PS3 sales

[Ginko]

Is that such a bad thing? As Shifty already correctly pointed out - what's in the box on day 1 is ultimately what you're stuck with for the next 6 years, if not longer. As a day 1 customer, I would sincerely hope that the product I'm buying has some kind of forsight into the future - it better have, because the console should remain to be an attractive buy even in 4 to 6 years from now. If the inclusion of BluRay can ensure this, why not?

Anything at this point on the spec list is a "potential". We don't know how well CELL will be utilized, we don't know if the larger storage of BR will be used effectively (though we already had some comments from devs that already support that's already being used one way or the other). We don't know if Sixaxis will be something useful in most games or if it'll be nothing but a mear gimmick. Welcome to today's market where products are sold based on their potential. Another potential everyone buys into, is if the console of your choice will have the games you like to play in the future.

I could understand this talk if Sony would be forcing us into using a more expensive medium without any real benefits. Since when is the potential for something good, a bad thing?

Sony talked a big game of offering a true next generation game console. They have yet to demonstrate how the PS3 is the superior game console. Nothing on the forefront seems like it is any better than the cheaper 360. In other words, there's no reason to believe at this point that it is worth the extra price over the competition, thus you are paying for potential. I never said anything about it being bad...I just find it silly to invest in one right now.

 

[Mintmaster]

If they follow the competition and offer nothing but a different brandname, it's called copying, yet adding functions that could differenciate their product even further (though at a drawback of selling at a higher price) is a negative?

I seriously doubt this is a problem for Sony. They brought out the Playstation brand years before XBox, and they're the market leader. They don't have to differentiate, and nobody significant will lambaste them for copying. If they hit a similar price point as MS in a similar timeframe, MS would be screwed from the start.

Besides, the higher price isn't all together because of BR in the first place - it's also partly because of their change in strategy in making less money on add-ons and making the PS3 a more open platform - something, that on the other side of the fence, Microsoft is making you pay for, by charging horrendous prices on accessories.

But this is a pretty serious marketing mistake on Sony's part. There's a reason everyone in the console business (except, apparently, Sony this particular generation) tries to keep the basic package low in price and gouge the consumer on accessories. It works. You want to create a low entry barrier to your system, and then when the buyer is hooked, he/she will buy more stuff - both games and accessories.

As for multiple delayed launches:
I really don't think the delayed launch is a direct result of the inclusion of BluRay - when you look at the way PS2 is still slaughtering the competition, one year after the launch of the 'early' Xbox360, launching any sooner [Spring 2006] would have been a bad idea. Especially when key features such as a built in HD, HDMI ports and BR would have had to be canceled.

I seriously doubt PS3 would take away from PS2 sales when it's four times the price. Why you're comparing PS2 sales to XBox360 is beyond me.

Also, the high price of BR is one that will come down quick as more are produced. Once prices come down, so will the price of the PS3. Assuming BR will remain the expensive feature throughout its lifecycle is not very accurate. The built-in HD will take that spot, for sure.

Okay, I'll agree here, but I think the early sales are pretty crucial, especially when you launch a year later than your primary competition. MS will be able to hit the $199 price point way before Sony. Maybe 1.5 years sooner.

 

[-tkf-]

I think it's a question of Sony putting what they want in the system vs Sony putting what the consumers want in the system. IF PS3 launches 1 year earlier @ $100 cheaper, do you think most consumers would have really cared that it didn't have a BR/HD DVD drive?

I don´t get this, do you honestly think that Sony would put a drive in the PS3 that consumers didn´t want? I think that right now the consumers doesn´t give a f*ck about the disc media, they want games that look awesome. In 2 years when they know what Blu-Ray is and they know that HiDef is the new Green then i´m sure they would "want" the Blu-Ray drive and by then they can have it cheap and it includes a console btw.

It takes the internet hate to tell everyone that omg Sony wants you to pay for the next gen movieformat, and as was so nicely pointed out, noone bitched about the CD/Audio playback or the DVD playback. But lots saw endless potential back then. Some so much they left the Nintendo platform to produce Final Fantasy games for the Playstation

 

[TheChefO]

It takes the internet hate to tell everyone that omg Sony wants you to pay for the next gen movieformat, and as was so nicely pointed out, noone bitched about the CD/Audio playback or the DVD playback. But lots saw endless potential back then. Some so much they left the Nintendo platform to produce Final Fantasy games for the Playstation

True nobody complained because it wasn't anything they had to pay extra for. If PS2 came out with dvd but charged $100 or more over their previous console or their closest competitor you'd have an argument. People would still be wary of purchasing many brd movies as it would still be competing with hddvd and nobody wants to have a betamax collection but if brd didn't add additional cost to ps3 you wouldn't hear as many complaints about it.

