Why Sony is Ready to Self Destruct 722
jammmma writes "Before even launching the PS3, Sony is ready to self destruct." From the article: "PS3 is doomed, thanks to Sony's ignorant attitude. None of us had the chance to seriously evaluate PS3 and the experience it has to offer. It's impossible without a series of titles and an official product at hand, but from where we stand, Sony's damaging attitude is all it takes to diminish the value of PS3. Kutaragi may be right in defending PS3; after all, he can't criticize his own product, but instead of exciting users with valuable features and winning them over so they can start saving, Kutaragi makes bearish statements in response to Nintendo's announcement and Microsoft's take on Sony. Last I heard companies were at E3 to impress media personnel, which yielded positive publicity, not make childish remarks when chances were against them."
it's been ongoing for a while (Score:5, Insightful)
SONY isn't ready to self-destruct, but it may be nearing the final disposition of its actions the past ten years including more and more proprietary technology, higher prices, and disdain for the customers.
Consider:
I don't know who's truly at the helm at SONY, but it's almost as if they've intentionally dug this hole, about six feet deep. I long ago eBay'ed and divested myself of all SONY equipment (still have SONY music CDs, sorry... ) and swore that, until SONY plays a little more nice, I'll never buy, recommend, anything SONY again.
I've never been a video game fan, so I don't know about SONY's escapades around those, but from what I see and hear it seems SONY is consistent across their offerings and markets.
So, it isn't SONY "ready to self-destruct", it's SONY reaping the rewards of what it's sown. It's too bad, they've shown they're capable of creating sophisticated and innovative new technologies.
Article Summary (Score:3, Insightful)
Sony isn't going to win this round 'cuz they're too high off their own success to see the writing on the wall. How stupid are they? I mean, are they total morons? Could they possibly be any dumber? I mean, really--Sony is sooooo stupid!
For some reason, it took the author two pages to get this point across.
Yeah, sure. (Score:0, Insightful)
Poor Sony, we hardly knew ye.
Sony equipment is great... (Score:5, Insightful)
Well...yeah. (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately, they seem to be banking on the fact that people will think the PS3 is better and they'll dish out the extra money for it. Guess what? It's not. Sony isn't what it once was - Microsoft and Nintendo give it valid competition, and it's looking more and more like the Walkman-created giant is toppling.
It's nice to see that history hasn't taught them that the "We're the best, so people will like us no matter what!" attitude doesn't work too well.
Re:Yeah, sure. (Score:5, Insightful)
Honestly, if you had the choice between the PS3, Xbox 360, and Wii for your kids...well, I sure as hell wouldn't choose the one that costs more than the other two combined.
While Nintendo may have won E3, Sony ... (Score:5, Insightful)
I would instead say that they missed an opportunity and need to rethink their marketing price points and possibly their game releases.
Sure, Microsoft (nope, don't own it, sold it to lock in a technical loss, and as of today don't own any of these companies) did manage to get the media to cover their GTA release on the xBox360 and most press never clued in that it is releasing on both the P3 and the 360.
Sure, Nintendo got all the buzz and those of us who really aren't into FPS very much are buying the Wii (hate the name). Heck, they even demo'd a really cool FPS or two, and Red Steel swordplay sold me on the controller more than even the fishing and driving demos.
But, in the end, if they pick themselves up, dust themselves off, reset the retail price for the non-crippled P3 to something reasonable - as in, less than $500 US and less than 500 EUs - then they can still regain the market.
Battles frequently can be won even with major setbacks - sure, Sony was routed at E3, but they've got six months to get their act in gear and learn from their mistakes.
Re:it's been ongoing for a while (Score:5, Insightful)
Hmmm -- ATRAC, "Connect" software -- never mind.
Think the PS3 is one year too early (Score:3, Insightful)
At this time the PS3 is intended to be an inexpensive blu-ray player - just as the PS2 was more popular as a DVD player than as a game machine when it first came out in Japan.
Problem is, blu-ray isn't DVD. Blu-ray isn't the only standard out there, nor is blu-ray that established.
