Understanding Sony's philosophy on the PS3

[Doug]

Meh, I think I'll keep my PC and buy a 'Blu' ray player if/when they become popular. The original post does make some good points, but I don't think you've taken into account the scale of the economic bias against the PS3 (and the XBox, not necessarily the Wii).

Both the XBox and PS3 do have HDTV, but at the moment, the demand for such hi-tech goods is down - families don't know if their primary income is about to go or not, so luxuries like that are not high on their lists. Without a HDTV, the graphical improvements are not all that great over the last-gen consoles.

Add to that the price above the XBox, and more so for the Wii, and the sales drop more.

Personally, I think all the consoles are in for a rough ride for the next few years, even the Wii, but only time will tell for sure.

Personally again, I think the PC will remain strong, although developers for it need to realise than having ultra eye popping graphics aren't going to sell if no-one has the hardware for it (obvious, you'd think, but EA haven't worked this out yet - Valve and Stardock have). Also, the insidious Java Applet games will remain strong - after all, most workplaces and web-cafe's have the ability to run them. In the words of XKCD: http://www.xkcd.com/484/

 

[Geo Da Sponge]

Mate everyone knew around the time of Cod4s release that Ps3 was the superior looking and running version and ive seen many comparisons of multiplat games on websties and with my own eyes on two seperate TVs many multiplat games look alot better on Ps3 now please remove your fanboy ass from this thread

I've seen the comparison videos too. In the PS3 version of Call of Duty 4 it rains inside the helicopter. Pretty much every multiplatfrom game looks either the same on 360/PS3 or marginally better on 360, due to it being easier to program for. Occasionally they've been optimised slightly to look better on the PS3, but this is rare.

But if you honestly think multiplatform games really look different to any tangible degree you need to take off your fanboy goggles (like beer goggles but sleeker and shinier).

 

[mikecoulter]

The problem with Blu-ray is that there is no difference from regular dvd that is viewable by the human eye. Sure eagles cats and other things with superior vision can see it, but those things don't have the money to buy it.

Have you gone mad? 0_o

 

[McClaud]

the only thing that bothers me about it is when you say the PS3 has to gain ground

but hasn't it already gained a huge amount of ground ??
after all it's been about 2 years and in that time i've seen it achieve a hell lot of ground

It still has a long way to go. I think the ground he speaks of is that it needs to expand it's .5% growth potential over the XBox 360's growth potential into something like 2 or 3%. I mean, last Christmas - its best sales period yet - it was still outsold by the XBox 360 2 to 1. You can check the NDP for that if you don't believe me.

but anyway this article deserves a medal

I think it does a fine job of pointing out many of the good qualities of the PS3 as well.

 

[pha kin su pah]

As much as i enjoyed your philosophical, and agree with it in some ways, but i have to kinda disagree, in certain parts.

Yes, Blu-ray is/could be the next step, however i feel that they may have jumped the gun on it, DVD become popular when licensing got released allowing other companies take create and sell, thus decreasing the value of the product as competition became available, which meant consumers could embrace the new technology to which it became mainstream.

By making the ps3 a long term product, and with the impending release of Microsoft's next product, its essentially posted a benchmark, for them to supersede, considering its barely 27 months old (2.25 years) and has another 7.75 years to last, from a marketing and business perspective it is somewhat dangerous.

I could be wrong, Playstation, may have created a benchmark too high, or plans to undercut and grasp hold of the market (a reverse of the situation), only time will tell but it will definately be interesting.

Take note PC fanboys i discluded your PC's for a competitive comparison, keeping it strictly console (ps3vbox).

 

[MrGFunk]

The problem with Blu-ray is that there is no difference from regular dvd that is viewable by the human eye.

...

Do you really, honestly, believe this? Have you sat down with an old, non-upconverting DVD player, popped in a DVD, and watched it and then watched the same movie in Bluray? Have you sat close to your T.V. (I'm assuming it can handle 1080p) with a Blu-Ray in? Have you compared that to an upconverted DVD?

