Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Sony Shifting PS3 Marketing to Focus on Blu-Ray

Posted by Zonk on Sun Sep 23, 2007 06:17 PM
from the facepalm dept.
Media Entertainment Games
Tabernaque86 writes "What started as joke among gamers Sony is now using as a Christmas advertising campaign. Kaz Hirai, president of the games unit, has been quoted as saying that the PlayStation 3 'makes a great Blu-Ray player'. That theme will be central to a wave of ads in North America and Europe. From the article: 'Sony on Thursday disappointed analysts by failing to cut the PS3's price, but Mr Hirai did not rule out a future price cut. "Going aggressive only on price without being able to back it up with content doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me," he said. A price cut would have a "real impact" on sales only if there were enough software titles to support the PS3. But analysts were skeptical and said Sony could miss its shipment targets for the year. "Without a price cut close to Christmas, reaching 11m shipments is going to be very tough," said David Gibson, analyst at Macquarie in Tokyo.'" This is regrettable, too, because there really are a number of strong titles coming out for the console this year.
+ -
story

Related Stories

Submission: Sony shifting PS3 marketing to focus on Blu-Ray by Tabernaque86 (1046808)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Sony Shifting PS3 Marketing to Focus on Blu-Ray 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Cheapest, and possibly upgradeable (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Shabbs (11692) on Sunday September 23 2007, @06:22PM (#20722883)
    Well, it is one of the cheapest Blu-ray players out there, and possibly one of the ONLY ones that is upgradeable to Profile 1.1. All other Profile 1.0 players are most likely not upgradeable. So, while it's not "hi-fi looking" it is not a bad buy if you want a Blu-ray player. You can always fall back on it as a gaming/media platform.

    Cheers.

  • Strong Titles? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by voidstin (51561) on Sunday September 23 2007, @06:29PM (#20722919)
    "This is regrettable, too, because there really are a number of strong titles coming out for the console this year."

    Really? In 2007? Like What? Looking at the release dates [ign.com], I don't see a decent exclusive before LittleBigPlanet or Killzone, both of which are in February.
    • but didn't you read the story saying like 40-something percent of owner didn't know it played blue ray? Hurray for Sony marketing lol.
      • but didn't you read the story saying like 40-something percent of owner didn't know it played blue ray?

        It does something else besides play overpriced movies?

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Aladrin (926209)
      He didn't say exclusive, he said strong. The PS3 needs -any- good title at this point. I loved DW Gundam, but that's it so far... It's really sad.

      I cancelled my pre-order of Stranglehold because the PS3 demo didn't play as well as the 360 one... The controls felt off, and I'll probably rent the 360 one instead.

      Folklore's demo sucked. I was looking forward to it until I played that.

      Looking forward to Ratchet & Clank and Bladestorm, though I pre-ordered Bladestorm on the 360 before I had my PS3. Mig
    • Heck, even Killzone has been disappointing. According to all the press out there the game is extremely pretty, and showcases the PS3's processing power, but its gameplay is uninspired and bland. So really, Little Big Planet is going to be the first truly fun game (at least it looks to be fun) with great graphics to boot.
      • (at least it looks to be fun)

        And that's a whole other problem. Heavenly Sword looked awesome back when it was a potential launch title and no one new it was only 6 hours long. I was excited about Warhawk as a launch title as well, but it's been a year and there's no single player. FIFA '08 was half a game, along with some other EA titles. There's still a lot of time between now and LBP's release date for the game to be changed for the worse. I don't even want to think about what might happen to GTA.

        • Re:Strong Titles? (Score:5, Insightful)

          by king-manic (409855) on Monday September 24 2007, @12:54AM (#20725247)
          Heavenly Sword looked awesome back when it was a potential launch title and no one new it was only 6 hours long.

          I bought it on friday and am about 1/2 -> 2/3 done. It's a good 6h. No filler. I guess you take it as you will. Some 30h games are mostly filler. This is a 6h game that is very good without filler. It's well paced, somewhat difficult. Frustrating but fair. Very polished. But short. IT's been more then 6h right now. I think they mean 6h if your good at god of war. I'm not that good and I keep trying to play it like ninja gaiden so I'm only 2/3 of the way through after about 12h.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by gravis777 (123605)
      Ratchet and Clank, Call of Duty 4, Medal of Honor, and Unreal all come out before Christmas, according to the post you posted. Are you saying these are not going to be strong titles? I am pretty sure Ratchet and Clank is a PS3 exclusive, and seems to be a successful francise for Sony.

