Playstation 3 - Failure?

[Abelmisi]

Recently I came across post/"article" on an other forum and I found it a very interesting read, so I thought I would share it with you guys.

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.monroeworld.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10998

 

[hide]

The PS3 Failure: Understanding the Trifecta

 

I've been giving this a lot of thought lately, and I wanted to document my feelings about why I feel the PS3 is failing/failed.

 

 

 

I'll do my best to keep my Nintendo "fanboyism" in check and stick to the straight up facts.

 

 

 

The Three Reasons The PS3 Failed

 

 

 

It seems funny to me that people inside (and outside) of Sony just can't figure out why the PS3 isn't the slaughter house success like it's two predecessors were. After all, on paper, it looked like a home run. The Playstation name (which they thought could do no evil) was even behind it.

 

 

 

What happened? Here are the Big 3 as I see 'em ...

 

 

 

1. Blu-Ray

 

2. Bucking the Marketplace Lifespan

 

3. Blue Waters

 

 

 

While surely these aren't the ONLY factors involved, I think these are the three worth looking at.

 

 

 

Blu-Ray

 

 

 

When it comes to Blu-Ray, there are a couple of things worth noting.

 

 

 

First, Sony hasn't successfully pushed a consumer proprietary format out the door - in fact, the track record of them trying has been woefully depressing from a stockholder point of view. Needless to go into detail, but remember Beta, MiniDisc and UMD to name but a few. To risk the gambit AGAIN on something you've NEVER been able to do successfully reeks of danger. Even Microsoft knew better (they are backing the competitor, HD-DVD) than to put HD-DVD into the 360.

 

 

 

Second, price. Everything - and I mean EVERYTHING - has a consumer price threshhold. No matter HOW amazing a product is ... no matter what a GOOD DEAL it is ... no matter what ... there is a cap to what consumers will pay for a product. It doesn't matter if "it's worth it" on paper - people have a threshhold of expenditure. I'm no psychologist - but there are reasons things are $299 vice $300; it fools consumers. Just like gas costs 2.49 and 8/9's instead of 2.50. There is a game to be played when it comes to consumers and cost. To someone that doesn't really care about HD movies, the difference of a $1000 player and a $600 one (technically a good deal, right???) is insignificant. Just because "it's a great deal" doesn't mean the market will bear EITHER price. Of course, there will always be the high end market, the early adopters and tech fiends that MUST have it - but it was apparent after a couple of months of sales that this market was small and it didn't take long for PS3s to start gathering dust - REGARDLESS of what a "great deal" a $600 Blu-Ray player was. Without trying to kickstart their own format, Sony could have made the PS3 a far more attractive price (at least matched 360) and put more [wagon] in the seats, so to speak.

 

 

 

Blu-ray could have been handled as an addon - just like MS did with the HD-DVD. Product dump the ADDON after the fact and build that much needed consumer install base FIRST. HUGE mistake, and probably Sony's biggest one this generation - regardless if Blu-Ray wins the HD war or not.

 

 

 

Bucking the Marketplace Lifespan

 

 

 

There are all sorts of reasons why a "10 year lifecycle" console was a really REALLY bad idea.

 

 

 

Let's look at it from the AUTOMOBILE point of view. Again, I'm no psychologist, but it doesn't really take one to understand how things work. In the car world, you have a couple of numbers to look at; 2 years and 5 years. These are the common lease and the common loan payoff duration, respectively.

 

 

 

Ever ask yourself why people LEASE cars instead of own them? You put down $4000, pay $500 a month - and at the end of 2 years you have to give it back ...? Who on EARTH would spend that money and walk away with NOTHING at the end? Simple - people that like new cars. Some clever bastard at some big car company found out that 2 years is a magic number - people are willing to pay out the [wagon] to be let go and put into a new car every 2 years (everyone knows someone like this - new car every 2 - just like cell phones).

