The new PS3 sales pitch: Better gaming, better technology, better value

Acert93

Artist formerly known as Acert93
Legend
I think Sony is in need of some PR love and redirection. They seem to have mis-placed their E3 mojo and were not very focused at E3. They have yet to explain to some potential customers, who are shell shocked over the sticker price, why it is so much more expensive. As one person I know noted, "I have a SDTV and hundreds of DVD movies. Why would I want Blu Ray? Since the games look similar, why should I pay $100.00 extra for a feature I wont use."

People are saying this because I believe Sony has not conveyed the full value of their product. They have a list of doodads and tech mumbo jumbo, but to get the sale closed they need to convey the value, and a passion for that value, to ignorant Joe Public. They need a face lift! The value of the PS3 is not an extra $100 for a Blu Ray player, or an extra $200 for Blu Ray, WiFi, and a larger HDD. Its the big picture, the future, and the PS3's positioning as an HD media center that plays killer games. How Sony could not hit a homerun on this I don't know! So I put on my marketing PR hat and have come to Sony's aid.

Sony is on the defensive, and a "Punter" is on the aggressive. How should Sony respond? My money-hat PR man has the answers! (NOTE: This is not a technical exchange, but how Sony PR can capitolize on the current state of affairs. Feel free to disagree with the PR marketing speak)

Punter 1: Why is the PS3 selling for $100-$200 more than the Xbox 360? The games look pretty similar. It can be argued at this stage the 360 has more better looking games. How can Sony justify the price difference?

Sony: The PS3 is not just a game console. We have been careful to not call it a video gaming console. We offer a lot of features that our competition does not. One key advantage is that the HD era needs a Hi Definition media format. We have that in Blu Ray to offer True HD gaming and movie playback.

Punter 1: But I have a SDTV, so I am not interested in HD movies. Blu Ray does nothing for my gaming, so why should I pay an extra $100 just for a Blu Ray player, it does nothing for games!

Sony: Not true. It means bigger, longer, deeper games all on one disk. It also improves security over DVD which means developers make more money due to less piracy. More money means better games. This is just one of many value features (e.g. WiFi, HDD, Online Gaming, games, backwards compatibility, media/internet, True HD, etc) that justify the extra price. This fall you can pick up a stand alone Blu Ray player for $1,000.00, or get this feature in the PS3 which also plays next gen True HD games. You may not want Blu Ray now, but in 2 years we bet you will! We have a lot of features, like common media ports and replacable standard Hard Drives, that give our customers the value they will need for the next 10 years of the PS3 life.

Punter 1: Interesting list of features, but I must note MS offers WiFi as well.

Sony: The PS3-60GB has WiFi built in WiFi; the WiFi adapter for the 360 is $100.

Punter 1: Ok, but MS also has a HDD too.

Sony: Yes, but ours is standard--meaning every game can use it. We are even pushing developers to use it. We also offer 3x as much space compared to MS's Premium SKU.

Significantly we allow our customers to use standard 2.5" Laptop HDDs. MS does not. This means you are not stuck paying through the nose to obtain our addon.

Punter 1: The 360 also has online gaming.

Sony: Yes, for $50 a year. Ours is free (a $250 value over a 5 year period), and we believe better. Why? Because we give more control to developers. Note how many Xbox games are limited to 16 or 24 players on Xbox Live. We have already announced launch games that support 32 players. We can do this because each game dev can have their own servers that backend our network.

Punter 1: You mentioned games, the 360 has a ton of games!

Sony: E3 established that a lot of 3rd party titles are multi-platform. So the question is one of exclusives. We both have new IPs. We have Heavenly Sword and Resistance, they have Gears of War and Viva Pinata.

But lets be fair: New IPs are a crapshoot. Most end up sucking. We at Sony have a long history of proven content that sequal after sequal are VERY good. Final Fantasy, Metal Gear, Tekken, Devil May Cry, and so forth. We have exclusive content, PROVEN exclusive content, that appeals to a wide array of gamers. We are not fixated on FPS. There is a reason we have sold 100M consoles in each of the last 2 generations. More games people like.

So while we will be giving you proven franchises MS is betting on... Too Human.

Punter 1: But I am not seeing the difference in quality!

