carleast

PlayStation 3 Sales Solid in Europe Debut

As I've been saying all along. I just couldn't understand everyone's concerns about the PS3. This is the future. The Xbox 360 is the present but why have the present when you can have the future right now. The Wii? Well, I've said all along that the Wii is different. IT's not in a fight with Sony and Microsoft because it's aimed at a different market. Plus it's longevity has already been questioned by those who own one.

The new Xbox Elite is not going nearly far enough. A hdmi output and a 120gb hard drive? Are you kidding me. Is that all you've got Microsoft?!!!

Nintendo vs. Sony: Like Atari vs. Betamax All Over Again

Yeah, it's not the ssame thing. Fair enough HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray is the same as VHS vs Betamax but there are otehr variables this time. I don't think you can bracket the Wii in with the Xbox 360 and the PS3 because it doesn't offer the same things. We should be keeping an eye on the Xbox 360 vs PS3 battle rather than what the Wii is doing.

What Sony needs to ensure is that their online experience is up to scratch. To make sure that downloading of games and video is good and also making the online gaming experience as good as the Xbox 360.

We're only in the first mile of a 26 mile marathon here so hold your horses!

EA: Microsoft, Sony, We Have a Problem

Great comments Thomas. I agree 100%. Where all this over hype of the Xbox360 has recently come from I'm not sure. Microsoft claims to have shipped 10m of them by the end of 2006 but reports show that there are significant amounts of surplass inventory being held by stores world wide which suggests that microsoft were shipping like mad just to meet their targets. I can see no way but down for the Xbox360.

The Wii certainly does have "velocity" right now as Robert put it. But I've been reading in a number of places that the gaming experience is very short lived. People get bored of the gimicky controller.

In the end it will be the hard core gamers who decide who the winner is. Long term the PS3 is the only winner.

Watch SNE stock reach 70 by mid 2008.

Sony PS3 Misses Sales Target, Xbox 360 and Wii May Beat Targets

I certainly feel that the predicted trouble of Sony with the PS3 is very premature from Carl. Thomas certainly put things into perspective here when he said that total Xbox 360 sales so far only represent 10% of what the PS2 has sold so far. That doesn't include Christmas season sales though so I'm assuming that by the end of this year the 360 may have sold around 12m units. Bear in mind that for the past 3 quarters the PS2 has actually outsold the 360.

Sony may have had trouble over the past few years but they've never put a foot wrong as far as the Playstation brand is concerned so to predict that they have done it here is a bit rich. The 360 may have better games but surely that's a no-brainer considering that the 360 has been out for over a year and the PS3 has been out a matter of weeks. And maybe the first selection of PS3 games have only marginally better graphics you wait until this time next year.

And don't predict the end of Sony yet. If you were to list the worlds four most highly sort after consumer electronic goods they would be as follows: MP3 players, Computers (with a larger percentage of them being laptops by the day), Flatscreen TV's, and Games Consoles. Sony is failing with MP3 players. But who isn't? Apple have that one tied up for the time being. They are holding their own ground on the laptop front but it's a saturated market with too many players. It is the new generation Sony Bravia range that is taking the flatscreen tv world by storm. The reviews for the latest models has firmly put Sony back on the top of the pile where they share it currently with long term players Panasonic and Philips. And now they have the PS3 coming out which follows the PS2 which has so far sold over 100m units worldwide.

On two out of the four above Sony is showing huge potential once again. And if someone finally wises up at their MP3 division I fully expect them to be the main challengers to the iPod in the coming years.

Write them off at your peril. The sleeping giants are just waking from their hibernation.

PS3, XBox or Wii: Pros and Cons of Gaming Consoles

Here's the first evidence that the controller is going to get boring

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/te...

PS3, XBox or Wii: Pros and Cons of Gaming Consoles

Don't worry about the rant. That's what these comment sections are for. Reading about someone else's point of viewing is certainly enlightening if nothing else.

I suppose we will just have to wait a couple of years to find out which console comes out on top. I for one am starting to think that the Wii may take top spot for the next year. And not just because the PS3 is short in supply. But gradually over the next 12-24 months I can't see how something like the Wii will win. Nintendo have always been great at innovation and doing something just a little bit different but I have to say that I'm sticking by my argument that different hardly ever wins. Better generally always wins. Sticking to tried and trusted formulas but improving on them is normally a sure fire way to win. Evolution rather than revolution is the name of the game. Especially when you are the market leader with huge brand loyalty.

