Sony COO - "Microsoft Have a Different Standard of Success"

[fitbabits]

Guaranteed to ruffle more than a few Microsoft-loving feathers, Sony COO Jack Tretton was recently interviewed in TheStreet.com (http://www.thestreet.com) and took the opportunity to praise their own E3 showing and fire a few broadsides at Microsoft.

You can read the full article here (http://www.thestreet.com/tech/gamesandgadgets/10292828.html).

TheStreet.com: The general reaction to Sony's presentation at E3 this year seemed to be disappointment. How did the company view it internally?

Jack Tretton: We were really pleased.

If we were trying to do a PR blitz on our announcements, we would have perceived it a little bit differently. But we really saw this as an opportunity to announce some very important details to the trade. And I think if you ask the trade, meaning the retail constituency and the third parties, they came away pretty pleased with how everything went.

..........

TheStreet.com: This time, though, you're going up against a competitor who's much better financed than the ones you went up against in the first two rounds, at least in terms of who came out first.

Jack Tretton: Right. There's no question they have a higher pain tolerance. I think most companies, if they'd lost the billions that Microsoft has lost on the Xbox, would question whether or not they belong in the business. Obviously, they have a different standard of success.

..........

[On GTA exclusivity] TheStreet.com: So are you saying that not having an exclusive on Grand Theft Auto doesn't hurt you at all?

Jack Tretton: No, I don't think it hurts us. No, I really don't.

TheStreet.com: Going to your point about first-party software are you saying that Sony has anything comparable to Microsoft's Halo 3?

Jack Tretton: I think it's a fact that Sony Computer Entertainment software has far outsold Halo, because Halo was the one and only title to come out there. So, do we have a title? I don't know.

I guess I'd have to look at the numbers on Grand Turismo vs. the numbers on Halo. But I can guarantee you that Sony Computer Entertainment's first-party software far and away outsold Microsoft's first-party software.

Yet another case of a Sony exec refusing to see the wood for the trees or does Sony have a better understanding of things than we gamers give them credit for?

Editor's Note - Thanks to TheUnknownSoldier for the head's-up on this one.

[bKangy]

Walking blindfolded into a minefield...

[bapenguin]

Microsoft's goal for the XBox was to simply get marketshare. It was never about money. Of course both companies have a different measure of success...both companies had different goals.

[AniAko]

MS is radically changing their business model. All over the web, execs are stepping down, and there's news about them trying to drive towards a subscription, or ad based model (Which is the future for most industries, but that's another story all together) They're following the trends others have paved. Will they take a hit on the nose for a console, you bet, will they reap the benefits of the "subscription" services they put in place for the next 4 years? Absolutely.

One thing I'm HAPPY about is that Sony didn't come out this year talking about the friggin' PS4 (YET?) I remember when the PS2 released, that's what they held a press conference on.

[Siraris]

I think that Sony has a much better understanding of things than we give them credit for. If they didn't, they wouldn't have been so successful over the past 12 years. With the PS3, we'll see down the line.

One thing that I don't understand is why everyone is concentrating so much on the GTA exclusivity? I know that many people will buy the game just because it says GTA, but does anyone else think the series is washed out? I've played GTA since the first one back on PC, and although it has changed a lot, GTA3/Vice/San Andreas, all seem a bit... dated and played out. I'm hoping there is a new franchise that will take GTA's place as the staple in many gamers diet.

I also have to agree with him on the first party front as well. Halo was the only game that came out of Microsoft Game Studios that really had any impact on the X-Box, whereas Sony has Jak and Daxter, Ratchet and Clank, Gran Turismo, God of War, even Singstar.

[Dabombpizza]

Are those pyramids? Because I think someone is in denial.

Those are some magnificent PR spins that Jack throws out there, such as not being concerned that GTA4 is not a PS3 exclusive. However, he does make a very significant point, something that applies to the PS3 and the Xbox360. But not so much the Wii...
The days of locking up exclusive content from a third party and having that be key to your strategy is really a dangerous road to go down because I think with the cost of development, not many developers can afford to do exclusivity. So, really what defines the uniqueness of a platform from a software standpoint are the offerings that you have from first party.
I'm glad to see that Sony is finally pulling their trousers up, but they have a long way to go. And good lord that price tag is a big fucking hurdle.

[Returner]

Jak and Daxter, Ratchet and Clank are not 1st party. Insomniac and Naughty Dog are not owned by Sony.

[camberiu]

"Jack Tretton: Right. There's no question they have a higher pain tolerance. I think most companies, if they'd lost the billions that Microsoft has lost on the Xbox, would question whether or not they belong in the business. Obviously, they have a different standard of success."

Following that logic, SONY's music and consumer electronics divisions should have left their "respective business" a long long time ago.

[Captain Awesome]

People also love to glaze over the fact that MS did what no other console company thought they could do. And that was brining "online gaming and multiplayer" to the console market, and they did it right.

The Dreamcast was the first to do it with a 56k modem built into the system but no one thought that a central online community system like XBL was possible. This is where MS did help pioneer consoles into the next-gen race. Now everyone else is playing catch-up and aspiring to what XBL has done and continues to promise.

So while all these companies continue to sling mud at each other. People should also consider that MS in many ways did create a niche for themselves and for being an "American" console its done fairly well for itself considering the asian market dominance.

[Heretic Machine]

Jack Tretton: I think it's a fact that Sony Computer Entertainment software has far outsold Halo, because Halo was the one and only title to come out there. So, do we have a title? I don't know.

...Oh goody, if you combine your library of SCE games you probably outsold Halo. Wonder how many consumers prefer quantity over quality?

[Captain Awesome]

...Oh goody, if you combine your library of SCE games you probably outsold Halo. Wonder how many consumers prefer quantity over quality?

Yeah thats a silly argument to begin with. Might aswell throw in how the Nintendo DS has outsold every console in the recent time its been out too.

[Returner]

GT3 out sold Halo 1 & 2 but Halo 1 & 2 out sold GT4.

[Plays4Pants]

Jak and Daxter, Ratchet and Clank are not 1st party. Insomniac and Naughty Dog are not owned by Sony.

You're smart...
I think the point is that games like this are going to thing of the past...not that they are.

