 because they can also play a game every now and then. Three of my neighbors bought a ps3 to play blu-ray movies but they buy kiddie games for their little ones or they might buy a cheap $20 - $30 game for themselves like Virtua Fighter or Motorstorm just to play once in a while.
The xbox 360 console is bought by consumers that just want to play games. When is the last time someone said: I am buying a 360 to watch movies? never.
Overall, these are my thoughts, wii are for non-gamers, PS3 is for blu-ray watchers and the 360 is the console for gamers.
[quote name='oasisboy']
When is the last time someone said: I am buying a 360 to watch movies? never.
[/QUOTE]
Seriously? About 5-6 times (or more) in this thread alone, not to mention dozens of times in these forums. Streaming netflix is now one of the consoles selling bullet points.
When is the last time someone said: I am buying a 360 to watch movies? never.
[/QUOTE]
Seriously? About 5-6 times (or more) in this thread alone, not to mention dozens of times in these forums. Streaming netflix is now one of the consoles selling bullet points.
oasisboy
Banned
[quote name='blackjaw']Seriously? About 5-6 times (or more) in this thread alone, not to mention dozens of times in these forums. Streaming netflix is now one of the consoles selling bullet points.[/quote]
My point was before the Netflix integration occurred. I still don't see Netflix being this huge thing for the XBOX. There overall population of this country is not very tech-savvy where they will buy a console just because they can watch netflix movies on it. If they want to rent a movie they will just go to Blockbuster.
My point was before the Netflix integration occurred. I still don't see Netflix being this huge thing for the XBOX. There overall population of this country is not very tech-savvy where they will buy a console just because they can watch netflix movies on it. If they want to rent a movie they will just go to Blockbuster.
farfus
CAGiversary!
Finally got onto LIVE last night, and i can see it has a little bit of everything for us, the consumer. Having held off of next-gen consoles for over three years till now i can say i think everything i need is on the Xbox, although until recently i was pretty much a Sony only person. But from what i see all my immediate needs are covered by microsoft...
Never underestimate the power of the casual market. Do you guys really believe that Apple's iPod was successful because the audiophiles of the world carried the platform? There are much better music players out there, but the casual prefer iPod products for too many reasons and elements out there. Nintendo emulated Apple's strategy and man did it work for them.
I think next-generation, as long as Nintendo doesn't do anything too stupid, they'll carry the market again in a big way. Especially if Microsoft and Sony continue to stumble and fall all over themselves in attempting to cater to this market. I only have to look at the DS to see where the Wii is going and I only need to look at sales to get an idea of where the long term market is headed as well.
It always seems like that even at their best, everyone is waiting for the day where "nintendo is doomed for blah blah XX reason".
Not to rant on too much though, this is about Sony afterall. I'm not so sure if Sony saw this coming, no-one expected the economy to go into the shitter and drag the middle class for a bloody beatdown but it did happen. But man, it had to happen at a time where Sony relied on their video games to bring in the bottomline.....
I don't think the PS3 is a sinking ship but I wouldn't compare it to the GameCube. Unlike Nintendo's platform, Sony has yet to see a dime made on the system software or hardware. If anything, they are bleeding money left and right.
Hopefully, this will teach MS and Sony a proper lesson. If you have to lose so much money on hardware to the point where it can leave your company vulnerable in questionable times, it is probably a pretty shitty strategy.
I think next-generation, as long as Nintendo doesn't do anything too stupid, they'll carry the market again in a big way. Especially if Microsoft and Sony continue to stumble and fall all over themselves in attempting to cater to this market. I only have to look at the DS to see where the Wii is going and I only need to look at sales to get an idea of where the long term market is headed as well.
It always seems like that even at their best, everyone is waiting for the day where "nintendo is doomed for blah blah XX reason".
Not to rant on too much though, this is about Sony afterall. I'm not so sure if Sony saw this coming, no-one expected the economy to go into the shitter and drag the middle class for a bloody beatdown but it did happen. But man, it had to happen at a time where Sony relied on their video games to bring in the bottomline.....
I don't think the PS3 is a sinking ship but I wouldn't compare it to the GameCube. Unlike Nintendo's platform, Sony has yet to see a dime made on the system software or hardware. If anything, they are bleeding money left and right.
Hopefully, this will teach MS and Sony a proper lesson. If you have to lose so much money on hardware to the point where it can leave your company vulnerable in questionable times, it is probably a pretty shitty strategy.
Nephlabobo
CAGiversary!
