Zipper Interactive's new IP called M.A.G. (Massive Action Game) looks to be the highlight of E3 for me.

256 players with 8 player squads, it's freaking awesome.

Looks like my contact was right about SOCOM:Confrontation being the last "classic" SOCOM game.

Also, at E3, it was announced that the 80gb bundle is now the core bundle and retailing for the same $399.99 that the 40gb was going for.

LittleBigPlanet just gets better and better.

My letdown was the way Resistance 2 looked. Resistance Retribution on the PSP looked really good though they made it into a Third Person Shooter.

No announcement for Home's release.

The new video store will be up tonight that will allow you to download movies from a lot of big names in Rental and also allow you to Purchase for keeps. They come in both SD and HD formats so that's by far better than what Microsoft announced with Netflix.

The new video store will be up tonight that will allow you to download movies from a lot of big names in Rental and also allow you to Purchase for keeps. They come in both SD and HD formats so that's by far better than what Microsoft announced with Netflix.

Buying SD for folks that want to own a DD copy is great, but as for renting MS has had SD and HD for a very long time now, and soon Netflix gets added. I wonder if Blockbuster will be talking to Sony soon.

just a huge letdown for me IMO. MAG will come out in 2010 or 2011. looks fun but again, i will not be out for a long time. they even laughed a HOME. Sony get your ass in gear. MS is kicked you in the teeth.

my impression is this

Sony: Blu ray in mind... gaming in the behind...

I was really disappointed with all three press conferences. My DVR stopped recording right as they were introducing the zipper game, the only new game announcement for ps3. Nintendo had a bunch of ridiculous waggle games that make you think your playing an instrument. And all Microsoft had to say is that they are stealing another sony platform. Overall pretty weak

my impression is this

Sony: Blu ray in mind... gaming in the behind...

Don't take this the wrong way, but your GIANT RED SIGNATURE is obnoxious.

MS is kicked you in the teeth.
With what? With FF13? We already had that one on board for as long as I can remember...

I was really disappointed with all three press conferences. My DVR stopped recording right as they were introducing the zipper game, the only new game announcement for ps3. Nintendo had a bunch of ridiculous waggle games that make you think your playing an instrument. And all Microsoft had to say is that they are stealing another sony platform. Overall pretty weak

Yeah, I'm still trying to figure out why MS "won" E3. Gears of War 2 (we all knew that was coming) and it's not like FFXIII isn't coming to the PS3 anymore. Looks like all gamers win. I know I'll be busy for the rest of the year.

With what? With FF13? We already had that one on board for as long as I can remember...


Yes and it served many folks here well as the example of why you need a PS3. but thats gone now. Now its another multiplatform game and not an excuse to spend $400 for RPG fans.

Winning or losing E3 is a joke. Hell most sites said Sony "won" E3 last year with titles that are STILL not out yet! Can we get last years win retroactively removed since Sony failed to deliver the reasons for the win???

Yes and it served many folks here well as the example of why you need a PS3. but thats gone now. Now its another multiplatform game and not an excuse to spend $400 for RPG fans.

I'm not sure I know a single person who would spend $400 for just one game, whether it was FFXIII or not.

I'm not sure I know a single person who would spend $400 for just one game, whether it was FFXIII or not.

Why? People did that for MGS 4 right on this board.

I'm not sure I know a single person who would spend $400 for just one game, whether it was FFXIII or not.

Me neither but you would sure as hell think they are out there from some of the posters around here. MGS4 is another offender, heck I have read Uncharted as being "so great you NEED to buy a PS3 to play this game!"

The thing that bugs me is that Sony started their conference off saying that "2008 is the year of the PS3", then they went on to show a bunch of PS3 games that have 2009 release dates, or no release dates at all. Lot's of trailers/videos and not much game demoing either. Though E3 just started, so there is bound to be lots of gameplay videos coming out soon.

Actually what bothered me was how Jack started off saying 2008 was about the software but really spent no time with any software.

One thing that needs to be understood, though, this is an overall company portfolo, not just PS3. Unlike MSFT who don't even really support XBox anymore, Sony still has huge sales numbers for the PS2 and obviously MSFT doesn't even have a handheld. So of course MSFT can spend more time talking about the X360. I think it has also been pretty clear that Sony is looking at more than just gaming, and I can see why that would disappoint some people who would rather the focus stay on gaming.

Me neither but you would sure as hell think they are out there from some of the posters around here. MGS4 is another offender, heck I have read Uncharted as being "so great you NEED to buy a PS3 to play this game!"

Well, I will say that MGS4 is a BIG reason I bought a PS3 on launch, but the software offerings as a whole from Sony are what bring me to their console. I also like the controller more than the 360 controller, but that's just personal preference, as I guess the whole gaming thing is. I still don't understand why some people take it so personally. "OMG, FFXIII is going to be on the 360!! Surely the world is ending." I find E3 great forum reading fun...lol.

I'm not sure I know a single person who would spend $400 for just one game, whether it was FFXIII or not.

I agree, somewhat.

I have a couple of buddies that inquire about Socom: Confrontation from time to time and tell me that's when they'll pick up a PS3. Whether that's true or not we'll wait and see.

Obviously they'll pick up future titles from there on.

It looks like a lot of focus on PSN, which I think is great. $15 for Ratchet and Clank should sell well.

I was hoping movie downloads would be a little cheaper. Not great incentive to rent from Sony as opposed to Comcast VOD. Maybe the quality will be better.

Not great incentive to rent from Sony as opposed to Comcast VOD. Maybe the quality will be better.

ya, the hd quality on comcast is craptastic. i would hate to think that sony would compress their hd downloads as bad as comcast.

I bought a PS3 bundle w/ MGS4 because of MGS4.

ya, the hd quality on comcast is craptastic. i would hate to think that sony would compress their hd downloads as bad as comcast.
Since they'll be able to use MPEG-4, Sony can get better PQ for the same bit rate. Cable companies are stuck with their legacy MPEG-2 only boxes.

Meh. I was really underwhelmed with Sony's showing this year.

The only thing they announced that wasn't overshadowed by their competition was the 256 player game...which will likely be a few years off. Other than that, it was a pretty weak showing in comparison imho.

Meh. Overpriced DRM'd video downloads - heck, even Roger's Video is cheaper than the HD downloads from Sony. Why would I want to pay $5.99 for featureless download versus renting the real deal with all the extras for less from a shop? And why exactly would anyone want to pay $9.99 to $14.99 for a featureless, SD video (presumably DRM's up the wazoo)? This is an alternative to better quality free fansubs and rips in what way exactly?

I still fail to understand why downloads that don't require expensive physical distribution and manufacturing get priced higher than their physical counterparts. Guess there is a sucker born every minute and all that.

