Stringer: PS3 is 'out of the woods'

by Ludwig Kietzmann { Jan 28th 2008 at 8:02AM }

If a PS3 falls in a forest and no one is around to play it, does it still make a sound? It's a vexing philosophical conundrum to be sure, but thankfully one that's easily resolved simply by paying attention to Sir Howard Stringer. Speaking to Reuters, the Sony CEO provided assurances that PlayStation 3 sales are improving, thus surrounding the system with players and removing it entirely from the metaphorical thicket. It's also a very quiet system, you know.

"PS3 has now gone past Xbox on the Christmas market," said Stringer. "It's moving into its own as it gets into higher bandwidth ... PS3 is out of the woods and beginning to hold its own." While the black (and possibly white) monolith still lags far behind competitors in the United States, there is a steadily tightening grip on the own in both Japan and -- according to SCEE chief David Reeves -- the European region.

[Via Eurogamer]

Tags: Howard-Stringer, HowardStringer, Sales, Sony, Stringer

Related From Joystiq

How to play Minis on your PS3: a Halfbrick tutorial
12 days ago
Sony still loses about $40 on every PS3 Slim sold
19 days ago
Sony thanks 440,000 customers for giving them money during Black Friday week
30 days ago

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

Chameleon @ Jan 28th 2008 8:11AM

who the hell would leave their PS3 in the woods ....

maverick_saturn_626 @ Jan 28th 2008 8:13AM

The rabbits from Sony's Bravia advert :) They ran into the woods to play with it, but left it there for the deers and the birds to play with.

NATO_Duke @ Jan 28th 2008 11:19AM

Oh, yeah, that would be me. My mistake. It was sitting there so quiet I thought it might want to hang out with some logs.

Korova @ Jan 28th 2008 8:11AM

That post was full of win. The Sir is probably right, too.

maylon @ Jan 28th 2008 10:15AM

No, Sir is not right, and wishing it so won't make it happen.

maverick_saturn_626 @ Jan 28th 2008 8:12AM

And its about time too, I must admit though, not long ago, half the games were missing, most delayed, others gone multiplat and the ones actually available weren't exactly EXCITING. Need I mention Genji?

But now things seem to be shaping up, good news, keep it up PS3.

Sony, do not forget flaming PSP, I need PSP games to sustain my interst ¬_¬

FOXHOUND @ Jan 28th 2008 8:20AM

I like the PSP... but damn if it isn't taking forever to get the GPS, camera, and Keyboard(if ever)over here in the 'States.

baby sea tuna @ Jan 28th 2008 8:21AM

Great...now where are our fuggin games?! I already beat the 3 I had any interest in in less than a month.

Vegeta (aka Ska Oreo) @ Jan 28th 2008 11:07AM

@Evan

Umm what? What do you honestly think rpg fans outnumber people who like fps? Like they'll determine the tide of teh console wars? HAH!!! Please let's look at facts, games in the fps genre have been selling more than any other genre on consoles(with the exception of the Wii of course). Even on the ps3, games like Resistance and even ports of Cod4 have done much better than adventure or rpg games on the ps3. there's a reason why Micrsoft and Sony keep on putting out fps games on their consoles, and that's because they sell very well.

Zsavior @ Jan 28th 2008 4:03PM

@ Vegeta

I really think you are over stepping the FPS market. Maybe in America FPS dominate the market but nowhere else. Which means in many different markets they aren't dominating at all, a good RPG though will be popular in Japan, Europe, Other and America. So I also believe there is a much bigger RPG market than FPS, if we are counting the world and just not America.

The problem is really there has been no great RPGs to come out as of yet, and no big names. FF XIII will be the turning point for that genre to get all the people hyped up again to just pick the rest of them up.

name123 @ Jan 28th 2008 8:23AM

The Xbox 360 isn't doing as well as people think.

