Prognosticating Sony's Downfall

Via Evil Avatar, an article on About.com theorizing Sony's defeat at the hands of Nintendo and Microsoft. An interesting piece of speculation. From the article: "Sony introduces the PS3, sporting far more powerful hardware than either alternative system, limited online system support, and a fairly solid launch line-up. Nintendo introduces the Revolution. At the same time that the Revolution and PS3 hit the store shelves, Microsoft reduces the price of the Xbox 360 and releases Halo 3. Halo 3, combined with the price reduction, effectively undercuts the momentum of the PS3 launch. Customers have to decide between the 360 with Halo 3, the PS3 with a potentially high price tag, and the Revolution, priced near current generation game consoles."

Comments

We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[BigDork1001]

Customers have to decide between the 360 with Halo 3, the PS3 with a potentially high price tag, and the Revolution, priced near current generation game consoles."

No, no, no no, no no. Customers don't have to decide between the three. They can choose more than one. I own all three (actually four, Dreamcast too) of this generations systems. Eventually I will own all three of the next gens too. There is no law that says I can only get one and I won't.

Not to mention that these predictions have little to no value. They are just predictions. People have predicted that Microsoft will flop. People predict that Nintendo will go the way of Sega. People have predicted that the world will end. It's just someone's opinion and while there's a chance it'll happen, whatever, there's a chance it won't too. We'll just have to wait and see.

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[RoadDoggFL]

I feel it's almost guaranteed that the price cut will happen either at or shortly before the PS3's launch.

The possibility is that MS could bundle Halo 3 with an HD-DVD drive or even a BluRay drive if HD-DVD remains as dead as it is right now...

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[harrkev]

Maybe, but the "videogame generation" who grew up on the NES is now in their 20s and 30s, probably don't have a family to support, and are willing to buy 2-3 consoles. We have money, and we are the gamers.

Huh? What planet are you from? People in their 20's are generally starting a family. People in their 30's are mostly firmly entrenched in doing the "family" thing. I am a part of the Nintendo generation. My first console was an Odyssey 2 (look it up).

If you look at the demographics, I think that you will find a fair amount of hard-core gamers with money. But you will probably also find even more teenagers who rely on their parents money on order to buy games and systems. A 16-year-old kid likely cannot afford multiple consoles. If you totally ignore the limited-income families, then you are ignoring a large market. Halo 3 might be the killer app, but how many copies of Halo 3 are you going to buy? Will you enjoy it enough to buy three or four copies

You are not the sort who supports the industry; you are the "later buyers" who support sales in the 3rd and 4th generation, after the large chunk of the market has adopted, and keep playing the last-gen consoles well after the next gen has launched. Do not think that most people are like you. The market is already well-defined by the time you buy in.

You are right. That is because I have a wife and two kids to support. But I still "support the industry." Every sale is still a sale. The initial cost of a console is high partially because of trying to recover the NRE costs. By the time the price drops, the NRE is paid for, so Nintendo will still make a profit off of me. While I am certain that Nintendo would rather have a bunch of early adopters, they would rather have the "late buyers" buy their stuff rather than Microsofts.

10 pages? bleh

[GoNINzo]

After 10 pages of extensive advertising, I see some problems, besides the about.com revenue stream.

1. Needs a much stronger outline form. I'm not the best writer in the world but that is a rambling article.
2. The handhelds are basically useless in this discussion, unless you talk about integration with the platforms. And I'm sure the market will accomidate whatever is popular.
3. The market has already seemed to have pushed the revolution out of the running as the 'next console'. But as long as they continue to make money on the hardware and the software, I'm sure they will continue to sell. It just won't be the 'it' console, which is okay with Nintendo.
4. It's not clear the market has the room for another console entry such as the ybox or ps3 or revolution, especialy if people keep making sequels for all the old generation machines.
5. I don't believe online will make/break this generations release, still. However, the download part might seriously help some platforms.
6. The consolidated control preferences and user details within the ybox series might seriously help them, as people are generally lazy. heh
7. Halo 3 is not the 'killer app' it used to be. Halo 2 didn't sell more xboxes.
8. The Revolution is not getting nearly the developer support that the PS3 or the ybox.
9. The PS3 will have exclusive titles that people will be willing to buy one for. And they are promising on release now, but we'll see.
10. I don't think the sony rootkit problem has much to do with their games division, really. And I doubt it will bankrupt them.
11. Backwards compatibility is still questionable on all three systems. Xbox 360 has 200 some titles they've announced, but how well they work and the requirements for a hard drive make it somewhat questionable. The others are questionable entirely. I think this will influence buyers, as it did when the PS2 came out.
12. The use of the multiple cores on the ybox and ps3 might be a total success on some software titles and a total bomb on others, it's an unknown and dependant upon the developers.
13. The prices of the hardware are pies in the sky, it's what they'd like to get near. And it's not completely clear if microsoft can drop the price of hardware, though they have the deepest pockets to do so. They won't let it get dreamcasted. (*sob*)
14. The launch of the ybox is not looking good currently, due to the restricted inventory and lack of revolutionary single platform games. However, microsoft will throw money to make it 'good', I'm sure.
15. I'm not without bias, but damn, you could at least pretend for a bit.

Anyway, I'm not convinced either way, it's still wait and see. With this subject matter, you'd be better off getting a random games.slashdot.org reader to come up with a comparison between the machines and the possible outcomes. Plus, you might not have to deal with 10 pages of ads.

Re:Hit the History Books

[Jambon]

Speaking of the history of game consoles, Joystiq has an interesting article about the ~10 year dominance cycle of gaming consoles.

BOYCOTT SONY (and do yourself a favour)

[FFFish]

First, Sony needs to be boycotted as a consumer act that sends a clear message to Big Business that we will not accept invasive DRM, such as that which made the headlines this past week. Smashing a security hole into our systems? That must be protested, no two ways about it.

Second, Sony will not be destroyed by the boycott. And to your benefit it will motivate Sony to perform so very, very well that they regain their loyal customers. This time next year they'd re-release the product with such stunning capabilities that you'd happily purchase it at even a premium price. Your boycott will spur them to outperform themselves.

Win-win situation all around. Boycott Sony. :-)

Re:Revolution

[HarvardAce]

But as long as there are quality games and they aren't losing money who cares if they are #1 or #6?

The shareholders will. If the difference is between being #3 (or #6 as you say) and making $10M in profit and being #1 and making $100M in profit, then you can be sure that the shareholders will care. Now, what is more likely the case is that Nintendo knows that in order to get close to #1 or #2 they would have to spend too much money in marketing. Therefore, the profit wouldn't be any greater (or perhaps even less) than where they are now. Remember, Nintendo is a business just like Sony and MS, and they are going to try and make the most profit that they can. If that means that they stay back in #3 instead of selling their console at a big loss and being #2 or #1, then that's what they'll do.