Sony President Says Xbox 360 Lacks "Longevity"

[y8c616]

Last time I checked, they've never had a console that's been on the market for more than four or five years and we've committed to a ten year life cycle, so you do the math.

That's because the Xbox was Microsoft's first console. The PS1 didn't last 10 years before the PS2 came out. It's kind of an unfair attack.

Read my mind.

Why does Sony keep talking smack? Last I checked they're the only company that's hemorrhaging money with their console.

Not true; i know that the 360 has lost microsoft somewhere in the region of $3 billion, whereas the ps3 has lost sony about $600million

 

[Jumplion]

Well for the 360 console itself, his statement is absolutly 100% true, in my case and all my friends who onw 360's as well, they have all had the red ring of death!

I think I've had the red ring of death a total of 5 times actually. Everytime I call MS a box showed up I shipped it off at no cost and got a brand new console (last time with two free games) in about a month. I have never seen any other company honor a warranty so well.

5 times? Seriously? I wouldn't stand for more than twice.

See, this is one thing that I don't get about many 360 purchases, people willing bend their asses over for a defunct system (not saying you do, just saying) that is almost guaranteed to break on you. And yet people don't care. I am a customer, I expect my product to last for a very long time, I shouldn't have to send it in for repairs five times.

If I ever do get a 360, I would never tolerate this manufacturing. If it broke down once in the warranty, fine, I'll send it in for repairs. Second time? It's stretching it. Third times the charm, you're out of here, you lost a customer. I would never tolerate this kind of lazy and defunct manufacturing.

I'm just saying, I'm sorry if I come off harsh or something, but no other product that I can think of is ever accepted that it's bound to break one day. Say what you want about the customer service of Sony/Nintendo, at least they build consoles to last (regardless of the horror stories you see, I'm not saying the consoles are completely idiot-proof).

 

[Logan Westbrook]

EDIT: I do wonder whether he was speaking through a translator though...

You say that our comments should have total context, but when Kaz is talking about his own company, he must speak in isolation, ignoring the relevant context of how they might be officially responding to their current position in the market?

And, the source of the question may be friendly, but given the numbers on the ground, it's actually pretty bold to even broach the subject. You'd rather they kept their customers in the dark to any information about their stance and attitude to the larger market? They should just lay down and let all the stories about xmas sales cement some false narrative about inevitability?

I don't agree with the underlying premise I intuit from your arguments. If I'm wrong, lets do keep discussing it.

You've completely misunderstood what I've said. In the very same post that you've quoted, I explained my position on this particular comment from Mr Hirai.

When I talk about context, I mean other recent comments from Sony, such as this chart [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.82948]. Their entire marketing strategy at the moment seems to be focused on the shortcomings of their competitors, rather than the strengths of their own products. It's a subtle difference admittedly, but it's there.

Because people seem to willfully ignore the systems strengths, as the depressing sales of a game that consistently came out as Game of the year show. People then say they want something cheap. Sony then responds by showing the figures - their system is cheaper overall than the 360.

I'm not going to dispute the numbers with you, because they're correct, as long as you buy all the add-ons, but the way that Sony chose to present that information made them seem petty, which has pretty much been my whole point all along.

With regard to LBP, which I assume is the game you were referring to, I think that it will be a slow burner. It might not sell a gajillion copies in a month like Gears of War, but it'll sell. I think that Sony may have misread the market a little though. Gears of War 2 sold something like 3 million copies in it's first few months, and Sony for some reason assumed that their market had different tastes. Just wait until God of War 3 comes out, it will sell by the truckload.

 

[Trivun]

Of course he's saying that, he's the bleeding boss of Sony! He's hardly going to make a press release saying that the Xbox 360 is better (which it is in my opinion, and I've played both, although everyone is welcome to disagree if they so wish) and that the PS3 is a load of crap. If he did he'd be out of a job, but apart from the RRoD there isn't any evidence to support his claims. He should come back with proof and then I'll listen. I actually have had an Xbox 360 for almost three years now and still haven't had the RRoD, although a friend has, and now I've said this I'll probably get it the day after the three year warranty runs out... :s

 

[kdragon1010]

Hey Jumplion if it would have cost me anything to send it off and get it back after the first time then yeah I never would have gotten another one. It didn't so I still have one.

 

[the_god_father_87]

Oh no not this again. If you spend as much time playing games, you will know that the console wars are ridiculous as it really comes down to what games do you like. E.g. I got my Xbox 360 because of the fact that I wanted to play Halo 3 and Splinter cell 4. Where as some one who likes Metal Gear solid 4 will buy a PS3. If you like both Metal Gear solid and Halo 3 buy both consoles.
With a little bit of research it's that easy. I short its about the Games you like not the consoles.

 

[Logan Westbrook]

EDIT: I do wonder whether he was speaking through a translator though...

