Why do so many gamers hate Sony?

[quote name='Strell']The problem with posts like these is that it's really difficult for you to get any kind of hard facts saying as much, and have to go on a lot of extrapolations and "here's what I think" anecdotal implications.

Likewise, it's hard to argue against them.

Point being that the best you can do with your theory is tout it around like it's a new puppy and hope people think it's cute as well.

For example, I know of at least one person at this time who is completely satisfied with a Wii and doesn't want a 360 or a PS3. And no, that person is not me.

Likewise, I know someone who started with a Wii and ultimately bought a 360.

And I know someone who bought a 360 first and then got a Wii.

So it's really hard to sit back and say things like this and completely own up to them.[/QUOTE]

That's why it's a discussion... it's a matter of opinion. You've got yours and I've got mine, but I don't call yours a cute puppy and dismiss it with abandon as if it were told by a 4 year old. Granted, unpopular opinions are just that, unpopular... but consider that unless we're talking statistical demographics, market breakdowns, game sale curves and demand distributions, this is _all_ opinion and theory.

Everyone I know who has a Wii (and it's quite a few) have 360's or PS3's as well... so we stand at an impasse. But I think we can let Nintendo say it best when they were quoted as saying:

"We're not competing with Sony or Microsoft".... (or words to that effect.)

That isn't a validation, that's simply supports the idea that Nintendo's strategy is not to go after either other company directly, but to expand the market into new territories, which is something the PS3 and 360 do not do... If they said it as a smug thumbing of their corporate noses at the other companies, more power to them... otherwise we can take it at face value and see where the Wii is really taking gaming... and it's not to the doorstep of Sony or Microsoft... but to the doorstep of those who wouldn't care if Sony made a VR machine that let you _in_ the game.

I'm not trying to be pedantic... it's just an interesting twist on the situation, and I wonder if time will prove it true...
 
[quote name='Mechafenris']That's why it's a discussion... it's a matter of opinion. You've got yours and I've got mine, but I don't call yours a cute puppy and dismiss it with abandon as if it were told by a 4 year old. Granted, unpopular opinions are just that, unpopular... but consider that unless we're talking statistical demographics, market breakdowns, game sale curves and demand distributions, this is _all_ opinion and theory.[/quote]
It isn't, as I was able to refute your position usinig facts.

As you see fit to ignore it, I declare myself the winner of the internet. All hail!
 
[quote name='mykevermin']The Wii, however, even being in first place, has to show that multiplatform games are worth buying on its console - they need to figure out why, even though they are almost at parity with the 360, their third party games aren't selling in the same ratios. [/quote]
I dont think multiplatform is going to, or even able to be a factor this time around. Its nearly already a non-option if you are using the high end 360/PS3/PC specs. You cant expect the multiplatform companies to have a game on the Wii and have it done well, which is always a problem with multiplatform games in some sense, but the Wii has it a little worse because of the power disparity.

Its going to have to be about 3rd party exclusives.

The 3rd party sales arent a mystery, they have some hardcore 1st/2nd party sales. Even in the days when they had dominant marketshare and so many developers on board that they could afford to be dicks to them, that was the still case. I dont think they're going to change that. They want to be the primary drivers for their platform. Ideally, they'd like to do what they did for the DS:

The platform struggled early on, and then a year out, they got the ball rolling with the likes of Mario Kart and Nintendogs, and then they kinda stepped back a bit and let the 3rd parties take over for the most part.

Get marketshare to a point where things like Draqon Quest 9 become possible. The likes of Brain Age and the marketshare it created is directly responsible for things like DQ9.

This is what the first party drivers like Wii Fit and Mario are supposed to do, even if no 3rd party sales are ever going to touch it.

I'm still waiting to see where the independent small RPG devs are going to go. They have never been multiplatform, and for the most part, cannot afford to in the future either.

The first NIS and Idea Factory games on PS3 are going to be critical. The niche genres have always depended on raw marketshare to get their sales. The winners of all the generations going back as far as NES have more RPG games, and other niche games.

I'm very open to the possibility that the DS could suck up so much developer share in Japan that the Wii is left in a very bad position overall. Historically I would say that its impossible to keep dominant marketshare without widespread 3rd party support, but maybe that old adage is being thrown out the window as well.

The crux of the Blue Ocean Strategy is that it makes the competition irrelevant. If thats the case, maybe for the first time ever we will see dominant marketshare with fewer games. Even saying such a thing makes me cringe though. Its like the world is upside down.

Nintendo needs to be much more aggressive in funding and advertising for 3rd parties. They've been absolutely miserable so far. The company is too conservative on many fronts.

I'm as long winded as you are!
 
[quote name='Mechafenris']
"We're not competing with Sony or Microsoft".... (or words to that effect.)

That isn't a validation, that's simply supports the idea that Nintendo's strategy is not to go after either other company directly, but to expand the market into new territories, which is something the PS3 and 360 do not do... If they said it as a smug thumbing of their corporate noses at the other companies, more power to them... otherwise we can take it at face value and see where the Wii is really taking gaming... and it's not to the doorstep of Sony or Microsoft... but to the doorstep of those who wouldn't care if Sony made a VR machine that let you _in_ the game.
[/QUOTE]

Well first, I'd argue MS did expand into new territories, because a lot of fucking frat boy shitheads started with Halo and will die with Halo and respawn with Halo. I don't think it was as big of an audience as Nintendo portends to capture, but it was still a new audience.

And Sony definitely shot gaming in the arm and sent it into the mainstream stratosphere, since the PS1 and PS2 are the highest selling consoles of all time respectively. So they definitely expanded the market.

Which is why I'm getting tired of people being so condescending about Nintendo doing the same thing. The difference is that Sony and MS are given a pass because it's a "more of the same" audience instead of Ninendo's murky, mysterious new markets.

Also, I think the comment about direct competition is funny. Taking away Monster Hunter 3 from the PS3 is direct competition. Getting support from Namco and Tecmo and other third parties that traditionally have shunned Nintendo for two generations is competition. Having a bigger userbase in a year is competition.

The point I'm making is that the comment in question came before the Wii ever hit the shelves. And while Nintendo will trumpet this "Blue Ocean/For everyone" thing like it's cake, everyone misinterprets it as nothing more than "We want mini games and lots of them," especially by the "hardcore" gamer crowd, since they have always traditionally misread, misheard, and then mis-retold just about everything Nintendo has ever fucking said.

Examples:
"We think games should be more concise and concentrated, which would make them shorter" comes out as "WE WANT TINY SHORT GAMES."

"We make games for everyone" translates to "WE LIKE KIDDY GAMES."

