Where to Trim Competition- Sony

[gamesource]

Warning: This was a quick post I threw on the 1Up.com forums after listening to the 1Up Yours! podcast. I expect a possible debate is more likely to spring up there, for those who are curious.

In the most recent episode of 1Up Yours!, John and the gang raised the point that the games industry is going through a sort of inverse cycle wherein their is a growing number of competitors who are simultaneously raising the price of products.

Two main ideas were offered for solving the problem:
1. Have one player demonstrate significant market leadership to allow developers to have a central development "hub". In the last couple of generations, this role was played by Sony.

2. Have one market dominator/one console and the PC. The closest we've probably had is the mid 1980s when the NES was launched. This marketplace is basically the first option to the nth degree. People are either homebrewing PC/Apple II/Mac games or are developing creative titles for only one system.

I feel as though there is one option left to consider, and it is the most likely of all possible situations. Three competitors, with three seperate target markets, all of whom can prosper in their respective niches.

-The hardcore gamers: Wii/Nintendo. These customers are gamers who are always looking for creativity and fun, which Nintendo is happy to oblige with.
-The casual, larger market: Microsoft. It's a large public company with a well-known brand, a massive cash cache, and the right direction for getting game developers to commune and support the XBox 360.
-The tech gamers: PC. Soopin' up with the latest graphics chips has always been the realm of the advanced PC gamers. Not necessarily hardcore gamers, but tech junkies who push processors to their limits.

And this, of course, leaves out Sony. The moral of my topic is that Sony is the ONE company in the industry today that is not needed.

-The Sony brand is losing its place. When the PS1 launched, the Nintendo brand was dwindling due to both a vicious Sega war and the various problems surrounding the 64. Sony offered a brand of a company considered "large" or perhaps as a "conglomerate". But now? An even larger, shadier Wizard of Oz is behind that curtain, and his name is Bill Gates.

-Sony is the only option with anything to lose. I'll take this with a step-by-step case. Microsoft will not cease producing game consoles simply because they can afford to do it, and are actually succeeding in growing their visibility. Nintendo, well, they have an army of bajillions of Asians who are willing to fight all offenders. It can be assumed that it would take a tidal wave on Kyoto and Tokyo to remove the big N from our industry. Sony has neither a solid enough fan base or the cash to continually support what could potentially turn into a losing battle should Microsoft continue to play an strong, agressive game.

-High technology is not a game Sony can win. Personal Computers, particularly the ones running Windows, are the realm of the tech obsessed, not consoles. Attempting to take the high road as a game console will be met by opposition from the casual consoles and the prestigious PCs.

This post has been largely negative towards Sony. Don't misread what I'm trying to say. If Sony is able to find a way to drop hardware and software prices in the coming years, is able to show that they have the continued support of third parties, and that their continued competition in the console market will keep gaming from stagnating or being monopolized, then I am completely pro-Sony. Heck, I've owned both Sony consoles and the PSP.

My personal problem is that Sony has not yet shown that they can lead an industry in the face of real adversity, and from what I've seen, they've only misstepped and cracked under increasing pressure from both directions. This can not continue to happen.

Good luck Sony. You're the only player who can lose, and it's solely up to you to not let that happen.

---
Logan Frederick
News Room Contributor
Escapist Magazine (http://escapistmagazine.com)

[PMS HateMaker]

What exactly was the point of posting this in the PS2/PS3 forums? To start an argument? This seems just, what's the word I'm looking for. Inflammatory? Extremely biased? Would it not have been more logical to post this in the Xbox forums?

[H2O SkywalkerX]

and this isn't biased?

Microsoft lost billions on the xbox, and are still currently losing money on the 360. 360's aren't going to sell anymore, everyone that wants one, has one. there are at least 10 at every store here.

oh and lets not forget, sony hasn't even released their system yet? even though it is significantly more powerful than the 360.

http://playsyde.com/news_3750_en.html just watch those videos.

my opinion, which right now, isn't going to be biased, is that game right there, looks better than any 360 game GeOW, r6:v. and that is a ps3 launch game, just wait for 6 months to a year later, what else can we expect?

