Sony says Its PS3 Still for 'Early Adopters'
Source: Tom's Guide US | Keywords: Sony, PS3, PlayStation, Blu-ray | Themes: Digital Entertainment
For the last several generations, the average shelf life of a console has been about five years. When a system was in its third year, many would consider that to be its prime, where franchises have been established, price cuts are given and a stream of quality games is to be expected.
For Sony and its PlayStation 3 (now in its third year), the early adoption phase of the third place console is not over. According to an interview with John Koller, director of hardware marketing at SCEA, the PlayStation 3 is still for early adopters. When talking to Gamasutra about the SCEA hardware lineup, Koller said "The PS3 is still in its early adopter phase, tech-oriented consumer... they're interested in the multi-functionality of the system."
If you look at the Nintendo Wii and the Xbox 360 from Microsoft, both of those systems have been around as long, or in Microsoft's case a year longer, than the PS3. However, neither company is touting the same "early adopter" message as Sony. So what gives? With Sony still losing money on each PS3 sold, Blu-ray still on the rocks, and a price tag $150 over its nearest competitor, the PlayStation 3 is in a precarious position. For many, sluggish PS3 sales are attributed to the aforementioned and not to a three year "early adoption" mindset.
Sony's PlayStation 2 is one of the most successful and popular gaming consoles of all time. Still going strong in its ninth year, Sony recently celebrated selling its 50 millionth PS2 in North America. With such a massive success in the previous generation, there is no wonder why many are disappointed with the PlayStation 3, which has sold less than 20 million worldwide in two years. Hopefully those April price cut rumors are true, because the PS3 could really use a shot in the arm.
Read the entire SCEA interview here.
-
Previous News Article
Democrats Ask $650M More for... -
Next News Article
Report: MySpace to Launch Email...
I think Sony made some large mistakes with the PS3 as well as event beyond their control. If we look at the hardware market we know that mid grade hardware is what sells the most and is what most likely caused the downfall of 3DFX simply because they focused on the high end. This seems to hold true for consoles as well. There are of course other factors as well.
PS3: Jack of all trades, master of none
PS3, biggest mistake was not coming out at the same time the X360 did
as for the Wii if you asked anyone that Nintendo would be making the #1 console after N64 and Gamecube, I would have laughed.
As far as a gaming system the biggest mistake Sony made was probably using the "cell" processor. Turns out that CPU performance doesn't matter near as much as GPU performance. You see this in PC gaming again and again. Since the GPU's on the 360 and PS3 are similar in performance they will never have a noticeable difference in graphical quality. Blu Ray in gaming isn't necessary at this point. (and I think we are a long way from it). I bought the PS3 when it first came out and I don't regret it. It has a great video processor. As a Blu-Ray and DVD player it's still the best. I think it's time for Sony to stop saying that the PS3 is still warming up. It's time to suck it in and admit that it's never going to sell as well as hoped.
Sony should be developing the PS4 at this point. In 3 years if Microsoft puts out a new Xbox with an updated GPU it will blow away the Ps3.
Not sure I agree with the jack of all trades comment. From my experience, the ps3 is an excellent blue ray player. It hasn't translated into sales figures vs the competition, but 20 million units sold doesn't sound like a failure to me.
PS3 has something the competition lacks, blue ray. I actually believe the early adopter stance, even after 3 years. I never expected to buy a 400 game machine, after owning every console under the sun since the pong machine. But the government stimulus provided an opportunity this last summer, and I love my ps3.
Looks even better since my niece's 360 went belly up after 6 months of ownership with the red ring of death.
Well, if the PS3 had come out the same time as the XBOX360, it probably would have cost $800+ instead of $600 (assuming the technology was ready at that point). Not very competitively priced. Not to mention, a SEVERE lack of games, quality games. So releasing the same year as XBOX360 may not have been feasible from a price standpoint or technological standpoint. Who knows, it could have brought about SONY's own RRoD-type debacle.
As far as a gaming system the biggest mistake Sony made was probably using the "cell" processor. Turns out that CPU performance doesn't matter near as much as GPU performance. You see this in PC gaming again and again. Since the GPU's on the 360 and PS3 are similar in performance they will never have a noticeable difference in graphical quality.
