Back when this blog was called Warriors of Gaming, I talked a lot about how annoying the console wars mentality is to me. Long story short, fanboyism is not inherently a bad thing. It's when you turn it into hating other companies that it becomes a bad thing. As things heat up and I keep checking QJ.net more thoroughly to get news for the radio show, I realize that even though my hate of Sony did not come from fanboyism, and that I always tried to be rational about it, I was still exhibiting the console wars mentality. So now, as I said on the radio, I am going to work even harder to make sure the console wars mentality is not part of anything I say about Sony. I still don't like them all that much as a company, but especially when I'm on the air or writing this blog, I am rededicating myself to not letting my personal opinions get out of hand. I am dedicating myself to staying completely rational, and not automatically assuming the worst from Sony.
Because I see it all the time. People deluding themselves into thinking Nintendo is manufacturing a Wii shortage, or that the red ring of death is proof that Microsoft doesn't care about customers, or that Sony would be out of business without Square-Enix. It's ridiculous. They are businesses trying to make money, yes, and there is nothing wrong with caring about their business practices, but either be rational or keep it to yourself.
Here's an example. On QJ there's one guy who goes by the rather stuck-up and hypocritical name of "Mr. Common Sense" who jumps at every chance to bash. But he doesn't bash Nintendo the way I bash Sony (with reasoned arguments); he prefers long, angry rants about how Nintendo is evil and their fans are idiots. You don't have to like Nintendo, buddy, but insulting your fellow gamers because they have different tastes than you is not going to help anyone. Do me a favor and look at the backlogs of this blog. I've said some pretty discouraging Sony, but have I ever been an asshole about it or insulted Sony fans? No. And if I have and just forgot about it, I deeply apologize, because as I hope you can tell from everything else I'm saying here, that isn't me. Tell me where it is and I'll change it. People like Mr. Common Sense him are the pinnacle of what I'm talking about here. It's ridiculous, and it has to stop. I'm doing my part, now do yours.
You might say, "But DJ Komali, but saying that about Mr. Common Sense, aren't you also bashing your fellow gamers for their opinions?" No, and let me explain why: I'm bashing one particular person, and not for what he believes or likes, but for how he acts. That's the difference. I'm not saying don't get mad at people, I'm saying keep it civil, and get mad at people when they actually DO something to make you upset, not just when they like brand A and you like brand B.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
We're back with a new name, on the radio, and as angry as ever
That's right, my few readers, I'm back. I probably will not return to Dark Diamond, as I would rather not have the content of my posts edited by others, so for now I'm focusing on my own blog.
Next, this blog has a brand new name and address. The former Warriors of Gaming is now Press Start: Blog for Gamers. This is because it will now go along with Press Start: Radio for Gamers, a radio show my friends and I are doing on our college radio station. For more information about the show, and how to listen to it online, go to freewebs.com/presstartkdic and check it out. Because of this change, my co-hosts Denny and Hanna (aka DJ Lemonsmith) may drop by for some posts as well. Also, I will start calling myself by my radio name (DJ Goron) instead of my previous nickname, Unknownwarrior33. The radio show is based on the same ideas and content as Warriors of Gaming was, so the type of content in the blog is not likely to change.
I hope you enjoy, and keep reading the blog. For gamers, it's the way to go.
Next, this blog has a brand new name and address. The former Warriors of Gaming is now Press Start: Blog for Gamers. This is because it will now go along with Press Start: Radio for Gamers, a radio show my friends and I are doing on our college radio station. For more information about the show, and how to listen to it online, go to freewebs.com/presstartkdic and check it out. Because of this change, my co-hosts Denny and Hanna (aka DJ Lemonsmith) may drop by for some posts as well. Also, I will start calling myself by my radio name (DJ Goron) instead of my previous nickname, Unknownwarrior33. The radio show is based on the same ideas and content as Warriors of Gaming was, so the type of content in the blog is not likely to change.
I hope you enjoy, and keep reading the blog. For gamers, it's the way to go.
Monday, August 13, 2007
Online or Off?
Here's a quick brain teaser: what's the difference between playing with your friends online and playing with your friends right next to you? Try to answer that question without just restating the question and you might have trouble...or you might not, depending on how you play online.
Here's an easier question: in terms of the actual experience, what's the difference between playing against a person and playing against bots? You can actually talk to a person, and that's it. Bots may not be quite as smart as human players, but in the middle of the game, you're not going to be thinking about that.
So for online gaming to really be worthwhile, at least in my opinion, it's got to be something like Xbox Live that lets you talk to other players. People always say gaming isn't a social experience, but it can be if we make it one.
Here's an easier question: in terms of the actual experience, what's the difference between playing against a person and playing against bots? You can actually talk to a person, and that's it. Bots may not be quite as smart as human players, but in the middle of the game, you're not going to be thinking about that.
So for online gaming to really be worthwhile, at least in my opinion, it's got to be something like Xbox Live that lets you talk to other players. People always say gaming isn't a social experience, but it can be if we make it one.
