PS3 Launch Titles

[l177l3d]

So one question, how do you suppose PS3 will bet 360 and WII by the hoilday rush of 2007?

do you mean beat? well... quite frankly... they wont... the price at the moment is too high... the ones who are going after the ps3 are the high end wealthy folks who can afford to drop the 1k on the console... but thats ok, because the bulk of the good games being released is still for the ps2... the ps3's battle will probably start 4Q07 or possibly early 08... and the folks over at sony are already trying to find ways to cut on production costs... i.e. software emulation instead of hardware emulation... when the price starts to drop, the ps3 will begin to attract more attn... since it does include more advanced technology

 

[theNoid]

2) The 360 did have competition in the form of the PS2, which it is still competing with and will continue to compete with for quite a while.

Haha @ blind ignorant !!!!!! comment. You do realize the GPU in the 360 is actually more advanced then the RSX in the PS3 ? In fact, nearly every developer working on both the 360 and PS3 have stated that the two consoles are near idenical in power... and guess what ?

The 360 came out last year, and costs $200 less...

 

[brucedeluxe169]

Haha @ blind ignorant !!!!!! comment. You do realize the GPU in the 360 is actually more advanced then the RSX in the PS3 ? In fact, nearly every developer working on both the 360 and PS3 have stated that the two consoles are near idenical in power... and guess what ?

The 360 came out last year, and costs $200 less...

forreal, all the people that say that the PS3 is much more powerful have no idea what they are talking about.... if anything, the 360 will end up with the better looking games....

 

[phoderpants]

forreal, all the people that say that the PS3 is much more powerful have no idea what they are talking about.... if anything, the 360 will end up with the better looking games....

Maybe, maybe not. The Xbox is the most powerful of the current gen and it has the worst looking games of the three IMO. The Metal Gear series and Resident Evil 4 trump anything that the Xbox has to offer.

 

[l177l3d]

its ultimately how they use the power allocated per system... as mentioned in the previous post... just having raw power doesnt cut it... its how its used... we dont know how the ps3 graphical capabilities will be presented... so until then... ill hold my comment...

and im sure that you realize the additional 200 cost is really for the blu-ray player... many are against it now... but what happens if blu-ray does become the stronger media? production costs will decrease as they find more efficient means to produce it... the quality will improve... etc... the blu-ray will get cheaper and cheaper and with the potential for storing massive amounts of data on the discs... who knows whatll happen...im not talking about just gaming... im talking about for pcs and other forms of media...

in the scenario that the bluray wins... (im thinking it will since the ps3 will sell well at launch regardless... and thats a lot of bluray players out there)... then when the price drops a bit...who knows whatll happen

 

[Bad_Boy]

Haha @ blind ignorant !!!!!! comment. You do realize the GPU in the 360 is actually more advanced then the RSX in the PS3 ? In fact, nearly every developer working on both the 360 and PS3 have stated that the two consoles are near idenical in power... and guess what ?

The 360 came out last year, and costs $200 less...

Umm..I think its more blind of you to not understand what he is talking about instead of insulting his intellegence. He is talking about market sales and the numbers each has been selling since 360's launch.

And on the other hand, I would love for you to tell us the final specs on the RSX because I could name 2-3 gaming/tech forums who are dying to find out.

 

[DaRat]

but nothing new. 2,2,12!,remake,sports crap.

Guitar hero 2 adds a lot to an already amazing game and is brand new songs. This is one sequel that will be worth the $ no matter what.

 

[Icetron]

Nothing that vaguely intrests me. I'll stick with my 360 thank you.

 

[PikachuMan]

do you mean beat? well... quite frankly... they wont... the price at the moment is too high... the ones who are going after the ps3 are the high end wealthy folks who can afford to drop the 1k on the console... but thats ok, because the bulk of the good games being released is still for the ps2... the ps3's battle will probably start 4Q07 or possibly early 08... and the folks over at sony are already trying to find ways to cut on production costs... i.e. software emulation instead of hardware emulation... when the price starts to drop, the ps3 will begin to attract more attn... since it does include more advanced technology

Hardware emulation will be done for PS2 games (IIRC) ---meaning you will still get perfect compatibility across all titles.

Software emulation will be done for PS1 games, which makes sense as you can now throw in Anti-aliasing, increased reolution, and maybe other stuff to clean up the graphics. This isn't very hard; PCs have been doing PSX emulation for quite a while now. They've even got PSX emulation on the PSP.