[phantomhitman]

actually, does anyone have solid numbers about microsoft tiles vs sony titles?

[Chalex]

actually, does anyone have solid numbers about microsoft tiles vs sony titles?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best_selling_video_game

[Returner]

wikipedia is not solid.

[Grifter]

Yeah thats a silly argument to begin with. Might aswell throw in how the Nintendo DS has outsold every console in the recent time its been out too.

If we are going to play this game why don't we throw in all the games made for windows and the PCs they are installed on?;)

From a numbers perspective Jack is right but his backpedling on everything else reminds me of a kid trying to talk his way out of a lie. When Sony has GTA exclusivity it's a big deal, when MS has it it is not. When Sony has a big glitzy press event showing pre-renderd bullshit claiming it's gameplay it's Amazing, when MS has a big glitzy press event showing impressive real time gameplay it is not. This guy still comes off like a pompass deuche bag that no one can touch. I don't want Sony to fail but I do want them to be force fed (painfully) a large portion of humble pie.

I may have missed something but has anyone from MS trashed Sony like this in an official interview? If so can some one post a link for me.

[GrinR]

"TheStreet.com: So are you saying that not having an exclusive on Grand Theft Auto doesn't hurt you at all?

Jack Tretton: No, I don't think it hurts us. No, I really don't."

http://img307.imageshack.us/img307/5962/113118119690313e6zr.gif

[MSUStud911]

[On GTA exclusivity] TheStreet.com: So are you saying that not having an exclusive on Grand Theft Auto doesn't hurt you at all?

Jack Tretton: No, I don't think it hurts us. No, I really don't.

That's utterly insane. Discounting the actual or perceived merits of GTA as a game, as a brand it's a powerhouse. People love and will buy GTA. If he thinks having GTA exclusive to PS2 (as well as other third party exclusives) he's crazy. I think he's just lying through his teeth personally. I mean, what's he supposed to say? "Yeah, dude. I gotta admit, it really fuckin' hurts." Of course not. But make no mistake, people are going to want GTA4 and when they find out they can get it for 360, a cheaper console, and that 360 will have exclusive XBL content the decision is going to be fairly easy and not in Sony's favor.

I do think Jacky has the right idea about first party exclusives being the real way consoles will be distinguished this generation. Sony definitely has some great first party developers and Jack is right on target as to Microsoft's 1st party efforts. Besides Halo, what do they really have? All I can think of right now as big first party MS games (beside Halo 3) are Fable 2 and Forza 2. Rare has been, in my opinion, quite a bust for Microsoft and every other first party attempt on MS's part has been pretty weak. Certainly nothing to compare to Jak & Daxter, Ratchet, God of War, Dark Cloud, and Grand Turismo. Plus, as far as we know, Sony still has MGS and Final Fantasy on lockdown, so those are exclusives as well.

[Khash]

If we are going to play this game why don't we throw in all the games made for windows and the PCs they are installed on?;)

From a numbers perspective Jack is right but his backpedling on everything else reminds me of a kid trying to talk his way out of a lie. When Sony has GTA exclusivity it's a big deal, when MS has it it is not. When Sony has a big glitzy press event showing pre-renderd bullshit claiming it's gameplay it's Amazing, when MS has a big glitzy press event showing impressive real time gameplay it is not. This guy still comes off like a pompass deuche bag that no one can touch. I don't want Sony to fail but I do want them to be force fed (painfully) a large portion of humble pie.

I may have missed something but has anyone from MS trashed Sony like this in an official interview? If so can some one post a link for me.
Oh please. What do you expect? Do you honestly expect him to come out and talk about how good the Xbox is and how Microsoft is doing a great job? It's their cheif competition. Quite frankly, it's pretty nieve of you to expect anything else. It's marketing. All companies do it no matter what products they make. If Sony and Microsoft made refrigerators, they'd both be talking up their refrigerators while saying the other guys refrigerators will burn your house down.

[bapenguin]

Jak and Daxter, Ratchet and Clank are not 1st party. Insomniac and Naughty Dog are not owned by Sony.

They are published by Sony. They are first party...or you could call it 2nd party.

[Heretic Machine]

Sony still has MGS and Final Fantasy on lockdown, so those are exclusives as well.

Er... we know for a fact that FF is no longer exclusive to the PS3, as there will be new FF games made for both the Wii and the 360. Whether those games will hold up to their PS3 counter-parts has yet to be revealed. I also think it is safe to say that MGS is going to go multiplatform, if not with MGS4, then probably with MGS5.

As for Rare... Kameo was a bust-ass game, that most people didn't give a chance. PD0 has great multiplayer, which I think makes it a better game than CoD2, which had shitty multiplayer but great single-player. Not to mention that Kameo seems to be one of the only games that are getting the kinds of things we should be getting from microtransactions.

I may have missed something but has anyone from MS trashed Sony like this in an official interview? If so can some one post a link for me.

Naa, MS mostly trash talks their customers for bitching about those promises they overdelivered on.

[Abash Alarmist]

Anyone else notice on the List of Best-Selling computer and Video Games list that Blizzard's games are in the most sold by genre with RTS with Starcraft (9Million), MMORPG World of Warcraft (6 Million), and RPG Diablo 2 (4 Million). Rather impressive and just shows how much love Blizzard deserves.

[MSUStud911]

Er... we know for a fact that FF is no longer exclusive to the PS3, as there will be new FF games made for both the Wii and the 360. Whether those games will hold up to their PS3 counter-parts has yet to be revealed. I also think it is safe to say that MGS is going to go multiplatform, if not with MGS4, then probably with MGS5.

With regard to MGS4, Kojima has said previously that MGS4 is PS3 exclusive. Now whether or not future MGS games are or not, I have no idea. I'm not even sure Hideo can make a decision to keep MGS4 exclusive for PS3. I would think that that is Konami's decision, so who knows?

As for FF, I know Square said some cute things about bringing FF to other consoles, but it was my understanding that FFXIII was PS3 exclusive. That is, the other consoles would get games with the FF name, but not necessarily FFXIII, FFXIV, etc. I could be wrong on that, but it was the impression I got anyway.

