Support NeoGAF

[Galactic Barret]

Sony wont follow... MS has to cut, but that would be good for console market.

I'm thinking long-term, year 6 yoy percentages and stuff like that. Wouldn't this have an effect on the endgame?

Its a marathon, not a sprint; isn't price-cutting this early like going all-out off the line?

 

[shinra-bansho]

Neither Ishin nor Ground Zeroes are likely getting anywhere close to 700K on the PS4.

GZ is essentially a paid demo and Ishin isn't a "proper" iteration of the franchise; for the latter Kenzan is a better comparison probably.

 

[Loudninja]

Neither Ishin nor Ground Zeroes are likely getting anywhere close to 700K on the PS4.

Yeah not happening.

The next games maybe,they have to build a good install base.

 

[Imperfected]

I wonder how ff14 will do in Japan? Seems to have gotten great reviews and praise after se rebooted it...

The retail sales were surprisingly good for an online-only game - you generally expect to see MMO sales much more heavily biased toward digital than retail, for obvious reasons - which implies there were probably a significant number of PS3 sales.

So, you might not see a ton of actual new sales - PS3 subscribers get the PS4 version for free - and probably want to have pretty mild expectations as a result. You'd basically just have to leave it to Square-Enix to decide whether or not they particularly want to give us PS4 subscriber numbers or just roll them in with PC/PS3 numbers. (Probably the latter, unless they really need to show investors something to convince them that moving to next-gen development is worthwhile.)

 

[EmptySpace]

3 months and 5 million? wow. didn't ps3 sell 10 million total in its first year? ps4 is looking like it'll sell 15 million by november.

 

[jeremy1456]

Relative to the Japanese market, it's probably just as big. MGS is pretty big...and the PS3 version is well behind what the PS4 is doing.

My point was that it's sort of disingenuous to dismiss titles on next-gen platforms just because they're not exclusive. As we've seen in the west, there's been a huge uptake in next-gen consoles thanks to many of these cross-gen games, simply because they run a whole lot better.

Well I could point out that New Super Mario Bros. Wii sold a few million copies in Japan. But on a console that launched at the equivalent of $350 NSMBU just didn't do that well, and it was exclusive.

MGS and Yakuza are both launching on a next gen console that costs more than the Wii U, and they aren't exclusive. It just seems to me that the writing is on the wall for them to do significantly worse on the PS4 than past iterations, which have launched exclusively on their respective platforms.

 

[Dragonborn]

The only reason why i can kind of agree with the bold text is that even the "Casual" gamers are more knowledgeable these days thanks to instant social networking like twitter,reddit,etc and the fact most people into technology have smartphones ...early last generation not so much and far less "{informed}" casual gamers which the casual gamer makes up the bulk of after launch sales. I would not be one bit surprised to see X1 with less than 100k next Feb NPD although March will be a decent month for X1 imho..I still believe PS4 will have better NPD's for March though.

They don't even need to be knowledgeable. All they have to know is PS4 = more powerful and cheaper.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

My point is more that 140k in January with no major software or price drops isn't that bad, not comparative sales. Whatever the PS4 did relative to it is irrelevant.

The entire "If you ain't first, you're last!" stance here is ridiculous. I'm sure Microsoft would hope that the sales would be higher but the way people are talking about the system's fate is beyond premature. Even a single enough below 100k isn't the end of a console.

Not the end of one no.

One had the highest start of any videogame console besides the PS4. And it's first January is lower than every home console for the past three generations but the DC, GCN, and WiiU.

Higher start yes, but nothing about its January performance says good things.

 

[Dr. Kitty Muffins]

All I can say is they produce more consoles than what has ever been produced before when the Christmas shopping season arrives. If this keeps up, demand could be insane.

 

[ethomaz]

Nevermind.

Meant to post in Fallout 4 thread maybe?

Ohhhh god... wrong thread MGS thread BTW.

 

[SwiftDeath]

I'm curious to see a possible Wii U version of this game... it will be really interesting.

Meant to post in Fallout 4 thread maybe?

 

[serversurfer]

My point is more that 140k in January with no major software or price drops isn't that bad, not comparative sales. Whatever the PS4 did relative to it is irrelevant.

The entire "If you ain't first, you're last!" stance here is ridiculous. I'm sure Microsoft would hope that the sales would be higher but the way people are talking about the system's fate is beyond premature. Even a single enough below 100k isn't the end of a console.

When you're talking about the first January post-launch, it actually sorta is.

Aquamarine posted some numbers in the NPD thread, but looking back at First Januarys, PS2, XB360, Wii, PS4, and even PS3 sold ~250K or more and were all supply constrained.

Spoiler

Wii sold much more.

XBone's First January wasn't WiiU- or GC-bad (~60K), but it's very nearly XBox-bad (127K), which ain't too hot.

I don't think Microsoft was wrong in their vision. They just f*up the hardware. I think the sale numbers would have been reversed had Microsoft had superior hardware in addition to all those other features.

