What the bloody hell is wrong with Sony?

[BabyHeadCrab]

Why does this company continue to repeat the same bullshit mistakes since the launch of the PS3? The least they could have done is stood by the last legitimate market they had and kept backward compatibility in place. But no - the newer PS3 models remove that completely. In the meantime they keep plugging this bullshit about how they will eventually dominate the market despite the fact that the only games the make it to PS3 have been severely gimped ports delayed to no end because they insisted on using technology that apparently only a handful of brilliant programmers know how to properly utilize.

They missed a HUGE opportunity, they could have been the big 3'rd party collector, the system who collects what Sega left behind - and continued their legacy as the masters of console gaming but instead they sit around with their heads so far up their ass they can't even let us play PSX/PS2 games on their latest system. I'm sure PS3 will collect some unique JRPGs and such as it ages - but it will never be a legitimate hot selling competitor, not now, not ever.

Microsoft has more holes in it's marketing strategy than swiss cheese, with a pay-to-play online service that basically steals money from it's player-base boasting features PC gamers have seen for years. Sony could have offered a free to play online service with a unique friends system to PS3, but instead they continue to plug away at the increasingly stupid looking Home service with no real applicability to the console market. Let's face it, Home looks more and more like the bastard stepchild of Second Life with some limited matchmaking services and half-assed attempts to reclaim the console MP market. Nice try Sony, kill yourself. Looks like Microsoft will monopolize console gaming as we know it, and Nintendo will continue to cater to women and casuals.

 

[smwScott]

I agree with you completely about the backwards compatibility, disagree about the rest. But yes, that was an incredibly stupid move. I don't really mind them releasing a cheaper SKU with missing features such as that, but making it the only option? That's just ****ing ridiculous. It seems like an incredibly bad decision, and I can't quite figure out the reasoning for it. Since they switched over to a software backed backwards compatibility method I can't imagine it being that expensive to implement. Unless people buying PS2 games is having a large impact on PS3 software sales, which I also doubt.

I still think that the PS3 is the best console this generation though. There's quite a few really big, AAA, great exclusive games coming out for it in the next few months. The free online service works perfectly well and is free. Home is just a nice little extra.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

But you see, in comparison to the accessibility and feature set of Live, it's nothing. And Home cannot make up for that. I hope these "AAA" titles can makeup for the other shortcomings but I'm still incredibly apprehensive about everything PS3 related at this point. The backward compatibility issue being the nail in the coffin.

Oh yeah and the fact that they are absolutely bombing on the multi-platform support / market.

 

[Bad^Hat]

What I see when I look at the PS3 now is a huge lack of communication and understanding between Sony and developers/comsumers at large. Instead of designing it around ideas that would attract these groups to the console and make it an easier and more appealing choice for them, it seems like they've taken a position of ignorance/arrogance and told themselves "whatever we make, they will follow". What we get as a result is something that's so unnecesarily complex as to be daunting to both groups instead, leaving only the "elite" and those with faith in the brand (or too much money in pocket) to pick up the slack.

The reason MS are succeeding, and will probably win out in the long run, is that they managed to strike a happy medium between performance and accessibility (and of course price). Luck's also been on their side to an extent, as by releasing earlier than the competition, all of their triple A games have released right around the time of the PS3 and Wii's launch, making buying a 360 at that time a more attractive prospect in comparison. PS3 will probably hit it's "peak" in the next year or so and start releasing some worthwhile games (releasing as opposed to drip-feeding), but by then the 360's - and even Wii's - libraries will be all the bigger and more impressive. And the bigger they get, the more they sell, the more developers flock to them to get a piece of the pie (and to get the hell away from the cell processor).

Edit - All that said, MS ****ed up backwards compatibility way before Sony did

 

[Tyguy]

good rant

 

[Warbie]

None of these gripes would matter if decent games were arriving on the PS3. Mine simply doesn't get played.

So far the 360 has filled the PS2's shoes far better than the PS3. Virtually all the variety Sony once enjoyed has gone multiplatform, including various franchises once taken for granted as Sony staples (GTA, DMC, VF, MH), and the online experience doesn't compare well to Live.

