Where were all of you PS3 users when they were doing research? LOL, I read an article...and it's probably been about a year now...that said according to research they found that the backwards compatibility was not a big issue for people wanting to buy a new console. So it seems as though they took it out, but didn't drop the price enough to justify it. A lot of people have made the comment that upgrading PC's every few years is troublesome and expensive, but I don't see where it's a lot different than buying a new console every few years.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Sony's PS3 A Sinking Ship?
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
I'm still surprised at how well the ps3 has done overall. I don't think its dead, but its at least treading water. It has sold far more consoles than I originally imagined it would. I think the combination of a blu-ray player and name recognition helped it to its current point.
But I think unless they bring out some sort of heavy hitting exclusive this year they'll need to hang it up. The cost of a ps3 and the lack of hd or necessity for blu ray in the majority of households in the US has caused sales to plateau and never gain ground.
I went to a walmart on black friday. I stood in the electronics section watching the madness unfold. Wii's flew off the shelves faster than i ever imagined. PS3's just sat there. A $250 price point coupled with a plethora of family friendly games means big sales for nintendo and mediocre sales for everyone else.
Sound familiar? This reminds me of when the NES battled the Sega Genesis way back when. The NES was inferior technology but had (lots) more family friendly titles and was a household name. The Genesis was superior in graphics, but was much more expensive at first and wasn't marketed well. In the end, the Genesis did well and by the time the SNES had arrived, the Genesis was at a lower price point and was already in a fair number of households.
The ps3 will hold its place in history. At the very least Sony can learn from there mistakes and possibly be the first to market with the next gen system.
But I think unless they bring out some sort of heavy hitting exclusive this year they'll need to hang it up. The cost of a ps3 and the lack of hd or necessity for blu ray in the majority of households in the US has caused sales to plateau and never gain ground.
I went to a walmart on black friday. I stood in the electronics section watching the madness unfold. Wii's flew off the shelves faster than i ever imagined. PS3's just sat there. A $250 price point coupled with a plethora of family friendly games means big sales for nintendo and mediocre sales for everyone else.
Sound familiar? This reminds me of when the NES battled the Sega Genesis way back when. The NES was inferior technology but had (lots) more family friendly titles and was a household name. The Genesis was superior in graphics, but was much more expensive at first and wasn't marketed well. In the end, the Genesis did well and by the time the SNES had arrived, the Genesis was at a lower price point and was already in a fair number of households.
The ps3 will hold its place in history. At the very least Sony can learn from there mistakes and possibly be the first to market with the next gen system.
alg7_munif
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2006
- Messages
- 5,862
So you're one of the people that actually paid for demo software? I've heard of people like you, but never thought I'd actually run into one
Call it whatever you want bu it is a much better than the latest NFS.
lostinseganet
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2008
- Messages
- 1,220
Sony is getting pounded into the dirt. Only Final Fantasy 7 can save them now. Don't they have special ties with Square? They really need a killer app to save the day. I honestly feel that Final Fantasy 7 is the only game with enough fanfaire to give them a solid chance of making a comeback this gen...If MS were to get their hands on Final Fantasy 7!...Game Over man.
I'm first and foremost a PC gamer, but I don't think anyone can say with a staright face that PC gaming isn't more expensive.
I paid $299 for my PS2 in 2000 and was still buying new releases for it in 2006
I paid $1200 for a computer build in 2000 that was completely replaced by 2002, with a new $800-1200 build ever 2 years or so.
PC gaming has always been more expensive and always will be, but in general its also higher quality.
I really don't think price has that much to do with anything. BMW's never have poor sales because they cost more than fords do.
I would pay 500 bucks for a PS3 if it has some sequels from the PS2 on it. A final fantasy, a Dragon quest, God of war, A few atlus RPG's, Tales of what ever, Suikoden, complete the Chrono trilogy, Xenogears, Growlancer, Grandia, Valkyrie Profile......
You know what an even easier solution FINAL FANTASY 7 remake that the fuckers teased the world with. I would buy it just for that I know many other people would too.
If they handed Square 20 million bucks and said how about a FF7 remake it would be Done and Done PS3 is the winner.