Cliffy B has already said that GeOW is using the 360's full potential, so is that all the 360 can spit out? and if so, why wouldn't you get a ps3? it is waaay more powerful, the graphics are better, its cheaper, and no, sony isn't the "devil" as some may think.

and you said nintendo has japan, so does sony, microsoft has barely sold any 360's in japan.

Sony has neither a solid enough fan base or the cash to continually support what could potentially turn into a losing battle should Microsoft continue to play an strong, agressive game.


the fan base of sony is, believe it or not, huge, but the mass of them, don't go online like the 360 owners. microsoft is scared, they aren't playing strong, they know the ps3 is going to put a huge dent in their "profit" the 360 already went down in price, what does that show?

on the topic of price. people always compare the 400$ to the 600$, but why? the ps3 500$ version is the exact same as the 400$ 360...except for the additional blue-ray player, and the free online. also, tack on that 99$ wifi adapter for the 360, the 199$ HD player, and the 60 GB hard dri...oh wait, there isn't one, what's that? 700$ for the equivalent of the 600$ ps3, so w/e is you're own. but the ps3 will not fail.


don't post this biased crap, if anything, like hatemaker said, it belongs in the 360 forum, not here where it's an obvious bashing to the ps3.

and here's some fanboy logic for everyone to enjoy.

this is the M$ fanbase ;)
http://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=25083860

[Rip]

I'd like to pose a serious question to you two, would it be physically possible to present a discussion on why one believes a console to be better or worse than the 360 or PS3 without either of you instantly becoming extremely defensive? I'm just curious because I'm beginning to believe people who are very opinionated when it comes to a console manufacturer are physically incapable of having a rational debate on the subject, no matter which console you believe to be (or believe will be) the best.

[PMS HateMaker]

Yes Rip, it would be possible to have a non-defensive discussion about differences between the 360, PS3, and the Wii. However, the people posting these topics in the PS2/PS3 section are not looking for a friendly debate about new technology, they're posting threads for the express purpose of informing us why Sony and thus the PS3 are obsolete as is the case above, (even though it hasn't been released yet) that they/it sucks, could never even come close to the 360 or what not. For people who glean a lot of enjoyment from their Sony toys that's really insulting.

Personally, I think the 360 is awesome. I've watched friend's play it and the graphics are sweet, the games look great, and if I could afford a lot of high-tech consoles I'd totally buy one. However, I'm not rich and I prefer Playstation so I stick with what I know and like.

It would never occur to me to go into a 360 forum and post a topic like "PS3 is going to put the 360 out of Business" or something equally one-sided. Frankly, its rude and if you are unable to see our point I sincerely apologize. I wrote a huge blog about this very topic on 1UP yesterday view here (http://www.1up.com/do/blogEntry?bId=7577716&publicUserId=5771578)

[H2O SkywalkerX]

I'd like to pose a serious question to you two, would it be physically possible to present a discussion on why one believes a console to be better or worse than the 360 or PS3 without either of you instantly becoming extremely defensive? I'm just curious because I'm beginning to believe people who are very opinionated when it comes to a console manufacturer are physically incapable of having a rational debate on the subject, no matter which console you believe to be (or believe will be) the best.

like hatemaker said

Yes Rip, it would be possible to have a non-defensive discussion about differences between the 360, PS3, and the Wii. However, the people posting these topics in the PS2/PS3 section are not looking for a friendly debate about new technology, they're posting threads for the express purpose of informing us why Sony and thus the PS3 are obsolete as is the case above, (even though it hasn't been released yet) that they/it sucks, could never even come close to the 360 or what not. For people who glean a lot of enjoyment from their Sony toys that's really insulting.

Personally, I think the 360 is awesome. I've watched friend's play it and the graphics are sweet, the games look great, and if I could afford a lot of high-tech consoles I'd totally buy one. However, I'm not rich and I prefer Playstation so I stick with what I know and like.

It would never occur to me to go into a 360 forum and post a topic like "PS3 is going to put the 360 out of Business" or something equally one-sided. Frankly, its rude and if you are unable to see our point I sincerely apologize. I wrote a huge blog about this very topic on 1UP yesterday view here (http://www.1up.com/do/blogEntry?bId=7577716&publicUserId=5771578)

this isn't really here for a debate.

but, i did address his post, in my post, so technically, i did in a way start a debate. of course it was a defensive post, but it also address things he had said.

but why not get defensive when someone is trying to say sony is out of the race completely and is going to fail, because M$ is "better". even though that isn't true,

[asphix]

What exactly was the point of posting this in the PS2/PS3 forums? To start an argument? This seems just, what's the word I'm looking for. Inflammatory? Extremely biased? Would it not have been more logical to post this in the Xbox forums?

