Read-only archive of the Armageddon Games Forums Archive (2000–2026) · About this archive

PS3 Releases in Europe

40 replies · 7,044 views · Started 24 March 2007

This article sums it up nicely:

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/8OGbTecqrEhZ7X/Was-PS3s-European-Debut-a-Dud.xhtml

Though Sony categorized the PlayStation 3's European launch as a success, many reports from the continent indicate slow sales. Was it the price? Was it game availability? Is PS3 simply a late bloomer that will take off when Wii and Xbox 360 start to grow old? Whatever it was, Microsoft appeared to be having plenty of fun at their competitor's expense.

The less-than-stellar sales for Sony's (NYSE: SNE) next-generation video game console PlayStation 3 (PS3) continued Thursday as the platform was made available in Europe.

According to reports from around Europe, the scene bore little resemblance to the frenzy that greeted the release of the PlayStation 2 console in 2000.

After the scheduled midnight launch, from Amsterdam, the Netherlands, to Paris, and even Australia, reports indicate only a fraction of the anticipated number of gamers showed up to purchase the PS3.

Hard Start

London was the site of the largest number of shoppers clamoring for a PS3, according to the BBC. Sony handed out free HD TVs and taxi rides to buyers there. Crowds in Germany and France, however, were distinctly underwhelming.

Several stores in France stayed open to welcome the expected midnight rush only to have that rush quickly become a trickle. One Web site claimed that nearly 95 percent of the consoles remained on store shelves following the late-night release spectacle beneath the Eiffel Tower and the FNAC store on the Champs Elys�e, where only 300 of the available 1,000 units were reportedly sold.

At the Eiffel Tower, near which Sony had moored a boat to serve as a temporary sales outlet, reports indicate that more journalists than customers showed up. The same was true in Sydney, Australia, at a release event held by Sony and Australian retailer Myer. The Sydney Morning Herald termed the launch "feeble" after counting a sparse showing of some 80 consumers. Meanwhile, in Germany, the release brought out several hundred gamers to the Sony Center launch event in Berlin.

In Amsterdam, queues consisted of mere handfuls of gamers. More than 100 people turned out to pick up the new gaming platform in Prague, Czech Republic, and, according to the BBC, that was one of the better attended events.

In Italy, some retailers apparently refused to go along with Sony's grand launch plans and began selling the consoles with little fanfare two days earlier than the scheduled Thursday release.

Sony's Stiff Upper Lip

As they did when confronted with lackluster sales in the U.S., Sony executives across Europe maintain that first-day sales met the company's expectations. News Web site France Matin quoted Sony Computer France representative Georges Fornay calling the French launch a success. He noted that some 60 percent of the 100,000 PS3s available in France had already been reserved.

"We have taken nearly 60,000 reservations compared to the 40,000 Xbox 360s and 75,000 Wiis sold at the launch of the two consoles," Fornay said. He added that the PS3 "is already a success" and that to avoid any problems with availability, Sony had shipped one million PS3s for the European market, of which more than 150,000 were available in France.

Ray Maguire, chief of Sony's UK division, held to the party line, reportedly classifying the PS3 launch to date a success with sales greater than those of the PS2 at the period of time from its launch seven years ago.

Twisting the Knife

Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) executives in Europe had fun at the expense of Sony at release events in both London and Paris, according to reports.

Outside the Virgin Megastore on London's Oxford Street, the Sony competitor handed out free beer to journalists. For gamers standing in the queue prior to midnight, the company handed out folding chairs with a Web address printed on them.

The URL, www.shkyw.org, was for a site at which Microsoft welcomes Sony to the European market.

"Xbox welcomes the PS3 to the next generation. Sony ... You're late! Let the games begin," reads the message on the site.

At the Parisian launch, Microsoft cruised the Seine in a boat sporting a signs on either side that read, "Xbox 360 loves you."

Reality Check

The problem with Sony's European launch is the high price, according to Brian O'Rourke, an analyst at In-Stat. While U.S. and Japanese consumers have paid up to US$599 for the more technologically advanced version, the price for Europeans is considerably greater. The PS3 will run consumers in the UK about Pounds 425 ($840); in France and the rest of Europe it costs 599 euros ($779).