The vision dictated the hardware. XBone is the way it is because they wanted it to run Win8 and be able to watch you watch TV, above all other considerations, and that meant going with DDR3, and that meant going with eSRAM, and that meant shrinking the GPU.

Instead of building the best gaming platform possible and then figuring out what all they'd be able to do with it — as Sony did — they instead laid out a bunch of design goals that had nothing to do with gaming, and did whatever it took to achieve those goals, gaming be damned.

Of course, this "other" stuff has been Microsoft's ultimate goal since the original XBox. Gaming was just a Trojan horse to get in to your living room. They also tried WebTV, but that went nowhere. Last generation, they pretty much had people convinced they actually cared about gamers, and that told them they'd be able to force all of this stuff on us this time around.

In short, Microsoft gonna Microsoft.

 

[onanie]

XBone is the way it is because they wanted it to run Win8 and be able to watch you watch TV

was that intentional?

 

[kinoki]

I believe that Sony actually believed that they would sell 5 million by the end of March. They planned a world-wide release to make sure that happened. I also think they planned for NA to be closer than it is. Probably neck-and-neck. They for sure didn't expect to totally destroy Xbone so completly in just a couple of months. Now they're sold out everywhere in the world.

In stark contrast Microsoft banked everything on winning NA. They skipped a world-wide launch in order to secure their stronghold with an impressive lead knowing that Sony might be too thinnly spread to do anything about it. Microsoft didn't expect PlayStation 4 to do as well as it has. Now they have hundreds of thousands of consoles in ware-houses only releasing shipped-numbers to media.

 

[jhmtehgamr20xx]

I wonder how many Xbones were returned in January, a la the Wii U. Wii U numbers actually increased in February due to January being depressed by failed scalper returns. If the same happened for Xbone, its numbers could improve for February.

Wouldn't there have been a note or mention in the NPD release if that were the case? Or is it more along the lines of they don't count returned units in January in the January NPD? This was explained before, but it's already been forgotten :S

I'm calling it now; 98,000 for XBO in February. 110,000 at most.

I believe that Sony actually believed that they would sell 5 million by the end of March. They planned a world-wide release to make sure that happened. I also think they planned for NA to be closer than it is. Probably neck-and-neck. They for sure didn't expect to totally destroy Xbone so completly in just a couple of months. Now they're sold out everywhere in the world.

In stark contrast Microsoft banked everything on winning NA. They skipped a world-wide launch in order to secure their stronghold with an impressive lead knowing that Sony might be too thinnly spread to do anything about it. Microsoft didn't expect PlayStation 4 to do as well as it has. Now they have hundreds of thousands of consoles in ware-houses only releasing shipped-numbers to media.

This is exactly what happened.

And why hasn't Guerrila Games, who sucks anyway, unveiled their new IP wrpg shooter hybrid with dating sim elements?

This part right here, man. This part right here....stitches...

 

[Anticitizen One]

I believe that Sony actually believed that they would sell 5 million by the end of March. They planned a world-wide release to make sure that happened. I also think they planned for NA to be closer than it is. Probably neck-and-neck. They for sure didn't expect to totally destroy Xbone so completly in just a couple of months. Now they're sold out everywhere in the world.

In stark contrast Microsoft banked everything on winning NA. They skipped a world-wide launch in order to secure their stronghold with an impressive lead knowing that Sony might be too thinnly spread to do anything about it. Microsoft didn't expect PlayStation 4 to do as well as it has. Now they have hundreds of thousands of consoles in ware-houses only releasing shipped-numbers to media.

This is the truth but of course there will always be people to try and deny it

 

[serversurfer]

was that intentional?

Err, I can't imagine it was accidental, given they initially told us we weren't even worth their time if we weren't willing/able to have the camera connected to the Internet 24/7, and they've been talking up that ability to their advertising partners for some time now.

Maybe I don't understand the question?

 

[onanie]

Err, I can't imagine it was accidental, given they initially told us we weren't even worth their time if we weren't willing/able to have the camera connected to the Internet 24/7, and they've been talking up that ability to their advertising partners for some time now.

Maybe I don't understand the question?

I actually agree, though I thought I was alone in my perception of Microsoft's eagerness to monetise anything around the console, including its owner.

 

[woodypop]

Err, I can't imagine it was accidental, given they initially told us we weren't even worth their time if we weren't willing/able to have the camera connected to the Internet 24/7, and they've been talking up that ability to their advertising partners for some time now.

Yeah, that's crossed my mind, too.

 

[George Claw M.D.]

Wouldn't there have been a note or mention in the NPD release if that were the case? Or is it more along the lines of they don't count returned units in January in the January NPD? This was explained before, but it's already been forgotten :S

I was going off memory and didn't remember specifics, but I found that, no, NPD doesn't mention anything about returns negatively affecting sales numbers. It was speculation and hearsay, but nothing official. Gamasutra had an article on the theory behind Wii U's January 2013 NPD numbers.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/187605/A_theory_behind_Januarys_weak_Wii_U_sales.php

 

[RaijinFY]

I don't see how a 128GB flash drive helps when they're at $0.50/GB at their cheapest still. They have to half again to make that even against a 500GB HDD.

