Sony says if the PS2 flopped, people would be cheering on the PS3
by Nick Doerr 
{ Feb 6th 2007 at 2:30PM }
This is more of an interesting piece of Sony-speak than anything. In essence, Sony thinks that expectations of the PS3 are getting built up into the unrealistic zone, thanks in majority to the great success felt by the PS2. SCEA President Jack Tretton went on record saying that if the PS2 flopped and placing Sony in third overall for the console war, "people would have a warm spot in their hearts for the good old days of PlayStation and they'd actually root for us to get back on top. But I don't know if we want to pay the price to get that kind of [love]."Tretton clearly doesn't want the PS3 to fall into third place to get some love in the upcoming generations... like... six years from now. However, he's not all that concerned about such a reality -- he's confident the PS3 is the best system out there (we'll just need some, you know, games to judge that belief) and will remain the market leader in the long term. In the long term, you'll find nothing but complete agreement from us. For another year? We may have to take a few sucker-punches and get comfortable in second place -- we'll get out of third fairly soon. Maybe. Probably. What do you guys think? If the PS2 had failed (and certain genres of games moved to the GameCube, probably thrusting it to the top), would more people think back on the "good old days of PlayStation" and root for the PS3?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Nameless @ Feb 6th 2007 5:11PM
I think what he said kind of makes sense. Though, I'm sure most Anti-Sony people will disagree.
The lack of games isn't all that surprising. Neither the PlayStation or the PlayStation 2 had too many games in its first few months. It takes time. Hell, not even the Revolution has all that many games.
Edge of Blade @ Feb 6th 2007 3:08PM
And who should we blame for having unrealistic expectations? I wonder...
Arno @ Feb 6th 2007 3:19PM
Sony Europe CEO said:
"... the first five million are going to buy it, whatever it is, even [if] it didn't have games"
How's that for unrealistic expectations?
(Source: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6151631.html)
Jesse @ Feb 6th 2007 3:31PM
Sony is the one who built up unrealistic expectations for their console.
Also, who is the PS3 going to start outselling to get out of last place? I cannot see any possible chain of events this year that will put Sony in second place. It's literally out of the question that they'll catch up to the xbox 360 by the end of the year and the Wii is expected to potentially match the xbox 360's total sales by the end of this year.
Nintendo is producing 200,000 units per week and it isn't enough. Sony is producing 100,000 units per week and it's too much. There's no way the PS3 is going to catch up to anyone in 2007, and it's unlikely they'll do so in 2008.
Tom @ Feb 6th 2007 5:01PM
Maybe Sony should get some new games and demos into the Kiosks out there? That Motorstorm demo is atrocious and I know the machine can do better.
Dolla Dolla @ Feb 6th 2007 4:14PM
As quoted above, the reason people have unrealistic expectations is because we were TOLD to by Sony. I think the month of April will be the telltale sign for the PS3. It will have launched in Europe and the market will be saturated. By then, Wiis should be available, as well. With all 3 next gen consoles sitting on shelves, April/May's numbers will speak leaps and bounds about the PS3s position for the remainder of the year.
Audie @ Feb 6th 2007 5:53PM
It is a good point. But it is like sobering up and saying maybe I should not have said or done what I did last night. They hyped this thing like the second coming of JC. They promised two hdmi outs for multiple monitors. They promised time travel. They promised immortality. I seriously doubt they will come out of this one in under 2 years. I buy systems for games and am still waiting for them from Sony.
Maybe they should focus on improving their position by getting the flaws fixed and shuffling some of their titles around to make it worth it to PS3 owners instead of picking on nintendo with these comments. It is fairly obvious they are aiming at gamecube with this comment. At least Nintendo and Microsoft provided some content on their downloadable services at the start to buy a little time to provide customers with something to choose while waiting for more large titles. PSN which is better than xbox live (sarcasm) has 4 titles tops now so about 1 every 3 weeks, barely any demos to try and they expect people to sit on a download screen for ages waiting for the next opportunity to play.
Aeris130 @ Feb 6th 2007 4:28PM
But if PS3 fails, ppl will root for the PS4. It's a win-win for Sony.
