PS3 600 dollars? Sony is on crack

[Vigilance]

I hope that some non-first party games are worth getting for it. I'm not worried about the Marios, Zeldas, Metroids and such. It's most of the other stuff that has been lacking for 2 generations of Nintendo consoles.

Square Enix is working on a shooter for it, Red Steel, and EA is doing a Madden port for it.

Chuck

 

[John Crichton]

Im going by the comments by the entire GameSpot editorial staff, who all used the Wii controller and (for the most part) liked it, and are most certainly NOT bleating fanboys from what I've heard for Nintendo or anyone else. They had a lot of reservations about the controller.

I, too, tend to trust the Gamespot gents as they seem to be a pretty fair bunch. It's promising that there is positive buzz for the system.

Also, the fact that EA is talking about making a Madden edition (the best selling RPG of last year) *specifically* to take advantage of the Wii controller, and that Square Enix is working on a shooter called Red Steel for it, hoping for that game to be a Wii launch game, says that developers are at least a little intrigued by the controller's possibilities.

I am not psyched (nor should anyone at this point) by anything with Square's name on it that that doesn't have to do with RPGs. However, the custom Madden could be a huge deal if it delivers an experience that the other consoles can't. I hope it delivers.

Devs would be fools to not try and make some cool games for the Wii. But, if the install base is low, we won't see that innovation at all.

 

[John Crichton]

Square Enix is working on a shooter for it, Red Steel, and EA is doing a Madden port for it.

Chuck

I've shared thoughts on each in my above thread but 2 games by major companies doesn't scream at me that the system is getting wide-spread support. The fact is the both Sony and Microsoft have lists of games on tap that are certainly going to be very good. And I'm not even looking at the names of the games.

The point is that both companies have healthy lists of games coming out and historically there is a good comparison between amount of games released and success of the system. Sure, there are stinkers all over the place for the big consoles of each generation but that just further proves the point.

The Wii has some games on their list for sure but both competitor's lists are much longer and, without looking, Sony's list is probably still the longest but the 360 has games that are must haves,too. So the whole - Wii + [360 or PS3] only theory is nice and maybe what the Big N shooting for but they better have the games. Affordable is great but that doesn't sell systems.

Prices will drop far enough on both Microsoft's and Sony's systems to please people. And it is a mistake to discount the HD crowd, which is growing all the time as the equipment becomes cheaper and cheaper.

Dang, it's a great time to be a gamer! I loves me some options.

 

[Vigilance]

I've shared thoughts on each in my above thread but 2 games by major companies doesn't scream at me that the system is getting wide-spread support. The fact is the both Sony and Microsoft have lists of games on tap that are certainly going to be very good. And I'm not even looking at the names of the games.

The point is that both companies have healthy lists of games coming out and historically there is a good comparison between amount of games released and success of the system. Sure, there are stinkers all over the place for the big consoles of each generation but that just further proves the point.

The Wii has some games on their list for sure but both competitor's lists are much longer and, without looking, Sony's list is probably still the longest but the 360 has games that are must haves,too. So the whole - Wii + [360 or PS3] only theory is nice and maybe what the Big N shooting for but they better have the games. Affordable is great but that doesn't sell systems.

Prices will drop far enough on both Microsoft's and Sony's systems to please people. And it is a mistake to discount the HD crowd, which is growing all the time as the equipment becomes cheaper and cheaper.

Dang, it's a great time to be a gamer! I loves me some options.

Well, I don't think the Wii is in competition to the X-box or PS3. Totally different price structure and business model.

Nintendo has always kind of done its own thing, and been VERY profitable doing it. I know last year in one quarter that reportedly made something stupid like 980 million dollars. They are often more profitable than either X-box or PS 3 because they don't worry about being on the BLEEDING EDGE console wise, which means they actually make money on hardware AND software.

Sony and MS tend to sell the consoles at a loss and make it up in software.

Also about developers... I think nabbing EA and Square is pretty good. Both are highly respected developers and the Square Red Steel game looks interesting to me.

Chuck

 

[John Crichton]

Well, I don't think the Wii is in competition to the X-box or PS3. Totally different price structure and business model.

For the most part, I agree. However, it is a videogame console which makes it subject to the Golden Rule: if it has good games it is worth owning. And being in the same industry does make people make a buying choice. For me, if the Wii shows me nothing interesting at launch, I will get a PS3 instead. I probably don't represent the majority but there is some competition when games are involved. I won't be getting both at launch.

