»

[merylsilverburg]

Originally Posted by Harry

You are so right; even the lack of the vibration function in the new controller is, in my opinion, a big loss, at least from a marketing point of view. I think that in 90% of videogames, vibration was nothing more than a little addition that didn't improve the gameplay; but in some of the finest PlayStation games it was relatively important. I think about Survival Horrors, where vibration can be used to create suspense and let you "feel" the blow when attacking some enemies (I really enjoyed the feeling I got when hitting giant bugs in Silent Hill using a pickaxe), but in general about games that made a more thorough use of the Dual Shock. It seems Kojima was incredibly pissed off by the announcement, as he was planning to do a great use of vibration in MGS4. In fact, can you imagine fighting those robots/Metal Gears without "sensing" the vibration produced by their heavy steps on the ground?

Yes, losing the vibration is pretty sad and I was surprised about it, but I figured they might come up with something else in replace of it that's better or even more advanced somehow. Yet it doesn't seem like that's the case now. I agree with you that the vibration does create a sense of "connection" between the game and the player; it makes the player feel more involved or feel they are right in the action.

Originally Posted by Harry

In general, Sony seems more scared of Microsoft than they probably want to admit, even though I do not understand why. If Microsoft wasn't around, they would have never released different versions of the same console. Sure, Microsoft secured rights on the GTA series (which is a great loss for Sony), but Sony still has much more support from third party developers. Not to mention that a lot of gamers, in particular outside North America, perceive the Xbox 360 as an updated version of the Xbox, a sort of Xbox 1.5. In most countries in Europe, for example, the Xbox is still perceived as a second choice, after all other PlayStation platforms.

Precisely. Before Microsoft, Sony pretty much ruled and, like you said, they might not have released editions of the PS3 if Microsoft didn't show up because they were so arrogant then and they knew no one could touch them. Not that Sony isn't annoyingly arrogant now, but the overshowy attitude of Sony seems like a mask to hide their fears and insecurities. It's as if they "know" it's a possiblity that Microsoft could gain up to them or overpower them someday and someway. But honestly, by releasing the console in two somewhat unfair ways, don't they realize they could potentially lose more fans than gain?

[jjmoohead]

Lets face it, even if sony is arrogant, they sorta deserve the position. No, better yet, they earned it. The price of this console is not that bad. The problem is for our generation of gamers comming up through the years are used to simple machines at somewhat simple prices. The PS3 is complex. What would you think about paying the price of the actual PS3. I bet the cost is closer to $1000 for the company. I don't think they are making a cent of the sales. As far as i see it, im getting a $1000 blueray player for nearly half the cost. Oh and it plays video games too that have the potential to make Xbox look like a intelevision. The PS2 if you remember correctly at release (as i noted earlier) with the price of a game, an extra controller and a memory card (which would require lots of memory cards for this HD) was about $700. The xbox 360 in canada is selling for $500 in most stores and there was a price drop already. Im getting a hell of a deal at Sony's prices.

I own a xbox and its currently the only system i own, but im really excited for the ps3 and no matter the cost im getting one on release, infact i just went and payed off the rest of the cost. Honestly I thought I was going to have to pay a hell of alot more. As for fans leaving. The fans wont leave, the true fans wont go anywhere. Will all fans be able to afford one, no, but let me assure you most will pick one up eventually.

[Faile]

The 360 sort of occupies the Dreamcast role of the last generation. It was rushed out to beat the other competitors to the detriment of the hardware.

[kupoartist]

Originally Posted by Faile

The 360 sort of occupies the Dreamcast role of the last generation. It was rushed out to beat the other competitors to the detriment of the hardware.

That's more than a little inaccurate and unfair If anything, the 360 is comparable to the Playstation 2, which was "rushed" between a year and a year and a half before the X-box and Gamecube were, just as the 360 will be this time round. The Dreamcast was between 2 and 3 years before the others, and the hardware was majorly inferior, whereas the 360 isn't that far behind the PS3 by most reckoning.

[Faile]

There was the same trail time between the DC's North American launch and that of the 360 and PS3 though. Thought the tech difference isn't vast, I still consider the 360 to be the DC of this generation. At least in my head...

[kupoartist]

Originally Posted by Faile

There was the same trail time between the DC's North American launch and that of the 360 and PS3 though.

But that doesn't really mean anything. The DC first launched in Nov 1998. The fact that it took a year to get to North America is an even bigger reason why 360 isn't really comparable to 360. But then I'm trying too hard to rationalise what i'm sure is just a general dislike of the console, aren't I?

[Faile]

Yeah, sorry. I wasn't using that point to disprove you, only to explain why I make the connection in my head. I liked the DC though. It was cute!

[Harry]

Originally Posted by kupoartist

That's more than a little inaccurate and unfair If anything, the 360 is comparable to the Playstation 2, which was "rushed" between a year and a year and a half before the X-box and Gamecube were, just as the 360 will be this time round. The Dreamcast was between 2 and 3 years before the others, and the hardware was majorly inferior, whereas the 360 isn't that far behind the PS3 by most reckoning.

While a comparison with the DC is inaccurate, this is how the Xbox 360 risks to be perceived by gamers in some parts of the world (probably not in North America), and I am sure marketing analysts at Sony thought about this.

