Wall Street Journal Weighs In On PS3 Comeback Chances [Archive]

The 1 2 P

12-31-2008, 06:20 PM

Good news Sony: The Wall Street Journal has picked the PS3 as a feature for a major article. Better news: it deals with your miraculous story of being a comeback player in the video game console wars. But heres the bad news: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123050978162738293.html

While some of this was very public knowledge, I didn't know that their other divisions were also faring so poorly. Looks like no one is safe from the all mighty economic depression.

RCM

12-31-2008, 06:37 PM

Wow, I can't help but feel a little sad for Sony. Sure, PS and PS2 destroyed many worthy consoles, but still. PS3 is the best PS/PS2 around. I guess that isn't enough for some folks...

Overbite

12-31-2008, 06:45 PM

The PS1 and 2 kicked all sorts of ass (PS2 has one of the greatest game libraries ever) but no console has "won" 3 times in a row.

walrusmonger

12-31-2008, 06:51 PM

The PS3 is the Xbox of this generation, just a damn shame that most people don't realize it.

Tupin

12-31-2008, 06:52 PM

Sony had a good run.

Usually when a console fails like this, it's because developers are having problems developing.

Tupin

12-31-2008, 06:54 PM

The PS3 is the Xbox of this generation, just a damn shame that most people don't realize it.
What do you mean by that?

The 1 2 P

12-31-2008, 07:09 PM

The PS3 is the Xbox of this generation, just a damn shame that most people don't realize it.

What do you mean by that?

I think he means that the PS3 will go thru the majority of this generation in the red, meaning they won't make a profit. The Xbox(original) only had one profitable quarter in it's 4+ years and that was Q4 2004 when Halo 2 launched.

grolt

12-31-2008, 09:07 PM

Funny that the only time that Sony actually has a technologically superior console to its competitors, it places last. While the loss positively helps reaffirm that Sony can't just force feed formats like Blu-ray to buyers and essentially do whatever conglomerated cross media planning they'd like, it's still a bit of a shame. A shame that the most impressive console is dying out. Maybe that's karma for all that false PS2 spec boasting that killed off the Dreamcast.

swlovinist

12-31-2008, 09:20 PM

I have posted alot about the PS3 and why I feel it is going to stay in third place(marketing, lack of price drop). I think that the actual system is pretty good, but they just arent going in the right direction with the system at all. Other than playing Blu Ray movies, the system is not doing enough to seperate it from its competitors as a unique game system. One of the strongest advantages the system could have had was taken out due to supposedly a cost measure(BC with PS2 games), as well as just not generating any type of momentum for the holiday. I think that the games it is getting is better, but I feel that it is not proving to offer enough to warrent the heavy cost. Not having a price drop for the holidays was seriously dumb, and yet another reason why the entire PS3 marketing team should be fired. I own a 20 gig, and love my system, but cant really recommend the PS3 as a game system for $400 when its library is not really diverse or that much different than a 360.

Tupin

12-31-2008, 09:40 PM

They do share most of their libraries, Sony was so confident that their system would outsell everything even if it was higher priced that they didn't bother to put their foot down and demand exclusives remain exclusives.

Did they really state false specs in order to keep their PS1 audience from purchasing the Dreamcast?

Rob2600

12-31-2008, 11:19 PM

Did they really state false specs in order to keep their PS1 audience from purchasing the Dreamcast?

You don't remember the whole "PS2 can launch missiles" nonsense?

The specs of both the PS2 and Xbox were severely exaggerated. Nintendo, in a strange marketing move, published severely understated GameCube specs. Stupid move.

The 1 2 P

01-01-2009, 12:56 AM

Nintendo, in a strange marketing move, published severely understated GameCube specs. Stupid move.

I don't think that would have really helped them considering all the other problems they had with the mini game disc, non-existant online play and miniscule first party/AAA offerings per year.

Rob2600

01-01-2009, 01:28 AM

I don't think that would have really helped them considering all the other problems they had with the mini game disc, non-existant online play and miniscule first party/AAA offerings per year.

Really? I never noticed any problems with the small discs. In fact, they loaded much faster than the full-sized discs on the PlayStation 2 and Xbox.

I don't think the lack of online play was a problem, either. Yes, online gaming was gaining momentum in 2001, but it wasn't nearly as popular then as it is today. I'm sure some people were disappointed, but overall, I didn't know anyone who cared about online console gaming back then.

And the GameCube's library wasn't quite as extensive as the PlayStation 2's, but it was still very good...especially Nintendo's own titles.