I've yet to meet anyone who's actually interested either of the next-gen DVD formats at this time - mainly because of the uncertainty of having competing formats on the market at the same time. Does anyone actually want to take a shot at having 50% of his next-gen media being declared "Obsolete"? Not to mention that if Sony wants the PS3 to sell as a blu-ray player, they're going to have to convince the high-end A/V market that the PS3 can stand toe-to-toe with the pricier models.
In a year, there will be more Blu-Ray titles on the market, players will begin to drop into the range of mainstream consumers, and the technology in the PS3 will be cheaper, allowing Sony to still position the PS3 as both a game machine and affordable blu-ray player.
If blu-ray fails to win the market, it would not surprise me to see Sony starting to talk about an earlier launch for the PS4, just so they can get away from the failed, and expensive, blu-ray.
NeoGeo (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm looking forward to seeing the PS3 in action on its release. And I'm wondering if the $600 price tag will stick for very long. It will be interesting to see what will happen. Will Sony get poor sales (at least initially)? I think so, but could be wrong. Will reducing the price of the system cost Sony a TON of money because of the major cut they will face at "giving" it away for less than it costs to manufacture, or will the adoption of the system and licensing fees balance it out and make the endeavor still profitable? It's tough to say, but if I was betting on this, I'd bet that Sony may have their first living room console flop.
It seems a lot of bad PR is coming up lately.
I'm not sure that spells the end of Sony in the video game arena, however. Anything can happen and Sony, as a whole, is not doing too shabby (yet).
Only time will tell...
Blu Ray is the PS3's Biggest Mistake (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:While Nintendo may have won E3, Sony ... (Score:5, Insightful)
You seriously think they will adjust the price point? Sony is going to ride this $600 to their demise. To think they will drop it is absurd. Sony is notorious for over-pricing products in the hopes of selling on some sort of reputations, which they still have with many normal consumers.
Now, granted they have undershot the price of their launch Blu-Ray player (and everyone elses really), but if they go much lower the other companies will start screaming foul, which they already should be, because Sony is technically selling a BD player for almost 1/2 the market price. Though I still believe Blu-ray players will drop below the PS3 price sooner rather than later.
Also, using estimated number the penetration of HDTVs has been projected, at best, near 30%...by 2010. This means that nearly 70% of televisions (probably close to 80-90% now) will have no gain from the new format, making Blu-Ray (and HD-DVD) largely pointless for most Americans. I think Sony might be signing their deathwish by making the console with a blu-ray player.
I do not want to come out sounding too much like a conspiracy nut, but Sony is trying to use the PS3 to launch BD and not the console itself. There is much more money to be made in movies then in the game market, since movies are a much more "universal" form of entertainment. If Sony made the console with only DVD support, like 360 and Wii, I would almost bet that they would have pricing that is much more competitive to the other consoles; however, I think their true competitor is HD-DVD and other Blu-Ray drive makers.
Re:Well...yeah. (Score:3, Insightful)
And even if 2008 was the watershed, its still too late. If PS3 is in 3rd after 2 years, you'll see most 3rd party devs dropping it for xbox and wii. Much like how Japanese devs dropped xbox and american ones dropped gamecube. If PS3 doesn't get significant penetration in the first year or so, its lost this round of the console wars, and gets to try again in 2011 or so.
bollocks (Score:5, Insightful)
At least that is the theory. It could easily backfire, as it seems to be doing judging by comments on this and other sites, by having a backlash against the initial price so strong that it actually turns people away from the console and onto the other platforms instead of them waiting for the price of the PS3 to drop as it inevitably will. But still, people are looking at this scene like it's all based on what happens in November and December of this year instead of looking at it like it's a multi-year game. In 1 year, in 2 years, in 3 -- the initial price of the PS3 will not be a big deal anymore.
Tunnel Vision strikes again (Score:3, Insightful)
Anti-SONY Alarmists: Remove your horse blinders and take a look around. Let's take a step back and look at this again.
