Why is it a problem for you to wait a few hours for a download. You need to go out and buy a UMD game, or get someone else to deliver it for you. With a decent connection, a download s always quicker and more convenient!
Of course this isn't really a big problem for the PSPGo.
One big glaring problem though, often overlooked, is that you need a PS3 to get your games.
Which is pretty stupid.
The only reason Sony could bring all those things is because they are a big international company with tons of cash flow and manufactures.
That's also why analysts always assumed Sony and MS would be the victors this gen instead of Nintendo, which still is a very small company compared to these behemoths.
It's easy to forget because Nintendo made profits like never seen before in this console generation, while the two others lost billions of dollars of money.
I think also that's why what Sony has done is nothing special (except if you think being a big corporation is special in itself) and can easily be brushed.
At the time, Nintendo was knee deep in lawsuits, especially from Atari, so it couldn't expand in Europe.
Question is how many did they sell? If they sold a metric assload of them (at a profit obviously), I doubt Sony would care *what* the critics thought...
Actually, in Japan, they still haven't sold the first shipment of PSPGo.
I'm not sure about USA, but that's surely the case too, given the really poor sales in NPD.
And in Europe, like in USA, PSP is dead since a very long time.
The problem is not the hardware, they've sold 60 millions of them. The problem is that the primary source of revenue is the software sales, and PSP software sales are dead since a very long time, despite countless hits released on PSP, which all flop.
Most of the time (and including earlier PS3), console hardware is sold at a loss to push it into the market and the vendor regains the money from game sales. The Wii was the first among the current generation consoles that broke this tradition.
This "everyone sells its console at a loss" is a myth.
This was never a tradition, so the Wii didn't break any tradition. Nintendo is the older console manufacturer still alive, so is the traditional one, and they never sold their console at a loss, except the very first months of Gamecube because they quickly dropped the price before launch.
Sony is the big one that introduced this business tactic that was then followed by several companies or gaming division of companies which all met their demise. This includes Sega, MS and Sony.
You'll rightly tell me MS and Sony gaming divisions are not dead, but the only reason why is because they are big enough and had enough profit in other divisions to stand the billions of dollars they lost by using this tactic.
This tactic only works when you're the one with the biggest market: the one with the more consoles and who sells the most games. When you don't, you fail harder to the point of not being able to sustain it even one generation.
The net result of XBox is a loss of 6+ billions of dollars, as for the PS3, they lost as much as they profited with the PS1 and PS2 combined! Two generations of profits (due to being market leader) erased with only one generation of loss (due to not being leader).
Why would anyone buy a PS2 if he can have a PS3. I never understood that. I would never play a PS2 game on a PS3. Why? For what? And if you have PS2 games it is highly likely you do have a PS2. So again, why?
I don't match any of your scenario.
I never had a PS2, and I bought a PS3 specifically for its PS2 compatibility. Actually, I bought a PS3 when they announced they were clearing stock of PS2 compatible PS3. Guess what, I still were able to buy old PS2 games new, and several PS2 games I bought went gold after I bought my PS3, like Persona 4.
And I play all my PS2 games on PS3. Even worse for you, I even play PS1 games on it!!!
Some people are more gamers than graphics whores, which is why FFVII PSN sold very well for example.
No, the first step to installing the pirate stuff isn't the homebrew channel. The first step is buying a Wii. Nintendo should eliminate that step first. This is just insane.
You're insane indeed. So the solution to piracy is to never sell anything that could be pirated? It's so stupid it's not even funny, if you wanted to be funny.
Only a few years ago it was utterly unimaginable that hardware makers would try their best to lock users out of their own systems.
Except Nintendo isn't trying to lock users out of their systems, they're trying to lock pirates out. Nintendo is not stupid enough to let pirates have an easy way. People that choose that way have accepted to do it the hard way anyway.
People that like homebrew won't be really impaired, and the true pirates won't be impaired either. The ones that will be hit hard are the casual pirates, people for whom someone knowledgeable installed the necessary software.
These are the true customers that can be put back on the right path to buy the content they actually want. Pirates and homebrew users are not real customers to Nintendo if they don't buy any games.
I'm pretty sure the Wii came out before his blog started,
And you're pretty wrong. The fact that he was posting in the Wiikly notwithstanding.
You sound like all these MS and Sony viral marketers that he talks about.
The fact is that he predicted nearly perfectly most of what happened in this generation of consoles, so it's no wonder people love Malstrom, but viral marketers hate him with a passion.
and that Nintendo/Sega have been into more casual mini-game style games for a lot longer than the Wii. Saying a blog has "opened your eyes" makes it sound more like you are easily brainwashed.
So you don't know his blog but you are quick to dismiss it and call people who read it "brainwashed" ? It won't work. Malstrom is really making life like hell to viral marketers.
It's funny to watch them recoil in terror at everything he writes.
