Author Topic: Sony getting hit Hard lately  (Read 872504 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Urkel

  • Reggie Fart-Aime
  • Score: 3
    • View Profile
Quote

That said, competition is good.  When Nintendo has no competition, prices for us gamers are high.


I think competition from the PSP is precisely the reason the DS is so awesome. If Nintendo had no real competition in the handheld market, they probably would've played it safe and released a GBA 2 instead of the DS.

But since Sony did enter the market, Nintendo realized what a threat they were, and that a GBA 2 simply wouldn't cut it. Sony's brand name was still incredibly strong at the time, and Nintendo's was... you know...   So Nintendo was forced to try something drastically different.

While the fanboy in me would love to see the PSP in the grave already, my logical side knows that it's best that it sticks around to keep Nintendo on its toes.
"ROFS? Rolling on the floor... starving?"- Phoenix Wright

Offline darknight06

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Says who?  The Japanese market was still in a downfall and they knew this for quite a while.  A GBA2 would've done nothing for that situation there, I believe they would've released the DS anyway PSP or no.  It might have been handled a bit differently, but it would've still existed.

Offline Kairon

  • T_T
  • NWR Staff Pro
  • Score: 48
    • View Profile
Yeah.. I think Nintnedo was as much motivated by the trends in Japan as they were by the PSP.

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Carmine Red, Associate Editor

A glooming peace this morning with it brings;
The sun, for sorrow, will not show his head:
Go hence, to have more talk of these sad things;
Some shall be pardon'd, and some punished:
For never was a story of more woe
Than this of Sega and her Mashiro.

Offline segagamer12

  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
Ok true, but the GG was more competitive than PSP, it directly attacked GB in its marketing, it could watch TV, it played SMS games (enhanced ports of NES and arcade games for the most part) and it had Sonic, GOOD Sonic, not crappy Sonic. Its few good years were beter than PSPs best so far. ALso it had a lot better market share and Sega always cliamed it was for gaming, Sony has since said PSP is the next walkman and isnt even trying to compete with DS anymore.


so wait what was the point again? oh yes Sony must die.  
You can call me
THE RAT thank you very much
check out http://www.myspace.com/phatrat1982

Offline Mikintosh

  • Score: -1
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: segagamer12
Ok true, but the GG was more competitive than PSP, it directly attacked GB in its marketing, it could watch TV, it played SMS games (enhanced ports of NES and arcade games for the most part) and it had Sonic, GOOD Sonic, not crappy Sonic. Its few good years were beter than PSPs best so far. ALso it had a lot better market share and Sega always cliamed it was for gaming, Sony has since said PSP is the next walkman and isnt even trying to compete with DS anymore.


so wait what was the point again? oh yes Sony must die.


Didn't Sony roll out a TV thing that hook up to the PSP or something? Thought I saw it at a Sony Style store. I think Sega's Game Boy-bashing commercials ended up backfiring on them in a subtle way, because even though it had color, the games I've seen were all sucky imitations of Genesis games. If the GG games in Sonic Gems Collection were representative...that was not good Sonic. Like with the Genesis, Sega rose up by tearing Nintendo down, but when Nintendo came back on the rebound with DKC, it kinda knocked the wind out of them, from a mass-market perception, I think. Sony was better off not trying to compete in ads with the DS (because it didn't offer much for the average 10 year-old that the DS didn't), but they never really addressed the "make the consumer feel they need the product" angle.

I mean, I bought it, but only because I'm here at college with no console and I wanna play a pretty game occasionally. That's not most people.

Offline segagamer12

  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
the FIRSt Sonic for Gg was good the rest were just typical handheld ports. i enevr said GG was good, I am a SEGA fna and I HATED the thing. But the Tv Tuner got widespread marketing, the psp thing, thast the first I heard of it. hopefully the last too.  Plus I think Sega is a lot more stubborn than Sony is. I could be wrong but I think they proved themselves to be quit stubborn and Sony is just plain stupid.  
You can call me
THE RAT thank you very much
check out http://www.myspace.com/phatrat1982

Offline UltimatePartyBear

  • Voice of Reason
  • Score: 35
    • View Profile
There's more bad news for Europe, and probably the rest of the world, too, sooner or later.  The dedicated hardware (read: a PS2) in the PS3 that allows it to be fully backward compatible with the PS2 is going bye-bye to save a little money.  From now on, the PS2 will be emulated instead.  It was bad enough when high costs forced Sony to cut promised features before launch.  Now they're cutting features that have made it to market already.  This will hurt anyone planning on buying one after the price drops to a reasonable level, too.  By that time, you won't be able to buy a fully functional one anymore.  

