Gamefaqs "Poll of the day" PS3 related

PaCrappa · Post by **PaCrappa** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 9:22 pm

"How do you feel about all of the recent negative rumors about the PlayStation 3?"

I wasn't aware of recent negative rumors, but then I read absolutely no gaming press online or off. Could someone please tell me what they're referring to?

Thanks in advance,
PaCrappa

99pence · Post by **99pence** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:34 pm

Maybe there's a nasty rumour a 2D game is going to be released on it.

The kids won't be happy.

jp · Post by jp » Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:35 pm

*shrugs*

All the rumors I've heard about were good. The Playstation HUB and all that. Unless they're talking about the PS3 not really being more powerful than the 360.

judesalmon · Post by **judesalmon** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:44 pm

At the end of the day, no-one really knows anything about PS3.

We know it's going to be powerful. We know it will have good games (eventually), but everything else is just rumours.

Personally, until I actually get to play on one, I'm reserving judgement.

Blade · Post by **Blade** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 11:36 pm

*sings the "I don't know and I don't care!" song*

The only thing I can think of that the PS3 would be lacking is 2D games, that is all.

neorichieb1971 · Post by **neorichieb1971** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 3:28 am

They are talking about devcos who have dev kits knocking the overall power.. Saying that 360 can hold its own against the PS3 and in some cases, beat it!

They are also not happy about coding the thing..

it290 · Post by **it290** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 3:33 am

I think they're referring to the Merrill Lynch report (which was linked to by Slashdot the other day) saying that Sony's cost on the PS3 was going to be $900 per unit at launch, leading many to believe that the unit would launch with an outrageously high price tag -- $600 or so.

neorichieb1971 · Post by **neorichieb1971** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 5:19 am

I don't doubt the product but $600 is definately "rich kids toy" territory.

I highly doubt those rumors are true either, I've heard $299, $399 and $500.. but never $600.

for $600 you could buy the other 2 systems instead.

Neo Rasa · Post by **Neo Rasa** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 5:28 am

$499.99 seems like the ideal price. Any higher and no one will buy, any lower and I don't think even Sony can make make back that kind of loss on licensing and bundles.

The other negative rumor, PaCrappa, is in regards to the controller. At several recent trade shows/whatever in Japan that Sony was involved in, the PS3 shell was being displayed with no controller present anyway. This making a lot of people think the whole controller was scrapped and is being redesigned, that there's no final controller design yet (and so potentially final system design, etc.).

Finally, Sony made some pretty big statements about their having a unified online service superior to XBox Live that PS3 games will be playable on. Microsoft had all sorts of Networking experience (not to mention MASSIVE resources to burn after they stopped really working with Sega with SegaHEAT, Dreamcast hardware development, etc.) and a lot of this is what eventually evolved in the XBox Live we know now. The rumor is that Sony has nowhere near the capabilities required to set up something like this, and will instead of NO unified online service like the PS2 or it will have some odd ad-based thing that's a poor quality service but free.

THIS was exacerbated by the PSP version of Fight Night Round 3. If you want to play any mode online you have to either pay EA $2 or give them your email address so that they can spam it. So people are worried that this style of "free" online play will catch on with the PS3 itself if Sony is incapable of making a real service for us to subscribe to.

All of it culminates into people thinking that the PS3 won't be making it out this year and that Sony doesn't have its act nearly as together as they say with regards to the PS3 in general.

neorichieb1971 · Post by **neorichieb1971** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 5:53 am

I've actually heard rumors of some sort of alliance between Microsoft and Sony regarding the online aspects of the PS3.

If Sony are making such losses on the PS3 hardware itself, I figure the online aspect of the system will be very limited, or will cost a fortune to subscribe to.

Online without a Hard drive is a big sore point too. I cannot figure out how Sony can manage to squeeze all this stuff into an affordable package, its just nuts.

Neo Rasa · Post by **Neo Rasa** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 5:57 am

Don't feel bad, at this point I don't think Sony knows how to squeeze it all into an affordable package either.

it290 · Post by **it290** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 6:05 pm

I don't really buy the $600 thing either, but only because I don't really trust the report. If their initial cost per unit were really $900 per unit, they'd have to launch at somewhere close to that or else face a huge loss -- if they sold for $500 they'd be losing $400 per unit, and most console owners don't buy anywhere near enough games for one console to make up that $400. Besides that, $500 still seems like it would be a hard sell vs. the other two consoles. Whether it's adults buying the system for themselves, or parents springing for their kids, most people just aren't willing to put up that kind of money for a console -- which is the whole reason why MS released the 360 in two different versions.

