Sony Confirms US $399

[Warrior]

And before the release of Halo 3? The PS3 wasn't magically outselling the 360 or the Wii. Not by a long shot.

I never said it did. But the reason for the 360 selling 5:1 is due to Halo 3. Before that, it was maybe 2:1 in the American market, if that. But I'm not disputing the facts, the PS3 isn't selling as much, but that doesn't mean it's not worth having.

August it was 3:1, still isn't much better.

Which ones? The only ones  with noticeable differences to me have been sports games, and I only play those with friends, and that's rare.

CoD 3 for example, ran considerably slower and was much less pretty than it was on the Xbox 360.

No, I'm trying to say that his decision isn't the only one that matters in such a massive industry.

How about Crytek (FarCry, Crysis), Valve (Half-Life)? Do you think that their collective agreements matter?
All of those companies have stated developing for the PS3 is difficult and usually not worth the money.

Name the games.

BioShock
Guitar Hero II
Oblivion / Shivering Isles / Knights of the Nine

They were never breaking even. I never said that. The only delusional person around here is you with all the words you're putting in my mouth.

Then how can you justify them cutting costs? The components they cut costs would have no impact on the manufacturing cost of the product, and therefore would have no reason to lower the price of the SKU.

It's logic.

It's a move that Sony felt would encourage PS3 console and game sales.

The "moves" Sony makes are seldom what's good for the consumer. MiniDisk/UMD/BetaMax come to mind.
Oh, let's not forget the entire Rootkit fiasco..was that a "good move" too?

I didn't say they didn't have options. Again, you're misrepresenting my argument. I said that the PS3 was a viable option, and nothing you have said has proven that to be otherwise.

No, it would not be a viable option. Considering the 360 offers everything the PS3 offers in terms of games, and way more.
Look at the facts man.

Again, there are fewer games, but that doesn't mean there aren't any. There are plenty of games that have been reviewed quite well. Blu-ray speeds are just fine.

Like what? Resistance? and..Resistance?

Want me to link you to the article proving Blu-Ray is having trouble with read-speeds for games?

Just because it's not xbox Live doesn't mean it's not substantial. Xbox Live is the best in the industry at the moment, Sony is second, and the Wii is a distant 3rd.

Of course Sony is going to be second, Wii's online is nearly non-existant. It's like saying "We're number two!...out of two!"

The Wii has been out for 1/2 the time. The only reason it hasn't sold more is due to production issues. And I believe your statistics are for the US, not the world.

The PS3 has sold a little over 5 million I'm thinking.

In summary, you think the Wii is king, the 360 is in the middle, and the PS3 is utter garbage. I disagree , and I am saying that it's too early to say.

How is it too early to say? The generation is almost over. I'd give it another year before Microsoft announces it's latest offering. Do you really think that Sony can recoup it's losses over the course of a year? They're going to end up reporting a loss the size of the loss Microsoft had with the original XBox.

Sony is going to be in last place.

[dark_drake]

I've told you that the price drop is justified so it can compete in the market; you keep thinking, incorrectly, that lower price will equate to people wanting it even less, which is illogical. Let me say it one more time, Sony is lowering the price to be more competitive in the market. Repeat this any time you don't understand why Sony is lowering the price on the PS3.

I'm through trying to correct any facts and statistics; even though it's a small inconvenience to find sources, I've done it too many times already.

You named 3 other games which have been developed on the 360 by third-parties which have done well (on top of Gears of War and Orange Box). That hardly doesn't come close to qualifying as many more. I can do it for the PS3, too: Tekken 5: Dark Resurrection, Virtua Fighter 5, Oblivion, and Heavenly Sword.

As for the generation being almost over, you're mistaken. They usually last 5 years; it's been 2 for the 360, and 1 for the other two consoles. IIRC, (and this could very well be a bit iffy), it wasn't clear cut who was going to win between the N64 and the PS1 for a few years. It's still a race between consoles. To think otherwise would be silly.

