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
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.
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.
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.
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.
I don't know where you're looking but Ubisoft is a pretty platform agnostic compay, look at the list of Wii games they're releasing before March 31, 2007:
I know for a fact that several of those games are going to be multiplatform, with games like Assassin's Creed and Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Vegas being on both the XBox 360 and PS3.
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.
Honestly, I think the most vocal people against the PS3 were people who were expecting to buy a PS3 at launch and are so disapointed by the line-up and outraged by the cost that they're angry at Sony; Sony has promised so much with the PS3 and most people are discovering that it is not true and are (understandably) upset.
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.
I think the PS3 will be a fine system, just like the XBox and Gamecube were fine systems, but I suspect that the success that Sony had with the PS2 and Playstation is a thing of the past. Much like the PSP, I think Sony is bringing the wrong dog to the fight and they're going to pay for it.