[quote name='dyeknom']God of War 3 has had a 2009 assumed release date since E3. It was reconfirmed to have a 2009 release date at the VGA. Some say Q4, some say Q1. So somewhere between Q1 and Q4 -_-
Heavy rain also has a 2009 release date scheduled, but it's place in 2009 is uncertain... so they put it at the latest date.[/QUOTE]
Okay - to be fair, I didn't realise they were both 2009. And I am looking forward to both. So that brings the total of exclusive games for PS3 I'm interested in up to 3, instead of 1.
[quote name='mykevermin'] just look at the implied language so many have made that the 360 is this gen's leader, when it's not even close. .[/QUOTE]
The 360 is the leader in terms of having exclusive games that I'd like to play. Whether it's the leader in sales is irrelevent (to me).
As a Sony fanboy and a PS3 owner, I can confidently say the PS3 is a disappointment. HD/Blu-ray etc. are irrelevent. Games are what matter and the PS3 is lacking them.
Heavy rain also has a 2009 release date scheduled, but it's place in 2009 is uncertain... so they put it at the latest date.[/QUOTE]
Okay - to be fair, I didn't realise they were both 2009. And I am looking forward to both. So that brings the total of exclusive games for PS3 I'm interested in up to 3, instead of 1.
[quote name='mykevermin'] just look at the implied language so many have made that the 360 is this gen's leader, when it's not even close. .[/QUOTE]
The 360 is the leader in terms of having exclusive games that I'd like to play. Whether it's the leader in sales is irrelevent (to me).
As a Sony fanboy and a PS3 owner, I can confidently say the PS3 is a disappointment. HD/Blu-ray etc. are irrelevent. Games are what matter and the PS3 is lacking them.
thrustbucket
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 7 (100%)
[quote name='HeadRusch']Sonys only hope for making the BD the standard is if DVD goes away. The chances of that happening in the next 3-5 years are..............remote would be an understatement of the highest order.[/quote]
Exactly. DVD will never be "replaced" for the same reasons CD's weren't/won't be.
The problem is, less and less people build DVD libraries these days. The biggest buyers of movies now are parents buying kid movies to babysit their brats, and kids don't care about HD.
Digital distribution has already changed my habits. I was renting 1 bluray/dvd a night with my blockbuster pass until Netflix on NXE came out. Sure, it's not as high quality to the eye of scrutiny but it's a hell of a lot cheaper and more convenient.
[quote name='HowStern']
digital distribution will fail terribly in the U.S. because of the snail speed internet. look at the U.S. internet speed compared to the UK or Japan or China.[/quote]
Wrong. Not only is it not failing, it's already picking up momentum. Fiber lines are everywhere now and very soon it's just a matter of replacing routers and flipping switches to make most peoples broadband 10-20x faster.
You do know how DRM works, right? You buy the right to the media, not a one time download.
[quote name='Thomas96']Blu Ray may become the standard one day, but its going to take time and more BIG movies like Batman The Dark Knight. 25% of Batman TDK sales were on blu Ray (600,000) when the movie costs around 24.99 - 29.99, I figure once Blu Ray can come down in price, then the market may accept them as the new standard. The new blu rays do have a digital copy, so there's an incentive for owning the hard copy.[/QUOTE]
The larger masses will never adopt Blu-Ray until the words "Blu-Ray" is simply listed as another feature on the box of the $75 DVD player they just got at Wal Mart, right along with features like "DivX", "MP3", and "Progressive Scan".
[quote name='HeadRusch']Uh, there wasn't room for VHS and DVD was there...? There wont be room for DVD and BD.[/quote]
One word: Laserdisc
You bring up some great points. The people savvy enough to know what Blu-Ray is and what it's advantages are, are also the same people already bittorenting most of what they watch.
The leap to true digital distribution that's easy, cheap, fast, and convenient, is very small. And when it happens, there will be little reason for those savvy folks to buy Blu-Ray discs.
Now, to bring this all back to the OP, trojan horse convergent devices are the last piece of the digital distribution equation. Who is doing what to be ready for this?
Not only that, but if Blu Ray can't supplant at least half of DVD sales by end of next year, I wager it's destined to be the next Laserdisc.
Exactly. DVD will never be "replaced" for the same reasons CD's weren't/won't be.
I disagree with that. Most people are happy just buying only new movies in the new format.
The problem is, less and less people build DVD libraries these days. The biggest buyers of movies now are parents buying kid movies to babysit their brats, and kids don't care about HD.
It doesn't doom the format. Sony makes a lot of money off selling stuff to Blockbuster and Netflix etc.
You are right. However Blu Ray titles will continue to drop into that range. They have to, if studios/Sony want them to pick up steam.
Digital distribution has already changed my habits. I was renting 1 bluray/dvd a night with my blockbuster pass until Netflix on NXE came out. Sure, it's not as high quality to the eye of scrutiny but it's a hell of a lot cheaper and more convenient.
