Print

[throwingks]

http://www.1up.com/d...cUserId=5380375

QUOTE(Dana Jongewaard - OPM Editor)

So ultimately, I can't justify it. $600 is a lot of money, especially when I can get what--for me at least--will be a very similar experience for $400. I would like to own a PS3, and I hope that the price drops soon so I can consider it. But until then, this Official PlayStation Magazine editor will have to join the dark side.

I can't say I blame her, but at the same time, I can't imagine Sony being to happy about these statements.

[jwin767]

LOL definition of PWNED really isn't it lol. naa ill probs get one when i can offered one, but like her i cant justify the price ATM i have my 360 and thats fine

[lex_luther23]

All that i been reading here and their the console may not last in the market 3DO AND Sega SAturn tryed this before launch with $500 and $600 consoles and they got washed out.

[calderra]

She is not the first or the last. Insert the PSM bit here:

"So here I am, playing Warhawk with the motion-sensing controller."
[Camera cuts to a PS1, the original Warhawk, and an ancient Pelican controller.]
"Sony said motion-sensing and rumble couldn't be integrated...."
[Controller rumbles constantly as he steers using motion-sensing.]

 
It's amazing Sony isn't a total laughing stock, considering the reactions from even their hardcore audience.

[Kira Yamoto]

you guys want to know why you shouldn't take this comment seriously?.....................................Because they get to play one in their offices for free.  Leaving thier hobby cash to be spent on Wii and Xbox 360 if they hadn't have already gotten a 360 that is.  

These editors thrive on free games due to their jobs.  They make more than enough money to buy/save up for one (the damn thing was announced last year!!!!) but what makes them reluctant to buy these consoles are purely what they see at work.  I guarantee that when the titles start rolling in, whoever editor that hasn't gotten one will get one.

[PatchBokov]

 I don't think that sony really care about the statement of this lady.. One years passed, and still, the Xbox 360 don't have any revolutionary or ''a keeper'' title.. PS3 price is too high ?  600 dollars is too much ?

That so.. funny, well... that normal, after all, the PS3 have everything the Xbox 360 don't have : new hightech hardware.. So the high price come with.


If its not the design, then its the price ?    that pointless.

[Kira Yamoto]

QUOTE(PatchBokov @ Aug 14 2006, 04:21 AM)

 I don't think that sony really care about the statement of this lady.. One years passed, and still, the Xbox 360 don't have any revolutionary or ''a keeper'' title.. PS3 price is too high ?  600 dollars is too much ?

That so.. funny, well... that normal, after all, the PS3 have everything the Xbox 360 don't have : new hightech hardware.. So the high price come with.
If its not the design, then its the price ?    that pointless.

this same argument happened years ago.  299 for a playstation are you crazy? and eventually people accepted it and it became the best console out of the three.  Now that technology has advanced, the technology calls for a higher price.  PC gamers have been paying 1000's (and thats at a good scenario) for state of the art technology and here we are getting it for 600.  It's just going to be as Sony said.  If you want super-high quality, then you're gonna get a PS3.  If you want average to good quality, then you're gonna go 360, and finally if you are just on a bargain or want something different, then you're gonna get a Wii.

[incognegro]

She is speaking from a consumers point of view. Of course sony doesnt care what she has to say, its obvious they don't care what any of us have to say and that is their biggest mistake. Whether she gets one for free cause of her job is irrelevant. She is a reflection of what is going on in the comunity right now. Even the sony enthusiasts (to put it mildly) are questioning their purchase. Sony NEEDS to take note of that, if they don't have respect for their competition then we as gamers lose.

Think about it, if sony brought a more reasonable product to the market then gaming for all gamers would be better off. If sony wasn't more interested in bringing a cheap blu ray player to the market then we would have some games to play on launch (shit, they don't even care if the system ships with games cause they know its gonna sell anyways). If the ps3 wasn't so expensive then MS would have a price drop by the end of this year. If sony thought about anyone but themselves when creating the ps3 then it would be a more attractive system for the Sony "enthusiasts" and multiplatform buyers alike (like myself). Plus it would make the devs happy.

Sony is fucking up, and whether you are a fan or not. We are (on a smaller scale) paying for it. Everything they do right now is a ripple effect in the community. You think what theyre doing is for the betterment of the gaming? Nope, its for the betterment of blu ray!

This industry used to be one that had no space for more than two big hardware companies going at it every 5 years. Now we can have 3 companies but if sony flops then we are back to two. Less choice for consumers. Less money for publishers and Devs.

Can someone remind what games are gonna be there for launch again!?

(Thats a rhetorical question)

By they way, I have a couple of 'revolutionary' 'keeper' titles on my 360

Oblivion and Ghost Recon

Now the ps2 had none for a year and a half!

