PDA

View Full Version : MS Shane Kim Discusses PS3 Announcement



Ben-N1ce
03-16-2006, 04:27 PM
http://www.oxm.co.uk/articles/features/role_playing_games/viva_piata_interview_-_shane_kim

OXM 360: You mentioned Sony – what are your thoughts on the announcement of the worldwide PS3 launch in November?

I think that it’s great that Sony realise how important Viva Piñata since they had to make their announcement on the same day as us! No, but seriously, I think it’s a good thing that they’re finally starting to reveal more. They’ve made a lot of promises and people want to know what’s happening with PS3. Even though it’s disappointing for people who were expecting PS3 this spring, it’s good that Sony is sharing more information. For us, it doesn’t change anything. We’ve had a very clear strategy for a long time now and we’re not going to change that. We’re not going to react to anything that they do. We know what we’re doing, we’ll be in full supply shortly, we’ve got great content on the way, and we’ve got fantastic third-party support. If Sony happens to stumble – and we know first-hand that there are a lot of challenges in a worldwide launch – then we’ll be in an incredibly strong position to take advantage.

OXM 360: Sony has never done a worldwide launch before. Do you think you forced their hand with the worldwide launch of Xbox 360?

I have a philosophy: Leaders don’t react. I don’t know what went into Sony’s minds. I think we’ll have to see what happens. They said they’ll launch worldwide? We’ll see if they can pull it off. It’s very challenging. It may be they did it because we did it and it may be because it’s what customers want. Hopefully it’s because it’s what customers want.

OXM 360: You’ll have had a year’s head start come November. Are you confident that you’ll have a huge and loyal installed base by then that could damage PS3’s sales?

I am confident that we’ll have a loyal and significant installed base. What I’m less confident about is that we’ll win. I think that’s the kind of call you can only make when the time is right. So we’re going to be maniacally focused on executing out long-term game plan. You can ask me in three or four years whether we’ve won. But I totally believe that people who have bought Xbox 360 and subscribed to Xbox Live are having a great experience and I think we’re going to get a lot of top spin momentum from that.

OXM 360: Sony will be looking to have a huge E3 with the unveiling of the console. Do you have anything planned to take that thunder away?

We’ll have real content, real games that people can go out and get their hands on. Similar to what we had last year. We didn’t want to go out there and show a bunch of rendered videos that wouldn’t necessarily reflect reality. Sony has created that expectation and we’ll have to see if they can deliver on it. For us it’s all about real content this year. We’ve got some great titles launching every week now so at E3 we’ll have some exciting announcements about games we’re working on, and games third-party developers are working on.

OXM 360: Is there a feeling within Microsoft that you need to announce something huge to blow Sony out of the water?

Not really. This may be hard to believe but we’re not really focused on what we do to Sony. We’ve got the game plan and we know what we want to do. Of course, there are strategic announcements in that game plan and if we’ve done it right they’ll have some impact on Sony. But we’re not sitting down and thinking, “okay, what’s the best way to hurt Sony? What’s the best way to hurt PS3?” We’ll do things our way, Sony will do it theirs, and the customers will decide.

Junox50
03-16-2006, 04:58 PM
Wow a huge departure from what one would expect from a typical MS employee.

Luis
03-16-2006, 05:07 PM
I have a philosophy: Leaders don’t react.One of the most stupid things I've read in a long while. Has this guy ever heard of the expression "rest on one's laurels"? No wonder why Rare is not what it used to be anymore.

P.S. Use the quote function next time.
P.P.S. Does this really belong to the PS3 section?

frosty
03-16-2006, 05:31 PM
Sure it does, they directly discuss PS3 in the article. I think M$ is realising that their cockiness is having a negative effect on gamers, so they are taking a more neutral approach that instills some confidence. Kudos to them for that, I'm tired of the Major Nelson type rhetoric. It's also nice to see them show some humility, by saying they are not sure if they will win the console race. Now they are actually starting to sound realistic. The only comment that made me gag was the "We'll be showing REAL games at E3" crap, of course Sony will have real time playables on the floor by then.

venomv
03-16-2006, 06:35 PM
VG What was wrong with that? He is saying that true leaders don't just suddenly change their mind all of the time, they get a plan and stick with it, if the plan seems to be going wrong they think thing through and then make changes, not just suddenly do something.

MS should always have that guy speak for them, he seems smart or at least knows what he's talking about.

cliffbo
03-16-2006, 06:40 PM
that is pure arrogance to suggest that the only reason Sony made these anouncements was because of their game. how low can you go. okay he suggested it was a joke but... he knows how sites will report this.

cliffbo
03-16-2006, 07:15 PM
VG What was wrong with that? He is saying that true leaders don't just suddenly change their mind all of the time, they get a plan and stick with it, if the plan seems to be going wrong they think thing through and then make changes, not just suddenly do something.

MS should always have that guy speak for them, he seems smart or at least knows what he's talking about.

world leaders should adjust there tactics to fit in with changing ideologies. it is narrowminded of him to suggest otherwise. it was philosophy like that that got hundreds of American troopes killed in Iraq and is continuing to do so. he just said it to make himself look cool. thought took a back seat on this occasion.

Luis
03-16-2006, 07:31 PM
VG What was wrong with that?Just tell me how much sense does that philosophy make. Consider a console manufacturer that has sold 100+ million units of their two home consoles to date. I can guess they're clever enough to think: "We want to keep being successful, so we'll do our best once again." Then they take a look at the market and say things like:

"There were complaints from the customer end when we made separate launches for our previous consoles. Let's seriously consider a simultaneous launch!"
or
"Our customers would like a full-fledged online service. Let's create one!"
or
"A hard drive could bring a lot of exciting features".

Do you honestly think a true leader would say:
"Let's just rush our console, games and services for an early and flawed single territory launch, and then let's solve the problems on the go while we release it months later in other territories"
or
"We don't need an online platform unlike MS and Nintendo."
or
"There's no point on releasing a hard drive for our console whatsoever."


His "leader's don't react" statement is totally derogative. It's like he wants to make Sony not to seem the leaders when they actually are... and by a wide margin. That's poor FUD in its purest form.

Now, shouldn't the question be: what was right with that?

woundingchaney
03-16-2006, 07:48 PM
One of the most stupid things I've read in a long while. Has this guy ever heard of the expression "rest on one's laurels"? No wonder why Rare is not what it used to be anymore.

P.S. Use the quote function next time.
P.S.S. Does this really belong to the PS3 section?
Depends on how you want to look at it. Leaders dont react primarily because they lead, those that react are often followers (hence forth they react to the leaders). I understand your view as well but by no means is the statement stupid.

The world wide launch concerns me primarily because I seriously doubt that was PLAN A. It seems they are in a rush to get the console out before Christmas and a rush is never good in the electronics department. I expect serious shortages on the PS3 this Holiday season for the PS3.
Although I seriously doubt Sony is doing this simply because MS did.

Its good to see MS focusing on MS and shows both maturity and a future in the console industry if they remain strong.

@ Cliff
It was by all means a joke and should be concidered this way. KK has made some of the most arrogant statements in the industry yet we dont hold it against the man, instead we claim him to be misunderstood or the like (I personally think he is a strong leader for Sony and an impressive business man). But holding other spokesmen to conduct we dont hold to everyone is biased.

overclocked
03-16-2006, 08:43 PM
Im just tired of hearing quotes from various MS guys speaking on PS3.
I give shit in what they say so i think this is something that shouldnt even be posted cause i dont see the relevance of it, no grinning on the threadstarter but thats just my personal opinion. Sick and tired of it always coming up :duh:

Luis
03-16-2006, 08:46 PM
Depends on how you want to look at it. Leaders dont react primarily because they lead, those that react are often followers (hence forth they react to the leaders). I understand your view as well but by no means is the statement stupid.You've got to be kidding. Being a leader is not a coincidental thing. Leaders have to keep up, introduce changes in their politics and take risks in order to remain as leaders. To rely on past achievements and not working to keep a leadership status or achieve a greater one is what he could possibly mean by "leaders don't react", regardless of the context that's in. And that's certainly not how a true leader would behave like.

With that statement, he suggests that this worldwide launch is a triggered sudden decision. No matter how much we heard "Spring 2006", we all knew it would only apply to Japan, if it ever happened. Now they're making sense with a later, but proper revised launch plan for the new hardware, software lineup and services.


It seems they are in a rush to get the console out before Christmas and a rush is never good in the electronics department.Huh??? A rush would have been a single territory Spring 2006 launch. Releasing in November is just about right.

