PS3 worldwide ship in November 2006
> News Comments > SPOnG Comments Index
Topic started: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 11:51
Click here to view the news article this topic refers to.
Click here to view the news article this topic refers to.
Sat, 18 Mar 2006 03:55
Another example of miserable Sony software: ***n00b weblink removed*** />
The question therefore is. Can anyone tell me some good software made by Sony?
I am ready to accept I am wrong, but I would really like to get at least one example. One will do, no need to make a big list. Just one software aimed at consumers use (not a game) which is well done.
The question therefore is. Can anyone tell me some good software made by Sony?
I am ready to accept I am wrong, but I would really like to get at least one example. One will do, no need to make a big list. Just one software aimed at consumers use (not a game) which is well done.
Mon, 20 Mar 2006 14:00
Anonymous2006 wrote:
The question therefore is. Can anyone tell me some good software made by Sony?
The CD player on the PS1.........oh hang on, did you say GOOD or the WORST EVER software made by Sony?!?!
A also remember seeing the media player for the Japanese import of the machine and it all looked black on funky..... Then for some VERY odd reason they assumed the european market would prefer something grey that looked like an old calculator!!
Mon, 20 Mar 2006 15:29
thane_jaw wrote:
See right there, it proves my point that Microsoft had to STRUGGLE to get people to develop for their system. No one, developer or consumer wanted them into the mix. They had to buy out and convince japanese developers that the XBox is a worthwhile system to work on. I will admit and say that Microsoft's push for gaming standards (720p, 5.1 sound) is ultimately good. But obviously done to say their games have an edge over others because all of their games do this and have that standard.
When I started in the games industry my first job was porting a PS2 game to the Xbox. I can backup the claim that developers didnt really want the xbox be to a success, most people in my company just wanted it to fail and slated it whenever they could.
I dont think that they were never wanted in the market, more that Sony was seen as "The Cool Kid" - they're marketing did the trick - and people blindly formed opinions, just as they are doing so this next generation.
I remember everybody laughing and slating Microsoft for making a console, with comments such as:
"Its a pc in a small box"
"They're trying to take over your living room by stealth!!!"
Its funny now how Sony announce that the PS3 will be an all in one Media Centre Hub in your living room with Linux installed......... isnt that exactly what people critizised Microsoft for trying to do!!!
This generation both Sony and Microsoft are being more direct about what it is they're both trying to achieve - which is both to control the huge revenues that a computer in everyones living room will bring via music/film/games/tv/voip in a simple user friendly system.
It makes me laugh how Microsoft is perceived as the Enemy thats forcing its way into peoples homes via unscrupulous methods (The EVIL that is Bill Gates), whereas Sony is seen as the consumers friend making great games consoles just for the sheer love of making us all happy while showering our living rooms with daisys of joy.......oh and they also happen to make Hi-Def TV/Plasma/LCD screens and Home Hi-Fis/Portable music/video players/games machines...... as well as owning a huge amount of film/music content through Sony Music and Sony Pictures.......Anyone see a connection! ;)
I just care about whether or not I can play a decent game irrelevant of whether or not its on the most popular system...who cares! Sure, Sony didnt want them in the market, but we as consumers should. I dont think Sony PS3 plans would have been this ambitious if Microsoft was not chasing on its heels!
Footnote:
Just out of interest, has anyone else noticed that most of the so called "exclusive" content on any given console is actually just a delayed launch for the other consoles by maybe 2-3 months...... This is usually done by the publisher getting paid money by the console maker to hold back the release on the other platforms...........
So next time we applaude any console for having a game "exclusive" or "first" its usually because they paid huge sums of money to make sure others couldnt play it!! Not exactly a benefit for the consumer, unless being able to say "I can play it on my console! ...And you cant! Nah Nah" actually counts.
Microsoft may have been seen to buy its way into the console market, but Sony in many ways has paid to keep others out of the market.....
Mon, 20 Mar 2006 17:43
Well the point is interesting, and I don't really want my gaming system to be all in one (because we all know that the Jensen tv with the built in DVD player and VCR just sucks ass), but I don't think SOny has the same marketing and business strageties as Microsoft. It always seems like Microsoft is trying to devour the competition, while Sony seems to welcome it. Now it may just be the media protraying it that way. But look at when Microsoft released C# to counter C++ or when they forced you to use IE and ACTUALLY went in and disabled and rerouted your browsing attempts to IE or how they keep forcing you to use Windows and all it's complementary products and locking out others. Just try and install Linux after a Windows partition is on that sucker. Microsoft just wants to be the ONLY game in town, despite current claims that they like the Sony competition. The Sony integration seems more optional. There not shutting out products that can fit nicely between the PS3. Anyone with me on this?