APU shrink could also happen in 2015 once 20nm availability rises and cost settles.

I think he's talking in about a few years from now...

 

[Imperfected]

I believe that Sony actually believed that they would sell 5 million by the end of March. They planned a world-wide release to make sure that happened. I also think they planned for NA to be closer than it is. Probably neck-and-neck. They for sure didn't expect to totally destroy Xbone so completly in just a couple of months. Now they're sold out everywhere in the world.

In stark contrast Microsoft banked everything on winning NA. They skipped a world-wide launch in order to secure their stronghold with an impressive lead knowing that Sony might be too thinnly spread to do anything about it. Microsoft didn't expect PlayStation 4 to do as well as it has. Now they have hundreds of thousands of consoles in ware-houses only releasing shipped-numbers to media.

Yeah, Sony expected to sell 5,000,000 because it was a reasonable number to sell. You have to look at it from their perspective: they haven't actually done much of anything. They haven't gone above and beyond in terms of software. The system isn't a massively subsidized uber-value like the PS3 was. There's no new 'killer feature' like DVD or Blu-ray player functionality. They just put together a solid console, a decent launch line-up, and an inoffensive advertising campaign and pushed it out there.

That's why the people who talk about how Sony needs Microsoft as a competitor to "push them" make me laugh. During the last generation, maybe, but there wasn't any pushing this time around. Sony really just did the most basic, middle-of-the-road, no-surprises console design and console launch we've ever seen. The reason it's gone over so well is because Microsoft has provided such piss-poor competition that just basic competence is enough to make their competitor seem like a godsend.

At this point Sony, like Steam, is better served by hypothetical competition than the actual competition before them. The possibility that some as-yet-unseen third party could come into the market with a legitimately competitive offering and pull the rug out from under them is more of a motivator than the actual "competition" that's arrayed itself before them, sad as that is.

 

[LiquidSolid]

Yeah, Sony expected to sell 5,000,000 because it was a reasonable number to sell. You have to look at it from their perspective: they haven't actually done much of anything. They haven't gone above and beyond in terms of software. The system isn't a massively subsidized uber-value like the PS3 was. There's no new 'killer feature' like DVD or Blu-ray player functionality. They just put together a solid console, a decent launch line-up, and an inoffensive advertising campaign and pushed it out there.

That's why the people who talk about how Sony needs Microsoft as a competitor to "push them" make me laugh. During the last generation, maybe, but there wasn't any pushing this time around. Sony really just did the most basic, middle-of-the-road, no-surprises console design and console launch we've ever seen. The reason it's gone over so well is because Microsoft has provided such piss-poor competition that just basic competence is enough to make their competitor seem like a godsend.

At this point Sony, like Steam, is better served by hypothetical competition than the actual competition before them. The possibility that some as-yet-unseen third party could come into the market with a legitimately competitive offering and pull the rug out from under them is more of a motivator than the actual "competition" that's arrayed itself before them, sad as that is.

SMH. I feel like the people that say this shit must've either been living in a cave last year or just have really shit memories. Sony did a pretty fucking tremendous job from February to November with the PS4. Months before Microsoft was publicly fucking up, Sony had done a great job announcing the PS4.

I'm also baffled by your comments about the PS4s design. It's obviously not a new Emotion Engine or Cell but Sony have still done plenty of interesting little things that directly benefit the player. The dedicated streaming chip+memory for instance, or the way they've set up installs to get the player into the game almost immediately.

 

[Imperfected]

SMH. I feel like the people that say this shit must've either been living in a cave last year or just have really shit memories. Sony did a pretty fucking tremendous job from February to November with the PS4. Months before Microsoft was publicly fucking up, Sony had done a great job announcing the PS4.

I'm also baffled by your comments about the PS4s design. It's obviously not a new Emotion Engine or Cell but Sony have still done plenty of interesting little things that directly benefit the player. The dedicated streaming chip+memory for instance, or the way they've set up installs to get the player into the game almost immediately.

What exactly is confusing you?

The console is made of off-the-shelf, commonly available components in a very sensible and non-exotic arrangement. There are no "risky" or "unproven" features or devices. There are some neat little bits of functionality, but nothing shocking. The design is very, very safe and basically exactly what you'd expect a competent group of engineers to put together if you told them to make a no-frills console.

The console is not particularly subsidized. You aren't being given significantly more "value" than the sticker price would suggest. They're selling it at pretty close to cost; just about the safest way you could price a console.

Their advertising, one cute joke at Microsoft's expense during E3 aside, has not been anything special. They have basically built their campaign around slightly stylish variations on, "PS4 is available*, it plays games. You should buy it." They haven't blitzed the media with amazing, controversial, high-stakes gambits; they've put clean, basic ads out through reliable media and done a very good job of remaining on-message throughout every PR opportunity.