Typically, it's Iwata or Miyamoto who get purple-monkey-dishwasher'd the most, since they tend to carry the most sway as public figureheads.

In other words, everyone in the gaming sector sits there and condescends about Nintendo's strategies, always sitting back and acting like they suddenly no longer want to have games like Metroid, Zelda, Mario, Fire Emblem, Star Fox, F-Zero, Kirby, Smash Bros, etc. Anything that is decidedly "not casual." Which is nonsense, because we've seen almost all of those titles within a year from launch, which absolutely destroys the release patterns of any Nintendo console previously, and that most likely includes portable systems.

Another reason I think people are so latched onto this casual idea is that Nintendo's approval process sits just slightly higher than "The No Homers Club," and is letting crap like Chicken Shoot, Balls of Shit, and whatever the hell else that is so bad onto the system. And while I agree that's a double-sided problem, it's not Nintendo's fault that the Wii is selling so well that people are rushing to port their shovelware crap. And since I didn't hear anyone complaining about that with the PS2 or PS1, it makes me wonder why everyone has such a big problem with it now. Likewise, because this has happened, everyone assumes Nintendo themselves only want casual games, and points to WiiFit as the solid proof.

And I'm not convinced just yet either way. Who knows - they might abandon all those core franchises. But I'm willing to bet that they won't. And since I think everyone is always confusing who is saying what, it's difficult for me to accept a carte blanche statement like "Nintendo only likes casual games" when everyone who says that doesn't bother to play the bigger franchise titles, ignores them, or flat-out actively dismisses them, and then complains none of them are there, "So why would I want a Wii?"

Point being is - Don't lie to yourself and act like there's nothing meaty on the system. There's definitely a good library to satisfy the core gamer, and telling me there isn't is crap. Now, you might not subjectively like the games that are offered - i.e., you want a big multiplayer FPS like Halo instead of something built on atmosphere like Metroid - but the point is that the game is there, it's executed very well, and contains an experience a core gamer ought to be thirsty for.

I said this last year, and I have to say it again - but a year from now, we'll have a much better idea of what is truly going on. I contend that third parties shunned the system from the get-go, and only now want a piece of the pie. So there may or may not be big things going on in the background. But a year will be a good testament to see what happens.

I mean, shit. One day I read "360 to finish in last place," and the next I see "PS3 to be finished at the end of this generation." And the next is "Expect Wii to die in 2009." So I don't think anyone has a clear idea of what is going to happen.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']What kind? Sugar or milk?



I don't think you'll see that dramatic lead this generation. It's going to be far closer than the last time around; moreover, the regional dichotomy (360 dominating in the US, being only moderately above the PS3 in EU, and being far behind in Japan) is going to ensure that neither of those two consoles is ever lacking for multiplatform support.

The Wii, however, even being in first place, has to show that multiplatform games are worth buying on its console - they need to figure out why, even though they are almost at parity with the 360, their third party games aren't selling in the same ratios. I refuse to think that graphics alone are the largest contributing factor.[/QUOTE]


Oh I just had to follow up on the second point that you're making regarding the Wii and multiplatform game. I was listening to the 1up podcast, and they were talking about tomb raider anniversary, and how its a basic 3d action adventure game, but its controls [using the nunchuck, and wiimote] made the game worse on the Wii than it was on any other console, even the psp [according to the 1up podcast group] This is one of the reasons why third party games aren't selling on Wii. The Wii is geared for games make use of its primary controller, nunchuck and wiimote. By having that as your primary controller, you kinda alienate yourself from the rest of the industry; which in one way is paying off high divends, but for 3rd parties devs, not only do multiplatform games look inferior, they are going to control inferior as well. There are some games, where you just need to analog sticks. Not everyone is going to go back out and buy the traditional controller, especially when the allure to get people to the system was the nunchuck and wiimote.

I don't see how the Wii can be considered a system for hardcore gamers, when it can't hardly get 3rd party games to sell.

Most of the Wii's games are poorly rated... just look at metacritic, and see. There's maybe about 5 games with a avg rating of 79 and above.
 
[quote name='Strell']Well first, I'd argue MS did expand into new territories, because a lot of fucking frat boy shitheads started with Halo and will die with Halo and respawn with Halo. I don't think it was as big of an audience as Nintendo portends to capture, but it was still a new audience.

And Sony definitely shot gaming in the arm and sent it into the mainstream stratosphere, since the PS1 and PS2 are the highest selling consoles of all time respectively. So they definitely expanded the market.

Which is why I'm getting tired of people being so condescending about Nintendo doing the same thing. The difference is that Sony and MS are given a pass because it's a "more of the same" audience instead of Ninendo's murky, mysterious new markets.
[/QUOTE]


The problem with the Wii is that it focuses too heavily on casual games, on PS2 there were plenty of casual games. Which imo is what's keeping the system going [along with price] but there was also an abundance of quality 3rd party and "hardcore" games for the gamers.


[quote name='Strell']
Also, I think the comment about direct competition is funny. Taking away Monster Hunter 3 from the PS3 is direct competition. Getting support from Namco and Tecmo and other third parties that traditionally have shunned Nintendo for two generations is competition. Having a bigger userbase in a year is competition.

The point I'm making is that the comment in question came before the Wii ever hit the shelves. And while Nintendo will trumpet this "Blue Ocean/For everyone" thing like it's cake, everyone misinterprets it as nothing more than "We want mini games and lots of them," especially by the "hardcore" gamer crowd, since they have always traditionally misread, misheard, and then mis-retold just about everything Nintendo has ever fucking said.

Examples:
"We think games should be more concise and concentrated, which would make them shorter" comes out as "WE WANT TINY SHORT GAMES."

"We make games for everyone" translates to "WE LIKE KIDDY GAMES."

Typically, it's Iwata or Miyamoto who get purple-monkey-dishwasher'd the most, since they tend to carry the most sway as public figureheads.

In other words, everyone in the gaming sector sits there and condescends about Nintendo's strategies, always sitting back and acting like they suddenly no longer want to have games like Metroid, Zelda, Mario, Fire Emblem, Star Fox, F-Zero, Kirby, Smash Bros, etc. Anything that is decidedly "not casual." Which is nonsense, because we've seen almost all of those titles within a year from launch, which absolutely destroys the release patterns of any Nintendo console previously, and that most likely includes portable systems.
[/QUOTE]

Everyone wants the basic games from Nintendo too, but people want new IPs and all the NEW IPs are for casual gamers. Nintendo is spending a tremendous amount of money in their efforts to cater to the casual gaming market - those who don't regularly play games, or haven't played in hears. The whole system, and controller was made for casual gamers.

