Support NeoGAF

[Opiate]

i disagree completely. making money is much more important than selling more consoles than Microsoft. they should do what will make them money and worry less about how many of the consumer dollars they control.

what's the point in having consumers spend 50% of their video gaming budget on Sony products if you aren't making any money that way? better to have them spending 30% of their money on your stuff at point where you make a profit.

I agree, but Sony hasn't agreed for a long time. They have a fairly long pattern of maximizing market share at the cost of profits, or even at the cost of increased losses. This history stretches back at least to the launch of the Playstation 2.

The question shouldn't be: "what is the smartest choice a firm could make to maximize profits?" Instead it should be: "based on historical precedent and our understanding of this specific, real firm, what are they likely to do?" Often the answers to these questions are similar, but not always.

 

[Megadragon15]

Comparing Kinect Sports to Wii Sports is like comparinng NBA 2K11 to playing real Basketball, especially when you play Beach Volleyball or Track & Field, man you can really pull a hamstring playing these LOL.

So you are saying Wii Sports is way more realistic? No wonder the Wii kicked Kinect's butt this Christmas.

 

[[Nintex]]

i disagree completely. making money is much more important than selling more consoles than Microsoft. they should do what will make them money and worry less about how many of the consumer dollars they control.

what's the point in having consumers spend 50% of their video gaming budget on Sony products if you aren't making any money that way? better to have them spending 30% of their money on your stuff at point where you make a profit.

If they fall further behind they'll start to lose developer support. Especially when and if MS is going to push and fund third parties to release more exclusive Kinect games. Both Nintendo and Sony will be kept out of the loop with their wands hanging. Nintendo could fill the 'gap' with a new Mario/Wii__ title, Sony not so much.

 

[aegies]

Some of the negative reviews for the Intuos4 put me off, so I might wait till they release the next version. And I thought the Small might have been too small and the Medium was a little too expensive for me to buy this Christmas.

Totally OT, but where were you looking for an intuos? You might try student bookstores at local colleges; they're frequently discounted for educational purposes, and you shouldn't need an ID to buy hardware (you could just say it's for a niece/nephew). You might also look at Intuos3s on eBay, as they're great tablets. Mine's been great for... 6 years now, I think.

 

[Opiate]

That is the risk no question, but bigger this time in the face of likely cuts from the rest.

With MS approaching ~15 million paid subs it has to be a place Sony is certainly looking at to make additional profit line.

This is something I've said for quite some time. I remember a day and age when people were waiting for Microsoft to drop the price of XBL in the face of mounting PSN competition: looking at the balance sheets, I knew it was the other way around. Eventually, Sony will need to recoup losses by finding more revenue, and a subscription service is the obvious place.

Enter PSN+. I have no idea how well it's doing. If it's doing well (say, already above 1.5M subscriptions), then I think Sony has found a brilliant way to begin to recoup lost revenue. PSN+ does not offend the sensibilities of many gamers in quite the same way that XBL does. But if it's struggling (which is entirely possible, as it may not hold enough content to justify a subscription base), then Sony needs to up its game in this arena.

Sony needs to extract more revenue frm their current user base. Their current revenue streams are simply insufficient to support the technology Sony fosters. They could also go the Nintendo route and diminish their technological ambitions -- lower technological thresholds require less revenue per customer -- but 1) that's not really possible mid generation, and 2) that's completely antithetical to Sony's historical methods.

 

[Beer Monkey]

Sony needs to keep hardware profitable given that the system is now the new Xbox 1 in terms of hacking for emulation, media, etc. I know lots of people that bought an Xbox 1 for XBMC, it was an amazing device that was literally subsidized by Microsoft due to their need to keep price parity with PS2.

So I can see them cutting price but not going crazy with it. Will they get their cost to make a system under $199 this year?

 

[Road]

By September of this year, more than likely they'll drop to $199 before PSP2 comes out.

The PSP2 launch actually makes it less likely for such a steep drop this year.

 

[RJT]

Congrats to Microsoft. I guess this proves people like new stuff, and thought Move was just a copycat. I really wanted the Move to succeed, especially on the FPS front, but I'm worried now... Damn it, I refuse to buy dual analog FPSs!!! Nurture me, gaming industry!!!

