KK again claims PS3 will be costly.

Status
Not open for further replies.
RancidLunchmeat said:
Of course they don't expect the PS3 alone to recoup the R&D costs of cell and blu-ray.

But they definately do plan on "hiding" a portion of the R&D costs of cell and Blu-Ray in the PS3.

If Blue-Ray fails to catch on and HD-DVD (which somehow now seems to have the edge in the media segment), becomes the standard, then Sony has no choice but to absorb ALL the R&D costs of Blu-Ray into their PS3 development. Same thing with CELL, but I believe that Cell has a far brighter future in other devices than Blu-Ray does.

The reality is that of course, the PS3 is going to cost Sony more money to develop and manufacture than the X360 will cost MS. That also leaves MS in a position to do price reductions at a far earlier time than the PS3 is able to do.

Depending on the launch price of the X360, I wouldn't be surprised to see the X360 actually have a price reduction at the LAUNCH of the PS3. If the PS3 comes out a year later, and maybe $50 more than the launch price of the X360.. the X360 may very well be able to not only meet the PS3 head on with a AAA title release but ALSO a $50 price reduction that will totally KILL the PS3.

Simply put: at the PS3 launch it simply cannot be more than $50 over the price of the X360. Whether the X360 can reduce it's tag by $50 or just maintain its launch price because the PS3 is so expensive is really what is left to be seen.

Some points:

Rancid I think you've got the wrong idea about PS3 and R&D costs. Those R&D costs are already paid, they don't need to be recouped - it's more a matter of the PS3 (or whatever else) making enough money to pay for the R&D they will be undertaking this gen for the next one. So it's kind of a 'pay it forward' situation with R&D.

That said - the Sony consumer elctronics arm I believe fielded the entire cost of R&D for blu-ray (or whatever division is responsible for it), and Sony's Semiconductor division payed the R&D for Cell; Playstation division may have been involved as well in terms of the costs, it's kind of hard to say since Kutaragi was in charge of both at the time.

But the point is R&D has been paid - they only have to worry about funding current R&D expenses and still making a profit. If you make a profit you make a profit afterall. ;)

As for Microsoft, well I again agree that their console will cost less to make. I'm not sure about dropping the price within six months of launch just for the sake of fighting Sony; afterall Microsoft would probably think that Sony will sell out of their initial stock regardless. And probably be right. But anyway if they do it they do it. Good for 360 sales, but probably not too bad for PS3 sales.

Now a AAA title I can kind of believe, but Halo 3? I don't know - seems like it would give it too little time in production, about a year and a half.

I don't know and don't really care - just wanted to chime in about the R&D expenses. 8)
 
A quick note on Halo 3...

Halo 3 has already been in development for ATLEAST 22 months. 22 months is assuming that, at the time this was said, that they were JUST starting on Halo 3. It could very well have been in development long before he said this.


"We're working on the next version -- I hate to tell you this confidentially but I'll have to swear you to secrecy now -- we're working on the next version of Xbox right now and we're working on Halo 2 and Halo 3, the two newest versions of the game." - MS CEO, Steve Ballmer, Oct 2003


http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/exec/steve/2003/10-21office-launch.asp

That means that if the PS3 launches in May, Halo 3 could have roughly 32 months ( almost 3 years ) of dev time behind it, and if the PS3 launches holidays season 2006, Halo 3 will have had 3 years + of dev time.

Halo 3 launching along side the PS3, is entirely possible and highly likely.
 
*shrugs shoulders*

I mean I don't know - they rushed Bungie on Halo 2, maybe they're willing to do it again. I can almost gurantee that Steve Ballmer has better things to do than keep up with video game launch dates - that info probably routes through two or three people before it reaches him.

Same with Bill Gates - I know he said it would launch beside PS3, but he also promised my Longhorn (Vista) would have several features that have since been axed and that it would be ready by now! :p

Seriously though - I like Bill Gates. It's just you have to understand that for Bill and Steve, the whole XBox thing is just another fiefdom in their empire, about which they would have no information without their vassal Allard to tell them.

