PS3 Strategy/Confidence Retrospective
- Thread starter scooby_dooby
- Start date
- Status
No I get you, and I didn't mean to say that these weren't a factor at all, just that I feel they are factros out of Sony's control. They did all that could be reasonably expected of them on this front; I definitely give them a 'pass' on a pass/fail system.
Well, but for what it is that time will be next year instead... similar in time horizon from launch to Halo 3. And whether it's a good position for them to be in or not, I think most all of us regardless of our disparate views have already resigned ourselves to 2008 being the year where either PS3 picks it up... or it doesn't. The titles it lacks this year, it will have next year though.
Priorities.
They'd still be making money on 3rd party sw and ps hw.
Now, they're losing money on ps3 hw, not making much on ps3 sw and not making much on 3rd party royalties either... and ps2 isn't doing much for em nowadays too.
Add the fact that if they took such an aggressive stance on ps3, xb360 would not be doing as well as it is which would be even more money in their pocket now and in the future.
btw - I'm speaking strictly sw here.
In the sense of "did they have decent sw"? yes, I agree they pass, but it is an obvious fail as it wasn't good enough to make up for their other negative factors such as price, timing, etc. I think if they were smarter about their dev sw selection and execution, they could have pulled it off.
Indeed. Imagine if it would have had these 2008 titles this year ... or better yet, last year.
No one denies the more the better. However, PS2 was released for $299 and the install base grew according to that price. PS3 was $599. Then again, GTA4, MGS4, GT5P and DMC4 will come approx. 1 year after the launch of PS3 though they slipped this Christmas. It's interesting especially for third-party games that are conscious about their profit on the install base. I suspect the delay of GTA4 was due to the small install base of PS3 at that time.
And an amazing lineup it was--with 2 of the 3 (and 3 of 4 if you count Madden) best selling franchises last gen all appearing within the first year. And FFX and MGS are also amazingly great selling franchises (probably both in the top 10 last gen). The PS2 was all about the games, both hardcore and casual, American and Japanese. It really was the one-size-fits-all console in almost every way. FPS and online, both of which it did too, were the only areas you really could find it lagging much. And it supported the new movie standard that had mass appeal and had a good market price. Complete market domination followed.
Approximately...
Which is a huge issue with the PS3. Sony's priorities weren't well invested into the PS3 until later instead of sooner and it has shown. It is a big issue that for Holiday #2 Sony is missing those titles.
It is more troublesome when your competitor has already been out a year longer and is in Holiday #3 and has a distinct software edge.
Eh, you're talking about MS and Windows here...
To my understanding, the PC shader approach provides more structure, tools and foundation to 3D development than traditional console approaches. They have to deal with the API overhead though and more optimization.
The Windows kernel runs well in mobile phones and PDAs too. Furthermore, the game console specs have also increased significantly this gen. So MS's expertise has proved invaluable thus far (MS engineers said so
).Now with a well-tested preemptive OS foundation, mature toolchain, familiar SDK, assorted Windows software IP (even Javascript was used in the HD-DVD layer), a large and self sustaining development staff, plus developer support methodology and experiences. MS definitely has the advantage. On top of that, add economy of scale and operational experiences for the MSN network.
Again, they don't have to deal with the Cell architecture. It's an area where everyone including the research labs are learning.
Except that... that was not marketing but an executive mis-spoke.
The marketing folks are probably busy testing bits and pieces of the next revision. We have heard a few rambling, but no one outside Sony seems to know yet.
Exactly.
At a time when they should have been even more heavily investing in ps3 due to an early and aggressive MS, they were riding the gravy train of ps2. Were they incompetent or "overconfident"?
Indeed.
Software is a big variable especially on new and radical HW (cell). That's why it's SMART to give them enough time to ensure they will have quality games ready at launch and the first year... not sitting back, milking ps2 profits.
woundingchaney
Regular
I think the correct term would be unprepared. I doubt Sony didnt realize the situation they were in (to some extent at least) and I wouldnt consider Sony to be "incompetent" particularly with their direction of first party relations. I primarily believe it to be a "grin and bear it" scenario.
Ok, but who's job is it to prepare their internal studios to produce ps3 games?
This isn't a 3rd party dev that wasn't given the proper tools from the hw maker...
They chose to stick with ps2 as a priority when they should have been getting them prepared to release launch titles and 1st year titles as they were already going to be late compared to their competition.
The Sony execs has the responsibility to make money for the shareholders. While I can empathize with people who want GoW on PS3 asap, I think the execs' also need to allocate minimal/sufficient resources to keep the money going.
It is not clear if they can do a mind-blowing job for GoW2 on PS3 yet. As I understand, Wipeout had to drop a few features to make the timeline. GoW2 may suffer similar fate.
It is not clear if they can do a mind-blowing job for GoW2 on PS3 yet. As I understand, Wipeout had to drop a few features to make the timeline. GoW2 may suffer similar fate.
They've lost how much on ps3 already? I really don't think missing this one title on ps2 would kill them. Plus they would have eventually made significant profit on the ps3 version (potentially more).
Don't you realize Wii and PS3 are in totally different ranges of price elasticity? The attention you are talking about would shift to more appropriate substitutional goods such as PS2, PSP, and Xbox 360.
Doesn't mean you can forget about profitability. P&L pressure is no joke. Like I said, it's hard for outsiders to see. And yes, hindsight is 20/20, so we always get to b*tch.
I am hoping these few threads get surfaced to Sony internal folks. Not sure what kind of effect it will have (Probably none since this is very busy period
). Hey Sony, I saw Warhawk v1.2 patch coming, which is great (I am really impressed !). But are you still afraid of wasting marketing $$$ like the "This is living" campaign when timeline get shifted ? Are things firming up yet ? How about some sign...
Last edited by a moderator:
For some, it's hindsight.
To be fair, I had no idea Sony would be this light on the SW front by this point. I did however caution that ps3 would have significant issues trying to sell a $600 system with xb360 sitting next to it.
- Status