I would pay 500 bucks for a PS3 if it has some sequels from the PS2 on it. A final fantasy, a Dragon quest, God of war, A few atlus RPG's, Tales of what ever, Suikoden, complete the Chrono trilogy, Xenogears, Growlancer, Grandia, Valkyrie Profile......
You know what an even easier solution FINAL FANTASY 7 remake that the fuckers teased the world with. I would buy it just for that I know many other people would too.
If they handed Square 20 million bucks and said how about a FF7 remake it would be Done and Done PS3 is the winner.
Its hard not to cloud this threads with a bunch of people who either hate Sony or not despite whatever the system is.
Is Sony a sinking ship? - YES
Is Sony beyond recovery? - NO
Sony put out an incredibly powerful amazing system. I think from a hardware/software standpoint you have to give them credit for putting out a really cool sysytem.
Sony has probably done the worst hardware sales launch in their history with the PS3. They failed in several different areas during their launch.
1. Internal Communication Problems - Sony between its different sides and its presidents and managers had so much different information coming out that nobody wanted to believe anything they said. You felt like they didn't even know what was happening.
2. Elitism - Gamers don't like to feel like you are telling them what is good and what is not. They want to be able to figure that kind of stuff out for themselves so when you make statements like this is only made for this type of person or only for real gamers or whatever it leaves a bad taste in peoples mouths.
3. Depth - Sony simply did not capture the public eye with their campaigns. Advertising is very important, and it wasn't there.
4. Developers - Sony lost a ton of exclusive deals this year. I however feel it wasn't because the platform was no good, or even because it was hard to build for. They lost exclusives because XBOX had built such a large base before the PS3 was even released that it didnt make sense to be only PS
5. Price - Sony its a great system, but you have to be priced to be competitive. Maybe it is worth the sticker price, but that doesn't really matter in the long run.
6. Blu-ray - Now I love Blu-ray and welcomed its inclusion in my PS3, but where I see the flaw is that it seemed like they used the PS3 to sell Blu-ray instead of using Blu-ray to sell the PS3. That was the problem
The list could go on, and I think everyone knows it so I think thats enough.
I do feel that Sony still has a chance though. Despite all these drawbacks and having to compete with the likes of a Wii which I do think takes money from the other 2, the PS3 has fared half-way decently. With a not so great game base, delays on features and more the PS3 isn't dead.
The PS people definitely need to do a 180 on some stuff, but they could still make a respectful generation out of their console. Will it ever catch the X360 or Wii...probably not, but being a strong 3rd is good enough to get them into the next set.
Thats about it for me
Is Sony a sinking ship? - YES
Is Sony beyond recovery? - NO
Sony put out an incredibly powerful amazing system. I think from a hardware/software standpoint you have to give them credit for putting out a really cool sysytem.
Sony has probably done the worst hardware sales launch in their history with the PS3. They failed in several different areas during their launch.
1. Internal Communication Problems - Sony between its different sides and its presidents and managers had so much different information coming out that nobody wanted to believe anything they said. You felt like they didn't even know what was happening.
2. Elitism - Gamers don't like to feel like you are telling them what is good and what is not. They want to be able to figure that kind of stuff out for themselves so when you make statements like this is only made for this type of person or only for real gamers or whatever it leaves a bad taste in peoples mouths.
3. Depth - Sony simply did not capture the public eye with their campaigns. Advertising is very important, and it wasn't there.
4. Developers - Sony lost a ton of exclusive deals this year. I however feel it wasn't because the platform was no good, or even because it was hard to build for. They lost exclusives because XBOX had built such a large base before the PS3 was even released that it didnt make sense to be only PS
5. Price - Sony its a great system, but you have to be priced to be competitive. Maybe it is worth the sticker price, but that doesn't really matter in the long run.
6. Blu-ray - Now I love Blu-ray and welcomed its inclusion in my PS3, but where I see the flaw is that it seemed like they used the PS3 to sell Blu-ray instead of using Blu-ray to sell the PS3. That was the problem
The list could go on, and I think everyone knows it so I think thats enough.
I do feel that Sony still has a chance though. Despite all these drawbacks and having to compete with the likes of a Wii which I do think takes money from the other 2, the PS3 has fared half-way decently. With a not so great game base, delays on features and more the PS3 isn't dead.
