Sony admits Home reveal was too early

By Oli Welsh Published 9 January, 2009

At least as far as the devs were concerned.

In an interview with Develop, the team behind PlayStation Home has admitted that they think the virtual world was announced too early.

Game director Peter Edward said that outside developers, targeted to create third-party content for Home, became wary when they realised how far it was from completion after its announcement early in 2007.

"Initially, there was real excitement from people, because we were showing something really different and that had a lot of potential," Edward said.

"And then there's the realisation that, well, we probably announced it too early - GDC 07 was a long time ago. I think there was sort of recognition amongst developers of 'Oh, this is interesting, but there's still a lot of work to be done.'"

Home went through numerous subsequent delays, with Sony eventually succumbing to the public pressure for some kind of launch by opening its beta to all users last month - without much third-party content in place.

However, Edward is convinced things are going to get better - and today's news of EA support would seem to bear him out.

"The feedback we've been getting is that, in the early days, it was a bit thin on the ground in terms of support and tools, but now it's mature and everybody's starting to produce some really interesting stuff," Edward said.

Elsewhere in the interview, Edward and lead programmer Mitch Goodwin talk candidly about the development Home, revealing that it started life as a lobby system for The Getaway: Black Monday on PS2.

"We recently found a bit of code which had weapon pickups in it; it was legacy from back in the day when the target was very different," Goodwin said.

Read our beta impressions or visit the PlayStation Home gamepage for more on Sony's virtual world.

Picture of Oli.

About Oli Welsh

Oli is Eurogamer's acting deputy editor and reviews editor and likes to take things one word at a time. He is among the best dressed people in South London.

Read more articles from Oli by visiting the Oli Welsh archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (66) Latest comment 3 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • DFawkes #1 3 years ago

    I'm reading it, but my brain can't quite take in the admission. Nice of him to be honest.

  • seasidebaz #2 3 years ago

    Guns please. Then I can shoot all the people dancing around the PSP3000 advert. And shoot the bloody screen so it shuts up.

    /win all round

  • PearOfAnguish #3 3 years ago

    It's not that it was too early, it's that Home is completely pointless. People did not spend hundreds on a games console to play a poor Second Life clone.

  • aidey6 #4 3 years ago

    no sh*t! Next we'll be hearing them stating that the PS3 is hard to program and they need to sell at a lower price if they want to get second place in the current gen sales.....

  • Beano #5 3 years ago

    No, Home was not shown to early... Sony just took waaay to much time deliver what they showed. If they announced it a year later (at GDC 2008), people would not have gotten exited about it in the same degree.

  • Dan234 #6 3 years ago

    I'm sure a Half Life 2 mod could have been knocked out in a quarter of the time.

  • Dizzy #7 3 years ago

    Home should not have been revealed... it should have been taken out in the back garden and shot in the head.

    Oh well... who knows... now that it is here they better expand it and it still might be a good thing for a few people.
    Edited by 1 at 09/01/09 @ 10:12

  • Beano #8 3 years ago

    @Dan234 : And the relevance to Home is ?...
    Edited by 1 at 09/01/09 @ 10:02

  • Prox #9 3 years ago

    Pfft, Home has barely changed functionally from what was announced and demonstrated back at GDC 2007. In fact it has less functionality than was described to eventually be present, nearly 3 years ago.

    So I don't see what the issue announcing it early was - nothing actually changed!
    Edited by 1 at 09/01/09 @ 10:08

  • The_vorlon_man #10 3 years ago

    Quick, get your boot in before any SDF notice!!


  • jonsaan #11 3 years ago

    Home is just so tight. As in stingy. Give us more stuff to do, and more free content to mess with and create. Then perhaps the interest will grow.

  • Dan234 #12 3 years ago

    @Dan234 : And the relevance to Home is ?...

    Far too long in development for what it is.

  • penhalion #13 3 years ago

    Some beta testers tried to warn you all about what home was *cough* *cough*

  • Beano #14 3 years ago

    "In fact it has less functionality than was described to eventually be present, nearly 3 years ago"

    It was announced less than 2 years ago at GDC 2007 (march). Feels longer though due to several delays.