Sony: We admit our powerful console (2x faster than MS's Xbox 360) has a learning curve. The PS2 had similar growing pains, but developers quickly exposed the power of the PS2. The PS3 is 250x more powerful and even easier to harness the power. But we are in there here and now. Compare our launch titles to MS's launch titles shown at last E3. Heavenly Sword, Resistance, Warhawk, MotorStorm, Assassin's Creed, FFXIII, Madden, F1 '06, Eye of Judgement, and so forth. This is our launch software. Last year MS showed games like Tony Hawk and Full Auto at E3 as playable. And the MS footage was very choppy whereas most of our software is butter smooth. As you can see even early development is getting big gains compared to MS's first software, and we have more power in there for the long haul. Just wait until the games are released this fall.

Punter 1: But MS has more games and backwards compatibility.

Sony: We have over 100 games in development for the PS3 as of Fall 2005, we are also backwards compatible to over 13,000 games. How many does the 360 play? Very few comparatively. We have more games, and more better games on our Playstation platform.

Punter 1: You mentioned media and the intenet. My 360 does all of that!

Sony: But we are offering the Linux OS and have a web browser. A cheap PC costs $400. We are tossing in this key feature that the PC is frequently used for... for free! A 360 and a PC to browse the web comes up to $800. We are offering much MUCH more value. We also have media ports for a ton of USB devices, SD and Compact flash, and other formats. Our competitor does not even offer these features.

Punter 1: What about True HD? My 360 plays in HD.

Sony: But not True HD (TM). The 360 only offers 720p (1080i is just upscaled from 720p), and even then a game or two have not even been 720p! On our side of the fence we have a number of games offering 1080i/p and as developers get more familiar with the hardware you can expect even more games to offer the highest level of HD. We also offer Blu Ray movie playback at 1080p. MS is stuck offering DVD quality video which is not HD at all!

They pronounced the HD era, but our movies and games are all in HD, even the highest levels of HD (1080p), while some of their games are not HD and none of their movies are.

Punter 1: That is a lot of information. Could you review why you think the PS3 is worth the extra expense?

Sony: Sure!

- More powerful hardware means future games will look much better (Processors: PS3 is 218GFLOPs, the Xbox 360 is 115GFLOPs; Systems: PS3 is 2 TFLOPs, the Xbox 360 is 1 TFLOPs). Even the system bandwidth (we have 2x as much) is indicative of the power difference. You need less bandwidth for a slower system, and that is why they have slower memory.

- Wireless controllers. Standard.

- Gyros. Welcome to the 4D world. MS has kept the same old controller design while we have innovated and offered new control inputs.

- Hard Disk. Standard. Every game can use it without fear of there not being a HDD. This also means we will have better load times., better connectivity, and better customizations.

- Games. We are the only place to get our great franchises. We still have the most exclusive content in the industry and have all the big names like Snake.

- Backwards compatibility. We support 13,000 games, not a couple hundred like MS.

- Media/internet. With the Linux OS and web browsing you get the functionality you expect from a home computer. This is why we are calling it the Playstation computer. It is not just for gaming, but TiVo, True HD movie playback, web browsing, and games. Our competitor's machine does not have a web browser, probably because it is not powerful enough. This is the power of CELL and RSX.

- WiFi. This is not included in ANY 360 console. You have to pay $100 for this addon. WiFi means no cable mess, it also means you can hook your PSP right up to the PS3 for more advanced gaming oppurtunities.

- Blu Ray. More space. More security. More room for longer, bigger, and more detailed worlds. Blu Ray players are over $1,000.00.

- Free online gaming. $50 yearly value. After 5 years of console ownership you will save $250!

- Lets just add up the last 4 items. WiFi, Online, and Blu Ray.

Cheap PC for internet web browsing: $400.00
Stand alone Blu Ray player: $1,000.00
WiFi Adapter: $100.00
5 years of online gaming through Live: $250

If you have a $399 Xbox 360 premium SKU with a 20GB HDD and bought all of the above that would be $2,149.00! And that does not include a 60GB HDD, the great Playstation games, web browsing, or the power advantage of the PS3!

We give you a $2,149 value of the Xbox 360 with addons for $499--$599 depending on your specific media center needs.