[quote name='Strell']
Another reason I think people are so latched onto this casual idea is that Nintendo's approval process sits just slightly higher than "The No Homers Club," and is letting crap like Chicken Shoot, Balls of Shit, and whatever the hell else that is so bad onto the system. And while I agree that's a double-sided problem, it's not Nintendo's fault that the Wii is selling so well that people are rushing to port their shovelware crap. And since I didn't hear anyone complaining about that with the PS2 or PS1, it makes me wonder why everyone has such a big problem with it now. Likewise, because this has happened, everyone assumes Nintendo themselves only want casual games, and points to WiiFit as the solid proof.

And I'm not convinced just yet either way. Who knows - they might abandon all those core franchises. But I'm willing to bet that they won't. And since I think everyone is always confusing who is saying what, it's difficult for me to accept a carte blanche statement like "Nintendo only likes casual games" when everyone who says that doesn't bother to play the bigger franchise titles, ignores them, or flat-out actively dismisses them, and then complains none of them are there, "So why would I want a Wii?"[/QUOTE]

Even though the PS2 has a full line of crap games, they also had an even larger line of great games. The Wii is flooded with only ps2 ports, and the "shovelware crap" as you so nicely described. The PSP had the same problem... ps2 ports, and some crappy games. PSP was worse, cause it wasn't like they had a great 1st party developer to ensure the system had some great hits, or some sure fire system sellers.
[/QUOTE]


People say "Nintendo only likes casual games" because the biggest NEW IP for them next year is Wii Fit... On the "Hardcore" Nintendo system that everyone wants, it would have been Kid Icarus, or some brand new IP to add to the Nintendo Universe of characters. Instead, its Wii Fit, a game and periphreal that's probably not going to get much support from 3rd party devs, and a game that most hardcore and casual will play for about a week. [The powerpad had aerobics training, and World Class track meet - I wonder how much more support will the Wii Fit periphreal receive]

[quote name='Strell']
Point being is - Don't lie to yourself and act like there's nothing meaty on the system. There's definitely a good library to satisfy the core gamer, and telling me there isn't is crap. Now, you might not subjectively like the games that are offered - i.e., you want a big multiplayer FPS like Halo instead of something built on atmosphere like Metroid - but the point is that the game is there, it's executed very well, and contains an experience a core gamer ought to be thirsty for.
[/QUOTE]

Wii has the second best game of all time Super Mario Galaxy [I hear Zelda ocriana of time was the highest rated.] Problem is, Nintendo has the best games on the system, so good that it makes it seem like the only good games are only 1st party games.

[quote name='Strell']
I said this last year, and I have to say it again - but a year from now, we'll have a much better idea of what is truly going on. I contend that third parties shunned the system from the get-go, and only now want a piece of the pie. So there may or may not be big things going on in the background. But a year will be a good testament to see what happens.
[/QUOTE]

I definitely agree, this time next year.. what will be.. will be.

[quote name='Strell']
I mean, shit. One day I read "360 to finish in last place," and the next I see "PS3 to be finished at the end of this generation." And the next is "Expect Wii to die in 2009." So I don't think anyone has a clear idea of what is going to happen.[/QUOTE]

Only time will tell... There's enough room in this market for 3 winners, who comes in 3rd is meaningless, cause there's enough money to go around.
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']I dont think multiplatform is going to, or even able to be a factor this time around. Its nearly already a non-option if you are using the high end 360/PS3/PC specs. You cant expect the multiplatform companies to have a game on the Wii and have it done well, which is always a problem with multiplatform games in some sense, but the Wii has it a little worse because of the power disparity.[/quote]

It's interesting, that's for certain. Last time around, multiplatform exclusives are what people point to (FF, MGS, GTA) when considering a bulk of the success of the PS2. Likewise, people point to companies moving away from exclusivity as part of the reason for the 360's success. Nevertheless, each console obviously has third party exclusives - it remains to be seen if this generation is going to be predicted by FF, MGS, and GTA - or if new properties, such as Bioshock, will matter more.

Its going to have to be about 3rd party exclusives.

The 3rd party sales arent a mystery, they have some hardcore 1st/2nd party sales. Even in the days when they had dominant marketshare and so many developers on board that they could afford to be dicks to them, that was the still case. I dont think they're going to change that. They want to be the primary drivers for their platform. Ideally, they'd like to do what they did for the DS:

The platform struggled early on, and then a year out, they got the ball rolling with the likes of Mario Kart and Nintendogs, and then they kinda stepped back a bit and let the 3rd parties take over for the most part.
Click to expand...

It is about third party exclusives - but what *is* that? Guitar Hero is obviously as close to its 360/PS3 brethren as possible, while EA Sports titles don't try to be identical (to show how unique the Wii is, I've never much cared for golf games, but can't fucking BELIEVE that nobody has released a "must play" golf title for the Wii - even Tiger Woods is a letdown, and I'm desperate for a solid golf title for the console).

What differs with the Wii and DS are two things I can see:
1) Nintendo has put a lot of time and effort (much of it at the expense of the late GC, I'd argue) to ensure the Wii had a solid and consistent run of first-party titles in the first year. The DS had a drought early on IIRC, and it took some time for people to warm up to it
2) Through the DS' success, they've shown themselves to take gaming and business seriously in spite of the big gambles they have taken with both systems. The DS was a huge leap of faith by them, but by succeeding, consumer confidence in the Wii surely started higher than it would have otherwise.

Get marketshare to a point where things like Draqon Quest 9 become possible. The likes of Brain Age and the marketshare it created is directly responsible for things like DQ9.
Click to expand...

Saying things like this are why I initially turned "wait for _____" back onto you. Because the Wii, despite selling like it has, has somehow not been able to capitalize on its own success. Sounds strange, I know, but somehow sales reflect either a lack of confidence in what third parties offer, that the people buying Wiis (the "casual gamer" demo) are only interested in WiiSports), that people are buying the Wii as a second/supplementary console, or something else.

This is what the first party drivers like Wii Fit and Mario are supposed to do, even if no 3rd party sales are ever going to touch it.
Click to expand...


That's Nintendo's struggle; some third-party titles are selling (GHIII), and others aren't. It should be their job to identify why this is the case, and try to increase their software attach rate.

I'm still waiting to see where the independent small RPG devs are going to go. They have never been multiplatform, and for the most part, cannot afford to in the future either.
Click to expand...


The first NIS and Idea Factory games on PS3 are going to be critical. The niche genres have always depended on raw marketshare to get their sales. The winners of all the generations going back as far as NES have more RPG games, and other niche games.
Click to expand...

