Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

Sony Denies PS3 Delay 188

Posted by Zonk from the fight-the-good-fight dept.
Eurogamer reports that Sony is flatly denying the delay of the PlayStation 3. From the article: "Sakaguchi was responding to allegations made by Merrill Lynch analyst Joe Osha in a report published late last week, in which Osha claimed that the PS3 could launch in autumn in Japan, with a US launch possibly being delayed to early 2007. 'There is no change in our original plan to release the console in spring 2006," Sakaguchi told the press in Tokyo, referring to the company's only stated goal for the launch so far - namely that the console will appear in at least one territory, most likely Japan, this spring.' They have lots of opportunities at GDC and E3 to change the public perception that their next console is still very much a work in progress.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sony Denies PS3 Delay More

Sony Denies PS3 Delay

Comments Filter:
  • They've been running around yelling "Spring" for months now. Why not expect them to say it again?

  • Delay? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Stachybotris ( 936861 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @12:55PM (#14762176)
    If it means having a better system with fewer bugs and more launch titles, I can't see how a delay would be bad from an end-user perspective. I realize that any delay will harm them as a corporation, and possibly drive up the system price, but these are relatively minor concerns. Then again, most manufacturers already sell the system itself at a loss.

    The only thing Sony really needs to worry about time-wise is beating the Revolution out of the gates. Given that details on the Nintendo system are still sketchy at best, this probably isn't a concern either.

    • Re:Delay? (Score:5, Funny)

      by CaymanIslandCarpedie ( 868408 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @01:16PM (#14762326) Journal
      Agreed. I hate how people always rag on Duke Nukem Forever just because its been delayed a bit! As long as it has few bugs when released whats the big deal?

    • Re:Delay? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Miraba ( 846588 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @01:34PM (#14762437) Journal
      I realize that any delay will harm them as a corporation, and possibly drive up the system price, but these are relatively minor concerns.

      Think again. The longer the delay, the more time the XBox 360 will have on the shelves as the lone next-gen console ("Now $249/$349!") and the less time they'll have until the Revolution launches ("Eh, I'll wait."). Remember that consoles sales will be reflected in game deals and the adoption of Blue-Ray. It's critical that they have a strong launch, and that means releasing in a fairly narrow window.

      • Re:Delay? (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Golias ( 176380 )
        The longer the delay, the more time the XBox 360 will have on the shelves as the lone next-gen console...

        Not to be a Microsoft basher, but the 360 has mostly been spending its time not on the shelves, hasn't it?

        All these hardware delays are making it very obvious why Apple dropped IBM in favor of Intel. The previous (Intel-based) X-Box didn't have these sorts of massive shortages to deal with.
      • The 360 launch is hardly the success it might have been:
        • It's February, bordering on March. To the best of my knowledge, if I wasn't on a list at the launch, I STILL can't walk into someplace and buy one.
        • Launch titles have been tepid at best. Even a source that should mitigate fanboyism like Game Rankings [gamerankings.com] has a 76% average rating for the 10th ranked game. That can't be good, although I have no historical comparisons.
        • Non-US sales have not been good.

        Sony sees this, and might be thinking that they're

    • Re:Delay? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by MikeFM ( 12491 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @02:31PM (#14762810) Homepage Journal
      I'll wait as long as it takes if they just put out a killer system. Last time I checked PS2's were still outselling XBox 360's so it seems to hardly matter to Sony and they could, if needed, slash the PS2 prices to keep 360 sales low.

      id, If I remember, has a motto of "When it's finished." or something like that. I think Sony should follow it. Don't let M$ trick them into releasing anything less than perfect. Let M$ be the one dealing with their consoles crashing and the power supplies catching fire.

      • Re:Delay? (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Golias ( 176380 )
        Last time I checked PS2's were still outselling XBox 360's

        Pfft!

        Of course it's outselling the 360 so far! There have been probably more PS2s shoplifted than the total number X-Box 360s manufactured! Last time I checked, they've shipped something like a total of eight of them, and two of those went to Japan (where they did not sell.)

        Also, previous-generation consoles in general are selling well, because the consoles are under a hundred bucks, and the games cost "$10 or trade for rifle."

        Heck, I own a curre
        • $50-$75 is my price point to buy consoles I missed when they were hot. That's what I did with the Dreamcast and is what I'll do with Xbox and Gamecube. I really don't need them but for that price I might as well throw one in my collection in case I ever want it.

