Reports of Sony's imminent demise were greatly exaggerated . . .

[somunny]

Care to make a friendly bet again?  You remember how that worked out for you with the Wii name-change bet, right? 
 

  Well, the difference is that we both thought that you would probably win that bet.  I was just willing to put a little money on it for fun and I thought it was possible that you could lose.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who remembers that. 

[shmokes]

Eye candy isn't the only consideration for playing games.

I did not even begin to suggest that it is.  I said that it is one consideration.  And I said that it is an important consideration.  It is.  And not solely for its effect on gameplay either.  Visual effects are an important part of the experience, just as they are in Forest Gump, The Matrix, or Lord of the Rings.  People who suggest otherwise are just being pretentious.

 [Enemies that hide, strategize, communicate, cooperate] have zilch to do with better graphics?

Again you are misreading my post.  The Wii's video chipset is not the only area where it is deficient.  Both it's main CPU and it's graphics chipset are incredibly weak compared to 360 and PS3.  Just a couple lines above the one you quoted, I said:

Additionally, graphical advances (not to mention other processing-intensive things like physics and AI) ENABLE new and better gameplay. 

I'm not a Sony fanboy.  That's hilarious.  The only Sony system I've ever owned was a PS One (which I recently gave away when I moved to Miami).  Not a regular Playstation, but that itty-bitty redesigned version that was released years after the Playstation's debut.  I bought an N64 on launch day.  The only systems I owned in the last generation were Xbox and Gamecube.  The only system I own from this generation so far is the Wii and I already mentioned that I thought I might get a PS3 in 2009.  I may be wrong, but if I am it's not because I'm blinded by some irrational Sony loyalty. 

Also, I'm not wrong.   

[DaveMMR]

I did not even begin to suggest that it is.  I said that it is one consideration.  And I said that it is an important consideration.  It is.  And not solely for its effect on gameplay either.  Visual effects are an important part of the experience, just as they are in Forest Gump, The Matrix, or Lord of the Rings.  People who suggest otherwise are just being pretentious.

Again: original Gameboy - one of the best selling system of all time - 4 shades of gray.   If you're going to invest your money based on graphical capability alone, you'd be better off just buying a stack of lottery tickets instead. 

I don't think anyone here is saying that graphics aren't important.  It's just that, based on past performance, it really only takes two things to move a console: game selection and price.  Of course, you're right: no one wants to buy a system whose graphics look like first generation PS garbage.  But the Wii again is not trying to up the ante.  Nintendo looked at the Gamecube and said "ehh, good enough for what we're trying to accomplish" and for all intents and purposes, it worked out.  And when people want those eye-popping graphics?  They're going to head right to the Xbox 360. 

As for game selection: I'm sure some people love Ratchet & Clank, but I have yet to meet anyone who bought a PS3 just to play that game.  Gamers, on the other hand, do want to play Halo 3 or Super Mario Galaxy (now, mind you, not six months from now... maybe).  Sony just doesn't have those must-have exclusives.  And their one "Ace"?  They botched their former limited exclusive!  The Xbox 360 is also getting GTA IV at the same time (not a year later).   And by shoehorning a Bluray player into their box, that people didn't ask for mind you (we all learned that the PS2s made horrible DVD players), they turned an almost guaranteed success into a third-place, also ran overpriced piece of "do-it-all-gizmo-that-also-plays-games".   Sony should have learned from the PSP (I didn't see UMDs fly off the shelves) - but they didn't. 

I'm sorry, but I'm predicting that Sony's finishing this console generation in third place.  They just completely forgot about the everyday people that helped turn Sony into a video game powerhouse and instead are using their beloved brand as a weapon in the format war, making the consumer the casualty. 

By the way, I entered this current console generation with a full desire to purchase a PS3.   But that $500 ~ $600 was way to scary to comprehend.  These were the same people that cut off Sega's sac in front of a packed audience by pricing their system lower than the Saturn.  Funny what happens when success goes to their head...

 

[danny_galaga]

It takes more than Nintendo to make a killer software library.  There's no better developer to have in your corner than Nintendo, but they can't do it alone.

well, house of the dead has completely sealed the deal for me.

