I think when Ken took power he said that Sony's no longer going to lower prices on their TVs in order to compete, because they were tired of losing money.
Unless I'm reading that wrong (and I may well be), Sony actually made a profit this year, which is a pretty impressive turnaround from last year's massive loss.
Unless I'm reading that wrong (and I may well be), Sony actually made a profit this year, which is a pretty impressive turnaround from last year's massive loss.
They expect to make a profit by the end of this year. They still had an overall loss of $115 million this quarter, according to the Washington Post. Though that loss has narrowed.
I think when Ken took power he said that Sony's no longer going to lower prices on their TVs in order to compete, because they were tired of losing money.
....yeah. Good jorb.
Well, that's a bit of a PS4 situation too. They can't afford to take much of a loss on it, so they have to stick to their guns and increase the profit they make on each unit sold.
I think Sony's TV division is hurting mostly because they refuse to put out a budget alternative. I think if they'd just get off their "High Sony Quality For A High Quality Price"- high horse and started making some cheaper sets they could right themselves fairly quickly. But that's just me.
Alright and in this next scene all the animals have AIDS.
I know this is likely wiseful thinking from a PS3 owner but Joystiq is reporting that Little Big Planet 3 is being worked on by Sumo (the Sonic All Stars group among other stuff). Sumo has said they are working on an unnamed exclusive PS3 game so that adds up. I wonder if the combination of a new dev team and a new marketing team might be a good thing for LBP. Just simplifying the interface a bit to give it more of a single player game structure combined with the right ad push could be huge.
Sony's been selling at a premium for many decades. Sometimes it works for them, sometimes it doesn't.
At any rate, a refresher on how awful the microtransactions were for last year's Tiger Woods game:
Tiger Woods PGA Tour 13 restricts access to 20 of its 36 courses. Players can rent one round on a locked course for 6000 Coins, the earnings of about 10 rounds at 18 holes, each of which takes about 20 minutes. For those who can't spend the inordinate amount of time required to borrow one round of golf, EA presents the option to pay for Coins. Rather than selling the audience iconic places like Banff Springs, it's made it more expensive than ever – and it's temporary.
Completing "Gold Mastery" tasks is the only way to open a course forever. The challenges are not only extremely difficult and time consuming -- sinking five Eagles, hitting the green in regulation 80 times, etc. -- but must be completed on each course players hope to own. Tiger 13 golfers need to trade dozens of their hours and/or dollars to access a course indefinitely.
This year, the new Tiger Woods game will return to a saner system of DLC, offering players the simple option to buy extra courses, or not.
Speaking at an EA-organized event at the Pebble Beach golf resort yesterday, franchise director Mike DeVault told IGN, “We’ve taken that [Course Mastery] system out and are using a more traditional DLC approach.” He said the game would come with 20 courses as standard - up from 16 last year - with extra courses available to buy.
DeVault said the reaction from the press had prompted a rethink but added that hardcore players - those who were willing to put the time and effort into earning coins and unlocking extra content for free - had enjoyed the option.
So instead of making the extra courses extremely difficult to unlock if you don't want to pay money, they've decided to make it so that you MUST spend money to unlock them. Not exactly an improvement.
Sony's been selling at a premium for many decades. Sometimes it works for them, sometimes it doesn't.
At any rate, a refresher on how awful the microtransactions were for last year's Tiger Woods game:
Tiger Woods PGA Tour 13 restricts access to 20 of its 36 courses. Players can rent one round on a locked course for 6000 Coins, the earnings of about 10 rounds at 18 holes, each of which takes about 20 minutes. For those who can't spend the inordinate amount of time required to borrow one round of golf, EA presents the option to pay for Coins. Rather than selling the audience iconic places like Banff Springs, it's made it more expensive than ever – and it's temporary.
Completing "Gold Mastery" tasks is the only way to open a course forever. The challenges are not only extremely difficult and time consuming -- sinking five Eagles, hitting the green in regulation 80 times, etc. -- but must be completed on each course players hope to own. Tiger 13 golfers need to trade dozens of their hours and/or dollars to access a course indefinitely.
This year, the new Tiger Woods game will return to a saner system of DLC, offering players the simple option to buy extra courses, or not.
Speaking at an EA-organized event at the Pebble Beach golf resort yesterday, franchise director Mike DeVault told IGN, “We’ve taken that [Course Mastery] system out and are using a more traditional DLC approach.” He said the game would come with 20 courses as standard - up from 16 last year - with extra courses available to buy.
DeVault said the reaction from the press had prompted a rethink but added that hardcore players - those who were willing to put the time and effort into earning coins and unlocking extra content for free - had enjoyed the option.
So instead of making the extra courses extremely difficult to unlock if you don't want to pay money, they've decided to make it so that you MUST spend money to unlock them. Not exactly an improvement.
Well it also says they've included four more courses than last time, so accusing them of locking more stuff away behind a paywall isn't capturing the entire story, is it.
Sony's been selling at a premium for many decades. Sometimes it works for them, sometimes it doesn't.
At any rate, a refresher on how awful the microtransactions were for last year's Tiger Woods game:
Tiger Woods PGA Tour 13 restricts access to 20 of its 36 courses. Players can rent one round on a locked course for 6000 Coins, the earnings of about 10 rounds at 18 holes, each of which takes about 20 minutes. For those who can't spend the inordinate amount of time required to borrow one round of golf, EA presents the option to pay for Coins. Rather than selling the audience iconic places like Banff Springs, it's made it more expensive than ever – and it's temporary.
