What is your opinion of the way Sony has handled the marketing of the PS3??

[Septimus Prime]

Originally Posted by toefer

Well, it's nice to see Sony is peddling this chart in some of its recent press releases:

That chart is exactly what they need to show in commercials.

[Volume11]

Originally Posted by Proteus

..

Am I frustrated that it must be this way? Hell yeah! I hate it. I want PS3 to be pushed forward also, but when you look at Sony's entire line-up it's easy to see their strategy. The PS3 is not failing, in the meantime, it's still flourishing and doing VERY well especially when you consider the very poor PR it's had. It's year over year performance is nearly 10% better than it's nearest competitor, the 360, (10% is a MASSIVE number in these terms too, just ask 'retail' how much the loss of 10% sales over the holidays feels to them) with probably 1/4 the advertising budget _and_ bad PR _and_ losing major exclusives. It's an amazing tale really. When the time comes for Sony to shift from PS2 to PS3 the Playstation brand is what will continue to push it forward and help convert PS2 owners up to PS3 (obviously, this requires the cost cutting and pricing mentioned above also). I figure it will be Holiday 2009 when things begin to really show their true colors and Holiday 2010 for the PS3 to become the sole focus and drive and eventually evolve to a 'cash cow' just like PS2 did. It's just frustrating when you've been on board since day one waiting for the big 'revelation' to occur as it seems like so long.

I'm pretty sure the sales went down for the months of October, Nov and December. I can find the link but a few articles came out last week that pointed out that the holiday numbers from this year were lower than last year, which was a huge blow to Sony. It was somewhat expected due to the economy and lack of price drop, but the kicker was MS had the best holiday yet posting its best Xmas numbers...

Also, no one thought DVD was going to fail. By the time the PS2 hit stores it was sold out for months and most people were dying for a DVD player. Outside of the weak DivX front it faced no competition.

[Sith]

Originally Posted by Septimus Prime

That chart is exactly what they need to show in commercials.

If your going to show a chart like that you could at least make the prices
right, and I don't know that many online gamers that care about wi-fi...

[Drew664]

Step 1.) Find a way to lower the price. Slim PS3 or internal design changes.

Step 2.) Open the damn flood gate that is the PS library. PSN would do so so so well with this. Why hasn't it been done?!

Step 3.) Advertise games and movies. Spend the dollars to advertise the game/movie itself and then say that it's available on the PS3. Just stamp it on the end. Make sure when people think of that new big block buster movie or new hit game, they think PS3.

Step 4.) Why can't a Sony rep go on the Tonight Show? I'm sure they would be allowed to demo their product, entertain the audience, educate the public, and in the end - sell Sony. Essentially an infomercial that someone mentioned earlier.

Step 5.) Luck. Buying exclusives isn't going to happen this generation. With all of these exclusive games that Sony helps develop, one of them will have to be huge.

Step 6.) Find a way to allow PS2 games to be played on a PS3. Ease the transition from the 100 million plus PS2 owners.

There you go. 6 steps to a healthier PS3! :P

[Terjyn]

Originally Posted by Volume11

Also, no one thought DVD was going to fail. By the time the PS2 hit stores it was sold out for months and most people were dying for a DVD player. Outside of the weak DivX front it faced no competition.

*EVERYTHING* that has been said about Blu-Ray failing because DVD was good enough was said about DVD re: VHS. Often, and repeatedly.

The difference is that you probably didn't know about it, and we didn't have the blogger factor.

[toef]

Originally Posted by Terjyn

*EVERYTHING* that has been said about Blu-Ray failing because DVD was good enough was said about DVD re: VHS. Often, and repeatedly.

The difference is that you probably didn't know about it, and we didn't have the blogger factor.

I don't think that's true.

DVD had more noticeable improvements over VHS (you could easily rewind/fast forward; they take up a lot less space, don't get crappier after each viewing, etc.)

You'd be surprised at how many people don't really care much about a better image, or lossless audio... or at least enough that they feel a need to upgrade.

To many people, BD is just an upgraded DVD (how many times do you hear BD referred to as "Blu-Ray DVDs"? because I hear it a lot), whereas DVD was a completely new format compared to VHS.

[Volume11]

Originally Posted by Terjyn

*EVERYTHING* that has been said about Blu-Ray failing because DVD was good enough was said about DVD re: VHS. Often, and repeatedly.

The difference is that you probably didn't know about it, and we didn't have the blogger factor.

A. I had the internet for almost 4 years by the time I got my DVD player in the Xmas of 97.

B. Almost every single person I knew personally (from family to friends and all brackets from student poor to filthy rich), talked to at electronic stores (both clerks and happy gushing customers) and read in both print (which admittedly was more of a factor back then) and online gushed over it. It was everything the Laserdisc should have been and everything VHS wasn't.

