Sony to PS3 Detractors: Go Sell Razor Blades

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT
 

Sony to PS3 Detractors: Go Sell Razor Blades

image

Analysts and game publishers are turning up the pressure for a price cut to the floundering PlayStation 3 console but as far as Sony is concerned they can all get bent.

Sony has been taking a lot of grief lately over its stubborn refusal to reduce the price of the PlayStation 3 despite the fact that the system is bringing up the rear in the console wars and has no immediate prospects for turning around the situation. Meanwhile, publishers are finally responding to the success of the Wii, with many shifting development resources to focus on the console, while the Xbox 360 continues to make slow but steady progress.

"You can't ignore the guy who has half the market," said EA Sports boss Peter Moore. "Sony obviously still has a ways to go with their pricing." EA Sports unveiled a new lineup of Wii exclusive "All-Play" games in June 2008 and soon after, Electronic Arts CEO John Riccitiello admitted the company "made the wrong call" by not supporting the Wii earlier. Since then, EA has unveiled a variety of new Wii titles and said that "half [its] emphasis in terms of title counts" will be going to Nintendo platforms.

Janco Partners analyst Mike Hickey said that could become a trend among publishers if Sony doesn't do whatever it takes to sell more PlayStation 3 consoles. "If they can't meaningfully increase their install base, then you will likely see a capital reallocation," he said. Those sentiments were echoed by fellow analyst Evan Wilson of Pacific Crest Securities, who said, "The publishers need the PS3 install base to grow in order for most of these games to be profitable."

It's a refrain Sony may be getting tired of hearing, if the response of SCEA Marketing Vice President Peter Dille is any indication. Sony is well aware of the size of the PS3 user base and the questions about the system's profitability, he said, but has no immediate plans for a price cut despite the clamor. "Everybody in the development community would love for the PS3 to be free, so they could just sell razor blades," he said.

It's not all bad news for the company: PlayStation 3 exclusives like Killzone 2 do well for the company and Epic Games Vice President Mark Rein, whose company is best known for publishing the Xbox 360-exclusive Gears of War franchise, said publishers who shift away from the PlayStation 3 risk losing out. "You make very good money on PlayStation 3 if you develop a good game," he said. "You can very easily take that game to Xbox 360 or PC."

And regardless of Dille's protest, Hickey predicts a price cut of $50-100 in either March or April, a cut that would be good news for publishers but much tougher to swallow for Sony, which is still manufacturing the PlayStation 3 at a loss. "It's an easy equation for [publishers]," Wilson added, "but it's very different from the one that Sony has to take on."

Which leaves just one question: What the hell does selling razor blades have to do with it?

Source: Bloomberg

Permalink

Stubborn Sony. If you had priced your console reasonably then I probably would own a PS3 rather than a 360 right now. I simply will not pay extra for blu-ray when I have no interest in it. Shame, but oh well.

Machines Are Us:
Stubborn Sony. If you had priced your console reasonably then I probably would own a PS3 rather than a 360 right now. I simply will not pay extra for blu-ray when I have no interest in it. Shame, but oh well.

My sentiments exactly. I'm not interested in the Blu-ray at this time and am just not willing to fork over the extra money. I had a PS1 and a PS2, but went with the Xbox 360 this time around simply because of price.

I bought a copy of MGS4 for $20 off a guy a while back, now all I have to do it wait for the PS3 to hit the bargain bin and I'll have played the only game I actually care about on the PS3...

I'm still wondering, what's up with all these analysts trying to predict when whatever it is will do whatever they think? If the PS3 drops its price, fine, if it doesn't, too bad. I have a hard time taking analysts seriously when they try to predict the craziest things even when the company themselves deny it repeatedly.

This isn't to say that Sony shouldn't drop the price of the PS3, they should, but for god's sake stop bitching and moaning about it. It'll happen when it'll happen. I havn't heard this much moaning since MGS4 on 360 rumours spouted out.

This is what razor blades have to do with it:

There's a saying "Give 'em the razor, sell 'em the blades", which alludes to the invention of the safety razor (the blade on a stick we use nowadays). The stick the blade was attached to was inexpensive for the consumer, and was often sold at a loss to the maker, but the consumer would continually have to purchase new blades (at a much higher profit margin for the company) as the old blades dulled. They'd recoup their loss several times over (especially since the consumer would probably be shaving the rest of their lives).

The idea is to sell consoles at a loss (unless you're Nintendo, who actually profits off the Wii even if they never sell another game) and make your money back as the consumer buys game after game and you get a cut of that. (Case in point: I got an XBOX 360 for FREE and have bought a dozen games already!)