[Heretic Machine]

With regard to MGS4, Kojima has said previously that MGS4 is PS3 exclusive. Now whether or not future MGS games are or not, I have no idea. I'm not even sure Hideo can make a decision to keep MGS4 exclusive for PS3. I would think that that is Konami's decision, so who knows?

As for FF, I know Square said some cute things about bringing FF to other consoles, but it was my understanding that FFXIII was PS3 exclusive. That is, the other consoles would get games with the FF name, but not necessarily FFXIII, FFXIV, etc. I could be wrong on that, but it was the impression I got anyway.

I had gotten the impression that Kojima was pulling away from the exclusive Sony support, but I could be remembering things wrong (very easily). As for the Final Fantasy thing, yes the main line numbered FF's are still PS exclusive, but who would care if the other console's titles had similar experiences? From what I understood, they were going to try to form FFXIII into the basis for a setting that many games would take place in.

Plus, if the other games sold well, you better believe FFXIII would be showing up to grab sales on the Wii and 360.

[Citizen Philip]

Holy cow, if that list of best selling games evar.. I didn't realize how big the difference is: PC is to console, like Xbox is to PS2.

[Grifter]

Oh please. What do you expect? Do you honestly expect him to come out and talk about how good the Xbox is and how Microsoft is doing a great job? It's their cheif competition. Quite frankly, it's pretty nieve of you to expect anything else. It's marketing. All companies do it no matter what products they make. If Sony and Microsoft made refrigerators, they'd both be talking up their refrigerators while saying the other guys refrigerators will burn your house down.

What you do is, like most MS employee interviews (Major Nelson not included:D) is laugh and word your answer in a way that removes your competitor from the scenerio while still praising your product. I guess if you have the mentality of a 12 year old you would have to consistantly trash talk your opponent for lack of something intelligint to say. Point out facts and numbers all you want, in the end they speak for themselves. When you start having to talk shit, that to me sounds like " i'm scared, i fucked up and don't know what to do so i am trashing the guy that was smarter than me"

I guess the only nieve one is you in assuming all companys would lower themselves to Sonys standerds when threatend.

[jacktion]

I think Sony is teh doomed but he does make a good point about MS. They are pretty thick-headed. They have lost billions (with a B) on their box systems and they are keeping at it. I am curious how long it will take them to make the 360 profitable, if ever. I guess it is only a matter of time, if they can wait it out.

[Heretic Machine]

I think Sony is teh doomed but he does make a good point about MS. They are pretty thick-headed. They have lost billions (with a B) on their box systems and they are keeping at it. I am curious how long it will take them to make the 360 profitable, if ever. I guess it is only a matter of time, if they can wait it out.

It is a drop in the bucket compared to having a box in everyone's homes with the MS name on it. They can stick it out for as long as it takes if they can become one of the top console manufacturers. Hell, they've done a damn fine job so far, considering the odds against them.

It is much the same with Sony and Blu-ray. They know that success could mean big things for them. The problem being that Sony is no where near as financially stable as Microsoft.

[JawaSnack]

"TheStreet.com: This time, though, you're going up against a competitor who's much better financed than the ones you went up against in the first two rounds, at least in terms of who came out first.

Jack Tretton: Right. There's no question they have a higher pain tolerance. I think most companies, if they'd lost the billions that Microsoft has lost on the Xbox, would question whether or not they belong in the business. Obviously, they have a different standard of success."

Everyone knows MS lost a TON of money on the first Xbox, but MS came out and stated that they were taking out 5 Billion for the project and half of it was just for Xbox Live (mostly for the infrastructure, the actual networking and hardware that is still being used for Xbox and Xbox 360 and I bet will be used for Vista and mobile gaming too) I doubt you will ever see MS take lumps that large again for their console/games division, but from here on out they will reap the benefits of Xbox Live.

That is what most people refer to when they say MS lost Billions on Xbox but when you think about it, it was a very smart investment that will payoff in the long run!
I'm sure MS is laughing all the way to the bank...

[Siraris]

What you do is, like most MS employee interviews (Major Nelson not included:D) is laugh and word your answer in a way that removes your competitor from the scenerio while still praising your product. I guess if you have the mentality of a 12 year old you would have to consistantly trash talk your opponent for lack of something intelligint to say. Point out facts and numbers all you want, in the end they speak for themselves. When you start having to talk shit, that to me sounds like " i'm scared, i fucked up and don't know what to do so i am trashing the guy that was smarter than me"

I guess the only nieve one is you in assuming all companys would lower themselves to Sonys standerds when threatend.

Are you JOKING me? Microsoft spews the most rabid bullshit I've ever heard about their competition. Everyone is guilty of talking shit, everyone

[oldjadedgamer]

Are you JOKING me? Microsoft spews the most rabid bullshit I've ever heard about their competition. Everyone is guilty of talking shit, everyone

so do two wrongs make a right?

[Siraris]

so do two wrongs make a right?

Did I say it did? I just think it's ridiculous for someone to even try and suggest that Microsoft conducts its discussions about rival consoles with any amount of tact.

[theguido]

Er... we know for a fact that FF is no longer exclusive to the PS3, as there will be new FF games made for both the Wii and the 360. Whether those games will hold up to their PS3 counter-parts has yet to be revealed. I also think it is safe to say that MGS is going to go multiplatform, if not with MGS4, then probably with MGS5.

As for Rare... Kameo was a bust-ass game, that most people didn't give a chance. PD0 has great multiplayer, which I think makes it a better game than CoD2, which had shitty multiplayer but great single-player. Not to mention that Kameo seems to be one of the only games that are getting the kinds of things we should be getting from microtransactions.





Well, getting spinoff Final Fantasy's and getting Final Fantasy proper is a totally different thing. Despite what their detractors may say, most people won't buy anything that has "Final Fantasy" written on it. The main FF is still the only guaranteed seller while the others, while they have the possibility of good aren't worth it just because of the name.

And while I don't care for action games so can't give a fair opinion of Kameo, Perfect Dark Zero is an awful, awful game. It's really damn obvious to me how much talent they lost since Perfect Dark. PD is probably one of my top two favorite FPS' of all time, and I couldn't stand play PD0 for even 30 min. I think that says a lot.

