I have to say I am impressed with the new Sony we are seeing.
While they still have arrogant flashbacks they do seem to be a lot more humble and truthful with their failings, which just makes them easier to like.
Shuhei Yoshida, President of Sony worldwide, has recently admitted that Sony have been struggling to get third party developers to dedicate more resources to the PS3 as it is more complicated and expensive to develop for.
Not that this admission actually tells us anything new but it is refreshing to hear.
I also thought it was impressive to hear that he also wished Blu-Ray had been out for a year or two before the PS3 so that they could have ironed out those issues as well.
I think this is the first time that someone at Sony hadn’t spoken about Blu-Ray as the second coming.
Sony has had a drastic change of attitude since around November last year and I think the effects are starting to be noticeable, in general there are less anti-Sony people around which will hopefully show all other large companies that the public demands to be treated with respect.Â
Source: Gamerchip
Last Updated: June 24, 2008
SlippyMadFrog
June 24, 2008 at 13:54
*applauds
Ken Katuragi and Phil Harrison where the biggest culprits of talking sh*t. Both left and Sony is already more likable.
kabraal
June 24, 2008 at 14:16
Say what you want about Sony and SCEE, they’ve come a long way with the PS3, and most of it was pretty bad. They had big issues with the “half specc’ed†Blu-Ray and with HD DVD being launched earlier than BD with completed specs, Sony had to scramble to get it to the market. With HD DVD making a big comeback during Q4 2007, Sony did an excellent job ward all that off while marketing a game console in between.
The PS3 has won Sony the format war, and now it’s battling in the console arena. Although by now I still believe none of these consoles will “win†or “loose†per se as all of them are pretty well cemented in the market. So in my eyes, there’s no such thing as a console war expect if you staring at figures 24/7.
After a year of corporate battles, format wars, console wars, incomplete BD specs and a whole lot of competition I think the PS3 will be in for an “easier ride†now that all these things converge to more of a steady state. I say well done Sony; a lot “humble†companies would’ve given up a long time ago. If you’ve ever worked with large Japanese Corporations, you’ll know that they come over as pretty arrogant, difficult to work with and even more difficult to communicate with, but they usually deliver.
Fox1
June 24, 2008 at 14:40
Does this guy also have anything to do with the price drop in the Bravia’s?
Well with SABC planning to go digital in November, you can expect more people to start buying HD TV’s and also buying Blue-Ray movies which in turn means that they will buy a PS3 because standalone BD players are too expensive.
doobiwan
June 24, 2008 at 15:39
That’s if you consider losing $3 billion in the process as delivery, especially considering they’re giving the things away with any new Bravia sold in desperation.
doobiwan’s last blog post..The Games that made the consoles
abe
June 24, 2008 at 16:08
Doobi what about the 100bil that RROD cost MS?
Every Comapny has its pitfalls, Im just glad Sony is going about things in a positive manner!
kabraal
June 24, 2008 at 16:17
No disrespect but that’s really shallow minded and stupid thinking. Yes it’s a big sum (quite possibly bigger than they expected) but certain things unfortunately requires losing money.
Sasol/Government lost billions to get their operations going. They’re smiling all the way now. Our tax payers are investing R20billion into a PBMR project which will run at a loss for a long time. That’s 20Billion gone. Good business? Perhaps, perhaps not but if it will succeed, it’ll be a future company that earn billions in foreign currency. There’s a lot more examples. PS2?
Taking risks is your friend. Sony took a risk with BD. Everything could still turn sour true, but if they have 100 million + consoles in the market 7-10 years from now I assure you that $3billion knock would’ve been worth it. Same goes for the 360. Same goes for any other billion $ project.
SlippyMadFrog
June 24, 2008 at 16:58
You seem to forget that the “operations” Sasol/Government spend billions to get going have very long life spans. A console life span is on average 4 years (with a couple more years of support). $3 billion in 4 years are a LOT of profit to make, considering the PS3 will struggle to hit that mass market adoption price of $200 because of the slow adoption rate and cost of Blu-Ray.
kabraal
June 24, 2008 at 17:16
4 years? Did the PS2 last 4 years? Damn…
Sasol was an example of a thing called investing in R&D, creating IP and selling IP. Surely a huge amount of that 3billion went into investing in BD which, if successful, will not last only 4 years.