Xbox 360 shipments:
2006: 8.8M
2007: 7.4M

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360
http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=NLNAMVXT3XPACQSNDLOSKH0CJUNN2JVN?articleID=205918713&subSection=News

This year will be even harder for Microsoft, but in 2009 it's pretty much over for the 360.

baby sea tuna @ Jan 28th 2008 8:35AM

2008-2009 are still _very much_ up in the air as far as the PS3 and 360 are concerned (and possibly the Wii, if people start getting tired of not having any games). It's all really going to come down to 1) Exclusives 2) Price and 3) how well implemented Home/PSN integration is. With so many multiplat titles coming out, Sony needs a legitimate reason for multiple console owners to play the games on _their_ system. Right now, they just don't have that.

SUPER DESU @ Jan 28th 2008 8:44AM

I wouldn't say it would be over, but things would defiantly begin to slow down.

Evan @ Jan 28th 2008 9:16AM

How many hard-core gamers wait more than two years to buy their console of choice? 360 sales are in decline because most gamers who want a 360 already own one. While Microsoft has been bending over backwards to attract hard-core shooter-fans, they've ignored almost everyone else. The 360 may have won the battle, but they've lost the war!

konajinx @ Jan 28th 2008 9:46AM

Super Desu,

I always wondered how things "defiantly" slowed down. Do get back to me on that.

Oh, and the 360 isn't going anywhere. Silly, delusional PS3 bots! Of course, when you've been starving on crumbs this whole time, that's how I would expect one to act.

hey alex @ Jan 28th 2008 10:15AM

Microsoft kept the price high when they should have lowered it greater. They're too close to the pricing of the PS3, while they're far from the Wii.

Now I can understand why they did this. They were concerned about making a profit and not lowering the price too soon, but they're should have been a $100 discount last year instead of a $50 discount. That was a mistake.

So this year, there's going to have to be a price cut.

Microsoft has let Nintendo run all over them, and Sony catch up. With a nice price cut, they should be able to move some more units and break away from Sony.

The only place the 360 will not do well is in Japan, which by the way, should have had a substantial discount ALL ALONG. I say subsidize the console greatly in Japan to build marketshare. It also needs a redesign for Japan. Make the unit smaller and offer different colors.

The other problem, long term, is that some software is too expensive for what they're offering. Not all titles should be $60. They are some so-so games that should have cost much much less.

Jcarpio @ Jan 28th 2008 8:24AM

"PS3 has now gone past Xbox on the Christmas market,"

Does he mean in regions that aren't in North America?

It's not that difficult to beat xbox in Japan. However, Europe, I can see that.

Cyro @ Jan 28th 2008 8:26AM

This generation might be quite different after all. Americans might stick to their own (360) and the Japanese to their own (PS3). Now the real battle might be Europe.

I don't know what he is talking about but last time I heard the 360 was selling like crazy in the UK. So in which European countries is the PS3 dominating?

maverick_saturn_626 @ Jan 28th 2008 8:40AM

Only because it had a year start, PS3 since being released is catching up, and fast, its selling faster then 360 did in the same time span. This is why Tretton made that comment about it catching up to and surpassing the 360 this year.

We Europeans are simple people, were aren't into all that FPS stuff or JRPG stuff, we just play whatever is good, especially if it has the words 'fifa' or 'pro evolution' on it, or any other football type game (soccer for you).

Soccer sells over here, which ever of the two has the most footy will succeed, hands down, thats excluding Wii which sells everywhere, regardless of what type of games it has.

Whats worrying me about Wii is its timespan, a lot of people bought the thing this Xmas, and half of them are bored with it already. Why did they buy? Because the news, thier friends and the hype told them to, just the same way Kareokee machines were sold out here too. Now you only see them at your local pub. People don't use them anymore, we have one, and its only been used twice, we have a Wii, its been used every time the cousins are over, but other then that, never, untill we gat smash bros of course ^^

Evan @ Jan 28th 2008 8:55AM

If the Japanese embrace the PS3, that's the system I want to own. I personally prefer Japanese-style games over American games, and the 360 isn't exactly stellar in the Japanese games department.

