http://gamingtrend.com
April 16, 2014, 08:41:45 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Ouch...Valve boss lets loose on PS3  (Read 3261 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Destructor
Special Project Group
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 15844


▲▲▼▼◄►◄►B A Start


View Profile WWW
« Reply #40 on: October 14, 2007, 04:54:59 AM »

If it's not 100%, it's sure something absurd like 30-50% or so.

Of course, technically the older model PS2s had a high failure rate as well - the CD laser would drift out of alignment during the course of its lifetime. Thankfully it could be easily fixed with a bit of GoogleFu and a screwdriver or two (like I had to do), but eventually you'd get disc read errors.

And the PS1 would fail period, due to how there was a little piece of plastic that held the entire laser assembly in the right position. It would eventually overheat (unless you actually powered off your PS1 every 15 minutes like you were told to do in the system manual) and warp the plastic bit.

Okay...maybe consoles are ALL just poorly built. Short of anything after the NES era in the Nintendo camp anyway.
Logged

"All opinions posted are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled."
Farscry
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4001



View Profile
« Reply #41 on: October 14, 2007, 05:42:23 AM »

Microsoft is George W. Bush (going to keep doing what they want no matter how much their voterbase/customers complain) and Sony is John Kerry (can't keep their story straight from one day to the next, and expect to win because of their noble/successful past).

And we all know how that election played out, don't we? icon_twisted
Logged

Purge - You have unlocked an Achievement!
You are now of the rank reprobate
disarm
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4168


my moral standing is lying down...


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: October 14, 2007, 07:03:33 AM »

Quote from: Lee on October 13, 2007, 11:26:02 PM

Quote from: mytocles on October 13, 2007, 08:12:50 PM

Destructor, is this really true (the 100% failure rate part)? I don't follow the stats on how many have failed, vs. how many are still going strong - though I'd have to be deaf and blind, both, to not know there have been many problems - I'm just curious if it is quite that bad. I have one launch 360 and one bought about 4 months later, and both are still going strong. Of my three friends who own them, they all have launch models and have had no problems either, btw.
No one knows, MS won't release the numbers. I have a Dec 05 model and it still works fine, but I am not a hardcore gamer and rarely play anything for more than 2 hours.

my 360 has a build date of 11/9/05, and i've been playing it since 12/23/05 without a single serious issue.  it's nearly two years old, still works great, and i regularly use it for marathon gaming sessions of 4 hours or more.  i know i'm not the only one...
Logged

*Gamertag - disarm78*
Now Playing: Grand Theft Auto V
metallicorphan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 16378



View Profile
« Reply #43 on: October 14, 2007, 09:11:10 AM »

Quote from: disarm on October 14, 2007, 07:03:33 AM

Quote from: Lee on October 13, 2007, 11:26:02 PM

Quote from: mytocles on October 13, 2007, 08:12:50 PM

Destructor, is this really true (the 100% failure rate part)? I don't follow the stats on how many have failed, vs. how many are still going strong - though I'd have to be deaf and blind, both, to not know there have been many problems - I'm just curious if it is quite that bad. I have one launch 360 and one bought about 4 months later, and both are still going strong. Of my three friends who own them, they all have launch models and have had no problems either, btw.
No one knows, MS won't release the numbers. I have a Dec 05 model and it still works fine, but I am not a hardcore gamer and rarely play anything for more than 2 hours.

my 360 has a build date of 11/9/05, and i've been playing it since 12/23/05 without a single serious issue.  it's nearly two years old, still works great, and i regularly use it for marathon gaming sessions of 4 hours or more.  i know i'm not the only one...

thank you,i was about to post a similar post...i mean i know people have been getting the red lights,and i know people are pissed about that,but that doesnt mean its okay to go out and say 'hey the 360 has 100% failure rate'...what a load of shit
Logged

Manchester United Premier League Champions 2013!!

Xbox LIVE:Metallicorphan
Wii:8565 1513 0206 1960
PSN:Metallicorphan
Reemul
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1029


Knock Knock


View Profile WWW
« Reply #44 on: October 14, 2007, 09:52:43 AM »

Yep i've had mine since June last year with no issues at all.
Logged

warning
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7328



View Profile
« Reply #45 on: October 14, 2007, 04:12:33 PM »

I think the worry is that the original 360's had a design flaw.  Some developed problems earlier (me!) and others have or will develop it later.  But the worry is that they will all experience failure due to this flaw eventually.