Completing "Gold Mastery" tasks is the only way to open a course forever. The challenges are not only extremely difficult and time consuming -- sinking five Eagles, hitting the green in regulation 80 times, etc. -- but must be completed on each course players hope to own. Tiger 13 golfers need to trade dozens of their hours and/or dollars to access a course indefinitely.
This year, the new Tiger Woods game will return to a saner system of DLC, offering players the simple option to buy extra courses, or not.
Speaking at an EA-organized event at the Pebble Beach golf resort yesterday, franchise director Mike DeVault told IGN, “We’ve taken that [Course Mastery] system out and are using a more traditional DLC approach.” He said the game would come with 20 courses as standard - up from 16 last year - with extra courses available to buy.
DeVault said the reaction from the press had prompted a rethink but added that hardcore players - those who were willing to put the time and effort into earning coins and unlocking extra content for free - had enjoyed the option.
So instead of making the extra courses extremely difficult to unlock if you don't want to pay money, they've decided to make it so that you MUST spend money to unlock them. Not exactly an improvement.
Well it also says they've included four more courses than last time, so accusing them of locking more stuff away behind a paywall isn't capturing the entire story, is it.
Unless the review posted above is wrong they're offering exactly the same amount of courses for free.
Besides, I'm not saying they're locking more stuff beyond a paywall, I'm saying they've "solved" the problem of having an annoying way to unlock for free by not giving any options to unlock for free.
So what's the lesson to be learned from Sony? It looked like Sony was trying to push the highest tech pieces of hardware in the industry. So is the lesson to be learned here: Keep prices down, to sell more boxes, even if it means the hardware suffers? I'm not sure I like that lesson. Is it exclusive games that is the driving force, or the price of the console?
It's not that simple, there are a lot of factors.
A company can't necessarily always afford to push hardware as far as possible and take massive losses on the sale price. Nor can they push the hardware so far that they're forced to price it so high that it becomes out of reach of most of the market (see ps3 and vita). If the former happens, the company might find themselves in the shitter and at risk for any number of things. If the latter, install base can be an issue resulting in developer support issues.
There is a middle ground. Which is, use the best bang-for-your-buck standardized parts to build the cheapest, but reliable, console that is easiest to develop for; with enough power that it satisfies the market but doesn't wreck havoc in losses.
The thing is, this is common sense! Make shit easy to develop for and devs will love you! Make it a reasonable price and the market will love you! Make it so it doesn't kill you with losses and your investors will love you!
So why don't companies always do this?? Well Ninty has tended to do it, hence their relative stability despite all the "doom" that's been aimed at them for the past decade (with some exceptions). Sony started out doing this with the PS1, iirc. But Sony went on ahead thinking the Playstation brand was invincible and that somehow proprietary bullshit architecture was a good thing, and they also had new mediums to push (dvd, bluray). I'd say that the industry suffered because of the PS3; for all its potential "power" of the Cell, it really didn't pull much off that the 360 couldn't do. If the PS3, which launched a year later, had used more standard and easy-to-develop-for architecture, they might have launched an equally powerful machine at a lower price that wouldn't have been hell for devs to make games for; resulting in probably a much better marketshare situation than they're in now. And MS? Well they started out losing a lot to try to break into this market, and they are continuing to try and expand in other areas with the Xbox. There are ulterior motives beyond making a powerful machine that plays videogames, and that has a huge effect on pricing and power strategies.
Anyway, nobody wants hardware to be "held back" per se. But this industry really would be in the shitter at the other extreme; extremely high priced consoles that still manage to lose their company tons of money.
I'll admit, I've always associated Sony with high quality electronics. My Walkman from the 80's still works, for example. My MSX2 is a sony brand - a hit-bit HB-F1 II. It's still a high quality machine. When I got my BC 80 gb PS3, my dad was actually wowed by the build quality of the machine as I unboxed it, "Boy sony sure does know how to make a good looking piece of electronics" he said. My original PSP-1000 felt like the most durable video game system I've ever owned, and my vita looks significantly more expensive than any of my tablets or phones (despite it not being more expensive).
They certainly nail the high cost aesthetic. Only problem is that, aside from their gaming stuff, when is the last time you could point to a sony product and say that it actually was high quality, not just looked high quality? My last Viao had a plastic fascade - didn't they used to have metal frames? I haven't bought a sony TV in years -- wait, scratch that, I have a Sony Playstation 3D Monitor. Technically not a TV, but essentially the same. It came with no remote, and has a bunch of cross-talk issues. I haven't owned a sony music product since the mini-disc.
Their products used to be considered universally worth the cost. As the price of electronics fell, their competition caught up, and now sony refuses to let go of the past. I've seen people call Samsung the new Sony, but they couldn't be more opposite in corporate philosophy. Samsung is all about making shit as cheap as possible. not with sony. I don't really know how Sony can remedy the problem without dropping what makes them Sony, either. I'd think a bit of reduction is in order - cull their losing products and concentrate on what makes them money. If that means the death of their TV branch, so be it. I don't know anybody who owns a bravia anyways.
Rayman Legends is no longer exclusive to Wii U — it will also be available on PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360, and publisher Ubisoft has delayed the launch of the Wii U version to early September, when the game will launch on all three platforms.
