Andrespetmonkey said:
slowmo said:
Andrespetmonkey said:
What!?
Isn't doomed = isn't in trouble at all?
I said much better "than you might think."
I said a lot of the doom and gloom is largely unfair. "Largely" CLEARLY implies not ALL of it. Also, "some [of the doom is] completely reasonable."
Please stop with the strawmans.
|
Yes or No answers please...
Sony are at this time in trouble? Yes
Sony need to make a number of changes in their business practice still? In general, obviously. Regarding PS home consoles, it seems likely to me that their going to make the right choices with PS4. As for why, well that's what the article is for. This is not a "yes or no" answer because "yes" or "no" would not be my full answer in the slightest.
The very fact you call me a strawman speaks volumes for your debating skills. You argued against a false representation of my position. That's the very definition of a strawman argument. Still not seen this evidence of their flourishing sales, especially in light of the fact the industry is in a huge decline year on year. The PS3 sales have been in decline for the last 2 years havent they now? It's been in decline, sure, 2010 followed a major re-design and rebranding so of course 2011 couldn't top that, but that doesn't mean it hasn't been incredibly successful, sold very well and made a lot of money in 2010 and 2011 (and is continuing to do so in 2012).
You've not addressed anything in my other reply, I'd appreciate a reply.
|
|
You still haven't answered how sales that are in decline year on year, for 2 years, are flourishing really either.
You used a lot of very imprecise wording in your article and opinion and then asked what people thought. My thoughts are that you're the very opposite of someone who is overly pessimistic of Sony's position, you're actually overly optimistic and ignoring some basic facts to try and paint a rosier picture. I actually went overboard in my criticism of your thread because I wanted to provide more balance. I think I answered your point in your previous email by saying that I still don't see how these sales of the PS3 can be seen as flourishing.
If we accept your viewpoint that it was the strong brand that saved the PS3 then do you accept that the people running Sony largely had little to do with the ultimate outcome outside of pushing on the price front. That's not a query but just a simple observation that if the brand isn't as strong anymore then Sony did well to recover sales, if it is still very strong then the sales are expected regardless of managment choices. This is how I don't get this opinion, it's widely accepted Sony changed their company ethos throughout the PS3's lifespan so it makes perfect sense to summarise there has been damage to the brand and some clever marketing and aggressive pricing/marketing recovered sales. People used to play Playstation, the term "play Xbox" is ever more present proving that while one brand has strengthed it's image, the other has weakened somewhat.
Onto software where I admittedly was very harsh. The 3 "Home Consoles" Sony have released have all been drastically different in their software ethos. The PS1 had moderate firsty part support from Sony but relied heavily upon third party support drawn to the console due to low licensingcosts compared to Nintendo and Sega and the fact the console was comparatively easier to develop for than the Saturn. The PS2 introduced the now famous Sony moneyhatting practice that Microsoft copied at the start of this generation. They paid thrid parties a lot of money to ensure the PS2 got many exclusives from third parties. The PS3 has seen Sony realise they couldn't go toe to toe with Microsoft on paying for exclusivity so they have created more internal teams and focused on building a core of 2nd party studios. Now we are getting towards the end of the generation of course they have started closing down studios as more titles aren't required to drive console sales given the remaining third party support both the 360 and PS3 receive.
The mian point of my block of text above is that Sony haven't used this strategy as a sign of health or strength, they literally had no choice but to create their own core group of studio's or they would have been in serious trouble. We may find (evidence suggests this could be true) that Microsoft may start funding more studios for the coming next generation as they will need to change their stratgey as money hatting just didn't work this generation.
I would argue even now that your original statement is saying Sony aren't in trouble, the fact you're saying it doesn't after the occasion doesn't change the words you wrote or the intent of the OP as a whole. Everything the OP is positive and nothing is painting even the slightest negative picture at present which hardly suggests you believed they were in any trouble. Call me a strawman if you like, I'm calling you out for changing your stance to suit your poorly worded OP.