PlayStation CEO Hopes 2008 Was "As Bad As it Gets"

[Treblaine]

Not everything revolves around you.

I hope Sony doesn't think the same way as you do.

The customer is ALWAYS right.

You're right. The customer is. They also want less shovelware from Nintendo. Nintendo doesn't comply, yet the fans are happy.

So something here is not like the other. Oh that's right. People still hate Sony for no good reason. How could I forget?

Oh, don't play coy with us. We all know what Sony has been like for the past 3 years, right now it feels like too little too late.

BTW, it is not the large amount of shovel-ware on wii that fans object to but the lack of hardcore titles. Wii-Motion Plus, Red Steel 2, No More Heroes 2, Metroid: other M as well as the exponential expansion of the Retro-Tastic virtual Console has it kicking well but if I had a Wii I would be just as disappointed with Nintendo as I am at Sony for how they handle PS3 and PSP.

At least I have my trusty PC.

 

[Pendragon9]

Not everything revolves around you.

I hope Sony doesn't think the same way as you do.

The customer is ALWAYS right.

You're right. The customer is. They also want less shovelware from Nintendo. Nintendo doesn't comply, yet the fans are happy.

So something here is not like the other. Oh that's right. People still hate Sony for no good reason. How could I forget?

Oh, don't play coy with us. We all know what Sony has been like for the past 3 years, right now it feels like too little too late.

BTW, it is not the large amount of shovel-ware on wii that fans object to but the lack of hardcore titles. Wii-Motion Plus, Red Steel 2, No More Heroes 2, Metroid: other M as well as the exponential expansion of the Retro-Tastic virtual Console has it kicking well but if I had a Wii I would be just as disappointed with Nintendo as I am at Sony for how they handle PS3 and PSP.

At least I have my trusty PC.

I still think they've been doing nicely. I happen to enjoy the most out of my PS3, and I don't even own all their awesome exclusive titles.

Oh that's right. That's because instead of whining like a 2nd grader on the internet, I actually take time out of my day to enjoy the consoles.

I'm sorry if people don't want to take the time to enjoy the console as well. Oh well.

Please, PLEASE do not make me think you're a 2nd grader by pulling the old "Ps3 and PSP lack any games" argument. Seriously, I know you can do better than that. I'm sure of it.

Mind you that despite my comments, I haven't once said that the 360 and Wii have bad games. I actually enjoy what games you can get on each one. I'm praying you will do the same mature thing and admit the PS3 has it's money worth of games too. A hundred extra dollars is worth it.

And if it truly isn't, you can always get an XBOX 360 or a PC. Nobody is telling you otherwise.

In fact, you have a PC. Why are you still unhappy? How much did you pay for your PC?

Now, I'm not going to be a hypocrite, so I think I'm gonna log off the Escapist for tonight and enjoy some gaming. Have a good night folks.

*walks off stage*

 

[Nifty]

I love the argument against the ps3 that its too expensive. yes when it came out the highest grade ( the 40g at the time) was 600 big ones. Now you can get the 160g with uncharted for only $500. and now you can find the 40g for $300.... i dont own one so i have to ask, how much is an elite?

An Elite is roughly $350 going by UK prices.

 

[Altorin]

I guess Jack doesn't realize America is about to hit double digit unemployment rates in a matter of months, if not weeks. Something tells me that will hardly bolster their sales.

they'll have more time for games!

 

[Joshimodo]

I'm afraid your opinion is not the opinion of everyone. People think differently than you.

I'm sorry if you think the world revolves around you. Besides, Microsoft isn't doing too hot either right now. More console sales doesn't mean they're rolling in the money, considering they have bad hardware they have to keep fixing.

I have a Ps3 and I see ten-twenty different games I want. So is my opinion wrong because it doesn't fit yours? Or are you going to admit people have different opinions?

You're obviously misinformed-I know it's not everyone's opinion, however it IS fact. The popularity, consistency and general quality of the games aren't of the high standards people expect.

Did I mention Microsoft? No. Stop dragging your fanboy drivel into this. Yeah, they're losing money, but guess what-I don't care about that either. They should make a less flimsy console next time around.

 

[Jumplion]

you know sometimes you guys act about as mature as /v/

Just saying.

Do I want to know what /v/ is?

 

[Silva]

You said that hardcore gamers would be aware of this price drop, but you weren't.

Okay, let's get some things straight.

Did I say that I was a "hardcore gamer"? Nope, and I'm certainly not, compared to the group I was speaking of. The actual hardcore base make me look like a dispassionate journalist who just happens to play video games daily.

I did a little Googling in response to what you said, and the only price cut, the $100 one you mentioned, was back in 2007 (which, by the way, is the cut that I did buy my PS3 after - I did say I have the 40GB version, which was released at the same time as that cut for the 80GB). In any case, that cut's a little bit far back to be using as a point in the present discussion.

