Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

History To Repeat Itself With PS3? 390

Posted by Zonk
from the kutaragi-hopes-so dept.
Dr. Eggman writes to mention a 1up article looking at the way things were when the PS2 launched vs. next week's PlayStation 3 launch. The question: can history repeat itself? From the article: "PS2: Released one year after the lower priced Dreamcast, lauded for its great games, ease of development, and superior online service. PS3: Releasing one year after the lower priced Xbox 360, lauded for its great games, ease of development, and superior online service. PS2: Competition from Nintendo: A smaller, cheaper 'family friendly' console with a 'focus on gameplay.' PS3: Competition from Nintendo: A smaller, cheaper 'family friendly' console with a 'focus on gameplay.'" The article also looks at how things have changed for Sony since the last time around.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

History To Repeat Itself With PS3?

Comments Filter:
  • by rednip (186217) * <rednip&gmail,com> on Friday November 10, 2006 @05:08PM (#16798646) Journal
    It's a good article, in particular because the link at the end of the page gives a link to 10 reasons the PS2 won't be able to repeat the success of the PS2. [1up.com]

    For me it's all about the price

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by MaXiMiUS (923393)
      That's the exact same article, and I think you mean the PS3 won't be able to repeat the success of the PS2.
      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by rednip (186217) *
        That's the exact same article, and I think you mean the PS3 won't be able to repeat the success of the PS2.
        well, it's the second page to the article (I did say that it is a good article), and yes, that is a typo, but it wasn't mine, I copied it directly from the page.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by AKAImBatman (238306) *
          The article is full of them. My personal favorite is the photo of the XBox 360 where the PS3 should be. (First set of images, even!) I almost have to wonder if 1UP has been hacked...
      • No, I really think he was making a deeper statement about Sony being its own enemy.
    • For me it's all about the price

      Ah, but pricing is always more art than science. The other way to look at that issue is that Nintendo's making the cheap gaming console. And when Christmas rolls around, kids always want the impressive one.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by IGTeRR0r (805236)
        You have a valid point, but in this case, both the Wii and the PS3 look like gourmet products. I think kids would appreciate any 3 of the systems, as long as they get a few games too. $600 doesn't leave much room for any games, but $250 certainly does.
        • by fistfullast33l (819270) on Friday November 10, 2006 @05:35PM (#16799012) Homepage Journal

          $600 doesn't leave much room for any games

          Of course, Sony not having many launch titles (Oblivion, I'm looking at you) means you don't need any games for your $600 videogame system!

        • by Mr. Underbridge (666784) on Friday November 10, 2006 @05:53PM (#16799216)

          You have a valid point, but in this case, both the Wii and the PS3 look like gourmet products. I think kids would appreciate any 3 of the systems, as long as they get a few games too. $600 doesn't leave much room for any games, but $250 certainly does.

          You'd think that, but the other way of thinking would be, if you're going to spend $600 you'll damned sure buy some games for it! It's also effective market segmentation - restricted supply at the beginning with a high price tag, followed by increased supply and lower prices later.

          I think what happened is they saw what went down with the Xbox 360. They see every unit being scraped up and sold on Ebay for between $600 and $1000. Sony probably figures if anyone is going to profit from the craze, it's going to be them. And if they have the sorts of supply problems that has plagued nearly every console launch in the history of mankind, demand WILL drive the price there anyway. No sense in watching someone else make the money instead.

          • Better then to include consoles in antiscalping laws. I'm sure they've got enough clout to make it happen, and the ability to penalize flippers and the buyers. Just void the warranty if receipts dont match in the first two years. Make a few buys from some high volume people, and have them call in who sold them the unit to take down the sellers. After that, publicly announce who these flippers are and how to contact them, telling that they (the flippers) are now ineligible for support for any further console
      • At more than $300 price difference, I think people will be very hesitant to buy a PS3. Especially with Wii being much more innovative. Personally, I think Wii is going to kick-ass with their awesome new controller. I plan on buying a Wii sometime after the christmas rush. I hope my friends buy one first, so I can try it out!
        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by whoa buddy (966879)
          I'm waiting until after the Christmas rush as well, I'd like to see if the Wii has any technical issues with the controller, the online service, etc.

          Back on-topic though, I just don't see the PS3 being worth its cost. Maybe it's because I'm not a fanboy? I love video games but I just don't have that much cash to shell out on a system, AND then the games. Then again I might change my mind once all of my friends get one and I actually get to play it :)
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by CronoCloud (590650)
            You're forgetting the PS3 does more than the PS2 does.

