Don Reisinger:
Sony was once viewed as the world’s most successful gaming company. After it launched the original PlayStation, many wondered if it could take off until, well, it did. And as we all know, the PlayStation 2 was a gaming juggernaut.
But all of that changed with the PlayStation 3. The console launched at a price that was far too expensive for what customers were getting, and it lacked the uniqueness of Nintendo’s Wii, which caught on quickly. Microsoft’s Xbox 360, while not as popular as the Wii, benefited from a strong online-gaming component.
30°
30°
30°
20°
Ad 
30°
Some will disagree because of sales but one wouldn't have to ponder why they would think that except to cite their reasoning which is telling.
If we're going by exclusive wise, Sony step their game up A LOT since last gen.
Just wish they'd profit more. Sadly this gen is almost over, they just need to learn from the mistakes of this gen, and apply to next gen and learn from it.
in the last 5 years they shut down Zipper...in the last 5 years they bought Evolution studios, Media Molecule, Gaikai, Novarama Technologies, Sucker Punch Productions...
Sony are making best games, best graphics, best racing simulator, best adventures, best AR games etc. it's logical someone is angry about this
Unless I am mistaken.
@Piroh
Look at the annual reports. Listen to the comments from Sony executives. No one is lying about Sony's money issues. They have huge money problems. In fact, it is illegal for them to lie about how much money they do or don't have. That's why they have to pull tricks like hiding vita sales by combining them with PSP sales. So that they can fool uninformed stock buyers into still buying and keeping people that already own their stock from selling. Unfortunately it's a poor decision because it makes it obvious that the numbers are bad if they have to be hidden.
And considering Vita was what Sony was counting on for the profits it was projecting, it makes the company look weaker than it already looked. The next six weeks will say a lot. But the third quarter will determine all. If Vita doesn't have a monster Holiday, it might be the end of Sony as we know it.
What BS. Playstation exclusives do sell ( http://ps3.mmgn.com/Article... ) and despite what you think the PS Vita has been profitable since day one ( http://www.playstationlifes... ). I don't see how we are getting all of these doomed articles on Sony when every console sales decline, when it was the console who sold the most for it's quarterly report and is currently leading in WW numbers. Funny enough, we had zero doomed articles on the 360 when it lost $229 Million dollars for it Q3 report.
http://www.gamespot.com/new...
Xbox360 shipped only 1.1 million for the quarter (Lowest sales have been since 2006/2007)
http://www.i4u.com/2012/07/...
PS3 shipped 2.1 million (according to neogaf) for the quarter and had a lost of $45 million in their gaming division.
get your facts right. When the man from the company himself says it would take 3 years which was based on projection of sales as well which we know today those projections have been downgraded twice. It is being sold at a loss
Plus you keep trying to bring up MS every single time when you have already been told what that loss pertains to. Still don't see how you are comparing a company that has losses over 10 years to a company that is profitable over the same time frame.
http://translate.google.com...
Sony’s PlayStation Vita is making headlines worldwide due to the system’s visual prowess and impressive lineup of launch titles. Cramming so much horsepower into this little package was certainly a costly investment for Sony, but the company shocked the world when they revealed that the Vita will retail for $249.99 (Wifi only)/$299.99(3G/Wifi AT&T Service Contract Required) for North America. This cheap price will come at a cost for Sony, however.
In an interview with Reuters Japan, Sony’s Kaz Hirai stated that Sony aims to make a profit on the PlayStation Vita in three years. Sony often sells their hardware at a lost, so this isn’t anything new for the company as they sold the PlayStation 3 at a loss despite the $600 price tag. Out of the three home-console manufacturers, Nintendo is usually the only company to make a profit on hardware right away due to their conservative nature of building their hardware.
Originally, Sony slated the PS Vita would launch by the end of the year, however, that has since been clarified and it is currently only scheduled to release in Japan by year’s end, meanwhile North America/Europe may not see it until early 2012.
Nice products, and holding on to old business practices that worked when Walmart didn't really exist, DOES NOT WORK ANYMORE. As far as understanding gaming, they know how to make some hit games, BUT they are disconnected with the way they run the online component (free is a good thing, but it shows)
Why do i say disconnected???? People are willing to toss yearly fees to MS for its online service proving that it is what people want.
Lastly one of the big things.. other then A FEW hit titles, the amount of money Sony invests in MANY games never hits projected goals for the profits. This means they expect to sell a specific amount, but it never happens.
Gamers this gen WANT COD more then MAG, want HALO over Resistance, and choose 3rd party games for the competition many times because of a system made that is strong as hell in comparison, but hard as hell in comparision to make games for. This even shows a disconnect with the hardest of hardcore gamers... the ones who make them.
Meanwhile, sales of the PS3 still easily outpaced the 360 as it had ever since it launched worldwide selling over 6 million consoles more than the 360 during the same time frame - and yet here's another article that insists that the PS3 was somehow still far behind.
And that's what kills me about these articles. It's not like the information is secret. Anyone who bothers to look at the sales of each console can tell you the 360 has sold the fewest consoles in the past 5 years, yet article after article insists that the Playstation brand is on it's deathbed when in the current market it's the console that's proving to be the most resilient with the Wii dropping 55% year over year their last quarter and the 360 falling 43% in the first 6 months of 2012.
