Japanese first-party PS3 games ¥5980 ($50 USD)
Remember how PlayStation 3 games were supposed to cost a fortune in Japan? Like, $75 to $85 a pop? Well, you can clear that space in your brain, as Sony has announced first-party launch titles Resistance and Genji will be priced at ¥5980 (about $50 USD), as will future first-party title MotorStorm. Third-parties have already announced higher prices, like Sega's ¥7140 asking price for Sonic and Sega Golf Club.Of course, this is commensurate with US pricing for Xbox 360 titles, where first-party titles go for $50 and third-party titles fetch the princely sum of $60. Of course, the announcement that the Microsoft-published, but not developed, Gears of War will command the higher $60 was met with some mild hissing.
According to Sony's own SonyStyle website, both first- and third-party games are going to be going for the full $60 in the US. Is this another case where Japan lucks out and gets the goods for less (like their $425 PS3), or has Sony not yet finalized their software pricing? As reliable as retail websites usually are for getting the scoop on video game news (uhhh), we're gonna wait this one out until Sony gives us the official official word ... like they just did Japan.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
SecondChance @ Oct 9th 2006 2:24PM
Sony: Japan, you are getting 100,000 PS3s at launch, so here's a bone we're throwing you because we're putting all our eggs in a North American shaped basket. Enjoy.
Flash @ Oct 9th 2006 2:25PM
Is this the 1st time xboxstiq, has made a post with no ps3 bashing in it, I bet they kept trying and trying but couldnt find a way to bash.
Anyways 1 less thing for xbox fanboys to talk about, but they will allways make more like "ps3 remote looks generic" they amaze me. Why cant M$ fanboys just admit that the ps3 is better than the 360 in every way.
Optimus Prime @ Oct 9th 2006 2:28PM
Congrats on the non-biased Sony post Jostiq; it wasnt that hard was it?
Ferretti @ Oct 9th 2006 2:29PM
You can all count yourselfs lucky, use in the UK pay £50 per 360 game, thats $93.36 of your precious US Dollars, And the ps3 is £425, $793.49. Stop complaining and look at a UK game store website to see how much more us UK gamers have to spend!
Saiclone @ Oct 9th 2006 2:36PM
Yeah Ferretti,
When I hear some guys complaining about game prices,I think of what it costs here and sigh. Extreme example- Test Drive Unlimited.
gamerx @ Oct 9th 2006 2:41PM
@ #2 Flash,
You know what? You're absolutely right! I mean...
Lack of rumble is so much better than rumble! Just imagine playing GT or MGS without rumble! Man its gonna be awesome!
Same PS1/PS2 controller design is so much better, especially for FPS games! The dual analog sticks' placement and feel is KILLER i tell you!
Not being able to turn the console on/off with the almighty SIXAXIS controller is so much better! this gives me an excuse to buy the PS3 remote! its so cool!
Blu-ray NeXGen TruHD 2x drive speed is gonna be so freakin' fast!
I could keep going on but I think I've praised PLAYSTATION 3 enough!
Lou D @ Oct 9th 2006 2:45PM
That's ok. We'll see how much of a game you get without having to spend $1000 unlocking content that should be included with the base game.
As for Gears of War...$60 for 12 hours of gameplay...sad... I wonder how much they will charge for each "new" 1-hour episode after... Mark Rein is an ass-clown. All his hype is over in 12 short hours. Even Tomb Raider Legend offered 14 hours...
Jon Speed @ Oct 9th 2006 2:47PM
"6. @ #2 Flash,
You know what? You're absolutely right! I mean...
Lack of rumble is so much better than rumble! Just imagine playing GT or MGS without rumble! Man its gonna be awesome!
Same PS1/PS2 controller design is so much better, especially for FPS games! The dual analog sticks' placement and feel is KILLER i tell you!
Not being able to turn the console on/off with the almighty SIXAXIS controller is so much better! this gives me an excuse to buy the PS3 remote! its so cool!
Blu-ray NeXGen TruHD 2x drive speed is gonna be so freakin' fast!
I could keep going on but I think I've praised PLAYSTATION 3 enough!"
Dear God gamerx, I hope you are being sarcastic. BTW, the SIXAXIS can turn the console on and off with the middle Playstation button.
