NPD September 2007

[Shifty Geezer]

That pie chart is CRAZY. No one would have expected us to be here a few years ago.

On Halo's release? Sure we would! Wouldn't it look the same with Halo 2? I'm sure the ordinary month's chart is more impressive by XB360 dominating without a crazy heavy-hitter (though that chart lacks PS2 which is a bit cheating) because it has such a good attach ratio, but it would still be expected with revised ideas that don't place PS3 as the top selling console each month as people anticipated a few years ago before we knew it was launching at $600. We've seen XB360 outsell PS3 2:1 for months, so why would it be amazing to see software sale very much in its favour now?

Sony needs to get some big titles out PRONTO.

You seem to repeat this sentiment, but how exactly do you suggest they go about doing that? Do you know of a magical device or fantastic management technique that can cram 2-3 years of development into 2 months? Sony designed the hardware they did, created the tools they have, invested in the software they have, and now just have to ride it out. There's no quick fix. They've got the upcoming library, delayed to ensure quality rather than rushed for the holiday season which is the better choice IMO (assuming it's delayed for quality reasons, and not because they can't even program their own hardware and are struggling!), and have dropped the price. They can chuck a few adverts on TV and that's that. Oh, I guess they could chuck tens of millions at developers to secure exclusivity of currently cross-platform titles, but that's one hell of a gamble. Which titles are the 'platform sellers' that are worth securing?

 

[Crossbar]

The source is NPD, the chart is by Kotaku...the reason the PS2 isn't in there is the same reason Xbox, Gamecube, Dreamcast, NES, tiger handheld, DS, PSP, and WonderSwan sales aren't in there -- it's strictly a "next-gen" (is it "current-gen" now?) home console software sales comparison.

OK, but the title of the chart didn´t say so.

 

[Arwin]

To me, in some ways, the PS3 is symbolised by this picture:

This picture (I just took, with a lousy camera off of my own tv) both shows the potential, strength and beauty of the machine, and is a symbol for things that are to come. Others may be quicker out of the gate, but I am fully convinced that the PS3 definitely has the longest (and by far the best looking) legs

 

[PARANOiA]

Yes and no.

Rather than going through your whole post, I'll just make some quick comments.

1st of all, hearing that you prefer the PS3 library shows you're likely out of touch with the general sentiment. I mean, of course everyone has their own tastes and preferences, but you only need to look at the number of top games by review score across the platforms to see where the "top games" are. Again, not digging on your tastes - you obviously got the best machine for you - but it's hard to disagree with pretty much all reviews of all games, with the 360 clearly on top. This is of course also reflected in the massive game sales on the 360.

Hearing you still play Resistance weekly too is great - but you can't honestly say that a person looking for an online shooter is better off passing up a 360 + Halo3 for a PS3 and Resistance. Again, look at reviews saying it is the best game on consoles for online shooters. Sure, Halo might not be to your tastes, but a majority of gamers are not in the same mindset as you - and this is reflected in both better review scores, more people online, and better sales.

Seeing you quote LBP and PS-Eye (and the comical Eye of Judgement) as reasons to buy the console are a little strange to me. Maybe it's just because there's little to no interest there for me, but I can't help but see these "initiatives" as being a little behind the eight-ball. The Eye-toy type games aren't really going to move to many consoles in my eye - that audience is the Wii/DS audience. As for LBP, there's certainly potential, but it's a 2008 title whose flag is simply "user generated content". I can't see a mass proportion of gamers walking into a store at Xmas saying "I really want a PS3 so I can build a 2D platforming game level sometime next year!"

As for the Apple analogy, I completely agree - I think both MS and Sony missed the boat compeletely here, while Nintendo seem to be sailing into the sunset.

