At last, Sony's troubles are over
with all the money they'll save on LEDs, they'll soon be back in the black
The PlayStation is slimming down again, after Sony made further tweaks to the console's innards, while insisting a PS3 successor is still a long way off. According to a report on Andriasang, the updated PS3 gobbles 30W less power at 200W, and weighs 400g less at 2.6kg. There have also been changes to the power and eject …
"What we’ve seen from the competition is trying to add features that already exist in PlayStation 3"
Yeah. 'Cos PS3 already has controllerless motion capture and controllers with their own screen in them. XBox Kinnect and the new Wii, they're just catching up with that. Sony are so absolutely the innovators, the Wii's motion controller: that was only a copy of PS Move, and not the other way around.
Who the hell are they trying to kid here?
Controllerless motion capture - Eye Toy, not great but it exists.
Controllers with screen - remote play with PSP, PSP rear view mirror in one game.
Move has been in developement for years - before Wii release.
Companies are allowed to have similar products from different development
You might want to grab your security blanket, this could be uncomfortable....
1) The PS3 Six-Axis controller had motion detection from the get-go, tho not many games exploited it very effectively. But I think it's true to say that the Wii *followed* that, certainly the two systems were launched at more or less the same time, but I think the PS3 actually just edged the Wii if you want to be picky (and your type usually does)
And the Six-Axis controller when not being waved about in the air still functions as one of, if not THE, best console controller out there. Unlike the Wii-mote.
Besides, PS Move goes WAY beyond what the Wii-mote can do. If you don't see/know how, then you simply have no business making comparative comments about the two technologies.
2) Controller-less input, a la "Kinnect" is shit. No seriously... watch someone playing a game with Kinnect *carefully* - don't allow the "OOOOH COOOL IT'S SO LIKE Minority Report" factor blind you to the fact that what the "player" is actually doing has little to no relation to what is going on in the game. The games essentially play themselves and take the mo-cap input from the player as a rough guide to what they should be doing, but in so real sense can the player be said to be "controlling" anything.
Shit, you only have to watch the desperate, vague waving of hands in the air to try to hit control points in the frikking game menus and the lack of definite response from the control system to understand this. If simply recognising hitting a big frikking "button" or hotspot on the "screen" is so hard, how the hell can a game be expected to control a virtual steering wheel/tennis racket/sword/what-e-v-e-r accurately ?!!
And even if it did work - you do realise that sitting there pretending to hold an invisible steering wheel and changing gear with an invisible gear stick makes you look like a 4 year old, right ? But if going BRRRRM BRRRRM while playing Need For Speed enhances the experience for you, go for it.
At which point someone will bring up some of the other stuff people have done with Kinnect that has given them techno hard-ons. I guess some people get a kick out of watching pointless demos of doing things on the cheap/with hackology that can be done better and more easily with kit that is actually DESIGNED FOR THE PURPOSE. Duh!
"PlayStation 3 is really just hitting its stride... technologically, I don’t think it’s possible to provide any advancement beyond what we have."
Perhaps if you opened it to the home brew hacker community they could make it do things you never thought it could, plus it would extend the useful life of the PS3 a bit more.
After all, the original T-Mobile G1 was supposed not to be able to run Android 2 and on due to hardware constrains. That didn't stop those clever people on the XDA forums making it happen.
Oh wait, what you would rather take them to court?
"We at Sony have worked hard to make the PS3 cheaper. For example, we have removed the composite video out, as we have determined that real gamers will have an HDMI TV. We also removed the ability to connect to less than a gigabit wired network, as real gamers will have at least gigE, and we removed support for less than 802.11an.
And since the newest PS3s won't support those, we are removing support in ALL PS3 software, as well, as we can't be bothered to support it. Oh, by the way, if you don't upgrade, you won't be able to use any online features or get any updates."
No, that won't happen - after all, Sony has no record of removing features in the PS3 to make it cheaper or removing features from older units because newer units lake them.
I'm struggling to think of what they could ADD to the PS4 that would make it worthwhile other than a bit of extra graphical 'oomph', and to be honest I'm quite happy at the moment with what I have, especially as the better games at the moment seem to be indies that can quite happily run on existing ps3 hardware.
Anybody have any suggestions on what they 'could' add apart from more polygons? I'm all ears.