Now I suppose Sony could do something similar, or they could just be planning on eating huge losses for some time until their costs come down. Even if their cost isn't $900 per unit, I would be surprised if it were much lower than $700 or so.

Neo Rasa · Post by **Neo Rasa** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 6:14 pm

The thing is that the PS3 doesn't have any real modular stuff that can be taken out like the hard drive (in fact Sony specifically stated it would have no hard drive at all several months ago) to make different versions. The price is being driven up by the BD-ROM and other silly internal features Sony keeps trying to implement so it can be the center of your living room and your lifestyle instead of "just" a game machine (like that picture in picture/shared picture for multiple HD signal, you know, so I can finally have a use for those extra four plasma screens everyone has just laying around the house collecting dust

).

The other negative bit is the game development itself. Outside of the Metal Gear Solid 4 trailer there's nothing. The Killzone 2 crap at E3 turned out to all be fake just like the PS1 "real time" movies and the PS2 "real time" movies. And people are leary because Sony is promising CGI on par with what you would see in a feature film, i.e., THE EXACT SAME STATEMENT made regarding the PS1 and PS2's graphical capabilities. I'm still waiting for "real time graphics on par with Toy Story 2" on the PS2.

Basically, all this hype bs Sony pulls constantly is catching up with them, that's the biggest reason for all the negative rumors.

neorichieb1971 · Post by **neorichieb1971** » Wed Feb 22, 2006 1:39 am

http://wikihost.org/wikis/ukres/program ... nyps3_lies

Cracked me up.

Neo Rasa · Post by **Neo Rasa** » Wed Feb 22, 2006 2:38 am

neorichieb1971 wrote:http://wikihost.org/wikis/ukres/program ... nyps3_lies

Cracked me up.

I have this site bookmarked.

I wonder if Nintendo will keep all their promises on the Revolution, so there'll never be any "lies" entry for them.

scrilla4rella · Post by **scrilla4rella** » Wed Feb 22, 2006 7:14 am

damn, that wikipedia entry is great,
geek bantering at it's best(':D')

JBC · Post by **JBC** » Wed Feb 22, 2006 3:44 pm

I heard that the PS3 has already killed 2 small japanese children and that it's coming for you next all because they tested the prototype model's dvd drive with a copy of 'Commando' and all further systems where just copied from that one.

jp · Post by jp » Wed Feb 22, 2006 6:12 pm

""The emotion engine does work. Every time I look at my PS2 I feel sad." - some bloke:

That... is awesome.

dave4shmups · Post by **dave4shmups** » Wed Feb 22, 2006 11:11 pm

it290 wrote:I think they're referring to the Merrill Lynch report (which was linked to by Slashdot the other day) saying that Sony's cost on the PS3 was going to be $900 per unit at launch, leading many to believe that the unit would launch with an outrageously high price tag -- $600 or so.

I just heard about that report today from a Game Force employee, who also said that he thinks that including a Blu-Ray DVD player in the PS3 was a really bad decision on Sony's part-evidently that's why console will cost $900 to produce-and then he said something about Sony reducing the power of the system, and that Sony's stock went down this weekend.

dave4shmups · Post by **dave4shmups** » Wed Feb 22, 2006 11:12 pm

neorichieb1971 wrote:http://wikihost.org/wikis/ukres/program ... nyps3_lies

Cracked me up.

How the heck will we even know, until the system comes out, that any of that's lies?

The n00b · Post by **The n00b** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 12:34 am

Didn't the neo geo break the bank when it was released? It also turned out good. Now I know this is Sony we're talking about but the neo geo proved that you could have a great system that's also uber expensive.

it290 · Post by **it290** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 12:47 am

The Neo Geo was never aiming for market dominance, though -- their goal was a 10% market share. Also, we're not in the 16-bit days anymore. The Neo Geo was lightyears ahead of the SNES and Genesis. The PS3 is not looking to be very much more powerful than the 360.

dave4shmups · Post by **dave4shmups** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 1:06 am

it290 wrote:The Neo Geo was never aiming for market dominance, though -- their goal was a 10% market share. Also, we're not in the 16-bit days anymore. The Neo Geo was lightyears ahead of the SNES and Genesis. The PS3 is not looking to be very much more powerful than the 360.