 

[[Nintex]]

Sony needs to keep hardware profitable given that the system is now the new Xbox 1 in terms of hacking for emulation, media, etc. I know lots of people that bought an Xbox 1 for XBMC, it was an amazing device that was literally subsidized by Microsoft due to their need to keep price parity with PS2.

So I can see them cutting price but not going crazy with it. Will they get their cost to make a system under $199 this year?

With the current exchange rates I think not. Japanese companies like Nintendo and Sony are clearly fucked by the weak dollar.

 

[okenny]

By September of this year, more than likely they'll drop to $199 before PSP2 comes out.

Which makes me wonder: With all the talk of the PSP2 and its graphical powers and whatnot, could it be that Sony has experienced a leap in production that not only allows them to bring such a product to market but will also allow them to do another slim redesign at a significant cost reduction? I'm grasping at straws (more like air) but I can't see them going $199 without saving as much as possible in hardware reduction. It's not like they can cut anymore USB ports (though there's that whole jailbreak thing :/ ).

 

[kswiston]

I think at this point it shouldn't matter who comes in second or third to Sony. Sony messed up horribly this generation, no one is disputing that, but I think they have recovered as well as could be expected after those first 2 years of weak sales. Even if new consoles hit in Fall 2012, PS3 will end up in the 50-60M range worldwide. At the end of 2007, some people were doubting that it would reach much more than half that number. Software sales have improved substantially as well. 30%+ software growth matches or exceeds the growth in the the US console user base no? That seems to indicate that older system users are still buying plenty of games. Third place in a generation where all three main consoles have a shot of being in the top 5 best selling systems of all time isn't as bad as third place last gen or during the PS1 generation.

If I was Sony, I would worry less on trying to best Microsoft by a couple million units worldwide, and focus on profitability. If they absolutely need a price drop to stay competitive (and in turn drive software sales), they should drop the core system by $50 and the move bundle by $100. The Move bundle is too expensive as it is. Encourage people to invest in additional move controllers which I am sure are high margin accessories.

 

[LosDaddie]

Do you approve of Sony constantly belittling Kinect like "Pew, pew, pew", "Yaybuttons" or http://www.destructoid.com/sony-kinect-is-mostly-a-bunch-of-tech-problems-188605.phtml ? Even Sony considers Kinect competition to Move.

Great point. How is it not obvious Kinect and Move are directly competing?

 

[apana]

Sony needs something to set themselves apart. People no longer seem to be interested in the machine that does "everything", if it does everything that everyone already did. The first party content doesn't have a broad enough appeal either but can't blame them too much for that, it's very difficult to do.

 

[Kagari]

Which makes me wonder: With all the talk of the PSP2 and its graphical powers and whatnot, could it be that Sony has experienced a leap in production that not only allows them to bring such a product to market but will also allow them to do another slim redesign at a significant cost reduction? I'm grasping at straws (more like air) but I can't see them going $199 without saving as much as possible in hardware reduction. It's not like they can cut anymore USB ports (though there's that whole jailbreak thing :/ ).

They've been making the current systems at a profit for some time now. IIRC it was near the beginning of 2010 when they stated that. Mid to late 2011 should have allowed for components to drop even further in cost, and thus allowing a decent drop in over all system price. It'll have been two years since the drop to $299, so they should be able to cut to $199 and still be profitable.

 

[Opiate]

On a different note, I wanted to point to last year's December thread.

Please note that the Playstation 3 outsold the 360 last year at this time: while it was only a slim lead, combined with the knowledge that the PS3 was demolishing the 360 in Japan and at least strongly outselling it in the EU as a whole, the PS3 seemed to be gaining steam and an eventual crossover between the two systems was seen as inevitable by a lot of intelligent posters.

Somewhere in that thread (or similar NPD threads), I maintained that we had seen several similar shifts in momentum over the course of the generation (the original PS3 price drop, the original 360 price drop, followed by the second PS3 price drop last year), and that it was perfectly possible we'd see another.

Well, we've seen another. And despite my apparent negativity about Sony's position in the above posts, I want to point out that we are perfectly capable of seeing another shift this year, if a PS3 price cut has a strong impact or if Sony pulls a maneuver I can't even concieve of yet. I'd add that I think it will cost Sony a great deal of money to achieve it, but my position is based on strong evidence: since the 360's release, about once every year, things have reversed course. Someone drops the price, or releases a slim SKU, or a major game bumps sales, or something along those lines. The PS3 has fallen to ~10M units behind (at its worst after the 360 price cut) to ~5 million behind (at its best after the second PS3 price cut). Based on this historical precedent, I continue to maintain that the most likely outcome is that the PS3/360 will maintain their sales disparity in this range. "Present trends continue" is an exceptionally boring prediction, but it's often the most robust forecast.