          I think next gen consoles don't really penetrate the market for at least a year after the first next gen hits the market so only the early adopter fan boys (or their moms) will buy them during that time. So Sony has about a year from the 360 release
        • Eh. I bought a PS2 this year (gift), and a cousin of mine got one for xmas...on the other hand, I don't know anyone who has a 360...Obviously not scientific, but does seem suggestive.
  • That report seemed kind of hard to believe. I mean, if they delayed it till 2007 and then priced it ridiculously high, that would give M$ a significant opportunity to cut into their marketshare. I didn't figure Sony to be that stupid.
    • I didn't figure Sony to be that stupid.

      I didn't figure Sony would be that scared.

      I can't help but feel that the XBox has Sony executives a little nervous, especially regarding the EU and US markets. The 360 has been incredibly well received by most of the developers I've spoken to, and public interest/desire for the machine is also high. It almost seems that people who were dissapointed by the final PS2 product are more wary of Sony's marketing/hype attempts this time, especially as MS has released a r

      • Re:Not surprising (Score:2, Interesting)

        by 7Prime ( 871679 )

        Woah dude, you're making a WHOLE lot of generalizations there. The PS2 outsold the XBox, worldwide, something fierce. As someone said previously, the PS2 is STILL outselling the 360, and it's still priced pretty high ($125 for a 5 year old console). It's also one of the most well-liked from a user perspective, despite it's being a distant 3rd in terms of power, this generation.

        Sure, the 360 was recieved fairly well... but compared to what, though? To be perfectly honest, I've never seen a more flacid syst

  • A Spring launch of the PS3, even if it's in a completely different market, would be good news for those of us considering the X-Box 360, but have been waiting to see how Sony's new console stacks up against it.

    I'm especially interested in what the next console iteration of GTA looks like. Here's hoping Rockstar does away with pedalling little bikes through the "hood", and "playing" weight training simulators, and gets back to making games that are actually... you know... fun.

  • When the denial is late-- not a good sign.. (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 20, 2006 @12:58PM (#14762204)
    Wow, only like 4 days to respond... They must have Dick Cheney's public relations team or something...

  • Too much cutting edge stuff (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hattig ( 47930 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @12:59PM (#14762208) Journal
    BluRay, Cell, ... it's going to add up.

    Ideally the best time to launch a next generation console is when the media format is established. DVD was established when the PS2 came out and popularised it.

    I feel the PS3 is trying to establish the format itself, but that means the format is brand new at console launch, expensive, with first generation issues, speed, etc.

    Cell too is very ambitious. In the long term I think it will be a good decision though.

    In the end the PS3 will be marginally better than the XBox360, and is that worth being a year later? In addition, the PS3 looks fugly in its mockups, whereas the 360 appears to be quite nice.

    ObRevolution: And let's not forget about Nintendo's new console either, that could beat them both on price and gameplay features.
    • Ideally the best time to launch a next generation console is when the media format is established. DVD was established when the PS2 came out and popularised it.

      It seems like Sony is hoping that the PS3's (presumed) popularity will help spread systems with Blu-Ray drives into millions of homes. It's quite obvious, as observed by others, that the decision to use a BD-ROM drive in the PS3 is being used by Sony as a way to gain an advantage in the HD format war.

    • Re:Too much cutting edge stuff (Score:5, Interesting)

      by kai.chan ( 795863 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @02:22PM (#14762759)
      In the end the PS3 will be marginally better than the XBox360, and is that worth being a year later?

      Here are the games I missed out because I didn't get the Xbox:
      Halo, Ninja Gaiden, various PC ports

      Here are the games that I would have missed out on if I got the Xbox instead:
      Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, Metal Gear Solid, Gran Turismo, Devil May Cry, God of War, Virtua Fighter, Soul Calibur 3, Shadow of the Colossus, etc, etc.