If Halo 3 really has been in real development for 22 months already - then sure, I totally see a PS3 launch as a possibility. They might as well show something about this game soon though! At the minimum by/at TGS.
 
BenQ said:
A quick note on Halo 3...

Halo 3 has already been in development for ATLEAST 22 months. 22 months is assuming that, at the time this was said, that they were JUST starting on Halo 3. It could very well have been in development long before he said this.


"We're working on the next version -- I hate to tell you this confidentially but I'll have to swear you to secrecy now -- we're working on the next version of Xbox right now and we're working on Halo 2 and Halo 3, the two newest versions of the game." - MS CEO, Steve Ballmer, Oct 2003


http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/exec/steve/2003/10-21office-launch.asp

That means that if the PS3 launches in May, Halo 3 could have roughly 32 months ( almost 3 years ) of dev time behind it, and if the PS3 launches holidays season 2006, Halo 3 will have had 3 years + of dev time.

Halo 3 launching along side the PS3, is entirely possible and highly likely.

After what Halo2 came to be (single player, imo), I doubt that Halo3 will have the impact that MS would like it to have.
 
So if Halo3 has been in development for 22 mos, and it's next demo showing only reveals a visual quality simply on par with XB2's other game demos, this could be very gloomy news for the prowess of MS's flagship hardware... :oops:
 
Vysez said:
In plain english, the US will get a correct price and Japan and Europe will get "100% rip-off" price. Add to that that Europe will surely get the machine last too.

And you will love it and beg, "Please sir may I have another?" :p
 
xbdestroya said:
*shrugs shoulders*

I mean I don't know - they rushed Bungie on Halo 2, maybe they're willing to do it again. I can almost gurantee that Steve Ballmer has better things to do than keep up with video game launch dates - that info probably routes through two or three people before it reaches him.

Same with Bill Gates - I know he said it would launch beside PS3, but he also promised my Longhorn (Vista) would have several features that have since been axed and that it would be ready by now! :p

Seriously though - I like Bill Gates. It's just you have to understand that for Bill and Steve, the whole XBox thing is just another fiefdom in their empire, about which they would have no information without their vassal Allard to tell them.

If Halo 3 really has been in real development for 22 months already - then sure, I totally see a PS3 launch as a possibility. They might as well show something about this game soon though! At the minimum by/at TGS.

Halo 2 wasn't rushed at all. The ONLY complaint people had was it's ending - In that it DIDN'T have one. It was designed very much like the Matrix trilogy in that sense.

And in a very real sense, M$/Bungie doesn't have to release ANYTHING about Halo 3 ( other than the fact that's it's coming ), and it will still sell multiple millions of copies ( and that's on day 1 ), and score extremely high review scores across the board.

In the videogame industry there's really nothing else like Halo.Halo 2 SHATTERED the world record for pre-orders, made more money in it's first 24 hours than any game or movie EVER has. Since then it's gone on to sell 6 million + copies and remains the most played game on XBL.

IMO the ONLY defense that Sony could possible use to balance out the Halo 3 release would be if it were to have a Next Gen GTA exclusively for the Ps3 launch.
 
Titanio said:
In isolation, cheaper pricing may not help. The "cheap" approach didn't help Nintendo a whole bundle this generation. Striking a balance between "reassuring expense" and "affordability" would be key, and could work well for PS3, which already has the whole "premium" image locked down.

Basically, within certain boundaries, cheaper isn't always better, and more expensive isn't always worst from the perspective of the market. It all has to be part of a larger proposal, made up of many different components.

Well GCN wasn't only cheap, it also LOOKED cheap too. The irony here is that the Revolution just from the way it looks have a lot of people already salivating. Imagine what a cheap Revolution with sexy looks would do.
 
BenQ said:
Halo 2 wasn't rushed at all. The ONLY complaint people had was it's ending - In that it DIDN'T have one. It was designed very much like the Matrix trilogy in that sense.

