• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

[Eurogamer] The big PlayStation 30th anniversary interview with Shawn Layden: "It was a fight to get the Sony name on the machine"

Astray

Member

The big PlayStation 30th anniversary interview with Shawn Layden: "It was a fight to get the Sony name on the machine - they didn't want to be associated with it"​


--------------
Shawn is basically the PS version of Phil Spencer, but there are some really fun and interesting stories there. 2nd half is coming tomorrow too.
 

Tsaki

Member
We wouldn't see them again for the rest of the day, because Sony Music populated sales, marketing, advertising, publisher relations. So those were the guys who would go out with the people at Square and ply them with whiskey until the wee hours of the morning to finally get Final Fantasy 7 off of Nintendo and onto PlayStation. When that announcement was made, that was really the 'oh my god' moment. 'Sony's really serious about this now.' And that's down to the music guys, the doggedness of just trying to get a deal over the line. They were amazing.
lmao nice
 
Great interview.

Shawn Layden didn’t last at the helm of SIE, and comparatively he was less amusing than the cartoonish caricature that was Jack Tretton, but he knows the industry and offers fascinating insight.
 

DonF

Member
Our first party responsibility was to grow the pie overall, and as the pie gets bigger everyone's slice gets bigger, so everyone's happy. Growing the market overall meant creating new types of games, new genres of games, and not competing in some of the standard genre categories. And so you got games like PaRappa the Rapper. You got games like SingStar, Ico and Shadow of the Colossus. Who's going to make those games? It was a first-party imperative to show, firstly, the power of the platform, and then secondly, the endless categories that we could build games into. We weren't just trapped into three genres and trying to fight for market share from each other.
from "imperative to show" new things to trend chasers...what a disappointment
 
Last edited:

The big PlayStation 30th anniversary interview with Shawn Layden: "It was a fight to get the Sony name on the machine - they didn't want to be associated with it"​


--------------
Shawn is basically the PS version of Phil Spencer, but there are some really fun and interesting stories there. 2nd half is coming tomorrow too.
The PS version of Phil Spencer? I've heard hot takes holy shit.

They were nothing alike, and Layden didn't help bring down an entire brand.
 

TGO

Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
They had no problem slapping their name on the Nintendo add-on 🤔
 
Last edited:

TGO

Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
Shawn "Dont like it dont buy it" Layden.....yeah i'm good. After that shitty take, i no longer care what he thinks or says.
He seems to have more to say then Sony at this point, in fact he seems to talk more about Sony then he did when he actually worked for them.
Kinda odd
 

Robb

Gold Member
Sony Music populated sales, marketing, advertising, publisher relations. So those were the guys who would go out with the people at Square and ply them with whiskey until the wee hours of the morning to finally get Final Fantasy 7 off of Nintendo and onto PlayStation.
lkS1fn0.jpeg
 
Especially since Shawn Layden never had the top position within the business as Phil Spencer does.

I think they just mean Shawn's a very forward-facing and public gaming executive like Phil Spencer is, and in that regard, they're right. He's probably been the most communicative of PlayStation execs I've seen the past 10 years, even if he's no longer working at SIE.

But yes, the other difference between them is, Layden actually has results under his belt in the form of a successful gaming subsidiary. Spencer's track record is mostly ones of failure and disappointment outside of how much of daddy Microsoft's money he can spend on buying 3P publishers.

One has a track record to back up their talk, the other doesn't.
 
He seems to have more to say then Sony at this point, in fact he seems to talk more about Sony then he did when he actually worked for them.
Kinda odd
Not really. He's not a Sony worker anymore. No NDAs. He can just say whatever he wants about the brand whenever he wants now.
 

Calverz

Member
Yep, PlayStation basically exists thanks to Sony Music Japan, they don't really get enough credit these days.

What?

That's a weird comparison to make. Nothing alike.

Especially since Shawn Layden never had the top position within the business as Phil Spencer does.

The PS version of Phil Spencer? I've heard hot takes holy shit.

They were nothing alike, and Layden didn't help bring down an entire brand.

I cry for people's lack of understanding and basic logic and go straight to the fanboy wars stuff.

I think they just mean Shawn's a very forward-facing and public gaming executive like Phil Spencer is, and in that regard, they're right.
Glad someone at Playstation team gets what he meant.
 
Last edited:
He seems to have more to say then Sony at this point, in fact he seems to talk more about Sony then he did when he actually worked for them.
Kinda odd
How is it odd exactly? He couldn’t exactly say whatever he wanted as an employee.

Now that he doesn’t have to worry about stuff like NDAs and being a spokesperson for the brand he can be more candid and say what he actually thinks.
 

TGO

Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
How is it odd exactly? He couldn’t exactly say whatever he wanted as an employee.

Now that he doesn’t have to worry about stuff like NDAs and being a spokesperson for the brand he can be more candid and say what he actually thinks.
Not really. He's not a Sony worker anymore. No NDAs. He can just say whatever he wants about the brand whenever he wants now.
Doesn't he work at Tencent now?
Being a employee at another company and literally all your interviews and comments are about your old job
Not saying he can't talk about them or shouldn't.
Just find it odd he's name only comes up with Playstation.
Phil Harrison worked for Microsoft and although he spoke about Playstation his main focus was on Xbox and PlayStation as a competitor.
 

nial

Member
I cry for people's lack of understanding and basic logic and go straight to the fanboy wars stuff.
Nothing about warring, but ok. That was a such a very broad definition that I don't see how correlates to Phil Spencer in particular, but whatever.
 

Astray

Member
I think they just mean Shawn's a very forward-facing and public gaming executive like Phil Spencer is, and in that regard, they're right. He's probably been the most communicative of PlayStation execs I've seen the past 10 years, even if he's no longer working at SIE.

But yes, the other difference between them is, Layden actually has results under his belt in the form of a successful gaming subsidiary. Spencer's track record is mostly ones of failure and disappointment outside of how much of daddy Microsoft's money he can spend on buying 3P publishers.

One has a track record to back up their talk, the other doesn't.
Glad someone at Playstation team gets what he meant.
The Office Thank You GIF
 

SkylineRKR

Member
Sony deliberately never had more than maybe 22 percent of [first-party] software share. On the Sega platforms and Nintendo, first-party had 80, 85, 90 percent of the software market. But we always knew PlayStation would only be successful if we made it, quote, 'The People's Platform'. It's for third parties to come make a business. We'll come in and we'll get, you know, 25 percent typically at launch, the share is higher because we put all the bets on the new games. But over time, you know, the real leaders in that marketplace as far as revenue and share goes were the Activisions and the Take-Twos and EA.


Our first party responsibility was to grow the pie overall, and as the pie gets bigger everyone's slice gets bigger, so everyone's happy. Growing the market overall meant creating new types of games, new genres of games, and not competing in some of the standard genre categories. And so you got games like PaRappa the Rapper. You got games like SingStar, Ico and Shadow of the Colossus. Who's going to make those games? It was a first-party imperative to show, firstly, the power of the platform, and then secondly, the endless categories that we could build games into. We weren't just trapped into three genres and trying to fight for market share from each other.

This was smart. Sega and especially Nintendo pretty much competed in every genre, it was probably hard to get a slice as a third party for those 2. You need volume and quality. And yeah, Sony itself wasn't afraid to experiment and attempt to broaden their audience with some quirky games. They had shit like Fantavision, Jumping Flash, Kurushi. And Ape Escape sort of set a new bar in terms of dual stick controls.

I believe Sony had a reason to not embrace a mascot as well.
 
Top Bottom