C. I'm not implying BD is a failure and/or failing. Its pretty good when you consider the economy, the fact the PS3 isn't selling as well as hoped and the stiff competition from HD cable, internet and download services (to an extent).

[Volume11]

Originally Posted by toefer

I don't think that's true.

DVD had more noticeable improvements over VHS (you could easily rewind/fast forward; they take up a lot less space, don't get crappier after each viewing, etc.)

You'd be surprised at how many people don't really care much about a better image, or lossless audio... or at least enough that they feel a need to upgrade.

To many people, BD is just an upgraded DVD (how many times do you hear BD referred to as "Blu-Ray DVDs"? because I hear it a lot), whereas DVD was a completely new format compared to VHS.

This.

Not too mention you didnt need a spiffy HD set to enjoy the visual upgrade...

[Terjyn]

Where I was everyone claimed DVD wasn't worth it. Why should I rebuy an entire collection? Not to mention, DVD couldn't record! What is this piece of crap. I remember talking to many clerks telling me I was throwing away my money when I was an early adopter of DVD.

I don't care that you had the internet, I already said that the Blogger factor was not there.

The internet and it's free exchange of information magnifies all information, both good and bad. *THAT's* why you see so many more people claiming Blu-Ray is failing. There weren't enough people who even knew what DVD was in 1997/98.

You *can't* tell me that Visual upgrades don't matter for Blu but they somehow did for DVD.

http://www.adequacy.org/stories/2001...12921.289.html
You think someone would satire things that weren't said?

[Terjyn]

And, by the way, that's assuming the sight was satire and not said in all seriousness. :P

[Volume11]

Originally Posted by Terjyn

Where I was everyone claimed DVD wasn't worth it. Why should I rebuy an entire collection? Not to mention, DVD couldn't record! What is this piece of crap. I remember talking to many clerks telling me I was throwing away my money when I was an early adopter of DVD.

I don't care that you had the internet, I already said that the Blogger factor was not there.

The internet and it's free exchange of information magnifies all information, both good and bad. *THAT's* why you see so many more people claiming Blu-Ray is failing. There weren't enough people who even knew what DVD was in 1997/98.

You *can't* tell me that Visual upgrades don't matter for Blu but they somehow did for DVD.

Well, I guess the region you lived in disliked DVD, because where I lived at the time (between Fl and NYC) everyone was gushing with joy about the format. I talked to more people in the one DVD aisle Best Buy had at the time the FIRST day I bought a DVD than I have EVER buying a BD to this day...

And I never said BD wasn't an upgrade. I can't watch SD anymore...it literally kills me because all I think about is how much better it would look. However, most people I know think BD looks good, but isnt worth the upgrade when they can upscale DVDs and/or get HD cable. DVD didnt have the same competition. The only complaint I ever heard from anyone regarding DVD was that they hated having to rebuy or wait for their current 15+ year VHS collection. And most eventually succumbed...

[Terjyn]

It was two years before I ever saw anyone but me shopping for DVD.

You should check out the link I edited in above too.

[saprano]

Originally Posted by Terjyn

You *can't* tell me that Visual upgrades don't matter for Blu but they somehow did for DVD.

http://www.adequacy.org/stories/2001...12921.289.html
You think someone would satire things that weren't said?

Oh my god TJ thats so similar to whats going on now!
right down to the comments!

Thats need to be posted in the blu-ray technology and news thread....wow.

[BirdManJr]

sony has the better product in the ps3

and they do have games

But there lack of putting more into the game, exclusives or add on content is what hurts.

And the xbox 360 has the lower price but in the end to have wireless and the controllers and the online your spending the same if even more $$$

Its a illusion. I mean you see the xbox 360 starting at 199 commercial all the time..or the now with kung fu panda and lego indiana jones commercial.

they say this is what we have and this is the low price for gaming.

Ps3 doesnt get to the point. and a 80 gb with no games for 399 is just ridiculous..what crowd are they even trying to focus on?

even with the xbox having failure software they still have a big fan base of addicted users. Only reason ps3 is even in the running is blu-ray
if hd-dvd was still around and blu-ray wasnt they couldnt hold there own. especially the way xbox still sells with the death of hd dvd.

I dont even own a xbox...yet....but not blind to see who can push there product better. sony needs a wake up call..and the psp 3000 is a joke also.

[Maximus]

Originally Posted by Volume11

According to most insider reports RS went to Sony and made a fair offer for an exclusive buyout and Sony turned it down before MS was even mentioned last gen...which is even more stupid than doing it now because GTA3 helped propell the PS3 from strong number 1 contender to runaway console dominance (MGS2 and FFX helped as well of course).