B33 @ Oct 9th 2006 2:50PM
Gamerx, your post said nothing but poor lies...
"Lack of rumble is so much better than rumble! Just imagine playing GT or MGS without rumble! Man its gonna be awesome!"
Your pathetic if you won't buy a console simply for lack of rumble. Get over it.
"Same PS1/PS2 controller design is so much better, especially for FPS games! The dual analog sticks' placement and feel is KILLER i tell you!"
The controller has been altered. The analog sticks are broader and make it easier for FPS. And the L2 and R2 buttons have been converted into more trigger like buttons.
"Not being able to turn the console on/off with the almighty SIXAXIS controller is so much better! this gives me an excuse to buy the PS3 remote! its so cool!"
You can turn the console off. You don't need the remote. It's simply just a different option. Stop telling lies to prove a weak point.
"Blu-ray NeXGen TruHD 2x drive speed is gonna be so freakin' fast"
Blu-Ray is actually very fast. And load times won't be that bad since the system INCLUDES a hard drive.
Flash @ Oct 9th 2006 2:54PM
gamerx#6
are you being sarcastic,
If you are a gamer do you really feel rumble, if you been playing for more than 20 minutes do you feel it every time, (i know you dont)
Fps are a xbox thing, the few that are on ps feel fine on the controller, M$ built their controller for shooters cuz thats all they have.
Last time I checked you can turn it on with the controller, but if you cant your obously fat, if your complaining about getting up and turning it on, since you been doing it for every console b4 the 360.
I seen videos of loading it diddnt take that long, I say its a little longer than a 360 game.
I think you were being sarcastic, and your really a M$ fanboy, juat like this website.
crono141 @ Oct 9th 2006 3:05PM
Some people need to get their sarcasm detectors checked. They're malfunctioning.
"I hope you are being sarcastic"
"I think you were being sarcastic"
Yes, he was being sarcastic.
FreeCajunLove @ Oct 9th 2006 3:06PM
"I think you were being sarcastic, and your really a M$ fanboy, juat like this website."
Does no one remember Joytiq posting the pros and cons of the Xbob360? They even had more cons than pros I believe. Stop with all this biased b.s.
FreeCajunLove @ Oct 9th 2006 3:08PM
"As for Gears of War...$60 for 12 hours of gameplay...sad... I wonder how much they will charge for each "new" 1-hour episode after... Mark Rein is an ass-clown. All his hype is over in 12 short hours. Even Tomb Raider Legend offered 14 hours..."
I paid $50 for God of War and beat it in 6 hours. I still think it was worth every penny; even though I haven't touched it since.
Pedro Van Faulk @ Oct 9th 2006 3:15PM
Wow. A purely positive PS3 post and still the bitches crawl out of the woodwork to complain that joystiq is biased. Just no pleasing some people.
joe smith @ Oct 9th 2006 3:16PM
Sounds to me like htey are very scared of losing in their home market -- to Nintendo, not to Xbox. HEnce the price cut on hardware and hte lower than expected price on games. I think they are scared Mario is about to come down on their heads.
Flash @ Oct 9th 2006 3:18PM
crono141
My sarcasm detector is on full blast, might even be on after burner blast, it was a joke. Do you have your Joke detector on
Flash @ Oct 9th 2006 3:23PM
Pedro Van Faulk
Shut up ho, joystiq is a biast website, look at other ps3 related topics, they bash ps3 every chance they get.
Im just surprised they can put up something w/o any ps3 bashing. Trust me it wont come again, I hate when ppl (or in this case xboxstiq.com) bashes the ps3 when it obvious that the ps3 is again, better in EVERY way.
RoroCo @ Oct 9th 2006 3:26PM
Amazing... PS3 fanboys are punch drunk. The article mentions nothing negative about the PS3 and they are fighting back still. Seriously, the article is about pricing and not controllers. Just by mentioning the SUXAXUS you are going to draw people in to complain about controller.
As for my 2 cents…
1) Markets are different so pricing will be different…nothing new there…
2) Rumble is very necessary for racing games (tells you when you are on the rumble strip, tells you when to shift, and tells you when your suspension is too low and you are dragging ground). Rumble also has some interesting feedback applications…
B @ Oct 9th 2006 3:29PM
Flash,that's some troll attitude you got there.
