Ironchef3500
Banned
Hell no, we made them. At least in this market. Everyone else can play their wii u.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Is Sony making a mistake by betting the farm on 'true' gamers?
- Thread starter alexandros
- Start date
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
I still don't get what this is supposed to prove. The market is drastically larger than it was previously. You expect each generation's sales to increase.
I didn't say it was a disaster. I said it eliminated profit from previous generations.
yurinka
Member
Btw, 3 out of the Top 5 best selling consoles ever are the ones from the current gen. Lol at the 'consoles are dying' talk. Seems that the market is better than ever and if sales go down a bit it's just because of a transition between generations.
But if we compare it with all the console history the PS3 isn't doing doing that bad because they sold a lot of consoles, more than most of the other consoles in the past.
Like PSP is doing a good job in the long run (and still alive in case of PS3 for some few profitable years more since still isn't dead), something that keeps hidden because the market grew a lot this last gen and they have a smaller market share of it compared with the one they had during PS1 and PS2.
I mean that yep, maybe they this gen has been outsold by the others losing a big chunk of marketshare and spent almost all the profits they made in the past.
But if we compare it with all the console history the PS3 isn't doing doing that bad because they sold a lot of consoles, more than most of the other consoles in the past.
Like PSP is doing a good job in the long run (and still alive in case of PS3 for some few profitable years more since still isn't dead), something that keeps hidden because the market grew a lot this last gen and they have a smaller market share of it compared with the one they had during PS1 and PS2.
Can Indy developers make $1 games and release on PS4 for little or no cost, in the same way that they can on iOS (or similar platforms)? I haven't been keeping up on the latest PS4 developments.
If so, that's awesome.
Valkyria
Banned
IIRC there is no info about tools especially for indies but self-publishing is an option and if you self publish you can charge as much as you want. For my this is one of the best features, I have spent lots of money on Xbox marketplace and some of my best experiences of gaming this gen come from this type of games.
yurinka
Member
I think Yoshida or someone else from Sony mentioned in different places that they are to support in PS4 both :
-Self publishing
-F2P
-Microtransactions
-99 cent games
-A low cost dev program similar to PSM that they have under development to start somewhere in the future (but here as of now you obviously you'd need a devkit to test etc, I assume that at least until the console release).
-Social gaming features like to send gifts (game items), share game feeds to social networks (seems that in addition to current trophies, now also screenshots, videos and a link to the game store this case, without in-game benefit for other players who click on it), join another single player game to help.
As I saw in the PSM info, when you publish a PSM game (simple process done basically via web) you choose how much do you want to get for each copy sold, which Sony pays you. And then Sony charge what they consider to the user (it depends on the case).
AwayFromInfinityx
Member
Nope.
I'd rather them keep focusing on games 1st than all the other stuff that comes with there consoles (netflix,Hulu,etc). Not saying its a bad thing but when i buy a console, Its for GAMES and they do just that.
I'd rather them keep focusing on games 1st than all the other stuff that comes with there consoles (netflix,Hulu,etc). Not saying its a bad thing but when i buy a console, Its for GAMES and they do just that.
Well they can self publish, and if they do so they can set whatever price they want. So if they want to sell for $1 like they do on iOS then they can.
Are we talking units sold or profit? The myriad choices in type, delivery and price of various forms of entertainment create competition not just for handhelds, but for consoles, too.
It's not illogical to expect someone to take a risk... take a shot at a home run. You have to swing for the fences and can only guess at the type of pitch. If Sony knew exactly what kind of "out of the box" strategy would rake in the money, then it would be safe for them to pursue it.
Frankly, they could have revealed a cheaper PS4 with much cheaper DDR3 RAM or slightly lowered specs and still branded themselves as a "gamer's platform" and no one would discount that compared to their current specs. People are excited about the RAM simply because it exists in the console - they could have easily adopted the same strategy and saved money by never mentioning GDDR5 at all. How much more money do you think the extra GDDR5 expense will make for them?
mentalfloss
Banned
If MS goes the mid route between Wii U and PS4 in terms of cost/power, they will the best shot of winning next gen and Sony will be in last again.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
I think I agree with you.
I think if the next Xbox comes out and can have a price point $100-$200 lower than PS4 I think the graphical difference will be negligible enough for Average Joe Consumer to put their money toward the cheaper one.
I haven't factored in the price of 8GB of GDDR5, but even with that, if MS were to undercut the PS4 by $200 it would be insane. I don't think either of these companies want to take a major loss.
