Sony Removes PS3 System and Games Line Up from Japanese Website

[fitbabits]

Click on over to GamesIndustry.biz (http://ww.gamesindustry.biz) for details (http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=14165).

Sony Computer Entertainment Inc has removed six listings for PlayStation 3 titles from its Japanese website, PlayStation.jp, and has stripped all mention of the PlayStation 3 console from the forthcoming releases page.

The titles, including new Everybody's Golf, Gran Turismo and Genji games, were originally listed alongside PSP and PS2 releases for 2006, as we reported yesterday, and represented the first confirmed PS3 titles from SCEJ.
I can understand them removing all mention of the games as they are unconfirmed, but removing the PS3 itself from the forthcoming releases page is...interesting.

[Eran Hawke]

No PS3 in 2006?

[Suicidal ShiZuru]

No PS3 in 2007?

[Nite_Moogle]

No PS3 ever?

[fitbabits]

No PS3. Ever? :rolleyes:

[fitbabits]

No PS3 ever?
Dammit, you beat me to it.

[Scaryboy]

Good grief. It's starting to feel like the Xbox 360 is a console generation unto itself at this stage.

[kokyunage]

No PS3. Ever?

Why would anybody want that? Less competition means Microsoft would dominate the console market. Higher prices, worse services, bad games would follow.

[The Letter 3]

I can understand them removing all mention of the games as they are unconfirmed, but removing the PS3 itself from the forthcoming releases page is...interesting.
That's because Sony will soon release the finalized PS3 cell processor. In case you didn't know, "cell" is to be taken literal. Sony will actually implant the processor into your brain so you can have a "true gaming experience" When in use, though, the Cell processor will require almost all of your brain's resources to run. Microsoft representatives laugh at the idea, saying that they have had a competiting product out for years: the Windows operating system.

[ackbrack]

It's hardly possible, but it would be pretty funny if Sony had a press release and said:

"Sorry, guys, the PS3 has been cancelled. We've been meaning to tell you for a while now, but didn't want to hurt your feelings. Trust us, it's not anything you've done. We just don't think it'll work out anymore; can we still be friends? Let us know when you want to watch some Blu Ray moveis or something, we'd really like to keep haning out; we just can't stay committed to something so serious right now. Got a lot going on, you know?

L8r!"

[NoName]

Why would anybody want that? Less competition means Microsoft would dominate the console market. Higher prices, worse services, bad games would follow.
So... because the Revolution doesn't have HD graphics or three processors then it can't compete with Microsoft?

Personally, I think the price of Nintendo's new system will do a lot to keep market prices in check.

[Schnoogs]

Why would anybody want that? Less competition means Microsoft would dominate the console market. Higher prices, worse services, bad games would follow.

Yeah because paying $400x3 is much better than say $500 once.

competition is great when theres a single format...like DVD....but when the competition is the format itself (think HDDVD vs blu-ray) the consumer suffers.

If Sony folds who cares...then thats 400-500 I dont have to pay to play 1-2 games. Simple math.

[Morratut]

It was nice to see some info on the PS3. Now that it's been removed for me the PS3 is just vapourware again. Currently the PS3 is up there with the Phantom :D

[The Letter 3]

If Sony folds who cares...then thats 400-500 I dont have to pay to play 1-2 games. Simple math.
What? That makes no sense. So if Sony sticks around you are somehow required to pay 400-500? If you don't want to pay that then don't pay. It's called will power. I think they sell it at the store.

[Nite_Moogle]

It's hardly possible, but it would be pretty funny if Sony had a press release and said:

"Sorry, guys, the PS3 has been cancelled. We've been meaning to tell you for a while now, but didn't want to hurt your feelings. Trust us, it's not anything you've done. We just don't think it'll work out anymore; can we still be friends? Let us know when you want to watch some Blu Ray moveis or something, we'd really like to keep haning out; we just can't stay committed to something so serious right now. Got a lot going on, you know?

L8r!"
Well to tell you the truth guys, the PS3 really took a long time to get ready without any real product. We've actually decided to scrap the PS3 design and go straight to the PS4. This one will have FOUR Cell processors! Get it? PS-4? 4 processors!

[agentgray]

Imagine the furor if Sony did cancel the PS3.

Just. Wow.

I (rootkit) could (rootkit) care (rootkit) less.

[fitbabits]

What? That makes no sense. So if Sony sticks around you are somehow required to pay 400-500? If you don't want to pay that then don't pay. It's called will power. I think they sell it at the store.
Right next to elbow grease and sky hooks. :)

[Morratut]

Imagine the furor if Sony did cancel the PS3.

Just. Wow.

I (rootkit) could (rootkit) care (rootkit) less.

Also if nintendo follows it'll be great.

Excellent that means we would all have our MGS, DMC, Gran Turismo, PGR, Ninja Gaiden, Mario and Zelda all on one console. WOW!!!
We could have just have a 360 console. Sony, Nintendo and everyone could just write games for that.

Actually that sounds good :) and bad. :(

[Nite_Moogle]

The X-station Cube returns! Or whatever it was that Francis built...

[Citizen Philip]

Also if nintendo follows it'll be great.

Excellent that means we would all have our MGS, DMC, Gran Turismo, PGR, Ninja Gaiden, Mario and Zelda all on one console. WOW!!!
We could have just have a 360 console. Sony, Nintendo and everyone could just write games for that.

Actually that sounds good :) and bad. :(

Yes that would be really cool. We see how microsoft acts when it gets a monopoly! Another one would be just super swell.

[Schnoogs]

What? That makes no sense. So if Sony sticks around you are somehow required to pay 400-500? If you don't want to pay that then don't pay. It's called will power. I think they sell it at the store.

Let me educate you...if there was a single format then game makers would support it and then the competition would exist at the hardware level...sort of like DVD.

There are 2-3 games for the PS3 that I will want to play (since i'm a gamer which has nothing to do with will power). At the same time there will be most likely 2-3 for the 360 and 2-3 for the Revolution.

Using grade school math that amounts to...

9 games x $50 = $450
+ $400
+ $500
+ $250

for a total of $1600

Now if there was say a standard console platform I could buy just one and those same 9 games and that would cost...

9 games x $50 = $450
+ $400

for a total of $850

Hmmmm....last time I checked $850 < $1600.

So the lesson for the day is that having multiple console platforms means that in order to play the games that we want to we end up spending hundreds more. Thats about as dumb as having to buy a Blu-Ray and an HDDVD player. Most people would agree that having multiple formats (consoles in our case) creates unnecessary cost overhead from having to buy additional hardware,

Does that make sense??? ;)

[fitbabits]

Crazy idea - what if Sony bought Infinium Labs and turned the Phantom into the PS3?

I really should drink less coffee in the mornings. :)

[Atorak]

Why would anybody want that? Less competition means Microsoft would dominate the console market. Higher prices, worse services, bad games would follow.


Heh, I just love this mentality. So let me see if I understand this:

Sony leaves the console market. Nintendo leaves the console market. Microsoft's X360 is left as the only viable console. Since there is no other real competition, except for the Phantom (......), Microsoft declares victory!

In order to celebrate victory (according to kokyunage), Microsoft starts firing people in the X360 division. Next they start removing features from XBox Live, stop fielding phone calls from customers, and shut down their Live! websites (worse services). Then they add $200.00 to the price of each new X360 (higher prices). Then they stop all of their AAA title developments (ex: Halo 3, Elder Scrolls IV, etc), and go exclusively with games like Big Mutha Trucker 2 and Deux Ex 3 (bad, bad games).

Makes sense to me!

[greenapple]

So the lesson for the day is that having multiple console platforms means that in order to play the games that we want to we end up spending hundreds more. Thats about as dumb as having to buy a Blu-Ray and an HDDVD player. Most people would agree that having multiple formats (consoles in our case) creates unnecessary cost overhead from having to buy additional hardware, Does that make sense??? ;)

You're making the very big (and very grade school) assumption that the quality of the games will remain undiminished.

Single console: equals essential monopoly. Essential monopoly means that Microsoft can charge developers whatever it wants for the right to develope for its console. Don't like to play with them? Too bad, they're the only game in town. Multiple consoles means that a developer can shop around for the best exclusive license, etc. Get paid more, put out more or better games.

Yes, as your simple math shows, the hardware costs money. But nothing in your posts show that the quality of the games will remain the same or that developers can afford to make good products, if a single console monopoly existed.

Geez, even friggin grade schools teach about the downsides of monopolies, communism, etc. Don't they? Go look up living in the USSR in a grade school history book.

[Dr Quincy]

Imagine if the PlayStation 3 has just been a collective delusion of the games industry and didn't really exist at all.

[fitbabits]

Imagine if the PlayStation 3 has just been a collective delusion of the games industry and didn't really exist at all.
bubuwubuwubuwubuwubuw (the sound of rattling your finger between your lips).

Oh, and the world would stop spinning!

[greenapple]

In order to celebrate victory (according to kokyunage), Microsoft starts firing people in the X360 division. Next they start removing features from XBox Live, stop fielding phone calls from customers, and shut down their Live! websites (worse services). Then they add $200.00 to the price of each new X360 (higher prices). Then they stop all of their AAA title developments (ex: Halo 3, Elder Scrolls IV, etc), and go exclusively with games like Big Mutha Trucker 2 and Deux Ex 3 (bad, bad games).

Makes sense to me!

You want to see a recent example of this? Look at the American automakers in the 70's and 80's as the Japanese automakers started entering the market. Public companies have an inherent need to squeeze out profit whenever they can. A monopoly allows them to do this in oodles. Even if it means cutting costs, quality, etc. while improving the profit margin.

Don't hold your breath and expect Microsoft (or any other console maker) to self-regulate its quality and practices. Competition is what motivates them.

[boratika]

Crazy idea - what if Sony bought Infinium Labs and turned the Phantom into the PS3?

I really should drink less coffee in the mornings. :)

1-3 coffees (equivilent to 1-3 shots of espresso, only freshly brewed, no instant crap)a day significantly reduces your chance of diabetes. 8 or more a day is good for liver failure.

But...uh...wouldn't buying infinitum labs be like buying one huge debt?

[fitbabits]

1-3 coffees (equivilent to 1-3 shots of espresso, only freshly brewed, no instant crap)a day significantly reduces your chance of diabetes. 8 or more a day is good for liver failure.

But...uh...buying infinitum labs be like buying one huge debt?
So you're saying that 4 shots a day is fine? And in fact may even be beneficial? Bonus.

[easi]

Why is fitbabits always the one posting the Sony doom & gloom stories?

I demand an inquest!

[fitbabits]

Why is fitbabits always the one posting the Sony doom & gloom stories?

I demand an inquest!
I'm not, though. I posted the news about Sony possibly having as many as 7 million units available for launch and also the one about the online survey (which, by the way, are two good things)!

I demand an inquest into your inquest.

[EternalGamer]

Uh... doesn't Microsoft pretty much dominate the PC platform with Windows based gaming? I don't exactly see that going to shit. Well... uh.. ok scratch that, but it has nothing to do with Microsoft... I dont' think...

Dan

[kokyunage]

Heh, I just love this mentality. So let me see if I understand this...

+ of BS unintelligent crap


That's how the system works. Even a level 100 economics course will teach you that. Competition breeds better products and more choices for the consumer. That’s the whole reason for capitalism and globalization.

Assasin, you math is correct but its outlook is very short term. There would be no incentive to release another “standard” console. So, instead of the current 4-6 year life cycle of a console, it would be 10-15 years at best. And that would disappoint a lot of people who praise new hardware because it allows more innovation (that point is debatable, but the life cycle would extend). If your system was in place we would still be playing the Nintendo 64/PS1.

