Support NeoGAF

[Xavien]

I sorta feel bad for Square....then again...not really.

I dont see Ps3 outright failing/pulling the plug. sony has WAY too much money to let that happen. Thats the main problem this gen. two companies subsidized tech that the market isnt ready for, and the losses would normally put an end two these two premature consoles, but their parent companies have enough money to give the appearance that the consoles are succeeding.

Sony doesn't have loads of money, Stringer was brought in because Sony had tonnes of debt and he managed to turn Sony around, but that's all been sunk by Kuturagi and SCEI. They are still tight for cash and they can't endure a $2 Billion loss from SCEI every year.

What evidence? The Wii is getting new and unexpected announcement, true. But that hasn't come at the cost of existing PS3 projects, or so it seems.

It's true that they don't seem to be affecting the projects on the PS3, but if the PS3 keeps selling like it is now, you can be sure that it will. You can't deny though, that there has been virtually no announcements of new PS3 games, its been all 360 and Wii announcements since the beginning of the year.

 

[Sharp]

I'm certainly not an expert on console business, but until this thread, I'd see no such dire predictions. The worst I'd seen was forecasts of GC-like positioning, which isn't great but isn't horrible for owners (despite its reputation, the GC had a lot of good software by the end). But now we're declaring the death of the console and the abandonment of the existing userbase? That's a much different proposition. You'll have to excuse my incredulity, but I'm not yet ready to accept that as likely, let alone inevitable.

Only Wiitard is declaring that. Everyone else is calling him out.

 

[Innotech]

this makes me wonder if in the future companies might not be so ambitious with their console hardware. While hardcore gamers might hate this, they sort of brought it about by demanding bigger, faster, louder, prettier. I dont really blame the console makers for catering to these people because sales are sales, but I always wondered when the companies would hit a brick wall. with rising costs to make games and hardware, the install bases havent really grown much since Ps1, and all 3 million of these Ps3 owners cant be expected to all buy every game to ensure success. So I really think sony has priced itself into deep shit here. but I think Playstation brand is just strng enough to pull out of it. afterall,. Nintendo managed to survive with Gamecube so I know sony can make it. But I think you will see a much more humble and careful Sony come out of this. You will also probably see a more creative, innovative sony as a result of this lesson.

 

[Flakster99]

I'm certainly not an expert on console business, but until this thread, I'd see no such dire predictions. The worst I'd seen was forecasts of GC-like positioning, which isn't great but isn't horrible for owners (despite its reputation, the GC had a lot of good software by the end). But now we're declaring the death of the console and the abandonment of the existing userbase? That's a much different proposition. You'll have to excuse my incredulity, but I'm not yet ready to accept that as likely, let alone inevitable.

Agreed. It's early as hell, but I'm now leaning towards the PS3 having N64 like numbers world wide, with more sold in EU, less in the US, about the same in JP. With the amount of software available now through 2008, as stupid as this sounds, it will be tough for them to become that irrelevant.

Also, I have to give Sony major ****ing props for the quality of it's hardware. It is for the most part no longer a reliability such as their previous console efforts were. The 360 however..... ****ing abysmal.

 

[Evlar]

So much is dependent on what the third-parties do with future announcements, and that's uncertain right now. We aren't hearing many (if any) new projects on the PS3, but it's June, and the first year without a May E3 in a loong time, so there's not much reason to expect new announcements right now. Pay close attention to E3 and TGS.

If a sufficient number of new third party games are announced for PS3 at those events and at publisher events between them then the system still has time to turn things around. By "sufficient" I mean comparable to the 360. If PS3 is getting very few new game announcements at those events then we're closer to a crisis situation and Sony will no longer be able to manage the situation with a "business as usual" attitude. If and when the third-party support collapses nothing will bring them back short of drastic, bold measures from Sony.

 

[Wiitard]

Only Wiitard is declaring that. Everyone else is calling him out.

I just want to point out that I do not believe that PS3 will enter history as a bad console with crappy software.

So much is dependent on what the third-parties do with future announcements, and that's uncertain right now. We aren't hearing many (if any) new projects on the PS3, but it's June, and the first year without a May E3 in a loong time, so there's not much reason to expect new announcements right now. Pay close attention to E3 and TGS.

