Sony: We want PS3 to be like the ipod
by David Hinkle 
{ Jun 12th 2006 at 2:30PM }
Ken Kutaragi recently held a very long interview with Japanese web site PC Impress Watch where he spoke about the PS3's current presence and that for Sony, their goal is to have their next-generation console have the kind of market pull that the Apple brand does."Steve Jobs could slap an Apple logo on the PS3 and sell them for $2,000 each. We couldn't do that. That's the difference between the PlayStation brand and a computer brand, like Apple."
Kutaragi emphasized that he wished to make the term "PS3" synonymous with "entertainment computer." The company's goals seem to be in establishing an electronics "ecosystem" in the consumer's household, where the name Sony means enjoyment. However, where Apple has achieved this through stylish, trendy gadgets at affordable pricing, will this goal be achievable for Sony given the hefty price tag of the unit?
[Via Gamespot]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Thomas H @ Jun 12th 2006 4:34PM
Apple gadgets, affordable pricing? If an 30 GB iPod costs $300, and a PS3 costs $600, I don't see how a PS3 is considered expensive. As a matter of fact, all of these comments about how the PS3 is too expensive are foolish. $600 is less than almost all desktop computers. What they are saying about the PS3 being a "entertainment computer" is technically true. I mean, if it wasn't, what would it be?
Elric @ Jun 12th 2006 5:30PM
Um, an overpriced Video Game console...
you can't even compare the iPod to the PS3, Not only in functionality but also in looks and style, it's just nowhere near an apple product... now the new DS! Wooooooo WEEEEEEEEE! There's Apple style written all over that!
But seriously the PS3 is priced like a Neo Geo! The games look GREAT but not THAT great. If I spent as much time playing games as I used to when I was 8 It'd be worth the price but then I wouldn't be able to afford it if I was 8 :(
PS3 has a paradox on their hands, those old enough to buy a PS3 won't because they have other things to do... Video Games now are leisure time, interrupted by things like girlfriends/wives and children and jobs. And those that have the time to play it like a $699 machine deserves to be played, can't afford one.
SuicideNinja @ Jun 12th 2006 5:51PM
I hate iPods, but they are sure considered stylish. The PS3 on the other hand, isn't in my opinion. However, it isn't something that you carry around with you, which would make it's looks a bit more acceptable. you can hide it in an entertainment center.
The price of iPods is also ridiculous when you can get cheaper devices that do the same thing. Or even similarly priced devices with more features. Personally, I think iPods are more of a fashion-conscious thing. They make you "cool" I guess.
I also think the "computer" tag ruins the PS3 more than it helps. Computer & console should be separate. A gaming console will never do home computing as well as a dedicated PC if its focus is truly games.
I think a lot of people just want to the play the games. They couldn't care less about the Bluray or the Linux. It sounds good on paper, but in practice it holds little value.
Sony should bar Kutaragi, Harrison, and Hirai from saying anything else. The European reps have the best attitude.
doglet @ Jun 12th 2006 6:37PM
you will never be able to sell a consol for 2000, no one could do that. certainly not apple. i can buy a dell with a flat screen moniter and a printer for 300 bucks, wtf is this guy smoking thinking that someone will pay twice that for something not nearly as useful. ps3 is going to flop because its too expensive. consol should be 300 at most.
doglet @ Jun 12th 2006 6:41PM
you guys are idiots, the term "entertainment computer" is about the stupidest thing i have ever heard. my real computer is an "entertainment computer" AND runs word! the consol will have better graphics for the first 6 months its out but after that i would actually prefer to have a mouse and keyboard not to mention over 60 fps. oh and did i mention that i have to buy a computer weither or not i buy a ps3? people need spread sheets, microsoft word, email. a consol is a consol and a computer is a computer.
naggs @ Jun 12th 2006 6:52PM
from my point of view, ps3 is just not going to work. the only game i am interested is gran turismo (i dont think that any of the other games look worth while with no mouse and keyboard) and for that to be worth wile you need to drop about 200 bucks on a wheel and pedals. so thats an initial investment of 5-600 bucks +50 or more for the game +200 bucks for the good wheel. so we are talking about at least 700 bucks, probably more like 800. even if i did have that kind of money to spend i would get a new computer instead.
people will always need a pc but we dont NEED a ps3. the kind of people with 800 bucks to drop on videogames are generally responsible enough not to spend that kind of money on a video game.
someone who knows @ Jun 12th 2006 7:23PM
do you think that a "entertainment computer" needs to have full MS Office? no way, does a Media Center allow you to edit MSWord docs? no, or Excel spreadsheets, no.
while a movie is playing. pause. lets edit a excel spreadsheet, back to movie
nope
bobeotm @ Jun 12th 2006 8:22PM
I think one of the main reasons they like the term "entertainment computer" is the the PS3 is capable of doing all the multimedia entertainment functions of a PC, while putting it all where you want it the most, in the livingroom. Photo Slideshows, music, movies, gaming, online communities, videochat, and so on. For a gaming console, it's expensive, but they left out features on the cheaper model, with not limitations to its gaming abilities, an people get upset!?
