As above, with the focus of titles such as LBP, singstar and the Home service are sony counting on the fact that while there are still enthusiast gamers the mass market ( which ps2 tapped into so well ) has shifted since 6 - 7 years ago when ps2 etc were fresh and and starting to get a base developed. Home like bebo and myspace seems to be trying to tap into the success of social networking / community sites. Singstar with its ability to save and upload videos of your performance feeds into that youtube area of people liking to watch others make a fool of themselves. 360 to me seems to be the place ex - pc gamers go to play, Wii will not last long due to the fickle nature of people, and the fact its a one trick and an ugly one at that. Are Sony the only ones trying to conquer this new mainstream market with a much different set of tastes than the one that proceeded it with new ip and some fresh ideas?
Is Sony banking on a generational shift?
- Thread starter shifty100
- Start date
scooby_dooby
Legend
No. If they were, they would've produced something with a mainstream pricepoint, not a $600 bleeding edge console.
It's not a shift but a broadening. Sony are reaching out to a wider audience by offering some of everything, in broad entertainment terms and not just console gaming terms, whereas the other two consoles are more focussed in their targets.
It's arguable (and it's worth is another topic entirely!) but I guess they offer an expensive bit of consumer electronics.
Excluding media hub stuff, which sometimes seems a teeny bit limited, the PS3 can do an awful lot. But in that regard it isn't that different from the Elite. I should add I'm really not au fait with the Elite - just a plain old Core system for me!
I'm being a bit cheeky but that's certainly an attempt to broaden the market: AV enthusiasts??
Yeah, but that happens do that every generation... LBP and Singstar are just the Parrapa and Xi of the PS3 generation...
Absolutely. But the difference is Sony are investing in these kinds of titles, where MS isn't. The video is a nice demo, but Sony's demo of augmented reality has been turned into (at least) one game coming for their platform. And where Nintendo are investing in these kinds of unconventional titles, they aren't catering to the download content crowd or the HD playback crowd. The only company really trying to target everyone IMO is Sony, which is why they put so much kit in their box and it costs so much. They've gone for a one-size-fits-all-by-being-so-damned-enormous-everyone-can-get-a-foor-in strategy. MS targetted the traditional gamers market and are adding things as they go in a more make-it-up-as-we-go-along methodolgy. They've got some diversity, but aren't really pushing it. There's not much coming from MS funded titles that's totally different not even on Live Arcade as far as I can tell. The major diversity there that I know of is board/card games. Then we have Gates saying the future is motion control, but they haven't shown any real interest in that on XB360. They've talked a bit, but haven't gone on to say 'we've got 5 titles in development for Live! Camera' like Sony have. At least Nintendo and Sony added motion controls to their systems.
To that extent, Sony are trying to broaden the market. You buy their box if you want to play conventioanl games, different games, play media, HD movies, buy stuff online, muck about with Linux, view photo's from an SD card directly, yada-yada. They've taken the view that different people want different things so have created a box with a view to doing all of them. Nintendo have targetted non-traditional gamers, which is shifting their market. MS have gone for traditional gamers which is the same market, and have added options to broaden through peripherals and services, but I dare say those are in addition. If you're not a conventional gamer, you're not likely to get an XB360 despite it's HD DVD player or download service (I think, though no-one's got numbers). With PS3 if you're not a conventional gamer and don't care for shooters or racers or the types of games we've been playing for 10 years, there's still lots of reasons to consider getting one in unconventional games and media services. Of course the sacrifice for that was price, and even with broad appeal Sony are hard pushed to sell them. If you're only interested in a part of the features, there's cheaper alternatives. In a family situation though, one box shared between different people with different interests, I don't think PS3 has an equal. Referencing some ghastly family stereotypes, Dad gets his BluRay player and can watch content on the go on his PSP, Mum gets to surf the web and buy musics and show snapshots to her tea-party guests, Jonny gets to play his shooters and racers, Jilly gets to hang out in Home and play SingStar with her mates online, Jack plays his platformers and card battling game with camera gameplay enhancement, and they can all sit down together to play LBP. I don't think any other platform can cater for all and sundry situations. The alternative is buying piecemeal; an XB360 for Jack, a Wii for Jilly, and everyone shares a PC. If a household does work like that, PS3 does have the broadness to serve them all, no? And neither other platform can serve them all in their individual tastes.
