PlayStation 3 May Play Too Much 367
Businessweek has a piece looking at the PlayStation 3, worrying that Sony is confusing the consumer with all of the technology it's trying to work into the console. From the article: "Some question whether Sony is trying to cram too much into the new box. The PS3 is expected to cost $350 to $400. While it has the potential to be a megahit, Sony's message might get muddled in the process of going after too broad a market, says Deutsche Securities analyst Takashi Oya. 'It would be difficult to sell PS3 initially as anything other than a game machine,' Oya says. Sony declined to comment on such concerns."
It'll grow into itself. (Score:5, Insightful)
Too Broad A Market? (Score:5, Insightful)
Who comes up with ideas like that. If anything more features will drive more sales. Don't need to buy a blu-ray player, the ps3 will do it, along with movies and music.
Both Sony and Microsoft are trying to put a media pc in our lounge rooms, and they're free to compete for my dollar.
Re:It'll grow into itself. (Score:5, Insightful)
Remember the Dreamcast? Dial-up modem, the whole thing. It tried to do too much at the time, before the consumers were ready for it.
I don't care if blue ray IS the next big thing. Its not the big enough thing now to get the word out that the PS3 is more than a game machine.
Second Hand purchase (Score:3, Insightful)
Confusing? (Score:1, Insightful)
Confuse the consumer? Do too much? (Score:4, Insightful)
This is how it works (Score:5, Insightful)
This is how it works when you are an analyst: Make anything sound negative. Either it has too little features, or then it has too many. Never is anything just right, or well done.
That way, if it fails, you can say "See, I called it". If it succeeds, you say it did so in spite of those shortcomings. That's how it works.
Cram as much as you can into PS3 (Score:3, Insightful)
If you have the technology to be the latest and greatest, why not?
Jack of All Trades (Score:2, Insightful)
Sony needs to make sure that they really come through one some of the features they are offering with the PS3. If the PS2 is any indication, Sony may be in for some tough times ahead. While at the time the PS2 was a great option for a cheap way to get a DVD player, its DVD menu system is absolutely horrendous. Also consider that the Emotion Engine never even came within flying distance of living up to its hype and expectations (expectations which were created by Sony, and not the media, might I add).
There has been a TON that Sony has committed for the PS3, and have tried to one-up everything that Microsoft dedicated for the XBox 360, presumably to get consumers to hold off until the PS3 arrives, knowing that wallets for $400 consoles and $60 games are limited. My speculation is that maybe half actually ends up in the final console. This will no doubt be a disappointment for the consumers that were consciously waiting for the PS3 because of those features, but fortunately that market is more limited (even though they are also most likely to be the early adopters). However, if they actually are able to do the rest of these things well and come up with some good marketing, especially the Blu-Ray DVD features, Sony may do very well with the PS3. If not, they could be rolling on their belly pretty quickly.
PSP = Bad Comparison (Score:5, Insightful)
since the PSP also plays music and movies, fewer people are buying games designed for it. In the PS2's initial
year on the market, players bought more than three games for each machine that was shipped. For the PSP, that
ratio slipped to 2 to 1.
I suspect that the reason for this was not the fact that the PSP can play music and movies, but the fact that
(and I'm bracing for the karma burn here) the PSP simply hasn't released enough quality games.
Sure, there are some good titles, but nowhere near enough of the quality and variety needed to really push the
PSP platform.
As long as the PS3 manages to maintain a game catalog akin to that of the PS2, it should do well. Having a slew
of additional features should not harm sales, as long as the games are there in force.
I use my PS2 for 3 things (Score:5, Insightful)
2. Playing PS1 games
3. Watching Movies
Hopefully I will use my PS3 for 4 things
1. Playing PS3 games
2. Playing PS2 games
3. Playing PS1 games
4. Watching Movies
Re:It'll grow into itself. (Score:5, Insightful)
Nintendo called it (Score:3, Insightful)
The Revolution, similarly, is meant to play games and do very little else. Nintendo has said several times that they want to make GAME consoles, because people already have all that other stuff, and they can remain more focused this way.