No mention of true in game XMB support for user chosen soundtracks gets a big thumb down. Also no mention of better codec support for alternative video containers (gimme a decent media center already, so close yet so far). No mention (that I caught) of what the ICO folks are up to. What about live TV streaming - I want to watch live NHL games on my PS3 this fall.

IMHO of course.

Cheers

it just amazes me that sony can hype home for so long without having anything materialize. Dont get me wrong, I was never one of the people really excited about this concept, nor do I think it will be as revolutionary as sony thinks it will.

But what is funny is that they hype it to an obscene amount, scarcely release any details about it, are calling the full launch of it an "expanded public beta" (lmfao), and have shown enough of their avatar integration concept that xbox got to it first while sony is stuck running in place.

hilarious!

I bought a PS3 bundle w/ MGS4 because of MGS4.

That's great and I am in no way saying that's a bad thing. Welcome to the fold. All I'm saying is that I don't think your circumstance is the majority.

I think Sony won, but barely. MS showed off some new stuff, but it wasn't all that great. FFXIII is definitely an amazing piece of news for the 360, but the PS3 is already getting it. I'd say a really nice thing on 360's side is the exclusive DLC for Fallout. Sony on the other hand continued to push integration of the PSP and PS3, which looked really cool. Also, they showed off a ton of games, and the LBP being used to show off the business stuff was awesome! The biggest problem on Sony's side is we didn't hear much about anything that we don't already know about. This fall is packed with stuff for Sony. MAG was pretty cool, but it'd be nice if we could've heard more about it, it's just that Sony has to talk about a bunch of other stuff that 360 doesn't have to worry about (PSP & PS2). But the future of the PS3 looked a lot brighter, with a ton more exclusive first-party content for the PS3 that the 360 will never see. Besides, did anyone notice the 5 minute long montage of developers talking up the PS3? That's to try to change attitudes that the PS3 is "hard to program for", etc. I'm looking forward to the future. The PS3 has so far had far superior titles to the 360, and it's going to continue through the rest of the year.

Besides, did anyone notice the 5 minute long montage of developers talking up the PS3? That's to try to change attitudes that the PS3 is "hard to program for"

Yes we saw this in 2005 when they announced the PS3. Fast forward to 3 years and you got a different group of individuals repeating the same thing.

I think Sony won, but barely. MS showed off some new stuff, but it wasn't all that great. FFXIII is definitely an amazing piece of news for the 360, but the PS3 is already getting it. I'd say a really nice thing on 360's side is the exclusive DLC for Fallout. Sony on the other hand continued to push integration of the PSP and PS3, which looked really cool. Also, they showed off a ton of games, and the LBP being used to show off the business stuff was awesome! The biggest problem on Sony's side is we didn't hear much about anything that we don't already know about. This fall is packed with stuff for Sony. MAG was pretty cool, but it'd be nice if we could've heard more about it, it's just that Sony has to talk about a bunch of other stuff that 360 doesn't have to worry about (PSP & PS2). But the future of the PS3 looked a lot brighter, with a ton more exclusive first-party content for the PS3 that the 360 will never see. Besides, did anyone notice the 5 minute long montage of developers talking up the PS3? That's to try to change attitudes that the PS3 is "hard to program for", etc. I'm looking forward to the future. The PS3 has so far had far superior titles to the 360, and it's going to continue through the rest of the year.

For me, MS just brought some revolutionary things to the table that cast a shadow way too large for the competition to step out of this week. Sony and Nintendo can't touch the Netflix integration or the new Party system (think COD4 parties but set across anything you do or play seamlessly) that's being integrated. On top of that, they've yet to match 1/2 of what's needed with the XMB or deliver anything tangible with Home. As for the games being "far superior" on the PS3, I'm going to have to disagree. PS3 crossplatform titles have just in the last year gotten to where they consistently score as high as their 360 counterparts. And as for exclusives...Sony says Resistance 2, MS says GoW2. Sony says Uncharted 2, MS says Alan Wake...etc. Point being that I don't think any one platform offers a far superior lineup in the big picture--it's six one, half dozen the other. Combine that with Sony losing another system seller exclusivity after GTA4, FF...on top of the announcement that 360 users are getting more exclusive content in games like Fallout 3...and it all comes together to make me a very underwhelmed PS3 owner. And so far, ~70% of Joystiq readers agree. (http://www.joystiq.com/2008/07/15/joystiq-poll-which-of-the-big-3-had-the-best-e3-keynote/) Anyways, I don't mean to attack in the least...just trying to offer an adult discussion.

That's great and I am in no way saying that's a bad thing. Welcome to the fold. All I'm saying is that I don't think your circumstance is the majority.

I definitely wouldn't say majority either. I'd just imagine there are quite a few people that WOULD HAVE bought PS3's just to play FFXIII if they didn't already for some other killer app.

I gotta say, Sony did impress me the most out of the 3.

I was let down that HOME had no release date. At least we can all say that without Sony and Nintendo, Microsoft would not have any AVATARS.

Did anyone else feel like the level that was shown for Resistance 2 where the guy was climbing stairs looked really bad? This game looks like it needs a lot of work in the textures. MGS4 has really set the bar and after seeing MGS4 and seeing Resistance 2, I think it needs a lot of polishing.

I was thoroughly impressed with MAG, it's an awesome looking game and I'm hoping that they don't release that any time soon so that SOCOM:Confrontation has some time to make an impact.

Does getting exclusive DLC work better than having an awesome game right out of the box? I think Sony doesn't have anything to worry about because MS needs to wrap up some exclusives to keep ahead of Sony and the Blu-ray capacity.

In the end, MAG and LittleBigPlanet really did the job for Sony.

For me, MS just brought some revolutionary things to the table that cast a shadow way too large for the competition to step out of this week. Sony and Nintendo can't touch the Netflix integration or the new Party system (think COD4 parties but set across anything you do or play seamlessly) that's being integrated. On top of that, they've yet to match 1/2 of what's needed with the XMB or deliver anything tangible with Home. As for the games being "far superior" on the PS3, I'm going to have to disagree. PS3 crossplatform titles have just in the last year gotten to where they consistently score as high as their 360 counterparts. And as for exclusives...Sony says Resistance 2, MS says GoW2. Sony says Uncharted 2, MS says Alan Wake...etc. Point being that I don't think any one platform offers a far superior lineup in the big picture--it's six one, half dozen the other. Combine that with Sony losing another system seller exclusivity after GTA4, FF...on top of the announcement that 360 users are getting more exclusive content in games like Fallout 3...and it all comes together to make me a very underwhelmed PS3 owner. And so far, ~70% of Joystiq readers agree. (http://www.joystiq.com/2008/07/15/joystiq-poll-which-of-the-big-3-had-the-best-e3-keynote/) Anyways, I don't mean to attack in the least...just trying to offer an adult discussion.