The idea behind the Cell was that it would enable programmers to off load some of the graphical work of the GPU and onto the Cell. A goods idea in principle but the trouble is the Cell is very hard to code for (according to Valve and others) hence why 90% of PS3 title only use the PPU and none of the SPE's (excuse if I have the terminology wrong I'm no console fanboy.
The Cell from what I can recall has a computational output of around about 254 GFlops, now that's impressive compared to high end Intel chips which have about 70 Gflops. However even the power of the Cell pales in comparison to a GPU, I'm not sure what output the PS3/360 GPU's have buy the 4870X2 for example has it's computation measured in Tflops. I know the PS3 GPU is know where near anything like mainstream PC GPU's but still even a cell can't be expected to do the job a GPU.
There is one trade that the ps3 lacks, and the other 2 consoles have absolutely no clue about, and that is linux. I for one am an all os man myself, but the ps3 would have sold like hot cakes IF linux would have been supported from the geko and when i say supported i mean having a RSX driver to work with .. that would have replaced a computer or at least a HTPC for most ppl. Having that option, to switch to a gaming console or an OS with full support of every movie format, e-mails, IM clients, office applications and other .. would have been great.
There is one trade that the ps3 lacks, and the other 2 consoles have absolutely no clue about, and that is linux. I for one am an all os man myself, but the ps3 would have sold like hot cakes IF linux would have been supported from the geko and when i say supported i mean having a RSX driver to work with .. that would have replaced a computer or at least a HTPC for most ppl. Having that option, to switch to a gaming console or an OS with full support of every movie format, e-mails, IM clients, office applications and other .. would have been great.
I cant help but think the PS3 was ambitious. The cell processor technology wise is way ahead but with that came the difficulties in programming. You've only got to look at some of the alternative uses the Cell has been put to such as BOINC to see just how powerful it is. For me though, it's not BOINC or left field implementations, it's not Linux or even the Blue Ray player, it's the next installment of GranTurismo.....and still waiting..!! Gran Turismo is the reason, other decent games would be the excuse.
it's been two years. first they said they were the underdogs, which they weren't because the wii was and now they're saying that it's for early adopter.
Removing PS2 backwards compatiblity and not having a good price drop by now certainly hasn't helped, but making excuses doesn't help either. I guess the Gamecube, N64, Dreamcast, 3DO, etc... are still in the early "adopter phases" as well.
Sony, you messed up and know it. Really, what good is a 10 year outlook and being it for the long hall if your brand is killed by year 4?
Sony over the years has always been a little more "proud" of the their products when it comes to the retail price. The Walkman comes to mind. And it's more of the same with the PS3. What's more disturbing is Sony's stick their head in the sand mentality about their retail pricing. This early adopter phase is part denial and outright gibberish. The simple fact is: drop the price, and I'll coin this phrase, so the I-can-finally-afford-one adopters will buy a PS3. Why do I get it? I was only an English Major!
The reason the PS3 failed is because it was a poor effort to connect hardware, game studios, and the gamers.
It was released after Xbox360, which started the downword spiral. Not only because developers were to have more experience with the platform, but also because microsoft specifically created the 360 to have an EXTREMELY easy learning curve. It was both gamer and designer friendly.
Then of course the stupid cell procc, which is awesome if all anyone does is run folding@home. But unfortunately, it's a gaming system, not a server farm component. So compared to it's cost, usability for what it was designed to do just blows.
And then the Wii comes out, which was the cheapest at time of release. This hands sony a new ass because of the American ressecion. No one wants to spend a months rent and utilities on something with a subpar gaming library and bluray ability which doesnt matter considering most people dont have the money to run out and replace their DVD library with only HD content, not to mention the 52" TV.
Sony lost focus on what was important. Us.
does anyone know if OpenCL will help or hurt the cell processor?
exactly, right from the start, i saw the cell processor will PS3's downfall. the cell cpu is the exact opposite of the xbox concept which uses PC architecture which allows cheaper and easier development of games.