Ubisoft Montpellier, the studio behind the Wii U version, is also making the PS3 and Xbox 360 versions.
"We heard from many Xbox & PlayStation owners and Rayman fans who told us they really wanted to play Rayman Legends on their current system," said Geoffroy Sardin, Ubisoft's chief marketing & sales officer for Europe, the Middle East and Africa, in a press release. "We decided to give the fans what they wanted while at the same time broadening the audience exposed to this innovative and memorable game."
Sony's been selling at a premium for many decades. Sometimes it works for them, sometimes it doesn't.
At any rate, a refresher on how awful the microtransactions were for last year's Tiger Woods game:
Tiger Woods PGA Tour 13 restricts access to 20 of its 36 courses. Players can rent one round on a locked course for 6000 Coins, the earnings of about 10 rounds at 18 holes, each of which takes about 20 minutes. For those who can't spend the inordinate amount of time required to borrow one round of golf, EA presents the option to pay for Coins. Rather than selling the audience iconic places like Banff Springs, it's made it more expensive than ever – and it's temporary.
Completing "Gold Mastery" tasks is the only way to open a course forever. The challenges are not only extremely difficult and time consuming -- sinking five Eagles, hitting the green in regulation 80 times, etc. -- but must be completed on each course players hope to own. Tiger 13 golfers need to trade dozens of their hours and/or dollars to access a course indefinitely.
This year, the new Tiger Woods game will return to a saner system of DLC, offering players the simple option to buy extra courses, or not.
Speaking at an EA-organized event at the Pebble Beach golf resort yesterday, franchise director Mike DeVault told IGN, “We’ve taken that [Course Mastery] system out and are using a more traditional DLC approach.” He said the game would come with 20 courses as standard - up from 16 last year - with extra courses available to buy.
DeVault said the reaction from the press had prompted a rethink but added that hardcore players - those who were willing to put the time and effort into earning coins and unlocking extra content for free - had enjoyed the option.
So instead of making the extra courses extremely difficult to unlock if you don't want to pay money, they've decided to make it so that you MUST spend money to unlock them. Not exactly an improvement.
Well it also says they've included four more courses than last time, so accusing them of locking more stuff away behind a paywall isn't capturing the entire story, is it.
Unless the review posted above is wrong they're offering exactly the same amount of courses for free.
Besides, I'm not saying they're locking more stuff beyond a paywall, I'm saying they've "solved" the problem of having an annoying way to unlock for free by not giving any options to unlock for free.
I was going by this line:
the game would come with 20 courses as standard - up from 16 last year - with extra courses available to buy.
I would like to see the numbers on how many players actually put in the time to access the other stuff for free, instead of paying. I would be very surprised if it was enough for it to become a 'problem', and I'd guess the results simply showed them that the majority of players were leaving that content there to gather dust, neither willing to put in the time or spend money to 'rent' the courses. Makes more financial sense to sell them as DLC. Also while it says last year's one had 36 courses, I can't see where it says how many will be available this year (other than 20 available within the game).
Well that'll be a huge hit in the face of two new console launches. I'm guessing they're still stinging from having arguably the best WiiU showcase game (ZombieU) sell about 40k copies total.
I'd imagine that game is furiously being ported as we speak as well.
RE: Sony
I thought the launch models of the PS2 and the PS3 were kinda ugly. Still love'em though but I guess aesthetics are pretty subjective.
I agree, I found all models of the PS2 to be hideous and, even though I think it's the best looking model, I think the launch PS3s look ugly too. Sony's products are asymmetrical, which looks weird to me. There's always a weird bump or bulge or ledge somewhere on their console, which looks odd.
Their controllers and handhelds look amazing, though. Beautiful symmetry in that hardware. And, actually, their mini-disc and MSX lines looked cool too.
Rayman Legends is no longer exclusive to Wii U — it will also be available on PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360, and publisher Ubisoft has delayed the launch of the Wii U version to early September, when the game will launch on all three platforms.
Ubisoft Montpellier, the studio behind the Wii U version, is also making the PS3 and Xbox 360 versions.
"We heard from many Xbox & PlayStation owners and Rayman fans who told us they really wanted to play Rayman Legends on their current system," said Geoffroy Sardin, Ubisoft's chief marketing & sales officer for Europe, the Middle East and Africa, in a press release. "We decided to give the fans what they wanted while at the same time broadening the audience exposed to this innovative and memorable game."
Wow. Delaying the game that much when it's essentially done (since the demo went up long ago) to have it coincide with other versions? Especially when the game appears to be heavily based around the Wii U tablet, which can't be replicated with the others? Why didn't they just do this to begin with?
Either there's been some sort of corporate shift to cause them to want to really build Rayman up everywhere, or (more likely) they've definitely lost confidence in the Wii U.
I think they're doing the smart thing and just taking a game that could sell more copies and setting it up to sell more copies.
It'll be interesting to see how they handle the tablet aspects, but I'm sure they can work around that.
Ubi said recently that they use console launches as an opportunity to kickstart new generation-long lasting franchises, since you can get attention at a launch. Other than that reason, it's hard to imagine why you'd spend $20 to $60 million on a game to sell to an install base of 400-600,000 people. You'll certainly lose money unless your game budget was tiny. I mean really, 40k of ZombiU? It couldn't have been a success unless it sold probably 500,000 copies, or, nearly 1 copy sold for every WiiU sold. That's practically impossible.
