What can Sony do to become top dog again?

They need to make a system that appeals to casuals like the PS1 and PS2.Rocky32189

[QUOTE="Rocky32189"]They need to make a system that appeals to casuals like the PS1 and PS2.Bigboi500

for the ps3 to be #1 they have start another gen. In this gen they are toast. There are many reasons for this, and hardware is one of them.

edit: for sony to be #1. Gimme a break im tired :P

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

[QUOTE="Rocky32189"]They need to make a system that appeals to casuals like the PS1 and PS2.Rocky32189

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

[QUOTE="Rocky32189"]They need to make a system that appeals to casuals like the PS1 and PS2.Rocky32189

I am more of a casual gamer with a wii...bought a ps3 as well. I want the blu ray, i want the media server capabilities...it is a great machine, does a lot. Actually, considering the features, the price is pretty good. The 360 is not a comparible model, why should it be the same price?

And blu ray will be good for gaming...not yet, but soon. The games are getting larger and larger...it will become hard to fit them on one disc. The disc size will limit the games in the future.

[QUOTE="Rocky32189"][QUOTE="Bigboi500"] I think the PS3 does appeal to casuals with the non-game features and Blu Ray but the price is what keeps them at bay.

Bigboi500

I would say the ps3 is a little before it's time...i do know a lot of people who are shifting towards ps3 over their 360's

I would say the ps3 is a little before it's time...i do know a lot of people who are shifting towards ps3 over their 360's

xfcanadian

[QUOTE="Rocky32189"][QUOTE="Bigboi500"] I think the PS3 does appeal to casuals with the non-game features and Blu Ray but the price is what keeps them at bay.

Bigboi500

Know i am a nintendo fanboy the most but i love all my next-gen systems except maby the 360..but aside the point.... Sony was top dog until the wii came out infact the PS2 AND PS1 easily are one of the best systems ever made, PS3 has been destroyed because of the WIIS more libary of games and 360s better live (even though i do prefer PS3 MORE than 360) the PS3 has lost the console war against nitedno without a doubth,what sony needs to do?i think they need to grab the 3rd part support first.Second create a new system thats so unique every hardcore gamer and even some casual gamers woud go to it.and 3rd become like SEGA spread insults thats why SEGA beat nintendo in the SNES AND NES saga,with help from sonic but yo u now.Oh yeah then finally create a mascot.One thatll wow the crowds.Okay im done know what do you guys think?

P.S I didnt know where to put this in the leagacy platforms or here so i just decided here if i have put it in the wrong spot i will gladly move it to the legacy platforms.

Know i am a nintendo fanboy the most but i love all my next-gen systems except maby the 360..but aside the point.... Sony was top dog until the wii came out infact the PS2 AND PS1 easily are one of the best systems ever made, PS3 has been destroyed because of the WIIS more libary of games and 360s better live (even though i do prefer PS3 MORE than 360) the PS3 has lost the console war against nitedno without a doubth,what sony needs to do?i think they need to grab the 3rd part support first.Second create a new system thats so unique every hardcore gamer and even some casual gamers woud go to it.and 3rd become like SEGA spread insults thats why SEGA beat nintendo in the SNES AND NES saga,with help from sonic but yo u now.Oh yeah then finally create a mascot.One thatll wow the crowds.Okay im done know what do you guys think?

P.S I didnt know where to put this in the leagacy platforms or here so i just decided here if i have put it in the wrong spot i will gladly move it to the legacy platforms.

Maybe they should stop making decisions that lose them money.

Seriously, PS1 was weak, PS2 was weak, both sold well, and had tons of games. Why did they feel the need to make a console with tech never used before exactly? To make some statement? All it's done is make them lose billions of dollars.

Lower price

Bring back PS2 BC

The number one thing Sony must do is figure out how to blow our minds with amazing games again. Sony got to where it is on the back of amazing, groundbreaking games. If it wants to get back to the top, it has to forget about trying to convince us about how awesome its console is and just show us tons of great games.

If Sony shows us lots and lots of great games we can play today on PS3, we'll buy. Bottom line. Thus far in the Xbox 360's lifecycle, Microsoft has basically put on a master-classclinic on how to manage your console game portfolio. Sony needs to borrow some lessons from that and follow suit.

"SEGA beat nintendo in the SNES AND NES saga"

Don't know where you got that from... as far as sales went...

NES > Master System

SNES > Genesis

Care to explain?

