Uphill Struggle Comments by Rob Fahey

It is still fucking shit.

An interesting read

Great article. Sony should try push the price down to £200 early this year, before Street Fighter IV hits the shelf, or do some special pack with SF IV and 2 dual shocks.

price is not everything. they need to sort the services and the delivery of software to the console. Why don't games have a unified approach to multiplayer? no integration with the gaming community.
All of this being said, I might get a PS3 this year though (multiplayer is not a bigggie for me).

LOL it's gonna be a bloody Saturday on EG!

It's gonna be interesting what Sony come up with in 2009 and there is some nice goodies gaming or not coming this year. So many things were done wrong or need fixing though I don't think PS3 will ever be the home of Playstation if could of been, shame.

Mind you I know EXACTLY how Sony can turn this around. In just 10 easy steps.

1. Some GOOD Playstation brand exclusives! Sure there are many already is but Sony should look further back in the brand for their inspiration, seriously how many would love a new Colony Wars or G-Police. I don't really care about Buzz or Singstar or God of War, my PS2 was truly busted by then and I'd moved on to online goodness of Live.

2. PS1. seriously Sony sort your f**king life out, there are some good ones on there but come on! Put those PS games I actually played and loved up on PSN.

3. PS2. how many times Sony, fix it and more people will think about upgrading their PS2 and you will please many current users if you can do it through software (don't say it can't be done I have a PS2 on my PC - It don't work to great but I'm sure you can do better). Hell you might even, you know, make money by selling PS2 greats on PSN.....

4. PSN, like Live, is being filled with absolute worthless tat 80% of the time. Is this really the future of digital download gaming?

5. Price.....

6. Stop idiots like Konami ruining potential by going off and doing their own online system

7. Getaway 3 - slags!

8. G-Police remake - slags!

9. Colony Wars remake - Slags!

10. Jet Moto remake - slags!

There bad09 fixes PS3 for Sony, job done.

i have all 3 consoles... why? the wii is good for a few games ( super smash bros has hardly left the wii!, and the rayman rabbids games are brilliant (esp. with friends) despite what the reviews say!) and i bought the ps3 because my dvd player packed up and i wanted a blu-ray player. I have a couple of games for it, but its mainly used as a blu-ray player. The xbox is definitely my games console of choice, lots of good quality games in a variety of genres - and yes if i want a game that's multi format i'll always go for the xbox version (the lego (star wars / batman) games tho will always be bought for the wii...)

The blame will rest solely on the credit crunch.

The integrity of this article is extremely questionable it has to be said.

Xbox live is a very big weapon. So is GTA which is no longer a PS sony exclusive . its about the experience of the games , not the hardware we play on . game developers will go to the lowest common denominator EG: game sales . they just want to sell stuff . I dont care what system I play on , but have chosen xbox due to the online gameplay . I dont even bother with my Pc for games now . its just an expensive net surpher and photo lab . I wont bother with a ps3 cos games are more or less same as xbox .

PS . I do think we need rival systems though and wouldnt like to see the PS3 die . leaving another microsoft monopoly . that would be bad for our wallets .

"So is GTA which is no longer a PS sony exclusive"

very true GTA was a great weapon against the original xbox, Sony don't have that kind of muscle this gen IMO.

Hopefully Sony can ride out the storm. Only one proper gaming console could be more damaging for us gamers in the long run. Good to see Dopey_Cuntbit keeping up his intelligent debating skills.

Good read if slightly misleading. The article is basically a discussion of the console wars, but shhh, don't tell the fanboys ;]

Personally I think it's simply more to do with the pricing and marketing than the online implementations - certainly that has a factor to play, but I'm not sure the amount of people hitting Live over PSN are enough to account for a significant proportion of the sales disparity.

Like you say, MS' marketing has been far more direct - prices on the adverts highlighting how cheap it is etc, whereas all I can remember from Sony is more obscure, artsy marketing. So, things like the recent LBP adverts talking about Dave or someone and then there's all those "This is Living" adverts which were truly dreadful. The message they conveyed was pretty much bugger all. I think Sony took for granted that they made a lot of money with the previous generation, fairly easily, then tried to manipulate the gaming market to become a lifestyle option. So, they plonked in blu-ray and pushed the PS3 as a home entertainment system rather than - primarily - a games console. And the artsy Living adverts reflected their change in focus, to something far more sophisticated than it ought to be.

