Sony aims for comeback win with PS3

[Orius]

The only way the PS3 failing is the lack of exclusives, not that the console was expensive at the start.

I think it's a little of both. The high price I think contributes a bit to slower initital sales. But we're starting to reach the point where I think the price is becoming irrelevant. The lack of must-have exclusives I think is the real killer. Why buy the PS3 if the 360 has most of the same games, plus big exclusives like Halo 3? And there's the Achievements too; I don't know if that's affecting sales as well. Maybe MGS4 might turn things around a bit, but that's a few months off too. There's also FFXIII, but it's release date is so far off that it might not be able to help PS3.

I would have also like to have seen more 360 exclusive RPGs and less FPS with their lead time, but that's just me.

Yeah, but I think it reflects the NA market. American gamers I think seem to be far more attracted to FPS than RPGs. So the 360 naturally will have more FPS games, since it's sales are mostly strong in NA and maybe Europe too; they're really not making a dent in the Japanese market. So developers are going to concentrate on games that sell well in NA. The NA developers that do the big epic RPGs tend to develop for PCs rather than consoles as well.

 

[John Crichton]

It means that the PS3/360 don't do a good a job of it. Give one of those controllers to somebody who's never played a console before. With two analog thumbsticks, a D-Pad, four color-scheme buttons, two shoulder buttons, and two trigger buttons, they wind up wondering where the extra fingers are supposed to come from. A three-year-old can figure out a Wii controller.

Perhaps I am missing the point. I was just stating that a Wii isn't necessary to draw in the casual gamers. There are plenty of party games out there for other consoles that are just as fun.

The Wii may do it a little better but most games aimed at casual gamers don't make use of most of the controller no matter what system they are on.

True, one Halo can make all the difference.

It's well-accepted as factual that sticker-shock was a major problem for the PS3, so you're out on your own little island if you're insisting otherwise. Lack of titles didn't help, of course.

Well accepted doesn't make it fact. Not even close. Had the thing been a little cheaper at launch, no one has any idea that it would have sold better. What was the reason to buy the thing? A cheap BR player. That's why I got one so close to launch.

I'll admit to being in the minority on my opinion, but there simply isn't enough evidence to convince my otherwise. Had I not already owned a 360 at the time, I would have bought one over a PS3 due to game selection.

To answer your question, I wouldn't be pursuing the Wii without the offerings of the Virtual Console. The Wii doesn't have many AAA games that pique my interest.

I almost wished I waited. But I'm a tech junkie, soooo...

XLA is fine for coin-op classics, but the fact that they're not aggressively offering virtual board and card games like they were planning to is becoming very disappointing. Uno was a huge hit. Catan and Carcassonne were great for the strategy lovers. Where are the follow-ups?

This is true. I'm waiting for more conversions but I don't play it enough to be salivating for more. I did DL a few XLA games a little while back and had a blast for a night or two. I actually need to stay away from DLC for money. I'm too much of an impulse buyer.

 

[John Crichton]

I think it's a little of both. The high price I think contributes a bit to slower initital sales. But we're starting to reach the point where I think the price is becoming irrelevant. The lack of must-have exclusives I think is the real killer. Why buy the PS3 if the 360 has most of the same games, plus big exclusives like Halo 3? And there's the Achievements too; I don't know if that's affecting sales as well. Maybe MGS4 might turn things around a bit, but that's a few months off too. There's also FFXIII, but it's release date is so far off that it might not be able to help PS3.

It would bode well for FFXIII to come out in 2008 for the PS3. It's a surefire seller.

Have you seen how many furries are out there?!

Yeah, but I think it reflects the NA market. American gamers I think seem to be far more attracted to FPS than RPGs. So the 360 naturally will have more FPS games, since it's sales are mostly strong in NA and maybe Europe too; they're really not making a dent in the Japanese market. So developers are going to concentrate on games that sell well in NA. The NA developers that do the big epic RPGs tend to develop for PCs rather than consoles as well.

I can agree that FPS could be a bit more attractive to gamers than RPGs in NA. But that margin isn't all that big. The problem is that NA gets a glut of FPS, especially for the 360 so the "next gen" RPGs are lagging quite behind in quantity and one could argue quality.

Also, people will buy games for the system they have. Are people getting FPS because that is mostly all that is available for the 360 or is it the other way around? The 360 has mostly the usual releases that all platforms get (EA stuff) plus FPS and then racers. This gen could turn into a console/genre war the way things are shaping up. Mass Effect's numbers could be a sign of that.

 

[Felon]

Yeah, but I think it reflects the NA market. American gamers I think seem to be far more attracted to FPS than RPGs. So the 360 naturally will have more FPS games, since it's sales are mostly strong in NA and maybe Europe too; they're really not making a dent in the Japanese market. So developers are going to concentrate on games that sell well in NA. The NA developers that do the big epic RPGs tend to develop for PCs rather than consoles as well.

