backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 85 comment(s) - last by Chaser.. on Mar 25 at 4:00 PM
Sony hands out free 46" HDTVs to the first 100 customers in London

Eager London gamers that waited in line to get their hands on a PlayStation 3 this morning got way more than they may have bargained for before camping out. Sony, obviously in a generous mood, gave the first 100 customers to purchase a £425 ($834 USD) PS3 a free 46" HDTV and a free taxi ride home.

In all, Sony gave away over £250,000 ($490,450 USD) in HDTVs to accompany the PS3 launch. The free taxi ride was most likely a nod to the fact that many customers who showed up to purchase a PS3 might not have exactly had enough room to transport a 46" HDTV back to their homes.

"I feel fantastic. I'm delighted that everyone here also gets a television," said 17-year-old Ritatsu Thomas who was the first buyer in line.

The PS3 has gotten off to a somewhat slow start in the United States and has been consistently outsold by both the Wii and Xbox 360 since its November launch. Sony is confident, however, that the European and Australian launches of its PS3 will help vault it into first place in the next generation console wars. A strong showing in these two regions could help boost the overall global sales numbers of the PS3.

Sony has also had a few months to add features to the PS3's firmware and bulk up its game library to entice European gamers. "There are benefits for European consumers - there are more games available, more Blu-ray movies and we've updated the online PlayStation network," said Sony's Phil Harrison.

Sony had originally planned to launch the PS3 simultaneously worldwide on November 17, 2006. The company announced, however, in early September 2006 that the European launch would be delayed until March 2007. Sony at the time cited problems with manufacturing blue laser diodes as one of the reasons for the delay.

Despite the delay, Sony is ready to conquer Europe and has made 200,000 consoles available for the UK launch.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
But no price cut?
By BMFPitt on 3/23/2007 12:42:33 AM , Rating: 2
If they had that here, and I didn't have an HDTV and an XBox 360 already, that would be worth it.

But I wonder how many games you would have to buy for them just to break even on the deal?




RE: But no price cut?
By Macuser89 on 3/23/2007 12:46:19 AM , Rating: 2
^^ more games then the PS3 has out. I wish the PS3 did better.


RE: But no price cut?
By dome1234 on 3/23/2007 12:51:12 AM , Rating: 2
the quarter million bucks is a tad overrated. I won't be too suprised if they're older model. As sony concentrates on lcd tv as I read somewhere they're ditching plasma etc, I'd expect big sale on their non-lcd models to get rid of inventory quick. Warehouse spaces for bulky hdtv aren't cheap I would think.


RE: But no price cut?
By Marcus Yam on 3/23/2007 1:08:02 AM , Rating: 2
From what I understand, it was a Bravia TV. I don't care how old the model is, all Bravia's are great looking sets.

I'd even trade my Emotion Engine + Graphics Synthesizer for a Bravia.

Amazing deal from Sony Europe.


RE: But no price cut?
By ObscureCaucasian on 3/23/2007 1:49:13 AM , Rating: 2
Well for the first 100 in London. Sony just wanted to draw people out for the launch and probably hopes that number 101 on will stay even w/o the tv.


RE: But no price cut?
By dome1234 on 3/23/2007 6:03:54 AM , Rating: 2
I'm not complaining by the way. That freebie certainly is better than free t-shirts. Bravia tv line stretches far, if it's a projection, it's not ideal for gaming.

the deal's only valid for those who queued for the launch party I suppose. I don't think they advertise it baiting more folks to turn up.


RE: But no price cut?
By BZDTemp on 3/23/2007 5:58:24 AM , Rating: 2
It's also worth remembering that Sony does not pay retail for the TV's plus it's pretty cheap PR.


RE: But no price cut?
By dome1234 on 3/23/2007 6:05:32 AM , Rating: 2
i wouldn't say cheap. the prices for consumer electronics are pretty cutthroat due to the competition. But certainly lower than retail, by how much is everyone's guesses.


RE: But no price cut?
By brshoemak on 3/23/2007 7:39:55 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
i wouldn't say cheap. the prices for consumer electronics are pretty cutthroat due to the competition. But certainly lower than retail, by how much is everyone's guesses.


A majority of consumer electronics have razor thin margins (think digital cameras and computers), but most non-tube TV's still have quite a hefty markup in the retail space.


RE: But no price cut?
By exdeath on 3/23/07, Rating: -1
RE: But no price cut?
By exdeath on 3/23/2007 12:09:47 PM , Rating: 2
Back to the thread ...

Point being after my above post, is that it probably didn't cost as much as you think it cost to give a few TVs away.

If they were flat panels, it would be great use for those panels with a few bad pixels that most normal people would never notice =D If I'm paying $1200 for a 30" LCD for my PC, I demand zero dead sub pixels because I am paying a premium price for a premium product. When you pay $300k for a Ferrari, even a single bad stitch in the leather is absolutely not acceptable.

But if I was given a free 46" HDTV, can't really complain too much if it's only 99.99% perfect.


RE: But no price cut?
By Orbs on 3/23/2007 1:04:34 PM , Rating: 2
Since we're giving economics lessons, you have to remember opportunity cost. Even if it's much less expensive for Sony to manufacture those TVs, they would have sold at or close to the MSRP (given that the lucky few were lining up outside retail outlets). Therefore, Sony lost a lot of profit on that deal.

This may be somewhat mitigated by the bundle (or price hike in the worst case) of the PS3. The article cited greater than $800 US for the PS3s being purchased wheras it's $600 in the US for their premium package.


