I think the PS3 will survive for a couple of reasons:
1) It's still a very good gaming platform if you know how to properly program for it.
2) The PS3 runs VASTLY quieter than the Xbox 360 and as such could be put in the same room as the home theater setup when you connect the PS3 to your recent-production widescreen display through the HDMI connection because you don't have the distraction of the loud cooling fan like you have with the Xbox 360.
3) The PS3 still is by far the fastest-loading machine for playing Blu-ray discs. Users report loading times in the 17-22 second range, compared to a as much as minute for conventional console players.
4) I would not be surprised that Sony works out a deal with Electronic Arts to create the PS3 equivalent of Xbox Live as an extension to PlayStation Network so future versions of EA sports games on the PS3 platform allow true online multiplayer play.
Indeed, many have said the biggest thing propping up the Xbox is the Xbox Live online multiplayer system; once Sony achieves the same with the maturation of PlayStation Network, that could make Sony a major player in the videogames market again.
Microsoft now have Netflix on the 360 and I'm sure you can stream movies from your computer to the XBox too so it really comes down to Blu-Ray.
Netflix streaming is not even close to a killer app. I have netflix and I use the streaming feature often when I'm traveling. I also sometimes use it when I am doing menial tasks that don't require full attention: I can at least listen and glance over for important parts. The problem is that the video quality is really quite lousy. I would say it is on par with VHS, and sometimes worse. Plus, the shows and flix available for streaming are generally not the best.
Bluray video, on the other hand, is so cool. Netflix also has a really nice (and growing) Bluray catalog. Honestly, when paired with even a reasonable TV and set speakers it's better than going to the movies.
The PS3 has so much untapped potential. It's not as pure as the XBox360, and I would agree that Sony's marketing group made some real mistakes in defining the product initially, but it looks like it's going to manage to grow into its big shoes. I also can expect that Sony might do something like introduce a PS3+ that packs a quicker video card and an improved Cell.
I keep trying out PS3 games here and there and I'm just not "feeling" it. It seems for the high budget games which I would want to play, I'm fighting with the controller, and the graphics are not as good as today's average gaming PCs, and lack of antialiasing is a bit disturbing.
Maybe I'm missing something, I want to get a PS3 for the convenience, but I'm just not seeing it being worth it.
Regardless, of whether the product is good or not, Sony are a business.
They can not afford to keep throwing good money after bad.
They have consistently lost money on this thing for year after year. And presumably they have projected the revenues for the remainder of the PS3 lifetime.
Regardless, of whether the product is good or not, Sony are a business.
They can not afford to keep throwing good money after bad.
They have consistently lost money on this thing for year after year. And presumably they have projected the revenues for the remainder of the PS3 lifetime.
Expect Sony to cut some of their losses.
C.
With regard to the PS3 division, how would they cut their losses, besides laying off employees, spending less on R&D ... Less subsidies to game developers ... ? Curious.
With regard to the PS3 division, how would they cut their losses, besides laying off employees, spending less on R&D ... Less subsidies to game developers ... ? Curious.
Me too.
How do you stop a bucket leaking? You need to patch over the hole.
I own both systems - got my 360 in early 2006 (which died and was replaced in mid-07) and bought my PS3 in early 2007. I'm also a casual gamer that, save for the big third-party titles like GTA4, Call of Duty and occasional EA sports games, sticks to system exclusives. I'm not a big online gamer, but when I do, I don't want to worry about paying a 12-month fee for something I use a handful of times a year. Also, with Blu-ray now the official HD format, it is just value added. I have nothing against the 360, I like it, but I just use it less and less and have found that, over time, I have come to enjoy my PS3 more.
I while back I got an interesting lecture on the old Xbox. The original Xbox differentiated itself from the PS2 by having a hard drive. The hard drive was great for consumers. But was a terrible terrible commercial decision by MS. Why?
1) No one bought memory cards. Console margins are razor thin. Often companies lose money on console hardware. But they can make that money back on ludicously overpriced stuff like memory cards.
2) Hard drive prices don't fall much - instead capacities go up. This meant that over time. The cost of manufacture of the XBox did not fall nearly as much as it should. The XBox was always too expensive.
3) It facilitated piracy.