      • Re:Strong Titles? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by WhatAmIDoingHere (742870) * <sexwithanimals@gmail.com> on Sunday September 23 2007, @08:50PM (#20723711) Homepage
        "The Wii is in 1st place in large part because of its price."

        You make a good point, even if it's wrong. The price is part of why the Wii is on top. The majority of the reason is because Nintendo says it's a Game Console first and foremost. It's not a Blu-Ray player. It's not a media center. It's a low priced game console that offers strong gameplay and a unique controller.

  • Games, games, games (Score:5, Insightful)

    by vlad_petric (94134) on Sunday September 23 2007, @06:44PM (#20723013) Homepage
    ... which are made by developers, developers, developers.

    The main problem with PS3 is not the price, it's the games. There are a few good ones, but certainly not enough. With respect to developers, developers, developers, Sony made a few wrong moves:

    • The CELL is perhaps the most difficult platform to develop for. Instead of a clean SMP interface, they opted for a two-instruction set asymmetric architecture. They took a relatively complex problem—developing for a multi-processor—and made it much, much, worse. I always hear that current generation games don't fully utilize the PS3 ... to which I reply "D'oh, if you only knew what it takes to fully utilize it ... "
    • They did not release proper tools and libraries. Our developers are smart people, we'll let them figure it out ... That worked out well for the PS2, but it certainly doesn't work for PS3
    • Their arrogance (most likely) alienated quite a few developers that'd have produced exclusives.

    Conclusion: bad moves -> few games -> third place as a console

    • Re:Games, games, games (Score:5, Informative)

      by MBCook (132727) <foobarsoft@foobarsoft.com> on Sunday September 23 2007, @07:11PM (#20723171) Homepage

      It didn't work out very well for the PS2 for quite a while. Games were a bit slow at the start. It took quite a while. The best thing Sony had with the PS2 was the huge demand. Coming off the PS1 (which took Sony from not in the market to #1 by far), developers wanted to be on the PS2. They were willing to put up with the tough times until tools got better and middleware started to appear. I've read things by developers that said that was a HUGE screw-up on Sony's part. If they had tried to pull that with a new console (say the PS2 was their first video game console) they may have failed.

      The XBox had (from what I've heard) fantastic development tools. But that's what you would expect from MS and from someone trying to woo developers. I seem to remember reading that the dev tools for the PS1 were very good and one of the reasons the platform took off as it did (N64 cartridge prices and the Saturn multi-CPU setup being some of the others).

      The PS3 doesn't have the momentum this time. The 360 had a head start. The XBox put up a very good fight in the last generation (relative to how well the Saturn or Dreamcast did). The 360 is simpler to develop for (thanks to the CPU and tools). The PS3 is very expensive (down from incredibly expensive). At $300 tons and tons of people wanted to get a PS2 for their kids. At $600, the PS3 was.. to put it charitably... a little more of a luxury item. Compared to the cheaper and already out 360 and the yet cheaper and innovative Wii... the PS3 didn't have the golden-boy status that the PS2 had.

      The PS3 may end up doing quite well, and may turn out to be the most powerful. But if it does, it will take quite a while to hit it's stride the way the PS2 did.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Osty (16825)

        It didn't work out very well for the PS2 for quite a while. Games were a bit slow at the start. It took quite a while. The best thing Sony had with the PS2 was the huge demand. Coming off the PS1 (which took Sony from not in the market to #1 by far), developers wanted to be on the PS2. They were willing to put up with the tough times until tools got better and middleware started to appear. I've read things by developers that said that was a HUGE screw-up on Sony's part. If they had tried to pull that with a

        • "the Sony marketing machine had already killed the Dreamcast)"
          A shame really. The Dreamcast was every bit as good as the PS2 and had better development tools. I think the ease of piracy did a lot to kill the Dreamcast.
          • Yeah, I call shennanigans on Sony's "marketing machine" being the Dreamcast's downfall. As we can plainly see, Sony's "marketing machine" sucks. The PS2 just had tons of mindshare momentum coming off the PS1, a good performance-per-dollar factor, large library of PS1 games it was (mostly) compatible with, and some good exclusive games.

            • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

              by Osty (16825)

              Yeah, I call shennanigans on Sony's "marketing machine" being the Dreamcast's downfall. As we can plainly see, Sony's "marketing machine" sucks. The PS2 just had tons of mindshare momentum coming off the PS1, a good performance-per-dollar factor, large library of PS1 games it was (mostly) compatible with, and some good exclusive games.