  • Beano #15 3 years ago

    "Far too long in development for what it is. "

    And? Developing a mod for a existing game cannot be compared to building a brand new online community service. But I fully agree Sony took way to long delivering Home (as I mentioned in my earlier post).

  • rumrum4444 #16 3 years ago

    Shouldn“t have even come out !!!


    .

  • Dan234 #17 3 years ago

    And? Developing a mod for a existing game cannot be compared to building a brand new online community service. But I fully agree Sony took way to long delivering Home (as I mentioned in my earlier post).

    The point was Home already was an existing game.

  • moggsy #18 3 years ago

    Revealed it too soon and released it too soon.

  • Beano #19 3 years ago

    "The point was Home already was an existing game. "

    HUH?

  • zuljin #20 3 years ago

    @Beano
    He thinks because it started from the Getaway, that its just a mod.

    I know - logic isn't some peoples strong point.

  • mcbi4kh2 #21 3 years ago

    Expensive and unwanted. Kinda like the console itself.
    Troll-tastic comment there mr Farticus.

    Home will be quite good once it gets more 3rd parrty support. Both the Red Bull and the EA thing look promising. The Warhawk room will be really good for clans. At the moment though, its extremely dull.

  • Beano #22 3 years ago

    @zuljin : I'm still amazed... just "wow wtf!" :)

  • Widge #23 3 years ago

    The Reb Bull thing sounds "ok" at best, the EA area actually seems bloody good. I mean the least I could probably take out of that is being able to play poker with actual human opponents which is fair enough, there is a load of other stuff in there too.

  • Dan234 #24 3 years ago

    He thinks because it started from the Getaway, that its just a mod.

    I know it's not a mod. It however might as well have been because of the time taken to add 1) scale, 2) inventory, and 3) micropayments (which in any case most of the work was already done for the PSN store) to what was an essentially an already completed lobby system for a game.

    Anything I've said which is inaccurate?
    Edited by 1 at 09/01/09 @ 12:08

  • Goodfella #25 3 years ago

    In a string of really bad decisions, Home is a massive knot of bad decisions which unfortunately Sony cannot simply untie. Expensive and unwanted. Kinda like the console itself.

    What an absolute cockend you really are.
    Edited by 1 at 09/01/09 @ 12:14

  • Widge #26 3 years ago

    Not inaccurate, it just doesn't really make much sense

    SORRY:

    as in I can't see your logic, realised that came across a bit BLUNT
    Edited by 1 at 09/01/09 @ 12:17

  • Beano #27 3 years ago

    @Dan234 : All of it.

  • miiiguel #28 3 years ago

    Virtual worlds aren't cool anymore.

    Google said so.

  • Dan234 #29 3 years ago

    @Dan234 : All of it.

    Maybe you'd be so kind to point out exactly where I've gone wrong.

  • Goodfella #30 3 years ago

    No, it's not the truth that the PS3 is expensive and unwanted. That's just your twisted opinion.

  • zuljin #31 3 years ago

    @Dan234
    "Maybe you'd be so kind to point out exactly where I've gone wrong."

    This:

    "...to what was an essentially an already completed lobby system for a game."

  • Skooch #32 3 years ago

    @ Dan234

    A basic lobby system for ONE game is a long, long, long way away from the fully realised second-life-clone-piece-of-crap that Home is.

  • Goodfella #33 3 years ago

    So, 20 million units sold for a so-called over priced and unwanted console. Damn, shocking sales, they might as well just give it all up.

  • Mr_Brown #34 3 years ago

    The PS3 has just been one mistake after another. Its a real shame, because its obvious the console could be great without Sony piss poor management.

  • rob76 #35 3 years ago

    One of the many late announcements had to make so that Sony could give the impressions it's keeping up with the competition. Sadly the truth is it lagged behind dramatically. Hope they turn it around though cos the market, and my living room, is big enough for both the xbox and PS.

  • miiiguel #36 3 years ago

    "from what I hear the vast majority of sales are of the arcade"

    And ppl are chosing the best model, imo. If I was on the market for a 360 that'd be the model I get (plus the 60gb packge). The internal SSD makes it the most advanced SKU, despite what most ppl say.

  • Dan234 #37 3 years ago

    A basic lobby system for ONE game is a long, long, long way away from the fully realised second-life-clone-piece-of-crap that Home is.

