Excellent article really enjoyed reading this

I would say that there is a clear difference in Nintendo, Microsoft, and Sony's approach to producing a console which is driven by who "runs" each company ... Sony is a company that is "run" by engineers, Microsoft is "run" by managers, and Nintendo is "run" by game developers

As a result, Sony sees the hardware as the product, Microsoft looks at monetizable services as the product, and Nintendo looks at the games as the product.

Pretty decent read, thank you! Can't say I disagreed with most of it.

Well, that's always been Sony's MO.  God of War came out towards the end of the last generation, and I believe Killzone did as well.  SOTC too I think.  It's certainly a benefit to them, but only if the other elements (price, launch lineup) fall into place.  Unless you happen to be Apple, customer loyalty is hard to come by.

I own 3/5 on this list. I also highly disagree with the Vita reasoning and its points are easily contested with sales evidence.

I am also probably getting an Xperia TL soon, while not a Play it does have PSM which is a much better idea than what they did with the Play...I have no idea why they failed so hard by not having PSN be SEN by then and account integration for PSone titles.

It's not only about defining a target audience. Sometimes you just have to go to market and test it. Sony could have done more deskresearch but that only takes them that far. Pspgo was an experiment. Move was a forced response, a defensive strategy. Xperia play they didnt want to cannabalize their handheld market resulting in a poor library. That's a bad decision imo. Because vita isnt alife like the name is trying to say.
I tend to agree on a lot of what you are saying. However marketing isnt that easy. It's a fast paced consumer electronics market. You have to make quick decisions. They have to focus on quality third party support. Its more a b2b problem then a b2c problem.

Sony should forget about the casual audience and focus on the hardcore, they're not going to have another PS2 on their hand since Microsoft has stolen most of that user base. Focusing solely on the hardcore is fine, they sold nearly 70 million PS3s and over 70 million PSPs focusing purely on the hardcore. Their holiday games were aimed at the casual audience, Wonderbook, PASBR, LBPK, and they all failed spectacularly. The PS3 strategy was fine, just launch with a smaller price tag, better lineup, and stop ripping off the competition.

good read,i think a problem for sony and nintendo for that matter is microsoft have the USA market now,i'm not sure they will want to give that up,i'm proabably wrong but i think sony needs to get everything around their online services including music,movies,tv,games etc paying subs/cards whatever and making decent machines to use the services like consoles,tv's,phones to try and grab some of the market,it's clear to me online/streaming/downloads/storage will be the future

i think they need games for all markets on the vita to give it a chance plus the psn network

i'm pretty sure the PS4 will be launched as a PS3 but with ,major online services/games and surely breaking even but judging from a few threads they might be bankrupt by then

That's a really good point.

"Distant Star said:
It's not only about defining a target audience. Sometimes you just have to go to market and test it. Sony could have done more deskresearch but that only takes them that far. Pspgo was an experiment. Move was a forced response, a defensive strategy. Xperia play they didnt want to cannabalize their handheld market resulting in a poor library. That's a bad decision imo. Because vita isnt alife like the name is trying to say.
I tend to agree on a lot of what you are saying. However marketing isnt that easy. It's a fast paced consumer electronics market. You have to make quick decisions. They have to focus on quality third party support. Its more a b2b problem then a b2c problem."

The PSP Go was an experiment, but it was one doomed to failure.  The PSP Go didn't fail because it was digital only, it failed because it was expensive AND digital only.  If it was the same price as the 3000, it could have been a great alternative for newer owners.

I get that marketing isn't easy, but at the same time, many people saw these failures coming from a mile away.  I'm not claiming to be an expert analyst or anything, but I knew the 3D Display, Move, and Go were dead from the moment they were announced.  The Xperia play could have worked if it had PSP level software from the getgo.  I thought the Vita would perform well.  There is a clear problem in the marketing division.

"zuvuyeay- sony and nintendo for that matter is microsoft have the USA market now,i'm not sure they will want to give that up,i'm proabably wrong but i think sony needs to get everything around their online services including music,movies,tv,games etc paying subs/cards whatever and making decent machines to use the services like consoles,tv's,phones to try and grab some of the market,it's clear to me online/streaming/downloads/storage will be the future

i think they need games for all markets on the vita to give it a chance plus the psn network

i'm pretty sure the PS4 will be launched as a PS3 but with ,major online services/games and surely breaking even but judging from a few threads they might be bankrupt by then"

I wouldn't say Microsoft has the US market.  The Wii has been slumping for the past couple of years, but that's mainly due to a lack of support from Nintendo.  I think people are forgetting about how popular the Wii was at its height.  I can't say for sure that Nintendo can recapture the Wii magic, but I'd wait till E3 next year to count them out.

Btw bankruptcy does not mean out of business.  Marvel was bankrupt for a while if I recall correctly, and they're doing OK now.

sony and nintendo fail in one big thing this trying to get both hardcore and casual (their fanbases don't count) while nintendo got all of the casuals this gen and sony got all of the core and M$ is the only one who somehow manage to get both