Can Sony compete next gen?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="delta3074"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] I'm not saying Sony holds the console industry together I'm saying that M$ will rip apart the console industry if left virtually alone. It can be Sony, Sega, Panasonic, Samsung anyone but M$ can't be left to head the industry or it will be doomed IMO.kuraimeni fail to see what MS could actually do to ruin the industry, the insdustry is bigger than any one company and apart from charging for online MS has not done anything that Nintendo ,SONY or sega have not done before,it didn't ruin the industry then and it won't now. I guess I just don't trust M$ after what they've done by monopolizing the OS industry.
why is that? windows 7 is arguably the best OS ever made.
lol And yet everyone last gen had to buy at least 2 and perhaps 3 PS2's because it would stop reading disks. :o I think that may mean there were really only about 40 mil. PS2 gamers in all. :twisted: :P[QUOTE="rasengan2552"]
stupid question, Sony is about longevity and pleasing gamers WORLD WIDE, not just in the states. There are people in 3rd world countries that don't even know what an Xbox 360 is, but they sure as hell know what a PS3 is because they grew up on Sony consoles and even Nintendo consoles.
Microsoft had one good breakthrough gen, but even in MS's best gaming gen the RROD is a stain on the Xbox brand name that will never go away but lems like to sweep it under the rug lol.
SecretPolice
i had 4 PS2's due to this very problem, but hey, who's counting? no one cares that SONY screwed the pooch, only matters when MS does it. the big difference? when my original xbox red ringed, MS replaced it for free, whereas SONY wouldn't even consider replacing my PS2's.
ahh, you sony fanboys are too much.
[QUOTE="shadowkiller11"]Sony already has the crown in quality and Wii has the crown in sales, simple.K-76
Quality is subjective, Sales is simplistic. I think the consoles which had the biggest impact in gaming is the Wii for motion control and Xbox 360 for online gaming and the eco-system it brought with it. Sadly there is nothing Sony brought to the table this gen, blu-ray perhaps but it hasn't really changed the face of gaming.
......dreamcast was first console with online gaming so in all reality 360 didn't do anything new.If you believed MS could compete this gen in 2003 people would've laughed at you. Yes Sony can compete. They mess up one generation and their brand isn't ruined. Hell MS released a console only 4 years after its previous one and did very well. Next generation is anyone's game. I doubt it will be Nintendo's I really do, but it could go to any of the big 3.
[QUOTE="K-76"]
[QUOTE="shadowkiller11"]Sony already has the crown in quality and Wii has the crown in sales, simple.ristactionjakso
Quality is subjective, Sales is simplistic. I think the consoles which had the biggest impact in gaming is the Wii for motion control and Xbox 360 for online gaming and the eco-system it brought with it. Sadly there is nothing Sony brought to the table this gen, blu-ray perhaps but it hasn't really changed the face of gaming.
......dreamcast was first console with online gaming so in all reality 360 didn't do anything new. no but MS really got the ball rolling. pre live neither sony nor ninty really took online gaming seriusly. ninty still dont but sony have certainly pulled the finger out to compete with live. the nes had satellite online system in japan...but that didnt exactly get momentum. on topic....there making all the right noises. there buying and building a formidable firsty party so they can hit next gen with many exclsuives. they have mentioned there not going to spend stupd money on R&D this time so the hardware shouldnt be as completly bonkers. actual game developers will have a say in its design far earlier in the process (in contrast to the PS3 where another division just plonked a PS3 down at SCE and said "thats a PS3..make games for that"). its still going to be a media center with a boatload of extra features (this is sony were talking about here...dedicated hardware is a dirty phrase there). if they release a sensibly priced console that doesnt incurr huge losses to their bank accounts then thatll be a good start. the most important thing next gen hardware wise is that its easy to make games on multiple platforms...so they need to have easy to multiplat hardware. it doesnt have to be the most powerful. as we have seen this gen power doesnt mean beep to the market as a whole. then they need to bang out the big guns like uncharted to get momentus going. the one thing working against sony at the mo is they have still failed to land a mass appeal hit. there making some great games but there not generating the buzz of halo, gears or wii sports (not a typo) in the wider market. but can they compete? oh yeah absolutely. they just need to stop making really stupid mistakes.