Offline couchmonkey

  • I tye dyed my Wii and I love it
  • Score: 2
    • View Profile
Game Gear did attack Game Boy more directly, but it just shows a difference in philosophies that has happened since those days.  Sega had a very head-on method of marketing, and Sony emulated at first (Crash Bandicoot going to Nintendo HQ), but nowdays it seems like Sony and Nintendo can't wait to tell everyone how they're "not" competing.  Which way works better?  It probably depends on what market you're going for.  Attacking the competition seems to be a common tactic for "youth" oriented marketing, but not for older people.

I think Nintendo did a good job of refining Game Boy and maintaining the low price-point and low battery consumption.  The Game Boy also seemed to have better third party support, but that's just my impression, I don't remember for sure.  I'd say Segagamer had a good point with Sega releasing three handhelds: it lost it's focus.  What if Sega had engineered a new Game Gear that was smaller, cheaper, and easier on batteries instead of creating other handhelds?

I'd dare say Sega is a good example of how the quest for more powerful hardware is misguided.  I think Genesis took some of the spotlight from NES and then Sega got to thinking that power was the key to winning all battles.  So Game Gear and Nomad wind up being way more powerful than Game Boy, but they don't actually "win".  Sega CD and 32X pump up Genesis' power beyond the Super NES, but Super NES actually starts pulling ahead in sales.  More power is nice, but it's not the only thing.
That's my opinion, not yours.
Now Playing: The Adventures of Link, Super Street Fighter 4, Dragon Quest IX

Offline KDR_11k

  • boring person
  • Score: 28
    • View Profile
Europe gets a more expensive, less capable and way too late PS3 and the cheaper one isn't available.

Offline BlackNMild2k1

  • Animal Crossing Hustler
  • Score: 410
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Europe gets a more expensive, less capable and way too late PS3 and the cheaper one isn't available.
I find it funny that the discussion has turned to how Sega f#cked up, lost focus and made the customers feel like they got screwed and now this new Sony news about PS3 in Europe. The situations are very different yet so much alike.

edit: Sony's Official Press Release

Offline segagamer12

  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
its a wonder they stil have die hard fans like myself huh.



To be honest I used to like Sony alot, untl recently in fact. i just always hated playstation brand. Now I hate Sony altogether so its deeper now. Sega used to be cool and now they are not, Sony used ot be cool and now they are not. See how it fits?
You can call me
THE RAT thank you very much
check out http://www.myspace.com/phatrat1982

Offline Kairon

  • T_T
  • NWR Staff Pro
  • Score: 48
    • View Profile
Thanks to striderprime:

How to kill your brand

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Carmine Red, Associate Editor

A glooming peace this morning with it brings;
The sun, for sorrow, will not show his head:
Go hence, to have more talk of these sad things;
Some shall be pardon'd, and some punished:
For never was a story of more woe
Than this of Sega and her Mashiro.

Offline stevey

  • Young HAWNESS
  • Score: 15
    • View Profile
And just incase sony didn't piss off Europe enough, Sony giving away freebies to Australia to try to sell ps3...

Quote

Sony is handing out freebies to buyers of its PlayStation 3 as its hefty price appears to be scaring away shoppers.

The latest giveaway will take place in Australia, where the gaming console launches March 23. The first 20,000 buyers will receive a copy of the James Bond movie ``Casino Royale.''

Free downloads of the PS3 game ``Gran Turismo'' -- out since December for U.S. and Japanese PS3 owners -- also will be offered in Australia.

A PlayStation 3 model with a 60-gigabyte hard drive costs 999.95 Australian dollars ($790). The console costs $600 in the U.S., where it's been on sale since November.


lol
My Demands and Declarations:
nVidia is CRAP!!!
BOYCOTT Digest mode and LEGEND OF OO!

Your PM box will be spammed with Girl Link porn! NO EXCEPTION!
Wii want WaveBirds

Stevey Duff
NWR HAWTNESS Inspector
NWR Staff All Powerful Satin!

Offline BlackNMild2k1

  • Animal Crossing Hustler
  • Score: 410
    • View Profile
I'm telling you, there is some sort of bet between Sony & Nintendo. There is now way Sony would purposely sabotage themselves like this for no reason other than to win a bet. It makes absolutely no sense what so ever.

Offline Kairon

  • T_T
  • NWR Staff Pro
  • Score: 48
    • View Profile
You're almost there BNM. The bet Sony made was with MS.

