Not only their launch but perhaps their overall position right now. NOT trying to get you guys going about they're position because the sky is not falling. Let's just say a lot of people are taking shots at Sony right now and this is a poll to see how Sony could have improved on the PS3 launch. Wanna know your thoughts.
Without the blu-ray, not alot of peopel would buy it, theres no good games out. Well not manyPhoenix963
Â
I think it's easy to say cut the blu-ray so the price can drop. But what if I told you that you could pay 200.00 bucks more for a system that will last you twice as long as the competition's? That this system was so innovative that it could not only pull of this gen but the gen after this as well. I applaud Sony for taking a chance and including Blu-ray. Takes courage to bring something new and cutting edge to market.Â
IF The ps3 had no blu-ray that wouldve ment no 50 gb games :( and no hi-def movies now comon u want to pay 400$ on the ps3 and 1000$ for blu-ray or 600$ for both i think sony has done a great job with the launch all that was needed was for kutragi or waht ever his name to keep exclusive games exclusive
IF The ps3 had no blu-ray that wouldve ment no 50 gb games :( and no hi-def movies now comon u want to pay 400$ on the ps3 and 1000$ for blu-ray or 600$ for both i think sony has done a great job with the launch all that was needed was for kutragi or waht ever his name to keep exclusive games exclusive
Fadixon
There aren't any 50 gb games now. That was the biggest thing Sony could have improved on. Fewer ports and better games. First it was "wait until March" and now its "wait until September." More software. Better software.
I half agree with the first choice, they shouldn't of waited another year, they just should have had all the greats ready now (heavenly sword, killzone 2, etc) instead of september, but it's all coming so no worries
IF The ps3 had no blu-ray that wouldve ment no 50 gb games :( and no hi-def movies now comon u want to pay 400$ on the ps3 and 1000$ for blu-ray or 600$ for both i think sony has done a great job with the launch all that was needed was for kutragi or waht ever his name to keep exclusive games exclusive
bdhoff
There aren't any 50 gb games now. That was the biggest thing Sony could have improved on. Fewer ports and better games. First it was "wait until March" and now its "wait until September." More software. Better software.
Â
If there was a sixth option available I would have added not shown FMV and claimed it was in game footage. That set the bar so high that they won't even let Killzone out from under wraps. But I see what you're saying. Guess it takes time to utilize 50 gig formats...even when you designed it.   Â
I half agree with the first choice, they shouldn't of waited another year, they just should have had all the greats ready now (heavenly sword, killzone 2, etc) instead of september, but it's all coming so no worriessoundthealarm
Â
I put wait another year because a year after launch is when the really great games debut. So if having all the greats available in 11/06 was not an option then delaying the system till 11/07 was. Â Â Â Â
ALL it needs is more games. Period. If they released some amazing new exclusives that fully utilized the BD capacity, sixaxis tilt, killer graphics etc. with the console they would be in great shape now.
ALL it needs is more games. Period. If they released some amazing new exclusives that fully utilized the BD capacity, sixaxis tilt, killer graphics etc. with the console they would be in great shape now.XL83
IF The ps3 had no blu-ray that wouldve ment no 50 gb games :( and no hi-def movies now comon u want to pay 400$ on the ps3 and 1000$ for blu-ray or 600$ for both i think sony has done a great job with the launch all that was needed was for kutragi or waht ever his name to keep exclusive games exclusive
bdhoff
There aren't any 50 gb games now. That was the biggest thing Sony could have improved on. Fewer ports and better games. First it was "wait until March" and now its "wait until September." More software. Better software.
well you have to think long term. Sony wants the ps3 to last ten years. Blu-ray is a must for that to happen.
 but getting back to the topic, getting more exclusives would have helped. Assassin Creed was going Multi anyway but Sony had DMC4 and lost it.
Biggest mistake Sony made was not offering exclusivity deals for publishers. Or maybe they did, but they weren't appealing enough. lordxymor
Â
I think that's what the second majority of people are saying. Most are saying we should haven't included a blu-ray. I feel we should have waited to launch until we had a good slew of First party games. No one would have cared that we lost the exclusives or about the price if Heavenly Sword, Lair, Killzone, and perhaps FFXIII or MGS was available.Â
its good to see im not the only one tired of playing Resistance (my only PS3 games)Â because there isn't really anything out for PS3 worth buying right now.
its good to see im not the only one tired of playing Resistance (my only PS3 games) because there isn't really anything out for PS3 worth buying right now.shadowchaos7
 Very true. It's been a long wait for the games. But I guess we'd rather wait then have em rushed and not be all they could, e.g., MotorStorm.
Just for the record, PS3's launches in all territories were some of the most successful of all times. IMO all they needed was some more games and that's it.
Taking out Blu-ray would be a huge mistake, it was one of the reasons why i bought it now.
Just for the record, PS3's launches in all territories were some of the most successful of all times. IMO all they needed was some more games and that's it.
Taking out Blu-ray would be a huge mistake, it was one of the reasons why i bought it now.
Log in to comment