Will Sony throw away their dignity...

No, but I did read about a touch-screen version of the PSP (not kidding).

They might do it as a seperate add-on though (like Eye Toy,etc)

I don't think Sony could take the kind of risk to the extreme that Nintendo is. There's a good chance Sony might incorporate a somewhat similar technology into a more standard controller, though. And no, I don't think people would turn their backs on them. People are idiots, and customer loyalty means nothing these days. If it happened, most people would forget Nintendo ever had the idea first to begin with.

Either way, if the PS3 is $500+ to begin with, they are shooting themselves in the foot right out of the gate. There should never be any reason to spend any more than $300 on a console.

If they did copy the controller, and only if, they might actually cash in on it. Mainly because Sony is more popular amongst the general public. They won't sell lots of systems because of the controller but because of their reputation. When you hear the normal pupblic talking about videogames they always refer to the console as "the Play Sation". And when I say general public, I mean the people who don't know what the difference between the Xbox, PS2 and Game Cube are. To them, they're all "Play Stations". So people won't buy the PS2 because of the controller, well some might, but people will buy it because of the title and company name. And with the Rev.'s controller used on a Sony system, it won't be long untill you hear those Pro-gamer wannabes saying that Nintendo copied Sony's idea for a controller.

I remember hearing about this already. How some third party company made a motion sensitive controller for the PS2. It was maybe a few weeks after Nintendo unvield theirs. I swear I read it on Gamespot, and they we saying how cheaply designed it was. I've never heard anything else about this, so I'm assuming it was either a rumor, false information, or something that never got made.

Archibaldo wrote:If they did copy the controller, and only if, they might actually cash in on it. Mainly because Sony is more popular amongst the general public. They won't sell lots of systems because of the controller but because of their reputation. When you hear the normal pupblic talking about videogames they always refer to the console as "the Play Sation". And when I say general public, I mean the people who don't know what the difference between the Xbox, PS2 and Game Cube are. To them, they're all "Play Stations". So people won't buy the PS2 because of the controller, well some might, but people will buy it because of the title and company name. And with the Rev.'s controller used on a Sony system, it won't be long untill you hear those Pro-gamer wannabes saying that Nintendo copied Sony's idea for a controller.

That's exactly the point i'm making. I think that Sony could get away with it, whether they try will remain to be seen. Nonetheless, i hope Nintendo and Microsoft destroy Sony's worldwide market share in consoles. The PS3 being used as a launching pad for Blu-Ray, it's extreme cost, and my general dislike for Sony (DRM). I hate Sony's marketing. I'd love to see them struggle.

Know what I find stupid?

Whenever videogames are displayed in a positive light (in movies, etc) they alway say "PLAYSTATION"

But whever they say it in a negative way, they ALWAYS bash nintendo!

Examples: in many TV specials where they talk about kids palying too much video games and turning into fat, lazy people, they always cal the video games and systems "nintendos"

And I heard of some hand tendon disease that occurs sometimes when you play WAY to much videogames. They called it "nintendonitis"

This pisses me off because when it comes to making games, IMO, Nintendo did it first, and does it best. There are some excellent sony and Xbox games out there (Kingdom hearts, Halo), but I still find that nintendo is the better game making company.

IMO, nintendo represents what is best in the gaming world, because it doesn't need a bunch of ultraviolent, and bloody FPS's (though it does have one or two of these) in order to be popular. Nintendo is trying to cater to the tastes of everyone, not just the angsty teenagers who want to see exploding heads.

I am just sick of Nintendo being the butt of everyone's jokes.

I don't know wether Sony would want to risk stealing Nintendo's ideas, especially after the disaster with the dual-shock controllers.

I don't put it past them if they can get away with it though. :shrug:

The president of Sony Computer Entertainment France and vice president of Sony Computer Entertainment Europe, George Fornay, is talking price when it comes to the PlayStation 3. In a radio show with France's Europe 1, Fornay said that the PlayStation 3 will sell for between €499 and €599. Fornay acknowledged that the price may seem steep, but he emphasized that that price should be seen as inexpensive when one considers that the console will also play Blu-ray movies. Fornay also confirmed that Sony would be going for a simultaneous launch of the console in November of this year.

Strict currency translation suggests that American pricing may be in the range of US $605 to $726, but currency exchange alone can't tell the story. Case in point: the Xbox 360. In the United States, the Xbox 360 retails for $399, which is only €320 in exchange. Yet the Xbox 360 is priced at €399 throughout most of Europe.

