On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 21:28:36 GMT, "Slitheen"
<the.slitheen@nospamthanksmam.com> wrote:

>
>"Chris F" <chris@asifimtellingyoulot.com> wrote in message 
>news:4vs4021rtoast6ake9g3elg4qji2edh825@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 02:26:01 GMT, "Slitheen"
>> <the.slitheen@nospamthanksmam.com> wrote:
>> > i still think you're right, GOW2 will be on PS2 primarily, if only
>> because the PS3 might not even be out by the time its due for release
>> ;)
>> -- 
>
>Well that too, of course....goes without saying. :)
>
>I rather think Sony are feeling quite confident, and see no trouble is 
>taking their time with PS3. It could be a massive risk, but coming out so 
>long after X360, and with their final spec unconfirmed (or at least the 
>current spec is subject to change/improve), then they might be thinking it 
>could be greeted as almost a separate 'generation'.....a silly word really, 
>seeing as the 'generations' can't so easily be recognised now, and will get 
>less and less different from now on. And although people probably won't see 
>it as a separate generation as such (seeing as though there will actually be 
>little difference), just maybe even those who bought a 360 might have had 
>enough time to let their finances recover enough to warrant getting PS3 to 
>go alongside their X360. I think this could very well be at the back of 
>their minds.

but the majority of people who are seriously into their gaming would
get both anyway. contrary to what usenet may project, fanboyism is
nowhere near as prevalent as it was back in the megadrive/snes days.
the industry has grown up along with the people who have helped it
grow in the main.

i don't think sony will be chopping and changing the hardware that
much between now and launch, they can't really if they expect anyone
to have any games ready for the thing in time.

i also don't think they will be brimming with confidence, they have a
lot of obstacles to overcome still with this launch, and it still
seems a long way off. as you say, they as a company have a lot banking
on the PS3 and they know they can't cock it up (and theres nothing to
say they couldnt do that, just because they had the best-selling
machine with the ps2 doesnt necessarily mean the same will be true of
the PS3). i imagine there are a lot of underlying nerves in sony HQ
regarding the PS3, no matter how much outward blustering and posturing
they may show.
>
>Whatever the case, I'm happy. I have a few years worth of PS2 games to catch 
>up on, and in that time I know Sony are going to be beavering away making 
>PS3 as good as they can make it, like their very company depends on 
>it...which it does. This is all good for the consumer. I also hope that when 
>both are in good supply (X360 & PS3), that we see the dirtiest price-war 
>yet. That too is good for the consumer, and I'm all for anything that goes 
>in favour of the consumer - forget all the company fan-boy 
>arse-licking.....we want the best consoles, as cheap as they can be...with a 
>massive push by the competitors to make quality software to harvest profits 
>out of those consoles, by making better and better games. As the ultimate 
>winner will win with their software quality and 3rd party support, over 
>pipelines and polygons. :) 
>
so why didnt nintendo beat the ps2 then? ;)

sadly as with all things these days, the final product is not the be
all and end all, it's how it is marketd and perceived by the public
which will again prove which is to be the most successful.
-- 

gamertag: Chrisflynnuk
http://live.xbox.com/member/Chrisflynnuk