You know this how?

I never heard R* offering anyone exclusivity. The $50m "loan" that MS gave them is what broke it.

Anyway, the age of third party exclusives is coming to an end. MS are willing to pay so much to companies to break exclusivity it just isn't tenable anymore. Not that it matters, SCE have got the biggest and best first/second party studios.

[Volume11]

Originally Posted by Maxpower1987

You know this how?

I never heard R* offering anyone exclusivity. The $50m "loan" that MS gave them is what broke it.

Anyway, the age of third party exclusives is coming to an end. MS are willing to pay so much to companies to break exclusivity it just isn't tenable anymore. Not that it matters, SCE have got the biggest and best first/second party studios.

Before GTA3 was released on ANY console they offered MS exclusivity and they turned it down. Type "Dean Takahashi GTA3" into your browser and you will likely find the info that was found in his book. I can't find the article that discussed RS's offer to Sony, but it was in another Takahashi article that all of the major websites ran around a year or two ago.

And for everyone defending the beloved Sony and their shallow pockets, do you have proof MS has "deep pockets' that Sony can't compete with? Most sources point to Sony simply not wanting to pony up at all and MS swooping in OR developers realizing that games cost substantially more this gen than last to produce and they are selling less on the PS3...Square themselves cited this as a reason for going multi-platform with FFXIII on the 360 and sending DQ to the Wii and DS exclusively.

[Marine Mike]

Originally Posted by Volume11

Before GTA3 was released on ANY console they offered MS exclusivity and they turned it down. Type "Dean Takahashi GTA3" into your browser and you will likely find the info that was found in his book. I can't find the article that discussed RS's offer to Sony, but it was in another Takahashi article that all of the major websites ran around a year or two ago.

And for everyone defending the beloved Sony and their shallow pockets, do you have proof MS has "deep pockets' that Sony can't compete with? Most sources point to Sony simply not wanting to pony up at all and MS swooping in OR developers realizing that games cost substantially more this gen than last to produce and they are selling less on the PS3...Square themselves cited this as a reason for going multi-platform with FFXIII on the 360 and sending DQ to the Wii and DS exclusively.

Have you heard recent news of Sony having to shutdown departments (not gaming)? I believe that should be some proof of not having very deep pockets.

EDIT: Also, Sony has stated that they will not compete with bidding wars as they will use that money to develop better IPs.

[Volume11]

Originally Posted by Marine Mike

Have you heard recent news of Sony having to shutdown departments (not gaming)? I believe that should be some proof of not having very deep pockets.

I meant in context to directly competing for exclusivity buyouts, and more specifically, from the inception and launch of the PS3 when the economy was doing just fine and Sony made most of these decisions. Obviously, MS as a whole is the larger company with deeper pockets, but I don't think I have read one single article or report that claims MS maliciously outbid Sony on its PS1/PS2 exclusives like GTA (timed), FF, DMC, AC, VF and so on...The only articles I can come up with are ones stating that Sony, as early as the the late PS2 days, got real high on themselves and simply didn't think they needed to pony up to maintain their runaway 1st place gaming status.

[Steelmaker]

Originally Posted by Volume11

I meant in context to directly competing for exclusivity buyouts, and more specifically, from the inception and launch of the PS3 when the economy was doing just fine and Sony made most of these decisions. Obviously, MS as a whole is the larger company with deeper pockets, but I don't think I have read one single article or report that claims MS maliciously outbid Sony on its PS1/PS2 exclusives like GTA (timed), FF, DMC, AC, VF and so on...The only articles I can come up with are ones stating that Sony, as early as the the late PS2 days, got real high on themselves and simply didn't think they needed to pony up to maintain their runaway 1st place gaming status.

Well frankly I don't think Sony, MS, or Nintendo should have to pony up when it comes to 3rd party development. I think it's great that 3rd party titles come to as many gamers as possible, regardless of which console you own. However I do have a problem with all of the paid exclusive content that 360 owners have been getting. That's not fair to the gamer and in the end, that's who you're hurting. I think companies should consider that before taking the "quick buck" and isolating such a large number of gamers.

[dk3dknight]

Originally Posted by Steelmaker

Well frankly I don't think Sony, MS, or Nintendo should have to pony up when it comes to 3rd party development. I think it's great that 3rd party titles come to as many gamers as possible, regardless of which console you own. However I do have a problem with all of the paid exclusive content that 360 owners have been getting. That's not fair to the gamer and in the end, that's who you're hurting. I think companies should consider that before taking the "quick buck" and isolating such a large number of gamers.

And that brings us to a old Chinese proverb,
"Life isn't Fair but be thankful for what you have, because the grass on the other side may not be as green as it appears"