mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Has to be.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Sony on PS4: "We've never been first [or] cheapest. It's about being the best."
- Thread starter PaulLFC
- Start date
Has to be.
Syphon Filter
Member
I think as long as Sony doesn't give MS 1 year headstart they will be ahead of them.
JimmyRustler
Member
I think it's all about marketing.
If Sony is smart they're gonna make the console powerful and expensive. This console has to substain a couple of years after all. I totally see them pricing it at 600 $ again. Why not if it's worth it? I mean, the PS3 did not only fail because of the price pointof the console but because of the overall price point. Back in 2006 HDTV population was not what it is now. So not only did you have to buy the console but also the propper TV. In total this was about 1.500 $ back in the days.
Now everyone has an HDTV and most core gamers are pumped for the next gen. What Sony (and Microsoft) have to do now is to justify a price of 600 $. Sony failed to do that in 2006. Take an amazing AAA title like Watch Dogs, release it at launch and core gamers will pay. Microsoft.... Make the next Halo chapter 720 exclusive and release it at launch.... Core gamers will pay. I know I would.
Think about it. Why was the biggest height of PC gaming at the time Far Cry, Half Life² and Doom³ were released? Because these games were mind blowing at that time. I was a school boy back then and still I scratched together everything I had to buy a high end PC to play these games.
Make the first games of the new consoles mindblowing and the price will not matter. Fail to do so and it sure as hell will.
If Sony is smart they're gonna make the console powerful and expensive. This console has to substain a couple of years after all. I totally see them pricing it at 600 $ again. Why not if it's worth it? I mean, the PS3 did not only fail because of the price pointof the console but because of the overall price point. Back in 2006 HDTV population was not what it is now. So not only did you have to buy the console but also the propper TV. In total this was about 1.500 $ back in the days.
Now everyone has an HDTV and most core gamers are pumped for the next gen. What Sony (and Microsoft) have to do now is to justify a price of 600 $. Sony failed to do that in 2006. Take an amazing AAA title like Watch Dogs, release it at launch and core gamers will pay. Microsoft.... Make the next Halo chapter 720 exclusive and release it at launch.... Core gamers will pay. I know I would.
Think about it. Why was the biggest height of PC gaming at the time Far Cry, Half Life² and Doom³ were released? Because these games were mind blowing at that time. I was a school boy back then and still I scratched together everything I had to buy a high end PC to play these games.
Make the first games of the new consoles mindblowing and the price will not matter. Fail to do so and it sure as hell will.
AranhaHunter
Banned
I would rather pay $500 bucks for a PS4 and another $500 bucks for a 720 and have the generation last as long, if not longer than this one ( 2013 will be 8 years 360, 7 years PS3) than pay $300 and have something like what we had in the past with refreshes every 5 years.
statham
Member
they lost billions being 5-6 million behind. they pretty much pull a OG xbox with the ps3.
Chuck Norris
Banned
Gamecube, Xbox say no
OldJadedGamer
Banned
Neither of these systems launched at $299. Looking back on history of home systems, the systems closest to the $300 launch price have been the most successful.
InfiniDragon
Member
There's the other problem, Sony or any company doesn't want "down the line" out of their consumers, they want "immediately".
If everybody has the idea of saying they'll support a console if the company sells it at a high price by buying it when it's cheaper, that's money that company is bleeding out until those people get on board. Sony's not gonna be releasing the thing at some premium with all the bells and whistles so that people can wait until they're forced to take a bigger hit on it (aka a price drop). Or at least I hope they aren't or they really are done for. In short, if people want them to make the uber box, be fully willing to pay full price for the uber box.
Allonym
There should be more tampons in gaming
Do you understand what you are proposing? NO, Sony doesn't need to have a $600 priced console again that would be the most asinine decision of the century. Do you think Sony is currently happy with their current state and the PS3's performance...that's rhetorical! They aren't. Consider that with the PS2, Sony went from a far and away 1st place and making tons of money from attachment rates of games to being in a battle for 2nd with the PS3 and all their exclusives selling worse than flagship 360 exclusives (GT5 may be the only exception). Sony is in a situation now where they can't afford to release a console at $600 or $500.
What they should do is release one sku and multiple bundles with definite system sellers, focus on bringing PSN/SEN to Live levels while maintaining its "freeness" or ensure a lower subscription or entry fee than Live's and build a community gamers can get behind. Also offering incentives like lower priced DD games release date matched on the PSN store, free games like on PS+ or throwing in a headset/extra controller with initial batches of launch systems will go a long way in establishing customer loyalty and bringing back former PS users.
