PS3 Performance Downgraded Again 217
Heartless Gamer writes "The PS3's performance has been downgraded again, according to the Inquirer." From the article: "We can't tell you why the GPU lost nearly 10% of it's clock, it could be an NVidia screwup, or it could be Sony/Cell. Either way, it just became much less of an overwhelming value, but you get a DRM infected drive for 'free' either way." Interesting, but keep in mind this is The Inquirer. 9 out of 10 doctors recommend salt with their articles. Relatedly, the choice comments from Penny Arcade this past weekend about Sony's console are wandering around the internets today. From that article: "We've already talked about it, there's no chance we're buying a PS3 at launch."
again? (Score:3, Interesting)
Hmm... (Score:3, Interesting)
Given the crap the Inquirer has already talked about PS3, I'd take their article here with a pinch of salt roughly the size of Jupiter.
Re:Oh, Zonk (Score:4, Interesting)
If you click the link, you'll see it's not a cartoon but a comment made by one of the peeps at Penny Arcade. So, you're right, Penny Arcade isn't funny when it's not presenting a joke.
Re:Part of a secret plan. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:again? (Score:4, Interesting)
While I'm sure Sony will not disappear, it is far too large for that, unless it returns to it's prior days of creativity, quality, and innvoation, they will certainly go the way of Panasonic. That being stagnation and mediocrity in the marketplace.
Will they never learn? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Hmm... (Score:5, Interesting)
Regardless of what I might think about Sony and the PS3, I certainly am not going to believe something just because it comes from those jokers.
Re:"Zonked" tag this baby (Score:2, Interesting)
I dare you.
Launch titles don't count.
The only "good news" Google News found about the PS3 was the already-reported story about running Folding@Home on it. Everything else is negative.
Zonk isn't the one portraying the PS3 in a poor light. Sony's doing that all on their own.
Re:again? or will Sony survive as a stock? (Score:2, Interesting)
To which NineNine said: You go ahead and do that. I'll be buying.
To which myself, a different person who has many investments and who has been investing for 30 years say:
I wouldn't recommend it. I've owned Sony. I've made money off of owning Sony stock. I sold my Sony stock and bought Nintendo a few months back, and quite frankly, I have seen absolutely no reason to change my basic decision. Sony just plain isn't getting it - but Nintendo is. And it's not just the gaming platforms, quite frankly, it's the total corporation.
You probably want to buy Ford
Normal and Slower PS3's? (Score:1, Interesting)
screw DRM (Score:2, Interesting)
Actually (Score:4, Interesting)
The CPU is still 333 MHz as a peak without overclocking. It's designed to run at different speeds in order to optimize battery life. Sony's offical SKU allows it to run at 222 MHz, 266MHz, and 333MHz. At the moment, there's nothing really stopping developers from using 33MHz (in fact in all likelyhood there have been games released running at that speed), other then them wanting to conserve battery life. For instance, many homebrew applications either by default run at 333MHz or have an option to do so to increase performance.
You have to remember something here: this is The Inquirer. (No, I'm not confusing this with the British tabloid The National Enquirer.) Basically all this site does is make shit up in order to increase hits to their site. This is just the latest in a string of false information on that site about the PS3, it's Cell processor, and it's RSX graphics chip.
Re:Hmm... (Score:3, Interesting)
As both a Sony employee and an individual, what do you think about all the negative publicity for PS3 so far? It's even reaching back to mainstream, non-gaming press. The PlayStation brand loyalty will only stretch so far. Nintendo learned that between the SNES and the N64.
Might Spike PS2 Sales (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Price beyond the threshold of acceptability (Score:3, Interesting)
Your comment makes no sense. This is precisely what Sony is doing, and it does not involve any insight, but a severe lack thereof. Sony believes that people will pay $600 for a PS3 because it plays Blu-Ray movies and a Blu-Ray player is $1000. They believe this because people spent $300 on a PS2 because it played DVDs and a DVD player was the same price as a PS2, and since a Blu-Ray player actually costs more than a PS3, everyone will buy PS3s, right?
Well, that's their logic anyway. It's amazingly poor logic, unfortunately, because everyone wanted to get a DVD player and move into the new world, but less than 10% of househoulds in the US will even have a HD-capable display by the time the PS3 comes out, so no one gives a fuck about Blu-Ray. DVDs are higher resolution than my primary movie display device, so why should I move up? A full-HD TV that's actually worth buying costs more than I spent on my fucking car, with the registration. I'm not going to, on top of that, spend enough money to buy some slick wheels and tires for it just so I can have a game console that plays a new video format.
At this point, the only console of this generation that I plan to maybe spend full price on is the Wii. By the time it comes out, maybe the Xbox 360 will have come down a bit, and I can buy one of those too, although frankly there aren't any games on it that I care about yet. There's only one game I care about that's PS3 exclusive, and that's whatever version of Gran Turismo comes out for it... and I can wait to play that. I haven't beaten GT4 yet anyway.