"If the Sony Europe launch was less than successful, it's most likely a sign of two things," O'Rourke explained. "No. 1, the Sony PS3 price is too high. No. 2, there is more significant console competition in this generation than in the previous generation."

O'Rourke said Sony's PlayStation 2 was the market leader for its own generation of consoles by at least a year, which "gave them tremendous marketing advantages."

"If the PS3 launch in Europe is less than Sony expects, it may put more pressure on them to cut the PS3 price sooner," he said. "However, I think a PS3 price cut before the end of the year was already fairly likely.

Is Pricing the Issue?

However, talk of the PS3 being too expensive was a "red herring," according to Billy Pidgeon, an IDC analyst.

"Honestly, I don't think price is the issue," Pidgeon said. The pricing on game consoles has gone up rather incrementally since the '80s, and whereas inflation has occurred, games are roughly the same price. And consoles adjusted for inflation are not that expensive. Things get a little complicated in Europe because of the value-added tax [on top of the console price]."

The other component perhaps hampering sales is a lack of exclusive games for the PS3. Publishers have shifted their strategy and developed more games for the PS2, Wii and Xbox 360 in the short term and held off on developing games for the PS3 until the mid-term because the installed base will build rather slowly for the PS3, according to Pidgeon. Sony has built a console with a longer life span than both the Xbox 360 and the Wii, he added. So, when the other two consoles are reaching the end of their life cycles, the PS3 will just be hitting its stride.

"The PS3 won't require a successor as quickly as the Xbox 360 and Wii will. When there are successors for those two coming out, the PS3 will still be going strong," Pidgeon noted.

"I don't really expect to see major shifts in Sony pickup until the final quarter of '07 and into '08, when we'll start to see Sony gaining some momentum," he concluded.

The problem is that people are going to like the PS3 once they own one, but when you're just looking to buy, well, the 360 is cheaper, and the Wii is (in addition to being cheaper) more interesting.

I don't think people don't like the PS3, I just think they like the 360 and Wii better.

(And then there are those like me that just don't like it)

I agree with what Amaster said. Except I'm the kinda person who wants one but just doesn't want to cough up $600 for one.

1) It's too expensive.
2) There's hardly anything out for it.
3) The alternatives are far more attractive.
4) Software Emulation.
5) Blue-Ray won't take off for a good while.
6) There is NO Reason 6.
7) NO POOFTERS.
8) Sony have lost people's trust.
9) Lack of exclusive titles.

When XBox 360 and Wii reach the end of their lives, people are going to be like "Sony, Whats the deal? Microsoft and Nintendo both have a next gen console, but all you have is the PS3?! PS3 is yesterdays news, I want a <Insert Microsoft or Nintendo sytem here.>

The PS3 isn't worth the $600 price tag and the only game that has caught my attention is motor storm. It looks good but I'm not about to spend that kind of money for a single game when the 360 is cheaper and has a wider selection of games available.

Sony's future I think is highly dependant on how fast they can get the price of the PS3 down. For along time now the #1 reason people aren't interested is because of the price. The second issue is the poor game selection probably.

I'm pretty happy that PS3 had a crappy PAL region launch. Sony is getting what they deserve.

One thing I keep noticing is that the analysts keep assuming that the PS3 is technically superior to the 360, and so at some point down the line it will look really good in comparison. But I'm not really sure that's the case. As I've noted before, the PS3 effectively has less ram than the 360, which begs the question of how all this extra power is supposedly has can be used?

Graphics from god? What? Many people have noted they believe the graphics power of the PS3 is lacking compared to the 360. The supposed strength of the PS3 they claim will make it so much better than the 360 is the Cell processor (fat chance) and Blu-ray disc storage space.

Even if the PS3 performs more instructions per second than the Xbox 360 (cpu wise) what good is that doing? What's the big killer strength there? I mean theorectically the Sega Saturn's got alot more processing power than the Playstation. Funny thing though, Playstation did much better. You need a fair amount of processing power but there's a point where it's not doing you any real benifit cause of bottlenecks elsewhere. Sure in theory the PS3 after time could have some games that really take advantage of the system's offerings. And you know what those games will look like? The same fucking thing you've already seen, the same things you'll see on the 360.