      I get my FPS fix on the PC with keyboard and mouse, so really, the question comes down to: Is Ninja Gaiden really worth all the other games that I don't get on the Xbox? ~50% of the console market didn't think it was worth it, while ~25% -- likely people without a PC -- thought it was.
      • I concur. (Don't we all love saying that?) I have no need for an XBox because most of it's decent games are available for PC and the games I wanted to play on it I could count on one hand anyway. The Windows PC is as much a detriment to the XBox as the Playstation.
    • I think the PS3 will be faster than the 360 but not a lot faster. The main point though is that the Cell processor will scale better for future consoles than future rehashes of current CPUs. This switch is an investment in the future and will not really pay off fully until the next next gen console at which point everyone else will be playing catch up.
      • "This switch is an investment in the future and will not really pay off fully until the next next gen console at which point everyone else will be playing catch up."

        At which point will the developers start taking well to the Cell processor again? It doesn't matter if it's faster on the books if the speed's never properly utilized.
        • The developers that succeed will be the ones that embrace the power and stop whining about having to adapt. Mediocre programmers always complain when they have to adapt where as good programmers are excited by the new possibilities. As far as I can tell programming for the Cell isn't that different from programming for any other parallel system. It's not that hard to do. It's more an issue of having to get a feel for the new system and rewrite some libraries and tools. Short-term issues.
    • BluRay, Cell, ... it's going to add up.

      PS2 was cutting edge too when it was released. The GPU was better than what you could get for a PC, and in many ways it still smokes (better fill rate than the Xbox). The CPU wasn't anything too exciting, of course.
  • Many people have cast doubt on Sony's ship date, and Sony's been standing firm on Spring 2006 (mostly). If you think all the game industry layoffs are bad now, wait until Sony slips because, if they do, you ain't seen nothing yet. Thank goodness handheld gaming is going so strong or things would be even worse.

    One thing nobody is asking Sony is where they will ship in Spring. Might be Japan only. Even so, with the tepid response to the 360 in North America (made worse by the shortages), and the complete re

  • Spring = June (Score:4, Informative)

    by dubiousx99 ( 857639 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @01:04PM (#14762236)
    Sound about right, launch in mid June in Japan and then be ready to launch in November in the U.S. Launching a console in the first quarter of a calendar year in the U.S. just sounds like suicide to me.

  • Conflicting Statements? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Flaming Babies ( 904475 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @01:05PM (#14762238)
    In this article [bbc.co.uk], a "spokesman for Sony Computer Entertainment" says that the launch could be pushed back if industry specifications on some of the PS3 were not decided soon...

  • Screw the delay (Score:5, Funny)

    by Lord Apathy ( 584315 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @01:08PM (#14762261)

    Screw the delay, what about the price? Are they denying the damn thing is going to cost 900 bucks? If they are not they might as well delay the thing to judgement day. I don't know anyone that is going to reach up their ass and pull out 900 bucks for a video game.

    For that kind of scratch I could buy a xbox360, a few games, and still have enough left over for a night with a couple of high priced call girls.

    • Re:Screw the delay (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Albanach ( 527650 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @01:20PM (#14762351) Homepage
      The $900 figure was an analysts estimate of the build cost.

      Others have already pointed out flaws in the analyst's figures, for example Sony won't pay licensing fees on Bluray, and Bluray drives will probably costs less than the analyst predicts + will fall in price rapidly.

      The main point, however, is that this in no way pointed to the purchase price. Sony will have to compete in the sub $500 market and they know it. Sony will take a hit on hardware knowing they have revenue streams from games, accessories and imjportantly downloads (music, movies and games).

      As the build price decreases Sony will eventually break even and at some point in the future, draw a profit on hardware too.

      At no point will consumers pay $900 for a PS3 (unless they buy it on eBay the day after launch)

      • Re:Screw the delay (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Babbster ( 107076 ) <aaronbabb AT gmail DOT com> on Monday February 20, 2006 @04:20PM (#14763357) Homepage
        Here's something I've been wondering about: At CES, all the talk about Blu-Ray referred to a price point of around $1,000 at launch for standalone players. If Sony releases the PS3 for less than $500 and it includes fully functioning Blu-Ray movie playback, wouldn't that really piss off their hardware partners? In fact, if the above is true (and I honestly don't have the slightest idea), I wouldn't be surprised if Blu-Ray manufacturers abandoned the format and went for HD-DVD instead (with units projected to launch at $500). That could really put in a crimp in the assumptions that Blu-Ray will a) be the dominant high-definition disc format and b) make Sony a ton of money to make up for whatever losses they take on PS3 hardware.
        • $1000 Blu-ray players are mostly targeted at high-end applications, not really the mass market. I don't think the PS3 will be competing in that arena. Plus, I'm sure the prices will drop to $400 or so by the time it gets released.

