PS3... why?

[Brian Reed]

Saw this thread (http://www.606studios.com/bendisboard/showthread.php?t=89651) Bendis-side and realized I couldn't come up with any reason, even remote curiosity for owning a PS3.

Of the launch titles, most are either also available for the 360:

Call of Duty 3, Marvel: Ultimate Alliance, Tony Hawk's Project 8, Blazing Angels: Squadrons, NBA 2K7, Madden NFL 07, College Hoops 2K7, Sonic the Hedgehog, Tiger Woods PGA Tour 07, F.E.A.R., NBA Live 07, Need for Speed Carbon, Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six: Vegas, NHL 2K7, Fight Night Round 3, Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion


Sequels to shitty series that I wouldn't pick up even if I were buying a PS3:

Untold Legends: Dark Kingdom, Full Auto 2: Battlelines, Mobile Suit Gundam: Crossfire, Ridge Racer 7


Complete unknowns -- And when it comes to Sony, who also gave us Killzone, Toshindin, Warhawk, Philosoma, the 989 sports franchises, and let us never forget Kileak: The Blood, I just don't feel excited:
David Jaffe's Airwave Project [untitled], Resistance: Fall of Man, Genji: Days of the Blade

and finally, a game you've been able to play for free for a long time (http://intihuatani.usc.edu/cloud/flowing/core.html) on teh intarweb:
flOw

I guess I don't get it. Are we supposed to buy it just because it says PlayStation on the side? That's probably a "yes" even with the snark turned off. But, man... who's doing that and how do they justify it to themselves? Brand loyalty? Does it actually exist on this scale? Sony is completely thumbing its nose at its consumers. I love Nintendo, but if the Wii was $600 and offering me 90% of the same games as a system I already own, then Mario would be cordially invited to go fuck himself. I guess I have to say that Ken Kutagari is being extended the same invitation.

[ramtower]

I've been reading up on the PS2 launch just to see, historically, what happened then as compared to what's happening now. Their system was crazy expensive for a console at the time, and people were saying "why would anyone develop for the PS2 exclusively when it comes with full backward compatibility to the PS1, which has a far greater install base?"

The same questions and problems exist this time around, too, but last time, they pumped out units to be available early on -- something like 20 million were available in the first year. Their launch numbers tripled the launch numbers of the PS1, and their philosophy was "beat the other next generation systems, get the consoles out there, and then enjoy the #1 spot." It worked then. This time around, though, their launch numbers are 500,000, the cost seems so much more prohibitive, and the addition of Blu-Ray seems so much dodgier than that of the DVD player in the PS2 -- DVD was a proven format, and that dual use of the PS2 sold it in Japan, where DVD players were still pretty spendy. This time around, I'm not sure that strategy can work.

Launch titles for the PS2 were crap, though, every last one.

[TheContact]

Heck, the dual-use sold it here in the US too. $300 for a PS2 vs. $200 for a DVD player. Made a good deal, generally.

The PS3 is not nearly as good a deal, because Blu-ray is still in its infancy, may lose out to HD-DVD, and doesn't have all that many titles out yet. The remote for the PS3 is bluetooth only, which means that any hometheater guy (a market that actually may purchase blu-ray titles) won't be able to use a universal remote or IR-repeater to control the PS3, which is beyond silly.

Plus, $500-$600 is honestly a pretty expensive gift to give to kids, so they're cutting out a bit on that market of parents that don't play themselves.

I'm honestly not sure what market Sony is going after, they've priced themselves high, and provided no compelling reasons to purchase their wares, outside of tech-lust or something.

[ramtower]

Additional info: When I say that the PS2 launch tripled the numbers of the PS1, consider this:

By the end of 1995, within weeks of the US and European launch, Sony had sold 3 million PS1 systems. That's a year of sales in Japan plus a few weeks in the US and Europe. The PS2 tripled those numbers at launch and sold 20 million within its first year. Current plans for the PS3 put launch numbers at 500,000 for this year.

However, Sony hasn't been able to pump out the 2 million units initially promised (at E3, wasn't it? Maybe GDC? That's six to eight months of production time) for launch. They could only guarantee manufacture of 500,000. Pumping out another 19.5 million within a year's time, while not impossible, certainly does seem like a staggering challenge. I'm sure demand is there, maybe even at that price, but lack of availability could hurt them.