Just because someone has some thoughts to share on the Ps3 that aren't positive doesnt mean they dont fit the context. While I agree, this post is concerning the industry as a whole and I can understand questioning why it was placed here, you can also argue the point of, "why not?" It does include the ps3 and he is trying to constructively address issues through his post relative to both the ps3 and the console/pc/gaming industry in general.

Don't let the fanboys drag you down, when you become as pessimistic and flamatory as they, you lose much of your credibility and many an open minded and worthy ear. As long as he is expressing opinions based and backed up by rational thought then there is nothing wrong with it.

Now on to my thoughts:

And this, of course, leaves out Sony. The moral of my topic is that Sony is the ONE company in the industry today that is not needed.

I could not disagree more. While its my personal preference to be impartial to Sony and their products, they are VERY MUCH needed for this industry. I have been very firm in my stance against a lot of the design and marketing choices behind the PLAYSTATION3, however when hearing people speculate Sony bleeding dry due to the battery recall, slow to profit PLAYSTATION3 and various other issues I seriously get scared. I feel an emptiness in the pit of my stomach akin to what you would feel upon hearing of someone in your immediate family dieing or coming down with a horrible disease/illness.

The industry needs Sony, now more than ever for several reasons:

1. Microsoft loves a good game of Monopoly. Want an example of how they practice business in such a postition? Look at their major changes in Windows Vista along with their WGA initiative.

2. More players = more competition which means more bang for your buck in the console arena. Without competition we wouldnt have 1080p on the x360 and I highly doubt we would have an HD-DVD add-on for the x360. This is just naming a few.

3. More players = more perspectives on what is possible. While I do believe sony is critically out of touch with what their traditional consumer base wants, they are certainly working hard in their own direction. Again, their interests are more in your face than the competitions.. but if you think Microsoft or Nintendo cares more about the customer than Sony then you need to go take some classes in business 101. They're all corporations and while some are more transparent than others, they all have the same end goal in sight.

Have one market dominator/one console

While this may solve the issue of software price, I cant see this being a good thing at all and hardly desireable. This would result in low software prices due to high competition on a single platform but the drawback would likely be hardware stagnation and a slow down in development of new and innovative features. I rather pay more for games and see competition both on the software and hardware level, than see lower prices of software.

Which brings me to my last and final point. Its my opinion that the Wii will be fun.... but I seriously doubt it will be as huge as many of us think or hope it will be. Official specs of the broadway CPU were picked up on today according to what I've read and it is literally a die shrink and clock speed bump in comparison to the Gekko (G-cube). No new features.. its literally a GC 1.5

Thats not bad, but is a controller alone enough to push a console? I'm sick of people comparing the potential sucess of the Wii with that of the DS.. Its like apples to oranges... the Mobile market is completely differen than the console market as is proof by Nintendo's continual dominance of the portable market for the last 10 years yet their steady decline in the console arena. DO NOT draw comparisons between the two.. its about as effective as comparing a sport car to a motorcycle.

In closing, to add some perspective to my thoughts on the wii check out this article: http://arstechnica.com/staff/fatbits.ars/2006/10/22/5703

Please note, it does not touch on if the Wii will suceed or fail.. just brings to light a very important issue... it is breaking the tradition not only in introducing a new control scheme.. but its the first console in history of video-games to recieve nothing more than a slight clock increase and a few tweaks in the hardware sector.

Also, read this for a more realistic review of the Wii that does a good job of getting past the whole hype and "OMG AWESOME" buzz that seems to cloud peoples judgement
http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/2006/10/26/Nintendo_Wii_Hands_On/1.html

why the bit on Nintendo? How does it relate? I'm pointing out that even the console which has the greatest public appeal at the moment has SERIOUS downsides that arent being recognized.. its the rose colored glasses syndrome. The industry needs each of the three major players.. and honestly, in a perfect world we would still have SEGA developing hardware as well.

Software prices are the least of our worries.

p.s. sorry for any horrible spelling or grammar... i'm at work and really dont have the time to revise and make sure it all makes sense and looks good.

[PMS HateMaker]

Excellent Post, Asphix and I agree with your opinions on competition and the generation of new ideas created by competition.

Just because someone has some thoughts to share on the Ps3 that aren't positive doesnt mean they dont fit the context. While I agree, this post is concerning the industry as a whole and I can understand questioning why it was placed here, you can also argue the point of, "why not?" It does include the ps3 and he is trying to constructively address issues through his post relative to both the ps3 and the console/pc/gaming industry in general.

Don't let the fanboys drag you down, when you become as pessimistic and flamatory as they, you lose much of your credibility and many an open minded and worthy ear. As long as he is expressing opinions based and backed up by rational thought then there is nothing wrong with it.


The context of this forum as stated via the Title is PS2/PS3 Games. I'm assuming (and I could be wrong...you know what they say about assuming) that includes PS2/PS3 consoles as well. While Mr. Frederick's post did in fact include the PS3, the stated purpose of his post was to explain why Sony isn't needed anymore. Again, as I said in a previous post, to people who love their PS2 games and are eagerly anticipating the PS3 this is insulting.

I've made no rude remarks and as I was responding to a post I found flammatory I don't see how any "credibility" could be lost.

[Pantslesswonder]

While I may agree that Sony might not pull out this generation with their PS3, that does not mean I dont like them. I am a gamer at heart. System does not matter to me, as long as I can play good games. At the current, online games are my favorite, and the 360 pulls them off splendidly. I cannot discount the PS3 or Wii, because they arent out yet. I havent played them, therefor I cant make a personal judgment. I'd say the same goes for most in this thread. Dont judge the system till you actually get to play it, and its own killer apps.

[asphix]

Sorry, what I meant by credibility is, at least from my point of view, as soon as I see someone jump on the hate wagon or get overly upset over something I tune out their posts. Credibility was certainly the wrong word, I wrote that post in a hurry.

The initial poster, while currently showing a bias against Sony, posted with a formulated opinion on how he sees the current generation of consoles. If you agree, say so. If you don't, say so.. or even ignore the post all together. That way things dont get overly complex as is typical whenever Supersayan or any overly opinionated irrational people of similar nature post. Just because one person thinks Sony is horrible and isnt needed doesnt mean its true. Sony wont be going anywhere and I personally suspect they are still in a good position for this upcoming generation once their price drops and the novelty of the Wii wears off.

Again, only time will tell and nothing is certain as of right now. In reality, its all speculation until Q4 2007 / Q1 2008 when the outcome will start to become clear.

[gamesource]

Whoa, this topic sort of blew up while I was gone. Allow me to respond.

-I'm not anti-Sony. I like my Resident Evils, Shadow of the Colossus games, and my collection of PS2/PS1 titles. The post is not aimed to be a deliberate assault on the PS3.

-I think the context of the post plays an important part in understanding what I'm trying to say in the original post. The week old episode of 1Up Yours! directly posed the question as to how the gaming industry could or should be trimmed of competition because the current crop of competitors are placing to much pressure on the third parties through additional development/porting costs, risk-taking, and rising costs of innovative titles. My post was in response to that question.

-The point of the original topic was this: Sony, while a loved and still market-leading company, has larger weaknesses than either Microsoft or Nintendo. So, in response to the 1Up Yours! question on how and which hardware manufacturer would be removed from the industry, I would say Sony simply because they are the only ones who can.

Why?

-Microsoft: They can afford a fight much longer and tougher than Sony can.
-Nintendo: They're profitable, and show no signs of losing that edge. Market share doesn't affect them because their bottom line is still always in the black.

-Repeated for effect: I like Sony, I'm just worried about their grounding in the next ten years in the industry.

[asphix]

tthat clarification makes a lot of sense. Also, Nintendo will always remain profitable due to franchises that keep people coming back for more. Its what always has sold their systems and always will and its why they've been around as long as they have been. No other console has had first party franchises to rival nintendos.

[ninja]

Umm.....whatever happened to just playing great games? Who cares what system is better or whose winning or what not. Just hope there's more great games because of this.