Sony has dropped the ball come PS3, how lame to copy nintendo with the controller and microsoft with the "live" button in the center...LAME

PSThrii

Hahahahaha. Thanks Incognito, for proving that Sony does love to bash M$ and Nintendo, then steal their ideas. Ah Sony...

I don't really mind them adding this function, they're free to jump on the bandwagon if they want to.
What is really hurting me is the loss of rumble.
Why Sony why?
Well i guess we know why really. But just because you lost that lawsuit with Immersion doesn't mean you can't license the tech.
This certainly is a sad time in gaming history.

I think Sony is a WII bit Jealous...

This may or may not be the begining of the end of Sony's dominance. I am a fan of the playstation 1 and playstation 2. However it was because of the games that made me a fan of those systems. Not the features. In all honest, I couldn't give a damn about the features the Playstation 3 is capable. I just want good gameplay in the games that is made for the system. Come on Sony. Is this too much to ask?

Nintendo's got the Nuts this hand fellas. Looks like sony should have just dissed the idea all together. It was a stupid move for them to add a feature that was really not needed for the PS3. I mean nothing wrong with having it but they made two fatal errors. One they look like suckers and are exposing their fears and two they stated "No Sensor Needed" which to me was an obvious sign that they were not only affraid but also know a motion sensor is a good idea in the first place. I will always root for the underdog. I did when sega was not as popular as nintendo. I will now for nintendo when they are not as popular as sony. I give them credit for paving the way because nintendo has contributed the most to the way we play games.

I guess they decided that they really wouldn't have anything that special, so they decided to add this function. I believe they copied Nintendo, and their conference wasn't exciting at all, nothing original (including controller).

so they really did do this in response to the Wii controller. Wow, what a rip-off, Sony. How do you guys sleep at night?

Take a look at this::

http://press.nintendo.com/e32k6/index.html

user: golin
pass: harris

Everything Nintendo has, Sony makes 2 more of..Analog Sticks, Sholder Buttons, rumblepacks, and now motion sensors

I've got no problem with them copying Nintendo--business as usual.

The problem I do have, though, is that they're completely half-ass about it. It makes it obvious that they have no one philosophy for PS3 driving them forward. It's so completely ad hoc and convoluted that Sony is bound to lose some ground in this new generation.

That would explain why Warhawk was such a bad demo. Watch the guy controlling the plane and then watch the screen. It's a mess. He couldn't even land it. Sony should have never featured such a demo until it was better polished. They must have felt they could show it anyway, just to grab SOME attention. But I'm not sure they're getting the kind of attention they want.

It's more laughable than 'hey, can't wait for that!'

2 weeks ago?!?!

OMG it's one thing to bash your competitors then steal their ideas. But then you do a half job of stealing their ideas you just make it worse.

Worse than that it doesn't sound like what the market leader should be doing. The one thing I can compare it too is Sega scrambling to catch sony just before they were run out of the hardware market, trying to cram every feature they could think of instead of just concentrating on the gamers.

I'm not buying a PS3, too rich for my blood and since I don't have HDTV blu-ray movies aren't gonna look any better than my DVD's anyway. Honestly, how many people have TV's that make blu-ray worthwhile?

By the way if blu-ray doesn't catch on in the next couple of years A lot of the justification for that price is gonna go away and a lot of sony fans are gonna feel burned.

No matter how you feel about the new controller, or what the interviews/rumors say, it really does look like they tacked this on in response to Nintendo's controller and that they really gave no thought to the design or what it would mean to developers.

Did you guys see the Warhawk demo with the controller? It looked awkward and didn't seem like a smooth transition from the controller to the screen. Too loose, with the developer making these big motions with his arms.

Sony needs to either A)Commit the rest of the summer to making the controller feel/look good and getting the sensory input down or B)Just scrap the idea altogether.

I bet maybe 10-15 games will take advantage of this "feature" and MAYBE 1 or 2 will actually make really good use of it. Sony is treating this like a gimmick and so it will be one, which is sad.

But Sony looks like a bunch of executive assclowns right now because of this Dual Shock (it's still the same damn controller, even if you change the name, Sony!) and their price point. Oh, and the XBL/iTunes service they've implemented. A lot of their audience that bought into the PS2 has grown up and are raising families, they cannot afford this! Nor do they need another media center/DVR/computer in their house.

I just hope that some of the games that come out in the next year are worth getting when they drop the price and redesign the system.

Well, this just about proves that this is Sony's strategy behind this system:

"Hey, Nintendo may have a fancy controller, and Microsoft may have a fancy online service, but OMG WE'VE GOT BOTH!"

just for the record, the guy in the demo was really awkward i dmit, but everyone thats actually had a hands-on experience with the controller says that it controls really well. the main grip then switches to the fact that the controlle feels too light now, almost to the point of cheapness.

2:
PSThrii-6-T?

Man, that's hardcore. I mean, for a time I was thinking of giving Sony the benefit of the doubt, and say that maybe they were going to replace rumble with this all along.

But with this... it means that Sony saw what Nintendo had at TGS, and then copied them. 6 months later, their prototype was done, and it was shipped to devs.

No question.

Well I'll say one thing, driving games will be laughable on the Wii when you can do EXACTLY THE SAME THING on the superior hardware of the PS3.
Goodnight.

there are only 2 games that would make me get a ps3. Kingdom Hearts 3, and FF7 remake.

Then, and only then, a PS3 will I own.

I read somewhere (maybe on Joystiq) a few months back, that BluRay will not really be relevant for at least a couple of years (if ever). If this is the case, the PS3 is little more than an overpriced, corporate trojan horse version of the 360, which is also taking a (power-drunk/incopetent) swipe at Nintendo's impending domination of the "innovative" games niche market. The whole "BluRay is included so we're going to need you to give us another $200," when BluRay is utterly unproven at this point, should be viewed by prospective PS3 buyers as a bit of an insult to their intelligence, as it is little more than an assumption that said customers can be hearded like sheep. BluRay is about all the PS3 has that 360 doesn't (the graphics seem roughly equal), and it's not a worthwhile investment for the average gamer.

"driving games will be laughable on the Wii when you can do EXACTLY THE SAME THING on the superior hardware of" the 1988 Chevrolet Callaway Sledgehammer Corvette.

Once and for all, I think the recent ADHD on this forum needs a definitve thread on this split SKU debacle as well as the price. Let's just get this out of the way, shall we? Before continuing to read this post I need you to first do a few simple things.

1. Look up the definition of value, or at least imprint that word on your conscious.

2. Go back to Gamespot and watch the PS3 unveiling again.

3. Remember that USB2.0 is not the same as an HDMI or component connection for that matter.

4. Make a mental note that playing a game is not the same as watching a movie.

5. The most important one of all, because this one is completely unique to you the reader.. Ask yourself what "Next Gen" means to you.

Now, with that in mind. I want you all to note that any comparisons drawn between the PS3 and any other console in this post will be strictly factual. I'm not flame-bating you or anyone else on God's Green Earth by pointing out the sticker price on a product or its features. Also, I am going to paint a very pointed picture at the end of this post regarding non-gaming products as well to drive the main point home to all of you. The point is, I don't care what you have in your living room before or after reading this, I'm just clearing the air so to speak.

The XBox360 is a great console, but here's some facts.
1. To get a unit with a hard drive costs $400. Since the HDD is an optional feature on the 360, its games are not encoded to take advantage of cacheing across the board. Of course, I realize some games do all the same, which is good for those devs. So, if you are an XBox360 owner, chances are you have the $400 version. In fact, there was a period after the launch where Hard drives were next to impossible to find because people bought the core and had to get the Hard Drive seperately. Its safe to say that the 360 costs $400 in the light of this data.

2. The wi-fi adapter costs $100 more. Not really a point of deirision for a lot of consumers in the light that the PS3 with wi-fi costs $200 more. Of course, in order to get 60GBs of HDD on a 360 would cost an additional $200 for two 20GB HDDs.

Advantage so far? PS3, but only by a means of functionality over cost. There's no doubting that MS has a larger HDD in the works for the 360, but that would have to be an additional cost which we could technically tap onto the cost of the $300 version for the more savvy consumers who took a "wait and see" approach when they got their 360s at launch and opted for the Core. So far, the $600 PS3 is getting by on a mere technicality. Of course, if you are one of those people who didn't care about wi-fi you can simply move forward and forget all this. Just remember, cacheing means better performance.

Now that we've taken a quick look at the features in the boxes themselves, let's move outwards a little wee bit. This section will be about controllers. I guess I should warn you that if you're one of those people who just "doesn't care" about wireless controllers, you can happily skip past this.

1. Since the PS3 comes with standard wireless controllers, we are yet again in the position of having to compare the PS3 with the premium $400 360. The good news here (for Xbox fans) is that the 360 controller is a rather nice piece of kit. The bad news is, the PS3 controller not only (finally!?) has trigger buttons as well, but also features an advanced tilt sensory system that allows developers to explore possibilities. We can save the "Wii ripoff" thread for later since it's blatantly obvious that the Wii is far more advanced than the DS3 when it comes to spatial control. BTW, there is a Home Button on the PSP that does the same stuff as the XBox guide button, so please spare us the Home Button argument. At least spare me? This is my one and only point about the controllers.