And in a very real sense, M$/Bungie doesn't have to release ANYTHING about Halo 3 ( other than the fact that's it's coming ), and it will still sell multiple millions of copies ( and that's on day 1 ), and score extremely high review scores across the board.

In the videogame industry there's really nothing else like Halo.Halo 2 SHATTERED the world record for pre-orders, made more money in it's first 24 hours than any game or movie EVER has. Since then it's gone on to sell 6 million + copies and remains the most played game on XBL.

IMO the ONLY defense that Sony could possible use to balance out the Halo 3 release would be if it were to have a Next Gen GTA exclusively for the Ps3 launch.

I really am not trying to get into this, but BenQ (and SanGreal), Halo 2 was indeed rushed. They tossed out (rather put aside) the engine they had been workine on for the majority of that time and had to redo it all in about 8 months to meet Microsoft's aggressive launch timetable. Once I find an article describing it I'm sure you'll be somewhat surprised by the entire situation, and I'll be sure to post it.

As for the PS3 and Halo 3, c'mon - I really don't think that a game can effect a consoles launch - let's get serious. I'm not down on Microsoft, but I could care less about Halo and Halo 2, and I'm pretty sure there are several million other gamers will feel similarly come the day to choose between Halo 3 and PS3. If it effects any large swath of people, it will probably be the people who were planning on getting a 360 to begin with to follow their favorite franchise.
 
xbdestroya said:
BenQ said:
Halo 2 wasn't rushed at all. The ONLY complaint people had was it's ending - In that it DIDN'T have one. It was designed very much like the Matrix trilogy in that sense.

And in a very real sense, M$/Bungie doesn't have to release ANYTHING about Halo 3 ( other than the fact that's it's coming ), and it will still sell multiple millions of copies ( and that's on day 1 ), and score extremely high review scores across the board.

In the videogame industry there's really nothing else like Halo.Halo 2 SHATTERED the world record for pre-orders, made more money in it's first 24 hours than any game or movie EVER has. Since then it's gone on to sell 6 million + copies and remains the most played game on XBL.

IMO the ONLY defense that Sony could possible use to balance out the Halo 3 release would be if it were to have a Next Gen GTA exclusively for the Ps3 launch.

I really am not trying to get into this, but BenQ (and SanGreal), Halo 2 was indeed rushed. They tossed out (rather put aside) the engine they had been workine on for the majority of that time and had to redo it all in about 8 months to meet Microsoft's aggressive launch timetable. Once I find an article describing it I'm sure you'll be somewhat surprised by the entire situation, and I'll be sure to post it.

You couldn't possibly be more missinformed. Not only was Halo 2 NOT rushed, it was DELAYED by an entire year. Your claim that they threw out the engine that they had been working on to meet M$'s aggressive schedule is 100% garbage.

Also, I find it HIGHLY naieve of you to dissmiss the implact that Halo 3 will have. There are literally MILLIONS and MILLIONS of gamers out there who literally salivate at the mere mention of the word "Halo."
 
BenQ said:
You couldn't possibly be more missinformed. Not only was Halo 2 NOT rushed, it was DELAYED by an entire year. Your claim that they threw out the engine that they had been working on to meet M$'s aggressive schedule is 100% garbage.

Also, I find it HIGHLY naieve of you to dissmiss the implact that Halo 3 will have. There are literally MILLIONS and MILLIONS of gamers out there who literally salivate at the mere mention of the word "Halo."

I don't know... anyway you'll find it all on the Special Edition DVD. I'm still looking for a more professional article on it, but here's a post I found on it. (It's not like I'm making this stuff up BenQ - I'm too old for mind games like that and I could care less about it; it's just something I remember from back in the day. Hell, I thought everyone knew.)

"What were they doing for 3 years?" has been an all too common question popping up on Halo 2 boards around the net. When people see the glitches, the cheats, the lack of multiplayer maps, the shortness of the single-player campaign, and the horrible "ending," they cannot help but wonder if the copy they hold in their hands is truly the result of 3 years of hard work.