In Japan or the US (or both)? It will be fun to observe, but I doubt many people think the DS is going to handle all the RPGs this gen (not that you're saying that, but...). At the same time, I don't think the Wii could handle the Lost Odyssey (Blue Dragon perhaps), or FFXIII. But, at the end of the day, it could handle FFXII with ease, and that was a fantastic and beautiful game. Moreover, taking a look at Disgaea 3, even being on the PS3 wasn't an incentive enough to go with hidef sprites. Opin Sphere looks amazing compared to a PS3 game!

I'm very open to the possibility that the DS could suck up so much developer share in Japan that the Wii is left in a very bad position overall. Historically I would say that its impossible to keep dominant marketshare without widespread 3rd party support, but maybe that old adage is being thrown out the window as well.
Click to expand...

There's more disparity this gen across markets, so that may be what ultimately fucks everything up. The 360 can't be discounted due to its dominance in the US and lead in Europe, but its failure in Japan puts the Wii and PS3 in a situation where they'll never be lacking for support.

The crux of the Blue Ocean Strategy is that it makes the competition irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Huh?

Nintendo needs to be much more aggressive in funding and advertising for 3rd parties. They've been absolutely miserable so far. The company is too conservative on many fronts.
Click to expand...

First, though, they need to figure out why people aren't buying some games (whether multiplatform, or exclusives), and buying others.

I'm as long winded as you are!
Click to expand...

Merry Christmas everyone!
 
[quote name='Strell']Well first, I'd argue MS did expand into new territories, because a lot of fucking frat boy shitheads started with Halo and will die with Halo and respawn with Halo. I don't think it was as big of an audience as Nintendo portends to capture, but it was still a new audience.

And Sony definitely shot gaming in the arm and sent it into the mainstream stratosphere, since the PS1 and PS2 are the highest selling consoles of all time respectively. So they definitely expanded the market.

Which is why I'm getting tired of people being so condescending about Nintendo doing the same thing. The difference is that Sony and MS are given a pass because it's a "more of the same" audience instead of Ninendo's murky, mysterious new markets.
[/QUOTE]

MS went from nowhere to top of the heap in two tries. That's a pretty good shot, but like you said, Sony did it their first time out... so that is still a better record... but both are new(er) to the game industry than Nintendo. Nintendo's been dead last a few times... been proclaimed the savior of the industry a time or two, and has had notable flops that are colossally higher than what we've seen recently. (I don't consider the GC a "failure" so much as Nintendo's refusal to play nice with third parties holdover from their previous console outings.) It's no secret that Nintendo doesn't really have a great track record with third party support here lately.... and if the Japanese press has any credence, it's happening again... with 3rd party development moving away from the Wii long-term because what's good for Nintendo isn't always good for those playing in their sandbox.

I'm not being condescending... some people may be, but I'm speaking literally and dispassionately about the markets that Nintendo is opening up (Nursing homes? It's still baffling). And it's no secret that as they open these markets, there isn't a huge demand for Metroid 4 among the meat and pureed peas crowd. You can't very well say that everyone at Shady Grove Retirement Villa had a PS2 and an Xbox last gen and are simply moving on to the Nintendo... Because if not, I'd call those new markets. And they're not murky... just because I didn't list them doesn't mean they're coming from outer space or something. The Wii fit was a big deal at their presentation... a really big deal, and that's traditionally not something the "frat morons" would even consider tearing away from their Halo game for.

Whatever anyone else has said about the Wii doesn't apply here, because I'm indifferent to Nintendo, and I haven't been critical or condescending of their efforts (I do believe they could do more with the supply problem... because they do fine on the DS and only had a shortage early on...) This year's supply problem can be laid at the logistics dept. of big N. But that's really all I've ever been critical about.. And yes, those are my opinions.. they have a bit of tinfoil hat to them, but I state unequivocally that they are my opinions... I do not pretend to mask them as facts.

And misinterpreting Nintendo's comments isn't really new... you just have to delve a bit more deeply into the press coverage to get the more correct translations. (As you already have.) When they stated they weren't competing against Sony or MS, they meant not to... if Monster Hunter is taken to the Wii as a "coup", why is so much else going to the PS3 from Capcom? (They didn't abandon the Ps3 in favor of the Wii, is really my point.) Sure, that game is huge in Japan (but lots of people on this thread have been dismissing Japan as a non-starter in terms of this generation...) Capcom had to "clarify" its position after the press latched onto the MH thing...

No one is saying (and I'm certainly not) that we can predict the future of the market, or who is going to lose or who is going to win... this started as an exercise about the negative image Sony got this generation, and as we've all been gaming long enough to see.. it's only a shuffle of the deck to determine who will be next round's evil people. Next group might be Nintendo for all we know... or Microsoft... or heck, even Sony again... but for every "darling" corporation in any particular generation, the others seem to come out mostly negative, and one surely coming out as a dastardly villain who puts innocent gamers on railroad tracks.
 
If the PS3 was 300 dollars on release day... could Sony have recouped their losses? and would the PS3 have sold as quickly as the Wii sold?
 
[quote name='Teh Nitwit']Hasn't Sony's been very good to gamers? They invested huge amounts of money into the gaming industry and helped advance its technology. They provided the competition, which drove quality up and prices down.

Surely their business practices are no worse then those of Microsoft! Both Microsoft and Nintendo shafted their customers with their last gen consoles (forcing them to upgrade). Nintendo took out component from Gamecube to make Wii have "next-gen" graphics and then not allowed Wii's component cable to work on Gamecube...

Sony has some quality products out there and they invest heavily into gaming. Why is it so popular to hate them?[/QUOTE]

Two words: Blu-Ray.
 
[quote name='Ruined']Two words: Blu-Ray.[/QUOTE]

:lol:

Your format of choice is not dead yet - on life support, sure - but not dead. It's a bit too early for the sour grapes.

Besides, 50GB storage capacity will be quite nice for all console makers to use next generation, won't it?

EDIT: Rolento, don't count out another price drop, since two $100 drops in one year were surely unexpected (one, sure; two, no). I also think the "games" argument is so slanted by perception that it won't really make a difference - look at what people, including myself, say about the Wii - whereas in reality, you could have survived the entire year on Nintendo's first party offerings and had a ton of time invested into the machine. Many folks who have disdain for the PS3 active seek reasons to dislike or write off what it's offered so far, and I don't see that stopping anytime soon.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']:lol:

Your format of choice is not dead yet - on life support, sure - but not dead. It's a bit too early for the sour grapes.