Advantage? It's clearly a matter of functionality. Any attempt to make a price debate is just silly right now since neither Sony or Nintendo have released a price for their standalone controllers nor do we know if we'll need to ante up for a charge and play kit like the 360. We should take all these things into consideration.

Ahh, now we come to a real hot-button subject.. This subject has been beaten to death and resurrected just to be beaten into undeath many a time.. However, now that there are actual dollar signs to the debate I shall open Pandora's Box and talk about the disc media.

1. Straight up.. The 360 has a DVD9 drive and the HD-DVD drive would be very ill-suited for gaming since it is plugged into a USB port. The big deal here is that the PS3 will not only be a BluRay movie player (priced at a hefty Grand for a standalone player) but it will be used for game content. I don't think people think this one through very much because it may or may not suit their purposes to do so. The seek-time on the BD drive coupled with the cacheing and Cell processors expertise in encoding/decoding signal means that even a first generation PS3 will "seem" blindingly fast for content. On top of this, the volume of content is greatly increased on a single disc which gives developers enough room to create game assets that will reach far beyond anything they could have done with a DVD.

2. We can rewind this a little bit for the sake of comparison. After all, you may be one of those people who could care less about BluRay but perhaps you do care about HD content. For this reason, we can simply compare the drive in the PS3 to a cheaper standalone HD-DVD player which is around $500. Compare this with the DVD drive in both the 360 and the Revo, and you can see that the PS3 starts to make some real ground here.

Advantage: Undeniably and unequivocally the PS3. It can't help but use the BluRay to its advantage because that is what it is in essence designed to do. The Cell is more of an embedded media processor than anything else. Of course, these mathematical capabilities can most certainly be utilized to make games run impressively quick and repsonsive. This is where the value comes into play and theres really no wiggling out of it. If games were $100 on the PS3 I'd be more than willing to revisit this evaluation.

1. While we're on the subject of multimedia functionality, we should probably take a look at how the PSP can and will be integrated with the PS3 itself. Of course, the XBox doesnt have a handheld system to compare to except some limited iPod functionality. The Nintendo DS will be a major companion device to the Wii as well. So, we could more compare the abilities of the PS3 to the Wii in this instance. The clear advantage goes to the Wii. "WHAT! THE WII?!!" Yes, the Wii, because there are like fifty gajillion Nintendo DSes out there and the developers will target that functionality aggressively until PSP sales can pick up as well. Crazy, how that works.

2. Okay okay, the XBox360 can connect to a Media Center PC! That's some pretty cool functionality there! But.. We could tack on the cost of a PC and destroy any cost advantage the 360 has even if we tapped a GigaPack PSP onto the price of the Premium PS3.. So, thats just a little silly for our purposes. In fact, forget I brought this up, but someone was bound to.

Soooo, now we come to another one of those hot subjects.. HDMI.. It wouldnt even be a matter of conversation had Sony not harped on 1080p all summer long. Hey! I'll admit its shennanigans too! But lets be realistic here. What other console offers HDMI as a feature on any kit or add on or otherwise? (Jeopardy music) Times up, none. It's a feature you need to pay for and you know what?!!

*Booming God Voice*
If you're one of those people out there worried about 1080p and are willing to cough up several Gs to get a cutting edge HDTV then you're probably also likely to throw in another G on a Dolby Surround sound system.. If you are one of these people, you probably don't give a flying Ape Escape about spending $600 on a system that compliments it like apple pie and vanilla icecream now are you?


If you couldn't make it through all that I'll break it down like this..

To get a Wii that matches the PS3 you will have to..

1. *record scratching noise* Wait, you'll be too busy ninja flipping through your living room to care how many gigawallakallamazooFLOPS that thing is running?! Right?

To get an XBox to (uhh sorta kinda) do what the PS3 does out of the box at $500 you will have to..

1. Start with a $400 Premium because the "Broke butt PS3 for African villagers" comes with a 20GB HDD and component connectivity.

2. Add a $100 wifi adapter

3. Add a $??? HD-DVD drive

4. Here's the real killer.. You'll need to pay an extra $300 for six years of Live!

5. BEG for Japanese developer support!

and you still won't get the dynamic controls, the functionality out of the box, nor the built in OS features, and the size of games..

And that my friends, is value!

