Slashdot Mirror
Ask Sony's Phil Harrison About PS3 and Games
During GDC Sony made an effort to answer questions directly from the gaming community, taking steps to put aside the problems of the past several months. Today, we have a chance to take another step in the right direction with the company. Phil Harrison, President of Sony Computer Entertainment Worldwide Studios, has been the face of the PlayStation 3 here in the United States since before the machine launched. He's agreed to answer questions from the Slashdot community about the PlayStation 3, the console since launch, and their recent announcements about LittleBigPlanet and Home. I've linked a trio of other interviews he's done recently below, to give you an idea of topics that he's already covered. I'm sure there are plenty of questions we might ask that have yet to be put forward in a public forum. So - feel free to ask away. One question per comment, please, and keep in mind that Mr. Harrison is here to answer questions about the PS3 and games only; any other Sony-related questions are outside the scope of this interview. The highest-rated comments will be passed on, and we'll post his answers as soon as we get them.
Would you eat the moon if it was made of BBQ Spareribs?
Beat 'Em and Eat 'Em
The wii's sales have been meteoric, despite the "superior technology" of the PS3 and XBox 360. My question is, have Sony and MSFT completely underestimated the penetration, and demand for, HDTV, and are you both feeling that now?
On a standard set Wii titles look better than the last gen, and offer an new, innovative, and most importantly fun experience. On a standard set, a PS3 is a $600 PS2, and a 360 is a $400 Xbox.
Also, wrt Live, Home, etc: do you really think gamers are so eager to install stores under our TVs?
Do you have any vision for the online experience, other than as a way to get my credit card number?
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Do you really think you can compete with XBox Live?
Last generation, XBox Live really blew people away and has set the standard for console connectivity. It will be 6 years old this November. Microsoft seems to have learned from it and has enhanced it for the 360 (like achievement points), and will be introducing it for Windows. Nintendo, sadly, doesn't seem to have learned and will be using "friend codes" again on the Wii, with reports that each game will use different codes.
How well do you think your offering will be able to compete with XBox Live? While there is a price associated with XBL, making a service free doesn't make up for what may be lost. From what I know the PS3 doesn't seem to have the same focus and commitment that Microsoft has. And while some of your ideas are quite interesting (like the Home concept), I have to wonder if it will be seen as being as well developed and integrated as XBL is at this point.
Do you think you can beat XBL this generation, or do you think you might be relegated to playing catchup?
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
This question has been answered time and again by Sony (answer: no) and by people here on slashdot to whom you should pay attention to. The answer is that if they are considering a price drop, or even if they aren't, the stupidest thing they could do would be to announce it. It will stop people from buying a PS3 until there is a price drop, whether they were planning one or not. In other words, if he says yes here, then they will be forced to drop the price in the VERY near future or sales will slow to a crawl, and you can ALREADY find a PS3 on the shelf all over the place. There's little or no motivation to announce a price drop until you make one, or until one of your competitors announces one - but even then you only announce it if you think it will hurt their sales more than yours.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
It's high time we started holding companies accountable for the wild ramblings of their representatives.
Anyone who believes in fairness and honesty has a moral obligation not to purchase anything from Sony until many helpings of $1200 are released to many people out there. Which of course we know will never happen...
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
If someone manages to get homebrew games running on the PS3, will there be firmware updates to stop this kind of development, to protect your software developers, or is homebrew something you are planning on and even encouraging? How does this strategy differ from your strategy with PSP homebrew?
Whether or not there is some sort of god, I'm not supposed to say/god is a word and the argument ends there-Smog
Because, well, they're on crack over there at Sony.
Here's what I think the deal is: Sony thinks that stamping the Sony name on a turd will make it sell, and what's more, make it sell more for the turd with the competitor's name on it. For the most part they're right, because people typically go with what they know. Regardless, this made Sony believe that since the PS1 and PS2 were the most popular consoles of their respective generations, that people would just automatically go out and buy a PS3.
Sony felt that people would do this more or less regardless of income. I personally think that the line of reasoning had something to do with the idea that since people go out and buy their kids this shit on credit to shut them up, that it didn't matter that it cost literally twice as much as the prior generation of console. Furthermore, they believed that they would do it regardless of whether they owned an HDTV.
This of course has not really been the case. PS3s are sitting on shelves while you can't find a Wii anywhere, in spite of the fact that the PS3 is probably several times as powerful as the Wii. And of course, the Xbox 360 is also outselling the PS3, in spite of the fact that it was out months ahead of Sony's offering.