If a sufficient number of new third party games are announced for PS3 at those events and at publisher events between them then the system still has time to turn things around. By "sufficient" I mean comparable to the 360. If PS3 is getting very few new game announcements at those events then we're closer to a crisis situation and Sony will no longer be able to manage the situation with a "business as usual" attitude. If and when the third-party support collapses nothing will bring them back short of drastic, bold measures from Sony.

But the question is: by bold a drastic measures we mean stuff with a vey high price tag. I just don't see why HQ would go along with that.

Think about it this way: one of the reasons Nintendo is so succesful now is because they decided NOT to take the bold drastic measures to save GC and instead focused on the next battle.

 

[Terrell]

I'm certainly not an expert on console business, but until this thread, I'd see no such dire predictions. The worst I'd seen was forecasts of GC-like positioning, which isn't great but isn't horrible for owners (despite its reputation, the GC had a lot of good software by the end). But now we're declaring the death of the console and the abandonment of the existing userbase? That's a much different proposition. You'll have to excuse my incredulity, but I'm not yet ready to accept that as likely, let alone inevitable.

Funny how so many people only claim this NOW, when PS3 appears to be in a worse position than GameCube. Oh well, if everyone sees fit to blot out the past 5 years of GAF and internet history, so be it.

 

[AniHawk]

I just want to point out that I do not believe that PS3 will enter history as a bad console with crappy software.

Yeah. This isn't the PSP we're talking about.

 

[Speevy]

The PS3 will enter history as the best console to ever sell horribly.

 

[Wiitard]

Yeah. This isn't the PSP we're talking about.

I thing currently the first party development is taking some crazy risks. Interesting stuff should result.

The PS3 will enter history as the best console to ever sell horribly.

Well, there is the Dreamcast...

 

[Evlar]

The PS3 will enter history as the best console to ever sell horribly.

This might be true.

 

[Sharp]

GAF likes all failure consoles. But the N64 serves as a much more apt comparison to the PS3 than the Gamecube at this point, and nobody denies that the N64 had some true killer games (well, nobody sane).

 

[ghostlyjoe]

Funny how so many people only claim this NOW, when PS3 appears to be in a worse position than GameCube. Oh well, if everyone sees fit to blot out the past 5 years of GAF and internet history, so be it.

Whoah. I always defended the GameCube. I love my Cube. It's reputation wasn't fairly earned, in my opinion, and it was home to some of my favorite games. I was just stating my opinion as a satisfied, longtime GC owner.

 

[Flakster99]

So much is dependent on what the third-parties do with future announcements, and that's uncertain right now. We aren't hearing many (if any) new projects on the PS3, but it's June, and the first year without a May E3 in a loong time, so there's not much reason to expect new announcements right now. Pay close attention to E3 and TGS.

If a sufficient number of new third party games are announced for PS3 at those events and at publisher events between them then the system still has time to turn things around. By "sufficient" I mean comparable to the 360. If PS3 is getting very few new game announcements at those events then we're closer to a crisis situation and Sony will no longer be able to manage the situation with a "business as usual" attitude. If and when the third-party support collapses nothing will bring them back short of drastic, bold measures from Sony.

Some good points. I would like to add that perhaps Sony has developed some forethought recently and are in the middle of shaking things up with their hardware/ business sense.

Again, we haven't seen shit from Sony's end, or from 3rd parties that have given us that impression, but the opposite works in their favor as well, for the time being.

 

[Wiitard]

GAF likes all failure consoles. But the N64 serves as a much more apt comparison to the PS3 than the Gamecube at this point, and nobody denies that the N64 had some true killer games (well, nobody sane).

From the business perspective the only similarity is the expensive media used to distribute games.

 

[Evlar]

GAF likes all failure consoles. But the N64 serves as a much more apt comparison to the PS3 than the Gamecube at this point, and nobody denies that the N64 had some true killer games (well, nobody sane).

I lurve my GameCube (I loved all three consoles from last gen, fabulous generation all around). But the N64... In my opinion it had about five or six stellar games and nothing else at all.

 

[Deku]

To be quite honest I think this may be a case of singing to the choir, groupthink leading to more extreme positions etc.