Not to mention, if you allowed multiple hardware companies to make the “standard” console it would create hardware incompatibilities and software issues. Company A would get their parts from country Z. Company B would get their parts from country X. They all ‘should’ be the same and act the same but that never happens in the real world. Take a look at DVD players as a perfect example of that. Some players just have better quality, with better image quality. I’ve had some DVD’s not even play in some piece of shit Chinese DVD player. Since we’re on a unified standard console now, the user would blame the software and just return the game.

[XenonCJ]

Heh, I just love this mentality. So let me see if I understand this:

Sony leaves the console market. Nintendo leaves the console market. Microsoft's X360 is left as the only viable console. Since there is no other real competition, except for the Phantom (......), Microsoft declares victory!

In order to celebrate victory (according to kokyunage), Microsoft starts firing people in the X360 division. Next they start removing features from XBox Live, stop fielding phone calls from customers, and shut down their Live! websites (worse services). Then they add $200.00 to the price of each new X360 (higher prices). Then they stop all of their AAA title developments (ex: Halo 3, Elder Scrolls IV, etc), and go exclusively with games like Big Mutha Trucker 2 and Deux Ex 3 (bad, bad games).

Makes sense to me!Thus giving rise to a new "Golden Era" of PC Gaming =)

[Citizen Philip]

Wouldn't it be cool if you could enjoy your console of choice without stirring shit about someone elses choice. Because we all know deep down inside, that if someone chose something you didn't, that means they are different and that is always bad. Conformity is the way.

[Atorak]

You want to see a recent example of this? Look at the American automakers in the 70's and 80's as the Japanese automakers started entering the market. Public companies have an inherent need to squeeze out profit whenever they can. A monopoly allows them to do this in oodles. Even if it means cutting costs, quality, etc. while improving the profit margin.

Don't hold your breath and expect Microsoft (or any other console maker) to self-regulate its quality and practices. Competition is what motivates them.

Point well taken, and I do not disagree in the slighest. As for the previous poster, I was just ripping his typical response in this type of discussion, comically. :)

Further clarification: I do believe that if Sony and Nintendo decided not to enter the console market this generation, gamers would definitely benefit greatly for several years. All the titles in development for those two companies would almost certainly be ported to the X360, which means more money in gamers pockets. Also, with regards to the Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD battle, Blu-Ray would essentially lose their biggest backer, the PS3, which would (hopefully) declare victory for HD-DVD.

However, this "Golden Age" of gaming would only last a few years, and eventually gamers would start to see the effects. It would certainly be amplified when the market demanded the next-generation AFTER the X360. No competition would mean higher prices, cost-cutting techniques being implemented, lack of new features, etc.

[Schnoogs]

You're making the very big (and very grade school) assumption that the quality of the games will remain undiminished.

Single console: equals essential monopoly. Essential monopoly means that Microsoft can charge developers whatever it wants for the right to develope for its console. Don't like to play with them? Too bad, they're the only game in town. Multiple consoles means that a developer can shop around for the best exclusive license, etc. Get paid more, put out more or better games.

Yes, as your simple math shows, the hardware costs money. But nothing in your posts show that the quality of the games will remain the same or that developers can afford to make good products, if a single console monopoly existed.

Geez, even friggin grade schools teach about the downsides of monopolies, communism, etc. Don't they? Go look up living in the USSR in a grade school history book.

Not even going to waste my time with this one...enjoy forking over THOUSANDS for 3 consoles....enjoy forking over another THOUSAND for Blu-Ray and HDDVD.

You're a moron if you think having 3 consoles = quality games. Are there no quality games on the PC?? Are there no quality DVDs? Think this time before you respond.

We've seen how DVD has suffered from a single format...we've seen how the PC has suffered from a common graphics API. unless of course you preferred the days of every video card manufacturer having their own.

To the bafoons who are defending having multiple consoles I've seen a bunch of you knock having two next gen DVD standards. Common sense says that a common format is superior to having multiple. Let the hardware segment duke it out for the cheapest product.

Adios...Auf wiedersehen...Sayoonara...See ya!!

[zorper]

Atorack,

That is about the most well thought out response on this thread. No sarcasm.

We want Microsoft and Sony (at least) punching each other in the face until the end of time.

[crashedout]

In this hypothetical one console world there is still competion:

-between the game devs
-between the pc, handheld and console market
-between the component manufactures: nvidia vs ati, ibm vs intel vs amd....

That could be enough to keep forcing change. I think it could be very interesting.

[Kelegacy]

You guys should all be ashamed of yourselves for disgracing the internet further.

[jspeak32]

Why would anybody want that? Less competition means Microsoft would dominate the console market. Higher prices, worse services, bad games would follow.

he's right. i think thats why the ps2 was so bad until the xbox/gamecube came out. sony sat on their hands because they didn't have competition.

[Schnoogs]

In this hypothetical one console world there is still competion:

-between the game devs
-between the pc, handheld and console market
-between the component manufactures: nvidia vs ati, ibm vs intel vs amd....

That could be enough to keep forcing change. I think it could be very interesting.

All one has to do is look at the PC. For the most part DirectX is the most widely adopted Graphics API. It essentially represents the common format. Then companies like ATI,Nvidia, and the OEM vendors duke it out trying to deliver the cheapest product.

consoles could do something similar. One platform with built in plans for staged upgrade cycles. Then the developers dont have to make 5 versions or screw people over with exclusivity contracts.

Meanwhile the consumer gets to pick the cheapest console that meets the spec and can play whatever game they want.

This has been done in every other market...consoles should be no different..could you imagine if every recording studio signed with a different CD format....or DVD...or whatever. We'd all be screaming our heads off.

People lose common sense when it comes to defending consoles...they use words like monopoly yet noone can name a DVD monopoly or a CD monopoly or a VHS monopoly.

[Strand]

Yeah right. Did you notice Microsoft has a monopoly on PC operating systems? Did they fire everyone working on Windows? Do they not offer support or a knowledgebase? Do they not do updates and patches? Do they remove features from Windows? Did they shut down the Windows website? Do they not make Windows games anymore?

I wouldn't mind if the Ps3 was cancelled. We only need one cutting edge high tech HD console. I'd rather have those developers working on 360 w/live support titles. I've hated Sony ever since my Ps1 and Ps2 both failed as did my sony receiver and tv! I don't want to see the Revolution gone though - Nintendo rules and they are leading in innovation over technology.


In order to celebrate victory (according to kokyunage), Microsoft starts firing people in the X360 division. Next they start removing features from XBox Live, stop fielding phone calls from customers, and shut down their Live! websites (worse services). Then they add $200.00 to the price of each new X360 (higher prices). Then they stop all of their AAA title developments (ex: Halo 3, Elder Scrolls IV, etc), and go exclusively with games like Big Mutha Trucker 2 and Deux Ex 3 (bad, bad games).

Makes sense to me!

[jspeak32]

What? That makes no sense. So if Sony sticks around you are somehow required to pay 400-500? If you don't want to pay that then don't pay. It's called will power. I think they sell it at the store.

I think he's saying there will always be 1-2 titles on every system that are so good that it makes it worth purchasing the console for. if the ps3 is belated or whatnot, then its a higher chance those 1-2 titles will be placed on the 360. one console for all. (with due respect given to the revolution, i think it will be an entity of its own).

[steinfoot]

You're making the very big (and very grade school) assumption that the quality of the games will remain undiminished.

Single console: equals essential monopoly. Essential monopoly means that Microsoft can charge developers whatever it wants for the right to develope for its console. Don't like to play with them? Too bad, they're the only game in town. Multiple consoles means that a developer can shop around for the best exclusive license, etc. Get paid more, put out more or better games.

Yes, as your simple math shows, the hardware costs money. But nothing in your posts show that the quality of the games will remain the same or that developers can afford to make good products, if a single console monopoly existed.


hello? when are developers shopping around for the best licenses?? they arent. they are developing for all 3 consoles. how does that benefit the consumer over them developing for one hardware system? it doesnt. They are unable to tap into the powers of a particular system because it must be easily portable across all consoles. Why do you think Sony games like GT4 look so good? because sony only has to develop for one piece of hardware. they can squeeze out every last drop of power.

[51|RandoM]

Here, let me pick this apart piece by piece.
Not even going to waste my time with this one...enjoy forking over THOUSANDS for 3 consoles....enjoy forking over another THOUSAND for Blu-Ray and HDDVD.

I thought you weren't going to waste your time? Anyways, do you really need to buy all three consoles? If you fork over a thousand for Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, you are an idiot. There is almost no reason for either format to exist, much less for somebody to delve into both.

You're a moron if you think having 3 consoles = quality games. Are there no quality games on the PC?? Are there no quality DVDs? Think this time before you respond.

Sorry guy, there is competition in the PC marketplace. It isn't a monopoly on either a hardware or OS front. One could pretend to agree with you that it is, though, and then ask why PC gaming is steadily shrinking? DVDs are a completely different market, you do realize, right? You are aware that most of the material on DVD starts out as a movie or television production? You do realize that those productions efforts are from competing houses? You're confusing medium with content, and assuming a single format means there is no competition, which is clearly false.


We've seen how DVD has suffered from a single format...we've seen how the PC has suffered from a common graphics API. unless of course you preferred the days of every video card manufacturer having their own.


Directx is a different story. Once again you're confusing the issue.

Long story short, anybody who has been around long enough has already seen what happens when one company completely dominates the videogame market for multiple generations. Guess what? It didn't have a happy ending for anybody.

One of the biggest points you seem to be missing is the competitive drive from each major player to produce stellar 1st party titles, titles that end up being hailed as system sellers. Remove the system competition and you'll remove those titles too.

[greenapple]

noone can name a DVD monopoly or a CD monopoly or a VHS monopoly.

That's because these were standard formats developed to facilitate innovation and competition. None of these formats are proprietarily owned by any of the companies producing them. They profit models of these companies are not centered on the licensing of the use of the formats. There are NO royalties for the use of those formats.

Compare the console makers who's business model centers on profitting off of licenses to develop on their hardware. In fact, they take a LOSS on their hardware to foster adoption and payment of royalties and licenses.

Without competition, what is the incentive to take a loss on new hardware? What is the incentive to NOT raise royalty/licensing fees?

Don't confuse a standard with a proprietary platform exclusively controlled by a single company.

[Reanimated]

They're better off not having that list of shovelware up anyway.

[Schnoogs]

Let me pick apart your post...

If you fork over a thousand for Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, you are an idiot. There is almost no reason for either format to exist, much less for somebody to delve into both.

Funny...you're a genious when you buy multiple consoles but an idiot if you buy multiple video devices...thanks for enlightening us.


Sorry guy, there is competition in the PC marketplace. It isn't a monopoly on either a hardware or OS front. One could pretend to agree with you that it is, though, and then ask why PC gaming is steadily shrinking? DVDs are a completely different market, you do realize, right? You are aware that most of the material on DVD starts out as a movie or television production? You do realize that those productions efforts are from competing houses? You're confusing medium with content, and assuming a single format means there is no competition, which is clearly false.

Not even worth commenting on since most of it is just fluff and does nothing to make the case that the consumer isnt better off by having one format with many players to choose from. I'll give you a chance to restate this part because frankly it sounds liek you were just rambling.




Directx is a different story. Once again you're confusing the issue.

No actually it isnt. It represents a standard. Do you want me to post the definition so you can understand why we use things like API's and DVD's as analogies to consoles.


