[Mrjinglesusa]

Originally Posted by TETENAL 

The PS3 will outsell the XBOX. Developers would be stupid not to develop for the dominant system. And the PS3 might be more work to develop for than the XBOX, but that is because also more powerful. F1 and GT5 will be available for the Playstation only anyway, no matter what.

Fanboy alert!

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by TETENAL 

The PS3 will outsell the XBOX.

There is no evidence to suggest that.

Developers would be stupid not to develop for the dominant system. And the PS3 might be more work to develop for than the XBOX, but that is because also more powerful. F1 and GT5 will be available for the Playstation only anyway, no matter what.

They will develop for whomever will make them the most money. PS3 = more work, less sales volume potential. 360 = less work and the MOST sales volume potential at the moment and through the next year or 2.

[Dakar²]

Yeah, I have no idea how you project for the PS3 than out of sheer stubbornness. Its not implausible, but conventional wisdom says they have a tough mountain to climb now. A lot fo the advantages they had last generation are gone.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

Yeah, I have no idea how you project for the PS3 than out of sheer stubbornness. Its not implausible, but conventional wisdom says they have a tough mountain to climb now. A lot fo the advantages they had last generation are gone.

What they did was to abandon their bread and butter…the mainstream. The PS2 wasn't the most powerful or the cheapest but they were right smack in the middle where most people live. Now they have thrown all their chips in with this high-end bleeding-edge monstrosity, leaving the the mainstream market for MS and Nintendo to fight over. By next Christmas the cost of a Wii AND a 360 may very well be close to a PS3's. That's gonna be tough to overcome.

[icruise]

Here is my prediction for the long term (3 or 4 years in the future):

1. PS3
2. Wii
3. Xbox 360

Yes, the PS3 got off to a rocky start, and Sony made some mistakes with the system. They got greedy and decided to leverage their "surefire" Playstation brand to get Blu-ray into people's houses. But it is a remarkable system in many ways, and Sony has quite a number of potentially system-selling exclusives on the way. In the end, it'll boil down to a couple of factors. Is Halo 3 more attractive to people than Final Fantasy 13 and the other Sony exclusives? And is a price differential of $100-$200 going to be enough of a problem for people who want a Playstation that they'll get an Xbox instead? I'm betting no.

I think the Xbox 360 is a great system in a lot of ways, but it does have some things working against it. One of the main issues is its failure to get any kind of meaningful market share in Japan. This is important for a couple of reasons. Obviously, Japan is a major market, so success in Japan would help financially, but the main problem is that without a large enough installed base in Japan to make it worthwhile, the smaller Japanese developers will probably not develop games for the Xbox. This is what happened in the last generation. The PS2 had hundreds more games available than the Xbox in North America, and thousands more games available in Japan. And I'll have to admit that I really don't want Microsoft to "own" console gaming. We all know what happens once Microsoft gets the top position in any market -- stagnation. I think it's possible that the Xbox 360 will be this generation's Dreamcast. But then again, maybe not.

I think the Wii's comparatively low price, its popularity in Japan, and its appeal to casual gamers will give it the edge over the Xbox 360, but I have trouble imagining it coming out on top, largely because of its uninspired graphics and lack of blockbuster third-party titles. It's sort of a wild card though, since it isn't competing directly with the other two consoles. It's possible that it could take off more than expected, or it's also possible that the novelty will wear off. It's hard to say.

[ort888]

The thing to remember is that Japan is becoming less and less meaningful. Right now, it consists of about 20% of the total game market, and the country is moving more and more toward portables and away from consoles.

It's definitely not a good thing that the 360 is doing so pathetically bad in Japan, but it's not as big of a deal as people think it is. Not anymore.

[icruise]

It's surprisingly difficult to find hard numbers about this kind of thing, but this document (ironically published about the Australian game market) has info about the world game market as of the year 2000. According to it, Japan accounted for 27% of the worldwide game market, while the US accounted for 36% (interestingly, if you correct for the US's larger population, the per capita market for both countries is about the same). But when you look at the number of titles sold by country of developer, you'll see that Japanese titles accounted for 35% of all games sold worldwide. US games accounted for 44.1%. I don't think there has been a dramatic shift since 2000 (and in fact, the success of the DS and to a lesser extent the PSP probably increased the number of Japanese games sold).

