Back To Special Features
It seems that just about every video game web site from out there has
some sort of editorial regarding the PlayStation 2, which is still
officially referred to by Sony as "the next-generation PlayStation."
However, for the purposes of this editorial, I'm going to avoid doing what
others have done (re-hash old news and publish false rumors) and instead
get straight to my opinions on all the relevant topics. And as you can
tell by the length of this editorial, I've got a a lot of opinions...
Backwards Compatibility
This isn't really a big deal to me. I've already got a PlayStation, and
the ability to play all my old PlayStation games on the PlayStation 2
doesn't excite me at all. I don't know about you, but when I get a new
video game system, I hook it up to my TV along with all my other systems.
Backwards compatibility might be useful if old PlayStation games were
enhanced on the PlayStation 2, but they're not. It might also be a big
deal to people who don't currently own a PlayStation, but with over 50
million units sold and counting, that encompasses an ever-shrinking
percentage of the gaming market. Backwards compatibility is a nifty little
feature that is very convenient, but it's not something I would base a
purchasing decision on.
If anything, backwards compatibility will be a headache to Sony's many
third-party developers. The PlayStation market is over-saturated enough as
it is. Companies releasing new games can easily find them lost in a sea of
hundreds of other PlayStation games competing for retail shelf space and
the consumer's wallet. Rather than offering third-party developers a
chance to start fresh with a wide open market, new games released for the
PlayStation 2 will still have to deal with all of the problems over-
crowding brings to the market despite the fact that it will be a brand new
system.
Backwards compatibility may even convince some companies to keep
developing for the original PlayStation a little while longer and avoid the
PlayStation 2. Why should Company X make PlayStation 2 games and sell them
to a relatively small audience when they can make PlayStation 1 games and
sell them to the PlayStation's 50 million+ user base AND the PlayStation 2's
audience? It might also be more appealing for smaller game companies to
pump out PlayStation 1 games at little cost, in a comparitively small
amount of time, and fairly easily. The PlayStation's hardware may be five
years old, but anyone who thinks it's not still sufficient for most games
should go play Final Fantasy 8 and see for themselves just how "sufficient"
it is.
The Modem
Given how technologically advanced the system is and how expensive it
will be for Sony to manufacture, it is not a given that it will come
packaged with the system at no extra cost. If Sony were smart, they would
make the modem built in to the system even if it meant taking a loss on the
hardware (they would make the money back in software sales anyway). If the
modem were sold separately, it would bring up a whole bunch of ugly issues
that would never even have be thought of if it were sold with the system.
Specifically, there's the cycle of developers not wanting to support the
modem and consumers not wanting to buy it. Why should Company X bother to
waste the time and money to make their games support the modem if only a
small percentage of the system's owners have the modem? In turn, why
should Joe Gamer buy the modem if not enough games take advantage of it?
If all the Joe Gamers of the world don't buy the modem, why should Company
X bother to make games that support the modem? This cycle is the nature of
add-ons, and one of the biggest reasons why the 32X, Sega CD, Jaguar CD,
and countless other add-ons failed miserably (and why the 64DD has still
not been released).
If the modem is built in, everybody has one. It's not even a question.
If Company X sees that five million people have purchased a PlayStation 2,
they know that their modem-supported game is going to have a potential
audience of five million people. The horrible and inevitable cycle
described above never takes place. The Dreamcast is going to have a huge
advantage over the PlayStation 2 if Sony drops the ball with the modem and
sells it separately.
First-Party Games
Sony does a great job of picking up the publishing rights to promising-
looking titles and then marketing them to no end, but they've never been
good at actually making the games. Gran Turismo was made by Polyphony
Digital (a semi-independent spin-off of Sony), not Sony itself. As for 989
Studios (formerly Sony Interactive Studios America), I've always thought
that everything they make is crap except for the NFL GameDay series, and
even GameDay was finally surpassed by Madden last year. 989's basketball,
hockey, and baseball games have been a joke throughout much of their
existence, and continue to lag behind Electronic Arts' franchises in sales.
The bottom line is that for the most part, Sega makes great games,
Nintendo makes great games, and Sony doesn't make much of anything. This
is one of the biggest obstacles the PlayStation 2 has to overcome, although
admittedly, the original PlayStations seems to have done just fine without
much in way of first-party games...
Third-Party Support
While no announcements have been made yet, you just know that third-
party support is going to be one of Sony's biggest assets, just as the
PlayStation's massive third-party support gave it a major edge over the
Nintendo 64 and Saturn. Given the attractive publishing model Sony has set
up with the PlayStation (as well as their strong relationships with
publishers, developers, and retailers across the industry), it seems only
natural that the PlayStation 2 will be equally attractive to all parties
involved. Of course, it's not that simple, but there is no reason to
believe that just about every major third-party video game company in
existence won't be making PlayStation 2 games.