I encourage people not to be too pessimistic about the PS3, just as I encouraged people not to be too pessimistic about the seemingly doomed 360 last year.

 

[Vinci]

I encourage people not to be too pessimistic about the PS3, just as I encouraged people not to be too pessimistic about the seemingly doomed 360 last year.

Kinect has ended that pattern for the foreseeable future.

 

[Kagari]

On a different note, I wanted to point to last year's December thread.

Please note that the Playstation 3 outsold the 360 last year at this time: while it was only a slim lead, combined with the knowledge that the PS3 was demolishing the 360 in Japan and at least strongly outselling it in the EU as a whole, the PS3 seemed to be gaining steam and an eventual crossover between the two systems was seen as inevitable by a lot of intelligent posters.

Somewhere in that thread (or similar NPD threads), I maintained that we had seen several similar shifts in momentum over the course of the generation (the original PS3 price drop, the original 360 price drop, followed by the second PS3 price drop last year), and that it was perfectly possible we'd see another.

Well, we've seen another. And despite my apparent negativity about Sony's position in the above posts, I want to point out that we are perfectly capable of seeing another shift this year, if a PS3 price cut has a strong impact or if Sony pulls a maneuver I can't even concieve of yet. I'd add that I think it will cost Sony a great deal of money to achieve it, but my position is based on strong evidence: since the 360's release, about once every year, things have reversed course. Someone drops the price, or releases a slim SKU, or a major game bumps sales, or something along those lines. The PS3 has fallen to ~10M units behind (at its worst after the 360 price cut) to ~5 million behind (at its best after the second PS3 price cut). Based on this historical precedent, I continue to maintain that the most likely outcome is that the PS3/360 will maintain their sales disparity in this range. "Present trends continue" is an exceptionally boring prediction, but it's often the most robust forecast.

I encourage people not to be too pessimistic about the PS3, just as I encouraged people not to be too pessimistic about the seemingly doomed 360 last year.

Well said. And it should be noted that as of last quarter reports, the PS3 was only 2.6 million units behind the 360 worldwide. It'll be interesting to see what changes were made when the Q4 reports come in.

 

[BladeoftheImmortal]

That is a excellent avatar.

Thanks, I do love it.

 

[Opiate]

They've been making the current systems at a profit for some time now. IIRC it was near the beginning of 2010 when they stated that. Mid to late 2011 should have allowed for components to drop even further in cost, and thus allowing a decent drop in over all system price. It'll have been two years since the drop to $299, so they should be able to cut to $199 and still be profitable.

If this is the case, why has Sony only made 41 million dollars in the last 6 months? 41 million on sales of ~2 Billion is a 2% profit margin. That falls somewhere between "Razor thin" and "non existant" margins by technology standards.

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying the empirical evidence thus far doesn't support your position. It's entirely possible that they made 300 million (arbitrarily chosen value) this quarter and I'll change my tune if so, but thus far, the profits we should be seeing if everything is working aren't there. That leads to the conclusion that everything isn't working, and if so, adding a 100 dollar price cut on top of it isn't likely to allow for profitability.

 

[Opus Angelorum]

@ Kagari

Shuhei Yoshida (President) said the PS3 Slim began making a profit in April 2010, but a price cut was unlikely. Instead they would focus on 'added value', with bundles like Move for example.

That strategy clearly hasn't worked, so we should expect something like the 4GB Xbox 360 S (although I still don't believe there will be a $199 PS3 this year).

 

[Kenka]

i disagree completely. making money is much more important than selling more consoles than Microsoft. they should do what will make them money and worry less about how many of the consumer dollars they control.

what's the point in having consumers spend 50% of their video gaming budget on Sony products if you aren't making any money that way? better to have them spending 30% of their money on your stuff at point where you make a profit.

Sony wants to sell more 'cause it's a question of pride.

Stuuuuuuuupid.


And when they fail, they refuse to admit it. It must be one of worst managed department in the entire company.

