Microsoft's Peter Moore Dreamcasts the PS3

by Ludwig Kietzmann { May 16th 2007 at 2:55PM }

When the topic of sluggish PlayStation 3 sales is brought up, Peter Moore recalls his previous corporate life and asks, "Remember the Dreamcast?" Speaking to Next-Generation's Colin Campbell, the Microsoft exec compares Sony's current difficulties with those he experienced with Sega on its final console. "We thought we were doing right," he says. "All of a sudden it didn't pan out."

Though we're not privy to the same lucid and possibly prophetic dreams Mr. Moore is, lumping Sony's latest effort into the same category as the Dreamcast brings with it many sticky implications, intended or not. Is Moore saying the PlayStation 3 is failing to "pan out" for Sony, less than a year into its supposed ten-year life? Sega came out of the gate strongly and promptly drove off a financial cliff like Thelma and Louise, whereas Sony is off to a slow start and has every chance of picking up the pace. Moore goes on to say that Sony's focus on the Cell processor and the Blu-ray drive was a mistake, that it "miscalculated the global consumer's appetite for the experience the offered at the price point they offered it at." But wasn't the PS2's "Emotion Engine" and DVD drive instrumental in its triumph over Moore's ex-box?

We remember when the Xbox 360 was given the Dreamcast treatment as a means to highlight impending failure, and it was as odd then as it is now. Despite the system's commercial demise under the watch of a struggling manufacturer, it enjoyed amazing first-party support and is still remembered for hosting some remarkable games and innovations. When did being compared to the Dreamcast become such a bad thing?

[Via Xbox 360 Rally]

Tags: Dreamcast, Microsoft, Peter Moore, PeterMoore, Sega, Sony

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

Tom @ May 16th 2007 3:00PM

Well, like the Dreamcast, the PS3's greatest competition is still the PS2, so there's that atleast.

vadermaggot @ May 16th 2007 3:02PM

I wonder what Peter Moore is doing about the failed Halo 3 Beta? While I sit on my couch humbly waiting for Bungie to figure their *&^% out)

kingofwale @ May 16th 2007 3:02PM

Dreamcast sold 9+ million. the reason it failed was because it has NO 3rd party support. (amongst other reasons)

Of course, a better analogy that's more known to Microsoft should be here. why doesn't he just say:

"Remember the Zune"?

;)

vadermaggot @ May 16th 2007 3:03PM

......

x876543 @ May 16th 2007 3:03PM

BURN!

Jack of No Trades @ May 16th 2007 3:04PM

I love the guy and all but damn "heastupidbastard"!!

*Sony has way way more money in the pocket than Sega did.

*The PS2 is still selling.

*The only department to see loses this year was the game division. The Motion Pictures department is sitting in money from Spiderman 3.

*Sony is here to stay like MS.

copa @ May 16th 2007 3:04PM

Terrible analogy. Dreamcast made consumers like me giddy, but failed due to lack of publisher support.

PS3 has strong publisher support, but has turned off consumers with high prices and sloppy execution.

vadermaggot @ May 16th 2007 3:04PM

I have a Zune. And I actually like it. (go figure)

maverick_saturn_626 @ May 16th 2007 3:04PM

And Peter Moore suddenly became the great all seeing god of technology when?

I can't take anything this guy says seriously, hes one of those people I laugh at when they say something and upon realizing it wasn't a joke sincerely apologize.

mkvakumajin @ May 16th 2007 3:05PM

Umm, Peter if I remember correctly, you are the piece of work who killed the dreamcast. And my beloved Saturn. Good Job America, you are nothing but a school of fish with no free thinkers, yea, lets just follow that guy!!!!

maverick_saturn_626 @ May 16th 2007 3:07PM

Roflmao, even his face resembles a clown, stick a red nose on his face and he wouldn't even need red cheeks and a ghost white face.

Why is he tensing his muscles and crap, does he think hes a mans man or something?

Konny @ May 16th 2007 3:10PM

LMAO.. this is classic shit from Sony PR.. errrr.. no, wait, its from MS.. lol

This, from the guy who wrote off the high failure rates of 360 as business as usual.

