Slashdot Mirror
Sony Needs To React to Microsoft
Ars Technica's Opposable Thumbs column discusses comments by Ubisoft president Yves Guillemont. Mr. Guillemont's kind words for the 360 prompted thumbs poster Ben Kuchera to think even less well of Ken Kutaragi's recent arrogant windbag statement. Essentially, Mr. Kuchera is of the opinion that at this stage of the game Sony not only should 'care', they should be worried. From the article: "I wonder what the talk is within Sony... are they talking about the increased competition this generation, or do they all share Kuturagi's confidence? This isn't the same fight they had with the Dreamcast and the Xbox: in that case they had Sega's last system that never enjoyed EA's support, and Microsoft's first, unproven piece of hardware. Now they are up against Microsoft's second system, with very strong software support and online support, and the very popular and affordable Wii."
It often seems that Sony is playing for a the stockholder audience rather than the customer audience. You see if they say they're worried the stock goes down, which is bad for them, and it's unsure whether saying they're worried would have any positive response from customers. I expect them to make a few small concessions on the obviously wrong issues, like they did with the HDMI port without ever really admitting that their competition exists. The stock market loves unbridled optimism and arrogance, as long as nothing goes too obviously wrong.
Fanatically anti-fanatical
...after all, that's what the whole rootkit thing was about, right?
TDz.
Are the first two links supposed to go to the same location? I couldn't find anything about Sony's arrogance in the second link...
"What is Internet Explorer 7? Are you saying we can't access the normal internet?" - I love tech support. Really.
Well, that's what I imagined, anyway...
Meta will eat itself
Which consoles win or fail has been all about what a select few game companies decide to do really. Square releases ff13 for sony. Bunch of companies assume fanbois will buy PS3 to play FF13. They have to plan 1.5 years ahead before a RPG game even finishes so they all decide to avoid risks and also release on the PS3.
Bam a bunch of good console RPG's come out for PS3 and everyone buys the console because said games aren't on the 360.
It's like a self fufilling prophecy really.
Compared to all the money MS spends on other stuff you'd think they'd bother to at least spend 20 million on making a few good RPGs at a total loss just to sell the console.
Not sure I agree. Outside of PC ports and games available on other consoles the 360 doesn't have much going for it, in terms of software. Dead Rising, a few arcade games and N3 seems to be about it for exclusives. Which is a shame, the hardware is pretty nice aside from the price.
Before any fanboys respond I'm well aware that PGR3, DoA4 etc are technically exclusives, but I'm not counting anything that's just a visually upgraded sequel.
or do they all share Kuturagi's confidence? ...yes, they actually do. They think the PS3 is some type of Godsend and all guard it like some state top-secret when the rest of the AAA game development community have used it and rated it as the worst next-gen system to develop for. Figures.
Given that Mr Kutaragi can barely get a word in edge ways without his P.R. team sticking their oars in, I would suggest that 'behind closed doors' i.e. in the sony offices, the heat is starting to rise and people are beginning to panic a little.
Anything that comes out in public is carefully worded, but in the sony HQ they have no fear from the 'outside' so they can think what they want to, and that is likely to mean that they are being true to themselves, which I believe to be a little bit shaky.
>>>Scanning for I.D.I.O.T.S. >>>
>>>I.D.I.O.T.S. FOUND! >>>
Sony is starting to sound like the underdog.
When his defense asked, "Which computer has Jon Johansen trespassed upon?" the answer was: "His own."
Look at what Sony is doing instead of what they're saying. Considering the Sony will have some sort of online system to replicate XBox live and their sixasses controller that sounds an awful like a Wiimote crossed with a Dual Shock, I'd say that Sony is very worried about the competition. If not, then they wouldn't be trying to copy their functionality.
They should react and produce Sonium Microsate.
And given that SE and any number of other devs need to sell their games, I can't imagine they're going to put their game on a system that has a tiny install base. Even if 10% of their fans would buy ps3 just for FF, that won't be enough for SE to make a profit on. They'll go to where the biggest install base is, which won't be ps3, even in Japan. I think that eventually FF will be on either 360 or Wii.