It looks like Sony's just being greedy, since developers will likely get a bigger piece of the game-sale-price pie than they do, but since they're losing money on the PS3 console ALREADY, does it really matter how much more money developers get than Sony? Sony's getting negative profits now. ANYTHING positive would be an improvement, no matter how much more it may happen to enrich their business partners in the development houses.

I suppose it's tied into the psychological quirk that makes more people want to live on $25,000 in a world where their neighbors get $5,000, rather than make a $1 million in a world where all their neighbors make $4mil. Greed is really not good when it actually works AGAINST self-interest.

Did you really not know that the razor blades are a reference to the razor-and-blades business model? Its basic idea is to sell a base unit at a loss that then requires very expensive (and profitable) "fuel" to actually use. Besides the obvious razors the examples are things like printers and a few videogame consoles (contrary to popular belief however most consoles are sold at a profit, not loss, the razorblade approach is a recent phenomenon here).

I'm uncertain if Sony is in need of a pricedrop. On one hand, the maxime is "if you consider a price drop that means your product's value is below its price, rather than lowering the price you should seek to increase the value" but on the other hand increasing the value requires developers which aren't there without the most important thing: CUSTOMERS. They can use their first party teams to create some base material to get more customers and thus sales or maybe they could increase the value of the console itself without adding games but judging by their performance so far they have the wrong understanding of value so it would be doomed to failure. Sony sees value as an absolute size, every feature has a fixed value and you add them all up and the PS3 is a bargain. The real value is the value to the customer and Sony seems to have picked features with little to show there. You sometimes hear fanboy debates about which console has the most graphics power but the value to most customers is fairly low, that the PS3 is more powerful doesn't matter much.

Also the price IS high, the money I would have needed to buy a PS3 already bought me a Wii AND a 360 (which has a massive library overlap with the PS3 and thus fairly equal value at half the price). It'll be nearly impossible to out-value the competition when you're dealing with a price discrepancy like this. Sony has screwed itself into a corner, they're stuck with a system that's expensive to make and not coming down in cost but needs to go down in price (I believe MS had the issue last gen with the XBox). By now I think they should cut loose and make a new console to focus on, one with more customer value per cost.

Jumplion:
I'm still wondering, what's up with all these analysts trying to predict when whatever it is will do whatever they think? If the PS3 drops its price, fine, if it doesn't, too bad. I have a hard time taking analysts seriously when they try to predict the craziest things even when the company themselves deny it repeatedly.

Analysts don't analyze, they quack. The best they can do is take old data, slap a new date on it and maybe extrapolate linearly.

"If you had priced your console reasonably then I probably would own a PS3 rather than a 360 right now."

The price is reasonable, that Sony still takes a loss and sells it is reasonable.

"I'm not interested in the Blu-ray at this time and am just not willing to fork over the extra money."

As a PS3 owner with a HDTV, I could care less about Blu ray, I didn't buy it for Blu ray. I bought it because it had a built in wireless, hard drive, rechargable controllers, a low failure rate, and free online content. I don't have to pay $50 a year to play Warhawk (which is roughly the PS3 equivalanet to Halo 3). Blu ray is more of a bonus, not a major selling point.

The cheapest Xbox is $199. Once you add in a HD ($70-$150), a wireless network adapter ($50), pay for Xbox live ($50/year), hybrid rayovack NiMH Alkaline batteries ($10) you are already up to $380. A whopping $19 difference from the cheapest PS3. Then if you purchase Xbox live for another year, you are over the price of the PS3.

Then there's the fact that I don't have to screw with rechargable batteries for the PS3. I also don't have to worry about my discs being scratched and ruining my games, and I don't have to worry about my PS3 dying and having to send it back to be repaired.

So I just don't understand the cost argument against the PS3, since I would have to pay more to get the same features with the Xbox 360. So maybe there's something I'm missing, but features like having to buy a hard drive, paying for xbox live, having to buy a wireless network adapter, and failure rates were things that I thought about when buying a PS3 or Xbox 360. The PS3 seems like a better deal to me. At the time I also thought Play TV was coming to the U.S., it's a shame that it didn't.

Edit:spelling

Brokkr:

Machines Are Us:
Stubborn Sony. If you had priced your console reasonably then I probably would own a PS3 rather than a 360 right now. I simply will not pay extra for blu-ray when I have no interest in it. Shame, but oh well.

My sentiments exactly. I'm not interested in the Blu-ray at this time and am just not willing to fork over the extra money. I had a PS1 and a PS2, but went with the Xbox 360 this time around simply because of price.

So you honestly have no interest in LittleBigPlanet, Metal Gear Solid 4, or Killzone 2?