I think RPG's are pretty well-established as being popular. I don't think American studios want to work on them. Game publishers have a penchant for only designing games that the designers want to play. You get FPS games for the twitch crowed, and strategy/sim games for the cerebral crowd. Then there's Bioware, who have carved out a niche as being the American RPG company.

Personally, I regard the GTA games as being a kind of RPG. You got a big world to explore, you get loot drops, you got progressively better stuff to spend loot on, you have a storyline--everything I want from an RPG except XP and levels.

 

[drothgery]

Well accepted doesn't make it fact. Not even close. Had the thing been a little cheaper at launch, no one has any idea that it would have sold better. What was the reason to buy the thing? A cheap BR player. That's why I got one so close to launch.

The thing is that other consoles, with a similarly poor selection of launch games, have sold much better. Heck, the only recent console with even one outstanding launch game has been the original Xbox (with Halo). And at $300, the PS2 sold quite well, in Japan at least, as a cheap DVD player despite a set of launch games that were pretty much awful.

It would bode well for FFXIII to come out in 2008 for the PS3. It's a surefire seller.

Maybe. It probably will be for me, in fact. But I see no reason to believe it will be out in North America in 2008.

 

[Vocenoctum]

Lack of support for all games and many of them have issues plus no ability to transfer saves from the old Xbox easily. I put in KotOR2 earlier this year and it played terribly. It's cool that games like Halo and Jade Empire look even better on the 360, but that needed to be icing on the cake not the endgame. The Wii & PS3 did a much better job supporting last gen with their current consoles. So it's just by comparison. I haven't been impressed.

Well, the 360's BC seems fine to me, but I haven't tried KotOR2 in it, given the shoddy treatment the game had even on the original Xbox. It hits most of the major titles well, and a good selection of the "other" titles.

If we peg the 360 BC as 85%, then the original PS3 20/60 would be 95%, sure. The 80 probably would be at 80%, since the issues seemed to be pretty extensive from the list I saw. The 40 of course is 0%.

The Wii is obviously 100% compatible (given it's "two gamecubes duct taped togethor" , only requiring a controller.

So, sure, it's not perfect, but it's been good enough for most people.

 

[Vocenoctum]

Well accepted doesn't make it fact. Not even close. Had the thing been a little cheaper at launch, no one has any idea that it would have sold better. What was the reason to buy the thing? A cheap BR player. That's why I got one so close to launch.

If that's why you bought one (BR) you were I'd say in the minority. By that indication, why did anyone buy the 360? The games for the 360 weren't exactly astounding at launch.

I think most folks bought the PS3 because it was Sony and they were confident of it's performance based on past performance. I mean, people were so confident that they believed in the rendered trailer for Killzone2, even once it was shown to be faked.

 

[John Crichton]

If that's why you bought one (BR) you were I'd say in the minority.

It's possible, but you have to recall at the time it was the cheapest and best BR player on the market. I was going to wait a little longer but I got it tax and shipping free (savings of about $50) so I got one a few months early.

By that indication, why did anyone buy the 360? The games for the 360 weren't exactly astounding at launch.

I waited until Oblivion came out to nab a 360. *shrug*

By I think most folks bought the PS3 because it was Sony and they were confident of it's performance based on past performance. I mean, people were so confident that they believed in the rendered trailer for Killzone2, even once it was shown to be faked.

I don't know why anyone else got a PS3 at launch. I'm sure familiarity and history played into it for some, but I can only say why I got it and was willing to spend so much. And also based on history, the PS2's were going on ebay for more than $600 a pop at launch so I didn't think a $600 price tag, with all that money going back to Sony rather than poachers, was a bad idea.

 

[John Crichton]

The thing is that other consoles, with a similarly poor selection of launch games, have sold much better. Heck, the only recent console with even one outstanding launch game has been the original Xbox (with Halo). And at $300, the PS2 sold quite well, in Japan at least, as a cheap DVD player despite a set of launch games that were pretty much awful.

I think it just proves even more where the PS3, and its accompanying price point, was aimed at as far as market goes. If I didn't own a HDTV I wouldn't have even considered getting one. And I said that from the start. The thing wasn't aimed remotely at the casual gamer or even the PS2 owner. Mistake? Maybe. The other thing that helps support my theory is the unique situation the popularity and cash cow that the PS2 is. They still had strong revenue coming in from their last gen console so they didn't need the PS3 to sell like gangbusters out of the gate. And if I'm not mistaken, the only reason they released it in '06 was because the 360 came out early. They were planning for a later launch, from what I recall from years back.

I'm more than willing to admit that I may not be completely right on the PS3 launch/price thing but I do believe there is some true to it. What is reality is probably a bit of everything, including what many folks take as fact.

Maybe. It probably will be for me, in fact. But I see no reason to believe it will be out in North America in 2008.

Yeah, I'm getting that feel as well. I hope they can get it out next year. FFX was able to hit pretty quickly for the PS2 so perhaps I'm just holding on to hope because of that.