Thunder Monkey
Banned
Hollow Victory!Paracelsus said:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
WSJ Article: Hope Fades for PS3 as a Comeback Player
- Thread starter Go319
- Start date
- Status
OldJadedGamer
Banned
Death Dealer said:
As of November 2007 NPD (a year after the game launched) Resistance was sitting at 780k units. This was before it went to a greatest hits. So if it's over a million, I would guess it's *barely* over that mark after 2 years after release and hitting a greatest hits.
Motorstorm was a pack in and doesn't count.
The way I understand is
Jim Kahle from IBM suggested a design with cache based Power PC cores. It was Sony and Toshiba engineers that wanted the SPU design. Kahle didn't want to throw away the PowerPC design since he thought it made no sense for IBM to ditch their Power PC heritage. Then Peter Hofstee pitched the idea of SPU's and a Power PC cores joined together.
IBM just reused the Power PC core from the CELL development and improved it.
Jim Kahle from IBM suggested a design with cache based Power PC cores. It was Sony and Toshiba engineers that wanted the SPU design. Kahle didn't want to throw away the PowerPC design since he thought it made no sense for IBM to ditch their Power PC heritage. Then Peter Hofstee pitched the idea of SPU's and a Power PC cores joined together.
IBM just reused the Power PC core from the CELL development and improved it.
lowlylowlycook
Member
Dunlop said:
A killer app for the PS3 is a game that people are willing to pay $460 dollars to play. If that seems crazy to you then you have begun to understand exactly how fucked Sony is.
Apparently not many people are willing to pay $60 to play LBP. Just look at the prices being reported in the PAL sales thread.
So LBP is about $430 short of the mark.
There is exactly one possible killer app for the PS3
FF7 remake where it is possible to save Aeis with a spare Phoenix Down.
Clinton514
Member
So I guess those millions of gamers who bought it already are still waiting right...for this "killer app".lowlylowlycook said:
:lol
Death Dealer
Member
DeaconKnowledge said:
So what is the argument ?
People say this generation is set in concrete. 1, 2, 3
I said Nintendo is a foregone conclusion and MS has the advantage over Sony, but it's not a lock they finish #2.
There is a valid rationale to think over the course of the rest of this generation, Sony could eclipse MS. Not a definitive statement it will happen, but that it could. MS is closer to saturating the market for people who want an X360 compared to Sony's market with people who want a PS3. This is directly because of the large price discrepancy. Whether that is enough to make up the difference in debatable and not certain.
People predicting the future saying it cannot possibly happen seem to be the ones out on a limb.
BenjaminBirdie
Banned
Clinton514 said:
Jeepers. This thread isn't about the millions of blissfully happy PS3 owners who have plenty to enjoy on their console. This article is not about them. It's about why there aren't millions more of them.
Yeesh!
V
Vilix
Unconfirmed Member
deepbrown said:
Are you kidding? FFVII for the PS1, Brain Training or NSMB for the DS... A lot of gamers have bought a system just for one game.
DeaconKnowledge
Member
Death Dealer said:
And again I ask; what is this valid rationale? That's what i'm trying to argue; there IS no valid rationale as any argument that is presented always flies in the face of history and current convention, and the people who argue that there is a valid rationale can never pinpoint what said rationale is.
I've explained more than once in this thread what the rationale AGAINST it is, and gave evidence to support my claim. What is your rationale and evidence?
Phife Dawg
Member
Of course price cuts will only help sales but "waves" of new customers is assuming there is an unlimited potential VG market or that every PS2 owner that did not buy a PS3 has yet to buy a current gen console and is just waiting for a price drop to "upgrade".Death Dealer said:
People that bought a 360 or Wii recently are less likely to buy a PS3 later on. While the market is growing significantly it'll not grow infinitely.
Plus as always the biggest potential for sales growth through price cuts is for the leading console (which, by the looks of it, will not see a price cut any time soon).
Marketing is not the problem here in Germany. It has/had a huge ad campaign and when I was watching TV I discovered that the Simpsons are now being "sponsored by LBP, only on PS3". Sony and the fans have put too much faith and pressure on the product.Dunlop said:
DeaconKnowledge
Member
Timbuktu said:
It doesn't matter now. The PS3 will still get awesome games. It just won't see the quantity it did when it led the market.
deepbrown said:
Except that's not how success is measured in reality. How is PS3 selling compared to its competitors now? How is it selling compared to its OWN numbers last year? (Hint: it's down.)