As horrible as this move is, I do think Sony were incredibly smart by including this, even if it is tacked on at the last minute.

I don't mind at all that the feature is understated, all it means is that if Nintendo actually do start to succeed with their system, Sony will be in a posistion to actually compete in that genre, with standard controllers.

We know that optional accessories don't get supported, so it was either put this functionality in now, or risk loosing out to half the market. If you claim that you woudln't have done the same, then it's no wonder why you don't run Sony.

As for releasing a crippled core PS3?... That is a whole other topic.

sorry. I forgot to stay on topic for most of that last post, but I think:
a.)It's fairly obvious that this was a last minute decision. Sony's partially deaf recon guy misheard Reggie, and came back with "imitate or die"; and
b.)It really seems like Sony's gone completely off the wall this time around. I remember people complaining about the PS2's price being high when it came out, but now it's more than double. I'd love to hear their (non-marketing-department-filtered) take on why they think this is going to do so well.

Asas is dead on the money, the PS3 is a bigger bang for the buck no matter how you cut it(unless the games are more expensive, then it's a question of library size). The problem with the Sony conference is that they didn't touch on any of these points, bad mistake.

And the controller should add a lot more to fps games once it's finally implemented right. Just tilt up or down for vertical aiming, sounds pretty intuitive. It's obviously a last minute wii rip off but still a benefit to the system.

Hd-dvd isn't going to be the next big thing, there will never be enough adopters to it with blu-ray looming on the horizon. Even if it was the new standard I'm betting you'd find the adapter adoption rate for the 360 would be low and since it's not a bundled feature very few games would take advantage of it.

I'll admit the PS3 conference was probably the most dreadful E3 conference I've watched, reminded me more of stockholder sessions at the pharmaceutical company I work at than a game console unvealing.

Regardless, I'm probably going to sell my 360 now while I can still get good cash for it(I hope) to save up for a PS3. Viva Pinata was the only game that Microsoft hyped up at their conference that I even want to play. I'm so sick of generic action games(especially sci-fi and fantasy ones) I turn purple everytime I see one. Maybe some third party titles for the 360 will change my mind but I doubt it. Microsoft seems pretty intent on catering the teenage male gamer and that's a market I've long outgrown. The PS3 looks like it will have a more diverse audience to cater to, although it looks like the wii is making the broadest gestures in this direction.

asas that was enormous post. I skimmed through it, and basically you are saying that the ps3 is better value than the Xbox.
Well your argument would make sense if you could buy the ps3 right NOW, in stores. Of coures, fanboys like you always fail to consider that time has a monetary value also. You can get the Xbox right NOW. It will cost you even less than you would have to pay Sony 6 MONTHS from now. By then, i would bet my house MS will drop the 360's prices anyway.

asas is a dumbass for one reason only.

Consoles are not for the rich. Consoles are not for the people who want to be on the cutting edge of technology. That demographic is reserved for PC gamers and those that have money to burn.

asas has no clue what demographic buys consoles. Gamers buy consoles, casual or otherwise. PARENTS buy consoles.

That said....of FUCKING COURSE its a great deal to have all that crap in the PS3, but for some reason you half wits don't realize that they should have never put it in a GAMING CONSOLE in the first place.

Sony and Kutaragi are telling consumers what they want, not listening to what consumers need. Nobody except hardcores want a "super computer" with all the latest technology that nobody but the rich or stupid has. 1 example - 1080p high def output...most consumers don't even have a god damn HD tv!! Whats that?---Most if not all will have them in 10 years or so....this is probably true...the the PS4 should have 1080p output!!!

That would be like Ford selling nothing but hydrogen cars to the country when there is only one hydrogen station to refill in each state.

I know I'm bitching a lot...and I hope the best for Sony, but I am really worried about them. I will not purchase a 3rd place console for $600...ever!

"And the controller should add a lot more to fps games once it's finally implemented right. Just tilt up or down for vertical aiming, sounds pretty intuitive. It's obviously a last minute wii rip off but still a benefit to the system."

If it was intuitive, any one of the Big 3 would have done it ages ago. If it was intuitive, almost every PC controller would have this option, relegating the non-til-enabled controllers to the back of the shelf. If it was intuitive, they'd have replaced the standard GC, Xbox, and PS2 controllers with embedded tilt sensors a long time ago.

Have you actually tried playing a PC FPS with one of MS/Logitech's tilt-enabled controllers? It's a nightmare. Not so much for something that makes good use of the motion itself, like a flight simulator - but it's less accurate than the worst console controller for an FPS.