Price:While I will wholeheartedly agree that the price is about $100 too much on the PS3, is it really THAT big of a deal? Nope. Everyone planning on getting one before the announcement will continue to do so. They're early adopters who pay for the masses to buy at cheaper cost. How is this different from any other product launch?
Convergence:My comment about horse blinders is appropriate here, because nobody is seeing the pink elephant in the room. Or, should I say blu-Elephant. Blu-ray is the next generation format for watch-at-home movies. So is HD-DVD, as some would argue. There's only one catch-- MILLIONS of blu-ray readers will already be in the clutches of PS3 owners. They'll get a next generation HD format with the bonus of a next-generation game machine. Stand alone players will cost $600 to $800 at the time the PS3 launches but you won't get a game machine with those. And because this all comes standard on BOTH the low and high end PS3, it's a winner. If this was optional equipment I wouldn't be singing the same tune. HD-DVD will not win the format war because SONY will have blu-ray standard on the PS3. End of story.
Proprietary what?Some complaints have arisn about SONY's stance on proprietary technologies. Well taken. And while I am the last person to say ATRAC was a good idea, please point out the problems in the PS3 for me. I don't see them. Memory sticks come from many vendors. Bluetooth is a communication standard. Blu-ray is a movie standard backed by almost the entire movie industry. USB? Check. HDMI? Yep. Also a standard.
Market TimingMicrosoft has had a pretty good launch with the 360. They haven't done much wrong here. I'm amazed by that as much as anyone else. They have a cool UI, online distribution, etc. But so will SONY. The difference is that people with gaming PC's won't see much original (or better looking) content on a 360. They'll get unique titles on a PS3. SONY has sat back and looked at what was good and bad with the 360 (and Wii) and made their priorities known. While there may be a people who can't affor gaming rigs buying 360's, I would challenge that PS3 owners will own more games per console.
My point is that SONY isn't making a lot of mistakes with this launch aside from the costs of a blu-ray movie trojan horse. They'll have a great system, some great titles, and probably the same run-up time to first-class titles like any other new platform launch. Sure they could have better PR ... but I don't think that matters as much as some people are claiming.
Too much credit for the common man (Score:5, Insightful)
It is expected that people will push their spending to match their income. This results in people with a lot more house than they need, a lot more car than they need, and so on. It's not uncommon for people working low-end jobs to have a new car that they can't actually afford, and sure as hell don't need (as an example, my brother works as a restaurant manager... he has a 2001 Honda something or other, with a $119/month car payment. One of his employees, a waitress, has just traded in her previous car, a 2004 something or other, because she couldn't afford the $379/month payment. Her solution: Get a 2006 something or other with a $325/month payment). This is, unfortunately, not the exception to the rule.
People will buy expensive stuff as a status symbol. How often have you been at some gathering of people (high school reunions are notorious) and heard people talking not about their kids, but about how much they spent on their boat? Doesn't matter that they're going to estate sales every weekend to stock their pantry (Sweet, 10 cents for a box of cereal, just because the guy who died opened it and had a bowl or two? I'm there!), they still have the status symbol of the boat, and their 3,000 square foot house, and their brand new H3.
It's soulless and evil to take advantage of that attitude, but Sony never claimed to be a church. And there are enough people out there who will buy the more expensive console for either the status symbol, or just to shut their kids up about the damn thing (you might be amazed how far that one will push parents... ever done a price-check on a Disney World vacation? Compare that with a run to DC to hit up the Smithsonian museums for a week). And hell, they don't even need the high market share they've enjoyed in the past... with that price point, they'll have outstanding revenues even if the number of units sold is only 30% of what the PS2 did.
As much as I hate to admit it (the side of me that co-owns a business is fighting with my pseudo-hippie minimalist personal life on this), my hat is off to Sony for this. I think they've found a capitalist's utopia for this cycle.
Re:Yeah, sure. (Score:2, Insightful)
On the other hand the "Family friendly" and "Female friendly" market is with Nintendo. And the $200 pricetag is a lot more "Family friendly" as well.