I believe that razor blades comment could mean that if sony did a price cut, they would be cutting themselves some profits?

bridgerbot:
As a PS3 owner with a HDTV, I could care less about Blu ray, I didn't buy it for Blu ray. I bought it because it had a built in wireless, hard drive, rechargable controllers, a low failure rate, and free online content. I don't have to pay $50 a year to play Warhawk (which is roughly the PS3 equivalanet to Halo 3). Blu ray is more of a bonus, not a major selling point.

The cheapest Xbox is $199. Once you add in a HD ($70-$150), a wireless network adapter ($50), pay for Xbox live ($50/year), hybrid rayovack NiMH Alkaline batteries ($10) you are already up to $380. A whopping $19 difference from the cheapest PS3. Then if you purchase Xbox live for another year, you are over the price of the PS3.

This is what I mean with the wrong value approach (BTW, I got my 360 Pro for 200€ with the 60GB HDD, operate the thing with a LAN cable and a wired controller I had bought for my PC earlier and don't bother with Live because I know I won't play online enough to justify the cost, only problem is getting enough games for the system to actually justify the hardware cost since it seems to be lacking in interesting games). Feature parity is not a valid comparison because most customers do not attempt to reach feature parity. How many people actually need a WiFi bridge on the thing? How many people need to buy the HDD separate when the Pro already includes it for a very low price difference? How many people actualy get Live Gold? Hell, how many people actually hook their console up to the internet? If the people who do all that are a majority of your audience that means your audience is too small, too focussed.

And hell, even if the PS3 beats the 360, what kind of victory is that? "Yay we've gone from breaking the record for most consoles sold to a fight for second place"? As EA notes, their support is going to the Wii, not the 360. The PS3 doesn't have to beat the 360, the two are so similar almost any game made for one will be available on the other too, they're effectively one market. The Wii is the odd one out, it needs special games while also holding a massive chunk of the market (even if you assume zero overlap between 360 and PS3 owners the Wii market is the same size as the two combined, with overlap it's even larger). The PS3 has no chance against the Wii in the current situation.

*sighs* Sony for some reason seem to be trying to sell their ridiculously priced console on the exclusive games. But lets face it are 3 good exclusives and a Blu Ray player most people wont use enough to justify shelling out that cash?
(the games i mean are Killzone 2, MGS4, and GOW3 none of which I'm interested in, but a lot of people like)

bridgerbot:
snip

Yeah cause the PS3 didn't have to go through 5 hardware permutations to get to that point, oh and everybody who buys a console these days clearly has an HD-TV, and needs wireless in order to play games online.

Seeing as how the HD market has not taken off as fast as people thought, and I didn't need to buy a wireless adapter, I can safely say that I know how to run a wire to my router without anybody tripping over it. Hey look at that, I saved myself money!

And do people only buy rechargeable batteries because they have a game controller? I doubt that, so why does that even factor into costs?

Oh, and the one time my 360 bricked 2 years ago I got it repaired for free. So, I lost some time, big whoop. Also you act like your PS3 is apparently invulnerable just because it didn't suffer the same failure problems as the 360s did. Well maybe that's deserved, but what happens when yours breaks? Is that irony or just plain funny? Who can say.

Simply put, I bought a 360 because the PS3 did not have any outstanding quality to me, especially in its game library (the mountain of PS3 returns my place of work got post-Christmas 2006 would seem to indicate to me I'm not the only one who thought that way). That is why I bought a 360 despite problems, that is why I only spent the same amount of money then to get it for as much the cheapest PS3 is now (this was back when the 360 was still $400). Seriously I don't even know why I responded to this, but the fact that you had to lump on a bunch of add-ons half the customers don't even need to try and justify your argument, plus the fact you thought that somehow made you "correct" just struck a nerve.

Sony is trailing because they made epic cock-ups in how they did business when they were working up to the PS3's release. No amount of pricing spin will change that.

I believe that's called a "strawman", setting up an unstated argument and knocking it down, in an attempt to discredit an argument actually stated. Sometimes, as in this case, the strawman is the stated argument taken to an illogical extreme.

No one is suggesting you give away the console for free, you dork. Just reduce the price to a lower (non-free) price so that people will buy the thing.

if they price dropped the ps3, more people would buy it, but i can see why they dont want to considering they are already losing alot of money...

Sony could fix their problem in one of two ways. I'd suggest just lowering the price of the system and reap the rewards as more games are put out.....

or just incorporate more nudity into their games. Either would be awesome!

Metal Gear Solid 4 is a Blu-ray disc full of movies with a few game play segments scattered here and there. Killzone 2 and Resistance 2 are both inferior to Gears of War 2 and Halo 3. Most other PS3 games can also be had on the 360. That leaves only LittleBigPlanet as a killer exclusive for the PS3. Your opinions of that game aside, that's still only ONE killer exclusive.