I'm not sure how accurate that information is but I think that's what people are getting at.
Logged
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #46 on: October 14, 2007, 05:06:21 PM »

Quote from: Turtle on October 13, 2007, 07:31:24 PM

MS isn't filling an obligation to the consumer, they're running damage control to try and stop the class action lawsuits before they happen.  Fulfilling the obligation to the consumer would have meant them delaying the launch by at least 6 months, which meant either releasing in the middle of 2006, or releasing alongside the PS3.  Or, they'd probably have to increase the price by a bit to pay for higher quality components.

You're not separating issues, and lumping in stuff which doesn't belong.  MS has set aside ONE BILLION DOLLARS... that's a LOT of money... in order to resolve issues with broken consoles.  They didn't even make that much profit from the XBox, did they?  To me, that seems like a huge, huge step toward servicing the customer.  Does it really make a damn bit of difference if (in your opinion) they are doing it to avoid a lawsuit?  Dollar-wise, they might have honestly been better off taking their chances in court.  That billion dollars is money they have to set aside today- they could have just deferred paying it for a few years and possibly gotten off paying less money.

As for all the rest... do you have anything backing up your claim that they purposely used cheap components?  It seems like you are attributing some kind of malice in a situation which is, most likely, a simple design flaw in an important component.

It seems, to me, they are spending more money on fixing the problem than any amount they would have saved by doing anything improper (which you claim they did).  So I'm just not seeing how they profit by the scenario you outline.  Or is it all a diabolical plot to run a giant money making machine powered by pissed off customers?  Is Steve Ballmer actually Destro?  Should we alert the GI Joe team?   icon_biggrin
« Last Edit: October 14, 2007, 05:08:58 PM by unbreakable » Logged
gellar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8913


I'm a dolphin!


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: October 14, 2007, 06:21:20 PM »

Quote from: Brendan on October 13, 2007, 07:37:17 PM

Quote from: Turtle on October 13, 2007, 07:31:24 PM

Yeah, but you shouldn't have to be dealing with it, and with a failure rate that high there is no way MS didn't know about these problems ahead of time.  And, once again, they went ahead and released the elite model, which all it had was more glue, despite knowing that their systems were failing at an amazingly high rate. 

This is totally and completely false.  I've enjoyed your misdirection in this thread  ("Gabe Newell says the PS3's screwed?  Well, Microsoft hates everyone!"), but this is just too ridiculous to let stand.  If you seriously think that we'd ship product knowing that a billion dollar charge would be the outcome, you have no business sense whatsoever.  Yeah, we're going to intentionally piss off our customer base and lose the goodwill and momentum we'd generated to that point by shipping faulty product.  Genius!  That's how we'll win!

Absolutely.  It was simply a case of incompetence, not willfully malicious.  No one wants to spend $1 BIL (WITH A B, PEOPLE) on that.  It's just silly to think otherwise.

Quote from: jersoc on October 13, 2007, 08:16:38 PM

Quote from: gellar on October 12, 2007, 08:31:59 PM

Quote from: Graham on October 12, 2007, 08:25:15 PM

Quote from: Destructor on October 12, 2007, 03:19:13 PM

As far as the $400 PS3 does for sales - it'll be a tossup. The idiotic parents will buy the console (and then their kids will be pissed it won't play PS2 games), while the hardcore gamers already own the thing (and their fully backwards compatible system). For the rest of the gaming population - it's still too expensive (and doesn't have any killer exclusives until 2008).

What's really going to happen is that the parents are going to purchase the system and then try to return it when they find out that it isn't backwards compatible saying that they got a defective model.

You really think that's going to happen?  It didn't with the 360.

gellar

Well, remember way back when MS announced that the BC was going to be software based and limited to some extent? Now, I seem to recall a little known company gave them shit for this. I believe it was...Oh yes it was SONY. Oh my the plot thickens. Not only did Sony give MS shit(how competitive of them, no?), but then they kept sayign that BC is a major thing for a new console. They kept hammering and hammering at this for months and months. Claiming they would beat MS because of this BC they got will work with ANYTHING.

Now, what do they do? They back out. See that's the problem with sony. They can't make up their fucking mind on what they want the ps3 to be and do. It's becoming frustrating as a consumer. Do I want a ps3? Sure, give me a solid price and solid games. Do I want a shitty ass budget ps3 for 400 bucks? Fuck no. My ps2 was a launch unit. It died within 8 months thanks to the DRE. You know what sony told me? Give us 100 bucks. You know what I told them? Fuck yourself. Now they come back and piss in our face with a crap ass version of a ps3 and expect us to buy it? Eat a bag of hell, sony.