Back in 2001, Microsoft was claiming the Xbox could produce something like 70 million polygons per second, which was false. Meanwhile, Nintendo was claiming the GameCube maxed out at around 12 polygons per second, which was also false...and really, really stupid. In reality, both consoles ended up with games that pushed around 30 million or so polygons per second.

maxlords

01-01-2009, 01:36 AM

kedawa

01-01-2009, 01:55 AM

otaku

01-01-2009, 04:47 AM

yeah its definetly not to great honestly mine is used as:dvd/bluray player and as a nice piece to display with my big screen (sexy machine!) they definetly need more games.

smork

01-01-2009, 04:58 AM

You don't remember the whole "PS2 can launch missiles" nonsense?

You know, I had someone spout that nonsense to me a few weeks ago in the office. He tried to tell me the Japanese version of the PS2 was special because it was "military spec" and couldn't be exported to other countries. This was from an otherwise intelligent dude.

I agree with those who say the PS3 hasn't done anything to differentiate itself. I've always liked Sony consoles but really waited on getting my PS3 because as a 360 owner there was little on offer that I didn't already have available. I did pick one up a month or two ago because I got it dirt cheap (~$250) and I wanted to play Ratchet & Clank (and I wanted the Blu-Ray). But if it wasn't so cheap I never would have gotten it.

In the end a $400 console is still just too much money for most people, especially in this dire economy.

G-Boobie

01-01-2009, 05:27 AM

From what I understand, one of the issues with the PS3 is an underpowered graphics card or GPU (not sure which) in comparison to the 360. One of my buddies was telling me that this is why the PS3 side by sides aren't looking as good, and why most PS3 games are in 720p rather than 1080p like the same titles for Xbox. Any truth to this?

I wish Programming Ace would either confirm or deny this, but from what I understand, the Cell chip directly handles some of the stuff that a GPU normally does, like shaders and so on. It doesn't really need more graphics memory.

PS3 screens aren't looking as good as 360 because it, like the PS2, is a raging bitch to develop for. The 360 in comparison is a PC, and is super easy to code for. Most of the Sony 1st and 2nd party titles look great; ports and games released on both consoles suffer in the transition to the PS3 because most games use the 360 as the lead development SKU and port it to the PS3 from there.

I think the best looking game of 2008 was Metal Gear Solid 4, hands down: even better than Gears 2. Burnout Paradise was a PS3 lead SKU game, and it looks just as good as the 360 version, if not a little better(not as much compression). It's all in who's coding the game.

retro junkie

01-01-2009, 08:49 AM

Originally Posted by Rob2600
You don't remember the whole "PS2 can launch missiles" nonsense?

You know, I had someone spout that nonsense to me a few weeks ago in the office. He tried to tell me the Japanese version of the PS2 was special because it was "military spec" and couldn't be exported to other countries. This was from an otherwise intelligent dude.

What a coincidence. I had ran across some of my old gaming magazines and was going through them. I found and was thinking on this same thing a couple of days ago. This came from a June, 2000 issue of “Gamers Republic Magazine.”

http://file.walagata.com/w/redmoon/ps2bomb.gif
An interesting bit of PS2 history.:-D

Sudo

01-01-2009, 02:17 PM

Trebuken

01-01-2009, 02:48 PM

The 360 is not so far ahead of the PS3 in console sales, and the PS3 has not had a price drop yet. I do think Sony can catch the 360 in consoles sold but the 360 will probably continue to sell more software.

The 360 has only recently surpassed the Gamecube of all systems in console sales, and with the PS2's 140 million units shipped title I think we can say that this console generation is just getting started. Playstation HOME might be in full swing by next Xmas and could be a selling point over the 360's Mimical Mii's. Blu-Ray is on the rise and is about to find a new momentum...and the 360 is crippled by it's disc capacity...we're already seeing 4 disc games (Lots Odyessey).

Odds are with the 360, but I think Sony has more growing room with the PS3 than the 360 has remaing.

maxlords

01-01-2009, 07:39 PM

So between G-Boobie and Sudo, what I'm understanding is:

1. The PS3 is very hard to develop for due to proprietary Sony dev tools and complex processes, while the 360 is very simple to develop for, as one can use existing known PC tools and programs to make software.

2. Both PS3 and 360 are native 720p but the 360 has an upscaler built in to convert to 1080p.

So the real reason games that come out on both systems don't look as nice on the PS3 is that it's harder to code em and/or port em to the PS3 due to the software and tools forced upon devs. First party stuff like Heavenly Sword and major games like MGS4 DO look great though, due to the time and expense put in dealing directly with the Sony dev tools.