That is over $1,500.00 in savings. You may not use every feature NOW, but you may in the future as these things become standard. And the PS3 has them all, plus great gaming, for a much better value than the Xbox 360.

---

Ok, that is rough, but I think Sony has fumbled when it has come to a focused message about value. It is not about the machine being faster or some vague sense of "value". The hardware is blurring the distinction between gaming console and HD media center.

All Sony needs to do is put up a check list of what they offer, and MS does not, and the cost involved in adding it. Most consumers wont use many of these, but there is a lot there. Since Sony is betting on un-known consumer products (Blu Ray) and blurring convergence lines they have to be active in consumer education.

Obviously my fake dialogue is a PR hack job (I was just thinking of how Sony PR could make their case), but it is only intended to show that from many angles the PS3 offers a lot of value.

The question is, can Sony convince consumers they NEED these new features in a game console? If so, how? Do you have suggestions for Sony's PR department?


Personally I think the first 6M will sell out, and by the time production ramps up in 2008 things like WiFi, Blu Ray, and so forth will be much more mainstream ideas. And by that time Playstation owners will be evangelizing their friends on the games (dude, you have to play MotorStorm with me!) and on the features. "Why get a PC when you can browse the net on the PS3?"
 
Well...

Punter 1:
"Why is that I can buy a 360 and a Wii for the price of one PS3"?

Punter 1:
"I want to play the new GTA game but I don´t have a console yet. Hmm, so for the price of PS3, I can get a 360, GTA, Halo3, Madden 08, Forza2, 1 year XBL and a second wireless controller. Alrighty then"..

:cool:
---

Software drives hardware..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
xbdestroya said:
Well, let me add my voice to the choir:

PS3 Value Proposition

I figured you would do a piece like that...

Sony doesn't need to do any PR they have all their fans rationalizing away for them, the same ones in fact that said MSFTs two sku approach and their price tag was ridiculous. Now here we go full-circle, and Sony has two skus, $500 and $600 price tags, their controller politely borrows from the other two mfrs., but its all good, because, well its Sony.
 
Acert93 said:
Punter 1: Why is the PS3 selling for $100-$200 more than the Xbox 360? The games look pretty similar. It can be argued at this stage the 360 has more better looking games. How can Sony justify the price difference?

Sony: The PS3 is not just a game console. We have been careful to not call it a video gaming console. We offer a lot of features that our competition does not. One key advantage is that the HD era needs a Hi Definition media format. We have that in Blu Ray to offer True HD gaming and movie playback.

Ok but why do all your top games show only 720P which the 360 can already do? Sorry, my TV's only do 720/1080i so I have no need to for 1080P and I'm not in the market for a new TV anytime soon.

Punter 1: But I have a SDTV, so I am not interested in HD movies. Blu Ray does nothing for my gaming, so why should I pay an extra $100 just for a Blu Ray player, it does nothing for games!

Sony: Not true. It means bigger, longer, deeper games all on one disk. It also improves security over DVD which means developers make more money due to less piracy. More money means better games. This is just one of many value features (e.g. WiFi, HDD, Online Gaming, games, backwards compatibility, media/internet, True HD, etc) that justify the extra price. This fall you can pick up a stand alone Blu Ray player for $1,000.00, or get this feature in the PS3 which also plays next gen True HD games. You may not want Blu Ray now, but in 2 years we bet you will! We have a lot of features, like common media ports and replacable standard Hard Drives, that give our customers the value they will need for the next 10 years of the PS3 life.

I've never seen something techonology related hold out for 10years and still be useful. I just wanna play games and right now I can't see a good library for your console for until late 2007+



Punter 1: Interesting list of features, but I must note MS offers WiFi as well.

Sony: The PS3-60GB has WiFi built in WiFi; the WiFi adapter for the 360 is $100.

Having it plugged in via an ethernet cable isn't a big deal to me but thanks for the free feature!

Punter 1: Ok, but MS also has a HDD too.

Sony: Yes, but ours is standard--meaning every game can use it. We are even pushing developers to use it. We also offer 3x as much space compared to MS's Premium SKU.

Can you confirm that no MS games will make use of the HDD? I already know that Oblivion benefits from having a HDD as I'm sure other devs will recommend one also.
.

