«

On Feb 20, 7:23 pm, Doug Jacobs <djac...@shell.rawbw.com> wrote:
> In alt.video.dvd Tom <no...@nothere.com> wrote:
>
> > But, Sony (as well as MS) make their money on peripheral hardware and
> > software sales, so if they sell more PS3s, they also are going to sell both
> > movies and games. From a marketing standpoint, they cannot lose on this
> > scenario.
>
> That's only partially correct. Sony makes more money via
> licensing/royalties per game than they do per movie. I believe the
> amounts are about $20 for a $60 game, compared to $2 for a $25 movie.
> There's also the problem that "Sony" isn't a single entity. The money
> made by selling blu-ray movies doesn't go to the same department that's
> responsible for the PS3 and PS3 games.
>
> In the begining of its lifecycle, the PS3 was being sold for a net loss to
> Sony of about $200. That meant that to break even on those sales, each
> consumer would have to buy about 10 PS3 games..or 100 blu-ray movies.
> While advancements in manufacturing and whatnot have brought costs down,
> Sony is - at best - breaking even on each PS3 console sold. This doesn't
> mean that Sony needs only 1 sale of a blu-ray movie in order to declare a
> profit, however. During the development and construction of the PS3, Sony
> incurred a huge amount of debt which - so far - Sony's Computer
> Entertainment division (responsible for the PS3 and games) has not managed
> to start paying off.
>
> Sure, sales of blu-ray movies to PS3 owners who never play PS3 games could
> still manage to make the PS3 profitable, but it's going to take A LOT of
> blu-ray movies to do that.
>
> One final point. While this group may not care about the PS3 as a gaming
> machine, the game publishers DO. There continues to be many worries about
> the PS3 being able to attract enough sales to make releasing games for the
> PS3 financially viable for the publishers. If the PS3 goes down in
> history as being a great movie player, but has poor game sales, when Sony
> comes out with the PS4, publishers may decide not to risk it, and simply
> go with other gaming platforms. Obviously a game console with no games
> isn't going to sell very well... The last time that happened, it was with
> the Sega Dreamcast, which ended up being their last console. Sony may
> have won the video market with blu-ray, but they may end up losing the
> game market - maybe permanently.
>
> --
> It's not broken. It's...advanced.

You keep missing ther fact (I pointed this out in another post in thsi
thread earlier to you) that PS3 software is selling hotter now than is
the 360, so your point that it need to sell software (games) is a moot
point. You make it sound as if the PS3 isn't selling any games or will
at all. It seems that you ignore the numbers which can easily be
checked out, or you have ulterior reasons for your thinking.

Tom wrote:
> On Feb 20, 7:23 pm, Doug Jacobs <djac...@shell.rawbw.com> wrote:
>
>
> You keep missing ther fact (I pointed this out in another post in thsi
> thread earlier to you) that PS3 software is selling hotter now than is
> the 360, so your point that it need to sell software (games) is a moot
> point. You make it sound as if the PS3 isn't selling any games or will
> at all. It seems that you ignore the numbers which can easily be
> checked out, or you have ulterior reasons for your thinking.

Um, Captain Duhh--He DOES have ulterior reasons:
He wants to feel as "smart" as he did when the War was on, which is
getting more and more plausibly difficult to do now that it isn't...

(Y'know how they used to write about those ex-Resistance fighters in
London and Paris during WWII, who they later discovered just couldn't
psychologically adjust to peacetime, now that there wasn't any
adrenaline rush anymore and all everyone else was just complaining about
was food shortages and not enough gasoline for those new cars they wanted?
Yeah--Kinda like that, only with the whole "Evil Sony conspiracy" thing,
while everyone else's wondering when Warner's going to give us Wizard of
Oz.)