I'm not saying Sony isn't having huge issues. Quite the contrary, I've been warning of tough times for Sony for quite some time, but when looking at console sales, it's downright dishonest to paint Sony as some bleak, hopeless case that's lost it's way while ignoring the fact that console sales for it's competition have fallen off a cliff.
Edit: I just noticed RedHemi300c above making a fool of himself. I'm right here, buddy. I don't need duplicate accounts to make my point. I've been here for years. Then he goes on to argue a point that no one had made. Who exactly are you arguing with? Where did anyone say anything about Microsoft losses? And why on earth would anyone compare Sony and Microsoft as a whole? They aren't even remotely in the same business. Why don't you bring up Sony's credit downgrade again and explain how it spells the end that their credit rating went from "Good" to "Still Good"? At least Dante backs up everything he stated. Your link does nothing to disprove his claims. Did you even read it? Where does it say the Vita hardware isn't profitable? Obviously it takes time to recoup development costs.
this site is full of doomed article after doomed article of sony gonna fail. The xbots control this site, that's why.
we should only be speaking about gaming related aspect of the companies. we should only be concerned about which company is producing games that we like and pushes the industry forward, not whether the company met its sales goal and how much assets it is holding.
first up darkride, your an idiot! you're not analyst, you're just a self confessed sony leg humper with a blog site. you know nothing, go away.
anyway. sony as everyone knows as a whole is in big trouble. they knowingly sold 3D tvs worldwide in 2010 and 2011, at premium prices, that were never capable of displaying 3D correctly.
And when the consumers like me contacted sony about the problems, their response worlwide has been "corresponds with the specs".. incredible. the tech from sony even told me to buy "a more expensive set to improve the 3D" lol
I got my set changed after threatening the shop with consumer rights and selling tvs under false advertising. but that doesnt change the damage that sony did to themselves for two years just in the tv market.
their camcorders are way overpriced, and pretty much everything with "sony" wrote on it is overpriced. when something equal or if not better with samsung or lg wrote on it can be bought cheaper.
now the ps3. nearly everyone i know has xboxs. one or two have ps3s, but thats it. outside of sony fanboy land (n4g), the ps3 is not seen as the second coming, and the best exclusives in the history of the universe are not even considered, except for gt and a couple of others.
no matter how much bleating on n4g by sony sheep about exclusives that are nearly always a "technical marvel" to them lol, free on-line and consoles capable of time travel will change reality. i dont think one reason in particular has seen sony lose its iron grip on the console market.
but it is clear that sonys dominance, and the threat of a one console market are hisory....
Even worse, Sony no longer understands how gaming business works as evident of recent business moves with PS Vita and PS3.
Heck, even the Gaikai purchase seems fruitless to me.
The one thing Sony do have going are their game studios freedom. That is a big kudos to Sony regardless of it being accidental from poor management or just simple smarts.
Which of the big three companies did not abandon the core gamer in favor of the casual crowd?
Sony. Only Sony.
As a gamer I know that Sony understands what I want and at the end of the day that matters more.
I am thrilled Sony has purchased Gaikai because as usual they are forging ahead and leading the game industry in presenting the next format for gaming. While others are playing it safe Sony is taking risks.
It's amazing the gamers that say the love gaming, say they love innovation and then spent countless hours on this board not gaming but instead engaged in vain attempts to deny the value that Sony's Gaikai decision will have for gamers everywhere.
I would rather a company not have any business success if all they are going to do is pander to the casual crowd and shove the same tired 2 titles at me every year.
Brilliant just a generation ago, yet absurdly miseralble the next? only a sheeple would not see through the conspiracy .......
"I would rather a company not have any business success if all they are going to do is pander to the casual crowd and shove the same tired 2 titles at me every year."
I could not agree more.
The x360 crowd rejoices for the sales and success MS has due to Kinect and they can't see that they will in no way benefit from that success? Talk about blind. They will also come up with excuses like "MS is winding down their development due to next gen arriving shortly" and such. Since when would that be a good thing no matter IF it indeed were true?
I think MS is done as far as Exclusives go. You x360 folks better be ready to enjoy your timed exclusive DLC and such since that is all you will be getting from MS. This gen and the next one and if the next gen is succesfull to MS then they will keep doing the same thing next next gen too. Enjoy. You deserve it.
At any rate, Sony is the only $600 console to survive. The ONLY $600 console. Let that sink in for a moment. And while all others have failed, the PS3 has not only survived, but if the Wii U is any indicator, it could go two gens without changing and still be competitive.
@ greenpowerz below:
One thing you have to wonder about is if XBL is so wonderful, then why are there more PS3 people online than 360 people?
That's saying one of two things:
either XBL isn't worth it
or
there's not as many people playing because those sales came from repurchases and not actual new sales...?
In the end, I really don't care about sales, because if sales determined the quality of a console, people wouldn't be crying about the Dreamcast today; but when people use sales to represent the quality of a console, I kinda put my two cents in once in a while.
"As a gamer I know that Sony understands what I want and at the end of the day that matters more."
I agree, but in addition I want the company to flourish so it can actually sustain it's trajectory. Only giving me what I want without consideration for the people that work for you isn't good for anyone in the long run.
'
"I am thrilled Sony has purchased Gaikai because as usual they are forging ahead and leading the game industry in presenting the next format for gaming. While others are playing it safe Sony is taking risks."
I disagree that was a good purchase for Sony, but time will tell. I think Gaikai technology is a "somewhat" solution to an old problem that no longer exist. We are reaching a point where hardware technology isn't holding back games, but actual human resources to create them.