Punter 1: The 360 also has online gaming.

Sony: Yes, for $50 a year. Ours is free (a $250 value over a 5 year period), and we believe better. Why? Because we give more control to developers. Note how many Xbox games are limited to 16 or 24 players on Xbox Live. We have already announced launch games that support 32 players. We can do this because each game dev can have their own servers that backend our network.

How do you know that MS won't make Live Free once it has some decent competition? Also, I like that I can buy games off live and play them on my Vista PC, 360 and cell phone (for some titles). Will your Online allow that also? If you're gonna open it up to the internet, what anti virus, anti spam and other technology you have that'll stop hackers from messing up my PS3? I don't want to deal with the same issues that I have on the PC! Too much hassle.


Punter 1: You mentioned games, the 360 has a ton of games!

Sony: E3 established that a lot of 3rd party titles are multi-platform. So the question is one of exclusives. We both have new IPs. We have Heavenly Sword and Resistance, they have Gears of War and Viva Pinata.

Right now, I don't see a lot of games you have that interest me until late 2007 onwards but I definitely keep an eye out. Didn't you say that heavenly sword got pushed back to 2007?


But lets be fair: New IPs are a crapshoot. Most end up sucking. We at Sony have a long history of proven content that sequal after sequal are VERY good. Final Fantasy, Metal Gear, Tekken, Devil May Cry, and so forth. We have exclusive content, PROVEN exclusive content, that appeals to a wide array of gamers. We are not fixated on FPS. There is a reason we have sold 100M consoles in each of the last 2 generations. More games people like.

So while we will be giving you proven franchises MS is betting on... Too Human.

Do you have Mass Effect, Lost Planet and Bio Shock also? It seems this time around they also have a lot of exclusives and picked up GTA 4 and exclusive episode content. Also, a lot of games this generation are cross platform and I don't know anything about your release dates except for what year. A better timeline would be really nice.

Punter 1: But I am not seeing the difference in quality!

Sony: We admit our powerful console (2x faster than MS's Xbox 360) has a learning curve. The PS2 had similar growing pains, but developers quickly exposed the power of the PS2. The PS3 is 250x more powerful and even easier to harness the power. But we are in there here and now. Compare our launch titles to MS's launch titles shown at last E3. Heavenly Sword, Resistance, Warhawk, MotorStorm, Assassin's Creed, FFXIII, Madden, F1 '06, Eye of Judgement, and so forth. This is our launch software. Last year MS showed games like Tony Hawk and Full Auto at E3 as playable. And the MS footage was very choppy whereas most of our software is butter smooth. As you can see even early development is getting big gains compared to MS's first software, and we have more power in there for the long haul. Just wait until the games are released this fall.

Ok, I'll wait but how long will I be waiting? I guess I'll get one when I see the benefit which right now I don't. I don't care how powerful it is in the numbers but for 2006 and well into 2007 the 360games look better. Also, I have no idea how the CGI stuff will actually look like as a game but I'll play close attention.

Punter 1: But MS has more games and backwards compatibility.

Sony: We have over 100 games in development for the PS3 as of Fall 2005, we are also backwards compatible to over 13,000 games. How many does the 360 play? Very few comparatively. We have more games, and more better games on our Playstation platform.

I didn't buy a new console to play old games. Again, you guys are really far behind the library since you're a year late.

Punter 1: You mentioned media and the intenet. My 360 does all of that!

Sony: But we are offering the Linux OS and have a web browser. A cheap PC costs $400. We are tossing in this key feature that the PC is frequently used for... for free! A 360 and a PC to browse the web comes up to $800. We are offering much MUCH more value. We also have media ports for a ton of USB devices, SD and Compact flash, and other formats. Our competitor does not even offer these features.

I'm going to have to learn linux now!? I just wanna play games! If you give me full web browser that means I'll be able to watch all the different movie clips online, open up PDF's, listen to different music formats and all the other browser things my PC allows? Can I save attachments from my email and view them? what about printing? If not, I rather use my PC, it's more convenient. How will you protect my PS3 from viruses, spyware and hackers?

Punter 1: What about True HD? My 360 plays in HD.