As far as a gaming system the biggest mistake Sony made was probably using the "cell" processor. Turns out that CPU performance doesn't matter near as much as GPU performance. You see this in PC gaming again and again. Since the GPU's on the 360 and PS3 are similar in performance they will never have a noticeable difference in graphical quality. Blu Ray in gaming isn't necessary at this point. (and I think we are a long way from it). I bought the PS3 when it first came out and I don't regret it. It has a great video processor. As a Blu-Ray and DVD player it's still the best. I think it's time for Sony to stop saying that the PS3 is still warming up. It's time to suck it in and admit that it's never going to sell as well as hoped. Sony should be developing the PS4 at this point. In 3 years if Microsoft puts out a new Xbox with an updated GPU it will blow away the Ps3.
The gpu in the ps3 is a nvidia gpu that is based off nvidia 7800 series of gpus. It is almost identical to the 7800 gtx 512mb edition (which is different clocks than the 256mb edition), except it only has 256mb of gddr3 instead of 512 and a much slower memory clock (700 mhz instead of 1.4 ghz)
The xenos gpu in xbox360 is a wierd gpu, it was the first real gpu that ati made with a unified shader model (which is in all the gpus of the 2000-3000 series.) check out the response on this anadtech discussion to get an idea of its speed. In sum it was between the x800 and the x1800 in speed.
http://www.anandtech.com/gadgets/showdoc.aspx?i=3472
I think the problem lies more with the developers then with Sony. Sony brought out a system that should have developers salivating, but instead they keep churning out the same clones and attempt to adopt clones into the PS3.
If I was the developer I would try to think outside the box on how to get the PS3 to work for me and play to its strength, high computational output. You can do a lot with the game play with how much this thing can calculate. You can run entirely script based graphics, have realistic physics, you can use the controller to some effect, bla bla bla.
The new XBox being releasing in 2010 looks to be completely identical to a PC.
It's either an attempt at bad damage control or that "early" is really late for adopters. Face it, as great a machine as the PS3 is, it's marketing failed. The system works more like a Cell computer than a gaming system with a Cell processor. Hell, there are only 2 reasons why I want a PS3: Metal Gear Solid 4 and use it as a Cell computer.
There is one trade that the ps3 lacks, and the other 2 consoles have absolutely no clue about, and that is linux. I for one am an all os man myself, but the ps3 would have sold like hot cakes IF linux would have been supported from the geko and when i say supported i mean having a RSX driver to work with .. that would have replaced a computer or at least a HTPC for most ppl. Having that option, to switch to a gaming console or an OS with full support of every movie format, e-mails, IM clients, office applications and other .. would have been great.
Linux is supported by the PS3 you dummy. The Cell is based on the power PC architecture and most major Distros have tools to develop programs specifically for the Cell. You may want to look up yellow dog linux. That's the only reason I even considered getting one, but it's high price has kept me away.
The problem with the PS3 is blu ray. The Blu Ray consortium got out of hand and adding the capability of blu ray to the PS3 was a big part of its price, and don't forget the added cost to the developers and publishers for the "privilege" of using blu ray disks. Of course, if the PS3 didn't have blu ray then we'd be talking about how HD DVD is struggling since blu ray would have died off long ago.
Having a lower price would have given the PS3 more momentum and even though it's often been compared to the Saturn as a programming nightmare, there would be more and better games for it simply because it had a larger market. Instead its high price didn't allow it to capitalize on the fan base they built up with the PS2, thus leading to fewer exclusive games, thus leading to lack of interest, thus leading it to it's current place as "that other" system.
Don't get me wrong, I like the PS3, Sony got a lot right with it, and I suspect in terms of raw power, it's still heads and shoulders above the competition. The price, for what you get, is pretty reasonable. Sony, could probably go still lower, Blu-Ray disk drives are a lot cheaper, the Cell processors out of IBM probably could get still smaller (lower power or faster, pick some combination). But $/MIPS, it's a lot cheaper than Wii or XBox.
However, there are some things Sony, did not get right, at all, and these are hurting the potential of the PS3 as a platform, I think in a very serious way:
1. Noisy
The fan seems to like run on the things, and when watching a Blu-Ray movie, particularly something where everything is not blowing up all the time, the fan needs to be quieter. Think Theater PC.
2. Needs to Stream Movies
If I have a full blown PS3, why can't it stream Netflix over the network. Plenty of MIPS to do that? I suppose Sony will have its own, proprietary formats eventually, but I'm getting a little tired of waiting. I'd like to be able to buy-on-demand a Blu-Ray or DVD quality movie, have it download to the box, and play (for a day or if the downloads are too slow, a week).