If the PlayStation 3 follows the Xbox 360, the console may arrive in North America for US $499 to $599. This would easily make the PS3 the most expensive console on the market, with Microsoft's two next-gen systems coming in at $399 and $299. To round out the scene, recall that Nintendo is looking to launch the Revolution for less than $300.

There's already this: http://www.cnet.com/4831-11405_1-6412914.html?tag=ltst
I hear it doesn't work very well, though.

Wait, does Sony really have dignity?

goKi wrote:Nonetheless, i hope Nintendo and Microsoft destroy Sony's worldwide market share in consoles. The PS3 being used as a launching pad for Blu-Ray, it's extreme cost, and my general dislike for Sony (DRM). I hate Sony's marketing. I'd love to see them struggle.

Likewise. (can you believe I'm rooting for MS over Sony?) The failure of UMD movies has made me very happy, and it is only the beginning.

Sony already shots themselves in the foot by focusing too much on processing and graphical power. Microsoft didn't do themselves any favors either. But they did do something right, they got out there first trying to give themselves a head start. Although when you think about it, Sega did the same with Dreamcast and died. Although the story is different there since they'd already gone under from the days of 32x, Saturn, etc.

In the next generation it looks to me like Sony's market share will shrink while Microsoft's and Nintendo's take a bite out of Sony's old share. People in the end, vote their wallet.

If i remember correctly, the PS2 was released in Australia for a ridiculous price of $700AU (around $500US). It still sold, just because of the success of the PS1.

$300? No console system will ever be bought by me for any more than $200 and that's high end.

Aegix Drakan wrote:
I am just sick of Nintendo being the butt of everyone's jokes.

What do you guys think?

I would buy the revolution if they created and supported a VR head set to go with motion sensitive controls for games. It'd be nice to see VR games actually succeed.

Goki, the problem is that with the PS2, let's face it, the competition wasn't very strong. This time around the competition should close in. So this time, with better and cheaper alternatives, perhaps Sony's name alone won't carry them as well. We will certainly see won't we. That is if Sony ever finishes the PS3. God I'd hate to be one of the first to buy one seeing how they are already behind in development they'll certainly rush to get it out. Though you might get lucky and get a nice security hole.

DarkFlameWolf wrote:$300? No console system will ever be bought by me for any more than $200 and that's high end.

franky, I hope that both Microsoft and Nintendo take down Sony

Archibaldo wrote:If they did copy the controller, and only if, they might actually cash in on it. Mainly because Sony is more popular amongst the general public. They won't sell lots of systems because of the controller but because of their reputation. When you hear the normal pupblic talking about videogames they always refer to the console as "the Play Sation". And when I say general public, I mean the people who don't know what the difference between the Xbox, PS2 and Game Cube are. To them, they're all "Play Stations". So people won't buy the PS2 because of the controller, well some might, but people will buy it because of the title and company name. And with the Rev.'s controller used on a Sony system, it won't be long untill you hear those Pro-gamer wannabes saying that Nintendo copied Sony's idea for a controller.

I have to disagree. Maybe it's just my personal circumstances, but most of the non-gamers who I know refer to video games as Nintendo. As for the rest of this post's conversation, there's no way for me to dive in and comment on it all, so I'll just restate my old thoughts on the current next-gen race.

Nintendo has innovation. Connectivity, Wi-Fi, interesting new controllers, backwards compatability with the GC, and let's not forget that legacy library of games from previous systems. Super Metroid, anyone? Oh, and an army of fanboys.

Xbox has Live. HD in every game, broadband multiplayer standard, downloadable content, and millions of nerds who can't get their Halo fix anywhere else. Oh, and they're the first out the door, and that's months we're talking about there.

PS3 has... Cell processors? Backwards compatability with... MGS, perhaps? Unique, big name games like... MGS 4! And... the stumbling Final Fantasy series? Some kind of online service? Maybe a hard drive? I bet the case looks good.

So, in closing, the battle comes down to this: Innovation & Fanboys VS. HD & Live VS. MGS4 & Cell. The winner might not be clear, but I can sure place my bet on the loser. Sorry, Snake.

Whatever happens, Nintendo will keep going. They always have and they always will (yeah, I'm a fanboy. Doesn't mean it's not true though) - they just have that edge that'll always allow them to keep in the running, even if they're not the biggest.

