I'm trying to find a video or transcript of the whole discussion...but until then, here's Gizmodo's take:

Link (http://gizmodo.com/5025980/sony-knows-what-went-wrong-with-the-ps3)

"In a non-exclusive round table with various outlets like us, Kotaku and Engadget this morning, Sony Computer Entertainment America's CEO Jack Tretton gave us some great looks behind the public curtain of the PlayStation brand. In short, they know what's wrong with the way they made the PS3, and they know how to fix it. In Jack's words, "we know what we're doing," but it's going to take a long time to atone for past missteps.

As everyone knows, Sony is a hardware company. But when making the PlayStation(s), they've become a software company as well. The problem came from the fact that they didn't know whether they're a software company or a hardware company or even both, which influenced the way the PS3 was developed. In this case, the hardware guys developed the console fairly independently then dumped it onto the software guy's lap, effectively saying "do something with it." In essence, as Tretton says, the PS3 was not developed in collaboration between the two teams. As a result of this, the software team has been cleaning up the mess made by the hardware team for years.

This is one of the biggest problems with Sony as a whole. Their UI designs are not as good as they could be because much of the company still sees themselves as a hardware force first and a software firm second. Hopefully with previous boss Ken Kutaragi out and guys like Kaz Hirai and Jack Tretton influencing development on the sure-to-be-upcoming PlayStation 4, things will be better in the next generation."

hmm...why wait until now to release this?

Call me crazy, but I like the spartan look and simple functionality of the XMB OS. I do have some criticisms (update the flash player), but overall I'm fairly happy with it.

Makes sense..Its good to know Sony is finally fessing up to their past mistakes, instead of spinning them.

How the heck can things get better? It already is a great system. The only thing they need to improve on is the browser..and Firefox integration would take care of that.

The thing is software cannot resolve all the hardware teams mistakes. But they have done a fantastic job so far. Just about everything you could want has or is being upated. But who is going to be able to clear up the VoIP issues PS3 games seem to always run into? Is it hardware or software? And of course there is no cure coming for the controller. While some just love it there is simply no getting around the fact the triggers are the wrong shape for a human's fingers to rest in.

Jack has to go though... he has lied through his teeth so much no matter of truth now can regain his credibility. And for goodness sake he can barely speak in public!

I kind of feel sorry for Jack. It seems like he's had the position of the public face of PS3 forced upon him and he just popped up out of nowhere. He feels so awkward up on stage, and you can tell he knows it. Poor guy :\

In short, Sony became Apple in the 1980s....a hardware company that lost sight of the software and suffered for it. Its almost like the hardware guys figured every game company was like Polyphony...they'd be content to sit and toil away for 3, 4, 5 years to make 1 game. Hopefully, hopefully they are seeing the results of this and are learning a lesson.

Then again, every system has its time in the sun...Microsoft owns this generation...and now the #1 slot is theirs to lose. (Wii may sell a hell of alot more systems, but I think we all know that for hard core gamers its a two man race).

Its gonna suck if it takes another 2-3 years for the system to really show its colors when you get all the SPU's working, because by then replacements for their competetors will be on their way to market.

So far the PS3 is basically a 360 clone (game wise)...or vice versa...and thats too bad.

In short, Sony became Apple in the 1980s....a hardware company that lost sight of the software and suffered for it.

Its gonna suck if it takes another 2-3 years for the system to really show its colors when you get all the SPU's working, because by then replacements for their competetors will be on their way to market.

So far the PS3 is basically a 360 clone (game wise)...or vice versa...and thats too bad.

But that's what it was like last generation with the PS2 and Xbox.

And of course there is no cure coming for the controller. While some just love it there is simply no getting around the fact the triggers are the wrong shape for a human's fingers to rest in.

Those trigger extenders fixed it for me. Granted, you have to spend $10, and it would be even better if Sony would re-design the triggers to be shaped like the extenders in the first place, but they work fine.

I, strangely, do not have any problems with the "triggers." The first time I held the controller I did not like it one bit and figured my fingers would keep slipping off of it, but they don't. If I need a little more precision (pretty much only in racing games), I anchor my finger between the R1 and R2 buttons and press the trigger down that way.

The biggest mistake they made was putting in the bluray optical drive adding even more cost to the unit.

The biggest mistake they made was putting in the bluray optical drive adding even more cost to the unit.

There's no way in hell I would have ever a bought a PS3 without Blu-Ray built in, but maybe that's just me.

The biggest mistake they made was putting in the bluray optical drive adding even more cost to the unit.

Speak for yourself...I love my PS3 Blu-ray (which I use regularly, as opposed to gaming which I use less often).

The biggest mistake they made was putting in the bluray optical drive adding even more cost to the unit.

It's that Blu-Ray drive that's going to keep the PS3 relative and afloat this generation. With only a handful of exclusives left, they need it.

The biggest mistake they made was putting in the bluray optical drive adding even more cost to the unit.

it's funny you say that because including the blu-ray drive is what made Sony win the format war. I to would have never bought a ps3 if it wasn't for the the blu-ray drive.

I had to chime in here because as someone who is usually ruthelessly critical of products, never fully satisfied, and always looking for something better, I have to say that the PS3 probably ranks higher than anything else I've ever purchased in terms of my overall satisfaction for the money.

That being said, I should also say that I bought it primarily as a Blu-Ray player.

So...decoding audio and video and transmitting it over a digital link is not a big challenge you say? All you have to do is read the threads of other blu-ray players on this site, some at twice the price of a PS3, to feel good about this purchase. This thing just works. No drop-outs, no 2 minute loading times. No glitches and things that leave you banging your head.

Now...as a game console ...I've got a few games and they seem reasonable although the selection is small.

As a multi-media centre, the browser is painful, and the sony store never seems to update.

But back to AV, the SACD and DVD upscalling functionality again is more than competitive with standalone devices. Sure you'll find something for an audiophile or videophile that surpasses the PS3, but you have to climb pretty high up the mountain.

So for me, the real problem with the PS3 is product placement. Put it in a rectangular box, add IR remote, rebrand it into the Sony ES audiophile/videophile line, and they've got the best player on the market.

Call me crazy, but I like the spartan look and simple functionality of the XMB OS. I do have some criticisms (update the flash player), but overall I'm fairly happy with it.

Personally, the XMB is a lot more appealing than the 360's dashboard. The Dashboard is certainly a lot more flashy, but unfortunately for the last couple months it's seemed like flashy equals slow-loading. I can get to things I want to get to a lot faster on the XMB.

I agree. I bought a PS3 because of the Blu-Ray drive. The gaming has been a nice surprise.

I'm in a stage of life (late 30's) when I and most of my friends have young kids. None of my friends (or very few, anyway) are into gaming at all. They all know about the Wii, and many have one because of their kids (and the rest just won't wait in line for it). But as they are developing some disposable income, most have 42+ inch HDTVs. And most of them know the axiom that the PS3 is "the best Blu-Ray player on the market." If it wasn't for the Blu-Ray drive, none of these folks would be a potential customer for it. As it is, I would say many will have one within the next 12 months.

To me, it seems Sony made a very, very wise choice including the Blu-Ray drive.

did you post this topic on IGN?

Where can I find "trigger extenders"? GameStop?


Those trigger extenders fixed it for me. Granted, you have to spend $10, and it would be even better if Sony would re-design the triggers to be shaped like the extenders in the first place, but they work fine.

The biggest mistake they made was putting in the bluray optical drive adding even more cost to the unit.

With all due respect I have to disagree. If it wasn't for blu-ray PS3 wouldn't be around. The first year of sales explains that. I'm am a loyal Sony electronics fan and will tell you right now that my PS3 would be more like a 3DO if it wasn't for blu-ray. I don't even own a 360 but I would if it wasn't for PS3. Sales per game within the first year of PS3 was on par with Wii now; before (Mario=paper, galaxy, strikers, smash & kart) i still play Socom just waiting for the PS3's Gears or Halo. Call of Duty is great but cross and Resistance is cool but H3 was way better. Just to put this out there, I may not own a 360 but have played/beat most games that are 360 specific. It's a great system but I utterly hate any company associate with Gates; product aside! I'm greatfull that Blu was chosen and and helped keep PS3 alive. But specifics are not needed. Blu-Dragon and GTA are perfect examples why DVD is no longer good for a medium in the gaming world. I bet FFXIII has multiple DVD's if it doesn't I'll be very surprised. (HDD install may be required) Sounds are better because Raw or close to raw audio data can be used and more detailed textures can be stored. This again is all my opinion and you can interpret may word the way you see fit, But to me Blu and PS fans are the only thing that kept the PS3 alive.

WOW! In the time it took me t type this and have a smoke 9 people replied. I'm not alone apparently!

Where can I find "trigger extenders"? GameStop?

I do not think you can get them in-store yet. Amazon sells a controller cover that comes with them though.

The biggest mistake they made was putting in the bluray optical drive adding even more cost to the unit.

I agree with the other posters that disagree with you. Putting the blu-ray in the PS3 was a ganble that paid off and will continue to pay off. Sony will receive a stream of royalties until the next format comes out (if ever).

The biggest mistake they made was putting in the bluray optical drive adding even more cost to the unit.

wow i can't believe you think that. even if Sony never sold another ps3 it was the ps3 that won them the nex gen video format war. yes gaming is big business but go into any best buy,cc,wmt,etc. see the rows and rows of DVDs, now think 2 years from now all those rows will be bluray not hd-DVD this is huge for them and Sony has the ps3 to thank. plus with the kind of money and time needed to develop new AAA games no company is going to be rushing to sink billions and billions into another new system. bluray is future proof Sony is thinking 10 years for the ps3 and i for one will take them at their word.

wow i can't believe you think that. even if Sony never sold another ps3 it was the ps3 that won them the nex gen video format war. yes gaming is big business but go into any best buy,cc,wmt,etc. see the rows and rows of DVDs, now think 2 years from now all those rows will be bluray not hd-DVD this is huge for them and Sony has the ps3 to thank. plus with the kind of money and time needed to develop new AAA games no company is going to be rushing to sink billions and billions into another new system. bluray is future proof Sony is thinking 10 years for the ps3 and i for one will take them at their word.

For the most part I agree with you, BUT the caveat is that will people actually want to buy a 'disc'. My personal feeling is that in this 'IPOD' generation, people are more interested in ergonmics and convienence rather than a 'collection'. Like many I have been slowly converting my CD library into MP3's (and have not bought 1 CD in the last 6 years, I have only bought MP3's from I-tunes) and despite the 'lower' audio quality, it is still acceptable to me (unless I am in the mood to listen on my main system, which rarely is the case now). I suspect that in the next few years, with Terbyte hard drives becoming mainstream, people will have their DVD collection on a HD driver/server and connect this to their TV and have the portability with a hand held device (be it IPOD/PSP etc). They will forgo HD quality for convienience, and many will be 'satisfied' with compressed HD movies, as it takes less space, and quality will still be better than DVD. As a matter of fact I think DVD sales were down a whopping 10% last year (and this was not because of HD or Blu-ray). Current trends continue to show a declinine in DVD sales, and upswing in NEtflicks/Blockbuster online as people are content on renting, and soon will be content on downloading. If that is the case, the PS3 including the blu-ray player would end up being a collosal mistake, as the PS3 was delayed because of the need to incorporate the blu-ray drive, and the cost of the PS3 was also to high to begin with. Blu-ray would then end up being a niche product. For some reason I really think that this was the reason why Toshiba backed out, as they must have realized the long term outlook for 'discs' was not necessarily bright.

I know this is AVS so I'll excuse the blu-ray love. But for the PS3 to succede in the mass market it has to be seen first and formost a games console. My concern is sony are going to try and model the PS3 on the PSP. This will not work. The PSP sells at it's high price because it's easily cracked, and many users go through multiple units.

But that's what it was like last generation with the PS2 and Xbox.

Last generation Sony was second out of the gate, and they were up against a company (sega) that simply couldn't afford to play the marketign game. Nintendo and Microsoft were 18 months behind. If Sega had the marketing money I have no doubt they would have been on top last generation. Nearly every dev company that worked on the Dreamcast loved it, and the sheer volume of quality games that came out in such a short period showed a lot of long term potential.

This time around Microsoft launched a year ealier, and Nintendo launch at the same time with a cheaper product. And both companies have the money to market their products worldwide.

Anyhow, back to the original comments. I don't think it's a matter of the hardware guys dumping stuff on software guys. It was a simple fact that sony's internal software team was understaffed considering their grand idea of what the PS3 will be.

Unltimately Sony's succes this time around will depend on their ability to get the price of the hardware down low enough for mass adoption to occur. I personally think it's a fantastic piece of hardware (a little power hungry though that's excusable), but i'm concerned sony is relying heavily on external manufacturers, so much so that they will never be competitive price wise for this generation.

