PS3 600 dollars? Sony is on crack

[John Crichton]

Okay, based on publicly announced specs, there's no indication that the PS3 has a significantly more capable CPU or GPU than the Xbox 360, and is arguably inferior on both counts.

Let's see the games first. That could be right or wrong. I don't care either way.

When you looked at previous-generation specs, it was mind-bogglingly obvious to everyone that the Xbox was the most powerful machine, and the the GameCube and PS2 were about a wash (the Cube was easier to code for and had more memory, which offset the more theoretically powerful PS2 CPU/GPU). And multi-platform games reflected this almost without fail.

Makes sense to me. But the better comparison is to release time. Older tech means less sophisticated hardware. The Xbox/GC looked better because the tech was newer. It's like buying the newest videocard right now for $500 vs the one on July 13, 2007. The newer card is gonna give you prettier graphics and be more powerful overall.

You look at stats, I look at history and logic. Although I do wish I understood more of the tech like you do.

With the 360 and the PS3, the only real advantage Sony has is the Blu-Ray drive. And that just means more FMV without spanning discs, not any improvement in actual gameplay.

We don't know that at all. More space never hurts. Disc-read speed also matters.

Isn't the launch of GTA4 supposed to be before the PS3 launch, which would mean it's on the 360 first by default?

10/17/07 is the currect launch date for both. The PS3 is coming out later this year.

Microsoft is still using Sony as a meauring stick for success. A simulateous launch date is considered a success (and it is). But that doesn't mean they will topple them in this console cycle. The next one will be their shot. They still need to get the non-US markets on board.

 

[reanjr]

Maybe. I don't know though. UMD died pretty fast.

Yes, but UMD was PSP only. Blu-ray will be available as a standalone player as well as game system. In addition, consoles tend to have better market penetration than handhelds (gameboy being the major exception).

 

[reanjr]

Eh. There are lots, actually.

Anything pre-NES predates my memory, so...

I was only speaking of major players competing head-on with similar generation technology. If a second-comer has significantly advanced the technology, it's not really competing in the same way.

 

[reanjr]

Says people without HD setups.

And don't discount the impact of HD TV sets getting seriously cheaper all the time. Gone are the days of the $5000 40' flat screen. Projectors & LCD screens are dropping in price all the time. And people want them. Sales have been on the rise for longer than most realize. Check out any TV section of any electronics store like Best Buy or Circuit City. Not having a widescreen HD capable TV will be the norm before we know it. HD programming is on the rise (but not in the majority) as we type.

Yes, and 360 will have an HD-DVD drive that with the system, will still cost less than PS3. Blu-ray has no advantage over HD-DVD, is more expensive, and doesn't actually exist. If there is going to be a new disc format, it's going to be HD-DVD unless the PS3 sells enough units (ignoring Blu-ray as a selling point, because it isn't compared to HD-DVD).

Link me to the price of the PS3 launch title games. If it's $70+ for every game, I'll freak a bit (although I did pay at least that for Phantasy Star II back in the Genesis days when I was making less than that per week). If not, no big.

Sony is saying 60-80. My guess is that DVD games will be 60, Sony's games 70, third party 70-80, depending on disc format.

For now. BR disc space & dev time can make a difference. DVD games better last the 360 for at least 4 more years. I will not be buying another MS console before 2010 (and I love new tech). The PS3 won't have that problem.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with changing discs half-way through a game. It will be a very long time (or due to horrible development teams) before games require enough data that switching DVDs will become a problem. Especially with the cost of developing games going up. A huge amount of that cost is artists. To offset this, it is expected that many more companies will begin to use algorithms to generate art rather than having it done by hand in many cases. This will reduce the need to store huge amounts of textures.

And don't discount that the PS2 was like a fine wine - it got better with age and when the good titles started they didn't stop (took about a year). More devs were able to produce games that looked and played better and better as they went along. The best example is God of War. I never thought the PS2 was able to produce in-game graphics like that.