My theory why the PS2 is being given such support this holiday season is that with GoW2, Guitar Hero and all the others coming out, it's becomes very tempting to stay put for a while. It's a repeat of the PS1-->PS2 transition; where many people choose to stick with the Playstation1 until the PS2 came out, despite a rather good Dreamcast offering.

There's also the advantage that it will spread out the PS3 launch. By the time the production revs up, the games get released, the costs come down-- the supply-demand ratio should also be right on target. Launch day might be the big specticle, but that's not when most systems are sold.

 

[l177l3d]

yup, while the ps3 is currently using hardware emulation for ps2 games... they are in the process of making it software emulation, which will cut down on costs substantially...

no doubt that if sony can afford to continue dropping 200 bux for every ps3 sold... then they should be able to drop the prices... however... if the ps3 outsells their expectations (which im sure is pretty low with their current release price), then what happens if they do not drop the prices and just decide to take less of a loss for each console sold? how would that affect sales? sony is arrogant... and they will ride the wave if they think they can milk extra cash out of the ps3... but i would think that without a price drop... the ps3's sales will not rise high enough

i just hope that most of the stuff that has been happening has been their ultimate strategy to bring out the full potential of the ps3 1-2 years from now while in the process boosting blu-ray to the top and for the duration of these 2 years...still have the ps2 as the best selling console...

 

[phoderpants]

no doubt that if sony can afford to continue dropping 200 bux for every ps3 sold... then they should be able to drop the prices... however... if the ps3 outsells their expectations (which im sure is pretty low with their current release price), then what happens if they do not drop the prices and just decide to take less of a loss for each console sold? how would that affect sales? sony is arrogant... and they will ride the wave if they think they can milk extra cash out of the ps3... but i would think that without a price drop... the ps3's sales will not rise high enough

This could be any company you're talking about. There will have to be a price drop though, especially as the Blu-Ray drives get cheaper to make.

 

[erwos]

Anyone else think the PS3 launch titles are pretty weak?

It would be a surprise if they weren't, seeing as good news coming out of Sony these days is kind of slim.

That said, the 360's starting line-up was weaker. Of course, the bad news for Sony (and Nintendo?) is that they're not competing against that - they're competing against everything that's come out in the past year. The real matter, then, is how fast they can pull out releases that people really care about (FFXIII, MGS4, VF5).

I did some research, and the only exclusive that even looked vaguely appealing was Warhawk. I couldn't even find a preview about Bladestorm (which is a shame - I generally like Koei's stuff).

Does anyone even know what their Japanese release schedule looks like?

-Erwos

 

[NulloModo]

There are some potentially good looking titles on the list, I just wish there was a AAA level RPG coming out at launch.

All stock of PS3s are going to sell out within hours of launch, so Sony probably isn't too worried about the launch lineup, but FFXIII on launch day would have been sweet.

 

[Killdozer]

Haha @ blind ignorant !!!!!! comment. You do realize the GPU in the 360 is actually more advanced then the RSX in the PS3 ? In fact, nearly every developer working on both the 360 and PS3 have stated that the two consoles are near idenical in power... and guess what ?

The 360 came out last year, and costs $200 less...

I guess you missed all the post E3, closed doors, hands on early dev kit articles where they said that both systems have the same effects but the PS3 has more stuff on the screen with higher and more consistent framerates.

Considering how 'old' the PS2 GPU is it still makes incredible looking games and I'm sure that the AAA developers will make the same happen on the PS3.

 

[l177l3d]

This could be any company you're talking about. There will have to be a price drop though, especially as the Blu-Ray drives get cheaper to make.

i dont see how it relates to other companies... sony/microsoft are both producing at a loss... if there is no reason to drop the price, they wont... or rather, if they think the consoles are doing well enough, they wont...

i.e. if blu-ray does well, sony may decide to keep the price as is because it already includes blu-ray at a low price...if the ps3 surpasses expectations by a lot and if sony feels that there doesnt need to be a price drop, they wont

most price drops are driven by competition... will microsoft choose to lower their price to combat the wii? they are already suffering a considerable amount of losses as it is... what if they dont? what if they decide to maintain the price because its already cheaper than the ps3? and then suppose that the ps3 sells out at launch and does well post launch just because of unquestionable loyalty from their ps fans... then sony wont bother to do as early as they probably could... (im more or less talking short run)... long run prices will drop regardless...

in fact, i have no clue whatsoever what im talking about... i dunno what it is we are talking about nemore... /cry

 

[Psychotext]

I guess you missed all the post E3, closed doors, hands on early dev kit articles where they said that both systems have the same effects but the PS3 has more stuff on the screen with higher and more consistent framerates.

