Sony: 2012 focus on Kids & Family

[TheChefO]

"You will probably see us taking the console more towards a slightly younger demographic - more family market," Sony's European leader Jim Ryan told OPM.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-12-05-sony-aiming-ps3-at-young-gamers-and-families-in-2012


Where have we heard this before???

So, with this new found market being opened up, do you all honestly believe it will be years and years before next-gen arrives?

I think not.

Family and kids games are fine and dandy, but it has been years since the hardcore gamer has had anything new to be truly excited about.

The hardcore demographic is the one which drives a platform and drives sales as they buy multiple games a year along with DLC.

We are already starting to see some of them dive back into PC gaming (which does absolutely nothing for Sony's bottom line) and Nintendo has made clear that they plan to launch in 2012.

2013 will be the latest that I expect Sony to launch which puts MS somewhere between 2012 and 2013.

 

[Arwin]

I would expect at least 2 years between Vita and PS4. But also more or less at most. So I do think next-gen preparations are fully underway. Developers have likely been involved this year with the specs, giving input, and starting on new projects that target the launch-year.

 

[upnorthsox]

I still expect an Easter 2013 release for Sony, that would put a formal announcement at/around E3. Any later and your devs can't start getting the word out about their launch titles, esp. with new IP's.

This shift in focus is just paving the way for the PS3 aftermath.

As ChefO points out, the competition isn't just MS and Nintendo but also a resurgence of PC's and the continued progression of tablets/smartphones.

 

[upnorthsox]

I would expect at least 2 years between Vita and PS4. But also more or less at most. So I do think next-gen preparations are fully underway. Developers have likely been involved this year with the specs, giving input, and starting on new projects that target the launch-year.

If they wanted 2 yrs between then they should've launched Vita sooner. As it is, what they'll get is to avoid launching both at once which won't happen.

 

[Prophecy2k]

I agree upnorthsox.

Vita should have been out this year. I don't know what it was that made Sony delay the launch (possibly software not being ready), but they should have blown their marketing load for it over the ramp up to the holidays so as to capture all the holiday hype and Christmas spending.

 

[AlNom]

How do you get next-gen from Sony talking about PS3 plans for the coming year? It's not like multiplatform hardcore games will cease to exist. Sales WW are fine.

Microsoft talked about focusing on family/kids with kinect and 2011 is just fine for "hardcores".

 

[TheChefO]

It's not like multiplatform hardcore games will cease to exist.

Indeed, but as we are starting to see this year, hardcore gamers are starting to look to the PC because frankly, the console tech is getting old (2005-2012 = 7 years) and it is relatively cheap to build/buy a computer that outclasses an xb360/ps3 and now, developers are finally starting to tap into this market with games like BF3.

Gamers switching to PC does nothing for Sony's bottom line.

Sales WW are fine.

Indeed.

And sales will continue to ramp into these sub $200 pricepoints. But they will be increasingly selling to those that don't buy very many games/accessories/DLC.

Microsoft talked about focusing on family/kids with kinect ...

Of course, their pricepoint has been lower and now they have a device which eliminates the barrier to participation of young and old outside the traditional gamepad carrying gamer.

As for what it means to the hardcore, again, the shift is starting toward PC. Ultimately MS doesn't care all that much if a few head in that direction as it should (in theory) lead to an OS purchase, but they do not want to lose ground to Sony in stealing future livingroom dollars via ps4 (or Nintendo for that matter ...).

It isn't about short term.

 

[AlNom]

Gamers switching to PC does nothing for Sony's bottom line.

Where are you getting this idea about gamers switching to PC in such significant quantities? They've already got the hardcore audience so the next logical step is the markets they don't have a grasp on. Why would they want to reset the hardcore market capture by launching a new console simultaneously?

You're reading way too much into this article about impending next gen. Nothing is happening until 2013 at the earliest.

 

[TheChefO]

They've already got the hardcore audience...

Correction:
They've already depleted the hardcore audience.

2012 may not be the year, but I will be utterly shocked at the stupidity of Sony Executives if they intend to wait until 2014.

 

[AlNom]

Correction:
They've already depleted the hardcore audience.