3. It's a Networked Game box, so...
Sony needs to open up the PS3 more, work on its store, come up with models more like iTunes (download music/video), and then Games should follow the same model. Keep the game on the server, allow me to buy a digital license, download it to the PS3. Or follow the Netflix model, let me have 4 games at a time downloaded, but charging a monthly fee. Also let the 3rd parties make some money. Come up with a You-tube type connection.
It's not that the PS3 isn't a good hardware platform, it is, and was, in many ways, ahead of its time. And the application potential is still pretty open ended. Far more MIPS there than you average home PC. But if there's any company that is more NIH (Not Invented Here) than Sony, I'm not sure what it would be. The home space is going to be deeded over by default to Microsoft and the PC platform (and Wii, who seems to be the only game console manufacturer to get that aside from a few Jolt! caffeinated 15 year olds, the vast majority of game players would like something simpler), unless Sony figures this out soon. Open up the console, make it easier to use, let 3rd. parties help simplify and extend, and the PS3 would then do fine.
Eh. Sony made a big mistake with their "futureproof" console claims. In a year when Microsoft or Nintendo release their next-gen console, Sony isn't going to look too great in the eyes of its fans no matter what it does..
The PS3 was a huge technology leap over the PS2 and others from that generation (Gamecube/Xbox.) The marketplace, those billions of consumers out there who buy what they WANT for whatever their reasons may be, have decided they don't necessarily want the best technology game system for the price that it was set at.
As the owner of a Wii, I'll admit it's rather cute and addicting. My young children love playing it. If and when I have a few minutes free for a game, I'm kind of stuck playing the Wii with them since I don't think I'll ever have time to play a (beautiful, for sure) drawn-out game on the PS3 that's sitting next to it. As I must be an 'early adopter' I bought the PS3 to play Bluray movies on my HDTV and that's what it gets used for 95% of the time.
At this time, the market would rather be paying $150 less than what the PS3 is selling at so they can use the extra money for a second controller and a few games for their Wii. (I don't have an Xbox360, but I'd imagine it's similar to the PS3 experience and not the Wii experience.) If you're a gamer I bet the PS3 and 360 would be a BLAST when there was time to get involved.
I find this hilarious.
~20 million PS3s in 2 years is sluggish, but ~28 million 360s in 3 years is great.
Double standard much?
"However, there are some things Sony, did not get right, at all, and these are hurting the potential of the PS3 as a platform, I think in a very serious way:
1. Noisy
The fan seems to like run on the things, and when watching a Blu-Ray movie, particularly something where everything is not blowing up all the time, the fan needs to be quieter. Think Theater PC."
I don't know about anyone else's PS3, but mine is whisper quiet. When a game is first booting up, I can hear the disc in the drive, but once it's going, I can't hear the machine running at all. On the other hand, my XBOX 360 is loud as hell! I'm on my 3rd unit and this one was quieter than the first 2 I had, but was still noisy enough to be a distraction playing games with the surround sound cranked up pretty high. Now that I've "upgraded" the firmware on it, it runs the discs at max speed to reduce load times and it's REALLY loud!!
Noisy!!!?
You must have a messed up PS3. I have never heard my PS3's (20GB launch model) fan. My Xbox (Jasper Pro) unit, on the other hand, is audible from the second it turns on. The PS3 has it's flaws, but noisy is not one of them. It has a giant fan that runs at low RPMs and its silence is it's strong point!
Crazy...
Dan
It would be funny if the PS3 hits it's stride in the 5th year and Microsoft launches their next gen console at the 5 year mark. It would utterly destroy Sony. They wouldn't be able to give the PS3's away.
This is not hard.
Sony is to this point considered a failure. Why? It's prior success. The expectations for Sony were huge. I am an Xbox fan personally, I never dreamed that in year three MS would still have a lead over Sony. I fully expected 360 to be a decent #2 with Sony simply crushing the competition. Interestingly enough, the 360 is still a decent #2 only its the Wii which is crushing all other systems. Expectations, Sony had them while others did not.
Neither the XBOX360 or the WII are currently the PS3's biggest competitor!