Microsoft said years ago that they would never commit to the loss strategy again. I don't think they will either, at worst they would go the Wii U route and do near break-even pricing.
No I don't think its a mistake, because the core gamer market is strong. However, thats not where the real money is and where the most success will come from. A truly successful future console will be heavily diversified and offer features for everyone, regardless of what GAF thinks. Its like trying to argue if making a cell phone that just makes phone calls is a bad decision. Of course not, but clearly that isn't going to net you wide success. A cell phone that does many things, but more importantly does many things WELL will run circles around a smaller purpose device. The console that can captures the core gamer, the casual gamer, the person just looking for an entertainment box, or a media streamer combined, will be widely more successful than a console that focuses only on the core crowd. I think even Sony themselves will offer features for everyone, but it will not be as pronounced nor focused as competitors.
"Bolt on" technology that you acquire from buyouts will never stack up against software developed from the ground up to integrate across many platforms. Best of luck to Sony
"Bolt on" technology that you acquire from buyouts will never stack up against software developed from the ground up to integrate across many platforms. Best of luck to Sony
Raven77
Member
Since this is working out SO well for Nintendo, and since MS seems hell bent on following Nintendo right off the cliff, I have no doubt the upcoming system to be unveiled will be an underpowered, Kinect and gimmick laden let down.
I pray, PRAY, that I am wrong, but sadly, I don't think I will be.
CadetMahoney
Member
That price difference would be a megaton. I doubt they'll do that though if kinect comes bundled with every unit.
Raven77
Member
Lol are there enough "true gamers"?
The "true gamers" built this entire industry, just because all these half-assed mobile games are "uber popular" now (by uber popular I mean they get downloaded for free by 10 million people with an average total play time of 22 minutes before being deleted or forgotten about) doesnt mean that there is no longer a market for more engrossing full priced games...
Manmademan
Member
that would likely mean launching at or under the WiiU pricing- I just don't see it happening. less than Sony, sure. not THAT much though.
Obviously I agree with you...it was a jab at the ridiculousness of the gamasutra article.
Raven77
Member
Okay, so the general perception here is that Sony (and maybe Microsoft) are betting that new, more powerful consoles will be a shot in the arm to the traditional core retail market. I don't that's totally what they're thinking. Maybe to a degree, but I don't think Sony and Microsoft are pretending the market hasn't changed in the last decade. I don't think they have any illusions of going back to the way the market was during the PS2 era. I think at the very least they're trying to be flexible for how things are changing.
Right now, the real money is still in the retail console space -- most of these analysts don't seem to notice that the amount of money in mobile and tablet gaming is minuscule in comparison. However, things are definitely shifting towards that market. The core retail console space won't be king forever, at least not as we know it.
By the same token, even if I buy and play a lot of iOS games, as they are now they still don't replace console gaming for me, though I think they might for a lot of casual gamers. From what I hear a lot of kids do seem to play these games and forego consoles. To be anecdotal, my brother played console games a lot from the Atari era on through the SNES era, but now is pretty content playing games on his iPad with his kids (mind you, ports of the old games he used to play).
We still don't know if this will cause another change if/when Apple brings full iOS freedom to the television screen. Will developers start making apps and casual games specifically for the living room? Will kids and casuals start to play those as their living room entertainment instead of console games? I think that's at least what Microsoft is afraid of. That's why they're likely going in an app-driven route for the next Xbox -- probably combining it with the Windows 8 app store to beat iOS to the living room. Even Gabe Newell's afraid of this happening.
If this does come to pass, it could at the very least draw away the casual market that inflates console sales. Just look at what iOS and Android have done to dedicated handhelds. The Vita is crashing and burning, and the 3DS will likely never reach the original DS's success outside of Japan. What if it turns out most people outside of the core market don't want a console that mainly just plays games?
Anyway, I think Sony and especially Microsoft are more flexible than that. Sony's confirmation of allowing self-publishing, all games being day 1 digital, and a wide range of price variation, shows they aren't completely stuck to the $60 retail model. If they make it as easy as possible for developers to get in, and do this early, they could at least mitigate the effect of a living room iOS and become a competent alternative in the eyes of many outside of the core gamer audience.
Right now, the real money is still in the retail console space -- most of these analysts don't seem to notice that the amount of money in mobile and tablet gaming is minuscule in comparison. However, things are definitely shifting towards that market. The core retail console space won't be king forever, at least not as we know it.