Sony got too far ahead of themselves, too soon. They changed the PS3's model quite considerably from the PS1 and PS2 and it hasn't really paid dividends.

I think if Sony knock off £100, you'll see a big difference in sales. Of course M$ will do something equivalent and still probably win out. I don't think there's anything in this article which is untrue. Sony's advertising has been piss poor. Not just the lack of advertising but the ads themselves.

The cinema add for Buzz made me ashamed to be a gamer!

Also Rob, whereabouts is your article on the 1up takeover? I can't seem to find it. Don't make me go over to GI :P

@El-Dev
"The blame will rest solely on the credit crunch.

The integrity of this article is extremely questionable it has to be said."

What does that mean? If you feel you have to say it then maybe you should actually say it. Vaguely implying that there's something wrong is pointless: you sure you don't just dislike what you've read?

Sony have put more than a few dampers on my plans to buy a PS3 over the last couple of years, keeping the price high is one of them but removing backwards compatability to force people to buy games from the (at the time) sparse PS3 catalogue was a huge negative for me.

A price drop would be a huge incentive, but is unlikely as Europeans have proven that we're generally willing to pay their prices and Sony are, naturally, only too happy to take our money, same as any other company.

I would have thought the article would have mentioned that the PS3 was outselling the 360 in 2008 until the price drop. Kind of weakens the argument that Xbox Live drives sales more than price no? I mean when MGS4 was released it had a 250,000 lead over the 360.

Ugh, found that article you wrote Rob on the changing landscape of gaming media.

Here if anyone likes

Boy that is a depressing read :{. Very good though.

@Rob Fahey

Quite an opinionated article you got here. I guess EG is still upset with themselves after getting so hyped for the PS3 during E3 2005 that they will never forgive it.

You write "arguments over its actual power are really not of interest to the majority of consumers" in regard to the PS3. This is the equivalent of FOX News using "some people say (...)", a subterfuge to mask what in fact is an opinion rather than a fact. If you want to say that you base this on sales, again that would be speculation. I am sure a lot of people would prefer a quiet console, with a Blu-Ray player, HDD and Wi-Fi out of the box. I base this statement on common sense.

Yes, one is expensive and the other one is cheap, but then again that is reflected in the quality and specs of the hardware. And again, one has a very well defined online aspect while the other is more liberal, but then again one costs money and the other one is free. It all depends on how you look at it. How do you look at it Rob Fahey?

Here they come /o\

Herein lies the rub, in two key ways. Firstly, Sony's superior hardware (and I say that purely in the sense of its reliability and build quality - arguments over its actual power are really not of interest to the majority of consumers) seems to make the PS3 into a much more expensive system to build than its rival.

How politically correct! You sound so afraid of offending the resident XBots, that you have to be very careful with your wording when referring to superior hardware. (when using just an expression like "build quality" would have sufficed)

What's wrong about writing the truth? The "better build quality" and openly saying that the actual power is almost equivalent to that of a 360? Enough that it in practice it doesn't make a significant difference to most consumers? Your extremely vague wording is in fact, insinuating a bigger inferiority than the one that really exists...

In addition, Xbox Live (especially NXE) drives information and buying opportunities to consumers through an attractive, graphical interface. Sony's equivalent? A slightly pathetic RSS feed which scrolls in the corner of the screen.

This criticism I also don't fully understand. Sony's "pathetic RSS feed" can be easily turned off. The "attractive, graphical interface" that I presume you're referring to probably is the advertising (let's call "opportunities for the consumers" what it really is, shall we?), spamming the screen, that a lot of 360 owners complain about.

Other than those little quibbles, very good article. Your reasonings for your side of the discussion are clearly exposed.

"How do you look at it Rob Fahey?"

ROFL

Please let this become a new EG meme. Please. rauper - get a t-shirt made for this, stat!

