f13.net

Didn't see this posted anywhere else yet, but it looks like the pricing of the PS3 has officially been announced (http://www.gamespot.com/news/6149470.html).

Get your infoz here. Weened from about 10 sites worth of press information. (http://www.f13.net/?itemid=55)

Also, having read a bunch of other sites - live blogging makes bad writers even worse.

Merging other thread with this one.

Awesome.

Just awesome.  I'm more than willing to dish out $500 for a PS3 that is backwards compatable, comes with a blu-ray player, has a controller that is bluetooth (pc compatable maybe?), and will let me watch my tv in all it's glory.  I don't think the extra 100 will be worth it for the 60 gb hdd to anyone except schild, who already admits he has a spending problem.  Wonder what movies will be released in Blu-Ray formats first, and what the cost will be.

Also: yea to free online play.

How many of us are planning on free ps3's?  Buy 2 like the government!

Couple Pics:

(http://img475.imageshack.us/img475/624/ps3black9mf.jpg)

(http://img475.imageshack.us/img475/6951/ps3cont6mq.jpg)

Found this (http://www.scei.co.jp/corporate/release/pdf/060509ae.pdf) on another forum.  No HDMI, memory stick/SD/compact flash slots, or WiFi on the cheap version. 

Heavenly Sword looks amazing.

$500 isn't as bad as I was expecting.  I'm sure some people will find all kinds of uses for 60GB of space but I'm not one of them so when I pick one up (probably after the first price drop) I'll probably just stick with the 20GB, unless of course they've changed the configurations by then.

Oh, and a note to Square:  Stop milking the fucking FF shit already!  I remember when the release of an FF game used to be a special occassion and now they've got almost a dozen of them in the works.

Thanks, frontpaging the graph.


I'll tell you when I play it.

Press sheet cutout (http://www.f13.net/?itemid=57).

Good .pdf find, guess I'll have to find another hundred bucks.

I wonder how many sales sony will lose to microsoft because of the people who have already blown their my-money wad on the 360.

I'm more worried about a launch lineup that doesn't warrant $600. $400 I can think, ok, mediocre lineup, par for the course - 360 plz. $600 makes me step back and say - mediocre lineup, HOW MUCH? Fuck off.

So the new controller looks just like the old controller but without vibration and this goofy motion detection, is that right? (http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/08/sony-shows-off-the-real-ps3-controller/)  And can someone give me the lowdown on the whole three different versions of FFXIII please, what are they doing there?

Finally, those photoshop nintendo fans sure are fast (not the real controller). (http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d187/good_apolloIV/ps4stolen9jd8ux8by.jpg)

/rude

I'm jealous.  If it plays as smooth as it looks like it does I think we are in for a treat.

Also, those pics are sexy.  Too bad the thing is so damn big, 5 kilos.

Vibration, for the most part, sucks. 99% of the games don't use it well. In fact, the only thing that does is Fishing controllers and lockpicking minigames.

What's funny is now there will be PS3 exclusive games and games that come on the 360 and PS3 and games that come on the PS3 and Rev, but not games on all three systems.

Sony is smarter than words can convey. And Nintendo should have waited longer.

Maybe they figure watching Blu-ray movies will balance out the mediocre lineup of games.  Partial list of movies that will be available... (http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/).

$30 a pop. How fun.

I feel the same way about $60 video games for the amount of entertainment they give.

Ya fuck that.  Maybe we'll all have to buy into sony's shares so that we can get some sort of vicious money cycle going.  Spend money on sony, get money from sony -- repeat.  This is the same reason I don't buy any games any more.  That shit is way too expensive.  Digital distribution save us!

Anyone have a compiled list of PS3 release titles? I'm tired of sitting at my computer reading and not playing games, so I'm gonna fire up BF2 for a while.

Sheesh... everything is getting so expensive!  These new consoles better do something other than just run games.  Like housework or sex.

Seems like an odd list of titles.  I was disappointed when I noticed Silent Hill is not on the list.  I really enjoyed it and it is the type of movie I'd actually want to see in HD.  Who the fuck needs a Blu-Ray version of Blazing Saddles?  Great movie, but...


Same here.  Silent Hill 3 ho!