EXCEPT that some ppl cant afford $599 US DOLLARS. And it will still sell like hotcakes on ebay(rich parents anyway).
For those who can afford it,have fun with your blue-ray.
Erick @ Oct 9th 2006 3:30PM
I agree with CajunLove, the time isn't that material if you like the game. Secondly, I played Resident Evil, what, like 8 times through, and each time was faster. I could have done the first time through faster, if I just ran through, without trying to do more things...Saying a game is 14, or 12 hours is silly. Some can sit at a game (Cajun) play through it in 6 hours. Some would wander more, and take 10-15 hours... So? Maybe Gears will take you 22 hours? It always kinda bothers me when people put a time it takes to play on a review, with no basis for it. Skill levels in the game, or of the player make a huge difference, the way a person wants to play makes a huge difference...
I don't know...just base the game on your enjoyment level...or replay, not just some time limit is my suggestion.
Anyway, I also wanted to comment, I like the image used, great bill for Liars Poker...
I have 6 tens!
Liar!
Nope, I got 'em...win me a fifty!
crono141 @ Oct 9th 2006 4:04PM
"For those who can afford it,have fun with your blue-ray."
Thats BETA-Ray... I mean BlU-ray.
Lilant @ Oct 9th 2006 4:25PM
I have a request. Since there is so much good PS3 news out there that Joystiq seems to keep missing will some of you guys please post it? And if you have to rehash months old news then I think it may stand to reason there isn't much "new" "good" PS3 news. Anyone up for the challenge??? And to give you some cushion: let's say "new" means the last 7 days.
MetaHuman @ Oct 9th 2006 4:29PM
I'm sorry, I'm reading it as ¥5980=$59.80. Why would it be $50 here if they're "lower" in Japan? Have they ever priced based on exchange rates? How much does Sony actually plan on making with games? Understandably they were able to do that with $40 PS2 games, but with the sky-high production costs for PS3?
NO, this is NOT my inner fanboy talking, these are serious questions.
I guess they could make money back on all the microtransactions customers will be making. Personally though I wouldn't want any company that has to profit from such small purchases. The larger products should make the smaller ones even out, in my opinion.
RoroCo @ Oct 9th 2006 4:33PM
Lilant... Sony has stopped producing main stream monitors. That means they can put more resources on the PS3...
{Sarcasm tag for the inept}
crono141 @ Oct 9th 2006 4:46PM
"24. Lilant... Sony has stopped producing main stream monitors. That means they can put more resources on the PS3..."
Now sony is litterally banking on PS3 alone. If their monitor and TV line was their "second pillar", and they just knocked it over, if PS3 goes down, so does Sony.
These are BRILLIANT business decisions.
RoroCo @ Oct 9th 2006 4:53PM
I think they will continue selling Samsung TVs under the Sony monicer... It is just the monitor division they are - for the most part - closing down.
As for the PS3 and Sony... i do not think the PS3 will make or break Sony... The company is just too big and to spead out.
They do need a win here soon... or they will be in trouble.
Figboy @ Oct 9th 2006 4:53PM
why is everyone across the net acting as if a lower price point for it's First Party titles was Microsoft's idea???
about a year after the PS2 launched, Sony implemented a policy that all First Party titles would sell for $39.99. considering that the quality of those titles is top notch (God of War, Shadow of the Colossus, Sly Cooper, Ratchet and Clank, Jak and Daxter, etc), this was nothing to balk at. they've still kept this policy even this year, as it's first party titles are still going for $40.
but noooo, this was all Microsoft's idea, and Sony is once again, just following suit. it drives me crazy! Sony get's no mention or credit of anything they may have done in the past that is positive, but Nintendo and Microsoft get their past and present (even future) accolades screamed from the mountaintops at all times.
i expected, when the new $60 price of games was brought about (starting with the 360, but if you go back far enough, you'll find that Chrono Trigger was just one SNES game that sold for $64.99, and i shouldn't even have to mention that most N64 games were over $60 as well), that Sony would probably implement it's PS2 "$10 dollars cheaper" policy for their First Party PS3 games.
as annoying as it is, thanks to those wonderful early adopters that just had to have Tony Hawk and Call of Duty 2 on their X Box 360's, the price of games has risen to $60, so $50 is seen as a discount.
yesterday, i watched someone beat Castlevania, Mega Man, and Contra is less than 20 minutes. when those games came out, they cost $50. nowadays, a game is 10 hours long, and we bitch about a $50-$60 price point. get some fricking perspective people.
yes, Castlevania, Mega Man, and Contra were great games, but not $50 great. not when looking at a 20 minute play through. of course, back then, it took me ages to beat those games (i never beat Castlevania, and i didn't own Mega Man), but that's beside the point. gaming companies have been raping the consumer for prices since 1985, and since November 2005, we've sent another message that they can continue to do so.