JodyAnthony @ May 16th 2007 3:13PM

maverick_saturn_626, he's a man's man. He's a man's man's man. And more importantly his hand, while strong and masculine, is soft as a velvet child.

kingofwale @ May 16th 2007 3:16PM

@JodyAnthony

nice Zap reference.

but here's a real question, is Peter any relative to Michael? They both share the 'tool'-ish personality. ;)

Harold @ May 16th 2007 3:18PM

This guy is really starting to give MS and the Xbox 360 a bad name. The 360 is a great system, why must he always bash everyone else? This behaviour is childish and unbecoming of a major executive. It makes him look insecure and like he has something to be defensive about.

BPM @ May 16th 2007 3:19PM

Why PS2 was such a success: At most, it costed (retail) $300 (forced bundles don't count)

Why PS3 isn't doing as well: It costs $600

I've often hear that the 360 isn't doing as well as the original Xbox. It's probably due to the fact the good one costs $400.

I think the "sweet spot" for console MSRP is $300 or less. But, gimped models don't count (Looking at YOU, 360 Core, who doesn't even have a hard drive!).

You can fill your machine with all of the fanciest tech you can, but the mass market won't care if it has a huge upfront cost.

Metal Gear and Final Fantasy won't "save" the PS3. Don't get me wrong, they'll most definitely be great games, as neither studio is going to fall short on perfecting the games. They'll definitely help sell systems, that's for sure. But, they don't have the widest mass market appeal.
Looking at a list of the best selling PS2 games, Grand Theft Auto takes THREE of the top-five selling spots (1st, 2nd, and 4th). 3rd belongs to Gran Turismo 3, and 5th belongs to MGS2.

If anything, the thing PS3 needs the most to "win" is GTA... And they dropped the ball on keeping that exclusive/timed exclusive.

aegies @ May 16th 2007 3:21PM

Peter Moore and the American market are the only reasons the Dreamcast lasted as long as it did. In fact, the only successes Sega ever really had with hardware was almost entirely due to decisions and strategies made by its American arm. The Genesis was a failure in Japan, and the Saturn was developed and planned for release with no input or even notification to the American branch of the company. That's why the 32x was released.

If Moore wants to compare it to a Sega console, it bares more resemblance to the Saturn than the Dreamcast. Complicated architecture, last minute changes, too expensive, blindsided by competitors.

http://eat-sleep-game.com/news

Jack of No Trades @ May 16th 2007 3:33PM

EXTRA! EXTRA! READ ALL ABOUT IT!

***YOU CANNOT COMPARE SONY TO SEGA***

FOR HISTORY TO REPEAT ITSELF BOTH COMPANIES MUST SHARE THE SAME INADEQUAIES!

SONY HAS MONEY AND OTHER DEPARTMENTS TO FALL BACK ON. SEGA DID NOT.

SONY HAS TWO PREVIOUS CONSOLES THAT PIMPED THE COMPETITION. SEGA NEVER HAD THE STAYING POWER LIKE SONY HAS GENERATED!

CAN WE PLEASE AGREE SO I CAN TURN MY CAP LOCK OFF?

JodyAnthony @ May 16th 2007 3:36PM

weren't 360 fans like 6 months ago comparing the 360 to the dreamcast, using that as a reason that the 360 was good?

Brandson @ May 16th 2007 3:44PM

In 1-2 years the PS3 will be fine. The price will have come down, there will be more games, and the firmware will be more mature. I personally want to shift to HD movies eventually and being able to use one box as the source for all my media is appealing. I appreciate that I won't have to buy a separate BluRay player later. $600 is clearly too expensive now, but when the price comes down, being able to play BluRay movies out of the box will help drive sales.

The 360 has been getting a lot of bad press about heat, noise, and reliability issues. Moore and co. should be working on making sure those problems are fixed before sales begin to be seriously impacted and stop making arrogant comments about Sony. Sony has toned-down its arrogance a bit lately and it suits them better. MS should do the same because things can change very quickly in this industry.

