EA says bye bye to PSP! No joke!

M

MegaDrive20XX

Segatron Genesis... call me the wizard.
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/08/11/ea-says-the-psp-is-no-fun/

Third-party support is essential for the life span of any gaming product, so when you have a major publisher such as Electronic Arts calling you out, you better listen. EA executive VP and COO of worldwide studios David Gardner recently told MCV that Sony better get their act together with the PSP.

"I don't think Sony can afford to sit back. I think they still have things they can do with the price and performance of the machine-- things that they need to address."

Gardner points to the success of the DS as being about fun and accessibility, not about pure technical supremacy.

"There's no doubt that EA has historically bet more on PSP. I think we were excited by the technology, but the consumers have proven that actually what they want is fun. ... EA is putting more effort behind DS games -- and creative ones that really take advantage of the hardware."

And so, the bad press train keeps rolling for Sony.
 
Wow, just more and more bad news for Sony-I think that in 10 years, Sony's gaming department will be a memory..which means it for the rest of Sony. Guess they learn the hard way that the customer is always right.
 
MegaDrive20XX said:
"There's no doubt that EA has historically bet more on PSP. I think we were excited by the technology, but the consumers have proven that actually what they want is fun. ... EA is putting more effort behind DS games -- and creative ones that really take advantage of the hardware."
Click to expand...

:lol did Nintendo pay EA to say that? :lol ... wow....

I think Iwata had said something close to that... sans the EA and PSP discussion... and in a little different manner... but it was nearly the same thing.

There is not much to "take advantage with" on the PSP. It is a powerful system... but it is limited. The DS is limited as well... but IMO it is LESS limited due to the unique features it has. Hey... I like playing Socom on the PSP... that's fun. BUT, Socom is not a PSP seller IMO.

The DS needs a headset/microphone deal and to work more with online games.

Back to the comments above ... seeing EA say this makes me think Nintendo MAY have the right mix for the next generation of console hardware with the Wii.

Bv :hat
 
I don't think it would be good for the industry if Sony pulled out. And if you really think the collapse of Sony's video game branch would shut down the whole company, I don't know what to tell you. That's like saying if Microsoft stopped making games Microsoft would go under. No logic behind either statement. Sony makes alot of products... I'm using a Sony computer and monitor come to think of it...
 
SpartanEvolved said:
I don't think it would be good for the industry if Sony pulled out. And if you really think the collapse of Sony's video game branch would shut down the whole company, I don't know what to tell you. That's like saying if Microsoft stopped making games Microsoft would go under. No logic behind either statement. Sony makes alot of products... I'm using a Sony computer and monitor come to think of it...
Click to expand...
I think what they are saying is that it is a BIG blow to Sony in the gaming department. When they say go under... that means the PSP division would collapse... not the entire company. But it would be a big blow to Sony IMO. Maybe not in the money aspect... but in the gaming market aspect.


†B†V† :hat
 
SpartanEvolved said:
I don't think it would be good for the industry if Sony pulled out. And if you really think the collapse of Sony's video game branch would shut down the whole company, I don't know what to tell you. That's like saying if Microsoft stopped making games Microsoft would go under. No logic behind either statement. Sony makes alot of products... I'm using a Sony computer and monitor come to think of it...
Click to expand...

Very true but you also have to understand that the only division that is profitable for Sony is their Video Game Department. So it would be a huge blow for Sony since they've invested a lot on the PSP. It won't take the whole company down but it could be the beginning of something bigger.
 
I think that this decision will be bad for both parties involved. For Sony, a well known supplier is seemingly cutting ties. And this can be a very bad thing depending on how Sony is taking it. For EA, it can be cutting ties with a potentially profitable hardware company. Like Sony or hate Sony, but you have to agree that if they offer it, people will buy it.

Another bad thing for EA is the seeming immature way of cutting ties. You never air out your dirty laundry for everyone to see. They should have approached Sony, stated their case, and been done with it. If people notice the lack of EA titles, they could speculate and go about their business. The approach that EA has used will possibly tarnish their name to a degree.

Bottom line is I believe that Sony will slump in handheld sales for a while. But I think that other game developers will be hard at work to fill the void.
 
creepindeth said:
Very true but you also have to understand that the only division that is profitable for Sony is their Video Game Department. So it would be a huge blow for Sony since they've invested a lot on the PSP. It won't take the whole company down but it could be the beginning of something bigger.
Click to expand...

No, that is quite wrong. Sony makes plenty of money off of sales of other products. Here is a somewhat current article (April 06) that states their video game department will be in the red (not making money) while the rest of their sales are actually up.

Start-up costs for the PlayStation 3 will push its game division deep into the red, the company said.
Click to expand...

Profitable means in the red? I need to learn more business talk...
 
no... Below $0 = red.... above $0 = black. See.. investments can put you in the red, but you invest in hopes of a greater return later.... which would be in black. If you invest more than you get back, that could be considered "in the red" for that investment. OR... if the company is turning negative profits and taking the companies cash position down, that could be considered in the red. There are different ways to look at it.

BUT in this context... every company that puts a new system out is in the "red" to begin with. See.. there are other conditions as well... while they are in the red, they can have increasing profits.... OR decreasing profits (in this case decreasing profits take them farther in the red). Same thing in the black... you can be decreasing profits but still in the black...


†B†V† :hat
 
Mai Valentine said:
No EA support = kiss of death. Just ask the Dreamcast.


:lol
Click to expand...

Dreamcast never had an EA game...how is that even related to this? EA Games does not make a system, but I kind of see what you're aiming at, target audience. Did you mean SEGA SPORTS perhaps which legally died right during 2003 when it cut off GameCube support due to lack of poor sport game sales and could not compete with EA Games?
 
Bluevoodu said:
BUT in this context... every company that puts a new system out is in the "red" to begin with.
Click to expand...

You must have forgotten about Nintendo.
 
Sartori said:
You must have forgotten about Nintendo.
Click to expand...
ok.... 

Nintendo has ALWAYS profitable... even in dealing with console sales...  but it has to drop that investment, which I am sure put them in red.  Maybe not as a whole company, but more than likely for the "system" division.

See... Nintendo makes profits on their consoles ... their costs are less than their price.  But for the project of a new system... they have sell so many profitable systems to pull them back into the black for the project...

Does that make better sense? :lol

Bv :hat
 
Bluevoodu said:
ok....

Nintendo has ALWAYS profitable... even in dealing with console sales... but it has to drop that investment, which I am sure put them in red. Maybe not as a whole company, but more than likely for the "system" division.

See... Nintendo makes profits on their consoles ... their costs are less than their price. But for the project of a new system... they have sell so many profitable systems to pull them back into the black for the project...

Does that make better sense? :lol

Bv :hat
Click to expand...

Trust me, I assure you that I understand the fundamentals of business models. However, I was merely implying that Nintendo is most definitely not a "loss leader" in terms of console hardware, since it had seemed as though your reply asserted that. ;-)
 
Manson2 said:
Wow, just more and more bad news for Sony-I think that in 10 years, Sony's gaming department will be a memory..which means it for the rest of Sony.  Guess they learn the hard way that the customer is always right.
Click to expand...

Yeah the consumer is always right ask betamax dreamcast and i bet in the future Blu-Ray all great products that the consumers didnt want and chose the inferior of their competition

also Sony's gaming department is a part of its profit but remember that Sony also owns several movie studios including MGM and i believe TRI-star as well as their music division which holds the BMG music group that has about 21% of the music market not to mention their electronic group and ignoring their cell-phone Sony-Erricson division yeah if the PSP flopped sony would go under i agree
 
Nephlabobo said:
And the last good game EA made was................?
Click to expand...

Uh oh. He's on the money again.

EA aids mass appeal, but for a gamer looking for a good game is primarily worthless, I concur..
 
Nephlabobo said:
And the last good game EA made was................?
Click to expand...
Well... they've published some good games...  I can't name the last good game they "made."

regardless... it's a blow because it is the #1 software company sales wise.

†B†V† :hat
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top