Anyway if you want to go with that thinking, then surely both the Xbox business and the PS business is pretty fucked. And before you say MS can handle the financial hits better than Sony, think again.
Sony total net cash flow: $12,552,739,000,000 in total assets…$62,558,000,000 in quarterly net cash
Microsoft total net cash flow: $70,747,000,000 in total assets…$ 4,360,000,000 in quarterly net cash
http://finance.google.com/finance?fstype=bi&q=MSFT
http://finance.google.com/finance?fstype=ci&cid=33095 (click on balance sheet)
Yeah sure, MS is massive, but Sony is more than capable to take a 3billion hit.
Or will we all be playing Wii in 2 years time?
PaasHaas
June 24, 2008 at 17:23
4 Years? PS3 is following a 10 year plan similar as the PS2 that is still going very strong.
You seriously think the new 360 is launching 2009? because thats 4 years after its launch…
Lose money in one place to make sure Blu-ray succeeds… I guess sony is only going to be recieving royalties on that for 4 years? Blu-ray is the new accepted standard and it will be around for a good 10+ Years.
kabraal
June 24, 2008 at 17:30
Financials loss and profit aside, my original point still remains for me.
I think Sony have developed a excellent piece of CE. I’d happily pay R4500 for it and tbh I don’t give a shit if they’re making a loss on it atm.
SlippyMadFrog
June 24, 2008 at 18:39
“damn…”? take it easy dude, no need to be childish
The PS2 was the most succesfull console in history, it doesn’t mean the PS3 will be as well. PS3 third party support is suspect, didn’t you read the article? 😉
The PS4 will launch before 10 years, mark my words.
“Anyway if you want to go with that thinking, then surely both the Xbox business and the PS business is pretty fucked.”
Making a loss off a console doesn’t mean the business is “fucked”, MSoft is just more capable of turning profit this gen than sony.
SlippyMadFrog
June 24, 2008 at 18:43
I agree about Blu-Ray, but the discussion is about the PS3 and games consoles. If they don’t launch the PS4 near the time the Xbox720 launch, then they stand a serious chance of losing a serious amount of market share to Msoft, even more than they already lost this gen. Act quick or get left behind.
SlippyMadFrog
June 24, 2008 at 18:46
100bil? Next month it will probably be 100 gazillion.
PaasHaas
June 24, 2008 at 19:22
The PS3 IS A BLU-RAY PLAYER, it is part of what makes it a PS3, it is now and will always be.
And this current bit of discussion was about the PS3 causing a loss/making money so how the hell does Blu-ray not come into this? Its one of the MAIN aspects that affected this.
Try again please
MS themselves said that the 720 will only be due around 2011 in a article on N4G… so there goes that theory hey 😉
SlippyMadFrog
June 24, 2008 at 20:10
Strange, I thought the PS3 was a games console 😉 Blu-Ray touches on more than just a games console, it’s a format to which Sony have rights too. They will no doubt make money with Blu-Ray since everybody who uses Blu-Ray will have to pay royalties to Sony.
The PS3 itself is a different aspect. I don’t think they will turn a profit with the PS3.
MS saying the next console will be launched in 2011 holds as much credibility as Sony parading 4D and the sixaxis. They want people to feel they made a good investment in their console. If you believe anything PR is saying then you probably still think rumble is last gen and 4D will hit the PS3 any day now.
*PS
Relax guys, we are just discussing a games console. No need to get aggressive. The PS3 is a great console and I might be getting one soon. Sony making a profit or not doesn’t influence us as gamers, they have deep pockets as kabraal said 😉
kabraal
June 24, 2008 at 20:28
Where was I being childish? Your response would’ve done perfectly without that part.
kabraal
June 24, 2008 at 20:36
lol seriously, what the hells up with all this “relax guys, chill”, “stop being childish.”, “Don’t get aggressive”
Good lord, may we discuss / argue something with you without you throwing those comments around. Damn…
doobiwan
June 24, 2008 at 20:37
Uh yeah, hows your head there dude, took a bit of a knock? It was a $1 billion charge. Sony will overtake the last 6 years worth of Xbox loses in less than a year. In the mean time this year Xbox is declaring great profits. Go team! 😛
Anyway, I’m not arguing “The PS3 is doomed” that’s silly. But Sony’s “10 year plan” will fail I’m afraid to say, and I think they know it, that’s why KK was fired.
