Sony Reveals No 1 Reason To Buy A PS3

Sony Computer Entertainment America president Jack Tretton said the number one reason to own a PS3 (PlayStation 3) is because the console is "future proof".

"The original PlayStation lasted 10 years - a tremendous innovation when other platforms died and were all but forgotten," Tretton told PC Advisor's US-based sister title, GamePro. "The same thing is going on with the PS2, and I think that will be the case with the PS3."

He went on to say, "I don't think we expected nor we need to capture the lifecycle of the PS3 in the first nine months. We want to build evangelists, one consumer at a time, and it involves sacrificing in the short term before paying off in the long term."

Regarding the fact that some PS3 games often release weeks after their Xbox 360 counterparts, Tretton said, "We're taking all our development findings and investments and passing them on to the third-party development community.

"We are physically going to studios and working with them hand-in-hand. You will start to see that bear fruit in the near future."

Source

-Renegade

So even Sony and not just their fanboys are ramping up the "yeah..it sucks now but just you wait" arguement.

Who cares if the 360 is dead in 3 years? There will be a replacement for it that will be better than the PS3 and it will include which ever HD format actually wins the format wars...not the one that Sony just wanted to push down our throats.

This is the main reason why I didn't think $600 was ridiculous. When the 360 is dead in 3 years, my investment will last much longer. just as my PS2 has nowlegendbyname

Seriously, I have to question the intelligence of people who put down hundreds of bucks for a system with no stand out games because they think the future will be better. I guess they're all fortune tellers. And then to predict the 360 will be dead in 3 years is just plain stupid. Look at it's current line up. Look at the quality of games being released. Cow logic is sad.

[QUOTE="Snugenz"]

I want something tangible Jack, i cant play single player "future proof" nor can i play this "future proof" online with my friends.

Seriously only fanboys would see "future proof" as a good thing in the absence of actually software:roll:

bad82man82

Do you seriously think we don't have games to play? if you do, you fail also.

Oh we did have games to play, i loved NGS, R:FoM and VF5 to a lesser extent, but come on, its not even nearly enough, unfortunately my PS3 has been collecting dust since a month after i bought, purely because there's no games that interest me on it that i havnt already played and finished, i did consider getting HS, but 75 bucks for a 6 hour game is a waste, when i'm on a limited budget for how many games i can buy during the holiday months. And i'd honestly prefer to keep that money for the big hitters this year, which the PS3 has very few of.

Oh but not to worry, its future proof !!!, for who, the person who buys my console second hand because i get so bored of not having good games for it ???

[QUOTE="legendbyname"]This is the main reason why I didn't think $600 was ridiculous. When the 360 is dead in 3 years, my investment will last much longer. just as my PS2 has nowTrashface

Seriously, I have to question the intelligence of people who put down hundreds of bucks for a system with no stand out games because they think the future will be better. I guess they're all fortune tellers. And then to predict the 360 will be dead in 3 years is just plain stupid. Look at it's current line up. Look at the quality of games being released. Cow logic is sad.

I agree. What is the point of buying a PS3 now? If indeed it has some great games in a year or two then I'll think about it...when the price is lower and the HDD is probably bigger. Owning one now makes no sense.

[QUOTE="XL83"][QUOTE="kcpp2b"][QUOTE="XL83"]

Are you really going to wait 2 years to see the outcome of this bet?

kcpp2b

Who says anyone has to wait? What you think we're gonna stop the entire SW Bets just to look at his bet and gaze like a little school girl? :P

The thread will go on, with or without me. And one day his bet will come to pass. Simple

Let me rephrase. Will anyone care in 2 years? Might as well start a Duke Nukem Forever hype thread.

Care about the Bet thread or his bet? And yes to both anyway. Not gonna bother explaining why yes to the bet thread but for the bet..... he's betting the 360 will die. Whether he wins or loses someone is gonna be getting owned and someone will gloating and laughing. That's how bets work. You probably don't the point in the bet thread at all which is why you think it's pointless... Whatever

No, no, I'm pretty sure my meager brain can understand the concept of a bet, I'm pretty sure that isn't the problem.