"These new 320GB models – the CECH-3000 – will cost the same as the present set and will roll out as soon as retailers' current stock runs dry."
These new one's are cheaper to make, so we make more $$$$. Need cash to pay for the new one.
""PlayStation 3 is really just hitting its stride... technologically, I don’t think it’s possible to provide any advancement beyond what we have."
We ran out of money.
""What we’ve seen from the competition is trying to add features that already exist in PlayStation 3. We invested heavily in that, we rolled a very heavy rock up a steep hill, through the launch period. But now I think that all pays off, and we’ve got a long run way behind it."
Move was shit, we wasted all our money on that, we think we can stretch it for a few more years, in the hope that the gullible masses will waste money on our old tech, plus we were caught off guard by Nintendo.
and in any case, what's wrong with Sony giving their product a half decent lifecycle? I for one have no desire to have to buy a new console every year just to keep up. I bought a PS3 because I realised PC gaming was a nonstop race to keep buying video cards. The day it dawned on me I was spending as much each year on graphics boards as a whole PS3 cost I felt like the most gullible idiot on the planet.
Actually, now that I think about it, I think I see where he's coming from. It looks like he and indeed Sony are still wedded to their original console grand plan, which like any other corporate behemoth, they seem unable to modify when circumstances change. When the PS3 came out originally, Sony were saying that they weren't going to get into the console treadmill thing, the cell processor was so good that developers would be unlocking new potential in it for years to come, and between that and the blueray player, they were future proofed for 10 years, where Microsoft would have to keep churning out new consoles at horrendous expense because their hardware was already outdated.
The whole plan was predicated on console development continuing to be about processor power and graphics, and blueray being the future of film and game distibution. Instead, blue ray turned out to be a cul-de-sac, with the actual future of film and game distribution proving to be the internet, so those expected revenues when Microsoft gave in and licenced blueray never happened, and then Nintendo released the Wii and changed the game completely. Suddenly console deveopment was no longer about power and graphics, it was about user interface, and Sony completely missed the boat. Microsoft stepped up to the plate and topped Nintendo with Kinect, but the best Sony could manage was the Move, a catch-up play. And it would seem that the reason that its the best Sony could do is that they still see UI stuff as a side-show, not even worth mentioning, their focus is still entirely on power and graphics, and thus the 10 year plan is unchanged. Hence the announcement today.
We have a PS3 and do have Move as well.
With the right games it is great.
Sports Champions - it is the racquet.
Killzone - it is the gun.
As to expanding the PS3 - it is only really a graphics chip and low RAM against it, yes a new console would be nice, but would we spend the money when there are lots of games still to get for the current consoles.
So they produce a PS4, what would benefit the average user with it?
It would help the FPS fan with the huge PC type maps, but would it sell a console?
That said I think 2013 would be a good year to introduce newer consoles.
Hilarious that someone who doesn't even have the balls to put their name to their views has to resort to pointing out a simple typo in the absence of any stronger argument.
As for sales figures, perhaps the fact that Sony didn't force people to buy PS Move in order to get their hands on an PS3 had something to do with the difference between PS Move units shifted and the number of Kinect's "sold" ? And I wonder if the figures you are referencing are actual retail sales or units merely shipped to retailers.
The people who bought Move made a clear decision to, you know - buy a Move.
Many people who bought Kinect likely did so because it was bundled with the XBox they wanted.
It is also hilarious is that you think I'm excited by Move. I'm not. And I don't think I ever said that I was. I think you are projecting your own Kinect hard-on onto anyone who expresses doubt on your particular choice of controller porn and points out some uncomfortable truths about your choice compared to the alternatives. I didn't buy a Move and don't intend to. I have no dog in this fight.
But I have watched people playing games with Move and I have watched people playing games with Kinect. And like I say, watch someone playing Kinect and you'll see how ludicrous the system is.
Those actually playing it of course FEEL like the system is working - they are having fun and the game seems to be responding to them, but to an objective observer it really is very apparent just how little real control is going on. IF that observer is and can be truly objective.
Of course, if the observer has blown their hard earned on a Kinect already, then they aren't likely to want to have to face the fact that they were conned by the faked demo videos, strong arm sales techniques and marketing might of Microsoft. Are they?
Just for you - I was very careful to spell Kinect properly this time. Thus proving that I know and understand the technology fully. Sheesh.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019