Support NeoGAF

[Warm Machine]

The "true gamers" thing in relation to Sony is such an invention. All of the console manufacturers are using core gamers as the obvious initial market. The strategy across the spectrum is to get the hardcore and spread outward from there.

 

[Megadragon15]

As long as they do not price it at '599 US dollars' they should be able to capture a significant portion of the console market, and later they can appeal to the casuals when they start considering price drops.

 

[GenericUser]

I think there are millions of people out there that are just waiting to lay their hands on a proper next gen console. So far, Sony does everything right.

"Hardcore games" are what made the ps brand big in the first place, I do not see why going after this audience is a bad thing.

 

[Cornbread78]

seriously, they need the hardcore gamer, could you imagine them showing off tje new PS4 tech with angry birds and temple run as their focus? that would be a disaster....

Sony has stated many times they are all about the games and the gamer, so I hope they keep marketing that...

 

[joeblow]

Was Nintendo wrong for "betting the farm" on core gamers when they released the NES back in the 80s? Couldn't they see the writing on the wall with the Great Videogame Market Crash of 1984? Poor Atari 2600 game sales at that time showed that consumer tastes had moved on, right?

 

[Fried Food]

It's not like Sony has said they AREN'T going to do whatever it is analysts think they should do.

They revealed the console in a games centric manner and at the same time they did talk about digital and social.

To me it sounds like they hit everything and focused on games.

It's almost as if people don't realize that Feb 20th was not the only time Sony will be discussing their new platform.

 

[Freki]

Yes. We are the base for both consoles, you start with us and work your way out to other type of gamers. We are the most consistent type of gamer, you don't win us over, than your base can fall apart at the drop of a hat.

A business plan based on what's trending at that moment is weak.

Case in point WiiU.

 

[Warm Machine]

Was Nintendo wrong for "betting the farm" on core gamers when they released the NES back in the 80s? Couldn't they see the writing on the wall with the Great Videogame Market Crash of 1984? Poor Atari 2600 game sales at that time showed that consumer tastes had moved on, right?

ROB the robot was a direct response to dead video game sales and stores unwilling to stock video games. The console was sold as a robot toy initially in many respects.

 

[The Bookerman]

They won casuals in the ps2 days because of the DVD player, not the games. That is what sold the system to casuals as it was the cheapest DVD player at the time. You cannot rest your whole system on the casual base that is plain and simple. Nintendo did, and now they are really paying for it now.

What??! You must be on crack. it helped, but games like GTA 3 definetively captured the minds of gamers. It revolutionized game design. The dvd drive helped the ps2 in the early days when there were no games.
Please stop with this nonsense.

It's not like Sony has said they AREN'T going to do whatever it is analysts think they should do.

They revealed the console in a games centric manner and at the same time they did talk about digital and social.

To me it sounds like they hit everything and focused on games.

It's almost as if people don't realize that Feb 20th was not the only time Sony will be discussing their new platform.

Thank you: This reveal was for the enthusiasts and the developpers: Get the hype train going for the hardcore crowd who will buy the console early. It will still be a media hub, no doubt about it.

 

[Mr.Fresh]

Sony always did this. In the beginning they go after the people who will def, buy on day one . Then after the prove starts to come down they target the mass market.

 

[Not a Jellyfish]

Come on everyone we all know this is a front, we have seen the patent for the standard looking motion controller that breaks into two parts.

That will be at E3, count on it.

 

[cacildo]

~true gamers~

 

[Endo Punk]

Look at Nintendo with Wii. They chased casual gamers successfully but they weren't around to support non Nintendo games and eventually the sales slowed down to a crawl. You have to go for the core audience first because that will yield consistent sales with software, then you go for the mass market. Sony is definitely taking the right approach.

 

[Midou]

Doubt casuals will buy it at launch anyways. Can always appeal to them later. PS3 and 360 selling 150 million goes to show at least some kind of non-casual interest though.

 

[Hydrogen Bluebird]

Come on everyone we all know this is a front, we have seen the patent for the standard looking motion controller that breaks into two parts.

That will be at E3, count on it.

What if the dual shock 4 they showed actually splits into two and they demo it during E3?

That would be great.

 

[Dennis]

~true gamers~

You called?

 

[Setsuna]

What if the dual shock 4 they showed actually splits into two and they demo it during E3?

That would be great.

that would explain why the damn thing has like 4 different shades of black

 

[Endo Punk]

What if the dual shock 4 they showed actually splits into two and they demo it during E3.

That would be great.

E3:

Here is the DS4.. Once again... *drops* Oops it broke up in half, or has it?

 

[Midou]

In general casual gamers seem to be gravitating towards mobile gaming and stuff. Doubt anything will recapture casuals and non-gamers the way the Wii did, not even Nintendo bothered trying to this time.

 

[Paul Alexander]

And generally, a platform that makes an audience its secondary concern is going to lose that audience to a platform that makes the same audience its primary concern. In other words, "casuals" are a lot less likely to stick around when there are now lots of other platforms that cater specifically and especially to them.

It would appear Sony's learned very little about how mobile/casual/f2p etc. have changed the gaming landscape in the last 5-6 years. I didn't think it would be possible for me to be down on Sony even more, but after that press conference...dang.

Would not be surprised if PS4 was the last Playstation with a Sony logo on it.

 

[AgentP]

Those crappy $1 games are being played on Tablets right now I don't see anyone dropping $400+ to play them on the PS4.

Then where is the risk? They can sell 80m consoles without touching the tablet market. Not every company wants to be Kia, there is room for Mercedes. Remember that while there are many more casual gamers, they spend far less on games.

 

[thepotatoman]

It would appear Sony's learned very little about how mobile/casual/f2p etc. have changed the gaming landscape in the last 5-6 years. I didn't think it would be possible for me to be down on Sony even more, but after that press conference...dang.

Would not be surprised if PS4 was the last Playstation with a Sony logo on it.

Well then what would you want them to do differently? Come out and say Playstation 4 is a phone?

 

[kirby_fox]

Sony focused on the niche market with gamers and the PS3. I see no difference in what they're doing for PS4. The main focus was always a niche market, and hoping to broaden that later as the mass market won't buy immediately at launch anyways if cost is too high.

What will be interesting is actual 3rd party support. Throwing up a bunch of logos we should all know by now means nothing. Getting actual games people want does.

The problem I see is that a lot of the niche console market wanted something new years ago- and it's the reason why PS3/360 is still selling (they bought one and can now buy the other cheaper than before). I'm seeing some going PC because the access to info and how to upgrade is a lot easier than ever before.

With so many gadgets cutting into our budgets as gamers, buying systems we may not have or going PC - I honestly think it's an industry problem. No one but the niche gamer is going to spend $500+ on a new system if their old systems still work. And I think no BC is going to hurt them a lot more this time around with all the PSN games and what not. Niche gamers might not care, but mass market dude bro that plays COD and Madden just might.

 

[Paul Alexander]

Well then what would you want them to do differently? Come out and say Playstation 4 is a phone?

I lack both the expertise and the desire to sit here and develop Sony's next-gen business strategy for them, but it seems self evident that a company which has bled billions of dollars over the last half-decade, and is expecting to turn a profit in 2013 with a $350-500 video game console and $60 games by playing it safe, is a company that is in serious trouble. I can't really say anything that Opiate hasn't already said here much better, except that - absent a Hail Mary reversal of fortune - I believe the Playstation brand will exist independently of Sony, perhaps by the end of the decade.

Sony needed to do something drastically different with PS4. Tretton's comments are indicative of the fact that Sony's tethered himself to its current (unsustainable) business model.

 

[Mandoric]

I don't think this is impossible, but I'd add that hey need those "casual" games to be front and center showpieces.

Treating the "casual" games as secondary concerns like Eyetoy or Singstar will simply not be sufficient. These types of games will need to be given the AAA treatment a la Wii Fit and Kinect.

In this market, treating casuals as a secondary concern -- as a group that can jump on board if they want to but they aren't the main focus -- won't compete against your iPads and Browser games and other portables which put casuals in the drivers seat and treat them as the stars of the show.

Casual gamers have options now, and you won't win them by default simply because they have nowhere else to go.