As far as Sony goes, PRICE DROP PRICE DROP PRICE DROP and more consumer appeal by seeking out more 3rd parties to make something aside cross-gen and FPS games.

Offer a platform that continues on the foundation of the PS and PS2. A cheap, mid-line set of hardware with wide appeal and third-party support.

Offer a platform that continues on the foundation of the PS and PS2. A cheap, mid-line set of hardware with wide appeal and third-party support.

foxhound_fox

AAAAAAMEN.... this is the prob with Sony... not that much appeal except for the graphics-hungry hardcore... its NOTHING like the original PlayStation.

Plus Sony needs to stop being idiotic and doing things like packaging in AV cables with the PS3 instead of component or HDMI... thats just a slap in the face... also, the fact that it can't play PS2 games is just amazing...

Sony knows they have lost this console war- they are still focused on making the PS2 a super success...

they're just thinkin ahead brothers

they had to take a hit this gen to push out this new tech

now next gen they're gonna be the only one with high def storage device

if they put a 6x drive in there or something so no more game installs - golden

the brand name is just so strong so many people have been miserable with ps3 for a long time up until now just because they had to stay loyal and with what they knew

they're just thinkin ahead brothers

they had to take a hit this gen to push out this new tech

now next gen they're gonna be the only one with high def storage device

if they put a 6x drive in there or something so no more game installs - golden

the brand name is just so strong so many people have been miserable with ps3 for a long time up until now just because they had to stay loyal and with what they knew

BobSacamento

Maybe they should stop making decisions that lose them money.

Seriously, PS1 was weak, PS2 was weak, both sold well, and had tons of games. Why did they feel the need to make a console with tech never used before exactly? To make some statement? All it's done is make them lose billions of dollars.

Mr_Nordquist

This is a little off.

PS1 was the most capable system at the time because it handled 3D moderately well and utilized a disc based media format. Saturn struggled with 3D and N64 struggled with fitting games onto those cartridges.

PS2 was released right after the dreamcast. It was quite the powerhouse for it's time. Gamecube and Xbox were released relatively late in comparison.

Technology historically has given sony the edge (DVD being the latter edge against dreamcast).

sorry to say this but its true,

nothing,

they had their time to shine and when customers finally realised that their name meant nothing ,

it was time for them to let it go especally in a market so hard hit recessioned,

600 for a console- will not work and 300 for a stripped down version of one, ,, , i wouldnt prefer it,

any one remember the saturn- asking price was 700 lol and look where that ended up , , ,

simply put it, if next gen goes the way of doubling prices, you will pay 1200 for a ps4 , , 600 for a 720 and nintnedo does know better theyll stay wethin a good price , , lol there for theyll succeed again and theres nothing any one can do about it,

but watch and whine just like thier doing now the only differrence is the 360 is actually cheaper if nintendo can keep a 249 price point and still out sell a 199 console,.

then what makes you think they cant charge 249 for wii 2 whle the otther charges more expesnive ,prices, l;ol i see it,

dont say i didnt warn ya,

thats if theres any next consoles lol, better hope for a better market, especally microsoft, they took a bigger bullet then sony by rtushing ,

[QUOTE="curp11"][QUOTE="IronBass"]Travel back in time and stop the idea of including Blue-Ray on its console. Also use cartridges for the PSP. Ah, and cancel ALL the PR declarations.IronBass

Sorry, but no thanks. Cartridges would effectively destroy the PSP. Disc based format is superior.

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

[QUOTE="Rocky32189"] No, because all the casuals are buying Wii's. These are the same people who owned a PS2 last gen. If Sony wants to be #1, they have to win back this market.Rocky32189

Sony catered to gamers by having high quality, popular games on PS1 and PS2. Core games.

