Well, someone's in a sour mood! 
| ZenfoldorVGI said: It seems to me that, for far too long, we've been getting very excited about the prospect of this console "not sucking." |
We? As in all the users of VGC? Or just those who are excited about it? At least you said "It seems to me", because, as a PS3 owner, why can't I be excited that the PS3 is holding its own.
|
Unfortunately, we're treating the PS3's ability to not suck, as if it won the superbowl. Here are just a few specific examples of this fanbased ignorance: A. We get excited because the PS3's software sales are "starting to catch up to the 360." B. We get super-pumped over the biggest console exclusive for the PS3 selling 4 million LTD. C. We call the big three AAA exclusive games on the PS3 "the best games in their genre," and/or "the best game/s of all time." D. We flame multiplatform games, if they don't sell well on the PS3, despite their quality, like Bioshock. We also make up conditions as to why certain didn't meet expectations(ie: "sold well for a new IP" or "sold well for February" ect.) |
A. And so what? The 360 is the most appropriate measuring stick for software sales of the PS3, but we could have said "The PS3 has reached an attach ratio of 'x'" or something like that, and it is not something we can get excited about?
B. Which is good news, certainly enough of a reson to excited if you care. And more so, the specific case being Metal Gear Solid 4, when was the last time you looked at the sales of MGS3? Currently sitting at 4.02 million copies. It would be great for MGS4 to surpass that.
C. Which is of course completely subjective, and if you want to argue that Battletoads is the greatest game ever, than I can't stop you from thinking that.
D. Uhm... what? So, obviously Bioshock on the PS3 sold badly because it was on the PS3, and not because it was a late port. For some reason, I never hear that argument being used. Some conditions do infact apply, whether you like them or not. Is it unreasonable to think that maybe Killzone 2 has lost some sales, because someone didn't like the first game? No it isn't, it's actually a reasonable thought.
|
1. The console still has very poor Jrpg support by any standard. This is a travesty we can place directly on Sony's head. 2. Sony has decided to no longer support 3rd party exclusive games, instead concentrating on its first and second party party, admittedly western-centric titles, at cost to Sony fans, with profits as a motive. This is in stark contrast to the gamer-centric strategy of Sony's main competition. The Lost and the Damned, for instance, is a AAA loss likely due directly to Sony's cheapness. This has also led to the loss of every major 3rd party Playstation brand associated game, from DMC to FFXIII, to Tekken, as well as a wealth of DLC. 3. The PS3 is still on pace to easily end up in 3rd place this gen, and in fact, it is almost impossible mathematically to come up with any scenerio which would keep the PS3 out of dead last. The PS3 lost this generation. The gamecube also, didn't suck. 4. Even if it didn't lose this generation, which it did, the console still went from the most epic of wins, the PS2, to a degredation of its namesake, the near ruination of the Playstation brand, and all of this is attributed directly to Sony's attempt to push early adoption of Blu-Ray at the expense of its gaming fanbase. 4. The console still costs 399 dollars. This, above all else, is an unacceptable fiasco. 5. The console is still significantly behind in game library according to the quantifiable methods of determination, aggregate reviews and/or overall game sales. This is an admittedly weak point, but still, it's the only quantifiable methods we have to determine such things as game library quality and more importantly, game library popularity. 6. HOME has been underwhelming, and XBL is still the superior online service by most accounts, despite huge steps Sony has taken to make the services equal. 7. Sony actually and purposefully removed Backwards Compatibility, in what we can only assume was an attempt to sell more Playstation 2s. This is an insult to all consumers, and equivelant to a price hike. |
1. Travesty eh? Going into the database, and taking the mean of all JRPG sales on the 360, your average JRPG sells 0,33 million copies. Excluding that one game which sold ~10000 units and was ever only released in Japan, it rises to 0,36 million copies. Why would Sony spend money on such an unlucrative genre, when they are in the deep shit they are currently in?
2. And Sony can compete with Microsoft's bidding... how? There are very powerful incentives to go multiplatform with your titles this generation, and if Sony or Microsoft wants to offset the profits that could make for any 3rd party developers, they have to bring up a lot of cash. And currently, Sony is a bit short on cash, you must have heard..?
3. You like to say "not suck", but why can't it be in third place and be an awesome console? I love my PS3, I've gotten value for every cent I have thrown at it, and then some. The console selling the least among the three isn't going to change that one bit.
4. Pretty much.
4? To you perhaps, and probably also so, when compared to the competitors, but some 21 million people have bought PS3s despite the high price, and the console still continues to sell, so a fiasco may be a bit of a stretch.
5. Compared to what? The Wii? The Xbox 360? You know as well as anyone else here that game reviews does not affect sales. Otherwise, Bioshock should have outsold both Mario Kart Wii and Wii Fit right? The only thing you can conclude is that the PS3 doesn't move as much software as it's competitors, some of which can be attributed to the PS3 having the smallest userbase and the PS3 also having a more diversified userbase.
6. I don't think this forum is the right measuring stick for that, but whether you like it or not is another thing. Same goes for all those biased journalists you talked about earlier. Also, Peter Dille disagrees with you: http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/news/playstation-home-to-have-very-big-year/?biz=1
7. Or to reduce the cost of the PS3, or to move PS3 software, or all three combined. All are likely reasons for that move, and no matter how distasteful it may have seemed to you, I think it was for Sony's own good, and if it helped them recoup some losses in any way, how is it not worth it in the current economic climate?
|
Just remember this console's position. Not everyone is as entheuiastic as you are about it, but that doesn't mean it's a bad console, however, in an effort to prove it doesn't suck, most of you hype it as the second coming. This isn't the Playstation 1. The PS3 doesn't suck. Celebrating that is fine, but let's not go overboard. |
I agree, that doesn't mean it's a bad console. But sales do not interpret into enjoyment, so it is easy to think the PS3 is an awesome console from a gamer's perspective. And since a lot of your post has been written from the perspective of a gamer anyway, I will say that I think the PS3 is an awesome console and I disagree with many of the things you have written in your post.