By the same token, even if I buy and play a lot of iOS games, as they are now they still don't replace console gaming for me, though I think they might for a lot of casual gamers. From what I hear a lot of kids do seem to play these games and forego consoles. To be anecdotal, my brother played console games a lot from the Atari era on through the SNES era, but now is pretty content playing games on his iPad with his kids (mind you, ports of the old games he used to play).
We still don't know if this will cause another change if/when Apple brings full iOS freedom to the television screen. Will developers start making apps and casual games specifically for the living room? Will kids and casuals start to play those as their living room entertainment instead of console games? I think that's at least what Microsoft is afraid of. That's why they're likely going in an app-driven route for the next Xbox -- probably combining it with the Windows 8 app store to beat iOS to the living room. Even Gabe Newell's afraid of this happening.
If this does come to pass, it could at the very least draw away the casual market that inflates console sales. Just look at what iOS and Android have done to dedicated handhelds. The Vita is crashing and burning, and the 3DS will likely never reach the original DS's success outside of Japan. What if it turns out most people outside of the core market don't want a console that mainly just plays games?
Anyway, I think Sony and especially Microsoft are more flexible than that. Sony's confirmation of allowing self-publishing, all games being day 1 digital, and a wide range of price variation, shows they aren't completely stuck to the $60 retail model. If they make it as easy as possible for developers to get in, and do this early, they could at least mitigate the effect of a living room iOS and become a competent alternative in the eyes of many outside of the core gamer audience.
Chuck Norris
Banned
Microsoft's best decision this gen was betting on gamers. Getting some big name games, reducing the exclusives, easy development etc. don't see how its a bad strategy trying to make a game console appeal to gamers
shinra-bansho
Member
Market size in unit sales. The Wii mountain sits atop a seemingly stable and consistent home console market during an era of change. It was in one of jvm's columns a while back.
I don't think the extra GDDR5 is necessarily some sort of short term money making push to the core. It's a long term future proofing - intended to enable them to stretch the generation. They won't be able to increase the amount later without breaking compatibility. When stacked RAM with equivalent bandwidth becomes more viable, I imagine DDR3 or DDR4 will replace the GDDR5 anyway - as some have postulated.
I was primarily asking what you think they would have lost, profit wise, had they made the PS4 cheaper to build. Future proofing has less of an impact when you don't know will look like 4+ years down the road. Their machine is nice, but I fear that it's too nice for the return that they will get. Or rather, they could had gotten similar returns with a cheaper machine.
As for profits vs units... I don't see how they are actually making enough money with gaming to lift up their company.
Sammy Samusu
Member
I Am... On The Floor.
this is retarded ... what are they suggesting here ... sony should stop funding games the likes of uncharted and switch to angry birds ??
i mean seriously, who gives a shit if mum's and grandparents are finally discovering gaming via way of mobile games .... good for them. but why suggest stopping investment in REAL games for people like us?
actually thinking about it more - the types of gamers targeted by mobile games are those who aren't gamers at the mo ... who i assume didn't grow up playing games, so haven't yet deloped the skill set to handle a full pc/console title ...
so assuming this group either dies off from old age ..or develops a taste for meatier titles .... sony are right to expect some blow back back to consoles. for the people playing mobile games who don't feel the need for more complex titles ... those people where never going to be thinking of consoles as an option anyways ..so it's not a case of sony loosing market share to these people to start with ..
i mean seriously, who gives a shit if mum's and grandparents are finally discovering gaming via way of mobile games .... good for them. but why suggest stopping investment in REAL games for people like us?
actually thinking about it more - the types of gamers targeted by mobile games are those who aren't gamers at the mo ... who i assume didn't grow up playing games, so haven't yet deloped the skill set to handle a full pc/console title ...
so assuming this group either dies off from old age ..or develops a taste for meatier titles .... sony are right to expect some blow back back to consoles. for the people playing mobile games who don't feel the need for more complex titles ... those people where never going to be thinking of consoles as an option anyways ..so it's not a case of sony loosing market share to these people to start with ..
I'd have to agree with this. If there is one lesson that consoles can take away from smartphones and tablets, it's the power of pulling people in on non-gaming functionality and then bridging them over to playing videogames. Which is a strategy that ultimately is much better for the console industry in the long term, assuming that Microsoft can pull it off. They'll have solve some major problems, like the non-gaming services being very Anglo-centric at the moment, with not much on offer for those living outside of North America or the UK.
thehypocrite
Member
Not a mistake when your other alternative is trying to catch lightning in a bottle or start competing in a race to the bottom with ouya/gamestick/etc. It's the most sound strategy they can implement with the cards they have.
