Playstation 3

[QUOTE="MaKaV3Li666"]

The PS3 was supposed to dominate at launch.

Thewbacca

People seemed to automatically assume that it would, just because the PS1 and PS2 were big successes. The same thing happened when the PSP came out; People assumed that it would dominate Nintendo.

As history proves though, prior successes do not guarantee future ones. Nintendo was top dog with the NES and SNES, but fell into second with the N64. The Atari 2600 was a big hit, but none of their later systems fared all that well. Sega Master system was reasonably successful, especially in poorer countries, and initially the Genesis sold well, but they just couldn't recapture that spark afterward.

It launched at $600. You don't launch a videogame console for $600.Floppy_Jim

This post is proof of intelligence.

この投稿知能証明している。

It launched at $600. You don't launch a videogame console for $600.Floppy_Jim

Hopefully they'll know better next time.

[QUOTE="Thewbacca"][QUOTE="MaKaV3Li666"]

The PS3 was supposed to dominate at launch.

ThePlothole

People seemed to automatically assume that it would, just because the PS1 and PS2 were big successes. The same thing happened when the PSP came out; People assumed that it would dominate Nintendo.

As history proves though, prior successes do not guarantee future ones. Nintendo was top dog with the NES and SNES, but fell into second with the N64. The Atari 2600 was a big hit, but none of their later systems fared all that well. Sega Master system was reasonably successful, especially in poorer countries, and initially the Genesis sold well, but they just couldn't recapture that spark afterward.

Wise words

Ps1 and PS2 took the mass market in mind.

By forcing bluray and a $600 price tag, and also by underdelievering on software promises.........

there u go.

[QUOTE="Jakendo"]It takes the soul of three infants to make a PS3. People really dont want to support that. Thus, they lose sales. verbtex

Erm, okay. That was pretty lame.

But even then, people still eat meat, even though it denies meals from starving kids. Remember 15 pounds of vegetables can only produce 1 pound of meat.

Living on vegetables alone is a poor poor diet, not fit for a human being.

It launched at $600. You don't launch a videogame console for $600.Floppy_Jim

[QUOTE="Thewbacca"][QUOTE="MaKaV3Li666"]

The PS3 was supposed to dominate at launch.

ThePlothole

People seemed to automatically assume that it would, just because the PS1 and PS2 were big successes. The same thing happened when the PSP came out; People assumed that it would dominate Nintendo.

As history proves though, prior successes do not guarantee future ones. Nintendo was top dog with the NES and SNES, but fell into second with the N64. The Atari 2600 was a big hit, but none of their later systems fared all that well. Sega Master system was reasonably successful, especially in poorer countries, and initially the Genesis sold well, but they just couldn't recapture that spark afterward.

[QUOTE="ThePlothole"][QUOTE="Thewbacca"][QUOTE="MaKaV3Li666"]

The PS3 was supposed to dominate at launch.

Thewbacca

People seemed to automatically assume that it would, just because the PS1 and PS2 were big successes. The same thing happened when the PSP came out; People assumed that it would dominate Nintendo.

As history proves though, prior successes do not guarantee future ones. Nintendo was top dog with the NES and SNES, but fell into second with the N64. The Atari 2600 was a big hit, but none of their later systems fared all that well. Sega Master system was reasonably successful, especially in poorer countries, and initially the Genesis sold well, but they just couldn't recapture that spark afterward.

Why do you Cows always say that? Like you all believe that some miracle will happen and the 360 will just suddenly die off and the PS3 will florish and take down the Wii's sales and reign supreme forever and ever.....*sigh*

[QUOTE="verbtex"]

[QUOTE="Jakendo"]It takes the soul of three infants to make a PS3. People really dont want to support that. Thus, they lose sales. ukillwegrill

Erm, okay. That was pretty lame.

But even then, people still eat meat, even though it denies meals from starving kids. Remember 15 pounds of vegetables can only produce 1 pound of meat.

Living on vegetables alone is a poor poor diet, not fit for a human being.

Its only because humans can't get over the fact that they don't need meat.

Its funny how most of the well known and recognized geniuses were all vegetarians. Albert Einstein, Thomas Edison, and Stephen Hawking are vegetarians. Even though Thomas Edison and Albert Einstein are dead, they still refused to eat meat because they realized the health risks it came with.

I'm also pretty sure you recognize a few of these famous vegetarians.

[QUOTE="ThePlothole"][QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="FragTycoon"]

$300.00 (2000) = $381.68 (2008 ) with inflation

FragTycoon

PSOne launched in 1995 at $300. The PS2 launched at $300 in 1999. I say they should have launched it at the normal price for the industry, not inflation.

