Sony chief: A PS3 victory is best for everyone
Sony Computer Entertainment America President and CEO Jack Tretton said in an interview with Forbes earlier this week that a Sony victory in this generation's console war is good for the industry.
SCEA President and CEO Jack Tretton
(Credit: SCEA)"In an industry that has certainly had its challenges this year, we like to say that the environment where the PlayStation wins is best for this industry," Tretton told Forbes. "We have a brand that can play on a worldwide basis, to young and old, male and female, where our competition tends to be relegated to select regions or to select consumer audiences."
Tretton's comments came after the SCEA chief told Forbes that Nintendo, the current console leader, "delivers a casual, youth-oriented entertainment experience."
Of course, Tretton's statements echo what has been coming out of the Sony camp for quite a while. Sony has made it clear that it views Microsoft as its direct competitor. And although Nintendo sells far more consoles than both Microsoft and Sony, it seems that, as always, Sony doesn't believe that Nintendo is a real competitor.
More than gaming
That might be based in Tretton's belief that the PlayStation 3 is much more than just a gaming console. Tretton cited Sony's new advertising slogan where the company claims the PlayStation "only does everything." He said that the PlayStation 3 might be a gaming console at its core, "but it's so much more: Blu-ray movies, downloading music content, downloading video content, surfing the Internet. This is really the central entertainment device for a room."
Tretton was intent on driving that point home. He told Forbes that his company is trying to convince retailers that the PlayStation 3 shouldn't just sit in the video games aisle. Tretton would like to see it offered in several departments in a store.
Discussing senior management at big retailers, Tretton said that Sony tries to "convince them that the PlayStation 3 can help sell multiple devices in their stores and when they understand that, they're very receptive" to moving the PS3 out of just the gaming aisle.
According to Tretton, he expects the PlayStation 3 to be available in different areas of stores this holiday season.
"You'll find PlayStation 3 not only on the gaming aisle this holiday season, you'll see it where home theater is sold, where Blu-ray is sold," Tretton said. He went on to say that he would also like to see the PS3 in the digital photo aisle to "help people understand that if you want to buy a digital camera, you need a PlayStation 3. If you've got a PlayStation 3, you should be interested in digital photography."
In the end, Tretton wanted to drive the point home that the PlayStation 3 is the mass-market entertainment device that can beat them all. When discussing the PlayStation 3's competition in the marketplace, Tretton said that when it comes down to it, his company "has a much better entertainment infrastructure" than its competitors. And that, according to Tretton, is central to Sony's appeal going forward.
Check out Don's Facebook profile, Twitter stream, and FriendFeed.
Don Reisinger is a technology columnist who has written about everything from HDTVs to computers to Flowbee Haircut Systems. Don is a member of the CNET Blog Network, and posts at The Digital Home. He is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.
Yeah right next to the Sony Stand Alone BR players, and better players for a lot less money.
Actually the best BR player on the market is the PS3... nice job on your lack of research though.
As Shinobi2099 mentioned, the PS3 is one of the best Blu-ray players on the market... and there isn't a reason it won't remain that way, as Sony can easily keep updating it with new features. BUT, the point is that the PS3 is so much more than a BR player. I suppose if you completely don't care about all the other things a PS3 can do... go ahead and save a few bucks. Most people will probably recognize all the extras for not all that much more money.
That said, I DO HAVE TO TAKE SONY TO TASK on what Tretton has said here. The PS3 makes an awesome media player.... for the quite limited range of multi-media it currently plays. Granted, it plays HD and SD streams in the formats I've run across being recorded by DVR type systems, or my MythTV, etc. It plays the broadcast HD files recorded by my friends (I currently can't get HD reception). BUT, try to make a h.264 file play on a PS3, and it is pretty much a matter of luck (or VERY careful setting and re-encoding of files). Even h.264 files from many digital cameras won't play. This, IMO, is just unacceptable. Sony could easily address this. PS3 users need to POUR the pressure on Sony to change this, especially in the light of what Mr. Tretton has just stated above.
Before anyone jumps on me for stating the above... read my history of posts defending the PS3 from just about every other type of attack. I LOVE my PS3. Would buy it again and again if I had it to do over. BUT, it could be a MUCH better media center than it currently is. The average consumer isn't going to care about what 'standards' Sony might be trying to follow. They are going to put the card from their camera in, and files won't play (or won't show up).... and they are going to try to play video files from their computers... and they won't play either (unless in certain exact formats.)