... it required a change of pants
A year from now after the dust has settled it will be interesting to see how it all plays out. Sony is banking on the future and looking down the road past launch. What it is really going to come down to is the titles available for each console. Price is a factor, but great games are what make most gamers take notice (I hope) of what console to invest in. Sony should be worried about the competition, those are interesting points, but the competition should be worried about the PS3 as well. Sony shouldn't be underestimated, and the PS3 despite it's hefty price and heavy handed marketing strategies and failures has amazing capabilities and they have a huge fanbase coming off the PS and PS2. I think they will have succes with the PS3 if they can provide good games, 360 has the more interesting titles in development right now though IMO
Gaming for over 25 years
Except that Sony owns vaguely 20 percent of the company - remember when Square nearly went bankrupt due to The Spirits Within? Sony bought them up and saved them from a gruesome end.
The main reason they're with Sony has never been about installed base. It's been about technology. In an age where Nintendo was using tiny little cartridges that cost tons to manufacture and still couldn't fit their ideas, Sony stepped up allowing Square to span 3 CDs with their most successful game to date, with full motion video sequences to boot. It's the same thing now. Sony brings more space and more graphical power to the game and that's ultimately what Square will want for the mainline (numbered games, minus the MMO of course which is on everything with an online adaptor)Final Fantasy games for the forseeable future.
I wasn't aware the Wii was for sale yet.
Haida Manga
Well, in spite of what they may say, I'd say Sony is very much aware and very much reactionary to the competition. They've tried to mimic the Wii's functionality as quickly as they could after they learned of it, and they're trying to replicate Xbox Live's services.
If I had to guess, they're just playing right out of the Art of War rulebook: When strong, appear weak, and when weak, appear strong. They have to exhibit an air of confidence because they know they're vulnerable and taking a big risk this round. If they don't show confidence in their own product at this stage in the game (and they are very much behind) then they're not going to rally the support they need from consumers or third parties. At this point, they've been dealt all the cards they have to play, and it's poker face time, except it's up to consumers to place their bets for them from here on.
Personally, I'm going to be betting on the Wii this hand, and wait till the stakes are a bit lower before I throw any more money down on something more expensive.
As a general principle, every company should worry about its competitors. Microsoft has massive corporate lockin with Windows, most corporations have software developed for Windows that would cost a huge amount of money to switch to Apple's OS or Linux. But do you think that Microsoft doesn't spend time thinking about how to retain marketshare?
In the game console business alone we've seen leaders being bent over and abused. Nintendo comes to mind. It's a very fluid business. There isn't much customer loyalty.
Microsoft has been manufacturing the Xbox 360 for about a year, its part costs have probably come down 15 to 25 %, it is about to move to a 65 nm process for certain components (which will reduce power consumption and save money) and Microsoft has a huge amount of money. Microsoft can rape Sony on price. Nintendo is currently making money on each console sold and is using low cost components which will only get cheaper over time. Nintendo is in a position to rape Sony on price. The reason the Xbox 360 is selling as many consoles as expected is that $399 is too much to pay for a console. Microsoft has it in their power to correct that.
Sony's exclusivity deals with game developers are far more limited than they were before. The PS2 had a 100 million consoles sold (probably about 80 million are working), it made sense for developers only to develop for the PS2. With an uncertain install base, no developer in their right mind will develop exclusively for the PS3 without a sack full of money from Sony. This is compounded by high development costs for next gen games. If a developer makes a game for two or three consoles, the failure of one console will not ruin game sales.
1080p graphics don't matter at the moment. Look at bestbuy.com. Look at the televisions costing over a thousand dollars. How many of them support 1080p? There are quite a few televisions under a thousand dollars which support 720p. Sony is relying on the PS3 purchases 3 or 4 years from now. By that time this particular generation will be over.
I think that both the Xbox 360 and the Wii will do well. After the Xbox 360 drops its price by about $100 and includes a game with the system. Third-party developers will show a preference for the Xbox 360 over the Wii until it is clear that third-party games can sell well on the Wii. There were many people who bought a Gamecube and only played Nintendo games on it. Months would go by and there would be no Gamecube games on the top 20 games sold in the United States. The Wii is also a different sort of console, which will cause a degree of hesitation. Despite a small install base for the Xbox 360, a number of third-party Xbox 360 games have become number one sellers in the United States and Europe. Saint's Row, Dead Rising and Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter come to mind. When a developer is looking for investment, being able to say that other companies have been successful in the same field is a big selling point. Development of third-party Wii games will pick up once third-party sales pick up.