You give them something with a ton of features, and they complain about the price. Yet when you give them a more affordable option with some of the more extraneous features removed, and people compain about it being crippled.
Those who complain that they want a gaming machine only, for some reason complain about the core version of the PS3, even though its more feature packed than the premium XBOX360. I guess its just fashionable to hate sony nowadays, and the sony execs arent helping much.
Nik @ Jun 12th 2006 10:36PM
a 360 premium package is 400, a ps3 bare bones is 500. IMO the bare bones PS3 really should have dropped Blu Ray, games should stay on normal DVD's, at least this generation. We dont need that space yet, swapping disks? You can afford 10 seconds to get off the couch and change it. Blu Ray games only drive up costs which get passed on to the consumers and allow programmers to be lazier with their coding. I have yet to see a definitive argument that games need Blu Ray right now. If you have one that i havent touched upon, bring it on.
Tom @ Jun 12th 2006 10:55PM
What makes a computer a computer isn't its ability to run Word, or that it has Linux installed, or that you can put it in your living room and do all that online multimedia crap. No, it's not any of those things. It's ALL of those things, and much more. A computer is about freedom. Can I hook up a printer to a PS3? No, but that's not the focus. Can I edit and burn home videos onto DVD? No, but that's not the focus. Can I install Apache, PHP, and MySQL and host a Suh-weet PS3 blog? No, but that's not the focus. So what is the focus of the PS3? If we say the focus is gaming AND we say this device is a computer, should we not then be able to install Windows XP on it and see how good Oblivion looks running in 1080p, an experience not offered by the Xbox360 version of the game? No, of course not; that would be a ridiculous thing to ask of a game console, which is what the PS3 is: a CONSOLE.
James @ Jun 12th 2006 11:19PM
LOL I love how much everyone hates Sony these days....Anyway, yeah they are calling it an "Entertainment Computer" So what! Nintendo called thier systems: "Entertainment Systems" and all it did was play games... Do you expect companys to use obvious titles like: "The Sony: You can play games on this machine!" :P
matjet @ Jun 13th 2006 12:02AM
sheesh. harrison is european. welsh wasent it?
ps3 does not cost $699. |:-/. get it right.
ipod: $300
ps3: $500
not that bad actually.
from what iv heard you can infact hook your ps3 up to a printer...
from what iv heard you can upgrade your ps3 for non gaming uses...
from what iv heard you can put any data editing program you can get to run on linux, on ps3... including word editors!
yea its a computer all right.
Brian @ Jun 13th 2006 12:45AM
What do all you people think a console is if not a computer, a plastic box of magic?
Remember the original name of the NES in Japan - the Famicom: Family Computer.
Paul @ Jun 13th 2006 8:17AM
mat jet you are comparing the highest priced Ipod against the lowest price PS3... more like
Ipod- 99
PS3- 500
Ech.
It is all about percieved affordablity. When apple entered the mp3 marketplace it was a new market, they made people believe two things
1) Ipods were cheap for mp3 players- (a lie but effectively told, it sold to the masses)
2) you must have an iPod brand mp3 player to be cool, other players just arnt cool.
If sony wants the Ps3 to be the ipod of the gaming market they have a longgggg way to go (1- two cheaper systems/ 2- not much of a cool factor for general public with video game machines). But instead they want the Ps3 to be the ipod of the next gen DVD market! This is where EVERYONE keeps missing. Again, they are not selling us a game machine that plays blu-ray. They are selling blu-rays that play games.
An interesting sony announcement went ignored the other day. They are pushing back their standard blu-ray players until late august. Why? 1) they are not ready 2) it will drive PS3 sales. People are going to wait two months to get a Ps3 for 600 instead of dropping 1000 on a blu-ray player. It will drive Ps3 sales and will look like they are winning the console war, when in reality, they are being bought by non-gamers and have nothing to do with the console war.