That's a $400 system with one must-play game. True, it has wireless built-in, and rechargeable controllers, and free online play. But here's the thing: if I don't want these things, I save money by getting a 360. If I do want these things, then I've spent the same amount of money with the added bonus of access to a much, much better software library.

The PS3 looks good under the hood, and if it was even $50 cheaper I would consider getting one (then I could take the savings and buy that one killer game). If it was $75 dollars cheaper, I'm sold. If it was $100 cheaper, it would be an absolute steal. As it stands right now, you can get a fully-loaded 360 for the same price and play much better actual games, not just tech demos posing as games. There is more to buying a console than bells and whistles (that's why you never buy at launch!); when you think of buying a console as buying a key to a software library, it's clear why Sony is losing.

Opinions on the games are hardly relevant at this point,and there probably will be a price drop, but it makes no sense to do it now. They need to wait for the next really big title to make it profitable, or the number of units sold is unlikely to make a huge difference. I might be wrong, of course.

level250geek:
Metal Gear Solid 4 is a Blu-ray disc full of movies with a few game play segments scattered here and there. Killzone 2 and Resistance 2 are both inferior to Gears of War 2 and Halo 3. Most other PS3 games can also be had on the 360. That leaves only LittleBigPlanet as a killer exclusive for the PS3. Your opinions of that game aside, that's still only ONE killer exclusive.

The rest of your argument just lost weight when you showed this hypocracy in this statement. You act as if Killzone 2 and Resistance 2 are complete and utter crap, yet our opinions of the game don't matter since you think there's only one game worth playing.

I, personally, found Killzone 2 and Resistance 2 to be imensly enjoyable and found them better than Gears 2 and Halo 3. That's my opinion, but for some reason because you think Killzone 2 and Resistance 2 are inferior to Gears 2 and Halo 3 then that only means that there's 1 killer exclusive for the PS3.

There may be one killer exclusive for you personally, but don't go around saying that the other games are "inferior" to your other precious games as if it's fact. And even if you don't personally like it, you cannot deny that KZ2 and Resistance 2 are all exclusives for PS3 that were both heavliy hyped and supported. I'm pretty sure they're easily classified as "killer exclusives".

As for everyone else, we've been through this argument over and over again. We flip over the 6 in 2006. The PS3 has plenty of exclusives, whether or not you like those exclusives or take an interest to them personally is another story. The price point, I won't debate on, since there are two different positions on it. For one, yes it's expensive but for two, it's a fairly good deal for an all in one package.

AceDiamond:
Yeah cause the PS3 didn't have to go through 5 hardware permutations to get to that point, oh and everybody who buys a console these days clearly has an HD-TV, and needs wireless in order to play games online.

Seeing as how the HD market has not taken off as fast as people thought, and I didn't need to buy a wireless adapter, I can safely say that I know how to run a wire to my router without anybody tripping over it. Hey look at that, I saved myself money!

Obvious sarcasam aside, I hear people complain all the time that the PS3 doesn't come with HD cables. Yet clearly there arn't enough HD transfered people to have an HD cable. Yet the 360 comes with a cable, but not everyone has an HD-TV, hm? But wait, the PS3 doesn't come with an HD cable, even though the 360 comes with one, but people don't have HD-TVs, so why the hell are you complaining about something that isn't neccessary that you want neccessary?!?!

blech, rambling, sorry.

Brokkr:

Machines Are Us:
Stubborn Sony. If you had priced your console reasonably then I probably would own a PS3 rather than a 360 right now. I simply will not pay extra for blu-ray when I have no interest in it. Shame, but oh well.

My sentiments exactly. I'm not interested in the Blu-ray at this time and am just not willing to fork over the extra money. I had a PS1 and a PS2, but went with the Xbox 360 this time around simply because of price.

Yup. The PS3 in my eyes is little more than a glorified Blu-Ray player/multimedia center.

It also plays games. So what? They nixed the backwards compatability, so now the second of my three reasons to get the damn thing is gone, but the price is still sky-high.

But really, who cares at this point? The Wii and 360 have kicked the PS3 round' the proverbial playground. The only people who claim the PS3 to be a success are the hardcore fanboys. And who really pays attention to them anyway?

Sony has lost this round, and if they don't get their shit together for the next go, they might face severe problems...

Jumplion:
I'm still wondering, what's up with all these analysts trying to predict when whatever it is will do whatever they think? If the PS3 drops its price, fine, if it doesn't, too bad. I have a hard time taking analysts seriously when they try to predict the craziest things even when the company themselves deny it repeatedly.