Besides, 50GB storage capacity will be quite nice for all console makers to use next generation, won't it?[/QUOTE]

I'm the one with sour grapes? I'm not one of those who dropped $500+ on a console whose promises have not been fulfilled by the company that made it - the game selection is poor compared to the competition, the PS3 multiplatform games run worse than on 360 with PS3 having slowdowns abound (there are 1 or 2 exceptions), and the big BD movie format Sony spent big bucks making alliances and having bombastic ad campaigns in an attempt to defeat the competition has failed to do so while similarly failing to deliver superior video quality as advertised as well. So yeah, if anyone has sour grapes I don't think it would be me - I wasn't let down time and time again like many PS3 owners.

The hidef disc war is far from over, and at this point it does not look like Blu-Ray can win despite its fans wishes to do so; claiming BD victory has become a joke now in the hidef arena, as we have had the BDA claim victory at least 5-10 times throughout 2007 yet BD cannot clearly defeat HD DVD. In fact, the only studio shift we saw in 2007 was Paramount dumping BD and going HD DVD exclusive (conspiracy theories abound here, of course). The momentum BD had early in the year has been cut down and both formats are approaching equal footing again. We are probably stuck with both formats now.

My gripe with Blu-Ray is the intrusive BD+ copy protection. I don't want to give studios the ability to run executable code on my machine. Sony's creation of yet another format war instead of going with the DVD Forum's open standard made me decide to pass on upgrading my PS2 and its 50+ games to a PS3. My second console will probably be a Wii this generation.
 
[quote name='Ruined']I'm the one with sour grapes? I'm not one of those who dropped $500+ on a console whose promises have not been fulfilled by the company that made it - the game selection is poor compared to the competition, the PS3 multiplatform games run worse than on 360 with PS3 having slowdowns abound (there are 1 or 2 exceptions), and the big BD movie format Sony spent big bucks making alliances and having bombastic ad campaigns in an attempt to defeat the competition has failed to do so while similarly failing to deliver superior video quality as advertised as well. So yeah, if anyone has sour grapes I don't think it would be me - I wasn't let down time and time again like many PS3 owners.[/QUOTE]
So tell me, between Fall and Winter, what worthwhile games has the 360 gotten that the PS3 hasn't besides Halo 3 and Mass Effect? I can't think of any. Alternatively, PS3 has gotten Heavenly Sword, Ratchet and Clank, Time Crisis 4, Unreal Tournament 3, and next month it will have Haze which was canceled on the 360. I'd say the PS3 is doing pretty good game-wise.
 
[quote name='whoknows']So tell me, between Fall and Winter, what worthwhile games has the 360 gotten that the PS3 hasn't besides Halo 3 and Mass Effect? I can't think of any. Alternatively, PS3 has gotten Heavenly Sword, Ratchet and Clank, Time Crisis 4, Unreal Tournament 3, and next month it will have Haze which was canceled on the 360. I'd say the PS3 is doing pretty good game-wise.[/QUOTE]

In addition to Halo 3 and Mass Effect (which by themselves are huge), it appears you missed:

Ace Combat 6
Beautiful Katamari
Bioshock (Game of the year on many sites, btw)
Blue Dragon
DDR Universe 2
Eternal Sonata
Project Gotham Racing 4

Plus PS3's port of "The Orange Box" is a slowdown-filled mess compared to the 360 version. And UT3 will be out on 360 next year. All of this on top of the 360's already established comparatively massive library of games that cannot be found on PS3. So I believe my point stands.
 
[quote name='Ruined']In addition to Halo 3 and Mass Effect (which by themselves are huge), it appears you missed:

Ace Combat 6
Beautiful Katamari
Bioshock (Game of the year on many sites, btw)
Blue Dragon
DDR Universe 2
Eternal Sonata
Project Gotham Racing 4

Plus PS3's port of "The Orange Box" is a slowdown-filled mess compared to the 360 version. And UT3 will be out on 360 next year. All of this on top of the 360's already established comparatively massive library of games that cannot be found on PS3. So I believe my point stands.[/quote]

I can do that list.

Ace Combat 6 isn't huge in America as it is in Japan. Though I don't really play plane games. Beautiful Katamari.. Download only game. Bioshock is also coming to PS3 in the spring. Blue Dragon was nowhere near as good as promised, DDR games come to EVERYTHING, Eternal Sonota is also coming to PS3. Project Gotham Racing, alright I'll hand em this one though GT5 Prologue will give it a collosal bitchslap.

Orange box wasn't as bad as everything said it is on the PS3. It's not the stutterfest that everyone claims it is. Wasn't that stuttering already confirmed to be the fault of it quicksaving and when the quicksaving was over, it went back to normal?

The 360 owners seem to be forgetting that in the first year of its existance it literally had a whole lot of nothing with their top title being Dead or Alive 4.
 
[quote name='Paco']I can do that list.

Ace Combat 6 isn't huge in America as it is in Japan. Though I don't really play plane games. Beautiful Katamari.. Download only game. Bioshock is also coming to PS3 in the spring. Blue Dragon was nowhere near as good as promised, DDR games come to EVERYTHING, Eternal Sonota is also coming to PS3. Project Gotham Racing, alright I'll hand em this one though GT5 Prologue will give it a collosal bitchslap.[/quote]

I thought we were comparing games in mid to late 2007, not games "sometime in the future?" Your opinions on the games aside, many of these games in reviews all scored in the same as the PS3 exclusives listed, with the exception of Time Crisis 4 that scored much lower than any of the above games (low 60s in reviews).

As for GT5 vs. PGR, they are different subgenre games and hence have different fans. GT5 makes more sense to be compared to the Forza series; Forza 2 was released in early 2007 exclusively for XBOX 360, but I did not list that above as the poster was inquiring about mid-late 2007 360 exclusives. And according to Gamerankings, the original Forza scored higher in reviews than GT4 - so I would not be so confident that GT5 will be significantly better than Forza 2 (or maybe even Forza 3 considering how long its taking the full version of GT5 to come out).

Orange box wasn't as bad as everything said it is on the PS3. It's not the stutterfest that everyone claims it is. Wasn't that stuttering already confirmed to be the fault of it quicksaving and when the quicksaving was over, it went back to normal?
Click to expand...

The XBOX 360 version of The Orange Box scored 96% at GameRankings.

The PS3 version of the The Orange Box scored 78% at GameRankings.

Clearly something is very wrong with the PS3 version to get so much worse of a score composite.

The 360 owners seem to be forgetting that in the first year of its existance it literally had a whole lot of nothing with their top title being Dead or Alive 4.
Click to expand...

