Sony Responds To Crashing Sales with Management Shift

ps3Sony Computer Entertainment Europe has made some leadership changes in response to their in-ability to get things going in the sales department of the PlayStation 3. Gamer’s continue to refuse to believe the PlayStation 3 is in a bad situation by explaining how badly Microsoft’s Xbox 360 is doing in Japan and Europe compared to the Sony console. And, of course, the Wii isn’t competition to Sony.

“Andrew House, Chief Marketing Officer and Group Executive of Sony Corporation, has been named President, Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and Co-Chief Operating Officer (Co-COO) of Sony Computer Entertainment Europe (SCEE) as of May 1, 2009.” (smarthouse.au)

We’ve been told this is the year of the PS3, this is when they bring it all together. Nintendo’s losing some of their grip on the industry with slower sales, even in Japan. The economy isn’t playing nice with any of the consoles and sales continue to drop, reportedly 17% in March compared to last years numbers.

Australia isn’t proving to be any help to Sony, “for example in Australia a consumer can now buy the Xbox 360 for $299 and a separate Blu ray player and DVD upscale player for $199. Combined this is $200 under the recommended retail price for a Sony PS3.”

Here in the United States, we’ve bought more Wii balance boards than PlayStation 3 consoles. One can argue that the Wii is a novelty system but that really casts a dark shadow on the PlayStation 3. The PS3 is being beat out by a novelty item? Can the new SCEE management change the direction of Sony?

0 thoughts on “Sony Responds To Crashing Sales with Management Shift”

  1. Sony’s in big trouble. There’ve been a few articles talking about the PlayStation 3’s death spiral, and you have to wonder if changing from Reeves to House is going to do anything.

    I mean, what can they do – aside from the obvious move of cutting the price, and doing that is financially destructive for Sony.

    As a PS – if you see the graph they include – the PS3 is about $130-140 more expensive in Australia than it is in the US if you convert the currency. It’s brutal.

  2. Sony’s in big trouble. There’ve been a few articles talking about the PlayStation 3’s death spiral, and you have to wonder if changing from Reeves to House is going to do anything.

    I mean, what can they do – aside from the obvious move of cutting the price, and doing that is financially destructive for Sony.

    As a PS – if you see the graph they include – the PS3 is about $130-140 more expensive in Australia than it is in the US if you convert the currency. It’s brutal.

  3. Maybe its high time that Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft bring their prices lower… they jacked their prices so high as if their game consoles are necessity. the world economy is going down and they can help a bit if they bring their prices lower.

  4. Maybe its high time that Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft bring their prices lower… they jacked their prices so high as if their game consoles are necessity. the world economy is going down and they can help a bit if they bring their prices lower.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Post

Will Wright is Right: E3 is DeadWill Wright is Right: E3 is Dead

Imagine that, a well known game developer finally says what everyone has been thinking, “it’s the walking dead.” Will Wright, famous for TheSims, SimCity and upcoming Spore believes E3 is in a state now where we’ll never see the old E3 and we’ll never accept the slimmed down anorexic thing we’re getting now.

End result is simple: it’s time to move on and create a new event and begin our arms race anew. Or, bring a version of the Game Convention over here from Europe and allow a new convention group to see what they can do with it, booth babes and all.

It’s hard to argue with the sheer amount of money that was spent to “compete” at a PR level with each major publisher and console maker. However, allowing E3 to die and starting a brand new design means people will be able to think ahead of “what’s to come” before re-igniting the exact same brand under a new name. We need something as exciting and invogorating without the massive hommoraging of cash.

(Thanks, GameStooge)

Exclusive Artist Deals In Rhythm Games Not Good?Exclusive Artist Deals In Rhythm Games Not Good?

Rhythm games are the new FPS for a lot of gamers, a broader audience of gamers, and the market is thriving and demanding new titles. Harmonix and Activision are at the front of the battle with Konami following a bit behind but still contending (we think) very soon.

Each company plans to up each other with cooler instruments, tighter controls and new in-game options and multi-player fancies. It’s a business and each competitor tries to gain a lead by whatever means needed to win… or do they?

Harmonix stops short when it comes to purchasing exclusive rights to music artists, for now at least. Harmonix’s Eric Brosious went on blogger record saying, “We prefer not to sign exclusive deals with artists because while it seems like the competitive “business” thing to do, in the long run, it’s really not good for anyone. We think we should be working to get more music out to more people.” (kotaku)

As Marky Mark once said, we need “Music for the people” not for in-game exclusives making us choose between Guitar Hero and Rock Band titles. We’ve seen what EA has done to the football franchise by taking control of the NFL roster, money talks and the best game doesn’t always win.

If Activision decides to buy up a ton of great exclusive content and you’re a rock band gamer, you’ll lose out in a ton of great content. For some gamers, that might mean losing out in some artists you’ve never heard before which also means the artist loses out in new fans. We’ve seen younger gamers fall in love with the sounds of Boston and The Police, bands famous way before the birth of many of the Rock Band fan base.

You can tell Harmonix is a development group with roots in music while Activision is a development group with their roots in business. While exclusive access brings you an advantage, in terms of broadening the culture of music, it does very little. Harmonix may be in the right but will that matter in the end when business deals hit the table?

p.s. sorry about the Marky Mark reference, but it had to be done. Bringing out a bit of my own childhood there…

Bethesda’s Hines: Don’t Shoehorn MultiplayerBethesda’s Hines: Don’t Shoehorn Multiplayer

Bethesda Softworks vice president of marketing Pete Hines is critzing publishers and developers who shoehorn multiplayer into their games that doing such a thing is “a waste of time” and advises, “Just drop it, don’t bother…it’ll make for a worse game.”

In an interview with Next Gen BIZ, Hines states that using online multiplayer as a tool to prevent used game trade-ins and rental simply doesn’t work, and robs developers of valuable man-hours.

Hines stated:

“(People ask us) for a game like Skyrim or Prey 2, why doesn’t it have multiplayer? Well, our question is always the opposite when we talk to a developer. If you’re doing multiplayer, why are you doing multiplayer? What are you trying to accomplish?

“If you’re doing it just to check a box or because every other publisher says you’ve got to have multiplayer, then just drop it, don’t bother, it’s a waste of time, a giant distraction and it’ll make for a worse overall game.

“We want the best game possible. If that’s a singleplayer game that’s 15 to 20 hours, then make that! Don’t waste your time on features that don’t make the game better.”

The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim and Prey 2 are two Bethesda properties that will lack multiplayer, but one of the tools to encourage games to keep both games will be downlodable content and, even more important, good communications with the game communities and nurturing the fandom for both games.