Every developer I read interviews of said that the systems were pretty much identical with a little more headroom on the PS3 if you spend the time optimising for the SPEs rather than letting the compilers do the tuning. Hell, I personally know a developer that says they're pretty much identical. You got some links that show what you are talking about? Would find it really interesting to read more.

 

[Orange.exe]

I guess you missed all the post E3, closed doors, hands on early dev kit articles where they said that both systems have the same effects but the PS3 has more stuff on the screen with higher and more consistent framerates.

Considering how 'old' the PS2 GPU is it still makes incredible looking games and I'm sure that the AAA developers will make the same happen on the PS3.

Yeah, I think they said that about the next brother in arms. the dev said they will look the same, but the ps3 version will have more debris flying around (which is supposed to be a big part of the visuals.)

 

[Psychotext]

Yeah, I think they said that about the next brother in arms. the dev said they will look the same, but the ps3 version will have more debris flying around (which is supposed to be a big part of the visuals.)

Wish I could find it. All I managed to find was an IGN article that didn't really mention any differences: http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/717/717769p2.html

 

[K600]

There hasn't been a superb launch since the Dreamcast. Hopefully the Wii will change that.

 

[sculelos]

There hasn't been a superb launch since the Dreamcast. Hopefully the Wii will change that.

Sounds like the best titles won't come out till early 07 though.

 

[Hulk]

You know something? Everyone says how PS3 is not going to do well because of the pirce.

Just take a real quick glance at this thread: http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1084324&page=1&pp=20

It's in the hot deals sections of this forum - a member is advertising a $500 VIDEO CARD and people are posting what a HOT deal it is! $500 is a hot deal!!!

SO what I'm saying is there is no way PS3 is going to lose this round.

 

[JethroXP]

You know something? Everyone says how PS3 is not going to do well because of the pirce.

Just take a real quick glance at this thread: http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1084324&page=1&pp=20

It's in the hot deals sections of this forum - a member is advertising a $500 VIDEO CARD and people are posting what a HOT deal it is! $500 is a hot deal!!!

SO what I'm saying is there is no way PS3 is going to lose this round.

Completely irrelevent. A brand new 50 inch Plasma HDTV for $1000 is also a hot deal, but how does that have any impact at all on what people are going to be willing to pay for a PS3? Besides, the mass market does not buy $500 video cards. Mom and Pop would never consider $500 a hot deal just so that little Timmy can play PC games at buttery smooth framerates at a high resolution.

Game consoles have a history with mainstream consumers. The Xbox360 pushed the limits at $399 for the premium version. When Mom and Pop go shopping next year (I'm already assuming that casual purchasers will *NOT* be able to find a Wii or a PS3 this holiday due to early adopter demand) they will see the Wii at $229, the Xbox360 at $399, and the PS3 at $599. They all play games, so which do you suppose they will choose? If Mom and Pop don't have a HDTV yet, the Wii becomes an obvious chioce, if they do have an HDTV the Xbox360 becomes an obvious choice. The PS3 is simply priced beyond the reality of mainstream console consumers.

 

[l177l3d]

actually... what they get is really dependent on little timmy...

if little timmy knows that he wants a ps3 and not the other 2, hell bitch and whine to the next century... until he gets a ps3...

dont underestimate the power of bitching and whining when it comes to kids ^^

oh and isnt the average age of gamers like 20 to 30? so who cares about little timmy? shouldnt we discuss the intentions of the average gamer?

 

[Netrat33]

You know something? Everyone says how PS3 is not going to do well because of the pirce.

Just take a real quick glance at this thread: http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1084324&page=1&pp=20

It's in the hot deals sections of this forum - a member is advertising a $500 VIDEO CARD and people are posting what a HOT deal it is! $500 is a hot deal!!!

SO what I'm saying is there is no way PS3 is going to lose this round.

You're also talking about an enthusiast market that is used to spending a lot of money on computer upgrades. It's not a mainstream market. It's a small community.

You even have hardware enthusiasts saying how expensive the $600-$700 dollar cards are so we started seeming our (pc users) limits of too much.

 

[Netrat33]

oh and isnt the average age of gamers like 20 to 30? so who cares about little timmy? shouldnt we discuss the intentions of the average gamer?

Average adult from 20-30 is working generally making under $20 a year and can't make large purchases. They are still seeking out their futures (collage, place to live, food, jobs)

 

[Psychotext]

...making under $20 a year and can't make large purchases

Wow, and I thought wages were good in America.