As it is now, Microsoft is not in a position to take advantage of more than 1/3 of the game developers in the world. I'd say that's a problem. Of course, there is the possibility (which I mentioned a while ago) that the high prices will make lots of people swear off of console gaming all together and move to cheaper alternatives like the DS and PSP. So it's possible that the real winners will be the portables.

[ort888]

The year 2000 may as well be a million years ago when tracking the video game market. It's down to about 20% now.

World wide sales figures
Nintendo GameCube: 21.20 Million as of September 30, 2006 (Japan: 4.02, The Americas: 12.44, Other: 4.75)[6]
PlayStation 2: 111.25 Million shipped as of September 30, 2006 (Japan: 23.99, USA: 44.86, Europe: 42.40)[7]
Sega Dreamcast: 10.6 Million as of December 2004 (Japan: 2.30, Other: 8.30)[3]
Xbox: more than 24 Million as of May 10, 2006[8]

Game Boy Advance: 76.79 million as of September 30, 2006 (Japan: 16.62, The Americas: 39.10, Other: 21.06)[6]
including Game Boy Advance SP: 39.79 million as of September 30, 2006 (Japan: 6.48, The Americas: 21.95, Other: 11.37)[6]
and Game Boy Micro: 1.87 million as of September 30, 2006 (Japan: 0.59, The Americas: 0.47, Other: 0.80)[6]
Nintendo DS: 26.82 million as of September 30, 2006 (Japan: 11.52, The Americas: 7.51, Other: 7.79)[6]
including Nintendo DS Lite: 9.06 million as of September 30, 2006 (Japan: 4.97, The Americas: 2.23, Other: 1.86)[6]
PlayStation Portable: 22.94 million shipped as of September 30, 2006 (Japan: 5.37, USA: 9.57, Europe: 8.0)[13]


Console wars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Dakar²]

I can't believe the Dreamcast has sold half as many consoles as the GC. That's sad for Nintendo (and MS).

[icruise]

Yes, Japanese console sales account for about 23% of the total, not including Dreamcast or Xbox since they don't have a complete numbers breakdown. If you include the Xbox, it might be about 20%. But there's a reason that we don't judge the video game market by console sales -- that's not where the money is made.

In any case, though, as I said it's not the market that's important so much as it is the developers.

[Gamoe]

Originally Posted by icruise 

And I'll have to admit that I really don't want Microsoft to "own" console gaming. We all know what happens once Microsoft gets the top position in any market -- stagnation.

Thank you. I am surprised and disappointed at how many Mac users are rooting for the XBox and actually want MS to dominate yet another market. I want Nintendo to "win", but I'd rather see Sony get the gold than MS dominate yet another market and get more powerful.

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

I can't believe the Dreamcast has sold half as many consoles as the GC. That's sad for Nintendo (and MS).

The Dreamcast was an awesome machine. Blame its failure on Sega for not playing its cards right, but it had every right to be up there with the big guys.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Gamoe 

Thank you. I am surprised and disappointed at how many Mac users are rooting for the XBox and actually want MS to dominate yet another market. I want Nintendo to "win", but I'd rather see Sony get the gold than MS dominate yet another market and get more powerful.

You mean like Sony in consumer electronics, and Nintendo before that?

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Gamoe 

I am surprised and disappointed at how many Mac users are rooting for the XBox and actually want MS to dominate yet another market. I want Nintendo to "win", but I'd rather see Sony get the gold than MS dominate yet another market and get more powerful.

I'd rather have a good system. Sony hasn't exactly impressed me with their stuff while they've been on top of the video game market either.

[ort888]

Microsoft is delivering where it counts. I have my problems with the company like everyone else, but when they offer a quality product at a fair price, I'm interested.

If Window's didn't suck, I would probably like it too.

[icruise]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

I'd rather have a good system. Sony hasn't exactly impressed me with their stuff while they've been on top of the video game market either.

What didn't you like?

[Chuckit]

First they tried to use the PSP to foist a shitty, unnecessary media format on the market. Then they released an underpowered successor to the PS2 — one with no real innovation or vision, certainly less than either Microsoft or Nintendo showed — that was still overpriced and basically amounted to yet another attempt to foist their proprietary media format on the market.