Even today, there are very few games you can't do on current consoles. Imagine next generation, and imagine shortly thereafter the hardware will be obsolte.
This means we will be content with cheap hardware, because it is good enough similar to how PCs has been good enough for ages and is therefore shrinking in size.
"It's amazing the gamers that say the love gaming, say they love innovation and then spent countless hours on this board not gaming but instead engaged in vain attempts to deny the value that Sony's Gaikai decision will have for gamers everywhere."
It will be nice to actually explain why you think it was a good decision?
Also, you are also spending countless hours on this board not gaming, but instead talking positive about....
@insomnium2:
"The x360 crowd rejoices for the sales and success MS has due to Kinect and they can't see that they will in no way benefit from that success?"
I have benefit from Kinect and love it. I play a lot of the casual games, and love the hands free and voice control for my music listening and movie watching.
I think the opposite is also true, certain PS3 crowd hates success and only look for something to complain about. If people enjoy Kinect or Wii, let them!
Why do you care?
I'm not the type of person to hate on others for liking what they do. If people like Justin Bieber, I DON't CARE! It's their money, their time, why would I be a busybody!?
@pixelsword:
"One thing you have to wonder about is if XBL is so wonderful, then why are there more PS3 people online than 360 people?"
Have you considered a third option (or fourth, fifth for that matter)?
PSN accounts are free, so people have duplicate accounts and sometimes multiple different accounts for different regions!
I have a fat friend list of peoople that swapped or abandoned accounts. I'm also sick of joining up with people that cheat with little reprecussion, because they just create a new account.
"In the end, I really don't care about sales, because if sales determined the quality of a console, people wouldn't be crying about the Dreamcast today; but when people use sales to represent the quality of a console, I kinda put my two cents in once in a while."
Quality is somewhat opinionated so I don't think that is a good measure. I think you really should think of sales correlates to value. A Toyota might not be as good quality as say a Porsche, but it certainly provides more value and hence the more sales. While a GMC often times is significantly cheaper than a Toyota, it provides less value (because it isn't as reliable and has poor resale value) and so fewer consumers buy it.
i hope sony turns it around as a long time sony fan its been a sad decline,they once were worth over 200 billion to now just around 20. But we also have to understand this Kaz just took over so its not gonna happen over night give it some time.
One thing sony really over estimated is Vita while its the best handheld in the market and they had the best launch software wise where are the games? mostly it gets ports of ps3 games why can't 6 of their 16 owned studios just work on ps:vita and why can't they hire some independent studios to work on cool projects just for Vita. At E3 sony barely spoke about Vita.
I am not trying to hate on sony or dissing them or anything just saying its time to wake up and make the changes that are needed to be successful now and later. I know they can't drop the price since they will loose money how about this make one Uncharted bundle with 16Gb memory card and the system for $249.
Economy is tough people want value. Why you think people are buying Vizio TV's instead of better brands?
but let's also not kid our self sony gets us the most while Nintendo and MS have kind of left its core fans high and dry sony has delivered and with many more games announced already they are still delivering for the foreseeable future.
and all this talk of how their games don't sell well if each game sells one million plus and some do 2 or 3-4 than it all evens out. while MS has halo and 2 other games off course they will sell. you are comparing 3 games to 30 plus?
Hopefully Kaz can turn it around but they need to adopt new philosophies and quick.
XBL is a beast in terms of features. It really knows how to connect players in a fun and simple manner. It's like a party is going on in XBL and on PSN they're having tea.
One of the biggest dated features on PSN is having to install demos and certain games you buy. That's just ridiculous in this day and age. When on XBL all you do is download and play.
Last time I checked, dedicated servers were vastly superior to P2P, and sony has a lot of those for their games.
I'll take a smooth lagless gaming experience over cross game chat any day of the week.
Me too but you have to realize that most of the players on these consoles are kids around 10-23 yo. Being social is the most important thing to people who still hang out constantly with their friends. That's why MS is able to charge money from these suckers too. They make their console a shooter console and as online heavy as they can.
It's probably the best move for them to have those timed exclusive DLC for COD. It is a dirty trick and it exploits both the parents neglecting their children and the mentality of instant gratification but my god it really works.
I wish Sony would take the same route and go agressive with it. It's been clear that you can't be too honest and pure since all that gets you is red numbers in today's world. People really don't care about anything these days and Sony as a Japanese company is struggling cause they don't have the balls to fight dirty cause Japanese are taught to respect other people and not spit in their faces.
I want my exclusive games so Sony bailing out of gaming is not an option imo. Gaming would be ruined. Sony FIGHT DIRTY. It works for MS. Make online gaming cost to people. Learn from MS and beat them at their own game. Don't let them buy their way to success. You are the only one who can do something to prevent it and since people don't care how you do it please fight dirty. All I care about are the exclusive games that puts you over others for me in gaming ever since PS1.
It interesting to see some the the comments from certain individuals..but who cares..
No matter how you shake it no mstter what your feeling is about ANY of the companies' it would be laughable to claim Sony doesnt understand gaming.
It simply isn't true..
Sony understands gaming, but they like Microsoft and Nintendo they made some good moves and are learning from some of their mistakes.
Alot of people have strong opinions about what those mistakes are and many will miss the mark by a long shot.
The internet pumps a small sector of vocal gamers to bash other oonsoles with bullets that are simply a bunch of blanks in the real world. When those same blanks come their way...well you see the fire erupt.