Good games will come (I seem to be saying this often in regards to the PS3), but we're now approaching the midpoint of this generation and the PS3 has little to show for itself so far.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

What I see when I look at the PS3 now is a huge lack of communication and understanding between Sony and developers/comsumers at large. Instead of designing it around ideas that would attract these groups to the console and make it an easier and more appealing choice for them, it seems like they've taken a position of ignorance/arrogance and told themselves "whatever we make, they will follow". What we get as a result is something that's so unnecesarily complex as to be daunting to both groups instead, leaving only the "elite" and those with faith in the brand (or too much money in pocket) to pick up the slack.

The reason MS are succeeding, and will probably win out in the long run, is that they managed to strike a happy medium between performance and accessibility (and of course price). Luck's also been on their side to an extent, as by releasing earlier than the competition, all of their triple A games have released right around the time of the PS3 and Wii's launch, making buying a 360 at that time a more attractive prospect in comparison. PS3 will probably hit it's "peak" in the next year or so and start releasing some worthwhile games (releasing as opposed to drip-feeding), but by then the 360's - and even Wii's - libraries will be all the bigger and more impressive. And the bigger they get, the more they sell, the more developers flock to them to get a piece of the pie (and to get the hell away from the cell processor).

Edit - All that said, MS ****ed up backwards compatibility way before Sony did

In regards to backwards compatibility and Microsoft - Xbox has a far less impressive back catalogue and simply doesn't need to rely on this feature to be successful - as the 360 is gradually securing a marketplace as the poor-man's PC, the 360 (in my opinion) being the console Microsoft should have released initially.

Owners of the Xbox can still play Halo, and are thus pleased. Now if after securing all these 3'rd parties since the 360 generation the next iteration of Xbox didn't support 360 games, I'd probably have some concern. As Microsoft now has a lot more sway in terms of developer support in the console market-space.

None of these gripes would matter if decent games were arriving on the PS3. Mine simply doesn't get played.

So far the 360 has filled the PS2's shoes far better than the PS3. Virtually all the variety Sony once enjoyed has gone multiplatform, including various franchises once taken for granted as Sony staples (GTA, DMC, VF, MH), and the online experience doesn't compare well to Live.

Good games will come (I seem to be saying this often in regards to the PS3), but we're now approaching the midpoint of this generation and the PS3 has little to show for itself so far.

But the reason these games have gone multi-platform are because of (some) of the gripes I listed. It's as simple as nobody wants to make games exclusively for a system with such a small market-share. And my OP is some of the main reasons why Sony now holds such a small slice of the console market. If Sony had played it's cards right from day one we might see some truly good games on the horizon - it's circle logic really either way it ends up being a series of decisions on behalf of Sony that ultimately has turned them into a joke in the developer community. Sans maybe Team Ninja (and we know Itigaki is prone to say some bold, self promoting, nonsense) virtually no prominent developers have expressed interest in the system in the long term, aside from being fascinated with "eventually" taking advantage of this type of technology, ESPECIALLY stateside. Sure developers like Squenix and Sony faithfuls like Kojima San / Konami will continue to develop for Sony - but even they (at times) express concern that the platform isn't very marketable and have taken interest in the DS or other more mass-marketable approaches for side-money projects.

It's become more and more embarrassing and apparent to the public how blatantly Sony has screwed up, and continues to do so, and I think this post is long overdue - especially considering Gabe's recent interview rant regarding his frustration and outsourcing of development of the PS3 Orange Box to a separate team at EA.

 

[Raxxman]

None of these gripes would matter if decent games were arriving on the PS3. Mine simply doesn't get played.

So far the 360 has filled the PS2's shoes far better than the PS3. Virtually all the variety Sony once enjoyed has gone multiplatform, including various franchises once taken for granted as Sony staples (GTA, DMC, VF, MH), and the online experience doesn't compare well to Live.

