kd7ota wrote:
PS3 won't eat the Xbox 360 alive, it will be long dead before it ever gets a chance. :-)
Funny how there is still people out there hating a product just because Microsoft released it. Xbox stomps PS2 by miles. Dreamcast whomps on a PS2 anyday.
Meh, im not here to start warz. Only opinions. :-D :-)
So heres the deal. You buy what you want, and keep it to yourself! :-)
You're right, as only opinion, such words from yourself and others about performance really aren't going to determine final sales figures. The PS3 has unbelieveable peak performance, but as with the PS2 (but to a lesser degree), it's very hard to achieve anywhere near peak. In fact it takes years to manipulate the architecture to it's ideal usage. For years now, people have been trying to push more out of the PS2. This anal pursuit of performance by PS3 is somewhat like they are shooting themselves in the foot.
Though, with the PS2, Sony had the back-catalogue of PS1 titles to offer. Backwards compatibility is excelent. I heard they promised this with the PS3. As long as emulation doesn't blow out the timeline of the PS3, it may add some value to their product. And they have to, because with unique hardware for each new generation, they have *completely* different APIs.
With an XBOX game, you theoretically only need the new XDK with the newer version of DirectX, and with some tweaking (while never trivial with any upgrade) the game will run. So even without backwards compatibility, the XBOX has a real chance of having an extensive catalogue of games to sell with their new machine (though people may be cheesed at having to throw away their old games).
Ease of development, however, is always on the Xbox's side. PS3 like PS2, will almost be solely reliant on various 3rd party middleware. And even then, to really have some ground breaking features on the box, low-level programming will be needed. But the amount of titles alone aren't going to sell the machine..
Both Sony and Microsoft are excellent marketers, so first blood will be important. Who can come out first with a reasonable amount of killer titles will get the glutony of initial sales.
Both machines are somewhat equally specced and have similar targets. So both companies are likely to get a fair markup on the retail price. Though perhaps their marketing ploy will be to use the actual box as a loss leader? Xbox was forced to do this due to high production costs.
Which means money comes down to inhouse published titles... and with rubbish figures floating around like 150-200 AUD per high-quality 3rd-generation game, I wonder how many people are going to be sold on the idea that high realism = better game = value per dollar. It may be that these machines will be before their time!
It will be a slow start for these giants, and there will be tears no doubt. As for who will win? In war, there are only losers.
Jarrod