 

[andypnb]

Average adult from 20-30 is working generally making under $20 a year and can't make large purchases. They are still seeking out their futures (collage, place to live, food, jobs)

I would say the average person 20-30 is done with college. If youre not done with college by 22-23 its rare. And did you mean 20k/year, which seems very very low, or 20/hour which is more reasonable.

I think the average age of gamers is more 18-34, with a whole lot of early 20s and older, people with degrees and steady jobs. I dont think 600 is much for the console, especially if you are married/engaged/living with someone else, which most college graduates are i guess.

 

[phoderpants]

Average adult from 20-30 is working generally making under $20 a year and can't make large purchases. They are still seeking out their futures (collage, place to live, food, jobs)

$20,000 a year after going to college? Where do you live, Arkansas?

Seriously though, what's the point of arguing this? America lives on credit. If people want to spend the extra $200 to get a PS3 over an Xbox 360, they're going to put it on the plastic and be done with it. What's $200 on top of the $7000 balance they're already carrying? If the marketing for the PS3 is good (which it almost surely will be since Sony is pretty good at it), people will buy it hands down.
--- I'm not saying I do this (I pay off every month), but there are tons of people that do, so the price difference isn't really an issue IMO.

 

[Psychotext]

...especially if you are married/engaged/living with someone else.

Yeah, but you can kiss goodbye to buying a $600 console for other reasons then.

 

[JethroXP]

Just to clarify my point, I have no doubt that the enthusiast market will suck up every last PS3 to be had this holiday, and that we will see the same eBay madnees with $5000 PS3's just like we did with Xbox360.

However the long term is sustained by the mainstream market. The mainstream market does not buy $500 video cards, nor do they pay a premium over retail on eBay to have the latest gadget as soon as it's available. These are the folks who wait and see, and watch, and then a year or two later decide to jump in when 1) The price is right, and 2) there is a compelling library of titles. If Sony is unable or unwilling to dramatically drop the price in a year or two, and if Developer support continues to erode, the PS3 stands a very good chance of being the least purchased console of this generation.

 

[andypnb]

Yeah, but you can kiss goodbye to buying a $600 console for other reasons then.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2006/08/02/diamonds-technology.html

My wife actually made me buy us a large DLP TV a couple months ago, much larger and more expensive than I thought she would allow us to budget for.
Plus she loved HD so HD bluray movies sound like a good thing to her. She does not game, but she enjoys watching FF series and scary stuff like Silent HIll, so she said we can get a PS3 no problem, especially since PS2 does not look great at 56 inches, except for a few games.

And other women feel the same. I have noticed when we go over to someones house, or people come over, the wives ad women in general are quite proud of their technological prowess.

Sure, on average guys are still more gung ho about having the biggest one (TV that is), but i think women are catching up.

 

[Netrat33]

I would say the average person 20-30 is done with college. If youre not done with college by 22-23 its rare. And did you mean 20k/year, which seems very very low, or 20/hour which is more reasonable.

I think the average age of gamers is more 18-34, with a whole lot of early 20s and older, people with degrees and steady jobs. I dont think 600 is much for the console, especially if you are married/engaged/living with someone else, which most college graduates are i guess.

24-5 is usually when people are out of collage. After collage people make more. And to clarify it's different obviously with different locations. I live in Florida. I know New York they make more money but cost of living is higher too and even higher is say Cali, so translates differently down here.

Clear and simply stated that your average person can't make large purchases for a game system or have a hard time justifying. AVERAGE person. ( think the national average for income is $35 a year but you have to figure where you are living and how much it costs to live in a area)

 

[Netrat33]

$20,000 a year after going to college? Where do you live, Arkansas?

Seriously though, what's the point of arguing this? America lives on credit. If people want to spend the extra $200 to get a PS3 over an Xbox 360, they're going to put it on the plastic and be done with it. What's $200 on top of the $7000 balance they're already carrying? If the marketing for the PS3 is good (which it almost surely will be since Sony is pretty good at it), people will buy it hands down.
--- I'm not saying I do this (I pay off every month), but there are tons of people that do, so the price difference isn't really an issue IMO.

During collage. After collage things start looking up.

But true, lot of us live on credit. But I think even large credit purchases generally make people stop and think. spending $20 here and $20 there on shirts, food whatever is easy to forget about. $600 on credit is a little more noticed. But yes you are right on that.

 

[andypnb]

24-5 is usually when people are out of collage. After collage people make more. And to clarify it's different obviously with different locations. I live in Florida. I know New York they make more money but cost of living is higher too and even higher is say Cali, so translates differently down here.