[Brian Reed]

At PS2 launch, I remember picking up SSX, Armored Core 2 and NHL 2001 because I was working with a bunch of hockey heads at the time and they had me into the sport for a short glorious time until icing rules drove me batshit insane and I gave up altogether. AC2 was a dud, but I really enjoyed SSX and NHL. I picked up DOA2 within a week of launch and Summoner and Time Splitters by Christmas of that year. Summoner was a game I always wanted to like more than I did, but I kept playing it just in case. And Time Splitters was to the PS2 what Perfect Dark Zero was to the 360 - a gap-filler until a better game came along.

The key thing though is, at the time of the PS2 launch, only DOA2 was available on another system (Dreamcast) and we were all being lied to about the imminent releae of Metal Gear Solid 2 and Final Fantasy X, both of which were not seen for a long, long time. But back then, we were young and naive and believed these terrible lies.

I don't remember a big concern about the price tag at the time. I remember I had to plan for it and save up to score it at launch just due to my salary back then being in the "not very much at all, and why are you buying a game, let alone a game system" category, but I don't remember thinking "Jesus, that's a lot of money."

[ramtower]

I love my Dreamcast. I love it so.

[Brian Reed]

I love my Dreamcast. I love it so.

When I typed "Dreamcast" I had the sudden urge to dig mine out and fire up Crazy Taxi.

[GelfXIII]

I had a similar conversation with a buddy of mine. Here was his response:
QUOTE
You really going to buy into that hype? $650 bucks for a platform that may or may-not actually add any quality to your HD set?


It may be hype, but it will definitely add quality to the HD set. Let's put it this way. I hooked the old Gamecube up to the new set and plyed it for all of about 15 minutes before deciding to sell it and all of the games I had for it. It just couldn't cut it.

So it's XBox 360 or PS3 for me. Wii? Not a chance. I'm DONE with Nintendo - and I'm ten times more resolute about that than you are with your Mets. LOL.

PS3 will come Blu Ray equiped. Wont have to add on. With the add on XBox is planning, the price difference (if you want to be able to do some form of HD DVD through them) will be between $100 and $200 bucks. I'm willing to dole that out to finally go Playstation.

[ramtower]

The equipment fiends definitely want the Blu-Ray/HD-DVD support. My TV only does 480P, so I'm fine with the GameCube (your friend may not know that just about every game had support for progressive scan, but maybe he does), most PS2 and Xbox games, and all modern-gen stuff. I've heard a few techheads go on about resolution, but I can't get any value out of it. (One wonders if your friend plays games for fun or for graphics resolution, though...)

It's interesting how much a thing like the amount of money you spent on your TV can change your perspective. You'll do anything to have a console or media device that supports your system's more expensive features. Hell, I had a friend who would watch just about anything as long as it was in high definition. Didn't care what. Just wanted HD. I have another friend who will listen to any piece of crap band as long as it puts out a 5.1 DVD-audio disc. He'll even talk about how much he hates the music but OH, GOD, you can hear everything!

[Brian Reed]

I find the whole HD-DVD/Bluray discussion adorable since both formats are essentially moot in the marketplace at the moment. I'm sure in a couple of years we'll have a winner and we'll all be buying machines to watch our movies that way, but right now it's just not a real going concern.

I personally have money on Blue Ray winning the war because it's a friendlier name than HD-DVD and the boxes are blue, which is a more welcoming color than HD-DVD's red. I say this because I've been in the store when people buy one PC over another because the case is prettier.

[Itemeleven]

I love LOVE my lil' slimline PS2 so I loves/loved me some Sony.

But nothing screams $500-600 to me. Yet. Here's what's turning me off.

- From what I seen screenwise and movie wise of Resisitance, the big launch game, it just looks . . . blegh.

- They way they are creating mulitple Final Fantasy XIII games just turns me off completely. It's not about the game anymore, it's the brand. And that turns me off as a gamer.

- The idea of microtransactioning the HELL out of games. $900 Gran Turismo anyone?

But of course, I could totally change my tune if Virtua Fighter 5 and Metal Gear Solid 4 rock the house.

Right now, no thanks.

[Brian Reed]

They way they are creating mulitple Final Fantasy XIII games just turns me off completely. It's not about the game anymore, it's the brand. And that turns me off as a gamer.

But of course, I could totally change my tune if Virtua Fighter 5 and Metal Gear Solid 4 rock the house.

But... aren't Virtua Fighter Kids, Virtua Fighter Animation, Virtua Quest, Metal Gear AC!D, the entire Metal Gear Solid series itself (especially Substance and Subsistence) all just use and abuse of thier brands and not actual perpetuations of the series? ("Virtua Fighter" and "Metal Gear" both had many sequels before these spinoffs came to be.)