I just don't see how you're going to be like "YEAH SON TWO YEARS IS UP NOW WE CAN LAUGH AT THAT GUY WHO THOUGHT THE 360 WOULD DIE! WOO!" I've been waiting 24 months just to say "Haha you were wrong!"

Any bet that takes longer than like, a month to see the results of, is a waste of a bet.

Sony Computer Entertainment America president Jack Tretton said the number one reason to own a PS3 (PlayStation 3) is because the console is "future proof".

"The original PlayStation lasted 10 years - a tremendous innovation when other platforms died and were all but forgotten," Tretton told PC Advisor's US-based sister title, GamePro. "The same thing is going on with the PS2, and I think that will be the case with the PS3."

He went on to say, "I don't think we expected nor we need to capture the lifecycle of the PS3 in the first nine months. We want to build evangelists, one consumer at a time, and it involves sacrificing in the short term before paying off in the long term."

Regarding the fact that some PS3 games often release weeks after their Xbox 360 counterparts, Tretton said, "We're taking all our development findings and investments and passing them on to the third-party development community.

"We are physically going to studios and working with them hand-in-hand. You will start to see that bear fruit in the near future."

Source

-Renegade

I think they make an honest and legitimate point. However, the PS3 is reaching its first birthday. How long is the "short term" going to last? I'm sure they are fighting hard to make things better and easier for devs. But if the PS3 doesn't really start cranking it up in its second year, people won't care about the long term.

[QUOTE="-Renegade"]

i have to ask have you played heavenly sword? do you want to know what i find funny? how a game like heavenly sword does something new and gets rated so low by major gaming sites then you have games like halo 3which offer minor upgrades and does nothing newbut yet it is one of the most praised games this year.then fanyboys like your self use these reviews to try and own others like myself without even experiencing the game for yourself. play heavenly sword then get back to me.

kcpp2b

I have to ask you...have you played Halo 3?

This is the main reason why I didn't think $600 was ridiculous. When the 360 is dead in 3 years, my investment will last much longer. just as my PS2 has nowlegendbyname

That is to say most peoples' 3rd or 4th 360 is dead AGAIN in 3 years

The original PlayStation lasted 10 years

I stopped reading right there. You know why? Because thats isn't true, so the rest can't be true. How can I trust something, when the first thing said is a lie? I can't, so I won't. 10 years my ass. That would mean it lasted until two years ago. :lol::lol::lol::lol:

[QUOTE="bad82man82"][QUOTE="Snugenz"]

I want something tangible Jack, i cant play single player "future proof" nor can i play this "future proof" online with my friends.

Seriously only fanboys would see "future proof" as a good thing in the absence of actually software:roll:

Snugenz

Do you seriously think we don't have games to play? if you do, you fail also.

Oh we did have games to play, i loved NGS, R:FoM and VF5 to a lesser extent, but come on, its not even nearly enough, unfortunately my PS3 has been collecting dust since a month after i bought, purely because there's no games that interest me on it that i havnt already played and finished, i did consider getting HS, but 75 bucks for a 6 hour game is a waste, when i'm on a limited budget for how many games i can buy during the holiday months. And i'd honestly prefer to keep that money for the big hitters this year, which the PS3 has very few of.

Oh but not to worry, its future proof !!!, for who, the person who buys my console second hand because i get so bored of not having good games for it ???

I didn't say a word about the Future proof bull, I meant you can enjoy your PS3 now, it has games NOW, if you don't like WarHawk, you have HS, I recommand you to try this great game, if you are not buying it, then rent it, it is one of the best games on PS3 so far, as for other games, I have 10 games and Im still playing 6 of them, HS, R6V, NBA 2K7, Madden 08, Warhawk and RE:FOM.

BTW, games will keep coming and the biggest hits for both consoles will start from next month, don't worry, we are not the only guys waiting for more games, they got their beloved Halo 3 after three years of waiting.

BTW, I have both consoles and I also waited so long after GeOW, I didn't turn on my 360 until Bioshock came.

I have a question for lemmings, after Mass Effect comes out, what do you have after that?