This isn't to say that Sony shouldn't drop the price of the PS3, they should, but for god's sake stop bitching and moaning about it. It'll happen when it'll happen. I havn't heard this much moaning since MGS4 on 360 rumours spouted out.

I figured out that the analysts were talking out of their asses when Nintendo emerged on the corpses of defunct hardware businesses holding high the money of old people and little children.

level250geek:
Metal Gear Solid 4 is a Blu-ray disc full of movies with a few game play segments scattered here and there. Killzone 2 and Resistance 2 are both inferior to Gears of War 2 and Halo 3. Most other PS3 games can also be had on the 360. That leaves only LittleBigPlanet as a killer exclusive for the PS3. Your opinions of that game aside, that's still only ONE killer exclusive.

So you never played MGS4, Either Killzone II or Resistance II, and only know that the 360 doesn't have something like LBP yet.

Also you missed Folklore, Valkyria Chronicles, Ratchet and Clank, Warhawk, Disgaea 3, Uncharted, Noby Noby Boy, Eye of Judgement, Genji, Lumines Supernova, Nova Strike, Gran Turismo, Yakuza 3.

Not to mention up coming God of War 3, FFXIII 13 Versus, inFamous, Ratchet and Clank Future 2, Uncharted 3, Super Robot Wars, Shin Megami Tensai, Massive Action Game, Resistance 3, Sly Cooper, The Super Hero MMO, all the other MMO there releasing on it, Beyond Good and Evil 2, Fat Princess.
Possible Jak and Daxter, Dark Cloud 3, Legend of Dragoon 2, a Tales of game, Persona, .Hack, and Kingdom Hearts 3

And keep in mind these are only the ones I remember, and can you see the variety? we have SRPGs, Sandbox, FPS, TPS, JRPGs, MMOs, Interactive games, Widgit games, Action RPGs, Platformers, and Action-Adventure all lined up here.

Totally nothing. Nope not one intresting or unique gem.

Oh wait thats right. I guess the 360 DOES have SRW XO, which was just a ported Gamecube game that tanked and thus probably shuns the 360 from Banpresto work. And well... Hm I guess Saints Row if you don't wanna play it's vastly superior sequel. Fabel 2's horrendous gameplay issues, not to mention design issues.

And of course that's only exclusive, you can get the same Multi-platform games the 360 has. OR you could buy the majority of 360 games on the PC, which really doesn't make them exclusives now does it?

They have Halo Wars I guess, but then if I ever wanted to screw myself by playing an RTS on a console I would get Command and Conquer 3 and use the PS3's supported Keyboard and mouse.

WAKE UP PEOPLE! It is NOT 2006 anymore! You are blinding yourself with prejudice, hatred, and probably shallow pockets. Which is PERFECTLY FINE! Nobody is saying you have to buy a PS3, I'm not saying it and frankly if your stance is to wait for a price cut, wait for the damn price cut that's good for you!

But when you make stupid ridiculous posts as the one I quoted your just insulting, my intelligence, your own intelligence, and the intelligence of everyone reading. ALL consoles have good games that make them stand out. If you say otherwise you are an idiot, a blind idiot locked in dislike of a product!

As for Blu-Ray I personally don't own any movies.

But if this is an indication it is a NOTICABLE difference.


Animation from the 80's people, big difference. At least for animated works. (I used Zeta Gundam as the Example cause I couldn't find many other comparison videos using Animation)

Indigo_Dingo:

Brokkr:

My sentiments exactly. I'm not interested in the Blu-ray at this time and am just not willing to fork over the extra money. I had a PS1 and a PS2, but went with the Xbox 360 this time around simply because of price.

So you honestly have no interest in LittleBigPlanet, Metal Gear Solid 4, or Killzone 2?

Who DOESN'T have intrest in these games? The point he's trying to make is: the 360/Wii is cheaper and has at LEAST the same amount of gaming goodness. So why buy something pricier?

KDR_11k:

bridgerbot:
As a PS3 owner with a HDTV, I could care less about Blu ray, I didn't buy it for Blu ray. I bought it because it had a built in wireless, hard drive, rechargable controllers, a low failure rate, and free online content. I don't have to pay $50 a year to play Warhawk (which is roughly the PS3 equivalanet to Halo 3). Blu ray is more of a bonus, not a major selling point.

The cheapest Xbox is $199. Once you add in a HD ($70-$150), a wireless network adapter ($50), pay for Xbox live ($50/year), hybrid rayovack NiMH Alkaline batteries ($10) you are already up to $380. A whopping $19 difference from the cheapest PS3. Then if you purchase Xbox live for another year, you are over the price of the PS3.