In this case, as well as some of the blanks fired at Vita prematurely the strong reaction is warranted. Sony is and will for a longtime tyo come be a Super Power in the gaming world. This gen they just had to share a little of he spotlight with their competition.
But, it won't tarnish their great gaming legacy one bit..
Evil
like the website? NO
story? WTF.
Before I say this next part let me just say I have all 3 current generation consoles and I enjoy them all equally (well, the dust on my Wii is starting to develop dust at this stage!) but I honestly believe the only reason the 360 outsells the PS3 in some regions (mostly the US) is down to the Red Ring Of Death. I think parents in general are probably not clued in to the warranty offers for free replacements and so give in to their kids and buy a new one every time RROD strikes. Just a theory but one that makes sense to me. The reason the PS3 sales have slowed is because they're not breaking down. It's a common business tactic, make products that are designed to break after prolonged use so that the consumer has to buy another one generating multiple sales per person. Simple but effective.
Sony understands gaming at the very least as much as Microsoft. Their sales performance vis-a-vis the more aggressive competitor is a testament to this. Sony has never left the core, even in its foray into motion gaming which it pioneered for Pete's.
The vita situation is interesting. I have longed thought that Sony should get out of this market because of the rise in mobile devices who are starting to produce some quality games or they start making their devices more than a gaming device. The problem with the vita is creating a system seller. Portable gaming is usually for a younger crowd and they need (people are going to hate me for saying this but if they want to shift massive amounts of units they are going to have to do it) casual puzzle/ brain training/ those types of games I am also surprised they do not try to get small mobile developers developing app games for the vita.
Will I ever get a Vita...maybe but not at the current price and not until something like Gran Turismo is released for it.
The day of dedicated devices are over for the masses. Just look at what smartphones have done to the portable music player and camera markets. Sure you can buy dedicated mp3 players and digital cameras but we're talking in the tens of dollars and not hundreds.
As for Vita I got a feeling even with those big holiday games it won't help it sell more, smarts phones are just more appealing and do so much more than just play games. If I were Sony I would drop Vita and focus on making the PS3/PS4 the best they can.
You get a Vita to play games. I already have a phone and all I can do is play old games and crappy mobile games. Have fun NOT playing Vita and 3DS games.
Is it really so hard to find ANY other news?
You so called journalists should go stand in the corner and shame yourself... and then write an "professional" item..
So if Apple starts failing in the phone business, and we see articles on how on planet earth did that happen its an anti-Apple crusade ??
Its not because it hurts you people to see articles like this that it means its a conspiracy.
Since when is pointing out a giant failing, no matter the business, some kind of attack from some uknown soldier. It happens all the time, in every area of business.
Yes the truth hurts (for some people more than others, especially on N4G) but you have to deal with it. Sony goes from number one undisputed heavyweight champion to what it is today and you expect people to act like nothing happened ?
FOUR HOURS.
Of all the companies, Sony is the one most dedicated to actually, you know, making games - ones that appeal to a broad range of gamers. Also , keeping in communication with their fans, offering them the opportunity to express their ideas and requests through the blog (which spurs on feature implementation and game creation such as the most recent PS All-Stars), opening up more avenues of choice for the gamer through services like PS+, free to play models and partnerships with forward thinking companies with similar end user goals like Valve. They always have done well for creating diverse gaming experiences too which is why articles like this are so bemusing.
Wanna know what I think? I think that authors like this are so concerned with their own hit-based agenda with their website that their view on what makes gaming great is warped beyond belief.
170 millions ps2
66 millions ps3
79 milljons psp.
i think sony understand gaming pretty well.
and your stupid articles are based on nothing but bias opinion and where the writer s from.
Ps3 worldwide sales will overlap xbox360 s pretty soon.
Considering that for nearly 4 years of it s lifecycle ps3 was so much more expensive than it s rivals, +the terrible launch,+ the network hack+all fcking internet bashing. . . playstation is still standing and still going strong.
Take my first impression of the 360, first off, I dont care for MS as a company and I will admit that. I didnt like them when I bought the first Xbox and I love the xbox and still have it and still play it. So, not liking a company doesnt keep me from buying and enjoying their product. However, in the beginning I was reading stories all the time about the RROD and the failure rate and due to that I didnt trust the 360 and didnt buy one and still wont since this generation is almost over. I own a launch 60 PS3 and a Wii. First impressions are important and price is just as much part of that as quality.
don't forget the earthquake and tsunami that messed up the Japanese economy.
If I was a shareholder, I'd rather be in MS or Nintendo's side, but seeing as I'm a gamer, give me free online play, optional PS+ and the best selection of exclusive games available.
Oh wait, they already have. Thanks again Sony
Just games and game machines.
It's a business, not a charity program. They need money, not sympathy on the internet.
If playstation is making money, but the TV part is not where do you think the cuts are going? The tune keeps playing but you and others are just not listening. Sony's playstation is at profit, so why in in gods green earth would Sony make cuts in playstation?
Love or hate them, Sony have a rich history when it comes to gaming, beating them with a wrecking ball when they're trying to pick themselves up is way out of order.
If Apple or Microsoft got the same grief, there'd be anger and lawsuits on an apocalyptic scale.
Sony has made some of the best games of this generation and the last, hell I prefer my xbox 360 but to say Sony doesn't understand gaming is like saying Ferrari don't understand cars
So Goldwyncq, to hear you say you feel every journalist is targeting Sony now, is an understatement.