[quote name='HowStern']
digital distribution will fail terribly in the U.S. because of the snail speed internet. look at the U.S. internet speed compared to the UK or Japan or China.[/quote]
Wrong. Not only is it not failing, it's already picking up momentum. Fiber lines are everywhere now and very soon it's just a matter of replacing routers and flipping switches to make most peoples broadband 10-20x faster.
Just like if your Ipod dies or Xbox 360 HDD dies, everything you own is gone?
You do know how DRM works, right? You buy the right to the media, not a one time download.
[quote name='Thomas96']Blu Ray may become the standard one day, but its going to take time and more BIG movies like Batman The Dark Knight. 25% of Batman TDK sales were on blu Ray (600,000) when the movie costs around 24.99 - 29.99, I figure once Blu Ray can come down in price, then the market may accept them as the new standard. The new blu rays do have a digital copy, so there's an incentive for owning the hard copy.[/QUOTE]
The larger masses will never adopt Blu-Ray until the words "Blu-Ray" is simply listed as another feature on the box of the $75 DVD player they just got at Wal Mart, right along with features like "DivX", "MP3", and "Progressive Scan".
[quote name='HeadRusch']Uh, there wasn't room for VHS and DVD was there...? There wont be room for DVD and BD.[/quote]
One word: Laserdisc
You bring up some great points. The people savvy enough to know what Blu-Ray is and what it's advantages are, are also the same people already bittorenting most of what they watch.
The leap to true digital distribution that's easy, cheap, fast, and convenient, is very small. And when it happens, there will be little reason for those savvy folks to buy Blu-Ray discs.
Now, to bring this all back to the OP, trojan horse convergent devices are the last piece of the digital distribution equation. Who is doing what to be ready for this?
Not only that, but if Blu Ray can't supplant at least half of DVD sales by end of next year, I wager it's destined to be the next Laserdisc.
HeadRusch
CAGiversary!
I was saying about 4 years ago that BD and HDDVD will never be more than "Laserdisc" was in the 80's and into the 90's...that thing that afficianados own, but you dont know anyone personally like that, its always the friend of a friend
Its the timing of the thing...DVD *just* hit. Oh sure I had a DVD player in 99, along with 1/2 the people on AVS....but it wasn't until 2002 or 2003 when the $150 players hit *AND* movies stopped being released on VHS that blockbuster and stuff began to phase out their VHS collections. So you can get a BD player for $150 bucks, but if you can't convince people its a MUCH better experience than the DVDs they already own, they aren't going to bite.
Low priced media, low priced players will help in this cause of course.......but with DVD striding along side by side its a long slow climb for BD, and I think Sony really needs to make it more of a meteoric rush to the top.
In a sense, thats what has sorta doomed our economy...everyones in it for the quick buck, the instant gratification. bad stock market news, the lemmings go running. Good news? The lemmings go shopping...up..down..up..down. People don't seem to have the concept of the long-haul anymore, they aren't willing to wait 30 years to amass wealth, they want it NOOOWWWW.
Sony wont be getting a BD revolution NOOOWWWW.....so I wonder if they are positioned to deal with that not happening, in the same way they didn't seem to be well positioned to launch the PS4 in a market where they actually had competition.
Its the timing of the thing...DVD *just* hit. Oh sure I had a DVD player in 99, along with 1/2 the people on AVS....but it wasn't until 2002 or 2003 when the $150 players hit *AND* movies stopped being released on VHS that blockbuster and stuff began to phase out their VHS collections. So you can get a BD player for $150 bucks, but if you can't convince people its a MUCH better experience than the DVDs they already own, they aren't going to bite.
Low priced media, low priced players will help in this cause of course.......but with DVD striding along side by side its a long slow climb for BD, and I think Sony really needs to make it more of a meteoric rush to the top.
In a sense, thats what has sorta doomed our economy...everyones in it for the quick buck, the instant gratification. bad stock market news, the lemmings go running. Good news? The lemmings go shopping...up..down..up..down. People don't seem to have the concept of the long-haul anymore, they aren't willing to wait 30 years to amass wealth, they want it NOOOWWWW.
Sony wont be getting a BD revolution NOOOWWWW.....so I wonder if they are positioned to deal with that not happening, in the same way they didn't seem to be well positioned to launch the PS4 in a market where they actually had competition.
The bottom line is that Sony has to improve their sales, they know it, we know it, everyone knows it. Sony has done alot of meet some of the features that their console and online services were lacking. Sony has increased their number of sales, from last years sales, so that's a good sign. No matter what happens in terms of Sales numbers, you know Sony put themselves at a disadvantage, so their going to have to ride this storm out, and do the best they can with the PS3. I would suspect that when PS4 comes out they won't make the same mistakes.