Plus if anything, technology is expected to go down in price, not up. (just look at the average cost of a computer today compared to ten years ago, despite the fact that computers today are countless times more powerful)

$300 (1995) = $431.27 (2008 ) with inflation. For the PS2, If it had a standard HDD and LAN card it would add over $150 at the time (estimated by accessory cost)

I'm not saying that the PS3 is not expensive even by past standards. I am saying that It's not AS expensive as people make it out to be.

I don't think anyone can argue that every console not only has new technology but also more hardware in them now (HDD,LAN,WI-FI,CD,DVD,Blu-ray,Wireless controllers,motion control,HD/HDMI,new processors/GPU/RAM,ect).

example: In 1915 the Model T cost $440. Now it's safe to say that cars don't cost that much now day (not ones you want anyway). $440 sounds really cheap, but that equates $9,544.34 today.

I, along with you, would love for everything to stay the same price and have a console in 2020 to have the same price as today. But I know it wont.

One thing that needs to be remembered.... value is subjective.

Yeah I hate when people complain about paying $60 for a game when games in 1980 were $50 and sometimes a lot more. Games really haven't changed in price since the beginning of gaming.

People need to just get over paying the $10 more this gen, because when you stop to compare it to the price of things in 1980 to what they are now then it seems like you are getting a pretty good deal.

[QUOTE="Thewbacca"][QUOTE="ThePlothole"][QUOTE="Thewbacca"][QUOTE="MaKaV3Li666"]

The PS3 was supposed to dominate at launch.

Simulator_Shock

People seemed to automatically assume that it would, just because the PS1 and PS2 were big successes. The same thing happened when the PSP came out; People assumed that it would dominate Nintendo.

As history proves though, prior successes do not guarantee future ones. Nintendo was top dog with the NES and SNES, but fell into second with the N64. The Atari 2600 was a big hit, but none of their later systems fared all that well. Sega Master system was reasonably successful, especially in poorer countries, and initially the Genesis sold well, but they just couldn't recapture that spark afterward.

Why do you Cows always say that? Like you all believe that some miracle will happen and the 360 will just suddenly die off and the PS3 will florish and take down the Wii's sales and reign supreme forever and ever.....*sigh*

Whats that? You say I can't say these games will be good, despite all evidence of concepts, gameplay, graphics and story all sounding fantastic? Right, keep on thinking that.

Its called 2009. The combination of at least 10 kick ass major exclusives and absolutely **** all decent games for the 360 will kill it off. The Ps3 isn't going to surpass the Wii, but it will take control of the hardore gamers market.

Whats that? You say I can't say these games will be good, despite all evidence of concepts, gameplay, graphics and story all sounding fantastic? Right, keep on thinking that.

Thewbacca

Last year it was called 2008. Next year it will be called 2010.

The end result is that most games are now multiplatform and the 360 is by far the cheaper box.

Unless Sony find some way of really pressing home their "blu-ray" advantage, I can't see much changing between the two consoles.

[QUOTE="Simulator_Shock"][QUOTE="Thewbacca"][QUOTE="ThePlothole"][QUOTE="Thewbacca"][QUOTE="MaKaV3Li666"]

The PS3 was supposed to dominate at launch.

Thewbacca

People seemed to automatically assume that it would, just because the PS1 and PS2 were big successes. The same thing happened when the PSP came out; People assumed that it would dominate Nintendo.

As history proves though, prior successes do not guarantee future ones. Nintendo was top dog with the NES and SNES, but fell into second with the N64. The Atari 2600 was a big hit, but none of their later systems fared all that well. Sega Master system was reasonably successful, especially in poorer countries, and initially the Genesis sold well, but they just couldn't recapture that spark afterward.

Why do you Cows always say that? Like you all believe that some miracle will happen and the 360 will just suddenly die off and the PS3 will florish and take down the Wii's sales and reign supreme forever and ever.....*sigh*

Whats that? You say I can't say these games will be good, despite all evidence of concepts, gameplay, graphics and story all sounding fantastic? Right, keep on thinking that.

Right, and what did all the Cows all say in 06? and 07? and this year? Now its next year, and then it will be the year after that and so on and so forth until Sony release's the PS4. You're only fooling yourself by thinking that. Just stop with the "next year" excuse, its really embarrassing to hear that now.

cheaper alternatives I guess

and it released way to late, or the 360 released way too early

killerfist

The 360 released early, its a known fact

That damn pricetag...

[QUOTE="killerfist"]

cheaper alternatives I guess

and it released way to late, or the 360 released way too early

All_that_is_Man

The 360 released early, its a known fact

PS3 is the best system this gen. Anyone who agrees is just a fanboy.IvyCassandra

fixed

the only reason why the PS3 is the worst selling this gen is cuz of its price tag at launch, which led it to be hated

not the online service, cuz XBL was the best last gen, and yet PS2 outsold the xbox

not the games either, cuz the DC had better games within the first year of launch, but it didnt stop the PS2. did it?

if the ps3 retailed for 400 at launch, people would have been buying it for blu ray and for games

i hope sony realized where they went wrong, and have their next system launched at 400 at the most

Syk0_k03r

haha.. thought you wer general ram for second there and was gonna say that he posted something good for a change.

anyway, good post dude.