 

[RobertR1]

I seriously doubt this is a problem for Sony. They brought out the Playstation brand years before XBox, and they're the market leader. They don't have to differentiate, and nobody significant will lambaste them for copying. If they hit a similar price point as MS in a similar timeframe, MS would be screwed from the start.

But this is a pretty serious marketing mistake on Sony's part. There's a reason everyone in the console business (except, apparently, Sony this particular generation) tries to keep the basic package low in price and gouge the consumer on accessories. It works. You want to create a low entry barrier to your system, and then when the buyer is hooked, he/she will buy more stuff - both games and accessories.

I seriously doubt PS3 would take away from PS2 sales when it's four times the price. Why you're comparing PS2 sales to XBox360 is beyond me.

Okay, I'll agree here, but I think the early sales are pretty crucial, especially when you launch a year later than your primary competition. MS will be able to hit the $199 price point way before Sony. Maybe 1.5 years sooner.

Very good points and basically what I have been saying for a while now. Had Sony released the PS3 close to the 360's launch frame with a DVD drive and the same price entry point, the 360 would be hating life. On top of that, they could still release a BR drive add on for the early adopter/enthusiasts. The couter arguement is that without the promise of the PS3, there might not be CE and Studio majority support on their (blu ray) side.

With integrated wireless and a 60BG hard drive, that's 2 crucial accessories they're adding to a subsidized unit instead of making a profit off each accessory sold and using that to offset the loss per console.

The more I see it, the more it looks like they're almost willing to sacrifice the PS3 to an extent to make BR their new cash cow with the belief that it being the next "Playstation" it'll pick up exactly where the PS2 left off. Jan 2008 should be rather interesting.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

when you look at the way PS2 is still slaughtering the competition, one year after the launch of the 'early' Xbox360

Let's just wait a few more days for december sales numbers, OK? Remember, NPD's predictions are 1.8 million Wiis and 2 million Xboxes... I wonder if the PS2 can match that...

 

[avaya]

Let's just wait a few more days for december sales numbers, OK? Remember, NPD's predictions are 1.8 million Wiis and 2 million Xboxes... I wonder if the PS2 can match that...

That's a November - December IDC estimate.

 

[thatdude90210]

Let's just wait a few more days for december sales numbers, OK? Remember, NPD's predictions are 1.8 million Wiis and 2 million Xboxes... I wonder if the PS2 can match that...

Gamespot had an update on those recent predictions, saying that they came from a market research firm called IDC. Gamespot seem to think they'll be close to the final NPD numbers. Just want to head off any "those were bogus, probably made up" talk.

However, IDC's projections might be fairly close to the final numbers. While NPD hasn't publicly announced any preliminary numbers for December hardware sales, Wedbush Morgan Securities analyst Michael Pachter mentioned some figures this morning in a note to investors regarding Electronic Arts. Pachter referenced an "early assessment" by the NPD "suggesting" December Wii sales of 1.3 million systems and Xbox 360 sales of 1.5 million units. Combine that with the already announced November sales figures for those systems and you wind up with almost 1.78 million Wii systems and just over 2 million Xbox 360s sold for the holiday season, essentially the same numbers estimated by IDC.

 

[expletive]

Is that such a bad thing? As Shifty already correctly pointed out - what's in the box on day 1 is ultimately what you're stuck with for the next 6 years, if not longer. As a day 1 customer, I would sincerely hope that the product I'm buying has some kind of forsight into the future - it better have, because the console should remain to be an attractive buy even in 4 to 6 years from now. If the inclusion of BluRay can ensure this, why not?

Anything at this point on the spec list is a "potential". We don't know how well CELL will be utilized, we don't know if the larger storage of BR will be used effectively (though we already had some comments from devs that already support that's already being used one way or the other). We don't know if Sixaxis will be something useful in most games or if it'll be nothing but a mear gimmick. Welcome to today's market where products are sold based on their potential. Another potential everyone buys into, is if the console of your choice will have the games you like to play in the future.

I could understand this talk if Sony would be forcing us into using a more expensive medium without any real benefits. Since when is the potential for something good, a bad thing?

Potential is all well and good but their is no incentive for the market to pay for potential today, when that same potential will be available tomorrow at a lower price. Potential only gets figured into the equation with any significance by the very tech savvy or the gadget freaks. I think generally speaking, people pay for realized potential, not just the promise of it.

 

[nonamer]

Gamespot had an update on those recent predictions, saying that they came from a market research firm called IDC. Gamespot seem to think they'll be close to the final NPD numbers. Just want to head off any "those were bogus, probably made up" talk.

