Tuesday, July 26, 2005

10 years of the PlayStation 3

Sony got done having it's annual (I think it's annual) 'meeting' about the PlayStation, simply called PlayStation Meeting 2005. They showed a lot of clips about the PlayStation 3 and what it's going to be able to do. One thing that surprised me, though, was that they decided to announce that the PlayStation 3 would planning on a 10 year life-span. No other system has done thing. Back to the NES, it's always been a 5 year life-span and it seemed to be the defacto standard (before Microsoft decided to push to be first in the market, making them a 4 year machine). The gameboy would be the one piece of machine that endured a 10 year span of life. I don't think the PlayStation 3 is a gameboy. I don't think they can do it. I think in 5 or 6 years from now, something drastic has to change in the way video games are played in over for them to advance in the industry. We've hit a wall as far as graphics power and cinematic computing is concerned, and the only way to go is sideways. We have to think outside of the 'console hooks to the TV, controller plays the game' mentality. Luckily Nintendo is starting that this year with what they call the Revolution, but it's still to be seen how revolutionary it will be.

What did Sony exactly say? How are they going to do this? Sony states that with the upcoming HDTV transition, they plan on offering full HDTV from the very beginning so that when HDTV takes over they will still have the PS3 right there. As much as I want to believe this, It's like they're saying that the HDTV revolution isn't happening for another 5 years. They're saying that in 5 years when MS and Nintendo release a new 'full HD' machine, they wont' have to. I don't know if I believe this because I already think Nintendo is stupid for not jumping on the HD bandwagon this generation. I think HDTV will take over gaming before the end of this generation and gamers will be looking for more by time Sony thinks they won't have to release another system. I think PS3 will be looked at as 'old' and un needed when MS and Nintendo launch new systems in 5 years. I just think this is a mistake on Sony's part and I'm not sure they're going to back down.

The other terrible thing that's going to put quite a dent in Sony's market share and give Microsoft a commanding lead this time around, is price. How about a quote from the Sony big-shot, Ken Kuturagi.

"I'm aware that with all these technologies, the PS3 can't be offered at a price that's targeted towards households. I think everyone can still buy it if they wanted to but we're aiming for consumers throughout the world. So we're going to have to do our best (in containing the price)."

Sounds like the initial hopes that the PS3 would be around $400 might not be so true. Wait, what's that? You have something else to say?

"I'm not going to reveal its price today. I'm going to only say that it'll be expensive."

Ah. I see. That explains it then. So all you kiddos who thought you were going to get a PlayStation 3 when it comes out, you better start saving now. Because I'm seeing a number upwards of $600+. Sony wants this system to be the equivalent of two systems so that would be reasonable for two consoles. One of two things is going to happen from this. Either Sony will drown because no one will be buying the system because of how much it costs, or Sony will prosper and pricing of video games will skyrocket knowing that we all just dropped $600+ on just a system. As much as I had my hopes on Sony taking this next generation race, I really don't know if it's going to happen if you can pick up an xbox 360 for about $300 or a Revolution for about $200. I just hope you know what your doing Sony.


Post a Comment

<< Home