One of Sony's problems it that some PS3s are being sold as Blu-Ray players. Blu-Ray prices, and sales, probably aren't as high as Sony would like because DVDs are still holding out quite well. And those who buy it as a Blu-Ray player are probably less likely to buy lots of games. So if the PS3 is selling at a loss (unlikely - more likely they are selling it largely at cost) and buyers aren't all serious gamers, that means Sony is losing licensing fees on games not sold.
Sony can turn this around by releasing cheaper-to-build hardware revisions of the PS3 and selling them for profit, but I think the writing is on the wall. Sony will have to release the next system as a game system and little else if they intend to reap rewards from gamers.
Well, it finally happened...again...
Re: Well, it finally happened...again...
1. The PS3 is still selling at a loss. It's theorized that in about 6 months or less it will be selling at cost, but right now Sony still loses money on every unit.
2. Selling the PS3 as a Blu Ray player wasn't a bad move, in my opinion. Just the sheer fact of being able to release a game on only a single disc is phenominal. Does anyone even remember if there were any PS2 games that required two disks to play? The biggest problem with it being a Blu Ray player is that they had banked upon the fact that a certain portion of consumers would buy it first because it was a Blu Ray, and then try out games later. The thing about Blu Ray is that to the consumer it isn't a major upgrade over DVD. When you look at VHS vs. DVD, the DVD doesn't need to be rewound, has jump to scene, and has extras like director commentary. Blu Ray's advantage over DVD is that you have a better looking picture and better sound. However, those upgrades only matter to the still small portion of the consumer base that has a nice HDTV and a surround sound setup.
Plus, the Blu Ray movie case is hideous looking.
2. Selling the PS3 as a Blu Ray player wasn't a bad move, in my opinion. Just the sheer fact of being able to release a game on only a single disc is phenominal. Does anyone even remember if there were any PS2 games that required two disks to play? The biggest problem with it being a Blu Ray player is that they had banked upon the fact that a certain portion of consumers would buy it first because it was a Blu Ray, and then try out games later. The thing about Blu Ray is that to the consumer it isn't a major upgrade over DVD. When you look at VHS vs. DVD, the DVD doesn't need to be rewound, has jump to scene, and has extras like director commentary. Blu Ray's advantage over DVD is that you have a better looking picture and better sound. However, those upgrades only matter to the still small portion of the consumer base that has a nice HDTV and a surround sound setup.
Plus, the Blu Ray movie case is hideous looking.
Blizzard Entertainment Software Developer - All comments and views are my own and not representative of the company.
Re: Well, it finally happened...again...
Yeah, I did some reading and apparently the PS3 is selling at a loss. There always used to be talk of each new console selling at a loss, but I've read a number of articles that dispelled that largely as myth, that most consoles, even when new, were not sold at a loss. Seems Sony has decided that a myth should be real, and now they are paying the piper.
Re: Well, it finally happened...again...
I agree with you Marurun. The strategy of getting the PS3 in the door as a BD player was a bad move. It worked with the PS2, since DVD was a massive thing back then. The step up from VHS was massive, it didn't take very long before shops completely got rid of their stock.
We have to look at retailers for this change. Retailers were pushing for DVD to be accepted because of it's size. Not because it was a better product, purely because you could get more DVDs on a shelf and they took up less room in the store. Therefore profit margins were much higher. The better quality product was just a side bonus.
PS2 was in a unique position. It sold off the back of the phenomenal success of the Playstation. The added DVD playback was another bonus. Consumers wanted the next playstation, the fact it had DVD playback was even better. I know I bought my PS2 because I wanted a DVD player and didn't want to pay £200 for a standalone player. I'd rather pay a bit extra and get the latest games console as well.
Sony followed this pattern with the PS3. There's just on problem, retailers don't to want to have to store the same films twice on seperate formats. There are thousands of BD titles now but in every store you see 4 or 5 long rows of DVD racks and then one (2 if you are lucky) racks for BD. It's not because there is few choice (that factors in a little bit) it's because there just isn't that much of a demand for BD. You can pretty much bet on the people who are looking at BDs in a store also have a PS3. Price also factors into it. In retail stores the BDs are almost twice (if not more) the price of the same titles on DVD. When DVD first came out the price was very close to VHS it made for an easier adoption since people had no qualms about paying a slight premium for a vastly superior product. You don't get that with BD. What you get is a slightly improved fidelity and better sound. The only people who are going to get the most out of it are the people who have spent quite a lot of money on a big HDTV of about 40" or more. Anything smaller than that isn't going to get any benefit from 1080p at all. Yes, HDTV adoption is increasing, but only in the consumer grade market where most people are buying 32/37inch LCD tvs that aren't really going to get that much of a benefit from BD over a decent upscaling DVD player. I know i'd much rather keep my large collection of DVDs and keep purhcasing them for quite a while yet.
