Sony, Good or bad?

[Arrrhalomynn]

i dont know how Arrrhalomynn can say that the PS2 is innovative does it have a HDD as standard? Could or would it have gone on the internet if others had not done it first?

I have a pretty hard time decyphering your post, but the point of my little story was that the PS2 wasn't less innovative than the XBOX or gamecube.

I hate Sony because of their arrogance...I also hate the fact they are forcing Blu-Ray onto the consumer.

I 100% agree and have been stating that as well. It takes the decision whether or not they want a Blu-Ray player out of the consumer's hands and into the corporation's. Why should the consumer be forced to pay a higher price for a hardware option that they don't want/need?

They need SOMETHING to put their games on. First it was CD, then it was DVD, now it's Blu-Ray. It's called progress. Did you also feel forced to pay for DVD or CD? Or formats that didn't have any other functions like the dreamcast's CD-G and all the different types of cartridges of the old days?

I think it's pretty neat that the ps3 comes with an extra function for a relatively low price, when compared to a stand alone system with the same function. It might have been 50 bucks cheaper if it had used regular DVD, but that's in the past now and a custom drive would've cost just as much and wouldn't have had any extra functionality. I wish my 360 had HD DVD already built in, it would be a neat extra and could be very usefull for future games.

[The Metamorphosing Leon]

i dont know how Arrrhalomynn can say that the PS2 is innovative does it have a HDD as standard? Could or would it have gone on the internet if others had not done it first?

………………..,-~*'`¯lllllll`*~,
…………..,-~*`lllllllllllllllllllllllllll¯`*-,
………,-~*llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll*-,
……,-*llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll.\
….;*`lllllllllllllllllllllllllll,-~*~-,llllllllllllllllllll\
…..\lllllllllllllllllllllllllll/………\;;;;llllllllllll,-`~-,
…...\lllllllllllllllllllll,-*………..`~-~-,…(.(¯`*,`,
…….\llllllllllll,-~*…………………)_-\..*`*;..)
……..\,-*`¯,*`)…………,-~*`~.………….../
……...|/.../…/~,…...-~*,-~*`;……………./.\
……../.../…/…/..,-,..*~,.`*~*…………….*...\
…….|.../…/…/.*`...\...……………………)….)¯`~,
…….|./…/…./…….)……,.)`*~-,……….../….|..)…`~-,
……/./.../…,*`-,…..`-,…*`….,---…...\…./…../..|……...¯```*~-
…...(……….)`*~-,….`*`.,-~*.,-*……|…/.…/…/…………\
…….*-,…….`*-,...`~,..``.,,,-*……….|.,*...,*…|…...\
……….*,………`-,…)-,…………..,-*`...,-*….(`-,………


(Thanks for that Creso)

[phoenix1967]

When CD and DVD are the industry standard, I actually did not feel "forced" to pay for them. And that's my point, Sony didn't have to use Blu-Ray; so by them doing so I feel that they are "forcing" the consumer to buy into it.

DVD is STILL the industry standard. Both Nintendo and Microsoft are still using it in their next gen consoles, and to great effect. And back when the PS2 came out, Sony actually followed the industry standard that had been proven and in place by using the DVD medium, and to their great success. So why didn't they use a proprietary technology for the PS2? Quick answer: Sony hadn't created one that THEY wanted to be universally accepted. So for the PS3, they've made the command decision to go forward with putting their Blu-Ray drive into the system because that's what THEY want to see succeed because it's their designed medium, and not because they couldn't have used DVD in creating the PS3.  

Further, the PS3 would have been more like $200 cheaper if it had used regular DVD. Not $50.

Sony actually also knows that a miniscule amount of households have TVs capable of outputting at the 1080p resolution of the Blu-Ray, but Sony doesn't care. So guess what, the majority of consumers of the PS3 are going to be going home, plugging into their TVs with the PS3's composite video cable, and will find out that there's nothing special about the graphical capabilities of the PS3...because of the cable (since Sony's not even including component or HDMI cables) and because of their TV!

The decision to go with Blu-Ray was simply one of corporate greed and arrogance, imo. And gives no thought or care to the consumer. You can argue all you want about progress, but at $600+ you can have it. I'll stick with my 360 and DVD. And if I'm interested enough in a HDDVD playback, I'll pick up the 360 HD-DVD player or a different brand for use directly to my current TV since I'm not going to be buying a 1080p-capable TV.

[The Metamorphosing Leon]

A good point, it may be that the world isn't yet ready for the PS3. But this further illustrates what I believe, that the PS3 is the ONLY true next-gen system. It is almost completely out of the water compared to the last generation, whereas the Wii and 360 seem to be little more than "expansion packs," if you will, of the last generation.

There are a fair amount of ifs here, but if the technology used in the PS3 takes off then the PS3 will be set for quite some time. And what will the other companies do? Either not support the tech or scramble to release new systems or, at least, re-modified systems.

Perhaps Sony will get blown out of the water because they looked too far ahead, but I'm not so certain.

[Tan]

You can't single out Sony for not including a hdmi or component cable when 360's and Wii's still need mem cards, wi-fi hardware, component cables fibre optic cables etc etc. because they don't bundle them either. They are all guilty of accessory extortion. 

[Cobra]

I think 'this guy' is completely out of his mind.

 
I'm assuming  the mid 90s are what he was talking about, as his quotes from Sony are from around 95/96

"gaming has to evolve" or how they're "weeding out unsuccessful games,"

These were two of Sony's excuses for their anti 2D stance.

He dose portray gaming back in this era perfectly though like I said earlier with 3D being too new and limited at the time.