RE: But no price cut?
By exdeath on 3/23/2007 1:23:49 PM , Rating: 2
Definately. Giving away something free is always going to cause a loss, but giving away something that consumers are more than willing to pay 500% markup on? Definately lost opportunity.

This plan has something to do with making sure when these new PS3 owners show their new PS3s to their friends, it will be on a HDTV and leave a bigger impression. Better chance of a future PS3 and Sony HDTV customer.


RE: But no price cut?
By aos007 on 3/23/2007 1:36:18 PM , Rating: 2
"free £2,500 high-definition TV"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6482789.stm

100 x 2500 = quarter million POUNDS

These are not cheap nor crappy TVs. They are likely the latest 1080p Bravias, or at worst the previous model thoguh I doubt those would cost that much. Not XBR2's but still pretty high up on the food chain.


RE: But no price cut?
By FastEddie on 3/23/2007 7:33:39 PM , Rating: 2
A quarter of a million added to their advertising budget is a drop in the bucket.


Waiting...
By Ard on 3/23/2007 1:17:42 AM , Rating: 2
Now I'll just sit back and watch as the fanboys attempt to spin this negatively.




RE: Waiting...
By jtesoro on 3/23/2007 1:50:25 AM , Rating: 2
Reading through, it's happening already. On the opposite site, where is michal1980? Now he actually will have something more solid to back his statements up.


RE: Waiting...
By FITCamaro on 3/23/2007 7:25:35 AM , Rating: 2
All Sony bashing aside, it is a bad thing when a company feels compelled to give away something thats 2-3x more expensive than the item itself. Especially when they're claiming that anyone and everyone is clamoring to buy their product. That's like Chevy saying "Come buy a Cobalt and we'll give you a Corvette for free".

It truly shows the desperate state Sony is in to try and recover from the slow sales of the PS3. Regardless of this little ploy, I have a feeling European gamers aren't going be much more enthusiastic about the PS3 than American gamers have been. Especially when you consider they're paying 1.5x as much as us for a handicapped product. $599 euros is like almost $900USD.


RE: Waiting...
By dice1111 on 3/23/2007 9:28:45 AM , Rating: 2
To be fair, they did not announce that they were giving the TV's away before the launch. They have only stated that it happened after the launch.

"You bought a Cobalt, and get to take away this Corvette for free" is a more accurate analogy.

Still a ploy for publicity, but not a means for people to come to the store to buy. Truely lucky people either way you spin it.


RE: Waiting...
By FITCamaro on 3/23/2007 12:23:44 PM , Rating: 2
Ok my analogy was wrong but nowhere did I say they announced the giveaway. Just that it was evidence of Sony's poor sales that they'd even do it when the item is supposedly in such high demand.


RE: Waiting...
By deeznuts on 3/23/2007 1:00:27 PM , Rating: 2
It's a poor marketing ploy if they did announce it. But they didn't. That's a huge difference. It's more of a gesture of good will then any marketing ploy. If anything it'll piss off customers 101 and on.

It is no way evidence of poor sales (there might be poor sales but this isn't evidence of it). If it was they would have announced it to draw attention and notoriety. But they didn't, the people who bought it were utterly and completely surprised.


RE: Waiting...
By Hawkido on 3/23/2007 3:18:40 PM , Rating: 2
I see what you are saying, but without the advertising notification, I would say this is more like an apology to europe for making them way 3 or 4 months for their turn. Plus the statement that when firends come over to see the PS3 at one of these friends house I am sure they will be blown away by the max potential of the PS3, instead of seeing it on a crappy or low rez set and thinking it really isn't much better than the XBOX360. Now if only the good games would come out. They have alot in the works but the Dev time is really harsh for the programmers. Perhaps the second and third gen games will Dev out alittle easier as they learn the system.


RE: Waiting...
By Phillycat on 3/23/2007 2:59:58 PM , Rating: 2
I guess this is where sony spent the money they saved by taking out the ps2 hardware.


Well...
By Gatt on 3/23/2007 12:37:18 AM , Rating: 1
I guess this is what they meant when they said they'd give you $1200 if you could find a PS3...

Though it's never a good sign when a company is handing out half a million dollars worth of free stuff to sell their product...




RE: Well...
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 3/23/2007 12:41:24 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Though it's never a good sign when a company is handing out half a million dollars worth of free stuff to sell their product...

To be fair, I don't think that the customers knew anything about it until they were already in line. And by the time anyone did know, the first 100 were probably already there.

So it wasn't so much of an enticement to get people to buy the PS3 at launch, it was more of a bonus to those that were there.


RE: Well...
By bozilla on 3/23/2007 3:40:45 AM , Rating: 2
Regardless Brandon, it is a marketing ploy nonetheless. For a company to promote an $800 piece of equipment by giving away a $3000 TV is pretty weird. I would say they are pulling everything they can to get this European launch successful since I'm pretty sure Playstation brand depends on it.

Sony's North American launch was a disaster, out of 1.2-1.3 million shipped units, what, they sold like 600-700k units if that. Not to mention lack of game and gaming studios support. The only thing that's pushing the PS3 in North America is Blu-Ray and not games and it should be other way around.

If they fail in Europe, I'm pretty sure Playstation brand is in big trouble. You follow these trends and write articles and are in touch with media in general, be honest and tell you don't think this is the case?


RE: Well...
By michal1980 on 3/23/07, Rating: -1
RE: Well...
By bozilla on 3/23/2007 12:23:58 PM , Rating: 2
hm..then they must've shipped a million more units to the States because all these $599 units overstocks everywhere are new shipments right?

Nah son, don't think so, in february I believe the number of sold units was around 500-600k, Blu-Ray reports confirm too as they say there's around 500k Blu-Ray players (through PS3) on the US market..Sony has shipped a total of 1.2 million units to North America (shipped being the keyword, not sold).

You go to any store in the States and it's packed with PS3 consoles. The numbers you are led to believe are nothing but marketing lingo. Their sales are miserable and can't even compare to either Wii and especally not XBox 360.


RE: Well...
By exdeath on 3/23/2007 12:46:59 PM , Rating: 2
I have no interest in current consoles due to lack of quality games. I have no desire to downgrade my resolution to play crappy PC FPS ports on a analog stick or play some 1000th incarnation of Madden XYZQP 3000 Ultra Edition! or Sponge Bob, Pokemon, and Dora The Explorer... I think I've made my point.

I view the SNES as the greatest game console ever made.

But I still check the shelves just to see how things are going. I see 360s from time to time, I have never EVER seen a Wii on a shelf and don't even know what the box looks like, but I see PS3s in both flavors just sitting there, and even witnessed people returning them, or trying to return them after they couldnt sell them on ebay... LOL

Metroid might do it for me for the Wii... esp being backward compatible with the Gamecube at the hardware and register level... I see it as a direct replacement for the Gamecube which has a library of like the 8 games that are worth having one for, in addition to the 3 Wii games that I see as being worthwhile.

The 360 only has Gears of War and Dead Rising for me. A Dead Rising update to coop mode will be what sells me a 360 at this point in time.

The PS3? I want one more than any of the other consoles, but I actually have no interest in getting games for it. I only want one to use as a home brew dev kit to play around on the Cell SDK and experiment with parallel programming in the sadomasichist ways that only a demo coder could understand. =D


RE: Well...
By crystal clear on 3/25/2007 2:35:19 AM , Rating: 2
Just overheard a conversation,it goes like this-

Majority of the first 100 were Family members/Friends of
Sony staff-INSIDE INFORMATION ofcourse.

Nobody can deny- Sony staff KNEW about this,before the actual sale began.

The word spreads around mouth to ear.

Anyway not problem-Just overheard what people talk.


Im sorry
By Acanthus on 3/23/2007 9:05:42 AM , Rating: 4
But im lmao at someone saying using your PS3 for F@H is a selling point :D

Sorry for the not so constructive post, but man... hah.




RE: Im sorry
By elmikethemike on 3/23/2007 9:32:56 AM , Rating: 1
No it's not a selling point, but the PS3 destroys PC's in terms of its crunching power. Here are some stats for the F@H page:

OS Type Current TFLOPS* Active CPUs Total CPUs
Windows 151 158963 1624537
Mac OS X/PowerPC 7 8708 95323
Mac OS X/Intel 7 2696 7184
Linux 35 24930 215638
GPU 41 690 2179
PLAYSTATION®3 270 11034 11968
Total 511 207021 1956829


RE: Im sorry
By PrinceGaz on 3/23/2007 1:49:30 PM , Rating: 3
So lets look at the Current GFLOPS per Active CPU figures, as they are more meaningful (I effectively multiplied TFLOPS by 1000 to get GFLOPS, as it is easier to use):

Windows 0.95
OS X/PowerPC 0.80
OS X/Intel 2.60
Linux 1.40
GPU 59.42
PS3 24.56

The PS3 of course folds a lot faster than the average PC out there as a lot of them will be a few years old, and even some ten times faster than the OS X/Intel Macs which is a more useful statistic as they have modern x86 CPUs. Bear in mind though that those ratings are GFLOPS/CPU, and it is single-threaded on PCs so you should double the OS X/Intel number to get a rough idea of how fast a dual-core can fold, or quadruple for a quad-core. Even the quad-core figure would be less than half as fast as the PS3 though.

However, and this is the killer that makes the PC far more powerful and cost effective, look at the figure for GPU. It's over twice as fast as the PS3, and that is using X1900 based graphics-cards which were the fastest of the previous generation. The GeForce 8800 should easily outperform the X1900 at F@H when a client is available, given its many highly-clocked shader units and how it was designed with some consideration to GPGPU use, and the X2800 series is likely to be at least as fast, if not faster still. You can pick up an X1900 for a lot less than the cost of a PS3 as well, and their prices are likely to tumble once more DX10 generation cards are released.

Unfortunately the PS3 cannot effectively utilise its RSX GPU for F@H, as it is based on the GeForce7 which is already known to be poor compared with the X1900 when handling GPGPU workloads, which is no doubt why they decided to utilise the PS3's Cell processor instead.

Yes, the PS3's Cell processor can fold faster than the x86 CPU in current PCs. That is no surprise as number-crunching is the sort of work the Cell processor was intended for (making it a very odd choice for a game console). But GPUs already available can far outperform the Cell at the same number crunching, and GPUs continue to advance in leaps and bounds.

So provided the PC is equipped with a decent graphics-card, the PC destroys the PS3 in terms of its crunching power.


RE: Im sorry
By Murst on 3/23/2007 3:00:27 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
So lets look at the Current GFLOPS per Active CPU figures


Umm... so how does an OS relate to active CPU? If you want to compare the processing power of the PS3, compare is to a CPU, not an operating system...

BTW, doesn't the PS3 run a version of Linux? If so, it seems it outdoes itself by a factor of 15... Impressive indeed!


RE: Im sorry
By crystal clear on 3/25/2007 2:40:21 AM , Rating: 2

Your forgiven!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In the meantime get yourself a course in English & Typing.

but man... hah


What the article forgot to mention
By EODetroit on 3/23/2007 11:12:37 AM , Rating: 3
What the news article forgot to mention was that after the taxi ride home, Sony also let them keep the taxi cab as a thank-you for being such loyal customers of the taxi cab company.




By bozilla on 3/23/2007 12:26:53 PM , Rating: 2
hahahahhhah...very funny


Bravo Sony!
By Assimilator87 on 3/23/2007 12:36:50 AM , Rating: 2
Wow, now that is what I call a launch.




RE: Bravo Sony!
By KernD on 3/23/2007 12:56:52 AM , Rating: 2
There obviously desperate, they are just trying to look generous, to improve there bad image, the deal is they make the TV's so there not giving away all that money, it cost them less than that to make the TV's, still allot of money, but not 500 000$ worth to Sony.


But...
By Lazarus Dark on 3/23/2007 11:19:14 AM , Rating: 2
Were they 1080p? Because I wouldn't even take anything less. I'd give it to my mother and just keep using my Westinghouse 37" 1080p, thank you very much.




RE: But...
By exdeath on 3/23/2007 12:33:14 PM , Rating: 2
Doubt it. Probably some 852x480 or 1024x768 16:9 crap left over.

On the other hand, it would be in their best interest to give people a display that can can show the PS3 in it's best light, so who knows.


Where is my HDTV?
By restrada on 3/23/2007 2:12:27 AM , Rating: 2
That is sure nice of Sony to do this. Too bad they couldn't do this for the US as well.




Sony in general
By exdeath on 3/23/2007 12:27:45 PM , Rating: 3
Sony is taking lots of well deserved flag for all their hyping and crap talking with the PS3 and to me its funny to see them pay for it. Maybe the tarnished reputation of the PS3 already will make them learn that people are tired of it.

Remember when nVidia always hyped their stuff and bragged about over hyped specs when competing with 3DFX back in the day? And how the TNT2 launched, late even, and miserably failed to live up to the nVidia hype? They took the same flak and hit to their reputation and image that Sony is taking right now. They flaunted the projected success of their future products based only and I mean ONLY on the name and success of a past product. Examples of this today would be Sony with the Playstation and Sony name and Square with the Final Fantasy name. You don’t see nVidia hyping the GeForce 8800 just because it’s a GeForce.

Notice how ever since then nVidia doesn't hype their stuff any more? Don’t get me wrong, all companies issue press releases and marketing materials, but they are careful about misleading consumers now. Nothing I have seen from nVidia in recent years is even close to the Sony-esque hype of the TNT2 days. Note that I am talking about the kind of hype originating from the company itself, not unrealistic consumer originated hype and conjecture. You pretty much don't even know specs on new cards until the cards are in production and actually on the shelves. It's all conjecture until then. They learned their lesson and regained their reputation to get where they are now. Speak softly and carry a big stick and let your product speak for itself. Hype and brag after your product is shown to be superior. Even stumbling blocks like the FX series I don't recall being surrounded in prerelease hype, they were just inferior products at the time and we expected better.

Maybe the PS3 will be Sony's TNT2 and they will learn to settle down in the future and be more conservative in promising things they cant deliver, and quit riding on their chic and trendy image alone... we can only hope. Sony makes a few things I like, better than the competition, but they need to loose the chic and trendy teenage “it says Sony and its blue and flashy so it makes me cool” appeal and just focus on making superior products that speak for themselves again.




RE: Sony in general
By somegeek on 3/23/07, Rating: -1
By Munkles on 3/23/2007 1:26:38 PM , Rating: 2
This is actually pretty funny,

I wonder how many of those 100 people will get home with their new HDTV, set it all up and then are aghast when they see how horrible the SD picture looks stretched out over those 46 inches all because Sony didnt want to incdlude component/HDMI cables with their ps3.

Sure its an easy remedy but I can just imagine the extreme happiness turned to confusion when they first turn it on.

LOL




I love my PS3
By panda10 on 3/23/2007 2:06:37 PM , Rating: 2
Going to buy Casino Royale tonight. I'm glad the Europeans got it for free- its a great movie.

The TV's- I think it was just a good will gesture to make the launch better than the US launch that had problems.

Ultimately, Sony doesn't care about being the number 1 console- they care about everyone switching to blu-ray. They will make more money off royalties using the blu-ray tech then on sales of PS3. PS3 is a great way to get more blu-ray players in people's homes. Its not about how many Wii/X-box were sold compared to PS3- its about how many HD-DVD players v. Blu-Ray players are there in people's homes- even if the Blu-Ray players count PS3's.




Such cheap and filthy marketing!
By vze4z7nx on 3/23/2007 3:44:07 PM , Rating: 2
Click on the link in the article that leads you to the BBC article.

I can't believe Micro$oft would being doing such a thing. I used to like Micro$oft, but after this, I'll have to reconsider purchasing the next Microsoft gaming console.




100 Londoners in unison...
By xphile on 3/23/2007 6:26:59 PM , Rating: 2
Wow! A free 46 inch TV too? Gee THANKS Sony, now I really WILL Make a profit on Ebay!




By xphile on 3/23/2007 7:03:24 PM , Rating: 2
From an article on one of our New Zealand news sites Stuff

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4003077a28.html

"A slow start to sales was mirrored across the Tasman, with just 65 fans queuing outside Sydney's Myers Department Store, disappointing organisers who had predicted thousands for the glizty launch."

Cant imagine the carnage there might have been if Sony had been left with 35 tvs to give away and nobody interested enough to show up to give them to. Now that would have been a story.