This may be just anecdotal evidence, but Wii shipments were similarly sparse as PS3 shipments going by what we've seen in reports and forum posts. Plus, they've way missed their original plan to ship 1 million at launch (they've only shipped 500-600k). It's rather incomprehensible that they've could've actually moved 1.3 million more. Xbox 360 numbers may be more possible.

 

[JasonLD]

We will see if Sony made mistake by putting BR drive on PS3 later down the road, but I don't think Sony had any kind of choice. Sony has been promising they were going to include BR in PS3 way back in 2002...and that was the probably the reason why Sony was able to gather all the support from electronics companies and movie studios. If they hadn't promised anything, then they may had a choice to just include DVD and release in late 2005 or early 2006.

 

[quest55720]

We will see if Sony made mistake by putting BR drive on PS3 later down the road, but I don't think Sony had any kind of choice. Sony has been promising they were going to include BR in PS3 way back in 2002...and that was the probably the reason why Sony was able to gather all the support from electronics companies and movie studios. If they hadn't promised anything, then they may had a choice to just include DVD and release in late 2005 or early 2006.

I would say we will find out rather soon atleast in north america if blue ray was a mistake. The supply issues seem to be almost over and if sony is not outselling MS by a good margin in NA it is a major mistake. If sony does not make a big dent into MS lead this year sony will lose even more exclusives and could even cement the 360 as the lead development platform for 3rd party developers. That woud be very very bad for sony IMO it would mean developers not taking full advantage of the cell and blue ray. Regaining momentum in this industry is near impossible if history is any judge. The only time I can recall any platform regaining momentum would be the SNES but IMO that was due to sega and thier crazy add ons and leaving the 16 bit market early.

It is going to be a fun year no matter what happens in NA and Japan for sure. I am interested in the sales of the PS3 once the hardcore early adopters and AV people have thier PS3s. I am interested to see if the PS3 can put a dent in the nintendo domination in japan.

 

[JasonLD]

I would say we will find out rather soon atleast in north america if blue ray was a mistake. The supply issues seem to be almost over and if sony is not outselling MS by a good margin in NA it is a major mistake. If sony does not make a big dent into MS lead this year sony will lose even more exclusives and could even cement the 360 as the lead development platform for 3rd party developers. That woud be very very bad for sony IMO it would mean developers not taking full advantage of the cell and blue ray. Regaining momentum in this industry is near impossible if history is any judge. The only time I can recall any platform regaining momentum would be the SNES but IMO that was due to sega and thier crazy add ons and leaving the 16 bit market early.

It is going to be a fun year no matter what happens in NA and Japan for sure. I am interested in the sales of the PS3 once the hardcore early adopters and AV people have thier PS3s. I am interested to see if the PS3 can put a dent in the nintendo domination in japan.

Well, we cannot ignore Wii either...lol..it might become leader sooner than we might think. Well, I just hope all three succeed since I have all three.

 

[Rolf N]

Potential is all well and good but their is no incentive for the market to pay for potential today, when that same potential will be available tomorrow at a lower price. Potential only gets figured into the equation with any significance by the very tech savvy or the gadget freaks. I think generally speaking, people pay for realized potential, not just the promise of it.

As you're so sure it's not worth it, how much do you think you're paying extra for Blu-ray?

 

[Dregun]

You cannot blame Sony for wanting to push the BR format through the PS3. When the PS2 came out DVD was no where near as saturated as it is now, I mean they just released stats saying FINALLY more DVD players are in homes then VCR's! Now we are trying to replace DVD's with the next "Big" thing, people are too slow to adapt and thats why HD isn't in full swing yet like it was supposed to be already. My mother and grandmother own a HDTV because members of our family told them they HAD to, why spend $300 on a TV today when $600 can get you a TV for tomorrow? If the PS3 and 360 can get people motivated enough to adapt to the changes that are around the corner then GREAT!

Sony pretty much guaranteed that people who do not own a HDTV if purchasing a PS3 will be more likely to buy a HDTV sooner then those without a PS3. Thats not a bad idea if your company also sells TV's and if the machine they bought the TV for also plays a format of movies they get royalties from! In the end I think everyone wins, considering the faster people adapt to HDTV the faster those of us who own HD can enjoy actually getting programming for it........since we are going to have to anyways.

Another thing I love bringing up, my mother hated buying "Widescreen" movies because of the bars on top and bottom of the screen. I told her a long time ago (5 years) that she will regret having those movies when she buys a new TV. It wasn't until she bought her LCD that she figured out what I was trying to tell her and now she won't watch the vast library of movies she bought on her new TV.