Fanboy. Gah!

Asas has a logical argument, so calling him a fanboy or a dumbass is pretty baseless. He's got a point.

I think the counterargument is sticker-shock, as exemplified by Eric here. He is OUTRAGED by the number $600, even if it's worthwhile. Yes, if you sit down with a pen and paper, the PS3 isn't a bad deal. Thats *why* it costs so much. But in the end, when dad or Joe College Guy is standing in EBGames, he's not working it out on paper, he's looking at $500-$600 and thinking that's a whole lot of toilet paper or ramen.

Regardless of whether it's a good deal, it WILL turn people off at the register.




NOW, on the other hand, nothing's saying Sony has to stick with the high price. In half a year when demand has gone down and the Ebay scammers have gone on to greener pastures, they have the option of dropping the price substantially. It's pretty likely that they'd still sell out their initial stock, and then the more cost-concious consumers can start buying after a price drop into more competitive ranges.

Justin, in whoever you're refering to's defense, you haven't played any PC FPSes that were made to use the tilt controller. It may turn out that the tilt controller is better for moving and straifing, or it could be used to aim if the game impements it well. Developers have the option of playing to the device's stengths. At any rate, it can't be much worse than an analog stick, those things are terrible for FPSes, and only work for xbox games because of the reams of code they had to write to compensate. You could write a thesis on the autoaiming in halo. AUTOAIMING! PC games haven't needed that since someone thought up mouselook!

It's telling that Metroid Prime Hunters doesn't autoaim (from what I hear, I don't own the game yet. C'mon DS Lite, I'm waaaiting). A 2 inch touch screen doesn't need what's necessary to FPS on a console.

I appreciate the objectivity of your response Moogle. My response to asas is one of a newly former Sony fan.

However I think you may have missed my main point being WHY the PS3 is so expensive, and why it shouldn't be. Kutaragi's vision for the Playstation's future is FAR to ambitious for Console gamers. His vision was clearly spot on with the PS2, however looking at what this nut wants in the PS3...makes me think he should be making insane PC gaming rigs, not home consoles.

Reminds me of the Playstation they launched in Japan that acted like a Tivo or something...it was super expensive...and had functions Sony figured would be a good idea. Well nobody wanted those functions as cool as they were, and the price put everyone in Japan off. I don't remember the name because it was a s*** worthless product.

I think the PS3 may find itself in the same position...

What people don't understand about HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray is that

1) Sony stinks at creating media formats (Betamax, MiniDisc, UMD) and everyone knows it. That doesn't help your cause at all; and, the biggie no-one ever discusses:

2)Microsoft is supporting HD-DVD, obviously, but when they release their next OS on HD-DVD and all the drive's in 90% of PC's around the globe need an HD-DVD drive to function with the OS, I think microsoft has won the battle.....Why is this never discussed?

PS The bigger the disc, the more the content, the longer the load times....load times only go down after years of learning how to optimize content on the disc.

erik,

Maybe I haven't looked enough into it. But I'm pretty sure Microsoft doesn't make PC's they make software.

I'm also pretty sure that Dell does make PC's. Dell, among a crap load of other PC related companies, support blu ray. Thus some of their PC's will come with blu ray drives.

It would be bad business for Microsoft not to support blu ray, at least in software. And I'm pretty sure they very politically answered in the past that they will probably do that.

Blu ray may not dominate as far as a HD movie playback medium...but I'm pretty sure blu ray will dominate as a storage medium.

BTW, Sony isn't the sole company supporting blu ray. (but I'm sure you knew that sorry)

At the last minute, but more than 6 months before the release of the console. So at the last 259200 minutes.

Uhh... Those numbers asas pulled out of his butt are rather skewed and incomplete.

First of all, the Xbox 360 has the benefit of the WiFi, HD-DVD, and Live being OPTIONAL. They are 100% optional. Not so on the PS3. If you just want a next-gen game console without HD movies, even the lowest SKU for PS3 is $100 higher than the highest SKU for the 360.

I posted all about this in another thread. I'll break it down really quick this time.

First, I'll qualify myself by saying I sell video games for a major big box store, and we're consistently #1 in our district, and frequently #1 in the company in sales. I know my business. I know customers.

When I sell a console, people almost ALWAYS skip the WiFi. The reason is that most people don't have a wireless network, and when faced with the hundred dollars or so that it costs to set one up, they'd rather spend a few bucks and grab a 25' ethernet cable. This is usually what happens. Even I, with a decent WiFi network at home, don't bother with the WiFi adapter on the 360 because it's just cheaper and easier to run cable from point A to point B. It's not like I'm roaming to coffee shops with my 360. It stays in one place, and so does the ethernet cable.