Long story short, anybody who has been around long enough has already seen what happens when one company completely dominates the videogame market for multiple generations. Guess what? It didn't have a happy ending for anybody.


We get Sony and the PS3...your point??


One of the biggest points you seem to be missing is the competitive drive from each major player to produce stellar 1st party titles, titles that end up being hailed as system sellers. Remove the system competition and you'll remove those titles too.

Clearly you've missed the point since on several occassions its been brought up that there is no monopoly at the hardware level when there is a common format.

Name one DVD player monoply. CD player monopoly. Graphics card monoply. I'm sure you can do it because clearly we've missed the point and you're so freaken smart you can educate us as to why consoles are some how magically different and shouldnt have a standard archictecture and that developers just love dealing with 3 sets of different hardware.

[Schnoogs]

That's because these were standard formats developed to facilitate innovation and competition. None of these formats are proprietarily owned by any of the companies producing them. They profit models of these companies are not centered on the licensing of the use of the formats. There are NO royalties for the use of those formats.

Compare the console makers who's business model centers on profitting off of licenses to develop on their hardware. In fact, they take a LOSS on their hardware to foster adoption and payment of royalties and licenses.

Without competition, what is the incentive to take a loss on new hardware? What is the incentive to NOT raise royalty/licensing fees?

Don't confuse a standard with a proprietary platform exclusively controlled by a single company.

No shit...keep up with the conversation.

[Citizen Philip]

I think this thread became a bloated rotting corpse of insecurity and hate since about the second post. You maggots just keep eating this stuff up. Maybe you'll grow up to become bright beautiful flies, after this place has been digested down to the bones you can take your leave and move somewhere else.

Cheers.

[steinfoot]

come on people, think about it. how cool would it be to purchase your next console from either sony or toshiba or panasonic, yada yada. they each can have enhanced features, like DVR capabilities, etc, to fit ones needs. but they all support some Game Compatability format. They all are able to play the new Zelda, Halo, Killzone, and so forth. We as consumers get to choose which piece of hardware works best for us and we only have to buy ONE. That is also one less unit to clutter up your living room. who wants 3 frikin consoles laid out in the middle of the floor just to be able to play the 3 best games on the market?

[Schnoogs]

come on people, think about it. how cool would it be to purchase your next console from either sony or toshiba or panasonic, yada yada. they each can have enhanced features, like DVR capabilities, etc, to fit ones needs. but they all support some Game Compatability format. They all are able to play the new Zelda, Halo, Killzone, and so forth. We as consumers get to choose which piece of hardware works best for us and we only have to buy ONE. That is also one less unit to clutter up your living room. who wants 3 frikin consoles laid out in the middle of the floor just to be able to play the 3 best games on the market?

This is too much of a dose of common sense for this forum. The kids here need multiple consoles so they can have 3x the amount of bitching and moaning for each generation. A common format would mean only bitching about the games and that would just destroy their little realities.

[Schnoogs]

This reminds me of the Taco Bell Spork. Why go through the hassle of grabbing both a spoon and a fork when a COMMON utensile can satisfy the consumers eating needs.

Is there a spork monopoly...who knows...probably not seeing as the Spork specification can be given to many utensile manufacturing companies resulting in cheaper Sporks for all of us to enjoy our Nacho Bell Grande's with.

We can learn so much from the Spork.

[dr_wily]

come on people, think about it. how cool would it be to purchase your next console from either sony or toshiba or panasonic, yada yada. they each can have enhanced features, like DVR capabilities, etc, to fit ones needs. but they all support some Game Compatability format. They all are able to play the new Zelda, Halo, Killzone, and so forth. We as consumers get to choose which piece of hardware works best for us and we only have to buy ONE. That is also one less unit to clutter up your living room. who wants 3 frikin consoles laid out in the middle of the floor just to be able to play the 3 best games on the market?

if that happened I think evil avatar would essplode.

into a thousand million tiny pieces of goey buns, comix books, nerdathons, and spawntoy-a-mabobs.

[greenapple]

come on people, think about it. how cool would it be to purchase your next console from either sony or toshiba or panasonic, yada yada. they each can have enhanced features, like DVR capabilities, etc, to fit ones needs. but they all support some Game Compatability format. They all are able to play the new Zelda, Halo, Killzone, and so forth. We as consumers get to choose which piece of hardware works best for us and we only have to buy ONE. That is also one less unit to clutter up your living room. who wants 3 frikin consoles laid out in the middle of the floor just to be able to play the 3 best games on the market?

What you are discussing is completely different from the rest of the discussion.

Whether such a model would or would not be better (look at the problems with PC's and compatibility, etc.) is a totally seperate question.

Regardless, that discussion does not relate to the current console market which isn't geared towards making a unitary standard.

Microsoft isn't opening the Xbox market open to the world's hardware makers to make clones of.

You need to focus on the business model- how is the company in question generating profit? In this case, its licensing/royalties. How will the removal of competition affect that business model?

Again, there's a HUGE difference between the standard format and proprietary platform models. Assassin insists on lumping the two together.

[bone_matrix]

This reminds me of the Taco Bell Spork. Why go through the hassle of grabbing both a spoon and a fork when a COMMON utensile can satisfy the consumers eating needs.

Is there a spork monopoly...who knows...probably not seeing as the Spork specification can be given to many utensile manufacturing companies resulting in cheaper Sporks for all of us to enjoy our Nacho Bell Grande's with.

We can learn so much from the Spork.


But the spork sucks. It is neither a good spoon nor fork. So you are saying that you want a crappy console that doesn't play games or do anything else very well?

Then buy a PSP. FTW!!

[Schnoogs]

What you are discussing is completely different from the rest of the discussion.

Whether such a model would or would not be better (look at the problems with PC's and compatibility, etc.) is a totally seperate question.

Regardless, that discussion does not relate to the current console market which isn't geared towards making a unitary standard.

Microsoft is opening the Xbox market open to the world's hardware makers to make clones of.

You need to focus on the business model- how is the company in question generating profit? In this case, its licensing/royalties. How will the removal of competition affect that business model?

Again, there's a HUGE difference between the standard format and proprietary platform models. Assassin insists on lumping the two together.

Funny thats what I was discussing so perhaps its you that are not on the same page because Steinfoot is talking about the same stuff as everyone else.

[steinfoot]

IBM + ATI basically make the hardware for ALL the next gen systems. how is it any different with those companies supplying the same gaming chipset for manufaturers to place in Blu-ray players (example)?

Licensing and royalty fees should come from the use of game engines like Unreal 3 engine. that drives companies to develop the best engine and we end up with beautiful looking games that are fun to play, since other smaller companies can focus on gameplay, story, instead of on the technical side.

[Schnoogs]

But the spork sucks. It is neither a good spoon nor fork. So you are saying that you want a crappy console that doesn't play games or do anything else very well?

Then buy a PSP. FTW!!

The spork rules god damnit...oh yeah, look up sarcasm! ;)

[dr_wily]

What you are discussing is completely different from the rest of the discussion.

Whether such a model would or would not be better (look at the problems with PC's and compatibility, etc.) is a totally seperate question.

Regardless, that discussion does not relate to the current console market which isn't geared towards making a unitary standard.

Microsoft isn't opening the Xbox market open to the world's hardware makers to make clones of.

You need to focus on the business model- how is the company in question generating profit? In this case, its licensing/royalties. How will the removal of competition affect that business model?

Again, there's a HUGE difference between the standard format and proprietary platform models. Assassin insists on lumping the two together.

haha! that wins the EA tardburger prize! This thread was so goddamn random and you just had to NARC on it didn't you?

..
..
NARC!

[Deathbane27]

This thread sucks. :)

How about if Sony quits out of the console market, but Nintendo doesn't?

[rein]

come on people, think about it. how cool would it be to purchase your next console from either sony or toshiba or panasonic, yada yada. they each can have enhanced features, like DVR capabilities, etc, to fit ones needs. but they all support some Game Compatability format. They all are able to play the new Zelda, Halo, Killzone, and so forth. We as consumers get to choose which piece of hardware works best for us and we only have to buy ONE. That is also one less unit to clutter up your living room. who wants 3 frikin consoles laid out in the middle of the floor just to be able to play the 3 best games on the market?


We are not going to see a unified console. What makes you think the MS, Sony and especially Nintendo would give up their license to a unified system? I also buy more than 3 best games on the market. I do agree that having more than 3 (like right now) is a bit much. This does remind me of the failed JVC X-eye. Selling game systems in the normal home entertainment division of stores didn't work. when people think of video game consoles, regardless of how advanced they have become, they are still thought of as toys.

[steinfoot]

We are not going to see a unified console. What makes you think the MS, Sony and especially Nintendo would give up their license to a unified system? I also buy more than 3 best games on the market. I do agree that having more than 3 (like right now) is a bit much. This does remind me of the failed JVC X-eye. Selling game systems in the normal home entertainment division of stores didn't work. when people think of video game consoles, regardless of how advanced they have become, they are still thought of as toys.


I didnt say it was going to happen. I know they are too greedy to see the benefit of this solution. but its a nice dream yes??

[Schnoogs]

We are not going to see a unified console.

Let me borrow your crystal ball after you're done with it...BTW who killed Kennedy?

[Nadreck]

One of the biggest technical reasons for multiple game formats instead of a single format and mutlple console options is compatibility issues; even if they're all built to handle the same format, hardware will behave in different ways. With PC Games, this is still an issue, but is dealt with through the ability to patch both the software and update the drivers for the hardware. Consoles historically have not had this capability.

I used to work as an Xbox tester, and one of the most common shifts I'd pull was a "compatibility" shift. This entailed testing every game to come out to date for the Xbox on new hardware configurations (let's say Toshiba comes out with a cheaper drive, so Microsoft decides to switch to that drive instead of the Philips or whatever... that's a new hardware configuration, and requires testing and support). This was necessary, and we DID in fact end up finding bugs that required a reassessment of the hardware switch. That's purely internal to one company, where they control both the format, the operating system (and can adjust it as needed), and selectively choosing the hardware. If there were multiple manufacturers making that console, there would not be that level of control, and without the ability to patch a game, it could get messy VERY QUICKLY.

It's also worth noting that in all the examples of "a single format being good", all of the formats did or do have competition. DirectX is in competition with OpenGL (and vice versa... compare the evolution of these APIs, the features one adds gets implemented in the next version of the other, in both directions). Windows competes with Linux and OS X (neither of which has the level of market share, but do have significant mindshare, and have forced action to stay competitive, notably in the realm of security needs, though also a number of features being added in Vista come from features done in OS X or Linux, and to a lesser extent vice versa -- fast user switching is a good example). Put simply, it's not a matter of the competition being equal in the market: impetus to maintain that dominant position (or to take marketshare from the dominant position) is essential to continued innovation.

[Schnoogs]

One of the biggest technical reasons for multiple game formats instead of a single format and mutlple console options is compatibility issues; even if they're all built to handle the same format, hardware will behave in different ways. With PC Games, this is still an issue, but is dealt with through the ability to patch both the software and update the drivers for the hardware. Consoles historically have not had this capability.

I used to work as an Xbox tester, and one of the most common shifts I'd pull was a "compatibility" shift. This entailed testing every game to come out to date for the Xbox on new hardware configurations (let's say Toshiba comes out with a cheaper drive, so Microsoft decides to switch to that drive instead of the Philips or whatever... that's a new hardware configuration, and requires testing and support). This was necessary, and we DID in fact end up finding bugs that required a reassessment of the hardware switch. That's purely internal to one company, where they control both the format, the operating system (and can adjust it as needed), and selectively choosing the hardware. If there were multiple manufacturers making that console, there would not be that level of control, and without the ability to patch a game, it could get messy VERY QUICKLY.