Friday, July 13, 2007
Public Relations
While I put unity over my own opinions, I do have opinions. Very strong ones. For example, I hate Sony. It wasn't always this way; I've hated Sony for only about a year now. It all started at last year's E3, when Sony announced that the PS3 controller would have motion-sensing. This announcement generated tons of backlash for Sony, because it was a clear rip-off of Nintendo's Wii Remote. Then came the comments about how you're not a true gamer if you don't work a second job to afford a PS3 and that people would buy it even without any launch games. People do not like being taken advantage of, as the negative response to these comments showed.
It's all gone downhill from there, with racist billboards and bloody sheep carcasses, among many other things. It was enough to stop me and many other people from purchasing a PS3; while I wanted one pre-E3, I wanted a 360 post-E3 (I wanted a Wii from the beginning, and it was the first of the three that I got; I got a 360 later). Sony needs to remember that a high price point and lack of games will stop someone from buying your console at first, but bad PR will stop people like me from buying your console at all.
It's all gone downhill from there, with racist billboards and bloody sheep carcasses, among many other things. It was enough to stop me and many other people from purchasing a PS3; while I wanted one pre-E3, I wanted a 360 post-E3 (I wanted a Wii from the beginning, and it was the first of the three that I got; I got a 360 later). Sony needs to remember that a high price point and lack of games will stop someone from buying your console at first, but bad PR will stop people like me from buying your console at all.
(Price) cut, that's not a wrap
It was a shock to some when Sony cut the price of the PS3; others expected it. It certainly drove up sales...at first. But Sony made two crucial errors and two non-crucial error in the price cut that I predict will keep it from making a long-term impact.
The first crucial error was that they only cut the price to 500 dollars. 500 dollars is still 100 dollars more than the Xbox 360 Premium, and with Blu-ray players becoming cheaper, that angle won't convince people much longer. It's also double the price of Wii, which is still killing the PS3 in sales and gaining on the 360. Also, the 360 and Wii are likely to get price cuts in the near future as well, so this may not make a whole lot of difference for long.
Second, they released the 80 gigabyte version at the original price of 600 bucks. That means the now-500 dollar unit has become the "gimped" version, and that may push it in the direction of the version that originally cost 500. Furthermore, Kaz Hirai said they're going to phase out the 60 GB version. If that's the case, people will once again have to pay 600 bucks for a PS3.
The first non-crucial error was bundling a game with the 80 GB version. The biggest reason why this is a problem is that Nintendo already did it; copying Nintendo the first time around made Sony look really bad. That's one aspect. The other is that looking at game sales in Japan will tell you that bundling Wii Sports with Wii probably didn't make a huge difference; they didn't bundle it in Japan and it's been one of the top selling games over there since launch.
The second non-crucial error was not extending this price cut to Europe. I say it's a non-crucial error because North America and Japan (which got a price cut right at the beginning) are bigger markets (especially combined) than Europe. That said, bundling a game with the system in Europe will not boost sales as much as a price cut would, and that was a mistake.
I say this not to incite a flame war; that's the LAST thing I want to do. I say it because I want to quell the flame wars that the price cut no doubt started; this post doesn't say that the PS3 is doomed, only that I don't believe it's in a significantly better place than it was before.
What value do my predictions hold, you ask? After last year's E3 I predicted that the high price, Sony's PR (see my last post), and focus on Blu-ray over games would hurt the PS3's sales. Now that it's out, it's trailing far behind its competitors. True, that was an obvious prediction, but not so obvious that a lot of people didn't disagree with me.
(
The first crucial error was that they only cut the price to 500 dollars. 500 dollars is still 100 dollars more than the Xbox 360 Premium, and with Blu-ray players becoming cheaper, that angle won't convince people much longer. It's also double the price of Wii, which is still killing the PS3 in sales and gaining on the 360. Also, the 360 and Wii are likely to get price cuts in the near future as well, so this may not make a whole lot of difference for long.
Second, they released the 80 gigabyte version at the original price of 600 bucks. That means the now-500 dollar unit has become the "gimped" version, and that may push it in the direction of the version that originally cost 500. Furthermore, Kaz Hirai said they're going to phase out the 60 GB version. If that's the case, people will once again have to pay 600 bucks for a PS3.
The first non-crucial error was bundling a game with the 80 GB version. The biggest reason why this is a problem is that Nintendo already did it; copying Nintendo the first time around made Sony look really bad. That's one aspect. The other is that looking at game sales in Japan will tell you that bundling Wii Sports with Wii probably didn't make a huge difference; they didn't bundle it in Japan and it's been one of the top selling games over there since launch.
The second non-crucial error was not extending this price cut to Europe. I say it's a non-crucial error because North America and Japan (which got a price cut right at the beginning) are bigger markets (especially combined) than Europe. That said, bundling a game with the system in Europe will not boost sales as much as a price cut would, and that was a mistake.
I say this not to incite a flame war; that's the LAST thing I want to do. I say it because I want to quell the flame wars that the price cut no doubt started; this post doesn't say that the PS3 is doomed, only that I don't believe it's in a significantly better place than it was before.