Sony are going to have to start making a profit from their console because they sure as shit ain't making much of a profit elsewhere. I think consumers have gotten wise to Sony's brand and more and more people are looking towards alternate manufacturers of electronics (which are generally cheaper with better performing equipment). Just look at the slump in sales on their bravia range. In times of economic slowdown people have to be more pennywise than usual, especially on big investment purchases like new TVs. They're looking more towards the internet and the vast array or professional opinions on the net rather than brand recognition.
Even the stores seem to be going Anti Sony. When I was shopping for my Panasonic 42" Plasma there were several Sony TVs in my price range and they just ignored them. I overheard a couple talking about wanting to get a Sony, and the rep pushed them towards a Hitachi TV instead. If the reps are pushing Hitachi on people over Sony, what the hell is Sony doing wrong? The Hitachi TV wasn't even more expensive so it wasn't about commision or anything (AFAIK that store doesn't even work on commission, well it didn't when my friend worked there anyway).
You can't even use the gaming argument as a positive for the PS3, the library just isn't as good as the competition. The amount of exclusives that are worth playing is tiny. So for people like me who have both a 360 and PS3, most multiformat titles get bought for the 360, because they're cheaper and generally have better online play anyway. The last game I bought for my PS3 was GTAIV, that was a big mistake and only bought it because the 360 version was out of stock. It might not be as bad if the same games for PS3 were the same price as the the 360 versions but they're invariably at least £10 more expensive. Why would I pay that for less convenience (having to wait for it to install due a shoddy patch engine that takes forever, not to mention patches taking forever to download) and slower loading times (on the most part, some games are better than others but there is definately a noticeable difference on some games, it takes me well over 5 minutes to get into GTAIV on my PS3, and about 2 minutes for my friend who has it on 360).
We have to look at retailers for this change. Retailers were pushing for DVD to be accepted because of it's size. Not because it was a better product, purely because you could get more DVDs on a shelf and they took up less room in the store. Therefore profit margins were much higher. The better quality product was just a side bonus.
PS2 was in a unique position. It sold off the back of the phenomenal success of the Playstation. The added DVD playback was another bonus. Consumers wanted the next playstation, the fact it had DVD playback was even better. I know I bought my PS2 because I wanted a DVD player and didn't want to pay £200 for a standalone player. I'd rather pay a bit extra and get the latest games console as well.
Sony followed this pattern with the PS3. There's just on problem, retailers don't to want to have to store the same films twice on seperate formats. There are thousands of BD titles now but in every store you see 4 or 5 long rows of DVD racks and then one (2 if you are lucky) racks for BD. It's not because there is few choice (that factors in a little bit) it's because there just isn't that much of a demand for BD. You can pretty much bet on the people who are looking at BDs in a store also have a PS3. Price also factors into it. In retail stores the BDs are almost twice (if not more) the price of the same titles on DVD. When DVD first came out the price was very close to VHS it made for an easier adoption since people had no qualms about paying a slight premium for a vastly superior product. You don't get that with BD. What you get is a slightly improved fidelity and better sound. The only people who are going to get the most out of it are the people who have spent quite a lot of money on a big HDTV of about 40" or more. Anything smaller than that isn't going to get any benefit from 1080p at all. Yes, HDTV adoption is increasing, but only in the consumer grade market where most people are buying 32/37inch LCD tvs that aren't really going to get that much of a benefit from BD over a decent upscaling DVD player. I know i'd much rather keep my large collection of DVDs and keep purhcasing them for quite a while yet.
Sony are going to have to start making a profit from their console because they sure as shit ain't making much of a profit elsewhere. I think consumers have gotten wise to Sony's brand and more and more people are looking towards alternate manufacturers of electronics (which are generally cheaper with better performing equipment). Just look at the slump in sales on their bravia range. In times of economic slowdown people have to be more pennywise than usual, especially on big investment purchases like new TVs. They're looking more towards the internet and the vast array or professional opinions on the net rather than brand recognition.