Really, in my personal opinion from observations the PS3 is NOT the super computer that Sony keeps saying it is. Sure game quality can improve and it can offer good gaming. But it's not beyond the 360 or anything. At the very least both systems are on the same level. They each have their good points and bad. Neither is somehow towering over the other.

Basically the only thing I want to see is a good batch of true PS3 games. So far, the bulk of the titles have been cross-platform releases. These are likely written using generic routines that don't necessarily take advantage of one system or another (to ease the porting process) and therefore leads to a pretty consistent graphical performance across the board.

PS3, to live up to its hype, needs some kind of killer app.

AtmaWeapon wrote:Basically the only thing I want to see is a good batch of true PS3 games. So far, the bulk of the titles have been cross-platform releases. These are likely written using generic routines that don't necessarily take advantage of one system or another (to ease the porting process) and therefore leads to a pretty consistent graphical performance across the board.

PS3, to live up to its hype, needs some kind of killer app.

Honestly, this is exactly what I was talking about. Everyont thinks the PS3 has a lot more power that is just sitting there, waiting to be tapped. And yes there is more CPU power on the PS3 than the 360. But what most people notice is the graphics which are dependant not on the CPU, but the GPU. And the PS3 and 360 have very similar GPUs. And even worse for the PS3, it just doesn't have the RAM space available to load in the data needed for good graphics.

Sorry Europeans 😞
Now you have to wear shades in the game store.

Btw, I noticed a weird statement... video game console? Well maybe not... it's much less than a game console.

Ah, we in the UK always wear shades these days. Get with the times, man.

Once the PS3 gets some killer games, I suspect the consoles might start shifting some more, though that's probably not gonna happen for a while. What would really help though is a price cut, though that's just not gonna happen over here any time soon, is it Sony? F**kers.

There was/is a rumor that there is supposed to be a price cut at the end of the year. But you all know how accurate the rumors of Sony are. 😉

Pineconn wrote:There was/is a rumor that there is supposed to be a price cut at the end of the year. But you all know how accurate the rumors of Sony are. 😉

There won't be one. I'll bet you guys 10,000 monopoly dollars there won't be.

The PS3 is an ass fuck to program (from what I've read). The 360 is easy (relatively speaking) to program because the development tools are way better and it is not far removed from a windows computer.

The PS3 is not *much* more advanced from a CPU perspective than the 360, plus it has less RAM. This, combined with the difficulty in development due to it's assymetrical CPU architecture, will simply not lead to wildly better graphics, and it definitely won't lead to wildly better games.

The PS3 has officially become a console for people who have thousands of dollars to spend on videogames. Unfortunately for Sony, most people who spend thousands of dollars on video games, spend it on high end gaming PC's.

Beldaran wrote:The PS3 is an ass fuck to program (from what I've read). The 360 is easy (relatively speaking) to program because the development tools are way better and it is not far removed from a windows computer.

The PS3 is not *much* more advanced from a CPU perspective than the 360, plus it has less RAM. This, combined with the difficulty in development due to it's assymetrical CPU architecture, will simply not lead to wildly better graphics, and it definitely won't lead to wildly better games.

The PS3 has officially become a console for people who have thousands of dollars to spend on videogames. Unfortunately for Sony, most people who spend thousands of dollars on video games, spend it on high end gaming PC's.

Do me a favor and back up your wild ranting with facts/sources next time, ok?

Pineconn lolz wrote:Do me a favor and back up your wild ranting with facts/sources next time, ok?

I wasn't writing an academic paper with a bibliography, I was dashing out a quick post.

Pineconn lolz wrote:your wild ranting

It wasn't really wild ranting. I read a lot about programming, electrical engineering, and video games. I'm an electrical engineering major in university, I spent two years working as a software developer before going to college, and I've programmed a couple of NES style videogames, so I'm not unfamiliar with the technology, terminology, and literature.

I got most of my information from different interviews with John Carmack. Here is a video interview with John where he talks about the difficulties associated with asymmetrical CPUs and how the PS3 is theoretically more powerful than the 360 but not so in practice.

There are numerous other interviews with John Carmack about this subject, and especially interesting are his yearly keynote lectures given at Quakecons. However, I will spare you the incredibly long transript of the hour long speech because it's very technical in nature.