I've either just cost you $600 or ensured you'll never own a PS3 ;-)

[TheContact]

The equipment fiends definitely want the Blu-Ray/HD-DVD support. My TV only does 480P, so I'm fine with the GameCube (your friend may not know that just about every game had support for progressive scan, but maybe he does), most PS2 and Xbox games, and all modern-gen stuff. I've heard a few techheads go on about resolution, but I can't get any value out of it. (One wonders if your friend plays games for fun or for graphics resolution, though...)

It's interesting how much a thing like the amount of money you spent on your TV can change your perspective. You'll do anything to have a console or media device that supports your system's more expensive features. Hell, I had a friend who would watch just about anything as long as it was in high definition. Didn't care what. Just wanted HD. I have another friend who will listen to any piece of crap band as long as it puts out a 5.1 DVD-audio disc. He'll even talk about how much he hates the music but OH, GOD, you can hear everything!

Lots of hometheater people are like that. We are talking about people that will believe practically anything about stuff like unidirectionality of speaker wires and crap like that. That said, I myself am a huge hometheater buff, cuz I likes my movies and gadgets. That said, I'd much rather have a low resolution, awesomely fun console than one that sports all the latest whiz-bang graphics. Whiz-bang graphics you forget about after 2 minutes. Awesome gameplay you remember for a lifetime.

For that reason alone, I'm firmly on the side of the Wii, because it forces the issue a bit. Also, programming for Sony hardware is unnecessarily painful, like Sony hates me and has a personal grudge. Two can play at that game, Sony.

[ramtower]

- They way they are creating mulitple Final Fantasy XIII games just turns me off completely. It's not about the game anymore, it's the brand. And that turns me off as a gamer.


Square Enix certainly did start milking that franchise with the PS2. I mean, sure, they'd had sequels and spinoffs before, but the Advent Children/Before Crisis/Dirge of Cerberus revisitings of the FFVII world were steps back rather than steps forward. They haven't wanted to risk a new story idea in a while. Even FFXII is a revisitation of a previous FF universe, albeit with new political angles and a deeper approach to story. The FFXIII cycle just reinforces my belief that Square Enix should move on from FF altogether. I just think that they're afraid to, that they can't risk losing that name strength.

[Brian Reed]

Square Enix certainly did start milking that franchise with the PS2. I mean, sure, they'd had sequels and spinoffs before, but the Advent Children/Before Crisis/Dirge of Cerberus revisitings of the FFVII world were steps back rather than steps forward. They haven't wanted to risk a new story idea in a while. Even FFXII is a revisitation of a previous FF universe, albeit with new political angles and a deeper approach to story. The FFXIII cycle just reinforces my belief that Square Enix should move on from FF altogether. I just think that they're afraid to, that they can't risk losing that name strength.


Considering some of the crap that has spilled out of there recently (Drakengard, Unlimited SaGa, The Bouncer, Radiata Stories), I'd be inclined to agree with their theroy that if it doesn't say Final Fantasy on the box, there's trouble.

Problem is, all their spinoffs of the main franchise have been shit. But X-2, as awful as it was, sold like crazy and now they're trying to recreate that experience.

I do give them credit for Kingdom Hearts though. As much as I may dislike those games, they sell like crazy and it's a mashup most companies wouldn't have had the guts to go for.

[Cth]

Saw this thread (http://www.606studios.com/bendisboard/showthread.php?t=89651) Bendis-side and realized I couldn't come up with any reason, even remote curiosity for owning a PS3.

Of the launch titles, most are either also available for the 360:




Sequels to shitty series that I wouldn't pick up even if I were buying a PS3:




Complete unknowns -- And when it comes to Sony, who also gave us Killzone, Toshindin, Warhawk, Philosoma, the 989 sports franchises, and let us never forget Kileak: The Blood, I just don't feel excited:


and finally, a game you've been able to play for free for a long time (http://intihuatani.usc.edu/cloud/flowing/core.html) on teh intarweb:


I guess I don't get it. Are we supposed to buy it just because it says PlayStation on the side? That's probably a "yes" even with the snark turned off. But, man... who's doing that and how do they justify it to themselves? Brand loyalty? Does it actually exist on this scale? Sony is completely thumbing its nose at its consumers. I love Nintendo, but if the Wii was $600 and offering me 90% of the same games as a system I already own, then Mario would be cordially invited to go fuck himself. I guess I have to say that Ken Kutagari is being extended the same invitation.