It's also worth noting that in all the examples of "a single format being good", all of the formats did or do have competition. DirectX is in competition with OpenGL (and vice versa... compare the evolution of these APIs, the features one adds gets implemented in the next version of the other, in both directions). Windows competes with Linux and OS X (neither of which has the level of market share, but do have significant mindshare, and have forced action to stay competitive, notably in the realm of security needs, though also a number of features being added in Vista come from features done in OS X or Linux, and to a lesser extent vice versa -- fast user switching is a good example). Put simply, it's not a matter of the competition being equal in the market: impetus to maintain that dominant position (or to take marketshare from the dominant position) is essential to continued innovation.

I'm sorry man but posts like this do nothing to counter common sense that it sucks having to spend THOUSANDS to play a handful of games because of exclusivity contracts.

We've landed on the moon people so I'm pretty fuckign sure we could come up with a spec or architecture that would result in a common format and hardware that is garunteed to play it regardless of who makes it.

Instead of just certifying games they certify hardware...this isnt beyond human comprehension here...so yes a small fee of the consoles price goes to the governing body that maintains quality control. This isn't rocket science.

I would rather pay $500-600 once than $400x3. PC gamers have been doing just fine the last 15 years with our hodgepodge of hardware manufacturers and differing specs.

[Zanzibar]

Anyways, getting back to the article...

Is there any chance that the PS3 data on the website had "Spring '06" emblazoned across everything, thus they removed the site while they redesign it to match a new ship date? Has anyone visited the site prior to the removal?

[fitbabits]

Anyways, getting back to the article...

Is there any chance that the PS3 data on the website had "Spring '06" emblazoned across everything, thus they removed the site while they redesign it to match a new ship date? Has anyone visited the site prior to the removal?
I popped over to the site, but I'm not at all fluent in Japanese! There used to be an English version of the site, but that appears to have been removed.

[Demo_Boy]

Why would anybody want that? Less competition means Microsoft would dominate the console market. Higher prices, worse services, bad games would follow.


You forgot. Revolution for teh win!

[Lord Dongkey]

I almost feel enlightened by this thread... not the bickering and bullshit, but rather, the idea that Sony and Nintendo and Microsoft have been and will continue to do the very thing that we beat up HD-DVD and Blu-Ray over, and that so obviously screwed people over during the VHS/Beta wars...

Anybody else here own... what was that console called? A... oh yeah, DREAMCAST? How good did we all feel when that system lost the "format war" between them and PSX?

Name one time in the history of the industry that having multiple hardware platforms benefited *anyone* involved, other than the money-grubbing hardware manufacturing companies themselves? 1st party titles and allegience? All that is is the hardware manufacturers buying out good dev studios and making games... and keeping them proprietary to their hardware. There's no reason Mario Sunshine couldn't run on the Xbox, or Halo on the PS2 (although textures would have been scaled down all nasty like) etc.

All the companies are crying and moaning about the HD-DVD/Blu-ray format war, playing the PR battle of making everyone else look like the enemy and that they're our friends, but the reality is, they're scared they're going to lose and get bitten in the ass. It's all about money for 99.9% of companies and format wars run the risk of a HUGE loss of investment/R&D Costs for the upcoming "HD Era" of movies. There's no realistically deep fear of totally bottoming out with a console for our big three coming up, so the current business model stands of fucking the consumer right in the sweet spot and hiding behind claims of high hardware costs as the reason they have to make money on licensing and royalty fees... and why the business model stands as it is.

So everyone on here fighting the "2 different" battles is talking about the same thing, just various sides of the coin, some about a theoretical world in which a broken industry was mystica-magically fixed and one where this is the real world, and the industry is the way it is. Far as I've seen, and I'm not ancient or anything, but if something is making a business a ton of money, and they're not in imminent danger of tanking as a corporation, the train just keeps on chugging along.

The comparison of unifying hardware manufacturing for console makers to PC gaming is incorrect. PC Gamers buy component parts, or their "supplier" (Alienware, Dell, etc) buys component parts, and assembles them together to make a rig. This is prohibitively expensive because Alienware isn't running their own fabrication plants and building their rigs from the ground up. Volume production is what drives hardware costs down to the level of consoles, and differentiation and specialization furthers this trend. The console gaming industry would have to undergo an entire paradigm shift, and God only knows where the big three would keep making their money - perhaps becoming publishers or some such - but that's something that's not going to happen any time soon.

But having a unified architecture/API and differentiating fringe features? Yeah, that would benefit the gamers. And the developers. And the publishers. Immensely.

It would just leave the companies that have control over everything empty-handed.

El Edit:
Something I didn't think about at all is the concept of compatibility... I have to believe, though, that if there was a single defined standard of functions/graphics/sound/memory/etc that the hardware of a unified console had to adhere to, and no ability to patch into it, that you could provide this spec to hardware makers for 100% compliance and the spec to game developers for 100% compliance. Having a set understanding of featureset and "horsepower" would assist in making things run on multiple platforms, having no concern for multiple detail levels, texture resolution, scaling of game resources to accomodate for billy-bob trying to run quake 4 on his 486, etc. In an ideal world, the hardware makers wouldn't take shortcuts, the game developers wouldn't be sloppy and take shortcuts, and everyone would get along.

Human nature seems to dictate that the fewer moving parts we have to plan for, the lazier we can be, and the happier everyone stays. Except the guy that pays everyone else to be lazy. ;)

[rein]

I'm sorry man but posts like this do nothing to counter common sense that it sucks having to spend THOUSANDS to play a handful of games because of exclusivity contracts.


If you are only playing a handful of games, it probably isn't worth the investment for you. I think you need a new hobby.

[steinfoot]

Amen Lord Dongkey, great post!


R.I.P. ye old glorious Dreamcast.

[Dr Quincy]

PlayStation. Is. Life.

[Schnoogs]

If you are only playing a handful of games, it probably isn't worth the investment for you. I think you need a new hobby.

No offense but don't tell me what my hobbies should or shouldn't be. If I enjoy playing those games then that's my business and I should be free to do so.

We're talking about platforms not the subjective nature of game appreciation. If you play dozens of games per console then good for you...

[Schnoogs]

I almost feel enlightened by this thread... not the bickering and bullshit, but rather, the idea that Sony and Nintendo and Microsoft have been and will continue to do the very thing that we beat up HD-DVD and Blu-Ray over, and that so obviously screwed people over during the VHS/Beta wars...

Anybody else here own... what was that console called? A... oh yeah, DREAMCAST? How good did we all feel when that system lost the "format war" between them and PSX?

Name one time in the history of the industry that having multiple hardware platforms benefited *anyone* involved, other than the money-grubbing hardware manufacturing companies themselves? 1st party titles and allegience? All that is is the hardware manufacturers buying out good dev studios and making games... and keeping them proprietary to their hardware. There's no reason Mario Sunshine couldn't run on the Xbox, or Halo on the PS2 (although textures would have been scaled down all nasty like) etc.

All the companies are crying and moaning about the HD-DVD/Blu-ray format war, playing the PR battle of making everyone else look like the enemy and that they're our friends, but the reality is, they're scared they're going to lose and get bitten in the ass. It's all about money for 99.9% of companies and format wars run the risk of a HUGE loss of investment/R&D Costs for the upcoming "HD Era" of movies. There's no realistically deep fear of totally bottoming out with a console for our big three coming up, so the current business model stands of fucking the consumer right in the sweet spot and hiding behind claims of high hardware costs as the reason they have to make money on licensing and royalty fees... and why the business model stands as it is.

So everyone on here fighting the "2 different" battles is talking about the same thing, just various sides of the coin, some about a theoretical world in which a broken industry was mystica-magically fixed and one where this is the real world, and the industry is the way it is. Far as I've seen, and I'm not ancient or anything, but if something is making a business a ton of money, and they're not in imminent danger of tanking as a corporation, the train just keeps on chugging along.

The comparison of unifying hardware manufacturing for console makers to PC gaming is incorrect. PC Gamers buy component parts, or their "supplier" (Alienware, Dell, etc) buys component parts, and assembles them together to make a rig. This is prohibitively expensive because Alienware isn't running their own fabrication plants and building their rigs from the ground up. Volume production is what drives hardware costs down to the level of consoles, and differentiation and specialization furthers this trend. The console gaming industry would have to undergo an entire paradigm shift, and God only knows where the big three would keep making their money - perhaps becoming publishers or some such - but that's something that's not going to happen any time soon.

But having a unified architecture/API and differentiating fringe features? Yeah, that would benefit the gamers. And the developers. And the publishers. Immensely.

It would just leave the companies that have control over everything empty-handed.

El Edit:
Something I didn't think about at all is the concept of compatibility... I have to believe, though, that if there was a single defined standard of functions/graphics/sound/memory/etc that the hardware of a unified console had to adhere to, and no ability to patch into it, that you could provide this spec to hardware makers for 100% compliance and the spec to game developers for 100% compliance. Having a set understanding of featureset and "horsepower" would assist in making things run on multiple platforms, having no concern for multiple detail levels, texture resolution, scaling of game resources to accomodate for billy-bob trying to run quake 4 on his 486, etc. In an ideal world, the hardware makers wouldn't take shortcuts, the game developers wouldn't be sloppy and take shortcuts, and everyone would get along.

Human nature seems to dictate that the fewer moving parts we have to plan for, the lazier we can be, and the happier everyone stays. Except the guy that pays everyone else to be lazy. ;)

Amen!! Amen!!!

Excellent post!

[AspectVoid]

Anybody else here own... what was that console called? A... oh yeah, DREAMCAST? How good did we all feel when that system lost the "format war" between them and PSX?


Well, given that my favorite genre of games is RPG, I'm glad that the PS1 won. I had 30+ RPGs for my PS1, there were a total of like 4 for the DC. Its the same thing for the PS2 and X-Box this generation. The X-box has like 4 RPGs while the PS2 has dozens. The PS2 is by far my favorite system. As for next generation, well I'll get back to you in a couple of years when the next gen systems have decent sized game libraries.

As for the actual news article, I don't really enjoy playing games online anyway, so I really don't care what Sony does.

[Atorak]

Yeah right. Did you notice Microsoft has a monopoly on PC operating systems? Did they fire everyone working on Windows? Do they not offer support or a knowledgebase? Do they not do updates and patches? Do they remove features from Windows? Did they shut down the Windows website? Do they not make Windows games anymore?

I wouldn't mind if the Ps3 was cancelled. We only need one cutting edge high tech HD console. I'd rather have those developers working on 360 w/live support titles. I've hated Sony ever since my Ps1 and Ps2 both failed as did my sony receiver and tv! I don't want to see the Revolution gone though - Nintendo rules and they are leading in innovation over technology.

Welcome to Evil Avatar my friend. I apologize for the mess, there is sarcasm all over the floor. :)

[bone_matrix]

I'm sorry man but posts like this do nothing to counter common sense that it sucks having to spend THOUSANDS to play a handful of games because of exclusivity contracts.

Ya know, one thing I learned about the internet is that even if we were to get what we want, we will still find something to bitch about. Say you get your unified console, I could see this being you (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2003/08/25) .

We've landed on the moon people so I'm pretty fuckign sure we could come up with a spec or architecture that would result in a common format and hardware that is garunteed to play it regardless of who makes it.