If Microsoft is going to honestly compete in quality rather than try to use their market dominance to force crap down people's throats — which seems to be Sony's strategy — I say that's a move in the right direction. After they installed a rootkit on their customers' computers, my trust towards Sony is not much greater than my trust towards Microsoft.

[icruise]

I thought you were referring to the PS2. No?

I think UMD is just fine as a medium for games (the games that have unreasonable load times are actually relatively rare and are examples of sloppy programming). But yeah, UMD videos were a dumb idea for a lot of reasons.

[Dakar²]

He said Sony.

[icruise]

I know that, but he also said "while they were at the top of the video game market" so I assumed he was referring to the PS2 and not the PS3/PSP.

[Dakar²]

They certainly did release the PSP while on top. How long has it been out for?

[icruise]

The PSP has never been on top, has it?

[Dakar²]

The PSP is a release that occurred while Sony was on top.

[icruise]

Not in portable gaming they weren't. But this is all semantics.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by icruise 

I thought you were referring to the PS2. No?

Nah, the PSP and PS3 are what they made while they were on top. The PS2 was how they achieved dominance in the first place. It looks to me like they got complacent way too fast.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by icruise 

Not in portable gaming they weren't. But this is all semantics.

No, it was a use of their 'dominance'.

You really seem to be missing the point here.

[icruise]

OK, thanks for the condescension. Since this *whole thread* is already about the PS3 (and about home consoles in general), when he said that he wasn't a fan of what they did "when they were on top" (i.e. earlier -- not now), I interpreted it as being a reference to the PS2 -- not the PS3 or PSP. Is that so hard to understand? I can see what he meant now, but I don't think my interpretation is so out of left field.

[Dakar²]

I apologize, I wasn't trying to be condescending. But you really seem to be talking about the PS2 which is what got them on top. From what I understand he's talking about what moves they've done since they got on top.

Edit: I never said you're interpretation was 'crazy' just that it was incorrect.

[icruise]

Well, I always considered the original Playstation to be what put them on top -- according to the link given above, it sold 102.5 million units, which is more than 3 times as many as the Nintendo 64 and 10 times as many as the Saturn. The PS2 further cemented their hold on the market, but they were already on top when it came out.

[Dakar²]

I'm curious how many PS1s they had sold around 2001 (in comparison to the N64). I thought it was relatively close then.

[icruise]

You think they sold an additional 70 million systems since 2001?

[Dakar²]

No, not when you spell it out like that.

But I remember hearing it had a second life as a $50 system that had been unseen before.

Edit: 77 mil to 30 mil in early 2001, roughly...

[Hawkeye_a]

the XB360 isnt a good "product", look at the failure rates and those "red ring of deaths". And Microsoft is only extending the warranties/honoring them in the US. thats crap service, but did you expect any better ?

Both Sony and Microsoft are bohemoths, fighting for marketshare...by forcing crap down consumer's throats (selling stuff at a loss, some people like it...i call them short sighted after what ive learned from desktop operating systems).

We have "a" Microsoft fanboy at work(he's the only guy who uses a PC as opposed to a Mac)...and his only argument is how awesome games look and that it's going to "crap" all over the Wii. The XB360 has been out in Oz since march(i think). In comparison there are 3 of us who own Wiis and 2 more planning on getting one soon.

Apart from the fact that theyre both(XB360 and PS3) not compelling products for the prices asked, i refuse to contribute to the success of these dishonest (corporate, public) corporations, trying to dominate markets where they do not belong by using resources from other profit streams. cause in the long run that stifles competition, kills innovation and the consumer inevitably looses.

I'd prefer it if Sega, Atari and Nintendo (all game companies) were making consoles and competing.

[Kenneth]

That's it, I'm selling my Xbox 360. I just feel happier on my PS3 and Wii.

[ort888]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

the XB360 isnt a good "product", look at the failure rates and those "red ring of deaths". And Microsoft is only extending the warranties/honoring them in the US. thats crap service, but did you expect any better ?

Both Sony and Microsoft are bohemoths, fighting for marketshare...by forcing crap down consumer's throats (selling stuff at a loss, some people like it...i call them short sighted after what ive learned from desktop operating systems).

We have "a" Microsoft fanboy at work(he's the only guy who uses a PC as opposed to a Mac)...and his only argument is how awesome games look and that it's going to "crap" all over the Wii. The XB360 has been out in Oz since march(i think). In comparison there are 3 of us who own Wiis and 2 more planning on getting one soon.