Amazingly enough, Bungie released a Limited Edition DVD that gives a fairly complete picture of what exactly was happening all this time -- and it isn't pretty. It is the tale of blunders, mismanagement at top levels, and an artificially rushed deadline to get the game out the door. (All quotes are taken from the DVD.)

THE TEASER TRAILER

Remember the original trailer for Halo 2? Remember how wonderful its graphics were, how titillating was its suggested storyline, how exciting was the prospect of fighting in the "god-damned apocalypse"? Do you recall how proud Bungie was as they boasted that the trailer was completely done using nothing but the game's new engine? Clearly, the Halo 2 that was finally released came nowhere close to the advanced graphics and physics sported in that first trailer, and Bungie has been nice enough to explain why.

After they finished work on the teaser, Bungie was able to actually get around to implementing the new graphics and physics into some basic level designs. But they quickly ran into a really big problem: the current Xbox is just too wimpy to handle, to any large extent, all the advanced effects shown off in the first trailer. It was impossible for the first-generation console to pull off the bump-mapping, dynamic lighting, particle effects, destructible surfaces, etc., over an entire level.

So Bungie at this point seemed to be faced with a clear choice. They had to either (i) postpone Halo 2 until the next Xbox came out or (ii) use the graphics and physics engine that they already had from Halo CE, and reserve the new engine for later. As it turned out, Bungie did neither. Rather, they made the fateful decision to try and half-**** Halo 2 onto the current Xbox.

This, I believe, was the first major blunder in the development of the game. The logic here is pretty simple: Why bother to go through with an all-new engine when, because of console limitations, it will have little improvement over the engine you've already got??? When you compare the final release version to the original Halo CE, you cannot help but notice that it doesn't really look that much better than it did 3 years ago. So why spend so much time working on a new engine when you knew it wouldn't deliver much more than what you already have?

As it turned out, the costs simply outweighed the benefits in the end. Bungie's bad decision early on forced them to spend way too much time in coding the new engine, instead of working on what the game desperately needed: a solid storyline backed up by Halo's unique gameplay. Almost all the problems that came later on can be traced back to this bad tumble out of the starting gate.

THE E3 NEW MOMBASA DEMO

21 months before release day, Bungie showed off the E3 demo trailer to the excitement of Halo fans everywhere. What we got to glimpse was an epic battle taking place inside a mega-city. Whether advertently or inadvertently, we were suddenly all under the impression that work on Halo 2 was coming along wonderfully. After all, if what they're showing us now is so good, then just imagine how good is all the stuff they're not showing us, right? But this was far, far from the truth.

On their DVD, Bungie admits that the E3 demo was the ONLY thing that they actually had in their hands up until that point. After a year-and-a-half of work, they had nothing else to show but what we saw at E3:

Quote from DVD
"We came back from E3 with actually less than we wanted to. We came back from E3 with a demo. We did not come back from E3 with a playable part of a level. That was really bad, actually."

Quote from DVD
"What E3 gave us was the sense that we still didn't have the target we were aiming at. So after E3, instead of being able to jump into all of our levels and go right to it, we're still trying to figure out where we're going."

Quote from DVD
We got fifty, sixty guys now on the Halo 2 team. They're waiting to be told, "Hey, what do we do? ... Tell us, we want to do it."

These admissions on the part of the Bungie crew are astounding. Halfway through Halo 2's development time, they were still trying to figure out what exactly they're supposed to be doing with the game.

CRUNCH TIME: PUSHING AN ARTIFICIAL DEADLINE

Then came another fateful decision. The DVD, weekly updates, and post-release interviews with Bungie employees are all very careful in withholding the details, but somebody somewhere came up with November 9th as the non-negotiable deadline for when Halo 2 had to be released. In all likelihood, this was something that someone in Microsoft told Bungie that they had to do -- and that heads would roll if it didn't happen.