    True, but it took them three years to add those three basic features which I gave above to get from a lobby system to a Second Life clone which still has complaints about lacking functionality. This is too long. Second Life itself took less time to develop from scratch.

    And Sony are still talking about turning a profit on the PS3 this year, although I suppose some creative accounting will keep Home's cost separate from the PS3's.

  • Doctor_What #38 3 years ago

    @ Farticus: really, will you just stop banging this 'The PS3 is crap' drum every single day. It's hard to develop for, yep, but does it also have a pile of very good games (including some great exclusives)? Also yes. Is it quieter than the 360 so fits into my gaming habits (when I have to be quiet to not wake up my girlfriend so I can't turn up the volume to drown out the fan noise)? Yes. Is the interface so easy to use that my girlfriend uses it to stream the next season of Ugly Betty from the PC to our living room? Why yes, it is. Does it get used as a stereo whenever we have visitors over? Blimey, that's another 'yes' again. Did we put all our friend's wedding photos on there to show my parents when they visited? Yes, we did, and they loved the presentation of it all. Is it nice to have the option of treating myself to the blu-ray version of Blade Runner? Hell yes.

    The PS3 is harder to develop games for, yes, and most multi-platform games have a (usually) insignificant framerate drop on the system. I own both systems and have played versions of the same games on them, and I didn't give a fig about barely noticeable drops from a 360's 26fps to a PS3's 24fps.

    It's not perfect, but it does way way more that is useful in my house than the 360. The 360 is just for games, and it does them a little better than the PS3, but it's also noisy, expensive with the extra HDD, wireless, and Live costs.

    The 360 has RROD'd on me, cost me a fortune, and irritates the hell out of me with the fan noise. That, to me, is the definition of 'an awful machine'. The damn thing is designed to overheat, but for some reason you want to have it's babies. Fine, that's your opinion and I have mine, but I don't constantly slag it off on here at every single opportunity. It's got some great games and I have enjoyed many of them, but for me that doesn't balance out the bad design of the hardware.

    Personally I enjoy my PS3 a lot more than I enjoy using the 360, but do I say the 360 is 'an awful machine' because of this? No.

    So... To put it another way, just because you say something that you believe again, and again, and again. And again... That still won't make it true. It just makes you come across as a bit of a troll. Some of your posts have entertained me, some have made me think, but you really do bang on about your view of the PS3 continually and it bores me senseless.

  • merkdot #39 3 years ago

    people might take you seriously if you weren't given over to hyperbole.

  • Doctor_What #40 3 years ago

    Put up with? I use the thing constantly. It's bloody excellent, and the games on it are damn good too. Did you even read what I wrote? The supposed deficits make no impact on most games.

  • Goodfella #41 3 years ago

    It still is about games, just because you don't happen to like what's on there is your problem, not Sony's or ours.

    As for theis year I see far more appealing games coming out on the PS3. Killzone 2, God of War III, Uncharted 2, Heavy Rain, plus InFamous and GT5 if they are finished.

  • Goodfella #42 3 years ago

    Shunned? You really are priceless, or deluded, or baiting?

    Lets see, far more expensive, a year behind the 360 and the best yet to come. Lets see what state the PS3 is in a year from now after an almost guarantedd price cut and an even better library of games THEN compare it to the 360 at the same point in it's life.

  • Widge #43 3 years ago

    more functions > less functions

  • Goodfella #44 3 years ago

    Better still let's not.

    Why, can't you accept that it will be in a much better position by then?

    Give it a rest farty, you could power the entire globe with the amount of crap that you spew.

  • Goodfella #45 3 years ago

    Year after year, lol, you make it sound like we're ready for the 720 and PS4, it's not even 2 years old in PAL territories.

  • Goodfella #46 3 years ago

    Serious question. What are MS brining to the table this year in their relentless moving forward of the console?
    Edited by 1 at 09/01/09 @ 14:43

  • VandelayIndustries #47 3 years ago

    "I fully expect some deluded 'but the untapped potential' bollocks to be spouted in reply. Let me save you the effort. It doesnt exists any more than it does in the platforms it's competing with."

    Killzone 2 no?

  • Goodfella #48 3 years ago

    All Sony want do is make you wait for the next big thing. I prefer the 360 as it let's me play the next big thing RIGHT NOW.