[QUOTE="ianuilliam"]... I can trade any of my games in that I want, and still play online. Well, obviously I can't play online on the game I traded in anymore, since I don't have it, but that's to be expected. I guess what you mean is not being able to play games online that you buy used... which isn't the case either. I just have to pay a seperate fee to play the games online, but if I buy it new, I get a coupon to get it free. Hell, MS charges you to play online whether you buy the game used OR new. im talking bout something totally different then what your rambling on about . You're talking about the Playpass on used Sony games, right? Or the same kind of passes that EA, Ubi, and pretty much all the other big publishers are adopting, where games come with a one-use code to activate multiplayer, and if you buy the game used you have to pay for a new code, or the multiplayer (or other features) are unavailable. If you aren't talking about that, then please try to explain what you ARE talking about... I really can't be sure, from this "im talkin about the new rules where u will not be able to play online if u trade your game in only 1 consol per lock." (I'm assuming English isn't your native language.)[QUOTE="Allthishate"] im talkin about the new rules where u will not be able to play online if u trade your game in only 1 consol per lock .Allthishate
If you ARE talking about the playpass, then like I said, it basically is just all these publishers deciding to charge a one-time fee for online per game, but then waive the fee if you bought it new. I don't see what the problem is. If youfind the game used for $10 or more less than new, buy it used and buy the pass. If the used was only going to save you like 5 bucks, just buy the game new so the people that made it get paid, rather than GameStop.
Its certainly not any worse than MS charging $60 a year for Live, especially if you're one of the millions that only buys a handful of online games per year... If you play less than 6 different online games a year, Live Gold costs more per game than the playpass, which, again, you don't even need if you spend a few more dollars and buy the game new anyway, or if you don't play online mp.
ps vita has shown me that sony has learned coltgames
Not really, there still doing the samething they did with PS3 and PSP, putting in the most expensive hardware and then selling it at a loss.
im talking bout something totally different then what your rambling on about . You're talking about the Playpass on used Sony games, right? Or the same kind of passes that EA, Ubi, and pretty much all the other big publishers are adopting, where games come with a one-use code to activate multiplayer, and if you buy the game used you have to pay for a new code, or the multiplayer (or other features) are unavailable. If you aren't talking about that, then please try to explain what you ARE talking about... I really can't be sure, from this "im talkin about the new rules where u will not be able to play online if u trade your game in only 1 consol per lock." (I'm assuming English isn't your native language.)[QUOTE="Allthishate"][QUOTE="ianuilliam"]... I can trade any of my games in that I want, and still play online. Well, obviously I can't play online on the game I traded in anymore, since I don't have it, but that's to be expected. I guess what you mean is not being able to play games online that you buy used... which isn't the case either. I just have to pay a seperate fee to play the games online, but if I buy it new, I get a coupon to get it free. Hell, MS charges you to play online whether you buy the game used OR new.
ianuilliam
If you ARE talking about the playpass, then like I said, it basically is just all these publishers deciding to charge a one-time fee for online per game, but then waive the fee if you bought it new. I don't see what the problem is. If youfind the game used for $10 or more less than new, buy it used and buy the pass. If the used was only going to save you like 5 bucks, just buy the game new so the people that made it get paid, rather than GameStop.
Its certainly not any worse than MS charging $60 a year for Live, especially if you're one of the millions that only buys a handful of online games per year... If you play less than 6 different online games a year, Live Gold costs more per game than the playpass, which, again, you don't even need if you spend a few more dollars and buy the game new anyway, or if you don't play online mp.
ugh plz for the love of !@$52 god stop typing walls of text. but ya i can agree with what your saying . both are @#@% but the reason i brought it up was kuriman clamming MS is the only evil corporation around . and i find that wrong cuz both Sony and MS are equally bad or any organization in general.
[QUOTE="coltgames"]ps vita has shown me that sony has learned Vickman178
Not really, there still doing the samething they did with PS3 and PSP, putting in the most expensive hardware and then selling it at a loss.