As for the Wii being capable of coming up with games that have as much depth to them as games on the PS3 then we'll see. While something like Zelda is huge in detail and sprawling landscapes the new PS3 offers the opportunity to make the whole landscape completely interactive. Everything can be altered. Not only that you could have 200 characters on screen with a PS3 who are all completely different in looks and personality which I doubt will be something that you'll see on the Wii. Detail is now something that the PS3 will take to new levels.

As for games developers only developing a game to a certain standard that will look the same on all formats then I agree that this is what happened in the past with the xbox and PS2. But the only reason this happened was because even though the xbox was more powerful than the PS2 all of the games developers had stronger links and bigger contracts with Sony. So games were made for the PS2 and then adapted for the xbox without changing much. This time the tables are turned and the PS3 is more powerful than the Xbox360. What you will see is the games being developed for the PS3 and then adapted for the Xbox360. Because the Xbox360 is less powerful then the games will just be cut back slightly. Sony is in a very strong position to demand that this is the way things work being the market leaders. They still have strong ties with the developers (although not as strong) and as a result don't expect them to not utilise the power of the PS3. To be honest though I don't even expect this to have much of a bearing on whether people choose the PS3 or Xbox360. People will buy the PS3 regardless.

As for the Wii controller I am by no means saying that a normal controller is on par with it. It is far more unique and advanced. But in principle all it does is replace the analogue control stick with the ability to use your own body movement. But if I'm playing a game where I'm holding a sword then I'm still going to be able to move that sword in exactly the same ways with a control stick as I am with the Wii motion controller. It's not like the Wii controller increases the range of movement that the game character has. Granted it makes the whole experience more enjoyable and more life like but the limitations of the in game character will limit the abilities of the controller.

As for the virtual games concept. Well, it's nice enough but I can't see many people using it too much. It's not as if we all yearn to play games of yesteryear other than for just old time sake. With the exception of Mariocart 64 that is :)

PS3, XBox or Wii: Pros and Cons of Gaming Consoles

I have to say that even though the Wii does break new ground in many respects I have not had confidence in it from day one. Every man and his dog are tripping over themselves to laud this new console for everything that it can potentially do. But I've always taken the stance of what doesn't it do? T3 magazine even gave it product of the year in their current magazine.

Now I do think it will be loads of fun to begin with. But all of this motion control will get tedious after a few months for one simple reason. The motion control isn't really that advanced. Fair enough it's one step closer to virtual reality and we should commend Nintendo for that. But even in the fighting games all that you will be able to do is perform the same moves that you would have been able to do with a controller. For instance, if I picked up a sword in real life there are probably millions of different angles I could point it in (all varying by a matter of mm's). With the Wii I'm sure you'll be able to swing the controller and make the character swing the sword in a few different directions but that's it. So you may as well do it with your fingers on the control pad. The same with the tennis. The variables are many millions of times less than actually playing a real game of tennis so eventually you'll start to think "I may as well just use my fingers on the control pad".

The PS3 on the other hand is 10 times more powerful than the PS2 and 3 or 4 times more powerful than the Xbox 360. This doesn't just mean better graphics. It means far bigger games that allow you to do far more exploration. It also means far more characters and much better AI. While this isn't ground breaking it's a evolution that is far more superior. To use an analogy, in the real world we see ground breaking inventions in the field of transport every now and again that seem very interesting to start with. But the car remains the king. It evolves and improves and as a result we stick with it. We get traction control and abs breaks (Blu-Ray), we get satellite navigation (wireless controllers), and we get better fuel economy and more safety feature (faster processor and graphics engine). Microsoft is the equivalent of Ford and Sony is the equivalent of Honda. Nintendo is that wacky scientist who's invented the flying car. Well ahead of it's time and not quite working they everyone wants it to. But genius nonetheless.

What winds me up is the analysts who say that the Wii is cheap enough to buy now and not be broke enough to not be able to afford the PS3. What is this world coming to? The Wii costs £180 in the UK and games will cost £30 each. Although it's cheaper than the Xbox360 that's hardly cheap.