The PS people definitely need to do a 180 on some stuff, but they could still make a respectful generation out of their console. Will it ever catch the X360 or Wii...probably not, but being a strong 3rd is good enough to get them into the next set.
Thats about it for me
Bogie 19th
Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2008
- Messages
- 789
How can the PS3 be a sinking ship when it is selling better than the PS2 did at this point, and has exceed Sony's sales expectations? To me, that is successful.
Not always. I spend 600 and just sli'ed my 9600gt for another $60 and it should hold me up for a while.
AthlonXP
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2001
- Messages
- 20,588
That would be a huge boost, though the PS3 has help kill off HD-DVD
Will that system actually be able to play any new game at respectable settings three years from now? Many current games can already push those specs.
swatbat
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2001
- Messages
- 13,052
Sony's PS3 has had issues since day one. One of the biggest issues with it though is that the tried to make it do too much. Sony should have focused on gamers first and they didn't. Instead they tried to make it an all one one system for the living room. MS is trying the same thing mind you but they focused on the gaming side. Live was up and running from the start. Sony has struggled getting anything near its level running. Now they are adding in achievements and other features trying to catch up.
As others have said the PS3 wasn't a bad value if you needed all of the extra features. They also did some things right like having the HD be user upgradeable without needing a special drive.
They also made a lot of mistakes.
They have too many versions. They ended up confusing everyone with what model comes with what. They also removed features that people used from newer consoles like the backwards compatibility.
Online service was not ready. They were not ready to compete with live.
Price. A lot of people do not care about the added features that have nothing to do with gaming. Blue Ray is a big one. It is a nice feature but the system would have been better without it.
Rumble support. They went through how it wasn't needed then had to add it back in. This is just an extra thing they missed.
Really I think Sony sat on their ass' thinking that MS and Nintendo were not a threat. I think they thought the PS line was unstoppable. They are now paying the price for this. Really they are hurting the market in general. Nintendo doesn't have the resources to compete with MS and Sony with graphics. The competition between all 3 though is good. It helps make all 3's products better.
As others have said the PS3 wasn't a bad value if you needed all of the extra features. They also did some things right like having the HD be user upgradeable without needing a special drive.
They also made a lot of mistakes.
They have too many versions. They ended up confusing everyone with what model comes with what. They also removed features that people used from newer consoles like the backwards compatibility.
Online service was not ready. They were not ready to compete with live.
Price. A lot of people do not care about the added features that have nothing to do with gaming. Blue Ray is a big one. It is a nice feature but the system would have been better without it.
Rumble support. They went through how it wasn't needed then had to add it back in. This is just an extra thing they missed.
Really I think Sony sat on their ass' thinking that MS and Nintendo were not a threat. I think they thought the PS line was unstoppable. They are now paying the price for this. Really they are hurting the market in general. Nintendo doesn't have the resources to compete with MS and Sony with graphics. The competition between all 3 though is good. It helps make all 3's products better.
It will be able to run any game and make it look just ask good and a PS3 or Xbox360 would.
Being able to get a new video card to push graphics is a luxury not a necessity. Had the 9600gt for 18months got another which should last me another 18 months in which time I will snag another sub 100 dollar card to replace it. Gaming in mid range can be very affordable and looks better than most console games.
First out the door does not mean success. See Sega. It has less to do with when it was released and more to do with what I can do with the system... which is not much.
It can be a br player, but that is about it. If you own a 360 you have access to the vast majority of titles available for the PS3 at lower cost with a better online experience. The titles that should have been system sellers either aren't out yet (GT and FF) or just weren't that great this time around (MG). This is coming from someone who never owned a Xbox and didn't pick up a 360 for quite some time. Basically you have a system that has some pros and some cons, not too much in the exclusive department and a huge price tag. It was never going to fly off the shelf. That said I don't think the Playstation line will go the way of Sega.
I own all three systems and look at it this way. If you buy a PS3 strickly for games you're probably going to be disappointed. If you buy a PS3 for games and all the other things it can do it's a quality product. I don't play too many games on my PS3 but have enjoyed using it as a media hub and Blu-ray player. It has held up way better then the three RRoD 360's I've been through in the same time period. What I find lacking is the online experience. It's so much easier to find friends and get a game going on Xbox. I've messed around with the Home beta but it seems to be no more then Sony's Second Life which to me is lame. I have too much to do in this life.