It's nuts. So yeah for something like a 2D platformer which already has an uphill battle to fight in the market, putting it onto a ~100M unit install base in addition to the WiiU is probably a good idea for Ubi.
Well that'll be a huge hit in the face of two new console launches. I'm guessing they're still stinging from having arguably the best WiiU showcase game (ZombieU) sell about 40k copies total.
I'd imagine that game is furiously being ported as we speak as well.
ZombiU lacked broad appeal. How surprising could it be that it didn't sell like Mario?
Well that'll be a huge hit in the face of two new console launches. I'm guessing they're still stinging from having arguably the best WiiU showcase game (ZombieU) sell about 40k copies total.
I'd imagine that game is furiously being ported as we speak as well.
ZombiU lacked broad appeal. How surprising could it be that it didn't sell like Mario?
there is middle ground between "selling 40k copies" and "selling like mario" that I think they were reaching for. I'd also disagree that Zombies don't have mass appeal.
Well that'll be a huge hit in the face of two new console launches. I'm guessing they're still stinging from having arguably the best WiiU showcase game (ZombieU) sell about 40k copies total.
I'd imagine that game is furiously being ported as we speak as well.
ZombiU lacked broad appeal. How surprising could it be that it didn't sell like Mario?
there is middle ground between "selling 40k copies" and "selling like mario" that I think they were reaching for. I'd also disagree that Zombies don't have mass appeal.
Well, the game was also punishingly hard.
Switch: 3947-4890-9293
+1
Sirialisof the Halite Throne.Registered Userregular
So Sony is turning it around against all predictions, go figure. I feel like they're due for a big return to the top, with smart consumer friendly moves like PS Plus, a console priced fairly that's leagues ahead of the current gen and will likely actually play used games.
Meanwhile the current leader in the West is moving towards abolishing used games and making your console retain a constant connection to the Internet in order to operate. Oh, and now Siri, because we all demanded that.
Isn't that still just an unconfirmed rumour from anonymous sources? I havent seen it backed up anywhere else.
I've seen alot of people touting it as fact recently, so more of an honest question if its confirmed by Microsoft themselves.
Well that'll be a huge hit in the face of two new console launches. I'm guessing they're still stinging from having arguably the best WiiU showcase game (ZombieU) sell about 40k copies total.
I'd imagine that game is furiously being ported as we speak as well.
ZombiU lacked broad appeal. How surprising could it be that it didn't sell like Mario?
there is middle ground between "selling 40k copies" and "selling like mario" that I think they were reaching for. I'd also disagree that Zombies don't have mass appeal.
Well, the game was also punishingly hard.
Also, it doesn't really fit the traditional Nintendo demographic. Rayman at launch might have done slightly better actually - I could have seen Nintendoland, Mario and Rayman being the first three games a lot of families would have grabbed. A fair amount of those Sonic Racing purchases might have slid Rayman's way.
I wonder if the Rabbids game tanked so bad that might have had something to do with it too...
I wonder if the Rabbids game tanked so bad that might have had something to do with it too...
That's actually a good point. Granted the Rabbids game didn't get a hell of a lot of coverage and zero advertising, but if that AND Zombi U did bad, the suits could easily think "welp, two completely different games failed. Looks like the Wii U isn't as great as we thought."
Switch: 3947-4890-9293
0
AbsoluteZeroThe new film by Quentin KoopantinoRegistered Userregular
So Sony is turning it around against all predictions, go figure. I feel like they're due for a big return to the top, with smart consumer friendly moves like PS Plus, a console priced fairly that's leagues ahead of the current gen and will likely actually play used games.
Meanwhile the current leader in the West is moving towards abolishing used games and making your console retain a constant connection to the Internet in order to operate. Oh, and now Siri, because we all demanded that.
Isn't that still just an unconfirmed rumour from anonymous sources? I havent seen it backed up anywhere else.
I've seen alot of people touting it as fact recently, so more of an honest question if its confirmed by Microsoft themselves.
Microsoft hasn't even acknowledged a new Xbox at ALL this year, but after the last 6 years of following this industry I subscribe firmly to the belief anymore that "where there's smoke there's fire". And there's a TON of smoke about the "no used games" rumor. I almost wonder if it was an intentional leak in order to get people's outrage out there and over with before MS announces it next month or something.
"Premium price for premium quality/power" doesn't fly well in a global depression, when people start looking for bargains and places to cut. If a competitor's product scratches that itch almost or just as well, and is a hundred or a hundred and fifty dollars cheaper, what do you think is going to happen?
I'll admit, I've always associated Sony with high quality electronics. My Walkman from the 80's still works, for example. My MSX2 is a sony brand - a hit-bit HB-F1 II. It's still a high quality machine. When I got my BC 80 gb PS3, my dad was actually wowed by the build quality of the machine as I unboxed it, "Boy sony sure does know how to make a good looking piece of electronics" he said. My original PSP-1000 felt like the most durable video game system I've ever owned, and my vita looks significantly more expensive than any of my tablets or phones (despite it not being more expensive).
They certainly nail the high cost aesthetic. Only problem is that, aside from their gaming stuff, when is the last time you could point to a sony product and say that it actually was high quality, not just looked high quality? My last Viao had a plastic fascade - didn't they used to have metal frames? I haven't bought a sony TV in years -- wait, scratch that, I have a Sony Playstation 3D Monitor. Technically not a TV, but essentially the same. It came with no remote, and has a bunch of cross-talk issues. I haven't owned a sony music product since the mini-disc.