For the most part I agree with you, BUT the caveat is that will people actually want to buy a 'disc'. My personal feeling is that in this 'IPOD' generation, people are more interested in ergonmics and convienence rather than a 'collection'. Like many I have been slowly converting my CD library into MP3's (and have not bought 1 CD in the last 6 years, I have only bought MP3's from I-tunes) and despite the 'lower' audio quality, it is still acceptable to me (unless I am in the mood to listen on my main system, which rarely is the case now). I suspect that in the next few years, with Terbyte hard drives becoming mainstream, people will have their DVD collection on a HD driver/server and connect this to their TV and have the portability with a hand held device (be it IPOD/PSP etc). They will forgo HD quality for convienience, and many will be 'satisfied' with compressed HD movies, as it takes less space, and quality will still be better than DVD. As a matter of fact I think DVD sales were down a whopping 10% last year (and this was not because of HD or Blu-ray). Current trends continue to show a declinine in DVD sales, and upswing in NEtflicks/Blockbuster online as people are content on renting, and soon will be content on downloading. If that is the case, the PS3 including the blu-ray player would end up being a collosal mistake, as the PS3 was delayed because of the need to incorporate the blu-ray drive, and the cost of the PS3 was also to high to begin with. Bludeclining-ray would then end up being a niche product. For some reason I really think that this was the reason why Toshiba backed out, as they must have realized the long term outlook for 'discs' was not necessarily bright.

yes you are absolutely right, the future is digital downloads but like many on this forum you are 2-3 years ahead techno wise. billions of people around the world still use music cd's as their medium of choice. there will for years to come,be a place for actual plastic cases with content sitting on store shelves and most of it will be bluray format notdisc'stechnoCd'sshelve hd-DVD.

How the heck can things get better? It already is a great system. The only thing they need to improve on is the browser..and Firefox integration would take care of that.
Firefox would be nice, but I think Opera is a better choise for a device like the PS3...

It's that Blu-Ray drive that's going to keep the PS3 relative and afloat this generation. With only a handful of exclusives left, they need it.

Only a handful? The facts beg to differ. Currently there are 63 exclusive PS3 games confirmed with another 29 exclusives coming on PSN.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=858296

I am thoroughly satisfied with my PS3, I think I do more than the average person does with theirs.

I watch movies, mix/play music, play games, use the Blu-ray player. My PS3 is basically running all day every day.

As for the browser, Firefox over Opera in my opinion would be better.

PS
Martez, how many of those games on that list will be released in the US?

I personally agree with the BR drive being a mistake from a gaming standpoint. If they had stuck with DVD they could have launched a year earlier along with MS, and probably at a lower price point. Sure they wouldn't have won the HDM format war, but they would be selling more systems and more games, IMO.

I personally agree with the BR drive being a mistake from a gaming standpoint. If they had stuck with DVD they could have launched a year earlier along with MS, and probably at a lower price point. Sure they wouldn't have won the HDM format war, but they would be selling more systems and more games, IMO.

I don't agree with that. Had they stuck with DVD format, I don't think we'd be getting the type of games we're getting now. Some games are only capable on the Blu-ray because of the massive capacity on a single disc.

I personally agree with the BR drive being a mistake from a gaming standpoint. If they had stuck with DVD they could have launched a year earlier along with MS, and probably at a lower price point. Sure they wouldn't have won the HDM format war, but they would be selling more systems and more games, IMO.

But with a DVD games like MGS4 wouldn't be what they are today & the limits being put on future games are lifted.
With the death of hd-dvd my bet is Microsoft will be licensing Blu-Ray for their next gen (Xbox 720??) gaming box.
people will expect even more from games & DVD's are at their limits.

I bought my 60G for games & to just "dip my feet" in the pool of Blu-Ray but after watching a couple of movies I suddenly ended up with 100+ Blu-Rays & 6 games!

With Blu-Ray winning the war the addition of it in the PS3 will pay huge benifits for Sony, maybe not soon but as a long term investment it was a brilliant move.

Martez, how many of those games on that list will be released in the US?

All of'em. The list is a tad out of date (Rat Race is still listed), but check the link- that tally doesn't include stuff that isn't formally announced but we know is coming, like the next Team ICO game (there's a separate list for that stuff underneath), so the number is potentially larger.

One of the big mistakes they made was not including a hardware scaler. Or at least not including one that wouldn't cause the games to suffer because of it. Virtually every single high def device known to man has a hardware scaler in it, so that it can output either 1080i or 720p, yet the PS3 is the one device that doesn't. That's a pretty big freaking mistake.

I know, I know.... "Dude, go buy yourself a new TV and stop whining".


Still, you have to admit, that was a pretty big freaking mistake. We are talking about a part that probably would cost 50 cents when ordered in the millions (which is how many they would be ordering). To think that if the engineers of the PS3 weren't brain dead, they would have spent 50 cents more and put a real deal scaling chip in the system, and I would actually be able to play games like Motorstorm and Resistance on my living room TV (Which happens to be a Sony by the way).

I agree with the above comment about a hardware scaler. However, let's keep in mind that Japan has had HDTV's widely available since the 80's. It's possible that in Japan it's just not an issue at all (because all tv's support 720p), so that flaw just escaped unnoticed until release.

Well at least all new games are supporting 1080i, so besides Resistance and Motorstorm and a few other early games, this issue will likely fade into obscurity.

I agree with the above comment about a hardware scaler. However, let's keep in mind that Japan has had HDTV's widely available since the 80's. It's possible that in Japan it's just not an issue at all (because all tv's support 720p), so that flaw just escaped unnoticed until release.

Well at least all new games are supporting 1080i, so besides Resistance and Motorstorm and a few other early games, this issue will likely fade into obscurity.


Unfortunately, there are actually tons of new games that don't support 1080i. Here is a list:


UEFA Euro 2008
BattleField: Bad Company
Haze
DragonBall Z Burst Limit (demo)
Overlord: Raising Hell
Viking: Battle for Asgard
Battle Fantasia (JP Demo)
Siren
Dark Sector
GRiD
Iron Man
Hot Shots Golf: Out of Bounds
Condemned 2
DMC4
The Club


and many many more

Even worse, one of the most wanted games of 2009, Killzone 2, will only have 720p support. Supposedly they looked into doing 1080i support and discovered that it would take away from some of their special effects.



Also, Sony, being a hardware company that makes many TV's, should have been very well aware of the whole 1080i/720p issue. I happen to own a Sony TV with this problem. It's sitting in my living room right now, and I never play PS3 games on it, cause the PS3 just looks really ugly on it. It only does 1080i/480p. There are a few PS3 games I'll play on it, but I mostly just watch Blu Rays on it.

How the heck can things get better? It already is a great system. The only thing they need to improve on is the browser..and Firefox integration would take care of that.

EXACTLY though you pointed its hardware aspects, but yet you ignored its software aspects. Its nice to have a ferrari sitting in your driveway, but its not nice knowing its a kit ferrari with a Geo metro engine in it.

I personally agree with the BR drive being a mistake from a gaming standpoint. If they had stuck with DVD they could have launched a year earlier along with MS, and probably at a lower price point. Sure they wouldn't have won the HDM format war, but they would be selling more systems and more games, IMO.

Thats completely wrong. The CELL wasnt even producing decent yields until the Summer of 06

Wrong? How can anyone say "went wrong" at this point? It's way too early to tell. The PS2 is how old & still sells?

All the "issues" with the PS3 could go either way at this point, too soon to tell.

BR? Is the advantage in storage versus the cost a liability or a plus? Given the cost path of hardware I'd say it's nothing but a plus at this point. The overall cost of the unit is competitive & it comes with 5x the storage.

Library? Sure it's smaller at the moment but that gap continues to close. With the cost of game development spiraling upwards multi-platform games will become the norm = "libraries" will become less of a factor as time goes on.

Movies? Will the BD player be a help or hinderance? Once again, too early to make the call. Yes downloads seem the way of the future but let's not forget that Commie-cast, Warner, Cox, etc. ALL want their piece of the pie. Anyone think they're going to allow consoles to sell movies using their bandwidth while their very own VoD falls by the wayside? Not going to happen, ever.

Marketing? It would appear Sony has a more distant or realistic view of the market. News flash the "hardcore" market is saturated, there's little if anything to be gained by making this the main focus of one's effort. Nintendo has proven the way of the future is to EXPAND the market into non-traditional areas. Sony seems in a good position to accomplish this goal. The PS3 offers a very good "media center" platform.

And if the PS3 is such a "failure" (what went wrong)..............then why is the other side adding a HDD? Changing the interface to copy another company?

Thats completely wrong. The CELL wasnt even producing decent yields until the Summer of 06

Exactly, IMO, if they had ditched BR and the cell and stuck with a more developer friendly system they would have been pumping out systems and software from day one. You guys have to think like a normal PS2 owner, not a HT pro like most people on here. The vast majority of the Playstation faithful just want lots of good exclusive games, just like they had on PS2.


All I am saying is that if they had launched Fall of 2005 at the same or lower price point than the 360, with some good exclusives, they would be far, far ahead in sale, IMO. With that being said, if they had done that, I wouldn't currently own one:D

............................ With that being said, if they had done that, I wouldn't currently own one:D
Same here, bought it as a Blu-ray player............then checked the downloads............tried motorstorm & it all went to sh*t from there. :D

The biggest mistake they made was putting in the bluray optical drive adding even more cost to the unit.

I also disagree as most of my PS3 use is watching Blu-ray. I'm hoping some of the upcoming FPS titles will change that.

More from the roundtable discussion: (http://gizmodo.com/5026409/how-sonys-cheapness-is-biting-the-ps3-in-the-ass)

"Sony's mantra of not writing checks for exclusives—or much of anything—seems to be biting them in the ass a couple times this week. There are at least four cases where the PlayStation 3 has suffered because of Sony's lack of willingness to open up the pursestrings. We knew two of these before—backward compatibility and the DualShock 3—but we only found out about the other two during the roundtable session with Sony's Jack Tretton yesterday.

The first is exclusives. Final Fantasy 13 coming to the Xbox 360 was a pretty huge blow to the PlayStation brand seeing as they no longer having exclusivity to the main Final Fantasy line. This is just the latest in the line of Sony losing titles that were previously exclusive (or planned to be exclusive) to PlayStation. Grand Theft Auto, Devil May Cry are two more recent ones, but Wired also lists Assassin's Creed (could have been PS3-only), Virtua Fighter 5, Beautiful Katamari, and Fatal Inertia. What does Sony have of big third-party exclusives? Metal Gear Solid 4.

This, as we learned from Sony's Jack Tretton, is because they're "not in the business of writing checks for exclusives." Jack goes on to explain quite logically that in this day and age, it's just much more profitable for game publishers to put their titles on as many consoles as possible, and companies would have to throw out some big chunks of money to convince them otherwise. The kind of money Microsoft has been doling out.

The second is Home. Tretton called the current state of Home a "no man's land", a phrase which he immediately wished he didn't use. However, it's as accurate of one as we could come up with. The problem right now is that Sony's an an impasse. They've finished the shell of Home and much of the core functionality is done. However, there's no content for it."

it's just much more profitable for game publishers to put their titles on as many consoles as possible, and companies would have to throw out some big chunks of money to convince them otherwise. The kind of money Microsoft has been doling out.


And that's completely true. It doesn't make financial sense to pay large sums of corporate cash for third-party exclusives. It's capital that could be used to fund first or second party developers, reinvest in the company which would likely yield a higher IRR, etc. etc.

Despite its size, Sony isn't flush enough with cash to be paying out the kind of sums it takes to secure exclusivity in a market with ever-increasing production costs.

Microsoft, on the other hand, is. Though it's not really a good thing for gamers.

Thats completely wrong. The CELL wasnt even producing decent yields until the Summer of 06

IIRC, the yields were complete crap even then, too - so low that Intel wouldn't even consider producing them.

That is why there are only 7 available SPEs on the PS3.

I think that virtually every problem with the PS3 as released has been corrected at least in part: price, OS features, online service, game lineup, even rumble on the controller. However I still think Sony desperately needs Home out yesterday.

Despite its size, Sony isn't flush enough with cash to be paying out the kind of sums it takes to secure exclusivity in a market with ever-increasing production costs.


What exclusivity has Microsoft retained, though? It seems their checks lead to blocking exclusivity for Sony, or silly DLC agreements which is of questionable importance. Do people still care about GTA4 DLC, though? The hype fizzled out and the backlash started on that game within a week.

Microsoft have been buying their way to parity, not superiority. Seems like a silly use of funds but whatever.

Sony could sell 40 million PS3s this year, but if people only buy them for BD playback, there won't be any more games for it. If people don't buy the games, the publishers will only publish for XBOX. Once there are no more games and stand-alone BD players get better, or the XBOX catches up in a future release, that'll be it.

Yes, I know there will be those that bring them home as BD players and discover the great games, but it certainly won't be 100%.

I don't see anything wrong with PS3 game sales. With the cross platform games, you are seeing proportional or even better than proportional sales. The sales split might be 60/40 but I think GTA4 sales were split more like 55/45 or even tighter. Same with DMC4. Meanwhile exclusives like MGS4 and GT5P have been big hits in every territory.

I didn't know that GTA4 sales were that close. I hope it stays that way. I love the functionality of the PS3, and don't need another Beta player.

Exactly, IMO, if they had ditched BR and the cell and stuck with a more developer friendly system they would have been pumping out systems and software from day one. You guys have to think like a normal PS2 owner, not a HT pro like most people on here. The vast majority of the Playstation faithful just want lots of good exclusive games, just like they had on PS2.


All I am saying is that if they had launched Fall of 2005 at the same or lower price point than the 360, with some good exclusives, they would be far, far ahead in sale, IMO. With that being said, if they had done that, I wouldn't currently own one:D

Ditch the Cell and Blu ray?
Why dont they Ditch HDMI too...
Ditch built in Wifi?...
Who needs bluetooth?
mandatory Hard disks are for the birds... dump that too.

Then put it in a white box with a no room for proper ventalation. And make sure you have a big circle on the front capable of showing a red ring 3 times.