Spec wise they should have a high end gpu/cpu or gpu/gpu it whatever gives the best erupts while remaining cost effective. There is no sense in allocating resources to the gpu when 99% of devs don't take advantage of it; Killzone, Uncharted and GoW sales don't seem to have benefited tremendously from their graphics. Just provide gamers/devs with enough power that visuals are uniform across the ports but exclusives still look noticeably better. This plus the inclusion of dev tools/support with erase the stigma that PS gets the worst ports and aid with third party sales and in turn increase console sales as well.
Sony personally though has to get its marketing machine in order, that's the only reason why I'm lead to believe that 360 has consistently outsold it in the U.S. well that and the fact it gets CoD DLC earlier/exclusively for a limited time. If Sony would spend some damn money on marketing I'm inclined to believe their games would sell better. We need to see PS4 ads while in the movies, while reading newspapers, store ads, websites and during commercials. Hell they even need to be present on the sides of skyscrapers, buses and taxis. Hopefully they wont drop the ball next gen with advertising.
Lastly release different colors of consoles and controllers in every territory or at least allow me to buy them from Sony directly. Also allow PSN downloads to transfer over. Please don't waste resources to ensure complete backwards compatibility instead sell an inexpensive add-on that will read PS1, PS2 games but PS4 should definitely run PS3 games.
Have games ready for launch. I think that this doesn't even need to be addressed. I would bet my genitalia that Sony has Guerrilla, ND, Polyphony, Japan Studio, Media Molecule, Sucker Punch, Insomniac and others all readying either launched games or a steady stream of games post launch as the biggest incentive of all. Sony also moneyhats work too. If people can't play their favorite games on their favorite consoles, they will buy yours to get it. Trust me.
These are the steps Sony should take if they want to overtake everyone next year not release a damn $500/$600 console it would be repeating the past though only this time Sony wont be around afterwards. PS4 cannot, I repeat CANNOT be more than $449.99 if they want to succeed and even that is pushing it. I'd say shoot for $349.99-$400.99 for the biggest impact and launch in October.
P.S. redesign the entire store and user interface and make it user friendly no more stuff hidden. People don't read manuals these days so Sony do your best to make the flow/layout of the store on sensible that even a caveman could navigate it
Much of the cost of the PS3 was due to the Blu-Ray drive. They probably won't have that issue this time, and going by the Vita, they're much more sensible about the hardware.
Both the PS3 and 720 will probably be $399. And for the people who think this was a bad statement or that "SORNY IS DOOMED LOLZ," what the hell do you WANT exactly? Should they have said "screw the hardware. We wanna be the cheapest system on the market!"?
C'mon, Gaf.
Both the PS3 and 720 will probably be $399. And for the people who think this was a bad statement or that "SORNY IS DOOMED LOLZ," what the hell do you WANT exactly? Should they have said "screw the hardware. We wanna be the cheapest system on the market!"?
C'mon, Gaf.
Acrylic7
Member
Seriously? After every singe thing Sony has done wrong this gen people think that they aren't stupid/incompetent enough to let their competition have a year to themselves, again?
did anyone see that E3 conference, it was just a few days ago :/
maybe they can get away with a $499 console with something Excellent to play. But I doubt they will have something that good. Ruined all of their good multiplayer IP's and whatnot.
sales
All Microsoft and Nintendo has to do is say Mario/Halo/Zelda/Gears and their hardware sales will skyrocket.
Way to completely ignore the Vita, which everyone thought was going to be more than $300. This is 2012. The Ken Kutaragi era is over. If amazes me that people think Sony does not see the obvious.
Acrylic7
Member
When you buy one you will need a card. Plus a case because only a complete fool would put it in their pockets with those sticks exposed. When you go to buy a Vita you are easily spending $300.
Plus there are more things that are wrong with the Vita. Sony doesn't get shit. They don't see the obvious.
If they saw the obvious then I would have bought a Vita.
Agent Unknown
Member
Totally ignore Vita at E3 then have your stooge Tretton brazenly announce you're going all out with expensive, bleeding edge, cash burning hardware for PS4 while your corporation is currently all but imploding. Great game plan, Sony.
Where did he say is going to be expensive?
Sony, hire this man and make him head of the company.
Just out of curiosity, how would you handle the PS4 if you were Sony?
JimmyRustler
Member
I just don't see it that way. Times are different now. As long as Sony figures out how to make people really want the console they're gonna buy it for 600 $. But it needs to awe the people, have good games right at the start and release very fast after the announcement. Use the hype. Just look at what Apple is doing.