Sony knows gaming best of the bunch......The problem is, Sony don't know how to cater to the lowest comon denominator, as they make games that are for gamers. They get less of the Angry Birds crap, & more of the WipeoutHD, so even PSN is riddled with full on meaty games, over 10minute hit-athons.
The sad fact is that the gaming world is changing for the worse, & developers have the platforms now to give us less of a game, to allow them the charge for the rest later mentality.
And people are cheap....cheap, cheap, cheap....cheap by name, cheap by nature......so they will buy the cheapest console, the cheapest games & the cheapest peripherals. It's the way the majority think. Sony, may have just gotten too sophisticated for the masses.
First of all, it claims Sony is "far behind" it's competitors. It's true for Nintendo, at least in the case of hardware sales, but the 360 is only a few million units ahead. And you can attribute that lead entirely to the fact that the 360 had a one year head start.
Secondly, the author brings up motion gaming, and wonders why it took so long for Sony to jump on board. That's understanding gaming? Wii, Move, and Kinect's games don't do much of anything to show why motion gaming is the direction to go in. Move is largely irrelevant, Kinect hasn't proven it's worth outside of games in which you dance or exercise, and the Wii is seeing the sharpest drop off in consumer interest and is more or less an afterthought to the core gamer at this point. Sony doesn't understand gaming because they got into motion gaming late? Nobody in the industry even cares about motion gaming at this point. Not one third-party publisher has a noteworthy motion-controlled title in the works. Even Nintendo is putting it aside in favor of touch controls. So, Sony should have jumped on the ship before it started sinking?
Then there's the comparisons to Live. PSN has improved dramatically over the years. They've added in everything from the in-game XMB to cross-game invites. It's even been said by Sony themselves that they are limited at this point by the PS3 hardware. They continue to improve on the services front though. The PS Store and PS+ keeps offering more and more. What more is this guy expecting? Being limited by and having to work within the constraints of choices made six or seven years ago doesn't mean they don't "understand gaming". It's also rather pointless to overhaul PSN on PS3 when the next generation is right around the corner.
The only place where this guy even gets close to having a point is the PS Vita. But it's kind of stupid to say Sony should get out of the handheld market when the system has only had a few launch months and the summer drought to prove itself. The two biggest games, and the biggest season for the gaming industry haven't even hit yet.
But what's most important is what the article completely ignores. Sony screwed up and launched a $600 machine with "no games", that was a pain in the ass to develop for, a year after their primary competitor, and the machine didn't even offer background downloading. Look at it today. Sony made huge strides in nearly every aspect of the PS3. They made some big mistakes, and the competition threw everything they had at them, but Sony bounced back and the PS3 is as good as anything out there, both in terms of it's ability to compete on the market, and in the eyes of gamers. An article like this probably could have made a decent point six years ago back when giant enemy crabs were all the rage, but not today. Not after the PS3's turnaround.
The Wii focused on motion gaming results... Wii best selling console his gen.
MS focused on making a connected gaming media hub results making the most money out of all console this gen.
Sony wanted to be a blu ray player everything else was kind of shoe horned in. I remember when they launched they said they were going to let the online capabilities be designed by each studio for their games as they saw fit, there was no media stores streaming movie services, trophies friends list management etc. Sony stuck to what they knew best and that was making great games and lots of exclusives... problem is this is a different time. Muliplats games are so engaging they are competing against lots of companies instead of just 1 or 2. That why MS scaled back their exclusives production the market isnt really design for it especially right now.
Motion gaming despite what you hear ppl say is what is a dominant force in gaming. The WiiU still uses the controllers from the wii and also has motion controls mapped into the tablet controller. Kinect is a runaway success you hear people bash kinect a lot because you are listening to core gamers that dont want to play motion games even if they did work. If you fact check kinect you would learn it is a very capable device and has delivered lots of great things that they will improve on and expand on in the future. The kinect model is a proven success.
I personally love MOVE but i dont think Sony is putting the development effort behind it thus that looks like a big problem for them next gen. Motion control in a system will be standard next gen, and sony isnt even putting in the work to iron out any kinks or improve its tech. Are they going really start from scratch that what would be even harder.
I think sony just needs to reassess the market and adjust to it.
Wii was a success for Nintendo, but even Nintendo seems to question it's lasting appeal. It's still there in Wii U, but is it really a big selling point anymore?.
Move didn't do to bad, sales-wise, and technically, it was pretty capable, but it's basically irrelevant. Nobody is really supporting it.
And like I said, despite being a success, Kinect hasn't brought much to the table outside of dancing and exercise games.
Even if motion controls are popular, I wouldn't use a lack of interest in it from Sony as a reason to question whether they "get" gaming. Facebook games are pretty popular now too, but any article questioning Sony, Nintendo, or Microsoft's understanding of gaming based on their absence from that portion of the gaming market would be pretty laughable.
Gaming is a lot of things. You don't have to have your finger in every pie to "understand gaming" though.
I think right now their problem is they are to committed to old strategies like tons of exclusives flooding the market at one time. The theme now is maximizing yor efforts. Releasing games that compete against each other so directly is a bad business practice that seems like strength but translates in to a weakness.
The WiiU still completely uses the Wiimotes, its still standard. Nintendo is just expanding the Wii with the WiiU... its basically a high def wii with a compatible tablet controller.