They are indeed ghastly stereotypes ...
I definitely agree with you Shifty. One day this machine will cost $130, and as it slowly gets there, it will be within reach of more and more people. It will just take longer to get there. And not just in terms of price. Since there are so many possibilities, it will take longer for them to shine and made the best of. The more limited the console, the easier to find and play to its strengths.
Whereas even if a console's strength lies in its wide range of possibilities, it still remains a lot of work to exploit that wide range of possibilities, especially if you want to reach a reasonably comparable level of quality as the more specialised competitors - in fact, in some areas consumers may even expect a higher level of quality, as it is a more expensive device.
I definitely agree with you Shifty. One day this machine will cost $130, and as it slowly gets there, it will be within reach of more and more people. It will just take longer to get there. And not just in terms of price. Since there are so many possibilities, it will take longer for them to shine and made the best of. The more limited the console, the easier to find and play to its strengths.
Whereas even if a console's strength lies in its wide range of possibilities, it still remains a lot of work to exploit that wide range of possibilities, especially if you want to reach a reasonably comparable level of quality as the more specialised competitors - in fact, in some areas consumers may even expect a higher level of quality, as it is a more expensive device.
By then XB360 may have moved towards a broader audience too though. If MS wanted to, they could go the way of creating diverse niche titles and other features. At the moment though, PS3 is the only machine IMO actively battling on multiple fronts, perhaps spreading itself too thinly to begin with but maybe it will appeal in the long run? That seems to be Sony's hope anyhow.
Considering the PS1 and PS2, you could say that Sony is simply fullfilling consumers expectations of producing a console that lasts 10 years.
scooby_dooby
Legend
All you're really seeing here is a carry over from last generation. Sure, Sony's developing some unique first party games, but the vast majority of their 1st party portfolio is still traditional games.
MS is continuing to try and transition to a wider portfolio, but first things are first, they had to fill out traditional genres like RPG's which they've done extremely well. Once they've established some key franchises and bolstered their weaker genres, they can concentrate on non-traditional games (who knows if they will).
That's one thing I really like about Sony is their innovation in first party titles, MS is a little less adventurous. With that said, I think the difference is a little exagerated.
scooby_dooby
Legend
I don't know if anyone has broadened the market as much as they have between DS and Wii. So much so, that I may cave-in on my anti-wii household stance (please note that we have a gamecube, and I have bought no less than 6 DSes, so stow the hate)...just doing my civic duty to make Natomas stock prices jump!
Hooray!
I think Sony is the only one saying that consoles are allowed to be for more than just games, and should offer up that wide variety of functionality out of the box.
They aren't doing what Nintendo is doing, which is bleeding out most of the casual market with a low price point and novelty controller. What they are doing is attempting to bridge the gap between gaming and video / audio entertainment. By offering a huge variety of gaming and audio / video support, they are attempting to transform the face of home entertainment.
It's entirely possible that in the future, games and movies could be something of a similar experience, where the game and movie are bundled together, and various other possibilities. It's just an attempt for Sony to bring multiple markets together, not expand one. This could eventually turn into you purchasing a game, jamming out to the soundtrack, and watching the movie without feeling like they are separated experiences because you have to switch players and or channels / inputs. It's a way for Sony to create a hybrid form of home entertainment that in the past has failed.
It's just going to take them until the end of the PS3's lifetime to get it right.
They aren't doing what Nintendo is doing, which is bleeding out most of the casual market with a low price point and novelty controller. What they are doing is attempting to bridge the gap between gaming and video / audio entertainment. By offering a huge variety of gaming and audio / video support, they are attempting to transform the face of home entertainment.
It's entirely possible that in the future, games and movies could be something of a similar experience, where the game and movie are bundled together, and various other possibilities. It's just an attempt for Sony to bring multiple markets together, not expand one. This could eventually turn into you purchasing a game, jamming out to the soundtrack, and watching the movie without feeling like they are separated experiences because you have to switch players and or channels / inputs. It's a way for Sony to create a hybrid form of home entertainment that in the past has failed.