I think that the game console market is extremely price sensitive. If the game console market was not price sensitive, why did Sony drop the price of the all-powerful PS2? Why not keep it at $299 and rake in the cash? If Sony executives face a $299 Premium Xbox 360 and a $199 Wii, I think they'll start to worry or be replaced by their shareholders.
20% is no controlling share, after the Enix merger thant went down to single digit per cents and Square-Enix has already announced they will spread their games out over all three consoles in order to prevent monopolies like the PS2.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
This whole thing is a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing.
Of *course* folks from Ubi are going to praise the 360. Duh. Ubisoft is essentially a Microsoft-only shop these days, it seems. They've pretty much bet the farm on the Xbox, and have so far been the only game shop to make anything really decent for it.
I thought the 360 was going to suck chicken balls. I was surprised. It isn't too bad (though I'll never own one, boycotting Microsoft and whatnot). Now all these PS3 naysayers are screaming to beat the band about how it's going to fail, it's going to suck, and all that.
Until we see the PS3, and see the games that are there, and see how Sony handles the business end, everything we say is just a bunch of wind. The PS3 may suck, or it might be the best thing since the 6502. Sony may price themselves out of business, or they might hit the sweet spot. The launch titles may suck, or they may totally rock like an old lady on a rocking chair. The PS3 may be exploding batteries. It might be the best thing you've ever seen. We don't know. We can only speculate.
Based on the PS2, I'm thinking the PS3 is going to be a decent console, and they have nothing to worry about from Microsoft. The 360 may be Microsoft's best product ever, but that's damning with faint praise.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
"Square-Enix has already announced they will spread their games out over all three consoles in order to prevent monopolies like the PS2."
The real reason is that they figured out that if they make a game for 3 different systems then they are going to make more money in the longrun. I love FF but I'm not buying a PS3 for one game. I rather wait for an emulator to come out so I could play it.
I put my wii in a wii-wii-pump to make it bigger cuz it looks so tiiiny next to the ginormus PS3.
I never said it would be a good joke.
Modesty is one of life's greatest attributes
For my GameCube, I own first-party titles and Sega titles. For my Xbox, I own Sega titles. For my PS2, I own Sega, Konami, and Namco titles. Everything else (EA and other classic 3rd party), they produce mainly crap anyway.
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
This is starting to remind me of Intel, circa 1990 or early 2000, i.e. an industry leader with impressive marketshare caught off guard by an innovative, nimble competitor. Back then, when the O.G. Athalon was released and broke the Ghz barrier first, it became a case of Intel resorting to a chronic (and until recently, long running) case of me-too-ism where the former leader was forced to watch that competitor announce new breakthroughs, and come up with some response. Sony has made many of the same mistakes, perhaps even worse. Intel at least saw AMD as a viable threat and accellerated its development roadmap to get out of its funk. Sony, on the other hand, sees fit to pretend that the competition isn't there. Sony really needed to define this generation's fight on its own terms to maintain their market share lead. The boys in Tokyo failed miserably, despite a slight theoretical technological advantage and a copious amount of extra time they gained by not launching in the same time window as Microsoft. Coming in a day late and a c-note or two more than your closest competitor, and having a performance lead generally regarded as negligible is bad enough. When coupled with the fact that your new electornic wunderkind has a new-fangled HD-DVD player that most television owners in the U.S. and Europe can't fully take advatage of (but have to pay for anyway) compounds the issue. The fanboy predictions of that the Xbox would be Dreamcast 2 were pointless. Microsoft isn't Sega, and probably won't be with a multi-billion warchest and a hunger for new revenue sources in untapped markets. Remember, Microsoft's business plan upon entering any market is to dip your toe in the water with V1.0, examine the competition, make your tweaks to be competitive, and take market share incrimentally as you make improvements thorugh VX.X. It worked with web browsers, office suites, and database software... The other 800 pound gorilla in the room is Old Man Nintendo, who has successfully proven with the D.S. that an old dog can learn new tricks. The Wii itself can't be ignored, as Kutaragi has more or less implied. Regardless of what Sony and Nintendo would like to belive, the two systems will butt heads directly. As defined, Wii is a small, non-portable entertainment device that provides interactive entertainment via a television, just like PS3. The big difference outside of performace is their price. Every Wii purchased will likely amount to one less PS3 purchased, at least initially. Ditto with Wii games.
Square-Enix doesn't need to release all their products on the PS3. FF13 isn't going to float the PS3 all by itself.