It's not hard to reconstruct why Nov 9th was selected. If Microsoft had given Bungie the time they desperately needed, it would have meant Halo 2 would be released about the same time as Xbox 2 first goes on sale. This is unthinkable from a purely business standpoint, for it would turn the first Xbox into the biggest competitor against Xbox 2. A proper launch date for Halo 2 could actually end up destroying Xbox 2's chances. So in order to keep this from happening, Halo 2 just had to be released a lot earlier than the next Xbox.

And judging from Bungie's comments, this business decision sorely cut into the quality of their final product. Tons and tons of stuff had to be left out from what they really wanted Halo 2 to be -- and even then Bungie came frighteningly close to not reaching the deadline.

Quote from DVD
"Right about at the moment [10 months before release day] Pandora's Box was opened and decisions which were engraved in stone were re-thought."


Quote from DVD
"We messed up. We didn't have the design down. We didn't have the story down. Once we actually started to see how long the missions were taking to produce and how long they were taking to design and script, it just wasn't gonna work."

It is downright amazing to realize that Bungie didn't seriously get to work on Halo 2 until less than a year before the game was finally released. And they had to spend so much time to still code the new engine that the DVD admits the game was only half done a mere 5 MONTHS before release. Here's what one programmer said about the game's progress at that point:

Quote from DVD
"I'm so scared shyt right now, to be honest with you. We've got a huge mountain of work to do in a very, very compressed time period. That's scary. These guys ... everybody here is scared."

Bungie used to say in their official Halo 2 FAQ that "it'll be done when it's done." But now they talked about the game "kinda" being done whenever the deadline rolled around:

Quote from DVD
It's really great to have this deadline met. We can't move at all because it forces us to kinda finish it. When the producers [i.e. Microsoft Game Studios] come over and pry our hands from the keyboard and say, "Okay, you can't touch it anymore. We've got to start manufacturing these discs," I think that's the point where we're gonna have to stop and that's going to be the end of it.

Nevertheless, people at Bungie openly wish they could work passed the Nov 9th deadline. Indeed, in one of Frankie's weekly updates, a Bungie programmer said he wanted 6 more months to finish the game. And the DVD has a guy who bluntly says, "Yeah, we could use a lot more time."

CONCLUSION

So this is the sordid story behind Halo 2. It leaves only one possible conclusion: Because of bad decisions from start to finish, Halo 2 became a half-baked rushjob -- and it shows. It shows in the short single-player campaign, one that's ridden with lots of plot holes. It shows in the many glitches and cheats that were so easily found shortly after release day. It shows in the bad gameplay balance in multiplayer as well as the overall lack of maps to play in. And it definitely shows in the awful "ending" to the game.

Now, there are rumors floating around that the real Halo 2 is going to be released as a launch title for the next Xbox. "Halo 2.5" is said to have everything that was supposed to be in Halo 2. If this is indeed what's gonna happen, then the Halo 2 we all bought will go down in history not as Game of the Year, but as Most Half-Assed Game of All Time.

As for the 'millions and millions' that salivate for Halo 3, all I'm saying is that the majority of those people are already planning on getting an XBox 360 to begin with. I mean, do you disagree? I'm really not talking some strange language here.
 
Xboxdestroya. Would you mind summarizzing that, or atleast putting the important parts in BOLD. Developers feeling the crunch time as release date nears is something that EVERY dev goes through and is no indication of it being rushed.

I'd also lke a link.
 
BenQ said:
Xboxdestroya. Would you mind summarizzing that, or atleast putting the important parts in BOLD. Developers feeling the crunch time as release date nears is something that EVERY dev goes through and is no indication of it being rushed.

I'd also lke a link.

BenQ - get my name right - it's xbdestroya - not xboxdestroya. And I'm getting tired of your lazy research skills; it's all important, if you want to learn read the whole thing.

The fact is you know a lot less about the whole story than you thought, so I don't know, borrow the limited edition DVD from someone who has it - or bittorent it - and come to your own conclusions. Certainly make it your last lecture to me on the Halo 2 development schedule.

Like I said, my interest in this is purely tangentental and I was just relating something I remember reading about back in the day.