Besides it isn't an excluding proposition, as they get more pricing flexibility, they can start targeting the more diverse demographics.
Besides it isn't an excluding proposition, as they get more pricing flexibility, they can start targeting the more diverse demographics.
Unknown One
Member
Fixed.
MAX PAYMENT
Member
Yes Sony is making a mistake for targeting only core gamers. I'm a core gamer and I'm excited for the platform, but its obvious Sony really struggled this gen with a core focus. I bought my first Ps3 a year late on Walmart clearance for almost half price and they gave me 10 blu-rays free along with sony's pick 5 deal. The ps3 initially lacked mass appeal. All consoles need mass appeal to survive.
you didn't really fix anything... if the next Xbox is closer to the Wii U, I would think that most publishers would take the easy way out and pick the platform that they could make the most money on
InsaneZero
Member
Microsoft has a golden goose in the form of Xbox Live. They're going to leverage that sucker for all its worth and go full out as transforming their next hardware as a social hub, which would probably be a better strategy than what Sony is currently proposing.
Glorified G
Member
Based off current rumors, it's not at all. And even if it was closer to the Wii U it wouldn't make a difference in third party support regardless.
Unknown One
Member
Wii-U have a seriously tough climb, there is no way it'll get the amount of third party support as the PS4 and there is no momentum. I can clearly see the 720 and PS4 beating the Wii-U. PS3 never did 57k in January at 600 dollars.
in the off chance that it is closer to the WiiU, I think it would make a bit of difference. the xbox is dead in Japan, but it's getting better support than the Wii just because it's on the same level as the PS3
there is no doubt that there is a lot of work to be done, but it is also not impossible to regain some momentum once the games start trickling in. I just think that it's still premature to write it off just yet
It's 2006 again, yay =D
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
That´s not true at all. All of Sony´s other divisions have done better in third fiscal quarter in 2012 than 2011. Movies, Mobile phones, insurance, banking, and gaming are making money.
What is your evidence for this? Most evidence I can think of does not support your position. The Wii had a good attach rate until ~2011 when everyone stopped making games for it. The DS handily bested the PSP in attach rate despite having a much more "casual" focus with games like Brain Training and Nintendogs. In fact, it easily bested the PSP in attach rate by a huge margin. iOS has a ridiculously high attach rate, but that can be attributed to the low price of games.
I can't really think of a "casual" system that had an especially low attach rate.
Wii had a good attachment rate because the people who generally bought Nintendo systems prior to Wii were there to offset the more casual gamers who picked Wii up almost solely for the pack-in software. I can't remember when or where I saw the comparisons, but I'm positive that PlayStation 3 has a better attachment rate than Wii does, and that's because of people who bought a Wii for the pack-in software only.
I'm unfamiliar with attachment rates between DS and PSP, but I'd attribute the better attachment rate on DS to the fact that it was a more popular system that targeted a less tech-savvy user. It also makes for a considerably different experience from what you'd get with PSP during its lifetime. It was so much more approachable. As such, yeah, you had a lot of casual gamers, but you also had a ton of more dedicated customers buying games, and those games weren't as expensive as games on other platforms. PSP was comparable in that its games weren't terribly expensive, but PSP also had more tech-savvy users, and a lot of them happened to pirate their games. Most of the top-selling software for PSP happened to be software that aided in getting custom firmware onto the system to allow for piracy, as well as homebrew. It wasn't a system that people tended to buy as often to run legitimately purchased software on.
Although the Wii/PS3 attach rates were very close, this is wrong -- at least it was wrong until recently, when Wii software production fell off the face of the earth. Don't feel bad about this, as many people are surprised to hear that the Wii had a good attach rate. Everyone was so confident that casuals wouldn't buy games that very few people actually checked to see if the data agreed. Not only did the Wii sell software, but there were a couple years in its heyday (2008-2009, iirc) where the Wii sold more third party software than the 360 did. Remember, that's not including Nintendo's games!
Popular systems tend to have lower attach rates (for example, PS2's attach rate grew more slowly than did the Gamecube's), because it's hard to keep the attach rate up when your system is selling so quickly. Also, why would systems that target "tech savvy users" have lower attach rates? Wouldn't "tech savvy consumers" be more likely to identify as "core" gamers?
There just isn't really much evidence to support your position. I can even offer an explanation for why this might be the case; while "core' gamers may buy more games individually, a "casual" household may have more players.