Mon, 20 Mar 2006 18:11
vault 13 wrote:
Well the point is interesting, and I don't really want my gaming system to be all in one (because we all know that the Jensen tv with the built in DVD player and VCR just sucks ass), but I don't think SOny has the same marketing and business strageties as Microsoft. It always seems like Microsoft is trying to devour the competition, while Sony seems to welcome it. Now it may just be the media protraying it that way. But look at when Microsoft released C# to counter C++ or when they forced you to use IE and ACTUALLY went in and disabled and rerouted your browsing attempts to IE or how they keep forcing you to use Windows and all it's complementary products and locking out others. Just try and install Linux after a Windows partition is on that sucker. Microsoft just wants to be the ONLY game in town, despite current claims that they like the Sony competition. The Sony integration seems more optional. There not shutting out products that can fit nicely between the PS3. Anyone with me on this?
I agree with you about Microsofts history of locking out competition, DirectX versus OpenGL was another interesting example, but i think maybe Microsofts been less than subtle about its tactics than Sony has. Microsoft being an American company has the american ethos of "We're bigger, better and have more than you" thing going on. Where'as Sony being Japanese tends to mirror the Japanese ethos of Respect & himility and less aggresive business practices.
I think though in practice they both have the same fundemental "Business Strategy" which is to make money.
Mon, 20 Mar 2006 18:56
Always...
Mon, 20 Mar 2006 19:28
Wait, this discussion looks familiar. The difference and similarities between Sony and MS is a very interesting topic tough.
A common thing would be that both companies are using gaming to put their multimedia hubs under your telly... using in a sense that if it doesn't make a profit they'll drop it as fast as possible (being the major difference between Sony and MS on one side and the Big N on the other, Nintendo can't drop gaming, they don't use it, it's their way of life as a company). They both want to control your living room, MS in a software kind of manner, Sony in a hardware kind of manner.
A common thing would be that both companies are using gaming to put their multimedia hubs under your telly... using in a sense that if it doesn't make a profit they'll drop it as fast as possible (being the major difference between Sony and MS on one side and the Big N on the other, Nintendo can't drop gaming, they don't use it, it's their way of life as a company). They both want to control your living room, MS in a software kind of manner, Sony in a hardware kind of manner.
Log-in or register to permanently change your layout setting.
236 comments
Live down what? A marketing buzz word used to indicate that the PS2 is going to usher in a new generation of gaming and graphics (we all know Sega did that first with the Dreamcast but anyway...).
it was the way it was presented as something that the final product was clearly not and could never be.
Uhhh, how many Dreamcast games are being produced now. Sony trounced them for better or worse.
I was trying to make the point that drawing comparisons between Sega and Sony was strange given what has ultimately happened to Sega. The full speed was in reference to the fact that Sony haven't been seen to be going guns out with the PS3 launch just yet. I'm sure they are, but they have been slippages - not something you'd expect with a company going full out to achieve a console launch.
RTS? It's was going to be multiplayer massive online battles, maybe even a persistent world. No RTS and definitely no dinosaurs. You obviously didn't see the bagillion videos online or watch the Halo 2 special disc and see how similar the game is and was to the Xbox versions. If you want to attribute the game looking better and more polished just because Billy G. bought them out, you're wrong. If BIll Gates bought me out, I'm not going to magically produce good games for him. Bungie was doing fine with Myth 1,2,3 and the most likely release of Halo on PC and Mac.
I have a series of videos with bungie doing voice overs of the different halo builds. These videos were given away as part of an official U.K. xbox magazine coverdisc pre halo 2 launch. They show the original e3 demo for Halo and comment that although it looked like impressive AI it was all scripted. They also mention that in early designs there were plans to include rideable beasts - which looked liked dinosaurs, which were implemented in the game (with proper models and skins) although ultimately dropped. Whilst reviewing this early build they also talk about the fact that the Halo was originally designed as an unfinished ring although again this was later dropped. Amongst other things they said that Halo was originally designed to be a RTS, although this was changed when Microsoft bought them out.
See right there, it proves my point that Microsoft had to STRUGGLE to get people to develop for their system. No one, developer or consumer wanted them into the mix. They had to buy out and convince japanese developers that the XBox is a worthwhile system to work on. I will admit and say that Microsoft's push for gaming standards (720p, 5.1 sound) is ultimately good. But obviously done to say their games have an edge over others because all of their games do this and have that standard.
I'm not sure that people didn't want them in the mix. You could say that people were indifferent to them and ultimately a lot of people were sceptical whether MS, a tradionally software based company, could successfully retail a console at market for profit - which it turns out they couldn't, at least not at the moment. They did have to struggle to get people involved, but by constantly spending money they have started to attract developers.
Ummm Twisted Metal Black, SSX, SSX: Tricky, Gran Turismo 3, Ace Combat 4, ICO, Kolona 2, Zone of the Enders just to name a few.
Remember ICO is regarded as one of the best games of all time and I agree.
Xbox didn't have anything for at least a year after worth buying or even to get me to think about buying it.
Different strokes for different folks? None of those, aside from possibly gran turismo 3, sold the console. Brandstrength alone did that (maybe with some help from back compatability). The first true killer app the ps2 had was gta 3.