Regardless I hope the system lasts and gets better. I just bought Rock Band 2 for it because my girlfriend wanted the game and now we have another reason to use the PS3.
Regardless I hope the system lasts and gets better. I just bought Rock Band 2 for it because my girlfriend wanted the game and now we have another reason to use the PS3.
This makes me wonder if Sony even cares much about the PS3 anymore. I almost wonder if this was their goal with it first, and making it a serious gaming system second.
Don't get me wrong, I love my PS3. Valkyria Chronicles is my favorite game this gen so far. However, I also understand what it takes to sell a product to the average consumer. I know I am an enthusiast.
Which I think the Hidef movie crowd would be better off right now if HD DVD would have won out but that is a dicussion for another day.
I've been happy with my PS3. I use it primarily for media and have yet to purchase a game for it. I love being able to stream movies from my comp to it and use Netflix for all my Blu-ray fixes (I can also stream online Netflix movies to it as well).
Not to thread crap, but car sales aren't relative to console sales.
BMW has never reached sales in the US like Ford has. They never intended to. They don't produce as many vehicles here as Ford does. They sell luxury cars catered to a different group of clientele. Its kinda like 360 elites. They have a higher price point, limited production, and cater to a different gamer. They don't have poor sales though, just lower sales numbers.
CaptainMorgan
[H]ollywood
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2007
- Messages
- 6,554
So can Xbox!
PS3 was the most over-hyped, over-rated console out there, the home shit was lame, Blue-ray media is even lamer. HD-DVD was affordable and offered the SAME QUALITY as blue-ray. You know its bad when your Blue-ray player takes 2 minutes just to start, its just not good engineering. I was at one point thinking of getting a PS3 for a media player, after much research, im waiting for a sub $150 Blue-ray player (gosh I hate saying that).
So you're one of the people that actually paid for demo software? I've heard of people like you, but never thought I'd actually run into one
And your point is? The GT5 Prologue was not demo software and it actually only cost $39 at launch. I don't know which system you have but if you have a x360 it would be like me asking so you pay twice to play online.
No they don't have any ties with Square Enix. Square Enix makes games for all consoles.
Square Enix made a small Final Fantatsy Crystal Chronicals game for the Wii Ware store, and they are making another full game for the Wii. Dragon Quest 9 is going to be on the DS, with them having released a Dragon Quest game for the Wii. Final Fantasy XIII is now going to be on the xbox360 and the PS3 instead of a PS3 exclusive. There is a new Star Ocean game coming out for the Xbox 360. Infinite Undiscovery was a Xbox 360 exclusive also. The Last Remnant was for the Xbox360 and PS3. Only exclusive PS3 title so far is Final Fantasy Versus XIII, although since FF XIII itself has went cross platform I wouldn't be too surprised if this game doesn't also.
Since they have moved Final Fantasy XIII to cross platform, I would almost bet that IF FF7 gets remade as a newer game it would be on both platforms. However I don't think they are planning on remaking the game, what they did was just a tech demo to help show off the PS3.
Short of a game made by the console developer or one of their related developers I don't think you are going to see very many exclusives anymore expect for the Wii. When it comes to the PS3 and Xbox360, it makes more since from a business standpoint to make the game crossplatform and make as much money as you can.
Right now they are going to be focusing on FFXIII
Actually thats not true, I had to send my 20gb model in twice this fall once for it putting green dots all over the screen and freezing all the time (i'm assuming it was a gpu problem?) and again a month later for the BluRay drive breaking. Both times I got a 20gb back. I still don't understand all these people that still think they need to play ps2 games though. There are so many good ps3 games out right now I don't have time to finish the ones I have, let alone the ones I'm planning on getting! By the time you go out and beat GTA4, MGS4, Little big planet, uncharted, resistance 1+2 and Fallout3 and bioshock there will be 5 more good games out that you'll need to get caught up on.
pay twice? You talking about xbl subscription and isp service?
