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.
Monday, August 13, 2007
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.
Labels:
blu-ray,
console wars,
format wars,
PS3,
sony
Friday, June 8, 2007
Back to our Roots
Let's check a trend, shall we?
Gamerankings scores by series, from old to new
Super Mario World: 96.7
Super Mario 64: 95.7
Super Mario Sunshine: 91.5
Sonic the Hedgehog 3: 97.5
Sonic Adventure: 87.2
Sonic Heroes: 74.4 (highest; xbox version)
Sonic and the Secret Rings: 70.8
Sonic the Hedgehog 2006: 46.2 (highest; xbox 360 version)
Soul Calibur: 96.4
Soul Calibur 2: 92.5 (highest; Gamecube version)
Soul Calibur 3: 86.5
Star Fox: 85.8
Star Fox 64: 89.8
Star Fox Assault: 70.8
Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2: 94.9 (highest; Dreamcast version)
Tony Hawk's Underground: 90.9 (highest; PS2 version)
Tony Hawk's Project 8: 82 (highest; Xbox 360 version)
Pokemon Blue: 88.3
Pokemon Silver: 91.1
Pokemon Ruby: 83.8
Pokemon Diamond: 84.8
Notice the trend? Each new generation nets lower and lower scores for these popular franchises. Pokemon is the exception; we'll get to that later. Now think about this: New Super Mario Bros. and Sonic Rush were hailed for sticking to the roots of their franchises.
New technology creates great new opportunities. Sometimes they can be beneficial, like the jump to 3D in Super Mario 64 (one of the most popular in the series even though it didn't score as high as Super Mario World); other times it can be harmful, like touch screen control for Super Mario 64 DS. However, Super Mario 64 was a rare case. Generally, straying too far from a franchise's roots is not a good thing. On the flip side, staying too close to its roots hurt Pokemon Diamond and Pearl. Still, because they didn't change drastically, the games got higher review scores than Sonic the Hedgehog, Tony Hawk's Project 8, and Star Fox Assault.
I also want to point out that Pokemon Silver and Star Fox 64 did better than their predecessors. These two games didn't add anything drastically new to their series', but they made use of new technology for strong benefits: Star Fox 64 got detailed, true 3D graphics and Pokemon Silver got color. That seems to be the best way to implement new technology.
Gamerankings scores by series, from old to new
Super Mario World: 96.7
Super Mario 64: 95.7
Super Mario Sunshine: 91.5
Sonic the Hedgehog 3: 97.5
Sonic Adventure: 87.2
Sonic Heroes: 74.4 (highest; xbox version)
Sonic and the Secret Rings: 70.8
Sonic the Hedgehog 2006: 46.2 (highest; xbox 360 version)
Soul Calibur: 96.4
Soul Calibur 2: 92.5 (highest; Gamecube version)
Soul Calibur 3: 86.5
Star Fox: 85.8
Star Fox 64: 89.8
Star Fox Assault: 70.8
Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2: 94.9 (highest; Dreamcast version)
Tony Hawk's Underground: 90.9 (highest; PS2 version)
Tony Hawk's Project 8: 82 (highest; Xbox 360 version)
Pokemon Blue: 88.3
Pokemon Silver: 91.1
Pokemon Ruby: 83.8
Pokemon Diamond: 84.8
Notice the trend? Each new generation nets lower and lower scores for these popular franchises. Pokemon is the exception; we'll get to that later. Now think about this: New Super Mario Bros. and Sonic Rush were hailed for sticking to the roots of their franchises.
New technology creates great new opportunities. Sometimes they can be beneficial, like the jump to 3D in Super Mario 64 (one of the most popular in the series even though it didn't score as high as Super Mario World); other times it can be harmful, like touch screen control for Super Mario 64 DS. However, Super Mario 64 was a rare case. Generally, straying too far from a franchise's roots is not a good thing. On the flip side, staying too close to its roots hurt Pokemon Diamond and Pearl. Still, because they didn't change drastically, the games got higher review scores than Sonic the Hedgehog, Tony Hawk's Project 8, and Star Fox Assault.
I also want to point out that Pokemon Silver and Star Fox 64 did better than their predecessors. These two games didn't add anything drastically new to their series', but they made use of new technology for strong benefits: Star Fox 64 got detailed, true 3D graphics and Pokemon Silver got color. That seems to be the best way to implement new technology.
A Gamer's Suggestions
I'm not an expert in business no matter how you slice it, but I am an expert in video games. On that note, I'm going to look at the biggest problem plaguing each console maker right now and give my thoughts on them. You may think it's pointless, and it may be, but I have a pretty good track record with video game-related predictions.
Sony's problem is obvious: people do not want to pay 600 dollars for a video game console. Sony's attempts to counter this problem are certainly true; it is cheap for a Blu-ray player, and it certainly does have the potential to last a long time. The problem is that the average consumer doesn't read gaming news sites and doesn't think about these benefits. The average consumer just sees a 600 dollar video game console. If a price cut is not economically viable for Sony right now, they should bring their defense to the public somehow. If they can dissuade the average consumer from seeing nothing but a 600 dollar game console, they might be more successful.
Nintendo's problem doesn't lie with the average consumer, but with the hardcore gamers. Now, I'm a hardcore gamer and I absolutely love my Wii, so I don't really agree with these concerns, but they certainly exist. On that note, Nintendo needs more hardcore games to snag the hardcore gamers. I suggest they get a move on with Project H.A.M.M.E.R. and Metroid Prime 3. They're certainly getting started, but they need to pick it up.
Microsoft is doing great in North America, and pretty good in Europe, but it's lacking in Japan. Japanese gamers like RPGs, plain and simple. When popular Japanese gaming magazine Famitsu polled its readers to get the top 10 video games of all time just a couple years ago, the only game on the list not made by RPG giant Square-Enix (or one of its two parts) was The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time at number 10. So Microsoft needs more RPGs to snag Japan. Blue Dragon was good, but they need more. Microsoft, keep working with publishers.
Sony's problem is obvious: people do not want to pay 600 dollars for a video game console. Sony's attempts to counter this problem are certainly true; it is cheap for a Blu-ray player, and it certainly does have the potential to last a long time. The problem is that the average consumer doesn't read gaming news sites and doesn't think about these benefits. The average consumer just sees a 600 dollar video game console. If a price cut is not economically viable for Sony right now, they should bring their defense to the public somehow. If they can dissuade the average consumer from seeing nothing but a 600 dollar game console, they might be more successful.
Nintendo's problem doesn't lie with the average consumer, but with the hardcore gamers. Now, I'm a hardcore gamer and I absolutely love my Wii, so I don't really agree with these concerns, but they certainly exist. On that note, Nintendo needs more hardcore games to snag the hardcore gamers. I suggest they get a move on with Project H.A.M.M.E.R. and Metroid Prime 3. They're certainly getting started, but they need to pick it up.
Microsoft is doing great in North America, and pretty good in Europe, but it's lacking in Japan. Japanese gamers like RPGs, plain and simple. When popular Japanese gaming magazine Famitsu polled its readers to get the top 10 video games of all time just a couple years ago, the only game on the list not made by RPG giant Square-Enix (or one of its two parts) was The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time at number 10. So Microsoft needs more RPGs to snag Japan. Blue Dragon was good, but they need more. Microsoft, keep working with publishers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)