Taylor @ Feb 6th 2007 4:35PM
I am saying this with an unbiased opinion, but I see the PS3 as the third best system for the next few years. The problems I see with it moving up is its price, losing exclusives, and weak online game (still better than Wii's though). The Xbox 360 has stolen too many exclusives from the PS3, and the Wii has the motion sensing controller and low price. It will be hard for the PS3 to move up, but I think some new original killer aps and an improved online will help move it up.
ndoerr @ Feb 6th 2007 5:17PM
Hey everyone -- I think some of you are misconstruing my comments about the GameCube. I'm not in any way bashing Nintendo. In fact, I'm complimenting them by saying if Sony wasn't eating up most of the gaming library of last-gen, the GameCube would have been the unanimous victor -- they'd get all the RPGs, Japanese action titles, etc. Squeenix probably would have returned to Nintendo if the PS2 fell flat on its face. So, I'm not taking any shots at Nintendo, just saying that they would have grabbed all the franchises that made PS2 great.
This is what makes alternate realities fun!
humpty @ Feb 6th 2007 5:57PM
He's making a jab at Nintendo. They finished dead last with GC which is making a lot of people root for them regardless of whatever they put out. Thats all hes doing.
John @ Feb 6th 2007 6:00PM
I live in Northern Ireland and actually saw a PS3 for the first time today. It was pretty lackluster, the graphics on GTHD (the game on display) wernt really that much better than my 360! The only game im excited about is MGS4 and itl be pretty hard getting me to pay the guts of 1000 US Dollars (thats what theyr charging us here) to play Metal Gear Solid. Hmmm...
Naaiif @ Feb 7th 2007 11:14AM
Everyone ripping on Sony again, they hype everything up, you should be used to this by now. Look at the ps2, Ken said it'd be like jacking into the matrix for gods sake. Who cares what they say man, everyone forgot about that whole ps2 hype, and just played the games and fantastic game they were.
Just forget what Sony says and buy the damn system when the good games come out later on in the year, you shouldn't be deprived of a potentially great console just because you hold a grudge over the company because they were arrogant.
Sure they were arrogant, but does that make the system or the games worse in any way? No.
ManekiNeko @ Feb 6th 2007 7:53PM
This is what we call a "sore loser". Sega acted exactly the same way back in 1998, thumbing its nose at its customers and competitors while refusing to acknowledge its failure in the marketplace. We all remember what happened to them, don't we?
Nintendo is winning the next-gen console wars not only because people have fond memories of the company's glory days, but because Nintendo is bringing new concepts to an industry that desperately needs them.
Sony is out of ideas... last year's E3 press event with its "real-time weapon change" and "giant enemy crabs" proved that. They don't have a new vision for the industry... they just keep heaping cutting-edge technology on their game systems without finding a purpose for it.
That is why people are starting to turn on Sony, and its failure to acknowledge the deterioration of the Playstation brand name will cause irreparable damage to the company in the future. Jack Tretton can make jokes at Nintendo's expense now, but in 2010, the last laugh will be on him.
JR
humpty @ Feb 6th 2007 9:12PM
Hey JR, did you forget that PS2 outsold Wii, GC, xbox, and 360 in holiday 06? This is a 6 year old console against next gen competition and nifty control schemes from nintendo.. yea, the Playstation brand is slipping really fast.
Figboy @ Feb 6th 2007 10:10PM
I can see 12 chain of events that could easily push Sony out of it's third place slot:
1.) Virtua Fighter 5 (releasing at the end of this month)- Playstation 3 Exclusive for 4 or 5 months.
2.) Motorstorm (releasing in March) - PS3 Exclusive.
3.) Lair (May 2007) - PS3 Exclusive
4.) Warhawk (June 2007) - PS3 Exclusive
5.) Singstar (June 2007) - PS3 Exclusive (and likely to be big only in the UK)
6.) Ninja Gaiden Sigma (June 2007) - PS3 Exclusive (i know it's a remake of an X Box game, but no 360 version has been announced)
7.) Hot Shots Golf 5 (July 2007) - PS3 Exclusive
8.) Heavenly Sword (Q3 2007) - PS3 Exclusive
9.) Ratchet and Clank PS3 (Q3 2007) - PS3 Exclusive
10.) Metal Gear Solid 4 (Q4 2007) - PS3 Exclusive
11.) Mercenaries 2 (Q4 2007) - PS3 Exclusive
12.) LA Noire (Q4 2007) - PS3 Exclusive
each of these games add up to reasons why people will purchase a Playstation 3 this year.
couple that with some really high quality multiplatform titles, and those people that haven't bought an X Box 360 for the reasons listed above (some killer PS3 exclusives), won't be buying a 360 just to play multi-platform games.