 

[FrankT]

If this is the case, why has Sony only made 41 million dollars in the last 6 months? 41 million on sales of ~2 Billion is a .5% profit margin. That falls somewhere between "Razor thin" and "non existant" margins by technology standards.

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying the empirical evidence thus far doesn't support your position. It's entirely possible that they made 300 million (arbitrarily chosen value) this quarter and I'll change my tune if so, but thus far, the profits we should be seeing if everything is working aren't there.

One part of that equation is most certainly the Yen versus the dollar. As for the above statement yea I would say more or less in-line though the big difference between 09 and 11 is MS will most certainly have it's price drop as well. Since Sony's last price drop 360 is up somewhere in the range of 2 million plus and that is without a price drop.

 

[Kagari]

@ Kagari

Shuhei Yoshida (President) said the PS3 Slim began making a profit in April 2010, but a price cut was unlikely. Instead they would focus on 'added value', with bundles like Move for example.

That strategy clearly hasn't worked, so we should expect something like the 4GB Xbox 360 S (although I still don't believe there will be a $199 PS3 this year).

Of course they won't say 'Oh yes, we're going to drop the price later on sometime.' That wouldn't be too smart for sales. I can't see them removing anything to make a 'base' model either... unless they slimmed down the system even more with another redesign.

 

[offshore]

It'll have been two years since the drop to $299, so they should be able to cut to $199 and still be profitable.

I wouldn't have thought so, and as Opus says, they only started making money early on in 2010, and even then it wasn't by a large amount.

$249 will be the next price point for the PS3 I would have thought.

 

[Opiate]

One part of that equation is most certainly the Yen versus the dollar. As for the above statement yea I would say more or less in-line though the big difference between 09 and 11 is MS will most certainly have it's price drop as well. Since Sony's last price drop 360 is up somewhere in the range of 2 million plus and that is without a price drop.

2 million plus in the US only. I know this is an NPD thread, but we're now clearly discussing the consoles fortunes more broadly (and I am allowing that).

If we're just talking US, then I would argue that the PS3 has never been in a concievable position to "catch up" to the 360: even in the PS3's surging moments, its leads over the 360 in the US have been razor thin (like that NPD thread I posted above). When people have discusssed the PS3 overtaking the 360 in the past, the most reasonable projection was something like sales parity in the US combined with dominance in Japan and a strong victory in the EU territories. I think that's what people were projecting, at least. I'm pretty sure. That's what I was projecting in my head, anyway.

I think Vinci could be correct that Kinect may have created a permanent sales disparity between the two consoles in the US. I am not as convinced that is true outside of the US.

 

[Kafel]

Majesco announces they've shipped more than 500,000 Zumba Fitness units.

 

[Maximilian E.]

On a different note, I wanted to point to last year's December thread.

Please note that the Playstation 3 outsold the 360 last year at this time: while it was only a slim lead, combined with the knowledge that the PS3 was demolishing the 360 in Japan and at least strongly outselling it in the EU as a whole, the PS3 seemed to be gaining steam and an eventual crossover between the two systems was seen as inevitable by a lot of intelligent posters.

Somewhere in that thread (or similar NPD threads), I maintained that we had seen several similar shifts in momentum over the course of the generation (the original PS3 price drop, the original 360 price drop, followed by the second PS3 price drop last year), and that it was perfectly possible we'd see another.

Well, we've seen another. And despite my apparent negativity about Sony's position in the above posts, I want to point out that we are perfectly capable of seeing another shift this year, if a PS3 price cut has a strong impact or if Sony pulls a maneuver I can't even concieve of yet. I'd add that I think it will cost Sony a great deal of money to achieve it, but my position is based on strong evidence: since the 360's release, about once every year, things have reversed course. Someone drops the price, or releases a slim SKU, or a major game bumps sales, or something along those lines. The PS3 has fallen to ~10M units behind (at its worst after the 360 price cut) to ~5 million behind (at its best after the second PS3 price cut). Based on this historical precedent, I continue to maintain that the most likely outcome is that the PS3/360 will maintain their sales disparity in this range. "Present trends continue" is an exceptionally boring prediction, but it's often the most robust forecast.

I encourage people not to be too pessimistic about the PS3, just as I encouraged people not to be too pessimistic about the seemingly doomed 360 last year.

