Sony's Kenny K removed

[wco81]

I think this was more of a way to promote Kaz Hirai than take away KK's responsibilities.

KK was demoted when Howard Stringer became president. KK was in charge of some other Sony division besides SCEI.

But the Playstation is his baby for the foreseeable future. He'll lead the design, make the major decisions and yes, he'll continue to speak to the media. If you think he's going to disappear from the public eye at events featuring anything to do with the Playstation, you're kidding yourself.

It's a little premature to punish KK for the PS3 not doing well, isn't it? It hasn't even been a month. The race is going to last several years.

[DivotMaker]

If you think he's going to disappear from the public eye at events featuring anything to do with the Playstation, you're kidding yourself.

That is too bad for Sony if it is true. He has a mouth that resembles a Gatling gun. Every time you turn around he has some sort of quote that is loaded with arrogance and the majority of that arrogance since E3 has bit him in the @ss and likely had a big impact on his "move" within Sony. If he would shut his friggin mouth and let the PS3 get in the homes of users, I bet Sony would be a much more positively perceived company.

It's a little premature to punish KK for the PS3 not doing well, isn't it? It hasn't even been a month. The race is going to last several years.

You're kidding, right? He plastered the internet with proclamations of PS3 greatness and has not delivered what he claimed. I'm not surprised that you don't hold him accountable, but I do. I guess I am just amazed that you and a handful of others who can overlook the pompous arrogance and the horribly inflated E3 claims that have not materialized since the launch of the PS3.

[Teal]

That's all I'm about, baby...

Maybe it's time that you TAKE a few classes...in the effects of tunnelvision on perception...

We can carpool as we go to your English language and humor classes... skills you desperately need

Thank you, oh wise swami...

[wco81]

He hasn't delivered?

What a console's potential has to be realized within a month of launch?

I was referring to the market share and overall sales race.

When the PS2 launched in 2000, it yielded about a 5-million unit head start to the Dreamcast.

Should Sony have surrendered then? Or say those mediocre launch titles were the best they were ever going to do?

[reeche]

When the PS2 launched in 2000, it yielded about a 5-million unit head start to the Dreamcast.

They are not going against a broke company that's seen its best corporate days years ago and even then weren't so hot (Sega).


They are going against two strongly entrenched companies who it could be argued have for more momentum at the moment and credible management.

Not all history is the same.

[wco81]

I wasn't saying history would necessarily repeat itself.

Just pointing out that at launch, the PS2 was at a deficit, with poorly-received launch titles.

Some people wanted to write off the PS2 then just as many apparently want to do now with the PS3.

They may eventually be right but now is not the time to make that judgement and I doubt Sony is in any way punishing KK.

Especially not after 10 years of successes, even if the PS3 launch has set the company up for a failure.

It's just amazing people are ready to pass judgement this early. For all we know, by the end of December, Sony may end up selling more PS3s than MS sold X360s last year in November and December. Yet nobody passed judgement then.

[wco81]

Here's some perspective from the WSJ:

Sony officials say that the management change was decided internally within the unit. But the promotion of Mr. Hirai could place an executive sympathetic to Mr. Stringer's views high up in the game division, analysts say. Mr. Hirai, who was at the videogame unit's U.S. operations for 10 years, has worked with Mr. Stringer on joint marketing efforts in the U.S. Mr. Hirai is credited with the successful marketing efforts that helped turn the PlayStation into a powerful brand that dominated home gaming for much of a decade. He is also knowledgeable about software through his experience working with U.S. game publishers.

Analysts also say that Mr. Hirai's expertise in running the U.S. game business will be a valuable resource for Sony, which is facing particularly tough competition in its overseas markets. In the U.S. and Europe, Microsoft's Xbox 360 has momentum as it was released a year ahead of Sony's PS3, which was launched earlier this month. The company is also being squeezed by Nintendo's Wii game console, which has been winning accolades for its innovation.

Mr. Kutaragi has helped turn the PlayStation into one of Sony's most successful examples of hardware and software coming together. But Mr. Hirai could provide a balance to Mr. Kutaragi, an engineer, as the unit is increasingly called upon to collaborate on software with other divisions, analysts say.

"In contrast to Kutaragi, who is an engineer, Hirai is closer to software," says Yuta Sakurai, an analyst at Nomura Securities in Tokyo. "Now that the PlayStation 3 is out, however bumpy it was, it could be a message that they're focusing on software next."