Nintendo has grabbed up casual gamers and non gamers with it's control scheme. People don't buy wii to play games. They buy wii to play wii. That's the difference. Sony will just have to wait until people get tired of the allure of motion controls, or create a similarly alluring gimmick oriented console. I hope the latter never comes true.

and as far as n64 struggling with games fitting on their carts thsi is so not true, ,

go back and compare the amouint of content found on perfect dark and many n64 games to many games today,

pd0 would be a perfect comparision

lol so dont even go there,

ill compare em

perfect dark

how many missions

data dyne-eploration

datadyne-research

datadyne extraction

carrington villa

chicago

g5 building

area 51- part 1

area 51 part 2

area 51 part 3

air force one

crash site

pelegic 2

carington institue

that min ship one,

then the last one -skedar and the 3 bonus ones,

perfect dark zero had 10 total plus one dlc one

now the multi player sections

chracters -pd64-over 50

pd0 -8

maps-pd -16

pd0 -13 (8 initally)

challenges-pd0 -30 plus the weapon range- pd0 -none

cheats-pd 25-pd0- none

and the graphics were on par or better then for its time , ,

the pd0 one was not using 360s full power and was 6 gig , , lol, so hows that , , appearanty, space does not mean quantity,

it just means they didnt use compression lol, or did not use its potential , and never have, only a few games do,

and thats a fact

mgs4 is an example ff would be another gta is rather long so is many similar games but many of the ones in question-fps, have shrunken , ,

also ,

ps1 can not handle more then n64 can , , thats a fact play the 007 games on ps1 or duke nukem oh god,

and hexen a few prime examples of n64 titles that have looked better,

and played better, in fact the n64 version of the world is not enough actually contains more missions and modes of play then the disc version for ps1,

and has more 3d effects to it,

turok , , this game looks great for a n64 game, , ps1 definatelly would choke, theres only a few ps1 titles that had great 3d graphics,

they are- spyro 1 2 and 3 , other then that, hmph id say n64 would stoomp it to the ground, heck stunt race fx on the snes looks alot better then many ps1 games,

driver is another good 3d game but there isnt much more, so your sol on the graphical and space edge , , lol that doesnt matter, when half the n64 library is decent,

unlike ps1 -where only 25 percent of all released titles are decent,

and not one has score a 10 like oot has, in that gen

lower ps3 price

mariokart64fan: It is a known fact that cartridges were a limitation for the N64, sorry. There's a reason why Final Fantasy VII moved to playstation. The cartridge format became a major limitation to developers, and certain cartridges such as zelda actually made games cost more because they had to be specially developed to fit all the content.

The N64 may have had more powerful 3D, but the cartridge format crippled it.

[QUOTE="Mr_Nordquist"]

Maybe they should stop making decisions that lose them money.

Seriously, PS1 was weak, PS2 was weak, both sold well, and had tons of games. Why did they feel the need to make a console with tech never used before exactly? To make some statement? All it's done is make them lose billions of dollars.

hakanakumono

This is a little off.

PS1 was the most capable system at the time because it handled 3D moderately well and utilized a disc based media format. Saturn struggled with 3D and N64 struggled with fitting games onto those cartridges.

PS2 was released right after the dreamcast. It was quite the powerhouse for it's time. Gamecube and Xbox were released relatively late in comparison.

Technology historically has given sony the edge (DVD being the latter edge against dreamcast).

I know it was slightly off. I wasn't saying weak as in pathetic, but weak as in their was competition that was more powerful, but as you pointed out developers could overcome the weakness to build huge games with pretty good graphics, and none of the tech was incredibly demanding on everyone's budget.

What they've done now is stray away from doing that ^^^. I really feel they put out such a powerhouse at $600 because they figured their brand power alone would sell it. Now MS has done what Sony did by putting out a decently competitive console that plays beautiful HD games, and at a cheap price. Something that, had Sony done a 3rd time, would have yet again put them in the lead by a huge market. I don't doubt that a bit actually.

They'd have had simpler tech that doesn't scare developers, a really cheap price, and they'd have been able to release a lot earlier to compete head on with the 360.

Why does it matter if they're top dog or not?. Quite frankly i'm enjoying the fact that the PS3 is more of a niche console this gen,whenever I want a break from XBL and the 360 in general,I can go play something on the ps3 like Valkria Chronicles and not worry about some Gears of war Meathead playing the same game as me.

[QUOTE="Rocky32189"][QUOTE="Bigboi500"] Well you must admit that Blu Ray and non game features don't appeal to hardcore gamers.

hakanakumono

Sony catered to gamers by having high quality, popular games on PS1 and PS2. Core games.

Nintendo has grabbed up casual gamers and non gamers with it's control scheme. People don't buy wii to play games. They buy wii to play wii. That's the difference. Sony will just have to wait until people get tired of the allure of motion controls, or create a similarly alluring gimmick oriented console. I hope the latter never comes true.

Um, I have a Wii to play games. Same reason I have/will get any game console or handheld, so I can play games.