Apart from the fact that theyre both(XB360 and PS3) not compelling products for the prices asked, i refuse to contribute to the success of these dishonest (corporate, public) corporations, trying to dominate markets where they do not belong by using resources from other profit streams. cause in the long run that stifles competition, kills innovation and the consumer inevitably looses.

I'd prefer it if Sega, Atari and Nintendo (all game companies) were making consoles and competing.

All 3 of these companies are guilty of shady business practices. Nintendo was monopolistic and ruthless in the 80s and 90s. They bullied 3rd party developers and got away with a lot because they were the only game in town.

People act like Nintendo is a non-for-profit company who makes game for the love of children. Visiting the Nintendo headquarters is not like going to see Willy Wonka.

[Gamoe]

Originally Posted by Eug 

You mean like Sony in consumer electronics, and Nintendo before that?

Somewhat. Sony is certainly one of the strongest brands in consumer electronics, and I so think Sony has gotten too big for our own good, but they are certainly not a monopoly, when RCA, Phillips, GE, Panasonic, JVC and other recognized brand names (as well as smaller, cheaper brands) are also competing and provide choice.

Nintendo has always had competition. Sometimes less and sometimes more, but I don't ever recall them being the only console maker out there for long.

Originally Posted by ort888 

Microsoft is delivering where it counts. I have my problems with the company like everyone else, but when they offer a quality product at a fair price, I'm interested.

If Window's didn't suck, I would probably like it too.

Then you are putting your own selfish interests above that of your responsibility of being an ethical consumer, and you've no right to complain when M$ or some other ruthless, heartless company is dominant is just about every industry.

Although I cannot stand Windows from a purely design and aesthetic point of view, the main reason I refuse to buy and use it at home myself is because I object to how it got to be the dominant OS, and I object to not having a choice, so I use the best alternative available-- Mac OS X, and Linux in some cases.

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

After they installed a rootkit on their customers' computers, my trust towards Sony is not much greater than my trust towards Microsoft.

Agreed. But who has more power at the moment? I'd rather M$ not have any more power, even if it means Sony gaining some. Of course, I'd like to see Nintendo win, as I've mentioned several times. But having Nintendo as the sole console maker would not appeal to me in the least, as I believe that honest competition is essential for consumer choice and better products.

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

Apart from the fact that they're both(XB360 and PS3) not compelling products for the prices asked, i refuse to contribute to the success of these dishonest (corporate, public) corporations, trying to dominate markets where they do not belong by using resources from other profit streams. cause in the long run that stifles competition, kills innovation and the consumer inevitably looses.

I'd prefer it if Sega, Atari and Nintendo (all game companies) were making consoles and competing.

Well said. I'd also rather see those companies competing once again in the home console and even portable console market. At least they wouldn't have ulterior agendas like Sony and Microsoft.

Originally Posted by ort888 

All 3 of these companies are guilty of shady business practices. Nintendo was monopolistic and ruthless in the 80s and 90s. They bullied 3rd party developers and got away with a lot because they were the only game in town.

People act like Nintendo is a non-for-profit company who makes game for the love of children. Visiting the Nintendo headquarters is not like going to see Willy Wonka.

Nintendo is certainly not non-for-profit nor even "kids-only", and I agree with your assessment. Nintendo is no saint. But of the three, I believe it to be the best company, ethically speaking, and the one most concerned with their work and art and gaming philosophy in general.

Nintendo was indeed a bully at times, and rather arrogant. But I think they've received a good does of humility since then and I think they've learned their lesson. Thing is, like a presidential election, you try to choose the lessor evil, as we all know none of the running candidates are saints.

Perhaps it's a bit much to ask for some, but I am asking you to look at the big picture and choose according to the good of the people-- that is, us-- rather than just for your own want at the moment.

We give these companies their power. Always remember that. And we have no right to complain about monopolies and corporate bullies if through our purchasing decisions we support those companies and let them get away with such things.

Frankly, for years (prior to the XBox) I've wanted to see a passionate North American company rise up and give Nintendo (and Sega) a run for their money (like the Japanese did with American cars), but unfortunately, the only North American company which did so neither did it for the right reason, nor can I stand behind, considering what it has done and continues to do in many markets.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by ort888 

All 3 of these companies are guilty of shady business practices. Nintendo was monopolistic and ruthless in the 80s and 90s. They bullied 3rd party developers and got away with a lot because they were the only game in town.