Oh, I want to an adult discussion on this also, and don't feel that you attacked me in any way. The 360 system seems to be nothing better than Home, though I know Home isn't out yet. But, Sony has LBP, Socom, MGS4, KZ2. Also, I know about the Joystiq poll...I voted, and I think it's only due to FFXIII. Take that out, and Sony won. IMHO, it was a huge coup, but just because a system now is getting it and Sony already has it, I don't think it's that big of a deal. Why isn't Bioshock on PS3 such a gigantic thing?

Why isn't Bioshock on PS3 such a gigantic thing?

Because Sony doesn't need to glorify an X360 game.

Sony focused on their own stuff more than the 3rd party stuff.

PS
How awesome was the GoW3 trailer... got me hungry for some chaos!

Why isn't Bioshock on PS3 such a gigantic thing?

Oh...to me? It's HUGE :)! Bioshock is one of my all-time favorite games and the fact that the PS3 version will have some exclusive DLC "scenarios" (http://www.joystiq.com/2008/07/15/bioshock-ps3-features-exclusive-dlc-scenarios/) seals the deal that this will be the first game I actually buy on two consoles. As far as a game that appeals to the masses in the US, Bioshock should be MUCH bigger news imho. Final Fantasy is a classic widely known franchise that, to me, is a excellent example of something that is "well-known" but not necessarily "popular".

PS
How awesome was the GoW3 trailer... got me hungry for some chaos!

Prerendered CGI always leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I want gameplay footage at a gaming conference.

Prerendered CGI always leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I want gameplay footage at a gaming conference.

You can't possibly think that a game at the stage GOW3 is in development would be showing actual gameplay footage. Sony HAD to announce GOW3 at E3.

^True

Why isn't Bioshock on PS3 such a gigantic thing?

Because it's a port of a game that's been released for a fairly long time already.

My letdown was the way Resistance 2 looked. Resistance Retribution on the PSP looked really good though they made it into a Third Person Shooter.



You know.....I hate to agree but I too just watched the Resistance 2 trailer and thought it was rather meh looking. In fact, I would dare to say that it almost looked the same as the 1st one. Sorta reminds me of the Halo 3 graphic complaints though, I could see Resistance following a similar fate. Overall a pretty game considering the size and scale, but up close just not quite the pop that some other games have.

FANBOYS......in reality what did sony brought new to the table NOTHING and i do own all systems. MS brought casual games and netflix and of course the Games. I mean really what makes you say that sony won really........

As far as a game that appeals to the masses in the US, Bioshock should be MUCH bigger news imho. Final Fantasy is a classic widely known franchise that, to me, is a excellent example of something that is "well-known" but not necessarily "popular".
.

And that right there is why I'm not understanding why FFXIII on the 360 is this amazingly large coup, whereas Bioshock isn't. Especially with extra content It's like all that is irrelevant.

And that right there is why I'm not understanding why FFXIII on the 360 is this amazingly large coup, whereas Bioshock isn't. Especially with extra content It's like all that is irrelevant.

Because we have seen games that show up a year later on the console with new content that doesn't do much when the first game originally hit the market. Big difference in announcements when the game has been announced since 2005 only to find out in 2008 the game is going multiplatform.

FANBOYS......in reality what did sony brought new to the table NOTHING and i do own all systems. MS brought casual games and netflix and of course the Games. I mean really what makes you say that sony won really........

Casual games? Oh like games that are also being released for the PS3 and Wii?

Movies, oh, like what Sony is doing and is actually offering HD content?

Did Sony win? Probably not, but they had a better showing than the 360 or Wii.

Casual games? Oh like games that are also being released for the PS3 and Wii?

Movies, oh, like what Sony is doing and is actually offering HD content?

Did Sony win? Probably not, but they had a better showing than the 360 or Wii.

When people talk about the new casual games for X360 they mostly mean the new innovative "programming" games that emulate game shows on TV, the Sing Star rip off and XBLA's huge game list. Maybe I'm in the minority, but the idea of playing a game show online with other real people in front of an audience of real people with real prizes to win just kicks a lot of tail. Also, you should know that Xbox Live has had both HD movies and TV shows for a couple years now. I see you making this mistake in multiple posts. The only difference at all so far is that you can buy SD movies on PSN and on Xbox Live all movies are rentals. You can only "own" TV shows.

I think Sony's biggest highlights are Mag and Resistance PSP. Everything else we've seen for years now.

someone mentioned earlier in the thread that we'll see the 80gb come down to 399.99. when does this go into effect?

September

I really liked the Ratchet game coming. As long as its a decent length it looks like I will be buying and sharing that for sure. LBP I just don't see as for me. I am sure I will buy it and tinker for a week but then I think most people, myself included will move on.

I was very impressed with what I saw from Killzone. The video of the warehouse reminded me of CoD4 and that can't be considered a bad thing.

Resistance though has me town. I really like the way the gameplay seems to be, it really did give me the feeling you will be fighting through a city. But the graphics are not even close to the renders they showed and certainly not close to the top tier FPS out there. (I am sure it did not help having them sandwiched between seeing Gears of War and Killzone!)

When I bought the PS3 I did so mainly because it played blurays. I've bought a few games, mainly sports, but since it still really is the best Blu Ray option I'm not dissapointed, I think I would be if I bought it mainly for gaming.

I cant wait to be playing resistance on my PSP..when is this coming?

Oh, I want to an adult discussion on this also, and don't feel that you attacked me in any way. The 360 system seems to be nothing better than Home, though I know Home isn't out yet. But, Sony has LBP, Socom, MGS4, KZ2. Also, I know about the Joystiq poll...I voted, and I think it's only due to FFXIII. Take that out, and Sony won. IMHO, it was a huge coup, but just because a system now is getting it and Sony already has it, I don't think it's that big of a deal. Why isn't Bioshock on PS3 such a gigantic thing?

Didn't they say development of FFXIII on XBOX360 would start after they finished the PS3 version? Would this lead to a timed exclusive? Or would they wait to release? Anyways it sounds like this game won't see the light of day until 2010.

FANBOYS......in reality what did sony brought new to the table NOTHING and i do own all systems. MS brought casual games and netflix and of course the Games. I mean really what makes you say that sony won really........

Who said Sony "won" anything? Please troll elsewhere.

That was a real downer. FFXIII-US is delayed even more, due to the xbox announcement. Where was Gran Turismo?

Get Rid of Trenton, and bring back the father of the playstation.

FFXIII isn't being delayed. The 360 port work is going to be done at the same time as the English language localization (which tends to take Square ages anyway).

Didn't they say development of FFXIII on XBOX360 would start after they finished the PS3 version? Would this lead to a timed exclusive? Or would they wait to release? Anyways it sounds like this game won't see the light of day until 2010.