Sonys will never be wiped out by MS because Japan is never going to fully support a MS system. The only ones that can finish them is Nintendo. I think MS know this and is planning to dominate the America market at all costs.
I really just dont see Sonys plan and i'm a great analyst.
For something that's the "next big thing", it's a doing a pretty poor job of showing it. Motion gaming has been around since before this generation with things like EyeToy. Still, to this day, it hasn't come anywhere close to proving it's worth, especially in comparison to online play. Stuff like Halo 2 and Socom proved pretty quickly that online was the next big thing. Where's motion control's Halo 2? Where's motion control's Socom? Where's the game that takes motion control from a decent alternative to a must-have feature?
Motion gaming has it's place, but it's pretty obvious it's nothing more than a supplement. It's not the priority for any company. Not Nintendo, not Microsoft, not Sony, and not one third party publisher or developer. For every single major game company, the vast majority of their efforts still lie with traditional controller-based gaming.
Like I said, even if motion gaming has it's place in gaming, Sony doesn't need to make it a focus. No company does. No company needs to be a jack of all trades to understand gaming. Just look at Nintendo. For ten years they lagged behind just about everyone with online play. But do they "understand gaming"? Sure do. Graphics aren't a priority for them, despite graphics' huge importance in this industry. But would the majority say they don't understand gaming? Nope. And there's Nintendo's clearly different approach to games. Gritty, ultra-realistic online multiplayer military shooters are all the rage, but Nintendo hasn't even shown an interest in touching them. Again, does that mean they don't understand gaming? Their idea of gaming is something different from Sony's idea of gaming, but neither of them "don't understand gaming" just because they have different priorities and focuses.
Like I said, gaming is a lot of things. You don't need to compete in every last aspect of gaming to "get it".
When people start looking at the lack of motion controls as a glaring omission from a game, then a lack of effort in the motion controls department might be a problem, but I don't see that happening any time soon, and it sure isn't happening today.
That might be good for their bottom line but in the long run gaming will only survive if the big three are willing to invest in RD does anyone really want to leave that all up to Nin? MS on the other hand had one goal and one goal only that was to unseat Sony as the dominant console maker and they might have succeeded if not for the surprising success of the Wii. For all intent and purposes it is pretty much a draw with MS having only a slight but insignificant lead (due to an earlier luanch and a lower price). But in some ways thier decision to start chasing the casual market with kinentic (?) and absolute dependence on third parties is troublesome and not the way to go going forward if gaming is to continue to thrive and grow.
Sony on the other hand, no matter what they were saying in the early days, had to have know that the initial price point and late launch was going result in a loss of market share. But decided that it was more important to win the HD format war than maintain their position at the top. It is the huge loss the company took on each ps3 initially and the down turn in the global economy that has hurt Sony's bottom line but they will learn from this generation and carry those lessons into the next. Dont count them out.
Every company has to adjust to a changing landscape if they are to survive its something Sony has had to do in the past and will do so again.
MS kinect record breaking sells, has expanded MS market as well. Is already being developed for next gen and kinect style controls are being integrated in to other companies products like the new smart TVs. The voice commands have expanded the functionality of regular genres and is being supported by many devs right now. the motion control functions are being supported in different games as well like Tiger Woods golf. Kinect has its million+ selling franchises so its not losing money (its actually making it hand over fist). In capable hands kinect is a great device with function to spare. They still have a bunch of games being made for it.
The MOVE has been integrated into some of Sonys biggest games. It has decent tech but is just lacking support.
The thing about the Eyetoy was it had no support which is understandable because the tech and system power at that time wasnt really practical. Same thing with this gen. The Wii system was to weak to produce the fidelity of the games we were playing this gen WiiU is its correction. The kinect eats up lots of processing power so its full potential probably cant be met with the 360. Move doesnt really have support.
You ask about motion gamings Halo2 and Socoms when you already have a bunch of successful motion game, like Mario Zelda, the Dance series. What are you basing the criteria of a game being a Halo2 or Socom.
Ultimate success comes from dominating your market, if these companies only wanted to cut out a little slice they would. They would try to specialize in specific genres and ignore other markets and genres. Nintendo abandoned the Wii because it wasnt capable of doing the ultra realistic games, if your theory was true about them they would have road out the Wii until someone else released a new system since they did come in to the market last. Understanding gaming and making a successful business strategy are 2 different things.
the time you speak of is next gen. Quiet as kept the 360 was the only console that didnt launch with motion controls this gen, remember the sixaxis. Next gen with motion controls being a bit more perfected and systems that can deliver the proper experiences it would be suicide for any company to not release with a motion control plan. It would at least show they lack vision.
Look at Guitar Hero. It was huge. Look at it now. It's dead. Nobody wants to play pretend band anymore. What's popular and successful doesn't always stay popular and successful.
The facts are right there for everyone to see... Motion controls are taking a back seat to the touch screen controllers in the Wii U. Reception to the Move has been lukewarm at best. Sixaxis was a total bust. Kinect hasn't produced a must-have experience unless you like dance games. Practically every big title releasing in the foreseeable future is a traditional controller-based game and only uses motion controls in a supplemental manner, if it all. Motion controls aren't integral to the experience. Third parties aren't going out of their way to build experiences unique to motion controls. They are just sticking it in where it fits. Motion control's biggest showing this year was Kinect being used in Mass Effect, and that wasn't even motion control. It was just voice recognition. Traditional controller based gaming still absolutely dominates the industry.