This is what I mean with the wrong value approach (BTW, I got my 360 Pro for 200€ with the 60GB HDD, operate the thing with a LAN cable and a wired controller I had bought for my PC earlier and don't bother with Live because I know I won't play online enough to justify the cost, only problem is getting enough games for the system to actually justify the hardware cost since it seems to be lacking in interesting games). Feature parity is not a valid comparison because most customers do not attempt to reach feature parity. How many people actually need a WiFi bridge on the thing? How many people need to buy the HDD separate when the Pro already includes it for a very low price difference? How many people actualy get Live Gold? Hell, how many people actually hook their console up to the internet? If the people who do all that are a majority of your audience that means your audience is too small, too focussed.

And hell, even if the PS3 beats the 360, what kind of victory is that? "Yay we've gone from breaking the record for most consoles sold to a fight for second place"? As EA notes, their support is going to the Wii, not the 360. The PS3 doesn't have to beat the 360, the two are so similar almost any game made for one will be available on the other too, they're effectively one market. The Wii is the odd one out, it needs special games while also holding a massive chunk of the market (even if you assume zero overlap between 360 and PS3 owners the Wii market is the same size as the two combined, with overlap it's even larger). The PS3 has no chance against the Wii in the current situation.

HIs pricing is off in more ways than one. In case he failed to notice, LIVE gold pays for ALL your online games content. So if you have an extensive multiplayer library you getting your money's worth. And if you don't, well, that's your problem. Question: If you don't have a spare 50 bucks, how the heck did you get that 400$ console?

Live: It's still cheaper than WoW!

Also, if you love recharging contollers that much, just get some rechargable batteries. 0_0
In addition, Blue-Ray is a MAJOR selling point for the PS3. It costs big bucks by itself, after all. The players I found cost 180$. That's not cheap.

As for low failure rates, so what? Repairs are free as long as you're in warrenty, as long as I'm not mistaken. If you fail to renew it, that's your fault.

http://www.vgchartz.com/hwcomps.php?weekly=1

http://journal.pcvsconsole.com/?thread=8498

I don't get it. All the critics are being idiots. No one said the 360 was doing badly a year ago, so why is the PS3 being savaged for 'bad sales' when in fact it's outperforming the Xbox 360 if you take the year headstart that Microsoft had into considertion.
Looks like people are just looking at the figures and nothing else. If sales carry on this way, the PS3 will outsell the 360...And that's a bad sign how?

Onmi:

I think I finaly found out what CantFakeTheFunk's avatar is now.

Mazty:
http://www.vgchartz.com/hwcomps.php?weekly=1

http://journal.pcvsconsole.com/?thread=8498

I don't get it. All the critics are being idiots. No one said the 360 was doing badly a year ago, so why is the PS3 being savaged for 'bad sales' when in fact it's outperforming the Xbox 360 if you take the year headstart that Microsoft had into considertion.
Looks like people are just looking at the figures and nothing else. If sales carry on this way, the PS3 will outsell the 360...And that's a bad sign how?

Because then they can't make jokes outdated from 2006.

Jumplion:

Onmi:

I think I finaly found out what CantFakeTheFunk's avatar is now.

Lockon Stratos's Haro from Gundam 00, the latest Gundam series. Haro is pretty much a Gundam Mascot since it's ridiculously cute. Sorta contrasts the fact nearly everyone dies.

Simriel:
*sighs* Sony for some reason seem to be trying to sell their ridiculously priced console on the exclusive games. But lets face it are 3 good exclusives and a Blu Ray player most people wont use enough to justify shelling out that cash?
(the games i mean are Killzone 2, MGS4, and GOW3 none of which I'm interested in, but a lot of people like)

Well if thats the criteria, the Ps3 really stacks up well against the 360, which has no decent games and never will have any decent games in any form, and just sits there, getting broken and more useless.

Indigo_Dingo:

Simriel:
*sighs* Sony for some reason seem to be trying to sell their ridiculously priced console on the exclusive games. But lets face it are 3 good exclusives and a Blu Ray player most people wont use enough to justify shelling out that cash?
(the games i mean are Killzone 2, MGS4, and GOW3 none of which I'm interested in, but a lot of people like)

Well if thats the criteria, the Ps3 really stacks up well against the 360, which has no decent games and never will have any decent games in any form, and just sits there, getting broken and more useless.

Oi the 360 has Tales of Vesperia Indigo! and Star Ocean 4! when the damn games get released Multi-Console (because the day a Tales game remains on one system when it was released on a console is the day I eat my ASS) THEN you can start throwing that around.

Although in a funny support, when my brother brought his own PS3 (so there are two in the house, his and mine) all his 360 does is sit collecting dust.