Nintendo has always kind of done its own thing, and been VERY profitable doing it.

Yes, that's true but it's not because of anything to do with their consoles over the last 5 years. The Gameboy and Pokemon is what supports Nintendo these days. Without those, there would be no new Nintendo consoles.

I know last year in one quarter that reportedly made something stupid like 980 million dollars. They are often more profitable than either X-box or PS 3 because they don't worry about being on the BLEEDING EDGE console wise, which means they actually make money on hardware AND software.

It also means a cummy selection of games with a few shining lights in comparison to its competition over the last 2 console cycles.

Also about developers... I think nabbing EA and Square is pretty good. Both are highly respected developers and the Square Red Steel game looks interesting to me.

No one "nabs" EA. They are the biggest maker of videogames in the known universe and are bound to take a few stabs at Nintendo's new game machine.

As for Red Steel, it's not an RPG. You can get hyped about the game it but history speaks differently about non-RPG games produced by Square. A big deal would be to have FFXII or FFXIII exclusive to the Wii. Squeenix has already released a game on a non-handheld Nintendo console recently and that game wasn't so hot. It's safe to say the Sqeenix does two things and does them well: numbered Final Fantasy games & Dragon Quest games.

But hey, I'll buy Red Steel if it's good. I'm just not holding my breath.

 

[Vigilance]

Yes, that's true but it's not because of anything to do with their consoles over the last 5 years. The Gameboy and Pokemon is what supports Nintendo these days. Without those, there would be no new Nintendo consoles.

This is a common misconception I think. Yes the Game Boy is a monster, especially the Pokemon franchise, which was the #2 selling game of 2005, second to Madden 2005. But the Gamecube was soldily profitable and is still being modestly supported with some good games.

Again since it's not TEH SHINY it tends to get disregarded as the flashier systems do battle but the Gamecube has been successful enough on its own to merit the Wii.

Nintendo is not a huge corporation on the scale of MS or Sony (and please don't tell me they're big, I know this, just not on the same scale as MS or Sony). They can't afford to lose money on consoles. I don't think they would be against abandoning consoles for hand-held gaming if they weren't achieving their goals in the console market.

And again, I run into people, like you, all the time who miss what they're doing. I own a Gamecube, not for me, but for the kids. It's a cheap system, so if it were to get killed by Kool Aid I wouldn't need to lose my mind, it's durable as hell, so the 9yr old and her squaking brood can play party games and beat it like it stole something and it still works just fine.

It's a nice, solid economical system that's affordable and reliable, in part because it DOES NOT rush to the edge of what's possible.

I look for the Wii to step into that same niche as a nice upgrade to the GC, while still being affordable and durable.

Not every TV needs to be a 60 inch plasma to be successful and not every game system needs to be a flashy 600 dollar PS3 to be worth my money.

No one "nabs" EA. They are the biggest maker of videogames in the known universe and are bound to take a few stabs at Nintendo's new game machine.

Right, but what you're missing is that this is a new port of the game. Madden has been on the Gamecube all along, with each year's game doing solid business there. It's my understanding that the Wii will still support the GC controller.

This means EA could have done a straight port using the standard interface for the GC controller. The fact that they are intrigued enough by the Wii wand controller to change the interface to take advantage of it says a lot to me about that controller being a GOOD controller.

As for Red Steel, it's not an RPG. You can get hyped about the game it but history speaks differently about non-RPG games produced by Square. A big deal would be to have FFXII or FFXIII exclusive to the Wii. Squeenix has already released a game on a non-handheld Nintendo console recently and that game wasn't so hot. It's safe to say the Sqeenix does two things and does them well: numbered Final Fantasy games & Dragon Quest games.

But hey, I'll buy Red Steel if it's good. I'm just not holding my breath.

Oh I'm aware of what it is, I call it a shooter above I think. But Square is still a solid company and the idea of the game, which sounds like it's a bit on the gritty side about a modern samurai who fights with gun and katana sounds very interesting to me.

Also, I believe Square is serving mostly as a distributor for Red Steel. It looks like from what I'm reading that Ubisoft (a company basically built around FPS design) is actually doing the game, just with some support from Square.

Chuck

 

[takyris]

Ah, but they are all pretty much influenced by Bioware, right? Could be my mistaken impressions.

What? No. Pandemic did Mercenaries and Star Wars Battlefront and Kill All Humans and, well, a lot of other stuff. They did all that stuff before the two companies merged (and it was a merger, not one buying the other).