I think you will say "Just wait".

This is the main reason why I didn't think $600 was ridiculous. When the 360 is dead in 3 years, my investment will last much longer. just as my PS2 has nowlegendbyname

[QUOTE="legendbyname"]This is the main reason why I didn't think $600 was ridiculous. When the 360 is dead in 3 years, my investment will last much longer. just as my PS2 has nowl-_-l

10 years cycle doesn't mean there will not be new PS, but someguys here misunderstood the article.

[QUOTE="kcpp2b"][QUOTE="-Renegade"][QUOTE="legendbyname"]

[QUOTE="kcpp2b"]Number one reason for any console or system should be games. End of story.-Renegade

Exactly. Games for 10 years? or Games for 5 years?

Its all about games.. why else would it last 10 years?

agreed. this was the whole point of his statement oh and 360 will be dead in 2 years.

Why don't you make a bet on it?

no point if i'd loose i would just make another account and you wouldn't know it was me.

[QUOTE="-Renegade"][QUOTE="kcpp2b"][QUOTE="-Renegade"][QUOTE="legendbyname"]

Exactly. Games for 10 years? or Games for 5 years?

Its all about games.. why else would it last 10 years?

BreakingPoint8

agreed. this was the whole point of his statement oh and 360 will be dead in 2 years.

Why don't you make a bet on it?

no point if i'd loose i would just make another account and you wouldn't know it was me.

By the end of the PS3's first year it wil get Resistance, , Heavenly sword, Uncharted, Warhawk and Blu ray movies. All exclusive games that you can't play anywhere else. Also the best console version of UT3. It's not as good as the PS2, but next year will be different.RedMarzBoy

"We're taking all our development findings and investments and passing them on to the third-party development community.-Sony

Translation:

It's really hard to program our machine. We are finding how hard it is ourselves, so when we learn something new, we pass that information to the third-party development community with the hope that they stop producing some of the biggest flops in video game history.

"We are physically going to studios and working with them hand-in-hand. You will start to see that bear fruit in the near future."-Sony

Translation:

Keep waiting, loyal fans. Keep waiting. Hey, you've waited this long, what's another year or two in the scheme of things? In the mean time, please feel free to enjoy our $30 blu-ray movies.

[QUOTE="Yellow_Rose"][QUOTE="-Renegade"][QUOTE="kcpp2b"]

Why don't you make a bet on it?

-Renegade

no point if i'd loose i would just make another account and you wouldn't know it was me.

We can insist the mods ban you IP. ;)

you can easily get around ip ban.

What about an ISP ban? Can't get around that can you? ;)

The PS1 lasted 10 years? It came out in 95. In 2005, the system was still alive and strong? Trashface

Sony was still making PS1 consoles and selling them. Some games were still coming out. So yes, still alive.

The PS2 will be 7 years old this october (in NA). It is still outselling most of thecurrent-gen consoles and getting a ton of games. At this rate, the PS2 will still be produced for another 3 years.

I don't see why so many lemmings refuse to accept this 10 year idea. I guess MS kills a console, flat-out, after only four years and suddenly history is rewriten and no console EVER can last more than 4 years.

umm..you realize PS3 will be obsolete in 3 years.

This is the main reason why I didn't think $600 was ridiculous. When the 360 is dead in 3 years, my investment will last much longer. just as my PS2 has nowlegendbyname

[QUOTE="-Sony"]

"We're taking all our development findings and investments and passing them on to the third-party development community.Pimpshigity21

Translation:

It's really hard to program our machine. We are finding how hard it is ourselves, so when we learn something new, we pass that information to the third-party development community with the hope that they stop producing some of the biggest flops in video game history.

"We are physically going to studios and working with them hand-in-hand. You will start to see that bear fruit in the near future."-Sony

Translation:

Keep waiting, loyal fans. Keep waiting. Hey, you've waited this long, what's another year or two in the scheme of things? In the mean time, please feel free to enjoy our $30 blu-ray movies.

1) A developer can know how to 100% utilize hardware to peak efficiency and still make a flop. Your logic is very flawed here.