But this is about perceptions. Japanese game Dev's "know" FF13 is going to come out for the PS3. They also "know" FF13 is going to be a hit. Since they "know" it's going to be a hit they also "know" a lot of PS3 will have been sold.
Thus they decided to develop on the PS3 as soon as they had hardware they could start working with. It's already a done deal which is why Sony is acting so arrogant. They already know they've got the goods.
Not really. Look at the current generation. You can reach 100M users by making a PS2 game while an Xbox or GC game would reach 25M (note that all of these numbers are probably a bit too high). You can gain 50% more potential buyers by making the game multiplatform but you'd lose 75% if you made it exclusive to the Xbox or GC (never mind the different demographics buying those consoles resulting in less buyers for e.g. jRPGs). Square-Enix doesn't seem to make multiplatform games very often.
Spreading your games over multiple machines also makes it harder for people to gobble up everything you release (S-E has plenty of fanboys that would). Look at Sega, their fanbase is distributed over all three consoles.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
Based on the PS2, I'm thinking the PS3 is going to be a decent console, and they have nothing to worry about from Microsoft.
I'd better start by openly admitting to not being a fan of the PS2, partly because Sony lied so audaciously about it's performance and in reality - despite how much later it hit the streets - the games were no better than the by then already aging Dreamcast (I assume this was in part because it was more difficult to develop games for and because the Dreamcast was a much more developer friendly console). That's true to the extent that some games (like Dead or Alive) were actually noticeably inferior to Dreamcast versions (e.g. 2d sprites in place of 3d rendered scenery).
I think the PS2's success is almost entirely down to the overwelming dominance of the origional Playstation, which gave life to the brand. The origional was by all accounts a great console (at a time when a lot of turkeys had been released), but it's worth bearing in mind it was origionally a Nintendo concept which Sony were contracted to develop, until the two companies fell out.
The PS2 was Sony's first real shot at building a console on their own, amd while it was an overwhelming commercial success, technically it wasn't particularly good. They also fumbled when senior Sony executives recalled launch units after they found out the SCE division (Sony Computer Entertainment) had made the DVD player region free (on purpose, thinking - correctly I'm sure - that it would be a feature that would sell more units). Apparently representatives of the other arms of the company were not happy with the upstart arm at the time and made life very difficult for SCE (even though SCE would go on to prop up the entire company), at least according to subsequent interviews from senior executives from Sony (unfortunately I don't have references for those to hand). As we know now, SCE would never the less go on to prop up Sony's profitability (and share price) in the years to come.
I am sure they are about to make some big mistakes again, but this time I think it will impact revenues and units sold, and they will suffer for it (though I do not expect the console to 'bomb' by any means - there is still a lot of wide spread anticipation by the general public). The overwhelming power of the origional brand is not as strong (a reponse to the relative mediority of the PS2) and I don't think that's going to be enough to overcome the huge price tag and the level of collective disappointment when people see that not only do games NOT look like this but that they actually look a lot more like this.
I know it's early days and I'm sure not all games will look that bad, but it's not a good sign - nor is it that GT is also looking decidedly underwhealming (I'm frankly amazed they have released what footage the have, I think it looks pretty desperate for a flagship racing title). Now the console is near release it's clear just how detatched from reality all those early renders were, and Sony are forced to start showing us what we can actually expect. While there was undoubtably also a touch of this with a few titles for the 360 (specifically with some EA titles and with GRAW (Ghost Recon)), the same level of discrepancy was not nearly as significant, and a year on games like Gears of War are showing that it really can look as good as, if not better, than developers said they thought it could (with reference to GoW actual in game footage compared to GRAW's pre-rendered footage).
The 360 may be Microsoft's best product ever, but that's damning with faint praise.
To be fair I think they make very good harware! The mice, the keyboards, the Sidewider gaming peripheral range and both X-Box consoles have been really good products!
It's just a shame about 90% of all the software they've ever written. Interestingly, their games over the years have been pretty good, as are some of the
Oblivion? Um yeah, Bethesda totally didn't support the Xbox. And Bioshock is super different from the type of games the Xbox gets already (not really). As for the Japanesse developers making RPGs for the 360, I would not call the support "a lot". Compared to the Xbox, maybe, but not compared to other systems.