Um... ok? So they've suddenly stopped buying for PS3? There are shit sales on PS3 showing your mythical PC migration?

2012 may not be the year, but I will be utterly shocked at the stupidity of Sony Executives if they intend to wait until 2014.

You do realize that launching at a not-so-retarded price and on an architecture that doesn't make people pull their hair out will make a pretty big difference this time compared to PS3's "one year delay" and associated market share loss over PS2. And yet, WW they are still doing well enough considering.

edit:

There's always the early adopters who will buy the system of their choice regardless of when they are released. The problem the console company has is how they deal with pricing and marketing to the wider audience. To say that a delay will be the end of them simplifies the problem exceedingly considering that most people will only care about pricing (over time) and what games are available that they want.

 

[function]

Both the 360 and PS3 had fairly crappy launches when you think about it.

The 360 was stuffing graphics chips in (limited numbers of) machines before they even knew that they would all blow up, then felt compelled to continue stuffing the chips in machines so as not lose their early momentum (and initially declined to use a better cooler because they didn't want to spend the extra $5).

The PS3 pretended it was going to launch in Spring 2006 up until about Spring 2006 (even though everyone knew this wasn't going happen) then it came out for $ IN$ANE at its global launch, which didn't actually end up being a global launch (it completely missed 2006 in its biggest market).

 

[TheChefO]

Um... ok? So they've suddenly stopped buying for PS3?

How many "hardcore gamers" are just now buying into xb360/ps3?

You do realize that launching at a not-so-retarded price and on an architecture that doesn't make people pull their hair out will make a pretty big difference this time compared to PS3's "one year delay" and associated market share loss over PS2. And yet, WW they are still doing well enough considering.

You do realize that they can achieve roughly 8x transistor density at 28nm which would put the cost at roughly the same BOM for the silicon as it was when xb360 launched, right? ($300 core BTW)

Or are you inferring some great leap is possible by waiting just one more year and "Aha!" Granted, TSMC has stated 20nm is on schedule for production at the end of 2012, but if 2012 is too soon for 28nm, then 2013 is far too soon for 20nm ... going by the logic of some around here.

But yes if that is the intention, wait an extra year after xb720 and launch a full process node more advanced, I say good luck with that approach (see xb1/gc vs ps2).


As far as referencing how well ps3 has done with their 1 year delay, they went from having roughly 70% of the market to less than a third. I'm not seeing how this is "well enough".

Granted, much of it was due to Sony pushing BR onto ps3 and using hardcore gamers as a means to bring manufacturing costs of BR down and to help instill a market for BR to win the HD media war (which still needed an additional 9 figure payout to certain movie studios but I digress), but launching late certainly didn't help their cause.

Now if this go-round they are literally last out of the gate and the schedule looks something like:
2012 Nintendo
2013 MS
2014 Sony

...then I'm not foreseeing good fortune upon Sony.

The process node jump will be substantial, but so was the one for XB1 and GC over PS2.

Developers for the most part won't utilize the technical advantage which leaves most multiplat games looking roughly similar with the edge obviously going to ps4 much as it was with xb vs ps2.

Sales however didn't mirror this superiority due to a multitude of reasons, one of which being the ps2 was already in the marketplace with an established 10m users and was "good enough" technically for the time.

Especially considering the newcomer didn't have established relationships with developers then.

So then, most games looking roughly the same (edge ps4) and what about this price tag...

See, last time MS tried this, Sony countered with what they thought would be a deathkneel to MS finances and thus push them out of the market clearing Sony of much of their competition.

As it was, MS reportedly lost 4billion in trying to keep the MSRP of xb to match the ps2, even though the BOM was nowhere near the same.

So then, either higher priced ps4 compared to xb720, or matched price and Sony eating losses.

Neither way makes a lot of financial sense which would be of utmost importance for Sony at about this time.

 

[AlphaWolf]

How many "hardcore gamers" are just now buying into xb360/ps3?

They are constantly reaffirming their commitment to the platform every time they buy a game (for example BF3 moved millions and so did MW3). So they are continuously 'buying in'. Just because they haven't bought hardware in a while doesn't mean they aren't committed to the platform.

