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

[SugarCoat]

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 . 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.

Well then my apologies. Perhaps i am just tired of reading line after line of hype about things like 1080P, HDMI and BlueRay, how superior Cell and RSX are. There is Sony's Facts, then there is facts, and finally theres realistics. This thread is entirely the former, and what struck me as annoying was that it contained so many points that have already been proven will never see the light of day due to realistic restrictions. Such as the RSX being able to power an abundance of games at 1080P. Let alone 1080P even matters considering TV's capable are way out of the price range of people. Or that the Cells bogus(excuse me..optimal) FLOP numbers actually matter. Need i remind people the Xbox contained a P3 derivative processor, and EE on the PS2 under their PR slides was capable of 3x more FLOPs, that number is totally garbage in trying to give you an idea of whats better.

I think i have said this well over a dozen times now. You'll have a good experiance no matter what your buying choice. For many people who have to make a choice it will come down to a few titles. For the rest of the world it will be price. Why is the Wii discounted in so many PS3 defense posts? Always vs the Xbox360. Sony has a pricing issue on their hands, they need to drop it down as fast as possible. A few people will benefit from the hardware HD capabilities. The majority are going to see an expensive plastic box and will look away until Sony can reduce the price to something more reasonable to the average family or youth/adult. HDD, linux, browser, functional HD device; price trumps all. End of story.

 

[Sis]

Here's the problem that is facing Sony, as I see it: they've broken the KISS rule. Their PR is complicated, if their PR follows a similar track as Acert's. They will have a difficult time explaining just what it is that makes it so valuable, other than to say, "It's an X, but so much more."

The rub is that there is sometimes too much distance between what they desire X to be, and what reality is. For example, see any suggestion that the PS3 will be a direct competitor to a media center PC or those hoping for the ultimate download service (seriously, I'd love to download HD movies onto a console, but at 20-25 gigs a movie, this seems farfetched to say the least).

For those desiring a media center PC, a media center PC is probably better. For those desiring a stand alone Blu-ray drive, a standalone Blu-ray drive is probably better (based on past performance of consoles-as-movie players, the Xbox 360 included).

But as a game machine, the PS3 will kick ass. So it's a shame that this gets downplayed due to the necessity brought about because of the price/feature set combination of the PS3.

 

[Tap In]

The decision to include Blu Ray in this machine (impacting the price) allows IMO only 3 possible outcomes.

1) Pure genius, it drives sales for people wanting HD movie content (relatively cheap), justifies the price and drives Sony's movie business.

2) Inconsequential. It never meets the mass demand in its lifetime if the public is not ready to adopt HiDef media. Sales do fine otherwise based on some "cheap blu Ray" sales, brand name, hype that it is more powerful than X360 and the games.

3) Total disaster allowing them never to reach a mass market price in time to make a difference and loses the format conflict to another source.

I think that is a mighty gamble to play with a company in Sony's financial position (relying on the games division for profitability) and they have balls to even try it. I think they would have been better off sticking to DVD and they would have wiped the floor with 360 at the same (or more aggresive) pricing. They could have released a Blu Ray add on for those early adopters at a cheap price. I doubt MS would have even bothered to release an HDDVD add on (let alone at a loss) if Blu Ray was not included in PS3. They would have less of a format fight on their hands too, IMO.

 

[ihamoitc2005]

Media Center

Here's the problem that is facing Sony, as I see it: they've broken the KISS rule. Their PR is complicated, if their PR follows a similar track as Acert's. They will have a difficult time explaining just what it is that makes it so valuable, other than to say, "It's an X, but so much more."

The rub is that there is sometimes too much distance between what they desire X to be, and what reality is. For example, see any suggestion that the PS3 will be a direct competitor to a media center PC or those hoping for the ultimate download service (seriously, I'd love to download HD movies onto a console, but at 20-25 gigs a movie, this seems farfetched to say the least).

For those desiring a media center PC, a media center PC is probably better. For those desiring a stand alone Blu-ray drive, a standalone Blu-ray drive is probably better (based on past performance of consoles-as-movie players, the Xbox 360 included).

But as a game machine, the PS3 will kick ass. So it's a shame that this gets downplayed due to the necessity brought about because of the price/feature set combination of the PS3.

I feel console is best for Media Center purpose because of simple OS design. For normal consumer to use computer for Media Center has too much hassles. Even Apple and XP Media Center has too much complications. If PS3 and Xbox360 can have external USB drive or have wireless external Hard Drive then it is even more amazing for this purpose.

Only problem for PS3 is (I think) PS3 Blu-Ray drive is read only. They should put read/write but maybe there will be too much disagreement with stand-alone Blu-Ray manufacturers.