Even the stores seem to be going Anti Sony. When I was shopping for my Panasonic 42" Plasma there were several Sony TVs in my price range and they just ignored them. I overheard a couple talking about wanting to get a Sony, and the rep pushed them towards a Hitachi TV instead. If the reps are pushing Hitachi on people over Sony, what the hell is Sony doing wrong? The Hitachi TV wasn't even more expensive so it wasn't about commision or anything (AFAIK that store doesn't even work on commission, well it didn't when my friend worked there anyway).
You can't even use the gaming argument as a positive for the PS3, the library just isn't as good as the competition. The amount of exclusives that are worth playing is tiny. So for people like me who have both a 360 and PS3, most multiformat titles get bought for the 360, because they're cheaper and generally have better online play anyway. The last game I bought for my PS3 was GTAIV, that was a big mistake and only bought it because the 360 version was out of stock. It might not be as bad if the same games for PS3 were the same price as the the 360 versions but they're invariably at least £10 more expensive. Why would I pay that for less convenience (having to wait for it to install due a shoddy patch engine that takes forever, not to mention patches taking forever to download) and slower loading times (on the most part, some games are better than others but there is definately a noticeable difference on some games, it takes me well over 5 minutes to get into GTAIV on my PS3, and about 2 minutes for my friend who has it on 360).
Marurun wrote:Don’t mind-shart your pants, guys
Re: Well, it finally happened...again...
I think backwards compatibility also played a part. When the PS2 was launched, there weren't that many solid titles on it, but the entire PS1 backlog was available so stores could sell all of that. With the PS3...no dice, unless you willingly coughed up several hundred dollars more. And then they discontinued that model. That pissed me off. I loved the PS1 and PS2, but Sony really hasn't impressed me with this console.
Now if I could find a 60Gb for cheap...well, different story.
Now if I could find a 60Gb for cheap...well, different story.
Re: Well, it finally happened...again...
Wow Niode, I didn't realize that in the UK they priced PS3 games that much higher than 360 titles. Here they both come in at the same price point, which makes the tipping factor to generally be Xbox Live vs. PSN. I personally go the other way, as I refuse to get an Xbox Live Gold subscription on principle. Plus, I think the XMB is a much better interface than the NEX.
Blizzard Entertainment Software Developer - All comments and views are my own and not representative of the company.
Re: Well, it finally happened...again...
Looks like Sony needs to make a new game. Maybe call it Sonynyny. It'll feature two teenagers who save Sony from a 3% market share.
What could Sony do to save themselves from their current position? I, personally, have been loving the hell out of some Valkyria Chronicles, MGS4, LBP, Resistence and most the PSN games, but apparently those aren't enough games for most people.
As much as I don't care for PS2 BC, looks like they better work their asses off on doing that. It seems to be the number one complaint. Software Emulation, on a case by case basis, is the answer they need to turn to. It'll buy them some time until they can get a fully-function PS2 emulator.
Get the companies involved too; with Capcom and Konami being so buddy-buddy with Sony, why not get them to Software Update their PS2 games for PS3? They'd sure sell a lot more Devil May Cry Collections and Metal Gear Solid Collections that way.
Next, hire a competent advertising team. When was the last time you saw a good PlayStation commercial? They have a PSN commercial and the only game they show off is... PAIN? What were they thinking? A video game commercial is extremely easy to pull off: Just show a few action-packed clips of the GAMES. No creepy babies, no animated shirts/buildings, no stereotypical squirrels.
Finally, lower the price, any way that you possibly can. Replace the wireless Blue Tooth controller with a wired USB controller. Toss out the 40 GB and put in a 20 GB. Toss out the pack-in movie and just give 'em a PSN card for $20. Hell, maybe even toss out HDMI and Wireless Networking if it'll allow you to comfortably go down to $300. I know Sony says that want the PS3 to be a 'value-added' machine, but the people have spoken. Apparently, they don't want the 'added', they just want the 'value'.
Oh yeah... sorry about the 360 Ack. Good luck of repairing it.
And Flak; Every single on of my friends have had it happen at least once, but four times? Your house isn't built on an Indian burial ground, is it?