The biggest example of the development community's devotion to Sony is
Square, who seems to be in Sony's back pocket. Square is one of the most
influential third-party developers in the world, and if they pledge their
support of the PlayStation 2, you better believe that every hardcore role-
play-gamer in the world is going to buy a PlayStation 2. Square has the
resources to easily be a multi-platform developer and make games for the
PlayStation 2, Dreamcast, and Nintendo's next system simultaneously.
However, they seem to feel that they have a lot more money to make by
signing a huge exclusive contract with Sony, and they are apparently
confident enough in the PlayStation 2 that they're not afraid of putting
all their eggs in one basket. For the record, Square has not officially
announced that they will be a PlayStation 2 developer. However, considering
their presence at the press conference that announced the PlayStation 2 to
the world, as well as the fact that they showed off demos of Final Fantasy
8 running on the PlayStation 2 and have been completely silent regarding
the Dreamcast, it would seem to be a no-brainer that Square is firmly
behind the PlayStation 2.
Another major company Sony has behind it is Electronic Arts, the largest
third-party video game company in the world. There are very few people who
doubt that EA will eventually sign on as a Dreamcast developer, but right
now they're taking a "wait and see" approach much like they did with the
Nintendo 64. If you're wondering "Will EA make games for the PlayStation 2
or Dreamcast?" the answer is more than likely "both." EA has always been
a multi-platform developer, but then again EA has always focused on one
system more than all the others. EA clearly chose the Genesis over the
Super Nintendo and the PlayStation over the Nintendo 64. While it's far
from a done deal, all indications are that EA will choose the PlayStation
2 over the Dreamcast as its next "system of choice," and EA is not a bad
company to have on your side...
The Price and DVD
How much the PlayStation 2 will cost at launch is anyone's guess. I've
heard figures everywhere from $200 to $400, and one prominent Japanese
mistranslation actually had many people believing that Sony said the system
would cost "under $850" (I would certainly hope so). As cutting edge and
expensive the hardware is, I think Sony is smart enough to realize that
they're going to have trouble selling systems for $350 or $400, and will do
whatever it takes to get the price at $300 or below. But even at $300, the
PlayStation 2 would still be comparitively expensive considering that the
extremely-powerful-in-its-own-right Dreamcast will be around $200 at launch
and presumably much cheaper by the time Christmas 2000 rolls around.
The PlayStation 2's DVD storage format is just another reason the system
will be so expensive. DVD offers a lot more memory than CDs do, but the
CD-ROM format is still very efficient and cost-effective. And even if a
company runs out of memory on one CD, they can easily make the game come on
as many CDs as they want as is the case with Final Fantasy 7 and 8. DVD
will give developers even more memory to work with, and that has to be a
good thing, but not if it comes at the expense of a reasonable launch price.
The Specs and Release Date
No one is disputing that the PlayStation 2 blows away every other
system technologically, because it definitely does. But I've said it
before and I'll say it again: Specs are specs. Games are games. Specs are
meaningless without games to back them up (espectially when they're as
blatantly exaggerated as the PlayStation 2's specs are). While the
PlayStation 2's incredible specs give it a great advantage over the
competition, don't assume that they grant Sony an automatic victory in a
sales war that hasn't even begun yet.
Sony should know better than anyone that superior specs don't
necessarily lead to superior games and superior sales. After all, their
own PlayStation is a technological piece of crap compared to the Nintendo
64 in almost every way with the exception of its CD storage format, and yet
it is still dominating the N64 in sales worldwide. Sony should know from
experience that a sales victory is never a sure thing in this industry, no
matter how impressive your specs are.
One more thing Sony could learn from its victory over the N64 is that
the early bird usually gets the worm. The N64 was severely hampered by its
late arrival to the marketplace, and now it's Sony who's showing up to the
party late. By the time the PlayStation 2 is released in the fall of 2000,
the Dreamcast, if all goes well for Sega, will already have a sizable
installed base and a healthy library of games. Getting a head start in the
sales race will aid Sega's efforts to get back to the top of the video game
industry.
As hot as the PlayStation 2 is looking, I'm trying not to get caught up
in all the hype and I am trying to avoid getting too excited about it.
I'm sure the PlayStation 2 will be a great system with plenty of third-
party support and great games when it's released late next year, but that's
next year. In the meantime, I can play dozens of games on the Dreamcast,
or read fancy and exaggerated PlayStation 2 technical specs on a piece of
paper. Which one do you think I'm going to have more fun doing?
Send me an e-mail at ivan@mastergamer.com
© 2001 ivan@mastergamer.com