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

Forums - Sony - Where Sony went wrong with the ps3!!

senatorpjt on 09 September 2008

It makes more sense to me now than it did then. Pricing the console at $600 on release had two effects. The most obvious was dismal sales, the other is creating a more subtle perception of it being "better" because "more expensive = better."
Sony was taking a loss even selling them at $600. This makes it look even better because it's not just "overpriced" like a Louis Vuitton handbag, it actually costs that much to make. It would have been even worse if it were $300 - they'd have definitely outsold the 360 - but if you look at how much money Sony lost in the first year, selling more consoles at a lower price only increases that loss. Then, when the price drops to $250 there's also the idea that you're getting something that "used to cost $600 a few years ago".

People gave a lot of shit to the PS3 and it developed a "bad reputation" but when you think about it, this "bad reputation" isn't really that bad at all. They may have developed a reputation for poor marketing, bad business strategy, but in the meantime the PS brand isn't really damaged at all as people thought - the worst that people generally say is "The PS3 isn't better enough than the 360 to justify the price", not "the 360 is better."

It's unlikely that most current 360 owners will eventually get a PS3 (for the reason mentioned, it's not much better than the 360). However, the total number of consoles out so far isn't really that much compared to previous generations, so there's a lot of marketshare left to capture by the end - when profits are highest.



Around the Network
Sephiroth357 on 09 September 2008
twesterm said:
Sephiroth357 said:
twesterm said:
Million said:
twesterm said:
megaman2 said:

Q1 -If the Nintendo wii and Ps3 had been priced the same, who would have been the market leader?

Q2 - If the Ps3 lauched a year earlier, would the Xbox 360 be able to catch up?

 

Whoops, forgot to answer the questions:

  1. Still the Wii.  The PS3 had nothing going for it at the time of launch other than its name.  Nintendo had its name, a new controller, and even a bundled game to show it off.
  2. Hard question-- would any of those 360 exclusives been multiplatform or PS3 exclusives?  Who knows.

 

 

Sorry but I beleive your incorrect.

 

If i have any understanding what so ever of the markets that the Wii & PS3 apeal to then i'm pretty certain that the Wii could not outsell the PS3 at a $600 Price point , the casual demographic woudln't be able justify a $600 price tage for the novelty of swinging a motion controller about with their friends at a party etc , the traditional gamer wouldn't be able to justify buying relativley old technology , yes the Wii is "innovative and revolutionary" but that can only add so much perceived value. for a relativley high price a $600 price point would server as too high a barrier for the vast majority of it's current userbase to jump on .

Keepin in mind nintendo came into this gen as the underdog , the Wii needed a low price to gain the consumers confidence.

A cheap Wii vs a Cheap PS3 is a though one to answer and I think depending on the scenario either one could have been the market leader right now. A Cheap PS3 would have completley demolished any competition the XBOX 360 posed ( I think the effect of PS3 price cuts alone demonstrate this) a low price point would most likely killed any opposition the XBOX 360 posed.

The HD format war would have never happened saving Sony possibly 100's of millions of promotional costs , Blu-Ray adoption would have increased at a much more rapid rate , Sony would have generated more profits from the PS3 via blu-ray and software from a larger PS3 install base . Sony with a more profitability ( and already affordable PS3 ) would have more capacity to price cut and sustain losses than their competitor Nintendo.

Sony would have had GTA IV , Devil May Cry , Burnout , Final Fantasy , Tales , Max Effect , Bioshock, Gears Of War and many more titles as exclusives ( or multiplatform at the very least) . 3rd Party developers would have been at their feet like last generation.

 

I wasn't assuming the Wii would have it priced raised since most sane people agree that it's the right price; the issue is the PS3's price so that is the price that would be affected.

And again, at launch what did the PS3 offer and what did the Wii offer?

From the box alone the Wii offered a very new way of playing, the Nintendo name, and a game.  The PS3 offered the PS3 name (everyone knew the SIXAXIS was a joke). 

We could argue about the libraries but it's just easier to assume they're equal.  Personally, I think the Wii had a stellar launch library, probably one of the best in a good while, but that is merely an opinion thing and that's why it should be left out.

 

 

 Ever heard of Blue-Ray?

No, what are these blue raayz and why should I fear them?

 
I see...Nice to speak with you.

 

 




megaman2 on 09 September 2008
senatorpjt said:

It makes more sense to me now than it did then. Pricing the console at $600 on release had two effects. The most obvious was dismal sales, the other is creating a more subtle perception of it being "better" because "more expensive = better."
Sony was taking a loss even selling them at $600. This makes it look even better because it's not just "overpriced" like a Louis Vuitton handbag, it actually costs that much to make. It would have been even worse if it were $300 - they'd have definitely outsold the 360 - but if you look at how much money Sony lost in the first year, selling more consoles at a lower price only increases that loss. Then, when the price drops to $250 there's also the idea that you're getting something that "used to cost $600 a few years ago".

People gave a lot of shit to the PS3 and it developed a "bad reputation" but when you think about it, this "bad reputation" isn't really that bad at all. They may have developed a reputation for poor marketing, bad business strategy, but in the meantime the PS brand isn't really damaged at all as people thought - the worst that people generally say is "The PS3 isn't better enough than the 360 to justify the price", not "the 360 is better."

It's unlikely that most current 360 owners will eventually get a PS3 (for the reason mentioned, it's not much better than the 360). However, the total number of consoles out so far isn't really that much compared to previous generations, so there's a lot of marketshare left to capture by the end - when profits are highest.

i agree with this

 



Millennium on 09 September 2008
Marty8370 said:
It's the PS3's future I care about, which is very rosey indeed. 360 future looks too be dire, the 'RROD' failures has damaged 360 image. Even Wii future looks dire too, Wii's sales will drop off faster than it sold in first place.

I don't think anyone disputes that the RRoD damaged the 360's image. But where are you getting any of the other things you've mentioned?



Complexity is not depth. Machismo is not maturity. Obsession is not dedication. Tedium is not challenge. Support gaming: support the Wii.

Be the ultimate ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today! Poisson Village welcomes new players.

What do I hate about modern gaming? I hate tedium replacing challenge, complexity replacing depth, and domination replacing entertainment. I hate the outsourcing of mechanics to physics textbooks, art direction to photocopiers, and story to cheap Hollywood screenwriters. I hate the confusion of obsession with dedication, style with substance, new with gimmicky, old with obsolete, new with evolutionary, and old with time-tested.
There is much to hate about modern gaming. That is why I support the Wii.

megaman2 on 09 September 2008
colonelstubbs said:
Marty8370 said:
It's the PS3's future I care about, which is very rosey indeed. 360 future looks too be dire, the 'RROD' failures has damaged 360 image. Even Wii future looks dire too, Wii's sales will drop off faster than it sold in first place.

 

 The wii will drop off? Saying that is like asking to be shot! Nooooooooo Marty, nooooooooo!

LMAO

 



Around the Network
megaman2 on 09 September 2008

My threads are always on fire, im going to have to start charging, loll!!!