Sony doesn't really need to release another console so early, so their only concern is to release a new console to remain competitive in every field, and they won't do it in a way that there would be a number of chances that they wouldn't be competitive. They are not rushing their new product.

Old_Timer!
03-16-2006, 09:00 PM
VG I totally agree with you, the nature of the battlefield is ever changing one has to adjust, would you continue charging if you see a batallion lined up to take you down. A true leader sees all and makes decision.

xbdestroya
03-16-2006, 09:15 PM
I don't see a problem myself with anything Shane said - it all seems very reasoned and reasonable. If I were him I would have taken a very similar approach. Put the focus on yourself, that you're in control of what you're doing and not always watching the other guy. I mean of course they are, and Sony is watching them, but I think Microsoft really is in a place right now where all they have to worry about is executing on the rest of their launch year and getting some games out.

If there's any mystery here for me, it's why Microsoft responded to this announcement *at all.* But that's really more the fault of the gaming media that demands statements and comments after everything.

venomv
03-16-2006, 09:38 PM
I depends on how take what he said, depends on how you take the word react. I take it in that context to mean react quickly and instinctivly with no thought involved. If you wanna take react as do anything at all then no it doesn't make sense.


OXM 360: Sony has never done a worldwide launch before. Do you think you forced their hand with the worldwide launch of Xbox 360?

I have a philosophy: Leaders don’t react. I don’t know what went into Sony’s minds. I think we’ll have to see what happens. They said they’ll launch worldwide? We’ll see if they can pull it off. It’s very challenging. It may be they did it because we did it and it may be because it’s what customers want. Hopefully it’s because it’s what customers want.

That seems like a positive statement, it looks like he is saying he doesn't think Sony is doing just because MS did. But you can read into what you want since he didn't really say anything.

Infernal
03-16-2006, 09:45 PM
Damn, you guys are so harsh on anything Microsoft says. I mean they could say 'Well PS3 Wins" and everyone would go "WTF is Microsoft doing, their being sarcastic and trying to trick consumers!" I mean they arent pure evil you know, the only thing I dont really understand is why they always feel the need to respond when the competition does something.

Nameless
03-16-2006, 11:27 PM
I was impressed with Microsoft's statements and the responses were very professional and realistic. I agree MS should take credit for puting console online gaming on the map. If MS Live was not so successful we may not see the robust multimedia tools being built into the PS3. (Can't believe we will get the services for free...) I want to see both companies have marketshare and success, someone needs to keep Sony on their toes. Also, it's good to see North America have some influence in the gaming world. Long live MS & Sony, peace...

woundingchaney
03-16-2006, 11:40 PM
You've got to be kidding. Being a leader is not a coincidental thing. Leaders have to keep up, introduce changes in their politics and take risks in order to remain as leaders. To rely on past achievements and not working to keep a leadership status or achieve a greater one is what he could possibly mean by "leaders don't react", regardless of the context that's in. And that's certainly not how a true leader would behave like.

With that statement, he suggests that this worldwide launch is a triggered sudden decision. No matter how much we heard "Spring 2006", we all knew it would only apply to Japan, if it ever happened. Now they're making sense with a later, but proper revised launch plan for the new hardware, software lineup and services.

Huh??? A rush would have been a single territory Spring 2006 launch. Releasing in November is just about right.

Sony doesn't really need to release another console so early, so their only concern is to release a new console to remain competitive in every field, and they won't do it in a way that there would be a number of chances that they wouldn't be competitive. They are not rushing their new product.


The worldwide launch is plan B and I personally dont see as to how anyone couldnt recognize that. Ever since E3 we have been hearing spring and internet rumor speculating against it. Well after Sony spokesmen have responded in varying degrees even to the point of refuting each other (everything from PS3 is on track to there is a potential delay),we are now confirmed for a world wide November launch. This is not what Sony initially had planned. Is it a rush, yeah Im going to say it is, just wait till this holiday season everyone everywhere is going to play hell getting a PS3. You had better believe it is a rush to get the holiday market. Now concider if Sony doesnt meet their "intended" product supply here.

Becoming a leader is very much a coincidental thing. Look at Sony's entrance into the console world, can one really doubt that they climbed so high due to both Sega and Nin dropping the ball during the 32 bit era, Im not belittle their progress but irregardless much of their dominance is the result of poor management of the other companies which for Sony was in part coincidence. However, remaining a leader is based primarily upon the decisions and strategys put into use. Looking throughout history leadership follows coincidence throughout wars and revolutions. Once again it depends on your view point as to how you wish to interpret his statements, simply belittling them is unfair.

This spokesman has been very fair and straightforward with respectable statements regarding the issue. MS isnt going to beat Sony, MS is trying to put themselves in a position to usurp Sony if Sony beats themselves. There is a difference in strategies here.

woundingchaney
03-16-2006, 11:41 PM
Damn, you guys are so harsh on anything Microsoft says. I mean they could say 'Well PS3 Wins" and everyone would go "WTF is Microsoft doing, their being sarcastic and trying to trick consumers!" I mean they arent pure evil you know, the only thing I dont really understand is why they always feel the need to respond when the competition does something.


Well they were proabaly questioned :dur:

Although I have no idea if they requested an interview or not

Coded-Dude
03-16-2006, 11:46 PM
MS is not pure evil, but they are about as close as you can get to pure evil.........(IMHO)

Viano
03-17-2006, 06:02 AM
Becoming a leader is very much a coincidental thing. Look at Sony's entrance into the console world, can one really doubt that they climbed so high due to both Sega and Nin dropping the ball during the 32 bit era, Im not belittle their progress but irregardless much of their dominance is the result of poor management of the other companies which for Sony was in part coincidence. However, remaining a leader is based primarily upon the decisions and strategys put into use. Looking throughout history leadership follows coincidence throughout wars and revolutions. Once again it depends on your view point as to how you wish to interpret his statements, simply belittling them is unfair.


coincidental, lmao.

GodMachine_Iridius_Dio
03-17-2006, 06:32 AM
This is actually pretty typical from Shane Kim, even though a lot of people would expect an extremely competitive, disrespectful, dismissive attitude from anybody in his position, he's usually like this in interviews. He doesn't come off as wanting to win a war so to speak, or even as if their is a war... more like a family reunion baseball game. eh... my own little rant there.

For the record, you realise he's joking when he says, "they must realise how important Viva Pinata is!", right? He wasn't trying to be arrogant.

Dio

Theo
03-17-2006, 06:36 AM
I agree with you VG. And with all the respect Mr. Wounding, you got to be kidding or I would believe you have no real idea of leading. True leading (especially leading a company) is not about following some scenarios set on stone for the future and success does not come out of coincidence. Things change rapidly and then you have to react and it is wise to react.

Luis
03-17-2006, 09:54 AM
The worldwide launch is plan B and I personally dont see as to how anyone couldnt recognize that.No way. There never was a plan 'B' to begin with. Not only this is a "revised launch plan" (in their own words), but Sony has a history (http://forums.e-mpire.com/showthread.php?p=1027407#post1027407) of establishing a very ambitious goal, trying to achieve it and if they don't, reconsider the situation while keeping it as much or more ambitious. It's not like they found out last week that they can't do a proper Spring launch, hence needing a totally different plan. By "delaying" it, they're buying themselves and developers a lot of time to mature manufacturing, services, development kits and launch games. You'll have to agree that there was no way that PS3 would arrive in Spring at the US or Europe. However, now they have the possibility to do a simultaneous launch with a greater result in every territory while the Japanese initial launch could have been weak in many ways. They're actually solving inherent problems rather than changing strategies.


Is it a rush, yeah Im going to say it is, just wait till this holiday season everyone everywhere is going to play hell getting a PS3. You had better believe it is a rush to get the holiday market. Now concider if Sony doesnt meet their "intended" product supply here.I wouldn't dare to say they're going to manufacture 2 million consoles for launch and 4 million additional consoles between December and March like they said, but I'm sure they will get closer to that figure than the competition would expect them to taking into account Sony's always been a hardware company with a decade of experience in the console business.


Becoming a leader is very much a coincidental thing.Now you're talking about totally different things here. Note that I said "being", meaning "remain as", instead of "becoming". I could agree with you that Sega Saturn didn't work too well in the market and while N64 was an excellent console, it was a mistake to release another cartridge based system with very inferior storage capacity and incredibly expensive games (up to 90 euros here), so Sony could actually make a fairly OK debut given the circumstances. However, no one could have expected a new comer to sell 100 million units of their first product in this new industry while facing the most veteran competition possible. Sony managed to make their way and created a huge market of their own that only grew more and more with PS2, despite releasing the new console a year and a half later than the Dreamcast and almost at the same time in the rest of the world as GameCube and Xbox. How could Sony possibly sell and keep doing so, even faster than before, yet another 100+ million units of a technically inferior console (after the disappearance of Dreamcast) when it wasn't the cheapest one nor had a launch timing advantage? Can anyone honestly think both generation overkill sales can be coincidental?


