After E3 2008, I understand Sony

They want you to wait, because they expect the PS3 to have a 10 year life cycle. Meanwhile, Microsoft knows that their life cycle will be much shorter, so they try to push out their new titles faster.

So while Microsoft will come out with a bunch of big releases, eventually the 360 will die out like the original Xbox due to lack of games, and due to the focus on Microsoft's next console. However on PS3 there will be a steady flow of good games for years to come.

So really, is waiting such a bad thing?

They want you to wait, because they expect the PS3 to have a 10 year life cycle. Meanwhile, Microsoft knows that their life cycle will be much shorter, so they try to push out their new titles faster.

So while Microsoft will come out with a bunch of big releases, eventually the 360 will die out like the original Xbox due to lack of games, and due to the focus on Microsoft's next console. However on PS3 there will be a steady flow of good games for years to come.

So really, is waiting such a bad thing?

hockeyruler12

no, only fanboys call waiting a bad thing. look what waiting for MGS4 did. same for GTA4

I think Sony's point was more that they realize that as of right now the PS3 is a little lacking in games, but you shouldn't give up hope because the PS2 had a very long life and amazing games throughout it.

As far as MS running out of steam with the 360, I don't see it happening any time soon.

Both systems have great games now, both systems will continue to have great games in the future.

I really do not get this whole "group X has to wait, LolOolOl!" thing that SW posters seem to always spout.

[QUOTE="hockeyruler12"]

They want you to wait, because they expect the PS3 to have a 10 year life cycle. Meanwhile, Microsoft knows that their life cycle will be much shorter, so they try to push out their new titles faster.

So while Microsoft will come out with a bunch of big releases, eventually the 360 will die out like the original Xbox due to lack of games, and due to the focus on Microsoft's next console. However on PS3 there will be a steady flow of good games for years to come.

So really, is waiting such a bad thing?

punkrocker163

no, only fanboys call waiting a bad thing. look what waiting for MGS4 did. same for GTA4

They want you to wait, because they expect the PS3 to have a 10 year life cycle. Meanwhile, Microsoft knows that their life cycle will be much shorter, so they try to push out their new titles faster.

So while Microsoft will come out with a bunch of big releases, eventually the 360 will die out like the original Xbox due to lack of games, and due to the focus on Microsoft's next console. However on PS3 there will be a steady flow of good games for years to come.

So really, is waiting such a bad thing?

hockeyruler12

MS makes you wait as well, I recall seeing a CG trailer of Banjo last year and here we are and Banjo still isnt out, the same goes with Fable 2 and Too Human which if I recall have gone through three E3's, I could be mistaken but I definatly know its been two. Alan Wake is still a ghost.

All gamers have to wait. Its the PS3 second year and I have HS, Ratchet, MGS4, Resistance, Uncharted, GTP, Motorstorm, etc on top of plenty of multiplats. If I recall up until GEOW, 360 fanboys were living off of Kameo, PDZ and Dead Rising. And even after GEOW they had to wait another year for their Halo, Bioshock and ME which was also delayed.

Gaming has always been a waiting game, but for some reason MS fans like to pretend their different.

no......try Sony focused on Blu-ray more than the PS3, that's why it's been a near total failure (in comparison to the PS2).darthogre

Yea but when you have 70% of the market down is the only way to go, otherwise I can guarantee if Sony pulled ahead of the PS2 , MS and Nintendo would be out. I mean the PS1 and PS2 were total domination and now the game is more balanced. I prefer that actually, that way everyone steps up their game.

[QUOTE="darthogre"]no......try Sony focused on Blu-ray more than the PS3, that's why it's been a near total failure (in comparison to the PS2).Javy03

Yea but when you have 70% of the market down is the only way to go, otherwise I can guarantee if Sony pulled ahead of the PS2 , MS and Nintendo would be out. I mean the PS1 and PS2 were total domination and now the game is more balanced. I prefer that actually, that way everyone steps up their game.

There are positives and negatives with this. The negative I can think of off the top of my head is when you focus on multiple platforms the game overall suffers. Meaning, if a game was exlcusive it probably would be better overall (kind of like MGS4). It might not have been a BAD idea to have Nintendo get out of the console business....then they can concentrate on their core games. Imagine a hidef Mario, Metriod, and Zelda!!!! If they wanted to add the motion controls how hard woudl that have been to include as an accessory? Make the motion controls with one game as a pack for $100, then they can make all their games like that.

Basically I'm saying I was actually hoping Nintendo was out and became Sega with software only. But then again they are making money hand over fist so what do I know.

[QUOTE="punkrocker163"][QUOTE="hockeyruler12"]

They want you to wait, because they expect the PS3 to have a 10 year life cycle. Meanwhile, Microsoft knows that their life cycle will be much shorter, so they try to push out their new titles faster.