Good games will come (I seem to be saying this often in regards to the PS3), but we're now approaching the midpoint of this generation and the PS3 has little to show for itself so far.

I actually think the 360 coming out so much sooner has been one of the primary causes of Sony loosing it's exclusivity. PS2 was first out of the last gen (ignoring the DC as everyone else seemed to) which allowed it to establish market position without competition.

 

[Warbie]

I actually think the 360 coming out so much sooner has been one of the primary causes of Sony loosing it's exclusivity

Agreed. Turning up a year late with very little to show for the time had to be the biggest mistake.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

I actually think the 360 coming out so much sooner has been one of the primary causes of Sony loosing it's exclusivity. PS2 was first out of the last gen (ignoring the DC as everyone else seemed to) which allowed it to establish market position without competition.

Well in terms of launch (in the States) the price of the initial SKUs and launch titles had a lot to do with it. I suppose if Sony had launched first they would have seen a bit more consumer enthusiasm (considering neither console has a particularly strong launch lineup) but regardless Sony would have been 1upped so to speak, by a (seemingly) cheaper and more marketable Xbox 360 in the near future.

Agreed. Turning up a year late wth very little to show for the time had to be the biggest mistake.

There's no doubt we'll see great games, and Sony is a company with a lot of sway, and bigger pockets than one might imagine (despite the rather large loan) they took out to foster PS3 sales and development. Sony has a lot of franchise power still working for it and will see some stellar games on it's PS3 platform, but will it save them from the mess they've created with the possibility of both erasing backwards compatibility and a system that's overly expensive to develop for with a minimal market to see any type of fiscal return from? Doubtful.

 

[Warbie]

Thing is, gamers are fickle. It'll take one or two awesome games for many of us to forgive all. For everything negative written about the PS3, you just know you're going to open a magasine at some point, see a 4 page preview on whatever Ico Team come up with next, and an explosion will take place in your pants. This is what gaming is all about - the few great games.

The PS3 will deliver in this regard, but it has lost the space under the tv the previous playstations carved out. The 360 is the PS2 of this generation - it is the 'essential' console.

but will it save them from the mess they've created with the possibility of both erasing backwards compatibility and a system that's overly expensive to develop for with a minimal market to see any type of fiscal return from? Doubtful.

In terms of being the top dog, probably not. The struggle is in making the PS3 seem worthwhile to current gamers.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

Thing is, gamers are fickle. It'll take one or two awesome games for many of us to forgive all. For everything negative written about the PS3, you just know you're going to open a magasine at some point, see a 4 page preview on whatever Ico Team come up with next, and an explosion will take place in your pants. This is what gaming is all about - the few great games.

The PS3 will deliver in this regard, but it has lost the space under the tv the previous playstations carved out. The 360 is the PS2 of this generation - it is the 'essential' console.



In terms of being the top dog, probably not. The struggle is in making the PS3 seem worthwhile to current gamers.

I guess I agree with you here, it's just a matter of Sony finding any market whatsoever stateside. I'm sure as the console nears middle of it's supposed lifespan I'll pick it up cheap along with a bunch of jRPGS and whatever else the Ico type developers have created along the way. By that time Naughty Dog and some other devs should have some great stuff out for it.

Oh and of course the latest God of War titles /crosses fingers

It's funny, Xbox gaining sway in Japan and getting support from some major Japanese devs with games like the guys behind Eternal Sonata and Katamari. It's really difficult to see where the international console gaming market will go next.

 

[Krynn72]

Thing is, gamers are fickle. It'll take one or two awesome games for many of us to forgive all. For everything negative written about the PS3, you just know you're going to open a magasine at some point, see a 4 page preview on whatever Ico Team come up with next, and an explosion will take place in your pants. This is what gaming is all about - the few great games.

The PS3 will deliver in this regard, but it has lost the space under the tv the previous playstations carved out. The 360 is the PS2 of this generation - it is the 'essential' console.



In terms of being the top dog, probably not. The struggle is in making the PS3 seem worthwhile to current gamers.