This has been a completely by-the-numbers exercise on Sony's part. The only reason it looks so impressive is that Microsoft has been fucking up so royally every step along the way that Sony manages to look prescient and saint-like by just doing their fucking job. I'm not trying to put them down; they did what they needed to do under the circumstances that were handed to them, it just happens they were given some pretty fantastic circumstances thanks to having two "competitors" of such poor caliber.

The PS4 isn't what we get when Sony's "pushed" by the competition, unless the "competition" for this exercise is mobile/PC gaming. The PS4 is what we get when Sony's is under no significant pressure and able to make very safe decisions every step along the way.

 

[1st Course]

You want to know how bad the numbers really was?

360 outsold the PS3 in NA almost two to one. Now the PS4 is outselling the XBO in NA almost 2 to 1. For a console that is readily available, this is bad, not mediocre, but bad. I will agree the dust has not settled yet. The 360 had outsold the PS3 by 6-8 million at one point, now the PS3 is on top. All it takes is some great games. MS certainly has the pocketbook to bankroll some great games.

So far it seems like the US (~2m)+ UK(~400k) make about 80-85% of total X1 sales (~3m). Add Canada and Mexico and that would be 90%+.

Anyone trying downplay MS losing NA and UK is beyond delusional, almost all of X1 sales came from those regions.

 

[On Demand]

What exactly is confusing you?

The console is made of off-the-shelf, commonly available components in a very sensible and non-exotic arrangement. There are no "risky" or "unproven" features or devices. There are some neat little bits of functionality, but nothing shocking. The design is very, very safe and basically exactly what you'd expect a competent group of engineers to put together if you told them to make a no-frills console.

The console is not particularly subsidized. You aren't being given significantly more "value" than the sticker price would suggest. They're selling it at pretty close to cost; just about the safest way you could price a console.

Their advertising, one cute joke at Microsoft's expense during E3 aside, has not been anything special. They have basically built their campaign around slightly stylish variations on, "PS4 is available*, it plays games. You should buy it." They haven't blitzed the media with amazing, controversial, high-stakes gambits; they've put clean, basic ads out through reliable media and done a very good job of remaining on-message throughout every PR opportunity.

This has been a completely by-the-numbers exercise on Sony's part. The only reason it looks so impressive is that Microsoft has been fucking up so royally every step along the way that Sony manages to look prescient and saint-like by just doing their fucking job. I'm not trying to put them down; they did what they needed to do under the circumstances that were handed to them, it just happens they were given some pretty fantastic circumstances thanks to having two "competitors" of such poor caliber.

The PS4 isn't what we get when Sony's "pushed" by the competition, unless the "competition" for this exercise is mobile/PC gaming. The PS4 is what we get when Sony's is under no significant pressure and able to make very safe decisions every step along the way.

You're assuming Sony knew MS was going to fuck up since the beginning. It's not so simple as you're making it out to be. Sony made damn sure the PS4 would be able to stand against xbox this generation. We knew this since Febuarury 2013. Any stupid decision made by MS just makes the PS4 look even better. But that doesn't mean Sony didn't work hard to get where they're at.

The PS4 is in fact what we get when they're fighting back against the compitition.

 

[zhao3gold]

I think this tread is for cheering the milestone of PS4, but not to troll Xbox One and Microsoft. But I realized I am wrong.

Congrats to Sony and PS4!!!

 

[Imperfected]

You're assuming Sony knew MS was going to fuck up since the beginning. It's not so simple as you're making it out to be. Sony made damn sure the PS4 would be able to stand against xbox this generation. We knew this since Febuarury 2013. Any stupid decision made by MS just makes the PS4 look even better. But that doesn't mean Sony didn't work hard to get where they're at.

The PS4 is in fact what we get when they're fighting back against the compitition.

Of course they didn't know. That's why they originally had a much more conservative estimate for how many PS4s they would sell: because they expected to have reasonable competition. The reason the PS4 isn't as heavily subsidized as the PS3 was is likely because they wanted to ensure that they wouldn't bankrupt themselves if they had another rocky start.

I'm not saying the PS4 is a bad machine. I have one, and I enjoy it quite a bit. I appreciate the utilitarian design. I'm saying that it's not a machine that was created to revolutionize the industry, or completely change the retail paradigm, or really do anything else other than be an iterative hardware improvement on the known and expected features of existing game consoles. The whole thing is very safe and Microsoft should have been able to bring something at least comparable to market, but their failure to do so has positioned a very safe, middle-of-the-road box as the undisputed master.

Sony's done a fine job - a spectacular job in terms of logistics, if nothing else - but that's it. A fine job. They deserve to be successful. They haven't done anything to deserve unprecedented success, though; that's entirely on the fact the only competition they have in the market right now is such a colossal fuck-up. So, when people say Sony "needs" Microsoft as competition, my reply is simply: no, Sony needs better competition, because this isn't even their final form.

 

[Sean*O]

Of course they didn't know. That's why they originally had a much more conservative estimate for how many PS4s they would sell: because they expected to have reasonable competition. The reason the PS4 isn't as heavily subsidized as the PS3 was is likely because they wanted to ensure that they wouldn't bankrupt themselves if they had another rocky start.

I'm not saying the PS4 is a bad machine. I have one, and I enjoy it quite a bit. I appreciate the utilitarian design. I'm saying that it's not a machine that was created to revolutionize the industry, or completely change the retail paradigm, or really do anything else other than be an iterative hardware improvement on the known and expected features of existing game consoles. The whole thing is very safe and Microsoft should have been able to bring something at least comparable to market, but their failure to do so has positioned a very safe, middle-of-the-road box as the undisputed master.

Sony's done a fine job - a spectacular job in terms of logistics, if nothing else - but that's it. A fine job. They deserve to be successful. They haven't done anything to deserve unprecedented success, though; that's entirely on the fact the only competition they have in the market right now is such a colossal fuck-up. So, when people say Sony "needs" Microsoft as competition, my reply is simply: no, Sony needs better competition, because this isn't even their final form.

Microsoft's heart was in the wrong place, their motivations are what will I think ultimately cost them their console business. It's unfortunate because, if they just took all of the money they poured into buying exclusives, securing deals with the NFL, spending what, a billion in advertising, online marketing plans, paying social marketing teams, paying people for positive youtube impressions, lavishing the press with gifts (both sides do this I'm aware) developing a box that was light on horsepower and more TV DVR oriented.. if they had just forgone all that and set out to make the highest value for the customer dollar, most powerful gaming oriented system they could possibly dream up and threw out all of that always online DRM no used games nonsense before it was ever sent to the design lab, they would probably have wiped the floor with Sony.

But that's not what happened.

 

[MogCakes]

I think this tread is for cheering the milestone of PS4, but not to troll Xbox One and Microsoft. But I realized I am wrong.

Congrats to Sony and PS4!!!

Console warriors will always exist. I don't think the comparisons themselves are necessarily with ill intent towards any party though, more like a crowd of people watching two men fight and making comments. Some are more invested in one guy, and vice versa. I personally was only ever angry at MS's DRM policies, since that was resolved I have no ill will towards the company or Xbox as a brand. That's just me though, a lot of people are much more passionate about it and how they feel about MS.

 

[Game Guru]

What exactly is confusing you?

The console is made of off-the-shelf, commonly available components in a very sensible and non-exotic arrangement. There are no "risky" or "unproven" features or devices. There are some neat little bits of functionality, but nothing shocking. The design is very, very safe and basically exactly what you'd expect a competent group of engineers to put together if you told them to make a no-frills console.

The console is not particularly subsidized. You aren't being given significantly more "value" than the sticker price would suggest. They're selling it at pretty close to cost; just about the safest way you could price a console.

Their advertising, one cute joke at Microsoft's expense during E3 aside, has not been anything special. They have basically built their campaign around slightly stylish variations on, "PS4 is available*, it plays games. You should buy it." They haven't blitzed the media with amazing, controversial, high-stakes gambits; they've put clean, basic ads out through reliable media and done a very good job of remaining on-message throughout every PR opportunity.

This has been a completely by-the-numbers exercise on Sony's part. The only reason it looks so impressive is that Microsoft has been fucking up so royally every step along the way that Sony manages to look prescient and saint-like by just doing their fucking job. I'm not trying to put them down; they did what they needed to do under the circumstances that were handed to them, it just happens they were given some pretty fantastic circumstances thanks to having two "competitors" of such poor caliber.

The PS4 isn't what we get when Sony's "pushed" by the competition, unless the "competition" for this exercise is mobile/PC gaming. The PS4 is what we get when Sony's is under no significant pressure and able to make very safe decisions every step along the way.

You forget that PS4 is just as much a result of what Sony learned from the relative failure of the PS3. The two big issues with the PS3 were overly complicated hardware and a high price tag. PS4 is standard x86-64, the most uncomplicated hardware anyone could use, and it is $400, the price that the Xbox 360 Pro launched at. This isn't Sony playing it safe... This is Sony learning from their own mistakes, while their competitors makes new mistakes.

 

[Mooreberg]

You forget that PS4 is just as much a result of what Sony learned from the relative failure of the PS3. The two big issues with the PS3 were overly complicated hardware and a high price tag. PS4 is standard x86-64, the most uncomplicated hardware anyone could use, and it is $400, the price that the Xbox 360 Pro launched at. This isn't Sony playing it safe... This is Sony learning from their own mistakes, while their competitors makes new mistakes.

This. I also think they learned from the pain of trying launch big, new franchises before PS3 was selling well. There are not a lot of franchises introduced early in PS3's life that still getting sequels besides Uncharted and LPB. I think they are doing a much better job this time around laying the groundwork for something like The Order to be successful.

 

[Imperfected]

This isn't Sony playing it safe... This is Sony learning from their own mistakes, while their competitors makes new mistakes.

That's, uh... that's actually pretty much the exact definition of playing it safe, you realize?

