Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 22nd Nov 2006 22:50 UTC
Games Ars reviews the PlayStation 3 personal computer game console, and they say: "The PS3 doesn't have any grand ideas; Sony wanted something high-tech, so they started from scratch with the processor and GPU, but what does it get them? Very little so far. The controller is a mash-up of ideas from their old systems, the 360's triggers, and the Wii's motion-sensing capabilities, but once it has that tech it doesn't really know what to do with it. The Blu-ray adds cost, but adds very little to the gaming experience for the user. It's great as a media player, but for those of us who love games first and foremost, we have to look at it skeptically. The PS3 is a system with no core message, and that is what keeps it from being elegant. Will it do great things in the future? I hope so, the possibility and potential are certainly there. For now, it's power looking for a mission statement."
Thread beginning with comment 184649
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: I think i see it ....
by smashIt on Thu 23rd Nov 2006 01:50 UTC in reply to "RE: I think i see it ...."
smashIt
Member since:
2005-07-06

Let's face it, with the GameCube Nintendo got owned by Sony and Microsoft.

ms and sony wrote red numbers in their game divisions. nintendo did earn money.
I'd say nintendo owned them all ;)

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: I think i see it ....
by rayiner on Thu 23rd Nov 2006 03:36 in reply to "RE[2]: I think i see it ...."
rayiner Member since:
2005-07-06

Sony loses money periodically during the development of new consoles, but they made a huge net profit over the lifetime of the PS1 and PS2. Even with a billion dollar loss incurred during the development of the console, they made back several times that in license fees and system sales.

Nintendo is consistently profitable with its systems, but they also don't make as much money as Sony does over the lifetime of the system. Also, Sony's primary profit center is the platform, while Nintendo's is their first party games (they're one of the largest game publishers in the world). Sony's console business by itself would still make a lot of money, while Nintendo's console business by itself wouldn't.

Edited 2006-11-23 03:37

Reply Parent Score: 4

No core message
by camo r on Thu 23rd Nov 2006 04:01 in reply to "RE[3]: I think i see it ...."
camo r Member since:
2005-08-26

for now, considering that it's only been a couple of hours since launch. For the love of gaming wait until we have the next firmware, the next couple of games that are developed solely for the power it harnesses, then come back and check your review.

It's the same everytime, who needs cds when we have cartridges, who needs dvd based games when cd's are all we are ever going to need.

Should probably dredge up every negative review that came out about earlier consoles just for the heck of it.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: I think i see it ....
by Ookaze on Thu 23rd Nov 2006 14:58 in reply to "RE[3]: I think i see it ...."
Ookaze Member since:
2005-11-14

Nintendo is consistently profitable with its systems, but they also don't make as much money as Sony does over the lifetime of the system

Sure enough, Nintendo makes more profit by console sold than Sony. So what do you mean ?

Also, Sony's primary profit center is the platform, while Nintendo's is their first party games (they're one of the largest game publishers in the world). Sony's console business by itself would still make a lot of money, while Nintendo's console business by itself wouldn't

This is false. Nintendo earns money on everything : console, 1st party and 3rd party games.
What you say is even more false for handhelds, where Nintendo makes tons of money off handheld sold as well.
Sony mostly does money on games. Selling lots of console helps of course.

Reply Parent Score: 2