What's the difference? What's available now is what counts. We are not game historians, we are gamers - hence what is important are the games available to play and not the history of game releases. Will PS3 get more games in the future? Sure, but that doesn't mean much in terms of playing games now nor does it erase the truckload of 360 exclusives that have been released over the past 2 years - because just as PS3 will get more games, so will 360. And hence it is likely 360's library will remain larger than PS3's for some time to come.
 
[quote name='Ruined']The hidef disc war is far from over, and at this point it does not look like Blu-Ray can win despite its fans wishes to do so[/QUOTE]

:lol: Sure, and the PS3 still has a chance at being this generation's #1 console.

:lol:

Don't you dare tell me I'm the one with sour grapes - I'm not the one who lays claim to "hating" a corporate entity (though, to be fair, I have general disdain for multinational corporations, but that's evenly distributed amongst what we're discussing here - and the reasons for feeling such are better discussed in the VS forum).

:lol:
 
I think apathy is a better word for the PS3. I've been getting my podcasts this week automatically from the PSP's RSS features which just makes me love that little system even more. No matter how good the PSP gets, you just can't play phoenix wright on it, though.
 
Myke are those sprites from some NES game?

If it's the one I'm thinking of, then a short story is in order. Long ago I went to a family friend's house. Their kids had an NES with whatever game that is. They were wrestling fans, so they had decided to have a tournament, and they all picked their favorite character. I was stuck with the Honky Tonk Man, who I didn't know if he was any good or not, as I didn't follow the sport and had never played the game before.

I proceeded to kick all their asses, one by one by one.

I'm fairly sure I was about 8 at the time, and the other people ranged in age from 7 - 12 or so.

/will reply in detail to this thread a little later, at least most likely
 
[quote name='mykevermin']:lol: Sure, and the PS3 still has a chance at being this generation's #1 console. [/quote]

Little bit of a different situation there. With HD DVD/BD's sales combined, they are still only a tiny fraction of DVD sales. This is different than the current console race as the next-gen consoles have virtually wiped the last generation of consoles off the map in sales. While Sony's PR would have you believe that the HD disc war is in the bag, looking at the big picture its very clear that there is still a long way to go. Sony makes a big deal about a title on BD selling 160,000 vs. 100,000 on HD DVD, meanwhile the standard DVD sells like 3,000,000 in the same time period; obviously the masses have not come even close to making a decision yet, and until that happens (if it ever does happen), the HD disc war will remain very much up in the air.

The sales for the past week, which should be released this Friday, should give us an interesting baseline on how close the two competitors are right now as it has been the most balanced week in terms of big releases (BD had a TON the week before that will carry over vs. Bourne) and BOGOs (both HD DVD and BD had BOGOs this week). Most previous weeks had either been big releases on the BD side or BOGOs only on the BD side to counteract HD DVD releases. Still, from what I can see in the Amazon rankings both sides are still doing piss poor compared to standard DVD - meaning that whatever the outcome its still anyone's game.

Don't you dare tell me I'm the one with sour grapes
Click to expand...

Thou dost protest too much :)
 
They're from WWF Wrestlemania - a severe disappointment to those who have played the awesometastic WWF WrestleFest arcade game.

I swiped the sig from some cat over at a Smackdown vs. Raw 2008 CAW forum.

Mmmm...wrestlefest. Some folks clamor for it to be released on VC/PSN/XBLA, but due to copyrights (old wrestlers and the fact that they can't even *say* WWF anymore, let alone use the logo), the only version that will ever show up, if at all, is one with an updated roster. That reminds me, a certain gaming magazine rumor columnist will receive a severe throat-cutting if they lied about WWF No Mercy coming to WiiWare with an updated roster.

...err, yes, back to bashing everything that moves. I hates me some N-Gage.

EDIT: it's "The lady doth protest too much." God dammit. I'll tell you one thing I hate: people misquoting shakespeare. You can paraphrase "thou" from "the lady" to apply to me (though, to be fair, it would be far more invective if you left it as is), but doth-doth-doth. Criminy.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']EDIT: it's "The lady doth protest too much." God dammit. I'll tell you one thing I hate: people misquoting shakespeare. You can paraphrase "thou" from "the lady" to apply to me (though, to be fair, it would be far more invective if you left it as is), but doth-doth-doth. Criminy.[/QUOTE]

I was assuming you were male so I did not want to heap an insult on top of a witty retort ;)
 
[quote name='mykevermin']
EDIT: it's "The lady doth protest too much." God dammit. I'll tell you one thing I hate: people misquoting shakespeare. You can paraphrase "thou" from "the lady" to apply to me (though, to be fair, it would be far more invective if you left it as is), but doth-doth-doth. Criminy.[/QUOTE]

2B R NOT 2B
THAT SI TEH ?
 
Strell, so help me, if this leads into a "LOL-Shakespeare" craze, I'm gonna rollerskate down to Tejas and hunt you down.

[quote name='Ruined']I was assuming you were male so I did not want to heap an insult on top of a witty retort ;)[/QUOTE]

[notclever]Then you could have heaped an insult on top of what you originally said[/notclever]
 
[quote name='Ruined']In addition to Halo 3 and Mass Effect (which by themselves are huge), it appears you missed:

Ace Combat 6
Beautiful Katamari
Bioshock (Game of the year on many sites, btw)
Blue Dragon
DDR Universe 2
Eternal Sonata
Project Gotham Racing 4

Plus PS3's port of "The Orange Box" is a slowdown-filled mess compared to the 360 version. And UT3 will be out on 360 next year. All of this on top of the 360's already established comparatively massive library of games that cannot be found on PS3. So I believe my point stands.[/QUOTE]


Ace combat 6 - FLOP
Beautifu Katamari - FLOP (might as well get the ps2 versions)
Bioshock - Success
Blue Dragon - FLOP
DDR Universe 2 - Decent
Eternal Sonata - FLOP
Project Gotham Racing 4 - Decent

and Orangebox (ps3) got decent reviews as well.



Most of those games you named weren't that great, they were nice to have on the system, but not really significant titles for the 360. Not like Halo, and Bioshock, and Mass Effect of course.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Strell, so help me, if this leads into a "LOL-Shakespeare" craze, I'm gonna rollerskate down to Tejas and hunt you down.[/quote]Don't you mean lollerskate? turnab00tz r teh farepleyz
 
[quote name='jer7583']I think apathy is a better word for the PS3. I've been getting my podcasts this week automatically from the PSP's RSS features which just makes me love that little system even more. No matter how good the PSP gets, you just can't play phoenix wright on it, though.[/QUOTE]
I think technically you could. The Phoenix Wright games were originally GBA games in Japan right? If your PSP has custom firmware you can put a GBA emulator on it and play that way. Sure it would be in Japanese, but the fact remains that you COULD play it, you just couldn't enjoy it unless you know Japanese :p
 
why did you just make a point even though you knew it wasn't a valid one and said that yourself in your post?
 