I'll eventually get one, but I've never been a Nintendo or Sony fan to be honest. I am a gamer, so I'll eventually own them all, but really, at this point, there's no need to get a PS3, especially at that price.

[ramtower]

Considering some of the crap that has spilled out of there recently (Drakengard, Unlimited SaGa, The Bouncer, Radiata Stories), I'd be inclined to agree with their theroy that if it doesn't say Final Fantasy on the box, there's trouble.

Problem is, all their spinoffs of the main franchise have been shit. But X-2, as awful as it was, sold like crazy and now they're trying to recreate that experience.

I do give them credit for Kingdom Hearts though. As much as I may dislike those games, they sell like crazy and it's a mashup most companies wouldn't have had the guts to go for.

Dude, you call a PS2 launch title "recently"? And Drakengard is a surprisingly good story, even if the gameplay is a step shy of Dynasty Warriors. Come on, a woman who gives up her womb to become bonded to a dragon and now devours babies to fill her longing to be a mother? That's one dark fucking game. And Radiata Stories doesn't quite fall into the same crap heap as Dirge of Cerberus by any measure. Radiata was, at least, a fun and lighthearted game instead of a gloomy, self-important piece of fan service. Don't forget the good work they've done this generation. Those were all solid games that just failed to sell. Drakengard 2 is a blast, too.

There was a fabulous year right before the PS2 when Square still experimented. Vagrant Story, Musashi (the sequel was poop), hell, even Ehrgeiz (despite being a failure of a game) -- they were exploring a lot back then. After the movie failed, they had to kill a lot of experiments and dedicate themselves to the moneymakers. We're stuck with a Square that's reeling from financial idiocy, incapable of justifying the development costs of riskier titles. And then, their marketing dollars go toward pushing the guaranteed hits, and the rest of their releases just...fade away.

[St Omo]

Vagrant Story

I really dug that game. :sad:

[Israel Horowitz]

You know what I want? Another Legend of Dragoon. That'd get me to buy a new system. :) Hell, I was considering pulling out the PS to play it through yet again.

[Taxman]

I was sold on the PS3 about a year ago. Based mainly on the fact that we already had a PS2, and it was supposed to be more powerful than the 360. Now I am more in a wait and see mode. I'll get a Wii at launch, but I am still undecided between the 360 and PS3.

[GelfXIII]

You know what would be a brilliant move? The day before the PS3 is finally released world wide, the 360 drops it's price.

Man, I'd be all over that.

[Taxman]

You know what would be a brilliant move? The day before the PS3 is finally released world wide, the 360 drops it's price.

Man, I'd be all over that.I can't imagine Microsoft ever doing anything like that.

[ramtower]

I really dug that game. :sad:

I loved that game. It's experimental, interesting, brilliantly written (if I do say so myself), and beautifully designed.

[St Omo]

I loved that game. It's experimental, interesting, brilliantly written (if I do say so myself), and beautifully designed.

I seem to only really enjoy the games no one else likes (no one being a handful in sales terms) and while I pretty much only play pc games (and don't own a platform newer than PSX), I found VS was a refreshing departure from the platform humdrum.

I kind of miss the days when game developers were more adventurous, with titles like Bard's Tale and the D&D titles were playable (PoR - PoD), but now no one seems to want to play a well-crafted RPG anymore. Admittedly, VS wasn't a traditional RPG perse', but it had a nice marriage of RPG and FF-style elements.

The boys and girls at Blizzard would do well to take some cues from games like BT and VS for the upcoming Diablo 3, yet while the Diablo series of games are ranked among my favorites, I'm not holding my breath.

[ramtower]

I feel like the bigger a company gets, the less leeway they have in exploring and experimenting, at least until they get big enough that losses don't matter to them anymore. Blizzard's at the "we're so big that we have to give people what they want just to stay afloat" stage. That's why they've really only got three franchises that they keep revisiting -- they're interesting worlds, but Blizzard can't really afford to experiment much and lose the equity their name gives them...

I miss the old games, sometimes. People were experimenting with genre a lot more back then, it seemed. Genres hadn't become so codified. That's part of Final Fantasy's problem -- their experimentation with that franchise is limited to variations on the RPG standards rather than exploration of different gaming directions. Not that I have the slightest clue what those directions might be.