If Sony doesn't address this, "Tretton cited Sony's new advertising slogan where the company claims the PlayStation 'only does everything.'" is simply going to become fodder for bad jokes.
A PS3 victory is a win for everyone? Nope. Nada. Do not pass GO. You FAIL.
A. Sony and Microsoft gaming consoles.
B. Everything else that outsells the 'A' category.
it's not about discounting people that beat you, it's that a majority of the games you can get for the 360 and PS3 really aren't available on the Wii.
Sorry but I fail to see why that is necessarily a problem. You can quite easily spin this the other way to say that the Wii has a lot of exclusive titles, which is to be expected because the system itself is quite different to both the PS3 and 360.
lol at scarcasm fail
At the time, a blu-ray player was 1000 dollars.
A PS2 was 130.
I use it for the internet.
For showing pictures to family on a big screen.
It's a great deal considering a computer with the equivalent graphics power would be at least 2000.
I currently have a low end PC hooked into my wide screen TV. Since the joy of VGA as a television interface became the norm the idea of the limited device like the PS3 being the central entertainment device in a room became something of a joke. Until I can get all the functionality and format support of a PC in one of those things for a reasonable price then it's really not worth talking about. Add a Wii to that mix, or use the PC for gaming the way I do and you're set.
Are you really saying that 3 year old tech is better than the new chips and video cards now....c'mon get serious. An entry level gaming computer could run circles around the PS3 or 360.
Once agin you miss the entire point. Are you a politician? You'd make a good one lol. For 299.99 it's the best gaming thing you can own. So do me a favor and build this computer for 299.99 that will "run circles" around a 360 or a PS3. Lol nice try. Isn't this like your third PHAIL today?
"In the end, Tretton wanted to drive the point home that the PlayStation 3 is the mass-market entertainment device that can beat them all. When discussing the PlayStation 3's competition in the marketplace, Tretton said that when it comes down to it, his company "has a much better entertainment infrastructure" than its competitors. And that, according to Tretton, is central to Sony's appeal going forward."
That's why the PS3 is the worst selling console, currently? Irony at it's finest, and dreams of glamour. The PS3 does what a computer can. And if you have internet, you have a computer. Thus, most of the junk on the PS3 is worthless. DVD Players play music, and videos. Those are much, much, much more widely bought and used.
Nice try, Sony. Please Play Again.
Yeah that's what we thought.
I'd have no problem with Nintendo lording over the gaming world, if only they'd join us in the 21st century with HD graphics and decent online capabilities, and *soon*. I have a Wii and I've really enjoyed it, but I can't understand how Nintendo thinks this hardware is going to remain competitive over the long term. I finally succumbed and added a PS3 to my arsenal (thank you new $299 price).
Keep in mind everybody that HD DVD and BR did not come up with anything innovative that required years and tons of money to develop. It's simply an improvement of older existing technology. The huge price tag of a player and the extrat $10 for the BR movies does not justify the improvement.
I don't care if you all don't agree with me because within 2-5 years BR will be dead. You will be able to have more space on solid state media (SD Cards/Compact Flash) than a BR Disk and for less money, faster access time, and smaller physical footprint.
-edited for accuracy
But whatever.
And also if you consider buying a PC with i7 chips.....i think they r not going to bee more cheaper than 700$s..
if you think i m making you fool search for yourself on google ........
My apologies if English is not your first language, but your grammar is extremely poor and so is your belief that 3 year old tech beats out the latest tech....think about it before declaring PS3 faster than any computer on earth.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090909034105AAsngqb
So this is your fourth PHAIL today. The Cell processor is more powerful than the i7. And you are going to say well the low video memory argument but the Cell processor does that and more when used CORRECTLY. Developer's just haven't devoted enough time to it. The Procesor hasn't even hit 50% of it's potential yet. But like the fprum goes on to state the i7 and the Cell processor are going for different things so the i7 would win in SOME areas but the Cell processor overall has the most potential. Man it's funny that a person with broken english makes waaaay more sense than you. lol n00b
"hidden cache of awesome computing potential"
I don't think anyone is saying it is hidden.. just largely untapped. To my knowledge there are less titles which get into the 80%-90% useage range of the capability of the PS3 than I can count on one hand.