Just because we can bottle a man up into an airtight container doesn't mean we can cure cancer. Hell, it doesn't always work: Apollo 13 didn't make it to the moon, many rockets blow up, and there are also people out there who would argue we even landed on the moon. Just because we should be able to do it, doesn't mean we can.


I would rather pay $500-600 once than $400x3. PC gamers have been doing just fine the last 15 years with our hodgepodge of hardware manufacturers and differing specs.

But PC gaming is more than $600 dollars. If you buy a good to great rig, that would be the $1200 dollars you could have spent on those 3 consoles. But, in just a year or 2, you would have to shell out more cash for a better graphics card, and RAM, and who knows what else. Then, in 3 or 4 years, you need a whole new computer with the better processor, etc. Buy new consoles every 5 or 6 years, and its cheaper. See, having 3 different consoles is cheaper than 1 PC. :D

Disclaimer: This is a funny post (sprinkled with truth), not meant to make you mad, angry, or give you hepres. If it causes one or any of the above, take some time away from the internet. (Goes towards everyone)

[Schnoogs]

Ya know, one thing I learned about the internet is that even if we were to get what we want, we will still find something to bitch about. Say you get your unified console, I could see this being you (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2003/08/25) .



Just because we can bottle a man up into an airtight container doesn't mean we can cure cancer. Hell, it doesn't always work: Apollo 13 didn't make it to the moon, many rockets blow up, and there are also people out there who would argue we even landed on the moon. Just because we should be able to do it, doesn't mean we can.




But PC gaming is more than $600 dollars. If you buy a good to great rig, that would be the $1200 dollars you could have spent on those 3 consoles. But, in just a year or 2, you would have to shell out more cash for a better graphics card, and RAM, and who knows what else. Then, in 3 or 4 years, you need a whole new computer with the better processor, etc. Buy new consoles every 5 or 6 years, and its cheaper. See, having 3 different consoles is cheaper than 1 PC. :D

Disclaimer: This is a funny post (sprinkled with truth), not meant to make you mad, angry, or give you hepres. If it causes one or any of the above, take some time away from the internet. (Goes towards everyone)

Wow...all I can say is wow.

They're called analogies.

Wow.

[kokyunage]

I would rather pay $500-600 once than $400x3. PC gamers have been doing just fine the last 15 years with our hodgepodge of hardware manufacturers and differing specs.

Assuming everything else stays equal, then yes, that math works out. But in REALITY and in history the result is that prices go up. One reason why games have stayed in the 50-60 dollar range for the last 15 years is there is competition. You set the MSRP for you consoles games too high, and people will flock to the different system. Like it or not, but HARDWARE vendors set the prices of games through their first party releases. No publisher would survive releasing Generic Title X for 100 dollars while Mario X by Nintendo came out at 49.99.

In your dream world of a unified console games would probably be 80-100 dollars.

[didragondi]

THe tangents people went on in this thread are amazing-everyone knows Sony is still making the PS3, probably for CHristmas 06 instead of spring.

[dr_wily]

<excellent observations>

now queue up greenapple and his chastising ways..

[Citizen Philip]

I was young, but I remeber when Nintendo had a total gaming monopoly on console systems. I think most people considered them saints for their business practices, since as a monopoly their desire to innovate and improve their services was totally motivated by the competition they had. I believe the story had a happy ending.

I have no idea how a thread about removing something from a website came to the promised land of the benevolent Microsoft corporations handing out golden scrolls with the rules to their publishing and developer cohorts.

I think Krispee Creme donuts have a profound effect on my writing style.

[Eran Hawke]

I suppose the unified game format would be bad for those who want competition between consoles but GOOD for people who like competition in games.

Seriously, once the format is good enough, people will worry about the software (game) side of things.

Think of it like DVDs. Movies come out all the time trying to be the next big thing. Movies compete with each other over content, not ovet the DVD players used to watch them.

Although, if you like to argue over hardware, a unified game platform would mean you have nothing left to argue about and you may have to spend your time actually PLAYING!

[Mrbunchypants]

Well, given that my favorite genre of games is RPG, I'm glad that the PS1 won. I had 30+ RPGs for my PS1, there were a total of like 4 for the DC. Its the same thing for the PS2 and X-Box this generation. The X-box has like 4 RPGs while the PS2 has dozens. The PS2 is by far my favorite system. As for next generation, well I'll get back to you in a couple of years when the next gen systems have decent sized game libraries.

As for the actual news article, I don't really enjoy playing games online anyway, so I really don't care what Sony does.

Well done. This is the whole reason why I take my time and research what games come out for what console. Sure there will be games that come out for all three console but there will also be game that don't. Those "Killer Apps" will be few and far between. So as a consumer I will be less likely to buy those console that have those "killer apps" that I don't like.

And like Lord Dongkey said Human nature seems to dictate that the fewer moving parts we have to plan for, the lazier we can be, and the happier everyone stays. Except the guy that pays everyone else to be lazy. I'm lazy. So there no way I'm going to spend a ton of money on a system that I'm only going to use a few time for a few games. I'll just rent. ;)

Ps: I really am lazy I'm at work not working..... :D :D :D

[Eran Hawke]

I don't really enjoy playing games online anyway, so I really don't care what Sony does.But, you have Guild Wars info in your signature. Care to revise your statement?

Maybe you are a PlayStation fan and are happy with whatever they give you?

[Morratut]

I think this thread became a bloated rotting corpse of insecurity and hate since about the second post. You maggots just keep eating this stuff up. Maybe you'll grow up to become bright beautiful flies, after this place has been digested down to the bones you can take your leave and move somewhere else.

Cheers.

LOL. I laughed at Kelegacys post too :D

Sorry about this guys. I shouldn't have imagined a single console world and whether it could be good or bad.

I find it funny because on here because we all swarm over the concept and have a good old forum chat about it. I love this site :D

[Reanimated]

Imagine the furor if Sony did cancel the PS3.

Just. Wow.

I (rootkit) could (rootkit) care (rootkit) less.





If that happens, there's a party at my house with free beer and BBQ ribs for all.

[disc]

Some of the posts here lately seem geared only to get the fanboys riled up.

Who ever said people posting news should try to be a bit serious.

How about forcing all posts to go through an 'Editor' before going to the first page?

[fitbabits]

Some of the posts here lately seem geared only to get the fanboys riled up.

Who ever said people posting news should try to be a bit serious.

How about forcing all posts to go through an 'Editor' before going to the first page?
Examples, please.

[Skjef]

Some of the posts here lately seem geared only to get the fanboys riled up.

Who ever said people posting news should try to be a bit serious.

How about forcing all posts to go through an 'Editor' before going to the first page?
I don't mind. Riling people up makes for interesting reading (though not always intelligent discussion), as we've seen.

Personally, I'm not purchasing either the PS3 or the 360 this generation. My PC and my Revolution will serve me just fine, thanks.

[Schnoogs]

Assuming everything else stays equal, then yes, that math works out. But in REALITY and in history the result is that prices go up. One reason why games have stayed in the 50-60 dollar range for the last 15 years is there is competition. You set the MSRP for you consoles games too high, and people will flock to the different system. Like it or not, but HARDWARE vendors set the prices of games through their first party releases. No publisher would survive releasing Generic Title X for 100 dollars while Mario X by Nintendo came out at 49.99.

In your dream world of a unified console games would probably be 80-100 dollars.


Just like DVDs cost $80 and CDs cost $80 and PC games cost $80. Oh wait they don't.

The industry and many believe the high price is due to piracy and used game sales. But what would the developers know.

[Oddmaker]

The PS3 rocks, I'm playing it right now.

[fitbabits]

Personally, I'm not purchasing either the PS3 or the 360 this generation. My PC and my Revolution will serve me just fine, thanks.
No they wont, and don't come one here all holier-than-thou and try to convince us otherwise. :rolleyes:

[fitbabits]

The PS3 rocks, I'm playing it right now.
Dude, that is not your PS3!

[rein]

Just like DVDs cost $80 and CDs cost $80 and PC games cost $80. Oh wait they don't.

The industry and many believe the high price is due to piracy and used game sales. But what would the developers know.

Why do people keep bringing dvd sales into the equation? DVD sales are a secondary market for movies and television shows. Not to mention there are dvd sets that cost well above $80.00. I don't think it cost near as much to produce a music cd as it does a video game. I'm not sure your cost comparison is fair.

Fact is, Sony is not going to do away with the PS3 and my magic eight ball (not crystal) still says we will not see a unified console. :)

[dotbomb]

The are most likely just changing the date or removing it. Hopefully they spruce up that launch line up too. Nothing on it got me very interested.

I just plunked down $2500 on a new computer for work. The nice side benefit is it plays games too. 3x$500 is much less than $2500 last I checked. I maintain having a few consoles to choose from is good for the consumer. Nobody is forcing you to buy all of them but it keeps everyone honest.

[Kelegacy]

This thread is filled with fanboys and retards, and I am prejudiced against both.

[Mason]

Both sides are correct here.

1) A monopoly is only as good or bad as the company that owns it. It can go horribly, or nobody can notice. It is not something that anyone should want, ideally.

2) There's a difference between competition on quality and competition on type. Modern graphics cards compete on quality, all brands play the same games using the same API, and although their nuts and bolts are different, that only matters to the consumer when it comes to IQ and performance.

Consoles compete on type, since they're fundamentally incompatible. If consumers want to play a broad range of games from a generation, they have to multiply their investment in consoles. This is not empowering consumers.

So, refocus your bickering on the fact that not all forms of competition are equal.

Here's the ideal situation: we end up with an open, flexible definition of what a "console game" is for a given generation. This defines the disc type, file system, instruction set, media types, and strongly-defined APIs for sound, networking, input, and graphics. Anyone who wants to can build their own hardware implementing this console design. Publishers all publish to this unified format.

It isn't easy to see a road that gets us there. But that's where we need to be. Having utterly split consoles is weird; it only benefits the companies involved if they really think they have a shot at dominating the whole market. But let's face it, that isn't going to happen, and the consumers get screwed either way.

[fitbabits]

This thread is filled with fanboys and retards, and I am prejudiced against both.
So what am I then? Can I be the local fantard?? :)

[Schnoogs]

Why do people keep bringing dvd sales into the equation? DVD sales are a secondary market for movies and television shows. Not to mention there are dvd sets that cost well above $80.00. I don't think it cost near as much to produce a music cd as it does a video game. I'm not sure your cost comparison is fair.

Fact is, Sony is not going to do away with the PS3 and my magic eight ball (not crystal) still says we will not see a unified console. :)

DVD's represent a common format. It's not like you have to own 4 DVD players just to play your library. And the cost of DVDs isn't dependent on it being a secondary market. If that were the case movies that bombed would costs twice as much as those that did well.

[Neosho]

This thread is filled with fanboys and retards, and I am prejudiced against both.

There's some gold in the muck, but it's few and far between. I'm just staying out of this one...arguing with assassin is like arguing with a brick wall.

Someone: (Valid Points)

Assassin: (OMGS YOUR STUPID/SACASM UBAR RETARDS)

I'm sorry man but posts like this do nothing to counter common sense that it sucks having to spend THOUSANDS to play a handful of games because of exclusivity contracts.

You do realize that it only costs that much because the market bears the cost? There's a solution there if you can connect the dots.

[rein]

DVD's represent a common format. It's not like you have to own 4 DVD players just to play your library. And the cost of DVDs isn't dependent on it being a secondary market. If that were the case movies that bombed would costs twice as much as those that did well.