The Japan version is being released first for PS3 only. The 360 version is starting development after it is released and SE decided to launch both at the same time. Plus SE has stated in a couple of articles already that since development is based off of PC that it will be a faster process to get it complete. So basically 2 different teams with neither version being the lead sku.

Who said Sony "won" anything? Please troll elsewhere.

That was a real downer. FFXIII-US is delayed even more, due to the xbox announcement. Where was Gran Turismo?

Get Rid of Trenton, and bring back the father of the playstation.

Is this a joke post? Ken Kuturagi left because he got Sony in its current mess.

Final Fantasy is a classic widely known franchise that, to me, is a excellent example of something that is "well-known" but not necessarily "popular".

Final Fantasy games consistently sell millions of units, and the two PlayStation 2 games (X and XII, not XI) are among the best selling games of the decade. What does it take for something to be popular to you?

Is this a joke post? Ken Kuturagi left because he got Sony in its current mess.




The word scapegoat comes to mind. Sony and Ken had big plans for the PS3. They were over ambitious... but how about cutting him some slack.

The Playstation brand carried Sony on its back for several years, and it was used to launch a new format. Ken deserved at least some time to turn things around.

I think Kaz Hirai has done a great job of turning things around, but even with that they find themselves in 3rd place in sales, with many lost exclusives, and in the hole $3 billion.

Ken Kuturagi is a brilliant engineer and a visionary, but the whole problem with PS3 was that he got so powerful within Sony Corp. that there was nobody to rein him in. I don't think he could have gotten the PS3 on the right track.

I'm not sure I know a single person who would spend $400 for just one game, whether it was FFXIII or not.

Not looking to raise a ruckus, but we exist.:o
I bought the original XBOX to play Morrowind. (It woulda cost me $300 to upgrade the video card and for $300 I got a full console and controller.) Played it for 6 months straight (its *that* kinda game) and moved on to KOTOR for another 3 before returing for a second pass-through.
No regrets.

Current-gen I woulda bought a 360 for MASS EFFECT alone (still playing it off and on--started in november) except I got it at, yes, $399 when Oblivion first came out. (And not an instant sooner.)

(Yes, I do like my western RPGS. JRPGs not so much. <shrug>)

A friend of mine got his first playstation solely for Resident Evil 2.
And I know no less than 3 teenagers who forced their parents (friends of mine) to get them 360s to play GEARS OF WAR.

Does anybody think that if World of Warcraft came out for a console it wouldn't draw in a bunch of dedicated PC gamers to get their first console?
That *is* why Sony is doing the DCU MMORG, no?

Maybe its a function of the circle I move in at work but people do buy consoles just for one game. The important thing, of course, is what do they do *after* that. Does the console go into a closet, get sold off, or get used with other games?

And that right there is why I'm not understanding why FFXIII on the 360 is this amazingly large coup, whereas Bioshock isn't. Especially with extra content It's like all that is irrelevant.
Mainly because Bioshock has already been out for a while. By the time it comes out on PS3, most of the people who wanted to play it will already have done so on 360 or PC.

FXIII on the other hand, is/was a potential system-seller. Big difference in the two.

Casual games? Oh like games that are also being released for the PS3 and Wii?

Movies, oh, like what Sony is doing and is actually offering HD content?

Did Sony win? Probably not, but they had a better showing than the 360 or Wii.
I don't see how they had a better showing when they spoke more about the PS2 than they did the PS3.

See, MS surprised everyone with their announcements. No one saw any of that coming, especially the FFXIII thing. Sony, when they got around to talking about the PS3, didn't mention anything they hadn't mentioned before.

It was clearly a presentation for shareholders, rather than gamers, MS came out looking the best. They had memorable announcements that generated anticipation and buzz, Sony did not. They did do a ton better than Nintendo, though.

I think Kaz Hirai has done a great job of turning things around, but even with that they find themselves in 3rd place in sales, with many lost exclusives, and in the hole $3 billion.

Ken Kuturagi is a brilliant engineer and a visionary, but the whole problem with PS3 was that he got so powerful within Sony Corp. that there was nobody to rein him in. I don't think he could have gotten the PS3 on the right track.

What did he do that was so bad? Incorporate Blu Ray in the PS3? Well, that was good for the company as a whole. If it were not for the PS3, it would have likely meant the death of blu ray.

Losing the biggest Exclusive IP that Sony had, was an unbelievable folly. Esp, when Sony owns a portion of that company. When you combine that with MSFT getting more JRPGs.... it just shows me that the current guy in charge doesnt care enough about the gaming side of the PS3.

With MSFT getting so many JRPGs... I wouldnt be surprised to see a bounce in Japan.

I'm not totally sure why Square decided to put FFXIII on the 360. But I am also not convinced at all that Ken Kuturagi could have prevented it.

I'm not totally sure why Square decided to put FFXIII on the 360.

It starts with "m" and ends with "oney"

I'm not totally sure why Square decided to put FFXIII on the 360. But I am also not convinced at all that Ken Kuturagi could have prevented it.

Money + sales in the West.

I'm not totally sure why Square decided to put FFXIII on the 360. .

SE along with alot of other companies back in 2005 said for about a year discussing development cost and not having loyalty for this gen. Eventually they were going multiplatform like most companies decided like Capcom with DMC4 and Rockstar with GTA4. Japan was declining as the U.S. and Europe have been rising with sales.

But I am also not convinced at all that Ken Kuturagi could have prevented it

Agreed

Casual games? Oh like games that are also being released for the PS3 and Wii?

Movies, oh, like what Sony is doing and is actually offering HD content?

Did Sony win? Probably not, but they had a better showing than the 360 or Wii.

MS had the best showing period. There is no questions asked about this. Nintendo had the worst. Sony was stuck in the middle, nothing too awe inspiring, nothing to dumbed down. Few good things and few 'where was this game and that feature?' They needed to show big and just showed up. It was a decent showing but EVERYONE truely expected them to pull out Aces and instead they pulled out Jacks and Queens.

Sony's PSN video service looks promising but I want to know more about it. LIVE has had SD and HD content for a looooooooooooooong time.

Sony's PSN video service looks promising but I want to know more about it.

It should be up now. Go and see it for yourself.

The big advantage it has is the ability to transfer stuff to your PSP. It's more like Apple's store in that way than Microsoft's.

I'm not totally sure why Square decided to put FFXIII on the 360. But I am also not convinced at all that Ken Kuturagi could have prevented it.

$ talks. It's that simple. Look at the big exclusive titles for the PS3 and how they did in terms of sales. Some well, some decent, some mediocre. Now look at multiplatforms (i.e. DMC4 is perfect example) once exclusive and seeing sales double then what they could have been and it's no brainer. Plus bigger install base only will give you more sales.

This is business, not friendship. Loyalty only accounts for so much in this business.

They needed to show big and just showed up.

