News Big S still on track for Spring PS3 Launch

While shopping today there was no mention of the 360 in both the towns game stores... not one poster.

The only evidence that it had been released was an anouncement in woolworths that they had just recived a shipment of them... no one seemed bothered.

although saying that there were alot of people asking for hard disks and ethernet cables at the game stores.. perhapse they got the crippled version?

 

Does anyone know what the percentages of x360's came with defects? My 360 has worked perfectly (despite being on 98% of the time since we've had it) and everyone else I know that has had one hasn't had any problems. It almost seems to me like reports of defects were getting blown out of proportion and that the result of most of the defects I'd heard were just overheating PSU's that needed more ventilation... hardly a system killer.
Does anyone know when MS started releasing like hard, factual data about the 360? Like how many months before launch? I'm interested to see if Sony actually does pull off this spring '06 thing, seems like they had a lot of work to do since the TGS.
Ah well, I guess time will tell how the next-gen "war" will go, all I know is that the x360 is a seriously sweet peice of hardware and that when the games start rolling in it will be even better.

 

Personally I have not seen any game on either the XBox or the 360 to make me buy it, I went into a shop once intending to get a XBox and looked at the games, not one looked interesting that I couldn't get on the PS2. As for Halo I havn't played very much of it but I prefer FPS on PC, I hate not using a mouse.

 

Well I know from personal experience that DoA for the first Xbox was probably the BEST 3d fighter ever, so DoA4 in my opinion is a really great buy, as well as project gotham.

 

The ignorance of man is quite a great thing. To get things straight, let's just use the facts.
1)Sony has yet to provide a real playable unit at any game show or industry demo.
2)Sony has not shown you what the hardware looks like inside.
3)Sony has yet to let anyone even touch a mock up or look at one in person.
4)Hideo Kojima said the PS3 was a pain in the ass to program for.
5)The number of cores used in the PS3 is still unknown.
6)The speed at which the blu-ray drive reads at is unkown.
7)No one has actually played a PS3.
8)The PS3 currently has no pricing.
9)Sony has lied about the graphical power of both previous console releases.
10) Due to outbreaks in corruption within Sony, the company can't afford to take a dramatic hit on PS3 sales.

So basically to compare the 360 to a bunch of numbers and videos made by a company that is in desperate need to win the console war, and is competing against a system that will already have a large user base is kinda, well it's very foolish.

 

Not really considering the PS3 hype is half as important as the actual unit, no one is seriously able to compared hte units technically at this early stage. The thing is, Sony have shown with great effect in the past that marketing your console effectively is vital to reaching the sales figures required of subsidising a high performance unit and making money from software sales.

As it stands the PS3 hype is all that is needed to disrupt 360 sales. The Japan launch, by all accounts, seems to have been pretty unexciting with reports stating that excess units are still available to buy over the counter despite the amazing launch price in that territory. There really were no killer titles available and the sales figures will reflect that.

To be honest I can't see why M$ really bothered with trying to break Japan so early. It would perhaps have been wiser to launch in the US and Europe with plenty of available units and leave the Japan launch for early next year. I have been less than impressed with the 360 launch in what I would consider MS best chance territories and the fact that Japan may well be poor in comparision does not lead to positive reading for execs. Heads will roll if the Japan launch is not everything that was promised; MS should have flooded the market in the US and Europe where demand was bound to exceed supply.

I would be surprised if the 360 didn't build on the original's relative success but MS is aiming for something far more significant with this gen and as such performance during the launch period and head start on the primary competition is critical.

 

Well, as it has been pointed out, John Carmack, as brilliant a programmer and mathametician he may be, isn't exactly the best source for information regarding the "console wars." As it should be well know, difficulty to program usually means squat, and apparently, so does specs; the PS2 had the disadvantage of being both the hardest to program for, using its own proprietary API while the Xbox used DirectX and the Game Cube used a slightly modified OpenGL, and also was easily the weakest system of the three, and even, in many ways, weaker than the Dreamcast. (the "Graphics Synthesizer" in most ways couldn't compete with the PowerVR in the Dreamcast) Yet oddly enough, it managed to dominate the marketplace. This shows that there are some other factors to consider here.

As for the blu-ray format, as far as I've heard, it's DONE, capable of holding 25GB per layer, with dual-layer discs availible initially, and eventually up to 10 layers per single-sided disc. DVD can't simply last forever, given that a whole dual-layer DVD can't even hold a full hour of HD movie at 720p; more space is needed. And Sony, for once, is perhaps making good moves in their format push; so far, they seem to be more successful than at any point since the CD; they've had loads of failed formats, from BetaMax, (vs. VHS) MemoryStick (to CF and later SD) and UMD. (which really needed no competition to defeat) However, it looks like they may succeed here; they're already well ahead of track for the format in general, and if they can get it out as part of the PS3 anywhere near schedule, they'll be doing excelently.

And personally, I don't see Sony releasing the PS3 in the United States, let alone the United Kingdom, before late 2006.

 

Personally, I know I'll have the ps3 and revolution, for some very different reasons. The ps3 will be great because I think for the most part they have the most consistantly strong lineup of games. As for the revolution, I love the idea for the new controller, and the ability to play old school games will be nice. I think nintendo did amazing with the gamecube peripherals, fun bits like the bongos and the mic for mario party. I also love my wavebirds.

From a general parent point of view (not mine, but from customer feedback) I can see these two systems doing the most business for a few reasons:

PS3 as far as I know will be completely backwards compatible (a huge selling feature with budget minded parents)

if the PS3 library is anything like the ps2's, it will have the most variety in titles(again, a huge selling feature for families).

As for the Revolution, i think price and fun games will be really hard to beat. I look at it now, where you can get the GC, a spare controller, mem card, and game for less than a base ps2 or xbox, bundles aside.

I honestly think though that microsoft jumped the gun on the launch.

and as for the quotes from Carmack, you guys have played doom3 and quake 4 right? He may be an amazing programmer, but I honestly don't think anyone there plays their games past the first couple of levels.

 

Couldn't have said it better myself.

I think I'd go for a Revolution due to it's speculated low price and high innovation and eventually get a PS3 when the ball starts rolling for pushing its hardware to its limits.

-=Ħұß®¡Ð=-

 

PS3 is not fully backwards compatible as many games at the moment are causing the very fragile system to crash. I say fragile because programming in an environment where you have to run off seven to eight different cores is very difficult (look to Gabe Newell's interview). So one small error could take a very long time to fix.

optigamer.com/news/?id=1089 (article on backwards compatibility)

And as far as I have heard the PS3 will actually cost Sony an upwards of 5-600 dollars. Since Sony doesn't have the funds to justify taking a hit of 100 to 200 plus dollars on every console they sell, they will have to market the PS3 at or above the actual cost. Add this into the fact that a Sony spoke person said the system would cost alot, well that speaks for itself.

Even if Sony manages a June - August launch in the states, Microsoft could already cut the 360 50-100 dollars in price. Why is this? A third manufacturing plant for the 360 will be ready in March.

Last but not least Sony is keeping the shape of the PS3 controller displayed at E3 and TGS.

ps3.net/newsboard/view.php?id=132