[Grifter]

Are you JOKING me? Microsoft spews the most rabid bullshit I've ever heard about their competition. Everyone is guilty of talking shit, everyone

In case you missed it I asked for a link.

Every interview I have read or listened to from MS the Interviewee avoided making any sort of comment about Sony, good or bad.

I do vaguely remember a brief Interview from Jeff Kiely(sp?) with Peter Moore after GDC. One of the questions were to the effect of what do you think of the PS3 delay and do you think this will have a serious effect on PS3 sales? Peter's response was to the effect of (laughing of course) Sony knows what they are doing and it shows but the longer we have to sell 360s without compitition the better. So no, not everyone is guilty of talking shit in an official capacity. So before you ramble on with any more of you rabid bullshit find a link to back your self.

I honestly don't care who says what I just wanted to hear some shit talking from MS, it's not like that don't have the ability to change weapons in real time in order to attack Sonys weak spot for massive damage cause this is the next generation baby, this shit be off da hook this time yo!:p (sorry, I'm really fuckin' bored)

[Heretic Machine]

Well, getting spinoff Final Fantasy's and getting Final Fantasy proper is a totally different thing. Despite what their detractors may say, most people won't buy anything that has "Final Fantasy" written on it. The main FF is still the only guaranteed seller while the others, while they have the possibility of good aren't worth it just because of the name.

And while I don't care for action games so can't give a fair opinion of Kameo, Perfect Dark Zero is an awful, awful game. It's really damn obvious to me how much talent they lost since Perfect Dark. PD is probably one of my top two favorite FPS' of all time, and I couldn't stand play PD0 for even 30 min. I think that says a lot.

Can you justify the reason you hated PD0 to me? Because the multiplayer is the most solid I've played in an FPS in a long, long time. The only problem being the numerous map exploits.

[ElectricMonk]

I think once microsoft itself stops making money then you can start calling them failures.

[EvlD99]

I do think Jacky has the right idea about first party exclusives being the real way consoles will be distinguished this generation. Sony definitely has some great first party developers and Jack is right on target as to Microsoft's 1st party efforts. Besides Halo, what do they really have? All I can think of right now as big first party MS games (beside Halo 3) are Fable 2 and Forza 2. Rare has been, in my opinion, quite a bust for Microsoft and every other first party attempt on MS's part has been pretty weak. Certainly nothing to compare to Jak & Daxter, Ratchet, God of War, Dark Cloud, and Grand Turismo. Plus, as far as we know, Sony still has MGS and Final Fantasy on lockdown, so those are exclusives as well.

Um... Knights of the Old Republic, Gears of War, Lost Planet, Project Gotham, Rallisport Challenge and Mass Effect to start (Not all 1st party but exclusive none the less). Being an older gamer these are much more appealing to me then Jak & Daxter and Ratchet. Your post comes off as very opinionated.

Here is the announced list of upcoming first party Xbox 360 titles:
http://xbox.about.com/od/e32006xboxnews/a/e32006presrecap_2.htm

[Johan]

Microsoft's goal for the XBox was to simply get marketshare. It was never about money. Of course both companies have a different measure of success...both companies had different goals.

Agreed...and the fact is that Sony desperately needs their gaming division to actually earn money, since their consumer electronics have been slumping and stagnant for years.

MS, on the other hand, is a cash cow with about a billion nipples (shall we say teats?), ready to feed the starving with soup cooked over burning $100 bills, and then to throw out the leftovers, the cooking utensils, pots, pans and the kitchen, to start from scratch the next day in a new facility.

I'm no MS or Sony fanboy, but if I had to choose one to go up against in any particular market, it would NOT be MS...they could bleed money from every orifice on their company-body and still survive.

[oldjadedgamer]

"Jack Tretton: Right. There's no question they have a higher pain tolerance. I think most companies, if they'd lost the billions that Microsoft has lost on the Xbox, would question whether or not they belong in the business. Obviously, they have a different standard of success."

Following that logic, SONY's music and consumer electronics divisions should have left their "respective business" a long long time ago.

I have to agree with this since Sony has been losing money hand over fist in these markets but continue to follow it and release new products.

If Sony took this advice, they would have stopped with Betamax since it was such a horrible failure.

As Homer Simpson says "If you try your best and you fail horribly, the lesson is... Never try"

[sync]

Jak and Daxter, Ratchet and Clank are not 1st party. Insomniac and Naughty Dog are not owned by Sony.Naughty Dog has been owned by Sony since 2001.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/2677654.html

SCEA first party would have outsold Microsoft first party easy, because SCEA releases far more titles then Microsoft.

4 Ratchet & Clank games
3 Sly Coopers
5 Socom
5 Jak & Daxter games
Eye Toy games

MS has released like 6 games in the last 18 months, including Xbox 360. Different approaches.

[Siraris]

In case you missed it I asked for a link.

Every interview I have read or listened to from MS the Interviewee avoided making any sort of comment about Sony, good or bad.

I do vaguely remember a brief Interview from Jeff Kiely(sp?) with Peter Moore after GDC. One of the questions were to the effect of what do you think of the PS3 delay and do you think this will have a serious effect on PS3 sales? Peter's response was to the effect of (laughing of course) Sony knows what they are doing and it shows but the longer we have to sell 360s without compitition the better. So no, not everyone is guilty of talking shit in an official capacity. So before you ramble on with any more of you rabid bullshit find a link to back your self.

I honestly don't care who says what I just wanted to hear some shit talking from MS, it's not like that don't have the ability to change weapons in real time in order to attack Sonys weak spot for massive damage cause this is the next generation baby, this shit be off da hook this time yo!:p (sorry, I'm really fuckin' bored)


"Tell me why you would buy a $600 PS3. People are going to buy two (machines.) They're going to buy an Xbox and they're going to buy a Wii... for the price of one PS3." - http://www.joystiq.com/2006/05/11/microsoft-befriends-nintendo-in-fight-vs-sony/

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6151414.html

http://biz.gamedaily.com/industry/feature/?id=12836 <- Rabid idiocy

Allard: "I hope that Sony is nervous. Their list of claims versus their list of proof, well, there is a big, big gap there to close between now and spring 06." - http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/660/660456p4.html

You may remember our recent PS3 feature in which the reality of 'Full HD' 1080p games for the console was thrown into some doubt. Scott openly offered his opinion, stating: "I think 1080p, just to address that directly, will be basically impossible. I think if you talk to any developer they will tell you that they will not have a performing game at 1080p."