[versapak]

It takes more than Nintendo to make a killer software library.  There's no better developer to have in your corner than Nintendo, but they can't do it alone.

well, house of the dead has completely sealed the deal for me.

Xbox FTW!


The Wii is the toy that every body wants,  but everyone that I know that has one has it collecting dust 80% of the time.


As far as gaming systems go though... The Wii isn't the competition to either the PS3 or the 360. Real gamers, the ones that are going to be buying the bulk of software, have the Wii as a secondary system. It is great for party play, and for getting non-gamers to play some games, but it is not a gamers system.

[tommy]

Where did the guy who loves Nintendo go, shmokes. Stop selling out to Sony. Now you say the Wii-mote is crappy and not worth a damn. Damn you. 

I wonder if Nintendo will improve on the Wii-mote next gen or just go another way.

[Hoopz]

There is no chance a whole family is going to sit down and play anything on the 360 or the PS3, those systems are mainly a one person online system and rarely will you ever have another person sitting next to you enjoying it with you.

Incorrect.  I have a 360 at work that I brought home to test.  My entire family played various games on Arcade Live together.  My 3 & 5 year old daughters played Uno and Feeding Frenzy while my 9 year old son played Pac Man and Boom Boom Rocket with my wife.

I would agree that the Wii is probably more attractive to casual gamers while most games on the 360 and PS3 are geared more towards gamers.

[tommy]

Arcade live hardly counts, people don't buy a 360 for those games..

[pointdablame]

Arcade live hardly counts, people don't buy a 360 for those games..

Arguments are great when you can pick and choose what points are valid aren't they?

 

[tommy]

Yeah, hoopz just did that. He took the one rare time when more than one person would be playing a 360 and tried to build a whole case around it when he damn well knows those arcade games are not the purpose of the 360.. 

Families don't all sit down and play the 360 like they do the Wii. that's my argument.

Don't make useless posts, PDB. Try to say something about what we are talking about and not focus so much on taking shots at people. 

[pointdablame]

Don't make useless posts, PDB. Try to say something about what we are talking about and not focus so much on taking shots at people. 

haha... omfg.   

You kill me tommy, you really do.  I bet you typed that with a straight face too.

[ark_ader]

Once the coders get up to speed with the PS3 we shall see better games.  The same could be said for the 360, but with a lot of titles being ports these days, there is little in the creative process department,  lately.

I have two PSPs who would love a PS3 system to hook into, but $399 is still a bunch of cash and I know after seeing the PS3 in action on a 40" Plasma, I will not get the same thrill on a standard TV set.

So before I can get a PS3 I now have to spring for a decent screen.  So its not $399 for a PS3, it is more like $2399.

For the record, I still have great fun on my 2 year old PC, with online games taking the most action.  Something I guess I will share when I eventually get the PS3.  Warhawk...!!!! 

Give Sony time and its developers, and then we will see which is the best console.

[lcddream]

And the PS3 will cost $150 by then.

And thats when I will own one. When it's affordable.

[danny_galaga]

It takes more than Nintendo to make a killer software library.  There's no better developer to have in your corner than Nintendo, but they can't do it alone.

well, house of the dead has completely sealed the deal for me.

Xbox FTW!


The Wii is the toy that every body wants,  but everyone that I know that has one has it collecting dust 80% of the time.


As far as gaming systems go though... The Wii isn't the competition to either the PS3 or the 360. Real gamers, the ones that are going to be buying the bulk of software, have the Wii as a secondary system. It is great for party play, and for getting non-gamers to play some games, but it is not a gamers system.

someone else might have mentioned it here, but isnt a PC the system of choice for gamers?

[shmokes]

Problem is, the PC is dying.  Anymore there are just too many great console games that will never make it to PC (or the PC version will suck) for serious gamers to stick with PC exclusively.

[AtomSmasher]

someone else might have mentioned it here, but isnt a PC the system of choice for gamers?

