Note: Mitch makes blog for the first time in a bajillion years (7 months really)
Ever since my mind has been exposed to the Internet, my views towards console gaming has been agnostic. Apart from the Dreamcast (which I couldn't find), I owned all the consoles last gen. I enjoyed them all for their merits and their games. So, when this current generation came up, I tried to go about it with the same open mentality...
But, the PlayStation 3.... there's just something that makes me feel some sort of disdain towards it....
Yes, it had a terrible launch. It was overpriced. Ken Kutaragi and Kaz Hirai sounded like raving lunatics whenever they spoke of the machine. It had no exclusives that made it worth buying a $1000 media centre. Ports were
horrible. But, all these things have been addressed (Price cuts, developers are more comfortable with the hardware, Kutaragi has been silenced, etc).
Then, why do I still feel that it's success is somewhat undeserved?
I can see why the other two are where they are. Microsoft were first, so their install base and game library is quite significant. The Wii is something refreshing, allowing many whom were intimidated, for whatever reason, by the medium to actively play games (though the amount of shit on the Wii is unacceptable, but that's for another blog...).
But as for the PS3, there isn't any apparent reason (to me anyway) to buy it over the other two. There's the Blu Ray capabilities, but the HD market is still a niche. Games are generally more expensive than the other two formats (usual RRP in Australia for PS3 games is around $120; the same for the Wii is generally $100, Xbox 360 $100-110) As superb as Metal Gear Solid 4 is (and this is coming from a guy who steers clear from MGS generally), it's only one superb exclusive out of a few OK ones and a couple of duds (Lair and Haze say hai!). In Australia (and probably world wide too), the PS3 is still the most expensive SKU on the market. PS1 and PS2 backwards compatibility is gone from the newer 40 GB models.
Has Microsoft and the whole RRoD fiasco (even though the new Falcon and Jasper chipsets eliminate this problem) pushed heaps of people towards Sony (a.k.a. Jim's Exodus)? Is the whole "Free Online" with the PSN attracting would-be fraggers? Or is it pure brand loyalty, as many would recognise ("I've always been a Sony boy" is used a lot)?
Please, D'toiders, help me understand. Because this baffles me. The PS3 doesn't feel like a console to me, just some hi-def multimedia centre with games capabilites. I really just don't get it why people are buying this over the much cheaper and more varied Xbox 360.
Help!
jestarinc's blog
Follow
RSS
Contact
-PS3 Games
-PSN
-Free online play
-Internet browsing
-Music
-Image browsing
-DivX
-DVDs
-Blu Ray
-Dual booting OS
-Radio
-And now trophies and in-game XMB
There is a lot to like about the PS3, it may not have any great new games out at the moment but it still has a great library of games to choose from. I also think the reliability has a lot to do with it; when people think Sony, you think QUALITY. You may be paying more than what you think is a fair price, but you are buying a top-quality product.
I can't really say why people choose the PS3 over the 360, for me it was the reliability issue coupled with it's upcoming exclusives. I didn't want the one console I could afford to backfire and fucking break mid-game.
The PS3 is the most powerful console, and to alot of people power=better, and for sony that equals RESULTS! lol.
But some people have too much money as well, so the price os not a problem.
Nevertheless the ps3 is suffering what the Xbox did last gen and it will continue for a while at least, hopefully it will be worth getting one soon.
I'm not saying that the PS3 is a pile of junk (which it is not, if anything the 360 was one until recently). But as a game console, I find it a bit lacking. Yes, I haven't had much experience with it, but that's because it's trying to be the Jack of All Trades at the expense of its true purpose: games. A lot of my frustration comes from seeing mates from high school buying a PS3 solely for games, when I know a 360 would be a better investment.
Don't take this post as some Sony-bashing (it is not), I am merely trying to understand its appeal. Because it's lost to me.
@ M3RCUR1:
Agreed.
Frankly, I've always been turned off by the idea of having to pay $50/year just to play my games online. The PS3 offers that for free, and while the PlayStation Network was lagging behind Xbox Live for a long time features-wise (especially regarding communication between users), the PSN has pretty much caught up (for the most part, not completely) as of midnight EDT with the launch of the system's v2.40 firmware update.
As for the PS3's media capabilities, I love being able to stream media (music/videos/photos) wirelessly from my laptop to my PS3, and Blu-ray was a factor in my decision to purchase a PS3 (I have a large DVD collection, and I now have a decent amount of Blu-ray Discs).
Regarding the RRoD: Microsoft says the new chipsets have fixed the issue, but I've heard stories of people who have had new Xbox 360s (and Elites, which were also supposed to have the new chipset) die on them. That problem is going to haunt the 360 forever. Reliability is a huge concern for a lot of people, just like it was for me.
Also, the 40 GB PS3 will still play PS1 games; it doesn't play any PS2 games, though. However, there have been rumors that Sony will eventually patch PS2 BC into the 40 GB PS3. Who knows? But yeah, I think the main issues with the 360 are the RRoD and the cost of Live. Personally, I don't care for nearly any of the 360's exclusives, and that's another reason why I went with the PS3. But hey, to each his own.
Glad to have your educated input. Yeah, it is each to their own. Personally, all that multimedia stuff is fluff to me (I never use it on my 360 nor my Wii). Also, even if the RRoD has been properly dealt with or not, there's still the disc scratching drives that Microsoft do not recognise. As for Live, I throw money away like that anyway (I did buy a Wii *gasp* hehehe I kid)
I'm glad to see that Sony is catching up. I would really like to have a PS3, honestly, but it would be unwise finacially at this time, and most of the games I want will be on the 360... for now.
I was so glad I didn't pay for that trainwreck. At least it had Ellen Page in it.
...Nah, it still reeked.