After the success of the original PlayStation machine in 1994, Mr. Kutaragi, known as a talented engineer with a feisty temper, quickly moved through Sony's ranks. In 2003, he was charged with drafting a new strategy for all of the company's electronics businesses and was widely considered as a potential candidate for the top job.

But Mr. Kutaragi's fiery personality sometimes got in the way of efforts to work with his colleagues. By 2005, he was relieved of all responsibilities other than the videogame business.

[DivotMaker]

He hasn't delivered?

No he hasn't. Consider the following quotes...

http://www.1up.com/do/feature?cId=3155393

"Microsoft is trailing behind us, but they are not a threat. They are good at improving [on products], but we will be advancing to the next level with revolutionary technology...Microsoft shoots for the moon. Sony shoots for the sun."

"With the PS3, our intentions have been to create a machine with supercomputer calculation capabilities for home entertainment...You can experience the 4D world."

"We want for consumers to think to themselves 'I will work more hours to buy one'. We want people to feel that they want it, irrespective of anything else...The PS3 will instill discipline in our children and adults alike. Everyone will know discipline."

and last but not least...

"The HD generation does not begin until PS3 arrives."

What a load of bullsh1t.

When you compare identical titles (as this article does) on both machiners why is it that all these PS3 games look just the same as they do on the Xbox 360?

What a console's potential has to be realized within a month of launch?

Sony has had almost a YEAR of delays to fulfill the promises THEY MADE AT E3. They claimed that the PS3 would "blow the 360 away at launch" in terms of graphics realism and high definition features. At this point, it is no better than the 360 versions of the same games and in some instances the PS3 version is not as good (see COD 3 for example).

I was referring to the market share and overall sales race.

He was not moved because of current market share and overall sales because that has yet to materialize. He was "moved" because he has made claims that he could not and still has not delivered and oh by the way, they also are likely trying to figure out how to reduce the $1.07 BILLION loss that the PS3 is going to cause in the next quarter. And you seen nothing wrong with his claims nor performance?

When the PS2 launched in 2000, it yielded about a 5-million unit head start to the Dreamcast.

The 360 has a 7+ million unit head start. The Dreamcast was not backed like the 360 is nor did the DC have EA Sports. So what is your point?

Should Sony have surrendered then? Or say those mediocre launch titles were the best they were ever going to do?

Why are you even making such a statement? This is about KK and how he should have been "moved" well before E3. I believe he is the one you can point to as being the catalyst for so many having negative feelings towards Sony and their whole attitude and approach to the PS3.

[pk500]

He hasn't delivered?

What a console's potential has to be realized within a month of launch?

I was referring to the market share and overall sales race.

When the PS2 launched in 2000, it yielded about a 5-million unit head start to the Dreamcast.

Should Sony have surrendered then? Or say those mediocre launch titles were the best they were ever going to do?

Sony launched far fewer PS3's than intended due to parts sourcing problems. The PSP is getting killed by the DS in the handheld stakes.

Someone must be held accountable for those problems, as stunning as that may seem in the "It's not my fault!" American society.

The whole thing is pretty self-explanatory.

Take care,
PK

[pk500]

They may eventually be right but now is not the time to make that judgement and I doubt Sony is in any way punishing KK.

Then how do you explain this move, especially since Kenny K has been the godfather, face and voice of the PlayStation since Sony launched it? If Kenny K is still the main man, then why was Hirai promoted?

Kenny K's dick may not completely clipped by this move, but he clearly was doing something wrong, probably from a PR and marketing standpoint. As you said, this move probably was made to let Kenny K concentrate on engineering and long-term "vision," which are his strengths.

But by making this move, Sony also is tacitly admitting that Kenny K is deficient in marketing and PR or that Hirai is superior to him in those areas.

Take care,
PK

[bdunn13]

Current games are not a reflection of the hardware. I could write a game for the 360 that looked worse than pac-man on the 2600.. but thats does not mean the 2600 has better hardware.

[DivotMaker]

It's just amazing people are ready to pass judgement this early. For all we know, by the end of December, Sony may end up selling more PS3s than MS sold X360s last year in November and December. Yet nobody passed judgement then.