You say that our comments should have total context, but when Kaz is talking about his own company, he must speak in isolation, ignoring the relevant context of how they might be officially responding to their current position in the market?

And, the source of the question may be friendly, but given the numbers on the ground, it's actually pretty bold to even broach the subject. You'd rather they kept their customers in the dark to any information about their stance and attitude to the larger market? They should just lay down and let all the stories about xmas sales cement some false narrative about inevitability?

I don't agree with the underlying premise I intuit from your arguments. If I'm wrong, lets do keep discussing it.

You've completely misunderstood what I've said. In the very same post that you've quoted, I explained my position on this particular comment from Mr Hirai.

When I talk about context, I mean other recent comments from Sony, such as this chart [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.82948]. Their entire marketing strategy at the moment seems to be focused on the shortcomings of their competitors, rather than the strengths of their own products. It's a subtle difference admittedly, but it's there.

Maybe because they are facing the fallout of a fairly slow xmas and stuff like this [http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/17-02/ff_killgoogle] from their main competitor. That the entire game industry has to be instructed in the practice of astro-turfing and FUD saddens me to no small degree. At least Kaz Hirai has the balls to stand up and be quoted bashing his competitor instead of relying on paid trolls to do it for him. In the context of fighting spin, FUD, and astroturf this marketing strategy makes perfect sense to me.

I'll assume that the article you linked to was the wrong URL, as it links to an article about Google. I also don't know what FUD means, but astroturfing is a quite a bold claim to throw around, especially as Sony has done its fair share too. [http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=0G0LlXv-nyI] ( Some more here too. [http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20051229/playstation_ads_051229] )

Can you provide any examples on Microsoft's part? None spring to mind, but I'm willing to be proved wrong.

 

[ward.]

Last time I checked, they've never had a console that's been on the market for more than four or five years and we've committed to a ten year life cycle, so you do the math.

That's because the Xbox was Microsoft's first console. The PS1 didn't last 10 years before the PS2 came out. It's kind of an unfair attack.

Read my mind.

Why does Sony keep talking smack? Last I checked they're the only company that's hemorrhaging money with their console.

They're not talking smack, they're responding to poorly thought out criticisms that are commonly leveled at them.

What's strange is people still believe nintendo and microsoft are going to be able to release something that can compete with the Ps3 without access to blu-ray.

 

[Jumplion]

Hey Jumplion if it would have cost me anything to send it off and get it back after the first time then yeah I never would have gotten another one. It didn't so I still have one.

I get that, but if people are whining about HOME not having much, and it's free, then why should having the entire god damn system breaking down on you 5 times be acceptable?

It's your console, and you do what you want with it. To be quite frank, I'd probably be a hypocrite and do the same thing you'd be doing, but this is my views on the whole fiasco.

 

[Ace of Spades]

Well, the PS3 is good for the consumer, but not good for Sony. Since I'm the consumer, I'm happy.

 

[kdragon1010]

Hey Jumplion if it would have cost me anything to send it off and get it back after the first time then yeah I never would have gotten another one. It didn't so I still have one.

But it remains that you still have huge stretches of time when you don't have the object you paid for - you've still encountered the expense, you just don't have the benefit. Its a timeshare at full price. I am aware I'm exaggerating the time length, but it remains that you are still fine with this thing failing and you being unable to do a thing with it.

ever had to take your car to a shop multiple times cause problems just popped up one right after the other?

unless you can fix it yourself there is going to be some time stretches that you won't be able to use it while its getting fixed. sure locally it wont be as long to get it back as a 360 that you have to send somewhere, but the cost is significantly higher for a vehicle too.

 

[SaintWaldo]

I'll assume that the article you linked to was the wrong URL, as it links to an article about Google. I also don't know what FUD means, but astroturfing is a quite a bold claim to throw around, especially as Sony has done its fair share too. [http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=0G0LlXv-nyI] ( Some more here too. [http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20051229/playstation_ads_051229] )

Can you provide any examples on Microsoft's part? None spring to mind, but I'm willing to be proved wrong.

No, it was the right article, as you obviously gather what my point is: MS engages in provable and documented shadow campaigns against their competitors. They are not above stealing code (see Video for Windows 1.1d and the Indeo codec), they have been caught more than once codifying and making FUD corporate policy (the Rick Jelliffe [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween_documents] spring to mind), and they happened to be the target of one of the largest anti-trust cases in US history, and they were actually convicted of such in the EU.

Your examples are failed attempts at viral marketing. They aren't even completely owned by Sony, they are the product of a hired marketing team that thought they could pull one over. It's not even the same ballpark.

So, what I'm saying is, yeah, on the subject of failed viral marketing, Sony and Microsoft share some similar bad marks. But on the overall culture of doing anything to win, including lying to your customer and the media, including stealing code from your competition when they are beating you, that's something Microsoft owns. Sony doesn't even come close to the level of plain old dirty pool that those guys up in Bellevue excel at.