              People hadn't yet fully seen how arrogant Sony can be (they were just coming off the successful PS1, and though they promised the world with the PS2 just like they did with t

          • The main thing that killed the Dreamcast was that Sega stopped making them *before* XBox and Gamecube hit the shelves. Kind of hard to win a fight when you give up before it has even fully started. EA not supporting the Dreamcast of course kind of helped of course too.
        • the Sony marketing machine had already killed the Dreamcast

          It;s much more "SEGAs incompetence machine had already killed the dreamcast". The saturn and the 32x left such a bitter pill in their fanbase that event he really well put together DC wasn't enough to revive their mojo. That along with the ease of pirating, the poor SEGA marketing, and Sony's looming threat is what sunk the DC. I'd place sony as a very small reason.
    • If you give people even more reasons to buy a PS3, then it only helps expand the market which in turn helps Sony maintain developer interest. As the PS2 showed, absolutley none of the items you mentioned mattered to dvelopers really, when the number of consoles is large enough to make it worth their while.

      • Which is what made the Xbox competitive in the first place. MS knew that developer support and install base are mutually reliant. How did they solve it? By spending oodles of cash and buying enough exclusive first-party titles to jump-start the console. Halo is the most memorable, though not the only one.

        This is what Sony failed to do this generation: they have thus far failed to provide must-have first party titles to the world. As soon as they do they will see sales rise, and developer support follow it

  • Confused (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Ajehals (947354) <andyhalsall AT ictsc DOT com> on Sunday September 23 2007, @07:03PM (#20723135) Homepage Journal
    I'm not a gamer and I don't own a console, so I may be missing something but does

    Going aggressive only on price without being able to back it up with content doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me,
    mean what I think it means? i.e. "We are not dropping our prices because we have don't have much content as yet, but when we do have more content we will drop our prices".

    I mean I can see the sense in the fact that more games will drive sales, but I don't see why people would pay more for a console when there are only a few titles* why not drop the price, have people buy it as a blueray player and then *not* drop the price again when the titles are out (after all it will already be as cheap enough as if they dropped the prices when the titles came out). Wouldn't that mean that more people would consider buying the console before the content is available (albeit at a lower price)

    Anyway,makes no sense to me, but as I said I'm not a gamer.

    *I have no real idea how many titles are available for the PS3 or how it stacks up against its rivals, so take that statement at face value rather than assume I am insinuating that the platform is not as good as or worse off than $otherplatform.

    • I mean I can see the sense in the fact that more games will drive sales, but I don't see why people would pay more for a console when there are only a few titles* why not drop the price,

      Because if you sell at a lower price you take a bigger loss on the console which means you need to sell more games (of which there aren't many of) to recoup the loss and actually make a profit.

      That's probably why a blu ray focus makes at least some sense. Producing a reasonable amount of game content is going to take a

      • "Because if you sell at a lower price you take a bigger loss on the console which means you need to sell more games (of which there aren't many of) to recoup the loss and actually make a profit."

        Actually, Sony also gets money from the Blu-Ray sales. Which are moving about as fast as.. something that doesn't move fast at all.
    • Speaking as a gamer - as my handle might imply,
      "A lack of games? Appalling! - and the price is much too high!
      We just got rumble back last Thursday after much outcry.
      We do much love our Sony - Hope this Blu-Ray thing will fly."

      "The games? Well, I'd say they're not that much alike,
      You won't find much FPS on Nintendo's little tyke -
      Unless some Wiimote Metroid or RE4 is what you like.
      And, of course, M$ has got Halo's new Third reich."

      OK, enough verse. My personal philosophy for purchasing a game machine since

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by 7Prime (871679)
        Oh, I don't doubt that Sony have a plan. But Microsoft and Nintendo also have plans, and currently, they're already way ahead.

        Sony is already playing catchup against two companies that ALWAYS have tricks on their sleaves. Sony hasn't ever had to pull Aces out of their asses before now, where-as Nintendo, and to a lesser extent, Microsoft, are well versed in the ace-ass-pulling.
        • I tend to agree with you here. I don't can't imagine Sony having anything significant to dramatically reveal.

          Consoles tend to be a numbers game, studios want to make money, and so the more potential customers they can have with a system the more likely it is that they'll put there best games on a given console.

          Large numbers of games being sold coincidentally enough has been for quite a while the way that console manufacturers make most of their money.

