Article: Sony never truly intended the PS3 as a Gaming console?

[Elandyll]

I thought that was an interesting take on the PS3...
Now the article also assimilates the Blu Ray format entirely with Sony, which is obviously wrong (Sony being one of the main backers, but not the only one, contrarily to Tosh and the HD DVD back in the days), but still an interesting take on it imo.

http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Edi...ole-14014.html

Editorial: Sony Didn't Intend PS3 To Succeed As A Console
By William Usher: 2008-12-13 15:50:12

Everyone was probably glad to know that the PS3 managed to sell more than a 150k during November. And while many Sony fans would see the glass half full, analysts and skeptics would see the glass half-empty, considering that the PS3 and PS2 combined didn't come close to the Xbox 360 or Nintendo Wii's numbers. However, selling a console during this generation wasn't Sony's priority for the PS3 to begin with. Good numbers or not, Sony already accomplished what they wanted from their third-generation console.

It all started back in E3 2005 with an article on IGN comparing Sony's and Microsoft's console specs. A lot of people are going to say "But the specs have changed since then." However, it's not the specs that gave away the PS3's general purpose, it was the intention of the specs. The one comment that stands out above them all in the article is the one that pinpoints what the PS3 has displayed in realtime gameplay (at present) and for what Sony was really using the PS3 for, as the comments states: "Sony's CPU is ideal for an environment where 12.5% of the work is general-purpose computing and 87.5% of the work is DSP calculations. That sort of mix makes sense for video playback or networked waveform analysis, but not for games."

That comment has stuck with me for the past three years, and with good reason. Now I'm sure techies will break down the PS3 specs to justify it as a more suitable gaming platform than the Xbox 360, but the fact of the matter remains: Developers needed multithreaded middleware just to keep the framerate stable when developing high-end games on the PS3. However, there was nothing needed for optimized video playback for high-definition optical media, specifically, Blu-ray media.

It all comes full-circle, and the facts are these: Even if the PS3 is Sony's last console Sony still wins. Whether the PS3 turns a profit or tanks, Sony still wins. For those of who you don't know what I'm talking about, simply understand that Sony, as an electronic giant, simply needs to survive the economic ebb to reap the benefits of what the PlayStation 3 established for the company. That establishment happens to be the Blu-ray format. The company didn't intend for the PS3 to succeed as the next big console, so much as they intended it to push their new format through the door, successfully. And it did.

Unless another form of high-def optical media emerges within the next two years, Sony will control the high-definition era of optical media for visual entertainment. Anyone who wants to see high-def movies, guess what format you're going to have to go with? Anyone who wants to burn high-def media, guess what format has to be used? If Microsoft wants the Xbox 360 to play anything other than DVD9 material, guess what format they're going to have to use? Sony didn't need the PS3 to just win over gamers, they just needed a vessel to carry over a new format that they would own. Something that Sony's BetaMax and their UMD failed to do in the past.

While Nintendo may control the console gaming market, and Microsoft has a stranglehold on the hardcore gaming arena, Sony will own all with Blu-ray. Even Microsoft and Nintendo will have to bow to Sony if they plan to use the formats for their current or future consoles. The only thing gamers can hope for is that Sony doesn't abandon the PS3 too soon (since they have no need for it anymore), or otherwise the entire gaming community will be stuck with Wii shovelware and Halo spin-offs for the rest of this gaming generation.

[Uniquely]

The cell was indeed a very odd choice for a gaming console. Wasn't initially developed specifically for video devices such as tv's?

[RustyK94]

As a Blu-Ray player yes the PS3 is one of the best. As a games consoles it's second best despite offering superior technology to the Xbox360.

I compare it in some respects the PS3 as a game console to the Sega Saturn. Im sure most ppl who have some understanding of that console know what im talking about.

[xtop]

thread title and article are 2 different things. the article didn't say sony didn't intend the ps3 as a console...

Originally Posted by RustyK94

As a Blu-Ray player yes the PS3 is one of the best. As a games consoles it's second best despite offering superior technology to the Xbox360.

I compare it in some respects the PS3 as a game console to the Sega Saturn. Im sure most ppl who have some understanding of that console know what im talking about.

i have a saturn. how is the ps3 like the saturn in any way at all?

[RustyK94]

Originally Posted by xtop

thread title and article are 2 different things. the article didn't say sony didn't intend the ps3 as a console...



i have a saturn. how is the ps3 like the saturn in any way at all?

Good technology but hard to make games for.

[xtop]

Originally Posted by RustyK94

Good technology but hard to make games for.

oh..duh. haha! well thankfully sony is providing more support than sega did. but i see what you mean now.

[FilmmakingFiasco]

Originally Posted by RustyK94

I compare it in some respects the PS3 as a game console to the Sega Saturn. Im sure most ppl who have some understanding of that console know what im talking about.