[QUOTE="IvyCassandra"]PS3 is the best system this gen. Anyone who agrees is just a fanboy.ahmedkandil

fixed

selfownage. perhaps?

For me, the Playstation 3 is not a dissapointment, at all.

The reason that people were dissapointed with it was a lack of good games after the launch.

People got impatient, and if the already had a PS3, sold it and got an XBOX 360, and if they were going to get a PS3, decided to get an XBOX 360 instead.

Sure, it was expensive at launch, but you have to remember that the Playstation 3 is more than a games console. At the time, it was the cheapest Blu-Ray player on the market, and I'm pretty sure it's still one of the cheapest.

I personally thought that the launch was pretty good. Motorstorm and Resistance: Fall Of Man kept me entertained for quite a while, but there was a dry spot after that, when no decent games were coming out.

That's not a problem anymore though, because we have got great games coming out at the moment and great games coming out soon to look forward to.

I remember my cousin bought a Playstation 3 on launch day, he waited in line for ages. He then got it, and after a few months, was bored of it and sold it to get a XBOX 360. He still thinks the XBOX 360 is awesome, but he wishes he had saved up some money and bought an XBOX 360 and kept his PS3, seeing as there is no shortage of great games now.

[QUOTE="Thewbacca"][QUOTE="Simulator_Shock"]

[QUOTE="Floppy_Jim"]It launched at $600. You don't launch a videogame console for $600.Phazevariance

And it had no games for its launch.

He meant no good games. Technically, take away multiplats, and they still don't have enough good games. Some, but not enough.

neither does microsoft, really :/

It launched at $600. You don't launch a videogame console for $600.Floppy_Jim

I agree you don't launch a videogame console at $600 and especially when their were no good launch titles.

PS3 is the best system this gen. Anyone who denies that is just a fanboy.IvyCassandra

I think anyone who can claim this with a straight face is a true fanboy!

The PlayStation 3 is the best! I'm all for it! It is true, even though the sales aren't showing it. All I can say to people is to get a PS3! Sure, it's expensive, but you get an awesome line-up of games (MGS4, best ever!), the best and most reliable hardware, great online that happens to be free of charge. It doesn't get much better. Quite simply, you pay the price for good quality.metalgear-solid

Fanboy much?

Fanboy much?

Simulator_Shock

It launched at $600. You don't launch a videogame console for $600.Floppy_Jim

/thread

[QUOTE="Nike_Air"]It is more than that though , they could have launched at $400 but the Wiimote/Wii Sports hype would have been enough to top it.agentfred

I disagree.

Frankly, I think the hype for the PS3 outmatched the Wii. If I remember correctly, the PS3 was in such high demand at launch, they were selling for 2000+ on Ebay. (This literally lasted DAYS. The expected demand FAR surpassed the actual demand) The reason why this didn't keep up was simply a lack of games.(The reason it didn't keep up was because you could readily buy a PS3 in stores within a week of launch. The 360 was hard to come by for more than 6 months after launch, and the Wii is hard to come by to this very day) Compared to the 360, it seemed to lack games, and compared to the Wii, it seemed to lack ingenuity. All that, and it was one of the most expensive consoles ever.

The Ps3 was stuck between these two, and it quickly lost all the hype it had gotten pre-launch. We started to see those 2000 dollar sales drop down, even below retail price IIRC. Started to? The high price lasted little more than launch week.

For almost two years now, Sony has been trying to rebuild the reputation it lost in a few short months.It lost in a few short DAYS.

The PlayStation 3 is the best! Darn right, it does have the best library...oh wait. Well, it undeniably has the best graphics...oh wait. Well it does have the largest library...oh wait. It's got the best online service....oh wait. Ummm, uhhh, it's got ummm, uhhhh BLURAY!!!!! I'm all for it! It is true, even though the sales aren't showing it. You mean even though NOTHING shows it? All I can say to people is to get a PS3! Unless you want to play games just as good for half the price. Sure, it's expensive, but you get an awesome line-up of games(don't you mean awesome lineup of game without the s? (MGS4, best ever! Funny, I see a whole bunch of games from this generation alone rated higher), the best (if its the best shouldn't there actually be some evidence to support that? and most reliable hardware(Really, I have heard zero problems with the Wii hardware), great online that happens to be free of charge.(So in the span of a few sentences you went from "Paying extra is worth quality" to "free is great even if not as good"? It doesn't get much better(Yes it does, if you buy a games console to play games). Quite simply, you pay the price for good quality.(Yet this doesn't apply to the online service right?)metalgear-solid