I'd gladly pay $35 - $50 a year for decent online play and a strong marketplace. Its cheaper than playing WoW. Seems like 11 million folks worldwide don't mind playing twice for WoW either.
No RPG's. To me persona 4 is better than all the PS3 games listed. Some people would like to use one console for both and if it upscaled my ps2 games I would like to use it as well. If the PS2 didn't kick so much ass and the PS3 suck so much ass more people would be buying the PS3 and not wanting to play their ps2. (this holds true for RPG fans at least)
Raced_out_Computers
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2003
- Messages
- 331
Personally I believe that XBox's Live pushes it into first place alot of the time in sales and customer feedback also. I would rather pay the $50 a year and have an almost 100% stable online platform then get one given to me that takes forever to connect. Thats my peronal experience with the online formatting for both systems, though im sure some reults could vary.
How about because they are still being released? There are still PS2 games coming out and they are still very much playable.
Usually the main thing that needs upgrading is the video card. And as long as you don't mind mid-level, each generation of midrange cards will do the trick and aren't that expensive. Older cpu's still seem to be doing the trick, which means you don't have to upgrade the motherboard. Especially over the last couple of years since there hasn't been a huge change in clock speeds. Usually you will have to add some RAM, but generally not a huge investment either. I bought my son a used 939 system with an Opteron 148 and it's playing everything from Team Fortress 2 to Tombraider Underworld. I don't believe you need to spend $800 ~ $1200 every 2 years to get a game-capable PC.
A lot of you guys are in a much different place gaming wise than I am. Soooo many people talk about RPG's, but I'm just not into it. Give me an FPS, some racing titles, and some sports games, and I'm set. I'd even play some Crash Bandicoot or something like that, but a lot of these RPG's I've seen mentioned, I've never even heard of.
silent-circuit
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2005
- Messages
- 16,136
Exactly. What the fuck happened here? PSX and PS2 were /known/ for RPGs, and there's not a single stand-out title available for PS3 yet, 2 years after launch. 2 years. I for one am feeling betrayed. Maybe they're all Japan-only this go-round, but I rather doubt it since I'd have at least heard of them and be waiting hopefully for a translation. There's something flat out wrong with the world when the 360 has 10x as many RPGs available for it than the PS3.
Magic 8 ball says "Without a doubt"
Really though, The Wii is just plain funner. Now I don't know why its wai moar fun! probably the selection and quality of the games - but overall it just is.
Sort of like UT2004 is way more fun than UT3. Sure the old one is graphically inferior (or at least the developers say that) but thats not the point, the whole idea of a game is to have *fun* which I think people sometimes gloss over.
I remeber having the debate way back when about the Wii not having media playback capability and how it was going to kill it off. Everyone and their dog was either supporting Xbox/HDDVD or PS3/Bluray, there were a rare few people who sided with me saying that it actually might hurt the platforms, that making a good game for a gaming console is key - and the rest is frivolous chaff.
Really though, The Wii is just plain funner. Now I don't know why its wai moar fun! probably the selection and quality of the games - but overall it just is.
Sort of like UT2004 is way more fun than UT3. Sure the old one is graphically inferior (or at least the developers say that) but thats not the point, the whole idea of a game is to have *fun* which I think people sometimes gloss over.
I remeber having the debate way back when about the Wii not having media playback capability and how it was going to kill it off. Everyone and their dog was either supporting Xbox/HDDVD or PS3/Bluray, there were a rare few people who sided with me saying that it actually might hurt the platforms, that making a good game for a gaming console is key - and the rest is frivolous chaff.
silent-circuit
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2005
- Messages
- 16,136
...I despise the Wii, and so does everyone I know (3 people) that bought one. It's a "I got it because my girlfriend wanted Zelda" system, to my mind; the game selection is weaker once you finish with Zelda, Medroid and Mario, and those games you do get are graphically and technically inferior -- look at Rock Band for PS3 / 360 vs. Rock Band for Wii. No character customization, no downloadable content, no online play, same price at the store. Genius. No thanks.
Dark-Colonel
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2004
- Messages
- 441
I don't understand why people are trying to prove which console is better.
You have ALREADY paid for your console. So has the OTHER guy. Just be happy with what you have.