2) The second point applies just as much to the millions and millions of PS2 fans who clearly haven't jumped to a new console yet. It isn't just for the few million who have a PS3 right now.

[QUOTE="l-_-l"][QUOTE="legendbyname"]This is the main reason why I didn't think $600 was ridiculous. When the 360 is dead in 3 years, my investment will last much longer. just as my PS2 has nowbad82man82

10 years cycle doesn't mean there will not be new PS, but someguys here misunderstood the article.

[QUOTE="Trashface"]The PS1 lasted 10 years? It came out in 95. In 2005, the system was still alive and strong? ZIMdoom

Sony was still making PS1 consoles and selling them. Some games were still coming out. So yes, still alive.

The PS2 will be 7 years old this october (in NA). It is still outselling most of thecurrent-gen consoles and getting a ton of games. At this rate, the PS2 will still be produced for another 3 years.

I don't see why so many lemmings refuse to accept this 10 year idea. I guess MS kills a console, flat-out, after only four years and suddenly history is rewriten and no console EVER can last more than 4 years.

Some people like the leatest and greatest. Others are happy with outdated technology.

I've seen people on the road driving a VW Rabbits...but hey, if they are enjoy the car, more power to them.

umm..you realize PS3 will be obsolete in 3 years.

Bdking57

Whats your point?

[QUOTE="Pimpshigity21"][QUOTE="-Sony"]

"We're taking all our development findings and investments and passing them on to the third-party development community.ZIMdoom

Translation:

It's really hard to program our machine. We are finding how hard it is ourselves, so when we learn something new, we pass that information to the third-party development community with the hope that they stop producing some of the biggest flops in video game history.

"We are physically going to studios and working with them hand-in-hand. You will start to see that bear fruit in the near future."-Sony

Translation:

Keep waiting, loyal fans. Keep waiting. Hey, you've waited this long, what's another year or two in the scheme of things? In the mean time, please feel free to enjoy our $30 blu-ray movies.

1) A developer can know how to 100% utilize hardware to peak efficiency and still make a flop. Your logic is very flawed here.

2) The second point applies just as much to the millions and millions of PS2 fans who clearly haven't jumped to a new console yet. It isn't just for the few million who have a PS3 right now.

There's no law that says if you bought a PS2, then you gotta buy a PS3.

So basically most of you think PS2 games suck now because they aren't on par graphically?

talk about shallow

I bought a ps3 because of my previous experience with the ps1 and ps2 both consoles lasted a long time with support even when the new console came out. Unlike the other guys that kill off their old consoles to force you to upgrade sony lets you enjoy your old product. The ps2 is still going strong and the ps3 has backward compatibility so I can still play all my old games if I want or buy ps2 new games.

The ps3 is also a cheap HTPC that does alot more than play games so the price was well worth it imo.

who pays for the future?PSP107

Just wait and find out. Betamax II, Sony at it again!

1) A developer can know how to 100% utilize hardware to peak efficiency and still make a flop. Your logic is very flawed here.ZIMdoom

Imagine how hard it is to make a good game when you are unable to 100% utilize the hardware to peak efficiency. The only thing that is flawed here is the design of the PS3 (and the programming tools that Sony released, of course).

2) The second point applies just as much to the millions and millions of PS2 fans who clearly haven't jumped to a new console yet. It isn't just for the few million who have a PS3 right now.

ZIMdoom

From what I've been reading, millions of PS2 fans have already jumped to a new console - most of them chose the Wii or the 360. The PS3 sales figures are misleading since quite a few of the consoles were sold to home theater enthusiasts. I estimate that at least half of the units were purchased as Blu-ray players, which would explaing the aweful software attach rate of the PS3.

Most of the PS2 owers that have not made a next-gen purchase yet are not fanboys, so they will chose the machine that appeals to them based on price, games and features. So far the PS3 does not have the best price, it does not offer the best games and the features it offers seem to appeal to the A/V enthusiast more than they do to the hard core gamer.

Face it, the PS3 is in real trouble right now.