The composite video cable is the modern lowest common denominator. It was formerly RF, so everything came with an RF switchbox. The NES has component video output, but it didn't come with a component video cable. It came with an RF switchbox, because they knew that people would have that connection available. A component video cable is cheaper, and everyone has that input on their TVs now (actually my TV doesn't, but it was free; any TV I would buy would have at least S-Video input, and these days I'd probably be looking for component) so they ship with that cable.
What I don't know is what percentage of PS3 owners have HDTVs. I suspect that it is higher than any other console, even the Xbox 360. But I haven't been able to find any stats yet.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Now that you have a few months with PS3s in the hands of consumers and plenty of reviews to pour over, what mistakes did Sony make in the design of the system?
Here's their standard sales pitch:
1. Cell processor, capable of incredible graphics and physics simulations
2. Blu-Ray, so you can watch movies at 1080p and listen to their excellent surround
3. Backwards compatibility.
While none of these claims are false, they all come with some limitations:
1. The Cell processor is difficult to program for, so don't expect games to use it fully for at least a couple of years, if ever.
2. You need a 1080p tv and a mid-to-high-end surround receiver to get the full experience of Blu-Ray
3. BackComp - It's limited, but it's there.
Frankly, your question was rather soft and almost looks like an astroturf. You might as well have asked "Please praise your system and tell us how good it is." I have no idea how you're getting moderated up.
I second the request to mod this up. I'd like a straight, non marketting response to the ridiculous showboating Sony's been doing lately. This remark especially emphasizes the idea that Sony thinks consumers are a bunch of morons.
-- sudo.ca
No offense intended, but for someone of your age and with your career, I don't expect that you play many videogames yourself. If I am correct, then what do you draw on to make decisions regarding the direction of the PS3, a product directed at customers who are notoriously passionate about their hobby?
Bad to who? Easy, bad to Sony. Which is kind of why it makes sense to ask Phil if he's worried about it.
I doubt they would lose much by freeing up the graphics chip for us Linux hackers. If anything, they will gain some much needed public image back by truly supporting Linux instead of just profiting from it.
It's true that homebrew games go against their business strategy (sell console at loss and make it up in game licensing), but I really doubt it's a serious threat. The potential positive aspects certainly limit the threat.
Along with this question, please include the entire transcript of the speech. If this question does make it, then the answer will be something like "that statement was made out of context..." Then followup with a copy of the speech, requesting what the context was.
I have mod points. But what's the point. This topic is all about Wii vs Xbox vs Sony.
A good chance to ask some questions and all that is read is a shitstorm from fanboys.
You not being able to afford a PS3 is not a question.
I can't afford a Ferrari, but I don't bitch about it every damn day.
*Le Sigh*
That is completely, utterly, and totally irrelevant to the conversation at hand.
The simple fact is that officers of a corporation should be held accountable for their utterances, and corporations should in turn share that accountability. If you can't trust someone to be a good corporate citizen, why would you hire them to be in a position of importance?
Neither I nor anyone else cares if Jack has been reprimanded behind the scenes. What we want is for Sony to stand behind the words of their officers.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
As a PAL gamer frustrated by the lack of availability of more niche titles, I have a large library of both PAL and NTSC-US PS2 games. With the removal of the Emotion Engine from the PAL PS3 and the move to software emulation, is there any possibility that Sony might be able relax region restrictions on PS1 and PS2 games? The inability to play half of my game collection on such an expensive piece of hardware is a significant barrier to entry for me.
I was just wondering if you saw any parallels to Sony in it's third generation and Nintendo in it's third generation. It seems that you marketing strategies have sort of become the same and that Sony is suffering the same accusations of hubris that Nintendo did. Nintendo in their third generation stuck with a proprietary media format, assumed that their brand loyalty would carry them to the lead in the console war. This as you know allowed Sony to take the lead with thier innovative marketing strategies (which seem to have all but disappeared). Nintendo was just coming off losing market share to the genesis, just as Sony has just come off losing market share to the Xbox. If you do see parallels, how do you intend to avoid the beating that Nintendo took in their third generation? If you don't see an parallels, how do you explain the similarities that I described above?
Considering my attach rate for the PS2 is, lemme check... 106, I'm the target consumer for what they need. Yet they'd rather go for the network gamer that has a high preference for a small number of games? (how many games does a WoW or the average CounterStrike player do?)
Because they lost exclusivity to Dragon Quest (which they even lost completely) and GTA, easily two of the best selling game series out there and more and more developers are talking about the need to go multiplatform.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.