I think youre overestimating the influence of those games. Maybe for true gamers it will be so, but I doubt the majority of the gaming consumer base will fork over that much cash for that few titles. Best I can see happening is people buying th system and the couple games they want, then once done with those games, selling everything. A couple good games wont ensure the longevity of the console/

 

[Warbie]

I think youre overestimating the influence of those games

Quite possibly. Then again, Final Fantasy and MGS are huge. When the adverts start appearing gamers all over the world are going to notice, especially the legions of ps2 owners.

Most gamers don't follow industry news, read sites/magasines/forums, and are oblivious to everything mentioned in threads like this. I know people who will purchase a PS3 when Pro Evolution arrives despite it being available for the 360, which they wouldn't consider buying for a second. As unlikely and undeserved as it would be, it's not beyond the realms of possibility for the PS3 to come out on top based soley on the strength of the PS2 and a bunch of adverts.

 

[VictimOfScience]

As things stand right now, I see the 360 doing well through the holidays (the Wii doing even better), but the PS3 taking over the momentum from there. 2008 will be the biggest year for the PS3. Microsoft has a few big exclusives left, like Mass Effect and Alan Wake, but the PS3 has its truly HUGE exclusives still to come in the form of MGS4, FF13, FF Versus 13, White Knight Story, Killzone 2, Little Big Planet, Gran Turismo 5, and likely some others we have not yet heard of (Ico team and God of War team to name a couple). Multiplatform titles are a wash unless the quality is ridiculously better/worse on one system as opposed to the other. The price will be even lower next year at some point and these games will have been released which should get a lot more on-the-fence PS2-ers out and buying.

That said, I love all 3 consoles for different reasons. The 360 for the PC games I can't play without upgrading; the PS3 for the exclusive entries in the series I have grown to love; the Wii for the point-n-click adventure potential and also the sheer fun of everything I do with it be it web-browsing, using the Wii-mote to do all sorts of things in loads of different and new games or just playing the Virtual Console. PSWii60 ftw!!

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

PSWii60 is a costly unit though sadly.

 

[jimbo118]

Virtually all the variety Sony once enjoyed has gone multiplatform, including various franchises once taken for granted as Sony staples (GTA, DMC, VF, MH)

Devil May Cry is coming to 360? whats VF and MH btw?

 

[Warbie]

Yeh, DMC4 coming to 360. Virtua Fighter 5 and Monster Hunter - the latter being a big deal in Japan.

 

[jimbo118]

Yeh, DMC4 coming to 360. Virtua Fighter 5 and Monster Hunter - the latter being a big deal in Japan.

again excuse my igonrance and off topic-ness but what consoles is resi 5 coming to? ps3 and 360?

 

[Warbie]

Yup. Sony better hang on to MGS and FF or they're in the shit.

 

[jimbo118]

Yup. Sony better hang on to MGS and FF or they're in the shit.

if mgs goes to 360 then the ps3 is dead for me...

 

[Apocalypse89]

MGS4, FFXIII, and Gran Turismo 5 are the only reasons I'd even consider a PS3(which I am not).

 

[VictimOfScience]

PSWii60 is a costly unit though sadly.

True. This is the first generation of consoles where I have actually wanted all 3 major competitors and actually have had the means with which to get them. It has worked out great so far, so the fanboy arguments are totally irrelevant to me now. Its all about great games on all systems!!

But on-topic, dropping BC for those cheaper PS3 units means they are dropping 1000s and 1000s of games from the potential libraries of their fans. That is just fuxed.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

update; nice little summary of more Sony fail. And yeah I can see each system being compelling for different reasons, but for my current lifestyle a PC and a 360 do quite nicely.

 

[-Psy-]

woah woah woah. 4 versions of the PS3? When the shit did the other two come from? :|

 

[ríomhaire]

Microsoft are dominating the market when Wiis have outsold 360s in a much shorter timespan and are still low-on, if not out-of, stock?

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

Microsoft are dominating the market when Wiis have outsold 360s in a much shorter timespan and are still low-on, if not out-of, stock?