 

 

 

Five years is the longest someone will let you get a loan for a car for. Why is that? Horrible depreciation? Sure, that's part of it. But I'm sure that same clever bastard above figured out that after the 2 year lease, the next big number is 5 - five years and people want a new car. They work it out so that the car is worth just the right about at the end of that duration to keep the trade ins and what not at a premium advantage for the car dealers.

 

 

 

You'll also notice that warranties follow these same sort of "fixed in stone" numbers too. Makes you wonder ...

 

 

 

The point of all this is - people as a whole have a finite length of time they will put up with something "old". The people have spoken; they want new cars every 2-5 years. The people have also spoken - they want a new video game console every 5 years. So the lifespan has been dictated - so it shall be done. Especially with the graphic [bleep] and physics [bleep]es out there demanding significant incremental upgrades on these features every time.

 

 

 

Let's compare this to the car industry. Let's say GM made a sedan that they claim will run trouble free for 10 years (after the first couple of years - the car needs constant oil changes and maintenance the first couple of years as the engine "breaks in"). It's a damn fine automobile. Pimped out. Feature packed. Runs as good at 150mph as it does 55mph. One kick [wagon] ride. The caveat? The sticker price is $100,000 and as nice of a sedan as it is - it's still a sedan. GM swears you'll come out money ahead on this car when after 10 years, you'll still have a kick [wagon] ride.

 

 

 

Who is in on this? A couple of people that are willing to take the chance that their claim will hold true - 10 years of lifespan with minimal troubles. People who want the latest and best (and most expensive) to show off to the Joneses next door. GM fanboys (the people with a car tattoo of that kid pissing on a Chevy logo). Sure, there is a market. But what about the "regular sedan" market? The bread and butter of the auto industry? Sorry, no matter HOW GREAT that $100k car is, it is simply a no-sale for those people. They don't need a luxury sedan. They need a clean, dependable car that gets good gas mileage to commute it. The Honda Accord is right in the next lot for $16,000. Good rep. Probably get 100,000+ miles out of it. It doesn't add up.

 

 

 

In a few years, there WILL be a Wii 2 ... there will be an Xbox 720 or whatever. There WILL be a DS Lite II. The people have spoken - and most companies have figured it out. When the 720, Wii 2 and DS 2 come out, people will expect (nay, DEMAND) Sony to come out with something new. With a "10 year" console, they have closed themselves off of "the upgrade game" that the consumer is ALREADY expecting (nay, I say WANTING) to play.

 

 

 

It doesn't matter if the technology can survive 10 years (which I don't believe it can anyway - there's Moore's Law to contend with) - people won't wait that long for something new.

 

 

 

Blue Waters

 

 

 

Hey, I thought it was nicer and less biased than "The Wii Effect" or "Wiifect".

 

 

 

Ever heard the joke where the punchline ended with something like ... "[wagon] .... bringing a knife to a gun fight!"?

 

 

 

The last generation (and even the one before) was a Gun Fight. Plain and simple. Nintendo brought a knife (the Gamecube) and lost. No denying there.

 

 

 

This generation, Nintendo quietly decided that instead of bringing a Gun to the small, niched O.K. corral - they would sneak in one night and take the fence down around the O.K. corral and make the battle field bigger. Then, they wouldn't have to bring a Gun - the knife would do just fine when there were more people to fight than just gun slingers.

 

 

 

Before they bothered, though, they tested it out with the DS. Would people accept a "new" way to play even if the system specs didn't blow your socks off? Bet your [wagon] they would. In fact, along with the "real" gamers, other people got interested (the fallen commrades that stopped gaming when it went to more than 2 buttons, for example). Turned out that if you played to "the people" and not to "the gamers", you could make a killing (aka the DS printing money). Once Nintendo was sure this would work, they applied it to the console world with the Wii.

 

 

 

Effectively, Nintendo changed the fight from a Gun Fight to a Knife fight - Sony and MS brought guns to the knife fight. MS wasn't worried about Nintendo at all - and jumped into the next-gen race early and it appeared to initially pay off. Lots more people can afford (and apparently like) knives over guns - and recently, the Wii overtook the 360 (in about 2/3s the time it took MS) as the #1 console of this generation.