Sony: But not True HD (TM). The 360 only offers 720p (1080i is just upscaled from 720p), and even then a game or two have not even been 720p! On our side of the fence we have a number of games offering 1080i/p and as developers get more familiar with the hardware you can expect even more games to offer the highest level of HD. We also offer Blu Ray movie playback at 1080p. MS is stuck offering DVD quality video which is not HD at all!

huh? Most of your games are also 720P and the 1080p titles don't appeal to me. DVD can do 720P HD fine. Where are you getting this information from?


Punter 1: That is a lot of information. Could you review why you think the PS3 is worth the extra expense?
[/SIZE]

Ok, I guess but I just want it for games first and foremost. Right now I can't see a reason to get the PS3 until late 2007 onwards but thanks for your time! Hopefully your price drops a little also, we see True HD like you said on all your top titles and reviews on the BluRay player built in are much more clear. It's still a great console but I can't see a need for it for some time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
RobertR1 said:

Generally people interested in a product and are on the fence aren't the type who will actively counter rationalize like you just did.

I'm not sure Sony really needs to do any convincing right now -- E3 '07 is where they should start worrying about trying to convince people. TGS will likely give us a taste of whats to come, but E3 '07 should be pretty wicked (for all consoles, as that's when the fight truly starts).
 
Thanks XBD and EndR for some constructive thoughts. Your two comments tend to galvinize the essense of each camps positions.

EndR said:
Software drives hardware..

XBD said:
In the end, the launch price of the Playstation 3 puts the system out of the reach of many consumers that might otherwise desire one. Luckily for Sony, this does not look like it will greatly effect the demand for the console during the launch window itself. After that period, it will be up to Sony to take advantage of falling processor and Blu-ray component costs to drop the price of the console as rapidly as possible for the benefit of the mainstream consumer.

For those that can afford a Playstation 3 at launch, however, the system represents a compelling value across a number of fronts. On top of that, when factoring in certain accessory prices and possible online gaming fees, in several scenarios the PS3 may actually come out ahead in total cost of ownership relative to the XBox 360.

The question is how will MS and Sony evangelize, effectively, these positions to the mass market? I see the pros and cons to both sides, I think much of it will come down to winning over the hearts of the consumer through effective communication along with an effect pricing strategy.

Just a reminder: My comments/dialogue is just an example of the value case one can make. There are others, and there is the other side. I am just looking for constructive dialogue on value and how Sony can convey this message and how it fits the consumer retail market (And if you keep it clean how MS would/should respond).

@ XBD: Your article is pretty good, we agree on most points. A Q for you: If YOU were Sony, how would you go about this? We both agree the next 12 months is irrelevant. Sony will sell everything they have.

But what then? How do they move down into the lucrative more "mainstream" audiance. As much as it has been disregarded, price points are still important (re: the Xbox1 is only 4.5 years old!) Price point strategy has held firm for a very long time, as have the sales responses. Sony may not need to hit $199 first, but becoming affordable to the mainstream gamers will be important to maximize install base, generate software sales, and foster further developer support.

When MS hits $199, Sony will still have a HDD standard, BRD, WiFi, etc. How would you market the PS3 at this time? Do you think the market, after over a decade, has now shifted from being gaming devices to the casual masses will recognize value in? Will there be enough HDTV penetration? And most importantly, if you are Sony, how do you sell me, Joe Casual Gamer, on why I need a PS3 which will probably be $299?

You follow Sony financials a bit, how would you position the PS3 for 2008 and beyond to be #1 install base and to hit the magic 100M console mark?
 
Is it just me or is it annoying to click on a thread and read annoying incorrect information as if it was being spewed out of the most bias PR machine possible? Thats over the top, and kinda sad and pathetic in a few ways. I love the "Xbox360 looks like trash compared to THIS" mentality. Buddy, you need to do more research. :rolleyes:
 
NucNavST3 said:
I figured you would do a piece like that...

Sony doesn't need to do any PR they have all their fans rationalizing away for them, the same ones in fact that said MSFTs two sku approach and their price tag was ridiculous. Now here we go full-circle, and Sony has two skus, $500 and $600 price tags, their controller politely borrows from the other two mfrs., but its all good, because, well its Sony.