 

[TheChefO]

There's always the early adopters who will buy the system of their choice regardless of when they are released. The problem the console company has is how they deal with pricing and marketing to the wider audience. To say that a delay will be the end of them simplifies the problem exceedingly considering that most people will only care about pricing (over time) and what games are available that they want.

Early adopters will indeed buy it, but how many are there?

There were multiple reasons for Early adopters to wait for ps3:

• Reportedly far superior hardware (see e3 "demos" and spec sheet)
• Bluray
• Assumed Exclusives carry-over from ps2
• Sony Brand

Hardware
This go round, we have yet to see what the deal is on hardware but let's assume that if it is late, Sony will put better guts in this time.

Media
BR advantage I'll assume won't exist.

Exclusives
Sony fans had a bit of an awakening in noting many of the once Sony exclusives were now multiplat. Expect this trend to continue outside of Sony 1st party.

Sony Brand
Still strong, but certainly weaker than in 2005...

With all of these advantages, their first full year on sale saw 2.5 million units move. In contrast, the first mover saw nearly 4 million units move in it's first full year on sale (USA numbers).



Bottom line, Sony has a bit of momentum now, they can't afford to lose it outright by forfeiting a year of sales to MS.

They would be fools to do so.


To your last point, it isn't that they would necessarily go bankrupt or even leave the games industry, but delaying a year will not help them to increase revenues (& hopefully profits) for their games division.

 

[function]

I suspect that profitability will be tied even more to service provision next generation. Without Kinect, Sony may well have overtaken the 360 by now and if Sony had been able to control costs better then the PS3 would be seen as highly successful (and following on from the incredibly successful PS2). Infact, if Sony hadn't lost so much on the hardware upfront the PS3 would still be seen as highly successful, even with Kinect boosting the 360.

Wii launched later than the 360 and was huge. PS3 launched later and was for quite a while selling better (and may still be, we'll have to see).

Controlling costs, profitable services and unique selling points (like Kinect and waggle) are all hugely important and all have the potential to trump the "going first" advantage, and do so without harming your current cash cow (which "going first" may or may not entail).

 

[TheChefO]

Controlling costs, profitable services and unique selling points (like Kinect and waggle) are all hugely important and all have the potential to trump the "going first" advantage, and do so without harming your current cash cow (which "going first" may or may not entail).

I suppose this is my problem with this philosophy:

What advantage/"unique selling point" will ps4 be able to rest on?

I spelled out the majority of the reasons for ps3 fans to wait in the posts above, but what reason will be there for ps4?

I suspect services will be roughly the same, media the same, games (for the most part +- a Gears or Uncharted) the same ...

Now if you believe like some around here, Sony may try to one-up xb720 HW wise, but for the reasons stated above, I don't see that happening.

I foresee both machines being roughly equal, thus leaving the only real element to compete on... timeline.

Launch first gets the hardcore on-board (assuming a good enough reason is given ie new MW or BF or Halo etc) and after this, the snowball effect takes place.


Doing so helped MS move up from a relative nobody last gen with ~15% of the market to now roughly equal with the undisputed market leader last gen.

It is only one element, but when other elements are leveled out and the playing field is roughly equal in most other respects, it can become a huge deal.

 

[patsu]

As long as Sony doesn't forget about HMZ-T1 revision...

[size=-2]They probably should accelerate Android 4 upgrade plans and Playstation Suite rollout too.[/size]

 

[AlNom]

How many "hardcore gamers" are just now buying into xb360/ps3?

It's called software sales. Are you meaning to tell me that your whole idea of PC migration is from observing hardware sales? People buy new PC configurations all the time. If people have really moved on from PS3 or 360, then there wouldn't be any software sales that keep MS, Sony, and all the publishers in business.

You are still failing to convince me that people have moved on.

You do realize that they can achieve roughly 8x transistor density at 28nm which would put the cost at roughly the same BOM for the silicon as it was when xb360 launched, right? ($300 core BTW)

$300 is hardly the BOM. What?

You do realize that 28nm production now is going to be much more expensive than 90nm was in 2005. 90nm was around for a couple years by 2005. I keep stating this but you aren't understanding the implications to cost or manufacturing or anything at all related to maturity of the process.