Clear and simply stated that your average person can't make large purchases for a game system or have a hard time justifying. AVERAGE person. ( think the national average for income is $35 a year but you have to figure where you are living and how much it costs to live in a area)

Average age to graduate college is not 24-25. Start at 6 or 7 years old, and look at 8+4+4 years of school, you get 22-23.

Average family income by education level.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=r...MHjHJDIwQL47cymDQ&sig2=iKZxoYNYBICE773B9g7zLg

For a college graduate family 60-100 so i would say for an individual 30-35.
Sure you adjust it for cost of living, but making a purchase of 600 on an income of 30-35 is not hard if you budget reasonably and in advance.
And you can always put it on a credit card and pay it off over a period of time.

I have single friends in NY living alone that make 40k a year and they still buy electronics and computer parts and go out. Its all about budgeting and setting priorities for yourself.

But justifying the purchase is something different, if i wasnt interested in consoles, or computers, or whatnot, i would say a 600 console or video card is outrageous. Even a 300 console or video card would be outrageous. Hell spending 20 bucks to wash my car is a lot, but for my car crazed friends a weekly $100 detailing is just right.

You have a point, not everyone can buy a 600 console, and they wont. But not everyone bought a 300 PS2 when it came out. Some waited until 199, some til 149. Same with the PS3, some will get it now at 600, some at 500, and some will wait till its 200-300 or less.

 

[l177l3d]

if the 'average gamer' WANTS to buy the ps3... 200 bux wont stop him/her from buying it... its ultimately gonna boil down to the welcome party... the price will turn away some folks... but it wont be the deciding factor...

 

[Netrat33]

Average age to graduate college is not 24-25. Start at 6 or 7 years old, and look at 8+4+4 years of school, you get 22-23.

Average family income by education level.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=r...MHjHJDIwQL47cymDQ&sig2=iKZxoYNYBICE773B9g7zLg

For a college graduate family 60-100 so i would say for an individual 30-35.
Sure you adjust it for cost of living, but making a purchase of 600 on an income of 30-35 is not hard if you budget reasonably and in advance.
And you can always put it on a credit card and pay it off over a period of time.

I have single friends in NY living alone that make 40k a year and they still buy electronics and computer parts and go out. Its all about budgeting and setting priorities for yourself.

But justifying the purchase is something different, if i wasnt interested in consoles, or computers, or whatnot, i would say a 600 console or video card is outrageous. Even a 300 console or video card would be outrageous. Hell spending 20 bucks to wash my car is a lot, but for my car crazed friends a weekly $100 detailing is just right.

You have a point, not everyone can buy a 600 console, and they wont. But not everyone bought a 300 PS2 when it came out. Some waited until 199, some til 149. Same with the PS3, some will get it now at 600, some at 500, and some will wait till its 200-300 or less.

Granted neither of us looking up facts on leaving school, but you got to factor in maybe a least a year for the student who doesn't know what he/she wants to be so wastes a year or parties too hard the first year . Yea everyone can buy stuff if they budget carefully. But then like the previous post said, most people live on credit meaning they don't budget.

 

[Jerome36]

Isn't the average time a student goes to school, for a 4 year degree, like 5 years? Though there's plenty of people who do it in 4, I think a LOT more end up staying longer then that, for their bachelor degree.

 

[JethroXP]

Isn't the average time a student goes to school, for a 4 year degree, like 5 years? Though there's plenty of people who do it in 4, I think a LOT more end up staying longer then that, for their bachelor degree.

An average of 5 years would have to mean that many are also taking longer than 5 years, because even if a majority were taking 5 years and a minority were completing in 4 years, the average would still be some time less than 5 years.

I found this study from UW-Madison that showed the average time to earn a 4 year degree for their students was trending down over time, to 4.17 years at the end of the study (which was 8 years ago, but still probably relevant).

http://apa.wisc.edu/JLM/TimeToDegree_ExecSummary.pdf

BTW - I got mine in four years.

 

[andypnb]

maybe. but a bachelors degree seems to statistically increase your average income to roughly 50k a year, which makes a big difference vs 35k.
I went to a 4 year regular college, and i got a bachelors degree. unless you go to a community college, 4 years is how long it takes to get a bachelors on average in my opinion.

i was typing this up as the above poster gave us some good evidence.

 

[LeviathanZERO]

Last I heard 80% of students that go to college dont graduate. Numbers might be different for University, but pretty sure thats acurate for community college. (at least thats where I got that information.)