You compared motion controls to online gaming. I bring up Halo 2 and Socom because they were games they proved without question that online play was a huge addition to gaming and the future of gaming. It's damn near mandatory in any shooter or racing game nowadays.
Motion controls have been around for years now. Can you point to any game that has had any kind of comparable impact? The only games you mention are Zelda, Mario, and dance games.
I'm pretty sure people wouldn't be terribly bothered if the next Mario or Zelda didn't have motion controls. It's not an important aspect of those games. Motion controls wasn't what made those games special. They were great games that just happened to have motion control. But could you imagine if Halo 4 didn't have online multiplayer? It simply wouldn't be the same game. As for the dance games, well, just look at who makes Dance Central... Harmonix. Guitar Hero and Rock Band sold well too, but they aren't working on Rock Band 4 are they? Is Sony out of touch for not jumping on the plastic instrument bandwagon too?
Like I said, gaming is a lot of things. You don't need to be a jack of all trades to succeed. That applies to all businesses. Hot dogs are fast food, but McDonalds doesn't serve them. Microsoft and Sony are both in the technology and entertainment business, but Microsoft doesn't make TVs and Sony doesn't sell computer software.
Having an answer to every aspect of the market isn't a recipe for success. You only need to do something, and do it right in order to succeed. Nintendo proved that. No HD, no notable online functionality. Not even a standard traditional controller. Yet it smoked MS and Sony who tried to do a little bit of everything.
You bring up Nintendo's abandonment of the Wii as proof that you need a multi-faceted approach to dominate the market. But we haven't even seen if that approach will pay off. What we have seen is Nintendo kick Sony and MS's ass by specializing in something, which you claim is the wrong way to go.
I'm not sure where you get this idea that touchscreen is getting the front seat there are games on the WiiU that dont require it but will work with the Wiimote. MS hasnt shown any dedicated touch screen controls they are implementing smart glass but without a true dedicated controller it would always be optional functions and features.
And one thing to touch on about kinect, dont mistake must have for massively accepted. Kinect hasnt made a real play yet. MS only backed Kinect Star Wars a little bit and its over 800,000 and will be over 1 million by christmas. Once MS buys a few 9s from IGN and Xplay and flood the airwaves with commercials for 4 months you will magically see your must have experience. You may think that is corrupt but, right now IGN and Xplay are working against them so its corrupt now. Or they may just wait til next gen right now is experiment and kink work out time and they are still profiting.
Gaming is subjective, if you look at all the reviews given to something like Star Wars kinect the game looks horrible, but if you ask all of the over 800,000 that own it youll get more than 90% telling you its good. read consumer reviews they will regularly be more honest. As a gamer since the 80s I can tell you my analysis from playing the games is that If MS could bring ppl in without a bias chip already on their shoulder they would accept the games easily. Right now the media is poisoning ppl with lies.
Anyway motion controls as we know them now are still very young. The wand style of play has only been around since the Wii, Kinects controller free experience is less than 2 years old. They have to create new genres learn what works and what doesnt. I played tons of FPS before HAlo and Socom. And online isnt a play mechanic you essentially play the game the same whether online or split screen at home. Motion control being in A Mario and Zelda game just shows that motion controls dont have to get in the way and can deliver a successful experience both critically and sales wise. To be fair you gotta give the industry time to develop motion gaming. If it was just shoe horn it into existing genres just to play them different motion control would be stupid.
Sony did jump on the plastic instrument bandwagon as much as any body else did, they jumped on the motion control band wagon too. And nintendo didnt really kick MS and Sonys ass, they sold more consoles but couldnt profit from 3rd party games they specialized and cut out a little piece for themselves but had no chance to stay flourishing against MS Sony in any other aspect. We havent seen whether or not them dumping the Wii to become more universal or a jack of all trades will pay off but we know them staying as a specialized experience was a fail (if not they would have stayed with it).
As for where I'm getting the idea that the Wii U touch screen is getting the front seat? Isn't it obvious? Nintendo isn't pushing the Wiimote option. They're pushing the touch screen. Hell, they've done more to promote the standard controller option. Do a Google image search for "Wii U". Most of the pictures are Nintendo's own marketing and almost all of them are focused on the pad. If you think Wiimotes (something that isn't even included with the Wii U) aren't taking a back seat to the touch screen (which comes standard with the console), you're out of your mind.
I'm beginning to think you don't want what I'm saying to be true. For some reason, you think the entirety of the gaming media is out to ruin motion gaming by lying to people about it's quality and fun factor. There's no conspiracy. If it was the media keeping motion controls down, but the rest of us saw the actual value in them, the biggest motion control feature of the year wouldn't be something as minor as voice commands in Mass Effect 3. And like I said, that isn't even a motion control feature. It's just voice recognition with absolutely no motion required. Reviewers haven't widely accepted it, and even developers haven't accepted it. And Kinect Star Wars sure doesn't help your argument. 800,000 units sold isn't what publishers strive for. Especially when their game is carried by an insanely popular license like Star Wars. Games like Sorcery or Rise of Nightmares or The Gunstringer have done nothing more than decent at best, both critically and commercially.
And sorry, but calling Wii "a fail" is just stupid. Nintendo made out like bandits, and consumers seemed to love it. 100 million units is not "a fail" at all. And it proves my point. You don't need to be the jack of all trades to "get" gaming. You only need to do what you do right.