The article is supposed to be an opinion piece! That's the whole point. Asking him how he looks at it is completely moronic. He's just told you!

I just have two major problems with the PS3:

1. The controller is gash (position of the left stick, triggers)
2. Lack of FULL PS2 backwards compatability

Fix those two things Sony, and I will buy a PS3.

@Tomo

I was speaking in terms of being subjective or objective, maybe I could have made that more clear. But please don't let me stop you from choking on EG genitalia. Anyone know the Heimlich maneuver?

Hahaha :]

Sony do have problems. The PS3 isn't the main one, as most consoles historically have made a loss for a while and recouped back at later dates. This is par for the course for any console manufacturer, the only exception to the rule is Nintendo and christ knows how they manage to do it. Dealings with the devil, maybe? But Sony are the only company right now that seems to be in some slightly serious dog-doo.

Credit crunch can be blamed, as can the PS3. But so to will Bluray, and the completely unrealistic targets that Sony felt it would be able to meet to justify the expenditure. This is not merely a current problem, as Sony targets have been unrealistic for a while now (they were before PS3 launched), but it exposes a weakness within a big company that targets can be moved upwards if the costs spiral too much. This does not make for a profitable company, Sony must know this by now and if they don't, they're going to need to learn it fast.

You get the feeling Sony haven't really been that careful of late. "We don't need to try." and "We've got tons of money." and "We have a recognisable brand name." - none of which has helped as the public - who were already not buying their goods start slowing their spending and are not buying Sony goods even more. With stiffer competition in their various markets, some of which have dwarfed their own sales, Sony are no longer the huge untouchable powerhouse they once were. They are not invincible. And they need to realise that - big companies are crumbling under the pressure of the collapsing economy. That's just how it goes.

Sony's troubles have been there for a fair while now. It's just now as the economy heads south for the winter, those troubles and problems and mistakes are becoming stark and clear. Sony can patch up the problem, and indeed, it should. It's lost a bit of water but the dam doesn't need to collapse... if it did, I guarantee the economic situation which is already struggling is going to drown in a flash-flood...

I think this article failed on so many levels. i agree, looking long term, addressing Sony's shortcomings as a service provider is crucial, but far too much emphasis was placed on this when Wii continues to out sell the competition irrespective of similar shortcomings. again the industry "experts" neglect to give credit to Ninty's strategy and what that strategy says about the market these manufacturers operate in, namely; the consumer is less aware and concerned with online than Microsoft would have us believe.

Well back when the 60gb PS3 was available I had a choice;
gaming console/blu-ray player + hdd + ps1/2 compatibility + wi-fi/online play out of the box. Or an xbox which was a completely unknown risk basically. Yes it wasn't cheap but no it wasn't a hard decision. I didn't think twice about it even. Of course sony's mistakes are obvious, but I still think the console has a bright future and much potential!

I really hate brand exclusives (not the games but the exclusivity). I wonder how much power companies have to move the profit loss,
it seems a very popular time to announce historic losses,
maybe they have been revaluing their assets.

if sony hadn't invented blu-ray, what disc format do you think the ps3 would have used?

It all comes down to price. You may argue that the ps3 is still good value for money with its features but at the end of the day until it's around £200 sales are not gonna pick up much. I honestly think software differences have little or no effect.

@ El-Dev: "The integrity of this article is extremely questionable it has to be said."

What on earth do you mean by that?

Sony's biggest problem is it doesn't have a monopoly or two to rip off customers...

"if sony hadn't invented blu-ray, what disc format do you think the ps3 would have used?"

Simple: HD-DVD

Considering I don't own either the 360 or PS3, I feel I can comment on this and my potential purchasing decision...

Essentially, the PS3 is too expensive, that really is all it comes down to for me personally. When you can buy a fully functional 360 for less than £200, which to the average buyer appears to have virtually the same games, then the PS3 doesn't even appear on the radar. Exclusives are the usual 'swing' factor, but there is nothing on the PS3 that would really warrant an extra £100 or so of my cash. If GTA had remained a Sony exclusive, and full PS2 compatibility been available, then the £100 would have probably been easier to swallow, as it is, there just isn't enough to pay the extra cash.