        • Re:Screw the delay (Score:3, Interesting)

          by ivan256 ( 17499 ) *
          If Sony releases the PS3 for less than $500 and it includes fully functioning Blu-Ray movie playback, wouldn't that really piss off their hardware partners?

          If the PS3 is a "fully functioning BluRay player" in the same way that the PS2 was a fully functioning DVD player, there won't be an issue. Also, if Blu-Ray starts to catch on, the prices won't stay in the $1000+ range for more than a few weeks before a price war kicks in. $99 DVD players were available before the PS2 launch even with all the talk about
          • What you describe would certainly be my expectation. It's just concerning when I read about Blu-Ray players debuting at $1,000 while HD-DVD players will [supposedly] be at $500, and when there's this much talk about the expense of the PS3 it increases that concern. And when Blu-Ray is explained as a big change from DVDs while HD-DVDs are billed as an evolution...Anyway, since I don't know the details of manufacturing, all I have are the questions.

            Thanks, by the way, for mentioning that fact about DVD p

      • Re:Screw the delay (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Daetrin ( 576516 )
        The $900 figure was an analysts estimate of the build cost.

        However that was the same analyst's estimate that was predicting their ship date was going to slip. If Sony felt it was necessary to deny one aspect of that report why didn't they say anything about the other? Maybe they just feel that the ship date is the foremost issue in consumers' minds, but it makes you wonder.

    • Are they denying the damn thing is going to cost 900 bucks?

      The $900 is a made up number by the analysts who wrote the article. I find that number hard to believe. However, Sony has always sold their consoles at a loss initially. If the analysts are to be believed, all this means is that Sony loses $500 per console in the first group of consoles. The Japanese might even be willing to pay this much initially (as happened with the PS2). By the time the console hits the U.S., though, you'll pay the same

      • Wait, you spend $400 for an Xbox 360 and $60 each for a few (3) games, which leaves $320. Assuming each girl gets the same amount, this means you just boinked two cheap hos.

        And the moral of this little tale is? Do the math before you shoot off your mouth.

      • Wait, you spend $400 for an Xbox 360 and $60 each for a few (3) games, which leaves $320. Assuming each girl gets the same amount, this means you just boinked two cheap hos.

        Hey one man's trash is another man's treasure I suppose ;D

    • Re:Screw the delay (Score:5, Insightful)

      by The-Bavis ( 855107 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @01:28PM (#14762400)
      They won't come out and deny that type of overpriced estimate. It worked great for the PSP, which was going to cost you at least $500. When the PSP came out, it was a steal at $250 (thanks to slowly getting your mind used to some ridiculously higher price). You even got a free rag.
    • People paid $900 for a NEO-GEO didn't they? This is supposed to be more than just a console as well. It would hurt them, sure, but it wouldn't be fatal...

      • People paid $900 for a NEO-GEO didn't they? This is supposed to be more than just a console as well.

        Some people paid for a neo-geo, but not enough to keep them in business. I admit that people with more money than sense would easily pay 900 bucks for what will amount to a throwaway game system. Just at 900 clams the masses won't be buying it. Hell, for most of the people I know the PS2 is good enough for them. Once the PS2 dropped to around 200 bucks everyone that I knew and their dog had one.

        At

    • For that kind of scratch I could buy a xbox360, a few games, and still have enough left over for a night with a couple of high priced call girls.

      $20 isn't enough for a high priced call girl. High priced call girls have all their teeth and aren't generally related to you.

  • Launch titles (Score:3, Insightful)

    by the computer guy nex ( 916959 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @01:09PM (#14762267)
    "if it means more launch titles"

    If the hardware was finished, why the hell would you wait for launch titles? Isn't it better to have the system now with the games available and buy them as they are released? This way you have more time to play the best games.

    I've never understood why someone would want to wait 6 more months to have 6 more games to play, when they could have been playing the first 10 already.
    • Um, well, let's see. First off, the 'best games' will certainly not be out at launch. Launch titles almost all suck. Always have, always will. There was not a PS2 title that interested me for at least 6 months. There isn't a single 360 game that looks good to me, and I doubt there will be for for the PS3.