It's just going to take them until the end of the PS3's lifetime to get it right.
I completely disagree with that actually.
What I think is that Sony has realised that as games have been driving technology harder than everything else, the technology required for games can also be used for a number of other things that are in its portfiolo and even things that aren't. You could see this coming from a mile away back when the first PS1 came out. The CD-ROM player used for storing game data could also be used to play back music, and it was even used as such in games at the time. So, why not add in software to actually just play CDs?
And later on, when Video CDs become popular in Japan, the white version of the PS1 was released which supported that also (though this was never released in other regions, as Video CDs never were that hot there).
Especially with Sony having traditionally being in the hi-fi business, it must have been even more obvious than usual ... Games need more storage capacity, and we have this thing called DVD. So, when not use it for both? Hey, we happen to own a lot of music licences, why not make our own karaoke game that can use it? Etc.
Really the only thing that you can blame them for is not doing it more and more efficiently than they have. This has partly been because software wasn't its strong point from day one. Always the best software came from third parties. They made up for it partly by at least recognising that talent, giving it a warm welcome, and make them into either very close third parties, or buying them and making them into first parties.
But as they are learning, they get better at the software part, and this is where it gets interesting.
To contrast, enter Nintendo. Forced by the unexpected success of Sony to review their strengths and opportunities, they looked at what their stand-out quality, their talent: playability. Nintendo can make awesome games. They can look rubbish, or not stand out at all, and the hardware may not always be the best, but their first-party material is awesome. So, as they focus on gameplay, they look at the market and think: "what do we need most to improve our games? what is currently the biggest limitation on the quality of our gameplay?" And so they focus on the controller. They do so for the DS, with the Styles, and they do so for the Wii, with the wii-mote.
This minimalist approach, asking themselves 'what is the single most important thing that we, given the qualities we know we have, can do to distinguish ourselves' allows them to innovate very specifically, and therefore make a smaller step into the future in terms of investments and getting the product on the shelves at an acceptable price. They effectively managed to get out of step of the traditional console generation cycle even more than Microsoft tried to do, and they succeed.
I think the shift we will start seeing, above anything else, is that the lines between the generations will blur. This has already happened during previous generation shifts, but this time I think it will stick. The reasons for this are varied: Xbox Live Arcade, PSN, Virtual Console, PSP, Wii, DS, PS2, PC 'Casual Gaming', MMOs and so on blur the lines between different hardware.
Certain games and game assets can cross-over very naturally between different formats, such as we are seeing already for PSP, PS2, Wii. We already had a lot of PC and 360 crossover, but of course there will be the more traditional 360 and PS3 crossover. The DS and Wii have a gameplay crossover in that the Styles and Wiimote share certain gameplay principles that can carry over fairly well. The PS3 shares in that genre also - a game like Mercury started out for PSP hoping to get tilt sensing, then is released for Wii, and there's no reason for it to be released on PSN.
I could go on and on. It's a big happy mess, and just goes to show that the games industry is still growing and maturing, and gaining a level of mainstream that can sustain various companies and business ideas at once easily.
What I think is that Sony has realised that as games have been driving technology harder than everything else, the technology required for games can also be used for a number of other things that are in its portfiolo and even things that aren't. You could see this coming from a mile away back when the first PS1 came out. The CD-ROM player used for storing game data could also be used to play back music, and it was even used as such in games at the time. So, why not add in software to actually just play CDs?
And later on, when Video CDs become popular in Japan, the white version of the PS1 was released which supported that also (though this was never released in other regions, as Video CDs never were that hot there).
Especially with Sony having traditionally being in the hi-fi business, it must have been even more obvious than usual ... Games need more storage capacity, and we have this thing called DVD. So, when not use it for both? Hey, we happen to own a lot of music licences, why not make our own karaoke game that can use it? Etc.
Really the only thing that you can blame them for is not doing it more and more efficiently than they have. This has partly been because software wasn't its strong point from day one. Always the best software came from third parties. They made up for it partly by at least recognising that talent, giving it a warm welcome, and make them into either very close third parties, or buying them and making them into first parties.