I bought a ps3 because of my previous experience with the ps1 and ps2 both consoles lasted a long time with support even when the new console came out. Unlike the other guys that kill off their old consoles to force you to upgrade sony lets you enjoy your old product. The ps2 is still going strong and the ps3 has backward compatibility so I can still play all my old games if I want or buy ps2 new games.

The ps3 is also a cheap HTPC that does alot more than play games so the price was well worth it imo.

BrooklynBomber

Hey bomber where'd you get the vid of the chicken **** coward hitting the guy from behind?

who pays for the future?PSP107

[QUOTE="Trashface"]The PS1 lasted 10 years? It came out in 95. In 2005, the system was still alive and strong? ZIMdoom

Sony was still making PS1 consoles and selling them. Some games were still coming out. So yes, still alive.

The PS2 will be 7 years old this october (in NA). It is still outselling most of thecurrent-gen consoles and getting a ton of games. At this rate, the PS2 will still be produced for another 3 years.

I don't see why so many lemmings refuse to accept this 10 year idea. I guess MS kills a console, flat-out, after only four years and suddenly history is rewriten and no console EVER can last more than 4 years.

Number one reason for any console or system should be games. End of story.kcpp2b

agree

Sony Computer Entertainment America president Jack Tretton said the number one reason to own a PS3 (PlayStation 3) is because the console is "future proof".

"The original PlayStation lasted 10 years - a tremendous innovation when other platforms died and were all but forgotten," Tretton told PC Advisor's US-based sister title, GamePro. "The same thing is going on with the PS2, and I think that will be the case with the PS3."

He went on to say, "I don't think we expected nor we need to capture the lifecycle of the PS3 in the first nine months. We want to build evangelists, one consumer at a time, and it involvessacrificing in the short term before paying off in the long term."

Regarding the fact that some PS3 games often release weeks after their Xbox 360 counterparts, Tretton said, "We're taking all our development findings and investments and passing them on to the third-party development community.

"We are physically going to studios and working with them hand-in-hand. You will start to see that bear fruit in the near future."

Source

-Renegade

i dont know sounds an awfull lot like the Gamecube in my mind

[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

[QUOTE="Trashface"]The PS1 lasted 10 years? It came out in 95. In 2005, the system was still alive and strong? yoshi-lnex

Sony was still making PS1 consoles and selling them. Some games were still coming out. So yes, still alive.

The PS2 will be 7 years old this october (in NA). It is still outselling most of thecurrent-gen consoles and getting a ton of games. At this rate, the PS2 will still be produced for another 3 years.

I don't see why so many lemmings refuse to accept this 10 year idea. I guess MS kills a console, flat-out, after only four years and suddenly history is rewriten and no console EVER can last more than 4 years.

I don't care what the reason is. It's irrelevant. I was answering the claim that PS1 didn't last 10 years.

[QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

[QUOTE="Trashface"]The PS1 lasted 10 years? It came out in 95. In 2005, the system was still alive and strong? ZIMdoom

Sony was still making PS1 consoles and selling them. Some games were still coming out. So yes, still alive.

The PS2 will be 7 years old this october (in NA). It is still outselling most of thecurrent-gen consoles and getting a ton of games. At this rate, the PS2 will still be produced for another 3 years.

I don't see why so many lemmings refuse to accept this 10 year idea. I guess MS kills a console, flat-out, after only four years and suddenly history is rewriten and no console EVER can last more than 4 years.

I don't care what the reason is. It's irrelevant. I was answering the claim that PS1 didn't last 10 years.

[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

1) A developer can know how to 100% utilize hardware to peak efficiency and still make a flop. Your logic is very flawed here.Pimpshigity21

Imagine how hard it is to make a good game when you are unable to 100% utilize the hardware to peak efficiency. The only thing that is flawed here is the design of the PS3 (and the programming tools that Sony released, of course).

2) The second point applies just as much to the millions and millions of PS2 fans who clearly haven't jumped to a new console yet. It isn't just for the few million who have a PS3 right now.

ZIMdoom

Developers can make a good game without fully utilizing hardware. It is the whole gameplay vs graphics debate. Just like how a developer can utilize all the power and make a crappy game. The claim was implying that hardware utiliziation = automatically great games. That is wrong.