as a PS3 owner, i'm buying these games for my PS3:
Assassin's Creed (August 2007)
Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway (April 2007)
Stranglehold (August 2007)
Medal of Honor: Airborne (March 2007)
F.E.A.R. (March 2007)
Oblivion (March 2007)
GTA IV (October 2007)
The Darkness (May 2007)
Half Life 2: Orange (June 2007)
Alone in the Dark (July 2007)
as a sole PS3 owner, there are plenty of multi-platform and exclusive content to keep me satisfied for this year.
i'm not saying i don't want a 360 (my roommate has one, and it's alright, although it crashes at the most inopportune times), i just don't see a reason to purchase one anytime soon outside of Crackdown and Mass Effect, the two titles that i'm looking forward to the most. And sorry, Halo 3 doesn't do it for me. the series is a mediocre FPS at best, and ridiculously overhyped. i'll get a 360, but not for another few months.
as long as the PS3 is getting the multi-platform titles, i get the best of both worlds (plenty of exclusives, and 3rd party titles). it's kind of a win/win, especially considering that i'm getting an HDTV in a month or two, so i can enjoy high definition content (after seeing HD movies on display, it's hard not to be impressed and want one of your own).
there's not much to whoop about when it comes to the PS3 now, but if you remember how things were back when the PS2 launched (hard to develop for, costly, "gamers don't want DVD," crappy release library, etc), you'll know that this phase will pass. all consoles go through it, or did you forget that Gears of War, Oblivion, Lost Planet, and Dead Rising didn't come out on the 360's launch day?
yoma @ Feb 6th 2007 11:02PM
Ima tell you guys str8 out, if the PS3 is a failure, lets say it sells less than 20 million or 30, sony will not make a 4th playstation. I know i would pull out, you disdain what you cannot have, no one wants to buy ur console, ok, we aint gonna make no more cheers.
Tyler @ Feb 7th 2007 12:19AM
I don't see any problems with the PS3 selling once more games come out, most people simply are waiting for more games to come out before they buy the system.. I myself am kinda weary how FF13 is coming out so far, but that definatly will sell systems alone with the sheer amount of FF-fanboys
Iridium @ Feb 7th 2007 12:59AM
If the PS2 failed I doubt the PS3 really woudl haev been on the drawing board. The original playstation sold extremely well but that gen of gaming was kind of a dark horse. I remember when I rented a PS1 when it first came out with Ridge Racer. I thought it was awesome and then when I played Tomb Raider and Wipeout the PS1 showed where gaming was going to go. Overall the PS1 still never had the same appeal as the SNES. For me the PS1/N64 era was when PC gaming became the place to be for a gamer. The rise of the FPS and online gaming held far more appeal than consoles. However this is now changing back the other way.
Sorry but Halo just isn't that great if you're coming from PC gaming. Once you've played one shooter you've pretty much played them all. After Half-Life very little has changed or been added to the genre. Graphics are light years better but the gameplay is essentially the same. Now the cost of PC gaming is rising to high for the few games worth playing. It's just not worth spending the ammount of money on a gaming rig. The $600 for a PS3 is peanuts compared to it.
Just like space sims and RTS games of the past the FPS and open world gangster GTA games are losing their appeal. Even though San Andreas was the best GTA game I became bored very fast because even though it was bigger and more polished it was essentially the same game as GTA3. That is why I wouldn't purchase a 360. The majority of the games are things I've played 100 times before. Plus the build quality of the thing is terrible.
Nintendo is having massive success with the Wii right now because I believe many gamers are longing for the experiences they had with the NES and SNES. The Wii has created massive hype because it has the potentail to be very different and bring new variety to stale game genres. Hopefully it will be able to work but the Wii needs a whole lot of new good games because right now there isn't much to play on it that makes the purchase worth it for me. I really wanted a Wii and tried to get one 3 times but failed. Now I'm just going to wait and see.
The PS3 is in my opinion the best new console. It has the ability to bring in the same types of Japanese games to match Nintendo and it has equal graphics to the 360. The PS3 is put together far better than the 360 and has the most standard features. To be a success the PS3 really just has to be good enough. Most people will buy one becuase it offers the most tech in the box for the money. Having a BluRay player, HD games, internet access, and major potential as downloadable content server makes it a good buy for many people. Sony has a huge catalog of movies and music it can draw from where MS must purchase it from outside sources.