"needed"

why? To impress you and yours?

I don't understand this thinking. Does this mean you think the PlayStation is dead? Because they didn't show big at E32008?

It should be up now. Go and see it for yourself.

The big advantage it has is the ability to transfer stuff to your PSP. It's more like Apple's store in that way than Microsoft's.

I like that feature but it's overkill for my personal tastes. I rip my personally owned films to a format the PSP can do so as I like owning the physical copy of the disk, I wouldn't spend $15 for a film I can get for $5-10 at the store. It's a neat feature and I'm glad they did that but personally... I won't be using it. MS doesn't have a portable and last I checked I didn't know PSP ownership was a requirement for owning a PS3, in other words cool feature if you have both but it isn't a big advantage if you don't own the portable.

"needed"

why? To impress you and yours?

I don't understand this thinking. Does this mean you think the PlayStation is dead? Because they didn't show big at E32008?

Reference E3 05, E3 06 and E3 07. Mediocre showings on the average. It all started bad when hyping the system bashing the competion was their incentive. Arrogance and egotistical are the words to use. Now it's different and I like that but they need to show me where that PS franchise went. Add more bad press then good all year long in terms of gaming and features as well as being in 3rd place and is more than enough reasons to 'need' to justify what I think...

I don't think it's dead, never said that. But when my opinion agrees with journalists, which agrees with analysts, etc I realize I'm right. Look at it in my book... HOME was mentioned when? and STILL is being mentioned? KZ2 is going on this whole talk about it, then don't scheme every year... No big news on GT5? Sure GT5P info on GT TV was there but many won't get GT5P due to us thinking it's a glorified demo and you pay to be a beta tester. Put it this way... I have always been a multiconsole owner and always, until this gen, favored Sony's platform. I WANT them to do better then what they have been since before the system was launched. That says a lot. At least to me. Without the GOW3 trailer, it was bland in my book. Again, some good stuff, others not so much

cuco33, you're the only person I know that thinks that MS had a better showing.

I've been listening to reports from journalists from the likes of 1up.com and ign.com and both agree that MS had the 2nd best behind Sony.

Anyway, everyone one is entitled to their own opinion, if you think that MS had the best, you go right ahead.

cuco33, you're the only person I know that thinks that MS had a better showing.

I've been listening to reports from journalists from the likes of 1up.com and ign.com and both agree that MS had the 2nd best behind Sony.

Anyway, everyone one is entitled to their own opinion, if you think that MS had the best, you go right ahead.

KingShorty, vice versa here... but then again who are you talking to, or reading on what site? Brand bias will always state one is better than the other regardless of truth. I have pro PS3 buddies that stated MS had the best showing. To me I don't care as I own all 3 and I am most disappointed in Nintendo's showing. But I don't want to get into it here since this is Sony's E3 Impressions so if you want, PM me and I'll give my reasons. I think they showed up and showed strong but nothing jaw dropping. RFOM2 looks good but the PSP impressed me more than the PS3, and the PS2 was about the same in my eyes as the PS3 and that speaks volumes. I discredit CGI trailers a lot so that might have to do a lot since GOW3 was in my book their big game and I really don't see MAG delivering on the 256 player thing. I've been promised A LOT and received the opposite.

What are you right about though?

This is what I don't get.

Clearly Sony's marketing strategy is not in line with what hardcore gamers want right now, which from the sounds of it is "gimme everything right now!!!" That's cool and all, and I think there is room for discussion of whether they are making a mistake. At the same time, it seems pretty clear that they have a much longer view here. And I ahve to assume they think that technically the PS3 will be able to compete with an X720.

Regardless, I think when you talk about games and the technical aspects of wowing people, it's important to remember how long it was before GTA3 came out on the PS2...and how at the time people felt that and FFX were about as far as you could push the technology...oops, 3 years later the hardware was still being pushed.

Basically I think they have some time to wow people. Personally, I think there are things they could have done better all along, and there has been plenty of hubris on their part. But, I just don't see how this show was supposed to be some lynchpin of their entire future strategy.

cuco33, you're the only person I know that thinks that MS had a better showing.

I've been listening to reports from journalists from the likes of 1up.com and ign.com and both agree that MS had the 2nd best behind Sony.


You can't be serious Shorty. I think its pretty well established that this year, MS stole the show, whether you hate to admit it or not. Microsoft introduced a slew of new things. Sony, on the other hand, mostly repeated things we already knew.

I've been listening to journalists from 1up yours.com and IGN.com and they were all there at the show. From what they said and from what I saw from having seen the live briefings, MS did introduce new things, but those things were clearly a rip-off from Sony's Home concept and Nintendo's Wii concept. The NETFLIX deal was not a "wow" factor in the eyes of many.

In fact, after MS introduced Gears of War 2 and moved on to the other "casual gaming" stuff, the floor was pretty silent. Their "punch in the gut" moment of showcasing FFXIII was a jawdropper, even for me because of the magnitude of the fact that SQENIX went multi-platform. Of course, once you sit and think about it, it's beneficial for SQENIX to do that because the cost of HD gaming is increasing year-by-year.

Like I said before, did Sony win, probably not, but they had the better showing and a stronger line-up.

Would MS have had a better showing had the gone last at E3? We'll never really know because they really did showcase a lot of third party games and was more like a "ha ha, we said it first, suck on that Sony and Nintendo".

In terms of First party AAA titles, I think Sony had a stronger line-up. The mere fact that Sony showcased not only the PS3, but the PS2 and PSP says a lot to me, they are not alienating the other members of the PS family but are slowly giving them reasons to move over to the newest member in the PS3.

As you said, your thoughts are an echo of what journalists and analysts are saying, well, mine are the same.

In any real case, we all benefit from the console wars as the gaming quality is going to get better for the consumers.

In terms of First party AAA titles, I think Sony had a stronger line-up. The mere fact that Sony showcased not only the PS3, but the PS2 and PSP says a lot to me, they are not alienating the other members of the PS family but are slowly giving them reasons to move over to the newest member in the PS3.

This is where I feel that it matters. MS showed off a ton of third-party, multi-plat titles (FFXIII included). I don't care about third party, I can get that anywhere, I want to see what is only available on your system, and why I should buy it. The Sony conference showed off no 3rd party games (other than a 10 second flash of some madden/ncaa, MS was SHOWCASING 3rd party games). Everything was first party, and that's the important part. They matched Gears with RFOM2, and then continued to showcase a bunch of new stuff. MS obviously has nothing in the lineup that I can't get on the PS3, whereas I can't get all the stuff on PS3 on an XBOX. Sony probably could've gone into even more detail if they had not said anything about PS2. I think the video announcements for Sony was much better than MS partnering with Netflix. There really aren't all that many movies in the Netflix play-it-now lineup that are interesting (3% of my queue). The price of Sony is comparable to renting from Blockbuster, and at the rate I now watch movies, is going to be cheaper ($15 for Netflix, $3 for Sony).