 

[PARANOiA]

This picture (I just took, with a lousy camera off of my own tv) both shows the potential, strength and beauty of the machine, and is a symbol for things that are to come. Others may be quicker out of the gate, but I am fully convinced that the PS3 definitely has the longest (and by far the best looking) legs

I agree the PS3 will likely be the only machine getting top notch games in, say, 2010 or 2011. However, most of us want to be playing the best games out right now. Sony need to do whatever it takes to ensure Uncharted and R+C are AAA games, so gamers like me - who can afford a PS3 whenever an unmissable game drops - feel the need to dive in. For right now, though, there's largely no reason if you already own a 360. It is very tough to sell something based on the promise of what's to come - especially when it will still be available in a few years for half the price!

One thing I like is that this generation is probably the most entertaining to watch (and be a part of). I think the only one as entertaining was the PS1/Saturn/N64 generation.

 

[patsu]

1st of all, hearing that you prefer the PS3 library shows you're likely out of touch with the general sentiment. I mean, of course everyone has their own tastes and preferences, but you only need to look at the number of top games by review score across the platforms to see where the "top games" are. Again, not digging on your tastes - you obviously got the best machine for you - but it's hard to disagree with pretty much all reviews of all games, with the 360 clearly on top. This is of course also reflected in the massive game sales on the 360.

Sure, but Wii sold the most although its reviewed top games are not rated higher than Xbox 360's and PS3's. Clearly, there are other dimensions to sales than just game ranking ?

Xbox 360 is out there 1+ year longer, and _if_ it still have lower scoring and fewer games than Wii or PS3, then something must be very wrong.

To summarize, the PS3 game library (now and in the near future) plus its ability to play Blu-ray movie offers more surprises and variety for me and my family. That's all.

Hearing you still play Resistance weekly too is great - but you can't honestly say that a person looking for an online shooter is better off passing up a 360 + Halo3 for a PS3 and Resistance. Again, look at reviews saying it is the best game on consoles for online shooters. Sure, Halo might not be to your tastes, but a majority of gamers are not in the same mindset as you - and this is reflected in both better review scores, more people online, and better sales.

I hear as long as a game is rated 8 and above, it will sell. That's all I check. The minor variant in scores boil down to reviewer opinions and preferences. What's interesting about PS3 is its game scores can vary wildly from 1 to 10 (That's when I took some interest, but I have digressed).

Specifically, for a thead on Resistance vs Halo comparison, you can search the GAF forum and contribute there if you like. I was a little surprised that thread didn't blow up. In my view and many others, both Resistance and Halo are very good series. On a PS3, I can still enjoy top notch FPS plus other surprises that PS3 offers.

Seeing you quote LBP and PS-Eye (and the comical Eye of Judgement) as reasons to buy the console are a little strange to me. Maybe it's just because there's little to no interest there for me, but I can't help but see these "initiatives" as being a little behind the eight-ball. The Eye-toy type games aren't really going to move to many consoles in my eye - that audience is the Wii/DS audience. As for LBP, there's certainly potential, but it's a 2008 title whose flag is simply "user generated content". I can't see a mass proportion of gamers walking into a store at Xmas saying "I really want a PS3 so I can build a 2D platforming game level sometime next year!"

Strange perhaps to you. I know people who bought PS2 because of EyeToy. Naturally the hardware device itself will not move console. What's interesting is the software operating it. With the improved quality and the available computing power, I look forward to more interesting titles.

For now, Eye of Judgment is a good start (Yes, I played Magic the Gathering once on my honeymoon with my wife in a commercial airliner cockpit, but it's a long story)

As for the Apple analogy, I completely agree - I think both MS and Sony missed the boat compeletely here, while Nintendo seem to be sailing into the sunset.

Nintendo yes. As for Sony, I don't know their plan well enough to comment. MS seems to have played all their major cards already.

 

[XeRo]

Any of you guys read this?

http://www.joystiq.com/2007/10/19/takahashi-sony-begging-ps3-devs-to-stay-on-board/

 

[patsu]

Yap ! I saw it. I see that as a positive pre-emptive move for Sony (although I don't know how much pleading they really do). Developers will make games based on market performance. Sony may have to pony up some cash to ensure some exclusives during the initial stage afterall. Everyone knows they have money

 

[TheChefO]

Yap ! I saw it. I see that as a positive pre-emptive move for Sony (although I don't know how much pleading they really do). Developers will make games based on market performance. Sony may have to pony up some cash to ensure some exclusives during the initial stage afterall. Everyone knows they have money

Seems a bit late.