I think it was also rampant piracy that contributed to the end of the Dreamcast more than anything else. The DC was hurt more by piracy than any other console simply by how easy it was to download and play copied games. The games were fairly small and no hardware modification was required. Other than that issue, it was a fairly solid system. The laser assembly in the disc drive was extremely loud though, probably the loudest drive I've ever heard. It didn't keep me from playing, but it was very annoying. So there are some similarities to the 360 there too.

JRM @ May 16th 2007 3:48PM

I don't know about Dreamcast, I'd say the PS3 is looking more like the Saturn.

sheppy @ May 16th 2007 3:55PM

Jody Anthony, yes... yes they were. Although, truth be told, I'm not seeing it. I cannot, for the life of me, see a connection between 360 and DC aside from Moore. Hell, I could see it with Xbox considering it's first couple years were fairly experimental. But 360? So far, it's been a by the books experience.

aegies,

Lack of RPGs were the main factor in Segas struggle in Japan with the Genesis. Something Saturn didn't suffer from, and it showed. Saturn had a HUGE following in Japan long after it fizzled in the states. And for the record, it was a 10 year long history of mismanagement from all three heads (Europe, US, and Japan) that would ultimately lead to their deaths. I mean, Genesis was a money farm, no doubts. But Sega was spending far too much in pointless endeavors. At the time of Sega's death as a hardware company, Dreamcast was profitable and making a ton of cash, that was being reinvested heavily into their arcade and pachinko divisions...

Sega, as a company, was successful in the gaming world, a failure as a company. 10 years of red killed Sega. Nothing else.

Jon @ May 16th 2007 3:55PM

Nothing wrong with the PS3 getting labelled the Dreamcast. It was a solid console with good titles (though not plenty).

Konny @ May 16th 2007 4:04PM

"Jody Anthony, yes... yes they were. Although, truth be told, I'm not seeing it. I cannot, for the life of me, see a connection between 360 and DC aside from Moore."

http://www.1up.com/do/feature?cId=3145154

jaysins @ May 16th 2007 4:07PM

ex-box lol That was downright clever. Your on my top two favorite posters Ludwig.

I know the PS3 to many sounds like a bad deal but in couple years, with the adoption of HD tv's up and Bluray possibly the winning HD standard(albeit not necessarily probable at this point), and a few block buster hits under it's belt it really could get some legs. It's certainly not outside the realm of possibilities at all. I don't want to Sony to fail as I think the competition between them and MS is good for consumers. Hopefully they learn a lot from this generation and past mistakes and can become more like the Sony of old.

BIGGEN @ May 16th 2007 4:11PM

haha, funny how this is spun to look like he compared the two as failures instead of similars. he is in no way saying ps3 is a failure, nor is the dreamcast. but they have similar little failures that he recognizes because he was a part of that dreamcast ship that sank. sony could use someone like peter moore right now. someone that has seen the ship sink, and knows the best way to deal with it. in the end, it will be the price that kills it. it has been said since before release.

and if you can't recognize that, then you really need to think, "how many people need a hi def movie player right now?" then think, "how many of those people that need a hi def player, want to play games?" then think, "how many of those people want to pay $600 for a hi def player, hi def games, but not really have any games to show for it yet?" i think the numbers reflect what that answer is. $250 a unit can be considered an impulse buy. $400 a unit can be considered a low cost investment. $600 can be considered a high cost investment. $600 can get you the hi def tv you've been wanting, but leaves most people with nothing to buy the console with.

i just think that instead of being biased because you own a certain system, look at reality and see that the ps3 just isn't needed right now. five years from now, maybe, but by then MS will have something bigger and better in the works. they have positioned themselves very nicely. now, if they can just give their consumers a fucking break on SOMETHING, they can ride the 360 all the way to 2010 or more.

Jack of No Trades @ May 16th 2007 4:15PM

I remember when the 360 launched. Most of you asshole defending it now were the ones saying it would fail and that Sony will continue to rule.

I liked the 360 then as I do now. I helped defend it two years ago against the same people that are now on the banwagon. You people are pathetic!

Pureshooter @ May 16th 2007 4:16PM

The comparison is fair if he's only talking about things not going as planned for two video game companies. Not much else is applicable.