Do you not understand the processes involved with manufacturing?

Density and die size are only one aspect of the cost. 28nm is hardly mature.

Or are you inferring some great leap is possible by waiting just one more year and "Aha!"

That's an extra year of tweaking the design on a new process. An extra year for wafer production on the new process to ramp up significantly, an extra year for the manufacturing process to mature - there's a big reason why companies don't go all out with papers and IP regarding these processes. It's a bunch of trade secrets and the folks continually improve the process for better yields.

Don't you understand why binning exists? Not all processed wafers are the same, even on the same wafer using the same processes. For a given operating voltage, thermal characteristics can vary greatly. The sensitivity to defects is also a heck of a lot higher for smaller transistors than larger ones. That's just a fact.

Do you know why bigger chips tend to launch first? Redundancy and binning. Look at launch line-ups that basically just use the same chip but with disabled parts.

Granted, TSMC has stated 20nm is on schedule for production at the end of 2012, but if 2012 is too soon for 28nm, then 2013 is far too soon for 20nm ... going by the logic of some around here.

Uh... yeah. That's exactly it.

As far as referencing how well ps3 has done with their 1 year delay, they went from having roughly 70% of the market to less than a third. I'm not seeing how this is "well enough".

Sony and MS can both write a book about their fumbles, and the one year delay for PS3's appearance is only a small part of losing marketshare compared to PS2. There were clearly a lot more problems surrounding the launch as I've mentioned and as you've outlined with the BR push - it doesn't help at all when you have a diode supply constriction; shit's expensive and that goes back to launching at $LOL599.

Developers for the most part won't utilize the technical advantage which leaves most multiplat games looking roughly similar with the edge obviously going to ps4 much as it was with xb vs ps2.

Indeed, so there's absolutely no reason for Sony to try to one-up the competition with a crazy half-to-full generational leap in hardware over the competition. Instead they ought to choose a more economical one that is in line with the competition's hardware. It's not like they should be trying to compete with PC hardware.

Are you saying that they have to be shown as graphically superior in order to sell?

So then, either higher priced ps4 compared to xb720, or matched price and Sony eating losses.

Sony doesn't have to eat a loss if they're smart about design choices. They ought to have learnt something from all the devs complaining about cell. Again, it's a market for multiplatform releases. How about doing something that has more in common with the established PC base from an architectural/programmability standpoint.

Now if this go-round they are literally last out of the gate and the schedule looks something like:
2012 Nintendo
2013 MS
2014 Sony

Right now, you're the only even mentioning Sony to launch a full year apart. It's not historically without precedent for Sony to do the launch part way through the year in certain territories. Microsoft's global launch was not an insignificant feat at all, and I believe they've learnt that Japan is a lost cause so won't even bother to try simultaneous launch there. The way you're pushing these so-called P.R. "volume productions" for 2012, there's not going to be enough supply anywhere for a WW launch anyway.

 

[AlNom]

Early adopters will indeed buy it, but how many are there?

Everyone who bought in at $599. The division between $499 and $599 SKUs wasn't nearly equal either.

There were multiple reasons for Early adopters to wait for ps3:

• Reportedly far superior hardware (see e3 "demos" and spec sheet)

Right, welcome to the power of PR and marketing bullshit. This will never end.

MediaExclusives

Sony Brand

And launching beside Microsoft, both companies will have that much more to prove their individual appeal to the market. People will only spend so much in a holiday season, particularly with MS and Sony being direct competitors.

What I see far more likely is both launching in different territories at different times in similar time frames because of popularity/momentum in a particular territory.

 

[AlNom]

I spelled out the majority of the reasons for ps3 fans to wait in the posts above, but what reason will be there for ps4?

What reasons will there be if they launch simultaneously? The uniqueness is going to have to be emphasized that much more to sway buyers away anyway.

There are already clear differences in direction with motion control gaming. There are clear differences with first party exclusives.

There are going to be differences in how online gaming is handled.

Now if you believe like some around here, Sony may try to one-up xb720 HW wise, but for the reasons stated above, I don't see that happening.

Who's saying that they will? Stop making things up.