The PS2 was also difficult to program for but that didn't stop people from making games from it.
precisely. For developers, choosing to develop for Sony has always been hard to say "awesome!"... both the PS1 and PS2 were renowned as being the most difficult consoles to develop amongst the other consoles of their generation.
However, they have all had a great OMG FEATURE, that while on its own was never truly OMG-worthy, but it would captivate people in a way understood only by those with ADD.
Oooo shiny!
PS1 had CD-ROM games, which meant larger textures were more possible compared to the cartridges of the time. This meant that while it had less "bits" (32bit PS1, N64 soon followed), it could look better in quite a few ways. Otherwise, Sony was a brand new company, entering in a time when the names Nintendo and Sega were huge. I'm sure marketing strategies most definitely had an important impact, and in short everything came together to just mean easy success for Sony.
PS2 not only captured the immediate attention of PS1 owners, it was marketed and hyped with such vigor that NOT knowing what a PS2 was seemed unfathomable. But just as importantly, it brought a new version of "ooo shiny". DVD was starting to gain market acceptance and it was pretty easy at the time to decide DVD was going to have a dominant stance in the market, it was just taking time for affordable options. PS2 offered both a new generation of gaming, and an included DVD player. (required a remote, but that proved to be essentially a non-issue.) Also, pricing was most definitely reasonable. In fact, in adjusting for inflation, it was right on the money as a sweet spot. As usual, they took a loss on the initial console sales to gain market share.
And then there's the PS3. It had all the same +'s of the previous two consoles, including yet another "ooo shiny", BUT... due to hardware costs, Sony could not possibly have afforded to stick around in the gaming industry if the charged anywhere near the same as the PS2 launch price. In fact, it was double. That hurt initial sales, severely. And due to that, developers had less reason to tell themselves "okay, it's a bitch to develop for, but it'll be worth it". It was essentially the Sony stalwarths that decided to absolutely stick to exclusive development that truly helped Sony in the short term. The bonus features helped draw attention, especially for those who truly sought out a Blu-ray player. Hell, at launch, it was the fastest loading BD machine.
It just took time, further cost shaving techniques, and more efficient production (die shrinkage), and now we are seeing a Sony that is both being more realistic, and, gasp... Learning! They are returning to market strategies that actually work. The new entry price is bringing far more interest - and what matters most, far more sales - which is bringing the developers in line. As more developers fall in line, that will likely spur even more sales. Hit titles in development for a long time, that was insanely successful on the PS2, are just now nearing proper release on the PS3, and that will likely help push more systems.
In the end, one could see that Sony saw themselves on quite the lofty pedestal, and it really went to their heads. In turn, the way they approached the PS3 had a very negative impact on the initial market share, and they seem to be learning that to reach what they want (this is a company after all, and they want money, not necessarily to please customers. It just tends to work out that to get more money, you often need to make the customers happy), they need to rethink their approach. And they did that, a whole lot of rethinking. Seems to be working. And that excites me - the PS3 truly is capable of a lot, it's been underdeveloped due to low sales. Looking forward to more people buying this system, as that means better games for me, and better for all.
Microsoft is dual-supporting the 360 and PC, which is effective, but doesn't truly create a dual-system owner out of PC gamers. See, there are not enough Xbox titles that do not find their way to the PC for me to justify a 360, especially because I prefer PC gaming. The Playstation brand, however, continues to piss me off by maintaining a stronghold on so many IPs. They never find their way onto the PC, thus in order to enjoy them, I must partake in the PS. Hurts my wallet, but I like the end result.
And Nintendo... well, they got my money with the Wii, but they aren't getting it with games. Since packing up the Wii to move over a year ago, if not longer, I have yet to unpack it. Though I do feel a need to get back to playing Zelda, need to beat that game eventually, never got that far into it.
And oddly, both consoles I see no real need for, had been the most successful. They are great machines and have great titles, just not what I am looking for.
Facebook
Twitter