The Ps3 is the most advanced console of this generation (360 fan boys- power wise they are equal, but since this does have a next gen DVD it is more advanced out of the box) but I would not be suprised if it is Sony's last console for that reason. Since the majority purchasing will not be game players, they will lose tons of money (because people will not be buying as many games per unit sold- as we all know games are their true revenue stream)and will not see the point of building another machine at a loss like is necessary with consoles.
Welcome to the end of the sony era, no one's fault but their own ineffectual marketing and poor strategic planning.
xbox360dsPSP @ Jun 13th 2006 10:11AM
"...PS3 is capable of doing all the multimedia entertainment functions of a PC, while putting it all where you want it the most, in the livingroom. Photo Slideshows, music, movies, gaming, online communities, videochat, and so on."
There's not a thing in this list that the 360 can't do and/or doesn't currently do. The exception being the camera peripheral that hasn't been released yet. That said, the entire PS3 console doesn't exist at this time let alone a camera.
When the right "knock your socks off" title comes along for the PS3, I may bite, but right now there's nothing in the launch line-up or upcoming platform exclusives that will have me pony up for the console. Platform exclusives are important, because I already own a 360. Multi-platform 360 and PS3 games will look the same for all practial purposes.
My eyes are wide open and ready for something to "WOW" me -- that's why I visit PS3 fanboy regularly.
Back to topic, I don't understand Ken's comments about brand. The Playstation brand is extremely powerful. Frankly, it's the only reason why we care about the PS3. If the new XBOX was $600, it would be DOA. If the PS3 was created by some other company, they would have been laughed off stage with investors demanding their money. Sony has an extremely powerful brand. This console will test the brand's integrity.
SuicideNinja @ Jun 13th 2006 12:25PM
"from what iv heard you can infact hook your ps3 up to a printer...
from what iv heard you can upgrade your ps3 for non gaming uses...
from what iv heard you can put any data editing program you can get to run on linux, on ps3... including word editors!"
You could do this with the PS2 as well. And it sucked. Using PS2 Linux would be the equivalent to sawing off your hand slowly with a butter knife.
If you want to hook up a printer and use postscript drivers, be my guest. If you are used to using Microsoft Office (which is bad enough), OpenOffice is going to drive you insane. Get even more frustrated and try StarOffice. That's assuming someone even make builds that are compatible with the cell. It will probably be a bit before any non-Sony-provided cell-compiled programs show up.
I can't wait for the "Sony package installer". I'm guessing the command line will be:
#SonyOwnsYourMonkey /a /ss /rootkit=yes [name of software]
=) Sorry, had to do it.
Upgrade your PS3? Do you really think Sony wants you messing with anything inside of that box other than the hard drive? Even then, you'll probably need a proprietary HDD just like the 360. The "upgraded" PS3's, should they ever come to fruition per Ken's psychotic fantasies, would be completely separate PS3's that you'd have to buy.
Headline to Sony:
"Gamers Want the PS3 to be Like a Games Machine"
How about some info on some fresh franchises? We've already established that gamers have relinquished Sony's right to speak.
Paul @ Jun 13th 2006 12:32PM
+1 billionzillionmillionkajillion
Suicide Ninja FTW
Vader582 @ Jun 13th 2006 1:44PM
"Steve Jobs could slap an Apple logo on the PS3 and sell them for $2,000 each. We couldn't do that. That's the difference between the PlayStation brand and a computer brand, like Apple." -Ken Kutaragi
Translation: "What we'd really like to do is slap the Sony/PS3 label on a big, nasty, brownish turd and sell it to you for $2000 and you be happy about that, because I really have nothing but contempt for you all."
john @ Jun 13th 2006 4:37PM
I think the ps3 isn't a bad machine. I think it is to far ahead of it's time like neo geo and to expensive. I see it as a console as I'm sure a large group of most gamers do. I think Sony should quit thinking of it as a computer and advertise it as what people really think it is a console. However with that being said I'm going with the Wii this round. Reason being at least Nintendo is tring to make gameing something new and fresh. I've already seen fancy graphics they don't wow me enough anymore I want as close to virtual reality as I can get. I see the Wii with it's motion control closer then 360 or ps3 in that area. Let's start feeling the games I mean the pad way of playing games is old fashioned now if you ask me. Give me a new way to play.
shu @ Jun 13th 2006 11:39PM
You know why Apple can get away with it? Because they don't do crap like install rootkits that destroy your computer or force weird proprietary formats down your throat. Screw you, Sony. Hopefully this will be the final nail in your long overdue coffin.
Kamisamanou @ Jun 13th 2006 11:55PM
Sony's not going to implement Linux or any OS worth having on there system. And even if they do, it will be removed in months. They did it with the PS2, and it caused alot of trouble brought on by crackers.
