NPD September 2007

I'm not sure but I guess it was after Christmas. The first mass bundle was with Fifa 07, so I'm told it's kinda impossible to sell that game second hand, as everyone seems to have a spare copy around...

 

Oh my God. I googled for Gears of war bundle announcment and it seems MS actually presented the first bundles in November!

http://www.myxbox360.com/news/news/Gears_of_War_Bundle_Announced_968

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=21238
Imagine how much these might have increased 360's sales during holiday season

Now we know what Sony should do. People need games. But are they(Sony) awake?

 

We shall see. The 1UP reviewers seem to think otherwise. Both R&C and Uncharted are held high by the people who saw them so far.

The games sell to existing PS2 owners (not only PS3). Some will finally decide to upgrade given the price drop. I also don't know what to say about your claim that Game A can match Game B even if they are of different genre (Uncharted vs Gears of War ?). They seem arbitrary.

Collectively, they represent a unique library. I don't think one can conveniently ignore them and claim that they contribute nothing. This is because the interested parties may be waiting for a price drop... just like Dr. Evil over here. I am going to pick up another PS3 for a friend too (He loves MotorStorm but think that $499 is too steep).

Simple... MS spent money to hype GeOW for a worldwide launch. We will have to wait for Sony to see what they do. Uncharted has received some glowing previews if you had paid attention to them. Regretably, your comparison with GeOW is simply an opinion and hardly proves anything.

Resistance got panned by the press at launch, but it went on to ship 2 million units by mid 2007. I wouldn't say "they" are not developing games right.

How do you measure a foot in NA ? The console is still growing steadily in NA despite so called a darth of content.

 

I don't remember Resistance being panned by the press. It certainly reviewed well, with an average score on GameRankings of 87% and 40 of the 73 reviews being 90+.

 

At that time, PS3 was being scrutinized by the press. Gears of War was also released simultaneously. If you get some of the reviews/posts/podcasts, you may see references to "PS 2.5", reviewer who didn't do his homework properly on MP (He indicated that Hailstorm was available in MP, which is dead wrong), statements that indicated the gameplay was boring, comments that Resistance was "sent to die", etc.

Look at the lower scoring ones. Fortunately, the gameplay speaks for itself. Not everyone is so lucky.

 

[modhat]The 'game reviews anti-PS3 conspiracy' stops now before it turns all shades of ugly. This is an NPD thread. Please talk sales numbers and what they mean for the consoles.[/quote]

 

Why conspiracy ? (It doesn't have to be there whenever bad reviews happen ). The climate for launching PS3 games was simply bad then (PS3 delayed and then launched with a minimal XMB, high price amongst FUDs). Both Sony and the emotional press/gamers contributed their share here.

 

I noticed that Dreamcast sales for the first year of its life were higher than PS3 sales. That's pretty shocking really. DC sold 5.7 million units in the same time the PS3 has sold about 4.7 million. Now it's true that the DC was only $299 during that time, but with no EA support either. The PS3 is doing a lot worse than I expected.

 

There are always ways to make interesting comparison, like this guy here:
http://www.techvat.com/orange-box-takes-the-lead.html

(No, I don't vouch for them but I hope all 3 consoles do well because that's very important for a title-based business like the video gaming industry. I see each one of them bringing different audiences to the mix further down the road)

 

Not to keep picking at your posts, but this brings to mind something I want to comment on.

The argument presented in the linked article has been presented in various forms as a rebuttal to commentary on the PS3's less than expected sales.

First it was, "How can you say the PS3 is selling poorly in the US? It is outselling the 360 in the US when you align the launch dates!".

Then, when this was no longer the case, "The PS3 has similar sales to the 360 in the US if you align the launch dates and this despite being so expensive!".

Now it's been modified again to , "How can you say the PS3 is selling poorly, it has similar worldwide sales to the 360 when you align the launch dates."

I'm pretty sure if you look you'll find there was a point where it was "outselling worldwide", too.

I find it interesting that the overall negative trend is even manifesting in changes in pro-PS3 spin.

 

This will likely continue. Especially with ps3 being $400 now... The excuses will be interesting to watch.

 

Interesting post, but one correction: DC was $200 at launch.

 

Given this thread topic...I think the fact that a couple years ago it was the Xbox360=Dreamcast comparisons that were en vogue says quite a bit.

 

Yes, I have observed the same trend, but it is to be expected. Xbox 360 launched a year ahead with a sustaining stream of good games year over year. The PS3 launched later, and also has its share of negative press, internal problems, delays and successes.

As they say, hindsight is 20/20, the former has a lower price and a more focused and huge dollar consumer marketing exercises. The latter has a higher price, no brand coverage, and longer, behind-the-scene shift in corporate strategies. While Sony has similar momentum, it has also demonstrated tight money control (less losses). We are seeing things as they pan out.

As TheChefO mentioned, all vendors will continue to evolve their strategies. We can always analyze after the fact based on different viewpoints and whatever their corporate objectives are (short term vs long term).

EDIT:
I also note that in these fora, a lot of people seem to think that spending big bucks to promote games/consoles is the (only) way to go. While this is true in many cases (depending on how much you want to make), there are also other marketing avenues to make money with less risk. Many companies rely on organic and silent growth to pan out too.

 

No brand coverage? The Playstation 3? They do have their problems, but I don't think that brand awareness is one of them.

 

Yes... no coverage. What existed was from before, not since PS3 launch even when under fire. The attitude was that it'd be futile if they tried to launch something positive in the midst of the negative voices (See Phil Harrison's interview about PS Home and LBP). Their European marketing effort was off the schedule due to the launch delay too (e.g., "This is living" campaign was launched half a year before Playstaion Home was announced in GDC. All it did was to confuse the hell out of us ). The "white room" one is cool but that's it. Only recently do we see them consolidate a mere few snippets (Heavenly Sword + white room, Lair + white room). They are still passive.

The PS3 name remains largely fragmented... perhaps waiting for Sony's next big push (Stringer's video effort ? or PS Home ? or I don't know some Sony brand chicken soup).

 

You're living on another planet if you think going into this generation with the Playstation brand was a negative for Sony. Hell, it's the only thing keeping them afloat in my mind.

 

Read my post again. Did I say it was a negative ? I merely indicated that Sony did not protect/extend their brand. And yes, the Playstation name helped but was also bruised with mishandled PR (The old PR chief left. Remember ?). What David Karraker did later was to address FUD/issues quickly, and to establish better relationships with the bloggers. But damages had been dealt.

 

That may be so, but the real thing that damaged the PS brand was the ridiculous price and lack of software. Sony had control over all of that. Their arrogance was their undoing. It's not too late for PS3 even if they don't have a great 2007. They still have some mega hits on the way like FF, MFGS, GT, GTA, and KZ2, but they are not likely to ever overtake MS in NA this generation and they aren't likely to ever be completely dominant like they were in the PS/PS2 days.

 

Quite true, but I think it's complexity, not arrogance, that bogs them down. The Blu-ray delay, the SDK delay, the PS Home delay, the game delay, etc. all point to a very complex/advanced solution. Some seem to have crossed the hurdle, but others are still working on it.

MS has the benefits of a familiar architecture, familiar Visual Studio and well-tested Windows OS to rely on. Sony has to start from scratch.

The pricing is a reflection of that complexity and business plan. Executives don't wake up one day and decide they want to charge high because of arrogance (They may appear so in front of the media for various reasons).

I'm sure people inside are holding out to see the final product. Thinking back a year ago, it's amazing Sony finally crossed the Cell and Blu-ray technical hurdles. Even the blue ray diode inventor was cautioning about the mass production issues of the diodes.

We shall see. For now, I am just glad that the box is humming along nicely in my office