You'll see in that same artice a rep of Dick Smiths (one of our biggest electronics retail chains) saying they fully expected to be sold out by the end of the first day. A quick hunt on their site 36 hours after launch shows every single store still has stock. The biggest online gaming store has stock, seems everyone does. No shortages whatsoever and as you can see from that article next to no interest at launch either, and not much better next door in Australia.

Since NZ and Aus are 12 and 8-10 hours ahead of Europe respectively, maybe Sony decided they needed some kind of good news story out of the launch day and giving away 100 tvs was a good fast way to achieve it, either way even going back to the old "we are in it for the long haul and in the end we will be the dominant console" argument and even saying maybe they might be right, it was still a pretty dismal launch, especially down this end of the world.




Ford vs Chevy
By Chaser on 3/25/2007 4:00:12 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not too overly concerned about the DT reqding audience when it comes to the PS3 and the expert predictions for its future.

Your average consumer that yes can afford $599.00 for a very versatile HD Blue Ray player -and yes you do need a prety decent HDTV to appreciate Blue Ray in the first place isn't going to carefully examine Sony's marketing tactics, cusotmer service and all the other red herrings used in here to gleefully declare the PS3 DOA.

Most will look at the product, the game line up and the features to make their decision. Thankfully. I don;t think folding home processing statistics are on the mind of the average buyger either. Good grief.




fanoboys are g-a-y
By elmikethemike on 3/23/07, Rating: -1
RE: fanoboys are g-a-y
By Munkles on 3/23/2007 10:24:17 AM , Rating: 2
Mike,

I would by and large be considered a raving MS fanboy, and Im putting that out there right at the fore-front. Just that way there is no confusion.

My problem with the PS3 isnt with the hardware, or the games, or even the controller. My problem with Sony, lies squarely with how they do business as a company. Now mind you no company is perfect but I feel Sony is REALLY going for the f-u to the consumer.

A lot of MY "hatred" comes from the last generation where gamers got a product that was shoddy in construction, had poor performance components, and that Sony offered virtually nill to the development studios in terms of tools to create content, all while demanding extremely expensive licenses to create content while offering in return nothing but the brand-name.

I feel that simply put Sony is bad for developers, bad for consumers, and bad for games.

IN MY EXPERIENCE ive seen Sony rip people off time and time again. IMO developing on the Sony platform is poor for the gamer because it takes more time, more money, more energy to create a equal to or lesser game than the competing platforms due to the lack of tools to utilize the extremely (and unnecessarily so) complex hardware.

Oddly enough; EVEN THOUGH I am no Sony fan, this generation I feel Sony's offering is quite a bit more attractive than anything Nintendo has put out. I myself (as most Anand readers are) am a avid fan of bleeding edge tech. Therefore I love that Sony has made such a beast. I dont like that Nintendo released "Gamecube 2.0 - Now with gyroscopes!" I personally feel its almost a step backward.

I apologize if this post is a bit disjointed as Im trying to express my thoughts in a non-offensive manner without flaming or bashing.


RE: fanoboys are g-a-y
By Munkles on 3/23/2007 10:27:08 AM , Rating: 2
***no edit feature***

I forgot to add that I can easily afford a ps3, and do plan on purchasing one just as soon as something that I feel is worth my dollar apears on the system. So no my "hatred" is not rooted in money issues, jealousy or case of the "Jones's"


RE: fanoboys are g-a-y
By deeznuts on 3/23/2007 1:05:52 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I would by and large be considered a raving MS fanboy, and Im putting that out there right at the fore-front.


quote:
My problem with the PS3 isnt with the hardware, or the games, or even the controller. My problem with Sony, lies squarely with how they do business as a company. Now mind you no company is perfect but I feel Sony is REALLY going for the f-u to the consumer.


That's cool you admit your a fanboy, most won't even when they are. What I find funny is, outside of the console wars (due in most part to Sony F'ups) most people feel MS is the doing the big F-U to the consumer. M$ anyone? lol.

Not saying you do this, but I'd wager a pretty penny a lot of MS supporters could be found in another thread about Windows or Office bashing them. For me I don't bash MS for windows or office. I'm a capitalist at heart, and a greedy bastard (I'm trying to get rich in my career!) so anything a company does for more profit I can agree with.


RE: fanoboys are g-a-y
By Munkles on 3/23/2007 2:05:29 PM , Rating: 2
Deeznuts,

Again I must be an odd man out here but while I will readily admit that Windows/Office are over priced and buggy, they do however make some of the most functional and versatile software and hardware the world over.

Ive actually have been theorizing about some new pricing structures that might be better for MS and the consumer and am working on a business model for it.

MS has a lot of room for improvement but you'd be hard pressed to find a more generous (charitable), or dedicated company. When MS focuses on something they are nigh unstoppable mostly because their practices are so very sound.

Phase 1
Release a quality product that while it may not win any awards works well and has a lot of locked potential.
Phase 2
work out the majority of the bugs and look at which features their consumer base are most interested in
Phase 3
Unlock a few of those features and now that the core product works properly it allows for a more seamless experience
Phase 4
Repeat phase 2 and 3
Phase 5
Release a new complete solution that has all the features but standarizes them allowing for greater functionality.
Phase 6
Repeats phase 2 and 3

MS never wins right out of the gate but when they release new products. Often competitors get out ahead then they tend to sit back and relax enjoying their well earned victory, but all too soon MS gears up and works as hard to claw their way past their competitors and then dominate them with their indomitable market presence.

You think MS is being serious with the 360? Just you guys wait MS hasnt shown us anything yet. One thing about MS is that they learn from their mistakes and they arent tied to any one way of doing things. MS does what it takes to win and thats that.

