Squilliam said:
Reasonable said:
I don't think the PS2 would have held off the 360 quite that well - although it would have slowed sales more than PS3, I agree with that.
360 was destined I think to get PC orientated online titles and would have nonetheless got strong sales in US/UK in line with that.
My view with hindsight is that Sony made 2 mistakes:
1 - they wrote of Nintendo (so did MS too I'm sure) and didn't consider them or their new console direction a threat
2 - they overexagerated the threat for the 360 and focused on matching it for specifications, online, etc. seeing MS as their real foe this gen
These led to 3 mistakes pertaining to their direction with the PS3, particularly at launch:
1 - they pushed in too much tech making the price far too high at launch (I know the price was actually good for what you got, but what you got was more than most people wanted then)
2 - they overly focused on mature titles and new IP to so so instead of getting some core franchises out early
3 - they felt sure they could use the success of PS3 to boost BR and never thought BR would in fact, for the first 2 years, actually be an anchor on the console due to the high cost it added to the console
I'd also say that they seriously over-committed to R&D around the Cell and the PS3 architecture in terms of real world benefits. |
Actually their problems were more fundamental than that. There was no winning solution for this generation because Sony never really knew how to maintain their position. Hindsight is golden with regards to simple simulations because if you change one factor then the other factors fall in line, say, had you crossed the street 2 seconds before you wouldn't have broken your leg. With more complicated solutions its impossible to say that had they done X differently to factor in Y that a new factor Z would not have bitten them in the butt even more.
My suspicion is that Sony were clueless as to how to maintain a console business. They thought they knew, but success only reinforced the problematic beliefs they had and they only way they would have learnt from these mistakes is to get a bloody nose. What they know now that the Wii etc has kicked them onto their butt is a different story from what they knew back in 2004. The fundamental combination of arrogance and ignorance would not have changed without Sony first experiencing defeat. This horse cannot come before the cart.
Btw they spent several billion dollars on the Cell and their fabrication facilities to get them up to snuff before selling them for a pittance to Toshiba. They Cell has definately not been good to them.
|
That's what I'm saying! I think...
They read the market wrong and didn't know how best to proceed themselves, getting overly focused in the tech of the Cell and BR rather than really looking at trends and what was changing in the industry. I think it didn't help they also ended up confused around how to market and position the PS3 either. I think Ken knew what he was delivering in his mind, but the company clearly wasn't sure how to translate that. Games console? Multi-media entertainment hub? Blu Ray player? What was it? The Wii and 360 both benefited I felt from a clear strategy and clarity of marketing.
Wii went Blue Ocean but knowingly so. 360 went after online and capturing more PC orientated players while courting third party developers big time.