[Brian Reed]

Dude, you call a PS2 launch title "recently"? And Drakengard is a surprisingly good story, even if the gameplay is a step shy of Dynasty Warriors. Come on, a woman who gives up her womb to become bonded to a dragon and now devours babies to fill her longing to be a mother? That's one dark fucking game. And Radiata Stories doesn't quite fall into the same crap heap as Dirge of Cerberus by any measure. Radiata was, at least, a fun and lighthearted game instead of a gloomy, self-important piece of fan service. Don't forget the good work they've done this generation. Those were all solid games that just failed to sell. Drakengard 2 is a blast, too.

Maybe I was thinking of something else when I thought of Radiata --I dunno, they're all sort of a blur right now. And I really was speaking as much in terms of sales as in fun/playability.

Dragon Quest 8 was certainly goodness.

[ramtower]

Just some numbers...

Drakengard: 157,837
Drakengard 2: 46,721
Radiata stories: 142,115
Bouncer: 246,786
FF X-2: 1,559,402
Driving Emotion-S: 31,784 (remember THAT one?)
Kingdom Hearts: 2,870,904 (number 8 on the PS2 top sellers)
DQVIII: 462,248
Dirge of Cerberus: 200,026

[Brian Reed]

Are those worldwide or just U.S.?

DQ8's numbers, while not surprising, still make me a sad panda.

But Driving Emotion -- oufuckingch. Both in numbers sold and the vague memory of "Square is making a driving game."

Now, X2 is hit territory for most publishers. I wonder if that outweighs the flopitude of Dirge for the suits up top?

[ramtower]

Just US. And those are just the TRST numbers, so they don't include all retailers.

[Busman]

I seem to only really enjoy the games no one else likes (no one being a handful in sales terms) and while I pretty much only play pc games (and don't own a platform newer than PSX), I found VS was a refreshing departure from the platform humdrum.

I kind of miss the days when game developers were more adventurous, with titles like Bard's Tale and the D&D titles were playable (PoR - PoD), but now no one seems to want to play a well-crafted RPG anymore. Admittedly, VS wasn't a traditional RPG perse', but it had a nice marriage of RPG and FF-style elements.

The boys and girls at Blizzard would do well to take some cues from games like BT and VS for the upcoming Diablo 3, yet while the Diablo series of games are ranked among my favorites, I'm not holding my breath.

Have you tried the Gothic series?

[St Omo]

Have you tried the Gothic series?

I played the first one so long ago I've forgotten most of it. I liked it quite a bit, but for some reason I got sidetracked with other games and kind of forgot about them.

Would you recommend playing both 2 and 3 or just skipping to 3?

[St Omo]

I feel like the bigger a company gets, the less leeway they have in exploring and experimenting, at least until they get big enough that losses don't matter to them anymore. Blizzard's at the "we're so big that we have to give people what they want just to stay afloat" stage. That's why they've really only got three franchises that they keep revisiting -- they're interesting worlds, but Blizzard can't really afford to experiment much and lose the equity their name gives them...

I miss the old games, sometimes. People were experimenting with genre a lot more back then, it seemed. Genres hadn't become so codified. That's part of Final Fantasy's problem -- their experimentation with that franchise is limited to variations on the RPG standards rather than exploration of different gaming directions. Not that I have the slightest clue what those directions might be.

I think a wider audience is to blame for a lot of that. Back when it was a nerd fanbase demanding nerd release, thus were produced the games of yore. And not all of them were good, but there was more variety it seemed.

Now it's kids and adults and adult kids and your half-retarded third cousin playing them, and mob mentality is quashing craftsmanship. I remember playing TES: Daggerfall back in the day and loving every minute of it. I enjoyed Oblivion, too, but it was lacking some of Daggerfall's magic, even though the graphics were far better and they'd managed to streamline the mythos a bit more. Maybe I'm just getting older and pickier.

One prime example I can think of is the Legacy of Cain series. The first game had its flaws, but it was fun to play. Then the 3d engines took over and the game was transformed into something completely different, which wasn't nearly as fun to me. That kind of thing, which seems to me to be happening more and more these days, is probably a big reason why I'm not much for playing platform games.

[TheContact]

I really dug that game. :sad: Vagrant Story is one of my favorite console games of all time :) I must have beaten that game 8 or 9 times in a row, which is pretty rare for me.

I miss Square's PS1 era RPGs.