The future is now! (http://www.learnshit.com/photos/teledildonics.jpg)

But seriously, the controller wireless, vibrates, has a port for expansions, and a gyroscope for motion sensing.  Skin that thing in rubber and sell it at a sex shop.

Edit: It doesn't vibrate.

It's not full motion detection, it's more like a tilt-sensor -- i.e. it's not the same as the main Wii controller. Also it has Bluetooth and also works wired through USB which also charges the controller.

Edit: Actually I take that back, it does have an acceleration sensor so it can do some motion sensing. How much it can do relative to the Wii controller remains to be seen.


FF XIII - story about a girl that looks like a guy
FF versus XIII - story about a guy that looks like a girl
FF agito XIII - story about who TF cares, it's a mobile phone game

That's about the price I was expecting. What a fucking ripoff charging more for HDMI output and memory stick/SD/etc support since that takes absolutely nothing to add in cost terms. No WiFi is super weak too.

HDMI definately does cost more. Not enough to warrant how they're handling it though.

The $100 is justified in my opinion.  Wifi adapters run $50 retail (or 100 if you bought that 360 one), more HDD space, and hdmi.  Memslot should've been included in the low package too.

I like that Sony is doing stuff that warranted the wait.  I mean, copying what others do and just including them. 

Why the fuck are they making console purchasing so complicated these days?  I barely understand what HDMI is so I can imagine how the mother who is picking the system up as a Christmas present is going to feel when the sales person starts talking about the $600 configuration with the HDMI, WiFi, and all that shit.  As it is I've seen people struggle to understand what the Hard Drive in the X-box 360 is for.

But yeah, looking at it all it looks like the $600 model is the best bet.  I'll be holding off on buying one for quite a while though (but then I told myself that with the PS2 also and ended up buying it at launch).

I seem to recall Sony stating that the Blu-Ray standard will not downscale image quality if HDMI is not used. Pretty recently as a matter of fact.

So uh, what's the point of HDMI again since decent component cables can put out the exact same quality image?

Blame Microsoft (or thank them as the case may be). The Xbox 360 doesn't have built in wireless networking ($99 accessory as MrHat mentioned), standard memory card slots ($40 for a 64 MB memory card? Hell I can get a 1 GB CF card for that much money) or HDMI output. In other words the "base" PS3 is as close to the Xbox 360 as possible, except with a Blu-ray drive of course. With the 60 GB PS3 you get all the goodies that are costly accessories for the Xbox 360 plus HDMI output plus a bigger hard drive to boot.

The price point should've been $449 $499.

Would've made for happier people.

It's up to each publisher to decide what to do with the non-digital, non-copy protected outputs. They've sort of vaguely said they will not use the special AACS flag that downconverts analog outputs for a while to give time to the thousands upon thousands of people who don't even have digital inputs to yet again drop a huge chunk of change on a brand new TV.

I don't recall Sony saying that they were not going to use the flag for only a period of time. That, and I don't know how many consumers would be happy about their games and movies not being able to play in high def if they got the cheaper PS3.

Yes, though I think $100 for a Blu-ray drive is already a steal so making it +$50 instead of +$100 would've cost Sony another $200 million or so this first year alone (assuming they can actually crank out 4 million units by the end of the year). I'm personally happy with the pricing and am willing to plunk down $600 once some decent games are available. At best they could've shaved off maybe $50 from the 60 GB model without hemorrhaging more money than they already will be but I'm sure they padded that extra $50 in there just to stem some of the losses.

This is Sony (http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/13198) we're talking about here (note the "forseeable future").

It's not an issue with games, hence the reason why the Xbox 360 doesn't have DVI/HDMI output.

Edit: Oh and I guess Sony gave up on the idea of dual HDMI outputs.

On one hand, a high launch price makes sense because launch demand always exceeds launch supply. If you have a million units at launch and can sell a million at $600 and five million at $400, it doesn't make sense to have frustrated gamers lined up around the block, only to be disappointed. Economically, when demand exceeds supply, a seller should raise the price. This means that all consoles should launch at a higher price than they do, and then the price should be cut when the demand at that price tapers off. There's an obvious publictity hit to be taken by a game company that screws early adopters by cutting the price within a few months of launch, but the companies get plenty of heat for being unable to meet launch demand. Sony effectively captures the Ebay booty for itself, while it loses the benefit of hype and news stories about lines and the desirability and prestige that attaches itself to highly scarce products. It's also possible that a launch price lower than the market will bear subsidizes the third-party developers who create launch titles, since buyers paying less than they might be willing to will spend the difference on software. 

However, the market for a $600 PS3 is smaller than the market for a relatively comparable $400 XBox, which means that all the people who are, to some degree indifferent between the two options will likely choose the Xbox. The PS3 will also take some heat for being substantially more expensive without being substantially more powerful.  The goal of console design, as I see it, is to pack the most powerful gaming device possible into the low-price box. If this was a $600 with an exceptionally powerful computer, or tons more memory, that would be one thing, but the decision to tie up that much cost in the drive is a really questionable one, if the goal is to sell a game console. 

As a marketing strategy for Blu-Ray, PS3 is excellent, but as a design decision for PS3, Blu-Ray is probably a bad call. A dual-layer DVD holds 9GB, and I have never seen a game that needed a second DVD disc. 

Not a Nintendo fanboi, but I think they're laughing at Sony's attempt to to steal their innovations, at least with this iteration.

The Sony controller didn't change, it's still that bajilliony buttoned multi joystick contraption that is the barrier to entry for  people who don't play video games. Sure it may have motion sensing capabilities, but it's still an awkward little thing.

And I'm sorry,  six hundred dollars is fine if you're a total moron who has to buy on launch day,  but in  a time where a lot of peoples expendable income is now being diverted to paying for their SUV's drinking habit it makes a lot less sense.

Paying five bills for a high def dvd player may make it worthwhile, but again, thirty dollar movies just don't sound like something I want to buy, no matter how many pimples you can see on Clint Eastwoods nose when he's training the next karate kid girl to be the best female boxer in the world. I admit I may be alone on that, or just a cheap bastard.


This does not expand the market. At all.

The Wii, still can't get used to that name, does a better job of that by its design. Wether it actually will or not, that's going to depend on the software.


That said I wouldn't but a Wii either  until I see some solid results in their library.


edit: Add Wii to the splling dictionary :)

It's getting there though. We babbled about it a bit over here (http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=6800.35) but just to add another another data point, Tomb Raider: Legend takes up 7 GB on my PC. I'm not sure why it takes up so much space since it's a relatively short game but it does. So it won't be long before PC games uncompressed will take up more than 9 GB. Of course compressed it can take up less space but then on a console you are trading off space for CPU cycles to uncompress the data on the fly. Now there's probably some fancy way to do that on the Xbox 360 and PS3 given they have multiple CPUs/PUs but that's still cycles they aren't using for other purposes.

HD video also takes up a lot of space (720p encoded with H.264 takes up roughly the same amount of space per minute as MPEG-2 480p DVDs do) so if you want a lot of prerendered video in your game you are going to have to make compromises if you want to squish it all onto a single DVD. So I'm sure companies like Square Enix, which ditched Nintendo for Sony because of storage issues back in the day, is loving the roominess of Blu-ray.

All I know is I sure as hell won't be buying one for myself for at least 2-3 years at that price.   Now, will I buy one on launch day and sell it on E-bay around the day after Thanksgiving? You bet your sweet ass.

I guess you could go back to the old amiga joysticks with 2 red buttons doing the same thing and a stick, but we're beyond that, most buttons are needed in todays games. My 50 years old father has no problems with the playstation controller, was a matter of minutes before he felt comfortable using it playing Gran Turismo. I guess he would have problems playing for example Soul Calibur 3, but he will never play that game anyway so that's no problem. I guess it would be awkward for people a couple of years older than my father, but they will never play games anyway, they're to busy whining about the good old days.

Try handing that same controller to your mother, and see how she does it, or to a  person who doesn't play video games.

You only need more buttons if you think that buttons are the only way to do something.

By thinking outside of the boc, Nintendo is betting that they will appeal to those who don't already buy games in addition to those willing to try something new. The execution of this is going to be the big thing. It may crash and burn horribly, but I give them  high marks forat least trying.

There's a learning curve. How do we know the Revolution will appeal to grandma and grandpa? I don't know about yours  or hers or his but my grandparents will not stand in front of their TV swinging their arms around because the mans arm on the TV moves when theirs does. They are not monkeys.

Your non-gaming grandma isn't going to want to play the faggoty hypothetical swordfighting game Nintendo fanboys nervously speculate upon when pressed to come up with an actual concrete use for that stupid-ass controller.

EDIT:  Fucking Schild beat me by a minute.  Drat.   :-P

I don't get why Sony suddenly added motion detection to their controllers, but I doubt it'll end up being used all that much.

Sort of like the way Third-Party games and ports will make little use of the Wii's controller.

Fanboy:  Oh my god, I love how Nintendo thinks outside the box!

Rational human:  Wait, what games are going to actually use this controller?  Because I can think of plenty that would be a bitch to play with that thing as an input device.

Fanboy:  Well you see, it looks like a TV remote control.  Nintendo will use this to sell games to all the people who hate video games and are afraid of a control pad, but who slavishly identify with their television remote.

Rational human:  WHAT GAMES?

Fanboy:  Er... ah.... f-fishing g-g-game...?

Rational human:  And?

Fanboy:  S-sword... fighting?

Rational human:  And?

Fanboy:  And... and.... uh.... WAAAAH!!!

EDIT:  Also, light-gun games.  Yeah, those are big.

I dunno. Every game seems like it's incorporating the nunchuck in some halfass way. Look at the DS Castlevania, they added completely nonimmersive elements so they could make it use that goddamn touchscreen. And then there's stuff like Trauma Center and Lost Magic that just rock on the DS. Basically, every game will use the nunchuck in some way or another, but Sony has done something brilliant here. Racing games will be more fun with a controller you use both hands on. You know, steering wheel and such. Ridge Racer 7? Yes. Gran Turismo? Yes. Mario Kart? No. It's a completely arcadey racer. It does not need this motion sensing hooey. Nintendo will probably force hokey controller implementation in all their first party games because they didn't have the foresight to have more than 3 usable buttons on the controller set. Can they really make everyone buy multiple shells and shit for the system?

I'm ust not seeing it. Meanwhile Sony only has to get people to use the controller that comes with the system for nearly all the functionality - including the only one that's really important, looking around/aiming in an FPS.

Wait, what did they do? Just re-release the PS2 controller essentially as-is?

No, he's talking about waiting until everyone shot their wad and then releasing an amalgam of their best stuff.

Subtle changes can make all the difference. The second analog triggers (L2 and R2) are now more like triggers. The D-Pad seems to be raised up a little bit more as do the face buttons (X, Y, O, SQUARE ^_^), and they added the motion sensing stuff.

It could be easily argued that the main Revolution stick thing is just an original Nes controller thinned out a bit, held vertically and had the b button moved to the bottom side fo you could play Nes games with one hand. But you know damn well it's not the same controller.

And the PS3 controller isn't the same controller. Just like the 360 controller is light years beyond the Xbox controller (and it is, trust me). On that note, I'll actually give a real opinion once I use it tomorrow. Maybe tonight if I'm sneaky sneaky enough at the convention (which....isn't likely. Drunk 6' tall football sized guys and sneaky don't often go together).

(http://www.f13.net/schild/ps3_controller.jpg)

See, it's the subtle differences that matter. Familiarity is still uber important though. It's ok to be radical (SNES -> N64) when it's called for, but Gamecube -> Revolution? I don't thiiiiiiiiink so.

$25+ was standard for DVDs when they first came out.  I seem to remember buying a few for $29.99 as well.

And neither is as bad as Beta/VHS movies back in the day.

(Edit:  oh, and regarding the pimples...after purchasing my first DVD player I distinctly remember thinking "wow, lookit them wrinkles...some of these porn actresses just ain't gonna survive the switch to DVD") :)

Side note: That nunchuck is a crutch. they should have introduced it later

That's where the whole idea of execution  comes in. if developers do a shitty job of making lame half assed titles, then the whole things a big turd in a box and Nintendo loses this round.

Given my cynical nature, I tend to think that's what's probably going to happen.

The gaming industry now  has the opportunity to do something other than the same shit we keep seeing which isn't going to drag any new faces into  the store to pick.
You need something other than a sports game, a rts, a typical rpg or any of the other stagnant genres to drive innovation, expand the market and  make some serious money. What that is, I don't know. It's not my job to come up with it.


The industry says they want change? Nintendo gave them something to work with.

It's probably going to be totally wasted, but  at least they didn't add motion sensoring with usb connectivity to a wavebird and say "OOOH, it's new!"

That Controller looks like a fucking dreadnought out of a sci fi movie.  Familiarity means shit when you're looking to go to different  environments.  I'm not saying they will succeed, but to do what they were intending, it had to be out of line from what's going on.

(http://ukresistance.co.uk/pics3/ps3liebackend.jpg)

Heh.

Harsh.

Motion-sensing controllers are, well, stupid.

-I don't want a controller that my buddy can fuck me up with by smacking me to the side.
-I don't want a controller where my mom (who does play sometimes) will complain about her little man doing something funky because she's one of those people who actually lifts and pushes around her hands as if it would help.
-Like WUA, I don't see any good use of it, other than lightguns (which I miss.)

That's what I thought at first also. Those "excited" gamers who jerk their controller up when they make risky jumps. Man they are fucked.

Man I do not like how the middle sentence there came out. Came indeed.

I'm trying to remember what my brother paid for my PS2 way back when. Shit, my brother got me mine when I graduated from high school and I think it was $400 minimum.

My PS2 cost $329.99 on launch day at Best Buy.

Motion sensing on a remote-style controller makes a lot more sense than on a joypad. Typically you point your remote at the screen, whereas people do whatever the hell they feel like with a pad. Probably a feature nobody will use.

And you've probably gotten every ounce of that $329.99 back out of it since then.  I've owned maybe 10 games for my PS2, early adopting makes no sense for me anymore.

After looking at the livefeed from Nintendo I am now even more convinced that I must own a Wii, drunken tennis will be great fun and potentially deadly.

Nintendo OWNED Sony this time.

The presentation was AWESOME.

I agree.  I had an ear to ear smile for most of the presentation.  I can't wait to get my hands on one of these things.

Off the top of my head: Grandia III.

I am all for insane speculation, but I do want to point out that the Wii will have a doohickey to make the controller into a more traditional form.  Or so they say; I haven't seen it.  You aren't going to be able to play Super Metroid with the base controller, as far as I can tell, so I am inclined to believe that bit.  My friend is going to buy a Wii just for Super Metroid.  This could be mildy entertaining, or incredibly entertaining, depending on the outcome.

Of course, it will be up to the developers to actually use the nunchuck doohickey or the laser-pointer doohickey, but the only thing that I worry about is the third-party people.  Either N opens up to the outside devs more, which would be good, or they maintain their usual iron grip on the situation.  One path will produce a lot of shitty games, while the other will produce a few good games.  Either one could be really bad.

EDIT: I just started reading the Wii report on the frontpage.  Go me!

http://www.gamespot.com/e3/e3story.html?sid=6149675&pid=928519&autoplay=6149700

It look like most games are going to be taking advantage of the analog stick attachment, which apparently also has a gysoscope built into it. The control is simpler looking, but in practice, it actually looks pretty complicated to use.

This thing isn't a light gun. It's more like a mouse that doesn't need to rest on a surface.

Did you see the Zelda demonstration? This thing looks mouse-keyboard precise.

Maybe I'm just afraid of change but that doesn't look like something that is so easy even my grandmother could use it.  Easy and intuitive interfaces don't require an image of the controller constantly displayed on screen to tell you what they do.  They also need to lose that huge fairy acting as a mouse pointer.

It's so different that the only way I will know if I like it or not is to play with it for a while but I'm predisposed to hating it.

I actually think those people that move the controller around might be at an advantage because of the natural motion.  The point is Sony did a smart thing and at least gave extra functionality to something old and proven.

The extra functionality is tacked on. You can bank on the fact that less than 10% of the games will make any real use of it. It just doesn't make sense. It's like having force-feedback on a d-pad.

Motion sensing only makes sense when there is a logical, consistent "normal" position for the controller to be in and when the motion sensing is a large part of the control scheme. You can't take an RPG and make it so that when you waggle the controller you attack and expect that to make any sense.

A remote is a pointer. Pointers are motion sensors. Moving a laser pointer around makes sense. Now imaging a laser pointing sticking out of your PS2 controller - makes zero sense. You hold the Wii controller in a way that makes sense for pointing at things.

I'm not saying the Wii controller is the greatest thing in the world. All I am saying is that the Wii controller is designed with motion sensitivity in mind rather than as an afterthought. Motion sensing on a PS2 controller isn't any more helpful than motion sensing on a keyboard or bagel.

Again, imagine using the PS2 as a laser pointer - retarded. The only real axis you can use is the waggle (roll) axis.

I think the PS2 controller is very good and the PS3 controller is fine, but the motion sensitivity is one of those things that will be quickly dropped by 3rd-party manufacturers when no games use it.

I am not sure why a two-handed device is considered harder to point.  Quick or exaggerated movements will be more difficult, however two hands will allow for much smoother movement and less shake after several hours of use.  Which is "better" will all depend upon the sensitivity of the devices and the application used by the developers.

What I can say (until I get a hands-on with the new units) is that I am comfortable with the PS controller design and using a TV remote to play a game doesn't interest me in the least.

$500 is huge price barrier to overcome.  After the demand of hardcore gamers is fulfilled I don't see a lot of casual sales happening.

I can just see little Johnny asking his Mom for a new PS3.  Then see her coughing and spitting up her morning coffee after she sees it costs $500!

I can see the 360 getting a lot of sales once parents see they can buy the stripped version for $299, when the cheapest PS3 is $499.

Haven't seen the sony press conference yet, but I did see the Nintendo one yesterday before I went to bed. Yes, Nintendos press conference was rather impressive. A few things though:

Either the dude who played that FPSy game sucked or it was the controller. If that'd be anything like a mouse you'd breeze through that game, even as a medicore player.

He mentioned that the difficulty has been reduced notably in the games to easier draw in new consumers, I hope there's difficulty options to choose from to allow for a more challenging experience for more experienced gamers.

Okay, so they're not aiming at hardware, but the graphics on most of the games were bad even by yesterdays standards. This could of course have to with the fact that I was looking at a low res gamespot stream, but it's usually easy to notice quality graphics anyway.

How long was that wire between the 2 controllers who were connected? It seemed like it wasn't long enough for the taller guy to really stretch his arm out while playing tennis, without having to move the analog stick controller around with his other hand.

As has been said before, this could either be the "next thing", or it will be a system with 10 good games and everything else feeling awkward to play on it.

I'll probably get a Nintendo system this generation since they're so cheap already from the get go.

I can't wait to see what kind of bundles retailers are going to try to rape people with this time around.

I was assed to look, and Shadowhearts: Covenant, a 2004(?) release, is also on 2 DVD discs.  I didn't go poking around in the library because that's a pretty good example, in my mind.  If you want to use that as a metric, it's time for a bigger disc format.

I'd like to note that Covenant makes excellent use of those two discs, unlike certain other overmarketed JCRPGs.

Wii graphics... I'm expecting the usual release-issue junk.  If anyone else can be assed, boot up Mario Kart or Thousand Year Door, then boot up Mario Sunshine.  Sunshine looks like garbage, comparatively.  But it's not like I'll be getting the Wii because I want to count the sweat beads on Lebron James' forehead.

Exactly. Which is why I think the Wii could be big. It's not just more shiney, and I could care less if it's even upgraded from the GC graphics hardware. But if it plays like it looks, I'd likely buy the Wii version of a game before I'd buy a 360 or a PS3 version. And I still can't figure out what is going to be gained by putting motion sensitivity in a dual-shock controller for the PS3. I'm with Margalis on that one. It'll probably get used by a few token developers with gimmick games and then dropped.

Oh noes. (http://www.f13.net/?itemid=100)

I'm going to treat it like I'm buying a gaming computer. Which it is anyways. And besides, if that hardware was equipped on a desktop, it'd cost considerably more. At least this is what I'm going to tell myself.

Secondly, I'm not insane. I'll wait at least until the first price drop.

Thirdly, once developers take advantage of the platform, it'll surpass what Nintendo and Microsoft have to offer. To hell with a gimmick controller being the deciding factor in this respect. Gyromite didn't revolutionize shit, and this won't either. The only ingenious hardware idea from Nintendo that third parties really adopted was the Gameboy. And this isn't the Gameboy.

The only thing new about the PS3 is the raw power, and even that's debatable.

At least Nintendo is trying. They're far more likely to get my money at this point than Sony is.

I don't understand why game companies hate Europe.  Glad I don't live there.

Fair enough.

But as for myself, what I do really need "new" for? I just want shiny. I'll leave "new" for the games/software. Until we have the technology for holodecks, I only want conservative paradigm shifts at best. I fear change! And useless ideas. There's nothing wrong with the basic console controller design now. It doesn't need to replaced. Just improved upon, if anything.

Doesn't matter though. It'll flop. The fact that Nintendo will offer an alternative already suggests that.

The prices for the PS3 have already been mentioned in some of the german gaming mags.

For sake of comparison for €600 you will get quite a decent pc system with a decent video card and all the frills that you most probably will never use but that would be nice to have anyway (TV tuner card). for €600 you could buy a X-Box 360 (the better version) and four games or a ps2 and almost every title worth playing.

I don't see how anybody (except for the most rabid fanboys) would buy one for that price especially when most people would have to buy a HDTV TV set to make the most use of the console and in europe most people do not have one.

Hell even the x-box 360 doesn't sell to well over here because with €400 ($510) it is too expensive for most tastes

Everybody hates Europe.
The same silly frontpage calculation could be done with a HDTV, a DVD-player or any other electronic device. Also please note that VAT in Europe is high compared to any US state and opposed to the US, VAT/sales tax is allready included in that price and not added at the counter. So the price difference isn't quite as crazy as Schild wants it to be, but the basic fact remains - it sucks to live in Europe and wish for a PS3.

Ah, it's not so bad when I know VAT (17%?) is included.  Including tax in an advertised price is not legal in the US; you have to give the actual price before tax in ads and even on signboards and price stickers in the store.

No, it won't. Really. Because by then, it'll have been 3 more years of the same kinds of game layered on top of more sweat pixels. What, is GT 6 going to somehow be a different racing game than GT4? Maybe, but it'll likely still feel like I'm playing GT3.

The only thing I've seen that's even a slight iterative improvement for the 360 or the PS3 is Gears of War on the 360.

The last discussion I saw outside of gaming forums about the PS3 started as a "OMG they are kidding!?" about the price and ended up as a big fangirl frenzy for the Wii.

A lot of people seemed to just assume the PS3 would be their console until they heard the price point and now they're looking at options. I think with the next gen we're going to hear a lot of the same things that came up with the DS vs. PSP. "Oh yeah, the PSP is better for watching movies, but Nintendo is about games and it's a hundred bucks cheaper."

That's, of course, if the thing actually works.

Having looked through the video clips at IGN I have to ask... is there something I'm missing that would explain the hype Heavenly Sword is getting?  The gameplay seems like it's only a notch above something like Final Fight, where you just beat on hordes of opponents.  I can only assume there must be something they're not showing in the videos that's making people drool.

Warhawk is even more baffling as it looks slow and duller than shit.

I think that consoles should cost a lot more money and have pricing schemes as tortuous as mobile phone plans. The PS3 is clearly a step forward in this regard, but a smack dealer or an oil company would have sucked more money from the addicts, so they've a way to go. Increasing the price of all games by five bucks a month would help sell more shitty launch titles too.

As others have mentioned, that European pricing seems to be pretty much par for the course.  A great deal of consumer electronics over here get that kind of treatment, so it won't be a factor for most.

Something to consider though:  HDTV sales in Europe, much like in the USA, has exploded.  Where Europe clearly lags behind however, is HD content.  Most people over here have close to ZERO access to HD content to display on their lovely new HDTVs.  Most satellite and cable providers have nothing to offer, and those that do are very limited from what I understand.  The new HD-DVD players are not available for the most part.  So when machines like the PS3 come along at this price point with Blu-Ray, or the 360 with its upcoming HD-DVD player...at prices comparable to one of the new Toshiba HD-DVD players...then you better fucking believe that it is an interesting option.  It is two birds with one stone, and it may be the first opportunity I have to enjoy true HD content of any kind. 

Console gaming wars aside, it is the above situation that makes my mouth water for either of these machines.  Not sure what the average EU consumer understands or cares, however.

It depends on the country we are talking about in germany VAT is currently 16%. So instead of $770 it should cost $695 if you just add VAT to the price. In certain other countries VAT is as high as 20% so it should cost around $720 insted of $770.

That would still be $50 Euro Tax from Sony.