I believe the 360 will move at a steady clip but never match the eventual volumes of the PS3. Everyone that will purchase Halo 3 probably already has a 360. Halo isn't going to sell 50 million systems, no game can. The Wii is burning to bright for what it really offers. Hopefully Nintendo can deliver to the people who purchased Wii's or in a few years time the Wii's lifespan may already be over.
Frankie @ Feb 7th 2007 1:59AM
@figboy
I can give you one, and only one reason why people will not be buying the PS3 as you expect even with those games.
1. $500-$600 price tag.
And when the PS2 was launched, people DID want DVD, as DVD was already the accepted format by then and was leaps and bound better than VHS both with functionality, quality and value.
Blu-ray or HD-DVD, it doesnt really matter because HD adoption rate is much slower and add in the cost of buying a new TV set to truly enjoy HD then you got a nasty situation in your hand. You can use your good ol standard TV with DVD, all you really needed to buy was the $300 PS2.
Today, you have to spend at least $500 for the console/player on a format that is still "at war", and the additional cost of an HDTV set of at least another $600, and it's pretty clear that the adoption rate would be much slower.
ManekiNeko @ Feb 7th 2007 4:54AM
There are actually some pretty intelligent and rational observations in this thread. I must say I'm pleasantly surprised... usually, when a PR flack like Jack Tretton makes a comment like this, all hell breaks lose and the discussion turns into a barroom brawl!
Anyway, I've got to side with Frankie on this one. Six hundred dollars is a lot to pay for a game console, and at the moment Sony hasn't done much to justify that premium price. Gamers are notoriously fickle, and will drop their brand loyalty in a heartbeat when price becomes an issue. It's happened before (the Sega Saturn cost just a hundred dollars more than the original Playstation, and was a flaming disaster here in the United States), and you can guarantee that it'll happen again.
I do worry about the Wii's future prospects, though. Nintendo did a poor job of supporting its last two game consoles, and I'm worried that history will repeat itself with an agonizingly slow trickle of first-party releases. Gamers just aren't satisfied waiting three or four months for their next fix, especially when there are other options available to them. They charged out of the starting gate, but if they want to stay in the race, Nintendo's going to have to ramp up game production and acquire a few outside developers.
JR
Frankie @ Feb 7th 2007 6:00AM
@ManikiNeko
I believe that Nintendo's strategy is to capture the casual and non-gaming public quite early in its life("now") because they vastly outnumber the hardcore gaming public. If the plan works as planned, the Wii would have overwhelming number on its side that developers just doesn't have any choice but to develop for the console with the largest install base.
Why do you think I subscribe to that school of thought?
1) The Wiimote. It's new, something interesting, and not threatening from the perspective of the non-gaming crowd. The remote itself doesn't use cutting edge technology but rather is made up of tried and true stuff. The implementation was the selling point, not the technology.
2)Price point and lack of HD support. Nintendo wants the system accessible as much as possible by doing away with cheap technology resulting in a very affordable price.
3) Glut of advertising commercials focusing on the casual gamer. Notice how Nintendo is focusing primarily on people playing together, families in front of the TV with people of all ages?
4) Delayed online support. See number 2, Nintendo wants people physically playing together. For now.
5) Early first party releases of party games, mini game compilations and other pick up and play softwares. There are some interesting titles for the hardcore crowd(primarilly from third party developers) but the true first party heavy hitters are set for release or were delayed later this year. Mario Party 8, Wario Ware: Smooth Moves, Wii Play, Wii Sports for this quarter alone.
TheSh0wstopper @ Feb 7th 2007 9:33AM
I hate to sound like a rich prick (because i'm not). But can we please stop crying about the price. Yes its $600, so what. Do you people have jobs? The AVERAGE and I stress average (hopefully you strive for higher than average or mediocrity) income for a working american is 35k a year. $600 is not a lot of money, and if you work 40 hours a week at anywhere other than McDonalds its shouldnt even be ONE weeks paycheck, not to mention there is this little term known as "saving up". Its also a nice investment, you get more than what you pay for. As for people who TRULY cant afford it, GOOD!!! This should motivate you to do something with your life. You should be ashamed of yourself. And poor people shouldn't be allowed to have fun anyway. It minimizes the lifestyle of the privileged. What good would it be to have a Jaguar if everyone had one in their drive-way?