You hate Sony; that's fine. Nothing I say or Sony does is going to change your opinion, and it is for this reason, I'm through in this thread. You're too hard-headed when it comes to topics involving Microsoft. I think Sony is just fine; they've never disappointed me before. Sidoh's MiniDisk player rocked when he had it , and I wasn't around for BetaMax (neither were you, but go ahead and tell me the horrible experiences you've had with it anyway).

[Warrior]

I've told you that the price drop is justified so it can compete in the market; you keep thinking, incorrectly, that lower price will equate to people wanting it even less, which is illogical. Let me say it one more time, Sony is lowering the price to be more competitive in the market. Repeat this any time you don't understand why Sony is lowering the price on the PS3.

And I'm telling you that's understood. They're doing it at the cost of a feature, a feature that has a negligible impact on the price tag. That is what angers me. You can try to downplay it as a non issue, but it is an issue to a lot of people. It makes or breaks a console at times.

You named 3 other games which have been developed on the 360 by third-parties which have done well (on top of Gears of War and Orange Box). That hardly doesn't come close to qualifying as many more. I can do it for the PS3, too: Tekken 5: Dark Resurrection, Virtua Fighter 5, Oblivion, and Heavenly Sword.

I don't own a 360, so I had to dig them up. I'm sure I could find more if I took the time, didn't think I'd need to list the entire collection though.

As for the generation being almost over, you're mistaken. They usually last 5 years; it's been 2 for the 360, and 1 for the other two consoles. IIRC, (and this could very well be a bit iffy), it wasn't clear cut who was going to win between the N64 and the PS1 for a few years. It's still a race between consoles. To think otherwise would be silly.

The 360 defined the dawn of the current-gen, and the first console of the next-generation will mark the advent of the next-gen. How much time the PS3 or the Wii have been in the game is irrelevant. They were both late to the market. It's actually pretty pathetic that the PS3 has such marginal improvements over the 360 when it had a years headstart.

You hate Sony; that's fine. Nothing I say or Sony does is going to change your opinion, and it is for this reason, I'm through in this thread. You're too hard-headed when it comes to topics involving Microsoft. I think Sony is just fine; they've never disappointed me before. Sidoh's MiniDisk player rocked when he had it , and I wasn't around for BetaMax (neither were you, but go ahead and tell me the horrible experiences you've had with it anyway).

I don't come here expecting to change anyone's opinion, I have been enlightened on a few subject but my opinion as a whole remains the same. It isn't a Microsoft thing, I'm not much of a console guy actually. It's a anti-sony thing.

Microsoft isn't doing too hot in the Console area either, let's count the Red Ring of Death, the losses in their fiscal year results, etc.
They have the resources to just dog their way through failure until they become successful, it's not something everyone including Sony can do.

I've never used BetaMax, and never made comments about it's quality. In fact, from what I understand the format (Like BluRay today) was slightly superior to VHS. I merely stated that it was a failed format.

The only format which bares Sonys name in part which succeeded was the Compact Disk.



[/quote]

[Warrior]

"Sony begs developers not to abandon the PS3"
http://www.gamepro.com/news.cfm?article_id=142068

Ouch.

[dark_drake]

"Sony begs developers not to abandon the PS3"
http://www.gamepro.com/news.cfm?article_id=142068

Ouch.

This is just some guy who is saying something.

"But drake, it's not just some guy! It's Dean Takahashi!"

Yeah, and the Xbox 360 team was working on a handheld system to be released this year or early next year.

[Warrior]

"Sony begs developers not to abandon the PS3"
http://www.gamepro.com/news.cfm?article_id=142068

Ouch.

This is just some guy who is saying something.

"But drake, it's not just some guy! It's Dean Takahashi!"

Yeah, and the Xbox 360 team was working on a handheld system to be released this year or early next year.

I'm sure you wouldn't doubt his credibility if he said the same for another console =).
Seriously, read his article history. Does not look bias to me, however conspiracy theories are welcome.