 

 

 

MS took it's own strategy of "first to market" - even bringing the gun. They really didn't know what Nintendo was up to. They get a bye this round (literally - see the wave ... BYE BYE!! - sorry, little fanboy in there).

 

 

 

Sony, on the other hand, was FULLY AWARE of what Nintendo was up to. In fact, they mocked and laughed at them - only in the 11th hour to try to haphazardly copy them with the Six Axis controller. Too late.

 

 

 

While it's easy to "blame" Sony on this topic, let's be honest; everyone had their doubts about Nintendo's strategy. Everyone got blown away. Sony is just one of the MANY casualties in that department. However what WAS Sony's fault was the arrogant, foot-in-mouth press releases that inevitably ended up crushing them in the media and around the internet.

 

 

 

Coming from someone who isn't a Microsoft fan and would like nothing more than to see them exorcised from the living room completely, it's almost painful to see Sony blundering through this generation. It's no secret I'm thrilled to death to see Nintendo back on top again, either. However, competition is good for EVERYONE (especially consumers) and Sony appears to be almost enjoying being in the #3 spot after all these years on top.

 

 

 

Prices will fall ... better games will be made ... Sony might even learn something along the way. The question is ... is it already too late?

 

__________________

 

Shane R. Monroe; Father, Husband, Ordinary Guy

 

Host, RetroGaming Radio / Dual Screen Radio

[/hide]

 

 

 

After reading I have a couple of questions to ask you guys. :)

 

 

 

 

 

What are your views on the article, the point the dude made?

 

 

 

What do you think of the PS3 as a system compared to the competitors?

 

 

 

To what point to you agree with the article? Was bringing out the Playstation 3 a market failure?

 

 

 

Feel free to discuss.

[AThousandLies]

This may just be the fanboy in me (and it sickens me to admit that), but I'm not ready to count either console as down and out to Nintendo until several months after GTA IV.

[Nadril]

This may just be the fanboy in me (and it sickens me to admit that), but I'm not ready to count either console as down and out to Nintendo until several months after GTA IV.

 

 

 

The 360 version of GTA IV though is going to be better than the PS3 version though because of extra downloadable content later, so you can count that out.

 

 

 

 

 

The PS3 is very sketchy right now, I compare it to the sega saturn launch IMO. Its just got out beat by the more efficient (to program on and run stuff on) system (360).

 

 

 

 

 

If they go on to make another poor console though in the future it may spell doom for sony.

 

 

 

Really though, its incredibly like the Saturn launch.

[AThousandLies]

This may just be the fanboy in me (and it sickens me to admit that), but I'm not ready to count either console as down and out to Nintendo until several months after GTA IV.

 

 

 

The 360 version of GTA IV though is going to be better than the PS3 version though because of extra downloadable content later, so you can count that out.

 

 

 

 

 

The PS3 is very sketchy right now, I compare it to the sega saturn launch IMO. Its just got out beat by the more efficient (to program on and run stuff on) system (360).

 

 

 

 

 

If they go on to make another poor console though in the future it may spell doom for sony.

 

 

 

Really though, its incredibly like the Saturn launch.

 

 

 

Yeah, that's why I'm going to get a 360. But either way, the game's release will see a peak in sales of both consoles - though more so the 360. FF and GTA fans will get it then, so that will help the PS3. Either way, I expect the 360 to take a firm lead over Wii after its release.

[x1992x]

its doomt i tell ya!!!

 

 

 

 

 

but i still wont one :^D i believe the game engine has a huge potentiel

 

 

 

 

 

ps. i spent 5-7min on getting the "huge" big and the rest small \

[Bloodredsword]

its doomt i tell ya!!!

 

 

 

 

 

but i still wont one :^D i believe the game engine has a huge potentiel

 

 

 

 

 

ps. i spent 5-7min on getting the "huge" big and the rest small \

 

 

 

Of course it has potential...but they arn't doing anything(much) with that potential.

[____]

I have always said that the hardware means [cabbage] if the developers can't utilize it, and given how hard it is to develop for it, i don't think much will come from it than already is.