So while Microsoft will come out with a bunch of big releases, eventually the 360 will die out like the original Xbox due to lack of games, and due to the focus on Microsoft's next console. However on PS3 there will be a steady flow of good games for years to come.

So really, is waiting such a bad thing?

MrsWakka

no, only fanboys call waiting a bad thing. look what waiting for MGS4 did. same for GTA4

exactly, my point proven.

[QUOTE="Javy03"]

[QUOTE="darthogre"]no......try Sony focused on Blu-ray more than the PS3, that's why it's been a near total failure (in comparison to the PS2).darthogre

Yea but when you have 70% of the market down is the only way to go, otherwise I can guarantee if Sony pulled ahead of the PS2 , MS and Nintendo would be out. I mean the PS1 and PS2 were total domination and now the game is more balanced. I prefer that actually, that way everyone steps up their game.

There are positives and negatives with this. The negative I can think of off the top of my head is when you focus on multiple platforms the game overall suffers. Meaning, if a game was exlcusive it probably would be better overall (kind of like MGS4). It might not have been a BAD idea to have Nintendo get out of the console business....then they can concentrate on their core games. Imagine a hidef Mario, Metriod, and Zelda!!!! If they wanted to add the motion controls how hard woudl that have been to include as an accessory? Make the motion controls with one game as a pack for $100, then they can make all their games like that.

Basically I'm saying I was actually hoping Nintendo was out and became Sega with software only. But then again they are making money hand over fist so what do I know.

No I agree multiplats suffer because you have to balance two systems which means you dont push the envelope at all, but my competition drives improvements. Right now the Wii is on top of the world because Sony and MS ignored the casual gamer, but I am sure their next console will be powerful and have casual games, and hopefully a better starting price as well.

Nintendo might be a victim of its own success, I mean if they keep up this gen. pushing shovelware with a couple solid titles how will they follow that up next time? The controller wont be inovative anymore, and most likely Sony and MS will have a counter for it as well. And if SOny and MS price their console correctly that would kill the Wii 2's price advantage. This little niche Nintendo carved might be their tomb if they keep ignoring the hardcore audience and allow Sony and MS to match their moves.

No waiting is not the answer. First of all a cycle shouldn't last more than 6 yrs. By then the technology is so outdated that the machine is a dinosaur. Face it PS3 is a flop.

No waiting is not the answer. First of all a cycle shouldn't last more than 6 yrs. By then the technology is so outdated that the machine is a dinosaur. Face it PS3 is a flop.

pilotc

Why are there fanboys everywhere? dont post if your gonna say something not needed here.

[QUOTE="pilotc"]

No waiting is not the answer. First of all a cycle shouldn't last more than 6 yrs. By then the technology is so outdated that the machine is a dinosaur. Face it PS3 is a flop.

punkrocker163

Why are there fanboys everywhere? dont post if your gonna say something not needed here.

This section is designed for fanboys. Don't post here if you don't want to "internet tough guy"

[QUOTE="punkrocker163"][QUOTE="pilotc"]

No waiting is not the answer. First of all a cycle shouldn't last more than 6 yrs. By then the technology is so outdated that the machine is a dinosaur. Face it PS3 is a flop.

pilotc

Why are there fanboys everywhere? dont post if your gonna say something not needed here.

This section is designed for fanboys. Don't post here if you don't want to "internet tough guy"

internet tough guy? is that what they are called? lol. and how is this section designated for fanboys?

No waiting is not the answer. First of all a cycle shouldn't last more than 6 yrs. By then the technology is so outdated that the machine is a dinosaur. Face it PS3 is a flop.

pilotc

Well, the PS2 had amazing games well into its 7th year.

That, and the PS3 hasn't even been around long enough for it to be declared a flop.

[QUOTE="pilotc"]

No waiting is not the answer. First of all a cycle shouldn't last more than 6 yrs. By then the technology is so outdated that the machine is a dinosaur. Face it PS3 is a flop.

gamefreakomega

Well, the PS2 had amazing games well into its 7th year.

That, and the PS3 hasn't even been around long enough for it to be declared a flop.

Tell me when ps3 has as many AAA's as 360 does now.

It will probably be atleast a year.

Tell me when ps3 has as many AAA's as 360 does now.

It will probably be atleast a year.

angelkimne

Dont make me pull out thy trump card.

Tell me when the 360 has 2 AAAA's on it.

This is ridiculous.

Sony IS the new Nintendo, only with a significantly less profitable business model.

Waiting isn't a bad thing when you've got a constant supply of good games padding the release list between the mega titles, but Sony doesn't have this luxury anymore.

They did on PS1 and PS2, but PS3 is an entirely different scenario.