EDIT:

In the article she said they dont get free hardware!

"Contrary to popular belief, editors of the Official PlayStation Magazine don't get free hardware for their own personal use"

Although I understand the company pays for them and employees use them for free. Just thought I should bring that up.

[Kira Yamoto]

QUOTE

You also have to remember that that sony has only one physical core on die, and the 360 has 3.

That's what Sega said.

QUOTE

Either way it will come down to the software and not the hardware, that will be the only distinguishing factor this time around between Sony and M$.

QUOTE

But i know that there are those individuals that will pay the hefty price tag for the PS3, like my brother in law, who isnt concearned about the price tag or the quality of the product he's going to buy it only because it says Play Station/Sony on the box.

You know, each and every time you post stuff like this you just keep losing credibility, although, you wouldn't give a damn anyways who thinks you're credible or not.

1. It's always been about the software than the hardware, that's why PSX won and thats why PS2 won.
2. But you see, you THINK that on the outside, people only want to buy PS3 for the Sony brand name, but that's totally false.  People who have been with Sony through the PS1 and PS2 know that we've been getting quality titles for years and continue to get them.  Eventually, it becomes second-nature to know that when we buy a Sony PS product, we are getting the real deal.

QUOTE

However the GPU architecture for 360 is actually far superior to the GPU architecture of the PS3. Anyone with any hardware knowledge knows that just because you have a faster processor doesnt mean you have a faster system, there are so many other factors that come into play.

blah blah blah.  more theory that hasn't been proved on paper.  Look at the games released this year compared to 1st gen games.  Theorists have claimed that stuff like this was impossible to be released on the PS2 and it wasn't.  Ever seen SotC? GoW? FFXII? Of course you havent, you're too busy downplaying PS product line.

QUOTE

Besides you guys have nothing to look forward to yet, Sony keeps loosing headway in the race/battle for supremacy of the next gen console.

What? That's just like 360 haters said when the 360 was pre-release.  This is largely not true.  We have Heavenly Sword, Fifth Phantom Saga, FFXIII, FF Versus XIII, Virtua Fighter 5, Tekken 6, Soul Calibur IV, Metal Gear Solid 4 GotP, and this is only what I can name on top of my head.  We got every major developer making quality games for PS3 as we speak, and I have no doubt that when these games come out, they will be truely next-gen.

Besides, they only lost headway when it comes to the poor people.  People who were smart and saved up are still getting it.

QUOTE

I have a million other points i could post here all in favour of the Wii and 360, but like i said this time around it's going to come down to the software not the hardware.

Yet you have zero for the PS3.  You're finding every way to hate the PS3 in every way possible.  I have not seen a Pro-PS3 comment come from you yet, while, you haven't seen an Anti-Wii or 360 comment from me.

QUOTE

If the ps3 wasn't so expensive then MS would have a price drop by the end of this year.

Ok now I know you're just plain hating the PS3.  Because this is the stupidest game politic comment I have ever heard in the history of industry hate.  MS would not have dropped the console price for shit.  Especially considering that this is their 1st real year of 360 operations and no console in the history of mankind had ever had such a quick price drop.  All I hear is how Sony is affecting the industry while they haven't really DONE anything yet.  Dude your comment was just plain idiotic and uninformed.  Even you have to admit to that.

QUOTE

We are (on a smaller scale) paying for it. Everything they do right now is a ripple effect in the community.

No, not really.  It was MS that started the 59.99 next-gen deal, they started the ripple effect.  Sony is following in that ripple effect.  But if you notice, the industry was heading back in that direction because the development costs have increased with this new technology.  Even w/o the release of the 360 we still would have seen this as PC development are already at that stage.  Stop blaming everything and anything on Sony.  I paid 59.99 for Doom 3 AND Warcraft 3.

QUOTE

In the article she said they dont get free hardware!

"Contrary to popular belief, editors of the Official PlayStation Magazine don't get free hardware for their own personal use"

Although I understand the company pays for them and employees use them for free. Just thought I should bring that up.

Ok now you can't read? NO fucking shit sherlock, you just repeated the same exact thing I said earlier.  Shows how much you know or care to read when you're on the opposing side of the argument no?

QUOTE

you guys want to know why you shouldn't take this comment seriously?.....................................Because they get to play one in their offices for free. Leaving thier hobby cash to be spent on Wii and Xbox 360 if they hadn't have already gotten a 360 that is.

So why oh why did you have to clarify to me exactly the same thing I said? Makes no goddamn sense.