But the Wii caters to an entirely different market.

 

[Bad^Hat]

Thing is, gamers are fickle. It'll take one or two awesome games for many of us to forgive all. For everything negative written about the PS3, you just know you're going to open a magasine at some point, see a 4 page preview on whatever Ico Team come up with next, and an explosion will take place in your pants. This is what gaming is all about - the few great games.

Yeah, but not all of us are going to slap down $1000+ (NZ bucks, I know, rediculous) for just a few good games. A well timed price drop around the time of some good AAA releases could help in this regard, but can they afford it?

 

[lePobz]

It's nice to see Sony suffering for their mistakes, finally realizing they can't take a steamy dump on their customer base every five minutes and get away with it.

Hopefully the management will realize what a useless bunch of tools they are, and fire themselves. Or kill themselves. As long as the Playstation 4 has nothing to do with them.

(if there is another sony console after this disaster)

 

[TCfromBN]

I fully condone this thread. All of the steam needs to be let out and this thread is doing in an orderly fashion.

On top of that, I agree with most of the points made thus far.

 

[Anthraxxx]

True. This is the first generation of consoles where I have actually wanted all 3 major competitors and actually have had the means with which to get them. It has worked out great so far, so the fanboy arguments are totally irrelevant to me now. Its all about great games on all systems!!

But on-topic, dropping BC for those cheaper PS3 units means they are dropping 1000s and 1000s of games from the potential libraries of their fans. That is just fuxed.

Yes, they're dropping 1000's of titles from the backwards compatibility, but 90% of those games suck anyway. How many of those thousands of titles were really worth playing? Even so, it still doesn't mean that the ps3 is worth the money. PS2, yes. PS3, no.

 

[ShinRa]

Yeah, but not all of us are going to slap down $1000+ (NZ bucks, I know, rediculous) for just a few good games.

If you bought a 360 premium, plus pay for live, your already well over $1000 assuming uve owned it for a year and have more than 5 games for it.

 

[Bad^Hat]

If you bought a 360 premium, plus pay for live, your already well over $1000 assuming uve owned it for a year and have more than 5 games for it.

Nope. The premium pack, when I got it a couple of years ago, was $799 at the most (that or 750). The Xbox Live starter pack, with the headphone thingy and a year's sub, was about $120. Subsequent subscriptions are under 100.

I do stand corrected about the price of the PS3 though, sort of. When it first shipped here only the 60gb model was available, for I think $1200 at launch. Looks like they got the 40gb in now aswell though, which you can get for $799. That's the bare minimum model though, whereas the 360 premium pack is now down to $650 or less.

 

[IchI]

Hmmmm, people always look at the games industry as this stable enviroment and industry. Its really really not. Its very very common in games history for a console to come out and completely fail and not sell well at the start and litrally never pickup. People always say the PS3 will pickup etc... etc... but people don't notice this type of thing has happened before and no one else recovered from it.

If the 360 takes japan which slowly I think it will, only very slowly. Basiclly in 8months time I think the 360 will continue to sell and speed up. The Wii will sell even more but after those 8months it will begin to slow down. The PS3 will sell well when MGS4 is released or any good exclusive but it will die down within a month. They will never reach 50millions sales with that console.

 

[jimbo118]

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=85419

LOL!

 

[Warbie]

It's begun /o\

 

[Laivasse]

I guess this shows how people don't give a shit what they're buying as long as they can be made to think it's a bargain.

 

[lePobz]

It's not surprising sales are up, as are sales of 360s and Wii's etc. People are doing their xmas shopping, and in first place on most peoples Xmas wish lists is a console. I think the PS3 is more predominant in wish-lists as kids cant afford to buy their own, as they could with Wii and 360. I'm the same, I wouldn't buy my own PS3 but I'd want to have one bought for me. I still think PS3 sales over the holiday period are just a flash in the pan, as theres no catalog of great games out to support it.

 

[-Psy-]

Dammit. Sony must learn from their arrogance.

 

[Raxxman]

178% of 0 is still 0