The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I feel like saying this again:
Playstation 3 has been approached and developed badly.
Let's look at some history:
*The Neo Geo was only partly successful as it was only really available to the rich whereas Sega's and Nintendo's offerings of the time were widely purchased.
So as pricing goes history shows that when you have not just one but two cheaper rivals your machine is only going to be moderately successful. Now as 360 titles drop significantly lower due to the established userbase and the Wii's offerings also very reasonably priced the potentially very expensive PS3 games may make many leave it well alone.
*Nintendo tried to force consumers into using a format most didn't want to (N64 carts).
Here we see that going doggedly with a format doesn't always work, as we can see from Sony's many failed attempts to re-create the cultural effect of the CD. Sony are also splitting their focus by having a blu-ray drive AND downloadable media with all versions of the PS3 - this is not a smart way to launch a machine (singular un-confusing visions sell better).
*Sega marketed the hell out of the Saturn by buying up entire ad breaks, the Saturn did not sell well.
Here we see an established console company falter by believing their own hype. This seems very applicable to the PS3 at the moment.
*A console company that is set in it's ways is unable to prevent a newer rival with a more modern approach from taking over as the industry leader.
Nintendo lost a lot of ground to Sony due to their inflexible business practices now it seems the same may be happening to Sony as Microsoft take a 'Chelsea' approach to the console business by going after exclusives and countering or equaling everything Sony tries to do.
*A console released later goes up against a similar console with an established user base and gets less sales as a result.
There are numerous examples of this but the N64's troubled history seems to fit the best.
Looking back at all the things that history has shown could possibly make a console falter it seems that Sony has ticked every single box.
There maybe trouble ahead but while there's bluelight and music and love and romance... let's whip-up a marketing trance. :D
Edit: Obviously this is a simplified version because I didn't feel like going into that much detail AGAIN and I've had no sleep for 24 hours so any factual inaccuracies can be blamed on that! :D
Playstation 3 has been approached and developed badly.
Let's look at some history:
*The Neo Geo was only partly successful as it was only really available to the rich whereas Sega's and Nintendo's offerings of the time were widely purchased.
So as pricing goes history shows that when you have not just one but two cheaper rivals your machine is only going to be moderately successful. Now as 360 titles drop significantly lower due to the established userbase and the Wii's offerings also very reasonably priced the potentially very expensive PS3 games may make many leave it well alone.
*Nintendo tried to force consumers into using a format most didn't want to (N64 carts).
Here we see that going doggedly with a format doesn't always work, as we can see from Sony's many failed attempts to re-create the cultural effect of the CD. Sony are also splitting their focus by having a blu-ray drive AND downloadable media with all versions of the PS3 - this is not a smart way to launch a machine (singular un-confusing visions sell better).
*Sega marketed the hell out of the Saturn by buying up entire ad breaks, the Saturn did not sell well.
Here we see an established console company falter by believing their own hype. This seems very applicable to the PS3 at the moment.
*A console company that is set in it's ways is unable to prevent a newer rival with a more modern approach from taking over as the industry leader.
Nintendo lost a lot of ground to Sony due to their inflexible business practices now it seems the same may be happening to Sony as Microsoft take a 'Chelsea' approach to the console business by going after exclusives and countering or equaling everything Sony tries to do.
*A console released later goes up against a similar console with an established user base and gets less sales as a result.
There are numerous examples of this but the N64's troubled history seems to fit the best.
Looking back at all the things that history has shown could possibly make a console falter it seems that Sony has ticked every single box.
There maybe trouble ahead but while there's bluelight and music and love and romance... let's whip-up a marketing trance. :D
Edit: Obviously this is a simplified version because I didn't feel like going into that much detail AGAIN and I've had no sleep for 24 hours so any factual inaccuracies can be blamed on that! :D
Dringo wrote:
> I agree almost entirely there Hedfix. But don't get carried away
> about the N64 "doing badly"... it may have been the
> moment Nintendo fell from their perch but the N64 was still a
> huge success (thanks mainly to Pokemon, Mario, Zelda and Rare).
Indeed, but it was still a fall that prompted a serious re-think from Nintendo.
>
> Also, the point about a console going up against a similar rival
> with a head start doesn't always work... take for example the
> Dreamcast.
