VetteDude said:
|
because Sony knew no one in the fucking world would have brought it at that price
yo_john117 said:
Once you reach a certain amount of games anything else is just too much. |
However, you have to atleast show some.
superchunk said:
When did I say it was a negative thing for the consumer? In fact I think I positioned it as a postive thing they did in pricing their product. However, as a shareholder or Sony exec its pretty bad business and easily toppled by Nintendo who has a very comparable product that should be fully capable to be reduced to below $200 by the time PSV launches, therefore making the price a much more important feature for Nintendo. Sony should try to think of a price consumers will want and then put the tech that comes close to that price. Instead they seem to put in tons of tech and then try to figure out how much they are willing to lose. PS3 is still losing to 360 solely for this reason. Had they cut back on many interal parts from the get go, they could have been more competitive out the gate. In PSV's case, Nintendo started high so Sony is not doing as bad out the gate. However, pricing still favors Nintendo in the long run as they have a margin to play with. Sony should have stayed lower costs and continued with better game divergence along with many of the other great features on it, like PS3 connectivity, etc. Personally I woudl have also ditched the backside touch panel as I don't see it becoming highly useful in the greater majority of games. |
@ bold.......read the rest of you post. you didn't say it, you implied it and then explained it in detail in the reat of your post, doesn't get much contradictory than that
goforgold said:
@ bold.......read the rest of you post. you didn't say it, you implied it and then explained it in detail in the reat of your post, doesn't get much contradictory than that |
"Only shining moment was PSVita's price and Sony's willingness to lose money on a console out the gate."
That's my first sentence which is clearly saying it was a smart move. I then continue to say what i think Nintendo will do to best this by lowering their price because they have the margin to reduce. I don't see how that implies in any way that its a negative thing for the consumer.
I think you're trying to create an argument that doesn't exist.
| Potable_Toe said: I largely agree that this E3 didn't really have any surprising announcements outside of PSV price, but even that didn't blow me away because all I could think about was the potential monthly fee associated with it. Other than that though Sony didn't show much in the way of unknown or new or 'exciting' looking games (in my eyes) and all of their big hitting game shows were titles we already knew about. My biggest gripe about their conference was the complete lack of enthusiasm, particularly Jack Tretton he looked like he wanted to cry through the whole thing... probably because of how dull he is. Microsoft had similar problems as far as unknown or surprise announements but people have been very hard on them saying many untruths about how very little first party content was shown and, falsely, that it was all "childish Kinect games". If you actually break it down they had 7 first party games shown, and a number of 3rd party exclusive games or game content shown and four big multiplats too, the problem was many of them had already been known/seen previously to a certain degree. In my eyes their biggest failure was in making me disappointed that Halo 4 got announced which is something that shouldn't be possible. I guess though that being somebody who is just waiting for a reason to get Kinect many things at the show had me pretty excited. You must also give them credit for actually being enthusiastic about their show. The Don 'geeky Cruise' Mattrick always looks too smug for his own good. Nintendo should have won with ease considering they had a new home console to show off and reveal, instead all they succeeded in doing is creating quizical looks, by showing off what many thought was actually just a peripheral for the Wii and completely ingnoring the console, personally it didn't confuse me but it did annoy and disappoint me that they ignored the console itself. Other than that they pissed off loyal Wii owner by announcing nothing new and only showing one game for it, Zelda Skyward Sword, after a percievably long winded orchestral performance... even if I did enjoy the music I couldn't help but think "C'mon you're wasting my time here". they did however deliver some good news in the way of a few big hitting first party titles for the 3DS, but a couple of those may or maynot make it this year which is news we don't want on a system like the 3DS that currently lacks much in the way of must have titles. I have never liked Reggie, his face needs to meet a fist... |
I agree on everythign except reggie. ... he is da man!