There are a lot of quotes. These are just a few I found in a 2 minute Google search. Others are harder to find because they were made by execs I don't know the names of.

[dimsumx]

http://img307.imageshack.us/img307/5962/113118119690313e6zr.gif

LMAO!

Is that from Densha Otoko?

[dimsumx]

- Allard: "I hope that Sony is nervous. Their list of claims versus their list of proof, well, there is a big, big gap there to close between now and spring 06."


That's an insult how? Looks more like a true statement...or should we start the whole '2-SKUs-no-dual-HDMI-omgwtf-ripoff' thread again?

[MSUStud911]

Um... Knights of the Old Republic, Gears of War, Lost Planet, Project Gotham, Rallisport Challenge and Mass Effect to start (Not all 1st party but exclusive none the less). Being an older gamer these are much more appealing to me then Jak & Daxter and Ratchet. Your post comes off as very opinionated.

Here is the announced list of upcoming first party Xbox 360 titles:
http://xbox.about.com/od/e32006xboxnews/a/e32006presrecap_2.htm

While I always try to be objective, I am giving my opinion. I'm not sure how to do that and not be opinionated.

Anyway, your poor word choice aside, as you said, most of your list isn't first party, and that's what we were mostly discussing. I forgot Gears of War, and for that I was definitely remiss. That game looks like it's gonna be great.

Right now MS's list of announced games frankly blows Sony's away for the simple fact that, in my OPINION, Sony hasn't announced anything all that great. But in the past Sony's first party efforts have been head and shoulders above MS's. A simple fact. I own every console and much prefer my Xbox, but I'm not gonna let that blind me to facts.

If the other titles you mentioned remain 360 exclusive, then yeah, that is a nice advantage for MS. But most of the titles you mentioned could go PS3 at any time. And then we're back talking about first party exclusives, the only true exclusives really. Now if Sony drops the ball and MS comes up with some legitimate franchises this generation (as opposed to Brute Force and Blinx) the first party advantage could definitely shift to MS. But it hasn't happened yet.

[Zanzibar]

Can you justify the reason you hated PD0 to me? Because the multiplayer is the most solid I've played in an FPS in a long, long time. The only problem being the numerous map exploits.

For me, anyways, I really didn't like the gun combat. Seemed like every guy could take four pistol shots right between the eyes and was still coming. Also, I didn't really like a lot of the level design. I gave it up after 4 hours or so.

EDIT: I was talking about single-player. Don't know nuthin' 'bout no multiplayer.

[Siraris]

That's an insult how? Looks more like a true statement...or should we start the whole '2-SKUs-no-dual-HDMI-omgwtf-ripoff' thread again?

Wow, see I seem to remember that the X-Box 1 was going to render real-time Toystory like graphics, did I miss something somewhere?

http://netscape.com.com/Microsoft+got+game+Xbox+unveiled/2100-1040_3-250632.html

"One of the basic premises of the Xbox is to put the power in the hands of the artist," Blackley said, which is why Xbox developers "are achieving a level of visual detail you really get in 'Toy Story.'"

What about the Nintendo 64 DD, or even the Virtual Boy, which Nintendo said would function just like a hologram projector.

[chowweekly]

It's expected for a company to spin bad news and make it seem good. Usually a company will explain themselves or give a different perspective that makes them look good. Sony does not. Sony flat-out denies and refuses to acknowlegde any evidence that they aren't doing so hot. Here is what I think an interview with Sony would be like if they just announced bankruptcy:

Reporter: What mistakes led to your company going into bankruptcy?
Sony PR: I don't think there were any mistakes. Our company has different goals and methods than our competetors.
Reporter: But you just went bankrupt? Isn't that a bad thing?
Sony PR: You might view it that way but we have stated all along that we don't care about being market leader. Our focus is different than that of competetors. Bankruptcy is another step in the right direction for Sony.
Reporter: What direction would that be?
Sony PR: We will be offering high-quality polished stones beside the freeway for $20 each.
Reporter: Why would people buy your stones? You can get polished stones for less elsewhere?
Sony PR: Because people know the difference between a Sony product and a regular polished stone. Frankly, $20 is too cheap for a Sony brand polished stone!
Reporter: Your optimism is inspiring and frightening at the same time.
Sony PR: Thank you.

[Royal Fool]

Jak and Daxter, Ratchet and Clank are not 1st party. Insomniac and Naughty Dog are not owned by Sony.

Oh really?

http://www.naughtydog.com/corporate/index.html

In 2001 Naughty Dog became a wholly owned subsidiary of Sony Computer Entertainment

http://www.insomniacgames.com/terms_use.html

NSOMNIAC GAMES and the Insomniac Games logo are the registered trademarks of Insomniac Games, Inc. SPYRO THE DRAGON, SPYRO 2: RIPTO'S RAGE, SPYRO: YEAR OF THE DRAGON, RATCHET & CLANK, RATCHET & CLANK: GOING COMMANDO, RATCHET & CLANK: UP YOUR ARSENAL, PLAYSTATION and PLAYSTATION 2 are the trademarks or registered trademarks of Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc. or its affiliates.

You're right that Insomniac are pretty much free to do what they want... except I'm pretty sure they get lots of funding and perks from Sony. Sony also owns Ratchet & Clank and Jak & Daxter.

[Heretic Machine]

For me, anyways, I really didn't like the gun combat. Seemed like every guy could take four pistol shots right between the eyes and was still coming. Also, I didn't really like a lot of the level design. I gave it up after 4 hours or so.

EDIT: I was talking about single-player. Don't know nuthin' 'bout no multiplayer.

Single player sucked, but something you should know is that most people and NPC's have armor. You have to bust through the armor (which is visually degraded, and eventually broken off completly) before you can shoot them, which includes headshots because they wear helmets. Headshots are very consistent and easy to get once you've taken down their armor. I know because most of the kills I get are with headshots. PD0 is one of those games where accuracy is extremly important, so you need to make liberal use of the left trigger (which brings up a more precise aiming mode).