DVDs represent a common format yes, but just because they are on shiny disk does not make them equal to the video game market. I didn't say the cost of the individual dvd was dependent on it being in a secondary market either. I said it is a secondary market for movies and television shows as a whole. It is, or else we would see many more movies going straight to dvd instead of theater. It's a way to get a little more milk from the cow.

[Schnoogs]

There's some gold in the muck, but it's few and far between. I'm just staying out of this one...arguing with assassin is like arguing with a brick wall.

Someone: (Valid Points)

Assassin: (OMGS YOUR STUPID/SACASM UBAR RETARDS)



You do realize that it only costs that much because the market bears the cost? There's a solution there if you can connect the dots.

No shit einstein...thats why I own ONE console!!! But has that changed the price??!?!?!?! NO!!!!!!!!!!!

Try talking down to someone else....or next time get your facts straight.

[Schnoogs]

DVDs represent a common format yes, but just because they are on shiny disk does not make them equal to the video game market. I didn't say the cost of the individual dvd was dependent on it being in a secondary market either. I said it is a secondary market for movies and television shows as a whole. It is, or else we would see many more movies going straight to dvd instead of theater. It's a way to get a little more milk from the cow.

And again you don't even seem to understand why DVDs were brought up. We're not talking about what is put on the media itself we're talking about the hardware and how there are many manufacturers creating them off of a common spec and format.

Its like manufacturing cups...noone gives a crap what liquid you put in it but almost every cup made is built off of the same common sense spec. Could you imagine having to own a different cup per liquid....a milk cup, orange juice, cup, apple juice cup, coffee cup, tang cup....

It doesnt seem to be sinking in that its practically common sense that its better for the consumer when the only competition comes in the form of manufacturing and not in format.

Its been said numerous times that it sucks that we have Blu-Ray and HDDVD but for some reason people lose all sense of logic and reason and don't apply that same analogy to consoles.

[Neosho]

No shit einstein...thats why I own ONE console!!! But has that changed the price??!?!?!?! NO!!!!!!!!!!!

Try talking down to someone else....or next time get your facts straight.

Ahh, i'm not in the mood to educate you today. Someday you'll look back and figure it out and feel stupid.

[fitbabits]

A small part of me dies each time a thread gets hijacked... :(

[Neosho]

Alright, i'll educate you on one part of this.


So the lesson for the day is that having multiple console platforms means that in order to play the games that we want to we end up spending hundreds more. Thats about as dumb as having to buy a Blu-Ray and an HDDVD player. Most people would agree that having multiple formats (consoles in our case) creates unnecessary cost overhead from having to buy additional hardware,


And here is where you're just dead wrong. If you're willing to wait, then eventually the format will standardize itself. Sure, you early adopters get fucked, but that's what you sign on to when you become an early adoptor.

Solution? Don't buy the console on launch day. Wait till your games come out on your console or on your computer. Problem solved.

Edit: and i just grabbed a random blurb at the end of one of your posts. I can do it to another one if you'd like to see more mistakes in your reasoning. And if you need a real world example, see Beta/VHS.

[Schnoogs]

Ahh, i'm not in the mood to educate you today. Someday you'll look back and figure it out and feel stupid.

Yes...I've just now figured it out. I now know that its actually great that we have 3 consoles and exclusive titles spread out amongst them.

I thank you so much Neosho for pointing out that standardizing formats is a bad thing and I cant wait for more things to be made proprietary.

You rank up there with Chomsky as one of the great minds of the economic world.

[Neosho]

Read the post above yours. Would you like another example?

Edit: Ok...standarized "console".

All of the sudden, games spike to 100$$, then 200$$ because suddenly there's no competition. Game producers realize that with no one else out there making a competing console, they can charge as much as they want for games. Eventually, you're online bitching about how much games cost now and how nice things were back in the day. See how the monopoly is bad?

[Zanzibar]

A small part of me dies each time a thread gets hijacked... :(

Quick - everyone - hijack more threads!!!

(It was the obvious joke. We love ya Fit.)

[rein]

And again you don't even seem to understand why DVDs were brought up.

Yes I do. When you brought up dvds it was in sarcasm to the point that kokyunage made if there were a unified console the cost of games would go up. You brought dvds into it to show that because dvds are unified systems, the cost of the media is still relatively low. I was pointing out that dvds are not in the same ball park as video games because dvds are a secondary outlet for movies and television shows that were already created. Also, you are still wrong to use the sarcasm because there are dvd sets that cost well above the $80 that was mentioned in your sarcasm.

[Schnoogs]

Alright, i'll educate you on one part of this.



And here is where you're just dead wrong. If you're willing to wait, then eventually the format will standardize itself. Sure, you early adopters get fucked, but that's what you sign on to when you become an early adoptor.

Solution? Don't buy the console on launch day. Wait till your games come out on your console or on your computer. Problem solved.

Thats your wisdom? You're kidding me right???!?!?

Have you even read this thread. We're talking about them adopting a standard. You disagree with this by arguing that we should wait for them to adopt a standard.

THATS THE SAME F'ING THING!!!

You are a genious...

Assassin: "Consoles should be standardized"
Neosho: "You need to be educated"
Assassin: "Oh?"
Neosho: "If you dont buy consoles they will be standardized"
Assassin: "But thats what we're saying. They should be standardized"

[Schnoogs]

Yes I do. When you brought up dvds it was in sarcasm to the point that kokyunage made if there were a unified console the cost of games would go up. You brought dvds into it to show that because dvds are unified systems, the cost of the media is still relatively low. I was pointing out that dvds are not in the same ball park as video games because dvds are a secondary outlet for movies and television shows that were already created. Also, you are still wrong to use the sarcasm because there are dvd sets that cost well above the $80 that was mentioned in your sarcasm.

Cracks me up when people try to tell me why I said something...are you that voice in my head.

Actually I brought it up to illustrate a common format and how the competition exists amongst players.

I think I know a bit more about what I said and why I said it so try reading back a few pages when I first brought it up.

[fitbabits]

Quick - everyone - hijack more threads!!!

(It was the obvious joke. We love ya Fit.)
That's nice. :)

I was wondering who would be first!

[Neosho]

Thats your wisdom? You're kidding me right???!?!?

Have you even read this thread. We're talking about them adopting a standard. You disagree with this by arguing that we should wait for them to adopt a standard.

THATS THE SAME F'ING THING!!!

You are a genious...

Assassin: "Consoles should be standardized"
Neosho: "You need to be educated"
Assassin: "Oh?"
Neosho: "If you dont buy consoles will be standardized"
Assassin: "But thats what we're saying. They should be standardized"

You're saying we should force a standard on the market. I'm saying we should let the market fight it out until we discover what the better/more cost efficent/better at getting stupid people to buy their shit company comes out on top. Instead of forcing the market to come to a standard though, you keep buying all 3 consoles, you keep buying those 2 games for your 3 consoles, and you continue the downward spiral.

I don't buy consoles, so i don't give a shit. I just laugh when people act all superior because their xbox360 can play NFS:MW and it looks "pretty"...

Edit: You are damn good at reading and not reading into the meaning though. Congradulations.

[Schnoogs]

Read the post above yours. Would you like another example?

Edit: Ok...standarized "console".

All of the sudden, games spike to 100$$, then 200$$ because suddenly there's no competition. Game producers realize that with no one else out there making a competing console, they can charge as much as they want for games. Eventually, you're online bitching about how much games cost now and how nice things were back in the day. See how the monopoly is bad?

You just dont get it do you. You don't even understand what we're arguing about.

Try reading the thread and then post.

Using your stupid logic DVDs would cost $200 because there is no competition to the format.

[Schnoogs]

You're saying we should force a standard on the market. I'm saying we should let the market fight it out until we discover what the better/more cost efficent/better at getting stupid people to buy their shit company comes out on top. Instead of forcing the market to come to a standard though, you keep buying all 3 consoles, you keep buying those 2 games for your 3 consoles, and you continue the downward spiral.

I don't buy consoles, so i don't give a shit. I just laugh when people act all superior because their xbox360 can play NFS:MW and it looks "pretty"...

Edit: You are damn good at reading and not reading into the meaning though. Congradulations.

I dont buy them either...try reading first before you argue with someone.

I am holding out til they adopt a common format...get a clue and stop arguing points that I'm not in violation of.

[Neosho]

You just dont get it do you. You don't even understand what we're arguing about.

Try reading the thread and then post.

Using your stupid logic DVDs would cost $200 because there is no competition to the format.

Wrong, because things arn't produced straight to DVD, the vast majority of the time. DVD sales are an addition to already made shows/movies. It's not the primary means of selling shows, unlike games.

[rein]

Cracks me up when people try to tell me why I said something...are you that voice in my head.

Actually I brought it up to illustrate a common format and how the competition exists amongst players.

I think I know a bit more about what I said and why I said it so try reading back a few pages when I first brought it up.


Here you go all summed up to what I was responding to.


In your dream world of a unified console games would probably be 80-100 dollars.

Just like DVDs cost $80 and CDs cost $80 and PC games cost $80. Oh wait they don't.

clear enough?... .and no... I pitty that poor voice in your head. He has to work overtime. :D

[fitbabits]

Neosho, Assassin, rein - will you three please get a room? :rolleyes:

[Neosho]

There are 2-3 games for the PS3 that I will want to play (since i'm a gamer which has nothing to do with will power). At the same time there will be most likely 2-3 for the 360 and 2-3 for the Revolution.

Using grade school math that amounts to...

9 games x $50 = $450
+ $400
+ $500
+ $250

for a total of $1600

Now if there was say a standard console platform I could buy just one and those same 9 games and that would cost...

9 games x $50 = $450
+ $400

for a total of $850

Hmmmm....last time I checked $850 < $1600.

So the lesson for the day is that having multiple console platforms means that in order to play the games that we want to we end up spending hundreds more. Thats about as dumb as having to buy a Blu-Ray and an HDDVD player. Most people would agree that having multiple formats (consoles in our case) creates unnecessary cost overhead from having to buy additional hardware


To go back to one of your earlier posts...is there some other "I" that you're refering to?

[Neosho]

Neosho, Assassin, rein - will you three please get a room? :rolleyes:
Hush you, i'm postwhoring here. :laugh:

[Schnoogs]

Wrong, because things arn't produced straight to DVD, the vast majority of the time. DVD sales are an addition to already made shows/movies. It's not the primary means of selling shows, unlike games.

You still dont get it.....thats not why DVDs are priced the way they are. We've already shot this down by pointing out movies that flop and movies that go straight to video. Plus you can use CDs as an analogy...the list goes on

Don't bother responding...you are officially a moron in my book.

[Schnoogs]

Here you go all summed up to what I was responding to.





clear enough?... .and no... I pitty that poor voice in your head. He has to work overtime. :D

Thats not when I first brought DVD up...I'm sure you were all excited when you quoted that but now you look like an idiot since DVDs were brought up before that.

[rein]

Neosho, Assassin, rein - will you three please get a room? :rolleyes:

Only if you will join us. ;)

[Schnoogs]

To go back to one of your earlier posts...is there some other "I" that you're refering to?


What are you drooling about?

[fitbabits]

Only if you will join us. ;)
Now there's an invitation! KY is not just the state abbreviation for Kentucky!

[rein]

Thats not when I first brought DVD up...I'm sure you were all excited when you quoted that but now you look like an idiot since DVDs were brought up before that.


I'm not going back to check. One because this whole fucking thread is lame. Two, because we are going to make Fitbabits head explode. Doesn't matter anyway because that is the quote I was responding to and the one I quoted when I responded. Did you miss that part?