            Download Yellow Dog Linux in a few weeks and it has all the functionality of a PS2 equipped with a Linux kit.

            It does PS1/PS2 games too.

            Music, photo and video.

            There's a built in web browser

            Built in WiFi

            Built in ethernet

            Built in card reader.

            It does more so it costs more

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by hexix (9514)
          I was thinking something along those lines too. The problem is I just went to Gamestop the other day and they had a demo Wii unit setup to play. The game on it was Excite Truck and it was hooked up to a LCD tv that might have been HD-capable. The connectors however were just the standard ones that come with the Wii and don't enable the progressive scan support. Because of this the graphics looked insanely bad. It was next to a game cube and the game cube's graphcis actually looked better (probably due
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by KDR_11k (778916)
        I don't know about American parents but my parents would never agree to a 600$/€ present. They'd give me a part of the money and tell me to save up the rest myself. How many parents would be willing to give their children a 600$ present even if they could actually buy it (at the current shipment numbers the parents won't get one anyway)?
    • by creimer (824291) on Friday November 10, 2006 @05:15PM (#16798754) Homepage
      That's funny. I'm reading "Just for Fun: The Story of an Accidental Revolutionary" by Linus Torvalds that was published in 2001. Linus predicted that Sony would be the next big thing after Microsoft -- if Sony got its act together. A few million laptop batteries and an overpriced game console later, I don't think Sony has a clue. Nintendo might if they get their act together.
      • by abradsn (542213)
        I don't think he intended that book to be taken seriously. Maybe it was just for fun too?
      • For God's Sake (Score:3, Insightful)

        by rsilvergun (571051)
        the ps3 is _not_ over priced. Just because you (and I :( ) don't have the scratch (or aren't willing to fork it over if you do), doesn't mean it's overpriced. The pre orders sold out, instantly. By definition it's not over priced. The only way it will become over priced is if Sony fails to drop the prices as sales slow and costs come down. Then it will be overpriced. Until then, if anything it's severely under priced. It's going for well over $600 dollars on ebay and all indications are that the bids aren't
    • Yeah, but I think they should have skipped the irrelevant first page. People who follow the console wars have already abandoned ps3, by and large. I say that because for all the game forums I'm on (and most like console RPGs, which the ps2 had tons of), I have yet to find one single person excited about the ps3. Their biggest potential fanbase isn't there. At the most you'll hear a noncommittal "I'll wait for [game X]", or "I'll wait for the price to drop". When the fanbase isn't excited, no one else
      • by AKAImBatman (238306) * <akaimbatman@gma i l . com> on Friday November 10, 2006 @05:31PM (#16798954) Homepage Journal
        I was reading the USA Today this morning, and they had an interesting outlook on the PS3 vs. the Wii vs. the XBox 360. It basically came down to:

        PS3: You're not getting one. Ha!
        Wii: Risky, but inexpensive.
        XBox: Just fork over the cash for instant gratification.

        I think that says a lot about the mainstream views on this generation of console.

        The article can be read online here:

        http://www.usatoday.com/tech/gaming/2006-11-09-con sole-cover_x.htm [usatoday.com]
    • by mcvos (645701) on Friday November 10, 2006 @05:28PM (#16798916)
      The real reason why the PS2 was such a success, is that it was a very cheap DVD player, and DVDs had just become established technology.

      The PS3 is a cheap Blu-Ray player, but Blu-Ray is by no means established. Instead of using the DVD to launch the PS2, they're trying to do the reverse: using the PS3 to launch Blu-Ray. I don't think that will work nearly as well. In fact, I expect it to fail miserably.
      • by PoderOmega (677170) on Friday November 10, 2006 @06:27PM (#16799598)
        You could get good DVD players (Panasonic brand) in $150 in late 2000. That's half the price of the PS2 when it came out. I didn't have a DVD player and I thought it was a good selling point when I got my PS2 in 2001, but I did not think it was a "very cheap" DVD player.

        The DVD player contributed it, but it is by far the "real" reason it was so successful.
      • "The real reason why the PS2 was such a success, is that it was a very cheap DVD player, and DVDs had just become established technology."

        I really doubt it, how many people knew the PS2 doubled as a DVD player? I'd venture to guess not that many (at least in north america) maybe in Japan where the people are more tech savvy and cultured. The xbox also played DVD's yet didn't sell anywhere close to what the PS2 did. People bought the PS2 because they were looking forward to the sequels of their favorite g
  • summary: (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 10, 2006 @05:09PM (#16798650)

    same games, better graphics, pay us again

    • by vought (160908) on Friday November 10, 2006 @05:29PM (#16798934)
      History To Repeat Itself With PS3?