Well, based on what I can see based on the ease of all of the new Wii games, Nintendo Hard has become Nintendo "this game will play by itself practically". Or Nintendo Hard has become Nintendo frustrating because third parties can't use a touchscreen/motion controller effectively in a game.
Well, based on what I can see, you have not played any Wii game, and you are a typical troll.
I'm sorry but the games on the Wii are crap, the Virtual Console has more decent games and more playability than the entire current Wii library.
Which is confirmed here : you haven't played any Wii game. Even Wii Sports, that comes with the console outside of Japan, destroys your argument.
And its not that the Wii is underpowered its just the developers aren't giving it decent games. I don't care that its in standard definition, I care if its fun.
This must be your 2 only correct sentences.
And I'd much rather play The Orange Box on my 360 than sit through another minigame compilation that seems to be the only games ever made for the Wii.
Sadly, it was true : only 2 sentences right...
Isn't it a little strange that none of the big console makers (Sony, MS, Nintendo) havn't announced plans for a next generation console? I mean christ..how long have the current-generation consoles been out for now..4 or 5 years?
We have seen plans for a next generation console. Kinect is marketed by MS as their next generation console, like a new launch that would give 4-5 years more life to XB360.
Even if that's only marketing, no console maker has any reason to launch a next generation console:
* We're in a recession, it wouldn't be a wise thing to do, especially given the state of the industry,
* That requires funds, and 2 of the 3 are in a "profitability" mode, Sony and MS console divisions lost countless billions this generation, they just can't afford to go on like this,
* MS lost more than $8.5 B (!!) on its XBox line across the years, and is only now slowly recovering some of this money back. The ROI of XBox is disastrous, and it would be worse if they were to make a new one soon;
* Sony Playstation division lost all the profits they made during the PS1 and PS2 era, with the PS3 only. Like MS, making a new console would put them back hundreds of millions in the red;
* The gaming industry is collectively in the red. If you remove Nintendo, they're all in the red this generation. Even if you add Nintendo actually
* Nintendo is the only one making insane (never seen before) profits in the gaming industry. Activision is the sole other making decent, thanks in part to WoW and CoD games. But Nintendo has no incentive to make another home console, when 3rd parties still have not embraced the Wii correctly, and while Wii is still selling like no other home console before it. For years, the gaming industry acted like they wanted the small Kyoto firm to die, and look at the small Kyoto firm just making the reverse happen, including knocking over two big companies in its way. It's just amazing to watch.
It's actually what a Sony guy said a few days ago when asked about the PSPGo. He said it was an experiment and they learned some lessons from it, like people wanting physical media instead of downloadable only.
This experiment is interesting because it just lowers any chance of success for MS strategy that was based on "no more physical media".
Every successful download only game is getting a physical media release on console. Isn't it strange if the future is no physical media?
None of the high end games to be released for it have been announced yet, they're waiting for E3 for that so how can you know there'll be no killer apps for it at release?
The leak says the focus is "casual gamers", which in itself shows they don't understand the market they're targeting. So far, only Nintendo managed to make killer apps for the audience targeted by Natal, and every single time the entire industry laughed at Nintendo for these "poor games" before these games just exploded in sales. So an educated guess would be that MS has no killer app for this thing. We can't be sure of it, but it's likely.
The last foray of MS into this trying to sell games to "casual gamers" was in holidays 2008 IIRC, and it was such a huge failure everybody in the game industry just do as if it never happened.
Also, as this isn't a simple camera, and is in fact an IR camera with depth sensing technology in it, that builds in hardware a 3D map of the environment, and can track actors in that environment, then what exactly is overpriced about it? It seems quite reasonable regardless for the level of technology in it.
You really expect that kind of technology for just the price of a new game?
The big problem is right there. It's overpriced means the price is too high compared to its value. In the entertainment industry, people don't care that the technology is higher grade, as what people give value to, is not technology (as in technology industry), but entertainment, the industry consoles are in. The consumer for entertainment doesn't care about technology, as long as it's good enough.
For this not to be seen as overpriced, the thing need to come with at least 2 perceived killer app games. Technologists and early adopters will flock to it, but the mainstream sales they seem to want for Natal won't come from these people.
A killer app like Wii Fit isn't even at 50 % of Wii sold, and it's already selling at amazing levels. That's the apps Natal needs to succeed, not just say "it has this and that and can do that".
I have an ATI AllInWonder 9800 Pro TV tuner card for my PC, and a Hauppauge USB TV Tuner stick for my laptop. Both are common as dirt, and neither of them are still supported by MythTV. Bummer.
It helps to understand what you're talking about though.
MythTV doesn't support any specific card or stick, the Linux kernel does, and the OS brings in some generic interfaces upon that.
MythTV then uses that.
It helps to read the MythTV documentation when you don't know anything about these, before trying to install such a complex application.
At least it would prevent you from saying stupid things, and direct you to LinuxTV site which lists hardware supported in Linux. I would be surprised your USB stick is not supported for example.
