7th July 2007, 10:08 PM
Hah... :)
Some people still think that the PS3 will eventually recover, somehow, but I very much doubt it. The problem is that as things go along it gets harder and harder to make a recovery... sure, right now the PS2 is the console getting most of the "largest market" titles to a large extent (with some on the 360), but those will eventually move somewhere, and it won't be the PS3 at this rate that's for sure. I wonder how long it will be until the general gaming public really realizes that the PS3 won't be the console to buy if you want the kind of mix of games you got on the PS2... right now a lot of people know that, sure,but I think the thinking is like "if not Sony, who?" because of the stereotypes of Nintendo's audience, DS/Wii efforts notwithstanding. That has been slowly changing ever since E3 last year and the DS's success, but it's not all the way yet, and the fact that the Wii's game lineup is still so thin while the PS2 still gets a lot of the mass-market or niche third party titles says something. The PS3 will not get those games as it is now. There are many reasons why consoles sell, but the games available on that platform are obviously a huge part of that, and Sony... I mean, the PS3 has so little available AND there's not a lot to look forward to for some time to come! I know that all three major systems are having a down period this summer, releases-wise (and they all definitely are), as is common in summer, but Sony is by far the worst off because of it... it's like with the PSP. When the perception (and to a large degree the reality) is that there are no games for the thing, and the company is doing little to change that perception, why should third parties go developing games for it? Hopes that MGS4 (this holiday season) or the FFXIII games (next year, hopefully) will change things? Isn't that called "probably too late"? :)
As for the 360... in that case, the "it's for FPS fans" stereotype isn't much wrong, I think... :) and MS hasn't done much of anything to change that. I mean, what's this year's big game? Another FPS. It's also too expensive. I mean, Microsoft... your sales are below expectations, who knows how many of that "11.6 million" are replacements for the innumerable broken systems, and yet the price is still $400... sure, Halo 3 will sell systems, but it really, really needs a price cut. And more good non-FPS games.
Anyway... it's definitely shaping up as a very odd generation, that's for sure. I mean, the leader (momentum wise) is the Wii, which has graphics barely better than the last-gen consoles had and is aiming at nongamers and casual gamers before hardcore gamers to a large degree (well, all three markets really, but those additional resources that are going into casual games have to come from somewhere I'd think...), and the other two systems are both faltering despite long lists of big upcoming games... if there is a lesson here, above all I'd say that it is "stop overestimating the will of the people to pay large amounts for videogame consoles". I know it was over a year ago, but the overnight 180 degree shift in PS3 public opinion from the minute before the price announcement to the minute after it was truly astounding... and it's stuck. And both Sony and MS, in search of less losses, have stuck to their losing high-price strategies...
Of course, MS is kind of stuck after stuff like this extra billion dollars in "oops our production quality is HORRIBLE" costs, but still. There should have been a price cut by now. Of course, on the other hand I don't think that a $100 price cut would do much for the PS3 (it'd need a $300 price cut and a lot of good games due out yesterday for it to do THAT), but still... if that got MS to also drop its prices... (I'd say Nintendo too, but with this level of success they can afford to ignore price drops from the competition unless their sales slow down to the point where you can actually go into a store and reliably find a Wii... :)), but still.
I mean, I want Nintendo to win, no question, but graphics are nice too... good graphics are nice. I like how nice games look on my new PC compared to the old one... Compared to gameplay graphics don't really MATTER, but they are nice, and many developers will want to make (and gamers will want to play) games on powerful hardware (that the Wii doesn't have). More importantly for third parties, though, the huge power disparity makes PS3/360/Wii games hard to do without massively cutting back on the Wii version, and that's a problem for them. The real question is, once the PS2 market dries up and they can't rely on PS2/Wii multiconsole games with additional wiimote control options in the Wii edition, what happens? Will the large size of the Wii market give it the third party games, or will multisystem PC/PS3/360 games be more prevalent simply because they work better on multiple systems... I expect the Wii to end up with a lot of exclusives, and third party games on it will be profitable simply because of the size of the market (and lower costs to make Wii games),but still, it must be a tricky decision for them. Still, if the Wii does as well as it's shaping up to they will have no choice but to make Wii versions of a lot of games, even if they are cut back compared to the PS3 and 360 versions. Good for control innovation (Wiimote), bad for graphics. Oh well... it's not like Nintendo had a choice, given that the alternative was presumably to go stupid and run after the same idiotic "people WANT $400-$600 consoles!" phantom that Microsoft and Sony are chasing. :)
Really the obvious answer is "just own multiple platforms then!" but costs are so high this generation... a lot of people can't afford that, I'm sure.
On another note, after playing the PS3 in a storedemo, I will say that I still hate the Playstation controller. :) Virtua Fighter 5 (demo) seemed pretty cool though...