Are you talking about the two Hitachi processors that were a pain to work with but paid off tremendously once developers got a handle on the hardware?

[RustyK94]

Originally Posted by xtop

oh..duh. haha! well thankfully sony is providing more support than sega did. but i see what you mean now.

Does not help that they stuck a processors there that only was primarily for video use. Making for lower frame rates in affect rendering the Blu-Ray potential as games medium very limited.

That's why there is not much of a step up between PS3 games and Xbox360. Sony where smart they sacrificed the PlayStation games franchise and used it's good name to get Blu-Ray off the ground.

Im sorry but if it had not been for the PS3 HD-DVD would have won i concede that. 2006 Blu-Ray was in no shape to compete with HD-DVD. But rather than letting the format get a full years head start and by that time be well and truly out of the game.

Sony gambled and released Blu-Ray a couple of months after HD-DVD the reason?

Had Sony launched Blu-Ray with the PS3 ppl would have seen the PS3 as nothing more than Sony's big plan to get every one to buy into Blu-Ray and nothing to do with games them self.

It's simple business Sony stand to gain more from Blu-Ray domination than just a games console.

[saprano]

Originally Posted by RustyK94

Had Sony launched Blu-Ray with the PS3 ppl would have seen the PS3 as nothing more than Sony's big plan to get every one to buy into Blu-Ray

Well that was the plan....and it worked

Now they can focus on games.

[Red Hood]

I never did use my ps3 for gaming. lol

[NARMAK]

I can see where he's coming from but you have to wonder, if sony really doesn't care about the games console side.

Why would they try & position themselves as THE 09 console to have & the year when they catch up & overtake the Xbox 360

I believe sony took a huge gamble including Blu-Ray in the PS3 & tried to use it as a trojan horse for the format war but it also served as a double edge sword as it was the next generation in optical media storage & would benefit games as well

[saprano]

Originally Posted by NARMAK

I can see where he's coming from but you have to wonder, if sony really doesn't care about the games console side.

Why would they try & position themselves as THE 09 console to have & the year when they catch up & overtake the Xbox 360

I believe sony took a huge gamble including Blu-Ray in the PS3 & tried to use it as a trojan horse for the format war but it also served as a double edge sword as it was the next generation in optical media storage & would benefit games as well

As i said blu-ray won now there focus is games

As the joker put it...you'll see i'll show ya

[mightypen]

Color me skeptical of this article.

[NARMAK]

Originally Posted by saprano

As i said blu-ray one now there focus is games

As the joker put it...you'll see i'll show ya

I think they always had a double objective from the get go

PS2 helped launch DVD & they hoped PS3 could emulate that with Blu-Ray but unlike DVD having been out for some years before PS2 launched & the price having come down due to the way economics of manufacturing work & getting lower costs yearly

Blu-Ray in the PS3 was a 1st gen application so they took a big gamble as it really tacked on price

I completely agree though that now they achieved Blu-Ray victory, it'll be 100% concentration to get it to the top again

This console war will last 5-6 years with 1,1/2 having passed so far from launch here in the UK & numbers not being too far off the Xbox 360 with a years headstart factored in,

18 million PS3s < in 2 years
23 million Xbox 360 < in 3 years

Sony will probably be able to bring some price cut next year & possibly a redesign

[ps3andlovinit]

Originally Posted by Elandyll

I thought that was an interesting take on the PS3...
Now the article also assimilates the Blu Ray format entirely with Sony, which is obviously wrong (Sony being one of the main backers, but not the only one, contrarily to Tosh and the HD DVD back in the days), but still an interesting take on it imo.

http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Edi...ole-14014.html

Well they definitely wanted to use the PS3 to establish Blu-ray and vice versa.. anyone that has been following the PS3 has said that all along. Nothing too surprising really.

That however is separate from the Cell being designed for a games console or not. MGS4, GT5 and Killzone 2 say hello to anyone that believes it wasn't. It's actually a pretty laughable premise given the highest quality games are available on the PS3.

And what does it say if other next gen consoles that were designed just as game consoles .. are inferior to something that was never meant to be a game console? Massive incompetence .. or maybe the PS3 actually was designed as a game console as well.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Well, I think to go so far as to say that Sony never meant for it to be a gaming console or to succeed as one is going a little too far.

I'm sure they probably knew that at a release price of $600, there would be less people buying than if it had a launch price of $300 like both of the previous consoles did.

But, I think they expected it to do well enough based on what (at the time) was the strength of the Playstation brand name.



With that being said, I still think the system under performed sales wise compared to what they were expecting.