Actually Sony said they would be making money from day one with Vita.I think Sony can compete next gen and I for one will purchase both Nintendo and Sony systems next gen.
Sure they'll compete, to what extent? Only time will tell.
Huh..I was fairly sure they weren't....still we haven't seen anything about PS4 and Xbox 3 so its hard to say who will come out on top just yet...
Just like people though Xbox couldn't "compete" this gen look what happened. Its not really a big deal anyways
If Sony can come back amd make a profit from their horrible start and now are even pulling close to overtaking 360 sales this gen... then surely they can compete next gen.
[QUOTE="delta3074"][QUOTE="kuraimen"]If Sony stops competing next gen say goodbye to console gaming. I cringe on imagining another industry lead by M$.kuraimenwhy? SONY didn't invent console gaming and it was already popular before the ps1with the snes and megadrive, SONY didn't join the console harware busines until the 5th generation of gaming machines, they have only been in the game for 3 generations, console gaming did fine before SONY and it will be FINE after it, to say a single compnay single company holds the console industry together is just plain silly, if that was the case it certainly wouldn't be SONY holding it together it would be nintendo who have been around since the 2nd generation of gaming machines. I'm not saying Sony holds the console industry together I'm saying that M$ will rip apart the console industry if left virtually alone. It can be Sony, Sega, Panasonic, Samsung anyone but M$ can't be left to head the industry or it will be doomed IMO. He fail to mention that non has been as big as the PS1 and PS2,he fail to mention that the Snes and genesis combined did not sold what the PS1 did,he fail to mention that sony lower the price of games from $70 to $50,the they redesign their controller to give 2 analogues and rumble build in,when on Nintendo you had to buy a separate adapter. If sony would have not get in MS would not be here now,denying that is a joke even better we would still be paying now $70 or $80 per game,because Nintendo would have never learn their lesson,and in a showdown between the N64 and Saturn and the DC vs the GC,i am sure Nintendo would have win both,and we would be stock right now. Some people deny that they hate sony,but show it when they actually say gaming would be the same without them.
[QUOTE="ianuilliam"]You're talking about the Playpass on used Sony games, right? Or the same kind of passes that EA, Ubi, and pretty much all the other big publishers are adopting, where games come with a one-use code to activate multiplayer, and if you buy the game used you have to pay for a new code, or the multiplayer (or other features) are unavailable. If you aren't talking about that, then please try to explain what you ARE talking about... I really can't be sure, from this "im talkin about the new rules where u will not be able to play online if u trade your game in only 1 consol per lock." (I'm assuming English isn't your native language.)[QUOTE="Allthishate"] im talking bout something totally different then what your rambling on about . Allthishate
If you ARE talking about the playpass, then like I said, it basically is just all these publishers deciding to charge a one-time fee for online per game, but then waive the fee if you bought it new. I don't see what the problem is. If youfind the game used for $10 or more less than new, buy it used and buy the pass. If the used was only going to save you like 5 bucks, just buy the game new so the people that made it get paid, rather than GameStop.
Its certainly not any worse than MS charging $60 a year for Live, especially if you're one of the millions that only buys a handful of online games per year... If you play less than 6 different online games a year, Live Gold costs more per game than the playpass, which, again, you don't even need if you spend a few more dollars and buy the game new anyway, or if you don't play online mp.
ugh plz for the love of !@$52 god stop typing walls of text. but ya i can agree with what your saying . both are @#@% but the reason i brought it up was kuriman clamming MS is the only evil corporation around . and i find that wrong cuz both Sony and MS are equally bad or any organization in general.Since when is 3 paragraphs (short ones at that) broken up with punctuation a wall of text? Last I checked a wall of text was when someone made one giant block of run-ons with no paragraph breaks or punctuation.Since when is 3 paragraphs (short ones at that) broken up with punctuation a wall of text? Last I checked a wall of text was when someone made one giant block of run-ons with no paragraph breaks or punctuation.ianuilliamDon't pay any attention to this dude,all he does is attack people personally when confront with good points.
Of course. I'm sure they learned from mistake and the PS4 will have even better success than the PS3.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment