XBox 2 is sick

[Faos]

A dvr? A pc? Are you kidding me?

Microsoft to release three versions of Xbox 2

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=19615

One of them will be like a PC

By Wil Harris: Thursday 11 November 2004, 10:23

A SLIDE from a non disclosure agreement (NDA) presentation seen by the INQ points towards Microsoft launching three versions of the Xbox 2, one of which is a fully functioning PC.

The presentation, understood to have been given to analysts and market researchers in the UK earlier this year, plots a timeline for the introduction of the systems. Xbox Next and Xbox Next HD are planned for Autumn 2005, whereas the Xbox Next PC is pencilled in for Autumn 2006.

The standard Xbox Next will not include a hard drive, which will allow Microsoft to cut costs on this basic unit. Xbox Next HD, as you might imagine, does include a hard drive and will offer increased functionality based on this. Xbox Next PC is, according to the presentation, an entry-level PC that runs Windows and all standard PC software. It also includes CD Burner, Wireless keyboard, mouse and controller and will work best connected to a high-definition TV or PC monitor. Media Center functionality - like movies, music and photos - is also included. The device will also play most available PC games.

System outline specifications note that internet browsing and instant messaging would be key applications, and that the entire unit will be smaller than the current Xbox, although it will not be possible to upgrade the shipping memory or processor.

The year-long gap between the mooted introductions of the two standard Xboxes before the Xbox Next PC is an interesting decision, which suggests that Microsoft realises the time that the market needs to acclimatise to TV media functionality. Since the Vole expects to ship Xbox Next before the Sony PlayStation 3, two versions of the console allow it to get the first wave out before PS3, but to also spoil the launch of Sony's flagship by concurrently announcing the PC version.

[Dave2000]

This has been rumored for awhile as I saw it mentioned on XBox IGN.

Will be interesting to see if its true.

[mogrod]

So the XBOX 2 is really coming out next year around this time? Great news if true!!!

[isoman2kx]

i'm not sure I follow the logic of building a pc

lol..

[RC Cola]

I'm still trying to figure out what Microsoft is doing. As a gamer, I'd rather them stick to just consoles rather than trying to make a PC as well, although I don't like them, so it doesn't really matter. :p

1st off, I would like all next-gen consoles to come with a HD, not some upgradeable version. I realize that a HD would up the production costs in each console, but I'd really like them to become a standard, even if they weren't very big. What I like about a HD is that it provides something that developers can use to improve their games, such as speeding up load times (notice XBox load times compared to a PS2 load time). Unfortunately, not too many developers took advantage of the HD of the Xbox, but maybe they can do better next-gen. Imagine playing TES IV: Oblivion and downloading all the great mods for the game, similar to those found in Morrowind. The HD allows this to happen; however, if the userbase is split (say 65% with regular console, 35% with HD console) there may not be much effort put into using the HD, similarly to how much support their is for the PS2 HD.

I also wonder how the PC version will affect the other big PC names. I'm sure Intel, AMD, etc., won't like having this new competitor in their market. No doubt, the PC version would definitly be appealing, at first anyways. Last I saw, the three dual-core Power chips running at 3+ Ghz along with the R500 ATI GPU for the Xbox 2 should make for a pretty awesome PC, but I wonder how it will do a year or two later since it will not be upgradeable. Additionally, in order to run some PC games, either this unit would need some modifications or developers will have to find a way to make their games work for it AND regular PC's.

This would be an interesting move if true, and I'm wondering how it could turn out. Perhaps Mircrosoft will find a way to not only have piece of the console market but the PC market as well, along with their dominance in the OS market. Or maybe it could all fail, causing Microsoft big losses since they had to produce all these units but not get anything in return. Keep in mind that the PSX didn't really sell very well, possibly meaning that gamers only care about games while non-gamers do not want a console/media center hybrid. Additionally, I wonder if there would be a "4th" version as well, depending on what Microsoft decides to do for their disc format. I believe the last I heard, possibly sticking with DVD until either Blu-ray or HD-DVD prove themselves as winner may be the route Microsoft goes, but then that would just mean a few more versions for their console. By next-next-gen, maybe there will be 8 versions of Xbox 2 sitting at your local Wal-mart, and these don't include anything like different colored versions or slightly improved versions like the PS2.

[UTweezer]

it's a bogus rumor. Xbox2 will be amazing, but I think PS3 will just once again dominate, but this time the specs and performance will be superior to ANY machine MS or Nintendo

[Ghettostar85]

ive heard some rumours about ibm,that they have sold the sama type of processor to both sony and microsoft.... proberly just a silly rumour

[RC Cola]

Originally posted by UTweezer
it's a bogus rumor. Xbox2 will be amazing, but I think PS3 will just once again dominate, but this time the specs and performance will be superior to ANY machine MS or Nintendo
I didn't really take it too seriously at first, considering it was from the Inquirer first IIRC, but I read from some people who I believe are working on next-gen projects that some of this would make sense, although they hadn't heard about this. I would lean against this happening, but then again, I'm not sure what Microsoft is planning.

I'm thinking the PS3 should dominate again as well. The PS2 has done quite well performance wise, especially considering the difference in release dates compared to the other two consoles. This time, the other consoles won't have 1.5 years to work on something to figure something out. Also take into consideration how much is going into Cell and other technology going into the PS3 and I think it could be quite an amazing machine. All that said, I hope Sony can figure out something good for the GPU for the PS3. Xbox2 already has a major beast with the R500, so even without something like Cell, the graphics will look nice on that console. Whether Sony is able to modify Cell to work as a GPU as well as a CPU or if they can come up with something else to combat the R500, I don't know, but they need something good to work with the great power that should come from the CPU. I believe this is the case of the PS2, which has by far the best CPU in terms of power this gen, but the GPU can't quite keep up with it. With a good GPU, combined with the power that should come from Cell, there really can't be much Nintendo or Microsoft can do.

Originally posted by Ghettostar85
ive heard some rumours about ibm,that they have sold the sama type of processor to both sony and microsoft.... proberly just a silly rumour
Yeah, it didn't really make any sense at all. Either Sony wouldn't be using Cell for the PS3, which would seem strange considering how much they invested into it, or Microsoft would be using it and paying Sony, along with IBM and Toshiba, for it. Or it was just a stupid rumor that may be true in a way since both processors are the same type since they both use transistors. :)

[Tenchi]

I thought the new Nintendo was using the IBM chip, while Microsoft was sticking with Intel, and Sony was going with the homebrew chip that they were working with some other company.

[RC Cola]

Originally posted by Tenchi
I thought the new Nintendo was using the IBM chip, while Microsoft was sticking with Intel, and Sony was going with the homebrew chip that they were working with some other company.
Not quite. Sony is working together with Toshiba and IBM to bring Cell to the world...or something like that. They'll then use Cell for their own purposes with Sony putting it in the PS3. Microsoft, according to the details I've seen, is supposed to be going with the latest Power chips from IBM (Power 5 or 6? Can't remember) and I believe Nintendo is as well, but I'm not sure on that one. In fact, I know very little about Nintendo's console other than the fact that IBM and ATI are supposed to be working on the CPU and GPU.

[Christopher]

Anyone know when the PS3 is rumoured to be coming out?

I think Microsoft is taking the wrong road having three different versions of their "Console".

I mean, if you want a PC you buy a PC.

I know personally I buy consoles because you dont have to stuff around with upgrades and compatibility issues. Its a one off cost for the console and the rest goes of games.


Having both a PS2 and XBox, I kind of felt like XBox was started to make some inroads in the console wars. I like what they did with XBox Live and while they dont have a huge amount of great games....there are a handfull of BRILLIANT titles and XBox.

But it SOUNDS like Sony will have the most powerfull console this time around by a fair way. If they can make their online play a big feature and throw in atleast a small hard drive....they'd be hard to beat.


Considering how dominant Sony is with what is now an old system...it could mean big problems for XBox.

[RC Cola]

Originally posted by Christopher
Anyone know when the PS3 is rumoured to be coming out?

It seems like no later than 6 months after Xbox2 is released, which, like mentioned, should be around the end of '05. I believe someone from EA said that and it does make some sense. It probably depends on how quickly Cell comes along as well as Blu-ray. So far, both seem to be doing ok.

Of course, I'm assuming that release would be for Japan and we (non-Japanese) will have to wait a little longer. It should be worth the wait, plus they can make sure everything is going good in the Japanese market and fix any problems before moving on. Still, that will be a long wait. :(

We should get some pretty good info from E3 next year, where all 3 consoles are supposed to have some sort of presentation. And actually, Xbox2 will probably be announced/shown/whatever at CES '05, which is coming up pretty quick (I think in January).

Just a FYI, but supposedly Nintendo is watching Sony's plan of releasing when it comes to the release date for their next-gen console.
If they can make their online play a big feature and throw in atleast a small hard drive....they'd be hard to beat.
I don't have a great Internet connection, so I don't play online, meaning I don't care about it much, but that is a huge part of gaming. Some people think that maybe Sony laid back on doing as Microsoft has done when it comes to online play in preparation for something even better down the road. Probably just hopeful thinking, but here's to hoping that hopeful thinking is more than hopeful thinking...or something like that. :confused:

The hard drive, like I mentioned earlier, is definitly something I want in my next-gen console, although I'm not sure of how practical it may be. From what I previously read, Microsoft seemingly wants to step away from the hard drive, at least in the normal version (sort of like how this article mentions). Given the losses they've had partly on that choice this gen, I wouldn't blame them.

I still would like it from Sony, but exactly how much can they put into a console, price it at ~$300 and still not get killed too much. Along with Cell and Blu-ray going in the console, both of which should take up a pretty good chunk of the production costs I'd imagine, the RAM (XDR I believe) going into the PS3 is supposed to be some of the fastest in the world. The controllers should get another twist, whether they be wireless or some other type of interesting idea (maybe included Eyetoy or something), not to mention the possibility of having 4 ports (although if online play continues to grow, 2 should be enough). A built-in network adapter may be part of the console as well (just guessing here). The PS3 will also have to be able to read both CD's (PS1) and DVD's (PS2), so that will add a little more to the Blu-ray part of the console. And they'll put all that into some sort of sleek looking box that just looks cool. That right there will most likely cost a lot. Now add a small HD. (not sure of the size; I read that sometimes, 40 GB HD's are cheaper than say a 10-20GB HD.) There's a possibility that I could be paying $400-450 for this baby or Sony would go bankrupt before reaching 10 million units sold. They should be able to drive down the costs of Cell, Blu-ray, and some other things they make themselves, but I believe HD's are not so friendly in this aspect, which makes sense given the problems with the Xbox. Perhaps they can figure out a way to do all of this, especially if they can increase the use of HD's in console games, making better games and better sales which would help pay for the HD's in every PS3.

[BrianKagy]

Microsoft launching three versions of the Xbox 2, one of which is a fully functioning PC.

Gee, that's a good idea. Margins are so high for PC manufacturers, that'll be a really profitable endeavor.

[droxford]

I don't understand something. Could someone please explain this to me?

I'm old school (I started on an Oddysey 2, Atari 2600, Colecovision, etc.)... But I've had to give up on gaming.

How can you people afford it? I mean, the base Xbox costs $150, but you gotta buy a bunch of extra crap to get it set up right. So lets say it's $225. Each game costs at least $20 and probably closer to $50 for the newest games. A decent Xbox system (I said decent, not great) with an OK selection of games must cost around $500, while a great system probably costs closer to $1000.

How much have you guys spent on your systems, and how can you afford to do it?

-- droxford

[R0ckets03]

Umm....

Xbox - $170 (including tax)
Comes with a controller

I dont think you need any extra "crap". It comes with a harddrive and a controller. Spend another $75 on two games and $70 on Live and you have more then you need for right around $300.

[Chicken Boy]

Where's DaDa? Wouldn't he know something about this?

[GladiatoRowdy]

Originally posted by droxford
I don't understand something. Could someone please explain this to me?

I'm old school (I started on an Oddysey 2, Atari 2600, Colecovision, etc.)... But I've had to give up on gaming.

How can you people afford it? I mean, the base Xbox costs $150, but you gotta buy a bunch of extra crap to get it set up right. So lets say it's $225. Each game costs at least $20 and probably closer to $50 for the newest games. A decent Xbox system (I said decent, not great) with an OK selection of games must cost around $500, while a great system probably costs closer to $1000.

How much have you guys spent on your systems, and how can you afford to do it?

-- droxford

I have had the same XBOX (given to me for Christmas) since right about the launch. I just bought a brand new one with Halo 2 and two wireless controllers for $300 (student loan check came in).

I already owned the games I really wanted (including ESPN2k4) so I didn't need to upgrade. Honestly, I don't see myself getting an XBOX2 or PS3 until well after their prices have dropped...unless Bungie releases Halo 3 for the initial launch of XBOX2.

[AntiSonic]

Originally posted by droxford
I don't understand something. Could someone please explain this to me?

I'm old school (I started on an Oddysey 2, Atari 2600, Colecovision, etc.)... But I've had to give up on gaming.

How can you people afford it? I mean, the base Xbox costs $150, but you gotta buy a bunch of extra crap to get it set up right. So lets say it's $225. Each game costs at least $20 and probably closer to $50 for the newest games. A decent Xbox system (I said decent, not great) with an OK selection of games must cost around $500, while a great system probably costs closer to $1000.

How much have you guys spent on your systems, and how can you afford to do it?

-- droxford

Secondhand game stores.

Anyway, weren't Atari and other oldschool games priced comparitively back then? With today's technology, it's hard to imagine someone actually dropping fifty bucks on a lot of those really bad NES games. :eek:

[rockbox]

Originally posted by droxford
I don't understand something. Could someone please explain this to me?

I'm old school (I started on an Oddysey 2, Atari 2600, Colecovision, etc.)... But I've had to give up on gaming.

How can you people afford it? I mean, the base Xbox costs $150, but you gotta buy a bunch of extra crap to get it set up right. So lets say it's $225. Each game costs at least $20 and probably closer to $50 for the newest games. A decent Xbox system (I said decent, not great) with an OK selection of games must cost around $500, while a great system probably costs closer to $1000.

How much have you guys spent on your systems, and how can you afford to do it?

-- droxford

What is worse is people spending 400+ dollars for a video card for their computer to play one or two video games that take advantage of the card. WTF.

[rockets-#1]

Originally posted by droxford
I don't understand something. Could someone please explain this to me?

I'm old school (I started on an Oddysey 2, Atari 2600, Colecovision, etc.)... But I've had to give up on gaming.

How can you people afford it? I mean, the base Xbox costs $150, but you gotta buy a bunch of extra crap to get it set up right. So lets say it's $225. Each game costs at least $20 and probably closer to $50 for the newest games. A decent Xbox system (I said decent, not great) with an OK selection of games must cost around $500, while a great system probably costs closer to $1000.

How much have you guys spent on your systems, and how can you afford to do it?

-- droxford

2 words: Modded Xbox


... Highly, totally and completly illegal, though.


True, the Xbox is $150 now, but I got mine around launch when it was $400!

Xbox is the best system by far in my opinion for many reasons but the main one being because of Live. The service works great. ESPECIALLY with Halo 2. I can't get enough of Halo 2 on live.

[DaDakota]

Originally posted by BrianKagy
Gee, that's a good idea. Margins are so high for PC manufacturers, that'll be a really profitable endeavor.

The unit itself is a lost leader, you make your money up on the games, and subscriptions.


The X-box 2 is indeed out next November, and for those trumpeting the PS3, we out here in the game world are very frustrated with Sony right now as they are not giving any details on the PS3.

My sources tell me that is because they are not sure which direction they are going to go with it.