Which is why while in general, they can be M$ (assholes) to me they will always be MS(guys who are always working to deliver a better product, and service to me.)


RE: fanoboys are g-a-y
By somegeek on 3/23/07, Rating: 0
RE: fanoboys are g-a-y
By Munkles on 3/23/2007 2:23:18 PM , Rating: 4
You may consider me a typical fanboy, hey thats your choice.

IMHO when im playing great games like God of War, MGS, Ace Combat, Ratchet and Clank etc. I cant help but wonder just how much better those games could be if instead of putting road-blocks in their path (poor hardware choices) if they gave them tools and a platform with which to truly unlock their potential.

Its really easy to say "but look they did overcame the obstacles!" that DOESNT however address that those great games may have been on an entirely different level of excellence if a different more developer-centric approach had been taken.

You might be the kind of person who likes to knock people down to see if they can get up and overcome their obstacles but Im not.

Long term? Ok lets look long term. IF sony maintains their lead console dominance you are likely to see the abolishment of independent development studios and creative material because the cost to create a Sony product is ridiculous - thus your most creative and inspired games will go away almost completely.

You think the market is stagnant now?! Lets see how much worse it gets when the only people who have the money to make games are Ubisoft and EA. Even from them, their choices will become more and more conservative as each game HAS to be more of a success because it costs so damn much.

Long term, Sony beats MS out of the market, you will all but cease seeing a strong set of WESTERN style games, because thats not what Sony does. All your games will feature wide-eyed anime characters. Games like Gears, and Halo will go unmade as Sony doesnt want to focus on the adult male but rather the "family unit"(not a bad thing btw).

I can argue this stuff all day but its not productive. Im not saying Sony should cease to exist or anything, just that I do NOT like their practices, I do NOT like their proprietary products, in general I find them to release fewer games to my taste, and I see them offering an adult American male virtually nothing. What I would like is a PS3-style product from them that drops the BRDVD format, and stops trying to imagine that the cell is the processing equivilent to the second comming.

I want a Sony that over-promises AND over delivers. I want them to be more open and friendly with their development studios and I want them to win (if they do) through content not hype.


RE: fanoboys are g-a-y
By bozilla on 3/23/2007 8:47:02 PM , Rating: 2
Beautifully said!


DailySquad: Home of the trendy Sony basher.
By somegeek on 3/23/07, Rating: -1
RE: DailySquad: Home of the trendy Sony basher.
By exdeath on 3/23/2007 1:12:03 PM , Rating: 3
Total bullshit...

Considering PC games have blown away HDTV resolutions and current console specs for a while now... PCs even started the rediculously high resolution texture trend; and PC games still ship on CDs, if not a single DVD... you're full of it.

Storage capacity is hardly an issue. How many PS2 games actually use up an entire DVD besides games that use extensive spoken dialog and FMV? I actually expect next generation games to be SMALLER. Texture quality and polygon counts will go up in the resource files, but the need for FMV cut scenes and 500 MB mpeg files should go away now with the real time power of the new consoles.

The game selection does suck but I think thats more of a gaming industry thing in general... reeks of stagmentation, rehashes, and another game industry crash if you ask me. There just hasn't been much good to play in a while.

The difference with the 360 and the Dreamcast is that the Dreamcast was actually superior to the PS2 (first gen DC games are far more vibrant and colorful than current gen PS2 games with their green and grey 8 bit textures), but the fan boiz bought the hype. They aren't buying the hype this time according to sales stats. Sega was also on their final legs of releasing crappy hardware. Dreamcast did the trick, but it was too late; their reputation had already been destroyed with 32X, Saturn, etc. Hardly the case with the 360; MS is gaining reputation in the console market with every move.

I'll stick with WOW, my SNES library, and my PS1 library for now... so far next generation titles are all shallow eye candy to flip a buck on the back of HDTV popularity while the game itself has no heart or soul.


RE: DailySquad: Home of the trendy Sony basher.
By somegeek on 3/23/2007 2:04:48 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
How many PS2 games actually use up an entire DVD


It's not a question of filling up a BR disc but using more than a DVD disc. Just as most PS2 games use more than a CD, most PS3 games will use more than a DVD. Saying Blu-ray storage doesn't matter is as dumb as saying the PS2 should have used CDs.


By deeznuts on 3/23/2007 3:16:43 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly. Blue Dragon for the 360 already takes up 3 dvds I believe.

Kojima has said MGS4 will use up most if not all of a dual layer BD disk (actually it might be Single layer but that wouldn't make sense since he said BD is necessary for MGS4)


RE: DailySquad: Home of the trendy Sony basher.
By FITCamaro on 3/23/2007 4:14:25 PM , Rating: 2
You Sony boys and your incessant taunting that if it isn't 1080p its crap mentality. And based on the sales, of the Wii and the Xbox 360, plenty of people want to hook up what you call "last generation SD based" consoles to their HDTVs.

Few people have 1080p TVs to even take advantage of its support. And the PS3 doesn't have the graphical horsepower to make a game play at a decent framerate and still have all the details turned on in 1080p. Which is why Microsoft choose to go with a <bminimum of 720p. It has a much larger install base, and it insured that every game would be capable of the best visuals possible. It also cuts down on the size of the textures required which aids in helping devs fit the game on standard DVD. The 360 is as capable as doing 1080p as the PS3, but neither probably has the horsepower to do it at a good framerate all the time.

Microsoft and Nintendo made their systems a games console first and foremost. Sony made theirs a games console second, and a way to push their format first. Even if devs do have to go to multiple discs for a game on the 360, who cares? Did you care on the Playstation with games like FFVII? No. Because it was a great game.