For PS3 to have 15-20% of the marketshare (which BTW should easily translate into at least 20 million units or more when growth is factored in) would be a collosal failure for the console and it would be report as such. I frankly don't think many in the industry is even contemplating this. And there's still enough time to rescue the PS3 from its current position.

As for comparing PS3 as a segregated product, it's a bit of a red herring. You can't compare a Nintendo business strategy to a Sony one. I certainly do not approve of the way Sony has abandoned sound financial planning and adopted Microsoft's warped economics of massive subsidies, but even if the PS3 as a product loses money, a lot of those technologies have multiple applications so their costs could be amortized and it does look like Sony is on the verge of winning the HD format war. A high price to pay for victory perhaps, but they could reap the rewards in the future.


The only thing that strikes me as a real worry over the short term is the stealth switchover by Sony to depending almost entirely on its internal teams to deliver software for the PS3 This is probably the biggest 'shift' to occur since 2006 but no one seems to notice it.
If these titles dominate the PS3 software charts, Sony might find itself in a precarious position where in order to keep PS3 sales healthy, they have to give up their traditionally 3rd party friendly software market. And the effect might be amplified by a small dedicated userbase who only wants Sony hyped titles.

 

[Grecco]

The PS3 will enter history as the best console to ever sell horribly.

Thats the Dreamcast

 

[CoolTrick]

But the N64 serves as a much more apt comparison to the PS3 than the Gamecube at this point, and nobody denies that the N64 had some true killer games (well, nobody sane).

Uh how did you arrive at that conclusion? N64 did really well in the US and had some amazing games. So how is it an apt comparison to PS3?

 

[ShockingAlberto]

The PS3 will enter history as the best console to ever sell horribly.

says FU.

 

[ghostlyjoe]

I lurve my GameCube (I loved all three consoles from last gen, fabulous generation all around). But the N64... In my opinion it had about five or six stellar games and nothing else at all.

I can agree with that. I was much more satisfied with my GC than my N64. In fact, it was probably worse for me than most, as I never really cared for GoldenEye or the Rare games.

 

[Sharp]

Uh how did you arrive at that conclusion? N64 did really well in the US and had some amazing games. So how is it an apt comparison to PS3?

The N64 did pretty well in the US, and I think the PS3 will do pretty well in Europe. I also think it will have some amazing games. I also think it's Sony's third console and the one that will result in a vast decrease in marketshare and mindshare, a paradigm shift of epic proportions, and make this generation its "first-party exclusive time!" generation. I also think the reason it's failing is because the tech was placed over affordable gaming.

In short, I think it's almost exactly like N64, except that it doesn't make a profit. And with such a hefty price tag that can't continue for long.

(I loved my N64 by the way. It had such stellar games that I was never bothered by the fact that there weren't any others; why should I care that there are no good games that I don't have?)

 

[LCGeek]

I lurve my GameCube (I loved all three consoles from last gen, fabulous generation all around). But the N64... In my opinion it had about five or six stellar games and nothing else at all.

N64 had plenty to go around

FPS games were actually worthwhile on the console where as psx was utter crap. N64 had the best racers of the gen sans GT. N64 still has one of the best version of tetris. Platformer and party games were much better as well. Despite PSX base and game library I still played saturn, n64 and pc more than it as most of the titles were junk. Outside of RR, Twisted Metal, Warhawk, MGS, Syphon Filter the system was all types of casual crap people ate up in loads.

I concur with Grecco about the DC.

 

[Wiitard]

Just some math for you guys:

Suppose Sony sells extra 20 million consoles losing $100per unit. Is it worth it? What if losses are $150 per unit? Is it worth it then?

At the same time, how many consoles they are going to sell if they are competing against 360 also priced at cost (or close to it)? The cost difference between the two consoles does not seem to be going below $150 in the next couple of years, does it?

 

[titiklabingapat]

this makes me wonder if in the future companies might not be so ambitious with their console hardware. While hardcore gamers might hate this, they sort of brought it about by demanding bigger, faster, louder, prettier. I dont really blame the console makers for catering to these people because sales are sales, but I always wondered when the companies would hit a brick wall. with rising costs to make games and hardware, the install bases havent really grown much since Ps1, and all 3 million of these Ps3 owners cant be expected to all buy every game to ensure success. So I really think sony has priced itself into deep shit here. but I think Playstation brand is just strng enough to pull out of it. afterall,. Nintendo managed to survive with Gamecube so I know sony can make it. But I think you will see a much more humble and careful Sony come out of this. You will also probably see a more creative, innovative sony as a result of this lesson.

Define "ambitious"? Nintendo is very ambitious with the Wii. They want to exponentially increase the video game market.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

The N64 was actually pretty lucky in a way.

If Sega made a competent stand that generation and hadn't ****ed people over with the 32X/Sega CD/lack of communication between America and Japan, Nintendo could have hit third place a lot earlier.

 

[Xavien]

The N64 was actually pretty lucky in a way.

If Sega made a competent stand that generation and hadn't ****ed people over with the 32X/Sega CD/lack of communication between America and Japan, Nintendo could have hit third place a lot earlier.

I'm sure Sega would have messed up in some other way, this is Sega after-all.

 

[Brofist]

Just some math for you guys:

Suppose Sony sells extra 20 million consoles losing $100per unit. Is it worth it? What if losses are $150 per unit? Is it worth it then?

At the same time, how many consoles they are going to sell if they are competing against 360 also priced at cost (or close to it)? The cost difference between the two consoles does not seem to be going below $150 in the next couple of years, does it?

Of course it's worth it. Do you not think they came into this figuring losses? That's 20 million new owners potentially buying blu-ray movies, PS1/PS2/PS3 games, getting micro raped on PSN buying furniture for their Home. Do have any idea how this even works?

 

[Wiitard]

Of course it's worth it. Do you not think they came into this figuring losses? That's 20 million potential owners buying blu-ray movies, PS1/PS2/PS3 games, getting micro raped on PSN buying furniture for their Home. Do have any idea how this even works?

I think you do not have a firm grasp of how it works.

Could you please explain how the current PS3 software and Blu Ray sales in US and Japan show that Sony will have they $150 or $250 respectively of their money back.

 

[milanbaros]

I think you do not have a firm grasp of how it works.

Could you please explain how the current PS3 software and Blu Ray sales in US and Japan show that Sony will have they $150 or $250 respectively of their money back.

I thinks its more a case of;

- make PS3 lose $200 and recover $100 + potentially the HD movie market or...
- Don't make the PS3 lose $100 and recover 0.

 

[Wiitard]

I thinks its more a case of;

- make PS3 lose $200 and recover $100 + potentially the HD movie market or...
- Don't make the PS3 lose $100 and recover 0.

What? How does THAT work?

 

[Brofist]

I think you do not have a firm grasp of how it works.

Could you please explain how the current PS3 software and Blu Ray sales in US and Japan show that Sony will have they $150 or $250 respectively of their money back.

First off I'm not going to pass myself off as some "analyst" here. Everything I am posting from here on out is based on common sense.

Sounds like you believe losses are a complete surprise to Sony. Do you honestly believe that to be the case? You are making it sound as if they are equally as screwed in selling PS3s as they are in not. But common sense tells us there is no potential for making money on software and movies if the units are not in people's homes.

The current PS3 software situation shows very little to anyone. The reason is because there is no ****ing software to buy yet.

 

[Wiitard]

First off I'm not going to pass myself off as some "analyst" here. Everything I am posting from here on out is based on common sense.

Sounds like you believe losses are a complete surprise to Sony. Do you honestly believe that to be the case? You are making it sound as if they are equally as screwed in selling PS3s as they are in not. But common sense tells us there is no potential for making money on software and movies if the units are not in people's homes.

The current PS3 software situation shows very little to anyone. The reason is because there is no ****ing software to buy yet.

Yes, I believe the abysmal attach rate is a surprise to Sony. Yes, I believe that the extent of per unit losses they would have to take during the whole of generation to even reach GC levels is a surprise to them.

You do make an interesting point and you are absolutely right: they need to get the units ALREADY MANUFACTURED to people's homes and the fact they are sitting on the shelves is costing them. However, once the pile they have is sold, no it is not worth it to keep producing PS3s to sell at the kind of losses they are selling in Japan (trully mindblowing) and US.