 

[RobertR1]

I think that is a mighty gamble to play with a company in Sony's financial position (relying on the games division for profitability) and they have balls to even try it. I think they would have been better off sticking to DVD and they would have wiped the floor with 360 at the same (or more aggresive) pricing. They could have released a Blu Ray add on for those early adopters at a cheap price. I doubt MS would have even bothered to release an HDDVD add on (let alone at a loss) if Blu Ray was not included in PS3. They would have less of a format fight on their hands too, IMO.

This is exactly what I would've done. You still get to promote blu ray but your gaming console is now directly competitive on price, has more features, a better history and would crush the competiton. Then later on you could even integrate the blu ray player into a version of the console. If you crush the direct competiton on price does it really matter if your apps could or couldn't take advantage of blu ray? No, it doesn't.

By integrating blu ray, Sony gave the competiton a new life by putting itself at that price range. Features aside, price is price.

 

[cthellis42]

Here's the problem that is facing Sony, as I see it: they've broken the KISS rule. Their PR is complicated, if their PR follows a similar track as Acert's. They will have a difficult time explaining just what it is that makes it so valuable, other than to say, "It's an X, but so much more."

True. At least Nintendo's break is just in explaining their damn name, not the whole shibang.

It can be overcome, but it'll be trickier to. And personally, I think it needs to be backed up by a software package that's firing on all cylinders to prove to consumers that their marketing points are worthwhile, and Sony hasn't had a good track record with that in the past.

Industrial design? Most certainly. Software and "whole package" design? Nar...

 

[mckmas8808]

The decision to include Blu Ray in this machine (impacting the price) allows IMO only 3 possible outcomes.

1) Pure genius, it drives sales for people wanting HD movie content (relatively cheap), justifies the price and drives Sony's movie business.

2) Inconsequential. It never meets the mass demand in its lifetime if the public is not ready to adopt HiDef media. Sales do fine otherwise based on some "cheap blu Ray" sales, brand name, hype that it is more powerful than X360 and the games.

3) Total disaster allowing them never to reach a mass market price in time to make a difference and loses the format conflict to another source.

Pure genius. Right on the mark.

I think that is a mighty gamble to play with a company in Sony's financial position (relying on the games division for profitability) and they have balls to even try it. I think they would have been better off sticking to DVD and they would have wiped the floor with 360 at the same (or more aggresive) pricing. They could have released a Blu Ray add on for those early adopters at a cheap price. I doubt MS would have even bothered to release an HDDVD add on (let alone at a loss) if Blu Ray was not included in PS3. They would have less of a format fight on their hands too, IMO.

See the problem with that is all PS3 games will come on Blu-ray disc. And if Blu-ray wasn't in the PS3 they would have a much more format fight on their hands between them and HD-DVD. Add-ons just don't sell in the millions (most of the time)

 

[Rockster]

I feel console is best for Media Center purpose because of simple OS design.

The whole media center/linux/browser concept is really more of a novelty than it is truely useful IMHO. Even my beloved Dreamcast had a browser. So what. It will never replace the PC, because it's simply still not as flexible. The depth and breadth of apps, upgrades, and peripherals available to PC's cannot be matched. You can get content from standard sources like iTunes, Sony's Connect, etc. but also from IRC, Newsfeeds, FTP, P2P services, e-mail, websites, anywhere. And you can do anything with it; re-encode it, edit it, share it, burn it, stream it, copy it, store it, you name it. You can add support for cable cards, digital tuners, analog tuners, various optical technologies, mass storage devices, removal storage devices, new input mechanisms, new output devices, .... It never ends.

My idea of a console is a FIXED platform, upon which developers can provide a consistent and optimized game experience in a fair, simple, and fun environment. Not some hybrid, compare me to a PC to justify my cost, device, which is a jack of all trades, and master of none.

It's sad that a thread has been created by consumers, to come up with ways to convince other consumers to buy this device. Even when the people selling it, think those consumers are so naive, it doesn't matter what they do or what it costs; just wrap a terd in a box, put Playstation on it, and people will buy it. It's disappointing. They wouldn't even need a "sales pitch" if they had focused on what was important and didn't try to address all their goals with a single device.

 

[NANOTEC]

Punter 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Wzmf0ChL24

SONY: We lied.

 

[one]

The whole media center/linux/browser concept is really more of a novelty than it is truely useful IMHO. Even my beloved Dreamcast had a browser. So what. It will never replace the PC, because it's simply still not as flexible. The depth and breadth of apps, upgrades, and peripherals available to PC's cannot be matched. You can get content from standard sources like iTunes, Sony's Connect, etc. but also from IRC, Newsfeeds, FTP, P2P services, e-mail, websites, anywhere. And you can do anything with it; re-encode it, edit it, share it, burn it, stream it, copy it, store it, you name it. You can add support for cable cards, digital tuners, analog tuners, various optical technologies, mass storage devices, removal storage devices, new input mechanisms, new output devices, .... It never ends.

