This topic is locked from further discussion.
With a price point where the PS3 started, it had to cater to only hardcore.
As the price drops to more "casual friendly" levels, I expect more broadening of software on the PS3.
With a price point where the PS3 started, it had to cater to only hardcore.
As the price drops to more "casual friendly" levels, I expect more broadening of software on the PS3.
SpruceCaboose
/thread
Thx for stopping the imminent fanboy ravings that were to come to this thread had you not posted that.
With a price point where the PS3 started, it had to cater to only hardcore.
As the price drops to more "casual friendly" levels, I expect more broadening of software on the PS3.
SpruceCaboose
I agree. We'll have to wait and see what they have prepared for us at E3, in orther to make some kind of claim. After all, this gen won't last forever.
However TC, since your question is tied with its predecessors... I'll only say that I highly doubt the PS3 will be able to surpass what the brand has achieved in prior gens. I think that is pretty much a fair point... unless some kind of miracle happens that completely owns the expectations of many gamers out there.
You can't play lower prices! and the speculation that lower price will equal more games is just that SPECULATION a.k.a Opinion! Sony has done a miserable job with the PS3 and destroyed most of the groundwork created by the PS2.Khansoul
So is saying it would have no impact at all.
But thank you for saving the day by clarifying that my predictions for the future are speculation. I am sure that no one here knew that.
The PS1 and PS2 did what no other console did by selling more than any other console(s) and yet having arguably the best library ever in gaming history. They had games from Casual to Hardcore, from Barbie Horse Adventures to Metal Gear Solid. The best for casuals and the hardcore.
The PS3 seems to however only cater for the hardcore, what do you think of this? Is it a good thing? or was it just as stupid as people voting for George W. Bush?
UnrealSin_X
The PS3 launched at a price that the casual majority isn't going to pay. Therefore, the audience for the console is smaller and growing slower than in the past.
Meanwhile, game dev costs have shot up meaning publishers are less willing to support innovative, new titles that aren't shooters or clones of other games. Those other games are deemed "casual" and then not supported because there isn't enough of a market to support the higher dev costs.
The PS1 and PS2 did what no other console did by selling more than any other console(s) and yet having arguably the best library ever in gaming history. They had games from Casual to Hardcore, from Barbie Horse Adventures to Metal Gear Solid. The best for casuals and the hardcore.
The PS3 seems to however only cater for the hardcore, what do you think of this? Is it a good thing? or was it just as stupid as people voting for George W. Bush?
UnrealSin_X
I think they lost touch of why people bought the others in the first place....I mean a year after the PS2 came out you could walk into the poorest neighborhoods and find like a dozen of them...You had people buy them because of the DVD player and the fact it was cheap.
Then they come out with the PS3 and it's exactly the opposite, only a handfull of people have them, alot of people who want one won't as easily put aside the money for it like they did for the PS2. Also fewer would be willing to get one just for the blu-ray(like they were for DVD on the PS2) just because in alot of cases it's only useful to them if they spend about a grand on an HDTV.
Then they come out with the PS3 and it's exactly the opposite, only a handfull of people have them, alot of people who want one won't as easily put aside the money for it like they did for the PS2. Also fewer would be willing to get one just for the blu-ray(like they were for DVD on the PS2) just because in alot of cases it's only useful to them if they spend about a grand on an HDTV.
Ilikemyname420
Yeah in the end some of the problems the PS3 is facing with only the consumer in mind, may be because of the blu-ray. The HD step with the HD format. They probably realised that unlike other formats before it, this one would have to be accompanied with lots of power and a huge price tag coupled with the supposed HD console wave in orther for the format to succeed. In the end, the whole thing is very cost worthy to the consumer in any front... and yes, I'm not saying that this is a fact, just good ol' speculation.
Did the situation favor Sony in the end though? I'd say that it did. Then again, that's not the point of the thread.
The PS3 has definitely begun to show some life recently, what with Metal Gear Solid 4 as a new killer app that will certainly move some systems. Also, we've got Resistance 2 and Gran Turismo 5 coming up, and if Home doesn't turn out to be vaporware, that can only help as well.
Right now, the Blu-ray is only a way to watch more expensive movies, and it isn't particularly appealing to the average consumer. But in a few years, it could be an ace up the PS3's sleeve, as the technology becomes more widespread and available.
It certainly will be interesting to watch how this all plays out.
I think Sony is still the same, arrogant. It's just the consumers have changed, they became more wiser and a hand full of them have realized that the PS3 is not worth that kind of money for a video gaming console. I think before consumers didn't really know what they were getting into, but now people are doing their research and realized there's better consoles out there that's cheaper and have more and better games than the this blu ray player called the PS3.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment