PS3 renders PCs obsolete

[Sky]

According to the president of one of a bajillion subSonys (actually president of Sony Computer Entertainment's Worldwide Studios).

"We believe that the PS3 will be the place where our users play games, watch films, browse the Web, and use other [home] computer functions," said Harrison. "The PlayStation 3 is a computer. We do not need the PC."

After I lolled, I thought money should go where hype went: cancel the VAIO line.




...yeah, I thought so.

[Miasma]

But I thought the PS2 already replaced the PC?

[tazelbain]

LOL, Sony.

[HaemishM]

They really are redefining the term assclown.

[Fabricated]

Sony's hype machine sucks.

The PS3 will still sell like fucking crazy though.

[Signe]

It was all a fad, I knew it.  Good.  I'll be glad to see computers go.  They've been nothing but a big pain in the arse.

[stray]

Sony's got the right idea though. It'll happen sooner or later (just not with the PS3).

[Brolan]

Sony's hype machine sucks.

The PS3 will still sell like fucking crazy though.

Yes, at first.  Then it will run into a wall of price resistance that dwarfs the Great Wall of China.

[Merusk]

"No really, it's worth $600 because it replaces your PC!  That's why it costs so much!  It's ok!"

This has been 30 seconds of reading the subliminal.

[Strazos]

Once again, Sony is fucking retarded. What are they smoking/injecting/huffing/snorting? And are whores involved?

[Kenrick]

Wasn't it Sony Pictures that had to create nonexistant film critics to "give themselves good reviews" and splash their fake quotes onto newspaper ads?  Yeahhh...  assclowns indeed.

[Roac]

More importantly, it could provide the processing power for the PlayStation 2 to challenge cheap PCs as the entry-level device of choice for home access to the Web... blah blah...the processor can handle 6.2 gigaflops at 300MHz. blah

Blah blah..."The PlayStation 3 is a computer. We do not need the PC."

Show me the keyboard and mouse first, bitch.  It's not about processing power; I can get on the net just fine with a P3, plus run most non-gaming applications without incident.  Let me send an email.  Or type on a message board.

Haemish, we need some creative cursing.

[Cyrrex]

Don't stop there...let us swap out the graphics card, upgrade the RAM, or add on non-propriety devices that we don't have to pay out the ass for.  Etcetera.

Just the simple lack of compatibility of devices and the inability to upgrade and keep the machines bleeding edge will keep consoles from taking the places of PCs.  No matter what fancy things they can make them do.

[Dren]

Cool.  I can create spreadsheets, work on my resume, manage my budget, manage my forums on my webspace, log into work when I want, create solid models, and play around with my CG creation software on a electronic device that is primary made to play side scrollers and 3d fighting games/sports?  That is truly amazing.

I am filled with awesome.

[Tebonas]

My computer already feels obsolete, he eyes the windows. I think he gonna jump down to his doom when I'm not lucking.

Damn Sony.

[Sky]

Sony's got the right idea though. It'll happen sooner or later (just not with the PS3).

I wonder how our Board would react to a request for 50 new PS3s. I'm quite sure the public would like them, but it might be tough getting our monthly reports in on time.

[Mr_PeaCH]

The PS3 or the PSP?

According to the Fox News report I just read over on Lum's site I can use the PSP to download porn FROM THIN AIR!  Good enough for me.

[UD_Delt]

In other news...

Microsoft reneges on backwards compatability.

http://www.xboxaddict.com/news/view.php?News_ID=7031

Microsoft VP Peter Moore may be taking on the role of the fat lady and singing backward compatibility a fond farewell in a video interview available today on gaming website Kikizo.

"Nobody is concerned anymore about backwards compatibility." Moore said. "We under promised and over delivered on that. It’s a very complicated thing... very complex work. I’m just stunned that we have hundreds of games that are backwards compatible. More are coming, but at some point, you just go, there’s enough, let’s move on, or people aren’t as worried about a game being backwards compatible -- and I like to think we’ve upheld our end of the bargain in making at least two or maybe three hundred games backwards compatible."

[Merusk]

Microsoft Exec:  The PS3 costs HOW much?  Hahahhaha.  Axe that compatability bullshit, we don't have to compete with them anymore.

[Strazos]

Microsoft Exec:  The PS3 costs HOW much?  Hahahhaha.  Axe that compatability bullshit, we don't have to compete with them anymore.

lol

[Hanzii]

Of course the fact that the subject is referring to something he didn't say and the very first quote is taken out of context shouldn't stop you.

He's answerring a very specific question about his reaction to Microsoft extending Live to the pc - and answers that since the PS3 has built in webbrowser (a proper browser that can search the entire internet not just some Sony hosted subsite) and fully supports USB keyboards, they (meaning Sony) don't need the pc (as a platform for their online service).

Apart from that the interview is just a rehash of the wellknown marketing bulletpoints. Apart from saying, that the lack of HDMI on the "cheap" PS3 won't be a problem. At least not until 2010 which is the date set by the Blu-Ray consortium when all Blu-Ray playback capable devices must have HDMI. Until that time the size of Blu-Ray movies is the only copy protection needed (a 50 GB movie is a bit much to download, he says.)

And if you want to do the "LOLZERZ teh PS3 is too expensive"- gags, you gotta be realistic about it. The comparable pricepoint (to the Xbox 360) is $499 not $599. The "cheap" version of the PS3 compares favorably to the 360 Premium not the Core. Sure it still a hundred bucks, which is a lot when people allready considered the Xbox expensive, but it's not a $200 difference and you're retarded for repeating that.

[Hanzii]

Of course the fact that the subject is referring to something he didn't say and the very first quote is taken out of context shouldn't stop you.

He's answerring a very specific question about his reaction to Microsoft extending Live to the pc - and answers that since the PS3 has built in webbrowser (a proper browser that can search the entire internet not just some Sony hosted subsite) and fully supports USB keyboards, they (meaning Sony) don't need the pc (as a platform for their online service).

Apart from that the interview is just a rehash of the wellknown marketing bulletpoints. Apart from saying, that the lack of HDMI on the "cheap" PS3 won't be a problem. At least not until 2010 which is the date set by the Blu-Ray consortium when all Blu-Ray playback capable devices must have HDMI. Until that time the size of Blu-Ray movies is the only copy protection needed (a 50 GB movie is a bit much to download, he says.)

And if you want to do the "LOLZERZ teh PS3 is too expensive"- gags, you gotta be realistic about it. The comparable pricepoint (to the Xbox 360) is $499 not $599. The "cheap" version of the PS3 compares favorably to the 360 Premium not the Core. Sure it still a hundred bucks, which is a lot when people allready considered the Xbox expensive, but it's not a $200 difference and you're retarded for repeating that.

Oh, and one of the repeated bullets is a promise of close to 100% backward compatability (the PS2 chip built in is what most believes) - but of course, nobody cares about BC according to Microsoft...

[schild]

Ok, I'm about to stick up for the po' man, which is something I never ever do. So listen closely:

It doesn't matter if the PS3 is WORTH $600. It doesn't matter if the technology is WORTH what they're charging. November is not tax season. There are no November windfalls. Mainstream America can not AFFORD a $600 gaming system at launch without incredible gaming support (which it won't have - riiiiiiiiiiiidge racer). Japan doesn't matter. Europe doesn't matter. AMERICA MATTERS. And AMERICA can not afford a PS3 and those than CAN afford a PS3 in America (mind you, first shipment always has and always will sell out - so we're talking shipments after early adopters are done), will probably buy a 360 AND Wii before they buy a PS3.

You can be as rational as you want about the pricing scheme. The fucking system could give the best blowjobs in the world. $600 would still be too much for an entertainment device. These aren't people buying electrostats to listen to their jpop albums. These are gamers. They have shitty TVs for the most part and shitty taste in entertainment. They also live paycheck to paycheck. It PAINS ME to say that Nintendo just won a console war by being lazy with technological advancement, but they did.

[Hanzii]

Two mistakes.
It's $500 not $600,
Japan matters. A lot.

But you're right. It's too damn expensive - even more so in Europe, which is a smaller market with less money to spend on these things on average (and the price will be higher). Nintendo winning? I'm not so sure yet Blu-Ray and marketing still matters a lot ouside the hardcore who reads boards like this - the average buyer believes that the PS3 may be the most powerfull doodah ever and if Sony can convince them (mainly Americans with HDTVs) that they need Blu-Ray, they're cooking. If they can lower cost and then prices after the initial 6 million run which will sell out even if Harrison personally takes a dump in every box, they're really cooking.
Lots of maybes and not as cool as hard predictions that nobody will care to remember anyway when proven wrong.

[Righ]

Actually, I think that the problem is Blu-Ray. Yes, its going to be the dog's doodads, but other companies just don't trust Sony with media formats any more. There's very little buy-in, especially on the hardware side, and that's why Sony must sell lots of PS3s for lots of money. They success of Blu-Ray depends on the success of PS3. The problem that Sony has on its hands is that success of the PS3 in Japan alone is not enough to save Blu-Ray, and with HD-DVD as another option, people don't need an expensive PS3.

[Miasma]

I would have bought a PS3 regardless of price a couple of years ago, but not now.  With all of the controversies and problems Sony has had recently I really just don't like them anymore.  I sort of hope Nintendo comes out on top now, I'll root for the underdog.

Although in the end I really don't care about the price since apparently Canadians get them for free.



I have already filled out the form asking for my name, address and social insurance number so now I just have to wait for it to be delivered, suckers.  I'm not sure why I had to enter in all that info about my credit cards and bank account numbers but I'm sure it is all legit, people on the internet are very honest.

[Hanzii]

Actually, I think that the problem is Blu-Ray. Yes, its going to be the dog's doodads, but other companies just don't trust Sony with media formats any more. There's very little buy-in, especially on the hardware side, and that's why Sony must sell lots of PS3s for lots of money. They success of Blu-Ray depends on the success of PS3. The problem that Sony has on its hands is that success of the PS3 in Japan alone is not enough to save Blu-Ray, and with HD-DVD as another option, people don't need an expensive PS3.

What do you mean by buy-in?
Blu-Ray definately has the strongest backing this time around on both hardware and content. The price of a player seems to be the important issue now, but it looks like  a standalone HD-DVD player will cost as much as the PS3. So if that's a decent player the choice will be between a Blu-Ray player/console (sorry Sony - entertainment center) and a standalone HD-DVD (or a noisy Xbox with an addon that will make it more expensive than the Blu-Ray playing PS3).

Now the question is, can Sony & co. convince the market, that they need HD players, when most are happy with DVD?

[Velorath]

What do you mean by buy-in?
Blu-Ray definately has the strongest backing this time around on both hardware and content. The price of a player seems to be the important issue now, but it looks like  a standalone HD-DVD player will cost as much as the PS3. So if that's a decent player the choice will be between a Blu-Ray player/console (sorry Sony - entertainment center) and a standalone HD-DVD (or a noisy Xbox with an addon that will make it more expensive than the Blu-Ray playing PS3).

Now the question is, can Sony & co. convince the market, that they need HD players, when most are happy with DVD?

I'm not even convinced I need an HDTV, at least not for another couple years.  It's going to be pretty hard to convince me I need Blu-ray.

[Roac]

I'm not even convinced I need an HDTV, at least not for another couple years.  It's going to be pretty hard to convince me I need Blu-ray.

[eldaec]

So if that's a decent player the choice will be between a Blu-Ray player/console (sorry Sony - entertainment center) and a standalone HD-DVD (or a noisy Xbox with an addon that will make it more expensive than the Blu-Ray playing PS3).

The people who will buy blu-ray players first (and the only people who will buy at all at $600) are enthuisiasts. Enthisiasts do not buy convergence devices, and gamers don't give a rats ass if the games console they want happens to play blu-rays badly, on the other hand the home-cinema junkie definitely will not be playing films on a games console.

Unless Sony acheive a first-time-ever marketing coup, the convergence argument is only remotely relevant in the sub $300 world.

People with nice televisions do not watch dvds on a PS2 - because it's a horrible dvd player if you have a nice TV. The same situation will arise on blu-ray. If you are budgeting in the $600 per component range you don't give a shit about convergence. And for that matter you probably don't buy budget brands like Sony.

I'm not even convinced I need an HDTV, at least not for another couple years.

I'm utterly convinced I *want* an HDTV. It's a couple of years before it's affordable is all.

[Der Helm]

Once again, Sony is fucking retarded. What are they smoking/injecting/huffing/snorting? And are whores involved?

Are you thinking what I am thinking ? (might not be save for work ?)

If not treated, syphilis can cause serious effects such as damage to the nervous system, heart, or brain. Untreated syphilis can be fatal.

bold = emphasis mine

[Strazos]

 

[Sky]

I'm not even convinced I need an HDTV, at least not for another couple years.  It's going to be pretty hard to convince me I need Blu-ray.

Oh, you knew this was coming:

Planetside at 5'. Oooh yeah (though I'd honestly like a 9' projector screen instead! And that pic is from 2003, not 1999). Imo the only reason for not having hdtv if you're a gamer is that you have a wife/girlfriend who is not properly supportive of your hobbies :)

BluRay...it's 1080p iirc, so I'd be dealing with downscaling issues and trying to save up for a mortgage means I might not be able to get into the 1080p DLP anytime soon. But I still think BluRay has already won the battle, because it's in the PS3. Every dipshit in every trailer park in america has a PS2. They'll eventually get a PS3, and when they eventually move to HD, they'll have an installed base of BluRay players that HD-DVD simply can't touch. PS3 shipping with BluRay ends the battle, period.

I just wish GTA4 was launching on the PC as well as the Box and PS3.

[Yegolev]

I'd like to get some opinions and rationale from anyone who is going to get a PS3 at $600, yet pass over the 360 and Wii.  If someone already has a 360 and is going to get the other two right off, that is easy enough to understand, no comments necessary.  I just want someone to explain to me, in small words that I can understand, exactly why they themselves are choosing the PS3 over the other consoles.  We have plenty of predictions on what Joe Fuckpack is going to buy; I'm looking for personal opinions and anecdotes.

[Yegolev]

I just wish GTA4 was launching on the PC as well as the Box and PS3.

Do you mean GTA6?