Who is passing judgement? I'm not. In fact I have gone on record here a number of times stating it is far to early to judge this generation. In a year or two, we will have a much clearer picture.

The only judgments being passed here are the strategy of this move by Sony. It is a big move and the way I see it, Sony is telling the world that it is time to move on to someone else as the spokesman of their company. Kutaragi has helped Sony to billions in profits. However, the PSP is certainly not meeting expectations and the delays and poor launch numbers of the PS3 certainly are high on Sony's corporate radar. I also have a strange feeling that some on the Sony board might have been embarrassed at the claims that KK made and has yet to deliver. I know if I were on that board, I would not be thinking too highly of his public statements.

[DivotMaker]

Current games are not a reflection of the hardware. I could write a game for the 360 that looked worse than pac-man on the 2600.. but thats does not mean the 2600 has better hardware.

Current games that are both on 360 and PS3 are 360 ports. Devs have had almost as long of a period with the PS3 development tools as they have with the 360 tools because of the hardware delays. I don't think there is any doubt that we have yet to see the potential of the PS3, but lets not make excuses for the machine's launch titles. No one was cutting MS any slack for many of their launch titles, so I am not about to give Sony a free pass on theirs....

[DivotMaker]

Another interesting article discussing the potential strategy of this move....

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/f6728ed8-8095-1 ... e2340.html

Analysts said that Mr Hirai’s promotion to a global role at SCE could mark a critical shift in management thinking, with Sony changing its emphasis so that the current generation of games console will be its last as a hardware manufacturer.

“The appointment of Hirai could be the start of a shift from hardware to software,” said Yuta Sakurai, an analyst at Nomura. “I cannot now imagine a PlayStation4.”

[pk500]

Another interesting article discussing the potential strategy of this move....

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/f6728ed8-8095-1 ... e2340.html

Analysts said that Mr Hirai’s promotion to a global role at SCE could mark a critical shift in management thinking, with Sony changing its emphasis so that the current generation of games console will be its last as a hardware manufacturer.

“The appointment of Hirai could be the start of a shift from hardware to software,” said Yuta Sakurai, an analyst at Nomura. “I cannot now imagine a PlayStation4.”

I think this is a real stretch, Chicken Little "the sky is falling!" analyst bullsh*t.

Take care,
PK

[wco81]

You don't remember the Emotion Engine hype? That was never delivered.

But in light of how successful the PS2 was, I doubt anyone inside the company or its shareholders cared about the hype versus reality.

That is going to be the ultimate measure by which KK will be judged, not the tech hype.

He's not an official spokesman but of course, the father of the Playstation is going to be interviewed at every opportunity and he's going to say some fanciful things.

Like it or not, he's a visionary. He created a business for Sony after Nintendo rejected the project. He may rub the Xbox partisans the wrong way (was it J. Allard who said he dreamed of getting Kutaragi's head on a platter or something like that?).

But once he retires, you're going to get really crappy designs, like the dongle box or gimmicks like the wand.

[bdunn13]

I don't think there is any doubt that we have yet to see the potential of the PS3, but lets not make excuses for the machine's launch titles. No one was cutting MS any slack for many of their launch titles, so I am not about to give Sony a free pass on theirs....

I agree, he never said anything about the games, he just mentioned the PS3. The games are something he has little if any control over. If the game suck, blame the developers(even if its first party).

[reeche]

But once he retires, you're going to get really crappy designs, like the dongle box or gimmicks like the wand.

I would make the argument that Sony hasn't been particularly innovative in the video game market outside of the playstation one. I think the problem is the exact opposite of what you suggest. They actually need new blood and innovative ideas and that's just not their videogame division.

[wco81]

I would make the argument that Sony hasn't been particularly innovative in the video game market outside of the playstation one. I think the problem is the exact opposite of what you suggest. They actually need new blood and innovative ideas and that's just not their videogame division.

There's nobody in the gaming industry who's a technologist on par with Kutaragi.

He brought 3D and mass storage to consoles and it's more or less been mired there. Now he's said the Cell can bring simulation to gaming but that remains to be seen.

Who knows, maybe gestures and arm-waving will really turn out to be the next paradigm-shift in gaming but I really doubt it.

As for the rest of Sony, I would agree, they were late with flat panels and MP3s.