      So, my opinion, is why buy the system now and pay an extraordinary amount of money for a system with a very limited library of full-price games, when in a year the console will probably have a hundred bu

  • Why do people listen to "Analysts"? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 20, 2006 @01:10PM (#14762273)
    Why do people actually listen to market analysts?

    For the most part, the ones that actually get any mention in the media are the ones that make the most outrageous and (typically) false claims. At this point in time the PS3 may be delayed but it would likely be a short delay of a couple of months (possibly a november launch rather than a september launch) and may cost more than people would expect ($450 rather than $350-$400) but there is no way that it is going to be delayed into 2007 and cost $900.

    The truth is that most analysts have worse connections to people "in the know" than many slashdotters and have less understanding of the market than most slashdotters, so why do we even read articles that mention them; I'm certain that many people are in the same boat as me, and know people who work for large developers like EA and UBI soft, and have heard small bits of information which discredit all of these analysts estimates.

    It is depressing that companies have to produce press conferences in order to deal with these wild claims.
    • Because for every 10, 100, 1000, 10000 wrong predictions they make, they make 1 right one. When you're talking about making multi-billion or trillion dollar decisions, you WANT to listen to every single one of those predictions no matter how insane or off-the-wall they sound. (Insurance and security agencies were predicting another terrorist attack on the WTC after the failed '93 truck bombing attempt, but who listened to them? 'They failed once but that doesn't mean they won't try again'? Sound logic to me
      • Unless the ratio of correct predictions to incorrect predictions is high, there is no point believing them "just in case". Even if it was 10 bad guesses to one good one, you're wasting time and effort planning for 9 eventualities that aren't going happen. That's not even counting when two different analysts make conflicting reports. "House prices to rise!" "House prices to fall!"

        A lot of this 'analysis' is just voodoo guesswork. People are so impressed with the hits they forget all the misses. So the psychi
        • Unless the ratio of correct predictions to incorrect predictions is high, there is no point believing them "just in case".

          So you would rather leave everything to chance and wait things out? Thats nice and peachy, but again when you're dealing with multi-billion or trillion dollar decisions, people don't want to hear you say "well, let's just wait and see what happens."

    • Why do people actually listen to market analysts?

      Because most people don't realize the difference between a Market Analyst report and an official press release. They read a report about Sony, so they assume everything in it is true. They fail to see the report for what it is, a view of the market from one analyst. It doesn't help when sites like slashdot present the story with tidbits like, "the PS3 will cost $900!" I use that as an example because most people assume that means it can cost them that amo

  • Spring? Absolutely not. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by UES ( 655257 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @01:31PM (#14762417)
    Is Sony's definition of Spring 2006 different than mine?

    It's late February NOW. "Spring" probably means sometime between now and the end of June.

    That's 19 weeks. So, sometime in the next 19 weeks, we would expect to see:

    1. A complete list of launch titles.
    2. Most, if not all launch titles not just in final version but manufactured and shipped.
    3. Retailers to have full, detailed pricing information. Best Buy needs WEEKS of advance notice to print those Sunday Newspaper flyers.
    4. Retailers to have PS3 sales spaces and media ready to go.
    5. Complete PS3 specs and instruction manuals beyond some flack saying "uh, blue ray".
    6. Teaser advertising beyond some Sony flack saying "any day now".
    7. A full marketing and advertising press, including print, television, and web advertising. This needs to happen MONTHS before launch so that people will know this important product is coming soon.
    8. Accessories not just announced but manufactured and shipped to retailers.
    9. Preorders offered at major game retailers.

    Any of this happening yet? Anyone think you'll be buying one of these in 8 weeks? 8 weeks from now is late April. Most people won't get the XBox 360s they ordered in DECEMBER until then.
    • Numbers 1, 3, 5, 6, and 7 will all be taken care of at E3 in May. The rest can easily be done in the month span after E3 and launch.
    • The Spring release is for Japan, which would follow the same pattern Sony used with the PS2: Spring in Japan, then October/November for North American and Europe in time for the Christmas spending frenzy.

      I doubt that Best Buy will be involved or concerned for some months yet.
    • Everything they've said indicates that Spring is only for Japan. The US could see a summer or autumn launch. However, if there continues to be BluRay delays, that could delay the PS3 launch as well.
    • Oh sorry, the Sony guy just came back from holidays in Australia - huge misunderstanding there!
    • It's late February NOW. "Spring" probably means

      February is a time period commonly reffered to as "Mid-Winter".