If Sony sold 40 million PS3s this year but people only use them for BD playback, there would be more games for it. Look at the huge amount of Wii sales, and the data that says so many are just playing Wii Sports or only getting one or two games for it. The sales numbers still caused a huge flood of Wii titles.

At first there would, but developers would catch on real quick if nobody bought the games.

:)Ditch the Cell and Blu ray?
Why dont they Ditch HDMI too...
Ditch built in Wifi?...
Who needs bluetooth?
mandatory Hard disks are for the birds... dump that too.

Then put it in a white box with a no room for proper ventalation. And make sure you have a big circle on the front capable of showing a red ring 3 times.

While I understand your point, how about we keep the rhetoric to a minimum? That way we can avoid the "usual suspects," whom we know will flock to the thread.

The problem wasn't including a BR drive, but the extra cost to us in adding it. No one wanted to pay 600 bucks for a console. If the PS3 had launched at the same price point as the 360, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. It would have absolutely crushed the 360.

Bla Bla Bla.. I really don’t care if other people love it or hate it. It’s been one of the best bang for the buck electronic devices I’ve purchased in the past 25 years of being into electronics. As far as I can tell, they have sold what 20 million units.... name another piece of electronics that has done that in 2 years. You probably couldn’t count to 25. I’m still waiting for my 2nd one (65nm chip) and hell, Ill pick up a 3rd… It’s that important in my digital life now.


My ps3 has now literally cost me at least $40,000.

Last upgrade was a media server to stream to it (I’ve now watched probably 300 movies on the thing):

TVersity
Dell Precision
2 x 2.6 GHZ quad core Zeon procs (8 cores)
4 x WD 750 gig drives in raid 5 for 2 TB of data
Adaptec Sata/SAS raid card
Etc…

And that's completely true. It doesn't make financial sense to pay large sums of corporate cash for third-party exclusives. It's capital that could be used to fund first or second party developers, reinvest in the company which would likely yield a higher IRR, etc. etc.

Despite its size, Sony isn't flush enough with cash to be paying out the kind of sums it takes to secure exclusivity in a market with ever-increasing production costs.

Microsoft, on the other hand, is. Though it's not really a good thing for gamers.

Yes and no. Most gamers are passionate about a franchise. Stick the name of 'Halo' on any future product and it is almost a guarentee that it will sell 10 million. MS has now done that with Gears of War as well. The lure of having such franchises is for the potential annuity it pays for furture games, and subsequent future hardware. People WILL buy the next version of Xbox just to play the next version on Halo. Since they will then have the hardware, they will in turn buy all the crossplatform games for that platform. Sony saw a little blip of that with Metal gear, but that game is too much of a niche game, not maintream. The only other game that would have massively boosted PS3 sales would have been GTA4. If that game was Sony exclusive I would have no doubt seeing a boost of 2-3 million console sales just for that game. (over 7 million copies were sold on the Xbox alone). Final Fantasy is also a 'niche type game' but would have been a reason for fans to buy a PS3 if they had an Xbox already. Now 'those' people no longer need to buy an PS3. The lure of 'exclusive content' is also something that will sway gamers from one console to another. Many people picked the Xbox version of GTA4 for this reason and will also pick Fallout 3 for the same reason.

The problem is that Sony does not have the financial backing that MS has. MS is willing to spend now, for furture dividends, and so far it is working. They are a software company, and know software very well. They understand that the hardware is just a tool and the real money is in software. Sony is a hardware company and makes very good hardware, they are inovative, and leaders, but in this generation no matter how good the hardware, software is still king. This will hold true for furture generations as well.

Wether it is good for gamers or not is questionable at this point, because Sony no longer has the monopoly (like they did with the PS2). In actual fact the competitiveness and drive to succeed this generation is pushing software developers even more. Think about it, within the last 2-3 years there have been so many outstanding games for a CONSOLE, that play so well. No longer do I have to worry about the lastest direct X, or video driver, or software in compatibility, or frame rates, or voice chating etc, etc. The quality of games are outstanding, especially since gamers will not accept anything less (developers realize this when they have bad ports, thus 'forsing' them to do a better job the next time around. Because of Xbox Live, PS3 got update 2.4 (they would have had no incentive to do so, otherwise it would have been incorportated at launch). MS has taken the massive initiative, and is spending the money, but I really do believe that in the end all gamers benefit.

Yeah, I call total BS on jacks explanation about hardware and software not communicating enough. Y'all have already been touching on it, but the PS3 is where it is because of Blu-Ray, for better or worse. Blu-Ray was the focus, NOT gaming and I think all of us can acknowledge that. It seemingly paid off though as they won the format war, however now that Blu-Ray isnt exactly raking in the average Joe, Sony is in a really tough position. If Blu-Ray were to fail and never really take off (Don't think its so far fetched....excellent article in the Home Theater Magazine this month about that possibility and reasons why it could happen), Sony could be in big trouble and its hard telling what it would mean for the PS3.

Ditch the Cell and Blu ray?
Why dont they Ditch HDMI too...
Ditch built in Wifi?...
Who needs bluetooth?
mandatory Hard disks are for the birds... dump that too.

Then put it in a white box with a no room for proper ventalation. And make sure you have a big circle on the front capable of showing a red ring 3 times.

Yeah, who does need bluetooth? At least it makes for some crappy remotes....

Since we are on the subject, what exactly has the Cell done that any other engine can't do? And don't give me theoretical floating point calculations, how about some real world benefits for gaming that we use right now. We know at least that it can't act as a scaler for games......


I love the HDMI, the upgradeable HDD, and the Wifi is cool.



One more thing, why is it that when anyone points out any of the PS3's flaws they immediately assume you are a rabid Xbot???

The problem is that Sony does not have the financial backing that MS has. MS is willing to spend now, for furture dividends, and so far it is working.




Thats not true:

Sony Revenue (2008)
$88.714 Billion

Microsoft Revenue (2007)
$51.122 Billion




Sony Total Equity (2008)
$32 Billion

Microsoft Total Equity (2007)
$31 Billion


Source: Wiki

And if the PS3 is such a "failure" (what went wrong)..............then why is the other side adding a HDD? Changing the interface to copy another company?

Its nice that the head of Sony America is a realist, even if you choose not to be. The PS3 is not a runaway success.....its not a failure but its clearly not living up to anyones expectations, and Sony has finally come out and admitted this. I think by being frank with the masses he's trying to let them know that there's no more ******** and hype, that they know there are some issues and they are going to focus on fixing them.

As for your incorrect comment about 360....its always had a hard drive, and its copying the Windows Vista AERO interface, not the CoverFlip Apple interface.

Thats not true:
Sony Revenue (2008)
$88.714 Billion


True, but divded by how many divisions and products......?

Sony is going to invest in TV's, digital phones, memory and storage formats, CCD Cameras, receivers and every other multitude of devices that Sony creates.

Microsoft has none of that, their products are mostly soft, for hadrware its basically Zune and Xbox. They can focus more of their income on cornering this market.

Microsoft sees the future of home entertainment as their meal ticket into the 21st century...they can't keep selling OS's that nobody wants, and they can only do so much with Word and Spreadsheets, so they want to stay in the hardware/software licensing game. They know the future of the PC as we know it is slowing down......but the console is on the rise...give it a mouse/keyboard and basic application software next generation and alot of people could replace their home PC's entirely with it. Thats probably what sony was thinking with LINUX on the PS3 too...

Sony is going to invest in TV's, digital phones, memory and storage formats, CCD Cameras, receivers and every other multitude of devices that Sony creates.

Microsoft has none of that, their products are mostly soft, for hadrware its basically Zune and Xbox. They can focus more of their income on cornering this market.


LOL at this post. The Xbox and Zune portions of the business are an absolute drop in the bucket at Microsoft. First of all, they don't make MS any money, second of all, they are a tiny tiny piece of an enormous company with tons of products and divisions. It doesn't matter if they are the only hardware and the rest is software, the software is where all of Microsoft's money is made. You are grossly distorting how MS does business.

The PlayStation brand is way way more important to Sony than the Xbox brand is to Microsoft. This is not even up for debate. I mean, Sony does hardware and the PS3 is hardware. The 360 is an anamoly in Microsoft's business.

Finally, Sony does do a ton of stuff but so does Microsoft - labeling what Microsoft does as "mostly software" is as simplistic as saying Sony mostly makes electronics. Sony might do TV's, phones, cameras, and receivers, but they don't do office suites, operating systems, internet browsers, graphic architectures, security suites, communication platforms, and the thousands of other pieces of software Microsoft puts its name on.

LOL at this post. The Xbox and Zune portions of the business are an absolute drop in the bucket in the Microsoft business. First of all, they don't make MS any money, second of all, they are a tiny tiny piece of a HUGE business. It doesn't matter if they are the only hardware and the rest is software, the software is where all of Microsoft's money is made. You are grossly distorting how MS does business.

The PlayStation brand is way way more important to Sony than the Xbox brand is to Microsoft. I mean, Sony does hardware and the PS3 is hardware. The 360 is an anamoly in Microsoft's business.

Finally, Sony does do a ton of stuff but so does Microsoft - labeling what Microsoft does as "mostly software" is as simplistic as saying Sony mostly makes electronics. Sony might do TV's, phones, cameras, and receivers, but they don't do office suites, operating systems, internet browsers, graphic architectures, security suites, communication platforms, and the thousands of other pieces of software Microsoft puts its name on.

I think that his point was the same as your, in that the hardware division that MS has is a 'small' portion of MS, whereas PS3 has become a large piece of Sony. NET profit for MS was 14 B, last year, where as Net profit for Sony was 3 B (whilst in previous years Sony usually hovers around the 1B net profit mark annually). Considering that the PS3 itself had a 1 B loss for sony, that is a substancial amount last year (especially if the other divisions did not have such a 'good' year). I suspect that is in part the reason why they cannot continue to throw money at software developers to remain exclusive.

LOL at this post.
The Xbox and Zune portions of the business are an absolute drop in the bucket at Microsoft. First of all, they don't make MS any money, second of all, they are a tiny tiny piece of an enormous company with tons of products and divisions. It doesn't matter if they are the only hardware and the rest is software, the software is where all of Microsoft's money is made. You are grossly distorting how MS does business.


Actually, I think the problem is that you are grossly distorting where Microsoft dominates...and where Microsoft is an "alsoran" in the vast software industry we have today. Microsoft does not dominate many of the major areas that are where real big bucks are made, in business licensing. They may own the OS market and probably the office suite market, but nobody is buying Vista at businesses. And thats a HUGE loss of revenue. Also, they are kind of just another player in the Server industry (be it application servers OR RDMS database servers).....their integrated coding environments are great if your groups are writing applications in VB or C#, but just as many places are using C or Java. People think Microsoft own the entire business world, and they don't...just the desktops.

The Xbox is so much more important to Microsoft that you have no idea. Sony knows the same secret that Microsoft does. The Home PC is slowing down. 80% of the worlds users simply do not need Dual and Quad core machines. Most of the people who buy them are gamers, and its clear that games are more optimized for play on consoles now, the focus is on console development first...PC development later...if at all. PC sales peaked in the late 90's and since have come crashing down.

You can do most of the things people did with a PC in 1997 today on your average CELL PHONE. The PC has peaked...and is now in decline. With decline comes less need for new OS's, new office Suites, and so forth.
Microsoft is going to have to draw the majority of its income from a new source.....that source will be the console.

Microsoft knows that there will be more emphasis put on consoles the next generation...look at today, PC's are being relegated more and more to the role of FILE SERVERS. You dont watch media on your PC, you STORE it there and STREAM it to your console. Your PC is where you rip and store content. Not watch it, not display it, not enjoy it.

You put a solid web browser and basic applications with keyboard/mouse support on a console....what do you need a PC for unless you're ripping files to it?

The PC hardware market is too hopelessly disjointed to ever put up a fight with the console makers, so that battle is already lost.

I'm a hard core PC user (seriously, look at my number of posts...I'm a nerd loser of the higest order..I'm online ALL the time). But if I had solid keyboard and chat support, web browsing ability and file-viewing like flash and stuff on my console, I'd be doing All that crap on it. My PC is nice, its how I earn a living really....but even I dont want Vista...nor do i want what comes after it. What I have works,a nd works well..and if you asked me "what would you want that is better" i'd have a hard time coming up with real, tangible improvements that weren't more like bug-fixes.

I dont want "wave my hands in the air OS" or "graphical user superinterface"....Microsofts trying that crap with Vista and its going over like a fart in an elevator.

Micrsoft wants to dominate this new market with hardware AND software...as the PC becomes the "big storage device you keep in your closet" and less the fancy box you keep under your desk and check emails on, they know their bread and butter is the box that sits next to your TV.

Sony knows this too, which is why "Multifunction" is the key with todays consoles. Well...microsoft and sony anyhow.


The PlayStation brand is way way more important to Sony than the Xbox brand is to Microsoft. This is not even up for debate.

Right, because you are hoplessly wrong. I want you to think hard about the future, 10 years down the road. Look at consoles and PC's in 1990, then 2000, now today. Consoles are doing almost all the things we used PC's to do before, and businesses are NOT upgrading to Vista. If you control the entertainment center connected to the High Def TV that eventually everyone will own, you control media.

You will not only own the hardware, you will own the software. You will own the gaming AND the movie viewing experience. You will own the communication tools that people use AND you will own the interaction with the ever-more-powerful fleet of portable devices (gaming, music, video and telephone/communication).

Thats the future, if you can't see that you must be blind.

Microsoft ain't gonna stay rich making Sql Server 2010.....it'll put money in their pockets to be sure, but its not going to keep them rolling in dough like pigs in mud.