You know what was the most popular part of Sony this past year or quarter? Banking. Yes they have Sony banks in Japan.
===================

There are those who say that Sony planned all along to launch in late 2006, that spring was never in the plans. If they knew this all along, then you can argue that Sony could have pushed the specs more, such as more RAM, maybe more aggressive Cell (maybe two instead of one) and especially using NV G80 rather than G71. The last one may not even have increased their costs that much.

But it may have delayed SW development to take advantage of the new GPU.

[reeche]

I would make the argument that Sony hasn't been particularly innovative in the video game market outside of the playstation one. I think the problem is the exact opposite of what you suggest. They actually need new blood and innovative ideas and that's just not their videogame division.

There's nobody in the gaming industry who's a technologist on par with Kutaragi.

He brought 3D and mass storage to consoles and it's more or less been mired there. Now he's said the Cell can bring simulation to gaming but that remains to be seen.

Who knows, maybe gestures and arm-waving will really turn out to be the next paradigm-shift in gaming but I really doubt it.

As for the rest of Sony, I would agree, they were late with flat panels and MP3s.

You know what was the most popular part of Sony this past year or quarter? Banking. Yes they have Sony banks in Japan.
===================

There are those who say that Sony planned all along to launch in late 2006, that spring was never in the plans. If they knew this all along, then you can argue that Sony could have pushed the specs more, such as more RAM, maybe more aggressive Cell (maybe two instead of one) and especially using NV G80 rather than G71. The last one may not even have increased their costs that much.

But it may have delayed SW development to take advantage of the new GPU.

I think real innovation is not only bringing technological achievements to the fore but also bringing them to the masses at an affordable price. Sony has blown that hugely this generation imo which is why their market share will drop significantly.

I wish I had a time machine because I swear their cell processer will go down with New Coke as one of the silliest decisions ever made. The video game market simply doesn't work that way that such a strategy will be effective The video game market is a market of ports and cost effectiveness (in theory). That's why no game currently on the Ps3 looks any better than any 360 game. The cost ratio to actively achieve that feat will be monstrous both in dev times and cost. Simply put it doesn't make financial sense to even strive for your best on that machine because it will cost so much time in re-engineering software. The only way it could have worked is if they achieved such dominant market share like in prior generations but because of a ton of issues both self-inflicted and out of their hands, their is no way that is going to happen. By the time (and that's only if they even can) Sony only dev studios create titles that are only possible on the PS3 the war will have already been decided. It's like building the world's most expensive ice cube tray when a 99 cent one would have gotten the job done. So wasteful. I finally saw that MotorStorm in person that everybody had been raving about as a true testament of PS3. Ignoring the bad frame rate and sketchy controls since it's an early demo, does anybody think this can't be done on 360 with equal quality or even better. I was truly shocked after all the hype on that one. Good looking? Sure. Only possible with Cell? No Way.

In additional I'll go out on a limb and say the 3-D controls implemented by Nintendo are the most important tech introduced this gen. Their is no way you won't see Sony and Microsoft each trying their own takes on this next gen. Sony introduced 3-D worlds to the masses (along with PC video cards) and they should rightly be applauded for that and Nintendo has introduced 3-D controls to go along with that and I think that is also to be applauded.

Finally when people talk about Sony arrogance what they don't realize is that arrogance extends even to the development side. In the last few years they have become an absolute nightmare to work with for developers. They are contradictory at best and flat our liars at worse when many developers are dealing with them on a whole host of issues. Talk about Microsoft being a malicious entity in the Pc world is very justified and I'm often the first one to sound that drum with their awful windows product but their gaming division by comparison is one of the more enlightened divisions in their company. Of course if they ever become #1 in the video game industry their draconian methods in the Pc market may surely emerge but for now I can tell you they are WAY better to deal with than Sony.

[DivotMaker]

There are those who say that Sony planned all along to launch in late 2006, that spring was never in the plans. If they knew this all along, then you can argue that Sony could have pushed the specs more, such as more RAM, maybe more aggressive Cell (maybe two instead of one) and especially using NV G80 rather than G71. The last one may not even have increased their costs that much.

But it may have delayed SW development to take advantage of the new GPU.

