Square Enix says PS3 marketing needs to be 'straightened up'

No, Sony has to make operational changes. They are way past the point where putting a few more toilet-girl commercials on the air is going to turn this around.

Right now, consumers have a simple and reasonable question: Why should I pay $600 for a system when it has fewer games that come out later and look worse than what is on the $350 XBox 360? And the games aren't as fun as what is on the $250 Wii?

From an advertising perspective, there is only one possible answer: Well, it's also a Blu-Ray player. But trying to solve the problem this way opens up a whole new can of worms: First, you have to convince consumers that they want to spend $600 on a Blu-Ray player. And then, you will get flak from Square Enix because you are positioning the PS3 as an A/V device, not a games player.

So no, the problem is not that they just need to 'advertise more'. They have to recognize and correct fundamental systemic issues if we are ever going to see a Playstation 4.

Once the good games start flowing, the thing will sell itself. Until then, they should run ads for all games currently available and flash the PlayStation logo at the end to give consumers the impression that these games are available for Sony systems only just like the 360 is doing over here in the states.

"Once the good games start flowing, the thing will sell itself."

Tell that to the Gamecube and Xbox.

I'm adding 'and Dreamcast' to Samfish's list

Unfortuantly the availbility of good games does not absolutely equal systems selling.

Popularity, hype, time to market, and other things have historicly proven to be just as important system sellers as good games. For a current example look at the wii.

The same thing happened last gen. Every multiplatform game was advertised like it was only for the PS2.

A $400 price point couldn't hurt either.

Advertising costs money. If they aren't getting a return on their investment via increased sales, what's the point of advertising? People know about the PS3, and many people don't feel the value is there. Sony has to create value - via a combination of increased functionality (more games, more options) and a lower price.

Not enough people in the states own PS3's to warrant an increase in advertisements. It is just that simple. The PS3 costs too much to get a good install base. Without a good install base, you can't release a big budget blockbuster title and make your money back.

Slowly the install base will increase and Christmas will help. Sony is in a sticky situation because they need to somehow boost sales before MGS4 and FFXIII drop. Those 3rd party devs won't be thrilled about making a massively expensive exclusive game just to lose money on the deal.

I'm no expert, but I really expect the 360 to take over in the US this Fall. Perhaps down the road Sony will come roaring back. I just don't see it happening until next Christmas or later.

@ Jake

But you advertise to get people to buy things...

Advertisements net purchases, especially when you've got Microsoft putting the 360 logo at the end of every EA Sports Commercial, making it look like exclusivity that doesn't exist

@ Everyone

I hope everyone realizes that I'm not in anyway attracted to little babies...that shit is just disgusting and people like that are probably going to hell. Or at least deserve to.

@ Noshino or w/e

Sorry but saying the truth isn't bashing a system. And I must assume that you're speaking in regards to my comment in ps3fanboy about Nick's obvious jealously of the 360.

If you read all the comments you'd see that there are plenty of other people who totally agreed with and saw what a load of sh*t that statement of his was.

The truth regarding the ps3 is that its marketing strategy probably ranks somewhere in the Top 10 Worst Marketing Strategies of ALL TIME. Sorry buy the average consumer doesn't want to see random shit inside a cube shaped room blowing up. They don't want to see a baby crying and crying with tears coming down its f&cked up face while all these random noises are going on in the background.

That and the fact that most people are not stupid (as all you sony fanboys seem to think). Everyone who is interested in videogames probably knows that theres...

1) The Wii
2) The 360
3) The ps3

I'm sure most people compare all three and then make their decisions w/e they may be. Despite what certain ps3 owners believe lots of people still think the 360 or the Wii is a better system than the ps3 for various reasons. Price, value, and others included.

It doesn't help matters when sony is basically selling a machine that does EVERYTHING and yet the main thing its supposed to do it doesn't seem to be focusing on that much.

Thats all I was trying to say.

OMFG why can't Joystiq fix this stupid response system of theirs?

Sorry Alan I wasn't replying to you.

and babys that arent crying are? you sicken me sir ;)

No its seems the Japanese are too bull headed to release multiplatform and recoup some cost in the uk and the states. They dont have to release these games in Japan if they will not sell, but they will sell in other regions.

Especially of the Demonic variety

ok, HaleysComet, why do I only see you bashing the PS3/Sony in almost everyone of your posts (even on the ones you make in PS3Fanboy)...

anyway..

PS3 does need better marketing campaign..

360 not so much, altho I don't like it for VARIOUS reasons, most of the time it has been shown as a gaming device...

Wii, well, it does need a hell lot of marketing too, first its for hardcore gamers, then WiiSports becomes famous and Nintendo changes their strategy, then it became a casual gaming one...and they even come out with all this stupid peripherals...next thing we know, you ll find them at gyms...