Even long time Sony publishers in Japan are taking X-box a lot more seriously now...Sony has become arrogant, whilst MS is courting them all.....it is a good strategy, and I would not bet against MS winning this round.

We have a saying about Microsoft.

Quality is job 1.1

And X-box 2 qualifies as 1.1.

:)

DD

[Mulder]

Why would I want a console that has a Windows based OS and thus can be brought down by viruses?
No thanks.

[RC Cola]

Originally posted by DaDakota
The X-box 2 is indeed out next November, and for those trumpeting the PS3, we out here in the game world are very frustrated with Sony right now as they are not giving any details on the PS3.

My sources tell me that is because they are not sure which direction they are going to go with it.

Even long time Sony publishers in Japan are taking X-box a lot more seriously now...Sony has become arrogant, whilst MS is courting them all.....it is a good strategy, and I would not bet against MS winning this round.
I have also heard recent stories concerning this matter, although there seems to be some issues with it. First of all, it seems like the majority of complaints in Japan have been coming from Tecmo, and I'm sure we all know who they plan on supporting next-gen. We can even go with conspiracy theories and say that they tried to get these developers and publishers to complain so that Sony would spill the beans, aiding Microsoft in any attempt to combat what Sony has in store,

It also seems like not many details would be given out on the PS3 compared to the Xbox 2 considering the differences in release dates. (although it seems as though Sony hasn't really stamped down a date, meaning it could be anywhere from early 06 or mid 06 before the PS3 is launched, compared to this November launch) From what I have read, it seems as though Sony is pretty much taking the same route as the PS2 this time around. At that time, it seemed as though this issue may have occurred as well, considering the launch titles for the PS2. However, looking at the 75+ million PS2's around the world, it didn't seem to hurt Sony too bad.

These reports also seem familar to me given the fact that I have followed the PSP a little bit. Prior to Sony's somewhat recent announcements concerning battery life, price, etc., there were several developers that seemed unsure of the PSP. I think there were maybe 100 or so games in development at that time. After Sony made a few announcement, BAM!, support showed up like crazy. The latest list I saw had 200 games in development for the PSP. Seems like support is not longer an issue.

All that said, this is an issue to be concerned about. Granted, I'm sure Microsoft would fly any Japanese developer/publisher to them, 1st class, given the support they've received from that region, but it certainly isn't good that there are remarks like this about Sony. I'm guessing some would understand that Sony seems to be going a different route (Cell, Blu-ray, etc), which would require more time to research so that more info could be given; others, however, will have other things on their mind, such as the need to get a game up and running ASAP to increase revenues, something they can currently do with Xbox 2.

Fortunately for all of us, it seems like the info may be starting to roll on out, given the info (http://pcweb.mycom.co.jp/news/2004/11/29/011bl.jpg) that came out today about Cell. These are the key things that I liked reading:

-4.6GHz clock speed. Maybe others had better predictions, but myself, along with others, were thinking the 4.0 GHz number that was going around earlier was crazy. I guess it was a little on the low side.

- 2-16 Teraflops can seemingly be accomplished rather easily for workstations. This is really clear, but there was a number going around that they already have 16 Teraflops coming from a single rack, which is rather extraordinary considering the numbers that today's supercomputers get. However, it seems like this is actually an estimate of the future, although there are 2 teraflop workstations now.

- Around a dozen or so "key video game developers" already have Cell workstations to help them. At least some people can begin work on PS3 games. One article stated that those who used the workstations were able to drastically cut down the development time needed for certain projects.

There is still plenty of info needed to be learned before any true projections can come about, but these numbers are pretty amazing to me. I really doubted the 1 TFLOP number that I've seen thrown around, but some have already shown that it could be possible for the PS3 to have that type of power (maybe a little more actually), although it may still be unlikely. Of course, developing for the machine could be a pain in the butt, but it seems like Sony learned there lesson last gen and have made attempts to ease the problems with the aid of OpenGL. I probably should have made another thread for this considering that Cell really has nothing to do with the possibility of Xbox 2 coming in 3 "flavors," but I don't even know how much anyone else would care about it.