Their products used to be considered universally worth the cost. As the price of electronics fell, their competition caught up, and now sony refuses to let go of the past. I've seen people call Samsung the new Sony, but they couldn't be more opposite in corporate philosophy. Samsung is all about making shit as cheap as possible. not with sony. I don't really know how Sony can remedy the problem without dropping what makes them Sony, either. I'd think a bit of reduction is in order - cull their losing products and concentrate on what makes them money. If that means the death of their TV branch, so be it. I don't know anybody who owns a bravia anyways.
There are still divisions of Sony that do high quality products. The Photography line for example, In particular the NEX system cameras are regarded as the best cameras of its type (and thats both on price and performance). Now that Sony has taken over its Mobile phone division again this year we are seeing the first true Sony designed smartphones for the market and the Xperia Z actually looks and is specified as a high end product.
The problem lies now with Sony keeping its other divisions back in line with those that are moving in the right direction.
So Sony is turning it around against all predictions, go figure. I feel like they're due for a big return to the top, with smart consumer friendly moves like PS Plus, a console priced fairly that's leagues ahead of the current gen and will likely actually play used games.
Meanwhile the current leader in the West is moving towards abolishing used games and making your console retain a constant connection to the Internet in order to operate. Oh, and now Siri, because we all demanded that.
Isn't that still just an unconfirmed rumour from anonymous sources? I havent seen it backed up anywhere else.
I've seen alot of people touting it as fact recently, so more of an honest question if its confirmed by Microsoft themselves.
Microsoft hasn't even acknowledged a new Xbox at ALL this year, but after the last 6 years of following this industry I subscribe firmly to the belief anymore that "where there's smoke there's fire". And there's a TON of smoke about the "no used games" rumor. I almost wonder if it was an intentional leak in order to get people's outrage out there and over with before MS announces it next month or something.
How will they phrase it, though? There is literally no way they will, in an announcement of a console, get on stage and say "and you won't be able to play used games on it!" So, how do you get something like that out? There's no way to talk that up as a positive to the consumer, so it's the kind of thing that would have to be announced through other channels.
0
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
In case you're wondering, Sony as a whole is blaming its overall continued loss on weak TV demand.
Sony cut its full-year sales targets for TVs to 13.5 million units from 14.5 million, for compact cameras to 15 million from 16 million, and for portable game players to 7 million from 10 million. It kept its smartphone sales target at 34 million units.
The electronics business faces a “tough environment,” Chief Financial Officer Masaru Kato said at a briefing.
Sony projects an 80 billion-yen loss at its TV-making operations this fiscal year. Imaging and gaming units will also have “significant’ drops in operating profits, it said.
Their TV's are even worse about their status. Sony needs to realize that this isn't 1995 and they are no longer the leader in TV's. Are they even in the top five? I forget the term, but they price their stuff so people think it's better. Instead they simply lose sales.
Almost everyone is losing money on TVs. Philips is leaving the consumer electronics market to focus on software. Panasonic, who make the best damn plasma sets money can buy (and are also cheap), may leave consumer electronics, as well, and focus on corporate level (their big money maker is still for auto manufacturers). Margins are razor thin and companies just can't turn a profit anymore. Also, consumers aren't buying TVs. They already bought their HDTV, and manufacturers thought that this desire to buy TVs would continue, so they pushed 3D, and are now trying to make 4K a big deal, when consumers just don't give a shit. The bubble has burst, and it's taking some big players with it.
SirUltimosDon't talk, Rusty. Just paint.Registered Userregular
It looks like a lot of Japanese firms are being driven out of the market by Korean firms, just like all the American firms were driven out by the Japanese ones.
Looks like the LittleBigPlanet baton has been passed.
LittleBigPlanet 3 is rumored to be in development at British studio and Sonic & All-Stars Racing Transformed dev Sumo Digital. VG247 is reporting that, according to sources, Sony and former series developer Media Molecule approached Sumo Digital to make LBP 3, and that the game, which has yet to be announced, has already been in development for "well over a year." Upon inquiry, a Sony representative told the site that it "doesn't comment on rumor or speculation."
When approached on the matter, a Sumo Digital representative told Joystiq, "No comment."
LittleBigPlanet 2's Cross-Controller Pack, released in December 2012, was outsourced to Sumo Digital, so the developer has hands-on experience with the property. Also, as spotted by superannuation last April, motion graphics artist Naomi Summerscales' LinkedIn profile noted the developer is working on a PS3 exclusive to be released this year.
Media Molecule is now working on Vita papercraft game Tearaway, having announced it was stepping away from LittleBigPlanet back in July 2011.
So Sony is turning it around against all predictions, go figure. I feel like they're due for a big return to the top, with smart consumer friendly moves like PS Plus, a console priced fairly that's leagues ahead of the current gen and will likely actually play used games.
Meanwhile the current leader in the West is moving towards abolishing used games and making your console retain a constant connection to the Internet in order to operate. Oh, and now Siri, because we all demanded that.
Isn't that still just an unconfirmed rumour from anonymous sources? I havent seen it backed up anywhere else.
I've seen alot of people touting it as fact recently, so more of an honest question if its confirmed by Microsoft themselves.
