Forbes Anti-PS3 Fallacies Smacked Down Again by SmashPad
August 19th, 2009 | Written by Anthony Perez | Topic: PlayStation 3, WTF
We’ve had quite a history with Forbes here at Gamer 2.0 and SmashPad. Once again Forbes is claiming the PS3 has done too little too late with the PS3 Slim in an article written by Brian Caulfie…Brian Caulfied?
Wait, Brian Caulfield? Why does that sound so familiar?
Oh, that’s right, because I’ve smacked that fool down twice already!
When? Well, I’m glad you asked. The first time was back when we were writing on Gamer 2.0 – that site is currently in development, please see this post – in an article called Sony, Not Nintendo, Should Be Very Afraid of the iPhone. Then later in the year, Brian Caulfield got me fired up again in the sequel, Forbes Says DS Should Fear iPhone; Still Doesn’t Get It.
In that article I directly addressed writer Brian Caulfield, which undoubtedly showed up in his e-mail via his Google Alerts, because he commented on the post. Then we had a friendly e-mail exchange.
Nice guy, even though I keep owning him.
But you know what, now he’s back at it with these sensationalist PS3 Doomsday articles (and we’ve discussed how we feel about those. See Attention Doomsayers: PS3 Is Not Dying ) This is the worst mainstream article I’ve ever seen on the gaming industry. Caulfield doesn’t even cite any actual numbers and even has a typo in his main, and only, point:
Now Sony’s ( SNE – news – people ) latest move, slashing the PlayStation3′s price by $100 to $299 and offering a thinner version of the ginormous console, has almost no hope of making a difference. That’s because Sony’s technology-packed console will remain more expensive than either the Xbox 360, which starts at less than $20,0 and the Wii, which sells for $250.
Since I’m kind of tired and it’s late, I’ll let PC World do half of the work for me. PC World’s Matt Peckham – who seems much more in the know – broke it down for me with a table (pictured below) in his post titled PS3 Slim vs Xbox 360 Price Fight.
What pisses me off most about Forbes article is that supposedly they’re a mainstream publication full of real jounalists. And what garbage do the publish? A 202-word brain fart void of a single citation or quotation. Meanwhile, game bloggers such as I are held to much less esteem. At least political bloggers write about something consideredimportant, we write about a form of entertainment which still has problems legitimizing itself with film critics.
But hey, even if I’m not making big bucks like Brian Caulfield (especially from those tiny Google Ads at the bottom of this post), at least I’m not writing articles like him.
(Looking forward to your inevitable comment, Brian)
UPDATE: I actually realized I should reinforce a point I didn’t originally make after a series of comments on N4G. Here was my reply on that site:
Also, his “opinion” wasn’t based on anything rather than a shallow understanding of the price points. You may say “well, he’s right because the average consumer doesn’t know about the difference the add-ons make,” which is true, BUT, if MS’ marketing department is full of at least high school graduates, they’ll run an ad campaign targeting at that difference.
Related posts:
- Forbes Says DS Should Fear iPhone; Still Doesn’t Get It
- SmashPad’s E3 2010 Preview
- New Nintendo DS? Is It Necessary?
- What Is SmashPad? Bloggers Wanted! Learn More!
- 50 Millionth PS2 Symbolizes PS3′s Errant Ways
Share This Post:
PlayStation 3, WTF |
Comment by p3rf3ct_gam3r on the August 19th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
Two things wrong about the write up.
1. XBox no longer comes with HDMI cables.
2. You have HDMI cables listed as $40. Who spends more than $6.00 on HDMI cables…. really?
Ok, and you can use any bluetooth headset for PS3, lots of people already have one for their cell phone so again this cost is negligible.
Later
Comment by TonyP on the August 19th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Once again, I didn't make the table. It was provided by PC World. Definitely two valid points, but those costs are negligible enough that the price gaps still hold true.
Comment by Godmars on the August 19th, 2009 at 4:47 pm
@p3rf3ct_gam3r:
Who pays $40, or $60, for HDMI cables? The same people buying a $200 360 who are equally clueless of all the other things they'll have to buy for it.
Comment by Lexon on the August 19th, 2009 at 6:34 pm
great work, that Forbes guy deserves a punch to his face
Comment by mboojigga on the August 19th, 2009 at 6:42 pm
So….why are they 8 million behind? How many times have we seen the same tables about cost yet consumers seem still choose the 360. Is the slim supposed to outsell it now x2? Are we supposed to see teh 360 no longer sale or actually offer anything worth having on it. Because it doesn't really matter what Forbes has said and what your article in reponse to his is about, consumers have still decided on the 360.
Comment by sam on the August 19th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
"why are they 8 million behind"
2 reasons
Because they were as much behind when tyhey launched. sales are neck-to-neck after launch
And because some of the killer apps – GT5, GoW3, Uncharted 2 and Trico – are yeet to launch whereas the 360 topsellers – Halo, Gears, Fable, Mass Effect – are already out on the 360. Expect GT5 and FF13 (exclusive in Japan) to sell a few mn on their own, with or without price cut.