Microsoft has learned its lesson. The base 360 comes without a hard drive and without WiFi. The base model price point is very low. But to to spec it up costs a lot of money. This maximizes sales of the console - and revenue. PS3's higher spec works against it.
Did anyone see how Sony helped fund the 360's CPU?
Face it, between the two platforms what we have is that MS killed the XBox early to facillitate 360 sales and then pushed a very buggy platform out to gamers.
Despite your wishes, it seems highly unlikely that Sony is going to do much to their PS division. Sunk costs are just that...sunk. The console should break even this year so neutering the division makes little sense unless Sony wants to leave the console market.
Yeah, right. The PS3 may not be winning the console wars this gen but it is outselling the PS2 during the same timeframe so it doesn't suck THAT much.
That they got a big kick in the pants this go around is GOOD thing...just like it was good for Nintendo to get it's ass handed to them prior to the Wii. For them to leave the market would be an insanely bad thing for gamers.
Face it, between the two platforms what we have is that MS killed the XBox early to facillitate 360 sales and then pushed a very buggy platform out to gamers.
Despite your wishes, it seems highly unlikely that Sony is going to do much to their PS division. Sunk costs are just that...sunk. The console should break even this year so neutering the division makes little sense unless Sony wants to leave the console market.
Yeah, right. The PS3 may not be winning the console wars this gen but it is outselling the PS2 during the same timeframe so it doesn't suck THAT much.
That they got a big kick in the pants this go around is GOOD thing...just like it was good for Nintendo to get it's ass handed to them prior to the Wii. For them to leave the market would be an insanely bad thing for gamers.
You are right that MS made some critical errors with the 360's engineering. But it turns out that under-specifying the 360 was not as serious an error as over-specifying the PS3.
Don't point to volume sales as a sign of success. The more they sell, the more cash they lose.
The PS3 hardware will not break even this year, because as soon as the cost of production approaches the retail price - Sony will need slash the retail price again.
Stringer will have the figures in front of him. If they are projecting that the project will *never* go into profit - then they may act to shut it down - exactly as Sega did with the Dreamcast.
But I am sure they are already looking to the PS4. I don't buy the "content-only" Sony idea.
You are right that MS made some critical errors with the 360's engineering. But it turns out that under-specifying the 360 was not as serious an error as over-specifying the PS3.
Don't point to volume sales as a sign of success. The more they sell, the more cash they lose.
The point is that Sony has a reasonable installed base in comparison to the 360 despite the cost and releasing later than the 360.
Quote:
The PS3 hardware will not break even this year, because as soon as the cost of production approaches the retail price - Sony will need slash the retail price again.
Except they have said that profitability is most important to them at this time. A price slash is more likely later in 2009 (closer to XMas) than in early 2009 when breakeven occurs.
Quote:
Stringer will have the figures in front of him. If they are projecting that the project will *never* go into profit - then they may act to shut it down - exactly as Sega did with the Dreamcast.
Saturn did poorly as well and the PS3 is not in the same boat as the Dreamcast. Frankly, it's not even in as bad a shape as the Gamecube was.
Forcasting the end of the playstation is pure FUD.
The number of console sales is irrelevant. The profitability of the platform is based on the revenue generated by games sales.
The 360 is selling more games per console. Developers have favored the 360 with more titles for many reasons. Legend has it that last year, only one PS3 title had actually gone into profit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
Forcasting the end of the playstation is pure FUD.
Possibly.
But when Stringer says he intends to "slaughter some sacred cows". And a clear war with the Japanese old guard about to break out. It is reasonable to guess that someone is going to get the chop. The axe is going to fall somewhere. If you were Stringer, what would you do?
The PS3 is half heat-sink. Which is why it looks like a George Foreman grill. It puts out twice as much heat as a 360, but at least it is quiet.
The bad engineering on the PS3 is of a different kind.
Heat comparison chart.
XB360 = 192 Watts
PS3 = 380 Watts
GFG = 780 Watts
GFG360 = 1500 Watts!
C.
So, two years after that bogus information was put out and discredited you not only parrot it like an imbecile, you actually compound your stupidity by even getting what your bogus numbers are intended to imply wrong.
The PS3 has a large power supply because, unlike the 360, it allows everyone to easily swap in any cheap off the shelf drive and is built to handle whatever you put in. The PS3 and the 360 both use roughly the same energy in use for the various models.