Here's where I found this particular quote:
link to random forum

This is a quote of yours from just three posts above: "You couldn't possibly be more missinformed. Not only was Halo 2 NOT rushed, it was DELAYED by an entire year. Your claim that they threw out the engine that they had been working on to meet M$'s aggressive schedule is 100% garbage. "

I would reflect on the level of confidence you put into writing your posts; certainly no one should ever be '100%' confident of anything.
 
xbdestroya said:
BenQ said:
Xboxdestroya. Would you mind summarizzing that, or atleast putting the important parts in BOLD. Developers feeling the crunch time as release date nears is something that EVERY dev goes through and is no indication of it being rushed.

I'd also lke a link.

BenQ - get my name right - it's xbdestroya - not xboxdestroya. And I'm getting tired of your lazy research skills; it's all important, if you want to learn read the whole thing.

Here's where I found it:
link to random forum

LMAO, that's your link?1?! To some random Halo basher on a forum that NOBODY responded to? LMAO :LOL: ( It's probably your post ).

I'm sorry, this may sound "crazy" but I require FAR more proof that Halo 2's engine was thrown away and reworked within the last 8 months ( which is what you claimed )than a link to some Halo bashing f*nboy on some random forum......does that sound "crazy" to you? :LOL:

I provide a link directly to microsoft.com and you provide a link to some random f*nboy ( probably you ) on some random forum ( which you present as soe kind of "proof" ), and you're getting tired of MY "lazy research skills"..... HILARIOUS! :LOL:
 
BenQ said:
LMAO, that's your link?1?! To some random Halo basher on a forum that NOBODY responded to? LMAO :LOL: ( It's probably your post ).

I'm sorry, this may sound "crazy" but I require FAR more proof that Halo 2's engine was thrown away and reworked within the last 8 months ( which is what you claimed )than a link to some Halo bashing f*nboy on some random forum......does that sound "crazy" to you? :LOL:

I provide a link directly to microsoft.com and you provide a link to some random f*nboy ( probably you ) on some random forum ( which you present as soe kind of "proof" ), and you're getting tired of MY "lazy research skills"..... HILARIOUS! :LOL:

Yes - that's what I've found thus far. I'm still looking. Are you saying then that you don't believe it?
 
xbdestroya said:
BenQ said:
LMAO, that's your link?1?! To some random Halo basher on a forum that NOBODY responded to? LMAO :LOL: ( It's probably your post ).

I'm sorry, this may sound "crazy" but I require FAR more proof that Halo 2's engine was thrown away and reworked within the last 8 months ( which is what you claimed )than a link to some Halo bashing f*nboy on some random forum......does that sound "crazy" to you? :LOL:

I provide a link directly to microsoft.com and you provide a link to some random f*nboy ( probably you ) on some random forum ( which you present as soe kind of "proof" ), and you're getting tired of MY "lazy research skills"..... HILARIOUS! :LOL:

Yes - that's what I've found thus far. I'm still looking. Are you saying then that you don't believe it?

What you have claimed is that they got rid on an engine they worked on for more than 2 years, and threw something else together on a different engine all within the last 8 months. :LOL: So NO xboxdestroya, I don't believe it..... I have no reason to believe the lies of such as obvious troll :LOL:
 
Just don't waste your, and everybody's time arguing with someone just to try to make him/her agree with your POV. It's useless. Just state, politely, your point of view on a subject and leave it at that. You can ask someone to expand on a subject, if you wish. But that would be about all.
.
 
True SanGreal, true.

Anyway I'll re-engage in this topic if it goes back to business matters; in the interim you can consider yourself the 'victor' BenQ.
 
BenQ said:
xbdestroya said:
*shrugs shoulders*
.

In the videogame industry there's really nothing else like Halo.Halo 2 SHATTERED the world record for pre-orders, made more money in it's first 24 hours than any game or movie EVER has. Since then it's gone on to sell 6 million + copies and remains the most played game on XBL.

Do you have any stats Halo 2's launch compares to games like GTA:SA and Dragon Quest 8 which also sold a lot on their first day?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top