 

[Piggus]

You forget that PS4 is just as much a result of what Sony learned from the relative failure of the PS3. The two big issues with the PS3 were overly complicated hardware and a high price tag. PS4 is standard x86-64, the most uncomplicated hardware anyone could use, and it is $400, the price that the Xbox 360 Pro launched at. This isn't Sony playing it safe... This is Sony learning from their own mistakes, while their competitors makes new mistakes.

It's an even better value than the 360 when you consider inflation. In fact the PS4 actually costs the same as the PS2 did when you factor in inflation.

On one hand I miss Ken Kutaragi's crazy exotic hardware designs. The money and effort that went into the Cell processor is insane so as a fan of technology in general I really liked when Sony pushed the envelope of what was possible (even if it didn't always work out the way they wanted). That said, I get that the more logical design of the PS4 is better for everyone. They're providing a great system at a great price and they're probably not taking a massive loss (if any).


Your avatar brings back memories of Sim City 2000 on our old Mac that ran OS7 by the way lol.

 

[jester_]

The PS4 is what we get when Sony's is under no significant pressure and able to make very safe decisions every step along the way.

Don't forget the GDDR5 gamble. They originally made it with 2-4GB and only upped it to 8GB right before the reveal when they realized it could be feasibly done. That was a risky move that paid dividends in my eyes.

 

[Piggus]

The only reason why i can kind of agree with the bold text is that even the "Casual" gamers are more knowledgeable these days thanks to instant social networking like twitter,reddit,etc and the fact most people into technology have smartphones ...

Very true. A lot of Gaf seems to think that "casual" gamers are dumber than a sack of hammers when in reality they're capable of doing basic research when choosing between two $400-$500 products. All tech companies talk about specs for a reason. Even if someone doesn't understand exactly what 1080p or 720p means, they know that 1080p is better and that's really all that matters.

 

[CheDominik]

That's, uh... that's actually pretty much the exact definition of playing it safe, you realize?

But playing it safe has a slightly negative connotation. I would take it as a backhanded compliment.

 

[Imperfected]

Don't forget the GDDR5 gamble. They originally made it with 2-4GB and only upped it to 8GB right before the reveal when they realized it could be feasibly done. That was a risky move that paid dividends in my eyes.

It wasn't really a risk because the system actually would have been serviceable at 4 GB, it just wouldn't have had quite as big of a lead on the XB1. I mean, it's not as if they chose GDDR5 on the knowledge the price would drop and would have had to scrap the project if it didn't happen; it was just an instance of good fortune making a good decision better, not a decision that was ever particularly risky to begin with.

Again, I love the system. I think it turned out great. It is in every way an example of Sony doing only what they know would work and not taking any chances on unproven technology, methodologies, pricing, or design, however. They let their competitors go out and take big, dumb risks and they're reaping the rewards of other peoples' failures.

I'm happy to see their utilitarian focus validated (and the myth that the most powerful console can't win a generation definitely put to bed), and I'm glad they're finding success with their console during a period when they honestly couldn't afford to take a lot of big risks. My hope, though, is that in a few years once they're back on their feet and able to go in for another round of real competition that we have someone in the market who can give them a reason to actually do it.

 

[Felessan]

Sony's done a fine job - a spectacular job in terms of logistics, if nothing else - but that's it. A fine job. They deserve to be successful. They haven't done anything to deserve unprecedented success, though; that's entirely on the fact the only competition they have in the market right now is such a colossal fuck-up. So, when people say Sony "needs" Microsoft as competition, my reply is simply: no, Sony needs better competition, because this isn't even their final form.

It was a failure of PS3 that cause Sony to went to "simple, practical and affordable" machine (as well as establishing a very strong 1st party portfolio). Sony learned that being too arrogant and try to push your own vision on consumer ultimately lead to fail, even if you are in market leader position.
And this is what competition for - sometimes everyone become so absorbed into "features" and "innovations" that no one need and they should be brought back to the ground. Something new is good only when it makes product better.
The idea of technical breakthrough/innovation on every step is not working. As it requires luck, market readiness and a really breakthrough technology. So often it's better to do the evolution and capitalize on good old technology than try to push another useless gimmick.

 

[Melchiah]

It's an even better value than the 360 when you consider inflation. In fact the PS4 actually costs the same as the PS2 did when you factor in inflation.

I take it, that you mean the same as what the PS2 cost in NA, as it cost 500€ here in Europe, which people always seem to forget.

 

[Game Guru]

That's, uh... that's actually pretty much the exact definition of playing it safe, you realize?

Well, if you want to call it that, that's alright, but then taking a risk kinda blew up in Microsoft's and Nintendo's faces, didn't it? I would say both were blinded by the success of their casual markets ignoring the fact that Wii was a relatively inexpensive console despite the risky motion controls.

It's an even better value than the 360 when you consider inflation. In fact the PS4 actually costs the same as the PS2 did when you factor in inflation.

On one hand I miss Ken Kutaragi's crazy exotic hardware designs. The money and effort that went into the Cell processor is insane so as a fan of technology in general I really liked when Sony pushed the envelope of what was possible (even if it didn't always work out the way they wanted). That said, I get that the more logical design of the PS4 is better for everyone. They're providing a great system at a great price and they're probably not taking a massive loss (if any).

Your avatar brings back memories of Sim City 2000 on our old Mac that ran OS7 by the way lol.

To be fair, PS4 is still the most powerful console, even if Sony toned their ambitions down a bit. I also think Sony only needs a single PS+ subscription or a single game sale to make a profit off of the PS4.

Also, I love the SimCity franchise, though I hate the most recent entry for its online DRM.

 

[heidern]

PS1 launch was a new console.
PS2 launch only in Japan for the first 6 months.
PS3 launch was a disaster.
PS4 launch is competent and shows the strength Playstation brand among the core gamer. Japan launch is going to give it another boost. The 6-8 months after that will be a challenge.

Xbox 360 might have been the market leader but in terms of trying to compare it with other market leaders in the US it benefits from an 8 year lifecycle which artificially inflates it's install base. RROD inflates it even more. Point being, the Xbox branding was never as strong as the Playstation branding was in its heydey. I'm not surprised that PS4 has started out so strong against the XB1. Even if XB1 was $399 I wouldn't have been surprised if PS4 started out stronger.

 

[panda-zebra]

Its a marathon, not a sprint; isn't price-cutting this early like going all-out off the line?

I'm reading this more and more often. It's not really the same this time around. Getting out of the blocks quickly and steadily pulling out a lead is more important than ever. There's two rival platforms with two rival subscription services and a lot of money to be made (money Xbox is more used to raking in than Sony).

Platform holders getting people in quick and keep them for the next 5 or 6 years will serve them well. Subscription income is important and far less likely to be something people will double up on, especially not with multiplats (the games people spend more money and time on) being so far apart visually, making that decision easier for some.

Stumbling over the line into a "winning" position with a late surge vs taking an early lead with steady and solid sales throughout the 5 or 6 years of the platform? Only one of those scenarios rewards the platform holder well. The sooner you get up to speed and build that lead the better.

 

[mrklaw]

That's, uh... that's actually pretty much the exact definition of playing it safe, you realize?

jumping from 4GB to 8GB at the last second is hardly playing it safe. Playing it safe would have been accepting 2-4GB and pushing the performance message. making the investment and push to go to 8GB shows Sony are out to compete and compete strongly.

 

[Tux]

Those numbers are not really comparable though due to the fact that this generation's success was largely a result of massively more initial supply than ever available. What I think will be interesting and far more relevant is to see when sales start to level off.

The "massive" initial supply you talk about is related to Sony strategy to move supply to the North American market. Not that actual production was increased. In the end, you still have to sell the console and game library. Price is a bigger factor. PS2 biggest selling point wasn't just it's game library, but also the price (launch). Game library matters much more later.

What you said about waiting for the PS4 numbers to level out is true. Here's an example...If you look at the numbers for the PS2 and the PS3 early on you will see two different trends despite the numbers being relatively the same.

PS2: 7 months (one territory) – September 30th, 2000 – 3.52 million
PS3: 7 months – June 30th, 2007 – 4.2 million (PS3 sold more than the PS2 at this point. Despite the $600 price tag)

What happened later is that the PS2 sales continued to rise as their game library grew and the price dropped. The PS3's sales look much longer as the number of early adopters willing to pay $600 faded. From there the PS2 sales took off...The PS2 broke 100+ MIL at its six year mark. The PS3 is at 80+ MIL. That's a 20+ MIL gap.

The PS4 takes the much more traditional approach that ushered in the PS2. Value and accommodating 3rd party developers. Who knows what the total sales will be after 6 years? But it's looking pretty good that it will be closer to 100 MIL than the PS3 achieved. Even if they only get to 95 MIL at six years means that the PS2's 155 MIL milestone will be challenged, at least. Hell, even PS4 reaching 140 MIL (lifetime) is a victory.

What's interesting in reading these numbers and what we know about console history is that we might be seeing a new trend in which the PS2's 155 MIL lifetime sales record is broken! The sky is the limit if that's true. :O

 

[MajorPain]

Not sure where to post this but these are my first impressions of my PS4.

I received my PS4 last night along with Killzone. I was able to get it set up and spent about 2 hours going through the menus and playing some killzone. First thing I can’t believe is how small it looks next to the Xbox One it is hard to believe it is the more powerful console in such a small package. The graphics are noticeably better than anything I have played on the Xbox One. But although the controller is a big improvement over the previous ones I still like the controller on the Xbox one much better. Also everything from the power cord, controller, ps4 casing to the hdmi cable have an overall cheap feel to it when compared to the Xbox one. Also killzone installed very fast when compared to how long things take to install on the Xbox one. Lastly the unit does not sit flat on the shelf and can be rocked back and forth. Does your PS4 do the same thing?

 

[jhmtehgamr20xx]

The PS4 isn't what we get when Sony's "pushed" by the competition, unless the "competition" for this exercise is mobile/PC gaming. The PS4 is what we get when Sony's is under no significant pressure and able to make very safe decisions every step along the way.