[quote name='Thomas96']Sony has increased their number of sales, from last years sales, so that's a good sign[/QUOTE]
No, they haven't.
Nov. 2007 / Nov 2008 = Differential
Playstation 3: 466K / 378K = -88K
Playstation 2: 496K / 206K = -290K
PSP: 567K / 421K = -146K
No, they haven't.
Nov. 2007 / Nov 2008 = Differential
Playstation 3: 466K / 378K = -88K
Playstation 2: 496K / 206K = -290K
PSP: 567K / 421K = -146K
svt1029
CAGiversary!
all i have to say is that everyone has high hopes for killzone 2, but as i remember, back when i play killzone 1 on ps2, it was a very average mediocre game that brought nothing new to the table whatsoever so why expect anything different from this.... the screen shots look decent but nothing phenomenol..... i hear as much hype for this game as i did for lair... all i can think in the back of my head is epic fail for killzone .... ill be shocked if it gets more the an 8 from any review site
oasisboy
Banned
[quote name='M-PG71C']
Hopefully, this will teach MS and Sony a proper lesson. If you have to lose so much money on hardware to the point where it can leave your company vulnerable in questionable times, it is probably a pretty shitty strategy.[/quote]
Hold on sir, the 360 just recently became profitable.
"Microsoft's Entertainment and Devices Division (EDD) – responsible for everything from the Xbox 360 to the Zune – has once again posted a net quarterly profit. What's behind the good news? "Xbox platform and PC game revenue increased $418 million or 85% primarily as a result of increased Xbox 360 console sales, Xbox 360 video game sales, and Xbox Live revenue."
http://www.joystiq.com/2008/04/25/the-xbox-360-turns-a-profit-again/
I think Microsoft is finally in good shape after the RROD debacle. I am glad Microsoft and Sony are pushing the limit of their consoles (unlike Nintendo with their last generation machine). Sony and Microsoft might take a loss with their consoles, but you and I as consumers win with their great consoles. Meanwhile, Nintendo's Wii which makes $50 profit per console seems to not move forward (No HD, online blows compared to Live or even the PSN store, no DVD functionality...). I rather have a company bleed $$$ out of their ass, than to have a machine that makes money but doesn't take gaming to the next level.
Hopefully, this will teach MS and Sony a proper lesson. If you have to lose so much money on hardware to the point where it can leave your company vulnerable in questionable times, it is probably a pretty shitty strategy.[/quote]
Hold on sir, the 360 just recently became profitable.
"Microsoft's Entertainment and Devices Division (EDD) – responsible for everything from the Xbox 360 to the Zune – has once again posted a net quarterly profit. What's behind the good news? "Xbox platform and PC game revenue increased $418 million or 85% primarily as a result of increased Xbox 360 console sales, Xbox 360 video game sales, and Xbox Live revenue."
http://www.joystiq.com/2008/04/25/the-xbox-360-turns-a-profit-again/
I think Microsoft is finally in good shape after the RROD debacle. I am glad Microsoft and Sony are pushing the limit of their consoles (unlike Nintendo with their last generation machine). Sony and Microsoft might take a loss with their consoles, but you and I as consumers win with their great consoles. Meanwhile, Nintendo's Wii which makes $50 profit per console seems to not move forward (No HD, online blows compared to Live or even the PSN store, no DVD functionality...). I rather have a company bleed $$$ out of their ass, than to have a machine that makes money but doesn't take gaming to the next level.
HeadRusch
CAGiversary!
[quote name='svt1029']all i have to say is that everyone has high hopes for killzone 2, but as i remember, back when i play killzone 1 on ps2, it was a very average mediocre game that brought nothing new to the table whatsoever so why expect anything different from this.... the screen shots look decent but nothing phenomenol..... i hear as much hype for this game as i did for lair... all i can think in the back of my head is epic fail for killzone .... ill be shocked if it gets more the an 8 from any review site[/QUOTE]
I enjoyed the hell out of Killzone 1. In an age of shooters that are always trying to be faster and quicker, KZ was a nice slower experience. You didn't blast through the levels at warp speed, you had to move carefully, picking and choosing your battles. The environments were cool too, from what I recall. That fogged in swamp level was great.
It just ran like Ass and had the most annoying repetitive Helgast phrases over and over, but as a game I enjoyed it...one of the few shooters I've played on a console that i really liked.
I also liked how you could go back and re-play al evel with a different character and have to play the game a completely different way.
Clearly KZ isn't going to be for the UT3 fans, but I for one like games that play at a slower pace.
I enjoyed the hell out of Killzone 1. In an age of shooters that are always trying to be faster and quicker, KZ was a nice slower experience. You didn't blast through the levels at warp speed, you had to move carefully, picking and choosing your battles. The environments were cool too, from what I recall. That fogged in swamp level was great.