      No.

      This has been another episode of Simple Answers to Slashdot Questions.
      • by MS-06FZ (832329)
        Well, things could go either way and still history would repeat itself. Consider:

        XBox: Hardware superior to the PS2, but came out later and spent much of its life trying to catch up and find its niche

        PS3: Hardware superior to the X-Box 360, but coming out later and at a higher price point... So will it lag behind the now-established X-Box 360, and gradually settle into runner-up position?

        Or will it be a come-from-behind victory for the Phantom console? You be the judge!
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by d34thm0nk3y (653414)
        History To Repeat Itself With PS3?
        No.

        I disagree.

        Unfortunately for them, it is the history of Betamax.
  • Online support? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Enoxice (993945) on Friday November 10, 2006 @05:09PM (#16798656) Journal
    Maybe I just wasn't as well-informed back in '99-'00, but I don't recall much talk about online plans during the launches. I mean, ChuChu Rocket and PSO were big deals for the DC, but I don't recall the PS2 boasting superior online play right out of the gate...
    • by Thansal (999464)
      err, TFSummery is badly worded

      the dreamcast was the one boasting everything (including superior online play).

      honestly, I was still a PC Fanboy at the time, and thus didn't pay any attention to the dreamcast and really do not know much about it.
    • by cdrudge (68377)
      The network adapter wasn't launched until after the XBox, with it's included network adapter, was available. Sony needed to compete or lose significant sales due to a lack of online gaming so they came out with the network/modem adapter in 2002.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Sony promised Toy Story graphics, hundreds of millions of polys/second, a widely used hard disk add-on to be used with an online Sony store selling music, movies, and games, as well as versatile online gaming. Articles describing it were featured in Newsweek and similar publications for months prior to the console's launch.

      Sega launched SegaNet as the start of online gaming, as they were the forefront of console online gaming from the Saturn days. They didn't proclaim the rest.
    • Actually, I remember the early PS2 "online" reports from Sony (before it was launched). They claimed that they were going to a ethernet/broadband only online service (not even offering a modem), because their PS2 online service would be so awesome that a modem couldn't possibly handle it. Obviously, Sony never even *made* any type of online service themselves...and only a few games ever used the ethernet adapter (which was not even built in until the new slimline PS2 game out). It was really just a lame
  • by Total_Wimp (564548) on Friday November 10, 2006 @05:11PM (#16798674)
    ... because today is not like yesterday. For example, online game play wasn't as important when the Dreamcast was released. Also, sales were sluggish from the beginning as people held their money for the PS2 launch which was not the case with the 360.

    The PS3 might still dominate, but it's not likely to be for the exact same reasons as in the past.

    TW
    • by Hao Wu (652581)
      ... because today is not like yesterday.
      I believe history is very important for youthful men and women to learn. Touching live hand grenade is stupid thing to do, if you recently observed headless friends who did the same.

      It is exactly the same with SONY. Dreamcasts can come true.

    • ... because today is not like yesterday. For example, online game play wasn't as important when the Dreamcast was released. Also, sales were sluggish from the beginning as people held their money for the PS2 launch which was not the case with the 360.

      The PS3 might still dominate, but it's not likely to be for the exact same reasons as in the past.

      TW


      actually, it still doesn't. People like occasional online play and some really enjoy it (inclusing almost anyone here). But it's not a mainstream feature. Xbox l
    • by Xugumad (39311)
      History does repeat itself. However, you can not (as the article appears to do) take random similarities between two events and claim a pattern. Unless there's evidence that the Dreamcast failed because it launched a year before the PS2 (would 18 months have saved it? 6 months?), for example, this is just random stabbing in the dark. It also ignores things like the fact that online game play is now a much bigger thing than when the Dreamcast was released (in no small part due to the original XBox), and a he
  • by Channard (693317) on Friday November 10, 2006 @05:11PM (#16798676) Journal
    ... otherwise we can look forward to the PS3's lens giving out shortly after the warranty period and refusing to read half of the discs. The PS2 lens problems made the 360's failure rate look like a drop in the ocean? Nope, this isn't intended as flamebait - it happened to me, and I was only able to get it working, sort of, by cracking the PS2 open and changing the lens angle. What Joe Public who's never even opened a PC was supposed to do, other than buy a new one, I don't know.
  • PS3 has ease of development going for it?

