I Now Want a PS3

I never did finish ICO way back when (maybe I should buy it now for the PS2), but I did finish Shadow of the Colossus. And now the third game from Team ICO is leaking or floating or whatever on the internet.

Digital is More Expensive?

Since the Xbox 360 started offering the ability to download older games from the original Xbox library of games online and store them on your hard drive, the Wii, PS3 and PSP have also taken to the idea and started doing it as well. I think it's a great service to have digital games instead of cds and cartridges (though I am a bit enamored with my own collection of stuff).

But I don't understand what's going on here. Instead of the idea of a digital service saving money by not using physical media, companies have started to offer the service at a premium, charging way too much money for games that are 5-20 years old.

It's hard to say for the PS3, since I can't seem to find any prices on their Playstation Network website, but the Xbox and Wii offer titles to download from their older consoles at about 200-400% markup on prices based off of eBay offerings ($15 from Live vs $6 average from StillLivesAtHome128 on eBay). Of course, the used games behemoth Gamestop is still selling Halo, a game from 2001, for $20, but only idiots shop there.

*crickets chirping*

Nintendo isn't doing much better. Nintendo offered the first three Mario games for download on the Wii for $5 each. You can find it on eBay for under a $1 if you can get an auction that doesn't charge $8 for shipping. That's almost a 500% markup on a game that they fully admit on their store website is 25 years old. In fact, it's the oldest commercial Nintendo game ever that they gave away with the console. I'm not even sure you could buy it because they made it available to everyone that had the NES.

And what's worse is that your paying for a transaction back into your childhood. Most people played these games when they were kids. I'd even bet that the majority of the buyers of games like Super Mario Brothers are in the 20+ age bracket and realize after buying the game that, like most childhood memories, some things are best left in the past. Games that old evoke other memories from times of yesteryear but not the ones that help you compare your new HD-loving, 1080p, BluRay watching eyes to the 8-bit bleeps and bloops that you fondly remember sitting cross-legged on the living room floor drinking a Tab.

Sure you have to manage a new set of resources when your dealing with digital distribution. Instead of trucks delivering games, your paying for bandwidth. Instead of paying retailers profit margins, your paying for server hard drives and routers. And instead of packaging, your paying for programmers to retrofit code to new consoles. But per game, I'd have to imagine that it's still cheaper to sell games digitally that it is to keep shipping out disks. Especially if sales are stagnate in brick-and-mortar stores.

So here's an offical plea to Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony: Stop trying to make money on games that are older than our kids. Here's some logic to follow: If (ParentAge-ChildAge/2) < GameAge Then GamePrice = 0. I think that's a pretty fair rule to follow.

Wii Store: http://www.nintendo.com/wii/virtualconsole/games
Xbox Live Store: http://marketplace.xbox.com/en-US/games/catalog.aspx?d=5

PSN Store: http://www.us.playstation.com/PSN/Store

E3: Nintendo

Well today's Nintendo press conference at E3 was kind of disappointing. I added some news bits in the sidebar though, most notable (again, to me) are Grand Theft Auto coming to the Nintendo DS, the new, improved motion sensitive controller add-on for Wii controllers (lightsaber duels, please!), a new Wii Sports game called Resort, and a Shaun White snowboard game to play with the Wii Fit board.

Some other news dropping today are a $400 80GB PS3, which signals to me that soon I will own a $350-ish PS3/BluRay player in about a year. I don't really care about the PS3, but a BluRay player that plays PS3 games I'm all in for.

The new Bionic Commando game is getting some decent play reviews. I want to like it, but classic remakes usually don't fair well. Especially if they are remakes from the 80s. I have absolutely no data to back that statement up. :)

Also, The Who's album "Live at Leeds" just hit Rock Band. I'm going to have to see if there are any songs worth a purchase. I've never listened to them. Maybe having the album to play in the game will make me like them just like Boston's Rock Band offerings did.

If You Want A Cheap PS3...

Better get it now.

Though I don't know why you would. There's crap for games on it.

My mantra will be wait at least 1 year and get one used. If Sony changes the newest console that much by then, I'll ditch Sony and never go back.

Sony = Nuts

As the next generation of video games consoles all make their first trip around the 1 year mark, I'm noticing that the console makers are all leaving their mark early on.

Microsoft was the late comer with it's original Xbox. Not to be trusted early on, the deliverance of the Xbox 360 has cemented their powerful feet in gamer land. They are here to stay. They're doing just about everything right. They have a working online presence that can only get better.

Nintendo has never really put up a huge fight for the living room. They were lonely kings once before, but since Sony and the PS1, things have never been the same. With the Wii, they decided to forget the living room battle and go for the people that are in it. The problem is going to be the hardcore gamers. But with Nintendo's quality titles that come out, most gamers won't have a problem dropping $250 for a console to play Mario, Zelda, and Metroid.

Sony. Sony was the Microsoft of yesteryear. Two generations ago, the PS1 killed Nintendo and stole all their gamers. The PS2 made a mockery of that fact. But towards the end of the life cycle of the PS2, there wasn't much of a difference in the games besides the exclusive titles that made each console special. Developers tried to make games a little different for each console, hoping not to piss off either Xbox or PlayStation camps. Now with the launch of the PS3, Sony seems to be having difficulties. The cost is huge. They've already dropped one version of their console from the market (the 20GB HD version). There aren't any games driving purchases even 7 months after launch. Now at E3, Sony is calling the 60GB HD version dead after Summer. Their entire launch line up of consoles will be gone less than a year after launch, replace with one expensive 80GB HD version. The hi-def generation of consoles dictates that console makers must have at least two versions of hardware, so most likely Sony will release a 120GB HD console to replace the $699 slot.

Sony seems to be the only console maker floundering for sales. Microsoft, even after a year plagued with hardware failures, is selling well. Nintendo, catering to non-gamers, is selling 6-to-1 on the PS3 in Japan. This is all really surprising considering Sony has the superior console. And I can't believe that the price alone is making things difficult. I just wonder how long, if at all, it will take for Sony to start putting consoles into peoples houses and getting back into the game.

Now, there is a chance that none of this is true. Overseas executives have a history of spilling beans that they've never eaten before. They either don't know what their talking about or get corrected by the home office. Another dirty ploy could be to release a statement about discontinued hardware to sell more consoles.

Regardless of what happens, the story is out there. Gamers are tuned in. If it's true, we'll all think Sony is nuts. If it's false, we'll all still think Sony is nuts. Then, two years later, we'll all go out and buy a used PS3 and realize that console wars are stupid and that we just want to play awesome games.

Link: Kotaku: Say What? 60GB PS3 Being Taken Out to Pasture