[Neosho]

You still dont get it.....thats not why DVDs are priced the way they are. We've already shot this down by pointing out movies that flop and movies that go straight to video. Plus you can use CDs as an analogy...the list goes on

Don't bother responding...you are officially a moron in my book.
The cost to put something on dvd is insignificant. Compared to the production costs of a movie, the cost to toss out a print run is utterly insignificant. Using obsolete technology as a base is hardly a good idea when you're talking about cutting edge formats as well.

[Neosho]

What are you drooling about?

You're not buying 3 consoles? What the fuck are you bitching about then?

So i can spell it out in slowspeak for you...Your post, the one i quoted, was about how you are complaining about how if you want exclusive titles, you have to buy all 3 consoles. Only issue is, you don't. All you have to do is wait. If you standardized the console, the quality of games would drop.

[Schnoogs]

I'm not going back to check. One because this whole fucking thread is lame. Two, because we are going to make Fitbabits head explode. Doesn't matter anyway because that is the quote I was responding to and the one I quoted when I responded. Did you miss that part?

Again...you must have been excited when you wrote this but if you recall YOU were implying that DVDs were brought up to illustrate price when in fact they were brought up because of their format...I tried to explain to you that they were FIRST brought up for this reason and you wanted nothing to do with it.

You can waste time arguing the origin of DVDs in this thread while the rest of us discuss more important things.

Rein: "I wonder when the word because first entered this thread??"

[Schnoogs]

You're not buying 3 consoles? What the fuck are you bitching about then?

HAHAHAHAHAHAH!

It was an example!!! Like a 3rd grade math problem!!

Next time I'll use Dick and Mary so you can read along!!

HAHAHAHAH!

Dick has 3 apples...mary has 2....how many apples will they have if they combine them?

that was the best laugh I've had all day

[Schnoogs]

If you standardized the console, the quality of games would drop.

just like the quality of DVDs has dropped...and the quality of CDs

Keep trying!!

[Neosho]

HAHAHAHAHAHAH!

It was an example!!! Like a 3rd grade math problem!!

Next time I'll use Dick and Mary so you can read along!!

HAHAHAHAH!

Dick has 3 apples...mary has 2....how many apples will they have if they combine them?

I'm sorry if i don't intimatly check up on your console purchases before i read each thread on EA. I assume that if someone's bitching about spending a lot of money on consoles, they must spend a lot of money on consoles. Am i out of line here? I think not.

[Zanzibar]

Don't bother responding...you are officially a moron in my book.

I always find these kinds of posts the most telling. It always lets me know that I've scored a few points and they don't want to defend their indefensible position any longer.

[Neosho]

just like the quality of DVDs has dropped...and the quality of CDs

Keep trying!!

It's not the DVD's we're worried about, it's the fucking content. Jesus, you're slow.

[Schnoogs]

I'm sorry if i don't intimatly check up on your console purchases before i read each thread on EA. I assume that if someone's bitching about spending a lot of money on consoles, they must spend a lot of money on consoles. Am i out of line here? I think not.

Your logic is what's out of line to be frank

[Schnoogs]

It's not the DVD's we're worried about, it's the fucking content. Jesus, you're slow.

Why in gods name would the content change?

Please actually have something smart to say!!

[Neosho]

Your logic is what's out of line to be frank

I'm going to agree with zanzibar here, and say that when you start rambling about some inside joke that only you know, you've run out of things to say and are just hoping that i'll stfu before you start really looking like an idiot.

[rein]

Again...you must have been excited when you wrote this but if you recall YOU were implying that DVDs were brought up to illustrate price when in fact they were brought up because of their format...I tried to explain to you that they were FIRST brought up for this reason and you wanted nothing to do with it.

You can waste time arguing the origin of DVDs in this thread while the rest of us discuss more important things.

Rein: "I wonder when the word because first entered this thread??"

Dude, buy a fucking clue. I re-quoted the shit you said about price you fucking moron. Do you not read your own post? After this post I am done with this thread. Like I said, the entire thing is lame any way. Sony will make a PS3, remember the original news story?

I figure out how you win arguements. You just keep going until the other parties get so bored they move on. Good strategy. From this point on I will refer to you a Duracel... ...you just keep fucking going... ..and going.. and going.

[Schnoogs]

Dude, buy a fucking clue. I re-quoted the shit you said about price you fucking moron. Do you not read your own post? After this post I am done with this thread. Like I said, the entire thing is lame any way. Sony will make a PS3, remember the original news story?

I figure out how you win arguements. You just keep going until the other parties get so bored they move on. Good strategy. From this point on I will refer to you a Duracel... ...you just keep fucking going... ..and going.. and going.

again...was that the first post DVD appeared in??

Do you not understand what FIRST means?

I actually win arguments by using logic and reason with kids such as yourself.

[Neosho]

Why in gods name would the content change?

Please actually have something smart to say!!

Let us look, for a moment, at EA(The bad one). They now have the money to essentially standardize development, and equally develop for all the consoles. The games they are now producing, overall, have taken a huge hit in quality. Look at the B2 interface. Look at the decline of madden. All of these things are because they ended up standardizing console development in house.

Edit: and for the leap, because i'm not sure you're going to be able to make it on your own, this is why monopolies are bad...hell, EA doesn't even have a full monopoly on develpment yet, and they're still releasing absolute shit.

[Schnoogs]

Let us look, for a moment, at EA(The bad one). They now have the money to essentially standardize development, and equally develop for all the consoles. The games they are now producing, overall, have taken a huge hit in quality. Look at the B2 interface. Look at the decline of madden. All of these things are because they ended up standardizing console development in house.

If EA only had to create games for one consoles they wouldnt have to make sacrfices to their codebase to ensure compatibility. They could put all their effort into exploiting the full featureset of the common console format.

If anything your post proved the downfalls of having multiple consoles and trying to support all 3 or 4 of them.

Why do you think some of the best games are the ones that come out exclusively...because those developers can focus on ONE spec.

[steinfoot]

Let us look, for a moment, at EA(The bad one). They now have the money to essentially standardize development, and equally develop for all the consoles. The games they are now producing, overall, have taken a huge hit in quality. Look at the B2 interface. Look at the decline of madden. All of these things are because they ended up standardizing console development in house.

Edit: and for the leap, because i'm not sure you're going to be able to make it on your own, this is why monopolies are bad...hell, EA doesn't even have a full monopoly on develpment yet, and they're still releasing absolute shit.


HAHA!! exactly, they had to standardize to maximize PROFIT, not quality, across all 3 platforms. Perhaps they 'could' make better games if they were concentrating on one unified platform and not 3 different ones.

[Zanzibar]

I hate it when threads get to the point of participants abandoning actual debate and instead start posting because they're trying to not let the other one have the last word. Might as well be 'I know you are, but what am I?'

Ass, as you've probably guessed by now, without competition, we get crappy products like EA's Madden 2006, which by most people's reckoning is still inferior to the NFL2K5 product that died when EA bought the NFL license. However, there will be competition between game developers and publishers for different genres - we won't be getting KiddieMallLand 6 as our only choice in gaming.

The DVD issue is a non-issue. The content for DVDs is almost always paid for by the cinematic release of the movies involved, or in the case of "Desperate Housewives - Season 1" and the like, by TV advertising revenues to pay for production. DVDs are cheap because they're competing with other DVDs to get bought.

We're going to start seeing the same thing in video games; just look at Majesco - they're going to abandon full-scale game development for cheapo games for cheapo prices.

[Neosho]

If EA only had to create games for one consoles they wouldnt have to make sacrfices to their codebase to ensure compatibility. They could put all their effort into exploiting the full featureset of the common console format.

If anything your post proved the downfalls of having multiple consoles and trying to support all 3 or 4 of them.

It's not the hardware that's dragging them back though. It's not like the games really look that bad or anything, it's the actual gameplay that's gone to shit.

This is what i'm saying. When a monopoly occurs in the gaming market, you will have a loss of quality. It may come out in graphics, or gameplay, but it will come out. And i would rather not, on the few times that i am playing a console, have everything dragged down by the fact that one monopoly is dragging the quality of games down overall.

Basically, once the monopoly starts, things may be good for a little while, but eventually they will realize that they can be lazy because there's no reason to push when everyone's working on a level playing field. How people fail to understand that a level playing field is oftentimes a bad thing is beyond me.

[Reanimated]

This thread is filled with fanboys and retards, and I am prejudiced against both.



I believe this phenomenon is called "self loathing".

[Neosho]

HAHA!! exactly, they had to standardize to maximize PROFIT, not quality, across all 3 platforms. Perhaps they 'could' make better games if they were concentrating on one unified platform and not 3 different ones.

And you think that they'd start maximizing quality just because suddenly there's one console? look at BF2, again, and say that with a straight face...

Edit: In my book, a producer will always attempt to maximize profits. I agree with what zanzibar says. However, if there's only one console out there, eventually a producer will own everyone, unless it includes some kind of online distribution, a la steam. And then, ever game you play will be brought down by the fact that the producer is only allowing so much money/whatever in to each team.

[Schnoogs]

The DVD issue is a non-issue. The content for DVDs is almost always paid for by the cinematic release of the movies involved, or in the case of "Desperate Housewives - Season 1" and the like, by TV advertising revenues to pay for production. DVDs are cheap because they're competing with other DVDs to get bought..

actually you're dead wrong. Try hanging out at websites like RottenTomatoes or BoxOfficeMojo and you'll understand that most movies depend heavily on DVD sales.

And again you've made the ignorant assumption that DVDs were brought up because of their cost....this is becoming tedious. DVDs were brought up because the format was specified by a consortium of MANUFACTURERS and then the competition existed at the manufacturing level. Why this has to be continously explained doesnt speak well for the intelligence level of the members here.

And your comment about EA is again dead wrong...competition at the developer level is good...compeition at the console level is not. If we had one console spec that was manufactured by Toshiba, Panasonic, Samsung, Sony, NEC,etc they would compete to have the lowest price. Then the developers could compete amongst themselves to create the best game. If EA's sports games suck then noone will buy them because the consumer is free to buy the other sports games for that common console.

Yawn

[Schnoogs]

And you think that they'd start maximizing quality just because suddenly there's one console? look at BF2, again, and say that with a straight face...

They would have to einstein because if they didnt the other game developers would steal their business.

Thats why people said "hmmm should I buy Quake 4 or FEAR???"

Quake 4 was subpar so its sales hurt...this is called a free market.

[steinfoot]

It's not the hardware that's dragging them back though. It's not like the games really look that bad or anything, it's the actual gameplay that's gone to shit.

This is what i'm saying. When a monopoly occurs in the gaming market, you will have a loss of quality. It may come out in graphics, or gameplay, but it will come out. And i would rather not, on the few times that i am playing a console, have everything dragged down by the fact that one monopoly is dragging the quality of games down overall.

Basically, once the monopoly starts, things may be good for a little while, but eventually they will realize that they can be lazy because there's no reason to push when everyone's working on a level playing field. How people fail to understand that a level playing field is oftentimes a bad thing is beyond me.


right right right. how any PS1's and PS2's has sony sold? MILLIONS, they have a clear market share, and in many ways a monopoly of the gaming industry. So by your logic there arent any good games for those systems anymore. Quality has really gone down hill.. yes right.. (gt4, god of war, GTA, and on and on)

all this blabbering about quality going down is retarded. developers want to make more money, how do they do that? sell more games. how do they sell games? Make better ones, that us gamers want to buy. that simple.