There's nothing terrible about Sony's approach, but it MAY confuse some people. It certainly seems to be lifting the price.
Re:It'll grow into itself. (Score:4, Insightful)
Exactly, because all of these technologies tie into where the game industry is almost certainly going, allowing Sony to already be in place as these innovations come into the mainstream. This means that they will not only have a strong grip on the console market, but they will also win the format and distribution war. As someone who works in the industry, I can tell you that Sony knows exactly what they are doing.
Current DVD Players (Score:2, Insightful)
If sony can make it accessible to the customer, then the customer will buy it, if it also plays other formats, the customer will be more pleased when they randomly find this extra functionality. It will set the level of what consoles "should" supply as default and god help any which dont then fit this selection".
The cost of the NES (Score:2, Insightful)
Someone's looking at the past through rose colored glasses. The NES had two bundles:
$249: NES Console 2 Controllers Light Gun R.O.B (Robotic Operating Buddy) Gyromite (R.O.B game) Duck Hunt Super Mario Bros.
$199 NES Console 2 Controllers Super Mario Bros.
Games cost anywhere from $59 to $79....and this was in 1985 Dollars! the Atari 2600 IIRC launched around $400 and sold like hotcakes. In comparison, the Xbox360 and the Ps3 are right in line with every other system launch that preceded them.
Re:Second Hand purchase (Score:3, Insightful)
The question isn't whether it has too many feature (Score:2, Insightful)
I will be able to play PS3 games.
Will I be able to play PS2 games I already own?
I will be able to watch DVDs.
Will I be able to watch DVDS from other countries?
I will be able to watch Blue-Ray DVDs.
Will I be able to watch Blue-Ray DVDs the way I want to watch them or the way the content industry wants me to watch them?
In a nutshell, the question isn't what it will enable me to do, the question is what will it keep me from doing.
Re:Too Broad A Market? (Score:4, Insightful)
Check PSP (lots of features) VS DS (games, and only games).
Did the PSP outsale the DS because of it's extra features? Duh, no, it's been badly beaten by the DS...
Re:In other news... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It'll grow into itself. (Score:5, Insightful)
People don't want to be able to do everything with one device. The Treo isn't a rampant success; it's just successful relative to other devices that try to combine multiple functions. And the Treo isn't that good of a device.
I'll give you a poor analogy - I work in film, and film meetings go like this: "This is a great idea, but we need to dumb it down." The intelligence benchmark used by the film industry is a 12 year old boy. This isn't to say that they gear products toward 12-year old boys (although they do) but to say they assume the avarage audience, regardless of age or demographic, to be that smart. Why? Because people hate feeling that they're not smart - or that there's something going on behind the curtain they can't comprehend. The worst thing that happens with a dumbed down film is that people figure everything out (and feel good about themselves for doing so). In this instance, the industry did its job in serving up an opiate. Hence IPOD - one wheel - anyone can use it. Hence the dumbest movies making the most money. Most people would rather something banal and predictable because it affirms them, rather than something that does not.
To conclude, you do not want a device that does all things. Complex technology often reminds people that they know little to knowing of tech. It smacks of purposeful obscurity (I've witnessed marketing tests where test subjects get mad, bang the unit on the table like an ape, then complain that the designers don't want the working man using their products). Nintendo is right in that most people don't play games because the user interface looks intimidating from the outside in (You have to step into the shoes of someone unfamiliar with tech and just sees a bunch of buttons). Sony is in a can't lose situation - the PS installation is so huge, all they have to do is shut up about the device and deliver it soon before really good games start coming out for the 360. The only way they lose is if they self destruct. They've already started down the path.
Standard in films is that the classic hero doesn't do much talking. Why? Talking is considered weakness in films - most people talk not to convey something, but to hide something else. Sony is doing a lot of TALKING RIGHT NOW. People are justifiably nervous.
