Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

LittleBigPlanet Could 'Move Consoles' For PlayStation 3

Posted by Zonk on from the need-a-bit-of-a-jump-start dept.

The always popular Michael Pachter offered up the opinion last week that LittleBigPlanet may be the title the PlayStation 3 needs to have breakout success. In a report pointing out failings on Microsoft and Sony's part to appeal to 'family gamers', Pachter said: "After seeing LittleBigPlanet at TGS, I believe it could be a console mover. The game is really innovative, and I think it adds a family element that is so far missing from both the Xbox 360 and the PS3. If they can accompany that game's launch with a price cut (or a lower priced SKU), I think we'll see a spike in sales." The game is really innovative, and I'm looking forward to it a bunch ... but I think I agree with the folks at Ars when they say the pricetag is still too high to appeal to family gamers.

12 of 122 comments (clear)

  1. Interesting idea, but they are ignoring the Wii by jimstapleton · · Score: 2, Interesting

    being both cheaper, and having plenty of family-friendly titles, I think it'll make it harder for the PS3 to have a one-title-wonder breakout in this sector, like the XBox had it's one-title-wonder breakout with the Halo series.

    Simply put, hardcores (Halo) will spend more money than families (this game), and the Wii will certainly provide a lot of competition in that arena. Plus, the Wii has many games (even if you count all the [animal]z games as just one game) that seem to excel in this arena, rather than just one.

    --
    34486853790
    Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
    1. Re:Interesting idea, but they are ignoring the Wii by Lally+Singh · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Couple of things:
        1. That assumes you can get a Wii. Only reason I bought one at all was b/c they had one in stock and I was gift shopping. (It turned out the gf didn't want it, so I kept it).
        2. I've got both the PS3 and the Wii. The Wii's got maybe 2-3 good games on it, and one of those comes with it. It's really not useful for me now beyond keeping guests happy. The PS3 games I enjoy more (regular ones, Resistance, Warhawk, etc) than the Wii stuff. IMHO people who played a lot of games on the PS2 will (and do) want more depth than the Wii offers in the area it excels in.
        3. With LBP, the PS3 could fit in as a good fit for everyone. LBP to keep the kids/girlfriend/etc happy, and Metal Gear 4 for the hardcore gamers. This is how it played out with the PS2.
        4. For those of us who really get turned off by the Halo set: not the gameplay per se, just all the 14 yr old kids humping fallen opponents, etc. the 360 has no appeal. IMHO it, like its predecessor, is set up for an FPS shooting game by far. It's really not my thing. God of War 1 & 2, all 6 hrs of Heavanly Sword, etc are more interesting. FPSs are fun, but they're not enough.

      I know the PS3 doesn't have the best game selection, but then again no console does for what I want. I looked at the 360, but I don't care about Halo the way most 360 lovers seem to. It's a fun FPS, but eh, I don't care nearly that much. The PS3 does have the most interesting selection coming up for me, and the games it does have so far, I enjoy. Motorstorm, resistance, warhawk, heavenly sword, etc. are fun plays for me (and that little rubber ducky game), and frankly, the only game I've wanted this generation is MGS4. Everything else is nice on top, but it's the only thing on any platform that interests me at all.

      --
      Care about electronic freedom? Consider donating to the EFF!
    2. Re:Interesting idea, but they are ignoring the Wii by jamie(really) · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So, this is a story about LBP moving PS3's because of its family appeal and you got modded up to 4 for saying that you, who is neither married nor has kids, would rather have a PS3 than a Wii. And the only game you've wanted this generationis MGS4.

      Errrr, ok. Nice modding everyone.

      I've got a wife and 2 kids. We play Wario Ware, Rabbid Rabbits, and Wii Sports on the Wii, and my 4 yr old likes to play LEGO Star Wars with me on the 360. If a family doesn't already have a PS3, there is no f***ing way a single game is going to cause them to spend $499 on a console just to play it. Period. If they don't have a Wii, they'd spend their $250 on that, and if they do, why would they buy a PS3?