      Late spring is 4 months from now. 16 weeks. Not 8. The first day of spring is March 21st. A full month from today.

      That's 19 weeks. So, sometime in the next 19 weeks, we would expect to see:

      1. A complete list of launch titles.

      The complete list of Xbox 360 launch titles didn't exist until after the launch when we all saw what was on the shelf and what wasn't. Why should Sony rush?

      7. A full marketing a

  • Subversion (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Kamalot ( 674654 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @01:35PM (#14762445)
    Sony will keep leading on consumers with the PS3 like a carrot dangled in front of an ass. The only reason they keep insisting that the PS3 will be released in Spring is to prevent people from buying a 360.

    The pulled the same shenanigans with the PS2, effectively killing the Dreamcast. They are trying it again.

    Don't be a tool. Don't listen to Sony.

  • PS3 (Score:4, Interesting)

    by the computer guy nex ( 916959 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @01:53PM (#14762555)
    "Any of this happening yet?"

    Of course not. Sony has said 2 things recently in press released:
    1) They will launch in Japan first and
    2) They will not sell the console "at a loss."

    This will push back a US release date till at LEAST late 3rd quarter, and push the release price most likely at about double the price of a $300 Xbox360.

    Sony *needs* to pony up and strip out the Blu-Ray drive. They are trying to push their own media technology and its costing the average gamer hundreds of dollars. A 10gig dual layer DVD is enough for any game in this generation since Sony is not doing 1080p.

  • PS3 will be so revolutionary.. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Lord Bitman ( 95493 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @02:19PM (#14762738)
    Playstation 3 will change the very definition of "spring". The rebirth of each year's springtime will become a shallow metaphore for the huge sweeping cultural and artistic changes which PS3 will bring to humanity as a whole.

  • Depends on how you define "delay" (Score:3)

    by kingsmedley ( 796795 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @03:07PM (#14763003)
    From the summary:

    Sony is flatly denying the delay

    Then, quoting the article:

    the company's only stated goal for the launch so far - namely that the console will appear in at least one territory, most likely Japan, this spring

    Hmm... the PDF I read from Merrill Lynch's Joe Osha does NOT say Sony won't launch the PS3 in 2006. In fact it doesn't say when they will launch anything anywhere. He only speculates (and he is quite clear of this by using terms like "if" and "might" throughout the document) about how a possible delay might affect the industry, and how such a delay could both help and hinder Sony. Furthermore, his comments about a possible delay refer specifically to North America and Europe, which actually falls neatly in line with Sony's half-assed denial of a delay.

    Funny how they can "flatly deny" his "allegations", and at the same time say nothing at all that clearly contradicts his speculative statements.

    Hmmm...

  • Of course they're denying the delay... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Malor ( 3658 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @03:08PM (#14763007) Journal
    Of course they're denying the delay. Sony, if you'll remember, lies. They'll do anything to blunt momentum of the 360. If they keep people thinking that the PS3 is just around the corner, they'll hold out just a little longer. And as long as they don't release specs, people can fantasize.

    They are NOT shipping in Spring. No way. Not happening. Blu-Ray isn't even finished yet. There's no specs, no launch titles, nothing but empty shells and promises. They need time to work out their manufacturing process and build up stock for the retailers, and you can't exactly go into full-scale production when you don't even have finalized hardware.

    They could take a page from the NVidia and ATI playbooks and paper-launch it, I suppose, but that would be the worst of all possible outcomes.... people will finally be able to make an intelligent choice whether the 360 or the PS3 is better, and by then, the 360 is likely to actually be available.

    If Microsoft can execute and get some really good, next-gen games out, they could build up some momentum. The games that are out now are, to my perception, competent but not very exciting. They have good graphics, but there's not much new, gameplay-wise. Kameo has some good moments, but it's too short, and Perfect Dark feels very unpolished and unfinished. Project Gotham Racing is probably the best game so far, and it's just not that much different from the old games... the graphics are great, sure, but that's about all there is to it. (I've heard CoD2 is very good on the 360, but I already have it on the PC and it seemed dumb to buy it again.)

    The Fight Night demo looks promising, I love how there's no on-screen gauges, just two fighters in a ring. And Oblivion may be truly next-gen content... we'll have to see.