What's not valid? You said Phoenix Wright can't be played on the PSP and I showed it can. Whether one knows Japanese and is able to enjoy it depends on the person, but it can be played. That was the point. Get it?
 
[quote name='Thomas96']Ace combat 6 - FLOP
Beautifu Katamari - FLOP (might as well get the ps2 versions)
Bioshock - Success
Blue Dragon - FLOP
DDR Universe 2 - Decent
Eternal Sonata - FLOP
Project Gotham Racing 4 - Decent

and Orangebox (ps3) got decent reviews as well.



Most of those games you named weren't that great, they were nice to have on the system, but not really significant titles for the 360. Not like Halo, and Bioshock, and Mass Effect of course.[/QUOTE]

Are we going by sales, gamerankings.com or your opinion? The first two have actual merit, the third is a complete non-factor.
 
[quote name='-Never4ever-']Are we going by sales, gamerankings.com or your opinion? The first two have actual merit, the third is a complete non-factor.[/QUOTE]


all of the above.
 
Also, in a radical reversal - like you might see in a wrestling match - the Playstation 3 version is clearly the better of the two. Clearly. People can talk about the contrast of the comparative images all night, if they would like, slight texture differences and so forth. Both look excellent. The 360 version quite simply doesn't have it in the performance department. It runs, and well, but once you've played it on the PS3 you start to notice performance dips and lost frames that used to just fade into the background. Also, this is the rare case where the 360's consistent UI is actually a hindrance to a cohesive experience: PS3 owners pull up an entirely in-game menu to select friends to play with. 360 owners get the same experience up until the end, when you leave the game UI altogether while this huge blade thing sweeps in and obscures the game. Typically, joining and invites occur outside the actual game experience. It's only jarring here because the distinction between single player and multiplayer is so liquid. Still, I thought it was interesting, particularly if that becomes a trend.
Click to expand...

OMG the 360 is done for!

:roll:

This is, of course, one person's take (it was a quote from one of the Penny Arcade guys) - but it just provides more evidence that any attempt to broadly paint all (or even the majority) of PS3 versions of games as inferior to the 360 version is foolish and mistaken. Ultimately, the actual release of the game will matter more than a demo, but let's not act as if this discrepancy is so constant.

What were the games that were, as Ruined claims, "the PS3 multiplatform games run worse than on 360 with PS3 having slowdowns abound (there are 1 or 2 exceptions)"? Orange Box...and?
 
[quote name='Thomas96']all of the above.[/QUOTE]

Actually, PGR4 flopped worse than any of the above on that list. But they're all awesome games that I either have bought or look forward to buying through next year. It's nice to have a backlog of interesting games to look forward to on your system as they get cheap.
 
[quote name='Ruined']The XBOX 360 version of The Orange Box scored 96% at GameRankings.

The PS3 version of the The Orange Box scored 78% at GameRankings.

Clearly something is very wrong with the PS3 version to get so much worse of a score composite.[/quote]
You missed the fact that there are only three reviews on GR, and only five on Metacritic at 83%. ;)

There's also the fact that the review and retail code's different, as 1up posted about the other day. Unless you know for a fact that they reviewed the retail version of the game, the reviews are a bit questionable.
 
This whole console war is about to change... there's a game on the horizon that made the PS2 in its 7th year the top selling console in the US.

God of War III....

All the true Playstation system sellers will be released in 2008. I just don't see how the 360 and Wii will be able to hold up agains the game scheduled for release on ps3 in 2008. [of course... assuming that the game actually come out, and they actually doesn't get pushed back]. In the US right now, there's no next gen RPG market. There's not many RPGs right now for these next gen system, and it seems that Sony might be able to establish a good set of next gen RPGs; that's going to be important for 2008. At least it breaks up some of the FPS, and action title monotony we've endured since the launch of the 360.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']You missed the fact that there are only three reviews on GR, and only five on Metacritic at 83%. ;)

There's also the fact that the review and retail code's different, as 1up posted about the other day. Unless you know for a fact that they reviewed the retail version of the game, the reviews are a bit questionable.[/QUOTE]


these review sites need to hurry and re review the actually retail version of the game.
People who I know have the game say that its pretty good and enjoyable.
 
You see, Myke? ^ This is the classical "Wait for ____" attitude.

Any one game wouldve been a miniscule dent in the PS2's overall 7th year performance. The 7th year performance is more of a factor of each of the preceding years:

A combined historical momentum created out of all that has come before, games included. Total hardware install base included.

The singular variable of marketshare changes ALL variables. Price drops have completely different effects depending on your market position. Price drops by those that are trailing accomplish but a temporary boost. Ones by the market leader further solidify their lead.

Game sales volumes are flipped on their heads. Game series that sold robustly along with lots of AFFORDABLE hardware units that had dominant marketshare and a cheap price point - Those games CANNOT be expected to have the same effect when nearly every other variable is different.

Selling a $200 console from the top position is radically different than selling a $400 one from the bottom.
 
Just wait one minute... mykevermin...and Mario Kart....

My post about God of War III is correct.. what's the problem. Is it not true that God of War II gave PS2 a big boost in sales... and is it not true that the PS3 could use and will receive a similar boost in sales, when God of War III is released on PS3.

Dr. Mario Kart... all thoughout the PS3 lifespan its been the PS3 has no games, then PS3 got games, and its no system selling games argument that came out. PS3 outsold the Wii in Japan which I think that surge was stimulated by Gran Turismo Prologue. So you're dead wrong in your assumption that a single game can't create a surge in PS3 sales, or any other system.


It funny how you two sit around thinking everything you say is right and everything I say doesn't have merit...

oh well.
 
You're just begging for a chart, maybe when I get back.

PS3 outsold Wii in Japan for 2 and exactly 2 weeks following the price drop.

Let me repeat myself on the stance of system selling games.

Single games absolutely can move a lot of systems.

However, it doesnt move enough to make a system successful. There are a lot more variables creating a more complex situation than that.

It wouldnt even matter if the games were the best games of all time (see: Soul Calibur, Ocarina of Time, and Mario 64).
 
The problem is you did not say "GOWIII will sell a lot of consoles." Of course it will.

You said "This whole console war is about to change," which is unprovable until after the fact. You also said "All the true Playstation system sellers will be released in 2008," which significantly diminishes the very damned good games I've played on my PS3 this year, and ignores the fact that the perception of the PS3 as lacking games does more to affect hardcore gamer sentiment than the reality of this many or that many wonderful titles.