Nintendo was not the only game in town at any point in the '90s.

[pyrite]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

the XB360 isnt a good "product", look at the failure rates and those "red ring of deaths". And Microsoft is only extending the warranties/honoring them in the US. thats crap service, but did you expect any better ?

Both Sony and Microsoft are bohemoths, fighting for marketshare...by forcing crap down consumer's throats (selling stuff at a loss, some people like it...i call them short sighted after what ive learned from desktop operating systems).

We have "a" Microsoft fanboy at work(he's the only guy who uses a PC as opposed to a Mac)...and his only argument is how awesome games look and that it's going to "crap" all over the Wii. The XB360 has been out in Oz since march(i think). In comparison there are 3 of us who own Wiis and 2 more planning on getting one soon.

Apart from the fact that theyre both(XB360 and PS3) not compelling products for the prices asked, i refuse to contribute to the success of these dishonest (corporate, public) corporations, trying to dominate markets where they do not belong by using resources from other profit streams. cause in the long run that stifles competition, kills innovation and the consumer inevitably looses.

I'd prefer it if Sega, Atari and Nintendo (all game companies) were making consoles and competing.

i'm sorry, but you have no idea what you're talking about! to say 'xbox 360 is not a good product' because of the initial failure rates is like saying macbook is a crappy product for the very same reason.. both had a rocky start in terms of quality control, and have settled down to become very reliable and high quality products.
if you look up the failure rate of PS2 in its first 6 months you'll see it wasn't such a different a story.. i've heard plenty of reports of people who had 2 or 3 units fail in a row in the first 12 months...

and the 'dishonest' act of 'trying to dominate markets' is a thing called 'business', which you apparently know little about.. i'm not trying to offend you, but every one of these corporations is trying to dominate, sony in particular. some analysts have been bold enough to say (rightly or wrongly) that the future of sony electronics and blu-ray ride solely on the back of PS3, so you can bet your ass they'll be planning to dominate! And dominate globally, obliterating the competition..
i personally have no problem with this mentality. it's exactly what gives us great, passionate products and competition between platforms

[Hawkeye_a]

Kinda like windows and internet explorer, right ?

Since i dont know much about or have my own business, im guessing you do. so lets take my opinion on Microsoft's (and Sony's) business practices for granted.

Customer service and QA arent even the issue here. Nntendo's straps break, PS2s fail, etc.... Nintendo replaced 3.2 million straps for free. PS2s are fixed under warranty.

After doing a software update, on many XB360s, u get teh red ring of death, and Microsf will charge you to get it sorted out if your not in the U.S. (the only reason they are supporting US customer's is probably cause of consumer pressure). That, from whichever angle you look at it, is poor product develoment, poor testing, poor quality assurance and pooor after sale service.

i personally have no problem with this mentality. it's exactly what gives us great, passionate products and competition between platforms

Of course you are probably very happy with the state of affairs with Windows these days and the quality and service you get for that Microsoft system... so please by all means continue to support them, wouldnt it be great if all electronics were of this quality? (sarcasm)

[pyrite]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

Kinda like windows and internet explorer, right ?

Since i dont know much about or have my own business, im guessing you do. so lets take my opinion on Microsoft's (and Sony's) business practices for granted.

Customer service and QA arent even the issue here. Nntendo's straps break, PS2s fail, etc.... Nintendo replaced 3.2 million straps for free. PS2s are fixed under warranty.

After doing a software update, on many XB360s, u get teh red ring of death, and Microsf will charge you to get it sorted out if your not in the U.S. (the only reason they are supporting US customer's is probably cause of consumer pressure). That, from whichever angle you look at it, is poor product develoment, poor testing, poor quality assurance and pooor after sale service.



Of course you are probably very happy with the state of affairs with Windows these days and the quality and service you get for that Microsoft system... so please by all means continue to support them, wouldnt it be great if all electronics were of this quality? (sarcasm)

i think we're coming at this from different angles.. i'm only talking about the quality of the xbox itself, i mentioned nothing of after-sales support. i have no experience with Xbox customer service except a knowledge that MS agreed to replace the pre-january 06 units if problems popped up. their customer service may be inferior to nintendo and sony for all i know, but as it stands today their console rocks. great hardware, great games, great future releases to look forward to.
do people here stop buying mac because of the deficiencies of apple's support? i've heard more apple customer service horror stories than i can care to count, but i'm still a happy mac user.