    The article also compares "the average price for PS2 on ebay [sic] in November 2000" with "the price for the higher end PS3 when it releases in November 2006." Stock eBay vs. high-end retail price? And this is supposed to be a formula?
    • by Knuckles (8964)
      PS3 has ease of development going for it?

      You beat me to it. The cell sure is not simple to write for, and many developers are on the record saying so. According to some I've read (like here [gamepro.com] and here [slashdot.org]) it might be not as hard as expected, or not as hard as PS2, but this does not say much since PS2 was considered very hard by most.
      • The phrase "lauded for its great games, ease of development, and superior online service" is meant to apply to the DC/360, depending on whether you're in the PS2 or PS3 column.
    • I think the "ease of development" was referring to the 360.

      But yeah, the price point argument really struck me that way, too. If the best you can say about your price is that it's no higher than what the scalpers and scam artists were able to squeeze out of a gross mismatch between quantiy supplied and quantity demanded last time around, I don't think you've managed a ringing endorsement of your value.
    • by Knuckles (8964)
      Hehe, grammar_fascist, two postings down someone explains [slashdot.org] that we are all mis-parsing the sentence, and that ease of development is actually attributed to DC and 360. I guess it's true if not obvious.
  • by rilister (316428) on Friday November 10, 2006 @05:19PM (#16798816)
    i think people are a little confused about what Sony are trying to achieve with the PS3. Sure, it's going to be up against the Wii and XB360, but I'm guessing that's a secondary concern to Mr Stringer.

    The PS2 sold 105million units. Let's say the PS3 is a disaster - how bad could it be? 50million? 25million?

    Those are all Blu-ray devices. At least an installed base of 25million Blu-ray players sold in a few years time. Versus how many HD-DVD players? How can HD-DVD compete with that kind of a headstart?

    Owning the next-gen DVD format is the prize here. HD-DVD is only 33% ahead of Blu-ray today, before the PS3 even hits the market. I think that's more precious to Sony than losing a bit of ground to Microsoft. Maybe they calculated on losing gaming market share this time round.
    • i think people are a little confused about what Sony are trying to achieve with the PS3

      I think you're the one that is confused, sorry. Sony is all about long-term w/the PS3, and there is no single element of it that will make or break those goals.

      Owning the next-gen DVD format is the prize here

      Irrelevant...that token is off the table with today's announcement of a 'playz-all' drive. Poof - gone. Risk-free for both sides and life goes on. Next problem?!
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Al Dimond (792444)
        Even if there's a drive that plays all (which as my elder sibling points out hasn't really happened yet), I think that only one of the two formats will win in the end. I don't think there's room on store shelves for two the-same-but-different copies of every movie. The Internet, where shelf space isn't a problem, will lessen that , but if one of the two formats gets critical mass the other will be marginalized. Controlling the format is not a means to the end of making The Big Bucks (tm) by selling hardw
    • hose are all Blu-ray devices...Owning the next-gen DVD format is the prize here.

      I agree. I think Sony's trying to take a double edged sword here. It's what [slashdot.org] I've been [slashdot.org] thinking as well.

      Cheers,
      Fozzy

    • How many HD-DVD players do you think will be out there in a few years time? The PS3 initial launch quantities are pitiful. While Sony's ramping up PS3 sales, HD-DVD is out there, looking cheaper, and if not better, at least as good (going on what I've read here - never could understand why Blu-Ray would not look every bit as good as HD-DVD, but nevermind).

      This also ignores the very real possibility that both formats will flop, because DVD was just too successful, and people don't want to start replacing med
    • by Black Pete (222858) on Friday November 10, 2006 @06:27PM (#16799604)
      How can HD-DVD compete with that kind of a headstart?

      Easily. HD-DVD has the letters "DVD" in it. That has an immediate meaning in the average consumer's head: It's like DVD, but now it's in HD! Just like how a HD-TV is like a TV but in HD!

      HD-DVD, regardless of how well it actually performs, has an immediate name recognition. The name "Blu-ray" really doesn't convey any meaning to the average Joe Blow -- unless s/he already did the homework. It doesn't exactly scream, "This is better than DVD!"
    • The PS2 didn't reach 40 million until September 2002 [bbc.co.uk], 2.5 years after it went on sale in March 2000. It took it until November 2005 [gamasutra.com] to reach 100 million. I couldn't find any reference to the PS2 hitting 150 million. All I could find was a cite from this month saying the entire "installed base" for all gaming number 150 million [signonsandiego.com].