JKPierce @ May 16th 2007 4:20PM

The industry (media especially) needs its scapegoat, its boy to kick when it's down. Last generation proved the Gamecube an worthy enough target; it was easy to claim Nintendo lost touch with its userbase and was going in the wrong direction. Now that simply isn't possible with the Wii, because they've made a point to do the exact opposite.

Sony's console is the most appropriate, now. Its six hundred (premium) pricetag alone sets it on a pedastal in which everyone can point, observing: Sony has lost touch with its userbase. But in reality, the only thing perpetuating the bad press (beyond the occasional bad quote from representatives that don't really need to talk) is the bad press itself.

In reality, the PlayStation 3 is not dead nor has it been out of the gate. When the Xbox 360 launched in 2006, its only competition was a 'last-generation' console. It sold approximately 850,000 consoles in the first three months given the 'inferior' competition. Along side the highest-selling Wii and with Microsoft's console a year ahead, the PlayStation 3 sold over 900,000 units in the same time frame.

The bad rap continues despite, though, as the userbase and media continues to perpetuate the mantra. Subjectively speaking, that's even with it's competition completely justifying cost: 100US for wi-fi, 180US for a hard drive above twenty gigs, 200US for the non-gaming-related HD-DVD drive, and whatever dart-board amount the HDMI ended up in the included price.

It took a solid year for Microsoft's machine to have any viable library (I still remember the countless forums' "I only play Geometry Wars on my 360"), yet its competition is expected have a stellar library to justify its costs from the get-go. It's reasonable enough, perhaps, but not particularly wise; the library is filling out in almost an identical timeframe.

September is shaping up to be an interesting month for both consoles. Embrace competition, as it will push developers toward better products.

Jonathan Tran @ May 16th 2007 4:28PM

Yeah I have to agree, Saturn would be a better reference.

Problem is (this is sad) most kids don't even know what a Saturn is, let alone played one or know anything about its highs and lows.

This guy is getting REALLY annoying though.

Oh yeah and uh, if PS3 = DC, why doesn't PS3 have a game that is one of the best rated of all games of all time (Soul Calibur)?

TK00 @ May 16th 2007 4:31PM

Peter Moore should get a job at Nintendo. Put him in a little green hat and he's the spitting image of link.

theDude @ May 16th 2007 4:36PM

@BPM

Don't forget that the PS2 didn't really sell well until around December of 2001, just over a year after it came out. People complained that the prices were too high then too but Sony didn't reduce prices for just over 18 months on the PS2.

BPM @ May 16th 2007 4:46PM

theDude, $600 is still twice as much as $300.

And at the time, Sony had little reason to drop the PS2's price. Dreamcast was on the way out, and GameCube and Xbox were a year away.
For a while, it was the only game in town, if you wanted next-gen. And for a while, it was difficult to find one (some claim there was an artificial supply strain, but I don't believe it without some proof).
Once the competition came, Sony dropped the price to keep their edge over the competition, forcing Microsoft and Nintendo to do the same, or risk losing more marketshare to PS2.

But, PS3 doesn't have the same luxury. 360 was out a year ahead, and has built up quite a strong library of games since. And the Wii is much cheaper, and is selling out much like the PS2 did. Whereas the PS3 hasn't sold out since launch weeks in each region.

theDude @ May 16th 2007 4:59PM

@BPM

Sony has little reason to drop the price of the PS3 now too.

The first price drop of the PS3 came FIVE months after the release of the original XBox and the GameCube. Neither of those systems was a threat at the time and Sony's price drop came from supply issues being resolved, not due to competition. (party line) Also, they didn't drop the price below the XBox or the Gamecube prices, the PS2 was always more expensive than the other two consoles last gen.

The PS1 outsold the PS2 for the first year that it was available too, something that I would expect to see with the PS3 as well.