But people already have PC's. And the ones too stupid to use a PC just get a 360 anyways.
Firstly I should say I'm no fanboy, I'm buying a 360 in a couple of weeks and couldn't be happier about it. But I seriously think the PS3 -is- a jack of "all" trades. It has all of those options, and it does them well; it is a fully functional media player/media streamer including online content, it can play games, surf the net, you can install multiple OS's or even use it as a computer etc; there is just so much more you can do with it than just gaming.
There is also a different appeal to the PS3. The 360 is like this fun, colorful, active gaming machine where friend meet online, play games and stuff around, while the PS3 is a lot more subtle in it's operations. The color palette is a lot more tame, the interface is simple and easy to use, it fits in with most home theater appliances, and again, it's a Sony product, which people automatically associate with quality and performance. I also think the PS3 seems a lot more "grown up" than the xbox 360 and that can sway a lot of interest.
I don't know, now I'm just ranting. I guess it just comes down to the individual and what information they know about the specific consoles.
I think he's referring to Australian Dollars (you DO use dollars, amirite?) and not US Dollars. Hence, the near double price. Just pointing that out.
Speaking of which, the typical game costs about $60 as you said, converting that to our currency, it would become roughly PhP2700. But when you go to the store and buy them, it costs PhP5000 (The current exchange rate is $1=PhP45). Does shipping and handling really cost that much?
It's cool man. My blog post itself was a bit rushed together as I haven't made a post in 7 months, and I felt like I needed to make one. Though I'm glad that (overall), this discussion has be insightful and enlightening.
@ SyntaxError:
Yeah, we use dollars. You can see my fury about Australian game prices in my first blog post "The Rape of Australia".
Shameless blog plug FTW!!
Also you don't have to pay for controller battery packs, wireless adapters and overpriced HDD upgrades.
If you are just looking to play games perhaps the 360 is the better choice because of the bigger line-up, but if you are looking for more than that the PS3 is IMO the better choice.
Yeah, the 360 D-Pad sucks. But, if you're playing old school games (especially fighters), you should be using a good arcade stick anyway. Plus, most of the next gen JRPGs are on or coming out on the 360, which I find odd.
Again, each to their own (a tired but ever so relevant statement)
Also like I said in a cblog yesterday, I want my new consoles to be Wi-Fi enabled out of the box, something the 360 isn't. The PS2 got an advantage for launching first last gen, but as hardware moves on its hard to not think of the 360's launch as a bit of a false start.
On a side note, I feel that all of us who purchased our 80 GB models should retain our exclusive ability to play PS2 games, i mean, i paid enough for two systems, why should you cheapo's get to play my Persona 3 ?
one major reason for the PS3's current success is that sony is now beginning to address the problems that the PS3 had in the past, one of which is a total lack of games which were exclusive to the console. I think that the PS3 is currently the most power full console out there but without games that power would be a waste. With the launch of MGS4 sony was able to gain a bit of momentum but its not enough we all have to wait and see if killzone 2 and resistance 2 is as successfull. Everyone's saying that 2008 is the year of the PS3 but i think its actually 2009. 2008 is just the start of the mommentum sony is building up but then again 360 also has tittles like gears of war 2 and fable 2.
Second problem the PS3 has is its price now the PS3 is a power full console but because of that same reason it's also lunched with a very high price tag. currently the 360 just slashed prices on there 20 gig model so i think that sony will also make the same move but only on the 40 gig models this means that if sony (hopefully) cuts the 40 gig prices it will begin to move more consoles and with the 65mm chip cutting sony's production cost this will mean more profit for sony (and better performance for the PS3).
Sony's online was cool mainly because it was free but it was way behind on the 360 but that issue is being addressed with the release of the 2.40 update. Its not perfect but its a step up showing us that sony has now seen the importance of online support for consoles (which they should have seen from the start).
we will have to wait till nov and dec to see what happens (cause thats when most of the buying begins)
If I have to buy a blu ray drive in the future is going to be a ps3, I have the HD tv, but no blu ray discs coming here anytime soon.
Anyway, to the topic at hand: Brand loyalty and mindshare, mostly. There really are tons of people who think Sony is the king of the video game industry, and that the PS3 will rise like a phoenix from the ashes. Which ain't happening. The PS3 will never come close to the success of the PlayStation 2, because with their previous two consoles Sony read the market well and delivered, and they prospered from it. However, this time they did the wrong thing at the wrong time, and they're paying dearly for it.
The PS3 certainly won't have a lack of good games, but people who believe it will repeat the PS2's legacy of uncountable RPG epics, quirky Japanese titles, and the library in general are outright deluding themselves.
wow, thats some good stuff your smoking there buddy. My friends have had the latest 360 and still RR, and when they send it to fix, it is replaced with a older version, lol.
Both have their pros and cons, but for the price I will take xbox 10 times out of 10.
PS1 had no real competition NINTENDO was there but the games were with sony and i believe at that time PS1 were cheaper. so sony overtook NINTENDO even thou it was the veteran console maker at that time.
PS2 was launched years ahead of the XBOX so it had an advantage and it again had great games. XBOX was the more powerful console during that time but PS2 had a monopoly on the market it rode the success of the PS1 and it worked for the console.
Looking back you would have to think that with sony having such great success they wouldn't repeat the mistakes that there competition did. this time they had the more powerful console but they launched too late and in turn lost great exclusives like GTA4, and Devil May Cry. (which was bound to happen anyways) I think sony just got to cocky thinking with the success of the PS2 and 1 the fans would wait and that they would fork over $600 at launch, sorry sony big mistake 360 and Wii did not cause your console to lag behind the race PRIDE did.
Having said that sony is making up for it but still have a long ways to go.