By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Why sony failed to deliver with the PS3

MontanaHatchet said:
This is new.

A gigantic article lambasting the PS3.

Oh joy.

HA!   Soooo funny...  Comic Genius!

 

 OT:  Wow, another article about what sony did wrong and blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blahb blah....  I forgot where I was going with this...  Oh yeah, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah...  There, I think that I've summed up your article and given you a nice reply. :)



Around the Network

im a nintendo fanboy i hate sony.
but i cant call a good game or a good system bad. The PS1 was any thing but bad, PS1 games where nothing other then amazing.



ckmlb said:
ClaudeLv250 said:
Banprest3 said:
LOL R&C flop tour is causing some demage controll amoung sony fans eh

Fix'd.

 


The other guy got banned and you went ahead and did the same thing...

 Yet... they remain unbanned.... how strange.



It seems the mods need help with this forum.  I have zero tolerance for trolling, platform criticism (Rule 4), and poster bad-mouthing (Rule 3.4) and you will be reported.

Review before posting: http://vgchartz.com/forum/rules.php

nofosu said:

- Using a Gaming console to push a new format (another part of the ingredients to the above bracketed Comments)

-Business strategy (instead of trying to sell a product, they should have tried to provide a service to us as gamers, this is supposed to be the entertainment)

Sony has some very talented people working for them, but they fell into Microsoft’s trap, with the whole bigger and powerful strategy, and blueray should have never been one of their main selling points.


What trap would that be? Creating a high-quality, flexible product which doesn't die on consumers and outsold its closest competitor (the 360) during its comparable launch year despite costing $150 more?

I've said this before, but I'm going to say it again: Sony is pursuing an INTEGRATED MEDIA STRATEGY. Each one of its consoles is designed to coexist with all the others - portable gaming, low-end gaming (the PS2, still selling like mad) and high-end gaming (PS3). Whatever money they lose on PS3 hardware they gain back via BluRay discs, Bravia sets and media peripherals. 

There's no other word for the PS3 than success. BluRay is thrashing HDDVD in the disc sales charts, and five million early adopters were willing to pay top dollar to get their hands on the hardware. Add up unit sales of the PS2 and PS3, and Sony is still neck and neck in home console sales with Nintendo.



SlorgNet said:
nofosu said:

- Using a Gaming console to push a new format (another part of the ingredients to the above bracketed Comments)

-Business strategy (instead of trying to sell a product, they should have tried to provide a service to us as gamers, this is supposed to be the entertainment)

Sony has some very talented people working for them, but they fell into Microsoft’s trap, with the whole bigger and powerful strategy, and blueray should have never been one of their main selling points.

 


What trap would that be? Creating a high-quality, flexible product which doesn't die on consumers and outsold its closest competitor (the 360) during its comparable launch year despite costing $150 more?

I've said this before, but I'm going to say it again: Sony is pursuing an INTEGRATED MEDIA STRATEGY. Each one of its consoles is designed to coexist with all the others - portable gaming, low-end gaming (the PS2, still selling like mad) and high-end gaming (PS3). Whatever money they lose on PS3 hardware they gain back via BluRay discs, Bravia sets and media peripherals. 

There's no other word for the PS3 than success. BluRay is thrashing HDDVD in the disc sales charts, and five million early adopters were willing to pay top dollar to get their hands on the hardware. Add up unit sales of the PS2 and PS3, and Sony is still neck and neck in home console sales with Nintendo.


Integrated Media Strategy = Small Market Strategy

The fact of the matter is that people buy a videogame console to play videogames and taking away core gaming features (backwards compatibility) or moving away from a typical price for a gaming system ($300) to push greater "Integrated Media" is a losing strategy. If you're cool with Sony losing exclusives (and potentially even ports) of many of the biggest and most important games of this generation so you can get a "cheap" Blu-Ray player (which will be inadequate because we're heading towards a dual format world) that's good for you ...

 



Around the Network
nofosu said:
<snip>

Nevermind, I give up.

These threads are getting old.



Words Of Wisdom said:
nofosu said:


Nevermind, I give up.

These threads are getting old.


I second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth that.  You have summarized a whole year into five simple words.  "These threads are getting old".  Five words have never brought me as much compeltion as these have.



I personally thought he had some good points, and I respect his input on the subject. I will say we've had tons of these :) If this is a re-cap of folly's I'll make it breif ( 360 breaks 100% of the time because of RROD, All wii games are kiddy and involve waggling, and ps3 had NO games, costs to much, and has features no one cares about) <- sarcasm folks :D. Anyways back on topic, I still agree with common logic, if the system doesn't offer what you want, don't buy it. Sony's "arrogance" just put out a damn nice machine that does amazing things for my living room, I use the Bluray drive, I play ps3 games, I store media (and stream it to my psp ;) ), and I'm currently connected via wi-fi. Definately the system for me.



From 0 to KICKASS in .stupid seconds.

Holy cow. Maybe the original post has been changed or something, but from what I read the guy just gives his honest opinion of what Sony could have done better and then it's flame-a-rama. He wasn't rude about Sony, and if you think his ideas suck, how about debating them?

As for me, I think the idea of delaying PS3 a year would not have really fixed anything. The hardware was basically done, so they would have just been paring it down, which is exactly what they've done anyway.

I think the only thing Sony could have done is scrap PS3 and start over from scratch to create something cheaper...but then without PS3 the company wouldn't have had some of the Blu-ray victories it has had, and would people really buy PS3 if it came out 2-3 years late, even at a reasonable price?



Well Sony is a hardware developer, and maybe BECAUSE they "forced" blu-ray onto the playstation was a good thing. The playstation 3 is about the same price as a standalone blu-ray player and offeres you a media center as well. As we know most of the blu-ray sales are contributed to the PS3, and if blu-ray actually makes them income on the technology or (helps drive the prices down) then I can say thats why we have cheaper PS3's on the market today. They took a typical Sony route by pushing hardware at a loss, and reaping the slow steady income to drive prices down. It's worked for them in the past and I have a feeling it will work for them this time as well. Maybe I'm just cheerfull, but I really do love my machine :P and I have Sony to thank for it.



From 0 to KICKASS in .stupid seconds.