Comment by TriggerFinger on the August 19th, 2009 at 6:52 pm
Actually lots of people who have no idea get sold a $40 or $60 HDMI in electronic stores all the time. That's what retail salespeople are for.
Comment by John on the August 19th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
Do you have to be so immature about this? What serious journalist says "owned" or tosses insults around about another one?
Comment by TonyP on the August 19th, 2009 at 7:39 pm
The article is mostly sarcastic as I've actually had pleasant e-mail exchanges with this guy before (as I mentioned in the post.) But seriously, if you're a writer for Forbes and you post an article saying that what Sony has done with the PS3 Slim is "Too Little, Too Late," you gotta add some more meat to your argument.
My delivery in this one was for stylistic reasons and to call out Forbes for their terribly unprofessional article. I choose my voice depending on the kind of article I'm writing. I'm much more casual in blog posts, generally. I've actually freelanced for GameSpot in the past.
If you want a sense of my more professional tone, I'd suggest these two article that I think you'd probably enjoy.
Sony, Not Nintendo, Should Be Very Afraid of the iPhone (note that this was written right after the iPhone 3G was announced and games were shown):
http://www.gamer20.com/features/331
And also, check out this feature about a new game developer:
Birth of a Game Studio: A Look at Prophecy Games:
http://www.gamer20.com/features/375
Comment by sticky on the August 19th, 2009 at 7:43 pm
you forget the difference an extra year on the market makes. At the same points in their lifespan(current overall ps3 sales to the 360s a year before) the ps3 is doing just fine
Comment by TonyP on the August 19th, 2009 at 8:26 pm
I definitely think things are different with this table. Now, I have a reputation for actually being Anti-Sony (check out this article which apparently people saw as an "attack" on Sony: http://www.gamer20.com/features/347
But this chart is a bit different. Past charts showed how close the PS3's price the 360 was after you add up the cost of the add-ons. This chart shows how much LESS the PS3 costs after the cost of the add-ons, which is a bit compelling and could be used in an ad campaign against Microsoft, much like Microsoft's own ad campaign against Apple.
Comment by Taxman on the August 19th, 2009 at 8:35 pm
Good job on the article and putting Forbes in their rightful place.
Comment by jay on the August 19th, 2009 at 8:39 pm
I agree that it is a bit too late… but not the PS3 Slim… everything else, Home is now starting to make sense, games now are starting to come out, and now it seems like a good game console more than a movie player
The cicle started 3 years ago and sony is starting today… it might be too late
Comment by TonyP on the August 19th, 2009 at 8:50 pm
I wouldn't say it's too late, I kind of go into why here: http://www.gamer20.com/features/347
There are still a lot of people who haven't made the leap to this generation as evidenced by PS2 software sales. Traditionally, a very large percentage of lifetime sales for a console come after 2 or 3 year as prices come down, so there's still a lot of sales left out there for all 3 competitors.
Comment by TonyP on the August 19th, 2009 at 8:50 pm
I wouldn't say it's too late, I kind of go into why here: http://www.gamer20.com/features/347
There are still a lot of people who haven't made the leap to this generation as evidenced by PS2 software sales. Traditionally, a very large percentage of lifetime sales for a console come after 2 or 3 year as prices come down, so there's still a lot of sales left out there for all 3 competitors.
Comment by dave on the August 19th, 2009 at 9:24 pm
one more point regarding that 8 million behind comment….. how many xbox gamers do you know that have had to purchase 2, 3,4 5 xbox's? i know quite a few and anyone who reads the gaming sites and forums knows that to be true……
Comment by Ryhanon on the August 19th, 2009 at 10:24 pm
Let me preface this by saying that overall, I agree with you. I think the PS3 is a great console, great bargain for the price, etc… and I absolutely agree that to buy all the add-ons for the 360 to make it comparable to the PS3 ultimately makes it cost more…
That being said, I think a very important point that it seems all too many people ignore, is that *most* people buy a console simply because they want a console. They just want to play video games and *nothing else*. The fact is, all of the add-ons that drive the 360 price up above the PS3 price are things that the majority of people do not care about. They just want to play Halo or Gears or Fable… They don't care if they play online, they don't care if they have the bigger HD, or headset, or wi-fi.
In this way, Microsoft has approached this console generation very intelligently. They understand that a large base of customers just want to pop in a disc and play a game and so they sell a stripped down console to that (very large) group of people. When you look at it that way, and you should, then there is absolutely no doubt that the 360 is the cheapest price of entry.
Comment by LevelHead on the August 19th, 2009 at 10:40 pm
You're just adding fuel to the fire by condoning one article and then supporting another when both are misleading. That table is pure BS. Who in the hell would add a $150 hard drive if you already have 60GB? This isn't the PS3 with mandatory installs. I've had my Xbox 360 for over 3 years and still have 6GB of free space on my 20GB hard drive. On my PS3 that I've had less than 2 years is already consumed 50GB of data on my 80GB hard drive.
Second of all why add other fees like Wi-Fi when it only pertains to a small percentage of actual owners who are going to buy the add-on adapter? I've only bought a play and charge kit, that's it and it was about $25. As for online fees yes there is no free option like the PS3 but the service is not the same. So it's not as simple as saying apples to apples.