Poisoned Al @ Jan 28th 2008 8:58AM

Funny, I'm English and I play loads of FPS games and I don't know anyone with a PS3. Loads of Wiis and 360's tho.

Unless you somehow confused the whole of Europe with "just you," which explains the "simple" comment.

Evan @ Jan 28th 2008 9:22AM

@maverick
I wouldn't worry about the Wii's lifespan. The hopelessly out of date PS2 still sells millions in the U.S. to parents looking for a cheap toy give to their kids. The Wii appeals to that demographic most, and they'll be buying the Wii years from now, long after the hard-core gamers have moved on to the PS4 and Xbox 720.

mattclarkie @ Jan 28th 2008 8:27AM

I was in a shop on Saturday (UK). I was picking up a copy of Nero 8 (I always pay for my software), and the person in front was buying a 40Gig PS3 with HDMI and some other stuff I presume games.

I have never seen anyone but myself buying a PS3 so maybe the sales are rocketing.

Ally @ Jan 28th 2008 8:35AM

id hardly call 2 people "rocketing"

just sayin' :/

maverick_saturn_626 @ Jan 28th 2008 8:43AM

Lol, maybe you didn't look at little Tommy behind you screaming and kicking for his, lmao

hvnlysoldr @ Jan 28th 2008 8:48AM

I'm tired of people thinking "If a tree falls in the woods/forest and no one is around, does it make a sound?" is a paradox. Obviously being in a forest means a fallen tree is making an impact on the forest. If there were nothing else around the tree it wouldn't be a forest would it? Animals and fungi have to decompose the tree and return it to the soil. Any animals like birds that lived in the tree would have to leave it and make a new home. The area left behind the tree makes room for a new tree with some of the renewed nutrients from the fallen tree.

I mean just because a person isn't around to hear the tree falling doesn't mean it has no effect whatsoever. And if nothing is around the tree it wouldn't be in a forest anymore.

maylon @ Jan 28th 2008 10:31AM

And the paradox states "noone around", not "nothing around". I cant believe these morons gave you a plus for your silly little diatribe.

hvnlysoldr @ Jan 28th 2008 12:12PM

Those considering it a paradox do perceive it as nothing around. Otherwise they'd realize the forest is hearing it.

Korova @ Jan 28th 2008 1:25PM

Thanks, dude. You did it. Now all the philosophers can retire and we can burn the libraries. You have given the world the light of wisdom.

Really appreciate this one.

is @ Jan 28th 2008 2:05PM

Wow - ive never seen the simplistic interpretation of the problem stated with such confidence. You, sir, are one of the most qualified layman to ever comment.

Ill simplify the 'paradox' (its not a paradox, but a thought experiment, but never mind). Sound is sensory data. Sure its caused by the movement of particles in the air, and this would happen whether someone is around or not. But you cant identify particle movements with sound, sound only truly exists when it is heard by a being that can hear.

Try thinking it this way: if an untouched cake is sat in the woods and noone is around to eat it, does it taste good?

ill trooper @ Jan 28th 2008 2:18PM

If no one reads this post,

hvnlysoldr @ Jan 28th 2008 2:38PM

You're all missing the simplest detail. IN THE WOODS! Not a vaccuum out in the middle of nowhere. In the woods. There's no HUMAN BEING around. BUT the woods would still feel the tree. Or the cake. Just because a thinker like yourself isn't around doesn't mean the universe doesn't exist if you're not around.

is @ Jan 28th 2008 4:08PM

yes but its the s e n s o r y d a t a. The problem is not whether the tree or the cake is there but whether the *sound* or *taste* is there. the whole point is that those things DO require a being that can interpret sensory data. Are you making the argument that the forest itself can hear?

hvnlysoldr @ Jan 28th 2008 4:55PM

I don't like that people are acting like a forest is not alive at all. That there aren't animals either. That even though there isn't human sensory function going on that the ecosystem IS affected by a fallen tree. Get over the limited idea that if you're not around, the universe isn't moving. That just because we're the collective of the earth means plants and animals don't have a connection to the surroundings.

A tree falls. Any animals in that tree have to leave. The tree decomposes and leaves nutrients to the soil. With an opening in the forest cover a little baby tree can collect enough sun to grow and take the place of the fallen tree. With a new tree animals can move in. A fallen tree affects its surroundings. That creates new data s e n s o r y input to the forest.

The exercise literally misses the forest for the trees. No quite literally. It shouldn't be an exercise on human sensory as it should be on universal relationships. What happens when one tree falls in a forest? Does it make a sound indeed.

is @ Jan 28th 2008 5:39PM

If ANIMALS are around, animals that have EARS and can HEAR then there is no question of sound.

There is also no question of whether or not there is decomposition, nutrients or if a in its place a new twee dat da new happi lil animawas ca wiv in wiw gwo.

But none of that is sensory data. A new tree growing is not a sound.

The point fo the problem is to isolate something, in this case a sound, that can only be recieved when theire is a an applicable agent, in this case a hearer. Youve extropolated that concept to include bodies of earth and minerals in the soil. You dont get it.

This is the problem in simple terms: if X (something which requires Y to exist) is in location Z (A place where there are no Y) and (just to be clear) there really are no Y, can X exist?

You're argument is that in this example as X does not require Y to exist, which is the contention people usually make, they feel that sound can exist without a hearer. Which is why i use the taste example, because most people understand that taste cannot exist unless it is tasted.

You have not *solved* the problem, the problem does not require solution. Youve just completely failed to understand it. Then attacked it on a gaming forum of all places.

Good show old bean.

Mike918 @ Jan 28th 2008 10:11PM

Snake! what did you did you created a time PARADOX!!!....what?

hvnlysoldr @ Jan 28th 2008 11:40PM

So it boils down to that something doesn't exist. What? Screw that I give up. It's Schroedinger's Cat. Both alive and dead. There is and isn't a sound. They exist and don't. There's no obverser at all since something doesn't exist to actually reciprocate with something that might or might not exist. And yes I know it wasn't a problem because it would require total isolation which is impossible. It just gets my goat with the stated "If a tree falls in the woods and no one is around, does it make a sound?"

I have no idea when I'll get PS3 but isn't right now when SSBB is coming out before my birthday.

Korova @ Jan 29th 2008 12:18AM

You make some good points, hvnlysoldr. I think you do understand the point of the phrase. Your solution seems to be some sort of universal mind response (everything is conscious or even self-conscious). It only begs the question though because the point is to explore whether sound (or anything sensed) is dependent on consciousness or is it just a mind-independent material phenomenon. The forest phrase is not a perfect thought guide - as you point out its very anthropomorphic - but if you are charitable, you can see that the question is who make the sound: the tree or the mind that hears it.

hvnlysoldr @ Jan 29th 2008 12:30AM

I was sure I would stop posting in this thread but Korova, dang I had thought of the same thing before. For me I always taint the experiment since I think and expect a sound.

To further elaborate my recent comment here was seconds before viewing Super Smash Brothers Brawl opening intro which confirmed Ness and Marth returning. I'm so SO psyched for my St. Patty's Day birthday even more now.

ThornedVenom @ Jan 29th 2008 4:25AM

This is the last kind of debate I'd ever expect on Joystiq, not that it isn't valid or anything.

is @ Jan 29th 2008 4:38AM

No,its not usual jostiqery. Certainaly more interesting than fanboy wars tho.

PS3 sucks.

jsn @ Jan 28th 2008 8:52AM

maybe if every AAA title they had in the works wasn't delayed until late 2008. Everyone, especially you Sony zealots, would be well advised to take what he says with the usual grain of salt.

Poisoned Al @ Jan 28th 2008 9:02AM

Well I live in the UK and I don't know anyone with a PS3. Behind the counter of the local Blockbuster and Woolworths is stuffed with Wii and 360 bits, with a few PS3s in the corner looking rather forlorn. If the PS3 is selling, it's not doing it here yet.