Maybe not much difference. It may sound surprising, but price is not everything here. As I said, it's PERCEPTION, and the perception is with the other two brands this generation.
Thing is, it's not random analysis after one month of numbers. It's what people have been saying all along. Well, people who know a little about marketing and positioning or who just have the good sense to know when a company's cocked it up.
This thing has been headed this way for a long time now.
Hey, I got computer problems so I'm not long for this thread. Happy New Year to you and everyone else!
Death Dealer
Member
Phife Dawg said:
Waves of new customers assumes there are many who would buy a PS3 for $200 or $300 that are unwilling to do so now. That's a safe assumption.
Look at the wave the X360 got from its price drop. And it was already cheaper.
Death Dealer
Member
DeaconKnowledge said:
Please enlighten me. What does history have to say about it ?
Phife Dawg
Member
Of course it depends on how you would define "wave", which is why I said that price drops will only help sales. In the light of this discussion (PS3 as a comeback player, battle for second place etc.) it can only mean a wave of such significant amount that it will really matter.Death Dealer said:
The 1 year head start helped MS with their pricing and with Sony's current situation I don't expect PS3 to hit the low 360 has hit any time soon. At that time it will hardly matter because like I said, the market will not grow insignificantly and esp. not through PS3 price cuts. If anything a Wii price cut could spur sales so late into the generation. And of course MS probably still has some breathing room as far as pricing goes. I expect them to at least sell the Arcade at a minor loss now and recent interviews make me believe that MS is willing to pass hardware savings onto the customer (and lose a bit of money) because they make money with software and Live subscriptions. So unless they post a loss in the forthcoming financial reports MS will be ahead of the pricing game for the rest of the generation (meaning that they can always drop the price when they feel the need to).
PepsimanVsJoe
Member
Also it kind of doesn't help when the 360 and PS3's library are nearly 1:1.
Why would anyone want to pay more for the same thing? It makes no sense.
Why would anyone want to pay more for the same thing? It makes no sense.
DeaconKnowledge
Member
Death Dealer said:
I'm not writing the same shit twice. Go back to the last page and read it.
Death Dealer
Member
Phife Dawg said:
An optimistic yet realistic view would be 2 years from now, it might take 3.
Of course the arcade will be $99 by then but it will be less of a relative price advantage. There are more people who want a PS3 but haven't bought one yet due to price than the same for X360. Market demand is not infinite but PS3 sales are not close to saturated. There is no reason to think demand won't increase as the price goes down. I doubt we'll see the same increase in demand as the arcade gets further price cuts as $199 is already a lot more affordable to many people than $399.
Phife Dawg said:
They've had almost a 2:1 entry price advantage the whole year and it didn't bury Sony. Before the holiday season they were virtually tied. I know 2007 worldwide sales figures were close, 2008 maybe a bit wider, but it's not unreasonable to think Sony will close ground on monthly sales #s, as the price difference diminishes. The question I ask, is there enough time left to overtake ? Probably not, but it's not impossible. No way to know because it depends on variables like when does X720 hit and at what price point, and how fast Sony can cut costs on PS3 hw.
Death Dealer
Member
DeaconKnowledge said:
I was looking for something relevant to the topic at hand. Didn't see anything.
DeaconKnowledge said:
We already assume Nintendo won this generation. We're talking about #2, and if what you say is correct, how did SNES come back against Genesis ? Genesis met your criteria with a very successful launch, plenty of "mindshare", and yet it still finished behind a system that launched 2 years later.
lowlylowlycook
Member
Death Dealer said:
newsflash!
They are not waiting to buy a PS3 they are already buying 360s and Wiis.
It seems that sales numbers indicate that the PS3 is just a 360 that plays Blu-Rays and MGSIV to most of the gaming public so why would they wait around for the PS3 to hit $200 3 years from now?
And being in a price war is already a huge victory for MS and a defeat for Sony. I mean really, can we define victory for the PS3 down any further.
PepsimanVsJoe
Member
Death Dealer said:
Why?
DeaconKnowledge
Member
Death Dealer said:
The Super Nintendo was a console that was created with the market in mind, positioned at an attractive price and had the bulk of third party support, primarily from Japan which was Video Games' biggest stronghold at the time and a market Sega never managed to fully breach. The same thing happened with the Dreamcast and the PS2; the DC's failing was that it lacked support and promotion from the biggest developers in the game at the time (most notably EA, who flat out refused to put games on the console.) The PS3 has none of these things (The 360 stole it's advantage with third parties, and the system was never conceptualized with the market in mind, instead being a beast that Sony wanted to dominate the marketplace instead of a machine the consumer wanted, which is the problem with convergence devices).
Now we're three years into a gen in which Sony has been sapped of all the advantages it had. The Super Nintendo never sold anemically like the PS3 then surged back late. It was a steady YoY increase from its inception. Europe, what people considered to be a huge Sega stronghold, and the territory that made the Genesis near even keel with the SNES, still wasn't enough to establish the Genny as #1 overall throughout the gen.
The only similarity that the PS3 and SNES share is that their predecessors led the market. And even that still isn't a guarantee, as the N64 will surely attest.
Your turn. Let's hear how the PS3 will surge back and beat the 360.
Death Dealer
Member
PepsimanVsJoe said:
slope of the price elasticity of demand
DeaconKnowledge
Member
Death Dealer said:
What about Opportunity Cost?
GenericPseudonym
Banned
The problem with the arguments of the PS3 apologists is that they hinge on the false assumption that everyone wants a PS3. No matter the price or the software most people want a Wii. So that narrows down Sony's base, cutting off a massive chunk of the old PS2 customers, then Sony has to fight MS who has a price advantage, a perceived glut of games, the perception of a superior online system etc.
There is no one holding out for a cheaper PS3, the only benefit to Sony in cutting the price is that they become more relatively more competitive when the price drops. However, there is no one game or price point that is suddenly going to open the flood gates and bring back all the old PS2 owners.
There is no one holding out for a cheaper PS3, the only benefit to Sony in cutting the price is that they become more relatively more competitive when the price drops. However, there is no one game or price point that is suddenly going to open the flood gates and bring back all the old PS2 owners.
Gully State
Member
shpankey said:
The ones that did probably weren't gamers. His statement still stands. Anyways, 3rd place isn't the death sentence that it was in the past. Sony may have lost exclusives, but it sure hasn't outright lost any titles. It's still getting the licensing dollars as 3rd parties are all adopting the multiplatform strategy. As long as the install base gap doesn't further widen between the 360 and PS3, PS3 owners won't have to deal with missing out on games. As for the loss due to hardware, as long as bluray has a long lifespan, those costs will be covered from licensing revenue.
The bigger install base gets the better games just doesn't apply this gen.
I can make something of an argument.
You had said earlier that no position-swapping had ever occured, historically speaking, Deacon, and you've now implicitly admitted that you were wrong (instead you seem to say admit that SNES/Genesis is a historical example, but that its example isn't applicable in this environment). Given this historical precedent, I think it's possible that the PS3 will pass the 360.
Now, I'm not saying this is likely. At this point, my official position is: "it's very close and has see -sawed several times already, so who knows what will happen." I would argue that mammoth shifts in market share are out of the question this far in to a generation. However, relatively minor shifts are possible and have some historical precedent, and a minor shift is all the PS3 would really need on a worldwide basis to overtake the 360 in the next 3-4 years.
You had said earlier that no position-swapping had ever occured, historically speaking, Deacon, and you've now implicitly admitted that you were wrong (instead you seem to say admit that SNES/Genesis is a historical example, but that its example isn't applicable in this environment). Given this historical precedent, I think it's possible that the PS3 will pass the 360.
Now, I'm not saying this is likely. At this point, my official position is: "it's very close and has see -sawed several times already, so who knows what will happen." I would argue that mammoth shifts in market share are out of the question this far in to a generation. However, relatively minor shifts are possible and have some historical precedent, and a minor shift is all the PS3 would really need on a worldwide basis to overtake the 360 in the next 3-4 years.
Death Dealer
Member
lowlylowlycook said:
The Wii only owners aren't looking at 360. But in a few years, they might look at a $199 BD player that happens to play games !
Eteric Rice
Member
Death Dealer said:The Wii only owners aren't looking at 360. But in a few years, they might look at a $199 BD player that happens to play games !
Or a $99 one that doesn't.
Death Dealer
Member
Opiate said:
Very eloquently put. I don't think anyone is arguing a flip will happen but MS and Sony's position this generation is unique. They're both fighting for scraps. I wouldn't bet on Sony, but it's too early to call the game for anyone but Nintendo.
DeaconKnowledge
Member
Gully State said:
I wouldn't necessarily agree with that.
We haven't seen it yet, but there is a very real threat to the PS3 that coming in last could perpetuate, and that's lost multiplatform games.
Recall, PS3 sales in November were down YoY by about 18 percent. If this trend continues, the software will definitely start taking a hit by proxy, reducing the feasibility of sustaining development for the console. Not saying it WILL happen, but it's something to look out for.
Also, please don't try and hand wave that as a side effect of the economic downturn, as the 360's YoY was up 8 percent, and the Wii a whopping 52 percent.
DeaconKnowledge
Member
Opiate said:
I never said that no position swapping has ever occurred. I said that there's no way for the PS3 to swap positions with its competition based on the variables presented by the hopeful. I used previous examples in history to buttress my point.
The SNES as it stands was a system that usurped the interim leader at the time, however the circumstances that it found itself in and the PS3s are very, very different. I will grant you that if the PS3 were in the same circumstances (again, bulk of third party support, attractive pricing and value positioning) then yes, it is entirely possible. The PS3 has no such similarities. The console would have to be completely different in philosophy, price, and positioning to have said chance, and if we were to entertain that then we are getting revisionist.
To put it another way; It would be (and was) foolish to assume the GameCube or XBOX would usurp the PS2 last gen, as they were both systems that largely did exactly the same things the PS2 did, AND were a year behind to boot. Also, they were systems that largely offered the same games that were already on the Playstation 2s people already owned. the only way they ever had a chance was if they were systems that the PS2 WASN'T; changing their value propositioning to lie outside what the PS2 was doing. The PS3 ISN'T that and will never BE that at this point; the only thing it can do is drop price, get more exclusives, and hope for the best, and even then all it will do will be closer to what the 360 and Wii already are; systems that are more valuable to the populace.
The philosophy to take from this argument is that the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer; there is no way for the PS3 NOW to foist itself ahead of what the 360 and Wii have already done by doing the same things. It's like a footrace; the PS3 isn't going to win by running the same path that the other two have already run.
Death Dealer
Member
DeaconKnowledge said:
There is no footrace. The Wii won. The X360's lead over PS3 is not insurmountable.
Nintendo caught the mass market. MS wanted it and missed. Sony is too expensive for the mass market. What happens a few years from now if they can attract just a fraction of the Wii only crowd ?
Death Dealer
Member
Link said:
Facetious ?
No casuals who had a PS2 and then jumped on the Wii bandwagon would consider a $199 PS3?
They'd have to already own an X360 ?
X360 is already at $199 and not attracting that crowd like MS wanted.
DeaconKnowledge, that was one great post. Kudos to you.
Death Dealer, you're working really hard today. You're giving it a hell of a shot, but things just don't work the way you think they do.
My advice is to sit back, relax, make your plans for New Years and then watch how the rest of this generation unfolds. Maybe pick up a few marketing books that explain the concepts Deacon is getting at. I can recommend a good one: Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind, by Al Ries and Jack Trout.
Death Dealer, you're working really hard today. You're giving it a hell of a shot, but things just don't work the way you think they do.
My advice is to sit back, relax, make your plans for New Years and then watch how the rest of this generation unfolds. Maybe pick up a few marketing books that explain the concepts Deacon is getting at. I can recommend a good one: Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind, by Al Ries and Jack Trout.
DeaconKnowledge said:
As an exclusively PS3 gamer (now) I'm worried about this as well. It doesn't help that the PS3 is more difficult (and thus expensive) to develop for either. As long as it's profitable I don't think this is a concern, though. I really hope that the piss-poor sales of Bioshock were due to it being a late port....
Regardless, I really think that sales are going to pick up once KZ2 and it's marketing campaign hit. I think it has the potential to turn into Sony's Gears and spur hardware sales.
EDIT: And to add to this- The lead of the 360 over PS3 is not impossible to overcome. I switched over to PS3 after my (3rd) 360 kicked the bucket. The decisive factor was more exclusives that I preferred. Resistance over Gears, LBP, Uncharted, MGS4, etc. My system breaking was just an excuse to finally do it.
Most importantly, I don't think that brand loyalty is as strong as last gen. Sony blew it and MS has yet to (really) become a household name. Switching systems is as simple as hitting up your local Gamestop for a trade-in, and I don't think that most gamers would hesitate to do it if the temptation became strong enough.
Grampa Simpson
Banned
Super Mario BrothersVox-Pop said:
Tetris
Super Mario World
Sonic the Hedgehog
Super Mario 64
Final Fantasy VII
Dead Rising
(I would have bought systems for Mario Sunshine and Mario Galaxy, but I already had the systems)
Death Dealer
Member
Kolgar said:
What are you an MBA ? I think I've taken the conservative position. #2 and #3 are very likely to stay where they are, but it's not a certainty, considering this generation maybe going strong for another 4-5 years.
- Status