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Carmine Red, Associate Editor

A glooming peace this morning with it brings;
The sun, for sorrow, will not show his head:
Go hence, to have more talk of these sad things;
Some shall be pardon'd, and some punished:
For never was a story of more woe
Than this of Sega and her Mashiro.

Offline darknight06

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
It's not sabotage, it's Sony only doing what they set out to finish their original disruption.  The PS3 was to be a computer set top box that takes over the living room.  The PSX was probably a testing ground for what they were ultimately going to do, each system that they made inched closer to this.  Remember, Kutargi screamed to the top of his lungs that every PS system was a computer.  Nintendo and Sega were always the least of their concerns, since the main target that Sony was after was the PC incumbent Microsoft, which Sony has even admitted during the PS1 days.  Why else to do you think Microsoft would just jump in to the console space and be willing to lose 4 billion plus in the process and then release a new system after they get to a userbase no. that they feel like they could expand upon later?  They know that letting Sony become the entertainment media hub computer in the living room could potentially disrupt the PC platform as well as have more developers working on an API other than Direct X. (Gamecube used Open GL 1.2)

Continuing on with Sony, the PSP was an interesting little proposition.  Nintendo had about what 85 to 90% of the handheld market at that time and I'm positive that Sony believed that if they infiltrated the handheld space with their brand they could probably eat a significant chunk of that pie from Nintendo (Sony was probably banking on Nintendo creating a sustaining N64 handheld).  However that wasn't Sony's only goal.  Remember, not that long ago the iPod (hate it or love it) completely disrupted the Walkman line of products and left Sony in a vulnerable state.  Sony's hope with the PSP was that it would become "The Walkman of the 21st century" all while at the same time become the new handheld market leader.  Or in other words "Take Handhelds Out Of The Gaming Ghetto". So what went wrong?  The iPod STILL has 75 to 80% of the market and Nintendo disrupted handhelds in general with the DS, putting Gameboy to rest and sending the PSP down with it worldwide.  Right now the PSP is partly responsible for their money problems, and the bad thing for them is that a stronger PSP isn't gonna get them out of the rut, it's already stronger more powerful tech.  Playing up the multimedia aspects isn't gonna help either, that's what the iPod and various other devices can do. (memory sticks are still expensive)

Bottom line, despite how the PSP and PSX sold, the PS3 must become a computer.  It must finish the brand's  original goal of disrupting Microsoft and the PC platform (web browser, running Linux OS, USB ports recognize and install components).  Blu-Ray must ultimately defeat DVD and HD-DVD to become the new standard.  It must stop the X-Box 360 in it's tracks to keep it from taking over the living room and prevent Wii60 from shutting the door to their video game entry point (especially the Wii in Japan).  It's not over yet, Sony still may have some opprotunities left but the path there isn't gonna be anywhere close to as cut and dry as it was the last time.

Offline segagamer12

  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
Sonys stated original goal for PS was to "kill Nintendo at all costs" that is who they have been going oafter, not microsoft, they never mentioned Ms ever. The Vaio was their entry into PC not the PS. PS is them trying to get rid of Nintendo and then focusing on making thier PCs stronger. So far I only know 1 person who has a Sony Laptop and everyone things its the coolest thing ever around here. When they set out to invade the PC market they werent using PS for that, they were using vaio. It is true that they are going after MS now and that they are more directly competing, but a lot of that is Sony stepped into MS territory witht he Vaio and PS and now MS is getting even by stepping into thier video game market Sony ahs pretty much taken over. Nobody expected Nintendo to be able to stand up to either company, yet they have been doing a pretty good job.


With PSP Sony was continuing thier quest to kill NIntendo, knowing that GameBoy was thier most profitable division, they felt they had to take that away inroder to ensure thier victory. So far they have suceeded in shaking Nintendo up and making them fight harder for thier money, which has made them a better company in many ways. Sony never really was a threat though, despite what people think, Nintendo still had a strong enough impact on people they would always have enough loyalists to stay in business. They knew that but with srinking market share they had to go after a bigger pie because they kept losing the loyalists with so many screwups and flat out ignoring the fans on so many occasions.  

I honestly think that Sony would have been better off if they hadn't killed walkman instead evolved it. The walkman may have been on decline but it still had  astrong brand name and if they ahd focused on that and left PSP alone they could have been better off, becasue they would have had a cheaper mp3 player and they could have left out the umd crap altogether.  The other big mistake they make is they like to use proprietary media formats, and thier stuff is always mroe expensive than other brands. So making an MP3 player that requires thier expensive media sticks vs a generic SD card or even a built in memory is what hurt them alot.


Still they arent competing directly with anyone anymore, before PS Sony competed with big electronics companies and inorder to secure funding for that and a staple place in the market, the bought out major holywood studios to have band to work with not to mention some negociating power. After enterting the video game market they still had to compete with big electronics companies and other hollywood studios, and now Sega and Nitnendo directly, seeing Panasonic enter the video game market along with JVC, and Phillips, three of their biggest competitors, was also liekly a major infouence on the desicion.

Now they got those guys out of video games, then decided to enter the PC market while there at it, and angered MS, who then had to respond by entereing Sonys bread and butter territory. Now they notonly have JVC, Panasonic, Phillaps, Sanyo, etc to compete with directly, they have Nintendo, and Microsoft also to worry about. Sony was way better off not entering video games directly because they could have worked with Nintendo and Sega still would have fallen and MS wouldnt have had a reason to enter video games like they did when they did.


Right now Sony is reaping what they sowed. They went on a rampage buying into as many markets as they could and trying to get bigger and bigger and now instead of having a core market to focus on and direct competition form handful of companies, they have thier hands in every major market and have to directly compete with too many companies to keep track of. Sony somehow expected thier own name to carry them for ever and now they are seeing that people have had enough of thier BS and want change. MS still has a good chance of sucessfully eliminating this new threat to thier software monopoly and they are going to go head to head with Sony until they do. See at thsi point MS *has* to get rid of Sony or get them out of thier territory or else people will start to see there are better Software and OS solutions than what they provide.
 
You can call me
THE RAT thank you very much
check out http://www.myspace.com/phatrat1982

Offline Amodaus1

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
What darknight said is intresting, it'd be funny if it was true, but id oubt sony really wanted to take on microsoft from day one of the ps1.

The PSP, yeah it didn't storm the handheld market like sony hoped. They play it down now, they say they have decent market growth, they're comparing the growth of the psp with the PS1 as its their first entry into the handheld market. But the reality is that sony wanted to capture proabably 50% of the market. They didn't come close, however, i doubt the PSP is doing as badly as eveyone suggests. It's still getting alot of third party support, not to mention sony is throwing alot of first party titles to the handheld. So it must be making some money.

As far as the state of the PS3, i read this months EGM and Game-informer, both had interviews with sony execs (one was Jack Tretton, both might of been with Jack Tretton, i don't own the GI to confirm) Either way, you can see the spin he was laying down in the interviews. Sony may not of had all the numbers they do now, but they must have been cringing at the bad press on the ps3, now that they have the numbers, esspecially the pitiful Japanese numbers, i wonder what kind of new spin they'll be willing to create.

Offline Adrock

  • I’m just here for the zipline.
  • Score: 138
    • View Profile
Quote

darknight06 wrote:
Why else to do you think Microsoft would just jump in to the console space and be willing to lose 4 billion plus in the process and then release a new system after they get to a userbase

To make money in the long run. Microsoft rushed 360 to get a jump on PS3. They were probably hoping for a bigger lead with the headstart.

Quote

segagamer12 wrote:
a lot of that is Sony stepped into MS territory witht he Vaio and PS and now MS is getting even by stepping into thier video game market Sony ahs pretty much taken over.

I'd say Sony is competing with companies like HP and Gateway more. Vaio laptops usually come with Windows (I've never seen one that didn't).

Offline Kairon

  • T_T
  • NWR Staff Pro
  • Score: 48
    • View Profile
Those last three posts were AWESOME! Lots of food for thought!

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Carmine Red, Associate Editor

A glooming peace this morning with it brings;
The sun, for sorrow, will not show his head:
Go hence, to have more talk of these sad things;
Some shall be pardon'd, and some punished:
For never was a story of more woe
Than this of Sega and her Mashiro.

Offline GoldenPhoenix

  • Now it's a party!
  • Score: 42
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: Amodaus1
What darknight said is intresting, it'd be funny if it was true, but id oubt sony really wanted to take on microsoft from day one of the ps1.

The PSP, yeah it didn't storm the handheld market like sony hoped. They play it down now, they say they have decent market growth, they're comparing the growth of the psp with the PS1 as its their first entry into the handheld market. But the reality is that sony wanted to capture proabably 50% of the market. They didn't come close, however, i doubt the PSP is doing as badly as eveyone suggests. It's still getting alot of third party support, not to mention sony is throwing alot of first party titles to the handheld. So it must be making some money.

As far as the state of the PS3, i read this months EGM and Game-informer, both had interviews with sony execs (one was Jack Tretton, both might of been with Jack Tretton, i don't own the GI to confirm) Either way, you can see the spin he was laying down in the interviews. Sony may not of had all the numbers they do now, but they must have been cringing at the bad press on the ps3, now that they have the numbers, esspecially the pitiful Japanese numbers, i wonder what kind of new spin they'll be willing to create.


Haha I read that EGM interview, it was so sad I almost felt sorry for the guy. Saying how the PS3 was selling so well, even though he failed to mention that at one point over 30 thousand were on ebay, and even then the bottom dropped out of it price wise (I know because I was hit with it).  
Switch Friend Code: SW-4185-3173-1144

Offline darknight06

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Of course Sony didn't exactly want to go up against Microsoft on day 1, but you better believe they were thinking of doing it in the long run.  As with most disruptions, you don't want to initially scare incumbents, otherwise you risk retaliation coming far too soon.    Other CD based consoles had CD playback in them, but the big difference with the PS1 was that they marketed it properly and in a disruptive way that was at the time unknown to the game industry.  Games were "cinematic" and began to mimic hollywood and the movies with a game CD loaded to the brim with FMV, no doubt to get people comfortable with the idea of using a game console for movies.  This was probably the big reason why 2D was gimped and even shunned on the system, anything reminding people of the past was not gonna help their disruption scheme.  Nintendo and Sega were still making games, Sony was pursuing all in one digital entertainment.  

Microsoft knew that Sony had to be onto something big.  Rumors of a successor to the PS brand with DVD playback had to turn heads over there and at that point they figured it would be time to act.  But first, they wanted an "in" into the industry.  That's when they came to Sega a few years back about using Windows CE and Direct X for Dreamcast games.  However, the reason why a game like Sega Swirl was one of the only titles that openly used Windows CE was because once Sega learned of Microsoft's true intentions they hurried up and got all developers on their API instead of Direct X.  Microsoft had two goals when coming to Sega, one was to learn about the console industry.  The other was to establish Direct X in the console space early so that when the DC died out (and they knew it would) doing X-Box ports of Dreamcast games wouldn't take much of anything because the groundwork would already be there.  

Take it with a grain of salt if you will, but I know I gotta be right somewhere.

Offline Kairon

  • T_T
  • NWR Staff Pro
  • Score: 48
    • View Profile
MICROSOFT TRIED TO KILL SEGA!!! AAARRRGGGHHH!!!!

RAT! JOIN ME IN RIGHTEOUS ANGER!

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Carmine Red, Associate Editor

A glooming peace this morning with it brings;
The sun, for sorrow, will not show his head:
Go hence, to have more talk of these sad things;
Some shall be pardon'd, and some punished:
For never was a story of more woe
Than this of Sega and her Mashiro.

Offline KDR_11k

  • boring person
  • Score: 28
    • View Profile
Microsoft tried to F###ING BURY GOOGLE by throwing chairs at them...

Offline couchmonkey

  • I tye dyed my Wii and I love it
  • Score: 2
    • View Profile
Hey darknight, did you been read Sean Malstrom on theWiikly?  That guy is really interesting!  What you've been saying is very similar.

Sony's mistakes are indeed due to trying to force its own disruptions into the market, while losing sight of what consumers want.  I think Blu-ray is generally seen as the main culprit behind PS3's high price and late launch - but Sony figured that everyone would eat PS3 up and Blu-ray dominance would follow.

Sony's mistake was thinking that people care about the Playstation name.  Why not assume that?  After all, it sold over 100 million units of both previous systems.  But Nintendo thought people cared about the Nintendo name, and three generations of home consoles since then have proven otherwise.  People don't buy game systems for the name on the front, they buy them for the games.  If Final Fantasy XIII and Metal Gear Solid 4 were available right now, more people might shell out $600 for the PS3...but they're not out and the way things are going, PS3 might have the worst third party support by the time they do arrive.

There's an analyst (yeah, I know) making the rounds today saying that PS3 will probably be number 1 because Sony has invested so much in increasing its internal development size (2200 employees versus < 1000 each for Nintendo and MS).  While that's a good thing, I don't think it can compare to having the best third party support...I'm reminded of the Nintendo 64 "dream team" - Rare, Left Field, Angel Studios, et al.  Nintendo kept N64 floating on that, but it was ultimately a big bomb compared to PSX.   PS3 is off to a better start than N64 in a lot of ways, it still has much better third party support than N64 ever had, but it appears to be shrinking due to the lackluster launch.
That's my opinion, not yours.
Now Playing: The Adventures of Link, Super Street Fighter 4, Dragon Quest IX