    So far, the best game I've played on the 360 is the $5 Geometry Wars. A $400 console to play a $5 game... and it's the best game on the system. Nintendo may be on to something.....

    Oh, and to the AC who called me a 'good liddle fanboy' for saying that Sony wouldn't ship in Spring the last time we had this conversation.... here's a big middle finger just for you.
    • They'll do anything to blunt momentum of the 360.

      They really don't have to do anything to blunt 360's momentum. Yes, It's pretty much sold out everywhere outside Japan, but so few 360s have been made that Xbox 360's launch has been one of the slowest ever...

  • Playstation 3 Questions (Score:3, Insightful)

    by smackenzie ( 912024 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @03:27PM (#14763118)
    So, which fanboys / experts / developers want to tackle the following discouraging issues that I have with the Sony Playstation 3? (And, no, I'm not a plant for Microsoft -- just trying to make sense of the whole Next Gen console thing.)

    Drive Speed

    A Blu-ray 1x drive transfer rate is 4.5 megabytes per second. A DVD 12x drive transfer rate is about 12 - 16 megabytes per second. Sony will have to release at least a 3x drive to compete with DVD 12x speeds. Will they? Or will they release a 2x drive and have a drive that is significantly slower than the XBOX 360? (The Blu-ray specification has indicated that a 1x blu-ray drive is too slow for HD video, so I'm assuming that this isn't an option...)

    HDTV 1080p

    A screen at 720p has (720 x 1280 =) 921, 600 pixels.
    A screen at 1080p has (1080 x 1920 =) 2,073,600 pixels.

    That is, 1080p requires 2.25x the general bandwidth of 720p. Does the Playstation 3 really have 2.25 the general bandwidth of an XBOX 360? Is anyone going to develop games for 1080p at the cost of 2.25 x "other things"?

    Anti-Aliasing

    XBOX 360 gets AA practically for free thanks to 10 MB embedded DRAM. Apparently, the Playstation 3 must do this in software with a performance hit. Does it matter?

    Unified Memory

    The Playstation 3 has 256 MB system RAM and 256 MB video RAM. The XBOX 360 has 512 MB unified memory. This means that a developer could use 128 MB system RAM and 384 MB of video RAM, which is 50% more video RAM than a Playstation 3 for holding textures, etc. Isn't that fairly substantial? Won't that allow for the possibility of better looking / higher detail games on the XBOX 360 if the system RAM isn't needed?

    • Also, we forget that the XBOX 360 is using a new api methology for talking to the video card. The architecture that:

      • Microsoft owns
      • PCs will be using

      Performance using the new api is significant because it cuts down the amount of data crossing the bus. Considering that a large percentage of reported XBOX 360 issues were user-head-space issues and Sony's stellar record of production issues (DVD switch anyone), I put my money that Sony has hard competion.

      Now, I have a XBOX 360 and a XBOX. I bought a PS2, but

  • Well, they wouldn't comment directly on the PS3 schedule, but they did say [realmmedia.com] that they won't receive any royalties from Sony this fiscal quarter, until the end of April at least.

    That leaves Sony at most two months, May and June, to get the PS3 into production & still release it in "spring". Assuming there are no (further) unforseen delays. How many do they hope to have on shelves? Where are they going to release it, Mauritius?

    I dunno, maybe Sony are trying to fool people into thinking they're going to

  • Perhaps if SONY were an Australian company the claim that the PS3 would be available in Spring would be easier to swallow. However, by the traditional definition of Spring in the northern hemisphere, SONY has a little over three months to finalize the system specs, establish a price point, advertise and compile a list of launch titles. To SONY's credit, however, advertising is not as cut-throat in Japan as it is in the United States - Japanese consumers tend not to care about fancy / clever advertising and
  • I've seen in various local news broadcasts the news that PS3 is to be delayed. The news have already travelled across the globe. Now the average consumer already knows PS3 is about to be delayed.
  • "There is no change in our original plan to release the console in spring 2006"
    So you've just not updated your plan. That is not the same as saying it will ship in Spring. Looks like they've got 4 months to get the hardware design complete, design a case, manufacture enough to launch and ship.
    Not going to happen - wonder where I can put money on that..

Slashdot Top Deals

Let's organize this thing and take all the fun out of it.

Close