Re:In other news... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:It'll grow into itself. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It'll grow into itself. (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the same could happen with Blue Ray.
Re:It'll grow into itself. (Score:1, Insightful)
Exactly. One word: N-Gage.
Re:The features won't kill it... (Score:1, Insightful)
I have been playing games for 20-something years now, and just recently (re)discovered that the best games are those that are fun and demanding (what you mature gamers call "sk1llz"). Adding some lame-ass porno sequence or making a vietnam-shooter does not make the game mature. In fact, I wager that most people who plays "mature" games is teens with identity crisis who needs silly wargames to feel comfortable.
On the contrary, I am pretty sure most Mario Kart and Pikmin players are at much older than that. They know what fun is, and select games based on that and nothing else.
Re:It'll grow into itself. (Score:4, Insightful)
I think this is the main problem with games today. We're stuck trying to appease adolescent males, and I think the ideas have run out. For the love of god, no more midless war games, shitty first person shooters, and games with pointless displays of scantily clad women.
Now I'm not saying those games don't have a place in the industry. My problem is that they ARE the industry. While I'm not even sure I want a next-gen console, at least Nintendo's Revolution gives off the _appearance_ of trying something different.
I'm not sure i agree (Score:3, Insightful)
That's a bold statement if i ever saw one. The PS3 vill probably be priced O($500), and judging from what I've read about the upcoming first generation Bluray movie players, they aren't going to be cheap. Pioneer's have a $1800 player set to debut around march, and judging from this interview http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articles/ces2006/pa
anyhoo, back to the subject. I'm willing to bet good money that a ½-decent salesman will be able to sell a 500$ PS3 to people with HDTVs who want a HD alternative to their regular DVDs if the alternative movie-only players are x2 the price.
Convergence has to be done right (Score:3, Insightful)
The big difference between Consoles and Computers nowadays is that the OS and core functions on one are on the hardware and are on volatile and modifiable storage on the other.
Build one size fits all device that doesn't suck and boots into the GUI in 3 seconds flat and you've got a sale on your hands. No matter how many features it's got.
Re:It'll grow into itself. (Score:2, Insightful)
Above is the way many "experts" think of American consumers. They are actually some of the best informed, most sophisticated buyers in the world. But it's easier to be elitist than thoughtful.
Re:It'll grow into itself. (Score:3, Insightful)
If kids' friends have them, and they play them at their houses, and decide they like them, then they'll get their parents to put one on the ol' credit card. Simple as that.
Re:It'll grow into itself. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: Too Much In One Box (Score:2, Insightful)
But that's not my goal. Like many folks, I already have a DVD player/home theater system for movies. I also have a PS2 and two computers that can play movies but I never use them for that. The DVD player can play CDs as well, so i got rid of my expired stereo system. I can also play CDs on my PS2, computers, iPod, and cars. MP3s? DVD player, iPod, cars, computers, TiVo, etc.
My point is that many people already have these things and throwing them into the PS3 is just going to jack the price. Honestly, $400 is a lot to pay for a game system packed with features when I already have 5-6 machines that can do the same already.
And there's this point. I prefer to move about during the day. Take a Saturday with no plans. I dont want to play games, watch TV, listen to music, order movies, and so on all while sitting in the same place. It's nice to move from place to place and get some variety. Rest your eyes, change the scene.
Re:BluRay could make it slower! (Score:2, Insightful)
As much as people call it a "1x BD drive", I've not seen any speculation as to the performance of the drive when reading DVD media, which I think is the comparison that will matter.
Re:It'll grow into itself. (Score:3, Insightful)
It was a selling point for the PS2, but it'll only be a feature for the PS3.
Re:It'll grow into itself. (Score:3, Insightful)
I myself made the same decision. However, between the time I decided that, and the PS2 was actually released, DVD player prices dropped to $150 or so. Since I was never all that interested in a game console, I changed my mind.
Re:It'll grow into itself. (Score:2, Insightful)
Man, that is a messed up definition of a great gaming machine. Really, how many consumers who bought the XBox or PS2 cared how much energy the developers had to put in to make the games? Not a single one. They cared about the games, not how difficult they were to make.
Re:I'd disagree..again (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't see PC games, themselves, as being any more technically minded than console games. I don't play games for what system it's on, I play a game for the game itself. Sure, setting up a gaming PC may require more technical sophistication, but at the end of the day, all I see on PCs are fairly brainless games that are more based on reflexes and repetative tasks than intelligence, problem solving, and technical sophistication. Obviously, I'm generalizing, things like The Sims, Darwinia, and Sim City do require a lot of ongoing problem solving, but most of the time, when I think of PC games, I think of generic first person shooters, which, IMO are the least technically minded GAMES on the market.
I read an interesting psychology book, recently, called "Everything Bad for you is Good", which outlines the thinking patterns in various types of games. At one point, it outlines 5 minutes in the mind of someone playing Zelda: Wind Waker, and demonstrates that the game requires a fairly sophisticated level of problem solving. This is Wind Waker we're talking about, the game hailed by most "hardcore gamers" to be childsplay, just before they go off to their gaming PCs to blow things up in half-life.
I think we need to redefine what we mean by "hardcore gamers" and the "technically minded". I used to think of "hardcore gamers" as people who wanted to challange themselves to the latest, and most difficult games... now, I more associate it with the mindlessness of hardcore porn. Most console gamers I've ever known in my life were extremely intelligent, technically minded people, people who would rather spend their lives problem solving in a game, then trouble shooting a computer just to play the game!
I dunno, but I've heard the term "hardcore gamer" used to refer to a lot of different types of people.
Yup, parallels to the film industry (Score:2, Insightful)
I couldn't have said it better myself. It always pisses me off to hear people talk about Nintendo as kiddy games. I'm starting to associate "kiddy" with "fun", which is exactly what I expect from a good game. It's starting to feel like, "if you're having fun, you're just being immature"... isn't "to have fun" the whole point of gaming in the first place?
Let's look at the gaming industry in comparison to the film industry, of which there is a lot of parallel. The average XBox or PS2 game is pretty much on the level of a summer action blockbuster... not too intelligent, not too difficult to digest, fairly unsophisticated dialog, one dimensional characterisation. At best, you get something on the level of The Matrix, which, though for a considerable part of the population is deemed "intelligent", in the grand scheme is pretty simplistic.
The closest comparison I can draw from the average Nintendo game is Pixar or oldschool Disney. Sure, it's animated, it values innocence, but if you look underneith the innocent veniere, the average Pixar movie has a whole lot more depth and sophisticated than the average summer blockbuster. I mean, really, are people actually claiming that Stealth is more mature than Finding Nemo?
I've always associated Pixar and Nintendo with innocence with a sense of sophistication. The average summer blockbuster just serves to make pre-teens suddenly think they're mature because they're watching someone's head get split open. It's all an illusion. I'd say that the average Pixar film is FAR more mature than the average hollywood bluckbuster. In fact, if you look at the REAL demographics outlined by movie sales, the average age of a Pixar audience member is a lot older than the average age of a bluckbuster's audience (which comprises primarilly of teenagers).
Now, until we have games that parallel movies like Good Night & Good Luck or Capote, I wouldn't talk about sophistication and maturity OUTSIDE of the context of the Pixar-esque Nintendo genre. I'd like to see some real world stastics, but I'm going to guess that the average age of GTA players is around 13, and the average age of Zelda players is somewhere around 19. Innocence is looked down upon by the 11-17 year old crowd, which, unfortunately, makes up a substantial part of the gaming demographic.
Which, yeah, btw, when are we going to get a video game that's on the level of sophistication as a good indie movie?
Re:It'll grow into itself. (Score:2, Insightful)
"up-scaling logic" can never add more real detail.