Problem is, there is not much to be done for both companies besides lowering the price.
A new slim for both will not make much difference (at least, I dont think so). Any move Sony does pricewise, MS can counter easily thanks to the two skus.

As I see it, and like some have mentioned, MS seems to have the rabbit in the hat here with Kinect. It has proven to be a runaway success, comparing it to the "wii me too" Move controllers. Kinect is generating way more buzz than move and will and is attracting more software to it, software that cannot easily be replicated on PS3.

A price cut on PS3 can help but a genre defining AAA game does much more to attract people to buy the hardware than a potential price cut does (at least for the foreseable future)..

AFAICT, MS have the advantage over Sony strategy wise.
1. Bigger userbase (even though majority of the games are multiplatforms - majority of the games end up on 360 anyways.

2. Kinect specific software - if there is a CoD/GTA kind of game (impact wise) that is exclusively for Kinect, then this will even more accelerate sales for 360. These is an unknown point, it might or might not happen.

3. Price-wars - MS has two skus and can easily match Sony. But this is also in connection with point 2. If there are kinect software that drive hw/sw sales, then a price cut might even not be needed at all for MS.

Well, im not pessimistic about PS3, im just pointing out that there are not many things that Sony can change in order to change the tide, many things have already been done (slim and price cuts).

but these are my 2 c..

 

[plagiarize]

I agree, but Sony hasn't agreed for a long time. They have a fairly long pattern of maximizing market share at the cost of profits, or even at the cost of increased losses. This history stretches back at least to the launch of the Playstation 2.

The question shouldn't be: "what is the smartest choice a firm could make to maximize profits?" Instead it should be: "based on historical precedent and our understanding of this specific, real firm, what are they likely to do?" Often the answers to these questions are similar, but not always.

well i think the counter argument in this case is that apparently that strategy stopped working. the loss leading model worked wonders for them with PS1 and PS2... no question, and this time it hasn't worked wonders at all.

they've got to look at Microsoft's software sales, and XBL revenues with envy.

i'm sure we've heard a few squeaks out of them suggesting that they were changing their tune, like the Yoshida comment would suggest.

if they're making a profit on the system since april they could have dropped the price nine months ago, but they chose to keep profitability, and they've stayed at the current price in the face of months of being outsold by the 360... which makes me think that perhaps, just perhaps, they've realised that at some point you've got to look to the bottom line and concede the console war.

Nintendo were smart to do that with the Gamecube on reflection. it left them with more in the war chest for next time out than if they'd gone after sales numbers rather than revenue.

i also look at the drastic things Sony has done to get the price of the PS3 down. OtherOS removal being a fairly recent one. getting the thing profitable seems to have become important to them in the last couple of years, so i expect it to continue for the foreseeable future.

of course, when they make the PS4 i'm sure they'll want to regain market dominance and will likely put out a loss leading system to do it... but they'll be in a better position to do that if they focus on profitability right now. they've been third place since they came out. another couple of years in third place can't be too much of a bitter pill to swallow.

and it should be apparent now too that when a generation changes, everything is back in play.

 

[Souldriver]

Somehow I can't help but find the analysing of stuff after the events pretty often funny and dishonest.

I mean, now suddenly Move never had a chance and Kinect obviously was gonna fare better. Move was an afterthought, while Kinect is a new platform. Neither of them are in direct competition.... That's not what people thought a few months ago. I know that things have played out the way they have for good reasons, but if in an alternate reality Move did well and Kinect not, people would gladly say that "Move was obviously a good concept as it improves on what made Wii the smashing success it is, while Kinect was pretty half-assed with lots of restrictions, a lack of precision and a lack of hardcore games, and ads money alone can't buy you market share."

I feel the same way about ads. When artsy fartsy ones are aired, and the next month sales are up, people say "well off course they work, they're different and keep people's attention". If they don't cause a noticible sales spike, people go "well duh, the fuck was that shit anyway? Focus on the actual games and price of your system!". Vice versa if the aired ads are simply game footage + giant pricetag at the end. I've noticed that with the Kevin Buttler ads. ZOMG they were amazing. "Wit works in marketing" bla bla bla. PS3 sales down (causation?), and suddenly everyone cries foul how the ads are not funny or amusing, and just stupid. "Off course they don't work! Anyone could see that coming!".