True, but the Saturn had already failed. Interesting to note that the DC had some odd technology and also suffered from a lack of decent exclusives for quite some time.
>
> The software point is the key one I feel. You may re-call
> Hiroshi Yamauchi (ex-president of Nintendo) stating that they
> "don't need Square or Final Fantasy"... similar things
> were being said by Harrison about GTA at E3... and we all know
> what happened to that arrogant Nintendo.
Indeed, I'm also wondering which company is taking less of a cut from each game.
>
> Yet the 360 hasn't had the best of starts either. It has shipped
> a little over 7 million this year and they have a target of 10
> million by the end of 2006, a target unlikely to be reached...
> and by not reaching it then the 360 in its first year hasn't
> done as well as the original X-box!
Indeed early days but the userbase lead is currently considerable which should help them no-end.
>
> Although, unlike the PS3, the 360 system is now profitable due
> to falling costs of its hardware.
And a common-sense approach where the console extras are not built-in from day 1. :D
> I agree almost entirely there Hedfix. But don't get carried away
> about the N64 "doing badly"... it may have been the
> moment Nintendo fell from their perch but the N64 was still a
> huge success (thanks mainly to Pokemon, Mario, Zelda and Rare).
Indeed, but it was still a fall that prompted a serious re-think from Nintendo.
>
> Also, the point about a console going up against a similar rival
> with a head start doesn't always work... take for example the
> Dreamcast.
True, but the Saturn had already failed. Interesting to note that the DC had some odd technology and also suffered from a lack of decent exclusives for quite some time.
>
> The software point is the key one I feel. You may re-call
> Hiroshi Yamauchi (ex-president of Nintendo) stating that they
> "don't need Square or Final Fantasy"... similar things
> were being said by Harrison about GTA at E3... and we all know
> what happened to that arrogant Nintendo.
Indeed, I'm also wondering which company is taking less of a cut from each game.
>
> Yet the 360 hasn't had the best of starts either. It has shipped
> a little over 7 million this year and they have a target of 10
> million by the end of 2006, a target unlikely to be reached...
> and by not reaching it then the 360 in its first year hasn't
> done as well as the original X-box!
Indeed early days but the userbase lead is currently considerable which should help them no-end.
>
> Although, unlike the PS3, the 360 system is now profitable due
> to falling costs of its hardware.
And a common-sense approach where the console extras are not built-in from day 1. :D
I agree almost entirely there Hedfix. But don't get carried away about the N64 "doing badly"... it may have been the moment Nintendo fell from their perch but the N64 was still a huge success (thanks mainly to Pokemon, Mario, Zelda and Rare).
Also, the point about a console going up against a similar rival with a head start doesn't always work... take for example the Dreamcast.
The software point is the key one I feel. You may re-call Hiroshi Yamauchi (ex-president of Nintendo) stating that they "don't need Square or Final Fantasy"... similar things were being said by Harrison about GTA at E3... and we all know what happened to that arrogant Nintendo.
Yet the 360 hasn't had the best of starts either. It has shipped a little over 7 million this year and they have a target of 10 million by the end of 2006, a target unlikely to be reached... and by not reaching it then the 360 in its first year hasn't done as well as the original X-box!
Although, unlike the PS3, the 360 system is now profitable due to falling costs of its hardware.
Also, the point about a console going up against a similar rival with a head start doesn't always work... take for example the Dreamcast.
The software point is the key one I feel. You may re-call Hiroshi Yamauchi (ex-president of Nintendo) stating that they "don't need Square or Final Fantasy"... similar things were being said by Harrison about GTA at E3... and we all know what happened to that arrogant Nintendo.
Yet the 360 hasn't had the best of starts either. It has shipped a little over 7 million this year and they have a target of 10 million by the end of 2006, a target unlikely to be reached... and by not reaching it then the 360 in its first year hasn't done as well as the original X-box!
Although, unlike the PS3, the 360 system is now profitable due to falling costs of its hardware.
[URL]http://uk.gamespot.com/news/6162235.html[/URL]
Ah, one that I missed.
Apparently Sony were too slow in tying up the exclusivity of certain titles (including GTA IV) so the publishers decided to port them to the 360 aswell.
Haven't got a historical version of this one, it's new and it's extremely dumb. I suppose the nearest thing is when Robert Maxwell thought he owned the rights to Tetris and the Russians gave the rights to Nintendo instead.