      So I really don't forsee this as being a coup for Sony. It might be, but I don't think so. I bought an N65 and then a Playstation. I bought a Playstation2 and then a Gamecube.
  • by Rik Sweeney (471717) on Friday November 10, 2006 @05:21PM (#16798830) Homepage
    So basically it'll boil down to:

    1. The naysayers will say that it'll suck
    2. It'll sell beyond expectations
    3. The naysayers deny the first statement and claim they knew all along
  • by Volante3192 (953645) on Friday November 10, 2006 @05:28PM (#16798924)
    PS2: Competition from Nintendo: A smaller, cheaper 'family friendly' console with a 'focus on gameplay.' released one year after the PS2

    PS3: Competition from Nintendo: A smaller, cheaper 'family friendly' console with a 'focus on gameplay.' released concurrently with the PS3."


    Fixed your article. Where's my co-author credit?
    • by meringuoid (568297) on Friday November 10, 2006 @07:23PM (#16800164)
      PS3: Competition from Nintendo: A smaller, cheaper 'family friendly' console with a 'focus on gameplay.' released concurrently with the PS3."

      In Europe, Wii is getting released Before Christmas, PS3 is getting released After Christmas, which I'd guess will be hugely important. That said, from what I hear from my contacts in the school playground (which is to say my little sister) the DS Lite is the must-have Christmas gift this year...

  • When a major third party tells us "We want to see Sony fail," there's a problem.


    Who said this?

    seriously, I don't remember anyone saying they WANT Sony to fail, most comments I have seen have been a desire to see all 3 systems do well, for a more open and competative game market....

    any one?
    link highly apreciated.
    • I can guarantee you that's the feeling among third party publishers and developers. What possible gain is it for one manufacturer to have a virtual monopoly. Plus with warring manufacturers you get sweet deals like delayed "exclusives" and the like. Its in no one's best interest to have a console fail other than the competing manufacturers and fanboys.
    • by Xugumad (39311)
      I believe Square Soft (Final Fantasy people) have publically said they don't want any one platform to succeed, which is why they're not making all their games PS3 exclusive (anyone got a URL?), but that's as strong a comment as I can remember from any major games company, at least publically.
  • by poot_rootbeer (188613) on Friday November 10, 2006 @05:38PM (#16799030)
    If we're going to look at the past to predict the future, let's look at these facts:

    No console with a launch price higher than $300 (at the time of launch) has ever been a success.

    No console with a launch price higher than $400 (adjusted for inflation to 2006 dollars) has been a success since prior to The Crash of 1982.

    Sony took a huge risk in pricing their new console so far outside of the historical comfort zone for price, and I don't think the outlook for them is good at all. I only wonder what derisive name will ultimately be attached to their failure:
    P$3?
    PS3DO?
    PS3O-GEO?
    • by laffer1 (701823)
      Last I checked, the xbox 360 isn't all that cheap either. The problem most people have with the price is that they are forced to only buy one console. Most real gamers have two consoles and that's why there have always been at least two popular consoles. Nintendo and Sega held the crown in the 16bit era and there was atari and nintendo early on. The other factor is that you can buy a whole PC for the price of these things. (not from sony) I can go to dell and buy a PC for less than the launch price of
  • Sega Issues (Score:5, Interesting)

    by therage96 (912259) on Friday November 10, 2006 @05:40PM (#16799058)
    One important item to make note of here is that while the Sega Dreamcast was itself a decent system, Sega had already burned a lot of its customers with their numerous "1.5 systems." What I mean by that is, all of the many systems they created as extensions of current systems (Sega CD, 32X, etc..) that they sold as the next big thing, but completely failed on when it came to supporting them. I myself bought the 32X for $130 when it came out, and how many games were made for it? Less than 60. Same with the Saturn, the ultimate 2D system, suddenly found itself floundering when the Playstation focused solely on 3D games and Sega dropped it, and went on with the Dreamcast. After all of those, you could be sure I wasn't about to spend another dime on a Sega system, because how do I know its not another "1.5" system than will have its support cut out from under it in only a few months time.
  • by Inoshiro (71693) on Friday November 10, 2006 @05:46PM (#16799124) Homepage
    " This one costed $300."