I get your general point, but I disagree with this part. This is a new PlayStation coming right off the PS3, and a lackluster Vita. It took the PS3 almost four years to really pick up steam, and if that were a normal console generation, it would have ended off much worst and never caught up to 360 in reputation or sales. The longer gen obviously benefited Sony more than it did Microsoft, but it's also obvious Sony doesn't want another system where it takes four damn years to start selling competitively or making a profit, so in that sense, they were under pressure from their past mistakes. Pretty significant in itself.

Also, it's even questionable if their "playing it straight to the gamers" was a no-brainer safe thing. To be honest it was actually a bit of a risk, because the assumption is/was that a new console launching these days has to knock it out of the park with anything and everything that makes it look like a media-friendly device. That a system simply could not sell to the masses based just on its games. Before all the fuck-ups, at a glance it seemed like Microsoft was actually taking the less-risky approach (ironically now it's evident they have, but for wholly different reasons not related to marketing). By the market's account, Sony had more to lose with the "for the gamers" push.

The problem there, was that as we now know, MS overestimated the eagerness of the casual segment to buy a next-gen system this early, and marginalized the core/hardcore who almost always are there exclusively for the first year or so. They either figured the casual market for consoles was unchanged from 2010 (when Wii fell off) or that Kinect garnered new loyal casual customers for them. Wrong on both fronts.

Sony was getting a lot of praise from the core/hardcore since February but there was no predicting if they'd be enough to sustain initial sales momentum. It's pretty evident now that the core market is still strong, and taking the traditional approach of starting narrow and spreading out the appeal down the line, is still the best way to go.

 

[todahawk]

It was a well thought out strategy that also got the tailwind coming off mistakes by both Nintendo and Microsoft. A $400 game system is priced very fairly and $100 less than it's main competitor. (The Pro XBox 360 for example was also $400 back in 2005). Check. Sony also has worldwide appeal (unlike the XBox). Check. They have a good online service now. Check. They are not behind in launch date with the XBox, it's main competitor last generation. Check. Sony has a history of a diverse line-up of studios that cater to all demographics. Check. They learned to make a game developers platform. Check. They are open to indie developers. Check. Build good relations with fans. Check.

The only real flaw in Sony's strategy is two things I can think of. A rather weak line-up of software that will be corrected soon. Plus they now charge to play online which is offset by the turnaround of Playstation Plus that gets better and better each year. So it should really be smooth sailing for them here on out and I personally think the PS4's success will revive Japanese studios that suffered last generation.

good points and agreed on the last two flaws. I think starting with Infamous 2 that will begin to be corrected and PS+ has been a better value than I ever thought it'd be.

One more flaw i'll add is the media capabilities of the PS4. I still use my PS3 a lot because of the music and movie capabilities. I actually do play music on my PS3 because it's hooked up to my speaker system and my PS3 is generally on. PS4 has some catching up to do there and fixes/additions are supposed to be coming.

 

[serversurfer]

Don't forget the GDDR5 gamble. They originally made it with 2-4GB and only upped it to 8GB right before the reveal when they realized it could be feasibly done. That was a risky move that paid dividends in my eyes.

That gets back to Sony's "gaming first" strategy that I mentioned earlier.

Even back in 2010-2011, when MS started designing the XBone — and Sony started much earlier — the only way to guarantee 8GB of RAM was to go with DDR3. DDR3 doesn't meet the performance requirements of modern GPUs, so going with DDR3 meant needing a high-speed "cache" to try to keep the GPU fed, hence the eSRAM. In turn, the eSRAM takes up tons of space on the die, meaning the GPU portion needed to be shrunk to accommodate it.

All of that would have the effect of reducing gaming performance, so to Sony, it wasn't really an option. A powerful GPU and 3.5GB of high-speed RAM to feed it made for a better gaming machine than a weaker GPU and 5GB of RAM that can't even keep up with the gimped GPU, so that's what they did. Gaming first.

Where Sony got lucky is that at the last minute, GDDR5 did jump to 8GB, allowing Sony to increase the game dev's RAM allocation from 8xPS3 to 11xPS3 (or more), while also bumping the OS allotment to 6x what they had originally planned.

If GDDR5 hadn't made the leap, Sony would've been "stuck" with the console that offered the best possible gaming experience, and not a whole lot else. As it stands, that's given them the console with the best possible gaming experience and the ability to do a bunch of other stuff at the same time

Spoiler

, though a lot of that extra functionality will be coming in the future, as 8GB really did come at the last minute, and they really haven't had much time to make use of it

.

 

[JPHJ]

Amazing number for the PS4. So feb 8th 5.3m. At the end of feb without japan could be 6 or bit more as jan was supposed to be a low month and they still did about a million with apparently some airlifted for dec. Also may have been stocking some for Japan. Numbers WW may be down this month due to japan launch but I thought that about jan and they still did that much so who knows.

Its not beyond the realms that japan could do 1m by end of feb so could be near 7m. 8m by end of march and 3m ahead of schedule. I wouldn't bet against it.

Edited for spelling.