Mark Rein already blew the lid off of the "high cost of development" justifaction gigantic publishers like Activision and EA were using to excuse their unneccessarily high prices, as Gears of War apparently only cost $10 million to make (most current gen games cost around 3 million when the generation just started. now, i'm sure, it's cheaper). sure, Epic had to develop the Unreal Engine first, but now that that's done, and practically every game under the sun coming out in the next year is using the Unreal Engine, there's no reason for games to be over $49.99.
hopefully other companies will follow suit with the $50 price point, but we know they won't, as us gamers will continue to by the games we just have to have at whatever price they throw at us.
sorry for the angry rant, but i'm cranky today. i blame old age.
LaughingTarget @ Oct 9th 2006 4:59PM
MetaHuman -
I'd take this as more of Sony trying to calm Japan after they essentially shafted the home market. They're only getting 20% of the launch units when they're used to getting all of them. Not a great way to treat the home team.
Sony had to penetrate the US market before the 2006 holidays or they would have built a hole too large to overcome. Basically, missing the US holidays or coming out with a peasly offering in the US would have solidified the PS3 in the third place and would have also guaranteed the project to be a massive loss for Sony. Despite what anyone thinks, no company is ever going to be in any specific business avenue ad infinitum. Sega and Pan-Am are perfect examples. Former big dogs in their respective industries, both of which died in their previous forms, one of which completely vanished off the face of the planet.
If Sony cannot pull a profit on the PS3, then it is not out of the realm of reality that they'll completely scrap video games entirely. Sony doesn't have a strong in-house developer and even second party companies can easily pull up stakes and leave, Factor 5 and Silicon Knights are great examples of this (both of which jumped from Nintendo, one to Sony, the other to Microsoft). Sony is 100% reliant on third party companies. Without a complete market dominance, they won't have the same third party support, and without the same level of support (if anything, the PS3 third party support is going to have to be even more lopsided for the unit to make a profit before the likes of the Xbox 720 show up), Sony cannot survive. All they do is make the hardware, and that hardware will always be a money loser.
So, they simply had no choice but to tear away 80% of the units away from the home boys and give them to the most profitable region, a region that, if Sony missed, would result in a completely different or even vanished Playstation name. Had Sony missed this November, then the Playstation name could be placed along side the Genesis in the annals of gaming history, lost to time forever.
But, that choice came with a price - the Japanese market. This market, while not nearly as profitable as the NA market, is the primary driver of innovations that made the Playstation name what it is today. Without the large support structure at home, the bevy of off-beat games that pushed the Playstation into the 100 million sales mark, then the Playstation brand is also as good as dead. This market is a bit easier to appease and is less shaky to the Playstation dominance than the NA market is. To counteract this, Sony chose to take an even larger loss on their products to keep the home crowd from jumping to the 360, which is countering the PS3 with what could be a massive punch from Blue Dragon and Lost Oddysey.
Sony won't be moving into the microtransaction route as a means to turn these losses into profits, but as a minor side-business to supplement sales. It is unreasonable to think that by selling their first party titles for a $10 loss or at break even that even half of those gamers will chose to buy all the extra stuff. This is purely a measure to keep the foothold in Japan from being eroded by Microsoft's tough efforts to yank the market out from under Sony's feet, not a viable long term business strategy.
Don't worry, Sony isn't going to seriously think about trying to make their money off of microtransactions. Such a business move would only guarantee the failure of the Playstation division as a whole. If everything but the small-sales go for a loss, then the entire thing will go for a loss.