My idea of a console is a FIXED platform, upon which developers can provide a consistent and optimized game experience in a fair, simple, and fun environment. Not some hybrid, compare me to a PC to justify my cost, device, which is a jack of all trades, and master of none.

So according to you PC is master of everything while PS3 is master of none.

 

[Carl B]

It's sad that a thread has been created by consumers, to come up with ways to convince other consumers to buy this device. Even when the people selling it, think those consumers are so naive, it doesn't matter what they do or what it costs; just wrap a terd in a box, put Playstation on it, and people will buy it. It's disappointing. They wouldn't even need a "sales pitch" if they had focused on what was important and didn't try to address all their goals with a single device.

Rockster, I think beyond being too cynical for healthy living, you're misunderstanding the purpose of this thread.

Acert is just setting up a mental excercise here as much as he is anything else - it's just brainstorming and for fun. Sony has a product with a good price to feature ration: how do they market it? That sort of thing.

Believe me, no one is trying to sell anyone else a PS3.

And frankly, this thread isn't at all a 360 vs PS3, Sony vs Microsoft thread either; I wish some posters would understand that, because there seem to be a lot of 'battle line' posts entering the mix.

Let me be the first to say, if you don't want a PS3 - don't buy one! And that goes for everyone. Buy the console(s) that best suit your feature requirements, your gaming needs, and/or any IP/franchise requirements you might have. There are no 'right' or 'wrong' console decisions in this world, only console decisions that are right for you.

 

[NavNucST3]

Rockster, I think beyond being too cynical for healthy living, you're misunderstanding the purpose of this thread.

Acert is just setting up a mental excercise here as much as he is anything else - it's just brainstorming and for fun. Sony has a product with a good value to feature ration: how do they market it? That sort of thing.

Believe me, no one is trying to sell anyone else a PS3.

And frankly, this thread isn't at all a 360 vs PS3, Sony vs Microsoft thread either; I wish some posters would understand that, because there seem to be a lot of 'battle line' posts entering the mix.

Let me be the first to say, if you don't want a PS3 - don't buy one! And that goes for everyone. Buy the console(s) that best suit your feature requirements, your gaming needs, and/or any IP/franchise requirements you might have.

bleh...you always edit your posts when I am responding to them, lol , so nvm.

And I concur, here, and your PM

 

[patsu]

The place-to-be is somewhere in between. Not as uncontrolled and unpredictable as PC, but still a better game console (faster, simpler, and more relevant/fun/useful). There is no hard and fast rules. Anyone can challenge/redefine the game rules but it's best to keep things simple (like Sis mentioned) and also pay attention to details.

I feel the best way is still to sell the PS3 apps/games and the benefits they bring. It is the apps that showcase PS3's speed, simplicity (*if* any) and its relevance/funness/usefulness.

In this regard, Xbox 360 is concrete and ahead. Sony has some good potential to surpass Xbox 360 but they will need to work extra hard for the apps. Stopping at component level features such as HDD, RSX, Cell, Blu-ray, new controller, HDMI, WiFi, Linux, Playstation Network Platform would be disastrous IMHO.

 

[Carl B]

bleh...you always edit your posts when I am responding to them, lol , so nvm.

LOL, yeah... sorry about that, I notice you and I tend to get caught up in edit/response crossfire sometimes!

You should give roughly five minutes after you see a post of mine go up for me to actually be done posting. I definitely do tend to go back, read through my posts, think if I'm actually conveying what I wanted to say, and then change things around. No one wishes more than me that I could just get it right the first time!

(and oh the fitting nature of having edited this very post)

 

[Crossbar]

.... So what. It will never replace the PC, because it's simply still not as flexible. The depth and breadth of apps, upgrades, and peripherals available to PC's cannot be matched. You can get content from standard sources like iTunes, Sony's Connect, etc. but also from IRC, Newsfeeds, FTP, P2P services, e-mail, websites, anywhere. And you can do anything with it; re-encode it, edit it, share it, burn it, stream it, copy it, store it, you name it. You can add support for cable cards, digital tuners, analog tuners, various optical technologies, mass storage devices, removal storage devices, new input mechanisms, new output devices, .... It never ends.

My idea of a console is a FIXED platform, upon which developers can provide a consistent and optimized game experience in a fair, simple, and fun environment. Not some hybrid, compare me to a PC to justify my cost, device, which is a jack of all trades, and master of none.

Maybe you should open your mind to some new concepts?