THERE ARE 140 MILLION PS2'S ON THE MARKET TODAY(SONY SOLD 200,000 IN NOVEMBER 08' ALONE)http://www.newsday.com/technology/wire/sns-ap-tec-techbit-sony-ps2,0,3111686.story
Every month SONY leaves the PS2 on the market it cuts the possibility of selling 200,000 PS3's. The day they decide not to support the PS2 is the day their PS3 sales rival even the wii's.
When the remainder of the 100 MILLION PS1 owners and 140 MILLION PS2 owners decide to UPGRADE, the PS3 is where they're going!
Microsoft is a SOFTWARE company! They took a gamble making the original XBOX and sold a total of 24 million over 4 years before DISCONTINUING SALES!!
The XBOX360 was an attempt to rush a system to market during PS2's long 7-10 year lifespan and to try to beat the PS3 to market. Microsoft has now sold 28 million 360's over 3 years with an unheard of 16% failure rate!! (RED RING OF DEATH)
Sony is the undisputed ALL TIME KING OF CONSOLES!!
PS1- 102 mil units (11 YEAR LIFESPAN)
PS2- 140 mil units (8 YEARS AND RUNNING)
PS3- 20 mil units
TOTAL 260 million
XBOX- 24 mil units (4 YEAR LIFESPAN)
XBOX360- 28 mil units (4 YEARS AND COUNTING)
TOTAL 52 million
NES- 62 mil units (10 YEAR LIFESPAN)
SNES- 50 mil units (8 YEAR LIFESPAN)
N64- 30 mil units (6 YEAR LIFESPAN)
CUBE- 22 mil units (8 YEAR LIFESPAN)
WII - 40 mil units
TOTAL 204 million
The PS3 is selling as well as the PS2 at a comparible point in it's life cycle. Considering the PS2 had almost NO competition at the time and the PS3 has the PS2 the Wii and 360 to go against, the much more expensive PS3 is doing pretty good!!
In the next two years the PS2 gets retired and PS3's costs will have fallen into a sweet spot this is precisely when sales will explode.
Sony has withheld FULL games from titles like SOCOM, GRAND TURISMO, TWISTED METAL, FINAL FANTASY, AND SYPHON FILTER. All of these are console sellers, all are Sony exclusives!
So you go buy yourself a Wii, it's fun, my girlfriend loves it. Or grab an XBOX360 and ignore bluray all together. It doesn't matter to Sony becuse in the end, when the price is right, you'll want a PS3 too!!
I find this hilarious.~20 million PS3s in 2 years is sluggish, but ~28 million 360s in 3 years is great.Double standard much?
Good point, but I'd really like to see the game sales numbers. If, as I suspect, the majority of PS3 owners use their console mostly for Blu-Ray, then they could be pretty low.
At this point, I'm really hoping that the next xbox moves even closer to the PC gaming industry. That way xbox games will be cheaper to develop AND the games should require very little work to port to PC (or PC to xbox). Having a similar architecture makes sense because it will make the parts cheaper and the development easier. Plus you get to write one game that works with little effort on console and PC.
Lets have 3 levels of gaming: 1) child / casual console (e.g. wii), 2) mainstream gamer console (xbox), and 3) real gamer platform (PC). The xbox will basically be a cheap, easy to use mid-range gaming machine (which is exactly what consoles should be).
My kids told me not to buy the PS3 because of the lack of games. But all I really play is Guitar Hero and golf, and I do have a projection system that does 1080P. When my son came home from college and saw that I could now easily and with high quality stream downloaded video and all my music thru the PS3 to my projection/audio system, he said "this is the future!" The he gave me a used PSP so I could have a wireless remote and run it all with out turning on the projector. I like it.
[citation]Sony has withheld FULL games from titles like SOCOM, GRAND TURISMO, TWISTED METAL, FINAL FANTASY, AND SYPHON FILTER. All of these are console sellers, all are Sony exclusives! So you go buy yourself a Wii, it's fun, my girlfriend loves it. Or grab an XBOX360 and ignore bluray all together. It doesn't matter to Sony becuse in the end, when the price is right, you'll want a PS3 too!![/citation]
Actually Final Fantasy is no longer a Sony exclusive. You can read many fanboys weeping and b*tching about this fact.