What could Sony do to save themselves from their current position? I, personally, have been loving the hell out of some Valkyria Chronicles, MGS4, LBP, Resistence and most the PSN games, but apparently those aren't enough games for most people.
As much as I don't care for PS2 BC, looks like they better work their asses off on doing that. It seems to be the number one complaint. Software Emulation, on a case by case basis, is the answer they need to turn to. It'll buy them some time until they can get a fully-function PS2 emulator.
Get the companies involved too; with Capcom and Konami being so buddy-buddy with Sony, why not get them to Software Update their PS2 games for PS3? They'd sure sell a lot more Devil May Cry Collections and Metal Gear Solid Collections that way.
Next, hire a competent advertising team. When was the last time you saw a good PlayStation commercial? They have a PSN commercial and the only game they show off is... PAIN? What were they thinking? A video game commercial is extremely easy to pull off: Just show a few action-packed clips of the GAMES. No creepy babies, no animated shirts/buildings, no stereotypical squirrels.
Finally, lower the price, any way that you possibly can. Replace the wireless Blue Tooth controller with a wired USB controller. Toss out the 40 GB and put in a 20 GB. Toss out the pack-in movie and just give 'em a PSN card for $20. Hell, maybe even toss out HDMI and Wireless Networking if it'll allow you to comfortably go down to $300. I know Sony says that want the PS3 to be a 'value-added' machine, but the people have spoken. Apparently, they don't want the 'added', they just want the 'value'.
Oh yeah... sorry about the 360 Ack. Good luck of repairing it.
And Flak; Every single on of my friends have had it happen at least once, but four times? Your house isn't built on an Indian burial ground, is it?
Re: Well, it finally happened...again...
I think we all know what Sony needs to do. For some reason Sony doesn't seem to operate on the same plane of common sense that most of us operate on. Whether it's stubbornness or fiscal reasons I don't know but there is something seriously wrong with how Sony conducts their video gaming division.the7k wrote:Looks like Sony needs to make a new game. Maybe call it Sonynyny. It'll feature two teenagers who save Sony from a 3% market share.
What could Sony do to save themselves from their current position? I, personally, have been loving the hell out of some Valkyria Chronicles, MGS4, LBP, Resistence and most the PSN games, but apparently those aren't enough games for most people.
As much as I don't care for PS2 BC, looks like they better work their asses off on doing that. It seems to be the number one complaint. Software Emulation, on a case by case basis, is the answer they need to turn to. It'll buy them some time until they can get a fully-function PS2 emulator.
Get the companies involved too; with Capcom and Konami being so buddy-buddy with Sony, why not get them to Software Update their PS2 games for PS3? They'd sure sell a lot more Devil May Cry Collections and Metal Gear Solid Collections that way.
Next, hire a competent advertising team. When was the last time you saw a good PlayStation commercial? They have a PSN commercial and the only game they show off is... PAIN? What were they thinking? A video game commercial is extremely easy to pull off: Just show a few action-packed clips of the GAMES. No creepy babies, no animated shirts/buildings, no stereotypical squirrels.
Finally, lower the price, any way that you possibly can. Replace the wireless Blue Tooth controller with a wired USB controller. Toss out the 40 GB and put in a 20 GB. Toss out the pack-in movie and just give 'em a PSN card for $20. Hell, maybe even toss out HDMI and Wireless Networking if it'll allow you to comfortably go down to $300. I know Sony says that want the PS3 to be a 'value-added' machine, but the people have spoken. Apparently, they don't want the 'added', they just want the 'value'.
Oh yeah... sorry about the 360 Ack. Good luck of repairing it.
And Flak; Every single on of my friends have had it happen at least once, but four times? Your house isn't built on an Indian burial ground, is it?
Also regarding the 'best games for the PS3' It's criminally low, for any system that's been out as long as the PS3. It's been out for nearly 2 years now, and the best exclusives it has to show is MGS4, LBP, Uncharted and Valkyria Chronicles. According to metacritic: there is 11 games that are rated 80 or over and are exclusive, 11!!! Even the Wii has 15... (the Wii was released only 3 months before the PS3 in this country and I remember there being a severe drought on software during that time anyway.)