As far as the iPod vs. PS3 goes:
Quit crappin' over the price difference! The iPod is roughy 4% the size of the PS3 meaning that it's technology is therefore more expensive. If the PS3 was packing the same 60gig drive it'd be another $100-150 more expensive. The iPod screen gleaming on our PS3 would also push the price tag. Truth be told, without iTunes, the iPod wouldn't be that big of a profit for Apple.
Also, you can pretty much slap the Playstation name on something and it sell, as was the case of the PS2. After Sony revolutionized the industry with it's cd-rom fed Playstation, the sales were amazing and produced a cult like following for the Playstation systems. After riding on the success of that name, the PS2 did run into some D.R.E.[Disc Read Error] problems which made many bitter towards them, yet it still sold. That name, Playstation, is what hindered the original X-Box.
Also, the decision by Sony to keep the system[PS3] under wraps was a bad one. The biggest reason being that previous to the 360 releasing, they had no hard facts to encourage people to make the choice.
And, as mentioned earlier, the iPod has so much success because of it's perfect marriage with iTunes. This affect is more likely to be seen with the 360 since it was built to integrate with Windows from the start. That will boost it's online and offline experience.
Finally, the X-Box 360 has a huge head start. While many would say this is a bad thing due to the use of standard DVD drives in the system, it's more likely to help it. Why? Because when the HD-DVD drives do release for the current 360, newer models will implement the drives and stay at the same price. This will result in a revitalizing of the console. Those who don't upgrade still won't be left behind. Game companies will release there games on hybrid discs[DVD on one side, HD-DVD on the other]. Those who do upgrade will get the excitement of extra levels and improved graphics and gameplay. Also, with this head start, by the time the PS3 enters it's prime, the 3rd X-Box will be releasing which will cut down PS3 sales for that year.
Brian @ Jun 14th 2006 1:30AM
SuicideNija, Sony doesn't make games, why would they be talking about franchises. That is something people mistake, Sony just makes the hardware and provides distribution, they do not create content.
Shu, Sony is a big company. Sony Records is made up of different people than SCEA. Although that is a good point, Sony did take a big hit to their name.
Alot of people are faulting the PS3 for Sony's stupidity. Sony has never been a well run company. They do not make entertaining presentationds. They gave their press conference the way they would to a group of investors which no longer works when so many fanboys are present and gamers can stream video of the event. Sony needs to shake up it's personnel - bring in some fresh faces or they have a rough future ahead of them which is unfortunate because I'd hate the PS3 to die before its time like the last two Sega systems.
elmimmo @ Jun 14th 2006 6:43AM
Do not ever take seriously someone who ties his trousers over hist navel.
Kyjibo @ Jun 14th 2006 1:19PM
Technically the ps3 is a computer but thats as far as it goes. the term has evolved past the meaing that they are assigning to it, maybe 10 years ago before the computer was what it is now it would have worked but now it just does not mean the same thing
as for ipod price, the screens and small HDs are the things that make it expensive.
as for ps3 price, the ps3 looks like its going to be an excelent console, but when there are altertatives available for less than half the price it starts to become hard to agree with such a hefty price tag.
Simon @ Jun 14th 2006 2:28PM
Do be like iPod, first thing to do: Stick with the name "Playstation". NOT PS1, PS2, PS3. Just Playstation, and make the 1,2,3 secondary. Like iPod.
Second thing to do: change the design of it. Playstation 2 design was really cool. Playstation 3 design is NOT COOL.
It's as simple as that. You know why? because playstation had once reached the status of being like an ipod. I remmber that some years ago, not having a playstation was uncool. You simply HAD TO HAVE ONE.
Elric @ Jun 15th 2006 11:07AM
Agreed Shu, Apple says "Hey, if want something cool and incredibly easy to use, you'll buy our product which we think is very reasonably priced. If you don't think it's reasonably priced, then you can keep your malfunctioning virus infected soon-to-be-paperweight." Enjoy your decision.
Sony doesn't have that kind of confidence or "Cool" anymore.....
Kyle Mistry @ Jun 15th 2006 9:31PM
Wii, anyone?
SuicideNinja @ Jun 16th 2006 2:51PM
"SuicideNija, Sony doesn't make games, why would they be talking about franchises. "
Okay, then who does David Jaffe work for? He is involved with God of War 1/2 for PS2.
And they certainly publish games (Shadow of the Colossus).
"The press event opened with David Jaffe, now creative director of Sony's Santa Monica studio"
http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/action/godofwar2/news.html?sid=6148166
I'm curious...why did you think Sony didn't make games?