Ken Kutaragi: "PS3 is a computer, just like a typical computer which downloads a program from CD-ROM to HDD then executes it from an HDD as a cache. If the HDD space is small for you, you can buy a bigger HDD. In the next year even a PS3 with 120GB HDD may be released. It's not another version of PS3, it's just another configuration. Because PS3 is a computer. We may be able to sell it in BTO (built-to-order) for each customer. With that assumption, the internal of PS3 is designed with modularity in mind unlike home appliances and game consoles. In the way of thinking with which a computer is designed, we adopted standard interfaces and selected various parts with extensibility in mind."

Izumi Kawanishi:

• The base system of the 20GB PS3 and the 60GB PS3 is the same, it's like PC motherboards with different interfaces but different peripherals. It's not that there are 2 models of PS3, they are variations.
• It's natural that specs are different due to price ranges, just like hi-end and lo-end PC.
• The PS3 spec is the same worldwide, but there'll be more variations in future.
• The current PS3 can't output different pictures through HDMI and AV-multi. There may be a PS3 with 2 HDMIs in future

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showpost.php?p=756616&postcount=1

EDIT: My point is, it will maybe not replace the PC for you, but it may do that for a lot of other people.

 

[TekkenMaster]

Great post acert. Good article xbd. Overall an interesting discussion.

 

[Graham]

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.

akaik the 360 wifi adapter is a/b/g, where the PS3 one is b/g. The reasoning being that you really need 802.11a to stream high def movies over a wifi connection that is also in use by other machines. I remember wathcing a channel9 interview where they stated even a clean g connection would be difficult to get uninterrupted playback at 720p30.

This would help explain the price and also why it is an add-on. The cheapest a/b/g pci-card I have found here in NZ is $130nz, whereas b/g's are $60. But I didn't look that hard...
[edit]
360 wifi adapter is sold for $180 here, which isn't too bad a markup all things considered.

 

[Chandler]

. It will never replace the PC, because it's simply still not as flexible. The depth and breadth of apps, upgrades, and peripherals available to PC's cannot be matched. You can get content from standard sources like iTunes, Sony's Connect, etc. but also from IRC, Newsfeeds, FTP, P2P services, e-mail, websites, anywhere. And you can do anything with it; re-encode it, edit it, share it, burn it, stream it, copy it, store it, you name it. You can add support for cable cards, digital tuners, analog tuners, various optical technologies, mass storage devices, removal storage devices, new input mechanisms, new output devices, .... It never ends.

Ever heard of the Amiga? It was a fixed platform with a great dedicated graphics card that had a huge userbase. Users around the globe contributed apps and games for it. The PS3 can do all of those things you listed above, it's got linux for the software, and USB ports for the hardware. Whether it will be done, who knows, but it's more flexible than you think.

 

[rabidrabbit]

akaik the 360 wifi adapter is a/b/g, where the PS3 one is b/g. The reasoning being that you really need 802.11a to stream high def movies over a wifi connection that is also in use by other machines. I remember wathcing a channel9 interview where they stated even a clean g connection would be difficult to get uninterrupted playback at 720p30.

That's why PS3 has a built in Blu-ray player, so there's not that much need for streaming HD video.
The "a" routers are still a bit hard to get, at least here. For example I couldn't even find a price for such after a quick browsing of local bigger shops online.
The other option is downloading HD video to PS3 HDD, either by using wired or wireless connection to 'net.
I was hoping the PS3 would be able to stream content wirelessly from my PC, but it seems Sony wants the PS3 to be the centre of our media, guess I'll just have to copy them from my PC to PS3 then (though even the 60 gig will soon become too small).

Does the PS3 have an IR port? I don't recall ever seeing there being one.
If so, there propably won't be a dedicated remote control for the PS3 as there is for the xbox360.
The controller will of course work as a sort of remote, but it's not as good as a real remote.
A Bluetooth remote is of course possible, but Sony has yet to announce any such, have they? Also with a Bluetooth, or even WiFi remote you won't be able to teach the PS3 to your universal remote (or use your PS3 with the universal for that matter...)

 

[Platon]

...snip...

Well, so far Sony has not really started their "mainstream" PR so we will see in what direction they will go. So far though I can't say that they have not underlined what they think is a great value the PS3 is, I think they have gone out quite strongly on showing what a great value they think their console is. As I have said before in the PS3 UK price thread, where they justify the price with the BR. The problem I see, at least here in Europe, and that will remain for quite some time is that BR is of no great value here yet. The need for is minimal and most likely will remain like that for some time. And no doubt there is price and there is value, after a certain price, value does not count so much anymore. So even if they go out and have comercials 24/7 about the great value of the PS3, too many of those features are not valuable enough for most of the population, where value is counted in money not spent...