Yes, Sony might have advertised a hell lot other than the gaming part of the PS3, but still, no one here can deny that such things aren't welcome...

"Wii, well, it does need a hell lot of marketing too, first its for hardcore gamers, then WiiSports becomes famous and Nintendo changes their strategy, then it became a casual gaming one...and they even come out with all this stupid peripherals...next thing we know, you ll find them at gyms..."

I'm not sure where you're getting this from. The Wii has been advertised, from the start, as a console that is easily accessible. Nintendo's marketing strategy has been very consistent. Further, IMO, they are the only gaming company to hit the market dead between the eyes this gen...

@ Everyone

I hope everyone realizes that I'm not in anyway attracted to little babies...that shit is just disgusting and people like that are probably going to hell. Or at least deserve to.

@ Noshino or w/e

Sorry but saying the truth isn't bashing a system. And I must assume that you're speaking in regards to my comment in ps3fanboy about Nick's obvious jealously of the 360.

If you read all the comments you'd see that there are plenty of other people who totally agreed with and saw what a load of sh*t that statement of his was.

The truth regarding the ps3 is that its marketing strategy probably ranks somewhere in the Top 10 Worst Marketing Strategies of ALL TIME. Sorry buy the average consumer doesn't want to see random shit inside a cube shaped room blowing up. They don't want to see a baby crying and crying with tears coming down its f&cked up face while all these random noises are going on in the background.

That and the fact that most people are not stupid (as all you sony fanboys seem to think). Everyone who is interested in videogames probably knows that theres...

1) The Wii
2) The 360
3) The ps3

I'm sure most people compare all three and then make their decisions w/e they may be. Despite what certain ps3 owners believe lots of people still think the 360 or the Wii is a better system than the ps3 for various reasons. Price, value, and others included.

It doesn't help matters when sony is basically selling a machine that does EVERYTHING and yet the main thing its supposed to do it doesn't seem to be focusing on that much.

Thats all I was trying to say.

Babies are hot.

One other reason nobody ever mentions, maybe because it's not a "fair" reason is the fact that the ps3 can't, for what i know, be hacked and made to play "back up"/piracy games until we all get ahold of some kind of blue ray disc writer. Yeah, it's illegal, i know, but either you like it or not, LOTS of people, at least here in Spain, buy a console only if they know they can play games for free, that's why the PS2, the DS and the PSP are selling so well here. I'm not saying that companies do or have to build their strategies based on that, or not, but it's defenitely something that affects console sales to a large number of potential buyers, mostly non-hardcore gamers. People are cheap, you know.

So, in the end, i think the ps3's fate will be in some way defined by the blue ray's success, and that's not a good thing because right now the thing's really split up between bd and hd-dvd and there's a lot of uncertainty in the market, something the xbox360 people don't care about (cause really, having games on multiple dvds isn't that big of a deal IMO).

So, basically, what i'm trying to say is that sony is pretty screwed and Square Enix and other game producers are going to jump out from it like it's a sinking ship on fire.

A non-CGI version could easily be done

in-engine graphics easily look good enough to make some beautiful movies

it would just require a lot of resource reworking

You wish.

... on 10 DVD9s and HDD required.

"on 10 DVD9s and HDD required"

If that's what it will take for SqEnix to make money, they'll do it. If the consumers don't mind changing disks they'll won't mind making a game that has to fit on a few. At the end of the day the only thing that really matters is 'did we make money'.

Lol I CANNOT WAIT for this announcement...

And yeah who CARES if it requires multiple discs?

Only sony fanboys and trolls.

Lets face it...you're scared that you're going to lose the biggest title on your system and with good reason too...If I were in your position too I'd probably be nervous as well.

I mean you all jumped on the "Bioshock on the ps3!" rumor not too long ago and were made to look like complete idiots over a piece of CODE.

Yet you chide, whine, b*tch, and moan like babies whenever the FFXIII or MGS4 on 360 rumor is revisited. Even though those are actually more credible when compared the pathetic "source" that you got your "Bioshock on the ps3!" rumore from.

And LOL at the petition to get Bioshock on the ps3...as if that will work. Lets see the Devil May Cry 4 is going to be on the 360 and despite the petitions to stop that nothing has been done by Capcom...

Without cutscenes it could easily fit on a DVD-9

Too bad cutscenes are half the experience with Final Fantasy :P

i'm sorry, what? you're bashing the 360 based on a feature that's prevalent on the PS3 and uncommon/rare on the 360 (requiring hard drive space). And even if Xbox games needed hard drive space, the 120GB Xbox is still cheaper than the cheapest PS3 you can buy.


10 DVD9 discs are equal to 90 GB. That's much larger than any Blu-Ray disc. Where's your logic?

"... on 10 DVD9s"

Only if they leave the audio and textures uncompressed, put ALL the language tracks on every disc pressed, and add about 80 gigs of junk data.