Come now, hypocrisy is not limited to one side of the fence -- I'd say there's plenty of it that goes around, regardless of what you're console preferences happen to be. Pointing it out exclusively on one side also doesn't help your case. I think you're also overexaggerating the rationalizing that has gone on.
 
Bobbler said:
Generally people interested in a product and are on the fence aren't the type who will actively counter rationalize like you just did.

I'm not sure Sony really needs to do any convincing right now -- E3 '07 is where they should start worrying about trying to convince people. TGS will likely give us a taste of whats to come, but E3 '07 should be pretty wicked (for all consoles, as that's when the fight truly starts).


Huh? People on the fence ARE the ones who'll debate the pro's and con's in their heads before dishinig out the cash.

Sony very well could dominate E3 07 but until then their machine is not a very desirable gaming console especially at the price presented. They're currently losing the price and games library war.
 
Also, a part of effective PR is:

- Maximize Sales
- Minimize Competitor Sales

It is important that Sony convince those on the fence why they should save and wait. There will be shortages this fall. HDTV penetration is low, there is a looming format war, the 360 is cheaper and has more software now and has a big 2007 lineup, etc... Sony not only needs to convince Joe Public that the PS3 has value, but so much more value than the X360 that he should wait for availability and pay more because I am certain come November 17th 2006 when no one can find a single PS3 on store shelves MS will have MILLIONS flooded into the market.

SugarCoat said:
Is it just me or is it annoying to click on a thread and read annoying incorrect information as if it was being spewed out of the most bias PR machine possible? Thats over the top, and kinda sad and pathetic in a few ways. I love the "Xbox360 looks like trash compared to THIS" mentality. Buddy, you need to do more research. :rolleyes:

:LOL:

The point was a PR-Marketing thread, ideas on how Sony can convey value. PR is not focused or based in strict reality or technicality but in perception. It is creating sales points that resonate with the consumer.

If you do a post history you will see I take my fair swipes at everyone and have written a bit on the pricing pitfalls I see in Sony's strategy. But it is a two way street. Some of us really are on the fence, are not covert-MS/Sony employees (boy I get giggles out of those!), and like the industry and look at it from different angles. Feel free to disagree. But give some feedback. Why not provide a counter PR explaining why my ficticious Sony-PR dialogue (which is ment to topple straw men, thus the "Punter" i.e. a "punt" question) and demonstrating why such a model of PR would be ineffective and is incorrect.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I still say this is about cost and not price. Consoles sell at 199 and below, we'd have to rewrite history to stray from that and I am not ready to do that. If Sony is going to lose a billion dollars a year in order to compete on price, or get to 199 nearly as quickly as the competition, its going to be a problem for them.
 
RobertR1 said:
Huh? People on the fence ARE the ones who'll debate the pro's and con's in their heads before dishinig out the cash.

Sony very well could dominate E3 07 but until then their machine is not a very desirable gaming console especially at the price presented. They're currently losing the price and games library war.

You're right, I guess I wasn't really thinking -- the people that are going to buy it in the first 6 months (at least) aren't the ones who would counter rationalize like that though =o

And I'd say PS3 is desirable to enough people, and I'm going to guess that the select few is larger than the stock of PS3s that'll be available throughout the first 6 months of its existance -- hence, E3 07 is the first really important date for them (for all consoles really -- first time all 3 consoles will be out and likely in relatively stable quantities).
 
Although some feel a bit bitter about Acer's points I totally agree with him. Its not overpriced at all. Its just expensive.
Besides most 360 games are coming to PC including Gears of War(confirmed), Halo3(most likely). I am not trying to say 360 is overpriced or a bad product, but PS3 is more expensive for good reasons.
Personally I see it like this: you either pay less for a 360 for some great and high quality gaming, or you pay more for a PS3 to get even better features including more exclusive succesful franchises. You get what you pay for.
If PS3 costed as much as an 360 I am sure most would have seen PS3 as a better choice but PS3's price balances PS3 and 360.
 
SugarCoat said:
Is it just me or is it annoying to click on a thread and read annoying incorrect information as if it was being spewed out of the most bias PR machine possible?
I find it more annoying to click on a thread where people are trying to discuss things, and someone injects nothing to do with the points in the conversation and only complaints at how biased people are :p. It's obvious you haven't picked up on Acert during you're time here (he went quiet, so you might'a missed most of his contributions). He's not a biased individual with an agenda, but he's having a think and throwing ideas out there for the sake of discussion. This time round it just happens to be about PS3 and marketting.