    The past tense of cost is cost. You sound like a retard or an elementary school child when you write it in a "real" article. This is the first line, too! Do they not hire editors at 1up?
    • Yea, costed is an english word - but only in game developer jargon when talking about game balance decisions. "Yea, we costed long swords at 50 gold after we realized that they were unbalanced at 40."

  • Its not the same (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Squarewav (241189) on Friday November 10, 2006 @05:52PM (#16799194)
    What killed the dreamcast wasn't the PS2 directly. What killed it was Segas poor reputation with its past systems. The Sega Saturns 3d support was very poor compared to PS1 and N64,and died off rather quickly. Segas Add-ons for the Genesis, Sega CD, 32X, 32x-CD, Sold moderitly well, but had poor games, and killed of right away when Saturn came out.

    So when Sega rushed the dreamcast out to be the first of the new generation systems, people were hesitant about buying another sega product. Some people only used the Saturn as a stop-gap till the PS2 came out. The hype of the PS2 helped kill the dreamcast but it wasn't the only factor.

    This time around PS3 is competing with Xbox360. Unlike Saturn the Xbox has proven itself as a strong system, and in many ways better then PS2.

  • The PS3 sounds exactly like the Ps2. And everyone knows it. If you had problems with the PS2, expect more from the ps3.

    Even worse people jumped on board the ps2 for two reasons. A. It was the only system worth buying, (Sorry dream cast) the only system with a great legacy. B. It had GTA. C. It played your PS2 games and only costed 300 dollars.

    Sony can pretend this is all good because it's the same, but Ps2's early launch saved them. PSX not really having competition for CD based systems saved them. Ho
  • by moochfish (822730) on Friday November 10, 2006 @06:28PM (#16799608)
    I'm all for objective comparisons we can all argue over but this one killed it for me.

    $600 - The average price for PS2 on ebay in November 2000.

    vs.
    $600 - The price for the higher end PS3 when it releases in November 2006.


    How is that a valid comparison? I wonder if the author is aware that the PS3's are going for up to $5000 on ebay right now. And there's also that gem about PS2's having DVD functionality:

    Offered DVD playback at a price cheaper than most existing DVD players. "[PS2] put DVD on the map, pushing hardware prices down and forcing the viability of the format. (Gear Live)


    From what I recall, DVD's were already kicking ass when PS2 came out. In fact, many people bought a PS2 because they liked the DVD functionality.
  • by superdan2k (135614) on Friday November 10, 2006 @06:28PM (#16799614) Homepage Journal
    PS2: Released in the middle of a booming economy when a large number of twentysomethings had either more money than god, or at least enough to warrant spending hundreds of dollars on a video game console.

    PS3: Released in the middle of a shitty economy when a large number of twentysomethings have less money, more bills, and enough to worry about that a $700 game console isn't in the cards.
  • Price predictions (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ConfusedSelfHating (1000521) on Friday November 10, 2006 @10:48PM (#16801972)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox [wikipedia.org]

    The Xbox was released on November 15, 2001 at a price of $299 and it was reduced in price to $199 on May 15, 2002.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_2 [wikipedia.org]

    The PS2 was released on October 26, 2000 at a price of $299 and it was reduced in price to $199 on May 14, 2002.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamecube [wikipedia.org]

    The Gamecube was released on November 18, 2001 at a price of $199 and it was reduced in price to $149 on May 13, 2002.

    My guess is that in May, the Xbox 360 Core version will be dropped and the premium version will be reduced to $299. The PS3 will be reduced to $399/$499 and the Wii will be reduced to $199. It may come down to one company cutting their price and the others following.

    Microsoft earns over $10 billion a year in profit, while Sony and Nintendo make about $1 billion each every year. Microsoft has been making the Xbox 360 for over a year, significantly cutting manufacturing costs.

    The one game that has been reviewed on both the PS3 and the Xbox 360 is Tony Hawk Project 8. There are two major problems with the PS3 version: lack of online support and frame rate issues. The frame rate issues are a huge problem for Sony. If someone is paying a premium price, they expect a premium product. If the PS3 version of games is inferior to the Xbox 360 version, I don't see why anyone would want to purchase a PS3. Luckily for Sony, it probably just means that people are having a difficult time developing for the platform.

  • by seebs (15766) on Saturday November 11, 2006 @04:28AM (#16803530) Homepage
    I have not elsewhere seen the PS3 described as "easy" to develop for. More like "very very hard".

    I am a big fan of the Cell (I've done some writing about it and played a bit with the sim), but I can't imagine calling it "easy".

The first sign of maturity is the discovery that the volume knob also turns to the left.

Working...