    My God, just when I thought you'd run out of ridiculous things to say you come up with that gem.

  • zuljin #49 3 years ago

    @farticusmaximus
    Do you actually believe any of the stuff you write?

  • Goodfella #50 3 years ago

    It's not called the Delaystation at all. It's just people like you who call it that.

    Your problem is you can't accept that a lot of people don't have and don't want a 360 so for them the PS3 is superb and it has plenty of great games. I've have all 3 three consoles and I like the 360 and PS3, the Wii just gathers dust though.

  • Goodfella #51 3 years ago

    Jeez, you really are bitter...about a console no less.

  • Widge #52 3 years ago

    I look at comments insisting that the PS3 is still to be some sort of valid platform and I think back to Dan W's comment:

    "...the lingering insistence from vocal gaming "enthusiasts" that each new PS3 exclusive must apparently single-handedly prove the worth of the console in every conceivable way"

    I don't know about you but I don't have to wait for someone to rubber stamp their opinion on some year being "the year of the PS3" because in their mind IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN.

    2008 has been full of games, full of bloody great games. There is no part of me that looks back and thinks "oh well, I suppose I will have to wait for 2009 to deliver".

  • Widge #53 3 years ago

    and this eternal console face off battle. By all reports from people in comments threads, I should have expected the likes of Fallout 3 to be some sort of graphical retard framerate shit fest. LO and behold, its actually not. Ctrl+v across other releases.
    Edited by 1 at 09/01/09 @ 16:14

  • Widge #54 3 years ago

    which you can't then wholescale apply to the entire world, and everyone else who disagrees is wrong

  • Law07 #55 3 years ago

    Its so great having farticus on ignore...although quite confusing when everyone is telling him hes talking the biggest pile of shit.

  • Goodfella #56 3 years ago

    I'm not unique in my outlook, I have many friends who have abandoned Sony this gen

    Yes, of course you have.

    I don't know what the problem is. The 360 clearly gives you so much pleasure so a Sony console would appear pointless, no matter how good or bad it is.
    Edited by 1 at 09/01/09 @ 19:50

  • banjo21 #57 3 years ago

    Exactly right from Mr. Pear - wft wait 2 years for a half-baked version of Second Life.

  • DAN.E.B #58 3 years ago

    SDF talking shit?
    no chance this WILL BE THE YEAR OF THE PS3!
    and if it turns out like 07 and 08 then
    2010 WILL BE THE YEAR OF THE PS3!
    and so on!
    some people eh?

  • TriggerHippie #59 3 years ago

    Home was just hopelessly misconceived from the outset. They should have gone down the cutesy Mii, Littlebigplanet, Animal Crossing road and made a multi-player hub with a little imagination. The whole style of Home as it exists now just leaves me cold.

  • shotgun44 #60 3 years ago

    Farticus, wind your neck in and tell me where the 360s blowjob button is. I can't seem to find it.
    Edited by 1 at 09/01/09 @ 23:58

  • djed #61 3 years ago

    admitted?

  • Gizmo_Logix #62 3 years ago

    "Home is a massive knot of bad decisions which unfortunately Sony cannot simply untie. Expensive and unwanted. Kinda like the console itself."

    farticusmaximus,

    Going through your posts and channel page it's obvious that you are a pure 360-fanboy. So, how do you expect us to take your exaggerations seriously? You say things like the PS3 is "Expensive and unwanted (kinda)" and then when someone points out that the PS3 has sold 20 MILION consoles you thing go on explaining that you didn't really mean "unwanted" but rather that Sony should be marching towards a 60% market domination like the PS2; as if there is ZERO completion this generation.

    I'll give you an example: Lets say that the PS3 was 6-7 MILION sales ahead of the 360 but still 6-7 MIL consoles behind the Wii does that automatically mean that the 360 would SUCK? I think NOT! The fact of the matter is that this generation people from all walks of life have three consoles to choose from. Not just one: like the PS2 (Remember Xbox1 and Game Cube sales?). What's interesting is it seems as though you WERE a PS2 fanboy yet are angry that you don't have the bragging rights NOW? Or you don't have the patience to let the PS3 evolve. Heck, even the PS2 had bad press during 2000 when it came out (See "Don't buy that Playstation 2: http://ar chive.salon.com/tech/log/2000/1... ). There's no doubt that Sony bit off more than it could chew and are playing catch-up the rest of this gen. But even light of the delays I'd say that the PS3 in 2008 is a excellent entertainment console like no other and it no where near the lackey that it was in 2006.