You are woefully off base on this one.

I think that his point was the same as your, in that the hardware division that MS has is a 'small' portion of MS, whereas PS3 has become a large piece of Sony. NET profit for MS was 14 B, last year, where as Net profit for Sony was 3 B (whilst in previous years Sony usually hovers around the 1B net profit mark annually). Considering that the PS3 itself had a 1 B loss for sony, that is a substancial amount last year (especially if the other divisions did not have such a 'good' year). I suspect that is in part the reason why they cannot continue to throw money at software developers to remain exclusive.

What I think is sad is that us Common folk, investors and probably a lot of people at Sony are NOT giving the PS3 the credit it deserves. All they see is that the PS3 is in the Red.

Well Crap, the reason its in the Red is because its pushing the entire home entertainment industry.

It won the Format war. Yet all of its gains on that front(royalties, disc sales) are in another division. Lossless Audio available via HDMI only pushes sales of HDMI AVRs and probably speakers as well. 1080P capability and movies pushes the sales of New TVs.

Well, no wonder other divisions in Sony did so well... Thanks PS3.

And if the slideshow capability was advertised properly, it could have meant more money for Sony Cameras.

The same people with the same arguments. 1 year later. The sky is still falling, eh?
Thankfully, the sky is pretty high up there, so it might keep falling for another 10 years.

As far as I can tell, they have sold what 20 million units.... name another piece of electronics that has done that in 2 years.

The Wii?

i think the ps3 is a great system. imo, the article is referring to the ps3's rep of being hard to develop for.

Wow - HeadRusch nailed it. That's high praise for me because it might be the first post with which I agree.

The xbox was the entry vehicle for MS. That got them in to the bedroom and living room. The 360 is the gateway to the next phase - the gateway to media and content, content ownership, and DRM. That is the "big plan" for MS.

The xbox division has spent how many years? Most other companies would have bailed by now. Not MS. They have the leadership, and just as importantly, have the $$$, to plan 5, 10, and even 20 years in advance - that's not saying they've always planned well.

And believe me, I'm not an MS fan. I make my living writing code for various MS platforms, more often than not using various MS tools. But I've dealt with MS crap, professionally, for more than a decade. I truly do consider MS to represent all that is soulless and evil in this world :)

Isn't Gizmodo the bunch of assclowns who posted the bogus story about the PS3's energy consumption? I'm sorry, but so much of their interpretation of events comes off as ignorant. "it's going to take a long time to atone for past missteps"..."Hopefully with previous boss Ken Kutaragi out and guys like Kaz Hirai and Jack Tretton influencing development on the sure-to-be-upcoming PlayStation 4, things will be better in the next generation". Wait, wasn't that conclusion the statement by Kutaragi that pissed people off so much? (bragging about PS4) What exactly is Gizmodo's point, that the PS3 is such a colossal failure that only the PS4 can resolve its problems?

And I'm sick of people dumping on Ken Kutaragi. OK so the guy had some bad press conferences. He wasn't a PR man. But he was also the dude responsible for turning Sony from a company having no presence in the gaming market into a powerhouse. How many people can claim responsibility for two consecutive hit gaming consoles, and a third that has for the first time combined HD home movie viewing with gaming? (And may indeed be a financial success a few years down the road, considering it's cornered the first generation of HD movie playback media).

Every driven, successfull person has a stubborn streak or a few odd ticks to their personality. It's part of what makes them great. I'm tired of seeing him portrayed as a loon who almost drove Sony into the ground.

And yes, if you're wondering...Ken Kutaragi is my father. :D

Its nice that the head of Sony America is a realist, even if you choose not to be. The PS3 is not a runaway success.....its not a failure but its clearly not living up to anyones expectations, and Sony has finally come out and admitted this. I think by being frank with the masses he's trying to let them know that there's no more ******** and hype, that they know there are some issues and they are going to focus on fixing them.

As for your incorrect comment about 360....its always had a hard drive, and its copying the Windows Vista AERO interface, not the CoverFlip Apple interface.
Depends on expectations, would seem they were a bit too high. Did Sony feel they would sell like the Wii (sold out for a year)? Likely, but given the current market & release pricing expectations were too high.

It's always had an optional HDD. Now the drive is standard as is the likelyhood of mandatory installs.

Depends on one's take, but using the name "channels" & avatars does seem to be taken from a competitor - not that it matters much or even has any relevance.

Actually, I think the problem is that you are grossly distorting where Microsoft dominates............................
Agree with all points, but I see the PS3 as positioned ahead of the 360 going forward. It has 90% of the features that make it an excellent media center & it's not going to take the level of effort M$ has ahead of them to finish polishing it up.

It offers Blu-ray movie play out of the box, to this the 360 has no answer. It's a gaping hole in the notion it's your "media center". What are the options? Add a Blu-ray player? (Sony'd like that).

They both offer downloadable movies, at the moment M$ has the edge but it's not even known at this time if this will be viable long term. What happens when the cable co's want their piece of the pie? Long term prognosis is that it will end in a tie - they'll be equal.

I agree that the console will be the media device going forward, difference is that the PS3 was built with this in mind. The largest HDD you can get on a 360 is currently 120gb - not nearly enough for a "media center"..........AND.....it's too expensive. The PS3 was designed to be user upgradeable with off the shelf components - historically this has always given devices an edge. Proprietary components have always held devices back.

M$ does have a huge leg up in the online arena, as they should. They had an extra year and it's something they're familiar with.........Can Sony catch up? Unknown, but currently it's the chink in their armor. If they don't it's game over.

On the flip side M$'s weak link is the console itself. They chose a faster pace to market & in doing so they made some short sighted choices. Optional and/or expensive storage for a media center? Proprietary controller interface? Using current gen storage for the physical media? Current gen movie play in a next gen console? All seem to be poor choices at this juncture......but only time will tell. I say they have 18 months on the outside, maybe. They'd better have a better unit available or it's game over for them. (of course selling that concept may be quite a rough road)

^^^^ hilarious lets see what you say in 18 months when the 360 hasn't failed.

Oh and they have had plenty of time to work with online for the 360. they have had it since the first xbox. 5ish years or so. sonys and nintendos online service cannot even touch how well LIVE works.

Depends on expectations, would seem they were a bit too high. Did Sony feel they would sell like the Wii (sold out for a year)? Likely, but given the current market & release pricing expectations were too high.


I think the disappointment isn't with the Wii, I think the disappointment is that even with the HD wars over, the PS3 hasn't surpassed the 360 by now and made it a distant third. I think Sony was hoping just the name alone would convince gamers to go off the 360... "Ok you had your fun, now come back home to Sony because PS3 is here!"...which hasn't happened. The other thing Sony is eyeing has got to be the debut of cheap-n-dirty BD drives. That will take a bite out of their PS3 business, so Sony needs those exclusive out in the next 12 months......and hope they live up to the hype.


It's always had an optional HDD. Now the drive is standard as is the likelyhood of mandatory installs.


Unless you heard news I didn't, the arcade is still on sale, and Microsoft hasn't altered their stance that all games must be coded to execute without a hard drive. I think, what we are seeing, is Microsoft now putting it on the table that while a game may run without the hard drive, there will be benefits to owning a hard drive with some games. Again, no announcements yet......we'll have to see where this one goes.


Depends on one's take, but using the name "channels" & avatars does seem to be taken from a competitor - not that it matters much or even has any relevance.


Yeah, I mean we can point fingers like playground kids here but we all know that in business: IF it sells, it WILL be copied. Who came up with the idea first is useful only in starting arguements....who implements it the best is where it pays off for consumers.


Agree with all points, but I see the PS3 as positioned ahead of the 360 going forward. It has 90% of the features that make it an excellent media center & it's not going to take the level of effort M$ has ahead of them to finish polishing it up.

The PS3 is better positioned because the PS3 is designed like a PC. Even the whole "Install Linux on it if you want!" kind of plays to that end. Removable, and required, hard drive. Mouse and Keyboard support out of the box (if not for all games). A web browser, etc. Of course its also got some of the clunkiness of a PC....having to install files once you download them, having to upgrade the hard drive if you want to install more games and play them than your hard drive will hold.

But I think it bears talking about here that Microsoft, like it tested the waters with the Xbox, is probably just laying the groundwork with 360 for the next uber system. With the xbox, they laid the online gaming groundwork. This gen its clearly all about the games and online, and they are "laying the groundwork" for the media interaction.

Still, neither machine has enough operational RAM to make either a suitable candidate for running any robust applications or even multitasking...and certainly not with a game running at the same time....EDIT: Unless they tweak stuff out running LINUX....you can do alot with a small memory footprint in LINUX, but again...its LINUX. You see mom and pop using Unix commands? Right.


It offers Blu-ray movie play out of the box, to this the 360 has no answer. It's a gaping hole in the notion it's your "media center". What are the options? Add a Blu-ray player? (Sony'd like that).

Agreed, but in a way Microsoft wasn't trying to fight that battle....their HDDVD player was more of an afterthought than a huge selling feature. They almost released it begrudgingly, and hardly played up its launch with any kind of fanfare. They wanted folks buying movies on LIVE, the way the cable companies want you embracing VoD. Sony wants you to buy discs because they have a horse in that race. (The only HD horse at the moment).

It wouldn't surprise me if Microsoft came up with its own propriatary format for its next system, skipping BD entirely. For combating Sony on the movie front I'd expect to see Live V3.0 with free HD rentals on all flicks, so long as you had a paid membership to Microsoft which would subsidize the licensing fee to the movie studios. Of course by then BD will be common, maybe, and I think an add-on BD drive would be a possibility. But I dont see it this generation interacting with the 360...thats a little too much to expect, I think.


I agree that the console will be the media device going forward, difference is that the PS3 was built with this in mind. The largest HDD you can get on a 360 is currently 120gb - not nearly enough for a "media center"..........AND.....it's too expensive.

Agreed, but that could all change at a moments notice. Microsoft could package a 3.5" 1 TB drive and have it interface with the 360. The thing is not up until this week was there a reason to have a huge HD on your 360, now with "install the entire game if you want to" options, people will be running to get 120gig HD's. Who knows...maybe even Microsoft will lower the price :) Hah...hahahaha...yeah that made me laugh too.


The PS3 was designed to be user upgradeable with off the shelf components - historically this has always given devices an edge. Proprietary components have always held devices back.


Careful now....it supports standardized hard drives, that is about where the generic add-ons end. Oh...well also blueTooth, micrsoft's wireless format is propriatary.


On the flip side M$'s weak link is the console itself. They chose a faster pace to market & in doing so they made some short sighted choices. Optional and/or expensive storage for a media center? Proprietary controller interface? Using current gen storage for the physical media? Current gen movie play in a next gen console? All seem to be poor choices at this juncture......but only time will tell. I say they have 18 months on the outside, maybe. They'd better have a better unit available or it's game over for them. (of course selling that concept may be quite a rough road)

I dont see it quite as bleakly as you do for the 360. The 360 has established itself as the game machine to have today...and last year and the year before that. Game wise, its a keeper..and looks to continue to be that way for the immediate future.

Hardware wise, they had no choice but to go DVD...HDDVD wasn't ready for prime time, neither was BD....and while their build quality was crap, you have to admit the system can play some games, so the architecture seems sound.

The BD disc is nice, but I am still waiting for someone to show me how BD makes games better. Texture sizes are the same or smaller on the PS3, framerates and resolutions on games remain about the same...number of levels remains the same, number of assests in a given game remain the same. Its been stated that in many games most of the space is taken up by either lossless sound or repeated data on the disc to speed up access times

Disc swapping I'm sure comes into play, but honestly..when a game like Grand Theft Auto performs almost identically on both platforms....one on BD...one on DVD....you really have to stop and re-evaluate if DVD9 isn't sufficient.

HD-Video laden RPG's will clearly have a leg-up over DVD...but their releases are few and far between on these shores and so I consider them a significant alsoran. FFXXXIXIIXX whatever is going to be interesting to see how the two compare.

(I said in another thread that its no surprise that Final Fantasy is coming to the 360 and at the same time they announce you can now install games to the HD...I see FF coming on like 2-5 DVD's and everyone will install them, keep the main disc in the drive for copy protection...JUST like a PC....and there you have it).

So maybe I'm not as doom and gloom on the 360 and some might be.

But I do think that Sony has a stronger set of exclusives going forward. And Sony aslo has the advantage that "they really can only go UP from here" unless they are planning for an epic failure down the road, so I think the PS3 will gain legs as the 360 stabilizes and becomes the "norm"......meanwhile engineers all over the globe are working on the hardware for the next 360.

And so it goes...

sonys and nintendos online service cannot even touch how well LIVE works.

In the past 18 months, PSN caught up a lot.

It's always had an optional HDD. Now the drive is standard as is the likelyhood of mandatory installs.



Why do people think just cause the HDD is becoming more standard on the Xbox360 that mandatory installs will soon follow? The Xbox360, for 3 years, has been able to play games efficiently and at faster speeds than the PS3 without any sort of installs whatsoever. What makes you think this will change? Mandatory installs on the PS3 was due to faulty design, like it or not, it is the only console that needs to dump data onto the HDD to play games without absurd loading.

PS3 is a great system. but I'll say this now... Sony lost focus when they wanted Bluray more than the successor to the Playstation franchise as a dedicated game console. It does both great but the core gamer wanting only gaming will look elsewhere to the rival HD gaming company for many good and legitimate reasons. Things are changing slightly but delays and game cancellations don't help.