You can't be serious Shorty. I think its pretty well established that this year, MS stole the show, whether you hate to admit it or not. Microsoft introduced a slew of new things. Sony, on the other hand, mostly repeated things we already knew.
Exactly. How strong could Sony's presentation been if they had no reveals, spent the first part of it apologizing for the PS3's slow start, and then talked rather extensively about the PS2?

I'm wondering what journalists from IGN and 1up saw that we didn't.

Exactly. How strong could Sony's presentation been if they had no reveals, spent the first part of it apologizing for the PS3's slow start, and then talked rather extensively about the PS2?

I'm wondering what journalists from IGN and 1up saw that we didn't.

I guess we're focusing on two different aspects of what was shown there.

I think it's nice that they acknowledge the fact that they were slow out of the gate but also reiterated that with the PSOne and PSTwo, they really didn't have a major competitor other than Nintendo and Nintendo has never been aggressive in the way they do things. Now that they have MS in the fold, they seem to be reassuring people that things will in fact pick-up pace.

I think the video announcements for Sony was much better than MS partnering with Netflix. There really aren't all that many movies in the Netflix play-it-now lineup that are interesting (3% of my queue). The price of Sony is comparable to renting from Blockbuster, and at the rate I now watch movies, is going to be cheaper ($15 for Netflix, $3 for Sony).

It seems that most people that don't own a 360 aren't aware of this, but the 360 has had movie/tv show downloads for quite some time now (many in HD). The Netflix partnership is just another addition to that, but completely separate from the 360's library, which has (as far as I'm aware) the same prices as Sony's new service. One huge bonus of Sony's service, however, is the ability to purchase movies. Again, as far as I'm aware, you are unable to do this on the 360.

Thanks for clearing that up danforth. Much appreciated since I do not know much about the 360's video content.

It seems that most people that don't own a 360 aren't aware of this, but the 360 has had movie/tv show downloads for quite some time now (many in HD). The Netflix partnership is just another addition to that, but completely separate from the 360's library, which has (as far as I'm aware) the same prices as Sony's new service. One huge bonus of Sony's service, however, is the ability to purchase movies. Again, as far as I'm aware, you are unable to do this on the 360.

I had thought that MS had it's own service, but what you are saying definitely sounds like MS then....trying to find a million ways to do something. Netflix, it's own service, it'll probably come out with a third way of doing things too that says you have to use Rhapsody or something, who knows. MS can never unify anything, and as such, they have multiple lackluster things, trying to do one thing that could be great (this goes beyond just a 360, see the whole Zune and playsforsure debacle)

Thanks for clearing that up danforth. Much appreciated since I do not know much about the 360's video content.

No problem. I personally stay away from both download services, as I'd rather rent/purchase movies on Blu-ray.

I'm assuming that neither comes close to the audio/video quality of a Blu-ray disc, but I do see the conveniences of the service and why so many people are attracted to it.

I guess my question is this?

Who cares who won what show? What does the winner get? This isn't business school, MSFT isn't going to get a better grade because they had a better presentation, etc. And even then, when you think about it MSFT's great "win" is mostly in keeping their big secret from leaking. That's what most of you guys are on about, the whole FFXII thing vs. no big surprise for Sony. Why do any of these companies need to make big surprise announcements at trade shows? Information on these games goes across the internet so quickly now that who cares where the announcement is made?

I guess that's my point. Why get worked up about the keynotes and talk about some stupid competition between them? It makes no sense to me.

MS did introduce new things, but those things were clearly a rip-off from Sony's Home concept and Nintendo's Wii concept. The NETFLIX deal was not a "wow" factor in the eyes of many.

Thats their business model, and it has worked well.

I guess my question is this?

Who cares who won what show? What does the winner get? This isn't business school, MSFT isn't going to get a better grade because they had a better presentation, etc. And even then, when you think about it MSFT's great "win" is mostly in keeping their big secret from leaking. That's what most of you guys are on about, the whole FFXII thing vs. no big surprise for Sony. Why do any of these companies need to make big surprise announcements at trade shows? Information on these games goes across the internet so quickly now that who cares where the announcement is made?

I guess that's my point. Why get worked up about the keynotes and talk about some stupid competition between them? It makes no sense to me.
Hype, really. It goes a loooooong way in selling your product. Remember E3 2006 when the Wii debuted? The hype was absolutely incredible for what's essentially last-gen hardware with an immersive control scheme. Now look at the Wii. Crappy library, and even the controller is iffy at times... but it's blowing away the 360 and PS3 combined in Hardware sales. Mainly because of the hype that surrounded it. All people talked about until it's release was the Wii and how cool it was going to be.

Halo 3? Hype. Good game, nothing special, but it broke records due to the overwhelming hype.

Microsoft generated a lot of buzz for gamers with surprises, Sony generated buzz for it's shareholders mainly. Nintendo generated buzz for no one. Hype pays off big, even if the product doesn't live up to it.

E3 is irrelevant in the long run. It doesn't make anyone buy the products, it doesn't convince anyone to switch over or anything, it really doesn't matter.

Proof positive, I went to E3 in 2000 and Sega's showing with the Dreamcast absolutely blew away everyone's, including Sony with their PS2. How did that turn out?

smastroyin is absolutely right, this stuff is irrelevant. It's fun to talk about, but it doesn't matter who "won" or "lost". Especially nowadays since leaks tell us pretty much everything way beforehand (one reason why FFXIII was such a big deal, it was some how not leaked). Consider that any one of these companies can make everyone forget the show next week if they wanted to with some big announcement. E3 doesn't matter.

Hype, really. It goes a loooooong way in selling your product. Remember E3 2006 when the Wii debuted? The hype was absolutely incredible for what's essentially last-gen hardware with an immersive control scheme. Now look at the Wii. Crappy library, and even the controller is iffy at times... but it's blowing away the 360 and PS3 combined in Hardware sales. Mainly because of the hype that surrounded it. All people talked about until it's release was the Wii and how cool it was going to be.

I think the price had something to do with the Wii being in so many households.

The Wii was introduced for a "right now" sale as opposed to MS and Sony's long term outlook.

Nintendo is not even a big factor anymore, they have alienated a lot of people by introducing the new controller, now what are the developers going to do? Will they program games for use on both Wii-motes?

But you said it well, doesn't matter who won, it's not like there was a big prize at the end of the day. I think the FFXIII should not have been as big of a shock because many games will be going the way of multi-platform because they are too expensive to make for a single platform now. It happened to Nintendo when Sony announced it many years ago. So it shouldn't be that much of a surprise.

Thats their business model, and it has worked well.

Yeah maybe someday they can pioneer with things like Trophys!