And even if it weren't, you should note that the one report that mentions that cut on the first page of searches said that they were helping the PS3's popularity:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13772_3-9820201-52.html

The only recent news of a PS3 price cut of an amount similar to the one that you mentioned appears to be only rumour:

http://technabob.com/blog/2009/06/10/playstation-3-price-cut-rumors

So unless you have an actual link talking about "last month"'s so called price cut, I'm going to go ahead and call your claim presumptuous. How do you even know the sales figures for last month? Did you really look them up? Maybe you should next time.

 

[Silva]

http://www.gamerzink.com/news/$199-playstation-3,-new-sku-inbound.aspx

My mistake, it was actually $160

I see. This one's different. But I still see problems with what you said.

This link is not talking about a large-scale price cut. This is talking about a cut in one store in Australia of all places. This country is hardly the capital of gaming worldwide. Meanwhile, this thread is about the potential for a worldwide PS3 cut, which is what I was discussing.

That aside, you said hardcore gamers didn't rush for it? That's because the staff of the company, as the article says, went straight for it. And you know, staff are always the first to know about price cuts, not the consumer, however fast the Internet may be. As long as any cuts are on this small a scale, the first dibs will always be for whoever works at the store that gives the cut.

The worldwide scale, which my economic prediction applied to, would be a different story.

 

[CoverYourHead]

All I want is a PS3 without all the fancy and expensive bells and whistles I don't give a crap about. I mean, if they just cut some of the non-game related tech out of the console then I could afford one, but as it stands it's not worth it to throw away cash on a blu-ray player. I think Sony needs to offer a striped down console so people could get what they want out of it without wasting cash on things they don't want. I think that would lead to a boost in sales.

 

[velcthulhu]

"Although the ps3 sold like crapburgers this year, we want our stockholders to believe it will sell much better next year, through the magical power of Hope."
-translated from sony-speak to english

 

[Treblaine]

I still think they've been doing nicely. I happen to enjoy the most out of my PS3, and I don't even own all their awesome exclusive titles.

Oh that's right. That's because instead of whining like a 2nd grader on the internet, I actually take time out of my day to enjoy the consoles.

I'm sorry if people don't want to take the time to enjoy the console as well. Oh well.

Please, PLEASE do not make me think you're a 2nd grader by pulling the old "Ps3 and PSP lack any games" argument. Seriously, I know you can do better than that. I'm sure of it.

Mind you that despite my comments, I haven't once said that the 360 and Wii have bad games. I actually enjoy what games you can get on each one. I'm praying you will do the same mature thing and admit the PS3 has it's money worth of games too. A hundred extra dollars is worth it.

And if it truly isn't, you can always get an XBOX 360 or a PC. Nobody is telling you otherwise.

In fact, you have a PC. Why are you still unhappy? How much did you pay for your PC?

Now, I'm not going to be a hypocrite, so I think I'm gonna log off the Escapist for tonight and enjoy some gaming. Have a good night folks.

*walks off stage*

Well my parents got me a basic entry level PC for work and study, but I paid a reasonable amount to upgrade the graphics card/RAM/Etc, I have actually had some good gaming on TF2 since I last commented. Shame the PS3 version of TF2 is so horrible... remember Valve saying something about the PS3 being a waste of time... something like that. I mean it takes a LOT to actively scare away third parties.

Look, regardless of games my trouble with PS3 is the most basic... I can't play the damn thing for 3/4 of the year. Why? The PS3 will only output HD via HDMI to a HDTV. Have you any idea how much HDTVs cost? Even lower end models cost 2x a new PS3 and then the image quality processing down the lower end makes the resolution pointless. So my PS3 stays at my parents house, their dual-income can afford a HDTV but they are too stingy to get me a HDTV and I am sorry I just can't bring myself to drop half a grand on a TV.

I mean the gall of all this is the Xbox 360 supports 720p output via VGA... play games in full native resolution on any old VGA computer monitor. Even cheap projectors. It has actually been found to be better than HDMI in many ways as mos games are rendered in 720p yet monitors that claim to be 720p are actually 1366x768 resolution for some retarded reason (something about images over 1 mega-pixel), so every 720p game on a 720p screen is actually upscaled, just a tiny bit, this reduces even the highest quality digital signal with artefacts that can be really severe with lower quality HDTV that don't have the most advanced signal processing. But plug into a 1280x1024 monitor and the horizontal resolution is exactly the same as 720p (1280x720) so it is just letter-boxed.

But PS3 can NEVER support this VGA-output feature as the Blu-ray base of the media is required by technical specifications to output via HDMI to a HDCP compatible device. HDCP compatible monitors are a problem as they are almost as expensive + the aspect ratio is all wrong and I have yet to find a cheap one that supports 1:1 pixel ratio.

THAT is why I am buying an Xbox 360 as Xbox 360 + HD VGA cable(+ XBL Gold x2) is still cheaper than even any entry level HDTV for my PS3. Plus I won't have to pay TV licence fee (long story).

Don't get me started on PSP and it's screwed up controls. I mean there ARE good games on the PSP (nothing wrong with PS2 ports) but the controls are so badly thought out yet developers shoehorn games that are BEGGING for dual analogue sticks and more shoulder buttons that mean the games are impossible to appreciate unless you have three arms. I mean the number of syphon filter-esque games where you struggle to aim with the face buttons: something is wrong in Sony HQ.

Case in point: Metal Gear Solid Portable ops. Firstly quite miffed how the graphics fell so short of PS2 (even Peace Walker looks sub-Dreamcast) but the camera led to so many cheap deaths and made it so frustrating to play that I gave up. The thing is MGS3 had a fixed camera, the right analogue stick was useless, and it played fine. Yet the Portable Ops sequel introduced a 3D camera... to take advantage of the right analogue stick... that didn't exist.

Also, what is the point in having a UMD if you have comic book style cutscenes... YOU COULD DO THAT ON THE DS!!!

PSP-Go just shows how much Sony is in denial. DS is selling because it is easy to play with intuitive, fast and precise controls, not because it is small. I'd rather have a Game Gear sized PSP as long as it had PS2 type controls.

Actually, lets get on to games. The ever popular Monster Hunter, to spite Monster Hunter 1 and 2 coming out on PS2, the third party developers abandoned the releasing MH3 on PS3 since the development costs were just so high. Everywhere you see third party developers abandoning the PS3 and is conspicuous that the only PS3 exclusives are 1st party titles OWNED by SOny. If not abandoning PS3 they are certainly not risking exclusive releases, even Sony's precious Kojima has taken the MGS franchise multiplatform following in the footsteps of Final Fantasy and really this has been going on since this generation started, franchises previously Sony exclusive have gone multi:
-GTA
-Tomb Raider
-Ridge Racer
-Devil May cry
-Resident Evil

I mean I would never have gotten the expensive PS3 if I had known these franchises would have been released on the much cheaper Xbox 360 that has consistently retailed in the UK for half the price of a PS3. It would have been moot but half of these games have ended up WORSE on the PS3 release! Especially on the DLC front.

The PS3 and PSP have fallen SOOO short in virtually every single area and I refuse to be a Sony apologist just because it had a few good exclusives.

 

[Lord Krunk]

So.........why the hell wouldn't they advertise it as a multimedia centre if it is a multimedia centre?

Because that's not what a gaming console is for.

The 360 has its own Media Centre, but advertises it as more of a neat little addition to its rig. The PS3 staff just blabber on about the hardware and features and not what people who would buy the console actually care about: the games.

As Khell_Sennett has already stated, there are far better (and cheaper) ways to spend your money if you want a full home entertainment system.

 

[Jumplion]

So.........why the hell wouldn't they advertise it as a multimedia centre if it is a multimedia centre?

Because that's not what a gaming console is for.

The 360 has its own Media Centre, but advertises it as more of a neat little addition to its rig. The PS3 staff just blabber on about the hardware and features and not what people who would buy the console actually care about: the games.

As Khell_Sennett has already stated, there are far better (and cheaper) ways to spend your money if you want a full home entertainment system.

As I stated before, if you want to buy a PS3 for a games console then buy it for a games console, nothing is stopping you. The PS3 is advertised as something to please all of your desires, IE multimedia platform. What is a problem with Sony trying to appeal to a greater mass than just "gamers", especially if Nintendo is taking up a huge portion of the "gamer" market? Didn't we just establish that "gamers" are whiny bitches who will never ever be satisfied? Nintendo advertises to the "newbies" of gaming, sure, but 360 is now trying to get a piece of that pie and PS3 is just advertising like a general machine for most of your needs.

If you want it for games, get it for games. Just go to their official blog, they talk about nothing but games with their announcements and such. Or just research the games yourselves if it's that important, Sony's PR and Marketing departments are horrible, we can all agree to that.

If you don't want a PS3, fine. If you do want a PS3, get it for what you want it for whether it be games, movies, TV shows, music, online play, blah blah blah, whatever. I see people scoffing and laughing at the PSP because "it doesn't play games" when it does. Just because it's multimedia, doesn't mean it doesn't have what you want. (now I'm just getting ranty) I guarantee you that if the PSP didn't sell as well as most people don't give credit for, the DSi would have come a lot sooner (fortunately or unfortunately for some).