[Wyrm]

The thing that bugged me about PD0 was the character models. The environments and guns all looked so cool, then you see these horribly shitty character models that just look so out of place in with everything else.

That, and the gameplay sucks ass. Of course, I never played the original Perfect Dark for its Single Player either.

[TrackZero]

I think that Sony has a much better understanding of things than we give them credit for. If they didn't, they wouldn't have been so successful over the past 12 years. With the PS3, we'll see down the line.

The only way Sony got where it is for the last 12 years is because Nintendo fucked the dog for too long and people got fed up with it. Sony slapped a CD-ROM drive onto a console and happened to pull ahead of that race thanks to it's fast imitation of the N64's analog stick (while it's other competitors with optical drives floundered). The PS2 merely rode off the PS1's success and had good 3rd party support, since the industry had nowhere else to go.

Now Sony is finally facing a real competitor, and we're already seeing how fast they loose ground. Make no mistake, Sony is largely disconnected from the consumer and the only way they'll be able to stay around is due to the Japanese marketshare (which they're going to continue to loose ground against Nintendo over the next few years). They'll perform moderate sales in America, but will fail to capture the lion's marketshare this time around. That's going to go to the 360.

This is Sony's last "big" gen, so enjoy it while it lasts. After this, I guarantee they're going to become a nobody. You can quote me on that. By 2012, anyone who owns a PS4 will be "fringe" (at least in North America, if not the rest of the world).

[TyphoidMarty]

It's expected for a company to spin bad news and make it seem good. Usually a company will explain themselves or give a different perspective that makes them look good. Sony does not. Sony flat-out denies and refuses to acknowlegde any evidence that they aren't doing so hot. Here is what I think an interview with Sony would be like if they just announced bankruptcy:

Reporter: What mistakes led to your company going into bankruptcy?
Sony PR: I don't think there were any mistakes. Our company has different goals and methods than our competetors.
Reporter: But you just went bankrupt? Isn't that a bad thing?
Sony PR: You might view it that way but we have stated all along that we don't care about being market leader. Our focus is different than that of competetors. Bankruptcy is another step in the right direction for Sony.
Reporter: What direction would that be?
Sony PR: We will be offering high-quality polished stones beside the freeway for $20 each.
Reporter: Why would people buy your stones? You can get polished stones for less elsewhere?
Sony PR: Because people know the difference between a Sony product and a regular polished stone. Frankly, $20 is too cheap for a Sony brand polished stone!
Reporter: Your optimism is inspiring and frightening at the same time.
Sony PR: Thank you.
Wonderfully done .. great dialogue! If I had been drinking milk at the time (which fortunately I was not) it would have exited via my nose.

[Siraris]

The only way Sony got where it is for the last 12 years is because Nintendo fucked the dog for too long and people got fed up with it. Sony slapped a CD-ROM drive onto a console and happened to pull ahead of that race thanks to it's fast imitation of the N64's analog stick (while it's other competitors with optical drives floundered). The PS2 merely rode off the PS1's success and had good 3rd party support, since the industry had nowhere else to go.

Now Sony is finally facing a real competitor, and we're already seeing how fast they loose ground. Make no mistake, Sony is largely disconnected from the consumer and the only way they'll be able to stay around is due to the Japanese marketshare (which they're going to continue to loose ground against Nintendo over the next few years). They'll perform moderate sales in America, but will fail to capture the lion's marketshare this time around. That's going to go to the 360.

This is Sony's last "big" gen, so enjoy it while it lasts. After this, I guarantee they're going to become a nobody. You can quote me on that. By 2012, anyone who owns a PS4 will be "fringe" (at least in North America, if not the rest of the world).


I want to say something witty and off the cuff, but I can't think of anything. I don't agree with what you said, but you sure as hell made it sound good!

It's also nice to see someone who has seen Mario Ice Capades. Jason Batemen was a stud back then.

[EvlD99]

"Knights of the Old Republic, Gears of War, Lost Planet, Project Gotham, Rallisport Challenge and Mass Effect"


If the other titles you mentioned remain 360 exclusive, then yeah, that is a nice advantage for MS. But most of the titles you mentioned could go PS3 at any time. And then we're back talking about first party exclusives, the only true exclusives really. Now if Sony drops the ball and MS comes up with some legitimate franchises this generation (as opposed to Brute Force and Blinx) the first party advantage could definitely shift to MS. But it hasn't happened yet.

The only title in that list that I could possibly see going over to Sony is Lost planet. Bioware agreed to form a first party publishing relationship with MS a few years ago and, as far as I know, this deal still stands.

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2002/aug02/08-06biowaregamespr.mspx


But in the past Sony's first party efforts have been head and shoulders above MS's. A simple fact. I own every console and much prefer my Xbox, but I'm not gonna let that blind me to facts.

Here is a gamerankings.com roundup from the 5 first party games you mentioned (The latest games in all the series):

(Jak 85 + Ratchet 83 + GOW 93 + Dark Cloud 88.5 + GT 88.3) / 5 = 87.56

Compared to 5 MS first party games that were mentioned (The latest games in the series). I even excluded Bioware.

(Halo 2 94.7 + Fable 85.2 + Perfect Dark 0 81 + Project Gotham 3 88.6 + Forza 92.7) / 5 = 88.44

There are many people who would prefer the Xbox lineup. That is why I pointed you out as very opinionated.

[Mr.Condescension]

There are many people who would prefer the Xbox lineup. That is why I pointed you out as very opinionated.

But they would be the vast minority, based on sales numbers.

[EvlD99]

But they would be the vast minority, based on sales numbers.

Of course, I almost forgot that sales numbers = quality.

[Mr.Condescension]

Of course, I almost forgot that sales numbers = quality.

I believe the discussion was about MS's exlusive lineup hurting Sony's sales. Purchasing habits are our only barometer for what the gaming masses prefer. In this instance, yes, sales numbers = quality.

There are plenty of games that sell worse than their quality would suggest, and plenty that sell better than they should, but what I was commenting on was the perception that MS's strong exclusive lineup would pose problems for Sony in winning the console war. Sony has a track record of making many games that sell very well. For this particular discussion, sales numbers for franchises are all that matter.

