Quantcast
Has Sony made PlayStation "too Western"?

Forums - Sony Discussion - Has Sony made PlayStation "too Western"?

Definitely. I don't have an issue with it, it's working out quite well for them. Its how they built their brand. And...because of this yes, they're losing Japanese influence. And I think this is why Sony isn't acknowledging Nintendo as a competitor. However, Nintendo is indeed a competitor westward so I don't know where they're going with that, but in Japan I can see why they'd say that.



Around the Network
Ljink96 said:
Sony isn't acknowledging Nintendo as a competitor. However, Nintendo is indeed a competitor westward 

The PS4/XBO are not in competition with the Switch. The sales of the Switch do not damage the sales of the PS4/XBO and the sales of the PS4/XBO do not damage the sales of the Switch. They appeal to different people, they have different libraries, they have different form factors. If the Switch was a competitor then when it rolled onto the scene in 2017 and sold 13m units PS4 wouldn't have posted it's best ever year. 



Predictions (Made July 2019)

LTD: PS4 - 130m, Switch - 110m, XBO - 52m       2019 : PS4 - 15m, Switch - 18.8m, XBO - 4.8m        2020: Switch - 22m (Peak Year)


Barkley said:
Ljink96 said:
Sony isn't acknowledging Nintendo as a competitor. However, Nintendo is indeed a competitor westward 

The PS4/XBO are not in competition with the Switch. The sales of the Switch do not damage the sales of the PS4/XBO and the sales of the PS4/XBO do not damage the sales of the Switch. They appeal to different people, they have different libraries, they have different form factors. If the Switch was a competitor then when it rolled onto the scene in 2017 and sold 13m units PS4 wouldn't have posted it's best ever year. 

I have to wholeheartedly disagree with this. They appeal to different people...that doesn't mean they aren't competitors. They also appeal to a lot of the same people. To say that it isn't 100% in competition with other devices in the same industry is quite foolish. There is overlap. They're game hardware manufactures, by default they're in competition...

This is not about being damaging...this isn't a console war scenario about "who's more damaging" or anything of that sort. It comes down to the fact that they're both hardware manufacturers and sell hardware in all major regions, and do share some of the same library. The latest example being Bloodstained: Ritual of the Night. If I have to make a decision of whether to get Bloodstained and a console, I have a choice to get it on PS4, Switch or Xbox. That choice creates competition. Else it's a monopoly. 



Ljink96 said:
Barkley said:

The PS4/XBO are not in competition with the Switch. The sales of the Switch do not damage the sales of the PS4/XBO and the sales of the PS4/XBO do not damage the sales of the Switch. They appeal to different people, they have different libraries, they have different form factors. If the Switch was a competitor then when it rolled onto the scene in 2017 and sold 13m units PS4 wouldn't have posted it's best ever year. 

I have to wholeheartedly disagree with this. They appeal to different people...that doesn't mean they aren't competitors. They also appeal to a lot of the same people. To say that it isn't 100% in competition with other devices in the same industry is quite foolish. There is overlap. They're game hardware manufactures, by default they're in competition...

This is not about being damaging...this isn't a console war scenario about "who's more damaging" or anything of that sort. It comes down to the fact that they're both hardware manufacturers and sell hardware in all major regions, and do share some of the same library. The latest example being Bloodstained: Ritual of the Night. If I have to make a decision of whether to get Bloodstained and a console, I have a choice to get it on PS4, Switch or Xbox. That choice creates competition. Else it's a monopoly. 

"This is not about being damaging..." That's exactly what it is about. If another products success does not have any affect on your own sales then it is not a direct competitor. You're not fighting over the same group of people to purchase your product instead of the other. Of course this isn't the case 100% of the time, just the majority. The PS4/XBO are essentially fighting over the exact same group of people, and absolutely cannibalise each others sales. This is the reason that when the PS5/XB2 launch, it's not going to affect the Switch. Because the amount of people that purchase a PS5/XB2 that would have purchased a Switch if they hadn't is negligible.

They are indirect competitors.



Predictions (Made July 2019)

LTD: PS4 - 130m, Switch - 110m, XBO - 52m       2019 : PS4 - 15m, Switch - 18.8m, XBO - 4.8m        2020: Switch - 22m (Peak Year)


Barkley said:
Ljink96 said:

I have to wholeheartedly disagree with this. They appeal to different people...that doesn't mean they aren't competitors. They also appeal to a lot of the same people. To say that it isn't 100% in competition with other devices in the same industry is quite foolish. There is overlap. They're game hardware manufactures, by default they're in competition...