+1 Insightful. I've been using Myth since 2003 (and keeping it running using the same database from then to now is no mean feat, I can tell you - but that's the only option for people with TV recordings they don't want to delete as Myth has no way of importing random recordings).
This just proves that using a product for a long time doesn't mean you understand the product or are proficient with it. You clearly have no clue.
These are the same problems I read about when I started installing MythTV, and it was a breeze to install for me, and nothing was a feat about MythTV.
But then again, I'm no ordinary user.
In that time the install procedure has changed from "tortuous" to merely "painfully inconvenient" - there's still alot of manual text-editing steps involved, for those of us in the UK at least, and the amount of hoops I've had to jump with for MySQL is atrocious, and anyone else who's run into the various debacles involving charset settings can attest.
I've already switched to XBMC as a frontend UI as it's superior in every way (apart from LIRC setup).
Going on with the nonsense. Like most people that don't know what they are doing but are quick to criticize what they don't understand, you believe configuring all the parts necessary for MythTV to be of any use (disks, TV card, remote,
I agree that MythTV setup (the true one) is far from being user friendly yet, which is a cause of MythTV being a generic product that can be put on most Linux configurations, and offer lots of architectures possibilities.
For now, using external frontends like XBMC is a sure way to lose 3/4 of MythTV features though. But if some user finds it more user friendly, why not.
Not sure it will work with 0.23 though. And sure enough, using XBMC already makes you lose most of 0.22 features.
Actually, it does make a difference. Granted, most of the people using Myth are probably geeks who understand about point releases, but even I am skeptical of a product that is at 0.2x. That says to me its still in early development, is not ready for prime time, and the fact that MythTV has been around for, oh, roughly eight years (archive.org's oldest page is July 2002) and is still at such a low point number says to me that there is not much development going on in it. The fact that its a stable release is moot. If I were to start an operating system, it booted and simply displayed "Hello World" without crashing makes it a stable release - doesn't mean its ready for world wide use.
No, I agree with the parent. Find a release that is stable and relatively bug free, and call it 1.0 already. This staying at 0.x for 8 years simply says your project is either not organized, lacks proper development, or lacks the balls to release a product that's ready for prime-time.
All this text just to say : "I won't use it, I can't bash it without looking clueless, so I'll troll the product so that I can repel people from even trying it".
For what purpose ? God knows.
If you just need reassuring, lots of MythTV users (including me) are using it for years and it's stable, in the sense that everything I recorded years ago is still available in MythTV, despite several MythTV versions updated already (started with 0.19 through 0.22, sometimes even using SVN versions, and now I'll go to 0.23), and several disk (200 Go to 2 To) and PC (3rd mythbox) changes.
For those who were around for GNOME 1.2 back in 2000, the 2.30 release stands as evidence that Linux on the desktop and GNOME in particular have made awfully little progress in the last decade. GNOME 2.0 was released in 2002, not 2000, and it was horrid; maybe if your first experience with GNOME was 2.0 then you might think 2.30 was a vast improvement- heck, TWM is a vast improvement on GNOME 2.0.
Well I was around at the time, and I used Gnome 1.4 (actually, I still compile it and still uses a few Gnome 1.4 programs to this day, like gcombust).
I'm not surprised by these reactions, but to me, they come from trolls or from people with a very narrow-minded view of the world that basically revolves around american geeks using Gnome. Because Gnome 2.0 actually brought huge improvements for Gnome, at least in presentation. If I have to select two of the most important ones, it has to be i18n/l10n and fonts handling. But actually there are far more improvements than that.
Comparing the usability worldwide of Gnome 2 and TWM, and saying TWM is better, is just plain stupid hyperbole.
I can't believe people are so dense. Sure Gnome 2 came with its loads of bugs, but to say there was little improvements, wow!
The progress GNOME made between 1998 and 2000, the big improvements in the 2.2 kernel series, and a host of other developments made it seem like Linux really would overtake Windows for desktop use soon. But I really don't find much about modern versions of GNOME that really improves on 1.2 or maybe 1.4; the last 9 years have seen little improvement in the Linux desktop IMO.
So this is due to a very narrow vision of users and the world outside english speaking users then. And blindness too, despite Gnome having improved on usability and disabled people assistance.
The replacing Windows part was always wishful thinking by geeks that don't understand the majority of other people around them, which is perfectly normal, most of us have strong NT personalities, which represent around 10 % of world population.
I argue that big improvements in the 2.4 and 2.6 kernel series (at all levels including audio and video), the Gnome 2 progress, the freedesktop initiative and middleware tools between the kernel and desktop are even bigger improvements than what we saw in those Gnome 1 years.
The experience was smoothed so much that some people don't even see the improvements anymore, despite them being right before their eyes.
"The one charm of marriage is that it makes a life of deception a neccessity." - Oscar Wilde