It just ran like Ass and had the most annoying repetitive Helgast phrases over and over, but as a game I enjoyed it...one of the few shooters I've played on a console that i really liked.
I also liked how you could go back and re-play al evel with a different character and have to play the game a completely different way.
Clearly KZ isn't going to be for the UT3 fans, but I for one like games that play at a slower pace.
The Mana Knight
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 41 (100%)
[quote name='munch']The PS3 is boring.[/QUOTE]It's because you have a 1080i TV and have ignored most all the great PS3 games. It's fun if you care to support it.
[quote name='Barnolde']It's just Sony's fault for being retarded this holiday. Expensive system + no bundles ($500 + a year old game doesn't count) = cheap systems will outsell you.[/QUOTE]
Like I said before, it's what Sony expected and they honestly could not afford a PS3 pricecut this year, since they are still technically only breaking even or losing money on every PS3 they sell. They aren't MS who would be willing to give consoles away for free to increase its userbase.
[quote name='Nephlabobo']
As a Sony fanboy and a PS3 owner, I can confidently say the PS3 is a disappointment. HD/Blu-ray etc. are irrelevent. Games are what matter and the PS3 is lacking them.[/QUOTE]Then sell the console if you aren't happy. We've been tired of hearing your complaining over SCEJ remaking Siren on PS3. Tired of your rants in the PS Blog about PSP downloadable games, complaining how SSD HD and Everyday Shooter aren't a UMD game. Being a UMD game would increase its price in the PSP Store AND in retail (because they gotta factor in retail loyalty, shipping, and UMD manufacturing into the cost. Plus, you cannot sell downloads cheaper than retailers MSRP or they'll be pissed). Like I said before, I've found plenty of PS3 exclusives which outnumbers the number of 360 and Wii exclusives I like combined. And since I BUY ALL my multi-platform games on PS3, my PS3 is overwhelmingly my favorite (someone who buys all their multi-platform games on 360 will feel the same way, since most good games this generation are not exclusive).
[quote name='Barnolde']It's just Sony's fault for being retarded this holiday. Expensive system + no bundles ($500 + a year old game doesn't count) = cheap systems will outsell you.[/QUOTE]
Like I said before, it's what Sony expected and they honestly could not afford a PS3 pricecut this year, since they are still technically only breaking even or losing money on every PS3 they sell. They aren't MS who would be willing to give consoles away for free to increase its userbase.
[quote name='Nephlabobo']
As a Sony fanboy and a PS3 owner, I can confidently say the PS3 is a disappointment. HD/Blu-ray etc. are irrelevent. Games are what matter and the PS3 is lacking them.[/QUOTE]Then sell the console if you aren't happy. We've been tired of hearing your complaining over SCEJ remaking Siren on PS3. Tired of your rants in the PS Blog about PSP downloadable games, complaining how SSD HD and Everyday Shooter aren't a UMD game. Being a UMD game would increase its price in the PSP Store AND in retail (because they gotta factor in retail loyalty, shipping, and UMD manufacturing into the cost. Plus, you cannot sell downloads cheaper than retailers MSRP or they'll be pissed). Like I said before, I've found plenty of PS3 exclusives which outnumbers the number of 360 and Wii exclusives I like combined. And since I BUY ALL my multi-platform games on PS3, my PS3 is overwhelmingly my favorite (someone who buys all their multi-platform games on 360 will feel the same way, since most good games this generation are not exclusive).
The Mana Knight
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 41 (100%)
[quote name='zewone']You are out of control.[/QUOTE]Not really TBH. I own 37 Disc based PS3 games. 23 are only on PS3. Only one of them I kind of regret buying TBH.
Relating to PS3 pricetag, here is what was actually suppose to happen:
2007, there was NOT suppose to be a PS3 price drop. Sony dropped the price of PS3 in 2007 because they desperately wanted to give blu-ray a push, and PS3 was under their sales expectations. 2007 was suppose to be the year Sony breaks even and recoups many of its launch loses.
2008 was suppose to be the first year they dropped the price, but since PS3 already got its pricecut in 2007 (a year too early from Sony's original projections) and blu-ray won the HD format war, they decided to keep the price at what its at because PS3 hardware costs around $400 to make (does not include retail loyalty, some accessory bundling maybe, etc.). Howard Stringer has been putting pressure on the PS division to break even/profit, so that's why there's no pricecut. And while PS3 may not be beating the competition this Holiday season (it was 2nd pace during the 1st half of the year), Sony is still ahead/on-track to meeting their projections on PS3 consoles sold by the fiscal year. Last year they were not, this year they are. They already told investors how many consoles they expect to sell and for what price, that's why there's no price cut.