So saying every 360 owner is spending $100 for WiFi to be "like the PS3" is ridiculous. Most of them are not even using WiFi, let alone buying the adapter.

Second, as so many of you so conveniently forget, if you want to use that fancy $600 PS3 as a Blu-Ray movie player, you NEED an HDMI cable, and those run $50 at my store, minimum. Now I know a lot of you are savvy internet geeks, and you know you can get an HDMI cable slightly cheaper online, but Joe Consumer doesn't know this, and he wants it NOW, so he pays my store $50 for his HDMI cable. That means that the PS3 is more accurately $650 and not $600 if you want to be fair about it.

The HD-DVD player is not reliant on HDMI, and since the 360 doesn't support HDMI right now, I'm betting they'll have full HD movie content via Component and VGA (which can be adapted to DVI). This means that, in addition to the HD-DVD add-on, you will not be required to buy a new cable to watch your HD movies like you would on a PS3. I'm guessing around $80 - $120 for the HD-DVD add-on, and that's all you'd need to spend for HD movie content (not counting the HDTV, of course, which both consoles would obviously need.)

So the Xbox 360, set up to watch HD movies, is only going to be about $520 before they drop the console's price in September (best guess) and then we'll see an even LOWER total price.

But let me remind you that HD-DVD is purely optional. With the PS3, Blu-Ray is not an option, it's a requirement. You're paying for it whether or not you want to watch Blu-Ray movies, whether or not you get that HDMI cable.

So for Joe Average Consumer, what they see is around $560 out the door (Xbox 360 + HD-DVD + tax) They WILL skip the WiFi if my experience tells me anything. And they see the PS3 at around $700 (console + HDMI cable + tax)

$560 vs. $700 is a big enough gap to make Joe Average say "screw it, give me the 360."

Why? Well, tell me what selling point Sony has offered that makes the PS3 significantly different from the 360 when it comes to games! Nothing!

So they're asking consumers to pay a couple hundred more for a different HD movie format, and WiFi, whether or not they have a network at home.

That won't fly. The niche customers and Sony geeks will get it, sure, but Joe Consumer is going to pass.

The Wii will sell even more with it's price point and broad appeal.

Oh, and as for all this "$300 for six years of Live" Bullshiat you keep spewing, again I'll let you know that many customers skip online altogether, and those of us who do it are actually transferring over from an older Xbox, and it cost us nothing to get a Gold account. Live Arcade, Marketplace, and downloadable content doesn't require a Live account, and so a lot of people don't bother because they don't play games online.

So stop building that into the price. Like the other things, it, too, is optional.

I will have a biatch of a time selling PS3 units, because I'm telling you- People balk at getting a $400 Xbox 360 + an extra controller + a game + for a total of $500 plus tax. They REALLY won't like the idea of spending $600 for the console, $60 for a game, $50 for an HDMI cable (if they want HD movies), and $40 for an extra controller on a PS3, for a total of $750 plus tax.

PS3 is going to be the console for lonely hardcore gamers and rich "money is no object" types. The average family will turn it down flat after seeing that they're so damn close to spending $1000 for a game system/movie player.

360 with harddrive(aka functional 360) = 400
Wifi adapter = 100
4 years of Live service = 240->380

Being tapped in the bum by hidden costs = Priceless

Not exactly something new to Microsoft either.

Good said ZeroCorpse

Now you see?

You have to add the WiFi price and the Live price, both of which are optional and NOT PURCHASED by a great many people, to make the 360 even close to the PS3's price.

And "hidden costs"? Ha! HDMI cable = $50 and Sony Memory Sticks are the most expensive, DRM'd, proprietary form of memory on the market... Oh, and if we wanna talk "hidden costs" like you guys are doing it, then wouldn't we need to add the cost of the PSP ($250) to the cost of the PS3, since so many features are integrated?

Of course, figuring the PSP in the cost of the PS3 is ridiculous... Just like figuring the WiFi and several years of Xbox Live Gold in the cost of the 360 is ridiculous.

Just stop it. For a person who wants to play next-gen games, the cost of an Xbox 360 is $300 or $400 and the cost of the PS3 is $500 or $600, and saying "Ooh. But you have to get teh WiFi separate!!!" is pretty lame, because WiFi is neither required, nor desired by the majority of console gamers.

Again, if we were talking about a laptop that's traveling around, then WiFi is a necessary expense. For the 360, the majority of owners are rocking the ethernet cable. WiFi is a non-issue.