  2. Sony needs to revisit their golden age of movers by kevin.fowler · · Score: 2, Interesting

    My roommate bought a PS2 when GTA III came out. This is one of the best examples of a console mover that I can remember. Sure the game had tons of hype, but it seems like a lot of people agreed that it delivered... and it was also a bit different nearly every game released. The problem now is that with genres being flooded with clones of clones of clones, and multiplatform releases... there are fewer console movers. It's going to take an game that has takes a COMPLETE departure from games that exist now and will only ever be on one console, to be the kind of mover that GTA 3 for the PS2 was in my eyes.

    --
    Bury me in mashed potatoes.
  3. I guess it could... by seebs · · Score: 2, Funny

    I dunno. I mean, I already HAVE a PS3, and I don't see why I'd want this.

    --
    My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
  4. How Sony could actually sell PS3s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    People might consider buying a PS3 if it came with a Wii bundled.

  5. One small problem with that idea... by Rimbo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Family gamers" don't spend $300 or more on a console.

    1. Re:One small problem with that idea... by kevin.fowler · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Considering how entrenched the PS2 is as a family gaming console (and how you can get it for $100), it's likely even harder to sell a "new one" for $600.

      --
      Bury me in mashed potatoes.
  6. Why? by Kelbear · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I saw the demonstrations for Little Big Planet, and don't get me wrong, I would definitely like to get a crack at this game.

    But it's not the kind of play that I'd throw down 600 bucks for. It's a seriously cool casual play game, but I mean casual play as in playing it when I don't have anything else to do. That kind of appeal doesn't make people throw down big bucks in a huge payout. It works /great/ getting a lot of people to spend a small amount of money repeatedly, but it's not the sort of thing that clears the huge mental hurdle of 600 bucks.

  7. Can't Wait by dracocat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This game is obviously on my must have list of games to buy. Don't get me wrong, Heavenly Sword was great, but thats come and gone.

    What Sony really needs is more good games, not one blockbuster. My co-worker compares the PS3 to a sports car. Most of the time its sitting in the garage or somewhere collecting dust. Then every once in a while a fantastic game comes out and you get to take it out for a good drag-race.

    To sell more PS3s Sony needs more than a killer game once every six months.

  8. Think about inflation and the $250 NES by Paktu · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The original NES was $200 or $250 (depending on the bundle) in 1985. If you add in inflation, that $200 becomes $375 in 2006 dollars, and the $250 is roughly $468. How many units of the NES did Nintendo sell at that price, anyway?

  9. Re:Next PS3 console mover? FF 13 by ElleyKitten · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why on earth would you believe that suddenly, and without any historical precedent to the contrary, people automatically expect video game consoles to become more affordable (as a percentage of household income) over time? Because consoles have had similar prices each generation despite inflation. The NES was $200 at launch. The SNES was $200 at launch. The N64 and the Gamecube were $200, and the Wii was $250. The Xbox was $300 at launch, the 360 was $300 and $400. The PS1 was $300, the PS2 was $300, and the PS3 was $500 and $600 at launch. Do you see a bit of a difference? Every major console ever released has been $200 or $300, and the PS3 is twice that. Why on earth would you believe that a console could be priced high above what consoles have been priced before, even current gen consoles, and people would be fine with that?

    And, I feel you are discounting the importance of the blu-ray player. Sony rightly believes that compared to past consoles, theirs offers more value. Surely, having a blu-ray player must be worth something. Not enough. Few people have HDTVs, without which the blu-ray is pointless, and even people with HDTV are waiting and seeing which format wins before they plunk down hundreds of dollars for a new player. This isn't like PS2 with DVD at all. DVDs didn't have any competition for the most part, everyone was onboard with the evolution from VHS to DVD just like they had with cassettes to CD. DVDs also had plenty of features over VHS, in addition to graphical pluses they also killed the tedium of fast forwarding and rewinding, and they introduced "special features" that couldn't fit on VHS. Blu-ray offers graphical improvements over DVD only if you have an HDTV, and while it offers more special features we reached the limit on how many special features people care about back on DVD. People will watch a few deleted scenes, maybe a commentary, but beyond that most don't care. High definition video just doesn't have that big of a market yet, especially not until a winner is chosen between HD-DVD and BD, and Sony has been foolish to throw away this gaming generation for it.
    --
    "What is Internet Explorer 7? Are you saying we can't access the normal internet?" - I love tech support. Really.