On T. : Personally I think the PlayStation brand is that strong, 2 generations virtually uncontested is mass mindshare, that it'll pretty much sell itself, with the higher pricetag just convincing the general populace it's better. They won't know why it's better, nor will they care to know, and they'll only concern themselves with whether PS3 is affordable and something they want. I think it's more a case of MS and Nintendo trying to convince people that PS3 isn't the right choice. To date neither have really sold me on their console (to be fair, Sony haven't sold me on PS3 exactly, other than what I expect of the brand and which has shown that diversity in what little we've seen), and last gen neither had decent marketting IMO. PlayStation marketted itself by being the quoted name synonymous with gaming, in books, TV, etc - the PlayStation Generation. I think they need to break up the mindset somehow. Kinda like how German cars are still considered high quality based on how they were years ago, despite modern critiques suggesting otherwise. It's much harder to change people's minds than keep them thinking along the same lines, like trying to turn a supertanker round...
 
expletive said:
I still say this is about cost and not price. Consoles sell at 199 and below, we'd have to rewrite history to stray from that and I am not ready to do that. If Sony is going to lose a billion dollars a year in order to compete on price, or get to 199 nearly as quickly as the competition, its going to be a problem for them.
That mentality has been changing--especially since even to start no one ever seems to adjust for inflation. :p

For reference, Sony sold (okay, technically "shipped," but we're using the same numbers all around) 18 million PS2's at the $299 price point (it took them ~1.5 years to drop to $199) in North America. Current sales are ~42 million, so that's over 40%. In Japan, they didn't drop to that price point until they'd sold ~15 (of a current ~23) million PS2's, which would be 65%. Europe is harder to track, but I would say about 16.5 of 38.5 (again, over 40%) were sold before prices dropped to the level you're talking about.

By contrast, the PS1 in the same amounts of time was at ~3 of 17 in Japan (18%), ~1.5 of 33 in North America (4.5%, due to low launch volumes and a very quick [9 month] drop), and... um... something even more annoying to track in Europe that's somewhere in-betwee. :p

I'm sure we'd notice the trend continuing through other consoles as well (but no as-date-accurate sales figures and amounts for them exist for me to do comparisons like that), and especially when we bring inflation into play, but I think it's safe to say that the consumer has moved beyond that "mystical" price point. We are, after all, in the age of the iPod. Heh... If nothing else, wouldn't the Cube have utterly dominated the Xbox in all markets because it STARTED there, had the huge legacy, and the most compelling total of 1st-party titles?

There are a LOT more factors that come into play. Especially these days.

As far as price is concerned anymore, I think it is the price difference between the competition that is much more important than any arbitrary static levels anymore. ...and the overall value of the machine that can compensate for it if properly leveraged. Again, witness the Xbox/Cube comparisons in North America; the advantages they marketed (hard drive, integrated online play, a higher level of graphics...) could still overcome a big price gap and having zero track record in the console market.

And that, I feel, is precisely what Acert was bringing up in this thread, highlighting, and showing just how he thinks Sony is bobbling their efforts so far.
 
Acert93 said:
Sony: It also improves security over DVD which means developers make more money due to less piracy. More money means better games.

:LOL: I have to say that's simply baloney. If it was, you would have the richest companies (ie, Microsoft gaming studios, followed likely by EA) making the best games.
 
Acert93 said:
@ XBD: Your article is pretty good, we agree on most points. A Q for you: If YOU were Sony, how would you go about this? We both agree the next 12 months is irrelevant. Sony will sell everything they have.

But what then? How do they move down into the lucrative more "mainstream" audiance. As much as it has been disregarded, price points are still important (re: the Xbox1 is only 4.5 years old!) Price point strategy has held firm for a very long time, as have the sales responses. Sony may not need to hit $199 first, but becoming affordable to the mainstream gamers will be important to maximize install base, generate software sales, and foster further developer support.