So yes, it very well could happen.

So... if I'm following your logic:  Because Sony changed their mind and made you angry, a bunch of parents are going to return their kids new PS3s due to a lack of backwards compatibility?

gellar
Logged
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #48 on: October 14, 2007, 06:29:13 PM »

I've never, ever understood why Sony made such a big deal out of backward compatibility, especially since BC doesn't help sell consoles.  Some people may like BC, but it's just one feature, and a majority of users will never use it.

Don't get me wrong, I would love just having one console which allows me to play my old stuff, since I do still have a ton of PS and PS2 games.  But I also realize I'm far and away outside the average (as are many of us).
Logged
gellar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8913


I'm a dolphin!


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: October 14, 2007, 06:36:56 PM »

Quote from: unbreakable on October 14, 2007, 06:29:13 PM

I've never, ever understood why Sony made such a big deal out of backward compatibility, especially since BC doesn't help sell consoles.  Some people may like BC, but it's just one feature, and a majority of users will never use it.

Don't get me wrong, I would love just having one console which allows me to play my old stuff, since I do still have a ton of PS and PS2 games.  But I also realize I'm far and away outside the average (as are many of us).

It's gotta be because they did it and MS didn't.  There weren't a whole lot of PS3 talking points, so they had to take what they could get.

gellar
Logged
metallicorphan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 16378



View Profile
« Reply #50 on: October 14, 2007, 06:41:56 PM »

Quote from: unbreakable on October 14, 2007, 06:29:13 PM

I've never, ever understood why Sony made such a big deal out of backward compatibility, especially since BC doesn't help sell consoles.  Some people may like BC, but it's just one feature, and a majority of users will never use it.

Don't get me wrong, I would love just having one console which allows me to play my old stuff, since I do still have a ton of PS and PS2 games.  But I also realize I'm far and away outside the average (as are many of us).

well the thing with the playstation is,that most people are upgrading...but if SONY continue to release PS2 games(which they are doing),most people dont want the hassle to have two machines hooked up...i certainly havent got the space for both machines...its a feature that will be used more if they continue to support the PS2 at the same time...continueing support of the PS2 isnt a bad thing,but they are now asking customers to have both machines for their new software releases

360 though,thats just niether here or there,they stopped with xbox games as soon as the 360 was out of the door
Logged

Manchester United Premier League Champions 2013!!

Xbox LIVE:Metallicorphan
Wii:8565 1513 0206 1960
PSN:Metallicorphan
metallicorphan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 16378



View Profile
« Reply #51 on: October 14, 2007, 06:43:42 PM »

Quote from: Farscry on October 14, 2007, 05:42:23 AM

Microsoft is George W. Bush (going to keep doing what they want no matter how much their voterbase/customers complain) and Sony is John Kerry (can't keep their story straight from one day to the next, and expect to win because of their noble/successful past).

And we all know how that election played out, don't we? icon_twisted

does that mean Hilary Clinton is the Wii?,LOL
Logged

Manchester United Premier League Champions 2013!!

Xbox LIVE:Metallicorphan
Wii:8565 1513 0206 1960
PSN:Metallicorphan
somoflange
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 303


View Profile
« Reply #52 on: October 15, 2007, 07:38:09 PM »

I think it's funny to see you guys getting heated up over BUSINESS SENSE in this console war.

Nothing about Microsoft or Sony's current plan makes any business sense whatsoever. It's hard to believe anyone can say MS or Sony did an awesome job this time around with a straight face.

Sony was able to rake in a ton of cash from their last 2 console rounds, but losing several hundred bucks a console is retarded. I don't care how many games you sell, that's a hard hurdle to overcome.

Last I checked MS still hasn't made a dime in profit from either generation. Is that still correct? If so, what's an extra billion if it let them beat Sony to the punch by an extra year?

Sure, it's unbelieveable that they did it intentionally, but it's quite plausible they knew the flaw and released it anyway knowing the year headstart over Sony could really help them more than the busted consoles would hurt them (at the time nobody even considered the Wii as a serious threat).