[DaDakota]

RC,

You still only have so many lines of resolution on a television monitor.

Sony is severly underestimating X-box 2.

As for the PSP, there are not 200+ games being developed for it, especially by 3rd party development or other publishers.

Everyone is waiting to see how it sells before jumping on the bandwagon.

At the Tokyo game show this year, X-box 2 got a lot of looks from traditional Sony players.

We are a PSP developer, but are actually switching over to another handheld because Sony is a pain in the A$$ to work with, they are treating it like a monopoly and just like Nintendo, it will hurt them in the end.

DD

[KingCheetah]

Originally posted by DaDakota
We have a saying about Microsoft.

Quality is job 1.1

And X-box 2 qualifies as 1.1.

:)

DD

LMAO ~ DD is an X-Box fanboy.

J/K :)
_____________________

If the X-box has a 700 mhz processor and the PS2 has a 300 mhz processor why can't developers continue making good games for the XB for a couple more years? It seems like the XB would just now be coming into it's prime. :confused:

[DaDakota]

Actually a fan of all 3, I want them all to be successful, it gives me multiple platforms to sell my games.

DD

[PhiSlammaJamma]

5.5 hours = time spent trying to get into the phophet room on Halo 2. Freaking Orange creatures kicked my ass from 12 am to 5 am.

2.0 hours = time spent trying to kill two Hunters in a circle.

2.6 hours = time spent before realizing that the laser gun kills the viral creatures.

2.5 days or more = Getting across the blinking bridge on Halo 1 only to realize it was not even important. But I made it god damn it. I will never forget the day I made the jump.

I love this stuff. Bring on x-box 2.

[RC Cola]

Originally posted by DaDakota

As for the PSP, there are not 200+ games being developed for it, especially by 3rd party development or other publishers.

http://playstation3insider.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3663&sid=5aa733ab201d9987687ece40914024b3

There is a link to a forum where a member (Speedis) has updated a game list for the PSP according to any news from the internet (from IGN, Gamespot, official site, etc.) concerning games for the PSP. Current count is at 207 and most of the games are linked to a source.
At the Tokyo game show this year, X-box 2 got a lot of looks from traditional Sony players.
What did they show off? I hadn't heard anything about Xbox 2 at TGS, which is pretty surprising considering the info coming from it. Could you elaborate?

As for Sony underestimating Xbox 2, I have no idea if they are or not, although it isn't far fetched given the situation. It could indeed bite them in the butt. However, it does not seem as though Sony has tried to slow down at all in these console wars, given the billions they've spent on Cell, Blu-ray, OpenGL, etc. If they thought next-gen would be an easy win, I'd think they would not take such a gamble on these things. Even if they do underestimate Microsoft, they seem to be putting out the best product that they can and not try to just put out something to make money off of. (hmm...sounds like someone else though. ;))

If the X-box has a 700 mhz processor and the PS2 has a 300 mhz processor why can't developers continue making good games for the XB for a couple more years? It seems like the XB would just now be coming into it's prime.
Don't ask me why they decided to jump-start this next generation. IMO, it seems like it would have made much more sense to follow the plan you mentioned. Instead, Microsoft wanted to hurry up and start a new generation despite being the last one to show up last gen. I'm sure Sony and Nintendo may have preferred to wait it out a little more as well, but I guess Microsoft is tired of paying for the Xbox.

[Rokkit]

Sony is, potentially, about to make two big mistakes:

1. Relying too much on hardware.

The mass market gamer, the kind of casual or mainstream numbers that bring in the biggest audience, doesn't care about cutting edge technology. Sure, they want to say they have the strongest system - and that's important - but that's about all they care about. You can reach this goal without pushing the envelope too far, like Sony seems intent to do with Cell, Blu-Ray, etc. Which will simply cause a delay that they don't need.