Microsoft hasn't even acknowledged a new Xbox at ALL this year, but after the last 6 years of following this industry I subscribe firmly to the belief anymore that "where there's smoke there's fire". And there's a TON of smoke about the "no used games" rumor. I almost wonder if it was an intentional leak in order to get people's outrage out there and over with before MS announces it next month or something.
How will they phrase it, though? There is literally no way they will, in an announcement of a console, get on stage and say "and you won't be able to play used games on it!" So, how do you get something like that out? There's no way to talk that up as a positive to the consumer, so it's the kind of thing that would have to be announced through other channels.
"Every retail purchase will include a digital download version of the game... Because it includes a one time registration code HEY GUYS HERE ARE THE KINECT DANCERS."
0
Brainiac 8Don't call me Shirley...Registered Userregular
Re Rayman: I'm thinking that losing the exclusivity of a sequel to a mediocre selling title won't hurt Nintendo's bottom line any.
Oh and Ubisoft: It'll sell as ho-hum as the first game did....just so you know.
So Sony is turning it around against all predictions, go figure. I feel like they're due for a big return to the top, with smart consumer friendly moves like PS Plus, a console priced fairly that's leagues ahead of the current gen and will likely actually play used games.
Meanwhile the current leader in the West is moving towards abolishing used games and making your console retain a constant connection to the Internet in order to operate. Oh, and now Siri, because we all demanded that.
Isn't that still just an unconfirmed rumour from anonymous sources? I havent seen it backed up anywhere else.
I've seen alot of people touting it as fact recently, so more of an honest question if its confirmed by Microsoft themselves.
Microsoft hasn't even acknowledged a new Xbox at ALL this year, but after the last 6 years of following this industry I subscribe firmly to the belief anymore that "where there's smoke there's fire". And there's a TON of smoke about the "no used games" rumor. I almost wonder if it was an intentional leak in order to get people's outrage out there and over with before MS announces it next month or something.
How will they phrase it, though? There is literally no way they will, in an announcement of a console, get on stage and say "and you won't be able to play used games on it!" So, how do you get something like that out? There's no way to talk that up as a positive to the consumer, so it's the kind of thing that would have to be announced through other channels.
Well I don't think it's going to be this "Aaand just one more thing, NO MORE USED GAMES!" announcement to thunderous applause after they've just done 45 minutes of introducing the New Xbox, but more like what you said, after the fact. But by leaking it now we have 15 threads on GAF on the front page and everyone is outraged for the 48 hour news cycle, and then when MS mentions it to a few outlets after their announcement the basic sentiment is just acceptance. People will say "welp, I guess that rumor was true, that sucks" and move on.
I'm sure there's some PR term for this shit, like "softening the blow" only way more douchey.
+1
Brainiac 8Don't call me Shirley...Registered Userregular
The no used games thing will end up as a footnote/fine line on the specs sheet of the system.
I'm not sure they'll want that announced on stage. :P
Re Rayman: I'm thinking that losing the exclusivity of a sequel to a mediocre selling title won't hurt Nintendo's bottom line any.
Oh and Ubisoft: It'll sell as ho-hum as the first game did....just so you know.
I really don't understand the delay of the Wii U version. Multiplatform I understand. But the thing was supposed to come out in a couple weeks. At a time where it would have had virtually no competition and people may have purchased it just because "hey, nothing else to buy." Instead they move the already done game to the busy holiday season to die. Seems like a dumb move.
So Sony is turning it around against all predictions, go figure. I feel like they're due for a big return to the top, with smart consumer friendly moves like PS Plus, a console priced fairly that's leagues ahead of the current gen and will likely actually play used games.
Meanwhile the current leader in the West is moving towards abolishing used games and making your console retain a constant connection to the Internet in order to operate. Oh, and now Siri, because we all demanded that.
Isn't that still just an unconfirmed rumour from anonymous sources? I havent seen it backed up anywhere else.
I've seen alot of people touting it as fact recently, so more of an honest question if its confirmed by Microsoft themselves.
Microsoft hasn't even acknowledged a new Xbox at ALL this year, but after the last 6 years of following this industry I subscribe firmly to the belief anymore that "where there's smoke there's fire". And there's a TON of smoke about the "no used games" rumor. I almost wonder if it was an intentional leak in order to get people's outrage out there and over with before MS announces it next month or something.
How will they phrase it, though? There is literally no way they will, in an announcement of a console, get on stage and say "and you won't be able to play used games on it!" So, how do you get something like that out? There's no way to talk that up as a positive to the consumer, so it's the kind of thing that would have to be announced through other channels.
"Every retail purchase will include a digital download version of the game... Because it includes a one time registration code HEY GUYS HERE ARE THE KINECT DANCERS."
Include a rewards scheme like Nintendo has with the Wii U. Basically talk up and make purchasing new retail the best thing ever. Microsoft will never announce on stage that the new xbox will no play used software but probably release a small press pack with the announcement/confirmation.
Posts
....yeah. Good jorb.
They expect to make a profit by the end of this year. They still had an overall loss of $115 million this quarter, according to the Washington Post. Though that loss has narrowed.
Well, that's a bit of a PS4 situation too. They can't afford to take much of a loss on it, so they have to stick to their guns and increase the profit they make on each unit sold.
I think Sony's TV division is hurting mostly because they refuse to put out a budget alternative. I think if they'd just get off their "High Sony Quality For A High Quality Price"- high horse and started making some cheaper sets they could right themselves fairly quickly. But that's just me.