See, I just think at myself back when the PS3 was released. Why didn't I buy it when it was 600 €? It was not because of the price but because aside from BluRay it had nothing to offer that I didn't already have with my 360. It wasn't jaw dropping any more. Even for the people that didn't own the 360 back then. The was no point in paying 600 $ for it if you were not a hardcore fan.
But if you make that leap huge, awe people AND deliver good games like Watch Dogs (assuming it has all the features that were announced) right from the start, core gamers will buy it. You think I as a core gamer will be sitting here and playing last gen games when there's a console out there with awesome games offering current CGI quality graphics as ingame. Graphics even PC gamers will be amazed of. No, I won't. Just like I couldn't keep playing PS2 games anymore when Far Cry was released.
Yeah, keep dreaming about free PSN for the next generation.
Agent Unknown
Member
He said "We've never been cheap." What's the opposite of cheap or affordable? Expensive.
Acrylic7
Member
how would handle the ps4? I'm not about to type a 10 page post. lol
Its not rocket science.
friskykillface
Banned
make PS4 games look like star wars 1313 and watch_dogs and i'll pay $600
do it Sony, go all out.
i'm really hoping for $400 though for the system, next E3 will be crazy D:
do it Sony, go all out.
i'm really hoping for $400 though for the system, next E3 will be crazy D:
"Not cheap" doesn't automatically mean "expensive" either. :/ The PS2 was not cheap but it also wasn't expensive.
You shouldn't have to type a 10 page post if it's not rocket science. I can't really take people seriously who criticize something and then refuse to explain their point. A lot of people say "they're wrong" but don't say what they feel is "right."
This is your mistake. Cheap means affordable but affordable doesn't necessarily mean cheap.
Same here. I barely ever use it, though.
Glorified G
Member
Xbox did launch at $299 in America, and ms cut the price 6 months later. So many factors go into a successful console than just $299=Instant success. It's not black & white.
Fenderputty
Banned
I'm ok with 599 this time around. Though I would imagine this has more to do with not being a broke ass 25 year old when the PS3 launched.
That being said ... I would much rather 399. So would my wife. HAHA
That being said ... I would much rather 399. So would my wife. HAHA
Pachterballs
Banned
I like PS3 a lot but compared to x360; the architecture admittedly has issues - even if it gave us the uncharted games/Killzone2 etc.
still; by the end of the gen, I thought UC3/2 looked a hell of a lot better than Gears. But multiplatform ALWAYS suffered on ps3.
*whats the point of that post? They're not always the best. I think x360 is the better console. that's my point
still; by the end of the gen, I thought UC3/2 looked a hell of a lot better than Gears. But multiplatform ALWAYS suffered on ps3.
*whats the point of that post? They're not always the best. I think x360 is the better console. that's my point
Boombloxer
Member
They had a format war to fight, and decided to use that as leverage.
Now, was the format war worth the price they paid? Not sure, but hindsight is 20/20.
My point is that this time, that factor is no longer there, and thus, should not be a concern.
What are you talking about? Most of the factors that lead to 599 aren't actually there anymore, same with the RROD--I don't expect to see either console with these problems next gen because they've gone through it already and fixed them.
They did get a lot wrong, but they also got a lot right (free online, open accessories, etc).
Unless you were watching a different E3 where a date, price and system was actually announced from MS/Sony.
MrCunningham
Member
The PS1 beat the competition in more than just price. First of all, it was cheaper than the Saturn. but actually came out a few months later (I think?).
But it was also a developer friendly console. It had a very clean architecture with one dedicated CPU, one dedicated GPU and a sound processor.
The Saturn on the other hand was a mess... Two main CPU's, two main GPU's, a sound chip plus a bunch of other support processors. The two main processors in the Saturn didn't work at all like modern day multi-core CPU's. Most developers didn't even bother to figure out how both CPU's worked together and would only utilize one of the CPU's in game and ignore the other CPU completely.
The PS1 became the popular choice for developers on this factor alone.
It also didn't help matters that Sega had the 32x on the market at the same time. That only confused and frustrated consumers and developers even more so.
Nintendo released their hardware cheaper than the PS1, but also shot themselves in the foot by making it cartridge only. This didn't make publishers happy, considering how much cheaper it was to press CD's than it was to manufacture cartridges. Sure you could technically say that the N64 was better hardware, but it was also hindered by a few factors.
Not only was the PS1 easier to develop for than the Saturn, but it also had the mass storage medium that Nintendo avoided using with the N64. It was also competitively priced somewhere between these two systems and completely conquered that generation.
