[Computer Gaming]
Well, the PS3 is looking decidedly unattractive as a gaming console right now. Sony looks arrogant, directionless, and more than a little like they suddenly don't know what the hell they're doing in the gaming industry in the first place. It's a long way to come from the triumphant success of the PS2.
So, just in case Sony execs are out there reading my blog (and why wouldn't they?), here's my five-step plan to get Sony back on its feet and ready to launch with both fists swinging.
1) Drop Blu-Ray
We don't need it. We don't want it. We certainly aren't prepared to have the price of a gaming console inflated by several hundred dollars just for the privilege of being able to use a format that nobody's supporting yet. If you, Sony, honestly think it's such a big deal, then damn well subsidise it yourself. Put the games back onto DVD, or (heaven forbid) HD-DVD, and don't make us pay the price of your format speculation.
2) Stop screwing around with DRM
DRM (Digital Rights Management) is not the way of the future. We, the consumer, are not interested in buying either systems or software infected with crippleware. Games that can only be played in one machine will not sell. Games that cannot be lent to friends or resold will not sell. Games that require online authentication before you can play them will not sell. Telling your customers that you think they're all thieving criminals is not the way to win a fan base.
3) Put Dual Shock back in the controllers
Suck up your pride and pay the damn guy for his technology. It's good technology, and if you have to pay for it then so be it. People expect to be able to feel their heartbeat in survival horror games; to feel the engine in driving games; to feel explosions during cutscenes. Plus, what the hell is the point of backwards compatibility if Psycho Mantis can't move your controller with his mind anymore?
4) Forget about this dual SKU nonsense
Having two versions of the system is just a cheap way of being able to lie about the true magnitude of the price point. It creates consumer confusion and waters down the value of your brand. There should be only one PS3, and that one version should be iconic and have a reputation of quality. There should not be the option of accidentally buying "PS3 - the dud version". Consumers should be able to know that when they're buying PS3 they're buying quality.
5) Remember where you're coming from
Sony, you're a media company. You're the company that combined a CD player and a console; a DVD-player and a console. What we were all excited about with the PS3 way back when was that it was going to be the ultimate media box - an aggregated MP3 server, sound system, web terminal, community client, DVD player and games station, all running on an open source OS with no worries about system spec or hardware compatibility. That was fantastically attractive. You're the company with the experience and the resources to pull that off, so stop flopping about trying to be the bastard child of Microsoft and Nintendo and get back to doing what you do well.
Honestly, I'm pretty sure blind comatose babies know that Sony's current strategy is just rubbish (or at least you can't prove that they don't). Sony needs to stop punching nuns and kicking puppies and get back to what made them so exciting to see in action for the last two generations - making gaming consoles designed for gamers.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
One word... Betamax.
It seems that they somehow can not or will not learn from their mistakes.
Amen. Also, it's the same thing that went wrong with the PSP, all over again - dodgy controls, a format that only a mother could love (UMD), and the whole media centre/OS capability ruined by DRM rubbish making it impossible to get your files onto the system and make them run. (Although Liberty City Stories is still a sweet game.)
The problem that I always have with the "Betamax argument" is that it doesn't get the whole story across. Sony had both formats. They chose Betamax over VHS because Batamax was technologically superior. It had better AV quality and longer life. Professional studios and equipment used it almost exclusively for many years. It was better and they believed in it. But because everyone else got to make VHS, there was a rash of cheap (in both price and quality) players available to the mass market.
Could Sony have dealt with it better? Yes. Were they wrong in choosing the bettor format? I can't say that they were. Perhaps Blu-Ray is better than HD-DVD, but forcing it on us isn't the answer.
Ah well... Sony hasn't done anything to impress me for about a decade now. Bad advertising. Continual bungling of great formats (can anyone say MiniDisc?). Insistence on using DRM technology. Overpriced and poorly managed retail division.