What people are saying, is that they hope more studios will tap this potential down the road as the PS3's popularity keeps climbing. Much of the reason is has not been tapped, is that many developers were simply porting games from PC or Xbox. Of course you're not going to tap the potential of any of the systems when you're simply going to do a port. It HAS to be lowest common denominator.
My argument is that this has a lot to do with kiddies with way too much cash. They were buying all kinds of horrible games based on marketing, not quality of the game. If you can sell a game without putting in the work, why not? The big studios realized this. The idea was to blast out game based on old game engines with different themes pasted on top... and then put all the money into marketing. It worked well until the recession hit. Now, some of the studios who have really done their work are starting to shine.
Ex: can you really compare something like Killzone2 or Uncharted2 to something like say Battlefield: Bad Company. Yet, I'm sure BF Bad Company sold a lot of copies.
If you are talking about your still shots... then I'm not sure what is up. The PS3 supports that quite well from my experience and in what I've read. What model camera do you have?
That's interesting. I've not tried camcorder, just video files my still camera records (SD880 in my case... but I've heard from others it is similar with other cameras and models). What format does your camcorder record?
central entertainment device? not with the sh*tty blu ray remote that doesn't let me control the volume or change channels on my tv.
Nintendo not a competitor? sure, there's no need to talk about reality. that's marketing.
My question for you is do you really enjoy leaving your camera sitting on the side of the TV stand sticking out like a sore thumb while you view them? Also, do you transfer your digital photographs to your computer for storage, and then quick-like-a-bunny copy them back to the cameras memory card and connect your camera to the TV to view them with your friends and family?
In this day and age, we spend insane amounts of money on all sorts of things. How much did the last cell phone set you back? How about that HDTV? You need to see the PS3 for its real value. I have the blue ray remote, and it does indeed let me adjust the volume. If you are watching a blu ray movie, then why are you complaining that you can't change the channels? I recommend you use your TV remote for that, or the remote that came with your cable package. Remember, the PS3 does not have "channels." For 300 dollars, the PS3 provides a capable web browser, a great music player, a video player, a dvd player, a blu ray player, and is easily the best device for viewing digital photos on the market. Digital photos look incredible viewed through HDMI on an HDTV. Sony has also developed the PS3 to cater to multiple card and camera manufacturers, which they did not have to do. They made copying digital photos a breeze from the card to the PS3's hard drive, or onto a jump drive.
Sony also included a dedicated Photo Gallery, in which the user can quickly create libraries and playlists, which double as sideshows, customizable with any track on the PS3 hard drive. My family simply adores how easily they can go back over the years that we have had the PS3 in our household, and look at the exact time and date that pictures were taken. We can easily re-live past memories and see how our loved ones have grown up. This feature all by itself is worth having the PS3 in our household. Albums created by each event (or photo shoot, if you will) keep track of all our photos, and its just easier and much more intuitive to look at the photos on our HDTV than to cram the family in front of the PC and look at new family photos.
The next time you want to state that a man is "high" I suggest that you get your facts straight, and make complaints that are worth making.
I think maybe you should make your own "central entertainment device" and see how well it functions, if at all. Also, price it at $300.
i still contend there is no 'need' for a ps3 if you have a digital camera. hey, all those things you say are true, but you don't need a ps3 to do them, a pc works just fine.
Blu Ray gone in a few years? This shows your ignorance..
Their TV's garbage? more of your ignorance coming through..
Then I guess the industry is screwed.
Little history here...........
Microsoft helped Apple in 1995 with 165 million USD's............at that time apple's were close to its end...........if ms would have not done this..........they would hve come near to there extinction...........
"Little history here...........
Microsoft helped Apple in 1995 with 165 million USD's............at that time apple's were close to its "
Um... no. Apple had plenty of money at the time (some # of billions cash on hand). M$ bought some Apple stock (and made out VERY well on it). It was a token gesture ($165M is peanuts) to go along with Apple being friendly towards, and promoting M$ Office. The reason M$ did this is because things were heating up in the courts for them as a monopoly.