Which is amazing when you consider the vast graphical power advantage the PS3 has over the 360.
The engineering in the PS3 is amazing. They managed to incorporate a brand new drive technology, internal power supply, incredibly silent operation, and have one of the best reliability records of any console ever created.
So, two years after that bogus information was put out and discredited you not only parrot it like an imbecile
Carniphage didn't provide any sources for his information, and neither have you. One of you could be right, you could both be wrong. Who knows until concrete power consumption measurements are provided from a reputable source?
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaitNextEvent
you actually compound your stupidity by even getting what your bogus numbers are intended to imply wrong.
No, he didn't. Those numbers aren't "intended to imply" anything. They "mean" something. And Carniphage is right in as much as if the 360's power consumption is 190 watts and the PS3's is 380 watts, the PS3 produces approximately twice as much heat as a 360 (the vast majority of electrical power consumption of devices like these is converted to heat). You should go away and learn some Physics before accusing someone else of stupidity in this area.
No, he didn't. Those numbers aren't "intended to imply" anything. They "mean" something. And Carniphage is right in as much as if the 360's power consumption is 190 watts and the PS3's is 380 watts, the PS3 produces approximately twice as much heat as a 360 (the vast majority of electrical power consumption of devices like these is converted to heat). You should go away and learn some Physics before accusing someone else of stupidity in this area.
Ignoring that non-sensical blather.
The PS3's newest models are in the 140-170 watt range and the oldest models are in the 170-200 or so range depending on what you are doing. Putting the PS3 about +10 watts over the 360. Pretty amazing for the massive performance advantage the PS3 has over the 360.
Anyone with a meter can see for themself or just google the many people who have already hooked up their PS3 to a meter.
Comments
1) It's still a very good gaming platform if you know how to properly program for it.
2) The PS3 runs VASTLY quieter than the Xbox 360 and as such could be put in the same room as the home theater setup when you connect the PS3 to your recent-production widescreen display through the HDMI connection because you don't have the distraction of the loud cooling fan like you have with the Xbox 360.
3) The PS3 still is by far the fastest-loading machine for playing Blu-ray discs. Users report loading times in the 17-22 second range, compared to a as much as minute for conventional console players.
4) I would not be surprised that Sony works out a deal with Electronic Arts to create the PS3 equivalent of Xbox Live as an extension to PlayStation Network so future versions of EA sports games on the PS3 platform allow true online multiplayer play.
Indeed, many have said the biggest thing propping up the Xbox is the Xbox Live online multiplayer system; once Sony achieves the same with the maturation of PlayStation Network, that could make Sony a major player in the videogames market again.
Microsoft now have Netflix on the 360 and I'm sure you can stream movies from your computer to the XBox too so it really comes down to Blu-Ray.
Netflix streaming is not even close to a killer app. I have netflix and I use the streaming feature often when I'm traveling. I also sometimes use it when I am doing menial tasks that don't require full attention: I can at least listen and glance over for important parts. The problem is that the video quality is really quite lousy. I would say it is on par with VHS, and sometimes worse. Plus, the shows and flix available for streaming are generally not the best.
Bluray video, on the other hand, is so cool. Netflix also has a really nice (and growing) Bluray catalog. Honestly, when paired with even a reasonable TV and set speakers it's better than going to the movies.
The PS3 has so much untapped potential. It's not as pure as the XBox360, and I would agree that Sony's marketing group made some real mistakes in defining the product initially, but it looks like it's going to manage to grow into its big shoes. I also can expect that Sony might do something like introduce a PS3+ that packs a quicker video card and an improved Cell.
Maybe I'm missing something, I want to get a PS3 for the convenience, but I'm just not seeing it being worth it.
They can not afford to keep throwing good money after bad.
They have consistently lost money on this thing for year after year. And presumably they have projected the revenues for the remainder of the PS3 lifetime.
Expect Sony to cut some of their losses.
C.
Regardless, of whether the product is good or not, Sony are a business.
They can not afford to keep throwing good money after bad.
They have consistently lost money on this thing for year after year. And presumably they have projected the revenues for the remainder of the PS3 lifetime.
Expect Sony to cut some of their losses.