Would this then imply that most of the dual platform games are primarily developed for the 360 and ported to the PS3? Would the porting process inherently cause a slight lowering of the quality due to the design of the game being optimized for the console it was developed on?

Also, from what I understand, even Blu-Ray is native 720p and must be upscaled to 1080p. Is there anything at all that's true 1080p native?

j_factor

01-01-2009, 07:52 PM

People say that multiplatform games often look a little worse on PS3, but in most cases (there are a few exceptions), I can't notice the difference at all. It's not at all like last gen.

Rob2600

01-01-2009, 08:12 PM

People say that multiplatform games often look a little worse on PS3

One example I remember is Madden NFL 07. Supposedly, the Xbox 360 version ran at 60 fps, while the PS3 version ran at 30 fps.

G-Boobie

01-01-2009, 10:56 PM

Would this then imply that most of the dual platform games are primarily developed for the 360 and ported to the PS3? Would the porting process inherently cause a slight lowering of the quality due to the design of the game being optimized for the console it was developed on?

Yessir. You can't blame the studios though: the 360 has a ridiculously huge third party software attach rate and a much larger install base.

Also, from what I understand, even Blu-Ray is native 720p and must be upscaled to 1080p. Is there anything at all that's true 1080p native?

You know, I don't know.

Tupin

01-01-2009, 11:02 PM

I haven't heard that "PS2 can launch missiles" thing in years, I forgot about it. LOL

TheDomesticInstitution

01-01-2009, 11:23 PM

Also, from what I understand, even Blu-Ray is native 720p and must be upscaled to 1080p. Is there anything at all that's true 1080p native?

This is the 1st I've heard of this. But without doing any research deep into this right now, here's what I know...

-All Blu-Ray discs are labeled 1080p and 24fps on their packaging.

-Our TV always displays a message about the native resolution of the source material it's playing. Every Blu-ray movie I've ever watched on our TV (with the PS3) has been displayed at 1080p. This is not the case with most PS3 games which come up as "720p."

-All the forums I've ever read pertaining to Blu-Ray discs, have never mentioned that Blu-Ray movies are encoded in any resolution less than 1080p.

This being said, I'll look into the claim that Blu-Rays are truly only 720p. Although everything I've ever heard and read up to this point has lead me to believe that Blu-Ray movies are a 1080p format.

Sudo

01-02-2009, 01:55 AM

This is the 1st I've heard of this. But without doing any research deep into this right now, here's what I know...

-All Blu-Ray discs are labeled 1080p and 24fps on their packaging.

-Our TV always displays a message about the native resolution of the source material it's playing. Every Blu-ray movie I've ever watched on our TV (with the PS3) has been displayed at 1080p. This is not the case with most PS3 games which come up as "720p."

-All the forums I've ever read pertaining to Blu-Ray discs, have never mentioned that Blu-Ray movies are encoded in any resolution less than 1080p.

This being said, I'll look into the claim that Blu-Rays are truly only 720p. Although everything I've ever heard and read up to this point has lead me to believe that Blu-Ray movies are a 1080p format.

All Blu-ray movies are 1080p, though that's not the case with games on Blu-ray. The vast majority of PS3 and 360 games are 720p native (some even less), but there are a handful (mostly on PS3) that are true 1080p.

noname11

01-02-2009, 04:11 AM

I haven't heard that "PS2 can launch missiles" thing in years, I forgot about it. LOL

you know, when I was in Middle School ('92) my 6th grade teacher informed us that NES controllers (and or systems) were used by Iraq to control missiles.

Is it just me or are authority figures over-hyping the ability of video game consoles?

TheDomesticInstitution

01-02-2009, 08:17 AM

All Blu-ray movies are 1080p, though that's not the case with games on Blu-ray. The vast majority of PS3 and 360 games are 720p native (some even less), but there are a handful (mostly on PS3) that are true 1080p.

This is precisely what I had always thought. For some reason though I was intrigued that this may be some urban legend, that had been on the hush hush. So after digging around on the internets for a bit, I could find no claim to the contrary. If it were some big A/V conspiracy you could bet that the boards over at avsforums would be ablaze over this issue.

retro junkie

01-02-2009, 08:39 AM

you know, when I was in Middle School ('92) my 6th grade teacher informed us that NES controllers (and or systems) were used by Iraq to control missiles.

Is it just me or are authority figures over-hyping the ability of video game consoles?

Now I understand more clearly why Senator Lieberman was so against violence in video games. ROFL