Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to CHARLIE'S CHILL. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
How MS could lead.......
Topic Started: Jun 26 2006, 04:52 PM (45 Views)
Abyss of Borg
Alsatian Rank
credit: 1up.com

by Sam Kennedy

I've been reading all of these headlines the past few weeks and haven't had the chance to comment on them -- I'll try to catch up now. Sony's recent admission that it's not concerned about losing market share really interested me. They must truly realize the threat that Microsoft now poses. I really enjoyed Shane's recent blog entry about Sony's situation, as it summarized many of my feelings exactly. Mainly: WTF. Ever since E3 I've been wondering what the heck happened... the PlayStation 3 is sounding less and less like the monster we thought it was and more like... I don't even know. At $600 -- the $500 version doesn't count (it's a bad deal and is just a ploy to get the system listed under the $500 mark...just look at how many $300 tard packs MS ended up selling -- very few) it needs to be a heck of a lot of something.



How Sony lost E3 still baffles me -- Sony should have completely owned the show. The price shocked a lot of people, sure, but the whole effort was a disaster. It all started with the press conference, which was all over the place. There were tons of game demos that really didn't matter (the GT HD demo was essentially the same thing we sat through two years earlier for GT4, except now it was all in high res -- it looked cool, sure, but also just made you realize how silly cardboard cutouts cheering you on look now). Then there were the rubber ducks. And crabs. And Riiiiidge Raaaacer. There was the new motion sensing controller -- and only one game (Warhawk) to show off how it worked (which apparently required spazzing out to play). Tom Byron, the EIC of OPM, and I were talking about this quite a bit -- this year's E3 press conference was kind of the one you'd expect to attend next year, when lots of game presentations would just be the norm. It really felt like business as usual for Sony -- certainly not like the event leading up to the launch of The PlayStation 3. I mean, here you had Nintendo renting out the Kodak Theater (where they hold the Oscars) and having its execs performing in all sorts of on stage theatrics, and Microsoft having the world's richest man delivering vision for the future of games and talking about gaming's importance for microsoft (not to mention showing Halo 3). And here you had Sony toying around with giant crabs and then telling us how we're going to pay hundreds of dollars more for that.



I've been saying this since last year's E3, but after all the flack Sony got for showing a CG rendered video of Killzone all they would need to do was show us that same demo running in realtime a year later and we would have all been convinced of the power of the PS3. Heck, that's probably all they would have needed to show us. Apparently, the reason they didn't show any Killzone was political -- internally at Sony the FPS they want to be promoting this year is Resistance: Fall of Man. What a missed opportunity, though. I loved how Microsoft kicked off its press conference. They were pretty much like, "Hey everyone, thanks for coming! Now check this shit out." And then they let Cliffy go nuts in Gears of War for like 10 minutes. I swear, that was like seeing Killzone in realtime. And that's the thing -- it was pretty clear that Microsoft "got it"...and Sony didn't.

All of Sony's E3 presence felt like it was pretty much just on cruise control. The booth was rather standard -- kiosks that held PS2s last year were converted to showcase PS3s this year. Even Sony's party felt unnaturaly blah. Kaz Hirai's "ARE YOU READY TO ROCK?!??!" to introduce the night's featured artist, which had almost become a party staple over the years, was diminished to just a "Are you ready to rock?" this year. Perhaps his ambivalence towards the act (Incubus) matched that of most party attendees.

Never once at E3 did it feel like we were months away from the launch of the most powerful gaming system ever. Did anyone talk about PS3 in a positive light coming out of E3? Never mind that, were there people even talking about it? They're launching the Playstation-Freaking-Three and yet the only things people were buzzing about were Halo 3, Spore, and Nintendo's new doohickey.