Make no mistake: having Microsoft get a head start on the market is something they would be wise to not let happen. MS will go all out, and if they have at least a fairly sophisticated machine - which they most likely will - they have already proven they have they hype abilities to draw big numbers. MS has made themselves a potential player in this market now, and giving them any advantage would cause problems.


Funny thing is, nothing Sony ever hypes actually lives up to their promises, which makes it seem all for nothing. It even looks that way with the PSP: I keep hearing how it's a 'portable playstation 2'; but those screenshots from the site you linked fall somewhere just barely outside the Playstation/N64 capabilities.



2. Becoming too arrogant about their current position.

You see it in little bits and pieces everywhere: trade shows, relationships with retailers, angering third party developers...Sony has become too comfortable with their huge numbers, and could risk a backlash and exodus to a more than willing Microsoft. I know this for a fact: Video-game specialty stores, such as EB Games and Gamestop, have had a considerable push for XBOX related sales. And Microsoft knows how to take advantage of this. Free stuff here and there, extras thrown in, more information and user friendly communication. MS has thrown plenty of attention their way and it's paying off.

In fact, Sony has noticed this. They've made requests of these game store chains to try and increase Playstation awareness. But at the same time they don't seem to practice what they preach; fewer Reps making the rounds to stores, less extras or incentives for store management/employees, lack of information to the retail chains.

Microsoft has given all that and more; happily.


And then you have DaDakota telling you how some developers are less-than-pleased with Sony. This isn't rare. In fact, it's becoming talked about more and more. Sony is treading on dangerous ground there; by biting the hands of those who would help them most.


Of course, having said all that, Sony has established itsefl in the market. If they can curb these mistakes, and get the right buttons pushed, the customer base is already installed.

But they seem intent on playing with fire.

[RC Cola]

Originally posted by Rokkit
Sony is, potentially, about to make two big mistakes:

1. Relying too much on hardware.


Yeah, maybe a company that specializes in hardware should lay off a bit on their biggest strength. :confused: The way I see it, Sony is just bringing to the table what they do best.

The mass market gamer, the kind of casual or mainstream numbers that bring in the biggest audience, doesn't care about cutting edge technology. Sure, they want to say they have the strongest system - and that's important - but that's about all they care about. You can reach this goal without pushing the envelope too far, like Sony seems intent to do with Cell, Blu-Ray, etc. Which will simply cause a delay that they don't need.
They may care when they start seeing games with graphics several times better than the Unreal 3.0 engine, 10 times bigger than GTA:SA, complicated AI, and real-world physics, all playing in high definition with no load times and at 60 FPS. Meanwhile, games for other consoles may be lucky just to get one of these things going, let alone all. Sony could have just let Moore's law, or whatever, come into play and come out with a console that was a little more powerful than Xbox 2, but didn't really offer much more. Yet if they can get a teraflop in the PS3, that could very well be 10+ times the performance coming from Xbox 2 according to the specs. (I forgot the number I heard last from their console) If Xbox 2 also decides to go with no HD, no backwards compatibility and stick with just a DVD drive, the performance gap could be more apparent. Consumers may not care about new cutting edge tech, but they might care what that cutting edge tech produces. Additionally, this tech could also persuade several developers to develop games for the PS3, even with the seemingly weakening ties Sony has been having with them. Why bother with a Xbox 2/Revolution if it seems as though these games are a generation behind?

Make no mistake: having Microsoft get a head start on the market is something they would be wise to not let happen. MS will go all out, and if they have at least a fairly sophisticated machine - which they most likely will - they have already proven they have they hype abilities to draw big numbers. MS has made themselves a potential player in this market now, and giving them any advantage would cause problems.
Like I mentioned earlier, I never really viewed the early launch of Microsoft to be that much of an advantage, especially when taking the Xbox series into consideration (seems like they would be hurting their own console by trying to get to next-gen early). It could turn out to be Dreamcast II (how many times have you heard that before?). Sony could let Microsoft get all the attention until maybe around the middle of next year, in which they'll start showing off the PS3. When the Xbox 2 goes on sale, Sony may try to remind consumers who is "king."
Funny thing is, nothing Sony ever hypes actually lives up to their promises, which makes it seem all for nothing. It even looks that way with the PSP: I keep hearing how it's a 'portable playstation 2'; but those screenshots from the site you linked fall somewhere just barely outside the Playstation/N64 capabilities.