That's not special. ALL consoles have the same thing happen. Look at Super Mario Bros. vs. Castlevania III, Super Mario 64 vs. Resident Evil 2, FFVII vs. Parasite Eve, Ghost Recon vs. Splinter Cell. By the time PS3 comes out, 360s performance may even outshine it due to developer experience. Add to that the fact that most dev studios only have experience writing single-process games and that creates an even larger hurdle for PS3 devs (which are dealing with Cell's ~10 processors).

Except Blu-Ray and back catalogue of titles from the last 10 years.

That's not innovative. All the consoles are supporting backwards compatibility. And PS3's back catalogue will be dwarfed to the point of not registering on radar compared to Wii's, which has 20+ years of back catalogue on more than half a dozen systems.

You are calling a game coming out a year from now momentum? It will take more than one to kill the Playstation. The new Metal Gear & 2 Final Fantasy games trump Halo 3. MS needs another killer game.

Sorry, poor wording, I wasn't indicating that Halo 3 adds momentum, just indicating that it will be a significant factor in PS3 sales. Final Fantasy is a big deal, but MGS games have become cross platform. All but one are or will be available for non-Sony systems.

Name a major franchise besides Rockstar that has jumped the Sony ship to cross-platform.

MGS for one. Name another deal-breaking 3rd party franchise besides MGS and FF.

This matters. But until we see the PS3 system in action we have no idea what it will be like. We only have XBL for comparison. I expect MS to be stronger in this area for the next couple years because of sucessful experience with XBL but Sony will catch up. It's bound to happen. Then again, online play doesn't apply to all genres and it doesn't make or break a console's success. Not yet.

It's pretty much a guarantee MS's service will be better. Sony has already said their online gaming service will basically consist of what has been available in the form of GameSpy on PC for a decade. They are not going to be regulating things like MS is. The regulation is what makes XBL great. Online didn't make or break last gen, but this gen, I expect things to be quite different. Even Nintendo's in on it, though they have a different focus that will beat out MS and Sony in many ways.

 

[drothgery]

Makes sense to me. But the better comparison is to release time. Older tech means less sophisticated hardware. The Xbox/GC looked better because the tech was newer. It's like buying the newest videocard right now for $500 vs the one on July 13, 2007. The newer card is gonna give you prettier graphics and be more powerful overall.

There are two problems with this analogy.

The first is that Sony's not launching a system that they intended to launch in late 2006. They're launching a system they intended to launch in late 2005, or at least early 2006, and was put together in a hurry after they realized that MS really was planning on launching their next-gen console in 2005. The exotic elements of the PS3's design (the Cell CPU and Blu-Ray drive) ran into delays, and so delayed the whole project.

And the second is that one year old tech quite often is close enough to match newer tech given more developer experience with the platform and greater ease of programming; PS2 games didn't consistently surpass the graphical quality of Dreamcast games (and the 2nd-gen Dreamcast games of the time made the PS2 launch titles look awful) until well after Sega discontinued the Dreamcast, but the PS2 was always able to stay at par with the GC. Also see PlayStation vs. N64 or Genesis vs. SNES. Xbox vs. PS2 was different because it was closer to a two year gap than a one-year gap between the Japanese PS2 launch and the US Xbox launch, and because the Xbox cost considerably more to make; the GameCube, with a much lower price and cost target, was pretty much equal to the PS2 (maybe a little better, but not decisively).

 

[Ranger REG]

But seriously, did anyone think that UMD movies were going to be a big deal? Especially considering that you can rip a movie for free to a 1gb Memory Stick? Bad move.

Meh. You can practically get a portable DVD player for less than the price of PSP, which can double as a CD player. They're better off using UMD for their gaming format until they have the gray matter to sell UMD recording devices.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Low Cell, Blu-ray laser yields could spell trouble for Sony in the short-term

7/12/2006 1:40:50 PM, by Ken Fisher
Sling Box

The Sony PlayStation 3 is a showcase for brand-spankin' new technology, and two of the stars of that show will be Blu-ray and the Cell processor. As we draw nearer to the planned worldwide November launch of the new console, there are signs, rumors, and premonitions that the PlayStation 3 may be in short supply for the first several months of its life.