I'm sure that's related to why Molly Smith, former head of SCEA's PR division, was recently asked to leave the company. Molly may not be a common name to most people, but to those of us in the games press, this was a big deal. I mean, Molly WAS playstation -- perhaps just as much as Ken Kutaragi or Kaz Hirai are PlayStation. She was there from the very begining of Sony Computer Entertainment America (over 10 years ago), and she played a large role in Sony's public relations strategy ever since (which, unfortunately, became somewhat questionable in recent years as sony shifted its attention from the enthusiast press to the hollywood spectacle). Though our day to day relations with her lessened over the years as she climbed the corporate ladder and no doubt had other matters to tend to, I still remember a time when, years ago, I was working super late on a deadline for a story for OPM and I needed an official comment from Sony. I called at 3 am to leave a message for Molly so I could get the jump on the next day -- and she answered her office phone. I'm not sure who was more surprised. Former EGM news editor Chris Johnston once told me he had a nearly identical experience. Granted, that was a long time ago -- few of us spoke to her much in recent years -- but it does serve as a reminder of how entrenched she was at Sony. In any case, people have speculated that her departure had something to do with Peter Dille, formerly of THQ, who was recently brought on to run the company's marketing efforts, or that she took the fall for the disastrous E3 showing and was forced out. Either way, one can't help but be intrigued by the timing. You don't just up and leave before the launch of the PlayStation 3.

That Sony also lost GTA (exclusively, I mean) was pretty substantial. My understanding is that Sony had the game locked down at one point but then balked at the high price and decided not to pay for the exclusivity (maybe Sony figured in a year's time GTA won't be quite the franchise it used to be, or maybe sony figured it would get the game regardless and didn't want to pay). Either way, Microsoft paid several million dollars just for the right to announce the game at its press conference... and it was worth every penny. Peter Moore's tattoo stage antics sent a clear message: It's On.



The loss of rumble in the PS3 controller was another blow. I don't know, Rumble is a feature that seems standard nowadays -- like having analog controls, a pause button, or a wireless connection. Somewhere Sony stated that it couldn't fit rumble and motion sensing technologies into the same control, which seemed like a made-up excuse (the guys at Immersion seemed to agree, saying that it technically shouldn't be a problem -- of course, that would require Sony to pay them quite a sum). Also, PSM posted a funny clip of a third party PS1 controller from 1999 that offered both motion sensing and rumble. What's up now, Sony? Besides, I haven't seen what else Sony have planned for the motion sensing yet, but I'm not sure I'd agree with that tradeoff (I'll stick with the Wii for swinging my controllers around). It's a shame, because without rumble the PS3's dual shock feels extremely light and cheap. Remember how the original PS1 controller felt? Not the first dual shock, but the original one. It feels kind of like that. Which is to say, it's really light and kind of like a toy... unlike the 360's controller which pretty much feels perfect.

It'll be really interesting to see how the price affects the PS3, as there's never really been a precedent for this. Sure, people have tried to point out that no expensive console has done well in the past, but I think that's had more to do with the offering than the price. You look at stuff like 3DO or CDi -- I can tell you, there was a lot more wrong there than just the price. Both could have cost as much as the other platforms at the time and likely wouldn't have done much better. These platforms also didn't have the built up brand equity or games that PlayStation now has. And they didn't come with as much in the box (the 60GB hard drive alone is a gutsy -- but likely beneficial
in the long run -- move on Sony's part).



I'm actually not as concerned with the $600 price at launch -- Sony is going to sell out of the initial million or so units no matter what -- but more of how much Sony will be able to lower the price over the next year or so. Sales of both the PS1 and PS2 didn't really take off until the consoles hit that $200 price point -- it could take more than five years for the PS3 to get that low. It also seems like there's a bit too much riding on Blu-Ray. Sure, some people bought the PS2 because it doubled as a DVD player (a halfway decent one at that), but there really isn't much of a market for high-definition movies yet (especially given that there's no established standard). And you didn't need a brand new (HD) TV to notice what DVDs had to offer over VHS.

Really, for $600 (face it, that's the only viable version) it's looking like you'll get: games that look no better than 360 titles (at least right now) + a Blu-Ray player. Seriously, that's really about it. Now, don't get me completely wrong here -- I certainly don't want to be all doom and gloom for the PS3. I realize that Sony still has a lot of things still going in its favor.