Looking throughout history leadership follows coincidence throughout wars and revolutions.You could have elaborated on that anyway.

pari
03-17-2006, 12:33 PM
Now you're talking about totally different things here. Note that I said "being", meaning "remain as", instead of "becoming". I could agree with you that Sega Saturn didn't work too well in the market and while N64 was an excellent console, it was a mistake to release another cartridge based system with very inferior storage capacity and incredibly expensive games (up to 90 euros here), so Sony could actually make a fairly OK debut given the circumstances. However, no one could have expected a new comer to sell 100 million units of their first product in this new industry while facing the most veteran competition possible. Sony managed to make their way and created a huge market of their own that only grew more and more with PS2, despite releasing the new console a year and a half later than the Dreamcast and almost at the same time in the rest of the world as GameCube and Xbox. How could Sony possibly sell and keep doing so, even faster than before, yet another 100+ million units of a technically inferior console (after the disappearance of Dreamcast) when it wasn't the cheapest one nor had a launch timing advantage? Can anyone honestly think both generation overkill sales can be coincidental?

You could have elaborated on that anyway.

I totally agree with you. The school of thoughts which said PS2 won because it was released a year before xbox, so MS released 360 before PS3 to negate that advantage. But still I believe PS3 would be leader, as long as PS3 has the same variety/collection/breadth of games as PS2. The online play has become important in this generation than previous generation and with Sony taking advantage of SOE to develop online play there is no advantage for 360. The situation is similar to software world where competitor would bring a new idea for only MS to copy it to the windows to negate the advantage. In console market Sony is in the advantageous position. The unique selling point for 360 is Live, if that is negated there is no USP, whereas PS3 has BD, HDMI, gigabit ethernet,...which have more tangible result, faster internet connection(wired) for LAN parties, HD experience...
I remember reading a developer quoting, the gameplay graphics matter for the first 30minutes, once engrossed inthe game the graphics does not matter only the gameplay experience. So even in the hypothetical case where 360&PS3 have same graphics, PS3 still has the edge IMHO

Ben-N1ce
03-17-2006, 05:00 PM
Ballmer: Xbox will capitalize on PS3 delay

Microsoft CEO says Playstation 3's November launch gives Xbox a shot to be the top gaming console.

By Telis Demos, FORTUNE reporter
March 17, 2006: 12:18 PM EST

NEW YORK (FORTUNE) - After Sony announced on Tuesday that the Playstation 3 won't launch until November, the Xbox 360 is in a better position to become the top gaming console, says Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer.

"In every other generation, the first guy to 10 million consoles was the number one seller in the generation," Ballmer told FORTUNE in an interview on Thursday afternoon. "Did we just get an even better opportunity to be the first guy to 10 million? Yeah, of course we did."

Ballmer: "Did we just get an even better opportunity to be the first guy to 10 million [consoles]? Yeah, of course we did."

But Microsoft (Research) will not formally revise its projected market share for the Xbox 360, and it will not speed up production to capitalize on Sony's delay, because it's already producing the Xbox as fast as possible. "We've been saying 'make them faster' before yesterday," says Ballmer.

When the Xbox 360 launched last holiday season, Microsoft had its own missteps. Shortages led to sales of only 600,000 systems from the debut on November 22 through December 31, far fewer than Microsoft and market analysts expected.

There is still a production bottleneck because of problems with a component vendor, whom Ballmer declined to name, but he expects Microsoft to sell 5 million systems by June. "We're sort-of on track," he says, "though it would've been nice at Christmas to have one for everyone who wanted one."

Previous generations of the Playstation outsold the Xbox by a wide margin. Worldwide in 2005, Sony sold 101 million Playstation 2 units, while Microsoft sold 24 million Xboxes and Nintendo sold 21 million Gamecubes, according to UBS. Even during the 2005 holidays, after Xbox 360 had debuted, Playstation 2 sold 1.4 million units in December, according to The NPD Group, which tracks sales of video games and game platforms.

Microsoft plans "major pushes" of the Xbox 360 in France, Italy, Spain and Japan -- markets where the first generation Xbox didn't perform as well as Microsoft hoped.

"I am palpably optimistic," Ballmer says. "I think we are absolutely in the game for the market position it would be nice to have."

Ballmer dismissed Sony's (Research) expectation that Playstation's Blu-Ray DVD player will give it an advantage over the Xbox, which will soon offer an HD-DVD peripheral. "Sony's going to try and define that as a fundamental battleground, but I don't think it is a fundamental battleground," he says. "I don't care whether it's Blu-Ray or HD-DVD, there's not going to be a lot of content in either format this year."

For now, Ballmer says, the timing advantage is all that matters. "It's not going to be that way forever," he says, "but we're clearly in the phase where it's about how fast we can make them."

Luis
03-17-2006, 05:35 PM
"In every other generation, the first guy to 10 million consoles was the number one seller in the generation," Ballmer told FORTUNE in an interview on Thursday afternoon. "Did we just get an even better opportunity to be the first guy to 10 million? Yeah, of course we did."The Dreamcast had sold around 10 million units by the end of year 2000 and you know what happened later. It's not like the 10 million thing is a norm. What if later on the competition reached 20 million units before they did? And how do they expect to be the #1 seller with the Japanese failure anyway?

Another recent good quote by Ballmer: "Sony has no online strategy."

Needless to say there were first hints of an upcoming Sony online service at E3 2005.

pari
03-17-2006, 07:24 PM
http://news.com.com/Microsoft+and+Epic+Records+duet/2110-1043_3-6050989.html?tag=nefd.hed



Microsoft and Epic Records announced an agreement to offer one year of free music and music videos to all Xbox 360 gamers, as part of its Xbox Live efforts. The service, which launched Thursday, will showcase 12 artists through the Xbox Live Artist of the Month program.

Users of the service will be able to download the featured music videos from the Xbox Live Marketplace and receive other benefits, such as artist interviews, that can be viewed from their Xbox 360 system. Details are not yet available on whether Microsoft plans to charge for the service after the one-year promotion is completed.

Interestingly, the Live is turning more like what KK envisioned for the CELL network.. music, video, games, seamlessly connected... Question is how much value does these add to console, to make them the must have... MS says PS3 is copying Live, but it looks like MS is borrowing KK's idea...

http://ps2.ign.com/articles/696/696558p1.html

That's fine and all if you're Japanese (or non-Japanese Japanese correspondents), but when will English speaking audiences get to enjoy this latest Final Fantasy? FFXII executive producer Akitoshi Kawazu, also in attendance at the countdown, mentioned that Square Enix is working toward a North American release in time for Thanksgiving. A European release will follow.

So rest assured, international Final Fantasy fans! The long-awaited next numbered entry in Square Enix's biggest global series will be in your hands before the year is out.

PS3 & FFXII in november, with PS3 scaling PS2 games, cannot even think about playing FFXII straight on PS3...

cliffbo
03-17-2006, 07:46 PM
i'm sorry but i just don't see this as PS3 related. it will invite 360 users here and whilst i welcome them to the PS3 threads i wouldn't want them to evalgalise. this thread should really be in the 360 section of this forum. sorry to be negative here but extra threads push others off the page and they are then forgotten.

woundingchaney
03-17-2006, 08:10 PM
No way. There never was a plan 'B' to begin with. Not only this is a "revised launch plan" (in their own words), but Sony has a history (http://forums.e-mpire.com/showthread.php?p=1027407#post1027407) of establishing a very ambitious goal, trying to achieve it and if they don't, reconsider the situation while keeping it as much or more ambitious. It's not like they found out last week that they can't do a proper Spring launch, hence needing a totally different plan. By "delaying" it, they're buying themselves and developers a lot of time to mature manufacturing, services, development kits and launch games. You'll have to agree that there was no way that PS3 would arrive in Spring at the US or Europe. However, now they have the possibility to do a simultaneous launch with a greater result in every territory while the Japanese initial launch could have been weak in many ways. They're actually solving inherent problems rather than changing strategies.

I wouldn't dare to say they're going to manufacture 2 million consoles for launch and 4 million additional consoles between December and March like they said, but I'm sure they will get closer to that figure than the competition would expect them to taking into account Sony's always been a hardware company with a decade of experience in the console business.

Now you're talking about totally different things here. Note that I said "being", meaning "remain as", instead of "becoming". I could agree with you that Sega Saturn didn't work too well in the market and while N64 was an excellent console, it was a mistake to release another cartridge based system with very inferior storage capacity and incredibly expensive games (up to 90 euros here), so Sony could actually make a fairly OK debut given the circumstances. However, no one could have expected a new comer to sell 100 million units of their first product in this new industry while facing the most veteran competition possible. Sony managed to make their way and created a huge market of their own that only grew more and more with PS2, despite releasing the new console a year and a half later than the Dreamcast and almost at the same time in the rest of the world as GameCube and Xbox. How could Sony possibly sell and keep doing so, even faster than before, yet another 100+ million units of a technically inferior console (after the disappearance of Dreamcast) when it wasn't the cheapest one nor had a launch timing advantage? Can anyone honestly think both generation overkill sales can be coincidental?

You could have elaborated on that anyway.


Ok call it not their first intentions or whatever, irregardless a worldwide November launch wasnt intended. They are also risking potential hardware problems across the globe here. In the past Sony has released in Japan to a group of homeland consumers, problems found there could easily and readily be remedied (well to a point). A world wide launch is an immense undertaking whomever is attempting it and repercussions could be fealt (initially any downfalls will quickly be forgotten in consumer's views, imo). Im imagining that a Spring Japanese launch was the initial plan, lets call it plan A. Well plan a didnt work out so they then move to a worldwide November launch call it Plan B. Your somewhat splitting hairs here (imo).


I never said nor did I intend to make the statement that Sony has remained so strong in the console industry due to coincidence. I stated and still believe that much of their initial success was due to poor showings by both Sega and Nin. which on Sony's part could be considered coincidence and luck. Some aspects of Sony's business strategies I dont care for (but I say the same things of all companies), I dont think I have ever belittled or undermined Sony's presence and marketing in reference to the PS brand.

The statement made referring to wars and Revolutions I would be happy to discuss with you elsewhere. Send me a personal message sometime, hell Im a history major and I never get a chance to discuss such things:happy:

This started with what I considered to be unfair criticism of a statement made. That statement being leaders do not react. I never passed judgement on anyones take on this, infact I said I understood your point of view. This statement also makes sense to me, a leader doesnt respond to the actions of followers if anything they augment their own course of action to succeed. Sony is the leader in the console industry and how many praises has been spread across this board saying "Sony operates under Sony's own choices" or
"Sony doesnt follow the crowds" or 'Sony doesnt mimmick its competiton they plow their own way" (these are generalized here I cant recall word for word) how can we take pride and give Sony credit for being such an individual company and then condemn a man for saying something that can be correlated to the same characteristic we love of Sony. I seroiusly doubt he was referring to war, politics, or the like my guess is that it was in a business sense. I can comprehend his comments as well as those posted here. There is room for it to go both ways.




I agree with you VG. And with all the respect Mr. Wounding, you got to be kidding or I would believe you have no real idea of leading. True leading (especially leading a company) is not about following some scenarios set on stone for the future and success does not come out of coincidence. Things change rapidly and then you have to react and it is wise to react.

This is uncalled for man. Simply because I can respect a different outlook or have different views is no indication of my abilities or comprehension of leadership itself.
Oh and many great leaders throughout history have both prospered and even relied on luck and coincidence.

Luis
03-17-2006, 08:32 PM
There's little point in replying once again since our opinions are already clear, but:
Oh and many great leaders throughout history have both prospered and even relied on luck and coincidence.This and your previous one are nice statements and all, but you could have elaborated a bit on those simply to legitimately support your words. Not that I'm saying it can't be true at all, but it sounds suspicious, as if you don't really have any examples to back your affirmations. Since there are or have been so many and so great leaders, like you said, please do not hesitate to illustrate us with well known concrete names and facts.

xbdestroya
03-17-2006, 08:40 PM
Guys, turn it down a notch.

What is this thread all of a sudden, lucha libre? No reason this thread should get personal over comments so innocuous.

cliffbo
03-17-2006, 08:56 PM
well I'm at a loss to understand these forums at the moment. threads about Blu-Ray are being demoted to general Sony while threads like this are continuing. its obvious that things would get heated here. there is no ambiguity with this thread: it belongs in 360 forum. i don't like the idea of people constantly coming into threads and typing 'lock' it ain't my style but this is doing a disservice to those who post legitimate Sony articles.

xbdestroya
03-17-2006, 09:35 PM
This thread has been kept open (for my part at least) because it's thread title:

MS Shane Kim Discusses PS3 Announcement

...frames the topic as one where someone is giving their opinion on the Playstation 3.

If the topic title were:

MS Slams Sony

...I would close it, because from the start it is setting up a combative framework.

I think there is room for productive inclusion of MS and Nintendo discussion in this forum; the only requirements being that they be framed within the context of Playstation and that they be kept civil.

cliffbo
03-17-2006, 09:46 PM
for the first time XB (and with respect) i can't agree with you at all on this. i had a thread moved which was related to BD/TV. it was discussing the fact that Sony had allowed full compatibility with analogue TVs with no token restrictions which i believe is very important news for future PS3 owners. this is very good news to all those who where worried that they would have to buy a new TV, which is probably the reason Sony announced it. if that thread has no home here then no argument on earth could justify this thread. but at the end of the day i will respect your decision. :)

xbdestroya
03-17-2006, 09:59 PM
Yeah but I wasn't the one to move the thread though. :smoke:

Basically, I think all of us mods respect each others decisions without necessarily always being of the same mind, so I'm going to leave that thread of yours in limbo-land. But I probably would have left it here myself though. :)

woundingchaney
03-17-2006, 10:38 PM
There's little point in replying once again since our opinions are already clear, but:This and your previous one are nice statements and all, but you could have elaborated a bit on those simply to legitimately support your words. Not that I'm saying it can't be true at all, but it sounds suspicious, as if you don't really have any examples to back your affirmations. Since there are or have been so many and so great leaders, like you said, please do not hesitate to illustrate us with well known concrete names and facts.


Caesar- Return to Rome and becoming Emporer/Ruler of Rome

Washington- American Revolution, decline of British occupation of colonial America

Napoleon- Actions of French politics at the beginning of the FR. Rev. and throughout his conquest of Europe

Lenin- Russian Rev., formation of Communism

These are but a few examples of Great Leaders that both prospered and came to power in circumstances of both luck and coincidence. Throughout history one could make a "reasonable" argument that ever successful leader prospered from coincidence and luck.
I am not going to write a book in these forums nor is it fair to ask me to. Once again I would be happy to speak with you about it further elsewhere.:bigpimp:

Domination
03-17-2006, 11:10 PM
Ok call it not their first intentions or whatever, irregardless a worldwide November launch wasnt intended. They are also risking potential hardware problems across the globe here. In the past Sony has released in Japan to a group of homeland consumers, problems found there could easily and readily be remedied (well to a point). A world wide launch is an immense undertaking whomever is attempting it and repercussions could be fealt (initially any downfalls will quickly be forgotten in consumer's views, imo). Im imagining that a Spring Japanese launch was the initial plan, lets call it plan A. Well plan a didnt work out so they then move to a worldwide November launch call it Plan B. Your somewhat splitting hairs here (imo).


I never said nor did I intend to make the statement that Sony has remained so strong in the console industry due to coincidence. I stated and still believe that much of their initial success was due to poor showings by both Sega and Nin. which on Sony's part could be considered coincidence and luck. Some aspects of Sony's business strategies I dont care for (but I say the same things of all companies), I dont think I have ever belittled or undermined Sony's presence and marketing in reference to the PS brand.

The statement made referring to wars and Revolutions I would be happy to discuss with you elsewhere. Send me a personal message sometime, hell Im a history major and I never get a chance to discuss such things:happy:

This started with what I considered to be unfair criticism of a statement made. That statement being leaders do not react. I never passed judgement on anyones take on this, infact I said I understood your point of view. This statement also makes sense to me, a leader doesnt respond to the actions of followers if anything they augment their own course of action to succeed. Sony is the leader in the console industry and how many praises has been spread across this board saying "Sony operates under Sony's own choices" or
"Sony doesnt follow the crowds" or 'Sony doesnt mimmick its competiton they plow their own way" (these are generalized here I cant recall word for word) how can we take pride and give Sony credit for being such an individual company and then condemn a man for saying something that can be correlated to the same characteristic we love of Sony. I seroiusly doubt he was referring to war, politics, or the like my guess is that it was in a business sense. I can comprehend his comments as well as those posted here. There is room for it to go both ways.