The system was initially selling out upon launch, but part of that was people hoping to sell the units on ebay to make a profit. But, of course, most people were already scoffing at the $600 base price for the system, so they certainly weren't going to pay more.


Within a week or so after Christmas, the system was pretty easy to find (at least in my area). I believe some of the hopeful ebay sellers ended up having to return them, in addition to new stocks just not moving that quickly.



Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the system is a failure or that it hasn't sold at all. Obviously is sold very well in terms of getting Blu-Ray off the ground.

But on many other levels, it has underperformed. And Sony has to make compromises because of it. Backwards compatibility has always been one of Sony's biggest bragging points since the PS2 first came out, and they went from having 99.9% compatibility with all previous PS1 and PS2 games, to reducing the PS2 compatibility in the initial 80GB game-bundle units, to eliminating the PS2 compatibility completely in all units since.

Not to mention the fact that all of the non PS2 compatible units completely lack the memory card slots and have fewer USB ports.



They really built this thing as the premiere, premium system, and they've had to cut corners quite a bit. Obviously that wasn't part of their original plan, and I'm sure came from the fact that sales weren't where they wanted them to be. It would be harder for them to make up the $ they were losing on each system sold via software sales since fewer people were even buying the system, and they had to find a way to make the system cheaper to make, and to sell it at a more appealing price to make up for that.


And while it may be selling well enough, the sales do tend to pale in comparison with the competition.


On another web forum that I frequent, there is a video game thread, and one of the mods on that site, who is also a gamer (and who also happens to be the proud owner of a 60GB PS3, so he's not out to make the system look bad), is always posting monthly sales statistics of how many units of each console (including handholds) are sold. More often than not, the PS3 is towards the bottom.

There are exceptions at times.. usually when a new game comes out, and especially when the MGS4 80GB bundle with the B/C came out. People were jumping all over that to get the compatibility, since the previous bundle had been out of stores for months.



I actually think that would be a good sales strategy for them. Releasing a premium system with the b/c, extra ports, card slots, etc, in limited quantities for a limited time every now and then, with a different game bundled in each time. The sales will likely jump during those times.

I know that it costs more to make the system, but right now the 60GB and (previous) 80GB units are often selling for even more than they originally cost on the 2nd hand market to people who want the compatibility.

They could likely sell a premium unit with b/c for $525 or even $550 to the die hard fans who want the feature during these limited time sales, but still have the $400 version out there as their standard, ongoing model.

[Headphone Czar]

HD DVD was dead before it started.. Movie companies made sure of this.

[ps3andlovinit]

Originally Posted by Dynamo of Eternia

And while it may be selling well enough, the sales do tend to pale in comparison with the competition.

Everything else pales compared to the Wii.

PS3 HAS OUTSOLD THE 360 WORLDWIDE FOR THE LAST 2 YEARS WHILE HAVING A HIGHER INITIAL STICKER PRICE

So with a larger library and 2 years of being cheaper I guess we can classify 360 sales as invisible .. if the PS3's are being classified as pale.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

I was referring more so to domestic sales than worldwide in my statement.

And regardless, PS3 is not anywhere near the position that the PS2 was, nor does it currently show signs of even getting into that ballpark.

The 360 is still giving the PS3 some decent competition, and when a system with that extensive of a failure rate can do that well against you, that doesn't say much for your marketing strategy.


I'm not knocking the PS3, in and of itself. I am the proud owner of the 80GB Motorstorm bundle version of the system. But, reality is reality.

[ps3andlovinit]

Originally Posted by Dynamo of Eternia

I was referring more so to domestic sales than worldwide in my statement.

Well until the latest price cuts the PS3 was outselling the 360 domestically in 2008 .. so pales didn't fit for most of the year. It was also easier to get the point across with worldwide.

Originally Posted by Dynamo of Eternia

And regardless, PS3 is not anywhere near the position that the PS2 was, nor does it currently show signs of even getting into that ballpark.

Well who expected the Wii to grab so many $$. That's really what has happened to both the 360 and the PS3. Given it's starting price I don't think the PS2 curve was going to quite hold true .. but the Wii threw everything off the tracks in that regard.

Originally Posted by Dynamo of Eternia

The 360 is still giving the PS3 some decent competition, and when a system with that extensive of a failure rate can do that well against you, that doesn't say much for your marketing strategy.

J6P had and for the most part still has no idea what they are in for .. and for the first two years the American media was complicit in not informing them while bashing the PS3 continuously. My daughters boyfriend is on his 4th. Do you think he would have bought one in the first place if he had known? I agree that Sony marketing SHOULD have been informing people and didn't take advantage of the situation.

Originally Posted by Dynamo of Eternia

I'm not knocking the PS3, in and of itself. I am the proud owner of the 80GB Motorstorm bundle version of the system. But, reality is reality.

I understand your distinction