Next Gen Not Worth It At All

[xxxplizit]

On-Topic to topic-starter:

Why is the price so high at the moment for the 7th generation consoles compared to the 6th (128-bit) generation? Here are some reasons:

+ More advanced tech power (obviously), especially with graphics, sound, processing power, and storage that some people rave about.
+ More connection versatility. I believe all 3 systems have USB support and other features.
+ More options to explore than just spending and playing $$$ per disc and backwards-compatibility. Services offered by the company can be downloaded and purchased to add more extensive satisfaction.
+ Increased employment for jobs. This includes employees for the 3 companies, game developers (exclusive or 3rd party), security measures, etc.
+ Higher demand for the consuming market than before. Yes, the higher demand for consumers has reached a higher peak.
+ Advertisements. How else can they bring their product to consumers, especially when the video game market itself is also competing against other digital entertainment?

A high price? Yes. But in a business point of view, does it really add up to that price? Yes. Just be glad (for now) that the price isn't higher than the supposed initial price. For a fact, Microsoft and Sony lose $$$ selling their system, thus must make up for selling games and their online services to even out or profit. If they were to sell their systems evenly or for profit, then the 2 systems would be too expensive for the consumer. Nintendo, though profits for their system which can give them more revenue, is at higher risk because it depends on the consumers if they are ready to adapt to motion-sensor gameplay despite lower hardware power than the other 2 systems. If the systems are deemed to expensive, perhaps they will lower their price by $50-$100 despite risks of profits.

Then again, most people who were concerned about the pricing said the same thing about how the 6th Generation (128-bit) systems were too expensive. But for this generation, I can somewhat understand on why people are shocked based on results. Let us compare the previous generations at its time (at their launch time):
16-bit Era: Sega Genesis: $150(?); Super Nintendo: $150(?).
32/64-bit Era: Saturn: $300; Playstation: $300; N64: $250.
128-bit Era: Dreamcast: $200; Playstation 2: $300; Gamecube: $200; X-Box: $300.
7th-Gen Era: XBox360: $300-400(?); Wii: $250(?); PS3: $400-$600(?)
Though this generation seem to dramatically increase both on $$$ and on features in comparison, it doesn't mean that it'll intimidate people from buying their product.

= = =

I could say more, but I'll leave it at that. I'll respond more later.

[Radd]

Originally Posted by alpha3six

If they delivered the results, does it matter in the end if they what kind of hardware they used for the demo?

Yes it does. Because for about the entire first year of the PS2's life, the Dreamcast was producing better graphics, and better games, on a regular basis. Sony sold the PS2 on graphic hype that it was not able to deliver on with the actual hardware until several years later, and by that time we had the Gamecube and the Xbox, which both had much better graphics than the PS2 at it's height.

Of the three major console hypefests in this generation, only Nintendo didn't attempt to dazzle us with fake graphics, but Sony gets singled out for some reason.

Oh, believe me, I'm well aware of Microsoft and EA's fabrications, and I feel equal contempt for them.

Yes, I meant a "single head floating on a black background." PS2 is capable of rendering that.

I have my doubts. That tech demo was rendered at much higher resolution than the PS2 is capable of, for one.

In any case, bashing companies for what they (or the sensationalist media) promise in the hypefest before major launches is pointless,

You confuse bashing for education. For some reason this misconception is common. I for one do not think we should forget what companies have done in the past, and embrace all their claims with open arms at the build up to every new generation. Especially because when a company believes they can get away with that, they continue to do it.

Originally Posted by Lumir

Sorry but that is incorrect. RPG stands for Role-Playing-Game. Simply put you play the role of a character that is already in a story or about to begin one. Now you can alter some parts of the story depending on what you do and what game it is, but the over-all story has a pre-set course.

Role Playing Game is a very broad and general term. It can mean a lot of things. I hear people used to play RPGs using pencils, paper, and dice...back before electricity I think it was.

And for those saying Sony always over-hypes there systems, that is incorrect as well... hype is created by the fans/people through thier response to new things, sony dose not control these people and how they react.

Er...when Sony shows off pre-rendered footage and claims that it is not pre-rendered, but in-game footage, that's not hype created by the fans, that is directly created by the company itself.

Of course as started above, Sony isn't the only guilty party here. Microsoft, EA, Square, and others are all responsible. Nintendo was reponsible for similar practices back in the N64 era, if I recall.

[Onizuka-GTO]

everyone hypes. You'll seem strange if you don't...like Nintendo for instant....

[Lebron]

Originally Posted by uLTraCarL-

Does 2K have that feature? I don't ever recall seeing such a feature -_-
I refuse to change it to XP for personal reasons.

This is how my living room is setup mainly, subtract that chair (used to play beatmania) and thats how it goes.

Spoiler:

A wire to the laptop would be also exposed wires but I could probably live with that for the cost of 100 dollars saved lol

Yea it does. Just go to your internet connection window, then right click on the internet connection you wish to share, then click on properties, then you should see 2 tabs, general and advanced, click advance and then click allow other computers to the internet through this connection.

Then there you go, shouldnt have any problems after that

[Lebron]

Originally Posted by Lumir

Sorry but that is incorrect. RPG stands for Role-Playing-Game. Simply put you play the role of a character that is already in a story or about to begin one. Now you can alter some parts of the story depending on what you do and what game it is, but the over-all story has a pre-set course.

And for those saying Sony always over-hypes there systems, that is incorrect as well... hype is created by the fans/people through thier response to new things, sony dose not control these people and how they react.

Haven't played D&D? You create your own story and characters with that game, and also it was the first and only True RPG. The FF's are more like interactive movies, they give you the story, the character, the atks, the party members, and all your job is to simply play along what they have already written out. Not very much freedom

And yea Sony did create hype, just like MS and Nintendo does. It's nothing new, its just comes to the fact on do you deliever on what you hyped up.

[Js2756]

Originally Posted by xxxplizit

snip

When taking inflation into account, this generation is actually cheaper than some of the previous generations that preceded it (when considering launch price).

[Lumir]

First of all im not trying to be too technical here but understand, sony/micro/ninte, cannot hype something on there own... If you think about it in terms of groups, say there are 100 groups of peeps, and one group makes something and gets really hyped about it beacause they made it, dose that mean all the other groups will fallow in turn?

Simply my point about this is that people seem to forget they are in control and alot now days just fallow the crowd... Yea the ps3 is new, it has insane power, im looking forward to getting one, but not because of the hype created by others and how sony presented it, but beacause i just love technology and games. Some call it an addiction, i call it fun beyond any other.

About the RPG topic, D&D was not the first true RPG. Like stated above, there were board games and other games befor the video game era even started that were known as RPGs. They were the true "first" RPGs. And in most of the ones i can remeber you had to fallow a set of rules, you had pre-set abilities and the main goal was pre-set as well.

A game were you make your own complete world and everything would be more of a sims type game... or simulation of fantasy.

[alpha3six]

Originally Posted by Radd

Yes it does. Because for about the entire first year of the PS2's life, the Dreamcast was producing better graphics, and better games, on a regular basis. Sony sold the PS2 on graphic hype that it was not able to deliver on with the actual hardware until several years later, and by that time we had the Gamecube and the Xbox, which both had much better graphics than the PS2 at it's height.

Admittedly the PS2's initial lineup was pretty weak, but there was still a lot of development going on for the PS1 so it was its own greatest competitor, so to speak. The PS2 hardware itself didn't change, so if it took 2 years for the developers to get used the its architecture it's not really Sony's fault unless you want to blame them for difficult SDKs compared to DirectX and forcing devs to learn parallel programming. The only reason I made my first post was to point out the major elements in the tech demo were delivered as promised. Better late than never.

Oh, believe me, I'm well aware of Microsoft and EA's fabrications, and I feel equal contempt for them.

My main problem with MS and Xbox is more about how they killed PC gaming but that's something for another day.

I have my doubts. That tech demo was rendered at much higher resolution than the PS2 is capable of, for one.

Was it rendered at greater than 640x480?

You confuse bashing for education. For some reason this misconception is common. I for one do not think we should forget what companies have done in the past, and embrace all their claims with open arms at the build up to every new generation. Especially because when a company believes they can get away with that, they continue to do it.

What I'm saying is once the product launches, it's pointless to refer back to prelaunch hype because no one remembers it other than some of the people who bought consoles at launch, hardcore gamers, or people with an axe to grind. If the launch hype for PS3 was really that influential, then how come everyone isn't already backing it? Maybe it's because most consumers aren't as easily influenced and sheeplike as people think they are? Or the fact that most consumers aren't hardcore gamers who actually scour the internet for every bit of information and are more likely to buy based on what a sales rep tells them to buy? Out of all the PS2 owners (or buyers) in the world, the vast majority of them never saw or heard of the PS2 tech demos, and I'm sure the same will be true for PS3.