 

[Smiles and Cries]

Holy Shit at the OP you are linking to every game every week

 

[Brofist]

You do make an interesting point and you are absolutely right: they need to get the units ALREADY MANUFACTURED to people's homes and the fact they are sitting on the shelves is costing them. However, once the pile they have is sold, no it is not worth it to keep producing PS3s to sell at the kind of losses they are selling in Japan (trully mindblowing) and US.

Well that's pretty much what I was meaning. PS3s in stores don't do anything for Sony, PS3s in homes does.

 

[Phife Dawg]

Uh what's going on here? PS3 discontinued? :lol

I Dunno, Nintendo's First Party in the N64-era produced some of the most highly rated games ever known. Sales of those first-party games were also very good (enough to keep Nintendo afloat atleast).

I really don't think that Sony's first party can compare to N64-era Nintendo (we are talking about Super Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time here).

So, i don't think sony has strong enough development studios to support the PS3 on its own.

I mean we are witnessing a jump from PS2 sales to worse-than Gamecube sales in a single generation, atleast Nintendo ramped down over two generations.

While it is true that first party titles alone probably won't keep PS3 afloat. It will have it's fair share of third party games, you can be sure of that.

Devs will just port over their 360 projects (or make other studios port them over). With this gen currently in limbo multiplat is the way to go, 360, PS3, PC. In a way the Wii is more in a tight spot really, since 360 projects can't be easily ported to the system. It'll still see support from the major publishers but most of the big cinematic third party games will stay on the 3 aforementioned plattforms.

First off I'm not going to pass myself off as some "analyst" here. Everything I am posting from here on out is based on common sense.

Sounds like you believe losses are a complete surprise to Sony. Do you honestly believe that to be the case? You are making it sound as if they are equally as screwed in selling PS3s as they are in not. But common sense tells us there is no potential for making money on software and movies if the units are not in people's homes.

The current PS3 software situation shows very little to anyone. The reason is because there is no ****ing software to buy yet.

Of course it's not a surprise to Sony that they are loosing money on the hardware, that's the business model.
But I bet you Sony did not expect to sell so bad across the world and esp. Japan. Still remember that 5 million quote? I really think they believed they could sell on brand recognition alone, esp. in Japan.

Otherwise there would be no explanation for the lack of compelling software for that market. Or do you honestly suggest Sony planned on selling sub 10.000 for weeks?

 

[Brofist]

Of course it's not a surprise to Sony that they are loosing money on the hardware, that's the business model.
But I bet you Sony did not expect to sell so bad across the world and esp. Japan. Still remember that 5 million quote? I really think they believed they could sell on brand recognition alone, esp. in Japan.

Otherwise there would be no explanation for the lack of compelling software for that market. Or do you honestly suggest Sony planned on selling sub 10.000 for weeks?

No doubt Sony didn't count on sales stagnating so quickly. But hey, from the sound if it that may be a good thing for Sony, or at least many here would have you believe that.

Hell I'm just happy I'll be able to buy a new game next week, first in months (NGS).

 

[JJConrad]

I think there are a lot of people thinking it, but nobody willing to come outright and say that the PS3 may not even reach Gamecube level of success. At this point in time, it's tracking below it in the US and Japan and is still slowing way down in every region. I'd bet that it does do better in Europe, but not by enough to offset the rest of the world. And I'm sure Sony will be able to find ways to drive sales, but it's not like Nintendo didn't do the same for their system just to get it where it is today. I don't know where the system will ultimately wind up and I have no problem with people using the Gamecube the base for comparing the PS3 to, just so long as they keep in mind that that is currently more of an optimistic goal than it is the worst case scenerio.

I think Sony is in an awful spot right now. The PS2 was supposed to fade away gracefully while the PS3 took it's place. They've dried up PS2 development in favor of the PSP and PS3, which now makes reviving that system difficult. Even if they redirected resourses back to it today there is still going to have a less than stellar line-up for the rest of this year. The damage done to Sony's marketshare will be huge in that time. It's also very unlikely that they be able to convince developers to make new exclusives for the PS2 with the Wii doing so well. Their long-term strategy is falling apart and I don't just see any way Sony can resurrect the PS2 back to the premiere platform it once was. It's not the sales numbers that is going to hurt them, it's the business model surrounding the PS3 that is going to really screw them.