The Dude @ Oct 9th 2006 5:00PM
"SUXAXUS"
-RoroCo
You made me lol. XD THE CLEVERNESS! :D
Awol @ Oct 9th 2006 5:08PM
Nobody's mentioned how Sony has a history of LYING about EVERYTHING.
They'll start with one title at $60, then one at $70 and justify it with BLURAY!OMG But by that time, everyone's drives will be crapping out. Then they'll start the $70 + $14/mo. standard fee for games.
BUT REMEMBER IT HAS BLURAY!!!1
Raynre @ Oct 9th 2006 6:07PM
Congratulations to all the Sony fanboys.
Now you know how the Nintendo fans felt 10 years ago...
John Lucas @ Oct 9th 2006 6:54PM
Laughing Target's words to Metahuman from Msg #28 are no laughing matter.
And absolutely correct.
I proclaimed in a forum recently that Metal Gear Solid 4 will NOT go to the Playstation 3. And the reason for that was because of PS3's lackluster representation in the market. Shortly thereafter Square-Enix (the Kingdom Hearts story) suddenly lost their console allegiance to Sony skittishly saying they are willing to support all systems. That—in addition to the news of Smackdown Vs. Raw 2007 (a heretofore PS exclusive) NOT going to PS3 but rather to XBox 360, PS2, and PSP— showed me that the writing is on the wall for the 3rd party exodus from Sony's mainline platform.
This happened to Nintendo 10 years ago. A move which sealed the deal for Sony to take the top spot in home console dominance.
The DIFFERENCE between Sony & Nintendo is that Sony is no Nintendo. They don't have that legendary, time-tested, nostalgia/retro, 1st party power that Nintendo was able to survive on throughout their 3rd party lack the past 10 years.
Zelda moved to the forefront BECAUSE of the weak 3rd party. The proliferation of the (great) Mario sports titles was a reflection of the lack of sport titles Nintendo had. And a game such a Super Smash Bros. came about BECAUSE Nintendo had to flex their mascot muscle in light of the near-total exodus of 3rd party developers.
In drought Nintendo was still able to maintain not considering their handheld power.
Not just this but also Nintendo's business model is better. They don't plan on losing money. They don't have that luxury so that have to play it smart. Lossleading is simply not an option for them nor would I think it would be if they DID have that option.
If the same thing happens to Sony, they don't have NEAR what it takes to survive both because their 1st party titles are not the real system movers AND because they operate on this money-losing business model of loss-leading. It's an oxymoron. A lossleader is ultimately a LOSER. He leads in loss. That doesn't sound good, does it? At best it should only be a strategy to make an entryway into a hard-to-penetrate business.
For all the marketpower PS2 possesses Sony's profits don't reflect this dominance. That's disturbing because the PS2 is a bonafide hit. Their income barely rises above their outgo. They HAVE to be a bonafide dominator just to make SOME money.
The PS3 is not lining up that way it's clear.
They have set up every single roadblock to making this thing a success. The price is CERTAINLY going to scare off potential buyers. Sony has said that they are selling this thing at a loss ALREADY. So will that make the price drop harder to come about? How much money do they plan on losing to finally break even & then surplus? How long will this take? And is it able to happen in time in light of all the competition?
Then you take into account this terrible public record they've been having all year & things get hairier.
If they continue their old product "standards" that had people with defective units, this doesn't make things well at all.
Their launch is laughable. 500,000 for the world??? That's not enough for the U.K.! That's not enough for Luxembourg!
Oh & speaking of Europe.
How do you think THEY'RE gonna feel to be shafted once again after being promised to be included in the launch? How are they gonna feel with two notable contenders willing to court them while the PS3—higher in their region price-wise than in the USA—hides out until Springtime 2007? That's not wise.
The competition. XBox 360's year-old headstart to siphon away Sony's base. This may be successful when you consider how similar the two systems are, how similar their business aims are, how similar their libraries are, how they are drawing exclusives away from Sony, & how this similar-to-Sony system prices itself less by comparison. Their only glitch is not getting a foothold in Japan AKA game-industry central. But will that ALWAYS be the case? It may not be. Don't give me that guff about Japan being racist against non-Japanese products because it simply isn't true.
Meanwhile Microsoft has an opportunity to capture the neglected markets of Australia & Europe to grow a loyalty base. The populations may not be as much as Japan & USA but it's something. And every little bit counts.