Er...when Sony shows off pre-rendered footage and claims that it is not pre-rendered, but in-game footage, that's not hype created by the fans, that is directly created by the company itself.

Using prerendered movies to hype games has been standard since the 32 bit days... unfortunate but that's how it is.

Of course as started above, Sony isn't the only guilty party here. Microsoft, EA, Square, and others are all responsible. Nintendo was reponsible for similar practices back in the N64 era, if I recall.

This just shows that hype is not what is behind success.

[Benoit]

Does 2K have that feature? I don't ever recall seeing such a feature -_-
I refuse to change it to XP for personal reasons.

That feature exists since Windows 98.

[xxxplizit]

Originally Posted by Js2756

When taking inflation into account, this generation is actually cheaper than some of the previous generations that preceded it (when considering launch price).

Hmmm. I thought it was equal with inflation into account. I may be wrong though.

[Shinoto]

There was a huge shocker released today

PS3 controllers Retail for about 5000yen(40USD)
The Remote will be 3500Yen(30USD)
The Mem Card Adapter will be 1500Yen(12.99USD)

This came as a shock since The controller was expected to be closer to 50USD....Then again they may change the price in the US market. It was just released in Yen. Such as the Wii Controller is about 30USD in Japan while really 40USD in NA

Prices are subject to change

[Sides]

Originally Posted by Shinoto

This came as a shock since The controller was expected to be closer to 50USD....Then again they may change the price in the US market. It was just released in Yen. Such as the Wii Controller is about 30USD in Japan while really 40USD in NA

Isn't it because the JPN prices are normally stated without taxes/vat,
where as the NA and European prices are ?

[Shinoto]

Originally Posted by Sides

Isn't it because the JPN prices are normally stated without taxes/vat,
where as the NA and European prices are ?

Actually supposedly this is with Tax. Like the Wii is 212 in Japan with Tax according to fami

And NA/Europe are not stated with Tax. Because Tax Varies on Country for EU and State with NA

[Js2756]

Originally Posted by xxxplizit

Hmmm. I thought it was equal with inflation into account. I may be wrong though.

It depends on which system you're referring to and which generation, but most generations have had systems which launched with an inflation adjusted price of between $200 and $400 (if we use today's dollar as the standard and adjust past prices to current value). If it weren't for the PS3's high price tag and the high price of the 360 bundle, this generation would be pretty darn cheap. The 360 core system is actually cheaper than both the original X-Box and PS2, cheaper than the PS1 and Saturn, roughly the same price as the Genesis and SNES and cheaper than Master System and NES. The $250 price tag of the Wii puts it only behind the Gamecube (cheapest at $225) and Dreamcast for launch price.

Coincidentally, all Nintendo consoles, excluding the original NES launched at under $300 in today's prices, and with each successive system, the launch price dropped.

[Radd]

Originally Posted by alpha3six

This just shows that hype is not what is behind success.

This statement shows the mistake of ignoring causality. There is almost never a single reason for anything. Every end is the reasult of many different causes piling up.

Why did the N64 fail to maintain Nintendo's lead of the market? Was it the carts? Was it the year head start that Sony had? Was it Nintendo's kiddy image, still fresh in people's minds from the SNES days and the Mortal Kombat debacle? Was it the games? Was it the decision of several major developers to leave Nintendo for Sony? Was that soley because of the carts decision, or because of Nintendo's corrupt business practices for the many years it was at the top of the food chain?

What about Sega? Did you know the Sega Saturn cost $400 at launch, in addition to being the weakest system of its generation, 3D-wise? What if Sega had not tried to compete in 3D games, but instead had pushed the best 2D games of that generation, given that the Saturn was by-far the most powerful 2D console out of the three? Did you remember that the Saturn launched early to try and get a head start on the PSX, but in doing so it launched with almost no games, and suffered a long drought of games because developers couldn't meet the new launch date?

That the PSX easily slipped into this environment is only part of that console's success. The marketing Sony employed was quite another, given that pretty much all early PSX commercials showed only FMV footage, in an age when FMV was still popular. The $300 price tag looked nice next to the Saturn's $400, and the N64 was a year away, and was bringing all the problems it already had.