Japan - Xbox 360 doesn't even stand a chance over there. It's sold even worse than the original Xbox. No one cares. Wii will do well, though.

Final Fantasy XIII - Both of them. Don't underestimate this franchise (especially in Japan).

Metal Gear Solid 4 - Like MGS2 was for the PS2, it's one of those games that shows technical superiority (never mind that Kojima said the game was technically possible on 360).



Backwards compatibility - Microsoft struggled with it, and Sony will once again show how it's done (by including the previous generation playstation hardware inside the new platform, now that prices for those parts are so low). Basically, it'll be easy for all the 200 or whatever million playstation console owners to transition to PS3.

Blu-Ray - For people like me (gamers that own HDTVs) it's a good deal. I'm not going to buy a standalone Blu-Ray player...PS3 is going to be my new movie player. And I'll likely buy quite a few Blu-Ray movies (I stopped buying DVDs for the most part about a year ago since I knew I'd just have to end up buying them in high res later).

The PlayStation brand - This should go without saying (especially in Japan and Europe), though Sony's arrogance isn't winning them any favors right now. "We have built up a certain brand equity over time since the launch of PlayStation in 1995 and PS2 in 2000 that the first five million are going to buy it, whatever it is, even it didn't have games," said SCEE's CEO David Reeves. OK David, let's see that -- release it without any games. I dare you.

Perhaps it's this arrogance and/or disconnect from reality that is rubbing people the wrong way. That Kutaragi still thinks the PS3 is too cheap, comparing it to a fine dinner as opposed to cafeteria food, amazes me. Of course, he also looks at it as a computer -- but then again, he did the same thing with the PS2...remember Sony's flat screen PS2 monitor and partnerships with AOL, REAL, Macromedia Flash, etc. that never materialized?. (Though, some suggest that this sort of tactic is all just for tax reasons). I'm sure Sony has great intentions for its new box, but it's still a games machine first. And given that it's $200 more expensive than Microsoft's, and $400 more expensive than Nintendo's, you have to wonder how many people are going to choose it as their first platform of this next generation.




In terms of games, right now the PS3 and 360 are looking pretty evenly matched. It's not like the battle between PS2 and Xbox was -- this time, most of the third party franchises are coming to booth platforms (GTA, Resident Evil, etc.). Even stuff like Assassin's Creed, which was thought to be exclusive to PS3, will likely hit on 360 at the same time. What's crazy is that Sony doesn't even seem to care!. "The days of locking up exclusive content from a third party and having that be key to your strategy is really a dangerous road to go down because I think with the cost of development, not many developers can afford to do exclusivity," said Jack Tretton, Chief Operating Officer of SCEA. "So, really what defines the uniqueness of a platform from a software standpoint are the offerings that you have from first party." Unfortunately for Sony, Microsoft seems to have plenty of answers for Sony's remaining heavy hitters (Gears of War and Halo 3 for MGS4, Fable 2 and Mass Effect for FFXIII, PGR and Forza for Gran Turismo). This isn't like when Microsoft launched Xbox 1 and didn't know what they were doing outside of Halo, this time they have years of experience and really solid games to back them up. Yeah, I'd say PS3 and 360 are pretty evenly matched right now. Except one platform is $200 cheaper.

At that point, it's almost as if Sony are completely banking on brand loyalty and Blu-Ray. Is the PlayStation brand worth $200 (or $400) more to people? How big is the market for high-definition movies going to be? It's an interesting gamble.

It's an interesting dilemma for gamers too. Who is going to buy the PS3? Or, perhaps, who is going to buy a PS3 that isn't going to buy a 360 or Wii first? I'd love to hear some opinions on that.