THEN Nintendo. Over here with this wild Wii business. Soemthing that is SURE to take over Japan like the DS. But not just there. Wii is doing so many things right that it is sure to globally become a phenomenon.
A wholly different system that no one can match. That gives a brand new experience to gamers current & potential. Yes, the N's business direction of capturing that always greater "NON-gamer" audience (there are always more non-gamers than gamers, remember?) will put them in a stratosphere all their own.
So you got Sony's curious moves in the face of Microsoft's & Nintendo's strong competition.
3rd party can leave Sony easily in this scenario.
If 3rd party gathers around MS, MS becomes the new Sony replacing them like a body snatcher.
If 3rd party gathers around Nintendo, Nintendo dominates gaming in total: both handheld AND console worldwide. Because 1st party + 2nd party + 3rd party = Nintendo's party.
Back in the day game companies MADE many of their own games in ADDITION to letting others make games FOR them.
Either or BOTH scenarios spell doom for Sony who can never out-losslead Daddy Warbucks Microsoft and can never have the tight business model of oldtimer Nintendo.
And yes as Laughing Target says it's not unfathomable for Sony to suddenly disappear from the gaming scene.
It has happened before. People don't remember the Crash of 1983.
Atari was riding high as the king of gaming and then it all collapsed right under their feet swallowing them into the ground. The company hasn't been the same since.
Sony's arrogance & tunnel vision may very well be their undoing.
This next-generation is going to be a great educational lesson for many gamers out there.
Let's see if they can remember these lesson when the test comes up again...
John Lucas
C. Grant @ Oct 9th 2006 7:17PM
Wow, these are some long posts! Thanks for the (almost) lack of trolling here.
Flash: I'll be monitoring your comments from now on. Any more ignorant fanboy shit and I'll be glad to ban your account.
MetaHuman: The current exchange rate is not ¥100=$1. It's more like ¥119=$1. Type in "5940 yen" into Google to get the current amount in USD, currently responding "5940 Japanese yen = 50.2538071 U.S. dollars"
Ben Hobbs @ Oct 10th 2006 2:43AM
The US$ Exchange rate is currently very low so all of those making comparisons between for example UK/US prices or JAP/US prices are misrepresenting.
For example just 3 or 4 years ago it was $1.3 to the UK pound, now its nearly $2 - You can't just convert the prices straight over from Japanese or UK retail prices into US retail prices like that.
It's more than likely that the US currency will rise again, its also widely acknowledged that its much harder to put prices up than knock them down on consumer electronics after they have been released.
Sony needs to build some level of buffer in for the fact that the US currency will rise again, I expect USA to see Japan pricing +10-20%.
Kite @ Oct 10th 2006 3:12AM
John Lucas. I read your post on that forum through a link that you posted before. And however I still am not too sure about if your 'view' is right or wrong, I applaud you for saying what you think. Your arguments were well - staved (or however you say that), and I can certainly see why you made those assumptions.
I really liked to read your vision on the 3rd party matter, and I will keep following your opinions and reactions. Congratulations on being rational :)
Greets, kite
Mobile360 @ Oct 10th 2006 4:29AM
In the UK consumers are expected to pay between £60-£80 per game of which is equivilant to $100-$140.
SustainedDiligence @ Oct 10th 2006 6:01AM
Mobile360 I honestly have no idea where you have been shopping recently, but the UK does not pay £60-£80. The 360 is currently selling for about £49.99 or £39.99 if you use play.com, The PS2 aqverages about £39.99, the 360 is essentially a £10 jump over on the PS2. This has happened with almost every new "Next Gen" console released in the UK to date. When the dreamcast first came out I remember being ready to go to arms over the £39.99 price point. PS2 at that point was still around the £34.99. The only console I can remember where a price point was above average increase was the N64, when they released Perfect Dark they expected me to pay £44.99!! I did, but then so did most people. They have the right to charge that price because they have the demand associated with the product. It's business practice with price skimming, don't act like it's something new.