... although that's really the 800lb gorilla of the industry. I actually agree with you in that the support isn't quite "a lot", but you can't dispute that it's grown tremendously. Compared to Nintendo, it might be a little bit less, if not even on-par, seeing how they had problems getting 3rd party support with the GC. (Although that should hopefully change with the Wii)
I have a feeling that you're trolling, but I'll bite.
Bethesda is supporting MS and the Xbox. Morrowind came out for the Xbox first, and never came to any other console (although it did come out for PC. As we all know, Oblivion debuted initially on the 360 and the PC. True, it's going to be a PS3 launch title port, but I don't see how you can call that "not supporting the Xbox". Does that mean Rockstar is no longer supporting Sony, because GTA IV will be coming out to the 360 at the same time as the PS3 version?
As for Japanese developers, the number is certainly growing. Namco, makers of the Xenosaga series, is working on a 360 RPG called Eternal Sonata. From Software (published by Ubisoft), just released Enchanted Arms recently (which I'm playing through, and it's decent so far). And the big news is that Mistwalker Studios is making a number of exclusive titles for the 360, Blue Dragon and Lost Oddysey. And then you've got all your traditional Japanese developers (Capcom, Konami, and even Square-Enix) with a slew of other titles, although they're not RPGs.
Compared to the PS2, of course it's still quite small
The biggest beef that I have is that the support coming in might be too late. If Blue Dragon was a 360 launch title in Japan, then you'd certainly have many more system owners than the pitiful number now. It'll be interesting, though, to see how the "re-launch" of the 360 with BD this holiday season does.
My gut feel is that there will be a lot of disgruntled wanna-be PS3 owners, who didn't get a chance to buy the console. (Remember, it is in EXTREMELY short supply, especially in Japan) Many of them will opt for a Wii, although there are probably a number of Sakaguchi fans that will opt for a 360 just to check out his latest creation. (FYI, Sakaguchi = creator of Final Fantasy, head of Mistwalker Studios)
-- jchenx
Well, what I'm suggesting is that even FF13 will probably eventually switch consoles. There simply aren't enough people interested in the ps3 to justify putting Square's flagship title as an exclusive on the ps3. People don't buy consoles for just one game.
What the hell happened here?
Was a bunch of kool-aid distributed and I missed out?
My original subject was "RPG support on 360 steadily getting better". I was comparing it to the last Xbox generation. Go to GameSpot and browse for all the Xbox RPGs and sort them by release date. You'll see that support was pitiful. First RPG for the system was Morrowind, which came out over 6 months since the Xbox first came out. The next notable RPG for the system, which was Knights of the Old Republic, didn't come out till a YEAR LATER. You'll also see a distinct lack of J-RPGs of any kind. Phantasy Star Online only sort of counts, since it was a port (came out for the Dreamcast and GameCube). There are a couple of notable RPGs that came on the scene later, such as Fable and Jade Empire, but they didn't come out till far later (2004, even 2005). And they're western-style RPGs. So, if I had to summarize, Japanese RPG support on the Xbox was pretty much close to zero.
The 4 Japanese RPGs I mentioned for the 360 is a huge increase percentage-wise, obviously. And I didn't mention the western-style RPGs coming out for the system, since that wasn't my point (you can Google if you want to read more about them). (I also forgot to mention FFXI, but that shouldn't count since it's also a port, much like PSO was) Maybe you got confused, I'm not trying to compare J-RPG support from the 360 to the PS2, and say that's even remotely close. That'd be obviously stupid.
Well, I was just speculating. I assumed that you did some research on the topic, or had some more knowledge of the industry, but apparently you haven't. So here I go.
Sakaguchi is a big deal. Here's the Wikipedia link for Sakaguchi-san. He's got a pretty impressive list of games there. Now, his latest creation, Blue Dragon, sports a couple of other big names. Ever heard of Akira Toriyama? He was responsible for developing the mega-popular Dragon Ball manga and anime. He's also the character designer for the extremely popular Dragon Quest series, as well as the cult-classic Chrono Trigger. Now, if that weren't enough, doing the music for the game is the ever popular Nobuo Uematsu. He did the music for many of the Final Fantasy games, as well as Chrono Trigger.
As you can imagine, all these guys have lots of fans. At the recent Tokyo Game Show, there were long lines for 360 RPGs. That actually surprised me at first, seeing how Japanese support for the 360 is currently so pitiful. But it makes sense. Why would Japanese gamers buy a console that doesn't have the type of games that they like? But once you bring in those titles, then that changes things.
Now, obviously big
-- jchenx