Microsoft could've used HD-DVD but it would have driven the price beyond what the majority of people are going to pay for a games console, as Sony is finding out. Plenty of Xbox 360 games can and will outdo the PS3 in graphical prowess because it's graphics hardware is far better and most PS3 games are going to be in 720p anyway so it will be an apples to apples comparison. And as the Wii is proving, graphics alone doesn't sell consoles.

Personally, I'll take a game with a great storyline, great controls, and even standard def graphics over a game thats output in 1080p but has no real compelling reason to play it(*cough* future Madden titles *cough*). I don't think anyone here would say the quality of the graphics is a reason not to play FFXII (granted the CG is damn impressive).


By somegeek on 3/23/2007 5:00:39 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Microsoft could've used HD-DVD...


No they couldn't have.

Microsoft doesn't have the confidence to fully back HD-DVD because Universal is the only major studio providing titles exclusively. By the way, this is the same Universal that screwed Bill Gates on the Zune deal. That pissed Bill Gates off so much that he said:
“People should just buy a CD and rip it. You are legal then.”

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=5377

DVD might be fine today but in the long run, the PS3 will be the better choice.


ironic.
By lwright84 on 3/23/07, Rating: -1
RE: ironic.
By Beany on 3/23/2007 1:26:40 AM , Rating: 1
The people that got a HD TV, also got a Taxi ride home. So how are they going to get mugged? Also while London isn't exactly the most safe part of the UK it's still alot safer than some places in the US, and the UK isn't retarded enough to allow people to buy guns. I'd be surprised if there were 1/10 as many incidends as in the US.


RE: ironic.
By ObscureCaucasian on 3/23/2007 1:52:53 AM , Rating: 1
Yea, I mean it's so stupid that we have a right to own a firearm here in America. That way I can defend myself against those muggers and thieves.... How terrible!


RE: ironic.
By aurareturn on 3/23/2007 2:12:55 AM , Rating: 3
Too bad you're too stupid to not bring the gun with you and the mugger is smart enough to bring it with him.


RE: ironic.
By sadffffff on 3/23/07, Rating: 0
RE: ironic.
By alifbaa on 3/23/2007 8:26:36 AM , Rating: 2
It must be nice to have such a wonderful relationship with every crook in the country that you know they will all give you the choice or even the opportunity to hand over your money.

Another point, what about hunters and those who enjoy target shooting? Shall we abolish their right to own firearms? It's a constitutionally guaranteed right, mess with it at your own peril. Look at Iraq right now. If there were death squads roaming your neighborhood hunting for you, wouldn't you be glad the government allows your family to own firearms? Bear in mind, I'm not saying firearms are the only answer in a situation like that, but for a person who is just trying to protect his family, they are literally a life saver. Do you think that can't happen over here? Do you remember what happened in New Orleans after Katrina? The founding fathers were not morons, and they were not talking about the national guard when they wrote the second amendment.

Firearms are the reason this country exists in the first place. Without them, we'd still be British. As much as I like the British now, the only reason they are so reasonable these days is because people all over the world found a way to out gun them and stand up to their previously imperialistic practices. By the way, today is the 200th anniversary of the British act to abolish slavery, another event brought on (albeit indirectly) by the American revolution.


RE: ironic.
By Munkles on 3/23/2007 1:15:41 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
by sadffffff on March 23, 2007 at 3:56 AM

because if more people had guns, less people would get hurt, right?

so if you had your gun and you got mugged, what are you gonig to do? shoot him? youre going to KILL a man??

well shut my mouth, ending someone's life is much better than him taking your money or your new toy.

if everyone had guns, noone would back down. a big fight arises and neigher side will back down because they know they have their gun. all thats going to accomplish is more gun fights. great idea.

guns arent really a means of self defence. guns are made to kill. if you want something for self defence, get something made for that purpose, get a tazer or mace, or something along those lines. making everyone in the public an executioner isnt the best of ideas


sadffffff,

Believe it or not, not all guns are made with the intention of killing people. Higher muzzle velocity, larger caliber, higher kenetic energy guns generally are but most of commonly available weapons that are popular among gun owners interested in self defense arent. You ask if "you are really going to kill a man?" the answer is no, but ill take out his knee-cap or put a bullet through his shoulder/gun-hand/wrist so he cant hurt me. The "bad guy" might suffer irreperable damage but he certainly wont die.

Just my $.02 but Switzerland is by many accounts possibly THE safest place to live and for all intents and purposes the ENTIRE countries population is a gun-owner. People who fear guns just beg for more violent crime on themselves and their family. The trick is that you HAVE to be properly trained and properly educated on weapons...

Then again I guess if parents in this country were doing a good job of that this wouldnt be an issue huh?

Back on the topic at hand though, its a nice gimmick and will certainly ensure people line up for one but outside that initial rush, and the publicity I firmly believe that the ps3 by most accounts will fail in Europe.


RE: ironic.
By lwright84 on 3/23/2007 1:54:12 AM , Rating: 1
all this i understand.. apparently my attempt at amusing satire failed.


RE: ironic.
By ObscureCaucasian on 3/23/2007 1:59:10 AM , Rating: 2
Ohhh.... my bad


RE: ironic.
By otispunkmeyer on 3/23/2007 4:51:30 AM , Rating: 2
while its true we arent as accustomed to guns, theres no guns stores and we dont see them as a commodity of sorts, guns are still slowly finding their way over here. "gang" style shootings and murders are getting more common.

only 2 weeks ago, a bouncer at my university who was part of the security team at an event held at the students union (the entire university is campus based also, not spread throughout town center) got shot 3 times after the culprit let of CS gas canister in the foyer.

its slowly getting here, first it was knives, now its guns.