It's also amusing you poke fun and seemingly downplay John Carmacks significance:
Let's see what he's done in the graphics industry:

"John D. Carmack II (born August 20, 1970) is a widely recognized figure in the video game industry."

"He has pioneered or popularised the use of many techniques in computer graphics, including "adaptive tile refresh" for Commander Keen, raycasting for Hovertank 3-D, Catacomb 3-D, and Wolfenstein 3-D, binary space partitioning which Doom became the first game to use, surface caching which he invented for Quake, Carmack's Reverse (formally known as z-fail stencil shadow mapping) which he devised for Doom 3, and MegaTexture, used in Enemy Territory: Quake Wars. While he was not the first to discover Carmack's Reverse, he developed it independently."

It's worth noting the bolded technolgies are present in some incarnation in commercial games today.

"Carmack's engines have also been licensed for use in other influential first-person shooters such as Half-Life and Medal of Honor."

"Carmack is a well-known advocate of open source software, and has repeatedly voiced his opposition to software patents, which he equates to "mugging someone".[3] He has also contributed to open source projects, such as starting the initial port of the X Window System to Mac OS X Server and working to improve the OpenGL drivers for Linux through the Utah GLX project."

So a 360 loving, GPL loving, Open Source contributing, Game algorithm pioneering programmer still lacks credibility in your eyes?
Like I said, if it makes you feel better at night, then go ahead and doubt his credibility. It's obvious what the truth is.

[dark_drake]

No, I'd doubt his credibility if he said it about any console. He's been wrong before. What's to say he's right or wrong about this, besides his "insider information"?

Furthermore, I didn't even bring Carmack up in my post. Nice try, though.

[Warrior]

No, I'd doubt his credibility if he said it about any console. He's been wrong before. What's to say he's right or wrong about this, besides his "insider information"?

Furthermore, I didn't even bring Carmack up in my post. Nice try, though.

You're telling me that the "But drake, it's not just some guy! It's Dean Takahashi!" was not a jab at my defending of Carmack?
Please.

If you won't believe on report, how about more affirming the same general conclusion?:

http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/02/02/2054201 - PS3 Developer fired for voicing his mind of the system
        - Gives his exact name, his job, and provides an example of his work (E3 PS3 presentation)
        - Compares his work with the work of XBox 360 Devs, favors the 360
        - Sony promptly fires him from SCEA. It seems not even their internal developers like the PS3.
http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-348-1.htm - Developers take on the PS3
        - Mentions the fact that the 360's three cores are easier to program for as opposed to the PS3 SPEs
        - Mentions the fact that the 360 has superior GPU processing power, the Cores is what theoretically push the PS3 over the top but none of them are taken advantage of in any way meaningful.
        - Mentions a method (employed by Halo 3) for using multiple framebuffers to anti-alias and light High Definition Content, saves processing power while retaining beauty. The PS3 has to process this itself, and with the lack of SPEs being taken advantage the cost adds up.
     

Now let's go back to pre-PS3. Developers were not given final development kits until very late in the Game, early on they had to cough up $25,000 per kit to get a system which emulated (quite poorly from the articles I've read) what the PS3 may be like.
Do you really think this encourages developers? Do you think this yields success?

Now, after reading all of this can you seriously still doubt the legitimacy of the article? Developers are shying away from the Playstation 3, it's something that's been reiterated by:

John Carmack
Crytek (Makers of FarCry, Crysis)
EA (Various Studios within the EA brand actually)

The only reason Epic seems to be staying with the PS3 is because Sony licensed their Engine and exclusivity rights for the PS3. Let's add this to the numerous complaints about frame rate and development technical support on the UE3 and it quickly starts to look sour. FYI: The reports of the UE3 fallacies are being made by people WORKING on PS3 games. The exact name of the game fails me now, but I'll look it up.

The facts like I've said many times, are undeniable.