Lion @ Feb 7th 2007 10:09AM
"If the PS2 had failed (and certain genres of games moved to the GameCube, probably thrusting it to the top), would more people think back on the "good old days of PlayStation" and root for the PS3?"
You mean, the way people rallied around the Dreamcast after the flop that was Saturn?
Dolla Dolla @ Feb 7th 2007 11:24AM
@Showstopper
You sound like you should be working for the Sony PR team. Apply, you just might get hired.
Regardless of what the average working american makes (and 35k sounds a bit much, I'd guess in the upper 20s, like 28), blowing 600 on a VIDEO GAME CONSOLE (yes, the PS3 is still a video game console, games FIRST) is out of the question. Why do you think there are talks of dropping the price of the PS3 so soon? Sony knows that is one of their biggest obstacles (And don't say the price of entry is 500. It's actually lower than that in Japan, around 450 and they still can't move units quickly, and higher than that when it launches in Europe with no 20gb version).
True or False: If the PS3 was the same price of the 360, it would've sold more in the US ..... a resounding TRUE.
If 360s aren't moving as fast as Microsoft wants (they cut their June shipments from 13-15 mil down to 12 mil), what makes you think people will PAY MORE for a system that has less games? And Blu-ray is not a good reason, since the HD adoption rate in the US is below 20%. As I understand, UMD movie sales are still higher than both HD-DVD and Blu-ray, and we all saw how fast studios pulled support from that format.
Price will always be a big factor, even if it isn't for you. I could pick up a PS3 today and it wouldn't put a dent in my wallet. But guess what? Sony has nothing desirable for me, at this moment. So parting with 600 right now is a waste. When their big name games start coming out AND their price drops, they might have this customer back on board, as well as many other casual consumers, which is the only way they can move out of third place.
Slaziman @ Feb 8th 2007 11:29AM
@Showstopper
Would you buy a 15$ soda that promises hightech taste and ultra quality ingredients, but tasted like shit?
Would you buy a 15$ soda at all?
It's not about how much money it is, it's about the money being too much for what it is; a game console, specially when the console is under delivering.
TheSh0wstopper @ Feb 8th 2007 11:43AM
hold up, that is completely different...
$15 for a soda!!!
but to be fair a soda that costs about $1 in a corner store I have spent about $5 for when I ordered it at a restaurant.
farmok @ Feb 8th 2007 4:53PM
Its realy funny to see sony making those claims. Honostly, while people were rooting for the underdog with Nintendo, there were loads of skeptisism from the majority of the gaming community when they announced their plans to part from the traditional added horsepower route.
I think the PS3 has alot of potential, especially with all the connection possibilities. Like Nintendo has been doing, Sony needs to show everythign this baby can do, other than improved graphics because unless you are hardcore, you are not going to realy notice the difference between a game for the 360 and a game for the PS3. They have the PSP, why not use it?
Sony needs to stop playing the blame game, accept responsibility for what they did wrong, and start over with the PS3, because they can still come out on top.
Gamedeals.ca @ Feb 8th 2007 6:35PM
People aren't rooting for Nintendo because the Gamecube failed, they're rooting for them because Nintendo owns our childhood. We grew up with Mario & Link, and a new generation grew up with Pokemon. No Playstation titles will ever hold our hearts in the way that Nintendo franchises have. The NES was like a safety blanket that kept us warm every night... THAT is why we're rooting for Nintendo's return to the top of the gaming food chain.
bluemillion @ Feb 12th 2007 1:23AM
I keep hearing about people saying that price will hold the PS3 back when it comes to sales. As sure as we are all sitting here the price of the PS3 will come down eventually. There are also going to be plenty of nice titles for it as well. I also keep hearing people say that the 360 looks just as good as the PS3. Well it should, after all we are talking about 2nd generation games here. What do you expect after over a years worth of development time with the system? But what about the 2nd and 3rd generation titles on the PS3? after the developers have gotten aquainted with the PS3's cell tech. The clear choice of system to be had here is the PS3. In fact, In my opinion Sony will eventually emerge as the clear winner when it comes to console sales because if you really think about it, the PS3 is actually a 4th generation console. Once Microsoft and Nintendo come out with their next generation consoles that have Blu-ray drives and upgraded processors in the next 6 or so years, the PS3 will outsell them at that point even more so than the PS2 is now. We are all going to talk about this 5 or 6 years from now.