Not sure if people remembered, but in 2007 for an example, some were urging SCEA/SCEE/SCEJ to cut the price of the PSP. The PSP price dropped at the beginning of Q2 2007, since Sony came close to their target at the expected price point, to at least please investors, and next up was to drop the price and tell investors the plan. Sony will most likely do that with PS3, along with re-designing the hardware internally to reduce costs. MS cut the 360 price because they were NOT meeting their projected sales.
Although I rather not argue anymore since I'm in a pretty good mood, after the SingStar update today.
Relating to PS3 pricetag, here is what was actually suppose to happen:
2007, there was NOT suppose to be a PS3 price drop. Sony dropped the price of PS3 in 2007 because they desperately wanted to give blu-ray a push, and PS3 was under their sales expectations. 2007 was suppose to be the year Sony breaks even and recoups many of its launch loses.
2008 was suppose to be the first year they dropped the price, but since PS3 already got its pricecut in 2007 (a year too early from Sony's original projections) and blu-ray won the HD format war, they decided to keep the price at what its at because PS3 hardware costs around $400 to make (does not include retail loyalty, some accessory bundling maybe, etc.). Howard Stringer has been putting pressure on the PS division to break even/profit, so that's why there's no pricecut. And while PS3 may not be beating the competition this Holiday season (it was 2nd pace during the 1st half of the year), Sony is still ahead/on-track to meeting their projections on PS3 consoles sold by the fiscal year. Last year they were not, this year they are. They already told investors how many consoles they expect to sell and for what price, that's why there's no price cut.
Not sure if people remembered, but in 2007 for an example, some were urging SCEA/SCEE/SCEJ to cut the price of the PSP. The PSP price dropped at the beginning of Q2 2007, since Sony came close to their target at the expected price point, to at least please investors, and next up was to drop the price and tell investors the plan. Sony will most likely do that with PS3, along with re-designing the hardware internally to reduce costs. MS cut the 360 price because they were NOT meeting their projected sales.
Although I rather not argue anymore since I'm in a pretty good mood, after the SingStar update today.
Last edited by a moderator:
tiredfornow
Banned
What does munch having a 1080i TV have anything to do with him thinking the system is boring? 
Temporaryscars
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 38 (100%)
[quote name='The Mana Knight']Not really TBH. I own 37 Disc based PS3 games. 23 are only on PS3. Only one of them I kind of regret buying TBH.[/quote]
Yet you don't have a job...
...DOES NOT COMPUTE!!
Yet you don't have a job...
...DOES NOT COMPUTE!!
Nephlabobo
CAGiversary!
[quote name='The Mana Knight'] Being a UMD game would increase its price in the PSP Store AND in retail (because they gotta factor in retail loyalty, shipping, and UMD manufacturing into the cost. [/QUOTE]
I would rather pay the higher price and buy the UMD. I would at least like the option, which I'm not being given.
I'd happily support the PS3 if had games I wanted to support.
That said, I did go out and purchase Persona 4 on its first day of release. And I've asked for Valkyria Chronicles for Xmas. (And I'll buy it myself if I don't get it)
So
I would rather pay the higher price and buy the UMD. I would at least like the option, which I'm not being given.
I'd happily support the PS3 if had games I wanted to support.
That said, I did go out and purchase Persona 4 on its first day of release. And I've asked for Valkyria Chronicles for Xmas. (And I'll buy it myself if I don't get it)
So
I for one like my PS3. Im not a real intense gamer. In fact most games make me nauseous (literally. I get bad motion sickness on anything that moves) But I have found games that I really like. (GH, MLB the show, Hot Shots) I do feel like the catalog isnt that big, but I figure in a couple years it will be. Although I also still own a nintendo and play that a lot too.
[quote name='zewone']No, they haven't.
Nov. 2007 / Nov 2008 = Differential
Playstation 3: 466K / 378K = -88K
Playstation 2: 496K / 206K = -290K
PSP: 567K / 421K = -146K[/quote]
The year does not equal one month. Sales at the begining of the year were much better than the holiday season for ps3. Get over it.
Don't be an idiot.
Nov. 2007 / Nov 2008 = Differential
Playstation 3: 466K / 378K = -88K
Playstation 2: 496K / 206K = -290K
PSP: 567K / 421K = -146K[/quote]
The year does not equal one month. Sales at the begining of the year were much better than the holiday season for ps3. Get over it.
Don't be an idiot.
The Mana Knight
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 41 (100%)
Sorry OTT members, I'll probably just ignore your replies and not try to get into any more arguments with you all. I'm in a good mood, like I said, after the SingStar PS3 update.
[quote name='Nephlabobo']I would rather pay the higher price and buy the UMD. I would at least like the option, which I'm not being given.