The difference is compression. Bluray isn't compressed. DVD is. It's as simple as that. >I< can see the difference, as can anyone who thought the same as you after I did 'the test'.

Even further, there's more to Bluray than the visual. Mainly the sound.

I'm confused by people who don't like BluRay, the comparison is crazy. BluRay is happening. Like the PS3, BluRay is trying to push Technology forward. I find it sad it's still too expensive and exclusive for some. I personally would buy more BluRays if they were cheaper and it's also slowed my DVD purchases as I'm holding out for BluRay offers. It's creating a limbo but I guess I'm saving money.

 

[Gormers1]

Microsoft will be planning the next xbox to release nextyear THEY SAID IT THEMSELVES

No.

 

[Snowalker]

The thing that I keep noticing here is that many excapists are becoming Xbox biased. I could be wrong, because, most of us realize that the PC will trump most everything. Also, because I have noticed that I myself, am somtimes biased for the PS3. All I'm saying is sometimes it seems like the people on here are more for the Xbox, and the webstite itself,Why no PSN id if you going to have Gamertags?,hmm. Anyhow I always thought the PS3 will be the console that would last a longer time, but I could be wrong on that also.

 

[Jumplion]

I'll be waiting for your response.

Please play Killzone 2. Or at least the demo. Maybe with some good surround sound at max. And a nice telly to play on, preferably 1080p or such. Or maybe just hook it up to your PC, you PC nerd you. Play it on a different language though, maybe Dutch, the voice acting is so bad it's hilarious.

Dated technology doesn't mean you can't squeeze some more juice out of it. Or more ragdoll physics. Or maybe some particle physics [http://ps3.ign.com/dor/objects/748475/killzone-next-gen/videos/killzone_omzet_part1.html] or something.

OH WAIT, you weren't talking to me? Oh dear, I'm sorry, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to respond to you, it's so much fun!

Anyway, on to the article the OP posted, very nice article that doesn't come off as biased. Usually it's always either;
"Blu-ray isn't selling because nobody gives a shit about it, so Sony should never have included it, and there is no notable difference, so it's a stupid format that should never have existed."
or
"PS3 is a good piece of hardware, it has all the best games but people don't know it, and the other consoles are technically inferior, and it uses blu-ray."

Both options were clearly biased, but this article was probably the least opinionated I've seen so far.

Good job, I applaud you.

 

[The_Prophet]

The biggest failure in this entire thread is making the false assumption that the PS3 is powerful in terms of gaming.

Woops.

HA! I support you!

 

[Jumplion]

Please play Killzone 2. Or at least the demo. Maybe with some good surround sound at max. And a nice telly to play on, preferably 1080p or such. Or maybe just hook it up to your PC, you PC nerd you. Play it on a different language though, maybe Dutch, the voice acting is so bad it's hilarious.

Dated technology doesn't mean you can't squeeze some more juice out of it. Or more ragdoll physics. Or maybe some particle physics [http://ps3.ign.com/dor/objects/748475/killzone-next-gen/videos/killzone_omzet_part1.html] or something.

I never said Killzone 2 doesn't look decent. But dated technology does mean you have to spend quite a bit more money, time, and effort, all things especially precious considering contemporary market conditions, in producing games which will be competitive and successful. That's a big reason why the PS3 is dead last in the console race, despite all the big exclusives that were supposed to save it which came out this year, and also why Sony has recently posted their first loss in 14 years.

When you're dealing with an SDK and platform which essentially requires you to reinvent the wheel just to get everything running compared to the two other platforms a major company is developing a blockbuster for (the Xbox 360 and the PC platform). Hell, even looking at the Wii, there isn't much of an issue since the platform has been around for so damn long. And you can typically print money with it.

By the way, when you put your CPU in front of your GPU, you lose. And you double lose, when your CPU is weirdly overpowered, extremely expensive, and essentially useless for gaming. It's great for marketing to talk about how awesome the Cell processor is, but marketing won't get you far when you have the most expensive console on the market at the moment.