I know that gaf is not a monolith, and with saying "people" and "gaf" I'm generalizing too much. There are people who were right all along with their predictions and can most of the times calculate the market correctly, and I know that there are people who admit to having wrong expectations if reality turns out differently. But still, sometimes reading threads like these, where unexpected turns of events are discussed, it's odd to see how people can say how things played out is obvious because of reasons x, y and z. Some people really are prone to revisionism, and I doubt they're even aware of it.


Edit: BTW, I'm not dissing the people on this very page specifically or anything. I love reading market analysis and sales talk in general. I'm saying it's something I've noticed in general, not here or now specifically.

 

[FrankT]

2 million plus in the US only. I know this is an NPD thread, but we're now clearly discussing the consoles fortunes more broadly (and I am allowing that).

If we're just talking US, then I would argue that the PS3 has never been in a concievable position to "catch up" to the 360: even in the PS3's surging moments, its leads over the 360 in the US have been razor thin (like that NPD thread I posted above). When people have discusssed the PS3 overtaking the 360 in the past, the most reasonable projection was something like sales parity in the US combined with dominance in Japan and a strong victory in the EU territories. I think that's what people were projecting, at least. I'm pretty sure. That's what I was projecting in my head, anyway.

I think Vinci could be correct that Kinect may have created a permanent sales disparity between the two consoles in the US. I am not as convinced that is true outside of the US.

Well I'm speaking in terms of NPD and specifically if they did another $100 price cut and the trade off for it since that is what brought this discussion on. Last time they never had another price drop to deal with from MS(and MS is now up 2M+ since that point with no cut) and that has to be part of the calculation this time. But if you do JPN + US this year 360 is in the 1.1M+ range and I do think MS had a decent year in EMEA. I'd Say 1.4M or so with the UK versus the rest of EMEA. I'm not even sure the last time MS cut in Euroland.

2012-2013 all this will start shifting though as the new HW generation starts coming out. 1-2 years doesn't seem like all that much.

 

[szaromir]

I think Vinci could be correct that Kinect may have created a permanent sales disparity between the two consoles in the US.

There has been, on a average, a permanent sales disparity in the US. 360 has gone from 3M lead in 2006 to 10M now.

While stating that either one is doomed is silly, both platforms are or soon will be above 50M units sold, assuming that there have to be shifts in momentum every year just because there have been in the past is silly, too. There were specific reasons for each shift and you have to give some reasons why you believe it'll happen in future. Yes Sony is releasing a bunch of new games, but they also had important launches of their motion controller and the real driving simulator last year, so it's not like they did nothing to prevent MS taking over - just what they did wasn't enough. Will MS do enough to maintain their momentum (vs PS3)? I don't know, but they'll surely try to.

 

[charlequin]

Sony's fucked up more times this generation than SEGA did in its entire console manufacturing history.

Whoa now, let's not say things we can't take back.

 

[Vinci]

Somehow I can't help but find the analysing of stuff after the events in this thread pretty funny and dishonest.

I mean, now suddenly Move never had a chance and Kinect obviously was gonna fare better. Move was an afterthought, while Kinect is a new platform. Neither of them are in direct competition.... That's not what people thought a few months ago. I know that things have played out the way they have for good reasons, but if in an alternate reality Move did well and Kinect not, people would gladly say that "Move was obviously a good concept as it improves on what made Wii the smashing success it is, while Kinect was pretty half-assed with lots of restrictions, a lack of precision and a lack of hardcore games, and that ads money alone can't buy you market share."

I have never considered Move and Kinect directly in competition due to how the two companies were positioning them. Check my post history if you like. I, however, did doubt that MS could pull off the scheme it was attempting. I was wrong on that note, or at least appear to be wrong. I'm curious how the platform will grow from this point on, but for now it seems to be performing very well.

Whoa now, let's not say things we can't take back.

Okay, that might have been a bit hyperbolic, but for crying out loud, this company can't even market its #1 IP without screwing it up. What am I supposed to think?

 

[BladeoftheImmortal]

Most logical thing they'll do is move the Move Bundle down to 299.99 and discontinue the Stand alone completely.

 

[Kagari]

Most logical thing they'll do is move the Move Bundle down to 299.99 and discontinue the Stand alone completely.

What about people who don't care for/want Move?