I got a little excited when I saw your ship.
At any rate, a refresher on how awful the microtransactions were for last year's Tiger Woods game:
http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/03/27/tiger-woods-pga-tour-13-review
Got that? Here's what they're doing this year:
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/02/06/ea-rethinks-tiger-woods-microtransactions
So instead of making the extra courses extremely difficult to unlock if you don't want to pay money, they've decided to make it so that you MUST spend money to unlock them. Not exactly an improvement.
Well it also says they've included four more courses than last time, so accusing them of locking more stuff away behind a paywall isn't capturing the entire story, is it.
Unless the review posted above is wrong they're offering exactly the same amount of courses for free.
Besides, I'm not saying they're locking more stuff beyond a paywall, I'm saying they've "solved" the problem of having an annoying way to unlock for free by not giving any options to unlock for free.
It's not that simple, there are a lot of factors.
A company can't necessarily always afford to push hardware as far as possible and take massive losses on the sale price. Nor can they push the hardware so far that they're forced to price it so high that it becomes out of reach of most of the market (see ps3 and vita). If the former happens, the company might find themselves in the shitter and at risk for any number of things. If the latter, install base can be an issue resulting in developer support issues.
There is a middle ground. Which is, use the best bang-for-your-buck standardized parts to build the cheapest, but reliable, console that is easiest to develop for; with enough power that it satisfies the market but doesn't wreck havoc in losses.
The thing is, this is common sense! Make shit easy to develop for and devs will love you! Make it a reasonable price and the market will love you! Make it so it doesn't kill you with losses and your investors will love you!
So why don't companies always do this?? Well Ninty has tended to do it, hence their relative stability despite all the "doom" that's been aimed at them for the past decade (with some exceptions). Sony started out doing this with the PS1, iirc. But Sony went on ahead thinking the Playstation brand was invincible and that somehow proprietary bullshit architecture was a good thing, and they also had new mediums to push (dvd, bluray). I'd say that the industry suffered because of the PS3; for all its potential "power" of the Cell, it really didn't pull much off that the 360 couldn't do. If the PS3, which launched a year later, had used more standard and easy-to-develop-for architecture, they might have launched an equally powerful machine at a lower price that wouldn't have been hell for devs to make games for; resulting in probably a much better marketshare situation than they're in now. And MS? Well they started out losing a lot to try to break into this market, and they are continuing to try and expand in other areas with the Xbox. There are ulterior motives beyond making a powerful machine that plays videogames, and that has a huge effect on pricing and power strategies.
Anyway, nobody wants hardware to be "held back" per se. But this industry really would be in the shitter at the other extreme; extremely high priced consoles that still manage to lose their company tons of money.
Steam ID: slashx000______Twitter: @bill_at_zeboyd______ Facebook: Zeboyd Games
They certainly nail the high cost aesthetic. Only problem is that, aside from their gaming stuff, when is the last time you could point to a sony product and say that it actually was high quality, not just looked high quality? My last Viao had a plastic fascade - didn't they used to have metal frames? I haven't bought a sony TV in years -- wait, scratch that, I have a Sony Playstation 3D Monitor. Technically not a TV, but essentially the same. It came with no remote, and has a bunch of cross-talk issues. I haven't owned a sony music product since the mini-disc.
Their products used to be considered universally worth the cost. As the price of electronics fell, their competition caught up, and now sony refuses to let go of the past. I've seen people call Samsung the new Sony, but they couldn't be more opposite in corporate philosophy. Samsung is all about making shit as cheap as possible. not with sony. I don't really know how Sony can remedy the problem without dropping what makes them Sony, either. I'd think a bit of reduction is in order - cull their losing products and concentrate on what makes them money. If that means the death of their TV branch, so be it. I don't know anybody who owns a bravia anyways.
http://www.polygon.com/2013/2/7/3963846/rayman-legends-ps3-xbox-360-wii-u-delay
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/
I write about video games and stuff. It is fun. Sometimes.
RE: Sony
I thought the launch models of the PS2 and the PS3 were kinda ugly. Still love'em though but I guess aesthetics are pretty subjective.
Steam ID: slashx000______Twitter: @bill_at_zeboyd______ Facebook: Zeboyd Games
I was going by this line:
I would like to see the numbers on how many players actually put in the time to access the other stuff for free, instead of paying. I would be very surprised if it was enough for it to become a 'problem', and I'd guess the results simply showed them that the majority of players were leaving that content there to gather dust, neither willing to put in the time or spend money to 'rent' the courses. Makes more financial sense to sell them as DLC. Also while it says last year's one had 36 courses, I can't see where it says how many will be available this year (other than 20 available within the game).
I'd imagine that game is furiously being ported as we speak as well.
I agree, I found all models of the PS2 to be hideous and, even though I think it's the best looking model, I think the launch PS3s look ugly too. Sony's products are asymmetrical, which looks weird to me. There's always a weird bump or bulge or ledge somewhere on their console, which looks odd.
Their controllers and handhelds look amazing, though. Beautiful symmetry in that hardware. And, actually, their mini-disc and MSX lines looked cool too.
Wow. Delaying the game that much when it's essentially done (since the demo went up long ago) to have it coincide with other versions? Especially when the game appears to be heavily based around the Wii U tablet, which can't be replicated with the others? Why didn't they just do this to begin with?
