| slowmo said:
You still haven't answered how sales that are in decline year on year, for 2 years, are flourishing really either.
"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)." It sold less in 2011 than in 2010 but it's still doing incredibly well. Maybe it's not literally growing year after year but that's expected since we're at end of a cycle and 2010 was a massive year... again, 2011 was still very successful. Maybe "flourishing" isn't the best word but who the hell cares? Everyone else knew what I meant.
Actually, flourishing fits fine.
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.
Fair enough, I feel like we've debated this stuff already and we're now going in circles. I've addressed your facts comment for example.
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.
In the first few years the PS3 was pushed heavily by brand power, not to amazing success or profitability, but the fact that it sold many millions is astounding. And THEN it was the newer team that made it profitable and a bigger success sales-wise that I praised.
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.
While they're closing studios, they're making exclusivity deals with others and expanding some other first-party studios, as I said in my article.
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.
And now they have this robust network available for the PS4, regardless of why it was first created.
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.
They are, they've opened a new studio in Vancouver and one in London I think.
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.
No, no, no. That is not what I'm saying. "why the PS4 is in a much better position than you might think:"
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.
"I think a lot of it is understandable and some completely reasonable"
Call me a strawman if you like, I'm calling you out for changing your stance to suit your poorly worded OP.
You're calling me out on something I haven't done. How many times do I or anyone else have to quote the bloody OP to show you I haven't changed my stance.
|