This is uncalled for man. Simply because I can respect a different outlook or have different views is no indication of my abilities or comprehension of leadership itself.
Oh and many great leaders throughout history have both prospered and even relied on luck and coincidence.

I didn't want to say this since it's off topic, but what happened to the Xbox, or what about when the PS2 didn't go as planned for consumers? Would you classify that as luck and coincidence, too? Couldn't those have been a direct time to capitalize as well since those were consided "poor showings"? Now, I'm not sure how the end result will turn up, but the very samething seems to be carrying over to the 360, if not worst. But then that goes back to the questions I am asking you.

Luis
03-17-2006, 11:23 PM
Caesar- Return to Rome and becoming Emporer/Ruler of Rome

Washington- American Revolution, decline of British occupation of colonial America

Napoleon- Actions of French politics at the beginning of the FR. Rev. and throughout his conquest of Europe

Lenin- Russian Rev., formation of Communism

These are but a few examples of Great Leaders that both prospered and came to power in circumstances of both luck and coincidence. Throughout history one could make a "reasonable" argument that ever successful leader prospered from coincidence and luck.
I am not going to write a book in these forums nor is it fair to ask me to. Once again I would be happy to speak with you about it further elsewhere.:bigpimp:Hmmm. Sorry, but this doesn't seem like a satisfactory reply to me. Although I'll agree it isn't too appropriate to talk about these unrelated subjects extensively in a PS3 forum.

I'll give you the benefit of doubt and I will also stop posting in this thread. There's no use to keep doing so.

woundingchaney
03-17-2006, 11:24 PM
I didn't want to say this since it's off topic, but what happened to the Xbox, or what about when the PS2 didn't go as planned for consumers? Would you classify that as luck and coincidence, too? Couldn't those have been a direct time to capitalize as well since those were consided "poor showings"? Now, I'm not sure how the end result will turn up, but the very samething seems to be carrying over to the 360, if not worst. But then that goes back to the questions I am asking you.


Well the Xbox is a mixed bag. Yes it lost money, however many people believed that it would never gain the marketshare it did nor would it have the support of devs as well as being able to compete in anther generation.

Are you asking me my the xbox didnt go as well as planned and if that was luck. If so then no I dont think it was luck in the least bit, they were simply beaten by PS2 on a number of things Sony simply carried through with a superior game plan and MS was rushed and freshmen in the field. Do I think the same thing will happen to the 360, no I dont- I look for MS to gain market share and turn a profit this gen, although still come second place to Sony. Remember right now this is all marketing and media until the actual release of the PS3 once both consoles are on the market together and settled I will evaluate my current theory. However, MS was lucky and prospered from the coincidence of Nin not reaching the market and having very poor dev. support for the Gamecube, if Nin was stronger last gen I wouldnt doubt that there would be no MS this one. Seeing as I seriously doubt that MS could have estimated these long term effects of the Gamecube I would concider this both luck and coincidence.

Did Sony capitalize on the PS2 of course they did they did on the PS1 as well, I was simply referring to their entrance into the console arena and circumstances revolving around it.

In what way are you referring to the PS2 not going as planned for the consumer?

woundingchaney
03-17-2006, 11:26 PM
Hmmm. Sorry, but this doesn't seem like a satisfactory reply to me. Although I'll agree it isn't too appropriate to talk about these unrelated subjects extensively in a PS3 forum.

I'll give you the benefit of doubt and I will also stop posting in this thread. There's no use to keep doing so.


I do not wish that, infact how do you wish for me to answer your question. Outside of my need to write you a book. I have taken no hard feelings, Im somewhat confused as to how you want this question answered.

Nameless
03-17-2006, 11:57 PM
I agree with the overall foundation of Wounding's statements.
I have marketing experience with a large telcom and business success is a combination of strategy and market conditions (coincidence). When you look at Sega taking marketshare from Nintendo it was due to poor decisions made by the Nin team & the same thing occured when Sony took marketshare from Sega.

Now this is completely subjective how you view this issue, but you can't deny it's good fortune when a competitor stumbles in the market. I'm sure Microsoft is trying to develop the most solid gameplan possible anticipating Sony will stumble in the next-gen space. If Sony in deed stumbles it's good fortune for Microsoft and their market strategy would need to be sound to capitalize on the opportunity. I hope that made since... Peace

Domination
03-17-2006, 11:59 PM
Well the Xbox is a mixed bag. Yes it lost money, however many people believed that it would never gain the marketshare it did nor would it have the support of devs as well as being able to compete in anther generation.

Are you asking me my the xbox didnt go as well as planned and if that was luck. If so then no I dont think it was luck in the least bit, they were simply beaten by PS2 on a number of things Sony simply carried through with a superior game plan and MS was rushed and freshmen in the field. Do I think the same thing will happen to the 360, no I dont - I look for MS to gain market share and turn a profit this gen, although still come second place to Sony. Remember right now this is all marketing and media until the actual release of the PS3 once both consoles are on the market together and settled I will evaluate my current theory. However, MS was lucky and prospered from the coincidence of Nin not reaching the market and having very poor dev. support for the Gamecube, if Nin was stronger last gen I wouldnt doubt that there would be no MS this one. Seeing as I seriously doubt that MS could have estimated these long term effects of the Gamecube I would concider this both luck and coincidence.

Did Sony capitalize on the PS2 of course they did they did on the PS1 as well, I was simply referring to their entrance into the console arena and circumstances revolving around it.

In what way are you referring to the PS2 not going as planned for the consumer?

I agree with the majority of that post. But the bolded still raises a few questions.

To elaborate on the first, Microsoft rushed the first Xbox, and now seems to have rushed the second one as well. The only difference now is the PlayStation being more sized up to the Xbox console this time. Could that be another coincidence, or were Microsoft forced into making the same mistake yet again, which costed them the last generation war?

On a different note, the PlayStation 2 didn't quite launch the way Sony had hoped for: online wasn't completely resolved, the console was inferior in a number of areas, and it suffered hardware issues and triple-A content for awhile.

IMO, the launch wasn't that bad, but even as a new competitor, I felt Microsoft had more than enough time to prepare for their launch. How they launched was completely in their power. So what I am basically saying is Sony's gaurd was down. The mistakes they made were considered "poor showings," no different from the others you mentioned earlier. To me, that was an opportunity for Microsoft to capitalize - similiar to what Sony did when they launched the first PlayStation. Was it a coincidence that Sony came out on top again? Was it luck? No. I don't think so at all. I think Microsoft were too inexperienced to respond.

woundingchaney
03-18-2006, 12:11 AM
I agree with the majority of that post. But the bolded still raises a few questions.

To elaborate on the first, Microsoft rushed the first Xbox, and now seems to have rushed the second one as well. The only difference now is the PlayStation being more sized up to the Xbox console this time. Could that be another coincidence, or were Microsoft forced into making the same mistake yet again, which costed them the last generation war?

On a different note, the PlayStation 2 didn't quite launch the way Sony had hoped for: online wasn't completely resolved, the console was inferior in a number of areas, and it suffered hardware issues and triple-A content for awhile.

IMO, the launch wasn't that bad, but even as a new competitor, I felt Microsoft had more than enough time to prepare for their launch. How they launched, was completely in their power. So what I am basically saying is Sony's gaurd was down. The mistakes they made were considered "poor showings," no different from the others you mentioned earlier. To me, that was an opportunity for Microsoft to capitalize similiar to what Sony did when they launched the first PlayStation. Was it a coincidence that Sony came out on top again? Was it luck? No. I don't think so at all. I think Microsoft were too inexperienced to respond.


On the last statement I agree, but it was Nin that stumbled and luck for MS last gen.

This one has yet to play out and I can still forsee MS to gain marketshare as many of the intentions Sony has mentioned depend highly upon their implementation as well as long term effects on both Sony and developers. I believe MS has built a solid ground with the 360 were Sony may indeed overstep their means, particularly concerning the recent PS3 statements. This war has not even begun this gen. and it is far too early to take MS out of the picture. Once again I expect Sony to be victorious this gen but with MS gaining ground. This is just a personal opinion as I have little more than that to back up my view on the situation.

By the time the PS2 was released Sega was all but dead and Sony had ample time to rectify any initial problems concerning the PS2. They had a solid performing system with an extensive library and market time before any competition arrived. Was this coincidence no it wasnt.

Domination
03-18-2006, 12:39 AM
On the last statement I agree, but it was Nin that stumbled and luck for MS last gen.