You're right, Sony have been devious with Blu-Ray. But look at it from Sony's point of view. Do you think that they were right to do it? I think so.

PS3, XBox or Wii: Pros and Cons of Gaming Consoles

Lol. I'm actually English and worked in Foreign Exchange up until Feb so no problems there with the exchange rates Marcus. Incidentally the EUR is far stronger than the USD at the moment.

I see what you're saying there and have to say that I'm sure that's what most of the disgruntled PS fans feel themselves. What I'm saying though is that I doubt the final cost of the PS3 has been increased that much by the inclusion of the Blu-Ray drive. If we're led to believe correctly the manufacturing costs of the PS3 with the 60gb hard drive is $840.35 (although this is a matter for some debate as it seems some of the breakdown is slightly inflated in it's estimation prices):

www.digitimes.com/bits...

Of that $840 the Blu-Ray Drive only costs $125. I think that price has been confirmed as far as I'm aware and isn't an estimation. So the Blu-Ray drive represents 15% of the final manufacturing costs of the PS3. Let's say we take out the Blu-Ray drive. That brings the manufacturing costs down to $715. That is still $115 above the retail price of the PS3. So I think it's safe to assume that Sony wouldn't have just passed on the $125 saving on to the consumer. On top of that they would have still needed to fit a dvd/cd drive. I'm guessing that consumers would have only seen a $60 reduction in price.

So, you can either have the PS3 for $600 with dvd or $540 with Blu-Ray. What do you want? That's only 45 euros more. Most can spend easily that much in the pub in a few hours.

Now in reality I don't think the extra cost is an issue then is it? Do you agree? But what is an issue is the time delay. Without Blu-Ray everyone worldwide would have had a PS3 for Christmas. Sony have taken a gamble on losing Christmas sales to get an extra piece of state of the art technology into their PS3 for hardly any extra cost to the consumer.

As for you point on the Blu-Ray drive not being up to standard of a stand alone machine. How do you know it's going to be that bad? There are a number of reasons why previous technologies weren't so good in the PS's. One of the main reasons was the low quality DAC's (digital to analogue convertors). The DAC is one of the most important parts to a CD/DVD player. But the DAC in the PS3 is not so important for Blu-Ray. Why? Because to transfer true HD pictures the signal remains in it's digital form via the HDMI cable to the TV. Only once it has got to the TV does it get converted. Obviously when you're dealing with pictures and sound there are other things to consider that make up quality but not having to rely on the PS3 DAC is very important.

So I'm eagerly looking forward to seeing the results of the Blu-Ray on the PS3 and comparing them to stand alone machines. For 45 euros I'm sure even you will be suitably impressed enough to hold off buying a Blu-Ray machine until they come down to a reasonable price.

Oh, and I bet a 100 euro dvd machine would beat your older more expensive machine. These upscaling DVD players are better than 4 or 5 year old machines that cost up to £1000.

PS3, XBox or Wii: Pros and Cons of Gaming Consoles

I agree with you to a certain extent Marcus. There are obviously always limitations with a new technology. And I'm sure over the next few years we'll see Blu-Ray or HD-DVD improve far beyond what the initial players are in quality.

But what you are not putting into perspective is that these PS3 owners are getting a Blu-Ray device machine for only $200 (if you take that as the amount that has been added on to put it in the machine. I actually think it might only be $120 though). How much do the first stand alone Blu-Ray machines cost? Many times more than that anyway. So even though I'm sure the quality isn't as good it is still sure to be worth well beyond the $200/$125 extra that it's adding to the machine. And I actually think Sony are absorbing some of the costs of the Blu-Ray chip anyway so I doubt you would have seen that amount shaved off the total cost of the PS3. The main thing that it has done is cause major delays. Those delays are worth it in my opinion.

The other point is that by integrating the Blu-Ray in to this I truly believe that it does change this from being just a games machine to a home entertainment system. The processor and graphics chip are powerful enough to use the PS3 for a number of other things. The internet and live streaming from various HD movie sites and music sites being one of them. When the PS1 had cd capabilities and the PS2 had dvd capabilities people weren't as excited about them as they are about the PS3's Blu-Ray drive.