[Neosho]

And your comment about EA is again dead wrong...competition at the developer level is good...compeition at the console level is not. If we had one console spec that was manufactured by Toshiba, Panasonic, Samsung, Sony, NEC,etc they would compete to have the lowest price. Then the developers could compete amongst themselves to create the best game. If EA's sports games suck then noone will buy them because the consumer is free to buy the other sports games for that common console.

In your nifty ideal world, yes, that would be true.

However, the problem here is that the producers of the games are the ones that will control development in the end. With the cost of develping for a console so high, there's no way in hell that any startup company will be able to make games for that standard at the level that gamers expect. Thusly, producers will say what goes, and they're notoriously bad at recognizing what's a good game concept and what's a bad game concept. See Madden.

Also, given that the producers control the release day and how much time is spent working on the games, you end up with decent games (BF2) with horrible interfaces. Also not a good solution.

While a standardized format would be nice in the short run, in the long run the monopolies that would occur would bring down the quality of games.

[Kamalot]

A small part of me dies each time a thread gets hijacked... :(
Not much of you left, eh?

"He is more machine now than man. Twisted and evil"
;-)

[Neosho]

They would have to einstein because if they didnt the other game developers would steal their business.

Thats why people said "hmmm should I buy Quake 4 or FEAR???"

Quake 4 was subpar so its sales hurt...this is called a free market.

The problem here isn't in the developers, who are motivated to make good games. It's that when you only have one method for distribution, (Publishers) you're going to end up losing quality.

[Kamalot]

all this blabbering about quality going down is retarded. developers want to make more money, how do they do that? sell more games. how do they sell games? Make better ones, that us gamers want to buy. that simple.
YES!

The message you have entered is too short.

[Neosho]

right right right. how any PS1's and PS2's has sony sold? MILLIONS, they have a clear market share, and in many ways a monopoly of the gaming industry. So by your logic there arent any good games for those systems anymore. Quality has really gone down hill.. yes right.. (gt4, god of war, GTA, and on and on)

all this blabbering about quality going down is retarded. developers want to make more money, how do they do that? sell more games. how do they sell games? Make better ones, that us gamers want to buy. that simple.

There's no monopoly though...there's plenty of competing consoles out there, with tons of quality games out there for them. The point i'm making is that once the format standardizes, the biggest of producers will buy or force out of the market all of the smaller ones, and developers will be hampered by the lack of ability to make the games that they want to make. They will be forced to conform to the publisher's desires, and that will end up screwing over the quality of games.

[Schnoogs]

In your nifty ideal world, yes, that would be true.

However, the problem here is that the producers of the games are the ones that will control development in the end. With the cost of develping for a console so high, there's no way in hell that any startup company will be able to make games for that standard at the level that gamers expect. Thusly, producers will say what goes, and they're notoriously bad at recognizing what's a good game concept and what's a bad game concept. See Madden.

Also, given that the producers control the release day and how much time is spent working on the games, you end up with decent games (BF2) with horrible interfaces. Also not a good solution.

While a standardized format would be nice in the short run, in the long run the monopolies that would occur would bring down the quality of games.


Nothing you said contradicts the idea that if EAs games suck then consumers will buy from the other big developers whose games dont suck.

Thats capitalism man....look at cars...american cars suck...so consumers started buying brands that didnt...american manufacturers were forced to improve and sure enough they have.

[Schnoogs]

The problem here isn't in the developers, who are motivated to make good games. It's that when you only have one method for distribution, (Publishers) you're going to end up losing quality.

Competition amongst publishers...keep trying. You just dont seem to understand that compeition is alive and well even in a world with a common console.

Who you gonna blame next...first it was the producers...now its the publishers...whats next?

[Schnoogs]

There's no monopoly though...there's plenty of competing consoles out there, with tons of quality games out there for them. The point i'm making is that once the format standardizes, the biggest of producers will buy or force out of the market all of the smaller ones, and developers will be hampered by the lack of ability to make the games that they want to make. They will be forced to conform to the publisher's desires, and that will end up screwing over the quality of games.

How can they force them out?

[kokyunage]

I figure out how you win arguements. You just keep going until the other parties get so bored they move on. Good strategy. From this point on I will refer to you a Duracel... ...you just keep fucking going... ..and going.. and going.

LOL. That is signature material there my friend.

[Neosho]

Nothing you said contradicts the idea that if EAs games suck then consumers will buy from the other big developers whose games dont suck.

Thats capitalism man....look at cars...american cars suck...so consumers started buying brands that didnt...american manufacturers were forced to improve and sure enough they have.

Because eventually one group will own the market. It's the nature of capitalism.

However, and i guess it comes down to this at the end:

I believe that competition at the hardware level is good because it forces innovation. Basically, in my mind, if you made a standard 10 years ago, we'd still be using CD's now because it would not be cost effective to move forward because the standard would still be limiting your ablility to take advantage of the new hardware.

[Neosho]

How can they force them out?


uhh...money? buyout, pricegouging...so on and so forth?

Edit: Aww he left.

[Mason]

Because eventually one group will own the market. It's the nature of capitalism.

However, and i guess it comes down to this at the end:

I believe that competition at the hardware level is good because it forces innovation. Basically, in my mind, if you made a standard 10 years ago, we'd still be using CD's now because it would not be cost effective to move forward because the standard would still be limiting your ablility to take advantage of the new hardware.

Jesus, kids. You can still have competition on the hardware level without having competition when it comes to disc format, file system, instruction set, and API. You might've noticed these things called PCs. They can have a lot of different hardware, yet the software runs on them just fine.

There are large practical problems with standardizing the APIs and formats for console games and yet allowing everyone to do their own thing with hardware. It'd take a lot of clout to prevent fragmentation. But in the end, the benefits would outweigh the costs for everyone except console makers. The downside here is that the console makers are 800lb gorillas, and the rest of the industry isn't coordinated enough to try and enforce a standard set of formats and APIs for any given console generation.

For consumers and developers, the best thing in the world would be for consumers to get to pick a given vendor's version of a universal console, which was collaboratively designed by the major console vendors. You'd still have competition on price and quality, yet you'd be assured of being able to play all of a generation's games with a single console purchase.

This is the dream. No one expects it to be reality any time soon, as it isn't in the benefit of the few parties who get to decide on this sort of thing, but it is still a good dream.

[Citizen Philip]

Neosho and Assassin! You both are on a time out!

Go get your apples from your lunchboxes, sit in opposite corners and face the wall. You may quietly eat your apples and contemplate what you've done.

That is all.

[absolut taco]

So you're saying that 4 shots a day is fine? And in fact may even be beneficial? Bonus.
I drink 4 shots of espresso every morning. Still waiting for my Diabetes to go away! ;)

[dr_wily]

I drink 4 shots of espresso every morning. Still waiting for my Diabetes to go away! ;)

ahhh NOW we are back on track!

those last oh, 10 fucking pages of yimmeryammer is pretty damn funny..
id give it 3 LOLs / 4 LOLs

all this and no player 1.. amazing.

[fitbabits]

I drink 4 shots of espresso every morning. Still waiting for my Diabetes to go away! ;)
I think if I were to have four shots of espresso every morning I'd be climbing the walls. Of the bathroom stall while my ass decides just when it's going to stop spitting out runny shit.

[Kelegacy]

I drink 4 shots of espresso every morning. Still waiting for my Diabetes to go away! ;)
People don't realize that espresso has less caffeine than regular coffee, about 2/3 less. Take 4 shots of black coffee, you'll feel it more.

[mister_slim]

Didn't we learn anything from the CD-I?

Anyway, I was going to tell you guys exactly how stupid this thread is, but my meter blew out on the second page. Readings are off the scale.

[fitbabits]

People don't realize that espresso has less caffeine than regular coffee, about 2/3 less. Take 4 shots of black coffee, you'll feel it more.
My asshole just involuntarily puckered up! :o

[Kelegacy]

My asshole just involuntarily puckered up! :o
Congratufuckinglations, fitbabits. You managed to gross me out. ME!

[rein]

since this topic is back to coffee and completely void of the original news post... ..does anyone have a senseo machine? I do and have gotten used to the coffee for a quick fix. However, I was wondering if anyone else has noticed how "sticky" the coffee feels? I used to not drink coffee but lately between the Senseo, regular coffee maker, expresso machine and places like Starbucks/Joe Muggs I am drinking about 4-5 cups a day. Not sure how long my body will support this habbit.

[Neosho]

Aww...time out? Do i have to? I was just bored at work...and poking the troll.

On topic though, i don't drink coffee...does that make me a mutant?

[Kelegacy]

since this topic is back to coffee and completely void of the original news post... ..does anyone have a senseo machine? I do and have gotten used to the coffee for a quick fix. However, I was wondering if anyone else has noticed how "sticky" the coffee feels? I used to not drink coffee but lately between the Senseo, regular coffee maker, expresso machine and places like Starbucks/Joe Muggs I am drinking about 4-5 cups a day. Not sure how long my body will support this habbit.

I use my "Free" Gevalia coffee maker, which produces coffee for one or two people. It doesn't have a pot, but shoots the liquid down into 16ish oz. covered mugs (goes through a tiny hole in the lid so you can just grab it and go if in a hurry for work like I am most mornings) and it makes some of the best coffee I've ever tasted. Beats going to Dunkin Donuts or Starbucks, that's for sure. This morning, at work, I declared to the entire office that I had made the perfect cup of coffee. Sometimes I might add a bit too much half and half or I may put in just a pinch too much ground coffee...but this morning was absolutely perfect. I don't believe I did any work at my desk until I finished that entire thermos. I was practically making love to the cannister.

It's probably the worst present I could have ever received. Now I'm once more addicted to coffee. Before I used a piece of shit 20 buck Black and Decker model I received free from some guy at college, and I was using some terrible coffee like Maxwell House with it. Absolute swill coffee to begin with, made worse by a crappy maker. Now I'm in bliss and couldn't be happier to wake up in the morning, like I had had multiple nocturnal emissions upon my bed sheets the night prior.

[Neosho]

Now I'm in bliss and couldn't be happier to wake up in the morning, like I had had multiple nocturnal emissions upon my bed sheets the night prior.

...Oh Kelegacy. Oh Kelegacy.

[bobbler]

Are you people really this dumb?

[mister_slim]

Are you people really this dumb?
I'm assuming that's rhetorical. I think the evidence speaks for itself.

[Schnoogs]

Aww...time out? Do i have to? I was just bored at work...and poking the troll.

On topic though, i don't drink coffee...does that make me a mutant?

Stop poking yourself.

[Subbacultcha]

My asshole just involuntarily puckered up! :o

SULU: Captain, the sensors indicate the presence of awkward homoerotic humour...

[Neosho]

Stop poking yourself.
...ZING! Seriously, i felt that all over the internet. I do find it amusing that you don't have anything to say besides make juvenile comments.

[saran_js]

hey hey... if i post to this retarded topic, will it increase my posting number by 10 ?

[Schnoogs]

...ZING! Seriously, i felt that all over the internet. I do find it amusing that you don't have anything to say besides make juvenile comments.


Right dude...after your 900 comments in which you established that you're an idiot when it comes to basic economic theory.

You were pretty much universally shot down in your silly "its great having to pay for 3 consoles" argument.

The icing on the cake was your EA example which in fact proved OUR argument that having too many consoles is bad for the gamer AND the developer.

Perhaps tossing you a jeuvenile comment is a consolation prize for the idiocy you displayed thus permantly tarnishing your intellectual credibility.

You'll most likely read this tonight since you're busy sitting in your 6th grade classroom right now ;) I guess they teach economics and logic in 7th!