I found this on NeoGAF, and I thought it was hilarious, so I pass it on to the rest of you. Warning: lulz ahead!
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/105/1059483p1.html
The more casual portion of the games industry has an interesting habit of latching onto a brand name during a console generation, where repeated and subtle use of the product name amongst friends and the general media helps build hype, trust and, in turn, sales for said product. Think of it as the current household name for a gaming generation.
Back in the '80s, it was Nintendo. If you mentioned games in an off-hand way, you probably also included the word Nintendo in your dialog. In the days of the Genesis, Sega seemed to (arguably) be the product name of choice. With the previous two console generations, the word PlayStation was practically synonymous with gaming.
This time around, the PlayStation name doesn't hold nearly as much weight with the non-core audience (the casual market). Though it's getting a little more even in terms of name-dropping, the more casual-friendly term associated with the HD consoles in recent years has been Xbox. This may seem like a small thing, but it's a fairly telling sign of how this generation is, and has been, shaping up.
Despite the fact that the big war these days is between the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and (especially in terms of the casual crowd) the Wii, the PSP is arguably playing a part in the console battle, and perhaps not a good one.
The title of this article says it all. Should Sony abandon the PSP and focus its efforts solely on the PlayStation 3 (and in the future, the PS4)? In the long run, this might actually be the best move.
Now, keep in mind that I think the PSP is a fine portable gaming system. There are a ton of great titles available for it, stuff that you won't find anywhere else (see our Top 25 PSP Games list for the best examples). But, that doesn't mean those games couldn't have been created for the PS3 (perhaps as smaller PSN titles) or even PS2. I also understand that the ability to take these titles on the go is a big benefit, though if you didn't have a PSP you could easily turn to the DS, iPhone or what have you. Not having the PSP around wouldn't mark the end of portable gaming.
The hardware has sold well, but it doesn't seem like the software is really keeping up. In the NPD numbers for October of this year, a PSP title didn't show up until #82. For November, one didn't show up until #107. Granted, things aren't crystal-clear now on the software sales front as the PSPgo requires titles to be bought from the PlayStation Store and downloaded directly (which don't show up in NPD numbers), but that's still pretty abysmal.
But those sales problems are just PSP issues and don't directly relate to the PS3. However, there are a couple potential aspects where the PSP is dissolving resources that could have been better spent on the PlayStation 3.
The first is obviously development resources, where the teams could have made PS3 titles rather than PSP games and bolstered the console's library for the better. Imagine if Patapon had been a PlayStation Network game, or even a full retail release. Hammerin' Hero. Pursuit Force. LocoRoco. All of the WipEout titles. Syphon Filter. Chains of Olympus. Dissidia Final Fantasy. The list goes on and on. I know that some of these pre-dated the PlayStation 3, and thusly the PlayStation Network, but you get the idea. The point is that the PS3's library could be bigger and stronger, and you'd still be able to play these great games. They'd probably have also sold much better in many cases.
The second issue, perhaps the most important one and the point that I was alluding to at the beginning of this article, is name brand strength. Early on, the PlayStation 3 was marketed as being the most powerful system of the three this generation. Sony was telling everyone that the PS3 was the system to get as its games could (and would) eventually look (and play) better than titles on the competing systems.
The problem perhaps (partly, anyway) is that the PlayStation brand wasn't solely synonymous with raw horsepower and HD gaming. It was also part of the PSP name, which was already failing to make a significant dent against the DS. Lots of PSP games (especially at the time) didn't look very good as they were quick and cheap efforts to take advantage of a major series release on the consoles. The PlayStation Portable name brand wasn't doing fantastically well, and it watered down the PlayStation 3 brand.
Think about it this way: when you think of the PSP in general terms, what comes to mind? Whether it's obvious or not, somewhere in the back of your head is the fact that it's playing second fiddle to the DS. Therefore, even if it's not apparent, the name brand is weakened and watered-down.
At this point, without an awesome hardware sequel that can compete with the DS in terms of portable mindshare, Sony seems to be treading water with the PSP. What's the point of keeping it around if the PlayStation 3 is the bread and butter, the thing that deserves Sony Computer Entertainment's full, undivided attention?
I don't know that there is one.
Again, the PSP has its merits, but it also has plenty of weaknesses, especially in the mind of the general consumer when they think about its library and quality of games. In order for the PlayStation 3 to be the most successful HD console and to make a strong move to overtake the Xbox 360 in sales (the Wii is a different challenge altogether), the PlayStation name has to carry a brand strength that is synonymous with the absolute best experience around. With the PSP there in the proverbial room to weaken that status, Sony's #1 priority is being hurt simply by association.
So what should Sony do? I wouldn't kill the platform overnight as that would leave a bad taste in consumers' mouths (look at how SEGA handled all of its various hardware add-ons over the years). But a slow phase-out might be the smartest move at this point.
Quickly cease all PSP advertising so that the only thing people are seeing in magazines and on TV are the great titles on the PlayStation 3; spend that cash on PS3 advertising instead. Enforce much more stringent quality control over the titles that hit the system. There would be much fewer titles, but they'd all at least be worthy of playing. And, perhaps riskiest but the most game-changing of all, focus resources on completely revamping the PSP's media playback functionality to turn it into a great media player. Take the focus off of games and move it to movies and music. Make gaming a feature of the system rather than the main point.
So, should Sony never make another portable gaming system? No, I think there's plenty of room for one, but it needs to be very different from the home experience to separate the two. As it is, the PSP is basically a very watered-down console. It wasn't as bad when the PlayStation 2 was Sony's main system, but now that everyone is gaming in HD, the PSP looks really outdated. Instead, Sony needs to take huge risks the second time around and do something that no one else is doing. Nintendo took a risk with the DS and its dual-screen setup with stylus input. The iPhone's touch controls allow it to have games that aren't possible on the consoles. Both are making a killing on the games front (and in the case of the iPhone, that's not even its main purpose). If Sony is going to release a PSP2, it really needs to be something special and unique.
Perhaps this means making a device that's a complete extension of the PlayStation 3 (or 4), where it uses the same AAA content that you're playing at home. Be it console games streamed over a wireless connection (think of the PS3 as your own personal cloud gaming machine) or that the device houses a lower-res version of the same title, that's something for Sony's engineers to ponder over.
Or, Sony can just ignore the portable gaming space and focus on its consoles. It's working out fine for Microsoft at the moment.