While I like to believe that is true, the reality is consoles are making a lot of headway in that area.  Oddly enough, Penny-Arcade just posted something on this very topic

As I have described previously, most of my friends these days get their Vitamin G from the console side of the spectrum. When the multiplayer options on those primitive machines were anemic, nasty little things, I would always nod knowingly, secure in the knowledge that they would be back (oh yes, they would be back). There's really no reason for them to come back, now. The transfer of PC gaming's richest, most vital blood to the console is almost complete. Where our best hopes have not died out completely, they've directed their vigor at a platform that has rewarded them with riches beyond imagining. If you told me that Pandemic, Irrational, Bioware, Raven, and Infinity Ward would be devoted to creating console entertainment years ago, I'd have pressed a button that sent you down to a kind of subterranean foyer where you could better acquaint yourself with my Rancor.

[versapak]

someone else might have mentioned it here, but isnt a PC the system of choice for gamers?

Sure, it is a "system" for gamers.

It certainly isn't the only one, and I never made any claim that there was only one system for gamers. I simply stated that the Wii was not a system that was geared toward "gamers".


The Xbox FTW comment was a direct response to the the House of the Dead III on Wii comment. House of the Dead III and II were released on Xbox years ago now.

[AtomSmasher]

The Xbox FTW comment was a direct response to the the House of the Dead III on Wii comment. House of the Dead III and II were released on Xbox years ago now.

Typing of the Dead FTW

 

[versapak]

The Xbox FTW comment was a direct response to the the House of the Dead III on Wii comment. House of the Dead III and II were released on Xbox years ago now.

Typing of the Dead FTW

 

Well... Dreamcast FTW too then.

[Hoopz]

Yeah, hoopz just did that. He took the one rare time when more than one person would be playing a 360 and tried to build a whole case around it when he damn well knows those arcade games are not the purpose of the 360.. 

Families don't all sit down and play the 360 like they do the Wii. that's my argument.

Don't make useless posts, PDB. Try to say something about what we are talking about and not focus so much on taking shots at people. 

You said that families would never sit down together and play the 360.  All I did was say that you were wrong and list specifics about why.  Don't say it's the one rare time that it will happen after you say that it will never happen.  That's just tommy idiotic.  I never said I bought the 360 for Arcade Live either. 

As a parent of three younger children, I would definitely say the Wii is geared more towards families.  I was in Blockbuster for the first time in years a few weeks ago and saw that the selection of 360 games was for a much different target audience than the Wii games.  (I didn't look at PS3 games.)  My 5 year old daughter wants a video game and I would have a much easier time selecting from Wii games than 360 games.

I think the key here is will the average family continue to buy the Wii in order to maintain it's lead or will the dedicated gamers purchase PS3s to take the lead?  I understand the point that some that have purchased the  Wii find them to be a novelty and don't continue to play them.  However, are those people going to purchase another system in the short term?  Maybe some, but I wouldn't see that being a high percentage.  Those that want the 360 or PS3 will get it regardless of any other systems at home. 

Edit: Oh, and Intellivision is still the best system ever.   

[tommy]

You said that families would never sit down together and play the 360.  All I did was say that you were wrong and list specifics about why.  Don't say it's the one rare time that it will happen after you say that it will never happen. 

Okay, I see you're a little slow and I need to spell things out for you. Families do not buy a 360 and INTEND on playing it as a family. The 360 is for the hardcore gamer who plays alone while online or if not online, still plays alone. Sure, there will be rare times when families will all use the system, but it is rare, as your case was.

You could always find the one time in any argument that will be the exception as you just did, but get real man, don't split hairs here.

You have no argument here, except for wanting to argue with me for no reason as you seem to like to do.

[Hoopz]

Don't make blanket statements that you can't back up.  Don't say that families won't play together then act like a petulant child when someone tells you otherwise. 

I'm not arguing with you.  I simply said you were incorrect and showed you why. 

[tommy]

Now I can see how so many people in PnR go around calling other members names, I have a few for you but you're not worth it.

Grow up, learn about what you're talking about before you talk about it and don't be so silly about it.

I'm incorrect in my argument because you, the one person on earth decided to play a few games with your kids, that's you're stance?   

Why do you think no one here saying I'm wrong with what I said so far, cause I'm not wrong. You're the only one who seems to know nothing about what is said around here.

[ChadTower]

I find it a little amusing that the argument is about playing a $2.50 card game on a $350 game system.

I actually spent time playing Uno with my wife and kids over the long New Year's weekend... with actual cards on the kitchen table.   