Also, Dragon Quest 8's numbers broke down like this:

Japan: 3.61M
US: 0.47M
Other: 0.60M

Total: 4.68M

So overall, an excellent showing (though it sold less in Japan than DQ7... overall it remains the best selling DQ/DW game ever).

[Busman]

I played the first one so long ago I've forgotten most of it. I liked it quite a bit, but for some reason I got sidetracked with other games and kind of forgot about them.

Would you recommend playing both 2 and 3 or just skipping to 3?

2 was better than 1, I thought. I haven't played 3 yet. Been too busy.

[St Omo]

2 was better than 1, I thought. I haven't played 3 yet. Been too busy.

2 it is then. Thanks! :D

[Cth]

I feel like the bigger a company gets, the less leeway they have in exploring and experimenting, at least until they get big enough that losses don't matter to them anymore. Blizzard's at the "we're so big that we have to give people what they want just to stay afloat" stage. That's why they've really only got three franchises that they keep revisiting -- they're interesting worlds, but Blizzard can't really afford to experiment much and lose the equity their name gives them...

I miss the old games, sometimes. People were experimenting with genre a lot more back then, it seemed. Genres hadn't become so codified. That's part of Final Fantasy's problem -- their experimentation with that franchise is limited to variations on the RPG standards rather than exploration of different gaming directions. Not that I have the slightest clue what those directions might be.

Now you've gone and reminded me of Starcraft: Ghost..

:D

[Brian Reed]

2 was better than 1, I thought. I haven't played 3 yet. Been too busy.

Having never played any of the series, this is all heresay by me, but it sort of makes me want to avoid part 3

http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/pc/gothic-3-combat-is-hilarious-207649.php

[mewelke]

Now you've gone and reminded me of Starcraft: Ghost..

:D

Towards the bottom, but in the top ten, of the reasons I left Blizzard.

[Brian Reed]

Towards the bottom, but in the top ten, of the reasons I left Blizzard.

If only her butt had been cuter.

[ramtower]

and if she had a gun all the time.

[mewelke]

If only her butt had been cuter.

Always a more important decision than gameplay.

[Noodle]

not that i am going to shell out the kind of money they are asking for but i have a soft spot for devil may cry and these videos look pretty damn cool
http://www.gametrailers.com/gamepage.php?id=1671

[Brian Reed]

And now the question becomes... why would I DEVELOP for the PS3 if they can't even MAKE the damn consoles?

http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/sony/sony-may-not-meet-ps3-shipment-targets-209250.php

[mewelke]

And now the question becomes... why would I DEVELOP for the PS3 if they can't even MAKE the damn consoles?

http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/sony/sony-may-not-meet-ps3-shipment-targets-209250.php

The only reason I can think is if you're a masochist and enjoy exercises in frustration for the sake of the frustration.

[GelfXIII]

And now the question becomes... why would I DEVELOP for the PS3 if they can't even MAKE the damn consoles?

http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/sony/sony-may-not-meet-ps3-shipment-targets-209250.php


Somebody is paying you enough up front that you dont care if it ever makes another buck?

... I'm just guessing there. :lol:

[mewelke]

Somebody is paying you enough up front that you dont care if it ever makes another buck?

... I'm just guessing there. :lol:

Yes, a ginormous check from SONY would probably do the trick.

[beta-ray]

Well, I'm just a casual gamer so PS3 is definitely not aimed at me. Seems like they are targeting more "serious" gamers and trying to make it a media center. I did find this interesting, though I wonder how the performance of the stream would be...

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/740/740469p1.html

[Lanowar]

It seems to me that Sony are targeting the PS3 at the "Hardcore gamer" and trying to make gaming an elite thing over somthing for fun. Compared to the Wii which is trying to take gaming back to being more fun, Devil May Cry 4 looked good until you find out that for some odd reason your not playing as Dante for most the time but Nero who is a totally different character that looks vaugely like Dante. Did Capcom not learn anything from Metal Gear Solid 2!

I agree with the orginal post I don't see anything that is making me want a PS3, I did'nt get a PS2 at launch date I waited and got one cheap. Do the same with this because every time I hear about it all I hear is Sony shooting themselves in the foot in what there doing next.

[ramtower]

Yes, a ginormous check from SONY would probably do the trick.

I thought you wrote "chick" at first and got very, very confused.

[mewelke]

I thought you wrote "chick" at first and got very, very confused.

Playstation Chick Must Crush City!

[St Omo]

Playstation Chick Must Crush City!

Maybe they're targeting hardcore female gamers.

More Snickers, more Coke!