Baloney. I don't know where you are coming up with this nonsense, but if they had gone with a second cell and/or the G80, they would have been:

a) delayed yet another year MINIMUM due to enormous redesign of board and cooling solutions
b) the G80 was just finished less than a month ago and is a HUGE chip that combined with the cell would have completely changed the design of the PS3 because they would NOT have been able to handle the heat. On top of this, the G80 is designed with a MINIMUM of 640 MB of VRAM and has 768 MB in the 8800GTX cards. The PS3 would have shipped TWO years late and at a minimum of $799-$899 in the scenario you posted. Sorry, until I see something from a reputable source on your claims, I am not buying it for a moment.

[wco81]

I'm saying what-if, based on the premise that what gated them was Blu-Ray, not the Cell, not the RSX, not the board.

Hey G71 cards are also stacked with RAM and going for $600 too. I'm only talking about the GPU and embedded version, not the full-blown video card with a lot of silicon used for things like codec acceleration which the PS3 doesn't need from the GPU.

Actually, I'm hearing the G80 core was finished awhile back but the card just shipped (but probably had been in development for months).

[Kazuya]

I think real innovation is not only bringing technological achievements to the fore but also bringing them to the masses at an affordable price. Sony has blown that hugely this generation imo which is why their market share will drop significantly.

There is no evidence of this at all... every indication has been that people will pay the full retail price for their console and then some. And everyone I've talked to who managed to buy the console has said cost was not a factor at all. As a matter of fact, the only people I have ever heard complain about the PS3 in anyway at all are Xbox owners. Actual PS3 owners seem satsified, even if some are underwhelmed a bit. The units aren't failing, and there's some good games available at launch.

I wish I had a time machine because I swear their cell processer will go down with New Coke as one of the silliest decisions ever made. The video game market simply doesn't work that way that such a strategy will be effective The video game market is a market of ports and cost effectiveness (in theory). That's why no game currently on the Ps3 looks any better than any 360 game. The cost ratio to actively achieve that feat will be monstrous both in dev times and cost. Simply put it doesn't make financial sense to even strive for your best on that machine because it will cost so much time in re-engineering software. The only way it could have worked is if they achieved such dominant market share like in prior generations but because of a ton of issues both self-inflicted and out of their hands, their is no way that is going to happen. By the time (and that's only if they even can) Sony only dev studios create titles that are only possible on the PS3 the war will have already been decided. It's like building the world's most expensive ice cube tray when a 99 cent one would have gotten the job done. So wasteful. I finally saw that MotorStorm in person that everybody had been raving about as a true testament of PS3. Ignoring the bad frame rate and sketchy controls since it's an early demo, does anybody think this can't be done on 360 with equal quality or even better. I was truly shocked after all the hype on that one. Good looking? Sure. Only possible with Cell? No Way.

There is some truth in what you say, especially about hardware design, but again you fall into the 360 comparison trap which is completely irrelevant to the millions of PS2 owners looking to go directly to PS3. They don't want 360s, never have and never will. MotorStorm just has to look good, not better than a system they're not going to buy.

The key was for Sony to develop hardware so that the games are sufficiently next-gen beyond the PS2, and they apparently have. Was it necessary for them to make the architecture choices they made? Who knows.. I think probably not, but I'm loathe to say so and then in a couple of years someone utilizes the SPE's or Blu-Ray for a new type of game we can't even imagine. Contrary to what the Xbox talking heads shout at the top of their lungs, there *are* developers who like the PS3 hardware and look forward to seeing what they can do with it.

In additional I'll go out on a limb and say the 3-D controls implemented by Nintendo are the most important tech introduced this gen. Their is no way you won't see Sony and Microsoft each trying their own takes on this next gen. Sony introduced 3-D worlds to the masses (along with PC video cards) and they should rightly be applauded for that and Nintendo has introduced 3-D controls to go along with that and I think that is also to be applauded.

I think they should be applauded just for trying it frankly. Whether it bombs or not, video game control needed a shakeup. I still say they are veering pretty far off the path of video games with all of the hand waving... almost forming their own business.

Finally when people talk about Sony arrogance what they don't realize is that arrogance extends even to the development side. In the last few years they have become an absolute nightmare to work with for developers. They are contradictory at best and flat our liars at worse when many developers are dealing with them on a whole host of issues. Talk about Microsoft being a malicious entity in the Pc world is very justified and I'm often the first one to sound that drum with their awful windows product but their gaming division by comparison is one of the more enlightened divisions in their company. Of course if they ever become #1 in the video game industry their draconian methods in the Pc market may surely emerge but for now I can tell you they are WAY better to deal with than Sony.