Some people still think that the PS3 will eventually recover, somehow, but I very much doubt it. The problem is that as things go along it gets harder and harder to make a recovery... sure, right now the PS2 is the console getting most of the "largest market" titles to a large extent (with some on the 360), but those will eventually move somewhere, and it won't be the PS3 at this rate that's for sure. I wonder how long it will be until the general gaming public really realizes that the PS3 won't be the console to buy if you want the kind of mix of games you got on the PS2... right now a lot of people know that, sure,but I think the thinking is like "if not Sony, who?" because of the stereotypes of Nintendo's audience, DS/Wii efforts notwithstanding. That has been slowly changing ever since E3 last year and the DS's success, but it's not all the way yet, and the fact that the Wii's game lineup is still so thin while the PS2 still gets a lot of the mass-market or niche third party titles says something. The PS3 will not get those games as it is now. There are many reasons why consoles sell, but the games available on that platform are obviously a huge part of that, and Sony... I mean, the PS3 has so little available AND there's not a lot to look forward to for some time to come! I know that all three major systems are having a down period this summer, releases-wise (and they all definitely are), as is common in summer, but Sony is by far the worst off because of it... it's like with the PSP. When the perception (and to a large degree the reality) is that there are no games for the thing, and the company is doing little to change that perception, why should third parties go developing games for it? Hopes that MGS4 (this holiday season) or the FFXIII games (next year, hopefully) will change things? Isn't that called "probably too late"? :)
As for the 360... in that case, the "it's for FPS fans" stereotype isn't much wrong, I think... :) and MS hasn't done much of anything to change that. I mean, what's this year's big game? Another FPS. It's also too expensive. I mean, Microsoft... your sales are below expectations, who knows how many of that "11.6 million" are replacements for the innumerable broken systems, and yet the price is still $400... sure, Halo 3 will sell systems, but it really, really needs a price cut. And more good non-FPS games.
Anyway... it's definitely shaping up as a very odd generation, that's for sure. I mean, the leader (momentum wise) is the Wii, which has graphics barely better than the last-gen consoles had and is aiming at nongamers and casual gamers before hardcore gamers to a large degree (well, all three markets really, but those additional resources that are going into casual games have to come from somewhere I'd think...), and the other two systems are both faltering despite long lists of big upcoming games... if there is a lesson here, above all I'd say that it is "stop overestimating the will of the people to pay large amounts for videogame consoles". I know it was over a year ago, but the overnight 180 degree shift in PS3 public opinion from the minute before the price announcement to the minute after it was truly astounding... and it's stuck. And both Sony and MS, in search of less losses, have stuck to their losing high-price strategies...
Of course, MS is kind of stuck after stuff like this extra billion dollars in "oops our production quality is HORRIBLE" costs, but still. There should have been a price cut by now. Of course, on the other hand I don't think that a $100 price cut would do much for the PS3 (it'd need a $300 price cut and a lot of good games due out yesterday for it to do THAT), but still... if that got MS to also drop its prices... (I'd say Nintendo too, but with this level of success they can afford to ignore price drops from the competition unless their sales slow down to the point where you can actually go into a store and reliably find a Wii... :)), but still.
I mean, I want Nintendo to win, no question, but graphics are nice too... good graphics are nice. I like how nice games look on my new PC compared to the old one... Compared to gameplay graphics don't really MATTER, but they are nice, and many developers will want to make (and gamers will want to play) games on powerful hardware (that the Wii doesn't have). More importantly for third parties, though, the huge power disparity makes PS3/360/Wii games hard to do without massively cutting back on the Wii version, and that's a problem for them. The real question is, once the PS2 market dries up and they can't rely on PS2/Wii multiconsole games with additional wiimote control options in the Wii edition, what happens? Will the large size of the Wii market give it the third party games, or will multisystem PC/PS3/360 games be more prevalent simply because they work better on multiple systems... I expect the Wii to end up with a lot of exclusives, and third party games on it will be profitable simply because of the size of the market (and lower costs to make Wii games),but still, it must be a tricky decision for them. Still, if the Wii does as well as it's shaping up to they will have no choice but to make Wii versions of a lot of games, even if they are cut back compared to the PS3 and 360 versions. Good for control innovation (Wiimote), bad for graphics. Oh well... it's not like Nintendo had a choice, given that the alternative was presumably to go stupid and run after the same idiotic "people WANT $400-$600 consoles!" phantom that Microsoft and Sony are chasing. :)
Really the obvious answer is "just own multiple platforms then!" but costs are so high this generation... a lot of people can't afford that, I'm sure.
On another note, after playing the PS3 in a storedemo, I will say that I still hate the Playstation controller. :) Virtua Fighter 5 (demo) seemed pretty cool though...
![[Image: logo_bos_79x76.jpg]](https://www.tendocity.net/logo_bos_79x76.jpg){kind=logo}