RE: ironic.
By Kazairl on 3/23/2007 5:15:48 AM , Rating: 2
Not to go off on a tangent, but you really should tell us the rest of the story. In the 2 years after the UK banned guns, gun-related crime INCREASED by over 40%. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1440764.stm . Here comes the real shocker. The crime rate in England is actually HIGHER than that in the US. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1184515.stm . Incidentally, a lot of the most dangerous areas in the US (Washington, NY, etc.) have VERY strict anti-gun laws.


RE: ironic.
By degziebob on 3/23/2007 6:14:20 AM , Rating: 2
Your remarks are complete bull, a simple search of google will show the gun crime rates. http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF01.htm .. these are about 6 years old .. but even then gun crime was 30x higher. Deaths from guns in the US per 100,000 = 4.08 .. In the UK it's 0.12 .. As Eddie Izzard said: It's not guns that kill people, it's people that kill people...um yes with Guns. And monkeys kill people too. You'll never get rid of guns/gun crime in any country... but do I feel safer knowing that any nut job can't go into a bank & buy a rifle, and yes I don't live in the US. Nice place, shame so many of you kill each other & can't work out that there IS a relationship between that & everyone having a gun.


RE: ironic.
By bubbacub616 on 3/23/2007 7:04:54 AM , Rating: 2
Absolutely right.

The gun crime figures from the bbc site that you mentioned include:

air gun and imitation gun offences (largely through kids playing around) which make up the largest proportion of "firearms" offences in the UK.

There is a correlation between the number of guns in a society and the number people killed by guns, it may or may not be linear but it EXISTS.


RE: ironic.
By RussianSensation on 3/23/2007 10:02:03 AM , Rating: 3
"You'll never get rid of guns/gun crime in any country... but do I feel safer knowing that any nut job can't go into a bank & buy a rifle, and yes I don't live in the US."

I live in Canada (no guns) and have been to U.S. (guns) many times. I can honestly say I did not feel that I was less safe when I was in U.S. compared to Canada. At the same time things are relative. When I lived in Russia for 13 years you expect someone to pull a knife on you and ask you for $ or your jacket. My boss from South America often tells me when she lived in Argentina she didn't wear jewellery, 3 of her cousins got kidnapped and she always expects someone to pull a gun on you at any point. To her Russia would be one of the safest countries in the world.

From a world perspective, U.S. is one of the safest countries in the world. My point is safety cannot simply be looked at statistically. For instance for someone who lives in country where 50 people are killed per 100,000 both 4.08 and 0.12 stats would be considered "safe" because it would be so far off from what they are "used" to that the crimerates at those levels would be have no impact on the state of mind of that person.


RE: ironic.
By Maharajamd on 3/23/2007 1:02:22 PM , Rating: 2
NICE!!

How about them apples everyone?


RE: ironic.
By alifbaa on 3/23/2007 2:05:03 PM , Rating: 2
Good points all around.

The difference between places like Russia and most of South America which makes things even safer is that here crime is localized to "bad" neighborhoods. In most other places, violent crime happens any where, and at any time. We just happen to be rich enough to afford good police coverage 99% of the time, an effective judicial system, and an extensive prison system. The other thing that makes things much better is that corruption is about as low here as you will find anywhere on earth. That is most certainly not the case in South America and Russia.
In spite of the fact that we have a good system here, and very low crime in the neighborhood I live in and the places I frequent, I am still smart enough to realize that the hard working police that protect me are not able to prevent or respond quickly to every violent crime and burglary. Personally, if my house gets broken into in the middle of the night, I'll lock my family and myself in a closet while I call the police on my cell phone. If the burglar makes it into the closet before the police do, I truly hope I don't have to shoot him or even threaten him with any sort of weapon to keep him from harming me, but I don't personally think it's reasonable to rely on his sense of mercy to protect me either.
For others, that same decision may seem wrong, and that's fine. I wish them all the luck in that situation, and I admire their courage and conviction not to harm another no matter what.
For me, I just don't feel safe unless I have that added bit of security. That's why the 2nd amendment is important to me. I'm a law abiding citizen, I've passed the background check and training requirements to be able to lawfully own and carry a firearm, why shouldn't I be able to do so? I am a threat to no one, and I have no intention of ever changing that unless I am left with no other choice.


How can you NOT buy it...
By daftrok on 3/23/07, Rating: -1
RE: How can you NOT buy it...
By ObscureCaucasian on 3/23/2007 1:56:29 AM , Rating: 3
Ahhhh, yea F@H is definitely NOT a selling point of the PS3. It's more like one of those extra things. If I could get all that for that price I'd probably jump on it, although I'd end up selling the PS3 to recoup some of the cost. And 100 units, hardly a promotion for Europe, more like people in London.


RE: How can you NOT buy it...
By oTAL (blog) on 3/23/2007 10:28:16 AM , Rating: 2
What?
There are other countries in Europe besides London?
And there are over 100 people buying PS3s there?
wow... you learn smth new everyday...

/european_irony off


RE: How can you NOT buy it...
By bubbacub616 on 3/23/2007 1:41:31 PM , Rating: 2
did you not know, london is the capital of yurop?


RE: How can you NOT buy it...
By bubbacub616 on 3/23/2007 1:42:04 PM , Rating: 2
(flame proof hat on)


"The whole principle [of censorship] is wrong. It's like demanding that grown men live on skim milk because the baby can't have steak." -- Robert Heinlein











botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki