News - Why Sony PS3 came third in the console race

[Numenor]

The PS3 came in too expensive. I had a new PC, there was nothing exceptional enough about the PS3 to make me want to spend that much money on one.

Then when they started lowering prices to a level I could actually justify paying, they removed the backwards compatibility with the PS2. Deal breaker for me. I have some PS2 games and no longer have a PS2 to play them on. And NO WAY will I pay for a PS3 which won't allow me to play my existing games as well as any new ones I choose to buy. I'm not buying two 'new' Sony consoles when one should suffice.

[pinkpound]

Also I think the fact that the Xbox360 games could so easily be "copied" helped is hardware
sales

[MrSamHideki]

Im just amazed at this graph. The Wii!!

[lohsmith]

Having owned a 360, and owned all previous generations of Playstations...my personal take on Sony's failure was down to their efforts at leveraging Blu Ray (and all of its cost implications) on to what was already becoming an online centric entertainment device.
Quite frankly, I don't care about the Playstations blu ray player. I have a Netflix subscription, and I have also yet to come across a game where the changing of a disc annoyed me.
Sony shot themselves in the foot. They wanted to dominate the physical media high definition film market...but in doing so, forgot that price and real innovation were key.
Xbox Live, Kinect, and a console that developers could really utilise. Those were the game changers.

[lohsmith]

The PS3 came in too expensive. I had a new PC, there was nothing exceptional enough about the PS3 to make me want to spend that much money on one.

Then when they started lowering prices to a level I could actually justify paying, they removed the backwards compatibility with the PS2. Deal breaker for me. I have some PS2 games and no longer have a PS2 to play them on. And NO WAY will I pay for a PS3 which won't allow me to play my existing games as well as any new ones I choose to buy. I'm not buying two 'new' Sony consoles when one should suffice.

Too true! Sony's real leverage in this console race was its incredible back catalogue of games. Once they became worthless, a key selling point was lost. Quite frankly, no other individual selling point of the PS3 made up for that glaring error.

[lohsmith]

XBox and PS3 games seem to be the same price to me? Am I missing something? Granted they're more expensive than Wii, but if you compare the Wii game with the equivalent PS3 or 360, you would expect that.

I've got PS3 and I don't feel it's a 'failed' product. It does more than I expected it to, now acting as a media hub rather than just a games machine, plus a route to online streaming through Netflix\Lovefilm, all for free.

From an entirely business perspective, there you have Sony's problem. It made the PS3 into a media hub...forgetting what its real purpose was.
The Xbox does a very good of media streaming. It is also a great family device thanks to Kinect...and it arguably has the best online system ever created.
I just can't see any aspect of the PS3 that could ever compete. (A nice touch from Microsoft was their increasing standard warranty to 3 years when the RROD issues came to light. Consumers can forgive if they feel they are being listened to. Sony removing backwards compatability...doesn't really show much corporate concern!)

[abaxas]

Almost all of the Wiis are still in existance.
Most of the PS3s are.
Some of the 360s still work.

Didnt the 360 have a 30% failure inside the first 3 years?

[lohsmith]

Almost all of the Wiis are still in existance.
Most of the PS3s are.
Some of the 360s still work.

Didnt the 360 have a 30% failure inside the first 3 years?

Almost all of the Wiis are still in existance.
Most of the PS3s are.
Some of the 360s still work.

Didnt the 360 have a 30% failure inside the first 3 years?

I dare say it was an even higher failure rate. The extended guarantee helped offset that issue - and having had a rrod myself, I was quite impressed with the turnaround.
I guess the point is, Microsoft evolved its console quickly - giving it arguably the widest appeal of all the consoles. Sony on the other hand went for a strange approach...it came in with the all singing/dancing hardware, then gradually stripped away core functionality - whilst at the same time failing to improve in those areas where MS was waaay ahead (Xbox Live & family orientated stuff such as. kinect).
The irony is, in the previous console war, MS brought in the most powerful console, and lost because it didn't expand its gaming portfolio enough. Sony did exactly the same thing this time around. I don't think Microsoft will make the same kind of errors next time....so it's going to be incredibly difficult for Sony to recover.

[levedy1]

Console gamers, y u no get PC

[Blademrk]

Console gamers, y u no get PC

simples! 'cos some of the games I want to play are not on a PC. And [i]some]/i] of those that are available are often not optimised for the PC.

That's not to say I don't play games on the PC.

Bottom Line is I'm not a "PC gamer" or a "Console gamer" I'm simply a gamer and I'll play games on any of the systems.

[crossy]

Bottom Line is I'm not a "PC gamer" or a "Console gamer" I'm simply a gamer and I'll play games on any of the systems.

So true - in fact there's been some titles (in the past - can't afford to do it now) where I've got it on XBox and PC - because the "feel" of the game has been different. Of course there's some titles (BF3 for example) where the console might be better for a quick blast, but overall the PC one is markedly better - more challenging, better graphics, etc.

Actually I'm playing through Mercenaries2 at the moment on the PC. I got that on the XBox not long after it came out and remember being very disappointed with it - ended up playing for a couple of sessions and then trading it in. On the other hand, the PC version (especially now I've got an XBox controller on my PC - hate driving with a keyboard!) is actually quite playable - okay Mercs2 is still a B-list title (maybe even C-list) but a heck of a lot better on the console.

Perhaps with the release of XBox720 and PS4 we'll see closer capabilities - for a while at least.

[maverik-sg1]

I have all 3 consoles here at home, the xbox was a xmas gift, the ps3 was a prize at work and the wii was a family console.

We stopped using the Wii about 18months ago and I stopped my live gold membership in January this year.

The PS3 does everything I want it to:

Web Browising for streaming of live sports
FREE online gaming for all my fave titles.
Rechargeable controllers (out the box) avoiding the cost of re-chargeable packs for both xbox and wii
Of course it's blu-ray, but I don't think I am a member of the blu-ray appreciation society because upscaled DVD's are good enough for me but still we got rid of the living room DVD player when this arrived
Having wifi built in when I first got it compared with spending £50 on the xbox(ok it's built in now but mine wasn't)
It has DNLA so streaming from the PC is also easy
I could connect an unused bluetooth earpiece for gaming chat

Now I know I could do some of this on the xbox, but spending so much money on accessories *charger packs* wifi etc and then paying for the online lag fest of a gaming experience was just throwing more money at it.

So by ticking all the boxes and free online gmaing made the ps3 our weapon of choice - but a lot of my friends use the xbox so I stil use it too.....but if they had not got xbox then I would of sold mine a while back.

PC gaming is still a more immersive experience for me though.

[maverik-sg1]

Also:

Biggest disappointment for me in the console world is the "innovation they brought" in chargeable download content.

It might of been okay when people were not engaged in the big depression we're in today but people are waking up and sense is once more commanding where the money is spent.

In years gone by 'map packs' and 'patches with new content' for the PC were free (still are for some games)and the games would still easily make a profit....consoles are jut one DLC license to print money for the greedy franchises.

I only ever brought one CoD Map Pack, found 75% of the maps we're re-skinned from previous CoD's and refused to do it again...if eveyone did the same then they would have to re-think their business models for the greter good of the consumer

A bit like sky sports, if no-one purchased the sky sports package, then sports would return to free-to-air channels