They have also fostered an environment where games like Guitar Hero, Katamari Damacy, Gitaroo Man, Vagrant Story and countless others have been created, as opposed to pumping out endless first person shooters and kiddie games. Over the past ten years, the most innovative games have been on Playstation hardware and it's not even close. I'm sure they're relationship with the average developer, which involves both of them making piles of money, is fine. Even if it wasn't, it doesn't matter to the consumer because no developer with any sense is not going to make their game for the PS3, outside of M$ and Nintendo first/second parties.

[reeche]

There is no evidence of this at all... every indication has been that people will pay the full retail price for their console and then some. And everyone I've talked to who managed to buy the console has said cost was not a factor at all. As a matter of fact, the only people I have ever heard complain about the PS3 in anyway at all are Xbox owners. Actual PS3 owners seem satsified, even if some are underwhelmed a bit. The units aren't failing, and there's some good games available at launch..

This will only be settled in a year and then we can revisit. Simply different opinions. You believe the playstation brand is so strong that there is a decisive mass of consumers eager and willing to spend $500 and $600. I simply don't believe that. By this time next year, the answer will be solved. I can only point to the PSP as an example of high tech, brand name, and high price not being what drives the market.

There is some truth in what you say, especially about hardware design, but again you fall into the 360 comparison trap which is completely irrelevant to the millions of PS2 owners looking to go directly to PS3. They don't want 360s, never have and never will. MotorStorm just has to look good, not better than a system they're not going to buy

The key was for Sony to develop hardware so that the games are sufficiently next-gen beyond the PS2, and they apparently have. Was it necessary for them to make the architecture choices they made? Who knows.. I think probably not, but I'm loathe to say so and then in a couple of years someone utilizes the SPE's or Blu-Ray for a new type of game we can't even imagine. Contrary to what the Xbox talking heads shout at the top of their lungs, there *are* developers who like the PS3 hardware and look forward to seeing what they can do with it...

This is partially the same argument above as a mass of consumers who identify so strongly with playstation they don't even look at other consoles. If the price wasn't so high. If Sony wasn't last to market with the fewest machines. If Nintendo's resurgence hadn't occured in this country and particuarily Japan. If Sega was the company looking in the rearview instead of Microsoft. Maybe. With all that. I think you have a completly different market outlook. As far as Sony developers claiming they can get more power out of the machine, I look forward to it. I hope they can and I'm being honest. They've certainly bragged enough about it. The proof will be in the pudding. The question also has to be mixed in though at what cost? Was this the most efficient way to handle the design process from a cost effectiveness measure. Not really a consumer issue per se but when Sony profit loss statements are generated for the next few years, I think that will have a huge bearing on it.

They have also fostered an environment where games like Guitar Hero, Katamari Damacy, Gitaroo Man, Vagrant Story and countless others have been created, as opposed to pumping out endless first person shooters and kiddie games. Over the past ten years, the most innovative games have been on Playstation hardware and it's not even close. I'm sure they're relationship with the average developer, which involves both of them making piles of money, is fine. Even if it wasn't, it doesn't matter to the consumer because no developer with any sense is not going to make their game for the PS3, outside of M$ and Nintendo first/second parties.

I don't think they've fostered an environment that is welcoming to diverse, experimental, or non-traditional games. They simply garned 70% of the market share by being the first company to attract a mass of traditional software and a large user base. The diversity of games is a by-product of having a monstrous market share. I applaud their business strategy of being smart enough to diversify a bit once acheiving a commanding lead but their software approval process imo is the least friendly to original designs of any of the console manufactuers. We'll see which console atttracts unique games this gen now that the market share battle will be much closer

[WillHunting]

I can't believe all the bickering on PS3. The PS3, at this moment, is not worth $600. Witness all the people who buy the system, to RESELL rather than playing the system. I think this is the first time I have seen/read/heard more stories on reselling system at launch than any other. Heck, even 360 was pale in comparsion.

Wii, on the other hand, seems to attract all sorts of people and most are buying it and playing it. I know I will try to get one tomorrow because the prospect of virtual bowling with my wife is just too enticing

But anyway, the PS3 is an expensive paper weight until more exclusive games that can show off what it can do arrives. And that may not happen until middle/late 2007.