To explain what I mean, consider a household with a PS3 where the 20 year old son is the only one who plays it. He's a "core" gamer who buys a lot of games, but he's the only one buying. Now imagine a household with a Wii in which the son, daughter, and mom all play games. Each one of them individually buys less games, but because three people are all buying games for the system it ends up with a similar attach rate.
This is a very good point I never considered as another reason why targeting the broad market is much more commercially viable (at least in potential).
I have been thinking more about what Sony is planning. I'm just thinking out loud here, but it appears sony isnt targeting the core in just the traditional sense. Some of this is obvious to an extent but there is alot that is still foggy in relation to their strategy.
It appears they are not makign the casuals their focus which is what people are beefing about. But if you step back and think of Sony as a technology company first before a game company they seem to be playing on that stregnth.
As others have said they want to create the ecosystem and infastructure to deliver core gamer games to many more core gamers..hence the multiple device and streaming media strategy.
While the core gamer market on a single console is small (relativly speaking) as a whole there are lots of core gamers on different mediums. So their idea is to be a backbone and bridge for that. The ps4 is just a stepping stone for them to create this "unified gaming vision". Its like their taking the idea behind steam and onlive and combining them into a hardware independent platform to deliver games to core gamers.
In business you can only increase your margins in a handful a ways. Aquire new customers, sell more to existing customers, increase the sales each customer makes. So basically if they play to their stregnths, that being tech and targeting core gamers, then the need a strategy to get more of the core into their eco system. Shifting the focus on the backbone/cloud is their long term play. But they need the ps4 to prove it and lay the foundation.
Its actually very interesting. The strategy has a blue ocean quality to it. Its an interesting parallel to steam as others have said. The difference is steam was designed with software focus as a driving force and is now trying to expand into ardware. Sony is going in with hardware & software as the driving force and have the bank and tech clout to potentially pull this off.
What they are trying to pull of (if this is the case) is not going to be easy but takes balls and will be interesting to watch. It makes more sense now why they are not going after the media center play like MS.
Its looking like..
MS is going for the tv/media
Nintendo for the broad/casual game audience
Sony for the core but in the context of distribution and multi device eco system and delivery mechanism.
If that is Sonys goal it has the greates profit potential of all, but is the hardest to pull off. But they have a few things ging for them. First they would be the only major player doing this, second it leverages what they do best tech and core appeal. Its pretty damn smart and stacks their deck even in the face of ruff odds.
It appears they are not makign the casuals their focus which is what people are beefing about. But if you step back and think of Sony as a technology company first before a game company they seem to be playing on that stregnth.
As others have said they want to create the ecosystem and infastructure to deliver core gamer games to many more core gamers..hence the multiple device and streaming media strategy.
While the core gamer market on a single console is small (relativly speaking) as a whole there are lots of core gamers on different mediums. So their idea is to be a backbone and bridge for that. The ps4 is just a stepping stone for them to create this "unified gaming vision". Its like their taking the idea behind steam and onlive and combining them into a hardware independent platform to deliver games to core gamers.
In business you can only increase your margins in a handful a ways. Aquire new customers, sell more to existing customers, increase the sales each customer makes. So basically if they play to their stregnths, that being tech and targeting core gamers, then the need a strategy to get more of the core into their eco system. Shifting the focus on the backbone/cloud is their long term play. But they need the ps4 to prove it and lay the foundation.
Its actually very interesting. The strategy has a blue ocean quality to it. Its an interesting parallel to steam as others have said. The difference is steam was designed with software focus as a driving force and is now trying to expand into ardware. Sony is going in with hardware & software as the driving force and have the bank and tech clout to potentially pull this off.
What they are trying to pull of (if this is the case) is not going to be easy but takes balls and will be interesting to watch. It makes more sense now why they are not going after the media center play like MS.
Its looking like..
MS is going for the tv/media
Nintendo for the broad/casual game audience
Sony for the core but in the context of distribution and multi device eco system and delivery mechanism.
If that is Sonys goal it has the greates profit potential of all, but is the hardest to pull off. But they have a few things ging for them. First they would be the only major player doing this, second it leverages what they do best tech and core appeal. Its pretty damn smart and stacks their deck even in the face of ruff odds.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
The price point MS was targeting in that leaked PP was $299. If they hit that, they'll most likely be $100 under Sony at minimum. That could be huge trouble.
I'm not sure--the market for Nintendo first-party games will always be there. With the rumored similarity in Durango/PS4, will there be enough of a difference between the two for the average consumer to buy both? It will be interesting to see how it plays out.