[incognegro]

lol.....oh god, its gonna be a long day cause now ur bordering on irrational

QUOTE

Ok now I know you're just plain hating the PS3. Because this is the stupidest game politic comment I have ever heard in the history of industry hate. MS would not have dropped the console price for shit. Especially considering that this is their 1st real year of 360 operations and no console in the history of mankind had ever had such a quick price drop. All I hear is how Sony is affecting the industry while they haven't really DONE anything yet. Dude your comment was just plain idiotic and uninformed. Even you have to admit to that.

I think you thrive on taking my words out of context. Im quite sure. In case you haven't noticed I was not speaking about anything sony has done SPECIFICALLY as the reason for a ripple effect. why you chose the price of games as the target, i dont know. I think the word 'everything' would lead you to believe that im generalising but maybe you think and interpret things differently from normal ppl. By the way, MS did not start any $60 price tag, publishers did. MS themselves has NEVER charged $60 for a game unless its a limited edition package (although I hear GOW might break this trend). Sony has done NOTHING to help the situation, in fact they are making it worse. They said games on the ps3 would be AT THE LEAST $60 and most likely will be more. This is because of blu ray. Oh and the PS1 had the price advantage over the N64 (because of cartridges) thats in terms of software. $80 compared to $50 for a decent PS1 game. The PS1 didn't have better software, it just had more support from devs and it was more bang for your buck. I know the price was a huge deciding factor for me.

QUOTE

Ok now I know you're just plain hating the PS3. Because this is the stupidest game politic comment I have ever heard in the history of industry hate. MS would not have dropped the console price for shit. Especially considering that this is their 1st real year of 360 operations and no console in the history of mankind had ever had such a quick price drop. All I hear is how Sony is affecting the industry while they haven't really DONE anything yet. Dude your comment was just plain idiotic and uninformed. Even you have to admit to that.

lol...ok here we go. Why is that stupid sir? because no one has done it before? that doesn't make it anyless possible. Lets be honest, MS has more control over the price of the 360 than sony has for the ps3. They have already said that they are changing to smaller die sizes by the end of the year on the 360 to make it cheaper to manufacture. Now Peter moore has mentioned before that after seeing the ps3 price they have nothing to worry about and how they are more confident in the price of the 360 leading you to believe they were considering a price drop before (hence the price drop rumors around E3). Now this is all speculative but fuck it, im sticking by it! Its fact that if sony had a comeptitve price for the ps3 then MS would feel more pressure to drop the price and thats the point I was trying to make. Now its not even a thought in MS' mind cause theyre cocky now. They dont care about dropping the price cause they already cost half the ps3. get what im saying?


and also that statement about them not having done anything. Now that is a stupid comment. They have already anounced a high price that has got the community up in arms. thats the first thing they did. Telling ppl ALL games will be on blu ray so we are guaranteed to pay more than 360 gamers are paying now! thats the second...

Listen they already have the devs complaining (and their investers) about how fucked up it is. Everything they have done so far has negatively affected the industry so far. Name one decision the have made with the ps3 thats positively affected the industry on a whole?

That statement wasn't directed towards you. I did read and see what you said. If you read the start of my post you would see that I did read it, let me refresh your memory:

QUOTE

Whether she gets one for free cause of her job is irrelevant

That was in response of what you said.

[Kira Yamoto]

QUOTE

by the way i was commenting on the fact of how your saying the 360 has "no" keeper title.

since you quoted me, and never mentioned incog, then I assume you were talking to me, btw, I never said this.  that was incog.  

and yeah most likely the titles will not come out at launch, but it will in about a year just like 360, DS, and any other new console that comes out.  But heres the main point.  It WILL come out, and I know that its gonna be kickass, so as a consumer I wouldn't mind buying one on launch.

[Kira Yamoto]

QUOTE

The PS1 didn't have better software, it just had more support from devs and it was more bang for your buck. I know the price was a huge deciding factor for me.

Your argument fell off here.  From then on, everything you said before automatically goes to shit.

QUOTE

Its fact that if sony had a comeptitve price for the ps3 then MS would feel more pressure to drop the price and thats the point I was trying to make.

I got your point, and I think it's ludicrous that you even mentioned, and even think that there is actually some sense to your post.  This would be true, if it was an Xbox vs PS2 situation where both consoles were close to, or broke even, but in a 1st year scenario, youre full of it just for even thinking it.  Other informed gamers will tell you the same.

QUOTE

Now its not even a thought in MS' mind cause theyre cocky now. They dont care about dropping the price cause they already cost half the ps3. get what im saying?

It's bad business sense that in the 1st year of operations, to drop the price of a console which costed millions to billions to make, and still had to break even.  A company like MS may have bottomless pit for finances, but that doesnt mean they don't care.  Bill may be making moves like he did before w/ the Xbox, but its a different situation now.  MS and Sony are pratically on an even level, starting out fresh with their new consoles.  They're nowhere near breaking even.