This one has yet to play out and I can still forsee MS to gain marketshare as many of the intentions Sony has mentioned depend highly upon their implementation as well as long term effects on both Sony and developers. I believe MS has built a solid ground with the 360 were Sony may indeed overstep their means, particularly concerning the recent PS3 statements. This war has not even begun this gen. and it is far too early to take MS out of the picture. Once again I expect Sony to be victorious this gen but with MS gaining ground. This is just a personal opinion as I have little more than that to back up my view on the situation.

By the time the PS2 was released Sega was all but dead and Sony had ample time to rectify any initial problems concerning the PS2. They had a solid performing system with an extensive library and market time before any competition arrived. Was this coincidence no it wasnt.

I don't doubt Microsoft any marketshare at all. But I do feel they rushed the 360 out the door to combat Sony. No, it doesn't spell doom for them, but Sony is very observant and tactical.

Sega died because Sony saw and seized the opportunity while it was still hot, and they didn't let up till it was over. So I don't see it as any coincidence that Sega died or Nintendo getting dethroned as leader or Microsoft losing out to Sony. I see providence.

cliffbo
03-18-2006, 12:42 AM
just a few points because I'm not in the mood to attempt a novel here. luck or bad look play a very small role in the success of consoles. this leads to the assumption that the winner is lucky and the loser is unlucky, without considering business nous. Xbox was rushed to the shops in an attempt to close the gap quicker because in their naivety they honestly believed that the only reason Sony was successful was purely and simply down to hardware. so they put out a product that beat Sony's just enough to be able to make the claim that their console was the most powerful. Sorry, Wounded, but this is typical American philosophy. so they were perceived as the brash kid on the block who needed to be taught a lesson. And they were. yes you can quote the later release as a reason for coming second but the numbers just don't add up. so our brash kid leaned a little from their first showing and that was branding. Live as a brand was becoming as successful as PS, but the console itself wasn't and so thats what they went with for their second machine 360. This time they were determined to come out first because rather than learn from their experience of branding with Live, they were convinced the reason they lost is because they came out after PS2 and that the power hadn't really made a difference. So they rushed the machine into the shops convinced that Sony would release their machine in spring (nice move Sony) in doing so they had no idea of what the PS3 was going to offer so they tried to bring something new into the equation: 'HD era' again they branded themselves incorectly and once they realised that Sony's machine was going to be real HD incorrectly they fell back on their innitial branding tool:Live. but this is the crux of my argument. everything that Microsoft have tried to brand themselves with is about to be bettered by Sony, including, by the looks of things, Live. so microsoft have a follower base that they built on power and Live. some are going to be loyal but others hungry to carry on with Microsofts phylosophy will search it out on other machines. and the connectivity that they so proudly announced that the 360 would have with the PSP will bite them in the ass. unlucky... hell no. Bad Management!!!!

woundingchaney
03-18-2006, 12:49 AM
Much of that is fine Dom and I do agree, but initially could Sony have estimated such poor success with the Saturn or the failure of the 64. Sony may have had a hand in the outcome but much of the causes are also directly related to the coincidences revolving around both Nin and Sega. There is much that they could have done to hinder the PS onslaught in its youth however both companies failed miserably, in part by simple bad choices and tactics used by Sony, thus resulting in both solid tactics and good old fashioned luck on Sony's side. Im not trying to imply by any means that Sonys success is strictly due to luck and coincidence.

cliffbo
03-18-2006, 12:55 AM
what coincidence are we talking about here Wounded? and just what luck did Sony get? Sony know how to capture the imagination and broaden their user base. truth is they take risks like dance mats and quiz games and later eyetoy. yes their open philosophy leads to shed loads of dross but it broadens their appeal and yes this dross is used to batter them with but at the end of the day people know that Sony deliver. luck has nothing to do with it. as far as 64 and Saturn are concerned. simple answer is Sony bettered them.

woundingchaney
03-18-2006, 12:58 AM
just a few points because I'm not in the mood to attempt a novel here. luck or bad look play a very small role in the success of consoles. this leads to the assumption that the winner is lucky and the loser is unlucky, without considering business nous. Xbox was rushed to the shops in an attempt to close the gap quicker because in their naivety they honestly believed that the only reason Sony was successful was purely and simply down to hardware. so they put out a product that beat Sony's just enough to be able to make the claim that their console was the most powerful. Sorry, Wounded, but this is typical American philosophy. so they were perceived as the brash kid on the block who needed to be taught a lesson. And they were. yes you can quote the later release as a reason for coming second but the numbers just don't add up. so our brash kid leaned a little from their first showing and that was branding. Live as a brand was becoming as successful as PS, but the console itself wasn't and so thats what they went with for their second machine 360. This time they were determined to come out first because rather than learn from their experience of branding with Live, they were convinced the reason they lost is because they came out after PS2 and that the power hadn't really made a difference. So they rushed the machine into the shops convinced that Sony would release their machine in spring (nice move Sony) in doing so they had no idea of what the PS3 was going to offer so they tried to bring something new into the equation: 'HD era' again they branded themselves incorectly and once they realised that Sony's machine was going to be real HD incorrectly they fell back on their innitial branding tool:Live. but this is the crux of my argument. everything that Microsoft have tried to brand themselves with is about to be bettered by Sony, including, by the looks of things, Live. so microsoft have a follower base that they built on power and Live. some are going to be loyal but others hungry to carry on with Microsofts phylosophy will search it out on other machines. and the connectivity that they so proudly announced that the 360 would have with the PSP will bite them in the ass. Luck... hell no. Bad Management!!!!


What is it about the 360 hardware or Lives services that make people believe it was rushed?? (Im thinking that is what you are basing this on) If perhaps you are referring to the poor launch then I could agree with you.

I believe that Sony themselves thought they were going to be able to release in Spring (hell we had statements confirming a Spring launch days before the Nov news). Right now Sony is still all intentions and where they seem good dont by any means think that they will be pulled of without a hitch or without complicated problems. At this point one could even argue that Sony is being rushed by MS. As many things are have yet to be revealed yet we have a launch date in mind.

I dont look for MS's follower base to slide however they may even pick up additional mainstream followers due to the course of Sonys actions here (although much of this is still speculative Im just referring to the possibliity). Many of the initial 360 purchasers are hardcore gamers and are also intending to purchase the PS3 myself included so it depends on just how intriguing the PS3 is going to be on launch and the months following.


Man is it just me or do I seem to be the lone voice of opposition :bigpimp:

woundingchaney
03-18-2006, 01:00 AM
what coincidence are we talking about here Wounded? and just what luck did Sony get?
check previous pages and posts within :banana:

That should catch you up if it doesnt let me know and I would gladly clear any questions up about my statements.:bigpimp:

cliffbo
03-18-2006, 01:09 AM
check previous pages and posts within :banana:

That should catch you up if it doesnt let me know and I would gladly clear any questions up about my statements.:bigpimp:

i'll just assume you explained it in full lol. i aint reading a novel this time of night. i think the 360 is a good machine though. but the way its been marketed has detracted from the games. yes they have a few franchises to fall back on PGR, Halo, but Sony are in peoples psychy in a way that Microsoft can't hope to emulate. PLAYSTATION is a word that says games console to more people than XBOX. ask a thousand people to name the first game console that comes to mind and they are more than likely to say PLAYSTATION. it describes exactly what you get and so its also a verb as well as a noun. XBOX sounds negative and describes nothing. branding is everything.

woundingchaney
03-18-2006, 01:16 AM
i'll just assume you explained it in full lol. i aint reading a novel this time of night. i think the 360 is a good machine though. but the way its been marketed has detracted from the games. yes they have a few franchises to fall back on PGR, Halo, but Sony are in peoples psychy in a way that Microsoft can't hope to emulate. PLAYSTATION is a word that says games console to more people than XBOX. ask a thousand people to name the first game console that comes to mind and they are more than likely to say PLAYSTATION. it describes exactly what you get and so its also a verb as well as a noun. XBOX sounds negative and describes nothing. branding is everything.


No arguements here my friend.