¥5980 is the UK equivalent to £26 at ¥222 to the £. (btw I hate the Yen to a pound, went into a record store over there bought ¥1200 worth of CD's oh only £12 *sigh* £60 stupid non-conversion capable brain), now I honestly don't know the proliferation of these micro-transactions, or how big an impact on the actual game content it will have but £26 is insane compared to the current trend! Add in production costs of Blu-Ray, a whole new production line capable of handling the laser wavelengths, built to create these discs. I highly doubt Sony will be making any profit off of this at all. They must be charging a lot for licensing fees, but then this would only increase the cost to third party developers?
Sony cannot and will not be able to continue mass production at these price rates for long. And if they can I tip my hat to them.
SustainedDiligence
John Lucas @ Oct 10th 2006 8:16AM
Thank you Kite from Msg #35.
I appreciate it very much.
I know it's a controversial statement, that about MGS4 not going to the PS3, but I really believe that just might happen since the game will take so long to come out & the market will be so much different by then (with all systems established). I believe that Solid Snake cameo in Super Smash Bros. Brawl signals things to come.
I took my time & broke down every component about each competitor when I came up with those statements. Then ran them through the wash of history. Then put 'em on the line to intuition about the future based on the knowledge of the past & present.
If nothing else I know 3rd party. They fill the gaps in between 1st party releases because they are independent from the console maker & can go on their own schedules. They are more important today than in the 8-bit days because as games became more & more complex it took bigger & bigger teams longer to make the games.
This has been the bane of Nintendo's home consoles for 10 years. Their 1st party are knockouts but they are so far apart & people get antsy waiting to buy another game.
Meanwhile Sony has game diarrhea. Almost TOO many games you get so lost in 'em! Somebody can always find something they like with the candy store-like collection. This is part of what led Sony over Nintendo & Sega which in the end ran Sega out of consoles.
Microsoft is still the outsider of the 3 which does give them an edge in some respect but they still have to prove themselves. They are hungry & desperate actually. So that makes them dangerous. And the first thing they want to do is cancel Sony's representation in the gamemarket. All their moves are designed to reduce & weaken Sony. That ingratiated Wii60 comment from Peter Moore (ask Mr. Fils-Aime what he thinks about that) was a Rick James slap in the face of Sony and a sly backhand to Nintendo for good measure.
WATCH when the PS3 launches & see what MS does.
You'll never BELIEVE such venom!
I really think the 7th generation is gonna surprise MANY gamer/market-watchers. Old predictions will be turned on their heads!
It really makes this "contest" exciting.
Thanks for taking the time to read my words, Kite.
And if we can't be rational what good ARE we, right? *wink*
John Lucas
Alan Cook @ Oct 10th 2006 12:40PM
Hey! You scanned U.S. currency.. isn't that like... not allowed?
gamerx @ Oct 10th 2006 1:14PM
Flash,
"Why cant M$ fanboys just admit that the ps3 is better than the 360 in every way."
I used sarcasm to disprove the above claim of yours.
Lack of rumble, worse loading times than X360, and worse controller for FPS games disproved that "the ps3 is better than the 360 in every way."
This was my one and only point. Im not an MS fanboy, I'm a GAMER. I can point out the flaws that X360 has as well, like a crappy dpad and crappy backwards compatibility. see? not a fanboy!
just wanted to let you know PS3 isnt superior to X360 in every way.
MetaHuman @ Oct 10th 2006 5:59PM
@ C.GRANT
I know, my YEN to US assumption is wrong, but I was stating that I thought that companies maintained the numerical value, despite the difference. So if even the yen went down, the US value would not.
I know Nintendo's stated that they keep the same numerical value, despite the exchange rate. If the Yen is weaker, they can make some of it better with the profit difference of the stronger US dollar. Maybe a contributing reason to why Sony wants to release first in the US. Financially, that's a smart idea but only 100,000 units in any territory is a joke. It's a good thing they'll have a decent number of games in the launch frame at least.
@ LaughingTarget
Awesome read. While I did say 'micro-transactions', I also included things like peripherals. I sort of want companies to make money from the core hardware and then use those to offset the prices of the smaller things that people keep buying.
@ John Lucas
Like above, awesome read. Though I doubt something like the magnitude of a crash will happen, companies do run out of luck on expensive hardware like 3D0, Neo-Geo, and Sega, while not having expensive hardware, did, at their messiest peak, have Genesis, CD, 32X, Saturn, Game Gear and Nomad all out at the same time. Not to mention suffering the downturn of the Arcades.