Besides, a move like this is suicide for MS.  The console itself is still relatively new in technology, and would cost much more in the PC scene.

QUOTE

Listen they already have the devs complaining (and their investers) about how fucked up it is.

Who the fuck cares about what some oddball developer thinks (yes even the big name ones such as Hideo Kojima, but HK makes good points and he's a varied dev, so hes cool), as history as shown, the company is the one running the show, not the devs.  The company pays the developer, so who cares if the developer gets fucked with harder work.  That's why they're paying them in the 1st place, and handsomely I might add!!!  Seems to me that dev's just wanna bitch and complain because its not easy.

[lex_luther23]

QUOTE(Kira Yamoto @ Aug 14 2006, 06:10 PM)

Your argument fell off here.  From then on, everything you said before automatically goes to shit.
I got your point, and I think it's ludicrous that you even mentioned, and even think that there is actually some sense to your post.  This would be true, if it was an Xbox vs PS2 situation where both consoles were close to, or broke even, but in a 1st year scenario, youre full of it just for even thinking it.  Other informed gamers will tell you the same.
It's bad business sense that in the 1st year of operations, to drop the price of a console which costed millions to billions to make, and still had to break even.  A company like MS may have bottomless pit for finances, but that doesnt mean they don't care.  Bill may be making moves like he did before w/ the Xbox, but its a different situation now.  MS and Sony are pratically on an even level, starting out fresh with their new consoles.  They're nowhere near breaking even.

Besides, a move like this is suicide for MS.  The console itself is still relatively new in technology, and would cost much more in the PC scene.
Who the fuck cares about what some oddball developer thinks (yes even the big name ones such as Hideo Kojima, but HK makes good points and he's a varied dev, so hes cool), as history as shown, the company is the one running the show, not the devs.  The company pays the developer, so who cares if the developer gets fucked with harder work.  That's why they're paying them in the 1st place, and handsomely I might add!!!  Seems to me that dev's just wanna bitch and complain because its not easy.

Who care's? Well the developers do and thats why their jumping ship to go were some one values what they are saying and working with them to help them put their goals on a disk and call it a game. Thats sonys whole problem as it is all they are thinking about is sony and blueray and not thinking about the devs or the customer. Devs don't have to make playstation games as you read and see their is 360/wii/pc.

[Kira Yamoto]

QUOTE(lex_luther23 @ Aug 14 2006, 11:29 PM)

Who care's? Well the developers do and thats why their jumping ship to go were some one values what they are saying and working with them to help them put their goals on a disk and call it a game. Thats sonys whole problem as it is all they are thinking about is sony and blueray and not thinking about the devs or the customer. Devs don't have to make playstation games as you read and see their is 360/wii/pc.

you're acting if devs make decisions for companies.  devs still have mortages, bills to pay etc, so if they want a job they will do as they're told.  Like I said, unless official companies (such as Atari) make official statements that they're delaying development, or moving to another console, then the developer statement is bullshit.

You're mistaking development houses (Capcom, Konami, etc) as developers, the people who actually code the game.  The COMPANIES, (Capcom, Konami, etc) are running the show, NOT (Shinji Mikami, Hideo Kojima etc) who are developers.

If Capcom told them screw you, if you want a job you'll make PS3 games, then they will damn well make PS3 games or thier job will be in jeopardy.  In response to your comment earlier (about how devs don't have to make games) yes the fuck they do.  That was the job they were hired for.  If they don't want to, they're fired.  I have not heard a developer on any level get fired because of a console war.  That is stupid in and of itself.

[lex_luther23]

QUOTE(Kira Yamoto @ Aug 14 2006, 06:39 PM)

you're acting if devs make decisions for companies.  devs still have mortages, bills to pay etc, so if they want a job they will do as they're told.  Like I said, unless official companies (such as Atari) make official statements that they're delaying development, or moving to another console, then the developer statement is bullshit.

You're mistaking development houses (Capcom, Konami, etc) as developers, the people who actually code the game.  The COMPANIES, (Capcom, Konami, etc) are running the show, NOT (Shinji Mikami, Hideo Kojima etc) who are developers.

If Capcom told them screw you, if you want a job you'll make PS3 games, then they will damn well make PS3 games or thier job will be in jeopardy.  In response to your comment earlier (about how devs don't have to make games) yes the fuck they do.  That was the job they were hired for.  If they don't want to, they're fired.  I have not heard a developer on any level get fired because of a console war.  That is stupid in and of itself.

No talking to you Your pointless your one of those people who thinks their a know it all. We will see how the console does in november and so on.