Derek Janssen

"Doug Jacobs" <> wrote in message
news:...
>
> Sony clearly sacrificed their position at the top of the video game market
> to use the PS3 to push blu-ray. One can only hope that it was worth it in
> the long run, because right now, they stand to lose quite a bit in the
> video game market.
>
dude, the PS3 has 10+ mill sold in about ONE year, give or take as the
availability was staggered by territory...and the 360, with A FULL YEAR+
head start, NO competition, WORLDWIDE launch, TWICE as many 'GHEYMZ', AND a
MUCH lower initial entry price has sold ONLY 7 mill more units?!?!?!? a gap
which seems to be shrinking by the week?!?!?!? and you think the PS3 is
going to LOSE in the video game market?!?!?!? to the 360?!?!?!? the 360
hasn't even sold as many units as the ORIGINAL xbox, and appears to be
tapering off ALREADY due to ::cough:: 'supply constraints' ::cough::,
while the PS3 continues to gain momentum. make no mistake, the PS3 is just
now getting into 'kicking ass and taking names' mode, and the butt of jokes
for decades to come will be '3FixMe.'

"Doug Jacobs" <> wrote in message
news:...
> In alt.games.video.xbox Calab <> wrote:
>
> With the exception of blu-ray, the 360 can do all the same media tricks
> that the PS3 can do
>
the 360 has a web browser?

the 360 can fold?

the 360 can nearly instantaneously browse and playback media from a remote
PC?

the 360 supports industry standard memory cards?

the 360 has built in wi-fi?

the 360 has a remote play function?

the 360 has a free online service?

the 360 is near silent?

the 360 hardware doesn't fail at a ridiculous rate?

khee mao wrote:
>
> "Doug Jacobs" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> In alt.games.video.xbox Calab <> wrote:
>>
>> With the exception of blu-ray, the 360 can do all the same media tricks
>> that the PS3 can do
>>
> the 360 has a web browser?

You bought a video game console to go to yahoo.com?

> the 360 can fold?

You bought a video game console to fold?

> the 360 can nearly instantaneously browse and playback media from a
> remote PC?

Umm, yes it can. I watch movies remotely, view pictures remotely and
play music remotely. I'm not sure what you're referring to here. In
fact, unlike the PS3, the 360 can play music remotely WHILE playing a game.

> the 360 supports industry standard memory cards?

Why the hell would a system need to read memory cards. Again, did you
buy your video games console to look at pictures? I can understand that
Sony intended for the console to be your one-stop for all multimedia
needs but how exactly does this feature benefit in video games?

> the 360 has built in wi-fi?

The 360 could have used that but they have a good excuse: they didn't
know whether it made sense to include 802.11a and b when g was close to
becoming the default standard. I'm not sure whether I believe them but
either way, I prefer wired connections to anything wireless.

> the 360 has a remote play function?

Well if the 360 had a portable device other than the Zune and Windows CE
machines then it would have possibly considered it but it doesn't.
Either way, what the hell do you need that for?

> the 360 has a free online service?

Microsoft took the other path. Instead of delivering an atrocity that is
free, they decided to deliver a near-perfect online system that features
cross-game messaging/chat/video, a general friends list and a demo
system that allows you to play the game IMMEDIATELY after download
(instead of forcing you to install what you just downloaded like the
PS3). Besides, if you can't afford a few bucks per month then fanboyism
isn't your only problem.

> the 360 is near silent?

The 360 should have had this but to be honest, the original Xbox wasn't
very quiet either. It was one of the things that I despised about the
original and frankly, I was already accustoemd to it by the time I got
to the 360.

> the 360 hardware doesn't fail at a ridiculous rate?

Yep, every 360 dies the moment you open the box. That must be why I'm on
the same console for over a year now. I guess mine wasn't programmed to
die upon unsealing like every other one. Shame on Microsoft for being so
inconsistent.

I just have one question for you khee mao. See, I'm the type of guy who
goes from one game to another fairly quickly. Once I'm done with one, I
jump to the other and so on. That's why I have about 85 games on the 360
and another 44 on the console itself from XBLA. My question is: what
exactly do you play on your PS3? Are you still on Resistance or did you
move up to Call of Duty 4? I'm not even being sarcastic here. I ask my
PS3-owning students all the time and even they don't know. They all
think the PS3 is the best system but they all haven't touched it in a
while. I'm wondering about you because you seem to spend so much time
here that I am guessing gaming isn't your first preoccupation.

