Sony: Price Doesn't Make or Break a Platform

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

Price does not. VALUE is the sticky wicket and PS3 couldn't sell it for far too long. It honestly had the hardest time figuring out what it was doing compared to say, Wii or DS who had a hard time getting developers to pay attention to at first.

When the PS3 came it it was a piece of shit because there were no games. They gave up their market domination to Microsoft and then Nintendo.

My impression is they don't have a clue what they're doing. So now they can make excuses that it wasn't price. No, it wasn't, it was releasing a product that was both OVERpriced and for which there was no real demand.

I'm not made of money. Price is immensely important to me. Sure, I care about quality, but it's a mute point when I can't even afford it. Better to have something with fewer features for less than it is to have nothing at all.

lol. i must disagree with Sony.

price can totally make or break a platform.

It's not the sole factor, but it's a major factor.

What a load of bollocks.

When I was choosing my latest console, my choices were the 360, PS3, and Wii I made my choice based on four criteria:

1) Selection of Games. That alone narrowed it down to the 360 and PS3 for the most part. There were some Wii only games that were interesting, but the 360 and the PS3 both supported games I wanted that you couldn't get on the Wii, neither had exclusives that were very compelling though.

2) Online support, PSN and XBL were running neck and neck, both fairly even, XBLA had somethings I liked better, PSN had other things, but it balanced out, the Wii's offering were pathetic at the time.

3) The PS3 was the winner here, but I honestly didn't and don't care enough about Blu-Ray to factor that in, but the 360s graphics were far from poor. The Wii game off poorly, I find motion controllers obnoxious and annoying, and the graphics looked like something out of the 90s.

4) Price. The Wii was the clear winner here, but between point 1, 2, and 3 it was already out of the running, so it came down to two consoles that were about neck and neck. The 360 with a 60GB hard drive, Gears of War (didn't care about that, honestly only played the first level) and a second controller was $399AU, the PS3 basic with no games and only one controller was $599AU at the time. That's $200 or better known as a weeks rent, or in this case 5 games that I picked up with the 360.

So yeah, Sony is talking our there ass here, I don't know anyone who would consider price to be a non-factor unless you were desperate to play one of the handful of exclusives that are on the PS3 (I wouldn't mind playing Uncharted 2 TBH, but it's not worth buying an entire console for), desperately want a Blu-Ray console, or are a die hard Sony Fanboy.

Yeah my PSP and PSP GO! proved its price AND lack of support from Sony that make or break it. And that statement is stupid Sony, if nobody can afford to buy the bloody thing without a big consideration on the price then how do you expect sales to happen in a steady stream? And in what will game sales look like when people don't have the bloody console?

"Something lousy and inexpensive won't be successful"

Gee I wonder how Nintendo's doing these days . . .

Just a thought, when they release the NGP, will they drop the PS3 price? I only ask because I dont want to spend $300 on one still...

I know, Im a greedy bastard, arent I?

I can tell you for a fact the price of the PS3 kept me from buying it, have a 360 instead.

Even when the price dropped, I couldn't justify replacing my 360 with it by that point.

I'll likely never own a PS3. This coming from a avid PS1 and PS2 gamer in days past.

RedEyesBlackGamer:
Lower middle class citizen- "Yes, it does."

Another Lower middle class citizen - "I concur."

He's right it doesn't...in theory.

There's several things Sony did wrong for the launch of the ps3, the major one being a lack of titles that had any interest or appeal.

If they would have remade FF7 and launched it with the PS3 we wouldn't be talking about this and they would sure as hell still own the market today and maybe just maybe that direction would have made them release quality titles.

I have a ps3, 360 and wii. I bought the ps3 last because there was no damn games on it that interest me. The only titles to this date that I consider well made titles is Heavy Rain, Little Big Planet, and of course the Uncharted series. Other than that, they have nothing. Kill Zone never interest me and never will but it probably helped sell units at some point.

Console features, game line up, quality all make or break the console. Needless to say if you want it you are going to try to find a way to get it. So no price does not make or break a console, the suits do.

If Sony wants to go down that road again and make a detrimental mistake, let them. The best lesson to them will be how little it sells. I would love it it NOONE bought one (or at least VERY few). The look on their faces as they swallow their own words would be priceless. We as the consumers have to power to make that happen. That would be a hardcore lesson for Sony.

Yeah, these are the same guys who thought that backwards compatibility on the ps3 was a stupid idea...
(A fact I was unaware of when I bought the damn thing)

Thats all fine and dandy, but I'm not paying 10,000 dollars for a system even if it despensed icecream and cured cancer, I couldn't afford it.

Says the company:
Losing the console war
Losing the handheld gaming device war
Facing lawsuits
Constantly bragging about it's exclusives, even though all systems have their exclusives, and personally I couldn't care less about PS3 exclusives
Came out with Wii motion sensor technology years after Nintendo, with the only upgrade being the ball on the end changing color
Has arguably the best console on the market ever, but still manages to sell less than the 360, which is known for faulty hardware and charges online play
Sold PS3s that had blu-ray players built into them for less than blu-ray players were being sold for

I have a soft spot in my heart for Sony. I sometimes think I should have gotten a PS3 instead of a 360. What does the 360 have that the PS3 doesn't?! The only thing I can think of is brand loyalty, and price. And I personally think brand loyalty is hypocritical and ignorant, as just about every gamer had a PS2.