Microsoft tried to do what Sony did with the PlayStation 2, as kupoartist said. But then again, games they have released so far for the Xbox 360, with a couple of fine exceptions, look like Xbox games in HD. The problem is, in my opinion, that when Sony launched its PlayStation 2 there were few games being released on non Sony platforms; on the opposite, the Xbox 360 has been launched while many AAA titles are still being developed for PlayStation 2. I am speaking of Shadow Of The Colossus (I can't find a game on the Xbox 360 as spectacular or as brilliant as this), but also God Of War, Metal Gear Solid 3: Subsistence, the soon to come Final Fantasy XII, the wonderful Rogue Galaxy (a great RPG from the same developers behind Dark Cloud), and many more. I think Microsoft underestimated this, capitalizing on the next-generation fever. Also, the Xbox was released one year later than the PS2, yet a new Xbox is released one year before the PlayStation 3 - this means two years less in the life span of a Microsoft console. Gamers - in particular those not living in North America, where multiple console owners are much more frequent than in Europe - do care about this kind of things.

In any case, as I said, the 360 and the PS3 will be directly comparable in terms of performance, like the PS2 and the Xbox did. If Sony is unable to launch a system that is slightly superior in terms of hardware to the Xbox 360, then they do have some trouble, especially because they are the ones, together with Microsoft, trying to market their console as the "most powerful".

I think things could get really interesting once the true second generation of Xbox 360 games and the first decent PS3 games will hit the stores. I just hope this generation will bring something more than hordes of nameless, soulless cross-platform releases from big corporates. Both Sony and Microsoft need to focus more on unique software for their systems than on silly comparisons of empty system specs.

[kupoartist]

All true, but it's worth factoring in the price differences. PS2 wasn't as proportionally cheaper than the Xbox as 360 will be to the PS3, in fact, in North America (the yardstick for console success) the PS2 kept a static retail price that was identical to the XBox at the Xbox's launch.

[Harry]

You are absolutely right, the PS3 price might be good considering what you get, but is too high in comparison with the one of the Xbox 360, which offers more or less the same features. And what if Microsoft is planning a small price cut, or some special bundle for the holiday season?

[Faile]

Remember the drastic price cuts Microsoft applied to the Xbox following its release though. It's easy to imagine Sony loss leading if they had to.

[Berserker]

Originally Posted by Harry

You are absolutely right, the PS3 price might be good considering what you get, but is too high in comparison with the one of the Xbox 360, which offers more or less the same features. And what if Microsoft is planning a small price cut, or some special bundle for the holiday season?

They admitted that this will be their strategy, cut the price down of their console as soon as the ps3 hits the store. They hope to have sold a decent amount of consoles by then and can affort it to cut down the retail price. It would be interesting to see, which strategy will be succesfull hope it will come down in the end to the quality of the exclusive games instead of clever marketing tricks and price battles.

[TtTackler]

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=17035

Both SKUs will support the wireless controllers and buyers are free to supplant the in-box HDD with any of their choosing. Sony will not be distributing specialized hard drives on the presumption of this open compatability.

In addition, Sony will also offer WiFi and Card Reader peripherals for those who don't option the $600 version of the console. As yet, there are no plans to add an HDMI adapter, leaving it as the only thing that would remain out of reach for those with the lesser package.

Good news, now just need word on the HDMI.

[Harry]

Thanks for the link!

Sony never announced that the 20GB version was without Wi-Fi controllers support. A lot of websites confused the announced lack of Wi-Fi support in the 20GB version - it didn't refer to controllers, but to Internet connectivity. As we wrote in our news articles, the 20GB has only an Ethernet port, while the other has a built-in wireless card.

What's good is that they will also sell Wi-Fi adapters and card reader peripherals - but we know average price of official PlayStation peripherals is high.

[Redpyramidhead]

This is all giving me a headache. Actually, what dissapoints me most is that the PS3 controllers will not have a vibration function. I am hoping that they will offer a peripheral that can be attached to controllers or a revision of their controller later on that will be allowed after they work something out with whoever was suing them over the vibration feature. In Silent Hill for example, the feeling of your heartbeat increasing as you are on the brink of losing your life is infinately important. So is the feeling of your engin and driving over a rough surface in pretty much ANY racing videogame. I can only imagine just how upset Kojima is knowing the interesting things he likes to do with controllers!

So yeah... that is the biggest dissapointment to me. The price of the PS3 would be the next dissapointment, but that is launch price and I wasnt exactly planning on getting my hands on one right away anyways. At this rate I probably won't own one until the latter half of 2007 and that is fine with me as I am sure the price will have dropped nicely by then as well as there being plenty of TRUE next gen titles for it by then. In the meantime I will probably invest in a 360.

Also, I still plan on getting a lot of gaming fun out of the PS2 for the next few years as should the rest of you. Not only are games going to drop to such a wonderful price that we all will be in gaming bliss, but developers are still belting out games that test the very limits of the system in ways we havent imagined possible before. Even Sony themselves will be continuing to invest lots of time and money into the PS2. Units are still being sold at a wonderful rate. This is where Microsoft is losing out. They have pretty much abandoned first party support for the Xbox and did not offer a more convenient redesign. The success of the PS2 it seems may continue to bridge the gap between this console and when the majority of us will finally be able to realistically make the decision to own a PS3. MGS4 and all those wonderful games will still be there. PLus, I dont know about you, but I still have hundreds of incredible games and series of games to play through before thinking or worrying about investing in a 600 dollar piece of eye candy. That is all it will be for the first 1-2 years.


_RED_ stuff