360 has the good games, padding out the waiting period between the halos and GOWs etc, but what does Sony have?

This is just like the N64 days, when months would go by without a worthwhile release, only this game has been played before.

Sony is the new Nintendo, only without the almighty first party to go with it.

And for those who think there's gonna be a ten year life cycle.....History says not likely.

Only winners stretch out the life cycle, and PS3 isn't in that position by any means.

NES -> SNES-> PS1 -> PS2.....guess what they all have in common? The biggest slice of market share.

GB -> GBA -> DS Same thing.

Master System, Genesis, GameGear, NGaGE....etc.

The least successful systems nearly always try to be the first ones out with new hardware, ala wiping the slate clean and starting from scratch.

Expect Sony or Microsoft to launch first next gen.

[QUOTE="MrsWakka"][QUOTE="punkrocker163"][QUOTE="hockeyruler12"]

They want you to wait, because they expect the PS3 to have a 10 year life cycle. Meanwhile, Microsoft knows that their life cycle will be much shorter, so they try to push out their new titles faster.

So while Microsoft will come out with a bunch of big releases, eventually the 360 will die out like the original Xbox due to lack of games, and due to the focus on Microsoft's next console. However on PS3 there will be a steady flow of good games for years to come.

So really, is waiting such a bad thing?

punkrocker163

no, only fanboys call waiting a bad thing. look what waiting for MGS4 did. same for GTA4

exactly, my point proven.

and

Waiting isn't as bad, as long as theres games to play while you wait.Hitman533

That^

I don't think Sony having the largest library of delays is planned. It just doesn't make sense. I mean just look at Killzone 2. They said its already finish but they delayed it because they want the other games to shine. What other games? Socom and Resistance 2? I don't know about you, but looking from a consumer perspective this holiday, you want to look at the console with the most top notch products available this holiday.

Also if they were really planning a 10 year life cycle, why did they cut out BC in all of their future PS3 sku? They instantly cut off the largest library by taking away BC. Can you imagine with the PS4 not having PS3 BC? You'll probably get damage control like oh if you want to play PS3 games play it on your PS3. Both the Wii and 360 have BC in previous, present, and future skus, Sony on the other hand, not so much.

[QUOTE="punkrocker163"][QUOTE="MrsWakka"][QUOTE="punkrocker163"][QUOTE="hockeyruler12"]

They want you to wait, because they expect the PS3 to have a 10 year life cycle. Meanwhile, Microsoft knows that their life cycle will be much shorter, so they try to push out their new titles faster.

So while Microsoft will come out with a bunch of big releases, eventually the 360 will die out like the original Xbox due to lack of games, and due to the focus on Microsoft's next console. However on PS3 there will be a steady flow of good games for years to come.

So really, is waiting such a bad thing?

J-Allard360

no, only fanboys call waiting a bad thing. look what waiting for MGS4 did. same for GTA4

exactly, my point proven.

and

Waiting isn't as bad, as long as theres games to play while you wait.Hitman533

That^

Yet GTA4 was on 360 also, got a 10 also, and with MS stealing all exclusives, i wouldn't put it past them to eventually get MGS4 onto 360 as well. Yep, 360 is the best consoel this generation, and if ps3 and MS are neck and neck in graphics now, wait until the next xbox comes out that'll blow PS3 away. Also, consider this fall update the half way point in MS 360 life cycle, its the 360.5 update. Will reinvent the console and send it soaring past ps3. Especially once the DLC for GTA4 hits, which they havent annoucned because its HUGE and FF13 now on 360, why even bother "waiting" for a ps3 title to arrive.

[QUOTE="hockeyruler12"]

They want you to wait, because they expect the PS3 to have a 10 year life cycle. Meanwhile, Microsoft knows that their life cycle will be much shorter, so they try to push out their new titles faster.

So while Microsoft will come out with a bunch of big releases, eventually the 360 will die out like the original Xbox due to lack of games, and due to the focus on Microsoft's next console. However on PS3 there will be a steady flow of good games for years to come.

So really, is waiting such a bad thing?

Javy03

MS makes you wait as well, I recall seeing a CG trailer of Banjo last year and here we are and Banjo still isnt out, the same goes with Fable 2 and Too Human which if I recall have gone through three E3's, I could be mistaken but I definatly know its been two. Alan Wake is still a ghost.

All gamers have to wait. Its the PS3 second year and I have HS, Ratchet, MGS4, Resistance, Uncharted, GTP, Motorstorm, etc on top of plenty of multiplats. If I recall up until GEOW, 360 fanboys were living off of Kameo, PDZ and Dead Rising. And even after GEOW they had to wait another year for their Halo, Bioshock and ME which was also delayed.

Gaming has always been a waiting game, but for some reason MS fans like to pretend their different.