Under the terms of the deal, Apple was forced to include a copy of Internet Explorer on every copy of Mac OS they sold, and Microsoft simply "guaranteed" that they would continue the version of MS Office on Mac (even though they would've done so anyways since it was a cash cow).
It had nothing to do with monopoly accusations, and actually there's more evidence to suggest that they wanted to settle intellectual property issues with Apple. We simply don't know exactly how much Microsoft paid Apple. It's very possible that those $billions Apple had during that time was FROM Microsoft in some sort of private settlement. You have to remember that MSFT was threatened by possible court action over GUI/other Windows features that Apple may have patented/copyrighted.
If it had to do with monopoly and antitrust, then MSFT would not have forced Apple to bundle Internet Explorer with MacOS. This only added to antitrust accusations, because MSFT's main problem was Netscape and their accusations that Microsoft bundled IE unfairly to destroy Netscape, which was found to be false.
"Observers say the deal, while a shot in the arm for Apple, also may help Microsoft by keeping antitrust charges at bay. Apple represents one of the only alternatives to Microsoft's Windows and the Microsoft-Intel hegemony."
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-202143.html
I should have said IE rather than Office, though both were part of the deal. Office was the attraction from Apple's view, and IE from M$'s view. By having IE solidly on another platform, they couldn't be accused as easily of forcing people to use Windows to surf the web. Remember, M$ tactic TO crush Netscape and other OSs, had been to modify HTML standard so that only IE would really be a viable web browsing experience. Anyone with half a brain who did web development at the time could clearly see it. M$ wanted the web to be their proprietary playground. They did it by giving away the browser and cheap dev tools which wrote non-standard HTML. If it had not been for the investigation, it probably would have worked. IE's current market-share is still a testament to this. It certainly isn't in front because it is any good as a web browser.
But, at that time, Windows was the primary concern for the investigation. So, these moves were more to show that M$ was all friendly towards competition (remember, Safari didn't exist then yet). M$ move was basically a PR move, which Apple accepted because they needed Office to remain in their application suite (because M$ had forced that to become the 'standard' similar to what they were trying to do with IE).
"We simply don't know exactly how much Microsoft paid Apple."
Apple's 1.2 B in cash on hand wasn't from M$. It would have been a matter or public record, so we could find out. Don't you think something like that would have made the news? Apple goes from almost no cash on hand to 1.2 B.... and gee, it came from M$. Give me a break! (Plus, I seem to recall there being quite a long history to this 'cash on hand'... as while everyone was arguing Apple was doomed, I realized they weren't in as bad of shape as the press was making out. I had customers freaking out at that time over it... so had to reassure them.) Apple WAS in big trouble IN THE DIRECTION THEY HAD BEEN HEADED.... but they weren't really in as much trouble as the press made out. While I do credit Jobs with much of the turn-around.... the biggest step was to get rid of the business morons who were slowly driving Apple into the ground. These guys were idiots who just didn't understand Apple's business..... making clones, licensing the OS, etc. The hilarious thing is that many business 'experts' today would take Apple down that VERY SAME PATH TO DOOM if they were at the head.
I can't recall what all M$ ended up getting found guilty of... but it was a pretty long list. What is sad is that they paid no real penalty for it all. People thought M$ was just too big and important to damage. So... we're now like a decade behind in technology. The silver lining, though, is that simply by WATCHING M$, it allowed the competition enough window to actually accomplish some things... and if you look closely, you can get a glimpse of some of the advances we would have been enjoying in MUCH GREATER ABUNDANCE had the courts actually punished M$ for all the damage they caused.
- by October 7, 2009 3:55 PM PDT
- Sony talks a big game, but what have they been doing since the PS3 launch? Competing for marketshare with its legacy system, ignoring the market plea for a console price cut, and arrogantly blaming the customer for not recognizing the inherent value of the PS3 and BluRay. Meanwhile, Nintendo spends two years flourishing with a demographic it understands, and MS finds a way to leverage online experience to boost Xbox sales. And finally, when Sony finally shows signs of "getting it" -- lowering the price, getting clever about its TV ads, and generating some positive buzz about upcoming game titles -- just when the dominos are beginning to fall Sony's way, the release the PSP GO and let this guy out of his cage to talk trash. Ugh!
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (109 Comments)