Onmi:

level250geek:
Metal Gear Solid 4 is a Blu-ray disc full of movies with a few game play segments scattered here and there. Killzone 2 and Resistance 2 are both inferior to Gears of War 2 and Halo 3. Most other PS3 games can also be had on the 360. That leaves only LittleBigPlanet as a killer exclusive for the PS3. Your opinions of that game aside, that's still only ONE killer exclusive.

So you never played MGS4, Either Killzone II or Resistance II, and only know that the 360 doesn't have something like LBP yet.

Also you missed Folklore, Valkyria Chronicles, Ratchet and Clank, Warhawk, Disgaea 3, Uncharted, Noby Noby Boy, Eye of Judgement, Genji, Lumines Supernova, Nova Strike, Gran Turismo, Yakuza 3.

Not to mention up coming God of War 3, FFXIII 13 Versus, inFamous, Ratchet and Clank Future 2, Uncharted 3, Super Robot Wars, Shin Megami Tensai, Massive Action Game, Resistance 3, Sly Cooper, The Super Hero MMO, all the other MMO there releasing on it, Beyond Good and Evil 2, Fat Princess.
Possible Jak and Daxter, Dark Cloud 3, Legend of Dragoon 2, a Tales of game, Persona, .Hack, and Kingdom Hearts 3

And keep in mind these are only the ones I remember, and can you see the variety? we have SRPGs, Sandbox, FPS, TPS, JRPGs, MMOs, Interactive games, Widgit games, Action RPGs, Platformers, and Action-Adventure all lined up here.

Totally nothing. Nope not one intresting or unique gem.

Oh wait thats right. I guess the 360 DOES have SRW XO, which was just a ported Gamecube game that tanked and thus probably shuns the 360 from Banpresto work. And well... Hm I guess Saints Row if you don't wanna play it's vastly superior sequel. Fabel 2's horrendous gameplay issues, not to mention design issues.

And of course that's only exclusive, you can get the same Multi-platform games the 360 has. OR you could buy the majority of 360 games on the PC, which really doesn't make them exclusives now does it?

They have Halo Wars I guess, but then if I ever wanted to screw myself by playing an RTS on a console I would get Command and Conquer 3 and use the PS3's supported Keyboard and mouse.

WAKE UP PEOPLE! It is NOT 2006 anymore! You are blinding yourself with prejudice, hatred, and probably shallow pockets. Which is PERFECTLY FINE! Nobody is saying you have to buy a PS3, I'm not saying it and frankly if your stance is to wait for a price cut, wait for the damn price cut that's good for you!

But when you make stupid ridiculous posts as the one I quoted your just insulting, my intelligence, your own intelligence, and the intelligence of everyone reading. ALL consoles have good games that make them stand out. If you say otherwise you are an idiot, a blind idiot locked in dislike of a product!

As for Blu-Ray I personally don't own any movies.

But if this is an indication it is a NOTICABLE difference.

*removed*

Animation from the 80's people, big difference. At least for animated works. (I used Zeta Gundam as the Example cause I couldn't find many other comparison videos using Animation)

Of all those games you listed you missed the only one that possibly interests me and might make me get a PS3; Heavy Rain.

Just goes to show you that just because you think some games are brilliant, doesn't mean others think likewise. Indigo's above post is case and point.

I am still dazzled at people saying that the PS is a glorified Blu-Ray player. There are all the games that both plattforms can run, plus the exclusives. If you want to spend a large time playing Gears of War, Halo or Fable and other X-box/PC exclusives that's fine but please just stop saying that there are no games out for the PS because that is just plain silly.

level250geek:
Metal Gear Solid 4 is a Blu-ray disc full of movies with a few game play segments scattered here and there. Killzone 2 and Resistance 2 are both inferior to Gears of War 2 and Halo 3. Most other PS3 games can also be had on the 360. That leaves only LittleBigPlanet as a killer exclusive for the PS3. Your opinions of that game aside, that's still only ONE killer exclusive.

No offense, but that post is pretty useless and stupid. Nice to know that you prefer Gears of War and Halo, but I doubt you have spend serious time with any of the 4 PS games you named, since you don't own the system. By your logic the Xbox only has 2 killer exclusives, and since a lot of people hate the over-hyped Halo maybe just 1 killer-exclusive.

Why aren't we beyond this useless shit? Since the Sega/Nintendo era we haven't exacly progressed much as a culture...

Indigo_Dingo:

Simriel:
*sighs* Sony for some reason seem to be trying to sell their ridiculously priced console on the exclusive games. But lets face it are 3 good exclusives and a Blu Ray player most people wont use enough to justify shelling out that cash?
(the games i mean are Killzone 2, MGS4, and GOW3 none of which I'm interested in, but a lot of people like)

Well if thats the criteria, the Ps3 really stacks up well against the 360, which has no decent games and never will have any decent games in any form, and just sits there, getting broken and more useless.