I still love my 2D, but that's probably more from an artists prospective, as I love and admire good animation in games or film.
3D however by now of course has come a long way, so while there will always be a place with 2D games for me, 3D games have now long surpassed those limitations mentioned in the majority of cases.

I feel Blu-Ray on the PS3 is simply a marketing move, they could of used a different type of media, but want to hopefully pull of what they managed with the PS2.

The PS2 blew the DC off shelves, due to false hyped up stats? This is obviously one of Sony's favourite marketing strategies, as it worked before, so they went with it again, but no, this alone wouldn't of had the same impact. Sony caught the DVD revolution but made sure their system was the cheapest DVD player people could buy. DVDs were a huge success, and with the PS2 being the cheapest player you could get, even stores would use PS2s to display DVD movies.

I may hate Sony, but I'm not stupid, and know a great marketing strategy. Not only did you have one of the cheapest DVD players of the time, but since DVDs were just new, not many people had a DVD player. So it didn't matter if you were looking to upgrade your system or upgrade your VCR, you would see it as a nobrainer, you get what you want, plus a bonus feature while saving money. If you wanted both a DVD player, and anew system, you'd be in heaven back at the PS2 early days.

Sony simply want to do the same once again. This time being a creator of it makes all all the easier to make their system much cheaper than other companies players. Will this tactic work again? It's hard to say, DVD were such a leap forward from videos, while Blu-Ray isn't quite so revolutionary despite it's ad of the Blue-Ray player transforming your room multiple times and holographic helicopters flying out of the screen. Mind you if Blu-Ray could really do this, I would buy a player right now

Time will tell... but on this note, I'm a Saturn Otaku. I would consider myself a Saturn/Old Skool Sega  fanboy, but then again am I? I listen to what others say, and admit if I feel I'm wrong. I also only hate Sony, and not it's fans, or supporters. But I do think those who camped out to get a PS3 are censored wits.

I also find Sony-Fan Leon's new Sony Nazi style humorous.

SEGA SATURN SHIRO!

[Arrrhalomynn]

http://www.isuppli.com/news/default.asp?id=6919

According to this study the Blu-Ray drive doesn't even cost 200 dollars, so there's no way the playstation 3 would be 200 dollars cheaper if it weren't in it. Especially because they're already losing money on the thing.

What proprietary format should they use? DVD, like the 360? That's almost like a step back in time. Even microsoft acknowledges that by releasing the HD DVD add on. Technologies are constantly evolving and when there isn't a proprietary format yet, it's sony's good right to promote the format they prefer. There will never be a proprietary format if both sides don't promote the hell out of their technology and one can claim victory.

I think some of you people are forgetting that the playstation 3 should have a life time of about 5 years. Sure, not a lot of people have 1080p now and not a lot of people might have need for Blu-Ray now, but in a few years all of that might have changed. Besides, it's not like you NEED 1080p to unjoy blue ray. It'll look good at 720p too.

Buying a 360 with an HD DVD player is just as expensive as a Playstation 3. But in the case of the 360 you have an extra thing inconveniently plugged into it and the console makes a terrible amount of noise. That makes for some very uncomfortable watching.

[phoenix1967]

Ok. Per the article, the Blu-Ray drive costs them $125 vs. about $20 for a DVD drive. You think that that $100 difference and cost savings couldn't be passed down to the customer?

And sure, you don't "need" 1080p to enjoy Blu-Ray if your TV's resolution is 720p, but why be forced into paying for the tech that you don't use?

@Tan, the 360 premium console ($400 version) includes a component video cable as well as a headset and an ethernet cable.

And industry pundits aside regarding what is a "bargain"...$600 is $600! And that's NOT a bargain to me.

[Tynstar]

PS3...because of the cable (since Sony's not even including component or HDMI cables) and because of their TV!

They didn't include a component? That is lame. The 360 comes with one. As much as Sony is talking about HD at the least it coould og come with a component cable.

[Hydrobond]

Sony is the status symbol of electroic devices.  It always has been, and most likely always will be.  
They make some nice products, but they will always be expensive.

[Tynstar]

Sony is the status symbol of electroic devices.  It always has been, and most likely always will be. 
They make some nice products, but they will always be expensive.

They do make nice stuff but it is too expensive. There is other brands just as good that are cheaper.

[The Metamorphosing Leon]

You say it's lame to exclude the cables, yet you also say nobody has the capabilities to use them yet. So why would Sony give out cables for things that nobody has?

And I agree with Arr on the DVD front. You can't believe that video tech won't advance past the DVD, it's going to continue to change and, like Tan said, if Blu-Ray is the thing of the future then PS3 is the way you'll to go. It's cheaper than other Blu-Ray players and it's also a Playstation. That's the market strategy, the difference between now and last time is the fact that Blu-Ray hasn't been quite as established as the conquerer of DVD. When DVD first showed up it was considered to be a marvelous replacement.

And no $600 is not cheap, but after buying a 360 for $399 and then the HD-DVD for $199 you will be spending THE SAME AMOUNT as you would buying a PS3. So...what's the big deal?

[Tynstar]

You say it's lame to exclude the cables, yet you also say nobody has the capabilities to use them yet. So why would Sony give out cables for things that nobody has?

I am saying component cables is what I am talking about. Not the HDMI. My TV uses component cables. All HDTV's do. Not to many use the HDMI.

[The Metamorphosing Leon]

Aha, well I'd find some way to refute you but I've got to run to class.

[phoenix1967]

PS3...because of the cable (since Sony's not even including component or HDMI cables) and because of their TV!

They didn't include a component? That is lame. The 360 comes with one. As much as Sony is talking about HD at the least it coould og come with a component cable.

Yup. Composite only. See the attached. The paragraph above "Controller Makeover".

http://reviews.cnet.com/S...64_7-31355103.html?tag=ms