When the PS2 rolled around, Sony was still riding on the huge wave that the PS1 created and it propelled PS2 sales to the damn moon.
Megadragon15
Member
Why would Sony raise the price of the PS3?
OldJadedGamer
Banned
Xbox launched at $199 and then dropped to $179 when Sony did with the PS2.
The original point was that gamers shouldn't have had to literally pay the price to be pawns and in a format war they didn't sign up for.
Who knows what war they will want to fight next that has nothing to do with gaming that you suffer.
Looking at the Vita, Sony thought they did it wrong... not right with open accessories since they closed the Vita shut with overpriced proprietary accessories. Expect the PS4 to follow the Vita's lead.
Acrylic7
Member
:/
$499 tops
BC
Software
-New pricing system for games. I shouldn't be paying $60 for Sly4. Not going to.
-1 model at launch so you don't fuck with peoples heads.
-Headset in Box, this way you don't look stupid trying to complete with xbox live in terms of community. that 25 cents to manufacture headset made xbox live what it is today.
-more games, games don't have to be AAA to sell well and be consider a success. They have an insane amount of IP's that collect dust from the ps1 and 2 era. Blows my mind why there arent any of them in development.
-Free psn for 3 months. pretty sure they will charge, might as well give us a taste.
-Have WarHAwk 2 for free already on the ps4, this gets the ball rolling in their favor.
a bunch of other stuff. Can literally go on for an hour.
Im no Steve Jobs. But I think these tactics work. Now imagine if I or anyone else had a Fucking full year to iron out their shit before launch.
You have to try pretty hard to fuck it up worse than the ps3's and Vita's management.
Melchiah
Member
I want the best and most future proof system they're capable of releasing, and I'm willing to pay for it as much as I paid for PS2 (504€
and PS3 (599€. Let them release a bare bone model with all the extra parts stripped away, or changed to cheaper, for those that can't afford, or aren't willing to pay, more than 399€/$.
and PS3 (599€. Let them release a bare bone model with all the extra parts stripped away, or changed to cheaper, for those that can't afford, or aren't willing to pay, more than 399€/$.
Pingoreous
Member
Its like Pachter said, the boss of a corporation has to say things like this to keep the "we doing good" mantra going. No CEO will amid defeat or he will be fired by the investors. But i find it condescending when Sony says we the best out there, when it has so many flaws. SONY you better match Microsoft's Next Gen pricing or you wont make it next time. Microsoft ate half the Pie this gen. Don't loose the whole thing on the next one.
Oh and i don't care for backwards compatibility. kept alot of PS2 games and they became worthless as soon as i played something better on the current gen console. Sold 40 classics for the crackhead price of $50 bucks.
Oh and i don't care for backwards compatibility. kept alot of PS2 games and they became worthless as soon as i played something better on the current gen console. Sold 40 classics for the crackhead price of $50 bucks.
Alias Greed
Neo Member
Good, as a gamer I want the best hardware possible. I don't care about sales and bottom-line like half of the people here on gaf. It's like some people only buy stuff based on sales, I could care less if they sell only 1 copy of anything.
Just keep making the best possible hardware and games your capable of making and I'll always be there day 1.
Just keep making the best possible hardware and games your capable of making and I'll always be there day 1.
Whilst I agree the bigger picture is I want all the current manufacturers healthy financially so they can keep on truckin' in the console arena!
Well if they only sold 1 PS4 you can pretty much guarantee they wouldn't be making a PS5.
-Pyromaniac-
Member
I'll be blown away if the PS4 launches at more than $399.
Melchiah
Member
It always annoys me when people say PS2 was so cheap compared to PS3, and that the price of PS3 was the major culprit in their loss of market share. When in truth PS2 cost 504€ in Finland, and AFAIK in the rest of Europe. It might have been cheaper in USA, but it sure as hell wasn't in the rest of the world, and the price surely didn't make PS2 fall over here.
Glorified G
Member
Sony was banking on there being a lot of people like you with the PS3.
They were wrong.
Boss Man
Member
Good for them I guess. I just hope it doesn't put them under.
After this generation, I think marketing is more important than anything else. Including price, features, and software.
JimmyRustler
Member
Well, point is, the PS3 wasn't that amazing machine at it's release.
Melchiah
Member
Neither was PS2.
This.
Don't see why some people don't understand that. For a system to have solid games for a decent period of time it needs to be... you know... actually successful.
Depends if you only compare the PS1 to the Saturn and N64. There were other consoles launched during that hardware generation. The Jaguar was cheaper, and I think the CD32 was too.
The Xbox was $299 and I think the GameCube was $199.
Similar threads
- Poll