Whether the PS3 will do well or not depends on whether Sony shoot themselves in the feet - high price, release date being delayed, etc. Regarding the original question, remember that Sony copied Nintendo's Rumble Pack, and even improved on it by having it built into the controller, leading to numberous people thinking that Nintendo copied Sony. So I wouldn't put it past them to copy them this time either.

Question - has either Microsoft or Sony anounced plans to have a similar 'Back Catalogue' of games in the same way as Nintendo with the SNES, Genesis and so on?

Darth Marsden wrote:
Question - has either Microsoft or Sony anounced plans to have a similar 'Back Catalogue' of games in the same way as Nintendo with the SNES, Genesis and so on?

No, but I imagine they'll be doing so any day now, what with their bountiful lists of celebrated first party titles going back to the mid-80s.

Owning almost all the past generation games that i want to play anyway, am i the only one who thinks that virtual console is a great idea, but isn't completely over the moon about it?

No you're not the only one. I think it's a nice feature but I personally will probably never use it. I already have all their games. 😉

I'm looking forward to to the Virtual Console for games I missed out on and games I previously owned (and wished I hadn't sold). But, I will only be siked about it when they announce Squaresoft titles will be available, specifically Chrono Trigger and Secret of Mana.

It's a great feature, and it's great for new gamers, I'm not too huge on it.

Needs Squaresoft support badly.

Bump.

They couldn't resist. Nothing nearly elaborate as Nintendo's system, and i think developers for the PS3 will very seldom use it. How fucking ironic that Sony's keynote began with a slanderous comment about gimmicks in 'innovation'. Just like i said i would never purchase a PS2, i will NEVER purchase a PS3 either.

On a second note, the Dual Shock controller was fucking awful, even back in the day of the PSX, it was uncomfortable to use, and really, nothing special at all. I hope the PS3 does terribly.

Discuss.

I remember in the N64 era Nintendo kept its controller under wraps for months, and didn't show it off until soon before launch. The big feature was the analog controller, which no one had at the time.

Within a short time, thus spake Sony:
"HEY GUYS LOOK AT US WE PUT TWO ANALOG STICKS ON OUR CONTROLLER! HOW XTREME IS THAT?"

Then, Nintendo announced the rumble pak for the N64 controller.

"YOU PAID FOR YOUR WHOLE SEAT BUT YOU ONLY NEED THE EDGE! WE'RE THE FIRST TO PRODUCE A VIBRATING CONTROLLER WITH TWO (count them!) TWO ANALOG STICKS!"

So it comes as no surprise to me that Sony is sticking a tilt sensor in their controller months after Nintendo announces the same thing. My problem is your thread title assumed Sony had any dignity in the first place.

On the other hand, I would applaud using bricks that you use to smash your testicles as opposed to the awful boomerang controller they had before. If that's what Sony thinks a 'better' controller is like maybe it's not such a bad thing that they haven't changed from their horrible design for 3 generations.

goKi wrote:On a second note, the Dual Shock controller was fucking awful, even back in the day of the PSX, it was uncomfortable to use, and really, nothing special at all. I hope the PS3 does terribly.

Discuss.

I never liked the PS controller. It feels cramped in my hand, and the analog sticks are just awkward to use. I can't imagine playing F-Zero GX or anything that requires precision control with them. What can I say? I'm spoiled by the Gamecube controller, which despite being terrible for fighting games, is great for everything else.

Also, it doesn't surprise me that Sony is putting a tilt sensor in their PS3 controllers.

goKi wrote:Bump.

They couldn't resist.

Argh.... I haven't seen anything thing yet regarding E3.
Are you saying they did? They copied Nintendo?

"The biggest change is inside the controller. There are motion-sensing gyroscopes inside the controller that will detect tilting as well as raising and lowering."

I just read this... I can't believe it. Days after Nintendo unveilded their controller, Sony says theirs isn't finished. And this is what we get.... those thieving little....:whap:

:shakeno:

unbelievable. you know, this only proves one thing.

Nintendo is the best game and consule producer, and other companies depend on copying it's technology in order to succeed.

I hope Nintendo sues their sorry asses.

I can't believe no-one's given me a link...

Well yeah, Sony copied it. 'course they did, they're a business. You do what you need to in order to survive. Now excuse me while I quote myself...
[Quote="Darth Marsden"]Regarding the original question, remember that Sony copied Nintendo's Rumble Pack, and even improved on it by having it built into the controller, leading to numberous people thinking that Nintendo copied Sony. So I wouldn't put it past them to copy them this time either.[/Quote]
...and feel very superior about my prediction.