I believe Sony needs to push the PSP a lot harder than they are. It's still a viable long-term platform for them. It won't ever be market leader, but I think it can support the Playstation brand until they can get things turned around. The other thing they need to do is find every possible way to lower the cost of the PS3. Even if it means redesigning the system and cutting features. They can't kill the system outright ... that would destroy any reputation they have left. The system can still keep a respectable name for itself and build a decent library over time, then in a few years they can release the Playstation 4 (or whatever) around a business model that's not insane.

 

[Phife Dawg]

No doubt Sony didn't count on sales stagnating so quickly. But hey, from the sound if it that may be a good thing for Sony, or at least many here would have you believe that.

Hell I'm just happy I'll be able to buy a new game next week, first in months (NGS).

Since I owned a GC last gen I feel your pain.

But wasn't a baseball game released not to long ago for PS3? If I'm not mistaking you had a baseball avatar once and the animations in that one looked pretty damn stunning.

 

[LCGeek]

I think there are a lot of people thinking it, but nobody willing to come outright and say that the PS3 may not even reach Gamecube level of success. At this point in time, it's tracking below it in the US and Japan and is still slowing way down in every region. I'd bet that it does do better in Europe, but not by enough to offset the rest of the world. And I'm sure Sony will be able to find ways to drive sales, but it's not like Nintendo didn't do the same for their system just to get it where it is today. I don't know where the system will ultimately wind up and I have no problem with people using the Gamecube the base for comparing the PS3 to, just so long as they keep in mind that that is currently more of an optimistic goal than it is the worst case scenerio.

I think Sony is in an awful spot right now. The PS2 was supposed to fade away gracefully while the PS3 took it's place. They've dried up PS2 development in favor of the PSP and PS3, which now makes reviving that system difficult. Even if they redirected resourses back to it today there is still going to have a less than stellar line-up for the rest of this year. The damage done to Sony's marketshare will be huge in that time. It's also very unlikely that they be able to convince developers to make new exclusives for the PS2 with the Wii doing so well. Their long-term strategy is falling apart and I don't just see any way Sony can resurrect the PS2 back to the premiere platform it once was. It's not the sales numbers that is going to hurt them, it's the business model surrounding the PS3 that is going to do them in.

I believe Sony needs to push the PSP a lot harder than they are. It's still a viable long-term platform for them. It won't ever be market leader, but I think it can support the Playstation brand until they can get things turned around. The other thing they need to do is find every possible way to lower the cost of the PS3. Even if it means redesigning the system and cutting features. They can't kill the system outright ... that would destroy any reputation they have left. The system can still keep a respectable name for itself and build a decent library over time, then in a few years they can release the Playstation 4 (or whatever) around business model that's not insane.

Conrad sony can't kill the features of PS3 to cut cost, but the BR drive, ram, HDD, and gpu will keep those costs up for quite sometime. The areas that need to be made more cost effecient aren't really solvable by any practical means besides time. Hopefully after this generation console manufacturers will be much smarter about developing the tech in a console to a very bad mindset that niche elements of the bases want because they are too cheap and dumb to get a HTPC. PS3 would've been in my room now if it weren't price nothing else is holding me back.

 

[sphinx]

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6172233.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=newstop&tag=newstop;title;3

I know, with the PS3 doing terrible in US and JP, Europe might not look like a great success but PS3 doing well there can only mean that "Other" will keep the system alive, remember that the gamecube didn't do well in ANY territory. If Europe, together with Australia and New Zealand, remain faithful as they seem to be, PS3 will stay afloat.

Wiitard, stop getting ahead of yourself with your predictions.

 

[SouthernDragon]

Except the GC wasn't losing 200$ a console. Just sayin'.

 

[Phife Dawg]

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6172233.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=newstop&tag=newstop;title;3

I know, with the PS3 doing terrible in US and JP, Europe might not look like a great success but PS3 doing well there can only mean that "Other" will keep the system alive, remember that the gamecube didn't do well in ANY territory. If Europe, together with Australia and New Zealand, remain faithful as they seem to be, PS3 will stay afloat.

Wiitard, stop getting ahead of yourself with your predictions.

Well problem is, after a pretty good launch sales slowed down a good deal. I still remember when people were proclaiming that Sony would sell 1 mill on day one in Europe.

They sold 800.000 until April and have sold a million up until June, that means roughly 100.000 for the months of April and May, not bad, but not the saving grace for Sony everyone is seeing either.

 

[Deku]

European sales is inline with market sizes. US> EU> JPN. I'm not sure we can infer too much about this PR announcement to how well its actually doing. Country specific charts have shown it selling in last place behind 360 in the months since it launched.

1 million looks like a big number but it sold 800k that within a three of weeks of its March 23 launch.

This is not a defense of the outlandish claims about the PS3, since I'm not keen on comparing it to past consoles either. Comparisons to the past isn't particularly helpful considering the newness of the scenario playing out.

 

[Brofist]

Since I owned a GC last gen I feel your pain.

But wasn't a baseball game released not to long ago for PS3? If I'm not mistaking you had a baseball avatar once and the animations in that one looked pretty damn stunning.

Yeah, I debated whether or not to pick it up. In the end though I ended up getting decent mileage out of the PS2 version of MLB 07.

 

[Kafel]

Sony is trapped.

MS stole its mature image and is doing better at a lower price. Don't forget that multi-support games still use the X360 as basis.

This development issue hasn't shifted.


The PS3 will still sell to hardcore high-tech lovers. That's why even the best exclusive games ( FF XIII, MGS4 ... ) will only create sales bumps.

 

[HyperionX]

You know how you guys like to link to PS3 fansite boards and laugh at them? I wonder if this thread is facing the same treatment at some other site.

 

[Smiling Bandit]

Here is what I think will be happening in a year:

1) The hardware will stop being subsidized (which in effect means almost complete abandonment of US and Japan);

2) Dramatic reduction of fist party effort on PS3 and shift to PS@ and PSP.

3) Repeated declarations by all Sony managment brass that they are 100% commited to PS3.

This is what I called pulling the plug. It makes little sense for them to actually declare anything officially. So I do not expect an official announcement.

:lol No, just no. On a relative to launch basis it's doing better than Xbox360. They might not be first but they are far from pulling any plugs, that would be corporate suicide.

 

[iamblades]

Except the GC wasn't losing 200$ a console. Just sayin'.

This is the important bit.

I'm not going to jump on the 'Sony needs to ditch the PS3 completely' bandwagon yet, but if you look at the numbers hard, all you can say is ouch.

Nintendo managed to survive on first party titles alone for two reasons:

1. cheap sub $200 price, dropping to $99 fairly rapidly. Makes it easy to say 'oh that's worth it, even just to play Nintendo games'. At $600, it's much less likely for people to say 'oh that's worth it, even just to play Sony games'. It also doesn't help that Sony's first party is not nearly as strong as Nintendo's.

2. Nintendo never sold at a massive loss like PS3 is doing. Sure Nintendo would dip into loss for a couple months after a price drop, but Sony is losing a couple hundred for each console sold, thats a LOT of first party titles to make a profit even ignoring the dev costs for the games.

Bottom line: Nintendo could afford to sell a cheap N64/GC and still make a profit, even if the consumer only bought the machine for Mario and Zelda. Sony does not have that luxury. Sony needs everyone who buys a PS3 to buy at least a couple dozen games.

I'm not saying that Sony will, or even should can the PS3, but at the current trends I don't see how the economics could possibly work. You can't sell a high priced console at a fairly large loss based on mainly first party titles and expect to ever make a profit. Look at Xbox for an example of what happens when a minority console sells as a massive loss. Xbox type losses over this generation would entirely wipe out all the profit Sony's gaming segment has ever made. Would Sony be willing to accept that just to hold on to their fanbase until PS4 can be launched?

Again, not saying what Sony will or should do, and the trends could change tomorrow. At the current trends, and with Sony's current business model and strategy, I do not see how they can hope to profit from this generation.

 

[justjohn]

holy crap @ this thread. :lol