Every time I refresh the newsgroup, there's about 5 new posts from
you... I'll have to assume that you're using the PS3 to browse to Google
Groups and post to this newsgroup from there. After all, the PS3 has a
browser right?

Anyways, while you wait for the adventure in teenage emo angst that will
be Final Fantasy 13, I'll finish up Lost Odyssey.

In alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 khee mao <> wrote:

> "Doug Jacobs" <> wrote in message
> news:...
> > In alt.games.video.xbox Calab <> wrote:
> >
> > With the exception of blu-ray, the 360 can do all the same media tricks
> > that the PS3 can do
> >
> the 360 has a web browser?

That's not media. As for web browsing, I have my laptop, and in an
extreme pinch, I have my PSP. Why would I want to use my PS3 and tie up
the main TV in the house for something like browsing?

> the 360 can fold?

Again, not media. Furthermore, is this REALLY all that important a
feature to you or any PS3 owner? I mean, if the PS3 DIDN'T have this
feature, would it have made a difference in the sales? Anyways, if I want
to participate in this project, my desktop is much faster and uses less
energy than the PS3. After all, I'm not being paid to run my PS3 24x7 now
am I?

> the 360 can nearly instantaneously browse and playback media from a remote
> PC?

Um, yeah, it can. Neither console is perfect though since they don't
support as many formats as a true media player should.

> the 360 supports industry standard memory cards?

I have the 40GB PS3. It doesn't support memory cards of any sort since
they removed that functionality for cost-saving purposes. I can, however,
plug in a standard USB hard drive into either the 360 or the PS3 and read
media files off of that.

> the 360 has built in wi-fi?

No, and IMHO, doesn't need it. Built-in WiFi just makes the console more
expensive when not everyone is going to use it.

> the 360 has a remote play function?

Why exactly would I want to play a PS3 game, in lower resolution, on my
PSP which doesn't even have the correct number of sticks and buttons?

Also, is this really a deal-maker/breaker feature? I mean, how many
people are going to be in the stores looking at the 360 and saying "man,
this console sucks because I can't use remote play!"

> the 360 has a free online service?

Do you honestly think Sony could get away with charging for their online
service in the state it's in right now? Even as we speak, Sony is
hurriedly preparing HOME, which at best will be a "me too" answer to all
the features that the 360's online service has had since day one. If
anything, Sony's online service is still incomplete.

It may not be free, but I'd rather pay a bit of money for a superior
product than suffer through an incomplete one.

> the 360 is near silent?

> the 360 hardware doesn't fail at a ridiculous rate?

No arguments here. My 360 is quieter than some, but it's still noisier
than my PS3.

At least Microsoft has been taking action to fix this issue. As I recall,
both the Playstation 1 and 2 had their share of hardware problems...and
Sony's response was less than amicable. At least, I don't rmember Sony
extending the warranty on my PS2 to 3 years after it died of the DRE
problem.

--
It's not broken. It's...advanced.

"Doug Jacobs" <> wrote in message
news:...
> In alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 khee mao <> wrote:
>
>> "Doug Jacobs" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>> > In alt.games.video.xbox Calab <> wrote:
>> >
>> > With the exception of blu-ray, the 360 can do all the same media tricks
>> > that the PS3 can do
>> >
>> the 360 has a web browser?
>
> That's not media. As for web browsing, I have my laptop, and in an
> extreme pinch, I have my PSP. Why would I want to use my PS3 and tie up
> the main TV in the house for something like browsing?
>
>
I pull up youtube/web videos all the time when friends are over. much
better than huddling around a laptop/pc/iPhone screen...
>
>
>> the 360 can fold?
>
> Again, not media. Furthermore, is this REALLY all that important a
> feature to you or any PS3 owner? I mean, if the PS3 DIDN'T have this
> feature, would it have made a difference in the sales? Anyways, if I want
> to participate in this project, my desktop is much faster and uses less
> energy than the PS3. After all, I'm not being paid to run my PS3 24x7 now
> am I?
>
>
your desktop can't even begin to fold at the speed of a PS3. it's really no
contest. 8 hours to fold a unit on a PS3 is much less time than the 2+ days
it takes my x2 4200...
>
>
>> the 360 can nearly instantaneously browse and playback media from a
>> remote
>> PC?
>
> Um, yeah, it can. Neither console is perfect though since they don't
> support as many formats as a true media player should.
>
>
my 360 takes an eternity to sync my album art, and is completely
non-responsive (ie useless) until they sync is complete, and laggy as hell
afterwards. my ps3 can get to and play album data (from the same PC!) near
instantantaneously.
>
>
>> the 360 supports industry standard memory cards?
>
> I have the 40GB PS3. It doesn't support memory cards of any sort since
> they removed that functionality for cost-saving purposes. I can, however,
> plug in a standard USB hard drive into either the 360 or the PS3 and read
> media files off of that.
>
>
plugging in a memory card is vastly more convenient than an external hard
drive, which, afaik, a ps3 can also handle. I can go out, take a buncha
pictures, and plug the memory card directly into my ps3 for instant viewing.
I can also use this same memory card to save games/music/video to for easy
transport to a friend...
>
>
>> the 360 has built in wi-fi?
>
> No, and IMHO, doesn't need it. Built-in WiFi just makes the console more
> expensive when not everyone is going to use it.
>
>
wifi chips are cheap. this literally only adds a few dollars to the cost of
a PS3.
>
>
>> the 360 has a remote play function?
>
> Why exactly would I want to play a PS3 game, in lower resolution, on my
> PSP which doesn't even have the correct number of sticks and buttons?
>
>
being able to access your music/pictures/videos/games from anywhere in the
world via wifi isn't a cool fawkeeng thing? I mean, if it came down to
either an iPod or a PSP to take with me on a vacation, I'd take the PSP, as
I could dynamically change its content.
>
>
>> the 360 has a free online service?
>
> Do you honestly think Sony could get away with charging for their online
> service in the state it's in right now? Even as we speak, Sony is
> hurriedly preparing HOME, which at best will be a "me too" answer to all
> the features that the 360's online service has had since day one. If
> anything, Sony's online service is still incomplete.
>
> It may not be free, but I'd rather pay a bit of money for a superior
> product than suffer through an incomplete one.
>
>
>
thanks for the laugh. LIVE is a candy coated amalgamation of crap. laggy,
rife with pre-teen assholes, and a complete mishmash of lists of even more
crap, the browsing of which makes my eyes bleed. navigating the marketplace
is almost as annoying as hearing an endless littany of
racist/homophobic/your mom comments made by squeeky voiced brats. and
that's when it's working!

Doug Jacobs wrote:
> Do you honestly think Sony could get away with charging for their online
> service in the state it's in right now? Even as we speak, Sony is
> hurriedly preparing HOME, which at best will be a "me too" answer to all
> the features that the 360's online service has had since day one. If
> anything, Sony's online service is still incomplete.

Dung, Dung. You continue to expose what an ignorant nitwit you are
with your long, empty-headed, rambling monologues displaying your
supreme lack of knowing anything about what is going on. All the anti-
Ps3 blog sites are starting to gush and salivate over what Home is
providing and will be able to do. Resistance and Uncharted Home is
going to allow a PS3 gamer avatar to traverse through game levels and
Warhawk has a sandbox war room for players to plan and strategize
before joining on-line multiplayer. There are trophies and
accomplishments and much much more. A completely 3D and new game
interface experience and for no extra cost. Poor Dung, so out of it.

http://www.joystiq.com/2008/02/29/so...arted-warhawk/

Sony reveals Home integration for Resistance, Uncharted, Warhawk
Feb 29th 2008 1:30PM

Worried that game integration with Playstation Home will just be
trophies, trailers and t-shirts? Well, so were we, actually. Luckily,
Kotaku's learned some interesting details about the Home integration
of Warhawk, Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, and Resistance: Fall of Man.
Turns out its way cooler than we thought.

Warhawk will reportedly allow up to eight players to meet in a "war
room" prior to a match, mapping out strategies on "sand table"
replicas of each level. Once they're ready to go, players can jump
right into an online Warhawk match from the Home interface. A nice
touch, indeed.

Resistance and Uncharted, meanwhile, will give Home users access to
full unpopulated levels from the games, allowing players to casually
walk through battlefields with their Home avatars. In addition to this
killer feature, Resistance will allow players to explore unseen
portions of the game, and locate radio transmissions that further
explain the storyline. Uncharted will feature a Contra-style 2D
shooter that launches from Home. Consider us floored. We can't wait to
see these features in action.

khee mao wrote:

> thanks for the laugh. LIVE is a candy coated amalgamation of crap. laggy,
> rife with pre-teen assholes, and a complete mishmash of lists of even more
> crap, the browsing of which makes my eyes bleed. navigating the marketplace
> is almost as annoying as hearing an endless littany of
> racist/homophobic/your mom comments made by squeeky voiced brats. and
> that's when it's working!

Like I said before, you simply can't like anything that comes from the
360, regardless of whether it is superior to the PS3 counterpart or not.
Everyone knows that PSN is a piece of garbage compared to Xbox Live
but, since you have an innate inability to say anything good about the
360, you'll go ahead and bash that too. I also love that you point out
that your PS3 can stream music and movies... or view photos. It's
absolutely amazing that you seldom mention a game or two. I guess we
know what you bought the PS3 for. However, I can stream divx onto my 360
and it does it beautifully unlike the PS3. I can stream music from my PC
to my 360 DURING a game, you can't do that on the PS3. Basically,
regardless of the trash talk you come up with on a daily basis (or
hourly since you're here spewing bullshit at all times of the day
instead of playing games on your 'amazing' system), people know the
truth about the 360 system.

In every possible imaginable way, the actual system of the 360 is
superior to that of the PS3. The ONLY way that the PS3 wins out is in
terms of durability. Ask anyone who has both systems which is used more
often and RARELY will you hear someone say that they prefer their PS3.
The reason is simple: the PS3 store, the PSN and pretty much everything
else on the PS3 is a joke in comparison. Using the PS3 feels like they
took parts of many different things and put them together to make a
whole whereas the 360's separate units all blend in perfectly. In
essence, your PS3 is a rusty (but reliable) old Honda Civic with a
suped-up engine capable of about 300hp whereas the 360 is a Chevrolet
Corvette capable of about 350hp that, unfortunately, has an American
engine that tends to break down every so often. Enjoy your Civic you
pansy-ass fanboy.

"Andre Matuch" <> wrote in message
news:Xm6yj.11941$...
> khee mao wrote:
>
> It's absolutely amazing that you seldom mention a game or two. I guess we
> know what you bought the PS3 for.
>
it's true that I'm getting older and don't put nearly as much time into
gaming as I did even several years ago, much less than when I was in my 20s,
but here's a list of games I purchased and played in the past half year or
so:

BioShock: looks great, but there's a problem when the hacking minigame is
more fun than the main quest that I never bothered finishing. I tell myself
I'm gonna finish this one day, but I know I should just go on and trade it.

Halo3: had fun with it in spite of all of the filler, but it's nothing I'll
probably ever play again. should trade this asap.

Heavenly Sword: had fun with it. great new IP, imho. will keep this one
around for a while.

Mass Effect: had fun with it until it grew tedious, which was about the 15
hour mark for me, then I just wanted to power through and get to the end.
will probably keep this around until playing through the dlc scheduled to be
released on the 10th before deciding whether or not it warrants another play
through.

Orange Box (PS3): I really don't know why I bought this since I thought HL2
kinda sucked. haven't re-finished HL2, haven't touched the episodic
content, Portal, or Team Fortress. should probably trade this asap.

Conan (PS3): am really liking this game, but haven't found the time to
finish it as I've been assigned to a crazy project at work and have been
away from home more than usual.

Devil May Cry (PS3): same as Conan.


p.s.

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/ps3-divx-...ted-335062.php