But as they are learning, they get better at the software part, and this is where it gets interesting.
To contrast, enter Nintendo. Forced by the unexpected success of Sony to review their strengths and opportunities, they looked at what their stand-out quality, their talent: playability. Nintendo can make awesome games. They can look rubbish, or not stand out at all, and the hardware may not always be the best, but their first-party material is awesome. So, as they focus on gameplay, they look at the market and think: "what do we need most to improve our games? what is currently the biggest limitation on the quality of our gameplay?" And so they focus on the controller. They do so for the DS, with the Styles, and they do so for the Wii, with the wii-mote.
This minimalist approach, asking themselves 'what is the single most important thing that we, given the qualities we know we have, can do to distinguish ourselves' allows them to innovate very specifically, and therefore make a smaller step into the future in terms of investments and getting the product on the shelves at an acceptable price. They effectively managed to get out of step of the traditional console generation cycle even more than Microsoft tried to do, and they succeed.
I think the shift we will start seeing, above anything else, is that the lines between the generations will blur. This has already happened during previous generation shifts, but this time I think it will stick. The reasons for this are varied: Xbox Live Arcade, PSN, Virtual Console, PSP, Wii, DS, PS2, PC 'Casual Gaming', MMOs and so on blur the lines between different hardware.
Certain games and game assets can cross-over very naturally between different formats, such as we are seeing already for PSP, PS2, Wii. We already had a lot of PC and 360 crossover, but of course there will be the more traditional 360 and PS3 crossover. The DS and Wii have a gameplay crossover in that the Styles and Wiimote share certain gameplay principles that can carry over fairly well. The PS3 shares in that genre also - a game like Mercury started out for PSP hoping to get tilt sensing, then is released for Wii, and there's no reason for it to be released on PSN.
I could go on and on. It's a big happy mess, and just goes to show that the games industry is still growing and maturing, and gaining a level of mainstream that can sustain various companies and business ideas at once easily.
If it really is a generational shift, I don't think it works out to Sony's advantage. The sorts of activities you mentioned have one thing in common: they're all personal- computer-centric. People work on their MySpace pages on their computers. People watch YouTube videos on their computers. People play MMORPG on their computers. And so on. Basically more entertainment hours are now spent away Sony's stronghold, which is the livingroom. They can put whatever they want in the PS3, it's not going to win against the PC.
I don't agree. I think Sony can effectively pull all of those people back to the living room if they play their cards right. I can't get my friends together around my PC to watch movies, but if I get them around my big TV I can. I can get them together, BBQ, listen to music on the PS3, then watch a movie, drink some beers, finish out with some games, etc.
The multiple users feature reinforces this 'family living room' feel. Should Sony play their cards right and eventually add more custom features to the PS3 OS, it could become a viable replacement for PC entertainment. With some improved browser features (and much needed speed) combined with it's other entertainment possibilities, the PS3 could become the social network for many families and friends. I think Sony is hoping that's how it turns out.
Really, PC is only the strong hold right now because nothing has ever tried to break it. WebTV made a short attempt, but it was web only. The PS3 offers the downloable content like PC, the web browser, the games, the music, and the video. If Sony puts together a good iTunes like store to get music and movies / videos, along side Playstation Home, I think they could have a good thing going for them.
I think most importantly, PCs can be a pain to work with. That's why Apple's are proving ever more popular, and an even simpler, less computery way of doing media tasks is bound to be popular.
I agree, there are too many tabs, options, file types, and programs on the PC.
If Sony plays their cards right, everything can run through the extremely simple XMB. This would give Sony the opportunity to tap into the home that isn't looking for a super computer, who wants to download music and videos, but doesn't want to deal with the hassle of programs, torrents, and 3rd party accessories etc.
The only barriers keeping Sony from overthrowing the home entertainment market right now is price point, and their lack luster Store setup.
If they expanded it to include their huge selection of games, movies, and music (rather quickly) then they could probably stand a good chance to take over the living room near the end of this generation.