New Ps3 bundle?

[ProudNissanFreak]

Check it out:

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/100/1001230p1.html

Pretty good package with those 2 games.

Also, not sure if you guys heard, but Activision threatened to drop PS3 support if price drop doesn't come soon. They will drop as soon as 2010. PS3 slim may be confirmed sometime this year. Supposedly it's 120GB. Time will tell.

[bmike818]

LOL @ Sony. Activision will be doing the smart thing if they dropped the PS3. I read the article too and I thought it was too funny. Everybody in the industry knows that the PS3 in this ecoonomy is priced way too high!!!

I want a price drop Sony!!!

[MinisterofDOOM]

I've never understood console/game bundles. They are rarely offered with games I care about (this time is no exception). I'd rather they knock the price of the games off the console and let ME choose the games. Or give me a voucher for two free games of my choice. A console bundled with two games I don't want is no more enticing than a console bundled with no games.

[RCA]

Activision will be doing the smart thing if they dropped the PS3.

Why?

[ProudNissanFreak]

Why?

They're not making as much profit from the PS3 as they are with the 360 because of the PS's price, which results in not a lot of people going for that system.

I hear the price cut is to be $100 and will hit in August. We'll have to wait and see.

[RCA]

So Activision should drop the PS3 because the PS3s are being sold for too much money?

[ProudNissanFreak]

I guess people are buying more 360 versions of their games over PS3 versions, so in their eyes, it's not worth it to support the PS3. Sucks.

Edit: The bundle was just confirmed. http://www.gamespot.com/news/6...tle;1

[RCA]

Ahh ok, I see what your trying to say.

If Activison leaves I will be in tears

COD4 and Modern Warfare 2 are both Activision...
Modified by rcabrita at 11:14 PM 7/7/2009

[ProudNissanFreak]

Meh, the CoD games aren't doing much for me. I see them as "just another shooter."

As far as Activision dropping Sony, I really haven't seen very many great games from them to begin with. I mean, no exclusives, etc. so I really don't care if they drop Sony. (I looked up a list of every game they've made)

Here's the list if you're interested:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...games

[RCA]

Yea that list is pretty weak...Some GREAT oldies but as far as the new games

But I am a crack fiend for COD4 so I will hope for the best...

[Hijacker]

Activision has been turning into a big powerhouse publisher lately. Not only do they have the CoD series, but they also publish Guitar Hero. I think losing future GH releases will hurt Sony more than MW2.

[ProudNissanFreak]

Yea that list is pretty weak...Some GREAT oldies but as far as the new games

But I am a crack fiend for COD4 so I will hope for the best...

I tried to like CoD4, but it just didn't stick. I mean yeah my K:D ratio is awesome, but I never really had fun. After a few matches it just got boring and I ended up with a headache. I liked CoD5 better, but it still didn't stick lol.

[ProudNissanFreak]

Activision has been turning into a big powerhouse publisher lately. Not only do they have the CoD series, but they also publish Guitar Hero. I think losing future GH releases will hurt Sony more than MW2.

Yeah, that will be their biggest blow if Sony losses them.

Edit: Sony's response to Activision's threat.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6...tle;1
Modified by ProudNissanFreak at 2:35 PM 7/8/2009

[bmike818]

LOL at Sony's CEO.

[MinisterofDOOM]

The Sony guys' responses are stupid though.

"Not enough people are buying, are you going to lower the price?"

"Don't you realize it costs a lot to invest in this tech?"

Um...neither the question asked nor the issue at hand, Mr. Tretton. This is the issue faced by every business everywhere. You can't just say "it cost us this much, you have to pay this much" and expect it to work. Most people are not paying what you want. They're not going to magically start paying simply on the sudden realization that it cost you a lot of money to develop the system.

I mean, look at Nissan when Titan sales were slow but profits were high just before this recession took hold. They didn't complain that the Titan cost thiiiiiiiiis much to develop and by damn they were going to sell it for what they felt like. No, instead, Titans could be had for DIRT cheap. You have to MOVE your tech for it to do you any good. Being stingy on the subject benefits NEITHER you nor the consumer. Cut prices, sell more; true, losses won't be improved but at least you'll have more presence in more living rooms.

[nnorton44]

Sony CEO: No price cut

http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Ho....html

[bmike818]

I know when they will do a price cut!

....when Gran Turismo comes out....

just like that price cut, who knows when GT will come out

......when Transformers 2 comes out on video, I will be buying my first BlueRay player, if Sony does not reduce their price by then, I will just by a stand alone player for $199. Thier argument that they have the best deal is getting old. You can find cheap BleuRay players for $149 brand new, that means that the PS3 now costs $249. This margin is just going to keep bigger unless the price cut is implemented.

[Kenrik]

The PS3 Expensive but out of the box you don't have to buy a ton of stuff...

Xbox 360 Pro + Wireless Adapter + Xbox Live = $400 +

Xbox 360 = RROD

Because of the RROD you can't safely buy an older version of the 360 used. You HAVE to buy it new as only the latest model "possibly" fixed the RROD issue.

I picked up my PS3 Used for $250 with two games and it's been a trooper.

Point is the hardware cost ends up being irrelevant in the long run. Who cares if you pay $400 if you only have to do it once.. if you end up buying two Xbox 360s because of RROD then did you really "save" anything?

My original Xbox took a crap and I had to buy a new one (X360) but my PS2 from 2000 is still chugging along like a trooper.

Anyway what really matters is the games. I'm more angry at the developers who make a game for the Xbox 360 then do a crappy port to the PS3 and wonder why the sales suffer. (Fallout 3 I'm looking at you!)

The reason Xbox 360 and PS3 graphics "look the same" is because developers make the games to run on both so they are limited to the power of the Xbox 360. If you look at the first party or PS3 only titles you will see they have better graphics than your average Xbox 360 game. Uncharted, MGS4, Ratchet & Clank to name a few. While Graphics are not everything (Wii.. we love you) they do make a difference.

I'm not a Sony fan boy, I own all of the consoles.

I think Sony made a good console but has been doing a downright TERRIBLE job marketing it. They need to take a card from Microsoft and start paying off the developers to get better deals on release dates and exclusives.

Also they need to get developers to actually USE all of the power of the PS3 not just get it to run Xbox 360 versions unoptimized.

[MinisterofDOOM]

Fallout 3 was a PC game ported to the PS3, not a 360 game ported to the PS3. The 360 version worked well because Windows and the the 360 are similar to develop for, while the PS3 is over in crazyland and a whole different animal.

I think you're dead on about the PS3 being a good console that's been marketed amazingly badly.

Microsoft's price for the wireless adaptor is completely unacceptable. Hell, with all the revisions of the console they've done, they should have wireless built in by now. Very stupid.

[bmike818]

I love the way Sony thinks

"We don't provide the 'easy to program for' console that (developers) want, because 'easy to program for' means that anybody will be able to take advantage of pretty much what the hardware can do, so then the question is, what do you do for the rest of the nine-and-a-half years?" explained Hirai.

http://news.cnet.com/sony-ps3-...pose/

Microsoft's price for the wireless adaptor is completely unacceptable. Hell, with all the revisions of the console they've done, they should have wireless built in by now. Very stupid.

IMO it's completely genius, I don't want a wireless adaptor so I am happy they did not make me pay for it when I bought my console. I don't get why you would want to play wireless anyways, lag. I do agree that $99 is way too much when you and I know it really just costs around $30 for that little dongle.

[Kenrik]

People complained that the PS2 was "Hard to develop for" as well. Now there are like 500,000 PS2 Games. I think you're misreading his point.

They made a console that provides better graphics than the X360 out of the box but has the capability to provide MORE in the future as the developers unleash it's potential. Meanwhile X360 just blew it's whole Wad at the starting gate.

Now I'm an iPhone Game developer. Programming for the iPhone requires Objective-C and using Xcode. Proprietary to Apple. You don't see me complaining that my game won't run well on a PSP or Nintendo DS do you? No because I developed my game FOR THE IPHONE.

If the developers get behind the PS3 and develop for the PS3 instead of just trying to port the same crap around to all of the consoles, guess what! the PS3 would have the user base regardless of the price of the system because that's where all of the badass games are.

In the world of software development it's not uncommon to make an application that only works on one system.. Direct X games will not run on Linux... that's why people usually use OpenGL when they want a multi-platform game.

Ever wonder why it is that the ones making the most noise about the PS3 are PC game developers? because they are used to developing for Microsoft!

[ProudNissanFreak]

^ +1

My thoughts exactly.

[MinisterofDOOM]

"We don't provide the 'easy to program for' console that (developers) want, because 'easy to program for' means that anybody will be able to take advantage of pretty much what the hardware can do, so then the question is, what do you do for the rest of the nine-and-a-half years?" explained Hirai.