I don't see why you had to be so hostile. The PS3 is widely regarded as being more difficult to develop for than the 360, and it is widely accepted amongst programmers that Microsoft's development tools are superior. Your hostility suggest unfamiliarity with the subject, and perhaps a bias towards Sony.

Yeah, I was a bit hostile. I actually thought YOU were being bias by the way your post was worded, which is why I worded my post as such. I hate fanboyism. And no, I am not a fanboy myself. I have yet to buy a PS3 (although I currently own and enjoy a Wii and 360). And lastly, I am rather knowlagable on the subject, but because neither I (or you, i'm assuming) have direct experience with PS3 programming, I think its good to try and back up your facts/opinions. its pretty annoying when someone hops on a forum ands says something to the effect of "OH-EM-GEE PS3 PWNZ TEH WIIZ!!!oneone" (although you didnt actually do this)

Beldaran wrote:The PS3 is an ass fuck to program (from what I've read). The 360 is easy (relatively speaking) to program because the development tools are way better and it is not far removed from a windows computer.

An Ass fuck to program for is reaching a bit far man. While it certainly isn't as inviting, we are talking about people who are supposed to be professional. More difficult/tedious I'm sure. One of the guys working on Ninja Gaiden Sigma for PS3 was saying how it isn't horribly difficult to develop for once you get adjusted.

Still to get the massive potential power out of the system it's going to take time and alot of clever tricks like PS2 I imagine. Anyway, just had to say it's a bit of an overstatement on how hard it is to work with.

MottZilla wrote:it's a bit of an overstatement on how hard it is to work with.

One of two or three best graphics programmers on earth thinks it is hard to program for and that it is not well designed. He says programmers will have to "sweat blood" to get peak performance out of the PS3 and that it is twice as difficult.

Note carefully what he's saying though... it is horribly difficult to get "peak performance" out of the PS3. This means most developers won't commit the budget, time, and personell to do so. This means PS3 games will look pretty much the same as XBOX 360 games, which is what I was pointing out would be the case.

The PS3 is not dramatically more difficult to develop for if you are making normal games that look just like 360 games. (Although it is still more difficult due to worse development interfaces) However, it is insanely more complicated to make games that push the hardware, and thus not many companies are likely to do it. All cross platform games will look pretty much the same. The only way you will get better graphics on a PS3 game is if the company making it devotes an entire group of it's best programmers to deeply studying the CPU and how to wrangle more performance out of it.

So I still think my point stands, and I don't think I'm over exaggerating... especially since I'm not really making my own point, but echoing the words of a pre-eminent authority in the field.

Well, the reason I have the same name as Pineconn is a kind of weird/long story. We know each other, though.

By the way, who are these 3 programmers you are reffering to? I assume one is Carmack, and i'm sure the other two are well known. There are a couple of problems with this:

A.) These people are trying to push their own agenda. Carmack has always been favorable to MS for whatever reason.

B.) Specifically to Carmack, at least, i'm pretty sure he had no direct experience with the PS3 at the time he made those comments, and was only speaking theoretically. I could be wrong though.

Try visiting some gamedev forums, and you'll see 'nobody' developers who have had experience with the PS3. Their comments tend to be a good bit less overexaggerated.

Also, you guys seem to be equating cpu=gfx. They really are a bit more seperate than some could have you believe. Unless you're a really terrible programmer (in which case poor cpu programming could end up bottlenecking the system), the way the CPU is designed will have little effect on the final GFX.

Well, I don't know who the three best graphics programmers are. I'm just saying Carmack is pretty gauranteed to be one of them. Maybe Tim Sweeney and a couple of others, but there are likely a lot more than three really insanely good engine programmers now. I was just making a point that Carmack is really knowleageable.

A) Carmack is famous for being objective, even handed, and never pushing an agenda. He discusses technology based on what he thinks of it, and that's it.

B) True he wasn't developing for the PS3. But I'm sure he has more than a passing knowledge of its architecture.

Well, like I said... it isn't insanely more difficult to develop games for the PS3... as long as you aren't using all the features of the cell processor. However, it is my impression, both from Carmack's comments and from a few other articles I can't find at this very second, that the multi-threaded programming on the cell is a horrible bitch to get working smoothly.

I'm not entirely sure, but I think the GPU on the PS3 is a cell processor too, isn't it? I wouldn't know. Anyway, I know that CPU != GPU.