    I bought my first PS2 in 2004. And I was happy I did since the amount of games were plentiful and I happened to miss the "bugs" of the 1st year. I'd say that this gen the PS3 does not have any of the hardware problems the PS2 had (minor compared to the 360) but has suffered due to the lack of games early on. But we're not even at the 3rd year yet and look how far it's come! I'm also glad that the Playstation brand has competition this gen since it ma kes Sony get off its lazy ass and listen to its consumers. And yes they are listening. They have to! Or else! During the PS2 years they ignored their fans.

    One more thing. I think your numbers on the amount of money lost per console sold has been exaggerated as well. Sony has reduced the manufacturing cost of its PlayStation 3 video-game console from $690.23 to $448.73, according to iSuppli. So, yes they are still losing around $50 per console. But that a huge difference when they were losing $280-300 per console when they first released. They are expected to break even this year and finally start making money on the hardware. The PS2 lost money for Sony early on as well.

    Personally, I don't think the PS3 can compete with the Wii since that console attracks too many non-gamers (mothers, grandparents and young kids). It's a different type of game system. Sort of like a board game or card game. It's universal that non-gamers can enjoy. But I do think that the PS3 will compete with the 360 in the long run. Again, I didn't buy my PS2 until 2004 four years after release. And even if the PS3 passes the 360 in sales in two or three years that doesn't mean that the 360 sucks either. Just that the PS3 has come of age and proven it's longevity.

    So, if you don't like the PS3. Don't buy it. But just wait until the PS3 cost $249.95 in two years. It wont matter if the 360 cost $149.95. The bennifts of a $250 (165 UK) would be too cheap to pass up.

    Here's a few games I'm looking forward to...

    Valkyrie Chronicles
    White Knight Chronicles
    God of War III
    Infamous (unsure how good this game will be)
    Heavy Rain (unsure how good this game will be)
    ICO
    Shadow of the Colossus II
    Uncharted: Drake's Fortune II

    Edited by 1 at 10/01/09 @ 03:01

  • Jockie #63 3 years ago

    I don't really get home. It's basically second life innit?

  • shotgun44 #64 3 years ago

    I'm gonna throw it out there; drakes > gears 2? I think so and I love them both...

  • Furfoot #65 3 years ago

    Scrap home and replace it with LBP.

  • bonker #66 3 years ago

    "Yes, that's all very nice.

    The fact that you put up with the PS3 doesn't bring us any closer to the games machine the PS3 should have been.

    If you want a media centre then buy a PC. The Playstation brand used to be about games. I'd like it to be about games again. "

    I think both machines demand compromises of their gaming owners but in different ways - horror noise and reliability issues for the 360 and high initial cost plus 2nd class multi-format games on the PS3.

    Clearly, your personal priorities (and available cash of course) are going to be the deciding factors.

    That said, I've been in a similar position of choosing between the two with both gaming and media requirements to be satisfied and I went with the 360 and a HTPC (£300, yes, really, it ain't hard) - the best gaming and a peerless media centre experience to boot. I can understand why people go the PS3 route for one-box convenience and not having to buy a scary PC etc but I'm not convinced it gives you the best overall solution but it *is* the cheaper route to satisfy all of your gaming and media needs if you're willing to compromise as I wasn't ...

  • eldarko #67 3 years ago

    This is pathetic.

    The admission that Home was announced too early is supposed to make us believe that Sony has some humility and, hence, some believability. But let's not ignore the main issue: Home was announced so early on because there was absolutely nothing else upon which to pin the future success of the PS3. So it wasn't as if it were a mistake, but simply a mark of desperation (remember back in 2007, the 360 already had a solid core user base and everybody was head over heels in love with the Wii).

    Yes, Home was announced too early. But this must have been a well-considered executive decision because there was simply nothing else to announce.

    Pathetic to attempt to redress the balance in this way. Pathetic.