All I kept thinking while watching Sony's was, where's butler?
superchunk said:
"Only shining moment was PSVita's price and Sony's willingness to lose money on a console out the gate." That's my first sentence which is clearly saying it was a smart move. I then continue to say what i think Nintendo will do to best this by lowering their price because they have the margin to reduce. I don't see how that implies in any way that its a negative thing for the consumer. I think you're trying to create an argument that doesn't exist. |
what I'm talking about is why looking at things from a sharehold/ business exc. is relevant to the overal quality of Sony products. I hear the arguement all the time and it makes no sense, especially given the fact that that is what Sony has been doing since they entered the gaming indusrty, so CLEARLY Sony is ok with it so what's the point?? how is it relevant??
| goforgold said: what I'm talking about is why looking at things from a sharehold/ business exc. is relevant to the overal quality of Sony products. I hear the arguement all the time and it makes no sense, especially given the fact that that is what Sony has been doing since they entered the gaming indusrty, so CLEARLY Sony is ok with it so what's the point?? how is it relevant?? |
Because the decisions Sony makes affects the consumer. Making a console that is over-teched and priced out of competition means I won't buy it and then have to choose to not play games like Uncharted.
PS1 and 2 were essentially first to the market and within the same price range as the others a year later when real competition came to the market with far less games. This year head start made their loss leading strategy work without issue. Coming in late means they play catch-up to a console that has had time to reduce costs and naturally reduce price. Even more so when that console was selling for a sizable profit to begin with.
PS3 was severely too expensive and lost tons of money. You'd think by almost having the worst financial years in history woudl have made them less likely to go overboard and remain profitable which would mean a lower priced console for us as they would want to remain in the mass consumer price point.
PSV is in that price point and is very competitively priced. So they did well, which is what I said. However, Nintendo has surely lots of margin and will drive down the price near PSV launch to create buzz. Then it all comes down to games.
So my point is, by Sony always going to a high cost loss leading device, we are more likely to have a console that is simply too expensive. PSV is close to that. PS3 was well over that. I'm hoping PS4 is near whatever WiiU launches at with a comendable line-up and no chance of having later models gimped to reduce costs. I may not buy it anyways, but as a potential consumer that's my thought process.
| superchunk said:
3. Nintendo will continue to miss the mark. I love Nintendo. I will always buy a Nintendo home console so long as they offer Mario, Zelda, and Metroid among other best in class IPs. However, there is no excuse for what happened on that stage. To show a brand new product while leaving so much glaringly unanswered was stupid. They stated they wanted to target "U" the core crowed, yet they failed to show next gen game product. They even set up their conference in such a way that a large percentage of people weren't' even sure if this was just an add-on to Wii or an actual new console. WTF was the console not displayed to at least convey that's its entirely new hardware? Why did Nintendo now allow 3rd parties to show some sample of a new game for 2012 running on the hardware with clearly better visuals than PS360? Anyone who takes the time to research the potential CPU/GPU will easily acknowledge that it should definitely surpass them, but you have to show to the 'U' crowd you're trying to capture. Nintendo should have brought the controller and console on stage. It should have presented a new game with obviously better graphics, even if it was a longer ZeldaHD scenario. It should have stated that it was a "PowerPC 7" multi core CPU and cutting edge R700 based GPU. This coudl be said without giving up the specific specs and would appease the core. Then they could show those other tech demos to demonstrate that the casual audience won't be forgotten and will have reasons to jump on board. |
E3 2011 was about the 3DS. Wii U is releasing in 2012, thus for nintendo, E3 2012 is the perfect time to display lots about it. They will always be as closemouthed as Apple. I would guess that with at least 12 months to launch, there are very few games that nintendo would think are ready to show off yet. Keep in mind that the majority of Nintendo games are shown off 6 months before release.
scottie said:
E3 2011 was about the 3DS. Wii U is releasing in 2012, thus for nintendo, E3 2012 is the perfect time to display lots about it. They will always be as closemouthed as Apple. I would guess that with at least 12 months to launch, there are very few games that nintendo would think are ready to show off yet. Keep in mind that the majority of Nintendo games are shown off 6 months before release. |
I fully agree with you and expect next E3 to be amazing. Even removing my game argument though there were other big issues they should have fixed.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