Comment by TonyP on the August 19th, 2009 at 11:24 pm
Very, very good point. Obviously, the pricing argument really only works if people are interested in the extras.
It is interesting though that with 3rd party publishers making most games for both consoles and very few exclusives separating the two, there are now two main consumers:
Consumer 1) All about the price – most likely, the Xbox 360 wins.
Consumer 2) More interested in add ons, all about the extras (video downloads, Netflix, online stores, etc) – and in that area it's kind of a toss up. Personally I'd go for the 360, but technically, how many of those consumers are left undecided at this point?
Comment by TonyP on the August 19th, 2009 at 11:25 pm
You have an argument, but the table is just showing all the extra costs it would take for the 360 to match the PS3 with both maxed out.
Comment by Solkard on the August 19th, 2009 at 11:42 pm
You're absolutely right. Let's make that correction now!
XBOX 360-
Pro: 640 – 30 (HDMI) – 150 (120 HD) = $460
Arcade: 560 – 30 (HDMI) – 150 (120 HD) + 100 (60 HD) = $480
PS3: 370 – 30 (HDMI) = $340
Seems PS3 is still cheaper. Any other price adjustments anyone would like?
Comment by Solkard on the August 20th, 2009 at 12:16 am
My bad, I see you also mentioned the wifi adapter
Minus that,
XBOX 360- ( minus $100 wifi)
Pro: $360
Arcade: $380
PS3 (with wifi): $340
Comment by Art on the August 20th, 2009 at 4:48 am
I would add a bigger hard drive to my 360, because I did. As have almost all of my friends that own one. I also have a ps3 with an upgraded hard drive ( which i bought online for far, far cheaper and with a larger memory than 360) and both are almost full, as would any serious gamer. With thet amount of music, DLC, trailers, video, pictures, etc. i have the original HDD for both systems (which I have had since launch for both) where never going to cut it. But what I found the big difference when purchasing initially was I didn't realise how much I was spending on the 360 because I was buying in little chunks. It Was much harder when the PS3 launched to convince myself to get it because it was one giant chunk of cash but in hindsight I have spent more on 360 hardware than PS3.
Comment by JoshS on the August 20th, 2009 at 5:16 am
I almost forgot how expensive gaming is
Comment by Guy on the August 20th, 2009 at 7:52 am
Completely agree with LevelHead. The PC World table is complete BS and the only thing dumber then writing that artice there is actually taking it seriously and referring to it here.
It ignores the fact that we are all aware the X360 price cut is imminent: the arcade is already 180$ at selected retailers like amazon, and together with 120GB it's less than 300$.
It ignores the fact that PS3 owners need to pay for QORE 20$ a year if they want to download exclusive content like the Live gold owners on X360.
It ignores the fact that Wifi is not even needed for online in most cases, and the wired connection will give you a much better connection and is definately superior.
It ignores the fact the the X360 consoles provide component HD connection as standard (Pro and elite) and therefore HDMI is not even needed.
It ignores the fact that PS3 controller is 20$ more expensive than X360 controller, so when buying a full set to play with friends at home you need to buy 3 extra controllers so there's a 60$ extra you have to pay for the PS3 on top of the X360 price (180$ compared to 120$).
And it ignores the fact that PS3 needs about 2X to 3X more space than X360 to function properly because of the mandatory HD installs.
Comment by pmeister on the August 20th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
yeah… i stopped reading after he said …."even though I keep owning him" …. did he actually make a point in this article?
Comment by John on the August 20th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
Ah, sorry, it just irked me for some reason.
Also, what do you think of PC World basically saying the same thing now?
Here's a link: http://www.pcworld.com/article/170435/slimmed_ps3...
Comment by TonyP on the August 20th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
I heard about that article late last night, and though I don't entirely agree, at least Brennon Slattery of PC World tries to make an argument with actual statistics. Though he could've at least provided a link or two when writing:
"Also, based on several game reviews I have read, the PS3 often suffers graphical glitches in its games that Microsoft's Xbox 360 simply does not."
He obviously has an argument when it comes to the profit failure of the PS3. It reminds me of my article "The Fall of Sony: From #1 to (Barely) #2" which you can read here: http://www.gamer20.com/features/347
Comment by TonyP on the August 20th, 2009 at 8:20 pm
My point in the article was to call out Forbes for publishing such a weak article in a mainstream publication. Some people may not approve of me writing "even though I keep owning him" but as I've explained in other comments it was brash stylistic choice. This is a blog so I have no disillusions of having to write in a particularly professional way on every single post.
If you read the rest of the post, you would see that my post is that for years we've heard about how bloggers are not real journalists, yet this "real journalist" cited no numbers aside from potentially misleading price points.
Comment by TonyP on the August 20th, 2009 at 8:32 pm
I have found it almost a necessity for getting the 360's 60 GB Hard Drive if you get the Arcade unit, so that runs the price up $100.
I've had a system since launch that didn't RROD for three years before finally going haywire. It's had some problems of late reading discs though, so what I've been doing is installing games I play frequently and the extra HD space comes in handy.
Good thing is there is the upcoming price drop of the Elite, which will definitely help end this entire argument.