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard in my life. "We're holding our console back now so that it'll look better later." What a moron. By that line of thinking, the next Ferrari that comes out should have electronic power-restriction that'll be date-lifted in 2015 so that the car won't be obsolete when the next generation of supercars hits. If the console stands out TODAY, it doesn't NEED to get better.And it's not just "anybody" complaining that the PS3 is difficult to work with. Some of the greatest, most talented developers ON EARTH have cited the console's difficult-to-work-with nature as the source of delays and cancelled PS3 versions of games.

IMO it's completely genius, I don't want a wireless adaptor so I am happy they did not make me pay for it when I bought my console. I don't get why you would want to play wireless anyways, lag. I do agree that $99 is way too much when you and I know it really just costs around $30 for that little dongle.

Nobody WANTS to go wireless. But it's not always practical to have cables running everywhere. Plus, wireless isn't THAT bad. The wireless adapter's bandwidth is wider than the broadband connection you're using anyway. The only real issue is connectivity, which never gave me any trouble when I was using the wireless adapter.And if the wireless support was built into the console, the large volume would reduce the cost significantly compared to the sold-separately dongle, so you wouldn't be tacking even $30 onto each console's build price, which means added cost to the consumer would be negligible if any at all.

[Chaotic_Warlord]

For all the 360 haters out there that say that the PS3's graphics are more superior to the 360's and that the games coming out for the 360 have already pushed the hardware to the max, you guys are just ignorant. Sure some games look better on the PS3, but in the end both systems are running on quad-core technology. Microsoft took into account that PC games always have better graphics than consoles and they also took into account that the tech for PC hardware outdates itself in 6 months to year. Sony knew the same thing but designed there console to be a jack of all trades systems (hence the reason of it's high price), Microsoft on the otherhand designed the 360 to be a gaming console with PC gaming graphics and thought ahead so the system wouldn't be outdated by the time it was released.

We haven't seen the limits of the 360 yet, yeah there are games released that have been known to cause E74 errors and the onset of RROD (GTA4, Fallout3) but this isn't the developers fault or the 360's fault, this is because Microsoft wanted to follow the EA Marketing logic and released the system with cheap parts and rushed it out the door before heavy extensive testing was completed.

The new 360's and in particular the Elite's that are being made and sold now are just as robust as the PS3 and Microsoft has seen the error of their ways and actually put new quality parts in the system, and they did this while not only raising the Warranty to 3 years but also dropping the price by $100. You can say they owed this to their customers, but in actuality Microsoft ate a lot of that profit loss by not just fixing the RROD systems but also by giving those systems new warranties.

I'm on my 3rd 360 in 4 years and I've never had to pay a dime for any of the repairs, and every time I sent it in I got a new unit back in return with a new 3 year warranty. Will Sony honor their problems like that, I think not.

We have yet to see exactly what capabilities either system have graphically, but I can assure that the 360 will be just as good visually in the end as the PS3.

[MinisterofDOOM]

Exactly. Talking about either system's late-game capabilities at this point is pointless. Look at how far the PS2 and Xbox were pushed before they were replaced. It has less to do with whether the system was "designed" to be stretched (again, I call foul and BS on those claims from the PS3 camp) and more to do with the fact that exposure to a hardware environment leads to better familiarity with it, which allows you code more efficiently for it.

The PS3 isn't some magic alien artifact with unseen powers. It's tech is very down-to-earth even if Sony sticks cryptic names on it to make it sound exotic. I mean, when you come right down to it, it's a PowerPC with supplementary processors and GeForce 7 graphics...ancient stuff that should be cake to work with from a deveopmental standpoint.The problem is that Sony made it OPERATE in a way that's not traditional. Instead of sticking with what has always worked (and worked WELL for that matter), they decided to take a risk and take a different approach. And it bit them in the butt. MS took the tried and true formula and simply fitted it into a home console format, which was low-risk and low-cost. They didn't really stand to lose anything, Sony did. If Sony's route had worked out better, we'd probably all be taking potshots at MS for not being daring like Sony.

[Chaotic_Warlord]

Thanks MOD for taking what I said and simplifying it, sometimes the fan boi's are blinded by logic and need for the flaws to simplified to see the light. I love my 360 even though I worry it's going to die on me everytime I turn it on and play Fallout 3. It's kinda like my car, I love it, it looks like a giant pile of crap and doesn't run exactly as I wished and I worry that it's going to die on me, but at the end of the day it does what I want and I have fun putting it through it's paces... Oh and it was cheap, and it performs just as good as a more expensive 240 does.

[RCA]

Can we change the title of this thread to something more appropriate?

It is obviously not about the PS3 bundle any more

[MinisterofDOOM]

It is obviously not about the PS3 bundle any more

Eh, it wasn't really only about that anyway. OP discusses potential price drops and pubs jumping ship, too.