HERE YA GO!!! HOPE THIS BRIGHTENS UP YOU'R DAY!!!!!!

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y127/Jahgah_x/ps3TrueForm2.jpg

Wow... this is truly amazing. Sony has not ceased to amaze me with the PS3, well not so much with the PS3 but with how completely retarded they are. Do they really think gamers are going to pay $600 to play games with half-assed tilt sensitive controllers when they could buy a Wii at 1/3 the price with better control? Sony is all over the place with PS3, and like any technology, the more stuff they add to it, the less I trust it. Remember the Gizmondo? It promised video games, movie playback, music playback, camera fuctionality, and a GPS system, and it failed miserably. It didn't even make it to stores in the US, and it had absolutely abysmal sales in the UK.

Though the most ironic and hilarious thing that comes out of this is that Sony is unknowingly going to help sell Nintendo Wiis. PS3 owners will get a small taste of motion sensitive gaming with the 'Dual Shake' and if they like it, they'll turn their heads to Nintendo's console, and they'll likely buy it too since the price will supposedly be so low. And if they have the money to shank down $600 on a PS3, they'll likely have the moolahs to spend a couple hundred more on a Wii.

So Sony thought they would be sticking it to Nintendo, but their half-assed feature will probably help push their fanbase onto another console! Man, what f---ing morons.

Can anyone tell me whether the $600 version of PS3 can be plugged into a HDMI-less TV (SD or HD)? If it is not then most people will be forced to buy the crippled $500 version and even worse, when those people upgrade to a HDMI enabled TV they still can't use the HDMI connection (thus putting the right to display true HD content of the blu-ray movies at the mercy of the studios)

We stole the playstation
We stole the rumble feature
We stole the analog stick
We stole the sequel to goldeneye
We wish we had stolen RARE

NOW WE?RE BACK




SONY
What Nintendo create, we take


Bringing ridiculously high prices since we were founded

I really think Sony have messed up big time with the controller situation. They made Boomerang as a final in my opinion but pulled it. Now they have no time so slap an old design with gimmicks and take out features because they were too stubborn to settl out of court. Its basically... BORING! But hey its the same as we are used to, so once the fuss settles down its gonna be ok.

One thing that seems good is that there is a mini USB jack on the back and no obvious battery pack or slot so I'm guessing you wont need to spend more on play and charge accessories and it should have rechargeable batts built in?? just a simple USB cable to charge? Hope so.

And in actual fact it HAS got analogue triggers!! that wasnt made clear at first so thats a bonus for me. It needed at LEAST this addition.

Still I think the Xbox 360 controller is going to be the best traditional controller. The moment I held my Xbox 360 controller I thought "This is going to be really hard to beat". Microsoft have spent alot of time and effort on their's sony have spent alot of time, but not made any effort (Or did they?). I'm really curious now how the boomerang would fare? nobody will ever know, but maybe it was the ultimate! Nah... ?? hmmm.

BTW, Microsoft could easily make an update controller with tilt tech. They almost invented the idea for a Joypad (Stealing from the powerglove admittedly) so they can just pull it out of a draw and stick it in. A bit how the Dual sticks appeared on the Sony pad after N64 was released.. anyone remember those early non rumble dual controllers? they were really BIG as well for some reason. They were really light as well and felt cheap. The rumble motors are what add weight and feel. Be strange to not have that now.

to #22.

Asas, I don't necessarily agree with a few things you said, but I'll only point out what I see as flawed in two particular notes:

1: the seek times one the BR drive are actually just 7mbps faster than the minimum of the 360 DVD drive, and 60mbps _slower_ than the maximum speed of same drive. the BR drive speed is constant, while the DVD speed goes through troughs and peaks. all in all, it seems likely that the seek times will be mostly greater on the PS3, despite any additional assistance from the hard drive. there is also the factor of the 360's architecture being such that correctly designed games will never pile up in the buffer, while the PS3 games will, due to a different architectural schematic. the buffer, and not the seek times, are where you'll generally see problems during play.

2: it's very easy to believe that Sony will provide you with a free online service to rival LIVE. after all, they said so, and they didn't just spend two hours backpedaling from a giant portion of the things they said repeatedly over the last half-year. oh, they _did_? it really comes down to this: Sony, just like any corporation, don't give a rat's piss about making people happy if it doesn't satisfy the pocket books. they'll give you just enough to claim ably that they've got a service similar to LIVE, and they'll almost certainly expect to make enough money back from the Sony Online Store part of the service to pay for development and upkeep. when that doesn't happen, and given the giant costs of creating and supporting said service, it won't, Sony just might have a change of heart about giving you such a good, free deal.

oh and if it does pan out, and Sony spends years shatting out gobs of money just to keep you playing the same game online forever and keeping money out of their own pockets because you're not buying new games and getting increased functionality out of just a few? then it's entirely feasible Microsoft could do the same, and make LIVE_gold free, and not really feel the financial repercussions the way Sony would.

someone told me Microsoft's got a couple of dollars stashed away.

