What Sony said about the PS3

by Steve Parsons { May 17th 2005 at 9:03AM }

sony logo Shock horror! This isn't an E3 story. Well, at least not this year's. With the PS3 finally out there for the world to see, EuroGamer revisits what Sony, themselves, said just over a year ago.

What was said? Well, multiple versions of the console to meet different needs and price points, for one thing. An interesting business model for sure. Will Sony follow through with it? Or were they just blowing smoke?

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

crumb @ Dec 18th 2005 9:46PM

Well, I hope the different versions of the PS3 wont look like the George Foreman Grill.

SetupWeasel @ Dec 18th 2005 9:46PM

Blowing smoke. Why stop when it's what they are best at doing?

Like this "supercomputer" talk now. I remember that crap leading up to the PS2.

Tesla @ Dec 18th 2005 9:46PM

Ahhh, weasel living up to the name as usual. So sad... Nintendo fanboys who just spout off hate for other companies is just pathetic.

andy @ Dec 18th 2005 9:46PM

Tesla, dude, that is what Sony said last time. They also said PS2 would deliver Toy Story visuals in real-time.

We have to be critical of all 3 companies, and think whats best for us gamers, regardless of the company.

I'm no fanboy, i just own a PS2, but whats starting to come out is particularly interesting.

PS3 is obviously the work-horse of the 3, but sony's lack of on-line expertise is worrysome.

XBOX360 on the other hand looks like a good system, particularly because of it's seamless on-line and dev support (XNA etc.). However, their business model is worrying. Making us pay for half-finished games, only to charge us for downloading the rest of it, bit by bit, is only going to hurt innovation.

Revolution, well, who knows. But Nintendo's commitment to games only is unique, whether one likes that or not. I for one do. It reveals a business model which itends to make profit through innovation in games, and not through movies or music etc. Nintendo are also quick to point out their shortcomings; they know they can't compete with Sony in terms of processing power, but by admitting this they let you know how they're gonna compensate. Their commitment to seamless on-line is also promising. Essentialy, Nintendo has been forced to learn a lot of hard lessons with the GameCube...

...and we all can only benefit from this....

Jason @ Dec 18th 2005 9:46PM

I take any Sony announcement with a grain of salt. They have a history of pumping things up to be a lot more than they really are.

I'm 100% sure that there will be a PS3 hooked into my entertainment center, but I don't need smoke blown up my ass to be convinved to buy.

Jason
http://www.xboxsoftmods.com

SPIKE @ Dec 18th 2005 9:46PM

In numbers , Sony claimed that PS2 had better graphics than GameCube, then we saw this information blowing smoke

Robert @ Dec 18th 2005 9:46PM

What does it matter what Sony said a year ago? It's all talk anyway.

I think any company has the right to consider product strategies and then not commit to them. It's all about managing expectations--setting the goal so high, that even it you can't reach it, you've still achieved more than you started out with.

But to commit and not follow through, that's bad business, and Sony did a bang-up job of that with the PS2 by essentially promising more than it ended up delivering.

So far with the PS3, I haven't seen much by the way of promised technology other than the just-released specs and design, and even that is subject to change.

Tesla @ Dec 18th 2005 9:46PM

Robert, you need to watch Sony's press conference from E3 then.

PS3 seems to be the most promising system when compared to Xbox, and I have a feeling that will be the same case when we hear more about Revolution (which is going on right now...) I have a feeling that since Microsoft is only backwards compatible to "some" games and will incorporate a lot of purchasing items online BS it will not do as well as it should. I will definitely look more at Revolution than at XBox360...but only after PS3.

On the terms of system capability, generally higher processor power doesn't always equal better graphics. Take Metal Gear Solid 2 for example. When it was brought over to the XBox the environmental graphics were not as good because the XBox architecture was not optimized in the same way the PS2 was.

Robert @ Dec 18th 2005 9:46PM

Cool, Tesla, I'll take a look...

And yeah, I'm not totally feeling Microsoft's approach, with "microtransactions" and all that. I love playing games on Live, but I'm not sure if I really need it to go beyond that.

On the other hand, I haven't seen anything from Sony that can compare with that online experience...yet.

Rare Hare @ Dec 18th 2005 9:46PM

you guys honestly think that Sony won't respond with the same or better online play than Xbox Live? they'll not only have a while after the release of the Xbox 360, it's pretty much a must-have feature nowadays.

if you want to talk about poor online support history, bring up nintendo.

while i believe the PS3 wil outdo the competition, the Revolution definately looks the coolest so far.

and on the original subject at hand, i sure hope they're just talking. i totally disagree with releasing multiple versions of the console..

Rare Hare @ Dec 18th 2005 9:46PM

ease @ Dec 18th 2005 9:46PM

Heeeelllooo people xbox 360 should be our obvious choice so far...

think about it ps3 and xbox 360 both have power pc based cpus, but the xbox has 3 of them in parellel...

and what about PS3s crappy controller? Have we all forgotten what the sidewider did for us?

Plus the online game pay is still unmatched. The only thing i thnk microsoft will have to work on is the game issues....