BTW mandatory installs = BS excuse for a crutch. I really hope MS doesn't follow suit and Sony starts forcing developers from allowing it. Both are making more strides then missteps in my book but Sony REALLY needs to refocus it's gaming strategy because MS is continuously stealing the spotlight under it's nose time and time again.

Careful now....it supports standardized hard drives, that is about where the generic add-ons end. Oh...well also blueTooth, micrsoft's wireless format is propriatary..

Wrong. It fully supports USB 2.0. Anything that is USB can be slapped onto a PS3.

Wrong. It fully supports USB 2.0. Anything that is USB can be slapped onto a PS3.

You mean anything that doesn't require drivers right? My webcam wont just work, will it? (I haven't tried, I'm asking).

Wrong. It fully supports USB 2.0. Anything that is USB can be slapped onto a PS3.

Reference my buddy... USB2.0 external HDD and the PS3 doesn't recognize it. His USB1.0 external HDD also doesn't recognize it. I'm assuming the file system is wrong so he has to go through a big hassle to prep it I think OR just continue streaming his content. It's not just plug and play like you make it out to be.

Thats not true:

Sony Revenue (2008)
$88.714 Billion

Microsoft Revenue (2007)
$51.122 Billion

Sony Total Equity (2008)
$32 Billion

Microsoft Total Equity (2007)
$31 Billion

Source: Wiki
Wiki's never a good source. Good to glance at for reference...never source it.

These two figures (revenue and total equity) are inconsequential to the topic. They don't give you a good idea of the picture for which we're looking.

Total equity is a "since inception" account entry. Any net profits are booked to this account each year, therefore it is not at all indicative of current performance. Sony's slight equity lead is a consequence of them being around for approximately 30 more years. When viewed in those terms, the number doesn't sound so good, does it?

Gross revenues ignore a company's sector and efficiency; making direct comparisons rather useless. Microsoft is a high-margin software company with a great deal of intellectual capital while Sony is a low-margin, capital intensive electornics manufacturing firm. This explains Sony's higher total assets. I'm sure if you took a good look at their consolidated financials, you'd see a significant relative proportion of their assets are property, plant and equipment and other such long term assets.

For simplicity's sake, we'll stick with your Wiki numbers for what is really important: operating income....which is nearly five times greater for Microsoft.

Sony: $3.745 billion
Microsoft: $18.524 billion

Even more relevant is their respective liquidity positions. Microsoft has a significant amount of cash and cash equivalents on hand, to the tune of $14.5billion. (http://www.microsoft.com/msft/download/FY08/Q3-08_10Q.doc) This is actually significantly decreased from years past (not sure why...haven't looked in a while. Big stock repurchase? Acquisition? RROD certainly ate into it a little bit) It used to be $30+ billion. Sony's cash position is surprisingly strong at $10.8 billion (http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/fr/07q4_sony.pdf)(pg.24), but I think this is necessary for a consumer electronics firm, lest they have a large recall, warranty issues, etc.

Anyhow, just an FYI :)

I think MSFT blew through their cash when they paid a $3 special dividend to shareholders, and started a huge buyback program. Don't quote me but it was 2004/2005?

PS3 is a great system. but I'll say this now... Sony lost focus when they wanted Bluray more than the successor to the Playstation franchise as a dedicated game console. It does both great but the core gamer wanting only gaming will look elsewhere to the rival HD gaming company for many good and legitimate reasons. Things are changing slightly but delays and game cancellations don't help.

BTW mandatory installs = BS excuse for a crutch. I really hope MS doesn't follow suit and Sony starts forcing developers from allowing it. Both are making more strides then missteps in my book but Sony REALLY needs to refocus it's gaming strategy because MS is continuously stealing the spotlight under it's nose time and time again.

excellent points.

I think the disappointment isn't with the Wii, I think the disappointment is that even with the HD wars over, the PS3 hasn't surpassed the 360 by now and made it a distant third. ..............................................And so it goes...
All valid points, we'll see how it shakes out - seems to all be good for the consumer, competition keeps them moving forward.

Lol - I certainly agree, Sony certainly didn't see themselves sucking hind end.......a bit of arrogance. They assumed the once dominant position would continue "just because". Which is what I meant, expectations - the expected the franchise would make it certain......they now seem to realize a name only gets you so far.

Why do people think just cause the HDD is becoming more standard on the Xbox360 that mandatory installs will soon follow? The Xbox360, for 3 years, has been able to play games efficiently and at faster speeds than the PS3 without any sort of installs whatsoever. What makes you think this will change? Mandatory installs on the PS3 was due to faulty design, like it or not, it is the only console that needs to dump data onto the HDD to play games without absurd loading.
Work if from the reverse - why is M$ making a HDD standard? Easiest answer is downloads & DVD9. Downloads are obvious but while DVD9 is getting by at this juncture it is reaching it's limits. As game content grows it will soon outpace DVD9's abilities. That's when load delays come in, you simply can't un-compress that much data on the fly = installs, just like PC games. M$ ain't stupid, they know it's inevitable. The PS3 HDD has nothing to do with a "faulty design" - Sony knew from the outset that if you expected to sell downloaded content in any form you'd need a place to store it. I won't even go into actual throughput from the two types of drives.

^^^^ hilarious lets see what you say in 18 months when the 360 hasn't failed.
I didn't say nor mean failed as in "gone". I meant they will be hitting the wall, the won't be able to match the features - they'll reach a point where they have to admit "we can't do that because..............". But as was pointed out I'm quite certain they're hard at work on the 720 :D

PS3 is a great system. but I'll say this now... Sony lost focus when they wanted Bluray more than the successor to the Playstation franchise as a dedicated game console. It does both great but the core gamer wanting only gaming will look elsewhere to the rival HD gaming company for many good and legitimate reasons. Things are changing slightly but delays and game cancellations don't help.

BTW mandatory installs = BS excuse for a crutch. I really hope MS doesn't follow suit and Sony starts forcing developers from allowing it. Both are making more strides then missteps in my book but Sony REALLY needs to refocus it's gaming strategy because MS is continuously stealing the spotlight under it's nose time and time again.
That's because you're thinking about today or tomorrow...........see HeadRusch's post above. This is not about game consoles, that's simply the vehicle. As he points out the PC market is dead & the growing market is the "home media center" - the all in one device that sits in the living room. An in this scenario mandatory installs aren't a crutch they're just good sense. The storage is there, why not use it? Like PCs of today a 5 or even 50gb install means what when you have 1tb available? As of yesterday a 320gb HDD for a PS3 was $99 - shipped............the trend will continue, it always has. M$ ain't stupid, they know this is the path.............I'd wager HeadRusch is right, won't be too long before they offer a 1tb (or even more) add on for the 360. They're trying to sell content - content which requires storage AND it the storage is present then why not use it? (it IS faster)

Wrong. It fully supports USB 2.0. Anything that is USB can be slapped onto a PS3.
Yep, standard bluetooth & USB = lots of after market products at competitive prices. Standard SATA HDD means cheap upgrades.

All valid points, we'll see how it shakes out - seems to all be good for the consumer, competition keeps them moving forward.

Lol - I certainly agree, Sony certainly didn't see themselves sucking hind end.......a bit of arrogance. They assumed the once dominant position would continue "just because". Which is what I meant, expectations - the expected the franchise would make it certain......they now seem to realize a name only gets you so far.


Work if from the reverse - why is M$ making a HDD standard? Easiest answer is downloads & DVD9. Downloads are obvious but while DVD9 is getting by at this juncture it is reaching it's limits. As game content grows it will soon outpace DVD9's abilities. That's when load delays come in, you simply can't un-compress that much data on the fly = installs, just like PC games. M$ ain't stupid, they know it's inevitable. The PS3 HDD has nothing to do with a "faulty design" - Sony knew from the outset that if you expected to sell downloaded content in any form you'd need a place to store it. I won't even go into actual throughput from the two types of drives.


I didn't say nor mean failed as in "gone". I meant they will be hitting the wall, the won't be able to match the features - they'll reach a point where they have to admit "we can't do that because..............". But as was pointed out I'm quite certain they're hard at work on the 720 :D


That's because you're thinking about today or tomorrow...........see HeadRusch's post above. This is not about game consoles, that's simply the vehicle. As he points out the PC market is dead & the growing market is the "home media center" - the all in one device that sits in the living room. An in this scenario mandatory installs aren't a crutch they're just good sense. The storage is there, why not use it? Like PCs of today a 5 or even 50gb install means what when you have 1tb available? As of yesterday a 320gb HDD for a PS3 was $99 - shipped............the trend will continue, it always has. M$ ain't stupid, they know this is the path.............I'd wager HeadRusch is right, won't be too long before they offer a 1tb (or even more) add on for the 360. They're trying to sell content - content which requires storage AND it the storage is present then why not use it? (it IS faster)


Yep, standard bluetooth & USB = lots of after market products at competitive prices. Standard SATA HDD means cheap upgrades.

If they still want $100 for a 20GB, and $180 for a 120GB.... I'd hate to see the cost of a Terabyte Hard drive.

You mean anything that doesn't require drivers right? My webcam wont just work, will it? (I haven't tried, I'm asking).

If sony writes a generic webcam driver, sure it will. Just like mine works fine under linux on the PS3.

Reference my buddy... USB2.0 external HDD and the PS3 doesn't recognize it. His USB1.0 external HDD also doesn't recognize it. I'm assuming the file system is wrong so he has to go through a big hassle to prep it I think OR just continue streaming his content. It's not just plug and play like you make it out to be.


Recognized my USB2 western digital 750gb MyBook just fine.


It IS just plug and play, assuming its fat32, which his probably isnt.

Recognized my USB2 western digital 750gb MyBook just fine.


It IS just plug and play, assuming its fat32, which his probably isnt.

Confirmed... his was NTSC even after I told him numerous times to make sure it's the right file format. But it's not plug and play as easy as you make it out to be. Sure most cases are, some require some tinkering. I like tinkering. Gives you a sense of accomplishment when you get it to work right. Nothing today is as easy as people make it out to be.

Honestly I bought the machine because of Blu-ray. I already have a 360 for video games. I love my PS3 and games is not a reason. I use every aspect of the media streaming which is fantastic, name a bluray player that does half what a PS3 does. If you think the Blu-ray was a waste you gotta be a lil' on the slow side because the games are lacking big. PS3 is great and lil' by lil' the machine is blowing up, so as for the way the PS3 was put together they've made major updates that have made me appreciate what the machine is capable of.

Confirmed... his was NTSC even after I told him numerous times to make sure it's the right file format. But it's not plug and play as easy as you make it out to be. Sure most cases are, some require some tinkering. I like tinkering. Gives you a sense of accomplishment when you get it to work right. Nothing today is as easy as people make it out to be.

If you don't think the usb (with HDDs) is 'plug and play' then nothing is, and you shouldn't be anywhere NEAR this forum.

You just plug it in. If its not in fat32, you plug it into a computer, right click, hit "format" and click "fat32". If you can figure out how to get into the PSN store, you can figure this out.

That's because you're thinking about today or tomorrow...........see HeadRusch's post above. This is not about game consoles, that's simply the vehicle. As he points out the PC market is dead & the growing market is the "home media center" - the all in one device that sits in the living room. An in this scenario mandatory installs aren't a crutch they're just good sense. The storage is there, why not use it? Like PCs of today a 5 or even 50gb install means what when you have 1tb available? As of yesterday a 320gb HDD for a PS3 was $99 - shipped............the trend will continue, it always has. M$ ain't stupid, they know this is the path.............I'd wager HeadRusch is right, won't be too long before they offer a 1tb (or even more) add on for the 360. They're trying to sell content - content which requires storage AND it the storage is present then why not use it? (it IS faster)


Sony being involved in the gaming industry, as well as Bluray, as well as being a studio (along with everything else they do, i.e. TVs, HT systems, etc) would LOVE gamers who dump money on gaming to also dump it on the other product lines and media they are directly connected with. Same as you see MS wanting people to rent films/shows on their LIVE service... they expand the horizons. But let's not kid ourselves here... This is my biggest gripe with Sony. The PS3 is the 3rd PLAYSTATION in the gaming product family (sans PSP), and note the name of the product ;) as further proof of this, clearly gaming wasn't their main focus this gen. If it was we'ld see all the latest updates to be DTS-HD MA decoding, DVD upscaling, and other BD/DVD playback functionalities but instead we got that first and FW 2.4 was to bring the PS3 up to speed on what everyone has wanted since launch. I mean even the PSP got the whole remote play and that wasn't for gaming either! We're still waiting for the basic use of a true ingame xmb, cross game invites and voice communications, as well as a trophy system that is more than just 1 game and promises. Hell, what about HOME and all the neat gaming integration it's supposed to have?! I know this is all being worked on but even the heads are making claims of lost focus, and priorities shifting as well as disappointments in game developers leaving exclusivity.

Put yourself in game developers shoes... You made yourself and the business tons of money in the past, and now you have a big player who is commiting themselves more towards other aspects of a game console... you yourself would expand elsewhere and rightfully is why VF5, GTA, DMC, FF and other titles are now multiplatform. $ talks. Sony in my book started thinking only for themselves and lost focus in the gaming world.