 

[Vinci]

What about people who don't care for/want Move?

Why would that be a problem?

 

[ShockingAlberto]

What about people who don't care for/want Move?

What about the people that don't want Alan Wake and Forza?

They'll sell the extra stuff.

 

[Beer Monkey]

Most logical thing they'll do is move the Move Bundle down to 299.99 and discontinue the Stand alone completely.

That's nuts. They need to get a $199 SKU out there as fast as they can, and if every PS3 comes with Move that just pushes the cheap SKU another year or so down the road.

i also look at the drastic things Sony has done to get the price of the PS3 down. OtherOS removal being a fairly recent one. getting the thing profitable seems to have become important to them in the last couple of years, so i expect it to continue for the foreseeable future.

Don't really see any meaningful cost savings there.

 

[Road]

If this is the case, why has Sony only made 41 million dollars in the last 6 months? 41 million on sales of ~2 Billion is a 2% profit margin. That falls somewhere between "Razor thin" and "non existant" margins by technology standards.

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying the empirical evidence thus far doesn't support your position. It's entirely possible that they made 300 million (arbitrarily chosen value) this quarter and I'll change my tune if so, but thus far, the profits we should be seeing if everything is working aren't there. That leads to the conclusion that everything isn't working, and if so, adding a 100 dollar price cut on top of it isn't likely to allow for profitability.

Apr, May, Jun, 2010:
-Sales: 142bn yen
-Operating income: 0.5bn yen (0.35%)
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=22599503&postcount=104

Jul, Aug, Sep, 2010:
-Sales: 171bn yen
-Operating income: 13bn yen (7.60%)
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=24104949&postcount=125

It doesn't change anything. I just wanted to add values for the game business instead of the whole NPS division.

 

[Owzers]

Sony needs something to set themselves apart. People no longer seem to be interested in the machine that does "everything", if it does everything that everyone already did. The first party content doesn't have a broad enough appeal either but can't blame them too much for that, it's very difficult to do.

needs more legend of dragoon imo.

yes the game had problems but....they could make a sequel work! It's better than making several White Knight Genericles games.

 

[Celine]

Third place in a generation where all three main consoles have a shot of being in the top 5 best selling systems of all time isn't as bad as third place last gen or during the PS1 generation.

I like to point out that, while it's true the all three consoles are doing great sales for the position they are compared to the past, the current one is a generation where two out of three console have a shot of being top 3 worst loss-leader ever.

Spoiler

with the exception that's stupidly profitable

 

[SimpleDesign]

Kinect Sports...selling 1 million units in US alone

I've noticed more people on my friends list playing Kinect Sports than any other Rare game this generation.

Anyone have the total US sales for Banjo-Kazooie: Nuts & Bolts and Viva Pinata: Trouble in Paradise?

 

[Jokeropia]

Nintendo once again delivers when it counts the most. I wonder if people will remember this or once again call for doom and gloom if Wii does middling numbers next fall. HW is a bit lower than I expected (another Wii price drop next year, please) but excellent software sales outweigh this. (And it's not like these are bad HW numbers by any means.) Very happy for Retro especially, like the Prime games DKCR was such a wholehearted effort.

Some people are so butthurt about the whole wii third party fiasco that they'll take what they can.

I suspect you might be a bit butthurt that you couldn't come here and troll Wii third party sales like you were hoping! But hey, at least you're not alone:

Epic Mickey shows that they can sell even if they do treat their audience like lower-class citizens.

I'm pretty sure it had more to do with Mickey Mouse than anything the publishers did or didn't do.

You're right, it only requires what may be the world's most recognizable cultural icon.

Without any actual numbers it's hard to say if it actually did well relative to its brand/advertising.

 

[Opus Angelorum]

Of course they won't say 'Oh yes, we're going to drop the price later on sometime.' That wouldn't be too smart for sales. I can't see them removing anything to make a 'base' model either... unless they slimmed down the system even more with another redesign.

Agree.

It is not in Sony's remit to release a barebones PS3 that could actually be competive and remain profitable.

For some reason they insist on the 'it only does everything' marketing campaign when in reality, some people just want a cheap PS3 to...just play games.

 

[kame-sennin]

Speaking of which, DKCR is on track to be a 10 million + seller world wide (just as I predicted). It's gonna have some monster legs over the coming year or so! Just like NSMB Wii.