Domination
03-18-2006, 01:32 AM
just a few points because I'm not in the mood to attempt a novel here. luck or bad look play a very small role in the success of consoles. this leads to the assumption that the winner is lucky and the loser is unlucky, without considering business nous. Xbox was rushed to the shops in an attempt to close the gap quicker because in their naivety they honestly believed that the only reason Sony was successful was purely and simply down to hardware. so they put out a product that beat Sony's just enough to be able to make the claim that their console was the most powerful. Sorry, Wounded, but this is typical American philosophy. so they were perceived as the brash kid on the block who needed to be taught a lesson. And they were. yes you can quote the later release as a reason for coming second but the numbers just don't add up. so our brash kid leaned a little from their first showing and that was branding. Live as a brand was becoming as successful as PS, but the console itself wasn't and so thats what they went with for their second machine 360. This time they were determined to come out first because rather than learn from their experience of branding with Live, they were convinced the reason they lost is because they came out after PS2 and that the power hadn't really made a difference. So they rushed the machine into the shops convinced that Sony would release their machine in spring (nice move Sony) in doing so they had no idea of what the PS3 was going to offer so they tried to bring something new into the equation: 'HD era' again they branded themselves incorectly and once they realised that Sony's machine was going to be real HD incorrectly they fell back on their innitial branding tool:Live. but this is the crux of my argument. everything that Microsoft have tried to brand themselves with is about to be bettered by Sony, including, by the looks of things, Live. so microsoft have a follower base that they built on power and Live. some are going to be loyal but others hungry to carry on with Microsofts phylosophy will search it out on other machines. and the connectivity that they so proudly announced that the 360 would have with the PSP will bite them in the ass. Luck... hell no. Bad Management!!!!

I could not have agreed more.

@ Wounding, I'll just agree to disagree. :happy:

Nameless
03-18-2006, 01:47 AM
I have to add some final thoughts to this discussion.
I'm a gaming fan not a console fan, let that be said first...
I think the Sony fans are getting a bit ahead of themselves regarding the next-gen battle. I agree Microsoft rushed the 360 to market, but the hardware is on par and aurguably slighty more powerful than the state of the art PC gaming Rigs. This is a first in the console arena and a huge accomplishment for Microsoft. If MS plays their hand correctly and the opportunity to build a strong consumer base for the 360 they can definately gain a significant portion of the gaming marketshare.

The number one driver for developers is a large consumer base to offer their titles. Considering the rising cost of game development, developers must consider the largest audience possible to ensure profitable sales figures. If the 360 has a large enough install base and the PS3 has shortage issues or poor sales due to the price point developers will look toward the 360 as the more attractive platform. (This is based on finance not the software development cycle) This theory holds true when you consider the PS2 & the Xbox, clearly the XBox was a more powerful platform with an easier development enviornment, but developers delt with the PS2, because the install based ensured profitable sales figures. This same theory applies to smaller development houses as well.

Now let's discuss the technology of the consoles:
The PS3 will clearly be the more powerful console, but will the average consumer see those advantages in the near future. I would argue that the average consumer with early model HD sets and standard CRT displays will not experience the advantages of "true HD" (1080P HDMI) If the initial reports are true concerning BD movies only being viewable in 1080P resolutions this will exclude mass consumers and only the few with deep enough pockets to purchase a new HD set sporting the 1080P resolution standard.
Personally I'm excited about Sony's move to use "bleeding edge" technology with the PS3, but will the average consumer see the advantages in the near future, honestly no... I believe the PS3 is definately more "future proof" than the 360 and the games will outshine the 360 once developers become familiar with the platform, (at least 2 years for a significant gap) but will consumers buy into that concept, only time will tell...

The most important variable to consider is the software not the hardware. If Microsoft gains enough marketshare we may see the larger library on the 360 and history has shown that gamers play games not consoles. I believe that Sony will maintain lead market share in the next-gen, but Microsoft has created a lot of pressure for Sony and a small margin for error. Microsoft has made many mistakes, but they have positioned themselves well for the next-gen, if Sony stumbles we may witness another shift in gaming market share.

In conclusion I want both consoles to succeed, we need Microsoft to keep Sony on their toes. It's ultimately good for the industry and the consumer, long live Sony & Microsoft. Peace

gnznroses
03-18-2006, 02:25 AM
P.S.S. Does this really belong to the PS3 section?
actually, that's "P.P.S." :)



If the initial reports are true concerning BD movies only being viewable in 1080P resolutions this will exclude mass consumers and only the few with deep enough pockets to purchase a new HD set sporting the 1080P resolution standard.
umm, i dunno where you heard that but i seriously, seriously doubt that's correct... (seriously...)

Z
03-18-2006, 03:30 AM
from good ol' Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postscript):

A postscript (from post scriptum, a Latin expression meaning "after writing" and abbreviated P.S.)

P.P.S. is a "Post-postscript" and allows the letter writer to add even more thoughts after the first postscript. To continue, a third postscript would be a P.P.P.S. and a fourth would be the P.P.P.P.S.

-
you learn something every day. make that 20 thanks to Wiki ;p

xbdestroya
03-18-2006, 06:00 AM
Whatever we're discussing though, certainly people should be aware that it wasn't just Sony's strong execution that propelled them to #1 - Nintendo and Sega really did stumble at a time when they were facign a lethal opponent. They just didn't know it until it was too late. But I *do* think that if Nintendo and Sega had also executed like they could have, Sony would not be as strong as it is today, Nintendo would still be a mass gaming platform, and Sega would still be around.

Luis
03-18-2006, 10:41 AM
gnznroses and Z, give me a break! :cry2: English is not my native language, I learn new English grammar, vocabulary and expressions from many of you every single day I visit these forums, so it's just natural I commit some mistakes from time to time or even all the time, I think. I know what P.S. and its derivatives mean, but you just can't expect me to be perfect in every way! :shrug:

P.S. No hard feelings, dear fellows. At all!
P.P.S. See? :king:
P.P.P.S. Thanks for correcting my mistake, I actually appreciate that!
P.P.P.P.S. Sorry for going off topic!

pari
03-18-2006, 12:58 PM
My 2 cents...
If xbox360 is gaining marketshare, then its not happening in Japan. In Japan mindset is more technology centric, there are so many CE devices that are not being released in US. On technology front, PS3 way ahead of 360.
For all the faults in PS2, its initial adoption in Japan was for DVD capability, if SONY likes up all its ducks regarding BD, then there would be a large adoption for PS3 to be a poor mans BD player. The PS3 would not kill the BD player cometition, it would sensitize the people towards BD.
And never underestimate the interia, here PS family has huge collections of games which would be playable in PS3, I would want to play FFXII in PS3 and I believe so many others would want too...
Live is good brand, but the Live product can be replicated by Sony and Nintendo. In the business model, the first key for valuating a company is how easy is for its competitor to replicate its product. On that basis Live cannot be the USP for 360, unless they do a iTunes story.
Sony and Nintendo have PSP,DS to attach to their console, if they figure out a half decent idea (not the lame GB attachment to GC) that would in turn gives Sony an advantage(also to Nintendo). There are about 4million PSP in US(world??), which itself has more userbase than 360, if 50% of PSP owner buy PS3, then instant 2million userbase which is still higher than present 360 userbase.
The market conidtion that was there during Sega Saturn is not there any more, because programming parallel processing has been there for many years but lots of effort have been put into it. There were no dual core available other than Sega Saturn(Atari Jaguar), but today its very prevalent and OS has support for it. So developers struggling like they did with Saturn is not the case. The market dynamics has changed too... Sega made amendments with Dreamcast, but the company was in poor financial shape which was the reason for them to quit the console market.
What Sony did to Sega, can MS do to Sony, might be... but still there is no compelling advantage or USP for 360 over PS3. For me, to play next gen dvd I need to get an attachment for 360, it means 360 is not uptoday. How many of the people would buy an attachment to their product or buy a product which has it builtin to it. Example, how many would buy a cheap sound/video card as an attachment to their motherboard or buy a motherboard with built in cheap sound/video card? People buy precieved high value/high end sound/video card as an attachment than the builtin card in the motherboard...
My bet is still on SONY, wild card is Nintendo to do a upset if they do virtual console. MS market position is still not secure... That is why they are doing a viva pinata...
I would definitely like to see MS loose in console business, competition is good but not MS. I do not want a choice between Devil and Deep Sea condition, which would be more likely if MS wins the console market...

Domination
03-18-2006, 12:59 PM
I have to add some final thoughts to this discussion.
I'm a gaming fan not a console fan, let that be said first...
I think the Sony fans are getting a bit ahead of themselves regarding the next-gen battle. I agree Microsoft rushed the 360 to market, but the hardware is on par and aurguably slighty more powerful than the state of the art PC gaming Rigs. This is a first in the console arena and a huge accomplishment for Microsoft. If MS plays their hand correctly and the opportunity to build a strong consumer base for the 360 they can definately gain a significant portion of the gaming marketshare.