[Jack B]

I believe the discussion was about MS's exlusive lineup hurting Sony's sales. Purchasing habits are our only barometer for what the gaming masses prefer. In this instance, yes, sales numbers = quality.

There are plenty of games that sell worse than their quality would suggest, and plenty that sell better than they should, but what I was commenting on was the perception that MS's strong exclusive lineup would pose problems for Sony in winning the console war. Sony has a track record of making many games that sell very well. For this particular discussion, sales numbers for franchises are all that matter.

Here's an interesting question.

If Microsoft's top 5 lineup mentioned above sold better than Sony's top 5 lineup would the Microsoft lineup be "better quality"?

[Mr.Condescension]

Here's an interesting question.

If Microsoft's top 5 lineup mentioned above sold better than Sony's top 5 lineup would the Microsoft lineup be "better quality"?

I think it would definitely mean that people preferred those 5 games, yes. And what people prefer = quality, right? If twice as many people buy Halo3 as Halo2, that would mean that twice as many people thought it was a good game. For all intents and purposes businesswise, sales are all that matter (poor psychonauts).

Of course, comparing the top 5 first party games isn't what we're really talking about here, since both companies don't have only 5 first party games. It was a question of which company has a better stable of exclusive developers/titles. Based on sales numbers it's hard to argue that Microsoft is bringing a better 1st party stable into the current generation than Sony.

[Jack B]

I think it would definitely mean that people preferred those 5 games, yes. And what people prefer = quality, right? If twice as many people buy Halo3 as Halo2, that would mean that twice as many people thought it was a good game. For all intents and purposes businesswise, sales are all that matter (poor psychonauts).

Of course, comparing the top 5 first party games isn't what we're really talking about here, since both companies don't have only 5 first party games. It was a question of which company has a better stable of exclusive developers/titles. Based on sales numbers it's hard to argue that Microsoft is bringing a better 1st party stable into the current generation than Sony.

In the post before this one you phrased it "sales numbers = quality".

I can't agree. Quality is subjective.

Oscar films don't always outsell Batman 3 or similar. The best symphony's don't always outsell Britney Spears and so on.

I think Forza is a better game with higher consensus reviews 93 to 87 (gamerankings.com) over Grand Tourismo 4.

The Grand Tourismo franchise sold many more versions over a longer period of time into an installed base of approx-100 million compared to an installed base of approx-20 million.

I just don't think sales numbers = quality.

[Mr.Condescension]

In the post before this one you phrased it "sales numbers = quality".

I can't agree. Quality is subjective.


You're absolutely right. Sales numbers != quality.

Sales Numbers = Preference

In the past generation the public preferred Sony's exclusives to Microsoft's. Does that work better?

edit: also note that GT4 sold more than 6.5 times as many copies as Forza, which gives it a much better attach rate on the console. Also, GT4 was released a whole 2.5 months earlier than Forza. That's not exactly a much longer time. Forza may indeed be a better game (I have friends who very much think so) but the general gaming public isn't necessarily represented fully on gamerankings.com. Most people don't rate games at all. It's a sample, and not necessarily a representative one of the gaming public as a whole.

[Jack B]

You're absolutely right. Sales numbers != quality.

Sales Numbers = Preference

In the past generation the public preferred Sony's exclusives to Microsoft's. Does that work better?

edit: also note that GT4 sold more than 6.5 times as many copies as Forza, which gives it a much better attach rate on the console. Also, GT4 was released a whole 2.5 months earlier than Forza. That's not exactly a much longer time. Forza may indeed be a better game (I have friends who very much think so) but the general gaming public isn't necessarily represented fully on gamerankings.com. Most people don't rate games at all. It's a sample, and not necessarily a representative one of the gaming public as a whole.

Yeah, I've noticed that as well. The GT franchise has sold 43m units and even the last version GT4 did 6.5m to 1m. The attach rate was close, but GT4 did win at 1 in 15 for GTA4 to 1 in 23 for Forza.

Now that Forza is known a bit more, it will be interesting to see if Forza 2 can close the gap this gen, but certainly GT is still the leader until dethroned.

Forza 2 looks very impressive as it's my most anticipated title on the 360 this Xmas. I visit www.forzamotorsport.net often.

The force feedback wheel should help this gen as the Logitech was much better since the Xbox didn't support force feedback. This Gen the PS3 doesn't support rumble and the 360 has rumble and force feedback. Don't know about force feedback on the PS3. I've been wondering if that's also gone. I think it is as Immersion was responsible for that too...

[Jack B]

Mr.Condescension,

I'm not sure what to make of this data below, but just thought it was interesting to look at given our previous posts on the subject.

I got to thinking about attach rate and thought I'd share this. The PS2 had 19 games with an attach rate of at least 1 in 25 (ie 1 unit shipped for every 55 PS2's shipped).

The Xbox had 36 games with an attach rate of at least 1 in 25. Some of that is certainly due to the PS2 having more choices for titles, but it does speak to the strength of the titles within the individual communities. Odds are than 1 in 3 owners of an Xbox will have Halo. 1 in 7 will own Gran Tourismo 3.

Like I said, it could be that fewer choices are causing the Xbox users to funnel into certain titles more often, but it's interesting none the less. Someone else may have other thought of things I haven't.

Makes you wonder if Halo was on the PS2 how many it would have sold.

These use 100 million PS2's and 25 Million Xbox's as the installed base.