[tommy]

I guess the score is hoopz and his family playing the 360 as a family to people playing real games alone on LIVE is 1 to 10 million or so.

[Hoopz]

I actually spent time playing Uno with my wife and kids over the long New Year's weekend... with actual cards on the kitchen table.   

We play the card game also.  The kids saw it on Xbox and wanted to try it.

Tommy, I think people ignore you as I should have.   

[tommy]

I actually spent time playing Uno with my wife and kids over the long New Year's weekend... with actual cards on the kitchen table.   

We play the card game also.  The kids saw it on Xbox and wanted to try it.

Tommy, I think people ignore you as I should have.   

Thanks for seeing I was right and you have nothing more to say.

[shmokes]

Here's something to consider as well, when it comes to Grandma and Grandpa getting in on the Wii action:  Grandma and Grandpa are not gamers.  They might try Wii Sports and get a gigantic kick out of it and go get themselves a system, but they're not going to be down at EB or Toys R Us once or twice a month buying new games.  If Nintendo's giant hardware lead does not translate into increased software sales for third parties, third parties will continue focusing their attention on 360 and PS3.  GAMERS are the only segment of the population that buy 10 or 20 or 30 games for their console.  Ask yourself whether creating a system that isn't for gamers is a wise long-term move . . .

Nintendo will make loads of money on Wii.  They create fantastic software, and own properties that are worth billions.  But third parties will go where the money is, and so far I don't see third party software doing much of anything on the Wii.  Where the third parties go, the games go.  And the system with the best library will win in the end.

[tommy]

I don't think 3rd parties are even needed on the Wii. I mean look at what's been made for the Wii that is not from Nintendo, it's been all garbage anyway. Other consoles rely on 3rd parties a lot more.

[ChadTower]

Ask yourself whether creating a system that isn't for gamers is a wise long-term move . . .

Hrm.  These numbers are out of ---my bottom--- but probably not too far off.  Let's assume that Sony needs to sell 4 games to break even on the hardware loss for a PS3.  I have no idea how accessories factor in here.  If 4 games is correct, they aren't even making a profit until game 5.  That person at Gamestop once a month for a new game isn't making Sony any money for nearly 6 months.

The Wii makes money itself.  Immediate profit.  Even if that person only ever buys 3 games, that's probably as much profit as Sony will make on a person that buys 7-8 games... it's a whole lot easier to get them to drop the $250 + 3 than it is the $400 + 8.

[Grasshopper]

One thing that is likely to work in Sony’s favour is that the current generation of consoles is likely to last longer than the last one. Sony therefore has more time to catch up.

There are two reasons why I say that.

Firstly, the last generation was, in my opinion, brought to a premature end by Micro$oft. There was at least a couple of years of viable life left in the original Xbox if M$ had chosen to continue with it. It’s worth noting that Sony continued to achieve healthy PS2 sales long after the 360 had appeared.

Secondly, the gap between a console’s theoretical processing capability and the processing power actually used by a typical game has widened dramatically (the notable exception being the Wii). It will be many years (if ever) before we see games that fully utilise the processing power of the PS3 or 360. So although we might see minor upgrades for marketing purposes, there’ll be no real need for M$ and Sony to fundamentally change their hardware platforms for some time to come.

[shmokes]

Ask yourself whether creating a system that isn't for gamers is a wise long-term move . . .

Hrm.  These numbers are out of ---my bottom--- but probably not too far off.  Let's assume that Sony needs to sell 4 games to break even on the hardware loss for a PS3.  I have no idea how accessories factor in here.  If 4 games is correct, they aren't even making a profit until game 5.  That person at Gamestop once a month for a new game isn't making Sony any money for nearly 6 months.

The Wii makes money itself.  Immediate profit.  Even if that person only ever buys 3 games, that's probably as much profit as Sony will make on a person that buys 7-8 games... it's a whole lot easier to get them to drop the $250 + 3 than it is the $400 + 8.

That's the case today, but computer technology prices drop faster than prom dresses.  The Cell processor is already a year old.  Take a look at how much Intel chips are going for today that were top-of-the-line two years ago.  If PS3 owners had to buy 4 games to make Sony break even this Christmas, it will be one game by next Christmas.  The early adopters are loss leaders.