The much vaunted Cell processor, for instance, appears to be a low-yield wonder. Tom Reeves, VP of semiconductor and technology services at IBM, openly admitted that only one of every five Cell CPUs rolling out of their fabs is fully functional with regards to all eight Synergistic Processing Elements. In an interview with Electronics News, Reeves said "With a chip like the Cell processor, you’re lucky to get 10 or 20 percent [yield]. If you put logic redundancy on it, you can double that." His comments suggest that Sony's effective yield should be closer to 20 to 40 percent, since the PlayStation 3 only requires 7 functional SPEs (6 for the heavy lifting, one for the system). The low yields did prompt an interesting question as to whether or not Sony would consider re-engineering to use Cells with fewer functional cores, to which Reeves said, "It could [be done], but I don’t think Sony has thought about offering that."

On the Blu-ray front, China's Commercial Times newspaper is reporting that Sony has not been able to meet demand for producing the special diode required for Blu-ray's blue laser. Reportedly the problems affects both Sony and Nichia Corp., who together will supply the majority of diodes to all Blu-ray device manufacturers. The report, which was summarized in English by IMDB, suggests that the manufacturing problems could cause problems for the PS3 as well as Blu-ray players in general.

That said, yields on new technologies are typically low, and both the Cell and the Blu-ray laser are comprised of cutting edge technologies that few expected would see instant yields north of 80 percent come launch time.

The Cell is a large processor (235mm2) and expensive to manufacture, and Sony has known this since day one. As time goes by and IBM gets better at making the Cell, prices will drop and yields will improve. In the meantime, however, all signs point to "Sold Out!" being the PS3's holiday slogan, as the mad rush for the latest and greatest from Sony will likely hit a supply drought if production does not improve soon.

Ars Technica story

 

[Arnwyn]

Holy crap!

Your post saved me a ton of typing. I've thought this before but it's almost like I'm posting with a different username from time to time with your responses in this sub-forum. I completely agree with every single point in this post/response.

Heh... creepy - your posts seem that way to me, as well.

Sony is saying 60-80. My guess is that DVD games will be 60, Sony's games 70, third party 70-80, depending on disc format.

Sony has said nothing of the sort. You've read the interview with Hirai as much as I have, I'm sure, and this was never said at all. The 360 has already set the standard for higher game prices. Sony will follow lock-step.

That's not innovative. All the consoles are supporting backwards compatibility. And PS3's back catalogue will be dwarfed to the point of not registering on radar compared to Wii's, which has 20+ years of back catalogue on more than half a dozen systems.

Well, you didn't even bother to define "innovative", so your arguments aren't going to get you very far here.

And needless to say, the Wii's "Virtual Console" is hardly better than the PS3's back catalogue. Maybe comparible, if you like purchasing games that you already own again (or have never heard of - yes, illegal, but still existing - ROMs). The Virtual Console won't be a factor when considering backwards compatibility. It's a 'nice touch'.

And the 360 supporting backwards compatibility (compared to the others)? Funny. There have only been complaints about that "support". Barbie Horse Adventures, here we come!

but MGS games have become cross platform. All but one are or will be available for non-Sony systems.

MGS for one.

Incorrect. Konami tried twice (an old port of MGS2 for the Xbox, and then an attempt with another developer with MGS1 on the GCN), and failed on both accounts. They quit trying that with MGS3. MGS4 will be exclusive to the PS3, and it's been reported that Kojima will be sticking with the PS3 for the forseeable future.

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

How do we know that? Have you played any of the games on the PS3? I haven't, so I have no clue either way. This is simply conjecture.

Conjecture on the part of Sony itself, as well as multiple developers working on both systems. I think it's safe to assume they know what they are talking about...