[sycosis5]

this is coming from an EX PS FANBOY!! The PS3 is a faiolure this is Sony's Virtual Boy

[darkforaster]

I think sony as a whole is a rubbish gaming company. Not only do they lack many decent games (there are a few whom i found enjoyable), but they don't have much of a series which comes with the console. The series they do have, however, are usually on other consoles with a different name.

 

 

 

I'm a big nintendo fan and have got a nintendo wii, and have played an Xbox 360. After looking at the consoles sony have really no ideas of thier own.

 

 

 

The PSP idea was made from the success of the nintendo game-boys. And i'm sure there are tons of other idea snatching. (There was something at the end about it)

 

 

 

Both microsoft and nintendo are better than sony. This proven by the current third-place position in the next-generation of gaming race. All it seems is that the graphics are a little better. There are other changes but nothing major (in my opinion).

 

 

 

I know gamecube wasn't as successful as the others, but to me nintendo have the best games. So it doesn't matter.

 

 

 

Plus Nintendo is much cheaper.

[Medellin]

Potential is over 9000 bro

[unknownmasterofnothing]

not exactly. Ps3 is 1:2 with wiis now in japan. It will be like the gamecube of this generation.

[Necrobean]

not exactly. Ps3 is 1:2 with wiis now in japan. It will be like the gamecube of this generation.

 

 

 

One word; JAPAN.

[Nom]

PS3 just had another price drop. It's $399 now and you get five free blu-ray movies.

 

 

 

I would say it's failing pretty hard.

[llamster]

It did not do as well as expected, but I don't think it's a total failure.

 

 

 

I do think that Sony should have stuck with DVDs.

[adam_ross0]

I'd say the Ps3 is a failure. There are a few things they could do to redeem it...but at the moment, it is a failure. I agree with the article.

[arizark]

hopefully with ps3 failing squaresoft will make games for all the consoles now

[underu2000]

I think sony as a whole is a rubbish gaming company. Not only do they lack many decent games (there are a few whom i found enjoyable), but they don't have much of a series which comes with the console. The series they do have, however, are usually on other consoles with a different name.

 

Only one thing to say. What in heaven's name are you talking about?

 

. The Playstation doesn't have a series to accompany its systems? Have you ever heard of the ps2, and its 1+ billion units of software sold? To name some, metal gear, fintal fantasy, rachet and clank, devil may cry, jak and daxter, kingdom hearts, ace combat, grand theft auto and tekken? I can understand that the ps3 may not have many games, but assuming that the sony consoles as a whole were a failure...is sacrilege.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm a big nintendo fan and have got a nintendo wii, and have played an Xbox 360. After looking at the consoles sony have really no ideas of thier own.

 

That explains it. But no, the ps3 may not be the most innovative console to date, but the sheer amount of risk sony took by going with the tech of the ps3 makes up for that. And really, ever heard of dual thumbsticks? Or the first rumble controllers?

 

It does get annoying when people see the Wii and assume motion sensing is the ultimate invention and makes nintendo the most original company ever. Jeez, give sony some credit.

 

 

 

The PSP idea was made from the success of the nintendo game-boys. And i'm sure there are tons of other idea snatching. (There was something at the end about it)

 

The psp is not necessarily a rip-off of the gameboys. It is logical to think that, seeing that the only handhelds in the market were from nintendo, and sony decided to make some competition. Much like microsoft made the first xbox, and sony with the first playstation.

 

 

 

Both microsoft and nintendo are better than sony. This proven by the current third-place position in the next-generation of gaming race. All it seems is that the graphics are a little better. There are other changes but nothing major (in my opinion).

 

Being more pro-microsoft than anything, i won't disagree that sony is doing a bad job. It doesn't mean they're bad or anything. It's beyond me how the wii is selling how it is, but regardless, it doesn't establish anything. The next-gen race isn't decided yet, not by a long shot.

 

 

 

I know gamecube wasn't as successful as the others, but to me nintendo have the best games. So it doesn't matter.