Just because Nintendo is opting not to ride the motion control train until it derails doesn't mean Wii was a failure. It just means Nintendo are smart enough to move on when signs are showing that it has run it's course.
Simply put, if it's not a priority for the company that put it on the map, or the bulk of developers, I don't see why it should be a priority for Sony.
Motion control has plenty of support, remeber nintendos entire catalog was motion based and from what they showed at E3 that isnt changing. the kinect has devs making a bunch of kinect exclusives. FROM the ppl that did demon souls did Steel Battalion, Ubisoft has release 2 fighting games and are releasing the Avengers fighting game. I'm not sure who is doing the DBZ, I believe capcom is doing the Crimson Dragoon, theres another dev doing the harry potter game Crytek doing Ryse. keep in mind this is the end of a gen, they arent going to invest lots in systems reaching their twilight.
And you keep saying they had years to develop games Nintendo did and thats why you see they have some universally accepted games, kinect isnt even 2yrs old. If you followed kinect you would know they have made giant strides with it since launch, games they have now have solved problems the initial games had and in some cases the solutions are so new they werent even able to be put into the newer released games because the game was to far in develpment (thats actually why Star War Kinect Jedi destiny moved with dash and not a walk and why Steel battalion doesnt use open palm recognition).
As for nintendo promoting the touchscreen controller and the pro controller and not the Wiimote....well duh the wiimote is known why promote something that is already established, thats like FORD promoting tires being on their cars. And you know the tablet controller is a motion device as well.
Its not that i dont want what you say to be true its just that the evidence dont allow what you say to be true. If there is no conspiracy then the gaming media is filled with people that are terrible at there job. I'd rather think they are corrupt than that many people are stupid kbthere are too many lies misrepresentations and comparative embalance for everything to be on the up and up.
You are also confusing motion control with kinect functions. Voice commands is a part of the kinect package. mass Effect 3 has nothing to do with motion controls so why even bring it up. You truly dont get it MS used the Star wars license to further its agenda. They used it to move some consoles and get more people to try out kinect. There was more to the Star Wars thing than what you think. The real world enjoyed it and 800,000 soon to be 1mil units sold along with a boost in console sales. I'm sure they already made their money back and then some (DEVS dont want that?). Sorcery Gunstringer and RON are doing what they are suppose to do every swing cant be a home run,
And i never said the Wii or Nintendo was a fail, I sad the situation that the Wii was in (being underpowered and now not having motion control as its own novelty due to kinect and Move being released) would leave the wii unable to gain anymore staying like that was a fail. And as i said The Wii tablet is a motion device as well, nintendo has left nothing.
Next gen you will see that Motion gaming will hit its true stride. All the signs point to it, by the 2nd year 2nd screen gaming will be being perfected. Next gen is going to be great.
Related image(s)
Yes, Sony have made huge strides in nearly every aspect of the PS3. But I think that their earlier mistakes were catastrophic and have hugely contributed to the rise of the Xbox 360 as a successful and profitable gaming platform. Sony has lost a lot of market share from the previous generation, especially in the U.S, and arguably don't have a lot of momentum leading into the next generation. I also think that blu-ray inclusion was an error as it delayed the launch and was costly.
I believe that a PS3 launched in 2005 with DVD and conventional CPU/GPU (at a reasonable price point) would have carried on the momentum from PS2 and blown away the Xbox 360, and, maybe the Wii as well.
blu ray was expensive but it became such a great reason to get a PS3
Hopefully they release the PS4 at a competitive price, and hopefully they do a better job at having a machine that appeals to everyone right from the start.
We advertised that the PS3 is a Blu- ray player for the softcore and movie buyers. We made our console with the best hardware can buy in 2006. Our competitors have weaker hardware and have majority of the market. Yeah we understand gaming, it's not what the fans want anymore, it's what we want!!
if sony was like MS or nintendo we would be playing kinect or wii motion type games, and playing the same games forever (Aka halo 50 and mario 2089
Truth is you only know of those games because you were crying about Nintendo not having any new IPS and people pointed out how wrong you were. There are more than that on the DS and 3DS but its a waste of time because you let your hate and ignorance guide you rather than pay any attention to actual facts.
Sony's problem is that they started out casual allowing anything on their console and then they got cocky and started listening to people like you about what the PS3 needed. Just like Nintendo did at one point and paid dearly for it..
Yes I'm sure you consider Barbie, Rugrats, Power Rangers to be hardcore titles but honestly they are casual games that kids enjoy and they forgot that with PS3 which is why its dead last now.
Now I'll await your amusing fact less and childish response that wont prove anything I said wrong because not a fact will be given and not a f*ck will be given by me about anything you have to say.
no moron, I have a wii, got it for 100 bucks when i worked at gamecrazy. fav game on it is muramasa Demon Blade and xenoblade.
dont be a douche. ur the one who was offended. Im not sure what side ur on, MS or Nintendo, but i just hope your enjoying your games. and hats off to you for pointing out im a child and love barbie and rugrats. so many things i never knew about myself.
the wii downstairs musta been my imagination lol.
fact is the wii had good games, just not alot of them, it had the same old mario, zelda, metroid. but for new IP's it wasnt many. I count about 20-25 good games on the wii, thats nothing compared to my ps3 library.
I don't understand all this hate toward Sony when they're actually catering to the gamers and are the only ones bringing out new ips.
You would think gamers would be for the company that is arguably the only one for the hardcore gamers.
Crazy world we live in.