Also, I'm not entirely sure if it can be backed up by hard evidence, but 360 games appear to be cheaper generally as well, which is another major factor. I've lost count of the number of cross-format titles I've seen in shops that have been more expensive on the PS3.

A good article but noting to do with Sony Corp's operating losses, imo. Still, it was a good segue into the argument.

Agreed Lovely2cu:

"I just have two major problems with the PS3:

1. The controller is gash (position of the left stick, triggers)
2. Lack of FULL PS2 backwards compatability

Fix those two things Sony, and I will buy a PS3."


Sony need to let go of their beloved controller design because ergonomically it just really does not work well anymore. The Left analogue stick should gain priority rather than be stuffed down in the center, and those triggers... I LOVE racing games and those triggers are horrendous. The Dreamcast, where they originated in the first place even had better triggers than the PS3, it's designed specifically so your fingers keep slipping off it, and when using them the rest of the pad's ergonomics makes it feel like you're constantly at risk of losing grip of it. The Xbox pad is a major reason I love the 360 so much, it's pretty much perfectly designed (except the d-pad admittedly).

And I'm beginning to think that backwards compatibility wasn't removed to reduce manufacturing costs of the PS3 itself, but actually as some sneaky ploy to force a few more of us to buy a whole PS2 unit just for playing the huge back catalogue of games. The ever high price linked with the REDUCING of feature on the PS3 hardware over its lifetime is a sad sad mistake for Sony and they'll have lost out on a lot more than the few pennies they saved from castrating their original PS3 hardware.

And of course, third of all is price. The PS3 as a piece of hardware is solid and impressive most definitely, but even so they still need to compete on price. I don't mind paying a premium for it considering how much functionality comes out of the box, but being still about £100 more expensive than the 360 (incl cost of wireless adapter) when the games themselves are generally the same if not slightly worse off to the 360 equivalent, just does not make sense. I'd buy a PS3 now for a brand new one at £250, but at £200 they'd massively increase sales.

more ps3 id doomed articles lol, it may not be replicating the ps2's sucsess but its still doing ok, its not going away this gen and is a fine peice of kit imo, you pay more because it has more features and is better built, simple. course if you want to play games only then 360 is a cheap and chearful alternative but you still get shafted by the add ons and xbox live subscription. Well done MS for sneaking that lot in!

Good article I thought, okay perhaps skimming over some bits but as a concise take of Sony/PS3 situation is fairly apt.

Agreed that this doesnt meant that MS or even 'mighty' Nintendo got through the 2008 without any fluffs, I m may be termed as one of the 'biased' X360 multi platforms owner but I do feel that there are a good number of us who for various reason find X360 taking more of our attention (got level 6.5 trophy on PS3 mind you!).

I still think PS3 is a good console and in just term of hardware/software content should be in better position compared to the underpowered and underwhelmed Wii. But at the end of the day Sony made the decisions and history will prove if these decisions re PS3 was made with too much confident and overestimation of their product/underestimation of rival consoles. I do not wish to see PS3 tanking and Sony retreating as would not do us gamers any good. Hoping they have new found healthy respect.

I fully agree the assertations that the powers/specs of the hardware is not the main considerations for the mass consumers, its the price!

Very good article. I agree with those here who have pointed at the price being the biggest problem.

i like my ps3, it's alright you know. sony can can worry about their billions and i'll worry about buying the odd game or two, or blue ray...