 

[AceDiamond]

Last time I checked, they've never had a console that's been on the market for more than four or five years and we've committed to a ten year life cycle, so you do the math.

That's because the Xbox was Microsoft's first console. The PS1 didn't last 10 years before the PS2 came out. It's kind of an unfair attack.

Read my mind.

Why does Sony keep talking smack? Last I checked they're the only company that's hemorrhaging money with their console.

They're not talking smack, they're responding to poorly thought out criticisms that are commonly leveled at them.

What's strange is people still believe nintendo and microsoft are going to be able to release something that can compete with the Ps3 without access to blu-ray.

What's strange is people still believing the HD market is going to explode all of a sudden given the current economic situation. Or indeed that the HD market was suddenly going strong. Face it, not even Blu-Ray alone has sold enough PS3s right now.

 

[Reaperman Wompa]

Well, well a fanboy owns Sony...

But seriously, of course he would do his best to see the Xbox and Wii as barely competitors, he wants to think that his console will dominate. Maybe it will and maybe it won't but he's in for a rude awakening down the track when at least one of those consoles is still holding it's ground.

Just going back on it I love the reference to the less time they have had a console out. The next generation came and xbox moved on, if they had released the console sooner it would have carried on making games until the exact same point. Oh, it's beautiful when a president talks shit.

 

[Logan Westbrook]

I'll assume that the article you linked to was the wrong URL, as it links to an article about Google. I also don't know what FUD means, but astroturfing is a quite a bold claim to throw around, especially as Sony has done its fair share too. [http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=0G0LlXv-nyI] ( Some more here too. [http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20051229/playstation_ads_051229] )

Can you provide any examples on Microsoft's part? None spring to mind, but I'm willing to be proved wrong.

No, it was the right article, as you obviously gather what my point is: MS engages in provable and documented shadow campaigns against their competitors. They are not above stealing code (see Video for Windows 1.1d and the Indeo codec), they have been caught more than once codifying and making FUD corporate policy (the Rick Jelliffe [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween_documents] spring to mind), and they happened to be the target of one of the largest anti-trust cases in US history, and they were actually convicted of such in the EU.

Your examples are failed attempts at viral marketing. They aren't even completely owned by Sony, they are the product of a hired marketing team that thought they could pull one over. It's not even the same ballpark.

So, what I'm saying is, yeah, on the subject of failed viral marketing, Sony and Microsoft share some similar bad marks. But on the overall culture of doing anything to win, including lying to your customer and the media, including stealing code from your competition when they are beating you, that's something Microsoft owns. Sony doesn't even come close to the level of plain old dirty pool that those guys up in Bellevue excel at.

You somewhat sidestepped my question there.

 

[TsunamiWombat]

Sony v Microsoft. A Reinactment.

...[/youtube]

 

[cleverlymadeup]

When I talk about context, I mean other recent comments from Sony, such as this chart [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.82948]. Their entire marketing strategy at the moment seems to be focused on the shortcomings of their competitors, rather than the strengths of their own products. It's a subtle difference admittedly, but it's there.

so then you must REALLY hate m$ then because they patented bashing your competitors and not playing to your strong points. look at what they do with open source software. yeah they do it more than sony ever has, actually that chart DOES show the strengths of the console but it also shows the downsides of the other oens, it's a "is the glass half full or half empty" kinda issue. you want to bash on sony and say how bad they are, so you see how they are picking on their competitors by showing the short comings of their consoles compared to their own.


as for the sales of the 360 vs the ps3, the ps3 is actually selling more, the 360 had a 1 year head start. as it stands the ps3 has sold more in the same amount of time but it just seems that the 360 has sold more, the ps3 will soon eclipse it

as an example, my work is giving us bonuses this year and we get to choose what bonus we want. two of the choices we have are the 360 elite and the 80 gig ps3, i have a ps3 so i'm not getting one, i'm taking golf clubs as there's nothing really great on the 360 i want, however several ppl are picking the ps3 because of the blu-ray player and it has video games and no one i know of is picking the 360, one guy is getting a second ps3 instead of a 360. kinda says something about the value of the system

Hey Jumplion if it would have cost me anything to send it off and get it back after the first time then yeah I never would have gotten another one. It didn't so I still have one.

I get that, but if people are whining about HOME not having much, and it's free, then why should having the entire god damn system breaking down on you 5 times be acceptable?

It's your console, and you do what you want with it. To be quite frank, I'd probably be a hypocrite and do the same thing you'd be doing, but this is my views on the whole fiasco.

i've never understood that argument really, "my system broke for the 5th time and they replaced it for free, it's a great system"

a great system wouldn't break down 5 times, it would last for 20 years. it's nice they replace it but you shouldn't have to replace it in the first place