As it is, Sony may have to consider putting up cash just to get a decent port, forget exclusive.

Their new pricepoint should help their cause considerably, but if nobody is buying games, devs will still see development on the ps3 as a risk, or worse, a poor investment.

Good news for Sony is, xb360 seems to be selling very well at it's current pricepoint, thus MS will likely not cut it to true mainstream pricing (<$200).




I'd have to say that for as big and talented as Sony's internal devs are, they have been way too slow to bring quality games to ps3.

 

[TheChefO]

I agree the PS3 will likely be the only machine getting top notch games in, say, 2010 or 2011...

???

I fail to see how PS3 will be a part of AAA titles but these same devs will not have their titles on xb360. Unless you think Sony internal devs will be the only one producing AAA titles by then...


Besides, in 2011 we will be playing WiiHD and xb720. How many were gawking at GoW2 aside from a: "hey, that's pretty neat what they did on the ol' ps2 ... back to my xb360"

 

[Scott_Arm]

Nintendo yes. As for Sony, I don't know their plan well enough to comment. MS seems to have played all their major cards already.

I don't really see what major cards the PS3 would have to trump the 360. The big quality titles for the 360 are not going to stop. Sony has a lot of work to do before it can even catch up to the 360.

In no way do I think the PS3 is a bad piece of hardware, but I think a lot of people are expecting an unreasonable jump in hardware performance in the future. I'm very skeptical of the devs that are hyping the platform, only because they have financial interests in people adopting it to buy their games. There will definitely be an increase in quality, but I would bet on the extent, especially if the PS3 isn't viewed as a lead platform.

 

[one]

As it is, Sony may have to consider putting up cash just to get a decent port, forget exclusive.

I don't really see what major cards the PS3 would have to trump the 360. The big quality titles for the 360 are not going to stop.

OTOH, what make you think Xbox 360 gets more exclusives and continues to get relatively better quality multiplat games? Making games multiplatform is more necessary than the last-gen due to the ever-increasing development cost for major game productions.

 

[TheChefO]

OTOH, what make you think Xbox 360 gets more exclusives and continues to get relatively better quality multiplat games? Making games multiplatform is more necessary than the last-gen due to the ever-increasing development cost for major game productions.

Sure, but if your game doesn't sell on one platform enough to make up for the dev costs ... chances are, you'll think twice about making anymore ports. Especially, if the other platform had no problem bringing in a healthy profit for you.

 

[TheChefO]

I don't really see what major cards the PS3 would have to trump the 360. The big quality titles for the 360 are not going to stop. Sony has a lot of work to do before it can even catch up to the 360.

In no way do I think the PS3 is a bad piece of hardware, but I think a lot of people are expecting an unreasonable jump in hardware performance in the future. I'm very skeptical of the devs that are hyping the platform, only because they have financial interests in people adopting it to buy their games. There will definitely be an increase in quality, but I would bet on the extent, especially if the PS3 isn't viewed as a lead platform.

Exactly.

Great post.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Seems a bit late.

As it is, Sony may have to consider putting up cash just to get a decent port, forget exclusive.

It'd be a very hard sell to a NA dev to get them to pass over the 360 in favor of a ps3 exclusive, that much is certain.

Their new pricepoint should help their cause considerably, but if nobody is buying games, devs will still see development on the ps3 as a risk, or worse, a poor investment.

It's clear Sony was mistaken on the markets desire to pick up the ps3, they put themselves in a hole and its going to take them time to recover, I'm not sure that the 40gb unit is really the big deal, I know some people have grabbed up current ps3's with some retail deals over waiting for the cut down 40gb, as the 40gb really isn't a much better value.

Good news for Sony is, xb360 seems to be selling very well at it's current pricepoint, thus MS will likely not cut it to true mainstream pricing (<$200).

MS had a massive xmas last year and I think they are looking to improve on that. They've left themselves some room if they want to price drop, but I doubt we'll see anything more than bundling deals.

