The bad economy killed the PS3

[Stalin]

The PS3 may have succeeded had not the economy backfired so bad recently. Bad economy= want for cheaper priced console= hatred of PS3. The PS3 has enough decent games to succeed, but what backfired it was its support of Blu-ray instead of HD-DVD. While the PS3 does have the gigantic hard-drive built in to the system it is really blu-ray which is stepping up the price of the system. And why did Blu-ray fail? Again, bad economy and the fact that HD-DVDs are the cheaper option. Blu-rays could be revolutionary if its full potential was achieved, but not enough people are willing to milk the Blu-ray's full potential due to the hardships of bad economy, so people are just sticking with DVDs or going with HD-DVDs. So the failure of the PS3 does have to be accounted with the failure of Blu-ray. Sony believed that its support of Blu-ray would make its console a winner, but times had changed. 2008 was way different from 2000: while 2000 was looking hopefully to a better economy and things were looking up, 2008 was the other way around. In these hard times, people tend to go with radical, bold and innovative ideas because they are angry at the bad economy and the way things are in the world right now. And thus they chose the Wii. If the bad economy hadnt struck then most people would not even consider the Wii to be worth purchasing. But again, things had changed. The Xbox 360 succeeded because of its superior online service and brilliant marketing campaign: Sony's marketing campaign simply paled to Microsoft's in 2006/2007, and it still does now. But if the economy recovered, more people got dissatisfied with the Wii and if Blu-ray picks off, along with the cheaper price of the PS3, then Sony may rapidly advance its sales in the second half of this generation's console wars. But such a thing is not likely to happen, Sony is steadily withdrawing from the videogame business, and there had been no example of such a thing happening in videogame history.

[BanjoPickles1]

I don't think that the bad economy should be the blame, or at least not all of it. Sony's arrogance did them in, really. I'll tell you, I completely BALKED at Sony for charging $600 for the system at launch. Sony should have known that, had they looked at history, no system of that price range has ever been successful. The 3DO, Neo Geo, the Marty(I think that was $850, if I recall), etc. I even remember the arrogance of a higher-up at Sony making the claim, pre-launch, that "we could sell the first five million systems, with no games, based on name recognition alone(I'm paraphrasing but that was what it boiled down to).

Had Nintendo made something comparable to the competition, as they did with the Gamecube, I believe the industry would have experienced a backwards slide. The 360, while successful, is being commercially hurt by it's reliability issues. The Wii, in catering to a different crowd, will prove to be good for the entire industry in years to come. Just look at '09, really. Third party exclusives look more promising this year than in the past three. The Wii will have games for everybody, in time. Who knows, the Wii may just be the warm-up for it's successor.

[Luke]

[QUOTE=Stalin] The PS3 has enough decent games to succeed, but what backfired it was its support of Blu-ray instead of HD-DVD.
[/QUOTE]Stalin, do you also post on here as aa? Because this post seems very similar to the "Why The Dreamcast Failed" thread. And here you're claiming that Sony should have went with HD-DVD instead of Blu-Ray when Blu-Ray clearly won the battle between the two and HD-DVD format is no longer supported!?

Lord have mercy, you need to do some research!

[m0zart1]

[QUOTE=Luke]Stalin, do you also post on here as aa? Because this post seems very similar to the "Why The Dreamcast Failed" thread. And here you're claiming that Sony should have went with HD-DVD instead of Blu-Ray when Blu-Ray clearly won the battle between the two and HD-DVD format is no longer supported!?

Lord have mercy, you need to do some research![/QUOTE]

Yes, Stalin and aa are one and the same.

[Luke]

[QUOTE=Stalin] Blu-rays could be revolutionary if its full potential was achieved, but not enough people are willing to milk the Blu-ray's full potential due to the hardships of bad economy, so people are just sticking with DVDs or going with HD-DVDs.
[/QUOTE]Toshiba dropped the development of HD-DVD players in February of last year, buddy!

[ActRaiser1]

Anyone else think stalin/aa's postings read like something from a spam email? 

Regardless of content, fallacy, or just plain craziness, Mods, anyway to just deny walls of text as they're, well, unreadable?

[N64Dude1]

The economy is not to blame,the video game industry is recession proof .

No it is SONY's fault for turning it's back on the the strategy mit used to murder poor Dreamcast humble then arrogant Nintendo and keep Microsoft from following in footsteps. If PS3 had loads of crap with maybe 5 real games like the PS1 maybe then PS3 would do well

Nintendo simply went back to the casual roots that helped it take out old,deflating Atari and keep SEGA from taking the throne and that strategy is keeping it going.It turns out having  having 200 games of crap out of 205 is better than having 20 good games.

Oh well this is music to my ears seeing SONY go down.

[Fragnox]

No.  Just no.

The economy is not the cause of this.  Blu-ray did not fail.  HD-DVD would not have been any better for PS3.

The problem was that the PS3 took too long to get good games.  And the reason that the Wii is winning is because of the way it's been marketed and the way it's come off.  If people are so worried about the economy, why would they choose the Wii and then pay $90 on ONE game?  Because the economy isn't at fault here.  You don't seem to have a logical thought-process for this conclusion, you simply seem to be looking for an excuse for Sony and thought "Hey, the economy is in bad shape...I can say that killed the PS3!"  I don't see any other way you could arrive at this conclusion.

[Roperious1]

Why are we even using the word fail? As far as I can tell Sony is still manufacturing the PS3? They aren't going out of business, AND when you compare the 360 sales to that of the ps3 both entering their third year of production, sony is actually in the lead. People fail to consider the fact that microsoft has a cheaper system that has been out for longer.

[Stalin]

I was inspired by the "PS3 is a sinking ship: sales plummet" thread, and I originally tried to post my message on that thread, but on failing to do so, created my own topic.

Because so many posters on the "PS3 is a sinking ship: sales plummet" thread criticized the Blu-ray and talked about its failure, I thought that the failure of the Blu-ray was a granted concept among gamers.

I had not expected such a backlash from all these people just because I said that the Blu-ray failed, as I thought it to be a granted thing.

Well, consider this, the Xbox 360 is using the HD-DVD format and it is doing particularly well, so I naturally thought that the PS3 should have followed Microsoft's footsteps.

The thing was, though, that noone knew at the time which format would succeed: HD-DVD or Blu-ray.

I had not considered the aspects of the two formats outside of gaming: I had no idea what was happening in the movie-industry or the multi-media industry, and I didn't think that I needed to know those facts because this forum is supposedly a videogame forum and all threads had to based on videogame-related stuff.

So I only looked at the Xbox 360 which was using HD-DVDs, looked at its considerably cheaper price compared to the PS3, and looked at its success.

Then I thought that Sony made a colossal mistake opting for the Blu-ray format because not only was that format more expensive than HD-DVD but wasn't very successful even outside the gaming community (again, my information had been derived from the "PS3 is a sinking ship: sales plummet" thread).

But then I recognized the superior quality of the Blu-ray and its revolutionary multi-media potential (inspired by a poster in the thread previously mentioned), and thought that if the economy hadn't been in the decline from 2006 onwards and people had more money to spend they might just have opted for the PS3 instead of the (graphically) inferior Wii.

And I thought that I had reached a stunning conclusion giving insight that finally looked deeper into what really caused the PS3's failure among the mainstream (my argument was superb), but had been met with all this overwhelming opposition.

And moreover, I had no trouble reading that wall of text which some just referred to as "spam email": I think that if more people just had a little more patience and even read the first sentence of my long post, instead of being baffled by its length at the first cursory glance, then they would actually be immersed by what I posted (because the actual quality of my writing was pretty good).