|
I know it's not popular to like the PS3 these days, but I don't think it's a bad system. Much of the backlash was due to management arrogance and questionable decisions at Sony. Plus, it's always fun to take a pot shot at the big guy, and Sony dominated the last generation 5 to 1 compared to Xbox and Gamecube.
Right now I don't think the PS3 has anything really going for it that sets it apart from the 360...except for Blu-ray. Since only early adopters care about the format, the high price isn't justified for the average user. In the long run including Blu-ray might pay off (large installed base for Sony pictures to release high-def DVDs) but I don't think we're at the point in games where such storage is mandatory, especially with compression technology being what it is. I mean, most PC games still ship on CDs since not every PC out in the public sphere is equipped with a DVD drive (but yeah, most NEW machines have a DVD drive standard).
Years from now this will likely play a more important role in gaming, and right now most people don't buy Sony's line of, "You need Blu-ray for next-gen gaming...we swear!" It's because of that drive you're paying $100-200 more for a PS3, and it's hurting sales. Why do you think Sony is yanking the PS2 Emotion chip from all future iterations? Because it'll save them lots of money (they'll use software emulation like the 360, for better or worse) and if they can reduce their losses, maybe they can cut the price of the console to spur sales.
Until the PS3 has a dozen quality exclusive titles, I won't even entertain the thought of buying one. After that I'll wait for the price to come down a few hundred bucks.
|