When MS hits $199, Sony will still have a HDD standard, BRD, WiFi, etc. How would you market the PS3 at this time? Do you think the market, after over a decade, has now shifted from being gaming devices to the casual masses will recognize value in? Will there be enough HDTV penetration? And most importantly, if you are Sony, how do you sell me, Joe Casual Gamer, on why I need a PS3 which will probably be $299?

You follow Sony financials a bit, how would you position the PS3 for 2008 and beyond to be #1 install base and to hit the magic 100M console mark?

Well thanks for the complement first of all Acert, but my own thoughts on the matter... hmmm....

I've seen this article posted a number of times today, such that maybe Sony is already starting to think towards marketing to the consumer the 'value' of the PS3, and certainly this whole ICT hiatus can't hurt.

If I personally were Sony, there just has to be an acknowledgement that MS will be the first to $199. In lieu of that, what they have to do is market themselves as much as possible as the 'premium' console experience; if that means Blu-ray, the games, whatever... they have to beat that drum hard. We have to view Sony's goal as something beyond being #1 this gen in all territories. I think if PS3 can secure Blu-ray's victory, and Sony can keep MS shut out of Japan, that will be a victory right there. As long as they stay on track this gen to sell 100 million consoles by PS4's launch, then MS selling more in the States is something I think they can endure. And I do think North America is a legitimate battleground this gen.

But anyway, Blu-ray will scale down in cost such that by the end of these next five years, it's inclusion shouldn't come at too much of a premium over a standard DVD drive. The HDD will of course be the 'burden,' and the question in my mind is if they successfully monetize on that via their network strategy, will they maybe just subsidize it's inclusion outright as time goes on?

HDTVs I think are going to proliferate like mad though; can't go wrong banking on high-def for the next five years.

@NucNav: Sony doesn't need to do any PR they have all their fans rationalizing away for them, the same ones in fact that said MSFTs two sku approach and their price tag was ridiculous.

Well you see that just doesn't apply to me at all, because I've always been a supporter of the MS 2-SKU strategy, and never thought the price tag was ridiculous. So you'll have to address someone else I'm afraid. ;) This is not to say I didn't think the core version was a ripoff relative to the premium, but that's another matter entirely...

@SugarCoat: ........
 
only informed consumers understand and appreciate true value. the rest (majority IMO) just go off of what they feel when they are in the store confronted with the price, the box of contents and a sales person spreading his own opinion. Many times people walk into a store intending to buy one product only to leave with another.

The ideas put forth in this thread are most valuable to the first 10 million or so informed intentional buyers.

The other 30 million+ are not going to hear nor care to understand the rest of it.


*numbers are ;) pulled out of my arse for comparison sake.
 
Sony's American CE division predicts an end to the format war in 12-24months. There are rumours that Pioneer will be introducing a non-Elite branded player that will come in at around the same price point as the PS3 for Christmas. I personally believe Blu-Ray, even without PS3 could defeat HD-DVD just purely on the power it will have at retail due to the industry support it enjoys. Certainly the underlying sentiment amongst AV enthusiasts seems to have gravitated towards the format since Paramount and Time-Warner announced late last year.

HD-DVD is needing miracles in my opinion. I am making a great assumption here but I strongly feel that those early adopters of the PS3 will also be highly representative of the HDTV crowd and will make a Blu-Ray movie purchase or two, especially at the rather attractive price points both formats have come in for. These should bring volumes that HD-DVD will struggle to match, even with Toshiba's estimate of 600-700K players sold by early next year.

A quick victory for Blu-Ray is exactly what Sony needs to really bring home the point of PS3's value proposition. Under the cloud of a format war consumers will be reluctant to see that, this could begin to change from the latter part of 2007. The “Blu-Ray card” will only become useful when consumers have sufficient confidence that the format will become the standard.

The price right now makes things a level playing field with 360 currently clear favourite for the North American market, Europe now murky, and Wii seemingly having an abundance of latent consumer confidence in Japan.

For me personally the sticker shock of the price is beginning to wear off. I was totally blinded by the price and was reluctant to consider what the machine actually offers. Reading Acert's post was the first time in nearly 2 weeks that I have had that feeling of wanting to buy the thing at launch return to me, it was like I was just re-sold on PS3. Heavenly Sword may probably tip me over the crevace.
 
Back
Top