Have you heard about the Oblivion Game of The Year Edition? Amazing what smart compression and data packaging can accomplish.

"FFXIII on the 360 CONFIRMED"

If they want to make money, they'll put in the Wii or DS instead...

*It

It seems to me that Sony itself had gambled too much on PS, so that cannot come up with proper marketing for it.

As I see it, they should advertise it feature-wise. Say in conjunction with their TVs. What you can do with HDTV and PS3. I would buy such ad. (For example I have HD TV so I'm interested in anything I can connect to it.)

All Sony PS3 ads I have seen on YouTube (i do not watch tv) were ... creepy. If you sell device with bunch of functions - use ads to introduce the functions to general public. IMO.

You can't really market it as both, because the market for a multi-media hub is different than the market for a game machine.

People who want a game machine (who aren't in the know, like us folks) will go to the machine that proclaims loudly "I am a game machine, I play games", which is one reason why wii is doing so well, and a lesser extent the 360.

People who want a multi-media device are looking for something that can scale their various sources to their TV, have great connectivity with their media server (if they have one), and play the widest variety of formats. This group will also be willing to spend more money for a better perceived value.

If you try to market the PS3 as both, you alienate both groups. The media centric will just say "If I'm going to spend 600 dollars on something, I might as well spend more and get this real multimedia device over here", where as gamers are going to say "I'm not spending 600 dollars for a game machine! I'm going to get a 360 or a Wii!"

This is the biggest problem with these all in one devices. They spread themselves too thin and end up alienating all their customers. As a multi-media/blu ray player, the PS3 is average. Its not the best thing, but its not the worst either. But as a game machine, its currently not the best, and its overpriced if you're going to use it just for gaming. It ends up having no target market.

The only way they could market it as both is if they could somehow tie the integral parts of gaming to the integral parts of a multi-media device. Unfortunately, gaming and movie watching are competing mediums, competing for your time. You can't do both at the same time.

I think the problem with marketing it as a multimedia center also is that MMCs just are simply NOT ready for prime time yet.
The infrastructure isn't there to support them, for one. There's also no efficient way to browse through large lists of files or organize effectively with just a remote.

Things like AppleTV are a step in the right direction, but even that's gotten a fairly tepid response from consumers.

Multimedia centers are quite frankly just confusing as Hell, even if you're a techie who knows what they're doing...furthermore for the average consumer.

I personally would never buy a media center. Its a neat idea but all of my components already do all the jobs I need on their own. Sony need to market the PS3 as a game machine that just happens to have the capabilities to do all these other things beacuse of it p0war.

I bought the PS3 for playing games on, I have Linux installed on it and I also use its Mediacenter functions but that in no way influenced my desicion to get one.

So there you have it, I think Sony should market it as a pure games machine that just happens to be able to do other bonus things. Unless you've got hype behind you like the Wii selling a game machine to a non-gamer audience on other features is never going to work with a large enough section of the population.

When COST>REVENUE...you have a bottom line issue. Low instal base=lower revenues. This is what Square is complaining about. The sooner Sony turns things around, the happier Square will be about releasing big budget titles on their console.

"Bottom line" is financial term referring to budget items found in bottom. Budget is normally sorted by price descending.

Normally applied to big companies with many business and few core businesses. Core businesses often run into heavy competition with other similar companies so they are not much profitable. The items on bottom of budget - some special deals/one time profit - often help the companies to stay afloat.

"Hurting bottom line" is expression to describe situation when huge company (which makes little profit from core business) is getting all the little deals ("bottom line") taken away by smaller competing businesses.

PS3 for Sony is core business. Game development for Square Enix is core business. Not "bottom line."

I call BS on your defintion of bottom line, nice try though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bottom_line

Ok. Internally, for most companies, the term bottom line does not = how the journalists of the world use the term. High level, you know exactly what he's trying to say...

"I call BS on your defintion of bottom line, nice try though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bottom_line"

It's just another definition of bottom-line. He can apply the term whereever the hells he wants. Again, he knows damn well what the journalist was trying to say. Most people, INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF THE CORPORATE WORLD, define bottom-line as net revenue OR profit-before-taxes.

"It's just another definition of bottom-line. He can apply the term whereever the hells he wants."

So he's free to make up any definition of a word that he wants to? Language doesn't work if we all have different definitions for words.

When shes wearing shorts my girlfriend has a great bottom line.

No, he cannot define "bottom line" however he wants. Otherwise, what good is a language?

Relax ppl.

I'm not businessman. First.

Second. Definition I gave is the definition I deducted from talks with our CFO. Not that he would educate me what bottom line is while we are chatting at coffee machine.

But still it fits: for many companies - especially in IT industry - net income is made of bunch of little deals. So I had the false impression.

I'm a CFO and my dad invented the bottom line so I'm really getting a kick out of these comments.