Sure, the Wii may be attempting to change the face of gaming. But I believe the evolution that we are getting from the PS3 is a huge step in terms of all round home entertainment convergence.

I think Sony believed in the PS brand enough to try and use it to make the Blu-Ray brand get the head start that it needs. By flooding the market with Blu-Ray (even if it isn't the primary reason for owning the PS3) you are telling the movie studios that there is enough market penetration to need plenty of Blu-Ray content. It gives the market the kick start that it needs. That's especially important considering that neither Blu-Ray or HD-DVD is guaranteed to succeed.

Carl

PS3, XBox or Wii: Pros and Cons of Gaming Consoles

Feel free to use any of my comments Yaser.

Regards

Carl

PS3, XBox or Wii: Pros and Cons of Gaming Consoles

The thing is though Yaser is that if you're Sony you have this dilemma. You either scrap the Blu-Ray as standard in the PS3 idea and release the product world wide pre Christmas so that everyone can get one. That idea would also make it cheaper. Short term that is a great way to gain market share. But then you have this long term vision of the company as a whole. Blu-Ray is very much part of that vision. Not only that you are acutely aware that Blu-Ray faces just as big a battle against HD DVD as the PS3 has against the Xbox 360 and the Wii.

Here's where I am sure Sony have made the right choice.

The PS brand is huge. People are very loyal to it and they are also aware that the PS3 is far more powerful than it's competitors. Blu-Ray on the other hand is completely new and has no customer loyalty yet. It is also competing against a competitor that costs half as much that does exactly the same thing. Sony knows that in order for Blu-Ray to win it need some serious help. Not least because early market adoption of Blu-Ray and HD DVD is likely to be slow. So what better way to give Blu-Ray the advantage than to include it, as standard, in the big brother of something that has sold 100m units and has an army of fans and that is also much more powerful than it's new rivals.

Short term? Yes Sony definitely loses out. Long term? Well it's far from guaranteed but by saying no to the carrot on the stick they've given themselves a chance of feasting on far more profits in the future.

I say Bravo Sony. Or should that be Bravia?

PS3, XBox or Wii: Pros and Cons of Gaming Consoles

I find all of these complaints about not being able to play PS2 games on the PS3 strange. Does playing the PS2 games on a PS3 make them graphically better? Surely not? And in that case then if you want to play an old game then why not just get your PS2 back out of the cupboard. It's not that big a deal. Nonetheless the main reason that you're going to buy a PS3 is so that you can play PS3 games on it. Long term I doubt Sony have a problem here.

As far as the delay. Well Yaser, you can complain all you want but the fact is that if Sony can't have enough consoles ready in time for Christmas then you can't blame them. It's just a design and manufacturing fact of life. I can name a multitude of other delays that have happened recently: Microsoft Vista, the release of HD DVD and Blu-Ray, the new Halo movie and game, the new Wembley football stadium in London. Do you think that they do this just to piss you off? Get a grip.

I do fear for Sony slightly by missing out on the Christmas sales (especially in Europe where no one will get a PS3 for Christmas) but victories within the tech market are not decided by seasonal sales. They are decided by the technology itself. And this is where Sony have been 100% right in delaying the PS3. They may lose a few million sales to the Xbox 360 but they not done that for nothing. They done that to ensure that the Blu-Ray drive is in every PS3 and this technological advantage along with all the other advantages it has over the Xbox will ensure that it is Sony technology and not Microsoft technology that wins in the long term

A word about the Wii. It seems unique and somewhat genius. I like it. But while it offers something unique in terms of playability it doesn't offer us anything new in terms of everything else it offers. Graphically it's no great deal. While some people may not deem this important I do. We are in an age of ever increasing screen sizes that offer HD pictures that can leave people breathless. Sony have built a machine that is not only for the here and now but is for the future. It will take games developers years to really use all of the potential that the PS3 processor and graphics chip has to offer.

In two or three years time don't expect anyone to be talking about how the Xbox 360 or the Nintendo Wii created history. They can't. They can only be about the here and now. The PS3 could still fall on it's face but it is the only console that gives itself a chance of going down in history. It's all about convergence. The PS3 to lead the way in home entertainment and the mobile phone to lead the way in every other aspect.