Both consoles are very capable of being great multimedia machines with a whole bunch of other stuff to it.
As a PC gamer though I will point out that Sony tried too hard to make its gaming console ... more than a gaming console by advertising and going on and on about how the PS3 does more than games and etc. They developed a console too expensive and complex to make games on and look where that got them. No I'm not saying the 360 is better blah blah but at least Microsoft stuck to what the 360 was really meant for, playing games online and with you friends and put great emphasis on their games.
Those are the words of a PC Gamer who is just a bystander in all this.
You have ALREADY paid for your console. So has the OTHER guy. Just be happy with what you have.
Both consoles are very capable of being great multimedia machines with a whole bunch of other stuff to it.
As a PC gamer though I will point out that Sony tried too hard to make its gaming console ... more than a gaming console by advertising and going on and on about how the PS3 does more than games and etc. They developed a console too expensive and complex to make games on and look where that got them. No I'm not saying the 360 is better blah blah but at least Microsoft stuck to what the 360 was really meant for, playing games online and with you friends and put great emphasis on their games.
Those are the words of a PC Gamer who is just a bystander in all this.
I'm just throwing this out there for discussion's sake, but do you think Sony could have been much more successful by not dumping a ton of money into the Cell's development and manufacturing and instead went with something already in existence that was easier to take advantage of, like POWER5 (as an example)?
Catch22sk8r
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2002
- Messages
- 1,427
we've got all 3 systems, the only one that doesn't get play time is the one that sells the most (Wii) when the hell are they going to get more than 5 good games for it.
as far as PS3 and 360 are concerned we play them both pretty equally, but i find myself using the PS3 a bit more
as far as PS3 and 360 are concerned we play them both pretty equally, but i find myself using the PS3 a bit more
HardOCP News
[H] News
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1969
- Messages
- 0
I couldn't resist, Steve
Well, truth be told, that is a bit true today....I didn't post these on Friday because there was a complete week full of bad Sony news (bad NPD, laying off thousands, etc.) it just really seemed like piling on.
Posted them today, TOGETHER, so that the bitching / crying would be at a minimum.
I have my day one 60GB unit folding 24/7 and it plays an occassional Blu-ray movie, game, various beta's. Mine was the original $599 unit but at least I have all my memory slots, hardware backwards compatibility, etc.
hardware_failure
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2008
- Messages
- 1,370
Everyone I know that owns a PS3 bought one because it was basically a bluy-gay player with a free console. (back when blue-gay players were a million dollars)
Now that blue-gay players are cheap this is a moot point.
Too bad the media is still disgustingly expensive. Its really too bad HD-DVD didnt win, it was alot cheaper. Reminds me of the VHS / Beta (also Sony) days. Yeah Beta was a little higher quality but thank god it failed, VHS was soooo much cheaper.
And to the $60 game vs $35 movie point - what has more replay value? I agree that $60 for a game is pretty lame but many games get played 100's of times. Who watches a movie that many times?
Now that blue-gay players are cheap this is a moot point.
Too bad the media is still disgustingly expensive. Its really too bad HD-DVD didnt win, it was alot cheaper. Reminds me of the VHS / Beta (also Sony) days. Yeah Beta was a little higher quality but thank god it failed, VHS was soooo much cheaper.
And to the $60 game vs $35 movie point - what has more replay value? I agree that $60 for a game is pretty lame but many games get played 100's of times. Who watches a movie that many times?
Arcygenical
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2005
- Messages
- 25,066
Jesus Christ - I never knew the PS3 upscaled DVD's either.
I probably would have bought one had I known that - but I opted for an HDDVD player. Wow.
I probably would have bought one had I known that - but I opted for an HDDVD player. Wow.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2001
- Messages
- 15,805
what he said
I don't think anyone is "proving" PS3 is a bad system. It's a good system.
But if I told my friends I got a PS3, they'd laugh at me. I don't even see the PS3 as a competitor anymore. Why is it so? Someone will write that book. But as it is, I don't think Sony can do much about it anymore.
But if I told my friends I got a PS3, they'd laugh at me. I don't even see the PS3 as a competitor anymore. Why is it so? Someone will write that book. But as it is, I don't think Sony can do much about it anymore.