Sony's PS3 A Sinking Ship?

Dreaz said:
Why is it so? Someone will write that book. But as it is, I don't think Sony can do much about it anymore.
Click to expand...

Bluray.

PS3 - Bluray = HUGE competition.

And the unfortunate part about it is, it would have been so easy to do. They could have just put together a core edition minus the Bluray, and an elite edition with it. Juts look at some of the responses in this thread alone. So many people who have it who say they are using it mostly for something other than gaming. how ridiculous is that? It's a game console. How many 360 owners do you hear say that they use their 360 mainly for something other than gaming? If that's what Sony was truly going for, then they deserve to fail.
 
So many issues for and against, let people make up their own minds.

I have to say at least on this site that either system is small change compared to building a reasonable PC system these days, and how many of us here think nothing of doing a yearly upgrade that will cost more than anyone one of these systems?

Two weeks ago I upgraded a monitor to a 24" 1920x 1200 which in itself cost as much as an 80g PS3.
So what did I do next since the monitor will do 1080p ?
Picked up another ps3.

Why?

I was waiting to see if MS would finally clean up the 360 with the elusive Jasper .The 360 I presently have is replacement number 7 in the RROD saga and does not have a hdmi output .Do I really want to go down that path and save $100 ( How many of the original 360's are actually still in use ? )

I had brought in another ps3 last xmas for the hdtv since the xbox was once again "in for repair",that and the trojan horse excuse that it makes a decent bluray player, or at least that was the logic used on "She Who Must Be Obeyed"

Funny thing was that in the process I started to like the overall use of the system and so did SWMBO and it really gets used.
Why the second one ? While the other one still sits upstairs SWMBO has taken a liking to the hdtv along with the PS3, sort of leaves me sitting there waiting to get on to play either a game or bluray.
Hence the second system can only be described as an aid to domestic bliss.

Snivly
 
All of the games are on bluray discs, so how could you have a PS3 minus bluray? I really can't believe so many people are using their PS3's for media players. As I mentioned before, I thought most people wanted 360's to use as extenders and media players.

I think the Wii is just a novelty act. I think it probably is fun...in the beginning. Then it's like, "Why the hell did I buy this?". Most of the people I know who bought one, says they played it at first and now it just sits there. My son's getting one for Christmas, so we'll see. I was looking at the games in Wal-Mart last week, and there was so many LAME games for it. I mean, 3/4 of the games was just silly crap...all those carnival games and stuff like that. It reminded me of the Atari days.

And why do people buy $600 gaming consoles to end up running folding?
 
No one said you make the news, Steve, they just find it interesting which stories you post (ones that promote your opinions) and which ones you don't (anything that shows Sony in a positive light). Which is fine, people know your bias and we love you anyway :).
 
silent-circuit said:
The download wasn't the real issue, though. Install was. It took an hour and a half (no exaggeration whatsoever) so install a 1GB title. That's inexcusable no matter how you look at it; god forbid I purchase Burnout Paradise or Endwar via PSN, as they tip the scales around 4-5GB. I'd be waiting for days.
Click to expand...

Where do you get that Idea? I bought a 250gb hdd thats a 5400rpm slower than the HDD that came with the PS3 and guess what GT5 Prologue a 2GB title took me all of 5mins to install. So you swear no exaggeration? I swear BS. I buy lots of titles and install lots of crap on my PS3 nothing takes that long. If you want me to show you a video of a PS3 installing GT5 P then ill gladly uninstall, re download and reinstall to prove that you are over exaggerating.
 
I can't believe that some people in this thread are happy when Sony is not making much money because of the weak USD. I don't think a weak currency is something to be happy about.
 
I don't like buying potential. Is anybody else tired of hearing about the potential of the PS3, even more than 2 years into its lifespan? I certainly am.

Heck, they couldn't even figure out what to do with their controllers!

With Sony, there are a lot of afterthoughts in the system that seem to be marketing points but do not work cohesively with the system and games.