I'd happily support the PS3 if had games I wanted to support.
That said, I did go out and purchase Persona 4 on its first day of release. And I've asked for Valkyria Chronicles for Xmas. (And I'll buy it myself if I don't get it)
So[/QUOTE]Although you might want to pay a higher price, I'd be quite upset to see the price of the download go up just to match UMD.
You're probably more so into JRPGs, which the PS3 does NOT have many of. I'll be honest that I use to be a big JRPG fan and that's all I use to play. Now I can't even get myself to play any JRPG, regardless of what platform I get it on (I end up playing racers, fighters, music/dance or even FPS on my platforms more). Most time I could even get myself to put into one was the 360 version of Eternal Sonata (12 hours in 360 version, 6 hours in PS3 version). Valkyria is very awesome, no doubt, from what I've played. However, I just feel like playing R2 online most of the time. You will definitely enjoy it.
I recommend it to ANY PS3 owner who has any interests in an RPG.
But, if people want to try saying the PS3 has no good exclusives/games, then why not I bring up the IGN article.
Showdown 1, Battle of Exclusives
Showdown 2: Battle of Genres
However, I will not be blind and admit 360 won the battle on downloadable games:
http://games.ign.com/articles/938/938862p4.html
So to say PS3 sucks, PS3 is boring, or whatever is a bit short-sighted IMHO, because it definitely has good exclusives when comparing consoles this year, and it does have a decent variety of games in genres (although one thing I disagree with is that I'd give 360 the edge for RTS because of C&C, PS3 the edge in sports because of MLB08 The Show and Hot Shots Golf: OoB).
EDIT: Sorry munch I was a bit rude by my comment, but I remember an OTT posts once where you mentioned about your 1080i TV, then you said something like (PS3 has no good games anyway, am I rite?) and that's what I was referring to (although I understand that was probably partially a joke).
I'm in a good mood, like I said, after the SingStar PS3 update.[quote name='Nephlabobo']I would rather pay the higher price and buy the UMD. I would at least like the option, which I'm not being given.
I'd happily support the PS3 if had games I wanted to support.
That said, I did go out and purchase Persona 4 on its first day of release. And I've asked for Valkyria Chronicles for Xmas. (And I'll buy it myself if I don't get it)
So
[/QUOTE]Although you might want to pay a higher price, I'd be quite upset to see the price of the download go up just to match UMD. You're probably more so into JRPGs, which the PS3 does NOT have many of. I'll be honest that I use to be a big JRPG fan and that's all I use to play. Now I can't even get myself to play any JRPG, regardless of what platform I get it on (I end up playing racers, fighters, music/dance or even FPS on my platforms more). Most time I could even get myself to put into one was the 360 version of Eternal Sonata (12 hours in 360 version, 6 hours in PS3 version). Valkyria is very awesome, no doubt, from what I've played. However, I just feel like playing R2 online most of the time. You will definitely enjoy it.
I recommend it to ANY PS3 owner who has any interests in an RPG.
But, if people want to try saying the PS3 has no good exclusives/games, then why not I bring up the IGN article.
Showdown 1, Battle of Exclusives
http://games.ign.com/articles/937/937519p1.html
Showdown 2: Battle of Genres
http://games.ign.com/articles/937/937942p1.html
However, I will not be blind and admit 360 won the battle on downloadable games:
http://games.ign.com/articles/938/938862p4.html
So to say PS3 sucks, PS3 is boring, or whatever is a bit short-sighted IMHO, because it definitely has good exclusives when comparing consoles this year, and it does have a decent variety of games in genres (although one thing I disagree with is that I'd give 360 the edge for RTS because of C&C, PS3 the edge in sports because of MLB08 The Show and Hot Shots Golf: OoB).
EDIT: Sorry munch I was a bit rude by my comment, but I remember an OTT posts once where you mentioned about your 1080i TV, then you said something like (PS3 has no good games anyway, am I rite?) and that's what I was referring to (although I understand that was probably partially a joke).
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='zewone']That's besides the point of why you are out of control (although I find it impossible to find 37 PS3 games worth owning).
How would him "only" owning a 1080i tv contribute to why the PS3 is boring?[/quote]
Yeah... that was kind of a dickish thing to say.
Not all of us get our televisions handed down to us.
How would him "only" owning a 1080i tv contribute to why the PS3 is boring?[/quote]
Yeah... that was kind of a dickish thing to say.
Not all of us get our televisions handed down to us.