Also, keep in mind that for the most part, third parties don't care how well Sony is doing financially, so long as lots of PS3 owners buy lots of software.  EA makes a profit on every Madden sold regardless of whether Sony has recouped its costs on the hardware.  So if PS3 owners are buying 7 or 8 games apiece, while Wii owners are only buying one or two (or NONE considering the ultimate casual game is already packed in with the system), Wii's hardware lead is going to mean less.

[ChadTower]

That's the case today, but computer technology prices drop faster than prom dresses.  The Cell processor is already a year old.  Take a look at how much Intel chips are going for today that were top-of-the-line two years ago.

Console prices drop, too, on a curve almost as fast.

[versapak]

That's the case today, but computer technology prices drop faster than prom dresses.  The Cell processor is already a year old.  Take a look at how much Intel chips are going for today that were top-of-the-line two years ago.  If PS3 owners had to buy 4 games to make Sony break even this Christmas, it will be one game by next Christmas.  The early adopters are loss leaders.

Also, keep in mind that for the most part, third parties don't care how well Sony is doing financially, so long as lots of PS3 owners buy lots of software.  EA makes a profit on every Madden sold regardless of whether Sony has recouped its costs on the hardware.  So if PS3 owners are buying 7 or 8 games apiece, while Wii owners are only buying one or two (or NONE considering the ultimate casual game is already packed in with the system), Wii's hardware lead is going to mean less.

That can all be said about the 360 as well though.

I don't predict the demise of Sony with the PS3, and never have, but I do indeed predict that they have lost their top spot for at least the remainder of this generation.


Again I'll state that the Wii is no direct competition to the PS3 or 360. It is a supplemental system to the gamers that will buy a PS3 or 360, not a system that most gamers would by instead of.

[ChadTower]

I won't buy a PS3 or 360.  The Wii will be my only system of this generation that gets purchased anywhere near retail.  The other two will be picked up at yard sales years from now if at all.

[versapak]

I won't buy a PS3 or 360.  The Wii will be my only system of this generation that gets purchased anywhere near retail.  The other two will be picked up at yard sales years from now if at all.

I doubt the situation would be any different if the Wii didn't even exist though, so again I say that the Wii is no direct competition.

[ChadTower]

I doubt the situation would be any different if the Wii didn't even exist though, so again I say that the Wii is no direct competition.

You did say this:

It is a supplemental system to the gamers that will buy a PS3 or 360, not a system that most gamers would by instead of.

I say that is too broad a generalization.  There are plenty of people for whom one game system per generation is more than enough.

[shardian]

Casual gamers don't buy more than one system. Also, families usually don't buy more than one current gen console for their kids either - UNLESS one of them is a portable. Back in the day, if I would have asked for a Sega Genesis for my Birthday then turned around and asked for a SNES for Christmas, I would have gotten an "unappreciative brat" speech for the ages.

The only people who buy an XBOX 360 and a PS3 and a Wii are gaming nerds.

[tommy]

I look at it as what 1st party games do I not want to be without. I consider myself a hardcore gamer and I only buy one  console to go with my PC for gaming. I would not want to miss out on Nintendo's first party games compared to most stuff I can find on other consoles that I can probably get on a PC, unlike Nintendo's games.

[versapak]

I doubt the situation would be any different if the Wii didn't even exist though, so again I say that the Wii is no direct competition.

You did say this:

It is a supplemental system to the gamers that will buy a PS3 or 360, not a system that most gamers would by instead of.

I say that is too broad a generalization.  There are plenty of people for whom one game system per generation is more than enough.

I did not mean that the Wii was only a supplemental system.


I meant that the the type of gamers that will buy a PS3 or 360 will not buy a Wii instead. A "gamer" isn't going to sit there pondering whether they should be getting a Wii or a 360. They are getting the 360, and pondering whether or not they should be getting a Wii also.

Wii has found happiness in the casual gaming market, and that is cool, but it is what it is. The bulk of the big games of the generation will not be on the Wii. As it was with the last 2 generations of Nintendo consoles, the Wii will primarily be the place to get Nintendo games.