Sony should pack up the sales side and just get on with making the tech. Let other people decide how to market and sell it. They have proven that they don't have a clue how to do it properly.
As I understand Blu-Ray, the major advantage is storage capacity. This means publishers can cut a single multi-region CD containing all the language files, rather than a different CD for each sales region. This probably isn't going to happen anyway, because they're going to release in the company of origin as soon as it's ready, rather than hold it back waiting for translations. And in any case, it's a saving to the publisher which doesn't look like it's being passed on to the consumer, what with the price of next-gen games. So what the hell are WE doing paying to get the userbase installed?
I love to argue, but I can't find a single one of those points I disagree with. I especially think Blu-Ray is a bad bad idea. Not so much that the format is bad, but that putting it in the PS3 and using it to bank on Blu-Ray at the detriment of its price tag is just plain dumb.
I do think, even in light of the comments, that it is Betamax all over again. It doesn't matter which is the better format, what matters is what gets adopted. Right now my money is on HD-DVD and it's something that is already starting to hit the market. Is Blu-Ray out there yet? Is anyone using it?
Maybe Betamax is a bad example. Maybe it's UMD all over again.
Thanks to everyone for their comments. This post seems to be raising a bit more interest than I originally thought it would; I might submit it to the June Carnival of Gamers if I can't come up with something better by the deadline.
Yes, I've seen that quote.
Yes, there will be hardcore fanbois that buy at launch, no matter what the price. And there will be those who hold back, but cave in when MGS4 and FFXIII come out. But for all the high profile of those titles, the hardcore fans are a tiny, tiny proportion of the market.
Sony NEEDS to be winning the parents who will buy it for their children. Sony NEEDS to be winning the sports gamers who will buy it for the latest driving and football titles. Sony NEEDS to be pushing the word-of-mouth and peer pressure buys, from people who get it because it's what their friends have. And they have really nothing to sell to those markets with.
Sony has a lot of legacy pull; but it's very significant that EA has suddenly come out of the box and announced support for the Wii. That prominent third-party support is what killed the Gamecube (the lack of it), and at the moment Sony's pushing an expensive, hard to develop for platform with a non-standard hybrid controller and the possibility of offensive DRM restrictions. If it weren't Sony doing it, they would have ALREADY lost third-party support.
It's a very fine line here. The PS3 could be for Sony what the Dreamcast was for Sega - the technically wonderful machine from a trusted manufactuerer that they nevertheless couldn't move off store shelfs with a stick.
Anywho, thanks for stopping by and entering the debate!
I think it is a given that the console will sell, but will it sell in the same numbers?
The Gamecube sold millions of units and was considered by some to be a failure. Nintendo remained strong as a company, but they had other offerings to fall back on.
The problem is when the PS3 bundles start to show up, how much are you going to be able to charge even the hardcore? You're talking about a system whose initial price tag is the better part of $1K from the start.
To be successful the console has to sell well beyond its initial launch. It's not that I don't want a PS3, it's simply that I cannot justify the price. Therein lies the problem. I think Sony is right about demand, I think they are right about the interest, but I think they are dead wrong on the value.
You can't say something that is $600 is cheap when the amount does not represent anything that I think of as being cheap. RELATIVELY cheap, sure, but it's still $600. I make pretty decent money and it still seems like too much. No matter how Sony tries to sell it, I view it as a game machine. That's a tough sell for $600.
Sony trying to change people's perception of reality to sell a game console is unlikely to work either.
Agreed. Sony could say, "$600 is cheap for a diamond encrusted dog collar", and be completely right, and I still wouldn't care because I don't want to buy a diamond encrusted dog collar. And the same with Blu-Ray. It's not useful to judge it against the cost of a dedicated Blu-Ray player, because as yet there's no reason whatosever to want to own a Blu-Ray player. They need to sell Blu-Ray on the basis that you now have a machine that can play it, not sell the machine on the basis that it can play Blu-Ray.
Post a Comment