PS it's easy to point out (and many have) all the things a 360 owner might buy in the time after purchase and get it to add up to the price of the PS3. while it's a fair point, the 360 purchases are optional, and it just doesn't equal having to blow six bills and tax in one shot, which is the key issue for most people.

but last, I did appreciate that you kept it cool and polite. it's nice to see people can have civilised disagreements here from time to time. be good, and seriously, I hope you enjoy the PS3 and have a bit better luck getting a launch system than many of us did.

I want to play games.
I'm a gamer.
I want the most fun for my $$$.
Sony isn't providing that.

Microsoft came out and said they developed a controller just like what Sony?s got (which I actually owned, I think it was a Freestyle Pro) and said it failed miserably. This could have been because not many games were developed to take advantage of it, or the fact that most pilots fly with a stick or wheel, not a completely free motion based controller. That gimmik may work with a few flight sims or Motocross Madness 2 (which is what came with the Freestyle Pro), but gyro motion based control is a flop compared to motion sensitive control.

At least with the boomerang Sony showed some innovation. Now with the dualshock 3 (without the shock) they're copying superior controllers from Microsoft and Nintendo... and they don't even have balls to license the rumble feature just because they lost the lawsuit! that's arrogance at best, stupidity at worst.

And the whole thing about comparing X360 and PS3... it's great to see a discussion going (everywhere) but I still believe they are 2 entirely different products that shouldn't be compared spec-to-spec because one was released 1 year before the other. Sony basically had 1 year to look at what X360 did and improve on it. So the question should be not what Sony does more than Microsoft, but how better Sony does compared to Microsoft!

Thanks John! Very cool.

People need to stop dismissing the BluRay capabilities of the PS3 by saying they ?don?t get a console to watch movies?. The fact is BluRay will help make games better. It is larger and read data more efficiently than DVD. Look at when PS2 games switched over from CD to DVD, that?s almost the level of jump that will take place. The 360 cannot take advantage of next-gen media because they were in such a damn hurry to get on the market that they eschewed HD-DVD. Even if BluRay never takes off as a movie format games on it will still be better that DVD (and by my estimation, HD-DVD as well).

Oh, and Brad Lee, the Gizmondo comparison is unfair. It was a good little piece of hardware but it flopped because the company was destroyed from the inside by embezzlement and insider trading and whatever else those business-type assholes do to screw investors out of money.

But I will agree that the premium SKU is a screw job. I would be perfectly happy with the $500 model if it had HDMI because I?m with ZeroCorpse even with a good Wi-Fi network I?d rather run an Ethernet cable than risk something happening to the signal in the middle of a match. And the media reader ?functionality? is utter bullshit. And I?m not even going to get into my rant about movement sensing controllers but I hate them and I hope that it is used sparingly in the PS3. I know Sony has a proud tradition of stealing from Nintendo (but to be fair, they do refine the ideas more than Nintendo did) but why steal this one? And then to not even do it well but to slap on shit Logitech abandoned 7 years ago?

However, I am looking forward to seeing more of the actual games, Sony has always given fun games and I don?t see why that should change (not to mention they will be freaking beautiful). Also, I?m curious how they will further implement the PSP. There are some good games coming out for it now. Too many people wrote it off early on and they don?t see the good games available for it: Me and My Katamari, Daxter, Syphon Filter, Liberty Ciy Stories, X-Men Legends II, MLB 06. You might say that those are all console ports but they are GREAT ports to a handheld and add a lot of unctionality. Also, LocoRoco and the new MGS game look kick-ass. But I?m starting to ramble.

One more quick note: I?m sure Sony wouldn?t be getting nearly as much animosity if they had just tried to be entertaining in their press conference. I know Sony is trying to stick to a traditional idea of a press conference and that?s admirable but in an age when gamers are streaming video they need to spice it up a bit. Not nearly to the Nintendo level where they put on a big goofy fanboy-pandering show and don?t actually say anything, but please, just try.

Summary, holding HDMI hostage was a dick move, BluRay is good for games, the Wiimote is a dumb idea to begin with (in my op