All the consoles have *enough* games worth playing right now, IMO (to be fair, some more than others, and I won't claim that the PS3 is the one with the most - that's silly). So it's silly to act as if the PS3 lacked in the games department this year - you're playing right into the hands of those who don't like the PS3, and their silly post-hoc claims about there being nothing to play for it.
 
[quote name='Thomas96']Just wait one minute... mykevermin...and Mario Kart....

My post about God of War III is correct.. what's the problem. Is it not true that God of War II gave PS2 a big boost in sales... and is it not true that the PS3 could use and will receive a similar boost in sales, when God of War III is released on PS3.

Dr. Mario Kart... all thoughout the PS3 lifespan its been the PS3 has no games, then PS3 got games, and its no system selling games argument that came out. PS3 outsold the Wii in Japan which I think that surge was stimulated by Gran Turismo Prologue. So you're dead wrong in your assumption that a single game can't create a surge in PS3 sales, or any other system.
[/QUOTE]

I don't think the boost will be that big for GoW3. PS2 is only $130 and GoW2 is around $40 compared to $400/$500 (or $300/$400 if another price drops happens) and $60 for GoW3.

Wasn't there a Gundam game or something that helped the PS3 those weeks that it outsold the Wii. The PS3 will do that in Japan, for Gundam, Final Fantasy, Dynasty Warriors, Gran Turismo, and other BIG Japanese franchises will sell systems for Sony. Just look what Core Crisis did for the PSP.

A lot of people were predicting Sony to come out on top for the month of November and they still fell short in the States. Though the 285% (or whatever it was) increase in sales was nice but can they keep that momentum going. I think most consumers are waiting for another price drop to either at or below 360 prices for them to start overtaking the 360 in the month to month sales.

Also with BLU-Ray players now being below PS3 prices that could hurt Sony as people who are jumping into the High Def craze buy a $300 BLU-Ray player instead of the $400 PS3.
 
[quote name='Thomas96']

It funny how you two sit around thinking everything you say is right and everything I say doesn't have merit...
[/QUOTE]

Because it doesn't. You're far too biased to the PS3.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']The problem is you did not say "GOWIII will sell a lot of consoles." Of course it will.

You said "This whole console war is about to change," which is unprovable until after the fact. You also said "All the true Playstation system sellers will be released in 2008," which significantly diminishes the very damned good games I've played on my PS3 this year, and ignores the fact that the perception of the PS3 as lacking games does more to affect hardcore gamer sentiment than the reality of this many or that many wonderful titles.

All the consoles have *enough* games worth playing right now, IMO (to be fair, some more than others, and I won't claim that the PS3 is the one with the most - that's silly). So it's silly to act as if the PS3 lacked in the games department this year - you're playing right into the hands of those who don't like the PS3, and their silly post-hoc claims about there being nothing to play for it.[/QUOTE]


okay, my point isn't just "oh wait for _____" My poin is that God of War III will sell a lot of consoles, and there's a lot of good follow and some system seller titles scheduled for release to follow up the release of God of War III [whenever that is]. I mentioned RPGs because Sony has most of the Final Fantasy games coming to their consoles, PSP, and PS3, which will establish a genre that will perhaps make the PS3 have the robust library of games [next gen].


All true Playstation system sellers, refers to games like Metal Gear, Final Fantasy, GTA[which isn't exclusive anymore] which are the classic Playstation titles that push PS systems. If you check the sales of these games, they're probably in or close to the top 10 highest selling franchises. 360 would have been in a much better position if they could have gotten Halo 3 out during its first year. - where they had NO opposition. Its like the PS3 didn't get its "Halo 3" during the first year. But I'm not trying to discredit all the great games that were released.
 
I think you're missing the point. DMK seems to be arguing that it is the library overall, including high profile games, that push people to a machine. One game alone (save perhaps Halo) will push people to buy a system - God of War will sell systems, but by the time it's released (it's not even been formally announced yet, fer cryin' out loud), the PS3's library will be even more robust.

I, OTOH, am agreeing with DMK, but also adding that the perception some folks have of the PS3 (and you can see those people posting in this thread) will not permit them to admit any worthwhile games exist on the PS3. Go ahead; try and get Ruined or jer5783 to admit there's something strictly on the Ps3 they'd like to play. You'd have more fun having your teeth extracted without anesthetic.

God of War won't change all that. It will result in a spike in console sales, but it won't, as you say, change the console war.

EDIT: C'mon, I'm a devil's advocate PS3 fan as much as anyone else, but let's avoid delusion, shall we?
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I think you're missing the point. DMK seems to be arguing that it is the library overall, including high profile games, that push people to a machine. One game alone (save perhaps Halo) will push people to buy a system - God of War will sell systems, but by the time it's released (it's not even been formally announced yet, fer cryin' out loud), the PS3's library will be even more robust.

I, OTOH, am agreeing with DMK, but also adding that the perception some folks have of the PS3 (and you can see those people posting in this thread) will not permit them to admit any worthwhile games exist on the PS3. Go ahead; try and get Ruined or jer5783 to admit there's something strictly on the Ps3 they'd like to play. You'd have more fun having your teeth extracted without anesthetic.

God of War won't change all that. It will result in a spike in console sales, but it won't, as you say, change the console war.

EDIT: C'mon, I'm a devil's advocate PS3 fan as much as anyone else, but let's avoid delusion, shall we?[/QUOTE]


God of War won't do it alone... I definitely agree with that. That's why I mentioned the release of RPGs, and other big titles that will either cause surges in system sells, or be good follow up titles - [good titles that increase the quality of the overall library]. This year, the PS3 didn't get their Halo 3, but they got a bunch of decent "follow up" titles that may end up selling pretty well later on down the line. A 400 dollar PS3 would be good with Ratchet and Uncharted bundled in. [and a throw in of a high anticipated blu ray movie]
I was listening to 1up podcast and they made a good point, that Gran Turismo was released in Japan, and it missed the chrismas market here in the US. Gran Turismo could have gotten some systems sold this chrismas.


edit - I want to point out that every console has had a specific advantage to help it. Wii - 249 cheap price, 360 - was on the market for a year unopposed. PS3 - none so far, hopefully they can get all their big releases to see the light of day in 2008.
 
Gran Turismo Prologue would matter if it weren't digital distribution only - because at that point you're only appealing to people who are paying attention to the PSN's offerings, only a small portion of which aren't already PS3 owners.

DLC = Preaching to the choir, IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top