B
Blackout
Guest
IMO I think PS3 has some good exclusives. This gen has been crap as far as exclusives go. What makes the 360 seem so dominating as far as exclusives go? There are very few exclusives this time around. As far as the Wii goes, if I wanted to play Mario and Zelda for the 800th time I'll just whip out the N64. I'm a big fan of Ratchet, Uncharted, Resistance etc so I found some games I did enjoy. It's not like the PS3 has no good exclusives and the 360 has assloads of them. It doesn't. I think the PS3 needs more platformers and RPGs. It really doesn't have anything game wise to seperate from the 360 (and vice versa).
Mana, going with the "if you don't want to marry your PS3 why don't you sell it?" argument is not going to win anybody over. It really depends on what system you bought first. If you got a 360, you have no need for a PS3. If you bought a PS3 first you have no need for a 360. Instead of bitching about why PS3 is a sinking ship, people should be bitching about lack of exclusives on both systems and how the 2 systems are so similar that you can't even tell them apart.
Mana, going with the "if you don't want to marry your PS3 why don't you sell it?" argument is not going to win anybody over. It really depends on what system you bought first. If you got a 360, you have no need for a PS3. If you bought a PS3 first you have no need for a 360. Instead of bitching about why PS3 is a sinking ship, people should be bitching about lack of exclusives on both systems and how the 2 systems are so similar that you can't even tell them apart.
Nephlabobo
CAGiversary!
[quote name='The Mana Knight']
Although you might want to pay a higher price, I'd be quite upset to see the price of the download go up just to match UMD. [/QUOTE]
There's no reason it has to. Burnout Paradise had a lower price for the download. There's *no* reason they can't do exactly the same thing with PSP games. The precedent has already been set. All I want is the *choice*. I'm not arguing for an either/or situation.
[quote name='The Mana Knight']You're probably more so into JRPGs, which the PS3 does NOT have many of. I'll be honest that I use to be a big JRPG fan and that's all I use to play. Now I can't even get myself to play any JRPG, regardless of what platform I get it on (I end up playing racers, fighters, music/dance or even FPS on my platforms more). [/QUOTE]
Yeah, I am an RPG fan. I'm also a fan of the more quirky stuff like Mister Mosquito and Incredible Crisis. We've seen a bit of that on the PSP with Loco Roco and Patapon. And guess what? I *bought* both the UMDs. New.
[quote name='The Mana Knight']But, if people want to try saying the PS3 has no good exclusives/games, then why not I bring up the IGN article. [/QUOTE]
I'm not saying it has *no* good exclusives. It's just that there's a distinct *lack* of them, and I'd like more. There's a difference.
And for what it's worth, I will be buying Uncharted 2, GOW 3 and Heavy Rain this year, so I will support the PS3 when there's stuff that's interesting.
Although you might want to pay a higher price, I'd be quite upset to see the price of the download go up just to match UMD.
[/QUOTE]There's no reason it has to. Burnout Paradise had a lower price for the download. There's *no* reason they can't do exactly the same thing with PSP games. The precedent has already been set. All I want is the *choice*. I'm not arguing for an either/or situation.
[quote name='The Mana Knight']You're probably more so into JRPGs, which the PS3 does NOT have many of. I'll be honest that I use to be a big JRPG fan and that's all I use to play. Now I can't even get myself to play any JRPG, regardless of what platform I get it on (I end up playing racers, fighters, music/dance or even FPS on my platforms more). [/QUOTE]
Yeah, I am an RPG fan. I'm also a fan of the more quirky stuff like Mister Mosquito and Incredible Crisis. We've seen a bit of that on the PSP with Loco Roco and Patapon. And guess what? I *bought* both the UMDs. New.
[quote name='The Mana Knight']But, if people want to try saying the PS3 has no good exclusives/games, then why not I bring up the IGN article. [/QUOTE]
I'm not saying it has *no* good exclusives. It's just that there's a distinct *lack* of them, and I'd like more. There's a difference.
And for what it's worth, I will be buying Uncharted 2, GOW 3 and Heavy Rain this year, so I will support the PS3 when there's stuff that's interesting.
[quote name='zewone']I forgot you live in Japan/Europe, Thomaticus!
Those Japanese 360 fans sure did love the November NPD! It mattered greatly to them.[/QUOTE]
Look if you're going to be mying secretary, [pulling numbers for me] then pull those numbers... Ms. Piggy!
The thread is reference PS3 sales performance... of course we'd like to see worldwide numbers, why look at NA only.. and act like NA is the only place where PS3 sales..
you bring numbers, then bring them all...
Those Japanese 360 fans sure did love the November NPD! It mattered greatly to them.[/QUOTE]
Look if you're going to be my
ing secretary, [pulling numbers for me] then pull those numbers... Ms. Piggy! The thread is reference PS3 sales performance... of course we'd like to see worldwide numbers, why look at NA only.. and act like NA is the only place where PS3 sales..
you bring numbers, then bring them all...
- Status
bread's done