Shall I go onto the Dreamcast and the PS2? How the PS2 managed to bury the Dreamcast in an early grave, despite the Dreamcast having better games, and better graphics (at the time), due to a combination of marketing, brand loyalty established in the previous generation, PS2 DVD playback, Sega's reputation for add-ons, and no small amount of hype that the PS2 would be an unrivaled graphics powerhouse?

I can lay out several more paragraphs on why this currently ending generation has turned out the way it has. Why, do you remember when the Gamecube and the Xbox had just launched, and the message boards across the internet were still aflame with loyal Sony fans pointing at the tech specs saying the Xbox wouldn't be much more powerful than the PS2, and that the Gamecube would have the worst graphics of this generation? That misperception lasted well into the first year or so of both console's lives, and to this day you can still find a few people blindly fumbling along under that belief.

Hype is just one tool game companies can abuse. If you convince even the relatively small number that pay attention to tech demos and bullshots, those people and the gaming media spread the word, and then you have a large number of more mainstream gamers expecting that console will deliver. Price, and percieved developer support also still play a big role, as does brand loyalty.

It's a testament to Sony's brand loyalty and marketing hype that the PS3 has as much support as it does, given the incredible price tag attached, and the expected price of games ($60-80+). People simply expect the PS3 to retain Sony's top spot in the market, even if many expect that due to price and lacking a head start it will not maintain quite the lead Sony has enjoyed in the past.

[xxxplizit]

Originally Posted by Js2756

It depends on which system you're referring to and which generation, but most generations have had systems which launched with an inflation adjusted price of between $200 and $400 (if we use today's dollar as the standard and adjust past prices to current value). If it weren't for the PS3's high price tag and the high price of the 360 bundle, this generation would be pretty darn cheap. The 360 core system is actually cheaper than both the original X-Box and PS2, cheaper than the PS1 and Saturn, roughly the same price as the Genesis and SNES and cheaper than Master System and NES. The $250 price tag of the Wii puts it only behind the Gamecube (cheapest at $225) and Dreamcast for launch price.

Coincidentally, all Nintendo consoles, excluding the original NES launched at under $300 in today's prices, and with each successive system, the launch price dropped.

I am referring to the entire generation as a whole versus the overall launch of the 128-Bit Era (6th-gen). Not just 1 system.

But yeah. The 360 core, as you say, is cheaper ($300). Despite the lower priced units (360 Core and PS3 basic), I do question about the overall consumers in general if they want "more", directing interest on the more pricey units.

[alpha3six]

[edited]
In response to Radd: My post was getting a bit argumentative so I've deleted it.

[Radd]

So what is it exactly that makes you so argumentive? Someone says that the FFXIII trailer is definitely not fake because it's Square, I point out that Square has faked demos for Sony in the past, then you come in and it sounds like you're saying we should blindly forget all past bullshots and faked trailers and accept everything at face value. Then it sounds like you're trying to suggest that while companies fake trailers we shouldn't point that out to people who don't realize this because faked trailers alone do not win console wars.

What is it that you're trying to say? Every time I address what it seems you're saying, you go on and say you mean something else.

[Radd]

And for the record, I've stated repeatedly that I do not believe the 360 will go the way of the Dreamcast, or that the PS3 will stomp all over its compeition as the PSX and PS2 did before it. I can quote my past posts again if you like, so I don't see the point of putting words in my mouth as you have.

As for game prices, it has been reported in various sources that if developers want to put out games that look as good as the MGS4 footage we've seen, prices will go up past $60. Superior hardware does not automagically mean better graphics, it means better graphics are possible. Actually creating better graphics requires increasing amounts of manpower, time, and money. Game developers have been increasing the quality of graphics over time without really seeing much increase in game sales.

[Shinoto]

Offical
November 11, 2006:
Mah-Jong Fight Club (Konami, 5,229 yen / approx $44)
Sega Golfclub (Sega, 7140 yen / approx. $60)
Genji (Sony Computer Entertainment Japan, 5,980 yen / approx. $51)
Resistance: Fall of Man (Sony Computer Entertainment Japan, 5,980 yen / approx. $51)
Mobile Suit Gundam: Target in Sight (Namco Bandai Games, 7,329 yen / approx. $62)
Ridge Racer 7 (Namco Bandai Games, 7,329 yen / approx. $62)

November 22, 2006:
Mah-Jong Taikai IV (Koei, 5,040 yen / approx. $43)

December 14, 2006:
Armored Core 4 (From Software, 8,190 yen / approx. $69)

December 21, 2006:
Sonic the Hedgehog (Sega, 7,140 yen / approx. $60)