          In this iteration, all of the consoles, except the Wii I

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by 7Prime (871679)
            You must have not been around for the GameBoy Advanced and Nintendo DS... if there's ever any "pulling victory from their ass" award, it goes to those boys. And from what I'm seeing, the Wii seems to be the third system IN A ROW that did the same thing.

            If you think about it, basically every system launched after the GameCube has been a complete success. And I still standby the statement that the GameCube only "failed" (and only in marketshare, not profit) because of the horrendous disaster that was the N64.
      • Obviously, things are different this time. The PS3 costs much more (even when adjusted for inflation) than any Sony console to date. The US economy is much worse compared to '95 or 2000. And so on.

        In the US. Adjusted for inflation it's within $50 of the PS2 launch price in Canada, indeed in most markets it's close to the launch PS2 price after inflation, only int he Us is it massively more expensive. I'd chalk it up to bad aim from Sony. They aimed at roughly the same "relative" price as the PS2 but the US

  • but it runs linux (Score:5, Funny)

    by larry bagina (561269) on Sunday September 23 2007, @07:23PM (#20723229) Journal
    they ought to advertise linux compatibility. A lot of people are interested in linux but don't want to reformat their computer. Selling a PS3 with ubuntu installed would be pretty popular.
    • "they ought to advertise linux compatibility. A lot of people are interested in linux but don't want to reformat their computer. Selling a PS3 with ubuntu installed would be pretty popular."

      What universe do you live in? Just because on /. there are a bunch of people who are interested in Linux doesn't mean that people in the real world are. Go to a Gamestop and ask random customers if they'd buy a PS3 to run Linux. I guarantee you that the majority of them will ask if it's a new game coming out.

    • Re:but it runs linux (Score:5, Informative)

      by Chandon Seldon (43083) on Sunday September 23 2007, @07:41PM (#20723339) Homepage

      It runs Linux like crap because it doesn't provide access to hardware accelerated graphics. And by "hardware accelerated graphics", I don't just mean 3D games and Compiz. It doesn't even have 2D acceleration, so you'll see redraw lag just scrolling in Firefox.

      Basically Linux compatibility was just a scheme to get into a different import tax bracket in the European Union (where computers have a lower tax than video game consoles or media players). Actual usability wasn't a design goal.

      • It runs Linux like crap because it doesn't provide access to hardware accelerated graphics. And by "hardware accelerated graphics", I don't just mean 3D games and Compiz. It doesn't even have 2D acceleration, so you'll see redraw lag just scrolling in Firefox.

        Basically Linux compatibility was just a scheme to get into a different import tax bracket in the European Union (where computers have a lower tax than video game consoles or media players). Actual usability wasn't a design goal.

        Heck, Linux isn't even



      • It runs Linux like crap because it doesn't provide access to hardware accelerated graphics. And by "hardware accelerated graphics", I don't just mean 3D games and Compiz. It doesn't even have 2D acceleration, so you'll see redraw lag just scrolling in Firefox.

        Basically Linux compatibility was just a scheme to get into a different import tax bracket in the European Union (where computers have a lower tax than video game consoles or media players). Actual usability wasn't a design goal.

        I assumed you never tri

  • PS3 as a Blu-Ray Player (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Dr Cool (671556) on Sunday September 23 2007, @07:26PM (#20723243) Homepage
    I bought a sweet 47" 1080p LCD TV about a month ago. Of course, I had to get some kind of HD movie source and I don't watch cable TV. I prefer to rent movies. Since Blockbuster is now stocking Blu-Ray movies, it was a natural choice that I choose a Blu-Ray player. I looked around at prices and all the players are fairly expensive. Sony sells a standalone Blu-Ray player for $499. Imagine my surprise when I walked around the Circuit City store and noticed a 60 GB PS3 for... $499! I intended on buying a Blu-Ray player. But I walked out with a PS3. I haven't owned a console game machine since the Nintendo back in the day. And my roommate is the only one who's played games on it so far but I do enjoy watching him play it. So yes, I'm one of the few who bought a PS3 specifically because it's a Blu-Ray player. But I'm sure that if a killer game comes out that I'm dying to play and I know it's not coming out for the PC (my preferred gaming platform), I'll definitely drop $60 on it for my PS3. But for now, it's my HD movie machine.
    • You could have gotten an hd-dvd player for $199 (1080i) or 299 (1080p)....
    • "I bought a sweet 47" 1080p LCD TV about a month ago."