The PSN is not nearly as smooth and integrated as Live!
The achievements/trophies are an afterthought that were present from day 1 on the 360.
The controllers first came without rumble, then it was added in...


In each case above, the changes have caused an inconsistent gaming experience. That reminds me of my PC gaming days.

But at least it plays blue rayz!

The one thing I would really worry about, though, is that the PS3 sales will drop off significantly (if they have not already) as the price of stand alone blue ray players reaches the sub 200 mark for the quality players. That gives people one less reason to rationalize the price of the ps3.
 
im a big Sony fan but the one thing i will agree with all the nay-sayers about has to be that price tag...

it is almost 2009 and the thing is still $400!

prices on HD media needs to, at the least, come down to DVD prices as well or it will never be adopted
 
*shrug* I see nothing wrong with the price of the PS3. I think people need to adjust their expectations. People are expecting it to be priced like a standard console, the problem is it just isn't a standard console. It doesn't matter how you slice it, the PS3 is a Media center. Out of all the systems the PS3 is the Only one that actually justifies it's price. The one that really needs a price cut is the Wii, there is no excuse for that thing being $250 2 years after launch.

Want to know the major difference between the PS3 and 360? The PS3 actually works. I just RMAed my 5th..yes count that 5th 360 off. I have less then 100 hours playtime between 5 360s. I have had my PS3 on either playing blu-ray, games or folding@home nearly 24/7 for 2 years and have yet to have an issue out of it. Same goes for my wii actually, it stays powered on nearly all the time as well and continues to work fine.

The only thing that was really a failure for the Ps3 was honestly the marketing. It was marketed unbelievably bad. In the end though, it comes down to personal taste. I like all 3 systems, or at least I would if I could ever get a 360 that would let me finish a game without bricking. I originally bought the PS3 as a blu-ray player primarily, and found out it completely replaced my HTPC. As such it is the 1 system I own two of now. The 360 has good media capabilities as well, but reliability issues kick in. For those lucky ones that haven't had a problem, good for you. For a gamer, there are plenty of really fantastic titles out that more then justify the price. You just need to stop assuming it is the same system that launched 2 years ago. The PS store has a plethora of $10 titles that not only Look fantastic, but are some of the most fun I have had since my NES. The $60 games on the shelf are only a Fraction of what is offered. I utterly disagree with the comment about the PSN not being as smooth and integrated as LIVE. Have you even seen PSN in the past 8 months? I doubt it because it has been overhauled entirely. The interface now is Vastly superior to LIVE and not to mention it is actually Free unlike live.
 
Dreaz 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.
Click to expand...

i'll write the cliffs notes for the book.

no killer apps, even the killer apps are good but not great... charging for a demo (gt5 prologue), no longer plays ps2 games, and the general marketing as a media player. when i think ps3 i think "hey I can watch planet earth or kung fu panda" not "hey I really want to get home from work to play *insert ps3 exclusive* here".

Honestly to me i see the ps3 in the same market share as blu-ray players and the like...it actually takes me a while to remember its a gaming system sometimes... Since the only thing i really play on it is disgaea 3.
 
Oh and to contend the utterly retarded sinking ship comment.

25.18 million 360's sold in 3 years comes to 8.39 million sold per year.
18.08 million PS3's sold in 2 years comes to 9.04 million sold per year.

Looking at the math and not the hype, the PS3 is doing extremely well considering how much more expensive it is then the 360's base model.

source http://www.vgchartz.com/
 
charging for a demo (gt5 prologue)
Click to expand...
Really? Have you even played this? Simply labeling it a demo is a bit short-sighted, I'm afraid. It currently has ~75 cars, has 16-player multiplayer, split-screen, the GT-TV service, a new channel, and rankings. Officially, it is considered an installment to the series and Polyphony Digital supports it, evidenced by their updates. Suffice it to say, blaming Sony for what you consider a "demo" is misplaced anyway.
 
None of the geek factor arguments matter, all that matters is if it makes money for Sony at the end of its run.
 
Dekoth said:
Oh and to contend the utterly retarded sinking ship comment.

25.18 million 360's sold in 3 years comes to 8.39 million sold per year.
18.08 million PS3's sold in 2 years comes to 9.04 million sold per year.

Looking at the math and not the hype, the PS3 is doing extremely well considering how much more expensive it is then the 360's base model.

source http://www.vgchartz.com/
Click to expand...

I don't put much stock in vgchartz, but I believe I read somewhere that Sony had quoted 17 million PS3s sold last month. Not bad at all IMO. It's roughly at the same units sold at this point in it's life as the 360 was, so how is it a sinking ship?
 
Dekoth said:
Oh and to contend the utterly retarded sinking ship comment.

25.18 million 360's sold in 3 years comes to 8.39 million sold per year.
18.08 million PS3's sold in 2 years comes to 9.04 million sold per year.

Looking at the math and not the hype, the PS3 is doing extremely well considering how much more expensive it is then the 360's base model.

source http://www.vgchartz.com/
Click to expand...

I think the major issue is that sales of the 360 are accelerating while sales of the PS3 are slowing as evidenced by the monthly sales totals. Thats not a good sign for Sony as I think it indicates many people interested in buying a $400 console already have and now cheaper blu-ray players are eating into the "buy the PS3 as the best, cheapest, blu-ray market". I own both systems and want both to do well so I have a good choice in games to play.
 
I personally will buy PS3 sometime next year, it takes couple of revisions to get the next gen tech working. Unfortunately early adopters pay for impatience double as much...lots of money and nerves. I remember i bought my PS1 in 1998 with FF7 it was cheap as bread back then. I'll just wait until developers get their arses and start making games which use cell processor to the limits. I can't imagine that PS3 will be some kind of major failure for SONY...let's just wait and see what's going to happen.
 
I like all the posts of the PS3 having more horses under the hood. Who really cares if there there is 200% more power if it is not used. I keep hearing th potential is there. With the console being out this long these so called horses should be out of th pasture and running by now but are still no where to be seen.

People don't seem to understand that the so called extras that the PS3 are not needed to play games. If you want to do that then the Wii can't even play a DVD so it must be terrible but sales prove that to be wrong.

If you don't like the noise of the 360 install the game on the hard drive and problem solved.

All systems have their pluses and minuses but the PS3 crownd seems to never want to admit that point.
 
rflcptr said:
Really? Have you even played this? Simply labeling it a demo is a bit short-sighted, I'm afraid. It currently has ~75 cars, has 16-player multiplayer, split-screen, the GT-TV service, a new channel, and rankings. Officially, it is considered an installment to the series and Polyphony Digital supports it, evidenced by their updates. Suffice it to say, blaming Sony for what you consider a "demo" is misplaced anyway.
Click to expand...

i have it. a demo is a demo is a demo. I'm sorry. Thankfully it was given to me in a package deal. Still it's not a complete game and when the finished product comes out you will still be paying full price. So if i pay now at say ~40 and ~50-60 when it hits... thats 100 dollars on a racing game that cannot be modded and doesn't have the rediculous physics engine of some of its pc counterparts.

Again, i have a ps3, i actually have a couple games for it. My simple complaint is they are charging for a half done product, see it however you want, but it's simple bad marketing. because regardless of content its perceived as a demo by more than just myself. I'd be interested in it when it releases as a whole. Had i not received it in a package with a bunch of other stuff i wouldn't have touched it.
 
and i just want to mention i'm not a hater.. i played the hell out of gt2, and gt3, 4 didn't hit me the same way though i have that as well.
 
DarkVater said:
I personally will buy PS3 sometime next year, it takes couple of revisions to get the next gen tech working. Unfortunately early adopters pay for impatience double as much...lots of money and nerves. I remember i bought my PS1 in 1998 with FF7 it was cheap as bread back then. I'll just wait until developers get their arses and start making games which use cell processor to the limits. I can't imagine that PS3 will be some kind of major failure for SONY...let's just wait and see what's going to happen.
Click to expand...