Or maybe Rumble!

Maybe built in HDD!

Wirelss first party controllers!

Digital distribution for console games and movies!

Integrated network support!

Shoulder triggers!

A dashboard available from within a game!

Wait which company takes other companies ideas again? Oh yeah ALL OF THEM.

WTF is this discussion about?

All three companies announced stuff that was already known and 99% of the public won't see anything from E3 directly. The only thing that matters is what will be on the shelves and when.

I can list the new (to me) stuff on one hand... and none of it was spectacular.

Yeah maybe someday they can pioneer with things like Trophys!

Or maybe Rumble!

Maybe built in HDD!

Wirelss first party controllers!

Digital distribution for console games and movies!

Integrated network support!

Shoulder triggers!

A dashboard available from within a game!

Wait which company takes other companies ideas again? Oh yeah ALL OF THEM.

I can't believe you're even trying to be sarcastic with some of these things. Digital distribution is a fresh idea of none of the above. Same with integrated network support.

Personally, I don't give a crap who comes up with the idea first. I care about who executes it the best. I guess Burger King should close up shop because McDonald's already makes cheeseburgers?

Microsoft generated a lot of buzz for gamers with surprises, Sony generated buzz for it's shareholders mainly. Nintendo generated buzz for no one. Hype pays off big, even if the product doesn't live up to it.

Nintendo generated hype for your grandma. She's gonna love that frisbee-throwing game.

Personally, I don't give a crap who comes up with the idea first. I care about who executes it the best.

I agree with you, that of course is the reason for the sarcasm. The PS3 triggers and motion sensing sure did not turn out as well as the originals though...

Yeah maybe someday they can pioneer with things like Trophys!

Or maybe Rumble!

Maybe built in HDD!

Wirelss first party controllers!

Digital distribution for console games and movies!

Integrated network support!

Shoulder triggers!

A dashboard available from within a game!

Wait which company takes other companies ideas again? Oh yeah ALL OF THEM.

Are you serious with that list?

Rumble? The Dualshock came out in 1997.

Network support? Dreamcast had it built in. PS2, had it via add on

Wireless First party controller = innovation? That just jacking a product from the third party and calling it your own.

Hard Disc Drive, the PS2 had IDE support as well.

Shoulder triggers? Dreamcast. I dont consider the PS3 controller buttons shoulder triggers anyway.

I will give you trophies and the dashboard. What does the ingame dashboard give you anyway? Access to trophies?

Good list of where Sony adopted ideas but you forgot to mention Nintendo did rumble before the dualshock was released.

MS had rumble in their PC joysticks before that as well but who cares? I see none of these three companies bowing out and they all will be in the console business in 5 years or more.
Its a great time to be a gamer as we have choices and a lot of us own more than one of these fine consoles.
It seems those who only own one are the most sensative to some of these posts.

Yes and it served many folks here well as the example of why you need a PS3. but thats gone now. Now its another multiplatform game and not an excuse to spend $400 for RPG fans.

Winning or losing E3 is a joke. Hell most sites said Sony "won" E3 last year with titles that are STILL not out yet! Can we get last years win retroactively removed since Sony failed to deliver the reasons for the win???

It is all about SONY EXCLUSIVES!

It is all about SONY EXCLUSIVES!

What does that even mean?

What does that even mean?

First Party for the PS3 and PSP. To me its the game line up. Sucks not to be the only system with FF13 for bragging rights alone... Then again, SONY's FIRST PARTY EFFORTS will deliver from many angels, and on all fronts! Sure there will be letdowns... Since nothing is perfect, but I am glad that SONY is listentning to their FANS!

3rd Party is third Party, it should remain multiplatform for better buissnes revenue.

After all the projects are expensive to do. Then again, its my OPINION and view on the subject, you can take it as you please! I mean what is everyone arguing here in the first place? Does it really matter for you who won, and who did not? I mean if you focus on what interest you its ok.... No need to have a piss contest really...

If Sony listened to their fans, we'd have cross-game/movie voice chat and they wouldn't be phasing out BC. Now that the 360 is doing that party chat thing, hopefully they'll step up to the challenge and meet/exceed it.

If Sony listened to their fans, we'd have cross-game/movie voice chat and they wouldn't be phasing out BC. Now that the 360 is doing that party chat thing, hopefully they'll step up to the challenge and meet/exceed it.

it'll happen, just be patient.

Are you serious with that list?

Rumble? The Dualshock came out in 1997.

Network support? Dreamcast had it built in. PS2, had it via add on

Wireless First party controller = innovation? That just jacking a product from the third party and calling it your own.

Hard Disc Drive, the PS2 had IDE support as well.

Shoulder triggers? Dreamcast. I dont consider the PS3 controller buttons shoulder triggers anyway.

I will give you trophies and the dashboard. What does the ingame dashboard give you anyway? Access to trophies?

Are you serious with your rebuttal??

The N64 was the FIRST home console with rumble.

The Dreamcast had a builtin modem. The original Xbox was the FIRST with broadband network support and a single username login. There was no add on needed for the broadband connection. An ethernet port came with with every unit

Wireless 1st party controller. FIRST on the 360. It doesnt matter if 3rd parties did it first. The 3rd party solution was already messy.. using AA batteries and having a seperate IR/RF base that attached to the console. 3rd party solutions are never built with the same quality as 1st party.

HDD. FIRST on the original xbox. Every xbox had one.



About the only thing you even got right in your rebuttle was that the dreamcast was the first with real triggers.

I dont think I've ever seen someone list so many things.. so wrong.. trying so hard to be so right on this forum.. im seriously laughing over here.

it'll happen, just be patient.

Of course it will happen. Your looking at a great hardware company versus a great software company. Sony made its name on producing great electronics. Microsoft built its empire on great software.

And their experience shows directly in their consoles. The PS3 is better hardware solution, the 360 wins on the software front.

This is nothing new and will continue as the two battle it out. Noone should be surprised by this. Next generation.. expect the PS4 to concentrate on debuting with better software.. and the 720 to concentrate on providing sleeker, more reliable, future proof hardware.

If Sony listened to their fans, we'd have cross-game/movie voice chat and they wouldn't be phasing out BC. Now that the 360 is doing that party chat thing, hopefully they'll step up to the challenge and meet/exceed it.

the potential for the PS3 if FAR greater than the 360 you just remember this. This console was meant to last 15 years or more thanks to blu ray technology and swapplable hard drive unlike the other so called next gen console

the potential for the PS3 if FAR greater than the 360 you just remember this

lol, or else what? You'll tell me again? Nobody's denying that the PS3 is more potent hardware, but don't delude yourself in thinking that simply because a game is designed on the PS3 that instantly means it has to be dumbed down for the 360. Besides not seeing any shred of evidence that suggests the game is doing something that can't be done on the 360, FFXIII is running on an engine specifically built to be flexible and play nice with not only with the PS3 and 360, but the PC and even the Wii (source (http://www.joystiq.com/2008/02/22/gdc08-square-enix-unveils-crystal-tools-engine/)). Remember that.

the potential for the PS3 if FAR greater than the 360 you just remember this. This console was meant to last 15 years or more thanks to blu ray technology and swapplable hard drive unlike the other so called next gen console

Good lord how long before people start saying "IT WILL LAST FOREVER!".