Good points; I don't think as many people will be willing to shell out the money-there weren't even that many, IIRC, who bought the Neo Geo when it came out.

And the AES system, at least, still costs as much, if not more, then either the PS2 or the XBOX. Diddo with it's games. Granted that technology is moving a lot faster now then it was in 1992, but that may mean that the PS3 will remain very expensive years after it's been released.

Although, I'm pretty impressed with how games like Motor Storm and I-8 are looking-if that's actual game footage-I don't know how people can tell with games like Killzone 2.

Does anyone have a link to that original M.L. report? I found a report on this site, which has an interesting graph on the supposed component costs of the PS3:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060219-6216.html

Specineff · Post by **Specineff** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 4:31 am

dave4shmups wrote:
neorichieb1971 wrote:http://wikihost.org/wikis/ukres/program ... nyps3_lies

Cracked me up.
How the heck will we even know, until the system comes out, that any of that's lies?

Remember the "Toy Story-like graphics" promised by Cunt-aragi? Not even the best-looking PS2 games of this generation can make that claim. And we're talking about Onimusha 3, MGS 3, Xenosaga 2, FFX and X-2, and such. Heck, I want a game that looks as nice in real time as the FMV from PS1 games. (Klonoa, for example)

dave4shmups · Post by **dave4shmups** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 6:40 pm

Specineff wrote:
dave4shmups wrote:
neorichieb1971 wrote:http://wikihost.org/wikis/ukres/program ... nyps3_lies

Cracked me up.
How the heck will we even know, until the system comes out, that any of that's lies?

Remember the "Toy Story-like graphics" promised by Cunt-aragi? Not even the best-looking PS2 games of this generation can make that claim. And we're talking about Onimusha 3, MGS 3, Xenosaga 2, FFX and X-2, and such. Heck, I want a game that looks as nice in real time as the FMV from PS1 games. (Klonoa, for example)

True, but Klonoa did still turn out to be a pretty awesome game.

it290 · Post by **it290** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 9:07 pm

Mr. non sequitur.

dave4shmups · Post by **dave4shmups** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 9:33 pm

it290 wrote:Mr. non sequitur.

*shrugs* All I'm suggesting is that Killzone 2 may still turn out to be a great game, despite the fact that that wasn't real gameplay footage.

I can't wait for this year's E3; I think then we will have a lot of these doubts answered, whether positive or negative.

Specineff · Post by **Specineff** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 9:54 pm

dave4shmups wrote: True, but Klonoa did still turn out to be a pretty
awesome game.

No, no. I meant to say that I want my 128-bit consoles rendering their games real time, right now, with the same quality you saw on the Klonoa FMV's.

No_not_like_Quake · Post by **No_not_like_Quake** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 2:29 am

I hate Sony Computer Entertainment for these reasons:

Horrible lies regarding the systems power akin to the Nintendo Project Realty days. If it's not 1080p, it isn't HD bullshit and the like.

Fairly crap first-party stuff on ps2 anyway.

Inferior hardware casing. Compare the sturdy Sega Saturn to the original PS1 and as for ps2, do the old google disc read error. Oh and IMO dualshock controllers are outdated. Nice for playing 2D stuff yet analog sticks are better on an angle IMO.

that fucking Killzone video from E3 2005 and all the Sony fanboiz thinking that's what the games will look like on PS3

The audacity of showing that boomerang as a concept controller

That's about it. I'm sorry. I have no console loyalty but Sony has been pissing me off for a while. So has their number 1 fuck friend Konami.

dave4shmups · Post by **dave4shmups** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 3:02 am

Most disc read errors, and console failures in general, are due to improper usage. I have absolutely no sympathy for someone who places their PS2 on the rug, or some other dusty surface, and then gripes about Sony hardware quality. Or who puts their Slim Line right next to other consoles, and has it overheat.

I'm not saying anyone on here has done that, and yes, the Killzone 2 thing is crap, but hardware problems are not always the fault of the company who makes the hardware-be it Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo.

As far as the power of the PS3 goes, I don't think anyone has a definitive answer as to exactly how powerfull it is.