Sony is assuredly going to lose market share this generation. How much still remains to be seen, and it's going to be interesting to see how it all plays out. That's part of why I love this industry so much -- it's cyclical, sure, but there's never a clear guarantee as to who will take the lead. Even surefire bets, such as the PSP was last year, can turn out to be major disappointments if not handled properly (John just wrote a great blog about that, actually). As a side note, it's interesting how the parallels can be drawn between the Nintendo DS vs. PSP and the Wii vs. PS3 -- the Nintendo platform is cheaper, has a unique control scheme, has worse graphics, etc.... yet is consistantly either ahead of or neck-and-neck with the PSP.

Keep in mind, Microsoft has a 10 million unit lead before PS3 even gets out of the gate. And there are going to be a hell of a lot of gamers buying 360s this holiday season because they couldn't get their hands on a PS3 or Wii. And one thing that many haven't really taken into consideration yet is Microsoft's new Games for Windows initiative. By taking ownership of the PC platform and having become the PC's games platform holder, it has automatically just significantly increased its market share. And with the Live crossover between the PC and Xbox platforms (and mobile), Microsoft's "platform" will extend much further than just the box.

But if there's one thing you don't want to do, it's underestimate Sony and its built-up brand loyalty. Sony are incredibly smart -- if things like Blu-Ray and Cell seem rather superfluous for a games machine now, maybe they'll make perfect sense a year or so down the road. The big question is: Can sony convince consumers of that now? We'll see. Is it possible for Sony to remain the market leader? I think so. But they need to turn things around...and fast. Sony are the masters of the hype machine -- we need the same level of excitement that preceded and then surrounded the PS2's launch. Sony needs another brilliant marketing campaign like the PS2's PlayStation 9 -- something that gives gamers a real sense that Blu-Ray/Cell is the future. Sony needs more "Emotion Engine" -- catchy hyperbole to make us think we're buying something truly revolutionary, no matter how bullshit it really is. Sony needs PS3 on the cover of Time magazine. And really, a lot of this comes down to the games (even if David Reeves doesn't think so). People are looking for: A. games that are exclusive to the PS3 (come on Sony, start talking about stuff like Soul Calibur 4 or World of Warcraft!), B. games that look or play $200 better, C. games that offer experiences only found on the PS3 (maybe that's where Blu-Ray + Cell + motion sensing controller come in). I'm sure they're coming...but how long will we have to wait to see them?



Honestly, I think a lot of PlayStation's success has come from its cool factor -- it's always been the cool system to own. I'm sure a lot of that coolness came from the games themselves, but it was also the brand -- the vibe, the design, the ideals, and so on. Sony needs to recapture that cool with PS3. Stop insulting our intelligence, stop pretending you're something that you're not, and start sharing your true vision for the future of gaming and beyond. People are always more than willing to pay extra for cool, even $200 more, but they need to wholeheartedly believe in what they're supporting. Sony, you need to make PlayStation cool again.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sinion Kabe
Member Avatar
Pitbull Rank
Quote:
 
Honestly, I think a lot of PlayStation's success has come from its cool factor -- it's always been the cool system to own.

Don't speak for me, there. I see it very unlikely that most people are going to buy this console because it is "cool" to own. Most people do actually play games on them.

Posted Image
F A Q

P R O M O T E | C C

T H E | B O O K I E S

A F F I L I A T I O N

S T A F F | W A N T E D

C H A R L I E ' S | S C R A P B O O K

Posted Image

Q P R | F C

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ryan
Member Avatar
Staffordshire Bull Terrier Rank
Sinion Kabe
Jun 26 2006, 12:57 PM
Quote:
 
Honestly, I think a lot of PlayStation's success has come from its cool factor -- it's always been the cool system to own.

Don't speak for me, there. I see it very unlikely that most people are going to buy this console because it is "cool" to own. Most people do actually play games on them.

Ohh the Playstation is soo cool, everyone needs to get one.
Ummm no. The only reason soo many people had a PlayStation is because there was a big gap between when it came out & when the PS2 came out. Yea I agree wiht SK. I dont think there are that many people out there who only have one cause its a "cool" thing to have. I personally bought one to play the games.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create a free forum in seconds.
« Previous Topic · PC/Console Gaming · Next Topic »
Add Reply