Hey look. The fanboy alarm. Lets ring it. AWOOGA AWOOGA!

Programmed_For_Damage:

Onmi:

level250geek:
Metal Gear Solid 4 is a Blu-ray disc full of movies with a few game play segments scattered here and there. Killzone 2 and Resistance 2 are both inferior to Gears of War 2 and Halo 3. Most other PS3 games can also be had on the 360. That leaves only LittleBigPlanet as a killer exclusive for the PS3. Your opinions of that game aside, that's still only ONE killer exclusive.

So you never played MGS4, Either Killzone II or Resistance II, and only know that the 360 doesn't have something like LBP yet.

Also you missed Folklore, Valkyria Chronicles, Ratchet and Clank, Warhawk, Disgaea 3, Uncharted, Noby Noby Boy, Eye of Judgement, Genji, Lumines Supernova, Nova Strike, Gran Turismo, Yakuza 3.

Not to mention up coming God of War 3, FFXIII 13 Versus, inFamous, Ratchet and Clank Future 2, Uncharted 3, Super Robot Wars, Shin Megami Tensai, Massive Action Game, Resistance 3, Sly Cooper, The Super Hero MMO, all the other MMO there releasing on it, Beyond Good and Evil 2, Fat Princess.
Possible Jak and Daxter, Dark Cloud 3, Legend of Dragoon 2, a Tales of game, Persona, .Hack, and Kingdom Hearts 3

And keep in mind these are only the ones I remember, and can you see the variety? we have SRPGs, Sandbox, FPS, TPS, JRPGs, MMOs, Interactive games, Widgit games, Action RPGs, Platformers, and Action-Adventure all lined up here.

Totally nothing. Nope not one intresting or unique gem.

Oh wait thats right. I guess the 360 DOES have SRW XO, which was just a ported Gamecube game that tanked and thus probably shuns the 360 from Banpresto work. And well... Hm I guess Saints Row if you don't wanna play it's vastly superior sequel. Fabel 2's horrendous gameplay issues, not to mention design issues.

And of course that's only exclusive, you can get the same Multi-platform games the 360 has. OR you could buy the majority of 360 games on the PC, which really doesn't make them exclusives now does it?

They have Halo Wars I guess, but then if I ever wanted to screw myself by playing an RTS on a console I would get Command and Conquer 3 and use the PS3's supported Keyboard and mouse.

WAKE UP PEOPLE! It is NOT 2006 anymore! You are blinding yourself with prejudice, hatred, and probably shallow pockets. Which is PERFECTLY FINE! Nobody is saying you have to buy a PS3, I'm not saying it and frankly if your stance is to wait for a price cut, wait for the damn price cut that's good for you!

But when you make stupid ridiculous posts as the one I quoted your just insulting, my intelligence, your own intelligence, and the intelligence of everyone reading. ALL consoles have good games that make them stand out. If you say otherwise you are an idiot, a blind idiot locked in dislike of a product!

As for Blu-Ray I personally don't own any movies.

But if this is an indication it is a NOTICABLE difference.

*removed*

Animation from the 80's people, big difference. At least for animated works. (I used Zeta Gundam as the Example cause I couldn't find many other comparison videos using Animation)

Of all those games you listed you missed the only one that possibly interests me and might make me get a PS3; Heavy Rain.

Just goes to show you that just because you think some games are brilliant, doesn't mean others think likewise.

Thought I missed some.

And so what if their not brilliant? there is VARIETY at the very least! a majority of people probably haven't tried half the games they say are crap, we are ALL guilty of this even if we try to better ourselves.

Look I said it before, I don't want any console to not break even. Competition is good for buisness if there is no competition then things become like the WWE is right now. Stagnant, boring and losing more and more people every day.

Whatever happened to the phrase "You get what you payed for"?.
Im not trying to start a flame war about which console is best, but the PS3 is a GOOD CONSOLE.

The online service is free, works just as well as the other console (I have tested them all) and is capable of running some excellent games. I managed to afford one and I dont have a lot of cash, but I have never doubted my purchase as there are already a few gems that are well worth playing on the console.

The developers just need to realise that if they spend the time and effort making a great game for the PS3, that it will make them a tidy profit. MGS4 made Sony and Konami a stack of cash since its release, Im guessing Killzone will do the same.

Sony should stick to their guns, because out of the 3 companies left still making consoles, they make up the 2/3 of companies that I still respect as a gamer. I'll leave it to you to guess what I think is the 1/3 that I dislike :)

Meh... PS3 has about the same notable exclusives as a dead wombat, glad i didn't invest my soul into one.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here