First it was just another system, then it was 10 years... now its FIFTEEN!

Its a game console, thats is a locked in state machine designed to play games. Who in their right mind here actually wants to be playing thier PS3 in TEN YEARS? Show of hands and then I want to know WHY ARE YOU NOT JUST PLAYING THE PS2 FOR GOODNESS SAKE???

We are on an AV forum, in 5 more years the PS3 is going to look like the PS2 does today when you look at a PC game. Be honest you are AV enthusiasts you want more, you want better and you want it yesterday!

Good lord how long before people start saying "IT WILL LAST FOREVER!".

First it was just another system, then it was 10 years... now its FIFTEEN!

Its a game console, thats is a locked in state machine designed to play games. Who in their right mind here actually wants to be playing thier PS3 in TEN YEARS? Show of hands and then I want to know WHY ARE YOU NOT JUST PLAYING THE PS@ FOR GOODNESS SAKE???

We are on an AV forum, in 5 more years the PS3 is going to look like the PS2 does today when you look at a PC game. Be honest you are AV enthusiasts you want more, you want better and you want it yesterday!

Gotta agree with this. The one thing people know about hardware is that its upgraded consistently and theres a new thing out just when you think your system is top of the line. Coming from a PC gaming standpoint, it was hard enough trying to keep up with up to date technology with video cards, etc. For Sony to say that their machine will last 10 years is just crazy. Yes, its a blu-ray player which is great but to keep up with next gen games 10 years from now is a huge gamble I don't think they're going to bank on. I know their hardware is powerful but 10 years into the future powerful? Gee, I hope so b/c I made a helluva investment. I bought a PS3 and I have no issue buying a PS4 when it comes out but I don't think it'll 15 years from now ... at least if they want to stay on top of the gaming industry.

For the record, it is Sony's rhetoric that it is a ten year device. However, they also called the PS2 a 10 year and introduced the PS3 in year 6. However, they expect to sell PS2s for another couple of years, so it will have a 10 year lifecycle as a piece of manufactured hardware. So PS4 would be on target for sometime around 2012, although it would not surprise me if they accelerate some of that if the "third place" gap widens instead of shrinks. I also wonder if we will get an PS3 equivalent to the PS2 slim as manufacturing processes really update.

Are you serious with your rebuttal??

The N64 was the FIRST home console with rumble.

The Dreamcast had a builtin modem. The original Xbox was the FIRST with broadband network support and a single username login. There was no add on needed for the broadband connection. An ethernet port came with with every unit

Wireless 1st party controller. FIRST on the 360. It doesnt matter if 3rd parties did it first. The 3rd party solution was already messy.. using AA batteries and having a seperate IR/RF base that attached to the console. 3rd party solutions are never built with the same quality as 1st party.

HDD. FIRST on the original xbox. Every xbox had one.



About the only thing you even got right in your rebuttle was that the dreamcast was the first with real triggers.

I dont think I've ever seen someone list so many things.. so wrong.. trying so hard to be so right on this forum.. im seriously laughing over here.

1) Rumble was available for the N64 as a seperate pack, not built in. Look at how big the N64 controller was. The first console controller with built in Rumble was the Dualshock.

2) Including an RF controller with the console.... is similar to including Netscape into windows and calling it Internet explorer. Its nice that they built the RF reciever, but I think the PS2 slim had that first as well. At least the controllers on the Wii and PS3 are bluetooth. Secondly.. I dont know if you noticed, but the wireless controllers for the 360 are powered by AA batteries. Third, the logitech Wifi Controller for the xbox and PS2 were awesome controllers.

3) Hard Drive built in every xbox? Must not have been that important to MSFT, since its optional on the new xbox... just like the PS2s optional Hard drive.

4) Provisions for online gaming. Thanks Sega.

5) Who was the first to use DVD-Rom in a game system, despite all of the "its too expensive talk"

6) Who was the first to include Digital Video output? lossless audio? 50GB game media? Built In bluetooth and Wifi?

Watching movies on game consoles is great and all... but its not a part of gaming.

Nintendo, and Sony do use other peoples ideas....but their core business is to create something distinct. Microsofts Core business model has always been to take/copy/buy someone elses already successful business model and make it better.... or cripple the originator.

For the record, it is Sony's rhetoric that it is a ten year device. However, they also called the PS2 a 10 year and introduced the PS3 in year 6. However, they expect to sell PS2s for another couple of years, so it will have a 10 year lifecycle as a piece of manufactured hardware. So PS4 would be on target for sometime around 2012, although it would not surprise me if they accelerate some of that if the "third place" gap widens instead of shrinks. I also wonder if we will get an PS3 equivalent to the PS2 slim as manufacturing processes really update.

It is a ten year device. They still make the PS2. They made the PS1 for 10 years as well.

Unlike MSFT, they dont stop support for their old console... when the new one is released.

Microsoft built its empire on great software.

And their experience shows directly in their consoles. The PS3 is better hardware solution, the 360 wins on the software front.


I'm sorry, but that really made me laugh. Microsoft has NEVER built it's own software.

I think a more accurate statement would have been "Microsoft built its empire on stealing great software"

Same boring arguments. MSFT built their empire by bringing their software to the majority of PC's in the world. Marketshare is how the empire was built. Time will tell if it continues.

Here is my list of how E3 went:

1. Microsoft

1.0000001 Sony

10000000.01 Nintendo

Not every E3 can be great and this one was just mehhhhhh.

I do like the style Sony used for their Keynote though.

It is a ten year device. They still make the PS2. They made the PS1 for 10 years as well.

Unlike MSFT, they dont stop support for their old console... when the new one is released.

Yes, I understand. My point was that for the "WE WANT THE LATEST IN TECH RIGHT NOW!!!!!" crowd the PS4 will not wait until the end of the PS3lifecycle.

Yes, I understand. My point was that for the "WE WANT THE LATEST IN TECH RIGHT NOW!!!!!" crowd the PS4 will not wait until the end of the PS3lifecycle.

Of course... but I am just clarifying their 10 year lifecycle comment.

It means "Sony will still be selling/supporting the PS3" in 10 years.... Not that it will continue to be their latest and greatest.

I'm sorry, but that really made me laugh. Microsoft has NEVER built it's own software.

I think a more accurate statement would have been "Microsoft built its empire on stealing great software"

rofl...