There is no indication that all those PS2 fans (ie. casuals) have jumped into next gen yet. While I see your point, I think the large number of PS2 sales every month, combined with slow 360 and even slower PS3 sales, shows that the vast majority of gamers are waiting for something. My point is that Sony was talking to everyone waiting...not just PS3 owners waiting for games but also people waiting to see if the PS3 is worth it.

[QUOTE="Trashface"]The PS1 lasted 10 years? It came out in 95. In 2005, the system was still alive and strong? ZIMdoom

Sony was still making PS1 consoles and selling them. Some games were still coming out. So yes, still alive.

The PS2 will be 7 years old this october (in NA). It is still outselling most of thecurrent-gen consoles and getting a ton of games. At this rate, the PS2 will still be produced for another 3 years.

I don't see why so many lemmings refuse to accept this 10 year idea. I guess MS kills a console, flat-out, after only four years and suddenly history is rewriten and no console EVER can last more than 4 years.

Did I once state that it didn't last 10 years? I asked questions. I guess in it's later years, the ps1 was like a terminally ill patient, feeble and alone..but yeah technically that's still being alive.

[QUOTE="legendbyname"]

[QUOTE="kcpp2b"]Number one reason for any console or system should be games. End of story.-Renegade

Exactly. Games for 10 years? or Games for 5 years?

Its all about games.. why else would it last 10 years?

agreed. this was the whole point of his statement oh and 360 will be dead in 2 years.

Yeah? I am sure you have some internal MS memo or something backing up that ludicrous statement....

[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"][QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

[QUOTE="Trashface"]The PS1 lasted 10 years? It came out in 95. In 2005, the system was still alive and strong? yoshi-lnex

Sony was still making PS1 consoles and selling them. Some games were still coming out. So yes, still alive.

The PS2 will be 7 years old this october (in NA). It is still outselling most of thecurrent-gen consoles and getting a ton of games. At this rate, the PS2 will still be produced for another 3 years.

I don't see why so many lemmings refuse to accept this 10 year idea. I guess MS kills a console, flat-out, after only four years and suddenly history is rewriten and no console EVER can last more than 4 years.

I don't care what the reason is. It's irrelevant. I was answering the claim that PS1 didn't last 10 years.

Here is your logic explained via analogy:

Joe: The world is round? That's news to me!

Me: Of course the world is round, we've seen photos from space! Laws of physics detail how a planet is created. It's why we have a horizon.

You: Dude...nobody has been to the moon in decades.

In short...what you are saying has absolutely nothing to do with anything. He insinuated the PS1 didn't last 1o years. I said it did and the PS2 probably will as well. I never once mentioned the PS3 or whether it WILL last ten years. I simply said the precedent is there, and it is possible. MY problem is the constant bad habbit of people denying that consoles have ever lasted more than 4 or 5 years despite factual evidence.

[QUOTE="-Renegade"][QUOTE="legendbyname"]

[QUOTE="kcpp2b"]Number one reason for any console or system should be games. End of story.snyper1982

Exactly. Games for 10 years? or Games for 5 years?

Its all about games.. why else would it last 10 years?

agreed. this was the whole point of his statement oh and 360 will be dead in 2 years.

Yeah? I am sure you have some internal MS memo or something backing up that ludicrous statement....

Of course not. But I will point out that MS killed the Xbox after 4 years when the Xbox was just hitting its stride. MS has also openly said that they believe console lifespans are already to long and should be 3 to 4 years max.

Now I don't think they will dump the 360 as quickly as they did the Xbox. And despite fanboy memory, MS isn't known for their honesty any more than Sony is. But MS has stated that they want consoles to have shorter lifespans .

no point if i'd loose i would just make another account and you wouldn't know it was me.

-Renegade

LOL. Exactly! You're just throwing out useless fanboy dribble and don't even have the confidence to put your money where your mouth is. So enjoy your PS3 for the next 15 years and when the next Xbox console arrives in FOUR OR FIVE YEARS i'll be enjoying the NEXT step in graphical entertainment.