The year lead and title line-up are meaningless in the grand scheme of things, except to those XBot fanbots out there. Your recollection of the PS2 selling out is flawed, the machines were available, like the PS3 and were readily available after January, you could walk into most stores and just pick one up. The Wii phenomenon is a completely different situation as they cannot keep the supplies up with the demand.

mccomber @ May 16th 2007 5:01PM

"sony could use someone like peter moore right now. someone that has seen the ship sink, and knows the best way to deal with it. "

By getting in a lifeboat and finding a new ship to sail on?

jsn @ May 16th 2007 5:02PM

Sony's problem is that they failed to pay attention to the market they were in. They acted like they WERE the market and that is why their console will be a failure. notice, I didn't say fail. It won't fail, but it will be a failure by the standards Sony predicted and projected for it.

SuicideNInja @ May 16th 2007 5:04PM

"But wasn't the PS2's "Emotion Engine" and DVD drive instrumental in its triumph over Moore's ex-box?"

I'm surprised nobody said anything; I'm just going to point it out. The Emotion Engine was a joke and the Xbox had a DVD drive in it (although they stupidly required an adapter to watch movies).

That saying makes it sound like the PS2 had some type of hardware advantage over the competition. That couldn't be anything further from the truth. Even the Gamecube had better specs than the PS2!

We all know that the brand and the games propelled the PS2. The hardware was crap. DVD's were already busting in at the time, so attributing it's success to the PS2 is a bit silly...Blu-ray barely has a foot in the door so it's not comparable.

Mr Khan @ May 16th 2007 5:07PM

Please, it's apples/oranges

the Dreamcast was extremely well hyped up to and (unlike the PS3) after its launch, it rather draws comparisons to the 360, its a console that really offered nothing new, but offered everything better, and did so first in its respective generation

And the Dreamcast had some good 3rd party support (Soul Calibur, Bomberman Online, etc), the Dreamcasts failure was lack of future proofing (no good DVD and no good financial planning)

the fact that Dreamcast came first was its greatest weakness. PS2 patched all of Dreamcast's weaknesses, the PS3's big problem (as opposed to the DC) is being too far ahead of its time, with the hefty price and ineffeciently powerful CPU that comes with it (shadings of the original Xbox and Saturn, only much more so)

k0llateral @ May 16th 2007 5:15PM

I'm not bashing MS in general, but Peter looks like a gay pirate, and he irritates the shit outta me.

Rootbeer @ May 16th 2007 5:22PM

The PS3 is another N64, not another Dreamcast.

Sony should have been unstoppable this generation, but they made some missteps with their new console, and will likely see their 3rd-party support (and with it, their dominance of the market) fall off sharply this generation as a result.

However, all hope for Sony is not lost; I'm sure there will be several great games for the PS3 and PS4, and the segment of the market that's really into what they're offering will keep them viable.

Maybe in a couple more generations Sony will be able to change their gameplan and make a strong comeback, just as Nintendo has.

Cedbrokos @ May 16th 2007 5:33PM

How can he make comments like that when the 360 are taking losses too. The only one making a profit right now is the Wii.

syco @ May 16th 2007 5:37PM

I don't know. I think the Dreamcast is much cooler than the PS3.

2kings @ May 16th 2007 6:43PM

dreamcast is great i still play it a lot

but the ps3's time to shine is yet to come

bootsielon @ May 16th 2007 7:37PM

PS3 is not a Saturn, not a Dreamcast, not an N64, not a 3DO, not a Neo-Geo, and not a Jaguar. Neither is it a PS1 or PS2.

Shut the fuck up with the dumb analogies. Every console was in a different situation. Peter Moore is also an idiot for making these kind of analogies.

ManekiNeko @ May 16th 2007 8:32PM

The Dreamcast sold ten million units in the one and a half years that it was actively supported by Sega. So has the Xbox 360. Why then, is one console considered a failure while the other is a success?

Peter Moore is a reprehensible bastard for invoking the memory of the console he had sabotaged in the first place. Today, I am ashamed to own an Xbox 360.

JR

Alex @ May 16th 2007 8:59PM

Peter Moore should spend less time dissing PS3's woeful sales and focus on X360's woeful quality. I know we have beat the red ring of death .....to death but as I write this I am packing my 4th 360 to send back to MS to get fixed. I hate you Moore and if it were not for Halo 3 I would have a PS3 by now