That people don't understand the ramifications of this is worrying. Although, it's a little bit more worrying that Sony doesn't seem to understand this either. They should just give me a lot of money to help develop their next platform.

The same thing can be said about newer technologies coming out with new ways to do those things. And you're contradicting yourself when you're saying "But dated technology does mean you have to spend quite a bit more money, time, and effort," but then saying it's easier to develop for the other consoles since they don't have as complex of a SDK or NYJ or a XCDK or something when their technologies are older.

But it's always about graphics for you, never about sound maybe? Or ragdoll animations? Or par [http://ps3.ign.com/dor/objects/748475/killzone-next-gen/videos/killzone_omzet_part1.html]ticle [http://ps3.ign.com/dor/objects/748475/killzone-next-gen/videos/killzone_omzet_part2.html] phy [http://ps3.ign.com/dor/objects/748475/killzone-next-gen/videos/killzone_omzet_part3.html]sics [http://ps3.ign.com/dor/objects/748475/killzone-next-gen/videos/killzone_omzet_part4.html]?

 

[Irridium]

This is actually a pretty unbiased and tell-it-like-it-is post. That bit about the life cycle of previous Sony systems rings pretty true from where I stand. I didn't get my PS2 until 2004, so it was much cheaper when I picked it up and the library was much more fleshed out than a few years earlier.

Generally I don't like buying consoles at launch anymore. In this day and age it's likely that launch run consoles will have something wrong with them and it's almost assured that the launch titles will suck. That's why I didn't get my 360 until 2007. It seems very stable and in over a year of use I haven't gotten RRoD. It's an Elite.

But then again, I got my N64 as soon as the system launched and the fuckin' thing STILL works 12 years later.

because back then, they couldn't update the systems online with fixes, so they made absolutely sure that it worked. while nowadays, things can be updated with fixes, which makes companies much lazier in releasing a bug free console.

hell, my playstation 1 still works.

 

[Triscut900]

true dat

 

[Laughing Man]

You do know that on a basic level the card in a console and a card in a PC work the same. You can compare them on tera-flops / second or bandwidth but at the programming level they are not the same. The PC card needs the wonders of Direct X and Open GL APis to get the most from them where as the PS3 does not. They use totally different programming codes so simply taking a console card and sticking it in the world of the PC card power level doesn't work.

I am not saying that that makes the card in the PS3 more powerful than the PC fanboys here are suggesting I am just saying that beyond the basic levels, the basic numbers, the bits that sound great but don't actually necessarily lead to better graphics you can't simply compare the power of the console card to the power of a PC card.

 

[Joselyn]

The biggest failure in this entire thread is making the false assumption that the PS3 is powerful in terms of gaming.

Woops.

please remove your stupidity from this thread

This man speaks the truth.

He sure does...that guy would have been funnier if he had used strike through when posting his last reply...then his stupidity would have been forgivable...slightly

 

[Jumplion]

Err, I'm not contradicting myself. You just don't really understand the discussion, it seems.

That would be like saying Crysis would be balls easy to develop for MS-DOS because it's so old!

It would be difficult because it's limited, not because it's old. If you didn't mix those two words up, I'd agree with you, so just switch "old" with "limited" and there we go, problem solved, no need to continue an argument. Even newer models of whatever the hell CPUGMEOSP3J365J EW064W model number those are are limited in their own sense so you need specialized pieces that specialize in different things.

It's not what I think, but what people who these things think. When the lead designer of Morrowind and Oblivion came to talk about video game design in my class on...video game design, he said the number one priority for blockbuster game development is...graphics.

Besides, if I wanted amazing physics or sound, I'd get that from my 8800GT PPU and my E-MU 1616M + KRK RP-5's.

So the numerous undo thing about blockbuster games isn't the....gameplay part of the game?[/hippie game activist]

See, this one reason why I do not like PCs, what the fuck are those numbers supposed to mean?!?!?