Early adopters for the PS3 only really got punished in game selection, but that was not a big deal since It was a blu-ray player and fairly solid media center.

Early adopters of the 360 (me included) have been punished going on 3 years now with a hardware fail rate that is so bad, that it utterly shocks me there isn't a class action lawsuit against them.

SGD said:
I like all the posts of the PS3 having more horses under the hood. Who really cares if there there is 200% more power if it is not used. I keep hearing th potential is there. With the console being out this long these so called horses should be out of th pasture and running by now but are still no where to be seen.

People don't seem to understand that the so called extras that the PS3 are not needed to play games. If you want to do that then the Wii can't even play a DVD so it must be terrible but sales prove that to be wrong.

If you don't like the noise of the 360 install the game on the hard drive and problem solved.

All systems have their pluses and minuses but the PS3 crownd seems to never want to admit that point.
Click to expand...

You last sentence applies equally to the 360 group. At least the Ps3 works...the games might have been a little rough the first year, but at least the ps3 wasn't failing in mass quantities. I own both, and Love both. However when it comes to overall experience for the money the PS3 wins hands down simply on reliability. I may have spent $200 less on my 360 but I have used it less then my Wii because the bloody thing spends more time at MS then in my living room.

Once again, marketing failure on Sony. They marketed the PS3 as a Game console when it just is far more. Gamers were expecting a game console only, and sony was not looking to only deliver a game console.
 
So if i pay now at say ~40 and ~50-60 when it hits... thats 100 dollars on a racing game
Click to expand...
If that's how you look at it, then it's just not for you; I don't see it is a demo, but rather a way to get my foot into the game and learn it.
My simple complaint is they are charging for a half done product, see it however you want, but it's simple bad marketing. because regardless of content its perceived as a demo by more than just myself. I'd be interested in it when it releases as a whole. Had i not received it in a package with a bunch of other stuff i wouldn't have touched it.
Click to expand...
Polyphony has released other Prologues in the past, and I sincerely doubt this one has had any bearing on Sony's financials, which is what your first post directly implied. They're pretty up-front when letting you know it's not the full game. But even then, I'm not having trouble finding things to do in the game; there's plenty to learn about each car and racing with higher-skilled players is a nice experience. For me, it's been every bit worth the $40, considering what I've gained.
 
htpc_user said:
Somehow, one day it went all the way through and updated. I'd rather pay $50 a year like with XBOX Live if it would work.
Click to expand...

I thought I'd have to live a million years before I heard a PS3 owner say this.

You get what you pay for, kids. If what you're getting is free, do you really expect it to blow your effing mind?

Never could believe these people who paid 4-6 hundred for a system hating XBL's subscription fee. You can't afford $50 a year? Srsly? A new "Next-Gen" game costs $60, and you probably plop that down about once a month. Well, not if you're a PS3 owner I guess... ;)
 
htpc_user said:
What install times? I have a PS3, but I've never installed a game...except for demos.

I don't understand all the PS3 bashing, quite honestly. I bought an original XBOX and I liked it, but never bought many games for it. Never had any intention on buying a PS2, but my wife bought one from where she works. I never played that much at all so I ended up letting my son play games on it from about the time he was 3. The controller was smaller, so I just figured it'd be easier for him. But the PS2 at the time was the dominant console because it had been out way before the XBOX. But I firmly believe that the 360 has done so well, because it beat Sony to the punch by putting it out first. If the PS3 had came out first then we'd be talking about how the 360 was sinking right now. Everyone wanted "next gen" so they bought a 360; the library of games started to grow and people had more to choose from. By the time the PS3 came along, a lot of people already had "next gen" with the 360 and probably just wanted only 1 console. Then others who didn't have a 360 just couldn't see paying $600. We bought my son a PS3 for his birthday because I wanted something he could play his PS2 games on and I wouldn't have 2 consoles taking up space in his room. It disturbs me when I hear people say the 360 is cheaper. I have a friend who was a big PS2 fan, but wanted a PS3 or a 360. He ended up buying a 360 recently and talks about how great it is, and how it was cheaper. Sure, on the surface. But when you start comparing things, it's not really. Recently, my nephew bought a wireless adapter for his 360; he had to pay $100 for it. The PS3 already has it built in. The PS3 plays bluray; the 360 doesn't. The PS3 has a bigger hard drive. If you bought a 360, a wireless adapter, a standalone bluray player, and a larger hard drive you'd be over the $399 price of the PS3.