[pyrite]

maybe i missed your point entirely.. are you talking about MS making the games market stagnant by monopolising?

[ort888]

Originally Posted by Gamoe 

...Thing is, like a presidential election, you try to choose the lessor evil, as we all know none of the running candidates are saints.

Or rather, I choose the product that is the best games for the money? At this stage, I feel that Nintendo and Microsoft are trying the hardest to please me as a customer... and of the two, Microsoft has a much more appealing product for me.

[pyrite]

Originally Posted by ort888 

Or rather, I choose the product that is the best games for the money? At this stage, I feel that Nintendo and Microsoft are trying the hardest to please me as a customer... and of the two, Microsoft has a much more appealing product for me.

i'll second that

[icruise]

Yes, when you look at what the most attractive offering is right at this moment, the order is flip-flopped from what I said above. The Xbox 360 is on top (not surprising, given its one-year head start, but still true). The Wii is second, with a halfway decent lineup, although without any real standouts aside from Zelda. And the PS3 is in a distant third with only one truly good game (Resistance) and a number of OK games, most of which already appeared on the Xbox 360. If you're looking for something to play *right now* or even for the next 6 months or so, the Xbox 360 is the way to go. But then again, this shouldn't be much of a surprise to anyone. Right after launch, few systems have really good lineups. When you look into the future, though, I don't think things are nearly as clear.

Let me try and shift gears a little bit and offer up a new topic. I was having a discussion on another forum about whether the Blu-ray drive had anything to offer games over normal DVD. What with games like Blue Dragon now shipping on 3 DVDs, it seems to me that the extra storage provided by Blu-ray may be needed. And before someone makes the comment about multi-disc games not being a big deal, let me say that I generally agree. Changing the disc a couple of times in the course of a long role playing game doesn't really matter that much. But what about games that aren't linear RPGs? Couldn't the extra space be used to create a large free-roaming game world like in Oblivion or Grand Theft Auto? Couldn't it be used for better audio or graphics? Or more cut scenes in HD?

What do you think? Will the ~9GB limit of a normal DVD become an issue for Xbox 360 games in the future? Will the greater storage of the PS3's discs give it an advantage (particularly in games developed exclusively for the PS3)?

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by icruise 

Let me try and shift gears a little bit and offer up a new topic. I was having a discussion on another forum about whether the Blu-ray drive had anything to offer games over normal DVD.

Resistance is over 20 gigs also.

[pyrite]

Originally Posted by icruise 

Yes, when you look at what the most attractive offering is right at this moment, the order is flip-flopped from what I said above. The Xbox 360 is on top (not surprising, given its one-year head start, but still true). The Wii is second, with a halfway decent lineup, although without any real standouts aside from Zelda. And the PS3 is in a distant third with only one truly good game (Resistance) and a number of OK games, most of which already appeared on the Xbox 360. If you're looking for something to play *right now* or even for the next 6 months or so, the Xbox 360 is the way to go. But then again, this shouldn't be much of a surprise to anyone. Right after launch, few systems have really good lineups. When you look into the future, though, I don't think things are nearly as clear.

Let me try and shift gears a little bit and offer up a new topic. I was having a discussion on another forum about whether the Blu-ray drive had anything to offer games over normal DVD. What with games like Blue Dragon now shipping on 3 DVDs, it seems to me that the extra storage provided by Blu-ray may be needed. And before someone makes the comment about multi-disc games not being a big deal, let me say that I generally agree. Changing the disc a couple of times in the course of a long role playing game doesn't really matter that much. But what about games that aren't linear RPGs? Couldn't the extra space be used to create a large free-roaming game world like in Oblivion or Grand Theft Auto? Couldn't it be used for better audio or graphics? Or more cut scenes in HD?

