Over/Under on PS3 Holiday Price Cut

[Steerforth]

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6172545.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=newstop&tag=newstop;title;1

I say....16% off, a $100 cut. Over or under!

Also, while I give them credit for not giving up (they do have guts), I don't think it will be enough. I think Halo 3 is the biggest game come Christmas, this is America, after all, and I'm not sure any PS3 game can match the hype and expectation that is Halo.

The Wii will be......almost completely unaffected. It's almost as if some of us brain dead casuals aren't excited about rebuying all of our DVD's! Again! And I am a sucker for a good minigame compilation, especially if it has superficial motion controls!


P.S. Stringer says in the above link games that are out now for the PS3 presently  use only about  20% of the potential . I think that is actually bad news. How much time will you have to spend on a game to get up to 60 - 100% of power?!  Will these 'epic' games get shorter or will you just have to wait 5 years between releases? The depth of committment and investment continues to rise for Sony exclusives.

[JustLikeHeaven1]

[QUOTE=Steerforth]

Also, while I give them credit for not giving up (they do have guts), I don't think it will be enough. I think Halo 3 is the biggest game come Christmas, this is America, after all, and I'm not sure any PS3 game can match the hype and expectation that is Halo.

The Wii will be......almost completely unaffected. It's almost as if some of us brain dead casuals aren't excited about rebuying all of our DVD's! Again! And I am a sucker for a good minigame compilation, especially if it has superficial motion controls!


P.S. Stringer says in the above link games that are out now for the PS3 presently  use only about  20% of the potential . I think that is actually bad news. How much time will you have to spend on a game to get up to 60 - 100% of power?!  Will these 'epic' games get shorter or will you just have to wait 5 years between releases? The depth of committment and investment continues to rise for Sony exclusives.
[/QUOTE]

I agree that the first price cut will probably be around $100.  At the very least it will be $50.  Costing $499 is still alot of cash, but the value would be tremendous.  Compared to the Xbox 360 Elite you are getting so much more value for $20 more dollars.  Why Microsoft opted not to put a wireless card is beyond me...

In regards to the PS3 only using 20% of its power...its not so much based on time to develope.  Companies are still learning the architechture of the PS3.  They aren't used to making games on such a complex device.  Instead of having one processing core, they now have to use multiple. 

From what I've read, developers are simply lazy and don't want to learn all the new tricks to get the most out of the machine.  Sony is trying to get more developement tools out there so its easier, but its not happening all that fast.

I think at first you will only see a few companies really tap into the power of the PS3 and then slowly more will follow.  I bet the PS3 games in 2009 will make the 06-07 games look like last gen efforts...should be interesting to watch it unfold.

[Astrosmasher1]

Wow the Sony PS3 is only using 20 percent of its power.  So by that way of thinking it will be another 4 years (20 % per year) to get really going.  Well I am going to wait. 
I bet the dudes at Sony are kicking themselves the clearly inferior Wii is kicking their butts.  I still think that the system has a limited shelf life but what do I know, I bought the Atari Jaguar and the Sega Dreamcast!

[andrew]

I say a $50 dollar price cut so the PS3 can return to its initial retail price in canada. What a joke; went from 659.99 to 699.99 and probably go down to 649.99. Gee I cant wait, it'll be so affordable! It will be many years before the PS3 in reasonable under $300 which is still a lot of money.

[Atarifever1]

[QUOTE=andrew]I say a $50 dollar price cut so the PS3 can return to its initial retail price in canada. What a joke; went from 659.99 to 699.99 and probably go down to 649.99. Gee I cant wait, it'll be so affordable! It will be many years before the PS3 in reasonable under $300 which is still a lot of money.
[/QUOTE]

I'd say I feel your pain (also being Canadian), but seeing I didn't want one anyway, I didn't care about the price increase anyway.

[ActRaiser1]

[QUOTE=Astrosmasher]Wow the Sony PS3 is only using 20 percent of its power.  So by that way of thinking it will be another 4 years (20 % per year) to get really going.  Well I am going to wait. 
I bet the dudes at Sony are kicking themselves the clearly inferior Wii is kicking their butts.  I still think that the system has a limited shelf life but what do I know, I bought the Atari Jaguar and the Sega Dreamcast!
[/QUOTE]

Actually, that wouldn't be so bad.  If the PS3 turned out to be a Dreamcast well, hell, that system to me was worth way more than $1000.  I'd be all over it.  Jag, not so much.

I got way more use out of my Dreamcast then I did my gamecube.  On the flip side and to completely contradict myself I find my Wii being used to play gamecube games that I never got around to when I had that hooked up.  Case in point F-Zero isn't so bad and Scooby Doo is hilarious.