@ citizenHUNTER

1. The Dual Shock had its genesis as a riff on the SNES controller. Remember, PlayStation was originally meant to be a CD-based add-on for Nintendo's console. It was good at the time and the handlebars were a masterstroke, given how successful PlayStation was in making games (more) mainstream and getting older people with bigger hands to play. Then along came the N64 with its analogue stick. Sony chose to bung a pair into an unergonomic position on their own controller, in order to stay relevant, and 10+ years later it's all a bit outdated. Sony can't/won't refresh the design though, presumably because its silhouette is too iconic as a semi-logo, which is why the triggers are shaped the way they are, to fit, thus why they're crap

2. Maybe you're right about Sony removing PS2 BC from PS3 in order to prop up PS2 sales, which of course are profitable to Sony, but if that is indeed the case, all they're doing is holding up uptake of the PS3, with people not wanting to get rid of their PS2 games. Remember, a lot of non-nerd casuals probably don't want multiple games consoles under their TV, they've already got the Sky box, DVD player, etc under there

3. The PS3 is expensively prohibitive for cost-conscious families no doubt, but for someone like me who's young and has a decent amount of disposable income, it's palatable. And tbh I'd spend such money on a laptop or an iPod easy. The problem is one of value. What do you get with the PS3 that you can't get with the considerably cheaper 360? A much worse online ecosystem for one. A worse controller. Poorer multiplatform games, technically-speaking. A dwindling number of important exclusives. This is why the price seems worse than it is, there's a serious lack of value attatched to the sum you pay. Blu-Ray is the only source of any real value in the PS3 but I and many people don't really care about it, DVD is fine.

300 quid is hardly 'stratospheric'.

An interesting read but one with far more personal opinion than hard fact.

300 quid is hardly 'stratospheric'.

It is when for £200 or less you can basically have something which - for the majority at least - offers pretty much the same stuff.

As I said, full BC and hanging on to some important exclusives (such as GTA) might have made it more appealing, particularly for current PS2 owners, but as it is, there really isn't a great deal of difference between the two.

Price is the problem. Who in their right mind is going pick a PS3 when they look at the 360 and PS3 and see that they share a lot of the same games and both produce comparable graphics performance yet one is considerably dearer?

The thing is most people who are deciding which console to buy don't realise that the PS3 is region free so you can import Blu-Ray discs and games cheaper that most EU 360 titles from the US/Canada and recoup the additional cost after about 5 software purchases.

[i]'300 quid is hardly 'stratospheric'.'[/i]

It is if you're not a bourgeois bastard. Especially when compared to the 360.

I thought this article was a great read, although that might be because I love Xbox and the article reads as essentially '360 > PS3' but with economic terms thrown in.

PS3 exclusives are going to dominate this year though

Ah yes, my ability to not quibble over 40-50 quid makes me bourgeois, silly me. I would argue that your willingness to pay 60 quid for a wireless adaptor, 40 quid for LIVE services, 20 quid for a quick charge kit and 60 quid for a hard drive makes you more bourgeois than I. And a bastard to boot ;)

@jonsaan

Succinct and pertinent, much like the surgeon general's warning.

I thought this was a well written article, but underlines why I don't consider people who write about video games to be journalists - there's absolutely no work been put in to investigating the claims put forward.

Okay, so 360 owners are convincing their friends to buy the same console and join them online. Where's your evidence to back that up? Care to get any statistics. Of course not - you're not a journalist, you write about video games.

I have never understood the PS3 is too expensive argument.. Machines have always been this price point!! Have you all got shory memories and not remember how much it cost to buy a Saturn and a PS1 10 years ago?? I bought aboth a Saturn and a PS1 in the same year and that cost me £700.. that was a lot of cash back then, never once did i care that my PS1 was £100 cheaper than my beloved Saturn ;-)

If a PS3 is what you want then it shouldnt matter how much a X360 is, just bloody buy one!!!

@ChadSexington

Again you point out another instance of the classic "it's been said/ some people argue/ some say" which rules opinionated journalism. EG reads more like involuntary satire than anything else. You can have all the game consoles in the world, it doesn't mean it will hinder you from becoming an aficionado ;)

It is when for £200 or less you can basically have something which - for the majority at least - offers pretty much the same stuff.

Don't agree. I like my 360 for the software, but contrary to my older PS3 I am constantly worried about it falling apart. The 360 doesn't really radiate trustworthiness and it is clearly build to the bare minimum specs. If you toss in a few periphals (like WiFi) the gap isn't also that considerable anymore, and to me personally the price difference is warranted given the solid and reliable way the PS3 is build. I can see, however, that someone else might consider the gap too high. Horses, courses etc.