Oh, and the hype doesn't help either. Cry wolf so many times and eventually people will think you're full of it. Note though, my PS3 is the ONLY Bluray player I'ld own. It is a great value for the money but don't neglect one of the main reasons most picked up a PS3 for... gaming. And mandatory installs IS a crutch. If optional it'ld be great but how many games do you go thru before requiring an upgraded HDD or a nuisance of delete and reinstall titles just to play them? It really eliminates the whole 'pick up and play' attitude many of us like. Guess you can toss out that whole media hub/center idea as well since HDD space is taken up by game files... ALWAYS look at worst case scenario, in this case I feel partially sorry for 20gb owners... but hey at least you guys got the best PS2 BC :(

"Sony Knows What Went Wrong With the PS3 "


yeah people keep making statements without facts, and dont realize how long it takes a game system to be fully utalized...

If you don't think the usb (with HDDs) is 'plug and play' then nothing is, and you shouldn't be anywhere NEAR this forum.

You just plug it in. If its not in fat32, you plug it into a computer, right click, hit "format" and click "fat32". If you can figure out how to get into the PSN store, you can figure this out.

Plug and play to me says open box, plug in USB port, voila it works. It's a marketing term used to show how 'easy' something is to the consumer, kind of like the term 'future proof'.

If it requires more than just that, it's not the easy plug and play you described. This isn't nitpicking btw, just because you and I find it very easy, the average Joe might not. Hells I know a few fairly technical people that would be taken back by different file systems like NTSC and FAT32... I found out why in his case, explained it to him and what he has to do to get it to work and the issue is resolved now. Someone noted his USB webcam isn't plug and play and you came out saying it is, and mentioned your linux system (which btw I myself need to do ;) ) and installing linux isn't deeming it plug n play either. Think outside the box :p

The BD disc is nice, but I am still waiting for someone to show me how BD makes games better. Texture sizes are the same or smaller on the PS3, framerates and resolutions on games remain about the same...number of levels remains the same, number of assests in a given game remain the same. Its been stated that in many games most of the space is taken up by either lossless sound or repeated data on the disc to speed up access times


This is what I don't understand. With BD, I would expect the PS3 to have huge a$$ texture sizes. In my mind the PS3 textures should look 1000 times better than the 360, yet ps3 textures look the same or even sometimes worse .

Is the PS3's limited memory preventing developers from using larger textures, or is there some other technical reason coming into play?

yes you are absolutely right, the future is digital downloads but like many on this forum you are 2-3 years ahead techno wise. billions of people around the world still use music cd's as their medium of choice. there will for years to come,be a place for actual plastic cases with content sitting on store shelves and most of it will be bluray format notdisc'stechnoCd'sshelve hd-DVD.

Thank god...some will always prefer quality and hopefully will always have a choice.

Argh...I have to chime in here cuco33...it's NTFS, not NTSC! NTSC is the video format whereas NTFS is the file system.

NTFS vs. FAT32

NTSC vs. PAL

Carry on...;)

...would be taken back by different file systems like NTSC and FAT32...

Argh...I have to chime in here cuco33...it's NTFS, not NTSC! NTSC is the video format whereas NTFS is the file system.

NTFS vs. FAT32

NTSC vs. PAL

Carry on...;)

Doh! You should see how bad I am with names. I still to this day call the wrong twin girl cousin by the wrong name (and they hike me on it all the time and yes I can tell the difference between both of them :p)

One approach I think is a smart movie and not gaming related is the PSN video store. I think BD will be the last physical disc based format and will end selling out with DVD while digital downloads will become the norm as the younger generation matures. Sony being in position on all fronts, again not related to gaming, sees themselves in the corner where all consumers can go to one point. DVD/BD for physical disk based consumers and DD for those who don't want the actual disks themselves. DD still needs big steps to make though and I think we all know this, just as we know it's the future albeit not tomorrow or the day after that but it's coming

Put yourself in game developers shoes... You made yourself and the business tons of money in the past, and now you have a big player who is commiting themselves more towards other aspects of a game console... you yourself would expand elsewhere and rightfully is why VF5, GTA, DMC, FF and other titles are now multiplatform. $ talks. Sony in my book started thinking only for themselves and lost focus in the gaming world.
Personally I can see why any game would be exclusive at this point. Given the spiraling development costs it only makes sense to be multi-platform. Exclusivity simply costs too much money in lost sales...........may have been fine in the days when one console represented the vast majority of the market, now?

Oh, and the hype doesn't help either. Cry wolf so many times and eventually people will think you're full of it. Note though, my PS3 is the ONLY Bluray player I'ld own. ......................
Well it's pretty much the nature of the beast, they are computers now & all the baggage associated with them comes along. Given the vast increase in functionality I can't really see an alternative. Upgrades & firmware seem to be in the cards.

Plug and play to me says open box, plug in USB port, voila it works. It's a marketing term used to show how 'easy' something is to the consumer, kind of like the term 'future proof'.

If it requires more than just that, it's not the easy plug and play you described. This isn't nitpicking btw, just because you and I find it very easy, the average Joe might not. Hells I know a few fairly technical people that would be taken back by different file systems like NTSC and FAT32.
Differing definitions. To me plug & play includes reading the directions - which in the case of the PS3 means FAT32 for external drives. I consider the controller plug & play even though when I added one recently I had to read the directions (how do I register one again? :D ) since it was a year since the last time I did it. Me or the complexity? I say me.

And I would call anyone who doesn't know the differences between NTFS, FAT32, EXT3, etc "highly technical".....but that's just me.

Plug and play to me says open box, plug in USB port, voila it works.

Thats what I did with mine. Its not sony's fault your friend decided to format it to NTFS.

Someone noted his USB webcam isn't plug and play and you came out saying it is, and mentioned your linux system (which btw I myself need to do ;) ) and installing linux isn't deeming it plug n play either. Think outside the box :p

I did not say a USB webcam would be plug and play with the PS3. What I did say, was that the potential was there. All it takes is sony to port a generic webcam driver, and then yeah, it would be.

My mentioning Linux was to note that yes, the hardware is fully capable of supporting every type of USB device.

According to the SingStar folks, the camera does not have to be an PSEye to work, so it appears to me that "any" (i'm sure there are exceptions) USB webcam will work with the PS3.

clearly gaming wasn't their main focus this gen. If it was we'ld see all the latest updates to be DTS-HD MA decoding, DVD upscaling, and other BD/DVD playback functionalities but instead we got that first and FW 2.4 was to bring the PS3 up to speed on what everyone has wanted since launch. I mean even the PSP got the whole remote play and that wasn't for gaming either! We're still waiting for the basic use of a true ingame xmb,

I'm tryinb to play a game, not navigate a menu while playing a game. Total nonissue to me.

cross game invites
If I wanted to play ratched and clank, I'd be playing ratchet and clank, not oblivion. I turn off my cell phone when I get home for a reason. I see cross game invites as a total nonissue.



and voice communications, as well as a trophy system that is more than just 1 game and promises.(

Didn't a bunch of games already have voice comm? And c'mon, trophies? Who gives a crap? I don't need the PS3 to tell me what video games I"m good at.








For you, these are issues. For me, they've got nothing to do with gaming, and arent any evidence that sony wasn't focusing on a gaming system. They're more social networking and fluff.

According to the SingStar folks, the camera does not have to be an PSEye to work, so it appears to me that "any" (i'm sure there are exceptions) USB webcam will work with the PS3.FYI for dual owners, 360's camera works with PS3.

"Sony Knows What Went Wrong With the PS3 "


yeah people keep making statements without facts, and dont realize how long it takes a game system to be fully utalized...

Hehe...I love fanboy statements like this who see a thread title and post immediately without stopping to read its content--namely that it was from a roundtable with Sony's CEO. :D You know what? I think Jack doesn't know how long it takes a game system to be fully utilized...

Didn't a bunch of games already have voice comm?

Yeah, but cross-game chat would be very nice. Sometimes I want to talk to a friend online who's playing a different game. You're right that it's not a dealbreaker and the general-use functionality is already there; some of us are just more demanding than others :)

Thats what I did with mine. Its not sony's fault your friend decided to format it to NTFS.

He didn't format it to NTFS. It came out the box that way from what he told me.

Question for you synovia... do you have any other systems? Say 360 or Wii, just keeping to this gen? If so you'ld see how useful the features that come with ingame xmb can be, cross game chat is, cross game invites for MP games done right (albeit I think it's fine now but look at GT5P (I don't have it, refuse to get it and I'm one of the biggest GT fanatics out there) how easy can you load up a track with your buddies? ah ya can't just yet ;))

Knock the trophies all you want, I still do today with achievements (I game a ton more than most of my buddies and my score is just over 4000 while some of there's is double and even triple that of mine) but they are fun to get and add replay value to any title. Picture your absolute most favorite PS3 title you've beaten time and time again on all difficulties... now imagine the developer gave you a bonus that you can show off to friends for getting that very hard to reach goal... it makes it fun and is quite rewarding when you get it, gives a sense of accomplishment.

You seem to knock the very things Sony is bringing that MS has already. Why hike on it? They ARE good things and will get better soon as the groundwork is all in place and patched up. You'll be using these features more than you think. Sure some might be fluff but most in fact add to the gaming experience. They allow you and buddies to game, to communicate, to showoff, etc.

I'm tryinb to play a game, not navigate a menu while playing a game. Total nonissue to me.


If I wanted to play ratched and clank, I'd be playing ratchet and clank, not oblivion. I turn off my cell phone when I get home for a reason. I see cross game invites as a total nonissue.





Didn't a bunch of games already have voice comm? And c'mon, trophies? Who gives a crap? I don't need the PS3 to tell me what video games I"m good at.








For you, these are issues. For me, they've got nothing to do with gaming, and arent any evidence that sony wasn't focusing on a gaming system. They're more social networking and fluff.


so if you had friends who jumped on and wanted to play, say a round or 3 of COD4 you dont want to know? "screw em, IM PLAY xxyyaabb game right now!!!". its nice to know sometimes.

and as for bringing up a menu in a game, once you start using it and realize how nice it is to be able to get to those options while paused in a game, you realize how you want it all to work smoothly and quickly.

and trophies are cool. i have a 360 so im used to achievments. i dont play with them in mind, but its cool when i get one. a little added bonus. its a small thing, but its actually cool. its not taking anything away from your game, so why not have it and enjoy it?

now imagine the developer gave you a bonus that you can show off to friends for getting that very hard to reach goal... it makes it fun and is quite rewarding when you get it, gives a sense of accomplishment.

You seem to knock the very things Sony is bringing that MS has already.

Not really a Microsoft idea...

http://www.wyattf.com/pictures/Atari/Activision_Patches.JPG

Not really a Microsoft idea...

http://www.wyattf.com/pictures/Atari/Activision_Patches.JPG

I remember those... I swear I would beat anyone's top score in River Raid. But yes, every idea is a spin off of someone else's idea. We're talking today, not 20 yrs ago. The achievements/trophies that are out/coming out will be multiple tasks not just a high score type of thing. It'ld be kill this boss in insane or pull off a 1000 hit combo. Let's not forget how close the death of gaming almost happened back in that era ;)

Boy, Activision sure loved rainbows back in the day.

About the only way to add color to 2600 games.

I meant the badges. I played Pitfall, there was no rainbow trailing Harry :p

He didn't format it to NTFS. It came out the box that way from what he told me.

Question for you synovia... do you have any other systems? Say 360 or Wii, just keeping to this gen? If so you'ld see how useful the features that come with ingame xmb can be, cross game chat is, cross game invites for MP games done right (albeit I think it's fine now but look at GT5P (I don't have it, refuse to get it and I'm one of the biggest GT fanatics out there) how easy can you load up a track with your buddies? ah ya can't just yet ;))


I've got a Wii, and a PC that I game on. On my PS3 (in Linux) I also have a handful of other consoles emulated (snes, mame, etc). I also own a DS.

I play video games as an escapist thing. I don't want to chat while I"m playing video games, it distracts from the game.


Knock the trophies all you want, I still do today with achievements (I game a ton more than most of my buddies and my score is just over 4000 while some of there's is double and even triple that of mine) but they are fun to get and add replay value to any title. Picture your absolute most favorite PS3 title you've beaten time and time again on all difficulties... now imagine the developer gave you a bonus that you can show off to friends for getting that very hard to reach goal... it makes it fun and is quite rewarding when you get it, gives a sense of accomplishment.


I don't feel the need to show off my video game accomplishments to my friends. I also don't need Sony to tell me I did good in a game, seeing the endgame tells me that already.

You seem to knock the very things Sony is bringing that MS has already. Why hike on it? They ARE good things and will get better soon as the groundwork is all in place and patched up. You'll be using these features more than you think. Sure some might be fluff but most in fact add to the gaming experience. They allow you and buddies to game, to communicate, to showoff, etc.

No, I'm knocking on the fact that you said that this is something EVERYONE has been waiting for, when in fact, many of us, who are very enthusiastic gamers, don't care. They DO NOT add to the gaming experience for me.

so if you had friends who jumped on and wanted to play, say a round or 3 of COD4 you dont want to know? "screw em, IM PLAY xxyyaabb game right now!!!". its nice to know sometimes.

I hate FPS games on consoles. If I wanted something like that, I'd play Counterstrike, or something along those lines, on the PC, where the interface is better.

But yeah, if I got a message saying "hey, lets play COD" when I was playing Oblivion, yeah, they'd get a "i'm not interested" response. Again, videogaming is escapist for me. I play video games when I'm pissed off and dont want to talk to my friends. If I wanted to shoot the **** with a friend, we'd go get a beer.

Ditch the Cell and Blu ray?
Why dont they Ditch HDMI too...
Ditch built in Wifi?...
Who needs bluetooth?
mandatory Hard disks are for the birds... dump that too.