Casual gamers aren't "the stars of the show" on mobile devices, either, though. Token support for casual gamers on one side, token support for casual gamers on the other. Neither end is really equipped to bridge that gap by nature, but a traditional console with potential to relaunch as a $150 Slim (a boat both MS and Sony missed) has better potential than the mobile model that can't do anything about product commoditization.

We're also touching on the matter of SCEA marketing conservatism here. Kinect in particular was AAA treatment in the Anglosphere and a dud elsewhere, while something like Singstar is an OS feature in Europe but a single mistimed early-gen launch in the US.

 

[hoos30]

Sony is making a bet.
Microsoft is making a bet.
Nintendo is making a bet.
Apple is making a bet.
Google is making a bet.
Amazon is making a bet.

And those are on top of the bets made by Disney/Comcast-NBC/CBC, etc.

The only known fact is that Apple is in the lead at the moment.

Anyone who says they know what is going to happen five years from now is a liar.

 

[J-Rzez]

The media has really gone to shit.

"People want to relax when at home, not game. When people go out they want to have fun and game, or while at work" is basically what I get from this, and it's ridiculous.

Of course people will buy a ton of the new generation of shovelware since it's dirt cheap. Don't like that game you spent $.99-2.99 on, throw it out. It's easier to take a shot at a game for that price.

There is a wide swath of games available. From traditional blockbuster AAA titles, to small bit size experiences, and I'm positive F2P games will make the transition to consoles this gen. It's just shocking how many people don't know of these cheap-fun titles available on PSS and XBLA.

I don't really follow sales-age, but what is the current count on total console hardware sold from this past gen up to this point? All 3 consoles combined.

 

[Tom Penny]

They are forcing PS4 developers to make PS4 games which could be a problem.

 

[Uno Venova]

a huge one, fuck us man.

 

[dwu8991]

Sony is making a bet.
Microsoft is making a bet.
Nintendo is making a bet.
Apple is making a bet.
Google is making a bet.
Amazon is making a bet.

And those are on top of the bets made by Disney/Comcast-NBC/CBC, etc.

The only known fact is that Apple is in the lead at the moment.

Anyone who says they know what is going to happen five years from now is a liar.

This actually makes a lot of sense. All the tech companies are making some sort of bet one way or another for the living room box.

 

[Rootbeer]

The strategy for launching a new console is pretty clear at this point: Release relatively high-end hardware at a premium price, target at 'core' gamers to establish an install base. This is an easy way to get it into homes and access to more types of gamers inside the home who may not otherwise buy a $600 box for themselves. Then, gradually, reduce the price through hardware revisions and streamlining the entire production process to gain access to an even broader audience as the software library grows.

I don't think releasing a $200 or lower box pleases anyone, as it'll be seriously outdated faster and probably doesn't have the muscle or features to adapt over its lifespan the way the ps3 and 360 showed they could do. Look at where the ps3 was at launch and look at it today... its features were so greatly expanded (with one huge feature removed okay two if you count linux)

This is the approach that's worked over at least the last two gens if not longer. It may be a mistake in today's world. All I know is I'm definitely getting one so it's working on my end.

 

[Averon]

Sony leaving the "core" to chase after casuals would be a massive mistake. The core gamer are reliable and consistent. Casuals are not. Look at Nintendo for an example of what could happen. Nintendo won big with casuals and left the core behind with the Wii. Fast foward 3-4 years later and those same casuals left Nintendo for smartphones and tablets. Now the Wii U is suffering for it.

Casual are an extremely fickle group. And putting all your eggs in that basket is just asking for you to get burned.

 

[J-Rzez]

They are forcing PS4 developers to make PS4 games which could be a problem.

This was one of the best things I've read in a long while in an article lol.

Free pass to when Apple releases a new iPhone/iPad with a better screen resolution and more power and wanting them to take advantage of the new tech!

 

[The Bookerman]

I lack both the expertise and the desire to sit here and develop Sony's next-gen business strategy for them, but it seems self evident that a company which has bled billions of dollars over the last half-decade, and is expecting to turn a profit in 2013 with a $350-500 video game console and $60 games by playing it safe, is a company that is in serious trouble. I can't really say anything that Opiate hasn't already said here much better, except that - absent a Hail Mary reversal of fortune - I believe the Playstation brand will exist independently of Sony, perhaps by the end of the decade.

Sony needed to do something drastically different with PS4. Tretton's comments are indicative of the fact that Sony's tethered himself to its current (unsustainable) business model.

I think you should read a bit more:

Shuhei Yoshida interview.

It's not just a AAA 60$ machine. Hell, the ps3 had more small interesting games that the 360 ever had. They Still have the pub fund. This ain't going away.

 

[lowhighkang_LHK]

I've always held the belief that it's always best to attract the core audience first. They are the ones who buy game to game, and are actively engaged in whatever features and aspects a console has. They are the ones most likely to get a subscription to playstation world or whatever. They are also the ones who will take the time to talk about the console to other people or online, since gaming is probably one of their top hobbies, of course they are going to talk about it.

Where as a casual, will drabble in a game or two here and there. We kind of saw some of these issues with Wii's software sales, especially among third parties.

Hardcore gamers support gaming, it's what we do. If you're going to grab anyone, it's best to first focus on us and then have features that appeal to others. I.e, apps - netflix, youtube, mlb.tv, amazin, hulu, psn store, tv, photos, videos, movies - bluray, dvd etc.

You create a good gaming machine, but also convince those who have no interest in gaming that the ps4/xboxnext still come with enough extra crap to deserve a spot in your living room for the appropriate price and everything should follow suit.

I also think we'll start seeing people getting fatigued on the type of gaming experiences tablets bring. I know I am already.

 

[Last Hearth]

This gen will see the end of the dedicated consoles, handheld or otherwise. WiiU flopped and so will the PS4, so will Durango (or whatever it's called) unless MS succeeds in transitioning to a convergence device.

Hardcores gamers can always go back to PC. But the parents who buy a machine so their kids can play games in front of the livingroom tv market that has been the bread and butter of the console industry is going away, and going away quickly. They are going to get something for the whole family that can also play games, and they don't care about 8 GB of RAM.

 

[SpinningBirdKick]

"True" or "Core" gamers are a niche market that are dwarfed by the casual players.

Sony has no choice but to target "True" gamers because casual gamers won't be willing to spend early adopter type big prices at a system's launch, this has always been the case. Casual players won't consider it until it gets much closer to the magic $200 price point.

I believe he is mistaken in thinking that once hooked, the casual gamers will be willing to spend $60 or so for traditional core titles. It was quite clear from the Wii that this was not the case.

The fact of the matter is that Sony are competing for the ever shrinking amount of "core" gamers that Microsoft will also be targeting at launch. So they need to pull out all the stops to try and convince these "core" players that they will be better served by picking up the Sony machine.

If that fails they have an expensive to manufacture machine that neither core or casual players want which will make it all but impossible for huge software development costs to be recouped by third parties.

Sony is in a financially perilous position and can't afford to subsidise additional heavy price cuts after launch to stimulate demand. The stakes are so high they they are unlikely be able to play the long game approach like they did with the PS3 if the PS4 stalls.

Once developers and publishers smell blood in the water they won't stick around for very long...

 

[Oemenia]

Look, lets just accept that MS have shifted some of their focus but their bread-and-butter will always be the core gamers.

 

[Terrell]

So the question is: Can console gaming survive without the casuals?

Ask GameCube-era Nintendo.

The trick to surviving without casual buyers is a lesson neither MS or Sony want to learn: the loss-leader strategy of making consoles with totally unmodest hardware is what makes the console space non-sustainable. GameCube was designed from the outset to impress without breaking the damn bank and is a marvel of engineering because of that. It kept Nintendo profitable to a degree that isn't possible with the way consoles are expected to be designed in the current market climate, where expectations run too high to do anything but the loss leader strategy.

So unless some of the big names in this space change their thinking on how the business works, no, it can't survive. But there are options.

Was Nintendo wrong for "betting the farm" on core gamers when they released the NES back in the 80s? Couldn't they see the writing on the wall with the Great Videogame Market Crash of 1984? Poor Atari 2600 game sales at that time showed that consumer tastes had moved on, right?