I'd have to say that for as big and talented as Sony's internal devs are, they have been way too slow to bring quality games to ps3.

That's where MS really had an advantage by releasing first, Sony really needs software and they need it now just to keep from bleeding marketshare let alone close ground, the software delays and failures are killing them. Price will only help to a point.

 

[Nesh]

Rather than going through your whole post, I'll just make some quick comments.

1st of all, hearing that you prefer the PS3 library shows you're likely out of touch with the general sentiment. I mean, of course everyone has their own tastes and preferences, but you only need to look at the number of top games by review score across the platforms to see where the "top games" are. Again, not digging on your tastes - you obviously got the best machine for you - but it's hard to disagree with pretty much all reviews of all games, with the 360 clearly on top. This is of course also reflected in the massive game sales on the 360.

Hearing you still play Resistance weekly too is great - but you can't honestly say that a person looking for an online shooter is better off passing up a 360 + Halo3 for a PS3 and Resistance. Again, look at reviews saying it is the best game on consoles for online shooters. Sure, Halo might not be to your tastes, but a majority of gamers are not in the same mindset as you - and this is reflected in both better review scores, more people online, and better sales.

Seeing you quote LBP and PS-Eye (and the comical Eye of Judgement) as reasons to buy the console are a little strange to me. Maybe it's just because there's little to no interest there for me, but I can't help but see these "initiatives" as being a little behind the eight-ball. The Eye-toy type games aren't really going to move to many consoles in my eye - that audience is the Wii/DS audience. As for LBP, there's certainly potential, but it's a 2008 title whose flag is simply "user generated content". I can't see a mass proportion of gamers walking into a store at Xmas saying "I really want a PS3 so I can build a 2D platforming game level sometime next year!"

As for the Apple analogy, I completely agree - I think both MS and Sony missed the boat compeletely here, while Nintendo seem to be sailing into the sunset.

Evreything you said is hugely subjective. Some games are overrated and other underrated by reviews. I see game reviews that make me wonder really.

360 may have Halo3 but that doesnt mean gamers wont be interested on any other shoot-em up that has less critical acclaim. Resistance for example (which is extremely underrated) is as good as many of the top and most recently released first person shooters. Why ignore it just because of Halo? With similar logic, no other shooter matters even on the 360. Just Halo3.

PS3 may naver get a Halo-killer. But then again PS2 never got a Halo-killer either.
Why does it matter now so much? You cant downplay a console's whole library or other games of the same genre because of one game on another console.

Also about LBP and Eye of judgement. These are unique games that according to you arent anything special. If Wii never existed and Sony was planning to offer Wii type of games on the PS3, you might have felt the same. But we all know how well even mediocre but similar type of games do on Wii and how much they are praised. LBP or Eye of judgment on a Wii would have been praised as system sellers, and people would have talked about their uniqueness and how Nintendo targets playability above graphics.

In general what you are describing is what good experiences people are mistakenly missing on the PS3.

Sony is actually doing many things right and is many steps ahead in these of its competitors. They are overshadowed though because of their better market performance. These things would have been considered key features on 360 or Wii.

I find this unfortunate and feel that the console is excessively underrated.

Additionally great PS3 games are being nitpicked to death, while competitors' games are ok with the same "negatives". Hmm.

Personally I feel the same as Patsu. A great deal of 360's games are the type I would have preferred on PC, and they are often similar in content or just sequels of games that didnt matter a generation ago.

Ironically many of these games werent as popular in the past on consoles and I doubt they would have been if Sony did things better.

I find PS3's offerings and game library more creative and more appropriate for consoles, and I believe it is ignored due to the negative image low sales have created on itself.

 

[Scott_Arm]

OTOH, what make you think Xbox 360 gets more exclusives and continues to get relatively better quality multiplat games? Making games multiplatform is more necessary than the last-gen due to the ever-increasing development cost for major game productions.

All I disagreed with was that Microsoft had already played all of its major cards. There have already been a number of great games and there's no reason to believe that will stop. Right now the PS3 library isn't nearly as good as the 360 library. They have to catch up while high quality 360 titles continue to be released. It's not impossible, but it would be tough.

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

Rancid I bet you were one of those that thought Nintendo should get out of hardware during the GameCube gen.

Not at all. I think N should have done exactly what they did do. Which is give up the fight for the living room that Sony and MS are battling over, and just make a "pure" gaming system.

Nintendo's problem is that when you remove the requirements to be a digital distribution center, you necessarily remove the ability to provide a great gaming experience.

That memory and processing power can be used to generate great graphics, or great AI, or a number of other things in addition to playing HD movies and managing distribution of other content.

So, I guess I'd say that my opinion is that Nintendo scaled things back TOO far. But I've never been of the opinion that they should just sell software. They've got enough exclusive IPs to sell complete systems, and the profit margin is higher.

 

[Scott_Arm]

Evreything you said is hugely subjective. Some games are overrated and other underrated by reviews. I see game reviews that make me wonder really.

360 may have Halo3 but that doesnt mean gamers wont be interested on any other shoot-em up that has less critical acclaim. Resistance for example (which is extremely underrated) is as good as many of the top and most recently released first person shooters. Why ignore it just because of Halo? With similar logic, no other shooter matters even on the 360. Just Halo3.

PS3 may naver get a Halo-killer. But then again PS2 never got a Halo-killer either.
Why does it matter now so much? You cant downplay a console's whole library or other games of the same genre because of one game on another console.

Also about LBP and Eye of judgement. These are unique games that according to you arent anything special. If Wii never existed and Sony was planning to offer Wii type of games on the PS3, you might have felt the same. But we all know how well even mediocre but similar type of games do on Wii and how much they are praised. LBP or Eye of judgment on a Wii would have been praised as system sellers, and people would have talked about their uniqueness and how Nintendo targets playability above graphics.

In general what you are describing is what good experiences people are mistakenly missing on the PS3.

Sony is actually doing many things right and is many steps ahead in these of its competitors. They are overshadowed though because of their better market performance. These things would have been considered key features on 360 or Wii.

I find this unfortunate and feel that the console is excessively underrated.

Additionally great PS3 games are being nitpicked to death, while competitors' games are ok with the same "negatives". Hmm.

Personally I feel the same as Patsu. A great deal of 360's games are the type I would have preferred on PC, and they are often similar in content or just sequels of games that didnt matter a generation ago.

Ironically many of these games werent as popular in the past on consoles and I doubt they would have been if Sony did things better.

I find PS3's offerings and game library more creative and more appropriate for consoles, and I believe it is ignored due to the negative image low sales have created on itself.

So, to sum this up, Sony hasn't really made any misjudgements, it's reviewers and consumers that are wrong and overlooking the better platform?

That's a pretty tough argument to swallow. 3.3 million people bought Halo, and there are many other games that have sold very well and received very positive reviews. The consumers are speaking with their wallets. They're buying what they like.

I don't think Eye of Judgement would receive any more praise on any other system. It's a niche product for people interested in card games. LPB on the other hand, receives widely good impressions and would only help any system it was available for. The extent it will help is arguable.

 

[Nesh]

So, to sum this up, Sony hasn't really made any misjudgements, it's reviewers and consumers that are wrong and overlooking the better platform?

That's a pretty tough argument to swallow. 3.3 million people bought Halo, and there are many other games that have sold very well and received very positive reviews. The consumers are speaking with their wallets. They're buying what they like.

I don't think Eye of Judgement would receive any more praise on any other system. It's a niche product for people interested in card games. LPB on the other hand, receives widely good impressions and would only help any system it was available for. The extent it will help is arguable.

I didnt say that. Depends where you are pointing at. If you point towards their business plan and market decisions which resulted to low sales then yeah Sony did make many misjudgments.

People are buying what they like on other consoles but that doesnt mean they can see everything or buy everything they might like. And it doesnt mean that they dont buy games they wouldnt have liked under different conditions either.

If that was the case companies would have let everything work by themselves. No marketing, no advertisement, no nothing. The consumer can always 100% know by himself. Which is not the case