Nope, and neither do you. Link me some Q2 2006 stats.

November 2005 326,000
December 2005 281,441
January 2006 249,000
February 2006 161,000
March 2006 192,000
April 2006 295,381
May 2006 220,877

They are still suffering shortages in some areas, but the 360 is on track for Microsoft's projected sales...

MS needs to put out a non-FPS shooter to start getting new blood to buy the system. Their big gun right now is Prey (which is a non-exclusive) and will cater to people that already own a 360 because of it's heavy FPS lineup. The system needs a couple EXCLUSIVE action/adventure and/or RPG titles to move some units. That or Halo 3. I own a 360 but if I didn't I would certainly get one when that game or Mass Effect comes out. Those are system sellers.

Non-FPS games that got great reviews: (Non necessarily exclusive, but you can buy them today)
PGR
Dead or Alive
Oblivion (It has a optional 1st person perspective, but it is hardly an FPS)
Kameo
Burnout
Fight Night
Tony Hawk
LotR: Battle For Middle Earth
Tomb Raider

Right now, these non-exclusive games are still moving 360 systems because A: The PS3 doesn't exist, and B: A lot of people don't want to buy a $1000+ PC to play these games. Games always sell better on consoles than on PCs.

Problem is that the gaming community that aren't into FPS-type games are not buying the 360. And the FPS folks are split between the PC & 360. Exclusivity is the name of the game. Why? Because 3rd party devs will put their games on systems that are in the most homes (which we already know).

Personally, I play a lot of non-FPS games on my 360, and the fact that you can buy them on PC doesn't mean jack to me because I'm not going to upgrade my PC to be able to run them. You can get a 360 for the price of a good video card...

People with a high-end gaming machine, and a 360, are the extreme minority. And the PS3 hasn't been released. Therefore, these games being non-exclusive really doesn't seem as critical as you guys are making it out to be.

After the PS3 comes out, it will be a much bigger deal. But if the 360 has already dominated the market, it'll be a up hill battle for the PS3 all the way. Exclusives or not.

Also, I keep hearing that Sony has all these great exclusive franchises that will bury the 360, but oddly enough, I can't think of many.

FF & Metal Gear? Sure. They've also got God of War and Devil May Cry.... but then what?

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

And the 360 supporting backwards compatibility (compared to the others)? Funny. There have only been complaints about that "support". Barbie Horse Adventures, here we come!

On April 24, 2006 the website GamesIndustry.biz reported that Sony Computer Entertainment Europe in the UK were working on the Playstation 3 emulation which is being performed purely in software.

Sony revealed that the PlayStation 3 will display legacy recoded PlayStation titles in high-definition resolutions. However, backwards capability will be limited to only games that have passed Sony's TRC (Technical Requirements Criteria). Estimates by game developers put the number of PS and PS2 titles that have passed the TRC to be around 50-85%. The PS3 will not be backward-compatible with some of the hardware peripherals of the PS2. For example, memory cards for the PlayStation and PlayStation 2 will not work on the PlayStation 3 hardware.[4] Instead it was announced that the PS3 will only use the Sony Memory Stick to save games. The Memory Stick will be able to store saved games for both PS1 and PS2 games, unlike the PS2's memory card. However, with the announcement of a standard 20-60 GB HDD with the PS3, a hard drive game saving system is very likely.

So... Sounds like the PS3's backwards compatibility may not be much more than what we see from the 360. And on top of that, the 360 allows for games to be made BC in the future, where the PS3 doesn't look like it will have that option.

Regarding Barbie Horse Adventures....*sigh*... I get tired of explaining this...

Often times when a game is made BC, the requirments to do so also happen to match the requirments for other games. So while fixing a game like say.... Spinter Cell, they accidently make a game like Barbie backwards compatible. Since it is then BC, it is added to the list like the others. Contrary to what you may believe, MS did not waste thousands of man hours and millions of dollors to focus on the BC of Barbie Horse Adventures...