In short, price broke the PS3. Sony tried to sell jumbo jets to people looking to buy model airplanes.

Value is important, yes.

But value is also subjective. Getting high-performance hardware isn't always the same thing as getting good value.

and thats why they cut out a bunch of features so they could lower the price..... wait wut.

1 word sony: Betamax. I'll leave it at that.

mjc0961:

There's another problem for Sony: they don't have that same level of trust in the quality of their brand. At least not from some people. If there's anything I've learned from having a busted launch PS2 that Sony never fixed despite us sending it for repairs multiple times, a launch PS2 slim with a power brick recall (because it just might catch fire and burn your house down), and a launch PS3 that had the blu-ray laser in the disc drive fail and then it gained new features as a space heater and a noise maker 5 minutes after turning the damn thing on, it's that I sure as hell don't trust the quality of the Playstation brand enough to buy any more Playstation products at launch for a premium price. Now I'm more of a "Wait for it to be out for a while and see what problems others have, and hopefully by the time I feel that it's safe to invest, the price has gone down some."
(Same thing for Microsoft though, before someone starts whining about how RRoD is much worse than anything I mentioned above.)

Now Nintendo, those guys have some trust in the quality of their brand. The phrase "made of Nintendium" exists for a reason. ;)

Nice avatar.

You must have some seriously bad luck with Playstations. I haven't bought a console at launch, ever (I'd rather wait until I have a nice selection of good games *cough*3DS*cough*), but I'd think that most of them would at least work. My brother has (well, I have now since he doesn't play it) a launch Wii and it works perfectly. But I think Nintendium might have come from the Game Boy Color, which was the closest thing to indestructible any portable device, ever, has gotten to.

OP: It sounds like Sony just called us all suckers to me... Like, "You suckers are going to buy this! Mwahaha!" Yes, Sony, I was thinking about buying it, and if it's less than $300 I probably will. But $300 is still kind of sketchy, and I will not go a dime over. And that's if launch manages to be good.

Stop trolling Sony. You didn't amaze anyone when they heard €600,- for the first PS3. It's why I never bought one and opted for a XBOX360 instead.

A console that was so expensive and no games I liked or promised games in the near future

At any rate, price DOES break a platform.

Wow, I was going to quote some of the article, but there's just so much wrong with what they are saying. Have they not looked at their own PS3 market and learned something from it? Good lord...

The main reason I didn't buy the PS3 was because I couldn't afford it and I'm sure there were plenty of people in the same boat.

Article:
"If you're passionate about something you find a way to go out and get it and gamers are very passionate," Tretton said.

Not if it's overpriced my friend. Seriously...economics 101 right there (as someone mentioned above)

image

srsly Sony?

People invest several hundred dollars into portable devices that are deemed more useful than a gaming device. Mobile phones in particular are seen as absolutely necessary in this day and age, which is why people are willing to pay a lot of money for them. The NGP, on the other hand, will never have such a reputation - as far as I can tell its being marketed primarily as a gaming device, and that alone will make its value lower in the eyes of consumers in comparison to an iPod or a phone.

To a degree they are right. Price doesn't matter as much as people make it seem. That being said, there is a break point where stuff is just too expensive. The original price of the PS3 was too expensive for most but it is still worth more than the Xbox 360 or the Wii imo.

it kind of does... they would not have anywhere NEAR the sales that they have now with the PS3 if they had kept it at $600, or even 500. they absolutely had to lower it

The thing is the reason why Apple is so popular are a couple of reasons.
1. Good marketing from the start.
2. It's "hip".
3.You know when you're going to buy an ipod then you're buying a good product.

But the thing is that Sony most of the time don't have any of these and I don't consider the PS3 to be a good platform, I would rather spend it on cat food.

Because obviously cat food is way more tasty.

Sony that's cute but April Fools day was last week, try to be one time next year.
*recieves phone call*
Wait they are serious?
*leaves *

Sorry Sony, but you are dead wrong here.
Like others have said, when I first brought the Xbox360, I was thinking about getting a PS3 but the price was much too high. Yea, I've had to replace two Xbox's this far but it's not been that bad pricing wise. Also got a Wii...from a mobile phone contract, which just goes to show that SOMETIMES price will change what a person buys, and free stuff is awesome.

What a load of PR-Marketing bullshit.
I mean, even their unit sales performance proves how important price is.

PS3 sales lagged far behind their competition until the price cut.

If that were true, there'd probably be a lot more gamers on PC...

Tretton's smarter than Kaz and I'm sure he's painfully aware how much doubling the price hurts sales, so you can charitably take this as him prepping everyone for a high NGP price.

Where did these morons study economy?

There's an element of truth to this. I've always been willing to pay a little more than I'm comfortable with for a console, if I felt like the games were worth it. That said, $500-$600 is just stupidly excessive.

Wrong. If the PS3 was still $600, I would never consider buying one.

Looking at this from a very simplified point of view, this either means that:

A: Price really didn't make a diffrence and the wii and 360 were just fundamentally better

or

B: Sony is talking out of their ass......again.

All this seems like it's gearing up to justify another high price point- but that may just be my inner Nintendo Fanboyism speaking. Even so, this doesn't bode well

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here