So whats going to happen if nobody pushes HDDVD or BlueRay onto consumers? Then those of us who are adapting will have to wait longer because they wont adapt. DVD's will still be made in Full and WideScreen (instead of the new format only being widescreen) and people wont realize they need a "New" TV. The government will push back the standard yet again and some of us will be on our 2nd or 3rd generation HDTV before we even get a chance to really enjoy it the way it is supposed to be. I'm glad the PS3 has BR and wish MS could have gotten HDDVD into the 360 off the bat, the more HD devices they can get into homes the better chance people will finally adapt.

Dregun

 

[Acert93]

But this is a pretty serious marketing mistake on Sony's part. There's a reason everyone in the console business (except, apparently, Sony this particular generation) tries to keep the basic package low in price and gouge the consumer on accessories. It works. You want to create a low entry barrier to your system, and then when the buyer is hooked, he/she will buy more stuff - both games and accessories.

This has been my bugger. If Sony shipped with a PS3 SKU model like MS sans BDR I think they walk away with this generation, again, as well as hit 100M sales in 5 years. They basically offer what everyone else is, develop their online strategy and infrastructure, and kill everyone on brand and software.

Not a sexy strategy, but it would have worked.

Now they enter this perfect storm (article forth coming!). HD DVD, a year late, significant price disparity with their primary competition with little initial wow factor to justify such, newfound competition in Japan, and so forth. Ouch.

And back to your point, I think we just need to take a look at crack dealers. They get their product out for free, get their clients hooked, and THEN nail them on repeat business. The key is enticing them with that impulse buy.

So I think the PS3 problems for the next 2 years are pretty simple:

- They have a lot of potential with the standard HDD, BluRay, and Cell. But to get enough developers (3rd parties) to invest in those...
- Sony needs to drive an install base to warrant investment in those "ceilings" but
- The consoles price is a fly in the ointment to driving sales to all but the hardcore gamer

Classic Chicken-or-Egg.

The higher ceiling comes at the cost of time (delays) and consumer cost. The high price, and year delay, potentually mean an initially smaller install base. The smaller install base makes it difficult investing to show the platforms potential.

What Sony needs to do is nip this in the bud now and get the ball rolling. They need to match price drops and keep general price parity. Once the install base surpasses MS Publishers can begin justifying pushing on those ceilings. Until then it is difficult to justify.

Further, I think Sony picked the wrong ceilings. Content creation doesn't scale linearly. It is nice to have 50GB of space, but the problem is that for many genres disk spanning is a viable solution (or HDD caching). And the reality is that the pace of content creation isn't moving as fast as technology. I think I would argue in many cases the reality is games are getting shorter because assets require more quality so what was spread out over 20 hours is now spread out over 10. The content is just becoming more focused--not necessarily more end result. The HDD, while offering great online potential, does pose manufacturing price reduction issues and for initial wow factor it just isn't there--and is easily bundled in other SKUs, as a for-profit addon, or make it manditory for ONLINE.

So right there I think BDR and the HDD as standards pose bang-for-buck issues to get the ball rolling. Their benefit is something that benefits the userbase if they are either generation standards or absolutely necessary Year 1 and show an unquestionable benefit to the consumer at the kiosk.

Cell is less of an issue as I think it is a good long term (specifically PS4) investment. Maybe a different configuration would have been nice, but Cell should offer some nice benefits in year 1... but it also would have been available in 2005 and while 50% bigger in die area than Xenon it isn't necessarily the end of the world big in regards to total silicon cost when comparing to the 360 (Xenon, Xenos chips).

So if Sony was going to toss $200 of extra stuff into the console and get immediate--and longterm--benefit I would have suggested a far superior GPU. It doesn't cost a lot for developers to improve framerates and image quality. It is something that is immediately available to developers to tap and exploit without significant resource investment, immediately perceivable by customers, and has longterm benefits for both.

I think Sony was hoping BDR would get the ball rolling as a killer app/distinguishing feature. HD DVD never let that ball get rolling.