Either there's been some sort of corporate shift to cause them to want to really build Rayman up everywhere, or (more likely) they've definitely lost confidence in the Wii U.
It'll be interesting to see how they handle the tablet aspects, but I'm sure they can work around that.
Ubi said recently that they use console launches as an opportunity to kickstart new generation-long lasting franchises, since you can get attention at a launch. Other than that reason, it's hard to imagine why you'd spend $20 to $60 million on a game to sell to an install base of 400-600,000 people. You'll certainly lose money unless your game budget was tiny. I mean really, 40k of ZombiU? It couldn't have been a success unless it sold probably 500,000 copies, or, nearly 1 copy sold for every WiiU sold. That's practically impossible.
It's nuts. So yeah for something like a 2D platformer which already has an uphill battle to fight in the market, putting it onto a ~100M unit install base in addition to the WiiU is probably a good idea for Ubi.
Steam ID: slashx000______Twitter: @bill_at_zeboyd______ Facebook: Zeboyd Games
Steam ID: slashx000______Twitter: @bill_at_zeboyd______ Facebook: Zeboyd Games
ZombiU lacked broad appeal. How surprising could it be that it didn't sell like Mario?
there is middle ground between "selling 40k copies" and "selling like mario" that I think they were reaching for. I'd also disagree that Zombies don't have mass appeal.
Well, the game was also punishingly hard.
Isn't that still just an unconfirmed rumour from anonymous sources? I havent seen it backed up anywhere else.
I've seen alot of people touting it as fact recently, so more of an honest question if its confirmed by Microsoft themselves.
Also, it doesn't really fit the traditional Nintendo demographic. Rayman at launch might have done slightly better actually - I could have seen Nintendoland, Mario and Rayman being the first three games a lot of families would have grabbed. A fair amount of those Sonic Racing purchases might have slid Rayman's way.
I wonder if the Rabbids game tanked so bad that might have had something to do with it too...
That's actually a good point. Granted the Rabbids game didn't get a hell of a lot of coverage and zero advertising, but if that AND Zombi U did bad, the suits could easily think "welp, two completely different games failed. Looks like the Wii U isn't as great as we thought."
Microsoft hasn't even acknowledged a new Xbox at ALL this year, but after the last 6 years of following this industry I subscribe firmly to the belief anymore that "where there's smoke there's fire". And there's a TON of smoke about the "no used games" rumor. I almost wonder if it was an intentional leak in order to get people's outrage out there and over with before MS announces it next month or something.
Steam, Warframe: Megajoule
There's always a Rabbids game.
Steam ID: slashx000______Twitter: @bill_at_zeboyd______ Facebook: Zeboyd Games
There are still divisions of Sony that do high quality products. The Photography line for example, In particular the NEX system cameras are regarded as the best cameras of its type (and thats both on price and performance). Now that Sony has taken over its Mobile phone division again this year we are seeing the first true Sony designed smartphones for the market and the Xperia Z actually looks and is specified as a high end product.
The problem lies now with Sony keeping its other divisions back in line with those that are moving in the right direction.
How will they phrase it, though? There is literally no way they will, in an announcement of a console, get on stage and say "and you won't be able to play used games on it!" So, how do you get something like that out? There's no way to talk that up as a positive to the consumer, so it's the kind of thing that would have to be announced through other channels.
Almost everyone is losing money on TVs. Philips is leaving the consumer electronics market to focus on software. Panasonic, who make the best damn plasma sets money can buy (and are also cheap), may leave consumer electronics, as well, and focus on corporate level (their big money maker is still for auto manufacturers). Margins are razor thin and companies just can't turn a profit anymore. Also, consumers aren't buying TVs. They already bought their HDTV, and manufacturers thought that this desire to buy TVs would continue, so they pushed 3D, and are now trying to make 4K a big deal, when consumers just don't give a shit. The bubble has burst, and it's taking some big players with it.
http://www.joystiq.com/2013/02/07/rumor-littlebigplanet-3-is-in-development-at-sonic-all-stars-de/
"Every retail purchase will include a digital download version of the game... Because it includes a one time registration code HEY GUYS HERE ARE THE KINECT DANCERS."
Oh and Ubisoft: It'll sell as ho-hum as the first game did....just so you know.
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
Well I don't think it's going to be this "Aaand just one more thing, NO MORE USED GAMES!" announcement to thunderous applause after they've just done 45 minutes of introducing the New Xbox, but more like what you said, after the fact. But by leaking it now we have 15 threads on GAF on the front page and everyone is outraged for the 48 hour news cycle, and then when MS mentions it to a few outlets after their announcement the basic sentiment is just acceptance. People will say "welp, I guess that rumor was true, that sucks" and move on.
I'm sure there's some PR term for this shit, like "softening the blow" only way more douchey.
I'm not sure they'll want that announced on stage. :P
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
I really don't understand the delay of the Wii U version. Multiplatform I understand. But the thing was supposed to come out in a couple weeks. At a time where it would have had virtually no competition and people may have purchased it just because "hey, nothing else to buy." Instead they move the already done game to the busy holiday season to die. Seems like a dumb move.
Include a rewards scheme like Nintendo has with the Wii U. Basically talk up and make purchasing new retail the best thing ever. Microsoft will never announce on stage that the new xbox will no play used software but probably release a small press pack with the announcement/confirmation.