Yep, when NSMB and NSMBW started selling gangbusters, a lot of people claimed it was due to nostalgia or brand recognition (even though they were selling over and beyond their 3D counterparts). Now we have DKCR, a much weaker brand whose games have declined in sales over the past decades also lighting up the charts and showing impressive staying power. I think 2D platformers have much more selling strength than the industry believed - a belief based mostly on the performance of niche games that happened to be in the genre along with a dearth of AAA 2D platformers. It will be interesting to see if publishers revise their opinions and push out more games in the genre.

 

[Vinci]

Yep, when NSMB and NSMBW started selling gangbusters, a lot of people claimed it was due to nostalgia or brand recognition (even though they were selling over and beyond their 3D counterparts). Now we have DKCR, a much weaker brand whose games have declined in sales over the past decades also lighting up the charts and showing impressive staying power. I think 2D platformers have much more selling strength than the industry believed - a belief based mostly on the performance of niche games that happened to be in the genre along with a dearth of AAA 2D platformers. It will be interesting to see if publishers revise their opinions and push out more games in the genre.

Good lord, I hope so. It's actually my favorite console genre.

 

[User Tron]

Radom thoughts:

The PS3 windows as cheap blu-ray player has closed and isn't coming back. OTOH with the jailbreak it might get more interesting as a media player. Whatever that means in sales.

Lot of talk about PS3/Xbox360 price cuts but not so much about Wii. Why is that? IMHO a Wii price cut could do more damage to Sony and MS than they can hurt each other.

 

[test_account]

it means that the Wii has peaked.

it's got further to fall than the PS3 though, and Nintendo have the DS still outselling everything else, and they have a new piece of hardware coming out next month in japan, and the month after here.

Sony were in third place here in America and had been fighting for second place worldwide (which if you take out America they almost certainly have). for their sales to fall and the 360's to increase so much... that's obviously more of a problem than beating your opponents by less than you beat them last December.

but yeah, the Wii is now in decline. i just don't think you can stretch that to 'Nintendo are in trouble' since they had the two best selling consoles in December, and have a brand new system debuting soon.

True, i just ment it as a friendly joke based on the "PS3 dropped 25% YOY in one month, so the PS3 is in trouble" It is no problem to discuss it of course, but i just thought that 1 month of data is not really enough to say if a system is in trouble, the same goes for Wii in this case. But selling about 2.3 million units is still a very great performance. If the Wii sees a 38% YOY drop in December 2011 as well, i still dont think that Nintendo is in trouble with the Wii (at least based on the hardware sales)

 

[SlipperySlope]

So... how'd Goldeneye do?

 

[Skiesofwonder]

Somehow I can't help but find the analysing of stuff after the events pretty often funny and dishonest.

I mean, now suddenly Move never had a chance and Kinect obviously was gonna fare better. Move was an afterthought, while Kinect is a new platform. Neither of them are in direct competition.... That's not what people thought a few months ago. I know that things have played out the way they have for good reasons, but if in an alternate reality Move did well and Kinect not, people would gladly say that "Move was obviously a good concept as it improves on what made Wii the smashing success it is, while Kinect was pretty half-assed with lots of restrictions, a lack of precision and a lack of hardcore games, and ads money alone can't buy you market share."

Agreed. Because unless my memory is gone I very VIVIDLY remember plenty of members on this board dogging Kinect left and right, saying it was going to under-perform to hell and back because you can't sit down and play, you can't actually move your avatar around, $150 is way too much, blah blah, etc. and Move on the other hand was Wii 2, better graphics, better controls, and was going to sell like hotcakes. Yeah... didn't happen. Of course now everyone is all "OF COURSE Kinect is selling well, it's the next step in the motion control market, OBVIOUSLY" but going by my memory very few actually believed that. And one to none honestly believed (believed enough to make a bet about it) that it would do THIS good.

It's just like with Mario and Sonic (it would never sell 5 million) among others and now even Epic Mickey. Not many in the main threads actually thought they would be big hits, but now that they are it seems like we have thousands of posters saying "well of course it did" and "called it" lol. If people were providing evidence of posts they actually made (before any numbers were released) with correct predictions it would be one thing, but almost no one is. Which just makes me have to give a big roll of the eyes to most of the latter posts in this thread.