So the questions I have for Sony are

1.) when will we see exclusive content that demonstrates and justifies the extra cost of the platform
2.) when will drop the price of their platform
3.) when will they not only break even with MS, but outpace them by a significant enough margin that publishers feel confident in investing in extra content to push BDR, push Cell in ways that are not capable on the Xbox 360, and demonstrate the HDD killer app that justifies the inclusion of this poorly scaling hardware on every console sold

Until they can answer these questions -- and hopefully they can do most of it in CY 2007 -- they will be in the frustrating position Chicken-or-Egg. And the Xfactor to overcoming this all generation will be retail cost. If they are able to overcome this with perceived value in not only the US, but places like India, Australia, and so forth they will scream to the finish line. If not, they will be in an ugly boxing match all generation and probably conceed 20M or so sales. The fact the PS2 sells so well due to library and being cheap reinforces this opinion (at least to me). At some point people don't care about the technology at all, only that it is cheap and has a ton of games. Sony's strategy makes getting to that point a lot longer. Even if the market was a vacuum without MS and Nintendo I think they would have this issue. Of course then they could do a 7 year lifecycle to get those 100M units and the PS4 would be a pretty killer rig

 

[TheChefO]

1.) when will we see exclusive content that demonstrates and justifies the extra cost of the platform
2.) when will drop the price of their platform
3.) when will they not only break even with MS, but outpace them by a significant enough margin that publishers feel confident in investing in extra content to push BDR, push Cell in ways that are not capable on the Xbox 360, and demonstrate the HDD killer app that justifies the inclusion of this poorly scaling hardware on every console sold

Until they can answer these questions -- and hopefully they can do most of it in CY 2007

I think it's safe to say #3 is directly tied to #2 and #1. Unortunately for Sony I don't see either #2 or #1 being addressed in a significant enough manor to surpass their main competitor on the market for at least 2 years which will place ps3 firmly behind the xbox360 this gen and in my opinion out of the race (ie: behind by 10 -20 million).

I was triple dog dared to post this so I will accept the dare and state: I predict before this generation is done, the Playstation brand will either be financially seperated from Sony and on it's own or will be sold off.

Sony is back to being a profitable company outside of the Playstation brand and has done well performing in it's traditional markets again. With the standard equipment necessary in ps3 adding up to a sizable BOM and already losing $200+ per console at it's current retail rate and needing to regain marketshare and facing a competitior which is not only cheaper today but will be cheaper tomorrow as well and offers near indistinguishable gaming experiences I think they are in a VERY tough spot and will be draining Sony inc for a long time to come unless they do something about it. Game sales and downloads can only do so much, especially when their attach rate is horrible. Add to this the market situation in Japan with most there are gaming on much less expensive Nintendo platforms and I think the whole thing adds up to "A PERFECT STORM" as Acert put it

Not to say Playstation won't continue or we won't see a "ps4" but honestly I think another Company with a vested interest and better financial stability to accept the risky investment will be at the helm of future playstations. Who this company is, i don't know. Perhaps Apple? Google maybe? Samsung? I don't know. I do know that if sales continue to lag behind MS/N and component pricing makes it difficult to have price parity with their competition then it will become increasingly difficult to justify the losses when even on the BR platform they do not have a sure bet (due to a decent alternative in hddvd, confusion in the market and lack of demand/desire for hd media in general).

All my opnion of course and I could (probably ) be completely wrong.

 

[London Geezer]

Not to say Playstation won't continue or we won't see a "ps4" but honestly I think another Company with a vested interest and better financial stability to accept the risky investment will be at the helm of future playstations. Who this company is, i don't know. Perhaps Apple? Google maybe? Samsung? I don't know.

It will be MicroSony! Mark my words, MS and Sony to be one and the same before 2012

 

[expletive]

As you're so sure it's not worth it, how much do you think you're paying extra for Blu-ray?

I didnt make any claims as to what i think is or isnt worth the price. My point is that when faced with a choice, consumer buying habits are skewed towards what products can do today, what they can open the box and do as soon as they take it home, rather than what they will do in the future. This is why killer apps sell systems, because you can take it home and play that great title as soon as you hook it up, instant gratification.

That said, given the way Sony has marketed/priced the PS3, and MS the 360 and HD-DVD add-on, I think theres a good chance that consumer math arrives at $200 as the up-tick for BR.

 

[Rolf N]

I didnt make any claims as to what i think is or isnt worth the price. My point is that when faced with a choice, consumer buying habits are skewed towards what products can do today, what they can open the box and do as soon as they take it home, rather than what they will do in the future. This is why killer apps sell systems, because you can take it home and play that great title as soon as you hook it up, instant gratification.

That said, given the way Sony has marketed/priced the PS3, and MS the 360 and HD-DVD add-on, I think theres a good chance that consumer math arrives at $200 as the up-tick for BR.

I was afraid you might say that but it's probably rubbish. If I can buy a single (as in one) sample from a competitor for 85$, what will I pay per piece in full-scale in-house mass production? Not 200$, no sir.
And the cost of that element is pretty damn relevant because, as entertaining as your "Blu-ray is a disease" reverse logic is, without a big cost attached to the blue laser diode the common argument that the PS3 could have a much more attractive price only if Blu-ray were out of the equation, would explode and reform into a cloud of candy.