PS2 Unit Sales with attach rates of at least 1 in 25. 19 games. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best_selling_video_game)
Gran Turismo 3 (14.36 million)
Grand Theft Auto: Vice City (13.63 million) [441]
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas (13.44 million)
Grand Theft Auto III (11.42 million)
Final Fantasy X (7.93 million)
Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty (PS2 - 7 million) [442]
Gran Turismo 4 (6.58 million) [443]
Need for Speed Underground (6.47 million)
Medal of Honor: Frontline (6.22 million) [444]
Need for Speed Underground 2 (6.12 million)
Kingdom Hearts (5.21 million) [445]
Final Fantasy X-2 (5.14 million) [446]
Crash Bandicoot: The Wrath of Cortex (4.93 million)
Dragon Quest VIII (4.68 million)
Medal of Honor: Rising Sun (4.61 million)
Spider-Man (4.28 million)
The Lord of the Rings: Two Towers (4.24 million)
Madden NFL 2004 (4.08 million)
The Simpsons Hit & Run (4.01 million)

Xbox Unit Sales with attach rates of 1 in 25. 36 games. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best_selling_video_game)
Halo 2 (7.75 million)
Halo: Combat Evolved (6.61 million)
Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell (3 million)
Fable (2.39 million)
Grand Theft Auto: Double Pack (2.26 million)
Project Gotham Racing (2.14 million)
Need for Speed: Underground 2 (2.05 million)
Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic (1.95 million)
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon (1.70 million)
Need for Speed: Underground (1.64 million)
Star Wars: Battlefront (1.59 million)
Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six 3 (1.58 million)
Project Gotham Racing 2 (1.56 million)
Dead or Alive 3 (1.54 million)
Madden NFL 2005 (1.45 million)
Madden NFL 2006 (1.44 million)
ESPN NFL 2K5 (1.41 million)
Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow (1.41 million)
Medal of Honor: Frontline (1.40 million)
Star Wars: Battlefront II (1.36 million)
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas (1.35 million)
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon 2 (1.29 million)
Spider-Man: The Movie (1.26 million)
True Crime: Streets of LA (1.24 million)
Enter the Matrix (1.21 million)
Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic II: The Sith Lords (1.20 million)
Tony Hawk's Underground (1.17 million)
Doom III (1.13 million)
Hitman 2: Silent Assassin (1.13 million)
Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (1.11 million)
Medal of Honor: Rising Sun (1.10 million)
Max Payne (1.09 million)
Call of Duty: Finest Hour (1.07 million)
Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory (1.07 million)
Spider-Man 2 (1.05 million)
Forza Motorsport (1.01 million)

[Siraris]

I don't think you can compare the two. That list includes every single game for the XBox that sold over a million copies (36). The list for the Ps2 includes 19 games that sold over a million copies... there are over 200 PS2 games that sold over a million copies.

If people only own an XBox, then they are going to have to buy only XBox games, which is a lot more limited than the PS2.

[Jack B]

I don't think you can compare the two. That list includes every single game for the XBox that sold over a million copies (36). The list for the Ps2 includes 19 games that sold over a million copies... there are over 200 PS2 games that sold over a million copies.

If people only own an XBox, then they are going to have to buy only XBox games, which is a lot more limited than the PS2.

Yes, it is difficult to compare the two, but I was comparing 'attach rates' not unit sales. It's one factor to consider.

The Xbox had 36 games with an attach rate of 1 in 5. Some of that is certainly due to the PS2 having more choices for titles, but it does speak to the strength of the titles within the individual communities. Odds are than 1 in 3 owners of an Xbox will have Halo. 1 in 7 will own Gran Tourismo 3.

Also, for the record, Wikipedia states it's not over 200 PS2 games selling 1 million plus, but 174. 175 PS2 games selling over 1m units. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best_selling_video_game)

[Mr.Condescension]

I'm not sure what to make of this data below, but just thought it was interesting to look at given our previous posts on the subject.

For one thing, isn't this an attach rate of 1:25? 1 in 25 xbox owners bought Forza, not 1 in 5.

I got to thinking about attach rate and thought I'd share this.

This data isn't going to be very helpful with attach rates, since it's sales to date. You'd have to have the number of PS2s and Xboxes at the time of the game being published to get anything close to a real figure. The attach rate of the original Halo was much higher than Halo 2 even though Halo2 sold more copies (simply because there were alot less xboxes in circulation at the time).

I don't know if we can glean anything significant from these sales numbers for attach rate. At least Forza and GT4 were released fairly close together, but even then we have no idea how many Xboxes or PS2s were on the market at the time. Also we don't have any information for how many people wanted a racing game and maybe didn't have a system at all at the time, so they bought an xbox or a ps2. It's all very unknown. Did people buy GT4 because they had a PS2 or did they buy a PS2 because they wanted GT4? How about for Forza? So many questions....gah!

Makes you wonder if Halo was on the PS2 how many it would have sold.

Now that is a great question that has too many possibilities. It could sell better because of the dearth of good FPSs on the ps2. It could sell worse because people who like FPSs own an xbox. It could sell better because of the high installed base. It could sell worse because of the greater number of titles to choose from on the PS2 compared to the Xbox when Halo launched. God, who knows?

[Jack B]

For one thing, isn't this an attach rate of 1:25? 1 in 25 xbox owners bought Forza, not 1 in 5.

Your are correct. That's what I meant. I inserted 5 for 25 in a few places for the PS2 and the Xbox. Only one title was better than 1 in 5 on either platform and that was Halo 1 and Halo 2.

This data isn't going to be very helpful with attach rates, since it's sales to date. You'd have to have the number of PS2s and Xboxes at the time of the game being published to get anything close to a real figure. The attach rate of the original Halo was much higher than Halo 2 even though Halo2 sold more copies (simply because there were alot less xboxes in circulation at the time).

Good point. It also doesn't take into account damaged or returned consoles. Like I said, it's interesting, but not incredibly scientific.

It's more like attach rate over time considering all Xboxes sold...

I don't know if we can glean anything significant from these sales numbers for attach rate. At least Forza and GT4 were released fairly close together, but even then we have no idea how many Xboxes or PS2s were on the market at the time. Also we don't have any information for how many people wanted a racing game and maybe didn't have a system at all at the time, so they bought an xbox or a ps2. It's all very unknown. Did people buy GT4 because they had a PS2 or did they buy a PS2 because they wanted GT4? How about for Forza? So many questions....gah!

Yep, I'd agree.


Now that is a great question that has too many possibilities. It could sell better because of the dearth of good FPSs on the ps2. It could sell worse because people who like FPSs own an xbox. It could sell better because of the high installed base. It could sell worse because of the greater number of titles to choose from on the PS2 compared to the Xbox when Halo launched. God, who knows?

Ha! Exactly!

I'm in business intelligence (it's an oxymoron I know) in real life. These are the types of questions I deal with daily... It's nice to see you're considering more than the obvious. :)