If you can't see the difference between customers taking their desire to game elsewhere and the industry poisoning the well and leaving gamers without a true option to satisfy their gaming desire like in the 80s, then I don't know what to tell you.

 

[Raven77]

"True" or "Core" gamers are a niche market that are dwarfed by the casual players...

So not true.


Really, tens of millions of people are now a "niche market"?

Are Americans a "niche" nationality because their are only 310 million of us compared to a billion Chinese?

Give me a break...If 40-60 million customers can't support a market, then that market is incredibly unhealthy and is going to collapse NO MATTER WHAT. Learn from the lessons of the Wii, Microsoft clearly hasn't. People seem to think you either game on the go, or you game at home, not both. But MILLIONS of people do both and both markets can thrive, separately. Sony is making a great play in trying to combine these markets into one with their cross play and streaming tech.

 

[Last Hearth]

If it's the "hardcore" that drive the market, then how is it that all the big sales number that the industry depend on always happening during the holiday season?

Hardcores don't wait for the holiday season to buy their games. It's the moms and dads that buy stuff for their kids that do it during the holiday season, and it's the sales during that time that drives the profitability of the industry.

 

[Zolf]

The article relies on a few assumptions that I don't think are safe to make.

The NPD Group's annual report shows that in the United States, money is shifting away from retail and toward digital as Americans continue to embrace smaller, cheaper digital content. According to a recent report by SuperData, the money spent on microtransactions of free-to-play games in the United States rose 42 percent last year.

The first statement (retail to digital) does not prove the second (smaller digital content), nor does the second statement bode ill for Sony. If more people choose to buy games on PSN versus Gamestop, that doesn't hurt Sony. If people are buying DLC (smaller digital content), that doesn't hurt Sony either.

It's also incorrect to assume that F2P + microtransactions = Casual. Planetside 2 is coming to the PS4. Crytek is moving to F2P, and their games are about as far as you can get from "casual". It's true that business models are changing, but I haven't seen any strong arguments as to why the PS4 can't see success with those business models.

Market analysts tend to favor growth above all else, but you can't always have your cake and eat it too. Abandoning a stagnant $10B market in favor of a growing $100M market is not exactly a winning strategy, even if the alternative isn't much better. They may not be mutually exclusive, but ignoring your core customer base while focusing on growth above all else is a good way to go out of business.

 

[spock]

I've said this another threads, but its worth mentioning here. Nintedo has proved on multiple occasions on the wii and ds/3ds that their are multiple segments within the broad market which can be tapped by the industry. MS also proved this abit with kinnect.

I think the problem with Sony's approach is that they designed their system focusing heavily on pure tech which limits what can be done from the user experince side of the equation. There playing an old game in a new school.

Its not wrong to appeal to the core, the problem is if you design your system around them first you limit what you can do to appeal to the broader market. The social stuff is nice but that is not going to hook the broader market.

This is why odds are MS is going for lower specs and strong kinnect integration. They need a much broader canvas to create potential applications with mass market appeal becuase its not as precitable or easy to hook them in. The canvas required to grab the core is much more narrow and they are much easier to sell to. They are going to buy the new systems when new versions of the games they already play are released on the updated hardware.

The broader market needs new and fresh hooks. They dont buy on sequals as easy. They are finicky. They have different mindset, different motivators and buying behavior. But they do and will buy if you connect with them. They are also a much larger and more potentially profitable auidence.

Sony played it safe but also limited themselves by doing so. This aint 2006 anymore.

 

[legend166]

It's funny how people love to point out the downsides of Nintendo's strategy from last generation, whilst conveniently ignoring the fact that they made billions of dollars, and Sony *and to a last extent Microsoft) lost billions of dollars.

Hardcore gamers are not as solid and reliable a market segment as people think. Did Sony not make the PS3 for hardcore gamers?

There are so much fewer of them than people like to acknowledge. To put it into perspective: The attach rate for all the consoles is around the 8-10 range. The 'hardcore gamer' buys that many in a year. They are massively out numbered.

This doesn't mean the rest of the market is made up of Angry Bird loving casuals.

