PS3 Is "Dying On The Shelves"
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
It doesn't really matter with 16 million units sold every third-party developer will want to develop for both. Even if the 360 wins it will mean that Microsoft just stops spending a fortune to influence third-party developers.
So if I offered you $50, I could have it?DamienHell said:
If it wasn't for the price, I'd be a proud owner of the PS3, even if all I ever played on it was God of War III and LBP
I play MGS3, MGS1, Jak 3, R&C 3, FF12, and FF8 on my PS3 on a fairly regular basis and i dont have a problem with them. what kind of problems have you been hearing about?MsDevin92 said:
I like my Wii, but i wish there was more to play on it (as in more GOOD things to play on it).
As far as I can tell, only Fox pumps bad [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/81009-Fox-News-Commentator-Apologizes-for-Mass-Effect-Comments-Following-Blowback] news [http://www.areavoices.com/commonsense/images/thumbnail/only_on_fox.jpg] and fear [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLP4-cxQANs] into the world. MSNBC is an anti-Fox, and CNN just has a bunch of weird gimmicks, like the faux-hologram on election night. Though you don't have to put up with Fox's retardation week-in and week-out like we Yankees do, so I wont hold it against you. Hell, the only English news source I know of is the BBCsirdanrhodes said:
Dreamcast is the most underrated system of all-time. I'll take it over a PS3 every time. Got mine used for 20 bucks and it has more mileage on it than my goddamned Wii.meridiangod said:
Did I get to abandon C/C++ because it was harder than VisualBasic? No. Switching toolchains is what devs do and if it's a problem for you, perhaps you're in the wrong field. You know devs had the _same_ bolus of bellyaches when the PS2 came out, but they knuckled down and figured it out, to the benefit of all. How does that behavior fit against the fact that the XBox was just as much of a commodity PC back then, just as easy to program for as the 360, yet devs didn't fall out in droves to abandon the "too hard" PS2. Just because it makes no sense to you doesn't mean there's no sense to find.Woe Is You said:
Your points do not make this any less of an over-hyped story. Sony does have issues to address, they aren't the leading console, but the PS3 is not "dying on the shelves". This generation is playing out very different than the last few have. To read your post, no one ever made a PS3 exclusive because it was too hard. We all know that's not true. Following your assertions to conclusion, the dev community would be pumping out more Wii or 360 (which should it be? Anything that isn't Sony?) exclusives than any other platform, which isn't the case.
Two things here: first, switching toolchains is perfectly normal, yes, but what I actually mean is that the processor requires different toolchains just to access different parts of it. You compile things for the PPE using certain tools and then for the SPE using a completely different toolchain. That is an unnecessary pain in the ass.SaintWaldo said:
Second, it might be so that the the devs had the same problems in the previous generation, but there's one major difference: the PS2 was the dominating platform then. You had to knuckle under, because there was loads of money to be made if you did. This isn't the case with the PS3. What we have here is a device that is 1) expensive, 2) hard to develop for and 3) not selling too well in comparison to its competitors.
It's not all bad for Sony, though, for two reasons, which are the reasons why I don't believe Sony even considers dropping out of the console race. Even if they didn't step it up and the PS3 ends up dead last in the console race like it looks like now, the PS3 did succeed in one of its goals; helping Blu-ray become the de facto HD movie disc standard. Then there's the PS2 that's still a factor. People still buy them, games are made for it and the thing has a potential customer base many times the size of the Wii.
Again, my main point was, the title "PS3 Dead on the Shelves" is hyperbolic. Agree or disagree? That statement seems to agree.Woe Is You said:
I never said they had zero issues or would end up first this gen, I'm saying: It's not over yet, 1 bad month is not the end, and willfully misreading the NPD report to come up with that title is an abdication of journalistic standards because it obscures analysis in the source material in favor of reinforcing a useless "war" frame. Having a glimmer of a point about difficult dev does not make my main point invalid.
I absolutely hate that saying though and here's why.SuperFriendBFG said:I agree that you do get what you pay for. The coolest thing about the PS3 for me is that you can install Linux on it and host Quake 3 servers.
Everyone says that LIVE is better and you "get what you pay for". But if that's true, then PS3 is automatically the best choice.
Another one, you "get what you pay for" if you pay for a Mac Book Air (just an example) but there are better choices with cheaper price tags.
The whole saying contradicts itself because people want less for more which makes "getting what you pay for" impossible because you need cheap price tags to entice customers and make them feel like they're getting their money's worth. This saying is only true if you reword it into "You get your bang for your buck" meaning that you get a pretty decent package with a decent price.
People who say "you get what you pay for!" are only trying to justify their expensive purchase or whatever purchase they did (which Ironically, I think, I've only seen 360 owners use that saying to justify LIVE. But that's what I see)
PS: THANK YOU ESCAPIST FOR GIVING US BIGGER TYPING BOXES!#@$%!@#%!@#
BuT yOu GeT wHaT yOu PaY fOr!@#!#@#!Samah said:...which you can do with a low to mid performance PC for much less cash.SuperFriendBFG said:I agree that you do get what you pay for. The coolest thing about the PS3 for me is that you can install Linux on it and host Quake 3 servers.
This is exactly why I hate that saying, with precisely your example as well as the one I posted above.
Yeah, the problem is that Sony have a console with a samey library (GTA IV, Orange Box, BioShock, Oblivion, Fallout 3, Assassin's Creed, Soul Calibur IV) that retails at a higher price point.
The Xbox 360-PS3 rivalry reminds me of the PS1-Saturn rivalry: the Saturn - which would in this case be analagous to the PS3 - had alot of the same games early on and a few excellent exclusives, but it suffered because in competing for the same market because it cost more and was difficult to program on. Not to mention Sega's marketing blunders, which represented an about face since their "SNES isn't cool" Genesis days.
I've been writing the same for a while now.EzraPound said:
But those Genesis ads are classic. Genesis does what Nintendon't.
Granted, but truth and over-hype are two different words. I will agree that the article exaggerates the scope indefintely. I will say that the Playstation 3 is far from "dying on the shelves." Yes, this Sony console is still selling, both hardware and software. However, you can't tell me that coming in *dead last* after two consecutive cut-and-dry victories does not reek like fail.SaintWaldo said:
Is selling almost 17 million game consoles in only two years a failure? No. Is selling that many while one competitor doubles that amount in the same time frame, or if the other competitor beats you by about 50% despite only haveing a few years of experience in the industry? I would say probably. The PS3 is a good console and has its share consumer support, but sales figures (and profit reports) do not lie. The PS3 is not a success. It is a failure.
This article does over-hype the problems Sony has, but the notion of the PS3's, well, awful market performance is nothing too far from the truth.
I'd give sony a hand and buy their shiny black monolith if only it weren't so stupidly expensive.
A little off topic but I wonder how much it costs them to make a single PS3. Anyone know?
A little off topic but I wonder how much it costs them to make a single PS3. Anyone know?
Well this is appropriate seeing as microsoft have a large stake in cnn.harhol said:
Contrary to this article, the ps3 is not dying on the shelves. In Tesco, where i work, the ps3 outsells the 360 by a ratio of about 4:3. Also, it was confirmed last month the ps3 has a user base of 300,000 more than the 360 in the PAL region. Seeing as its pretty much been ahead in Asia since day one, 360 now only lead in America. If the ps3 is dying, the 360 is dying worse.
However, i will admit that so many more people would buy a ps3 if they lowered the goddamn price!!!