Apple ditched the PPC for a reason, and Sony built a George Foreman grill sized console for a reason. - PPC is HOT. This isn't a big surprise. I find it hard to believe MS had no idea this was coming.
Logged

PSN: plantatreeforlee
Live: blastdsamoflanj
warning
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7328



View Profile
« Reply #53 on: October 15, 2007, 07:59:56 PM »

What's the PPC?
Logged
Turtle
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 9237



View Profile WWW
« Reply #54 on: October 15, 2007, 09:48:51 PM »

Power PC, basically it's a processor architecture.  Not sure how similar it is to the x86 IBM PC architecture, but Apple used to use it for all their computers until they just recently switched to Intel.

The reason why I keep saying they did it intentially was from a job I had in high school.  I used to do QA on computers and appliances.  There are a lot of tests that a consumer product does, or should go through.  These tests cover not just the software, but the hardware, and software/hardware interaction.  The tests would also simulate use of the item over long periods of time in the best and worst conditions.  The fellow geeks that'd test these things could often tell which brand and model was which by certain problems that often popped up.

It's from these experiences I learned that testing, if done properly, uncovers a lot of problems.  So it's either gross neglect that these 360s got on market, or a willful decision to ignore the testing results after applying the formula.
Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #55 on: October 15, 2007, 09:51:14 PM »

Quote from: Turtle on October 15, 2007, 09:48:51 PM

The reason why I keep saying they did it intentially was from a job I had in high school. 

Uh huh.
Logged
Hrothgar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1499


Do you Talk Strategy?


View Profile WWW
« Reply #56 on: October 15, 2007, 09:55:53 PM »

Quote from: warning on October 15, 2007, 07:59:56 PM

What's the PPC?
Phased Particle Cannon.   It's effective against armor, but tends to scatter on sheilds.  Enough energy can overload sheilds though.  He's right though, they're very hot.  Not recommended for atmospheric use.
Logged

Cheers,
Hrothgar
Live gamertag & PSN name: HrothgarGG
I'm updating my website again.

"No, not alone."  -- War, Darksiders
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #57 on: October 16, 2007, 02:42:09 AM »

Quote from: Turtle on October 15, 2007, 09:48:51 PM

Power PC, basically it's a processor architecture.  Not sure how similar it is to the x86 IBM PC architecture, but Apple used to use it for all their computers until they just recently switched to Intel.

The main differences between PowerPC and Intel processors is RISC (reduced instruction set computer) and CISC (complex instruction set computer), respectively.  You've probably heard of Intel's (and AMD's) additional instructions, like MMX, MMX2, etc.: that illustrates the two design philosophies.  RISC seeks to streamline the instruction set, where any additional needs are in the software (either the OS, or drivers, or applications, or whatever), while CISC adds additional functionality right onto the chip.

One can argue which is better, but it's apparent at this point which is more popular.  Interestingly, I believe Windows NT 3.51 and 4.0 actually supported both the DEC Alpha and the Power PC (both being RISC chips).  The Windows NT architecture model was actually intended to be processor independent: the HAL (hardware abstraction layer) was meant to be the bridge between the OS and processor.  Now it seems the HAL is generally only modified in order to support one or more processors, or with 32/64 bit processors.  I'm not really up to date on current changes in the Windows Architecture, so I can't really say whether their design philosophy has shifted or not.
Logged
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71767


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« Reply #58 on: October 16, 2007, 03:44:35 AM »

Quote from: Hrothgar on October 15, 2007, 09:55:53 PM

Quote from: warning on October 15, 2007, 07:59:56 PM

What's the PPC?
Phased Particle Cannon.   It's effective against armor, but tends to scatter on sheilds.  Enough energy can overload sheilds though.  He's right though, they're very hot.  Not recommended for atmospheric use.

The PPG was much more effective.
Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
semiconscious
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4416



View Profile
« Reply #59 on: October 16, 2007, 03:44:55 AM »

Quote from: Brendan on October 13, 2007, 07:37:17 PM

Quote from: Turtle on October 13, 2007, 07:31:24 PM

Yeah, but you shouldn't have to be dealing with it, and with a failure rate that high there is no way MS didn't know about these problems ahead of time.  And, once again, they went ahead and released the elite model, which all it had was more glue, despite knowing that their systems were failing at an amazingly high rate. 