The PS3 is not perfect. There's several things I don't like about it. I don't like the fact that I have to download an update for the PS3 if I want to play certain games. One day a friend was over and I wanted him to try Motorstorm online. Once I got it up, I found that I had to download a system update. That took so long he had to leave before it was finished. Then there's been 3 games my son wanted to play that had to update its self before you could play: Sega Superstars Tennis, Lego Star Wars, and Rockband. All we wanted to do was play the game as we always had, not online, but it required us to update. Keep in mind, these were games we had already played many times. If I want to play a game without updating it, that should be my choice since it's not like I'm trying to go online and play with others using a different version. The Playstation network needs a lot of work as well. I bought my son Lego Star Wars (with 1 & 2 combined) even though he already had 1 for the PS2 and 2 for the PC just because I thought he would enjoy playing with people online. Problem is we can never connect with anyone. It will show rooms to join and then 1 by 1 they disappear. I've tried opening ports in the router, but it never helps. When I first bought Motorstorm, I had to update the game to play online. I tried many times, but the update would never complete. Somehow, one day it went all the way through and updated. I'd rather pay $50 a year like with XBOX Live if it would work.
Click to expand...

Not to be an ass, but I feel bad for you and your kid, that sounds like frickin' TORTURE. My buddy got one but didn't have internet, so he brought it over to open PSN account, buy MK3 from PS Store, and update the system. Downloading and installing the game and updating his system OS took TWO HOURS (not exaggerating). I was cursing by the time it got done. My gf just looked with disgust as that bar crept forward SO SLOWLY...I told him to get a 360. I downloaded MK3 in something like 5 minutes, in the background, doing other stuff...Sony could have gotten my money, but I'm one of those weirdos who refuse to pay to be inconvenienced...
 
PS3 had a lot of extras. A lot of chaff to be blunt.

Wireless controller? I know people in their hour+ long gaming sessions who do not move literally more than two inches from where they are sitting. Its like a zen-trance like thing where when they do move up to get a drink, you can actually see the imprint start to form - of their butt on the floor or whatever they were sitting in.

Bluray playback? Again, there are people - maybe 1/4 of them don't know that you can playback Bluray on a PS3. No idea how they don't know, but they don't.

Game playback? There is a significant portion of enthuisiast videophiles who bought the PS3 for Bluray playback. Use it to play a game? Nah... There was nearly a game released that was a *must* play anyhow.

Its sort of like having a swiss army knife, when all you want is a big serrated cleaver to carve the Xmas turkey. With that - happy holidays!
 
When the PS3 came out, you'd be crazy to buy a standalone bluray player. Even at $600 it was cheaper than any other player...and it played games.
 
I use mine mostly for a blu ray player and a few good exclusives. I like my xbox 360 a lot better for gaming and with the cheaper price I dont see how the ps3 really can compete with the better online of the 360
 
The more powerful and expensive system has never won a console war. I don't know why people use that as some sort of "evidence".

If we look at history, usually the cheaper and least powerful system wins (in total sales and market share).

Of course that's not always the case, but it is always the case that the most expensive system has never won.
 
I will stick with my gaming rig. Not the best but better than any gaming console out right now.=D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top