C.
With regard to the PS3 division, how would they cut their losses, besides laying off employees, spending less on R&D ... Less subsidies to game developers ... ? Curious.
With regard to the PS3 division, how would they cut their losses, besides laying off employees, spending less on R&D ... Less subsidies to game developers ... ? Curious.
Me too.
How do you stop a bucket leaking? You need to patch over the hole.
C.
I do actually have a 360, but I don't think it is perfect.
The biggest deal breaker for me is the fan noise, which kills the console as any kind of media center. It's unacceptable.
The PS3 is half heat-sink. Which is why it looks like a George Foreman grill. It puts out twice as much heat as a 360, but at least it is quiet.
The bad engineering on the PS3 is of a different kind.
Heat comparison chart.
XB360 = 192 Watts
PS3 = 380 Watts
GFG = 780 Watts
GFG360 = 1500 Watts!
C.
Actually, the latest Xbox360's, with 65 nm GPU, are only 150Watt.
They still use awfully chep-ass cooling sollutions though...
Actually, the latest Xbox360's, with 65 nm GPU, are only 150Watt.
They still use awfully chep-ass cooling sollutions though...
Yeah - The Jasper machines look very good.
C.
Yeah - The Jasper machines look very good.
C.
We'll see in a year if it really solved the RROD. If it's still using crappy cooling though I doubt that "look very good" is the proper reply.
We'll see in a year if it really solved the RROD.
I think that was (largely) fixed with the Elites.
I while back I got an interesting lecture on the old Xbox. The original Xbox differentiated itself from the PS2 by having a hard drive. The hard drive was great for consumers. But was a terrible terrible commercial decision by MS. Why?
1) No one bought memory cards. Console margins are razor thin. Often companies lose money on console hardware. But they can make that money back on ludicously overpriced stuff like memory cards.
2) Hard drive prices don't fall much - instead capacities go up. This meant that over time. The cost of manufacture of the XBox did not fall nearly as much as it should. The XBox was always too expensive.
3) It facilitated piracy.
Microsoft has learned its lesson. The base 360 comes without a hard drive and without WiFi. The base model price point is very low. But to to spec it up costs a lot of money. This maximizes sales of the console - and revenue. PS3's higher spec works against it.
Did anyone see how Sony helped fund the 360's CPU?
C.
The PS3 has so much untapped potential.
It really doesn't.
Getting a PS3 game to simply match the performance of a 360 takes months and months and months of additional work.
That work costs. And for key titles, developers are going to Sony for the additional cash or engineering support.
The device is not well suited for its purpose.
C.
Face it, between the two platforms what we have is that MS killed the XBox early to facillitate 360 sales and then pushed a very buggy platform out to gamers.
Despite your wishes, it seems highly unlikely that Sony is going to do much to their PS division. Sunk costs are just that...sunk. The console should break even this year so neutering the division makes little sense unless Sony wants to leave the console market.
Yeah, right. The PS3 may not be winning the console wars this gen but it is outselling the PS2 during the same timeframe so it doesn't suck THAT much.
That they got a big kick in the pants this go around is GOOD thing...just like it was good for Nintendo to get it's ass handed to them prior to the Wii. For them to leave the market would be an insanely bad thing for gamers.
There have been Elites with the RROD.
Face it, between the two platforms what we have is that MS killed the XBox early to facillitate 360 sales and then pushed a very buggy platform out to gamers.
Despite your wishes, it seems highly unlikely that Sony is going to do much to their PS division. Sunk costs are just that...sunk. The console should break even this year so neutering the division makes little sense unless Sony wants to leave the console market.
Yeah, right. The PS3 may not be winning the console wars this gen but it is outselling the PS2 during the same timeframe so it doesn't suck THAT much.
That they got a big kick in the pants this go around is GOOD thing...just like it was good for Nintendo to get it's ass handed to them prior to the Wii. For them to leave the market would be an insanely bad thing for gamers.
You are right that MS made some critical errors with the 360's engineering. But it turns out that under-specifying the 360 was not as serious an error as over-specifying the PS3.
Don't point to volume sales as a sign of success. The more they sell, the more cash they lose.
The PS3 hardware will not break even this year, because as soon as the cost of production approaches the retail price - Sony will need slash the retail price again.
Stringer will have the figures in front of him. If they are projecting that the project will *never* go into profit - then they may act to shut it down - exactly as Sega did with the Dreamcast.
But I am sure they are already looking to the PS4. I don't buy the "content-only" Sony idea.
C.
You are right that MS made some critical errors with the 360's engineering. But it turns out that under-specifying the 360 was not as serious an error as over-specifying the PS3.
Don't point to volume sales as a sign of success. The more they sell, the more cash they lose.
The point is that Sony has a reasonable installed base in comparison to the 360 despite the cost and releasing later than the 360.
The PS3 hardware will not break even this year, because as soon as the cost of production approaches the retail price - Sony will need slash the retail price again.
Except they have said that profitability is most important to them at this time. A price slash is more likely later in 2009 (closer to XMas) than in early 2009 when breakeven occurs.
Stringer will have the figures in front of him. If they are projecting that the project will *never* go into profit - then they may act to shut it down - exactly as Sega did with the Dreamcast.
Saturn did poorly as well and the PS3 is not in the same boat as the Dreamcast. Frankly, it's not even in as bad a shape as the Gamecube was.
Forcasting the end of the playstation is pure FUD.
The 360 is selling more games per console. Developers have favored the 360 with more titles for many reasons. Legend has it that last year, only one PS3 title had actually gone into profit.
Forcasting the end of the playstation is pure FUD.
Possibly.
But when Stringer says he intends to "slaughter some sacred cows". And a clear war with the Japanese old guard about to break out. It is reasonable to guess that someone is going to get the chop. The axe is going to fall somewhere. If you were Stringer, what would you do?
Sony are not a charity.
C.
The PS3 is half heat-sink. Which is why it looks like a George Foreman grill. It puts out twice as much heat as a 360, but at least it is quiet.
The bad engineering on the PS3 is of a different kind.
Heat comparison chart.
XB360 = 192 Watts
PS3 = 380 Watts
GFG = 780 Watts
GFG360 = 1500 Watts!
C.
So, two years after that bogus information was put out and discredited you not only parrot it like an imbecile, you actually compound your stupidity by even getting what your bogus numbers are intended to imply wrong.
The PS3 has a large power supply because, unlike the 360, it allows everyone to easily swap in any cheap off the shelf drive and is built to handle whatever you put in. The PS3 and the 360 both use roughly the same energy in use for the various models.
Which is amazing when you consider the vast graphical power advantage the PS3 has over the 360.
The engineering in the PS3 is amazing. They managed to incorporate a brand new drive technology, internal power supply, incredibly silent operation, and have one of the best reliability records of any console ever created.
So, two years after that bogus information was put out and discredited you not only parrot it like an imbecile
Carniphage didn't provide any sources for his information, and neither have you. One of you could be right, you could both be wrong. Who knows until concrete power consumption measurements are provided from a reputable source?
you actually compound your stupidity by even getting what your bogus numbers are intended to imply wrong.
No, he didn't. Those numbers aren't "intended to imply" anything. They "mean" something. And Carniphage is right in as much as if the 360's power consumption is 190 watts and the PS3's is 380 watts, the PS3 produces approximately twice as much heat as a 360 (the vast majority of electrical power consumption of devices like these is converted to heat). You should go away and learn some Physics before accusing someone else of stupidity in this area.
No, he didn't. Those numbers aren't "intended to imply" anything. They "mean" something. And Carniphage is right in as much as if the 360's power consumption is 190 watts and the PS3's is 380 watts, the PS3 produces approximately twice as much heat as a 360 (the vast majority of electrical power consumption of devices like these is converted to heat). You should go away and learn some Physics before accusing someone else of stupidity in this area.
Ignoring that non-sensical blather.
The PS3's newest models are in the 140-170 watt range and the oldest models are in the 170-200 or so range depending on what you are doing. Putting the PS3 about +10 watts over the 360. Pretty amazing for the massive performance advantage the PS3 has over the 360.
Anyone with a meter can see for themself or just google the many people who have already hooked up their PS3 to a meter.
Ignoring that non-sensical blather.
Nonsensical huh? Well, I'm sorry you're too ignorant to understand it. Like I said, go learn some Physics before accusing others of talking nonsense.