The PS3 has too many parts to cost reduce effectively, and PS3 gaming performance is not going to last that long. Never mind Microsoft, newer models by Nintendo, as early as Xmas 2009, will eat the PS3 for breakfast. Being the first party content king and current market leader, the world will forget Sony (and possibly Microsoft)
In the long term the PS3 is not viable as a BR player either because it will always be more expensive than a dedicated player because of the HDD, RSX, wifi, BT and RAM.
In other words the PS3 has to make up that loss in the next 2-3 years, that’s all it’s got.
doobiwan’s last blog post..The Games that made the consoles
PaasHaas
June 24, 2008 at 20:37
You are correct the PS3 is gaming console, it does BOTH, and there goes your argument again…
If the PS3 was JUST a game console then yes, but it is not and should thus not be treated like one.
Sony does not need to make profit from the gaming console aspect alone and they made sure of that, so its useless to try and justify it by ONLY looking at its gaming side.
But some odd reasone idiots refuse to understand that…
Goodluck with finding a next-next gen console 2009 tho, Ill personally buy it for you if its available 😆
kabraal
June 24, 2008 at 20:39
No I have to ask again. Where was I being childish? Are you that easily offended? 😕
PaasHaas
June 24, 2008 at 20:46
How will the 10 year plan fail? The PS2 is still going and its 8 years old. Same thing is going to happen with the PS3.
Sony never said 10 years before they release the PS4 or something like that so the 10 year plan is perfectly viable.
And regarding the PS3 “time-limit” to make up for profits… in 2-3 years time blu-ray, that the PS3 pushed to victory, will be making that profit for them alongside whatever they manage to achieve on the gaming side.
kabraal
June 24, 2008 at 21:14
No one said the PS3 will remain a viable BD player forever. Fact still remains a vast majority of that 3 billion dollar went into BD and the subsidizing of BD ROMs into the PS3. Now we all know HD DVD would’ve walked all over BD if the PS3 did not have a BD player. Excluding future BD revenues / royalties from the PS3s futures’ balance sheet would be unfair as it pretty much had a direct impact in winning Sony the format war.
In practice they most probably will move BD revenues away from the PS3s’ balance sheet for administrative purposes, so it might look pretty grim for PS3 as a games console only. But looking at the bigger picture, it’ll earn Sony tons of money in their other business units as well.
As for this 10 year life cycle? I don’t know, but it’s definitely not 2 years… Nintendo launching a new console next year? Links?
Fox1
June 24, 2008 at 21:56
While Sony is busy covering losses, MS is making profits, keeping the prices of consoles and games low and also doing their bit to help humans by donating money to charity and for research for AIDS.
The xbox720 will be released by the time the PS3 sales reach an all time high and by then the PS3 won’t be riding the BR wave because we may have cheaper BR players depending if Sony allows it.
I think the PS4 will come out before 10 years time because the xbox720 and the next Nintendo console will be too powerful at the rate technology is developing. Also, Sony’s PR has spoken enough lies already
Fox1
June 24, 2008 at 21:59
correction- “the xbox720 should be released by the time PS3 sales reach an all time high….”
doobiwan
June 25, 2008 at 00:46
Haas, the reason that’s worked for the PS2 is that it’s totally dominated content, and brand loyalty has seen a lot of users hold off due to the price of the PS3. The difference now is that PS3 doesn’t have the exclusive must have content, that honour goes to the Wii.
Wii2 or whatever in 2009 is pure conjection on my part. While Nintendo are printing dollars I don’t think they really care, but if PS or 360 start to make inroads I reckon it’s possible. At $250 consumers are not going to be too distraught if the unit is replaced after 3 years.
doobiwan’s last blog post..The Games that made the consoles
Janrik
June 25, 2008 at 07:55
If MS released a new console next month (take the 360 double all the specs etc) I would buy it in a heart beat.
If Sony released a PS3.5 (512mb more ram) I might not go there yet.
Simple fact is that the 360 games on offer (exclusive and multiplatform) will remain equal to or greater than the same PS3 games.
I hope and pray that all PS3 exclsusives are as brilliant, polished and fantastic as MGS4, but some how I don’t think so.
Sure there will be great games on it, but not on the MGS4 level.
I will play Killzone2 and Resistance 2. I hope they are worth the wait. Other than those 2 there is nothing else on my PS3 horizon.
Now if sony could get a ‘western’ MMORPG out on the PS3…
I love my 360, I enjoy my PS3, I live on my DS.
SlippyMadFrog
June 25, 2008 at 08:48
Sixth Gen:
Dreamcast 1999-10-14
PS2 2000-11-24
Gamecube 2001-05-03
Xbox 2002-03-14
fith Gen:
PS 1995-09-29
Nin64 1996-09-29
Saturn 1995-09-29
fourth Gen:
Sega Megadrive 1990-11-30
Snes 1992-04-11
Neo Geo 1991 somewhere
Thanks PaasHaas, I will forward you my banking details in 2009 so that you can transfer me the cash of the xbox720 (or PS4 or Wii2)
kabraal
June 25, 2008 at 08:58
You don’t read, comprehend or listen do you? Sony, Panasonic and others receive royalties from BD. The money comes from royalties paid by movie studios to encode and sell their products on BD. Not from selling PS3s. Sony will encourage cheap ass Chinese players asap. The more players out there the more software sales the more money to the BDA the more money to Sony. The PS3 was a mere launching pad to help BD win and it will definitely loose its “BD player†status in the future.
“PS3 won’t be riding the BR wave because we may have cheaper BR players depending if Sony allows it.â€
Like I said, read… Wiki is your friend. Sony has no control over how much BD hardware cost except their own branded products. If Samsung comes out tomorrow and decide to sell a BD player at a loss for $100, no one (incl that evil Sony) can stop them). That was like saying Toshiba controlled DVD player costs.
Imo, neither MS nor Sony will release a new console anytime soon. Both of them still have millions to recoup and both will recoup the money lost eventually. Nintendo will probably have to launch a new Wii a lot sooner. Like the Wii grew to the mammoth business it is atm, it’ll come crashing down just as fast, and Nintendo as a company does not the assets of a Sony or MS.
kabraal
June 25, 2008 at 09:01
And what wrong with MS releasing a new 360 by the time the PS3 sales is at a high? By that time a PS3 will cost $200 and a new 360 $600. I fail to see how that’s negative for Sony…
SlippyMadFrog
June 25, 2008 at 09:04
“How will the 10 year plan fail? The PS2 is still going and its 8 years old. Same thing is going to happen with the PS3.”
Don’t think so dude, the PS3 already lost too much market share that the PS2 gained from the dreamcast and gamecube. PS3 is a launch vehicle for Blu-Ray (maybe cell).
SlippyMadFrog
June 25, 2008 at 09:07
The 360 never cost $600, why will the 720? Looks like you don’t read, comprehend or listen. 🙄
SlippyMadFrog
June 25, 2008 at 09:09
“The PS3 was a mere launching pad to help BD win and it will definitely loose its “BD player†status in the future.”
Oh my word! That’s what we are saying!
Fox1
June 25, 2008 at 09:14
Do you know how many years that it took Sony to drop the prices on Memory Stick Duo? 4 years at the very least. I paid R450 for a 512mb Memory DTick Pro Duo whereas everybody else was flaunting 2 gig SD cards at half the price 😡
kabraal
June 25, 2008 at 09:36
FFS Mem stick duo belongs to Sony and is propriety Sony, BD isn’t. READ!
kabraal
June 25, 2008 at 09:37
It’s called inflation…
PaasHaas
June 25, 2008 at 09:37
Dude did you read your own stats?
Only the sega saturn that kinda bombed and the snes from the early 90’s had 4 year lifecycles.
Thank you proving my point for me.
The xbox should also be counter for a short lifespan but that was due to MS not owning the hardware themselves and related issues.
Worst case would be 720 launching 2011 forcing the PS3 to a 5 year span unless they dont mind coming late again.
My money is quite safe thanks
SlippyMadFrog
June 25, 2008 at 09:43
???
Are you blind?
gap between fourth and fith: 3 years
gap between fith and sixth: 3 years
Do you like being spoon fed?
SlippyMadFrog
June 25, 2008 at 09:52
Lol! We are talking about electronics, not gas and food prices.
xbox at launch: $300
Xbox360 at launch: (core $300, premium $400)
PS1 at launch: $300
PS2 at launch: $300
Neo Geo at launch: $650 (year 1991)
PaasHaas
June 25, 2008 at 09:52
Well I dunno how you read that but it kinda translates to this…
sega 1990 – 1995 – 1999
Thats 5 and 4 year gaps
nint 1992 – 1996 – 2001 – 2006
Thats 4,5 and 5 year gaps
ps 1995 – 2000 – 2006
Thats 5 and 6 year gaps
I think the spoon you feeding yourself with could be bent?
SlippyMadFrog
June 25, 2008 at 09:55
🙄
What you said:
“Goodluck with finding a next-next gen console 2009 tho, Ill personally buy it for you if its available”
There are a 3 year gap between generations…
kabraal
June 25, 2008 at 10:00
Omg, you’re the master spinner of words. We’re arguing here about whether or not 3 Billion was worth it for the PS3 or whether they’ll be able to recoup that. Since my first post I’ve clearly stated that Sony used their games consoles to launch BD and that a significant amount of that went into subsidizing BD. Hell the majority of firmware updates thus far, has been for BD. I feel they did a pretty good job since their focus was on BD for the last year and after the knocks they took; the PS3 is by no means in trouble on the game division side even though there’s a much cheaper xbox with a year head start. If you won’t give credit where credit’s due, well then arguing with you is a waste of time.
PaasHaas
June 25, 2008 at 10:02
I dont think the PS3 is going to share the same success as the PS2 but that doesnt meen they are going to dump it, im pretty sure it will be supported even after the PS4 is released.
kabraal
June 25, 2008 at 10:11
So over a short life span of the xbox it went from 300 to 400? PS went from 300 to 600?
Look you’re obviously out for a kill by trying to spin words in your own favour without getting to the point. If you didn’t catch the drift that a new 720 will be significantly more expensive at launch than a PS3 then you short some skills.
SlippyMadFrog
June 25, 2008 at 10:13
Agreed, but the PS3’s losses are much greater than the PS2. It’s going to be VERY difficult for the PS3 to chase down losses.
PaasHaas
June 25, 2008 at 10:16
Yes because 2009 is is when YOU claimed the 720 will launch since its 4 years after the 360 launch. It was first this gen would be in the best position to get to the next gen first…
I am disputing that very statement you quoted and your stats back it up.
If you want to use a blanket “generation” date then thats your own personal issue that needs to be sorted since each of those companies “next” generation dates dispute your 3 year theory (if you can call it a theory)
Because clearly there has not been a 3 year gap between different console versions before.
kabraal
June 25, 2008 at 10:17
So it’s settled then. By the latest, we’ll see a 720 next year. Funny, I though the 360 was just starting to become cool and was just starting to turn a profit. Ah well… good riddence I say.
Fox1
June 25, 2008 at 10:28
Then why are third party BD players so expensive?
We can sit an argue all day but we can’t predict the future especially the way MS are cutting prices 😛
SlippyMadFrog
June 25, 2008 at 10:29
“If you won’t give credit where credit’s due, well then arguing with you is a waste of time.”
Saying the PS3 deserves credit is YOUR OPPINION. I say the PS3 is breaking down what the PS2 built up. Sacraficing gamer market share for gaining Blu-Ray. After the PS3, the PS4 has a lot of work to do.
“Omg, you’re the master spinner of words. We’re arguing here about whether or not 3 Billion was worth it for the PS3 or whether they’ll be able to recoup that”
??? Thats what I’m arguing about.
Anywho, theres clearly a communication gap between us. Lets just agree to disagree and move on.
LazySAGamer
June 25, 2008 at 10:34
wow.. this story got more attention than I thought it deserved… mind you the majority of comments no longer have much to do with the story 😛
Jinja
June 25, 2008 at 10:46
Well, I bought my PS2 for R4000 when it came out in SA.
Jinja’s last blog post..Something fishy???? Smells like it!
Jinja
June 25, 2008 at 10:49
Well, if MS releases a 720 or wotever in 09, then its good for us gamers!
If it’s sh!t hot, then I’ll get one, but until then, I’ll enjoy me PS3.
Jinja’s last blog post..Something fishy???? Smells like it!
SlippyMadFrog
June 25, 2008 at 11:08
quote myself:
“A console life span is on average 4 years (with a couple more years of support).”
I never said the 720 WILL launch in 2009. Maybe it will, maybe it won’t.
Now, YOU said that 2009 you will buy me a NEXT GEN CONSOLE (note that you didn’t say xbox720). There is a buffer of 3 years where nothing launches judging from my stats. HOW ON EARTH is it so difficult for you to understand that looking at my stats, another console will launch 3 years after the PS3 launched? (and you are going to buy it for me)
@Kabraal
READ brother, READ my comments.
1. I didn’t say the xbox720 will launch 2009
2. IF the 720 launch in 2009, who said Msoft is dropping the 360?
Don’t say I’m spinning ’cause clearly you are.
SlippyMadFrog
June 25, 2008 at 11:11
lol
Looks like you also “accidently” left out that there are no price difference between the PS1 and PS2 at launch, five years between them. Also, the NeoGeo cost $650 in 1991.
I’m spinning hey?
SlippyMadFrog
June 25, 2008 at 11:13
Just wait till Friday buddy 😛
Jinja
June 25, 2008 at 11:24
Little Big Planet!
Jinja’s last blog post..Something fishy???? Smells like it!
kabraal
June 25, 2008 at 11:25
No, opinions such as the PS3 is the best console, didn’t compromise gaming, is best entertainment hub and bestest ested ever CE product for gamers and multi media junkies is in the eye of the beholder and that is my opinion. I’ve no problem with you or anyone else differing from it. But like I’ve said, we all know the PS3 had a horrible launch and a not to shiny 2007. Sony (as a company) had to battle with both giants such a Toshiba and MS. The PS3 was dubbed the next game cube. Sales were off and during Q4 2007 BD didn’t look all that powerful as it was during the first three quarters.
I don’t think everyone realises how much effort and money it takes to launch a new format to go up against another new one as well as DVD as well as try to fight for console market share. The PS3 had a pretty stiff and ambitious business plan and I don’t think everyone would’ve been that surprised had it all turned sour. Yeah, Sony still has a why to go with the PS and some of their other products, but showing some sort or respect for they way they turned the ship around from PS3/BD launch until today is not my opinion. It’s border line fact.
kabraal
June 25, 2008 at 11:32
Omg, ok the 720 or whatever will cost $449.95.
I still don’t think your getting at what I’m getting at so I’ll ask you again without using numbers as illustrations because you fixate yourself on them without answering my question. So here goes.
How will a significantly more expensive 720 launched is ummm 2011 (Jun 30th if you want) compromise a significantly less expensive PS3? That’s pure speculation from your part.
How will a significantly more expensive 720 launched is ummm 2011 (Jun 30th if you want) comprimise a significantly less expensive PS3? That’s pure speculation from your part.
PaasHaas
June 25, 2008 at 11:36
Well ok then, but 3 years after the PS3 is still 2009 and since the 360 launched first it has the highest probability to go at it early again. You never said it but the very point you are trying to make points towards that being the likely result.
It is EXACTLY what would happen if you were right, so why dispute it? Unless you want the PS3 or Wii to further defy YOUR data by only having 3 years between their respective console versions.
Good luck with your stats ability but sadly it doesnt work like you want it to…
and btw the last “generation gap” is actually 4 years and the first is 3, according to your reasoning. Cant exactly get a average of 3 with the info you presented. If you really want to use it could also actually imply that there is a 1 year increment between generations? but it does none of that sadly.
If you want to use stats to back up a argument you need to do it properly
Fox1
June 25, 2008 at 11:42
The strange thing is that the price of the PS2 has went up since the launch of the PS3 🙄
SlippyMadFrog
June 25, 2008 at 11:55
“but showing some sort or respect for they way they turned the ship around from PS3/BD launch until today is not my opinion. It’s border line fact.”
Kudos to them for surviving the launch and 2007, but it’s still their fault for being in that mess in the first place.
SlippyMadFrog
June 25, 2008 at 12:05
Nobody said the Xbox720 will cost less or the same as the PS3 when the 720 launch, it’s obvious that the PS3 will be much cheaper than the 720.
This is what happened point by point:
1. You said the Xbox720 will cost $600.
2. I disagreed
3. you said inflation will cause the 720 to reach $600
4. I said inflation doesn’t apply to electronics and supplied numbers to back up my claim regarding consoles
5. Now you are bringing the PS3 into the argument??? The argument is about the $600 price tag you put against the 720, nothing about the PS3. I KNOW the PS3 will be cheaper by then.
abe
June 25, 2008 at 12:07
Aapies kyk vir peanuts!
SlippyMadFrog
June 25, 2008 at 12:11
@ PaasHaas
The past numbers I gave you points at a new console being launched 3 years after the PS3 (regardless of what company). We can only speculate if it will happen or not.
Anywho, I think we argued anough for one day. Lets just agree to disagree. I will be looking for you in 2009 🙂
kabraal
June 25, 2008 at 12:14
Well I still don’t really get what your point is. If I followed all this correctly Paashaas said the PS3 was designed for a 10 years life/support span and he got lambasted. Which means it has 10 years to recoup its losses. Doesn’t matter if a PS4 is announced of released somewhere in between. The PS3 (and the 360) will remain in the market for a long time even after the successors are release. The original argument was all about whether the PS3 will stay in the market long enough to recoup it’s start up losses and not when a 720 or a PS4 will launch.
“IF the 720 launch in 2009, who said Msoft is dropping the 360?â€
And there you have it. If a 720 launches in 2011 and /IF/ PS4 launches in 2012 who says Sony will drop their 10 years strategy for the PS3? By then both 360 and PS3 will already have been in the market for 6 years making the 10 year life cycle not at all that difficult to believe. So you posting exact dates of generation shifts have absolutely fuck’ol to do with how long a generation stays profitable?
Maybe I’m still not understanding what you’re trying to say so perhaps you can explain in one single paragraph how the PS3 only has 2-3 years left to recoup its losses? That was the original argument right?
PaasHaas
June 25, 2008 at 12:26
I guess…
just pray you never need to write any kind of formal research paper cause that kind of stat usage would get you in trouble.
Now I need something else to keep me busy with at work 😥
SlippyMadFrog
June 25, 2008 at 12:28
@kabraal
Actualy, the argument started out as what you are saying, but then took a turn when PaasHaas said no next-gen console will launch in 2009. That’s what I’m arguing about. I agree with you that the PS3 has 10 years (quite optimistic imo) to chase losses. I also think a next gen console will launch way before that (which me and PaasHaas debated on).
kabraal
June 25, 2008 at 12:48
What do you mean by “Now I’m bring the PS3 into to argument? It was in my first point which started our little war in this part of the thread:
“And what wrong with MS releasing a new 360 by the time the PS3 sales is at a high? By that time a PS3 will cost $200 and a new 360 $600. I fail to see how that’s negative for Sony…â€
You fixated yourself on the $600 which is fine by using stats which as I see it works on both our advantage. But as of yet you haven’t explained to me how a new expensive 720 will hurt a much cheaper PS3 at the high of it’s wave.
And no, that’s not how the argument went. After point 4. I tried to explain to what I meant by the cheap PS3 vs the expensive 720. Here, I’ll quote it again:
“If you didn’t catch the drift that a new 720 will be significantly more expensive at launch than a PS3 then you short some skills.â€
So yeah, the $600 might have been a shot in the dark. The possibility remains that a 720 might cost $400, $500 or $600. This was not meant as an argument about economics, and you know that.
kabraal
June 25, 2008 at 13:01
And since you want to become all technical without answering my question I just to sooth your mind, inflation definitely applies to electronics. Or will we be paying $300 of a newly released console forever?
SlippyMadFrog
June 25, 2008 at 13:30
“So yeah, the $600 might have been a shot in the dark.”
Thanks, thats all I wanted to hear. I was arguing about the $600 price.
About the inflation, electronics is affected by inflation, but not in a way that $300 will become $600 in 5 years.
Anywho, thats that. Thanks for the debate, I will see you on Friday 😈
kabraal
June 25, 2008 at 13:43
“I said inflation doesn’t apply to electronics”
“electronics is affected by inflation”
😯 😛
SlippyMadFrog
June 25, 2008 at 14:10
Urgh!!!! you got me. I’ll stfu now. 😳
kabraal
June 25, 2008 at 14:54
I totally understood what you were getting at though. I.e. CE prices don’t increase each time the bread price increase.
That last post was just some tong in cheek to illustrate how annoying it is when you’re trying to argue a point by using “estimatesâ€, guesses or examples. Yeah, they’re not accurate but they’re there to illustrate -> . the point you’re trying to make. Then someone (you in this case 😛 ) comes and hammers your estimates (which you know is not accurate but accurate enough to support your -> . point) while totally ignoring -> . the point.
I’ll stop now. I don’t think I’ll join you on Friday, my eyes and head hurts to much atm to think about it! Please Lazy, only happy news this Friday.