What do you think? Will the ~9GB limit of a normal DVD become an issue for Xbox 360 games in the future? Will the greater storage of the PS3's discs give it an advantage (particularly in games developed exclusively for the PS3)?

this is the one technical advantage of PS3 that i definitely agree with. sony have future-proofed themselves by including blu-ray, where xbox is restricted to the trusty dual-layer, which will DEFINITELY limit it in some games in future. Gears of War, for example, includes mostly real-time cut-scenes (gorgeous), but the few pre-rendered scenes in the game (particularly the ending sequence) sometimes have the appearance of being compressed considerably more than they would need to be on a higher capacity disc, showing some some poor gradients and slight pixelation (i'm not sure whether this was because they ran out of space or not, i'm only guessing).

at the moment that's no big deal at all, barely even noticeable, but we're only 1 year into the life of the console, so space requirements will undoubtedly change with new graphics technologies before long..
the odd multi-disc game is fine as far as i'm concerned, i never had a problem with changing discs on metal gear solid or final fantasy for example, but free-roaming open-world games (which i'm fortunately not into anyway) will definitely feel the restriction on a technical level.

the xbox360 HD-DVD drive is a great option for HD movie playback, but i'd be very surprised if they ever change their mind about using it for actual games.

to me, blu-ray is the ONLY thing that PS3 has over Xbox 360 (many developers agree or even prefer the 360 over PS3), and the practical advantage of that is debatable and depends on the games you're into anyway. however, in terms of being a long-term format, it's got obvious advantages

[Hawkeye_a]

If Zelda twilight Princess reqires a 1.5GB gamecube disc, and this game is absolutely massive.....

But on the other hand, the texture resolution isnt as high, there was no voice acting, and only midi music. I think 8.xGB should be sufficient, obviously 3-4 years down the road it'll be a limiting factor. But if you only have 2-3 games actually needing more, its not worth the added cost per customer imo.

BR-DVD as a gaming medium is just as necessary as UMD for a gaming medium (when the mini-DVD gamecube offered similar capisity and was already on the market). obviously propreitary media formats is Sony's primary business these days.

And as far as Microsoft and the Xbox ....the XBox division is a subset of Microsoft as a corporation, and my satisfaction level with ANY microsoft is lower than ther nearest competitor.....

Windows vs Microsoft, IE vs Safari or Firefox, and i dont think their testing/qa/development has improved a whole lot for the XBox.

[icruise]

If you're suggesting that the PSP should have used mini-DVDs, I think that's not a particularly good idea. Mini-DVDs are significantly bigger than UMD discs, and I'm not sure if they're suited to mobile applications in the same way that UMDs are. Also, depending on how you look at it, the Gamecube's media is just as proprietary as the PSP's, since it is not a standard mini-DVD and can only be used in the Gamecube.

[Dakar²]

The GC disc was definitely proprietary. It was also the only system that needed multiple discs for some games last gen.

[smacintush]

The 360 is in a position to hit the most consumers, not because of some MS conspiracy or dirty business practices but because they have the product that can appeal to the widest variety of likely buyers.

It has HD-DVD capability…but you don't have to pay for it if you don't want it.
It has a great controller that is the type of controller that we have been used to for YEARS.
It has wireless capability…but you don't have to pay for it if you don't want it.
It has great graphics for those that care.
It has XBOX live.
It has a good game lineup with 2007 looking to upgrade that to a great lineup.

You can hate MS all you want but the 360 is a great product. Period. It's success is in no way the result of anything other than a great team bringing a great product to market and letting everyone know how great it is.

One of the reasons I bought a Mac was an ideological one. I didn't like MS and I still don't.

Then I grew up.

Call it selfish if you want but life is too short to deprive ourselves of the enjoyment of something out of silly ideology. This isn't life or death, or environmental disaster, it's a GAME. If you like it buy it, if you don't…DON'T. It really is that simple.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by pyrite 

this is the one technical advantage of PS3 that i definitely agree with. sony have future-proofed themselves by including blu-ray, where xbox is restricted to the trusty dual-layer, which will DEFINITELY limit it in some games in future. Gears of War, for example, includes mostly real-time cut-scenes (gorgeous), but the few pre-rendered scenes in the game (particularly the ending sequence) sometimes have the appearance of being compressed considerably more than they would need to be on a higher capacity disc, showing some some poor gradients and slight pixelation (i'm not sure whether this was because they ran out of space or not, i'm only guessing).

Again, the PS3 doesn't have enough VRAM to take advantage of Bluray's capacity. Bluray will help in game length, but not graphics quality.