The number one driver for developers is a large consumer base to offer their titles. Considering the rising cost of game development, developers must consider the largest audience possible to ensure profitable sales figures. If the 360 has a large enough install base and the PS3 has shortage issues or poor sales due to the price point developers will look toward the 360 as the more attractive platform. (This is based on finance not the software development cycle) This theory holds true when you consider the PS2 & the Xbox, clearly the XBox was a more powerful platform with an easier development enviornment, but developers delt with the PS2, because the install based ensured profitable sales figures. This same theory applies to smaller development houses as well.

Now let's discuss the technology of the consoles:
The PS3 will clearly be the more powerful console, but will the average consumer see those advantages in the near future. I would argue that the average consumer with early model HD sets and standard CRT displays will not experience the advantages of "true HD" (1080P HDMI) If the initial reports are true concerning BD movies only being viewable in 1080P resolutions this will exclude mass consumers and only the few with deep enough pockets to purchase a new HD set sporting the 1080P resolution standard.
Personally I'm excited about Sony's move to use "bleeding edge" technology with the PS3, but will the average consumer see the advantages in the near future, honestly no... I believe the PS3 is definately more "future proof" than the 360 and the games will outshine the 360 once developers become familiar with the platform, (at least 2 years for a significant gap) but will consumers buy into that concept, only time will tell...

The most important variable to consider is the software not the hardware. If Microsoft gains enough marketshare we may see the larger library on the 360 and history has shown that gamers play games not consoles. I believe that Sony will maintain lead market share in the next-gen, but Microsoft has created a lot of pressure for Sony and a small margin for error. Microsoft has made many mistakes, but they have positioned themselves well for the next-gen, if Sony stumbles we may witness another shift in gaming market share.

In conclusion I want both consoles to succeed, we need Microsoft to keep Sony on their toes. It's ultimately good for the industry and the consumer, long live Sony & Microsoft. Peace

That is very, very, very wrong. There is a reason for backwards compatibility, and there is a reason for different resolutions. Blu Ray supports them all.

You should also not forget that Sony is closing the gap for Microsoft as well. A lot of Microsoft's advantages have either been lowered or completely negated this generation. So it's not as easy as you are making it out to be. Now, I'm not going to go making claims about who I believe will come out on top when the smoke clears, but I will say that Microsoft isn't given very much room to screw up neither like they were before. :2cents:

Nameless
03-18-2006, 02:56 PM
That is very, very, very wrong. There is a reason for backwards compatibility, and there is a reason for different resolutions. Blu Ray supports them all.

You should also not forget that Sony is closing the gap for Microsoft as well. A lot of Microsoft's advantages have either been lowered or completely negated this generation. So it's not as easy as you are making it out to be. Now, I'm not going to go making claims about who I believe will come out on top when the smoke clears, but I will say that Microsoft isn't given very much room to screw up neither like they were before. :2cents:

Domination, I just read some recent reports that the PS3 BD movies will support televisions that do not have HDMI connections. The only potential problem is some movie houses can decide to implement ICT "Image Constrant Token" a form of digital security preventing pirates from creating high resolution copies of HD DVD and Blu-ray discs via the unsecured analog outputs. (The only viable digital outputs are DVI & HDMI) This could create some confusion regarding Blue-Ray movies and television compatiblity. Also, if you are using a SD "Standard Definition" display you will not see the visual advantages of BD over DVD technology. Overall this is still great news for the PS3 because SD owners can utilize DVDs and BDs with their current display and once they upgrade to HD they are good to go.

I knew my thoughts would be controversial, but I did state Sony would more than likely win the next-gen war. (#1 marketshare spot) The main point I was making is Microsoft has made an powerful console and created some legitimate pressure for Sony. If Sony stumbles regarding pricing or major technical glitches with the PS3 Microsoft is positioned to capitalize on the opportunity.

I completely agree that Sony has created some distinct advantages over the 360, but you can't deny that most of the population would not see the immediate benefits of the advantages. (Most consumers do not have HD displays) Also, let's be realistic the "average consumer" would not purchase a HD tv to play 360 games in HD or PS3 games/BD movies. Once HD broadcasting matures and HD sets lower in price the masses will come (we should see much larger HD install base 2008) The price point of the PS3 is going to be critical, if the PS3 has a 3X or 4X BD drive & 60G HDD out the box I doubt they can hit the $399 price point established by the 360. If the price point is too high and the average consumer does not immediately see the advantages of the console & BD technology, some consumers would roll with the 360 and give MS additional marketshare.

Once again Microsoft has created a good offering with the 360 and if Sony does not deliver a great offering with a decent price point we could see marketshare shift. If Sony delivers with glitch free "bleeding edge" technology at a reasonable price point for the masses (no higher than $499) it's game over for MS, only time will tell.

I did not mention Nintendo, because they are targeting a niche audience not the mass consumer. We all know gamers are maturing and unfortunately Nintendo has created a children friendly brand. (this is not a bad thing, but it's true) Most adult males (21+) are not anticipating the next Mario, Kirby & Pokemon titles. The innovation Nintendo is bringing to the table is refreshing and good for the industry, but I can't see them appealing to the 18-35 male demographic. If Nintendo embraces 3rd party development we could potentially see a shift... Also, the move not to support HD resolutions will make the console age fairly quickly. Well, graphics are not everything and if the gaming experience is powerful enough with the innovative controller we could all be in for a surprise... Peace

Smokey
03-18-2006, 05:33 PM
how come microsoft seem to think this 10mil figure is going to mean theyre the leader this generation. dont they think it can be overtaken from there?

cliffbo
03-18-2006, 05:35 PM
how come microsoft seem to think this 10mil figure is going to mean theyre the leader this generation. dont they think it can be overtaken from there?

dreamcast had 10mil! didn't do them any good.

Domination
03-18-2006, 06:08 PM
Domination, I just read some recent reports that the PS3 BD movies will support televisions that do not have HDMI connections. The only potential problem is some movie houses can decide to implement ICT "Image Constrant Token" a form of digital security preventing pirates from creating high resolution copies of HD DVD and Blu-ray discs via the unsecured analog outputs. (The only viable digital outputs are DVI & HDMI) This could create some confusion regarding Blue-Ray movies and television compatiblity. Also, if you are using a SD "Standard Definition" display you will not see the visual advantages of BD over DVD technology. Overall this is still great news for the PS3 because SD owners can utilize DVDs and BDs with their current display and once they upgrade to HD they are good to go.

I knew my thoughts would be controversial, but I did state Sony would more than likely win the next-gen war. (#1 marketshare spot) The main point I was making is Microsoft has made an powerful console and created some legitimate pressure for Sony. If Sony stumbles regarding pricing or major technical glitches with the PS3 Microsoft is positioned to capitalize on the opportunity.

I completely agree that Sony has created some distinct advantages over the 360, but you can't deny that most of the population would not see the immediate benefits of the advantages. (Most consumers do not have HD displays) Also, let's be realistic the "average consumer" would not purchase a HD tv to play 360 games in HD or PS3 games/BD movies. Once HD broadcasting matures and HD sets lower in price the masses will come (we should see much larger HD install base 2008) The price point of the PS3 is going to be critical, if the PS3 has a 3X or 4X BD drive & 60G HDD out the box I doubt they can hit the $399 price point established by the 360. If the price point is too high and the average consumer does not immediately see the advantages of the console & BD technology, some consumers would roll with the 360 and give MS additional marketshare.

Once again Microsoft has created a good offering with the 360 and if Sony does not deliver a great offering with a decent price point we could see marketshare shift. If Sony delivers with glitch free "bleeding edge" technology at a reasonable price point for the masses (no higher than $499) it's game over for MS, only time will tell.

I did not mention Nintendo, because they are targeting a niche audience not the mass consumer. We all know gamers are maturing and unfortunately Nintendo has created a children friendly brand. (this is not a bad thing, but it's true) Most adult males (21+) are not anticipating the next Mario, Kirby & Pokemon titles. The innovation Nintendo is bringing to the table is refreshing and good for the industry, but I can't see them appealing to the 18-35 male demographic. If Nintendo embraces 3rd party development we could potentially see a shift... Also, the move not to support HD resolutions will make the console age fairly quickly. Well, graphics are not everything and if the gaming experience is powerful enough with the innovative controller we could all be in for a surprise... Peace

Like I said, it's not as clean cut as it sounds. Give it time.


how come microsoft seem to think this 10mil figure is going to mean theyre the leader this generation. dont they think it can be overtaken from there?

I will only say this: this is far from a sprint unless Microsoft plans on releasing another console when they hit 10 million.