The 'hardcore gamer' demographic is a subset of a subset. Increasing focus on a subset that hasn't really grown all that much, whilst costs are growing is a bad idea. It's pretty much what Sony did last time and it killed them.

 

[clem84]

There's no reason they can't have both. I think it's the best strategy to have. They'll have all the different markets covered.

 

[Sulik2]

I think a lot of these declines in purchasing games is built on a flawed assumption that gamers are moving to mobile. I think its more that people are tired of these consoles and are trying new platforms in an attempt to find new experiences. I think the new consoles are going to do incredibly well because gamers are desperate for something new.

 

[legend166]

The strategy for launching a new console is pretty clear at this point: Release relatively high-end hardware at a premium price, target at 'core' gamers to establish an install base. This is an easy way to get it into homes and access to more types of gamers inside the home who may not otherwise buy a $600 box for themselves. Then, gradually, reduce the price through hardware revisions and streamlining the entire production process to gain access to an even broader audience as the software library grows.

I don't think releasing a $200 or lower box pleases anyone, as it'll be seriously outdated faster and probably doesn't have the muscle or features to adapt over its lifespan the way the ps3 and 360 showed they could do. Look at where the ps3 was at launch and look at it today... its features were so greatly expanded (with one huge feature removed okay two if you count linux)

This is the approach that's worked over at least the last two gens if not longer. It may be a mistake in today's world. All I know is I'm definitely getting one so it's working on my end.

How did it work last generation when the other strategy you mentioned (making a low cost, low power machine) sold more and made billions of dollars, and the apparently safe strategy lost billions for one and has only shown gain for the other (but isn't enough to justify the investment).

I don't understand why this is accepted thinking when it completely ignores what happened last generation.

 

[Skyzard]

It's funny how people love to point out the downsides of Nintendo's strategy from last generation, whilst conveniently ignoring the fact that they made billions of dollars, and Sony *and to a last extent Microsoft) lost billions of dollars.

Hardcore gamers are not as solid and reliable a market segment as people think. Did Sony not make the PS3 for hardcore gamers?

There are so much fewer of them than people like to acknowledge. To put it into perspective: The attach rate for all the consoles is around the 8-10 range. The 'hardcore gamer' buys that many in a year. They are massively out numbered.

This doesn't mean the rest of the market is made up of Angry Bird loving casuals.

The 'hardcore gamer' demographic is a subset of a subset. Increasing focus on a subset that hasn't really grown all that much, whilst costs are growing is a bad idea. It's pretty much what Sony did last time and it killed them.

They are a subset you can rely on. It won't be as easy as Wii Sports in the future. But costs really do slow things down these days I think. There needs to be enough interest from the get go so hopefully we've yet to see the majority of the games that we'll see with the PS4 launch.

The public will get hooked by marketing and showing them appealing new concepts that might not even be that related to gaming or next-gen but starting off with that is risky since it usually hasn't been built up enough by the core fans..

 

[noobasuar]

I'm not quiet sure how not offering any of their back catalogue other than with a paid service that add's input lag and a bunch of other crap does anything for "true gamers."

The way that I see it is that they are trying to appeal to just about any type of consumer without any real focus on any of these people which I feel could be a costly mistake for them.

 

[Mandoric]

If it's the "hardcore" that drive the market, then how is it that all the big sales number that the industry depend on always happening during the holiday season?

Hardcores don't wait for the holiday season to buy their games. It's the moms and dads that buy stuff for their kids that do it during the holiday season, and it's the sales during that time that drives the profitability of the industry.

Hardcore aesthetic and hardcore content are two different things, and the "hardcore" that wants $400 boxes are in large part little Timmy wanting to be hardcore by headshotting more realistic ay-rabs and aliens.

It's a similar split as film. There's not a hardcore/few/high cost/high margin and casual/many/low cost/low margin difference.
The sweet spot of the market in terms of size vs. margin is in people who want a flashy and expensive but not necessarily deep experience, the guys playing Cawadoody on their expensive new console are also the guys going to see Terminator 43 in 3D Imax with THX-certified speakers. And that's exactly who these boxes serve.