What I don't understand is that if some PS3s have software BC, why can't they all have it? If the 360 had backwards compatibility with xbox games (AND Render them at a higher resolution, NOT just upscale) and the architecture was completely different then why the hell can't the PS3? What is wrong with the PS3 on a fundamental level that stops this from happening? If Sony say their console is so much more powerful why don't they put their money where their mouth is and just release a software update that allows BC on any PS3. (I know it's not as easy as that but surely it's the easiest way to increase the perceived value of the PS3 with the least amount of cost to Sony)
Marurun wrote:Don’t mind-shart your pants, guys
-
RyaNtheSlayA
- Next-Gen
- Posts: 9201
- Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 4:56 pm
- Location: Denver CO, USA
Re: Well, it finally happened...again...
because the PS3's that had software emulation were only half so. The processor was emulated via software but the graphics chip was still put in the system.Niode wrote:I think we all know what Sony needs to do. For some reason Sony doesn't seem to operate on the same plane of common sense that most of us operate on. Whether it's stubbornness or fiscal reasons I don't know but there is something seriously wrong with how Sony conducts their video gaming division.the7k wrote:Looks like Sony needs to make a new game. Maybe call it Sonynyny. It'll feature two teenagers who save Sony from a 3% market share.
What could Sony do to save themselves from their current position? I, personally, have been loving the hell out of some Valkyria Chronicles, MGS4, LBP, Resistence and most the PSN games, but apparently those aren't enough games for most people.
As much as I don't care for PS2 BC, looks like they better work their asses off on doing that. It seems to be the number one complaint. Software Emulation, on a case by case basis, is the answer they need to turn to. It'll buy them some time until they can get a fully-function PS2 emulator.
Get the companies involved too; with Capcom and Konami being so buddy-buddy with Sony, why not get them to Software Update their PS2 games for PS3? They'd sure sell a lot more Devil May Cry Collections and Metal Gear Solid Collections that way.
Next, hire a competent advertising team. When was the last time you saw a good PlayStation commercial? They have a PSN commercial and the only game they show off is... PAIN? What were they thinking? A video game commercial is extremely easy to pull off: Just show a few action-packed clips of the GAMES. No creepy babies, no animated shirts/buildings, no stereotypical squirrels.
Finally, lower the price, any way that you possibly can. Replace the wireless Blue Tooth controller with a wired USB controller. Toss out the 40 GB and put in a 20 GB. Toss out the pack-in movie and just give 'em a PSN card for $20. Hell, maybe even toss out HDMI and Wireless Networking if it'll allow you to comfortably go down to $300. I know Sony says that want the PS3 to be a 'value-added' machine, but the people have spoken. Apparently, they don't want the 'added', they just want the 'value'.
Oh yeah... sorry about the 360 Ack. Good luck of repairing it.
And Flak; Every single on of my friends have had it happen at least once, but four times? Your house isn't built on an Indian burial ground, is it?
Also regarding the 'best games for the PS3' It's criminally low, for any system that's been out as long as the PS3. It's been out for nearly 2 years now, and the best exclusives it has to show is MGS4, LBP, Uncharted and Valkyria Chronicles. According to metacritic: there is 11 games that are rated 80 or over and are exclusive, 11!!! Even the Wii has 15... (the Wii was released only 3 months before the PS3 in this country and I remember there being a severe drought on software during that time anyway.)
What I don't understand is that if some PS3s have software BC, why can't they all have it? If the 360 had backwards compatibility with xbox games (AND Render them at a higher resolution, NOT just upscale) and the architecture was completely different then why the hell can't the PS3? What is wrong with the PS3 on a fundamental level that stops this from happening? If Sony say their console is so much more powerful why don't they put their money where their mouth is and just release a software update that allows BC on any PS3. (I know it's not as easy as that but surely it's the easiest way to increase the perceived value of the PS3 with the least amount of cost to Sony)
Older. Not wiser.
Re: Well, it finally happened...again...
What I'm trying to say is if the 360 can emulate the xbox (and properly upscale) despite not sharing any similar hardware (the 360 is PPC cpu and ATi graphics, the Xbox was intel x86 cpu and nvidia graphics) then if, according to Sony, the PS3 is so much more powerful than the 360 why can't it software emulate the PS2 (which is much less powerful than the original Xbox)?
I know it's not exactly a direct comparison but I think Sony should put the money where their mouth is and get software emulation. They desperately need it.
I know it's not exactly a direct comparison but I think Sony should put the money where their mouth is and get software emulation. They desperately need it.
Marurun wrote:Don’t mind-shart your pants, guys