Then put it in a white box with a no room for proper ventalation. And make sure you have a big circle on the front capable of showing a red ring 3 times.

glad your on my side vs the others here on AVS forum. I totally agree that PS3 is the next best invention. Not only does it cure cancer, but.....
-1080p full games
-cures cancer
-7.1 lossless
-bluetooth the first of its kind
-hard drive the first of its kind
-piano black
-blu ray movies in high def and won the format war
-ken kutagari
-sixaxxis controller
-cures cancer
-blu ray movies
-cures cancer
-blu ray movies
-cures cancer
-blu ray movies
-cures cancer
-blu ray movies....

For me, trophies aren't about bragging rights (though I understand they are for a lot of people and the system is built around that so it's obviously a majority). I like how it can give you unique goals to try and achieve that I would not have thought of otherwise. For example, Super Stardust. I would never had played Bomber mode trying to conserve and build up as many bombs as possible. I hear GTA4 has some pretty cool achievements as well. As far as I'm concerned, it's about extending the life of your game, not bragging about your e-penis.

The achievements/trophies that are out/coming out will be multiple tasks not just a high score type of thing. It'ld be kill this boss in insane or pull off a 1000 hit combo.
right, but the games that track this stuff, already ARE tracking this stuff. All this does is put it on the front menu, instead of inside the menu of the game.

glad your on my side vs the others here on AVS forum. I totally agree that PS3 is the next best invention. Not only does it cure cancer, but.....
-1080p full games
-cures cancer
-7.1 lossless
-bluetooth the first of its kind
-hard drive the first of its kind
-piano black
-blu ray movies in high def and won the format war
-ken kutagari
-sixaxxis controller
-cures cancer
-blu ray movies
-cures cancer
-blu ray movies
-cures cancer
-blu ray movies
-cures cancer
-blu ray movies....

I didn't get a Ken Kutagari with my PS3... :(

The same people with the same arguments. 1 year later. The sky is still falling, eh?
Thankfully, the sky is pretty high up there, so it might keep falling for another 10 years.

good point DRALT I bet in a year the same discussion comes up again with the same 10 pages of it. I bet if I save this link and someone posts the same discussion and I bring this specific topic up and they say to my response, "its not the same discussion its different SONY is different and 360 is different" i heard it all before and you know how sarcastic I can be :p

right, but the games that track this stuff, already ARE tracking this stuff. All this does is put it on the front menu, instead of inside the menu of the game.

I don't quite follow... if the games tracked these things, Sony should be retroactively dishing out trophies to current games. I think you're referring to the badges and perks you get as you rank up in a game and not an achievement/trophy set out by the developer. Look at GTA4, what do you get for flying under every bridge with a chopper on 360? an achievement worthy of increasing your gamer score. PS3? nothing. That to me is an accomplishment well deserving of showing off to other buddies who have the same game going for the same thing and you got it first. It brings competition and competition is good and fun.

It might sound stupid but how is a bunch of friends PLAYING THE GAME trying to do something hard competitively with friends not add to the game experience? It seems to me you refuse to even acknowledge it just because MS has it on their console since day 1. The great thing is Sony is incorporating a similar system, albeit late as hell but better late then never I always say. That's JUST achievement talk here. Maybe you don't play games online but I'm an avid PC and console gamer and to me MP is a huge thing. If a game doesn't have it, it The other features they are bringing will add value to the console, it'll give gamers features they want and ultimately make the console better than what it is now.
Many games require voice chat to play better but what is bad if a buddy sends you a message asking if you want to get in on a sports match or fighter for a round or two while he's in the game waiting and you're off doing something else? To me it's stupid to not want these features that Sony is adopting. You should seriously try out the 360 with an unbiased view and see what's to come, although you seem like the person who has the Sony brand tattooed on his arm refusing that any of it is good ;)

synovia - what types of games do you play? most games have some sort of co-op and its fun to play those also. having voice chat can be a real blast.

FPS's, sports, racing...all those kinds of games can be alot of fun when you play with another person.

i understand what you mean about playing alone though. right now im in the mood to sit by myself and play some bioshock. just get real involved and into it.

but i have tons of fun logging on and playing with my brother. halo3 is a ton of fun. co-ordinatin your attacks talking smack.....its really a different type of gaming. i dont know if you have really ever tried online, but you should. its fun.

This is what I don't understand. With BD, I would expect the PS3 to have huge a$$ texture sizes. In my mind the PS3 textures should look 1000 times better than the 360, yet ps3 textures look the same or even sometimes worse .

Is the PS3's limited memory preventing developers from using larger textures, or is there some other technical reason coming into play?

Limitation on texture size reside with the video memory, and not storage. Until you have 1GB or higher video memory, you will not see any difference in resolution for textures in video games.

However, more storage can provide you with more variety of texture for different scenes. But with image compression that is available, this really is not an issue. Which is why I always found "BR = Better Graphics" argument very amusing. What is true is "BR = Longer and Better Cut Scenes".

Yea, all Blu-Ray is used for is longer cut scenes. Just like when games moved from cartridge to CD, and then from CD to DVD. There are NO benefits to increasing storage.

Yea, all Blu-Ray is used for is longer cut scenes. Just like when games moved from cartridge to CD, and then from CD to DVD. There are NO benefits to increasing storage.

I think your the first person to actually point that out in the former high def war. US (AVSFORUM memberes) were blinded in all this HD former war format we forgot that the only diff was codecs and increased storage space between the two. the blu ray fanboys were saying that movies, "NEED 50GB OF STORAGE TO WATCH A FULL HIGH DEF MOVIE" then you had HD DVD saying, "its the codecs that matter the compression"

My comments below

I totally agree that PS3 is the next best invention. Not only does it cure cancer, but.....
-1080p full games in very limited numbers.
-cures cancer maybe, maybe not.
-7.1 lossless
-bluetooth the first of its kind tied with the wii.
-hard drive the first of its kind the original xbox had a built in hdd.
-piano black only on the 20gb. The rest have an ugly ass silver/white trip piece.
-blu ray movies in high def and won the format war
-ken kutagari is not included.
-sixaxxis controller without rumble at launch.


Like I said it's a great piece of hardware, but lets not fool ourselves into thinking it's a revolution.

Yea, all Blu-Ray is used for is longer cut scenes. Just like when games moved from cartridge to CD, and then from CD to DVD. There are NO benefits to increasing storage.

Well I remember being really envious of games on the TG-16 CD such as Y's book I and II and Cosmic Fantasy, which featured gorgeous animated cutscenes and voice acting during the SNES era. Then during the N64 era, the PSOne delivered fantastic games such as Metal Gear and Final Fantasy VII, thanks again to the increased storage capacity.

I do think having more storage capacity is an advantage, even if it's only used for cutscenes, that still matters. I want higher definition, less compressed and better sounding cutscenes.........they enrich the overall experience for me.

Well I remember being really envious of games on the TG-16 CD such as Y's book I and II and Cosmic Fantasy, which featured gorgeous animated cutscenes and voice acting during the SNES era. Then during the N64 era, the PSOne delivered fantastic games such as Metal Gear and Final Fantasy VII, thanks again to the increased storage capacity.

I do think having more storage capacity is an advantage, even if it's only used for cutscenes, that still matters. I want higher definition, less compressed and better sounding cutscenes.........they enrich the overall experience for me.

Does it really though :rolleyes:is that why FF7 is still considered a top game even with the carpal tunnel syndrome 3 disc set for the PS1 that it caused so many court cases over :cool:

Guys, number1laing was joking. At least, I think he was.

Limitation on texture size reside with the video memory, and not storage. Until you have 1GB or higher video memory, you will not see any difference in resolution for textures in video games.

So part of the reason that 360 games sometimes have slightly better textures are because the video memory on the 360 has access to 512MB, yet the PS3's video memory is only 256MB?

Or can textures also be stored in system memory too?

not only all that but the ps3 is so powerful that my wang actually grew an inch when i defended it to the evils of xbox 360 and wii..

Yea, all Blu-Ray is used for is longer cut scenes. Just like when games moved from cartridge to CD, and then from CD to DVD. There are NO benefits to increasing storage.

Are you telling me with the magical powers of MS compression technology we really can't have all the games on Atar2600 cartridges?

Yea, all Blu-Ray is used for is longer cut scenes. Just like when games moved from cartridge to CD, and then from CD to DVD. There are NO benefits to increasing storage.

You might want to tell that to John Carmack then.

Whelp I took all the haters advices and went and bought a second PS3 yesterday. Hell, I’m planning my 3rd to. I just figured I could be cool and put the piece of crap all over my house since its worthless right? Just so I can be a fanboy and say I own 2 now, it doesn’t do anything else but sit there like a brick right... Especially since I’m crazy to do so and no one has any rational to even own 1 right?

To comment on the original post, I agree that the PS3 hardware was designed without any input from the Sony's software guys, or any third party game developer. If the hardware division had consulted with anyone in software they would not have used an asymmetrical chip design, and would not have split the RAM pool. Those two things are what makes the PS3 more work to design for, and harder to port to, for developers. SCE has done a great job improving the hardware that wasn't quite done yet when released (because of the early and also undercooked 360), and I don't see anything stopping more improvements in the future. I also respect a company that can just admit a misstep like this- very refreshing.

If you look at the changes in the Playstation business since Kaz Hirai took over you can see the improvement in software. Kaz is a software specialist anyway, and it's what the PS3 needs going forward. Sony has now, by far, the largest first party stable of developers in the biz. I 'm with Sony on this- I like their commitment to new titles that aren't always sequels and are different. Customers are finally coming around as sales lately have perked up, and the improvements to the OS and PSN service are also helping sway those on the fence.

To say that PS3 is a failure is completely wrong. It's got problems, but so do the others. Since this is all a numbers game then what happens if PS3 passes 360 in total sales? Is it still a failure then? We'll have to start another thread then, and watch everyone change their tune.

Guys, number1laing was joking. At least, I think he was.

I absolutely was! At no point in videogaming history has increased storage been considered a bad thing, until now that is. There have been times its been poorly utilized (early CD-ROM, Sega CD, to name two), but its always been considered a good thing that developers have more space to put their work on. But heaven forbid a developer take advantage of Blu-Ray's space, or say they need Blu-Ray to fit their vision, or say the 360 DVD was not big enough for their game.

I absolutely was! At no point in videogaming history has increased storage been considered a bad thing, until now that is. There have been times its been poorly utilized (early CD-ROM, Sega CD, most PS3 games, to name three)

Fixt.


Obviously more storage is never bad, but it takes a while for it be properly utilized....

"Most" PS3 games? Care to name some examples? And don't say "Metal Gear Solid 4 because it has a lot of FMV omg", that game is really no different from any one in the series, and if you like them you like them, if you don't you don't.

The simple fact is that because so many games are developed for both Xbox 360 and PS3, the developers don't even try to take advantage of the extra space.

"Most" PS3 games? Care to name some examples? And don't say "Metal Gear Solid 4 because it has a lot of FMV omg", that game is really no different from any one in the series, and if you like them you like them, if you don't you don't.

The simple fact is that because so many games are developed for both Xbox 360 and PS3, the developers don't even try to take advantage of the extra space.

Several oof th hyped titles from the last year or so could have easily been done on DVD with no appreciable loss, ie, Lair, Heavenly Sword, Haze, Even Warhawk which is an excellent game almost fits on a CD.

Wait... no you're doing it wrong.

Blu-Ray, or DVD before it, or CD before that, is about capability... if developers need more than 6.5 gigs of space, it's there for them. For example, each of PGR4's locations could only have locations at one time of day, because there wasn't enough space on the 360 disc for the other time of day (for example, Shanghai and Las Vegas was only at night). If it was on a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD it could've been there.

That doesn't mean every hyped or exclusive game has to take advantage of all that space.

Wait... no you're doing it wrong.

Blu-Ray, or DVD before it, or CD before that, is about capability... if developers need more than 6.5 gigs of space, it's there for them. For example, each of PGR4's locations could only have locations at one time of day, because there wasn't enough space on the 360 disc for the other time of day (for example, Shanghai and Las Vegas was only at night). If it was on a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD it could've been there.

That doesn't mean every hyped or exclusive game has to take advantage of all that space.

All i was saying is that so far, the majority of PS3 games, including the exclusives could be made to fit on a DVD without any real loss. Of course now we are starting to see some new titles that would require multiple DVD's, and I am sure that the newer games will do a better job of using the extra space, ie MGS4.....

I am just going to stay technical since I don't want to get in a middle of fanboy flamewars...

The reason why video memory is so important is because of the way a video images are composed.

For any given scene, following things are happening inside your graphics card (simplified for easier understanding):

A 3D scene is composed, lighting is calculated, and z-buffer is figured out (hide things that are in the back of something else). Once the scene is set, the texture is applied (uncompressed) and the entire single screen is drawn bit by bit to the video memory.

Because the entire scene (single frame) has to reside in the video memory (it has to be really fast since you are doing a lot of updates, i.e. 30fps), how detailed that scene (in both resolution and detail) is limited to how much your video memory can store. It does not matter if you have a terrabyte of storage, if you have 64MB of video memory, that is all you are going to see in a single scene.

And while it is true that with each generation of game consoles, the storage has increased, you are conveniently forgetting that video memory has grown exponentially as well with each generation.

Again, more storage means you will have better cutscenes and more diverse textures (from scene to scene). But it has nothing to do with whether or not you will see more detail (higher resolution) in a given scene. That is really up to the video memory.