 

Somewhat contradictory, seeing that the gamecube was unsuccessful because of its lack of good games. I would say the Wii doesn't really have much in the way of blockbuster titles either, but my argument is null because of the wii sales figures.

 

 

 

Plus Nintendo is much cheaper.

 

Figures, hm?

[ReapMe]

wait til some exclusives like metal gear solid 4, final fantasy 13 and vs, god of war 3, gran turismo 5, the inevitable kingdom hearts 3 come out. these sequels of some of the best selling ps2 games have not been released

 

 

 

nearly 2 years after the 360's release, it comes out with it's best selling game halo 3 and ps3 hasn't even broke it's 1 yr b-day and people are calling it a failure. it did have a whole year head start on them

 

 

 

well compared to the wii, the 360 and ps3 could be called a failure since it came out later than both and is beating both of them in sales and will continue to dominate them. even with a year behind they caught up and surpassed the 360 in sales and haven't even released super smash brothers which will probably beat halo 3's sales records

[Spazbot]

PS3 sucks...no explanation needed. ( i like microsoft the most but have a 360 and wii)

 

anyways if any explanation is needed, just watch this video, which everyone has probably already seen:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMVoaHTWFDs

[foolgool]

This may just be the fanboy in me (and it sickens me to admit that), but I'm not ready to count either console as down and out to Nintendo until several months after GTA IV.

Of course, Nintendo has a few megahits coming out in the next 6 months. Super Mario Galaxy and Super Smash Bros Brawl, for example. It ain't over yet, but it's getting there.

[limpbizkit]

PS3 sucks...no explanation needed. ( i like microsoft the most but have a 360 and wii)

 

anyways if any explanation is needed, just watch this video, which everyone has probably already seen:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMVoaHTWFDs

 

 

 

stfu fanboy.

 

 

 

Ontoppic: wait for the exclusives then say its a failure.

[Verminox]

They have stopped making the 60gb models as people were buying this then playing there old PS2 games, and not buying the PS3 ones. They have no realesed the 40gb model which dosn't have backwards compatability hoping that epople will now buy the PS3 games and not wait for ones to come out. They also lowered the price to help lure people into buying it as its the same price as xbox 360.

[henman888]

I don't really know there are two things that could happen:

 

1. Sony fails to sell enough consoles. :(

 

2. Sony uses the 40 Gb to combat the 360 and if it works the PS3 will gradualy catch up. :D

 

I thought the PS3 may not work but when i heard about the 40GB i thought different. If sony can continue to work on it and advertise it.

 

And they should try to destroy microsoft like microsoft is trying to destroy the PS3 by trying to take its exclusives and other things.

 

One last thing...

 

You are still arguing about games!!!!!!!!!!!!! :evil:

 

There is some very fun games on the PS3.

 

I don't want to hear your rubbish about no good games!

[adam_ross0]

I don't really know there are two things that could happen:

 

1. Sony fails to sell enough consoles. :(

 

2. Sony uses the 40 Gb to combat the 360 and if it works the PS3 will gradualy catch up. :D

 

I thought the PS3 may not work but when i heard about the 40GB i thought different. If sony can continue to work on it and advertise it.

 

And they should try to destroy microsoft like microsoft is trying to destroy the PS3 by trying to take its exclusives and other things.

 

One last thing...

 

You are still arguing about games!!!!!!!!!!!!! :evil:

 

There is some very fun games on the PS3.

 

I don't want to hear your rubbish about no good games!

 

 

 

That's the whole thing though. A lot of the good games on Ps3 can also be found on the 360. As for Microsoft trying to take the Ps3's exclusives, even though I dont like Microsoft..they're not trying to take exclusives. The 360 is easier to develop for, so the developers are making the games for the 360 also.

[megakiller32]

I read another article saying Sony were saying

 

"This year dosn't matter, next year and the year after that is when we plan to be a hit."

 

Yeah, and so will the competitors. I try to be as unbiased and sympathetic to sony as possible, but they're not even trying anymore.....

 

Anyway, HD doesnt matter to me personally, i dont even have an hd tv. :oops: