MS response to PS3 "HOME"

xTenn <xTennREMOVETHISPART@tds.net> wrote:

> 1. Do not ever take Sony's finished or actual gaming products as
> anything remotely close to a released trailer. They, um, take creative
> liberties.....

True.

> 2. Home is too controlled to be anything like Second life or others.
> Sony is in the difficult position of trying to build a VR world that is
> restrictive enough to not offend anyone, flexible enough to allow VR
> freedom, and fast enough to work as a frontend. There is simply not a
> happy medium at this time, technology is not there yet. The problem
> lies in moderation technology, networking infrastructure and console
> capabilities.

I don't think Home is intended to be exactly like Second Life. For one
thing, I'm sure Sony will have very tight restrictions on what is
available, and you won't be able to freely create items, as you can on
Second life either.

Basically, Home is just a large, fancy online lobby.

While some of the ideas in Home could be nifty, it seems to me the idea
came about too late for games to fully take advantage of it. For
instance, you should be able to use your avatar in online games, no?

But what I don't understand about Home is how does this help Sony sell PS3
games? I could easily see some people getting caught up in the whole
thing of chatting and building their apartment, as opposed to actually
playing (much less buying!) games. Bottom line, I only see this system as
getting in the way of the main revenue stream for the PS3 - GAMES.

After all, Sony doesn't intend to charge people for Home, and I doubt the
revenue they'll make from hosting movie trailers or selling an ocassional
piece of virtual furniture to a user is going to do more than cover the
operating expenses for the network itself.

--
Win cash and giftcards just for clicking your mouse!
http://www.netwinner.com/?signupCode=amuro98

> But what I don't understand about Home is how does this help Sony sell PS3
> games? I could easily see some people getting caught up in the whole
> thing of chatting and building their apartment, as opposed to actually
> playing (much less buying!) games.

For the same reason that the Wii has Miis - to garner interest in the
system, and round out the game experience.

Remember, Sony doesn't necessary need sell games to make money. Sure
you can put this stereo in your apartment for free, but the UPGRADED
stereo will cost $.75. Lots of clothes are free, but the American Eagle
line? $.50 a shirt. Oh, you want to buy a BMW car? That'll be $3, and
you can drive it in the new Grand Turismo too! (Note these are random
numbers/ideas I'm pulling out of my ass).

Charging money for digital goods is the holy grail for companies,
especially when they're easy to create like "a chair". I'm sure the
Sony execs are salivating at the thought of nickel & diming us to death
with items in Home.

Jason Viers <spam@beanalby.net> wrote:
> > But what I don't understand about Home is how does this help Sony sell PS3
> > games? I could easily see some people getting caught up in the whole
> > thing of chatting and building their apartment, as opposed to actually
> > playing (much less buying!) games.

> For the same reason that the Wii has Miis - to garner interest in the
> system, and round out the game experience.

Except that Home isn't integrated into all games as Live is in all 360
games.

Also, you can't use your avatar from Home in your games as you can with
your Mii on the Wii.

If anything, Home is just a 3d chatroom version of Live or Sony's own
marketplace. I don't see how it adds anything to the gaming experience,
nor how it will drive revenues for Sony.

> Remember, Sony doesn't necessary need sell games to make money. Sure
> you can put this stereo in your apartment for free, but the UPGRADED
> stereo will cost $.75. Lots of clothes are free, but the American Eagle
> line? $.50 a shirt. Oh, you want to buy a BMW car? That'll be $3, and
> you can drive it in the new Grand Turismo too! (Note these are random
> numbers/ideas I'm pulling out of my ass).

Home is free to use, however, Sony is going to have to invest quite a bit
in hardware and resources to keep it running. True, they can make money
by hosting ads and movie clips for users to view, as well as by charging
users for items here and there. However, I doubt the money they make from
these transactions will do little more than cover the operational costs of
Home - much less earn enough money to erase that $300 barrel of red ink
that each PS3 represents...

Furthermore, if I'm fiddling with Home, I'm not playing games or watching
downloaded movie/tv content. In otherwords, I'm not really generating
revenue at all here.

> Charging money for digital goods is the holy grail for companies,
> especially when they're easy to create like "a chair". I'm sure the
> Sony execs are salivating at the thought of nickel & diming us to death
> with items in Home.

Maybe so, but it's just not a sustainable business model.

Seriously now, with the exception of maybe kids 10-12 years old, who's
going to really want to spend time acquiring things for their virtual
"apartment" so they can invite "friends" over to look at it? The whole
"premium trophy case" concept just screams "LUSER!" to me although I guess
if I were 8-12 years old, it'd be cool beyond belief.

Otherwise, what, you're going to walk around Home asking people to come to
your house and marvel at your trophy collection? "Hey mister, want to see
my Pokemon? No, really, you want to see my Pokemon!

And none of this anything to do with games - which is the point of this
$600 console, right? Games and blu-ray movies. Or is it now Games,
blu-ray movies, and virtual furniture shopping?


--
Win cash and giftcards just for clicking your mouse!
http://www.netwinner.com/?signupCode=amuro98

Doug Jacobs wrote:
>
> Furthermore, if I'm fiddling with Home, I'm not playing games or watching
> downloaded movie/tv content. In otherwords, I'm not really generating
> revenue at all here.
>


This to me is the most fatal flaw of Sony's model. The more depth they
have to Home - which is what they are touting - the less money I am
spending because of time spent using said depth.

Unless they are betting big on ad revenue, which as others pointed out
would lessen the experience. The thoughts of wondering around a vr
world of ads every time to just play a game really does not appeal to
me. Not to mention the time spent downloading and reloading, all the
overhead, of the no doubt flashy ad content.

Seems like a rip off of the sims to me and I cant even decorate that house
correctly let alone keep my own house clean, I bet if I had my "home" on a
Ps3, it would be a disaster area.... Gamer trophys all over the floor,
trailers and demos strewn about, cheap hand me down furniture from the gamer
down the street and a then in theory, I would be the pissed off neighbor who
complains about all the door to door salesmen (ads) that try to invade my
home.......


On 3/14/07 10:19 AM, in article Oy9x8wkZHHA.4940@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl,
"xTenn" <xTennREMOVETHISPART@tds.net> wrote:

> Doug Jacobs wrote:
>>
>> Furthermore, if I'm fiddling with Home, I'm not playing games or watching
>> downloaded movie/tv content. In otherwords, I'm not really generating
>> revenue at all here.
>>
>
>
> This to me is the most fatal flaw of Sony's model. The more depth they
> have to Home - which is what they are touting - the less money I am
> spending because of time spent using said depth.
>
> Unless they are betting big on ad revenue, which as others pointed out
> would lessen the experience. The thoughts of wondering around a vr
> world of ads every time to just play a game really does not appeal to
> me. Not to mention the time spent downloading and reloading, all the
> overhead, of the no doubt flashy ad content.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

"Chris Sunde" <chriss@cisport.com> wrote in message
news:C21D8AAC.8B15%chriss@cisport.com...
> Seems like a rip off of the sims to me and I cant even decorate that house
> correctly let alone keep my own house clean, I bet if I had my "home" on a
> Ps3, it would be a disaster area.... Gamer trophys all over the floor,
> trailers and demos strewn about, cheap hand me down furniture from the
> gamer
> down the street and a then in theory, I would be the pissed off neighbor
> who
> complains about all the door to door salesmen (ads) that try to invade my
> home.......

Don't forget virtual Jehova's Witness.. I wish I could buy a bazooka.

xTenn <xTennREMOVETHISPART@tds.net> wrote:

> Unless they are betting big on ad revenue, which as others pointed out
> would lessen the experience. The thoughts of wondering around a vr
> world of ads every time to just play a game really does not appeal to
> me. Not to mention the time spent downloading and reloading, all the
> overhead, of the no doubt flashy ad content.

I can see them making revenue on ads - but not tons. They can also do
things like have crossover campaigns.

Essentially, Sony would be imitating sites like Neopets.com, only instead of
an avatar, users adopt "pets" and then earn NeoPoints by viewing ads, filling
out surveys, or playing games. Each page contains several ads, of course.
The idea being the longer they can keep you playing on the site, the more
ad revenue they make. You then use the NeoPoints you've earned to buy a
house, furniture or other items for your pet(s). You can even earn trophies
by playing the various games. The only thing Neopets is lacking is the
whole "walk around and see 3d avatars" aspect. User interaction on Neopets
is limited to messaging ("neomail"), multi-user games, and the site
sponsored web boards.

However, I still fail to see something like Home generating enough revenue
to actually be profitable for Sony.

--
Win cash and giftcards just for clicking your mouse!
http://www.netwinner.com/?signupCode=amuro98