To put it another way, video memory is like seats on a plane. It does not matter how many people are in the terminal (i.e. storage), if there are only 256 seats on the airplane, only 256 people can get on. It does not matter if the terminal can hold 10,000 people or 100,000 people. The bigger terminal may be able to hold many different planes (i.e. diverse textures, cut scenes), but in the end, only one plane can take off at a time.

There is a reason why MGS4 cannot be done on 360; because it has hours and hours of Hi-Def movies (it can be done, but it would be a lot of disk swapping). But any given scene, MGS4 does not have any more details than what can be done with 360.

I am just going to stay technical since I don't want to get in a middle of fanboy flamewars...

The reason why video memory is so important is because of the way a video images are composed.

For any given scene, following things are happening inside your graphics card (simplified for easier understanding):

A 3D scene is composed, lighting is calculated, and z-buffer is figured out (hide things that are in the back of something else). Once the scene is set, the texture is applied (uncompressed) and the entire single screen is drawn bit by bit to the video memory.

Because the entire scene (single frame) has to reside in the video memory (it has to be really fast since you are doing a lot of updates, i.e. 30fps), how detailed that scene (in both resolution and detail) is limited to how much your video memory can store. It does not matter if you have a terrabyte of storage, if you have 64MB of video memory, that is all you are going to see in a single scene.

And while it is true that with each generation of game consoles, the storage has increased, you are conveniently forgetting that video memory has grown exponentially as well with each generation.

Again, more storage means you will have better cutscenes and more diverse textures (from scene to scene). But it has nothing to do with whether or not you will see more detail (higher resolution) in a given scene. That is really up to the video memory.

To put it another way, video memory is like seats on a plane. It does not matter how many people are in the terminal (i.e. storage), if there are only 256 seats on the airplane, only 256 people can get on. It does not matter if the terminal can hold 10,000 people or 100,000 people. The bigger terminal may be able to hold many different planes (i.e. diverse textures, cut scenes), but in the end, only one plane can take off at a time.

There is a reason why MGS4 cannot be done on 360; because it has hours and hours of Hi-Def movies (it can be done, but it would be a lot of disk swapping). But any given scene, MGS4 does not have any more details than what can be done with 360.

Thanks for the down-to-earth, unbiased explanation :)

There is a reason why MGS4 cannot be done on 360; because it has hours and hours of Hi-Def movies (it can be done, but it would be a lot of disk swapping). But any given scene, MGS4 does not have any more details than what can be done with 360.

I guess you missed the announcement about game installs to the harddrive for the 360.

^^^ Glad someone said that. Anywho, at least Sony admits that they F'ed up, when is MS going to tell us why their 360s keep breaking and why they don't bother fixing them? It's funny because before the Ps3 came out and even into its first year i would make fun of how horrible it was, but now that tables have turned :p

^^^ Glad someone said that. Anywho, at least Sony admits that they F'ed up, when is MS going to tell us why their 360s keep breaking and why they don't bother fixing them? It's funny because before the Ps3 came out and even into its first year i would make fun of how horrible it was, but now that tables have turned :p


MS is fixing them. From a company standpoint they had a choice to dig their grave early or come up with a solution to fix the issue. They offer a 3 year specific warranty for the RROD. I am pretty sure consumers are still getting RROD and at the same time have launch units that haven't had any issues yet(I am one of them Dec 05 build) but it looks like it has dropped with the new revisions out.

I guess you missed the announcement about game installs to the harddrive for the 360.


179.99 hard drive / 120 GB = $1.499/GB
1.49 GB X 50 (MGS4 Blu ray 50) = $74.99 just to STORE the game.
Game is ONLY 59.99
Microsoft is a genius !:rolleyes:

They offer a 3 year specific warranty for the RROD.
That's part of the problem Microsoft hasn't changes anything to prevent this from happening. Ever get mad at you cable company/internet provider because your service doesn't work ? Why they'll fix it for free. Not only do they break, even the replacment have problems, after problems.


I have a PS3 and really enjoy it. I feel Sony is starting to do a lot of things right but as far as the new price drop they DON'T have a clue. People are buying the 80 GB PS3 BECAUSE it plays PS2 games NOT the additional storage.

I can just hear it it.....
Little Johnny: Mom and dad can I get a PS3 ?
Parents: Does it play all your games?
Little Johnny: No
Partents: NO, what about all the money we spent in.........

I think it would be alot easier to move 130 million current PS2 users if they still had backwards compatibility. Then just slowly release less and less PS2 games to ensure consumers want/need a new system.

I guess you missed the announcement about game installs to the harddrive for the 360.

MGS4 = 50GB.

How will you install the entire game on a 20GB HD?

That's part of the problem Microsoft hasn't changes anything to prevent this from happening

They have but you are making a statement like that is why everyones 360 went out that had to get replaced. Ever heard of power surges? Shi*ty wiring?

Ever get mad at you cable company/internet provider because your service doesn't work ?

Yep only to find out this isn't always the providers fault.

"Someone hit a pole in your area"

"YOU didn't pay your monthly bill"

"Weather which really doesn't require a phone call when you got winds going on at 50mph outside or a tornado which I don't know why you are on the phone worrying about the service right now"

No one here knows the percentage of RROD's and I am not going to pretend they were not high. But you and I know that alot of people bought a 360 before the revision and were switched out with the same system or different build date until the change the insides out.

I own two 360's(Dec 05 and July 07 build dates) one 80gig Motorstorm bundle. Yet my launch 360 has outlived even some of the PS3 with issues. We have members on this very forum that own both systems that had crapped out on them. BR drive failures or simply it won't recognize anything BR but will play a dvd. Some of those people said they didn't need a replacement plan because the quality is so much higher which I am not saying it is but:

"I don't need flood insurance because we haven't had a flood in our area for 20 years and are chances are low"

Same thing with electronics. It could be that one person had RROD one time but the next his system went out due to power surge because he didn't believe in a surge protector for his home entertainment system only to be back at Best Buy to decrease his chances to claim it through insurance or a credit card.

I live in base housing here at Little Rock AFB and these houses have been here since 1955. I do have Monster Power Centers in each room for my systems. I am not saying because I bought them that it will guarantee I won't have problems but so far so good.

I never said everyones system had to get replaced. It's just a high rate of RROD that continued since it's lauch. I understand people have problems, even some are more vocal about it but you must admit there is A LOT of complaints even when compared to "other" companies. (Nintendo,Sony even Microsofts first Xbox)
They have but you are making a statement like that is why everyones 360 went out that had to get replaced. Ever heard of power surges? Shi*ty wiring?
How have they changed it? Offering an extended warranty is NOT changing anything ? Even Xbox 360 RETURNED still have problems. This wouldn't be true if they actually fixed something. MOST of these problems are "workmanship/design flaws"
"Someone hit a pole in your area"
Did someone hit a pole you Xbox 360 was on?:p
"YOU didn't pay your monthly bill"
If you complain about something that's your fault I can't help you.
Ever heard of power surges? Shi*ty wiring?
Yeah, but I never had to send a lamp,tv,toaster or anything pluged in back. You ??? Let me guess every outlet that had a XBox 360 pluged it had a power surge.

I'm not saying you shouldn't enjoy you xbox 360. If you enjoy it fine. :) It's just that it there is a problem three years old it should be addressed. It's funny to see people hate another company so much (Sony) that they put up with things that they shouldn't.

MGS4 = 50GB.

How will you install the entire game on a 20GB HD?

Well duh you don't. If you want you have the "option" to upgrade to the 120 gig hardrive. Plus my understanding is that this is all optional and not mandatory for the install feature. If this was mandatory then what does that say about owners without a hardrive period? The new install feature is backwards compatible for every 360 game.

One of the not-so-cosmetic changes in the fall update will be the ability to let you play your games directly from the hard disk. The new feature will let users install all of the game content directly onto the hard drive to improve game load times. Microsoft reports that it has seen a 30 percent improvement in load times in internal testing. As an interesting data point, Microsoft went out of its way to tell a group of reporters that the full Devil May Cry 4 hard disk installation took roughly 10 minutes on the Xbox 360. The installation took twice as long when we conducted our own installation tests on the PlayStation 3. Another side benefit of having games installed on the hard disk is reduced noise, since the optical disc no longer needs to spin up. However, you will still need to have the game disc in your optical drive while you're playing it, presumably as a piracy check.

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6194093/index.html?tag=top_stories;title;1

I never said everyones system had to get replaced. It's just a high rate of RROD that continued since it's lauch. I understand people have problems, even some are more vocal about it but you must admit there is A LOT of complaints even when compared to "other" companies. (Nintendo,Sony even Microsofts first Xbox)

Yet it still sales and has the higher attach rate for games. At least they offered somthing. Remember the PS2?

Did someone hit a pole you Xbox 360 was on?

No.


Yeah, but I never had to send a lamp,tv,toaster or anything pluged in back. You

Trust me there are people out their that want their toaster and lamp replaced :D. Some people act anal over anything. Not sure why you used a TV for example. They get serviced or taken back all the time. Were you not aware of Sony's XBR1 LCOS displays? I own one and I never had to service it but they got sued for the green blob issues those displays had. That issue just got resolved last year when the display was released in 05.

Well duh you don't. If you want you have the "option" to upgrade to the 120 gig hardrive. Plus my understanding is that this is all optional and not mandatory for the install feature. If this was mandatory then what does that say about owners without a hardrive period? The new install feature is backwards compatible for every 360 game.

My point was that this feature would be of very limited use for a game like MGS4. When the vast majority of 360 owners have 20GB hard drives or no hard drive at all, will the full install feature be as useful as you were touting it to be?

The full install feature is mainly for people who want to save disc drive wear/get rid of the noise, or multi-disc games. It's not supposed to be a thing where you can put every single game you own on the HDD.

While MS has never released exact numbers, they say the number of hard-driveless 360's sold is small compared to the ones that have them, and many of those people probably bought a HDD eventually. I never saw it as a SKU for people that didn't want a hard drive, but for people that simply wanted a lower cost of entry and were planning to upgrade later.

The full install feature is mainly for people who want to save disc drive wear/get rid of the noise, or multi-disc games. It's not supposed to be a thing where you can put every single game you own on the HDD.

While MS has never released exact numbers, they say the number of hard-driveless 360's sold is small compared to the ones that have them, and many of those people probably bought a HDD eventually. I never saw it as a SKU for people that didn't want a hard drive, but for people that simply wanted a lower cost of entry and were planning to upgrade later.

The arcade edition doesnt have a hard drive, nor does the Core.

The number might be higher than you realize.

My point was that this feature would be of very limited use for a game like MGS4. When the vast majority of 360 owners have 20GB hard drives or no hard drive at all, will the full install feature be as useful as you were touting it to be?

Wait a minute....you have the numbers of owners who have 20 gig 360's?
What about the numbers of owners who might have upgraded to the 120gig since they have that option to do so? You made the statement that the vast majority of owners all over this world have the 20gig. Please break it down for us. Even if that is true. They have the option to upgrade. I will be the first to say hell yeah the drives are expensive but that isn't the point. Some of you keep bringing up the fact that it isn't possible. Waiting for someone who can call up Konami and give us those very words that forum members keep harping just like it was said 3 years ago about FF13 "it just ain't fuc*ing possible"

Once again. The owner has a couple of options. Of course this being a fantasy scenario since nothing is confirmed that it is coming to the 360.

1. It comes on multiple disc and you switch out.

2. You upgrade to a 120gig and install game to system.

3. You get the PS3 version before or after it is announced for the 360 and deal with the mandatory installs like I did.

I guess we will actually find out since sometime soon about FF13 based on the size the game might be and what they are going to do on the 360.

The arcade edition doesnt have a hard drive, nor does the Core.

The number might be higher than you realize.

Just like the possible numbers of 20/120gig as an accessories fluctuating up and down for sales? Those are sold as a purchase option by themselves.

I absolutely was! At no point in videogaming history has increased storage been considered a bad thing, ...

I always thought one of the benfits would be in the HD movie and television series departments. You could put a whole season of a show in SD on one Bluray disc, as opposed to a box set of DVDs. Or an HD film and its sequel. That will be a nice cost-cutting move for Sony Pictures, and helpful for consumers wanting their entertainment to consume less shelf space.

I'm sure the PS3 will enjoy nice growth throughout its life cycle as late adopters to HD home theater get into the fun.

The arcade edition doesnt have a hard drive, nor does the Core.

The number might be higher than you realize.

Uh yeah. And like I said, I bet plenty of them ended up upgrading. The 360 is seriously gimped without a hard drive.

Wait a minute....you have the numbers of owners who have 20 gig 360's?

You made the statement that the vast majority of owners all over this world have the 20gig. Please break it down for us. Even if that is true.

Are you serious? I heard that most cars run on gas... did you want someone to break that down for you as well?

Uh yeah. And like I said, I bet plenty of them ended up upgrading. The 360 is seriously gimped without a hard drive.

I am sure that there are a lot of people who upgraded to a hard disk.... or as a media extender or just bought a core to replace their broken 360.

But its not likely that a majority of these core buyers would be willing to spend $80-$200 on a hard drive... considering that they
A) Didnt realize the 360 core/arcade was gimped(Therefore must not be good on researching)
B) Were trying to save a few bucks by buying the core/arcade

2006 called; they want their 360 vs. PS3 fanboy arguments back.

oh yeah the intellivision has a much better libary of games then the ps3 and the 360

2006 called; they want their 360 vs. PS3 fanboy arguments back.

*thumbs up*