I don't know exactly which promises you are referring to, but it seems as though Sony tends to just mislead, not really fail to meet promises. I had read somewhere on the Internet that their words are often twisted by others, although Sony can mislead(technically, not lying, just misleading :)). And they aren't the only ones to do that either. Microsoft , like Sony, also hyped several things, such as the tech numbers of their console, citing numbers that would never actually occur in game (IIRC, Like ~130 Million polygons for Xbox, and like ~70 million for PS2. Real world numbers are no where near there though). Nintendo is really the only one that doesn't really do this, AFAIK, preferring to stick to real-world numbers with their products (GBA lasting longer than Nintendo says).

As for the portable PS2 thing, I have heard the same, but I do not recall hearing it from Sony themselves. Looking at the specs of the system, it would take a heck of a developer to create something on PS2-graphics caliber, something only really likely due to the smaller screen of the PSP. The PSP can only push like less than half as many polygons as the PS2, not mention the fact the battery life wouldn't be good. One article I read a while back was how they would have been content with PS1 graphics, although they decided to up the power a bit. You may see some people say that the PSP is a portable PS2, much like you can find people saying that is will cost $500, last 20 minutes, and come out in 2006, but I don't think you'll be seeing some of those comments coming directly from Sony.

But they seem intent on playing with fire.
They aren't the only ones. All 3 console makers are taking risks with their next-gen consoles (Microsoft launching early; Sony gambling on Cell, Blu-ray, etc.; Nintendo seemingly trying to downplay console power and possibly online play and start a Revolution.)

Of course, the real deciding factor of next-gen, like any other gen, should be the games, something Sony does need to keep an eye on. I've read now that it may be several dozen Cell WS's that have gone out to developers, instead of just a dozen or so. May have been wrongly reported though. Nevertheless, at least some people can be working on the PS3. I would suspect that some of the big players that support Sony may still stick with them. Last I heard, the next Silent Hill would go on the most powerful next-gen console (IE: PS3, unless some castrophe occurs) and I would guess that others may follow the same route (I read that Team Ninja decided to go to Xbox because it was the most powerful). I've read that TES: Oblivion will be on the PS3, as well as Xbox 2. IIRC, Koei already announced Oni for the PS3. Of course, we got MGS 4, GT5 (along with other Sony 1st party titles I'm assuming, which should include something from Naughty Dog) scheduled for the PS3 as well. Given the amount of support EA has given the PSP, I imagine they're also have at least an ok relationship with Sony.

The big ones that I am somewhat worried about are Rockstar and Square Enix. I assume that even if Sony treats some developers and publishers badly, they don't treat these guys the same way. In fact, I've heard rumors that Sony basically gives RS the green light on several of their games just so they can keep GTA. I don't know about that, but RS has made a lot of money by selling their games on the PS2 somewhat exclusively and will no doubt want to do the same next-gen. SE has seemed to branch out a little bit, although they seem to keep their big titles exclusively with Sony. I imagine they'll stay the same unless Microsoft can grab a large piece of the Japanese market. Obviously, as with the previous reports, Sony may be slipping a little bit here, but I still would like to see where things are at a little over a year from now. I imagine that the consumers in Japan already have a certain feeling towards Microsoft as it is, something I think a smaller Japanese publisher may not wish to gamble on when they know they could get sales with the PS3.

Long story short, it seems as thought at least a few big name developers/publishers are on board with Sony. The smaller development houses may be at odds with Sony, but they may change their mind on what platform to pick when millions more pick the PS3 over other consoles due to at least a few good games, all enhanced by what the PS3 has to offer.

I kind of came up with all this at different moments and sort of randomly. I'm sort of busy at school so hopefully this all makes sense. Not sure how well I concentrated on the subjects at hand.