And as the guys who did a bunch of cross-platform development, they're the ones saying, "We're probably pushing back our PS3 roll-outs. Not cancelling them, but pushing them back to wait for more support, after realizing what a pain in the butt the PS3 is to develop for."

I'm not saying it's the only viewpoint, and I'm not saying that they're never doing any PS3 stuff ever. But they're guys who make popular video games for a living, and that's what they're saying.

I'm trying to say this without exaggerating it into "No one will develop for the PS3", so please stop trying to turn it into "BioWare, which doesn't do the Playstation, won't do the Playstation 3, which isn't realy news." I did think that information relating to actual video game developers with a cross-platform development history including Sony platforms might be apropos.

 

[Vigilance]

What? No. Pandemic did Mercenaries and Star Wars Battlefront and Kill All Humans and, well, a lot of other stuff. They did all that stuff before the two companies merged (and it was a merger, not one buying the other).

And as the guys who did a bunch of cross-platform development, they're the ones saying, "We're probably pushing back our PS3 roll-outs. Not cancelling them, but pushing them back to wait for more support, after realizing what a pain in the butt the PS3 is to develop for."

I'm not saying it's the only viewpoint, and I'm not saying that they're never doing any PS3 stuff ever. But they're guys who make popular video games for a living, and that's what they're saying.

I'm trying to say this without exaggerating it into "No one will develop for the PS3", so please stop trying to turn it into "BioWare, which doesn't do the Playstation, won't do the Playstation 3, which isn't realy news." I did think that information relating to actual video game developers with a cross-platform development history including Sony platforms might be apropos.

Taky, could you tell if you know anything about how expensive it is to produce for PS3? What I'm hearing is that it will pretty signficantly expensive compared to other consoles.

Chuck

 

[takyris]

Taky, could you tell if you know anything about how expensive it is to produce for PS3? What I'm hearing is that it will pretty signficantly expensive compared to other consoles.

Chuck

That, I can confidently answer with, "Not a clue." I'm a designer. They don't let me near the money.

My extrapolation is that if it's not supported as well as the 360, it takes more man-hours to get it done right, and more man-hours means more cost to the company. It might also be the case that developing for the 360 is closer to developing for the PC, which means that if you're developing for the 360 and the PC at the same time, you can use, well, not the same code, exactly, but some of the same methodologies. And with the PS3, you can't use as many, because it is, to use writing-ness, more-different-er. Which again means more man-hours, and thus more cost. Sort of like if you know Italian, it's easier to pick up Spanish than, say, Japanese. Except that it's not you trying to pick up a language -- it's a company telling you that the epic poem you wrote in Italian needs to be in haiku format by Friday.

As a contrast to the stuff in posts previous, though, which is based on, well, statements by people in a position and with the credits to know what they're talking about, everything I wrote in the above paragraph is supposition. I'm not a good enough programmer to say that with any certainty at all.

I just write heartbreaking scenes of truth and beauty to fill up time between the fights.

EDIT: My project is currently only in very early production. If I can talk later about how things are going for my project on various platforms, if we end up going that way, I will definitely do so. Right now, both project and platforms-to-be-developed-for are undisclosed. (Which, I will note, makes it a pain to brag to your friends.)

 

[ohGr]

What? No. Pandemic did Mercenaries and Star Wars Battlefront and Kill All Humans and, well, a lot of other stuff. They did all that stuff before the two companies merged (and it was a merger, not one buying the other).

And as the guys who did a bunch of cross-platform development, they're the ones saying, "We're probably pushing back our PS3 roll-outs. Not cancelling them, but pushing them back to wait for more support, after realizing what a pain in the butt the PS3 is to develop for."

I'm not saying it's the only viewpoint, and I'm not saying that they're never doing any PS3 stuff ever. But they're guys who make popular video games for a living, and that's what they're saying.

I'm trying to say this without exaggerating it into "No one will develop for the PS3", so please stop trying to turn it into "BioWare, which doesn't do the Playstation, won't do the Playstation 3, which isn't realy news." I did think that information relating to actual video game developers with a cross-platform development history including Sony platforms might be apropos.

This i find interesting; everything i've seen of Mercenaries 2 on various sites note that it's coming out for the PS3 but there has, thus far, been no indication of a 360 version that i'm aware of (admittedly, though, i haven't much kept up with news lately). Given Pandemic's inveterate cross-platform develepmont, pretty much everyone believes a 360 version to be inevitable eventuality, however. So i find this "pushing back PS3 development" thing, and it's ramifications on the development of Mercenaries 2, very interesting.