[QUOTE="hakanakumono"]

[QUOTE="Rocky32189"] Blu Ray appeals to anyone who wants it. It has nothing to with whether or not someone is a hardcore gamer. It's obvious that Sony completely failed to attract the casuals this time around. They thought that all the PS1 and PS2 owners would blindly follow them into this generation, but instead they bought Wii's. If Sony (or any company for that matter) wants to be number one, they have to appeal to this audience. And yes, price is a huge factor.Wolblade

Sony catered to gamers by having high quality, popular games on PS1 and PS2. Core games.

Nintendo has grabbed up casual gamers and non gamers with it's control scheme. People don't buy wii to play games. They buy wii to play wii. That's the difference. Sony will just have to wait until people get tired of the allure of motion controls, or create a similarly alluring gimmick oriented console. I hope the latter never comes true.

Um, I have a Wii to play games. Same reason I have/will get any game console or handheld, so I can play games.

Same.

I do like the part about Sony having to wait for the allure of the Wii to die down. Considering it sold a record amount of consoles just this february? lol. It sold like 100,000 more this february than last february!

What Sony has to do to get ahead:

1. Keep cranking out great games

2. Lower the price of PS3

3. Blow up Nintendo headquarters. :P

Your wrong on so many counts. For a start Nintendo eventually won the SNES era. Second Sony cant afford to make another console. Third most of the Wiis titles are gimmicky and not what would be considered traditionally this gen. I could go on and on but then I'd start to sound like the fanboy you obviously are. Sonys big mistake was putting gaming second and concentrating on getting a monopoly on a format, something they've been trying to do for years.

To be honst Sony are probably quite happy with their position. The losses they have took on the PS3 will balance out with gains made on Blu-ray. I think they just need to concentrate on making good games now, and to be honest they are hardly out of it. If they try to put things right with another console, they'll end up on the same road Sega eventually did.

[QUOTE="hakanakumono"]

[QUOTE="Mr_Nordquist"]

Maybe they should stop making decisions that lose them money.

Seriously, PS1 was weak, PS2 was weak, both sold well, and had tons of games. Why did they feel the need to make a console with tech never used before exactly? To make some statement? All it's done is make them lose billions of dollars.

Mr_Nordquist

This is a little off.

PS1 was the most capable system at the time because it handled 3D moderately well and utilized a disc based media format. Saturn struggled with 3D and N64 struggled with fitting games onto those cartridges.

PS2 was released right after the dreamcast. It was quite the powerhouse for it's time. Gamecube and Xbox were released relatively late in comparison.

Technology historically has given sony the edge (DVD being the latter edge against dreamcast).

I know it was slightly off. I wasn't saying weak as in pathetic, but weak as in their was competition that was more powerful, but as you pointed out developers could overcome the weakness to build huge games with pretty good graphics, and none of the tech was incredibly demanding on everyone's budget.

What they've done now is stray away from doing that ^^^. I really feel they put out such a powerhouse at $600 because they figured their brand power alone would sell it. Now MS has done what Sony did by putting out a decently competitive console that plays beautiful HD games, and at a cheap price. Something that, had Sony done a 3rd time, would have yet again put them in the lead by a huge market. I don't doubt that a bit actually.

They'd have had simpler tech that doesn't scare developers, a really cheap price, and they'd have been able to release a lot earlier to compete head on with the 360.

Well, what they did was exactly what they did with the PS2. Relatively powerful hardware (for the time). New media format. Complicated so competetor's don't get ports.

Sony didn't stop to think that a 600$ console might not have the same effect as a 300$ even though the setup was the same.

do whatever they did last gen

They can't do it this gen. But they could easily be back on top next generation by pricing the PS4 at $300-400 and not launching a year after the competition. That would be an easy win.Floppy_Jim

I don't think the time of launch is as important as the amount of games actually available.

Sony could come out on top next gen if they can keep their console affordable from launch.I imagine they could use a more advanced form of teh Cell tech for their PS4,that should help keep R&D costs down.

And no more BS next-gen Sony,got it?

Sony could come out on top next gen if they can keep their console affordable from launch.I imagine they could use a more advanced form of teh Cell tech for their PS4,that should help keep R&D costs down.

And no more BS next-gen Sony,got it?

GabeNewellsPie

Agreed, they also need to work at making the console more attractive to developers, by making the thing easier to develop on. I mean come on, it's done wonders for Microsoft this gen.