      And that's the problem with this new advertising gimmick:

      "PlayStation 3: for people who have cash to blow on 47" 1080p LCD HDTVs."

      Heck, they might get more sales if their slogan was "It still works on SDTVs too!"
    • The Samsung Blu-Ray (BD-P1200) player has been $449.99 since before the PS3 price cut. Even now the Sony BDP-S300 is $439.57 (on Amazon).
  • This is regrettable, too, because there really are a number of strong titles coming out for the console this year.

    Uhhh..and now this marketing plan will somehow prevent those titles from coming out? I don't get it.

  • If the PS3 platform is going down in flames... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Gavin Scott (15916) * on Sunday September 23 2007, @08:48PM (#20723703)
    ...at least those flames will be beautifully rendered at incredibly high resolution and we'll all go "oooohhhhhh! ahhhhhhhhh!" as it plows into the ground and erupts in a huge fireball.

    G.

  • 'Course they're not saying they're dropping prices (Score:3, Insightful)

    by r_jensen11 (598210) on Sunday September 23 2007, @09:16PM (#20723837)
    Why the hell would they say that they're going to drop prices November 23rd when it's only September 23rd? That's still two months away. Once you announce a future price cut, sales temporarily slow down until said price cut occurs. Then you see a spike in trading volume, followed by a trailing off toward your new equilibrium.

  • What the f...? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by shoptroll (544006) on Monday September 24 2007, @08:25AM (#20727843)
    Sony, for the love of all that is holy please have your right hand talking to your life hand.

    http://blog.wired.com/games/2007/09/kaz-hirai-plays.html [wired.com]

    Please please please adopt some consistent marketing and executive speak.
    • It's been argued that the Wii is dominating the current generation of gaming consoles simply because Nintendo advertises the Wii as a gaming console while Sony and Microsoft advertise their consoles as media centers.
      • A few questions: 1. In what way does Microsoft advertise its console as a media center? 2. Isn't this article about how Sony is going to start advertising its console as a media center? (because it is not currently advertising it in this way) 3. Who has made that argument? While both 360 and PS3 have media center capabilities, I haven't seen any advertisements that tell consumers that. They're all game advertisements. I think people like to be able play movies on their consoles. There are many reas
        • "because it is not currently advertising it in this way"

          That's actually not accurate. In the European market, the ads I've seen say "BUY A PS3 THE BLU-RAY PLAYER! (also plays games)"

          Microsoft's pushing the 360 as a media center and a gaming console, but they're still trying to push it as a media center. And if people liked playing movies on their consoles the Wii wouldn't be selling as well as it is.

          It's not "it doesn't play movies" but more of a "It plays games."
      • It's been argued that the Wii is dominating the current generation of gaming consoles simply because Nintendo advertises the Wii as a gaming console while Sony and Microsoft advertise their consoles as media centers.

        And I'd say it's exclusively because the price point is where it's not a huge deal to get one while the other two you have to budget for. I'm fairly certain thats the case because the Wii commercials are pretty dumb.
    • "Heavenly Sword is, as you will soon discover, the very definition of a rental title. Clocking in at somewhere between five and six hours (depending on your appetite for overwrought cinemas) it's a decent game saddled by impossible expectations. It has silly ideas and grandeur in close proximity to one another." - http://www.penny-arcade.com/2007/09/12 [penny-arcade.com]

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by bigstrat2003 (1058574)
        Tycho, as insightful as he usually is about games, is flat-out wrong on this one. Heavenly Sword is short, but it's such an amazing ride that I, at least, feel it worth it to support the developers who made it. It also is fun to replay, which helps mitigate the shortness somewhat. Tycho's other opinions about the game are just bizarre, imo... he insults the other characters, but picks out Kai, easily the worst character in the game, as the best? How can anyone not enjoy Andy Serkis' over-the-top bad guy per
    • If Heavenly Sword is a killer app, then the Killzone series is the next Half-Life series.

      In all seriousness, the game wasn't received (too) well by most reviewers, professional and casual (too short, lack of gameplay, too easy, nothing but eyecandy: take your pick). The game holds its own as a game, but its by no means a "killer app". I've played through and beat the game in a single day and I kept thinking how much the game felt like a God of War clone whenever I wasn't sniping with the crossbow.

      If you wa

      • Actually from reports I read, casual gamers really liked it because it was a great interactive movie and also kind of short - just the thing hardcore gamers hate.

        The parent post I think is witness of this.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.