If Lair ever ships and proves to be a AAA game there's hope for the PS3 yet...just not anytime soon.

[Steerforth]

I don't understand the "Well, PS3 is very complicated and therefore difficult to program for" defense. That is a big negative, not some kind of a harmless, expected drawback.

I don't doubt things will get slowly 'better', but I don't think it will be all that dramatic. What is the undefineable graphics standard/pricepoint  that will suddenly make PS3 'The Machine'?
 
To people who have both, how do the 360 and PS3  compare on a comprable high effort game? And is it really that important to anone that they continue to get more and more detailed, or have you hit a wall yet?

[JustLikeHeaven1]

[QUOTE=Steerforth]
I don't understand the "Well, PS3 is very complicated and therefore difficult to program for" defense. That is a big negative, not some kind of a harmless, expected drawback.
[/QUOTE]

Its not a defense...its a simple truth.  Game progammers have never had to deal with something as complicated as the Cell Processor. 

Instead of having one giant processor handle everything, you have a main core, and several smaller processors to handle different tasks.  One processor could handle sound, while another handles textures, while another...you get the picture.  Since programmers are not used to building games on a processor like this, it is very easy to see why people are having a difficult time. 

The main problem is games that aren't built from the ground up on the PS3 hardware are hard to port over.  The 360 is a completely different beast and porting games is no easy task...thus you see lots of developers cutting corners and making sloppy PS3 games.  Games built from the ground up on the PS3 don't run into the same problems and they are usually much easier to make.  They also look noticeably better than the games ported over from the 360.  Until you see a large enough install base, most games are going to built for the 360 and ported over to the PS3.  If the PS3 proves itself in terms of install base you might see that change. 

The 360 has stunning and beautiful games, but it wasn't always like that.  Early 360 titles weren't much to look at and the quality has improved greatly the longer the system was in stores.  However the improved quality in graphics hasn't helped push sales of the 360 all that much.  The Wii continues to flourish, despite its lack of power and its largely due to pricepoint and mainstream appeal.  However, I hope Nintendo doesn't become so caught up in the non-gamer market that the traditional games on the system suffer. 

[Steerforth]

 However the improved quality in graphics hasn't helped push sales of the 360 all that much - JLH

Exactly. So why would it help the PS3, especialy when as you also mentioned most games are being made for both anyway, because they are so early in their lives? So why are we fed this persistent myth that the 'underpowered' Wii will run into a wall and sales will fall out?  Why does Sony automaticly get to decide what will move systems tommorow, especially when everything today says they are wrong?

Considering how fast the Wii is selling and how they will eventually have the largest 'new' installed base, you will see the largest variety of games on it. If Nintendo truly is 'letting down' their traditional users, it is just an oppurtunity for a 3rd party to pick up the slack. But realisticly, things won't change much. Established franchises and my hated 'liscensed' games will continue to dominate, because that is what mom and dad and grandma buy for  Billy because they can at least recognize it. I still think that "Nintendo's converts" is overstated, too, at least so far. If it took the Critic 6 months to get a Wii, Grandma ain't got much of a chance, unless the VGC was knock over in the aisle by a 30 pound purse. 'Hardcore' gamers are the biggest buyers of Wii, and the biggest buyers of non-trad games, because it truly is something different.

Wii has momentum, that is the most important thing in attracting games.
In the battle for subsidised multimedia centers, 360 has a year lead and is still outselling PS3, the main reason is price, and a drop won't help much. Look for MS to drop in response and negate the whole thing. What do they care, they are a 'not for profit' videogame company anyway. I doubt Nintendo will drop until sales really start to slip. I refuse to buy into the propaganda, but maybe I'll be proved wrong.

[BanjoPickles1]

Power has rarely ever dictated who wins and who loses. Which console sold more, the NES or the master system? Snes was more powerful but barely beat the genesis in worldwide sales, with the genesis coming out on top in certain countries. The playstation was inferior, power-wise, to the n64 but not only did it get the better overall games but stomped it, sales-wise. The Jaguar and 3DO were superior, hardware-wise, to what else was available(16-bit) but they vanished! The ps2 was the weakest of the three, though some people refuse to accept that. I have had so many stupid arguments of "no, the gamecube was the weakest." Ummm, look at the multi-platform games and usually the ps2's is the weakest. Sonic Heroes(unplayable!), Soul Caliber 2(weakest of the 3), Max Payne 2(why even bother), etc. Power doesn't dictate, games do but, even more than games, marketing! Nintendo actually has a good marketing strategy with the Wii(those commercials are actually cool!).