This is totally and completely false.  I've enjoyed your misdirection in this thread  ("Gabe Newell says the PS3's screwed?  Well, Microsoft hates everyone!"), but this is just too ridiculous to let stand.  If you seriously think that we'd ship product knowing that a billion dollar charge would be the outcome, you have no business sense whatsoever.  Yeah, we're going to intentionally piss off our customer base and lose the goodwill and momentum we'd generated to that point by shipping faulty product.  Genius!  That's how we'll win!

to which i say (in the words of wonderpug):

Quote from: wonderpug on June 14, 2007, 05:35:39 PM

Quote from: mikeg on June 14, 2007, 05:19:36 PM

Personally, I think with them K N O W I N G it is a design flaw they should replace EVERY system that is not set up the new way.  Cuz make no mistake about it, they will die. 

To do anything else, imo, is criminal.   If not, they will never get my money again that's for damn sure.

Man on plane: A new console built by my company plays a game somewhere rendering at 60fps. The GPU overheats. The system crashes and burns with every Live download trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of consoles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.

Woman in next seat: Are there a lot of these kinds of failures?

Man on plane: You wouldn't believe.

Woman in next seat: Which console company do you work for?

Man on plane: A major one.

'business sense' can be a very tricky... business... & when any company (particularly one with enough 'influence' to keep news of any 'problems' out of the mass media) continues to sell an inherently flawed product, dangerous or not, warranty or not, that company's whole concept of 'business sense' definitely deserves a certain amount of suspicion...

from here:

"For the fiscal year ending June 30, 2006, Microsoft reported annual revenue of $44.28 billion -- 11 percent higher than the previous year. Annual profit was $12.60 billion, up from $12.12 billion. Legal costs of $1.11 billion were lower than the previous year's $2.06 billion...."

a billion here, a billion there - pretty soon, you're talking real money...
Logged

"... i'm not against some 'monkey catching'... but i'd rather be collecting pants..."
- snake, 'snake vs monkey' (mgs3:se)
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #60 on: October 16, 2007, 04:33:10 AM »

Yes, we all know MS is a multi-billion dollar company.  But once you factor in how something like 80% of their income is from MS Office (probably not entirely accurate, but it's probably in the ballpark), that doesn't leave too many billions for the XBox division.  And do you really think MS is in the business of throwing billions of dollar out the window (haha, punny) without seeing a return on their investment?

Sure, they've had some back and forth decisions, like whether they actually want to make hardware, or not, or do, or not... but we aren't talking about a billion dollar indecision.

And to use the fight club formula... we already know what X is.  And when X is a billion dollars, and when you look at the fact that the XBox and XB360 combined haven't even MADE a billion dollars profit... tell me how the bean counting is going to work out on that one.  Because I just can't figure it out.
Logged
Space Herpes
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 221


View Profile WWW
« Reply #61 on: October 16, 2007, 05:32:25 AM »

Quote from: semiconscious on October 16, 2007, 03:44:55 AM


"For the fiscal year ending June 30, 2006, Microsoft reported annual revenue of $44.28 billion -- 11 percent higher than the previous year. Annual profit was $12.60 billion, up from $12.12 billion. Legal costs of $1.11 billion were lower than the previous year's $2.06 billion...."

a billion here, a billion there - pretty soon, you're talking real money...

I don't really believe the formula.  As far as I can tell, every console is in the fight for it's life.  The PS3 is behind in sales.  MS is making up for bad press (there was a TON of bad press about MS's failure rate).  The Wii is selling well now, but I do think it's going to have to prove it's worth in the future.  There is no winner yet.

MS getting sued is bad press.  The last thing they need is months (years) of drawn out talk of MS having a flawed/broken console.  Heading the bad press off (I think) wasn't just about A * B * C.  It was about investing in the future.  It was about Halo 3 coming out and not having new consumers go "I like Halo, but all those problems I heard in the lawsuit... I think I'll buy the Wii instead."

I will say that I'm glad Sony took it in the nut sack this round.  Too much corporate hubris is very bad for consumers.  Sony said "you'll eat what we give you and you'll like it!"  The consumers told them to suck it.  Sony with it's massive price cuts in less than a year is pretty much crawling back to the consumers on hands and knees asking for us to buy their console (rather than telling us).  Last year, everyone said the 2007 season is the make or break year.  If the PS3 doesn't do some catching up (like NOT being outsold by the number two console by 2 to 1), it really will be in deep trouble.  At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if MS did another price drop for a $300 Premium unit of the $400 PS3 starts to pick up in sales.  Go consumer power!
Logged

See the Mr. Sticky Show!
http://one.revver.com/watch/261625
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.267 seconds with 67 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.028s, 2q)