Errrr.
Ah, one that I missed.
Apparently Sony were too slow in tying up the exclusivity of certain titles (including GTA IV) so the publishers decided to port them to the 360 aswell.
Haven't got a historical version of this one, it's new and it's extremely dumb. I suppose the nearest thing is when Robert Maxwell thought he owned the rights to Tetris and the Russians gave the rights to Nintendo instead.
Errrr.
I feel like saying this again:
Playstation 3 has been approached and developed badly.
Let's look at some history:
*The Neo Geo was only partly successful as it was only really available to the rich whereas Sega's and Nintendo's offerings of the time were widely purchased.
So as pricing goes history shows that when you have not just one but two cheaper rivals your machine is only going to be moderately successful. Now as 360 titles drop significantly lower due to the established userbase and the Wii's offerings also very reasonably priced the potentially very expensive PS3 games may make many leave it well alone.
*Nintendo tried to force consumers into using a format most didn't want to (N64 carts).
Here we see that going doggedly with a format doesn't always work, as we can see from Sony's many failed attempts to re-create the cultural effect of the CD. Sony are also splitting their focus by having a blu-ray drive AND downloadable media with all versions of the PS3 - this is not a smart way to launch a machine (singular un-confusing visions sell better).
*Sega marketed the hell out of the Saturn by buying up entire ad breaks, the Saturn did not sell well.
Here we see an established console company falter by believing their own hype. This seems very applicable to the PS3 at the moment.
*A console company that is set in it's ways is unable to prevent a newer rival with a more modern approach from taking over as the industry leader.
Nintendo lost a lot of ground to Sony due to their inflexible business practices now it seems the same may be happening to Sony as Microsoft take a 'Chelsea' approach to the console business by going after exclusives and countering or equaling everything Sony tries to do.
*A console released later goes up against a similar console with an established user base and gets less sales as a result.
There are numerous examples of this but the N64's troubled history seems to fit the best.
Looking back at all the things that history has shown could possibly make a console falter it seems that Sony has ticked every single box.
There maybe trouble ahead but while there's bluelight and music and love and romance... let's whip-up a marketing trance. :D
Edit: Obviously this is a simplified version because I didn't feel like going into that much detail AGAIN and I've had no sleep for 24 hours so any factual inaccuracies can be blamed on that! :D
Playstation 3 has been approached and developed badly.
Let's look at some history:
*The Neo Geo was only partly successful as it was only really available to the rich whereas Sega's and Nintendo's offerings of the time were widely purchased.
So as pricing goes history shows that when you have not just one but two cheaper rivals your machine is only going to be moderately successful. Now as 360 titles drop significantly lower due to the established userbase and the Wii's offerings also very reasonably priced the potentially very expensive PS3 games may make many leave it well alone.
*Nintendo tried to force consumers into using a format most didn't want to (N64 carts).
Here we see that going doggedly with a format doesn't always work, as we can see from Sony's many failed attempts to re-create the cultural effect of the CD. Sony are also splitting their focus by having a blu-ray drive AND downloadable media with all versions of the PS3 - this is not a smart way to launch a machine (singular un-confusing visions sell better).
*Sega marketed the hell out of the Saturn by buying up entire ad breaks, the Saturn did not sell well.
Here we see an established console company falter by believing their own hype. This seems very applicable to the PS3 at the moment.
*A console company that is set in it's ways is unable to prevent a newer rival with a more modern approach from taking over as the industry leader.
Nintendo lost a lot of ground to Sony due to their inflexible business practices now it seems the same may be happening to Sony as Microsoft take a 'Chelsea' approach to the console business by going after exclusives and countering or equaling everything Sony tries to do.
*A console released later goes up against a similar console with an established user base and gets less sales as a result.
There are numerous examples of this but the N64's troubled history seems to fit the best.
Looking back at all the things that history has shown could possibly make a console falter it seems that Sony has ticked every single box.
There maybe trouble ahead but while there's bluelight and music and love and romance... let's whip-up a marketing trance. :D
Edit: Obviously this is a simplified version because I didn't feel like going into that much detail AGAIN and I've had no sleep for 24 hours so any factual inaccuracies can be blamed on that! :D