This is not about being damaging...this isn't a console war scenario about "who's more damaging" or anything of that sort. It comes down to the fact that they're both hardware manufacturers and sell hardware in all major regions, and do share some of the same library. The latest example being Bloodstained: Ritual of the Night. If I have to make a decision of whether to get Bloodstained and a console, I have a choice to get it on PS4, Switch or Xbox. That choice creates competition. Else it's a monopoly. 

"This is not about being damaging..." That's exactly what it is about. If another products success does not have any affect on your own sales then it is not a direct competitor. You're not fighting over the same group of people to purchase your product instead of the other. Of course this isn't the case 100% of the time, just the majority. The PS4/XBO are essentially fighting over the exact same group of people, and absolutely cannibalise each others sales. This is the reason that when the PS5/XB2 launch, it's not going to affect the Switch. Because the amount of people that purchase a PS5/XB2 that would have purchased a Switch if they hadn't is negligible.

They are indirect competitors.

Huh, I thought I submitted my reply, guess I hit preview. But yeah, I still don't fully agree with this, but hey I'll take that they're indirect competitors over not being competitors at all, even though I don't agree with that but it's better than no competitors. My thing is you don't have to be damaging to be in competition, you can thrive in competition without having the mindset of being damaging. You can sell similar goods and services and be in competition.

By the way, Sega and Nintendo were fierce competitors back in the day. Genesis arrived almost 3 years earlier than the SNES, similar to how the Switch launched a bit over 3 years of the PS4 and Xbone. Yet they were competitors, they had different audiences, different libraries but we all know they were competitors. But I stand on the idea that they both sell video game hardware, by default they're in competition. There's some inconsistencies with this argument and for that reason I really can't go further with this. It's too loose of a claim to make. 

But hey, I'll meet you halfway and say Indirect just for the sake of moving on. 

Last edited by Ljink96 - on 05 July 2019

Around the Network

Yeah pretty much, even FF7 is an action game now :p

Unfortunately a lot of people in the west still have the opinion that anime-looking games are "kid's stuff," so that's why I think Sony makes their games with more realistic art styles these days. Only Nintendo seems to be successful holding on to their roots, but they're seen as the more "kid friendly" company, so I guess it makes sense they would thrive in that field.



All I know is that they are not making any LoD, and that sucks.
The rest is fine.



From my point of view yes. I greatly prefer Japanese style games over Western so to see 1st and 2nd party Sony relases go from being pretty diverse to almost completely western feels like a loss to me. I'm honestly bored with or completely apathetic towards Sony more often than not these days. 



Ljink96 said:
And I think this is why Sony isn't acknowledging Nintendo as a competitor.

Given Nintendo themselves announced "blue ocean" strategy i.e. not competing but finding/creating own unique niche, what is noteworthy about Sony taking them on their word? I'm not sure why what I assume are Nintendo fans seem to have difficulty comprehending Nintendo's own self proclaimed strategy, I suppose it is simply that "not competing" has negative connotation which they reflexively defend against.

Barkley said:

Not really, EU and NA are the biggest markets so it makes sense to focus on them. Also Japan favours handheld systems, so that's another reason to focus more on western markets. The 3DS outsold the PS1 and PS2 in Japan.

Here's the percentage of sales that came from Japan for recent consoles:

PS3 - 11.9%
Wii - 12.5%
PS2 - 14.7%
Gamecube - 18.6%
DS - 21.3%
PSP - 24.7%
3DS - 32.9%
Vita - 36.7%

Also, the Japanese market was already showing signs of decline before the PS3. Gen 6 was down from Gen 5 despite being up considerably in the West. To be fair, that was largely the result of the Dreamcast falling well short of the Saturn, with the GC's drop from the N64 contributing as well. But the PS2 only sold about 16.6% more units than the PS1, whereas Sony's gen-over-gen growth in the U.S. and Europe was over 54% and nearly 50%, respectively. In Japan, the PS1 was actually selling better better during its peak years than the PS2 was, and it was only the PS2's abnormally strong legs and the PS1 having a slow start and taking a while to get established is what put the PS2 ahead.