What value do my predictions hold, you ask? After last year's E3 I predicted that the high price, Sony's PR (see my last post), and focus on Blu-ray over games would hurt the PS3's sales. Now that it's out, it's trailing far behind its competitors. True, that was an obvious prediction, but not so obvious that a lot of people didn't disagree with me.
(
Thursday, July 5, 2007
DarkDiamond
If you like my stuff, you might be interested to know that I am now blogging on darkdiamond.com, a video game and anime blog. The content will mostly be the same stuff I post here, but I will no longer be updating my 1up.com blog because 2 is enough.
Thursday, June 21, 2007
PS3 and Blu-ray: A Match Made in Heaven?
IMPORTANT: I have nothing against the Playstation 3 or Blu-ray. Never having played the PS3 or watched a movie on Blu-ray, I really COULDN'T have anything against them. My statements about the PS3's current sales are based on the numbers as I know them, not my opinions or any data that I can directly and personally confirm. This is purely objective, from an economic standpoint, not from a gaming standpoint.
It certainly looks like Blu-ray is winning the format wars, which is exactly what Sony's Playstation division wanted. Sony has been reasoning all along that the success of Blu-ray would help the PS3, and their reasoning was relatively sound. However, now that both have been around for a while, we see Blu-ray with strong success and the PS3 trailing its competitors. Why?
I believe Sony was hoping Blu-ray and the PS3 would help each other, but it only ended up working one way: the PS3 helped Blu-ray, but Blu-ray didn't help the PS3. I believe Sony's mistake rests in the branding: rather than calling this device the Playstation 3, they should have given it a new name to separate it from its video game-focused predecessors. Why? Well, the only way someone can know that the PS3 plays Blu-ray movies is to seek information about it, but if you're not interested in a video game console, you're probably not going to check out the details. As such, to non-gamers, the PS3 is just a 600 dollar video game console. Advertising certainly helps bring the news to some, but for everyone else, Playstation=video game console.
Can I prove my theory? Of course not; I haven't conducted a mass survey or anything like that. However, price has always been labeled as the biggest factor hurting the PS3. The price is bad for a video game console, but not for a Blu-ray player. That indicates that people are primarily looking at it as a video game console; if they weren't, the price wouldn't turn them off.
It's understandable that Sony wouldn't want to give up the Playstation brand, but if that's the case, they should have left out the Blu-ray. If they did, while Blu-ray would have slightly less support, the PS3 would have much more because it would be cheaper. It seems Sony is beginning to realize that its functionality as a Blu-ray player is not selling the PS3, given that they've released a Blu-ray player that's cheaper than the console. Now they have to find a way to make the console much cheaper. Even analysts who predict the PS3 will win the console wars tend to base that prediction on the system having a massive price cut; if Sony doesn't deliver, it will turn out very differently.
Designing their console in part to sell another product was a mistake, one from which they seem to have learned. Now they have to rectify it in order for the PS3 to be as successful as they want it to be. They can't offer an alternate model without Blu-ray, because games are also on Blu-ray discs, so they'll have to figure out something else.
It certainly looks like Blu-ray is winning the format wars, which is exactly what Sony's Playstation division wanted. Sony has been reasoning all along that the success of Blu-ray would help the PS3, and their reasoning was relatively sound. However, now that both have been around for a while, we see Blu-ray with strong success and the PS3 trailing its competitors. Why?
I believe Sony was hoping Blu-ray and the PS3 would help each other, but it only ended up working one way: the PS3 helped Blu-ray, but Blu-ray didn't help the PS3. I believe Sony's mistake rests in the branding: rather than calling this device the Playstation 3, they should have given it a new name to separate it from its video game-focused predecessors. Why? Well, the only way someone can know that the PS3 plays Blu-ray movies is to seek information about it, but if you're not interested in a video game console, you're probably not going to check out the details. As such, to non-gamers, the PS3 is just a 600 dollar video game console. Advertising certainly helps bring the news to some, but for everyone else, Playstation=video game console.
Can I prove my theory? Of course not; I haven't conducted a mass survey or anything like that. However, price has always been labeled as the biggest factor hurting the PS3. The price is bad for a video game console, but not for a Blu-ray player. That indicates that people are primarily looking at it as a video game console; if they weren't, the price wouldn't turn them off.
It's understandable that Sony wouldn't want to give up the Playstation brand, but if that's the case, they should have left out the Blu-ray. If they did, while Blu-ray would have slightly less support, the PS3 would have much more because it would be cheaper. It seems Sony is beginning to realize that its functionality as a Blu-ray player is not selling the PS3, given that they've released a Blu-ray player that's cheaper than the console. Now they have to find a way to make the console much cheaper. Even analysts who predict the PS3 will win the console wars tend to base that prediction on the system having a massive price cut; if Sony doesn't deliver, it will turn out very differently.
Designing their console in part to sell another product was a mistake, one from which they seem to have learned. Now they have to rectify it in order for the PS3 to be as successful as they want it to be. They can't offer an alternate model without Blu-ray, because games are also on Blu-ray discs, so they'll have to figure out something else.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