Re:Well...yeah. (Score:3, Insightful)
Now they are trying use the success of PlayStation to push this format into consumer homes. Unfortunately it cripples the unit on price and is currently unneeded. Need drives adaption, not neat.
Re:Well...yeah. (Score:5, Insightful)
Their consumer TVs? Circuit City right now has several 32" conventional TVs to choose from. At the low-end you have a Sylvania for $340. Other brands, like Sharp, Magnavox, Phillips and RCA, command up to $499. The Sony TV? $649.
What about MP3 players? Sony has their bean-shaped Walkman players (1GB) available for $120-$160 depending on features. Compare that to an iPod shuffle for $100 or an iPod Nano for $140.
Sony has, through a combination of marketing and engineering, managed to convince a lot of people that their products are of a certain quality and demand a premium. It doesn't mean their worth the extra price, it just means people are convinced (In the same way that Mercedes-Benz, Starbucks, Bose, and Banana Republic customers are convinced).
Outside of consoles, paying 50% to 200% more for something with Sony in the title is commonplace. So I can see how they can continue to expect that. Whether consumers will follow suit is another story completely. I'm thoroughly convinced that if the PS3 launched at $899 with LuminesBlu and Ridge Racer 7, they would sell out of their initial 3 million in shipments. Whether they reach 100 million in shipments again is an entirely different matter.
The Yen Is Mightier Than... (Score:4, Insightful)
Sony is a Big Corporation in the Big Game, and they're far more concerned with the BoJapan than a bunch of Fanboys. In the past 2 months the Yen has appreciated about 7%... which dwarfs just about everything.
Re:Article Summary (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Why Sony is ready to self destruct: (Score:1, Insightful)
Well, this is all conjecture. (Score:3, Insightful)
Are hardcore gamers pissed of at Sony? Sure. But there are more than enough fanbois doing damage control for free.
Is the video game media a little miffed about Sony's attitude at E3? Sounds like they are, but that is kind of a moot point. Game magazines CANNOT put a major player out to hang, or they run the risk of losing subscribers. With the constant barrage of criticism that the gaming press constantly receives, they don't want to lose any more readers than they have to. Otherwise the doors close.
Has Sony done this type of thing before? You bet.
Have they been removed from the face of the earth? Not yet.
Re:Well...yeah. (Score:5, Insightful)
You are assuming that HDTV is going to hit critical mass by 2008. You are also assuming that HD-DVD or Blu-Ray will become the preferred medium for movies in the next few years. Heck, it's far from certain that Blu-Ray won't become the next Betamax.
The fact of the matter is that Sony is using the PS3 in an attempt to drive the market towards HDTV and Blu-Ray because Sony sells HDTV sets and owns the Blu-Ray format. Worse, Sony is apparently willing to gamble its lead in the ridiculously profitable gaming industry on the off chance that it helps it maintain an edge in the electronics market where margins are razor thin.
Sure, the PS3 might be a value to consumers that already have a HDTV and $600 burning a hole in their pocket, and who happen to be looking for a gaming console combined with a Blu-Ray player, but that's a ridiculously small segment of the community compared to folks that simply want to play some games on an existing "normal" TV set, and are willing to spend $300-$400 on new hardware. While the PS3 might sound like a better deal when transported to a mythical HDTV/Blu-Ray future, the PS3 has to compete with the XBox360 and the Nintendo Wii today in a world where HDTVs are relatively rare and where no Blu-Ray content is available.
If the PS3 doesn't sell in today's marketplace then developers won't support it, and the PS3 will find a place in the gaming history books with the NeoGeo and the 3DO.
Re:it's been ongoing for a while (Score:5, Insightful)
Similar thing seems to happen with Microsoft in the last 10 years or so. They want soup-to-nuts control of the software ecosystem. For example, ActiveDirectory on the servers and clients. And like IBM, other companies will have to pay $$$ to MS if they want to be part of that ecosystem (i.e. if they want to provide domain servers). A bit more open than IBM, but not much.
Now, it's possible that the architects at these companies aren't attempting lock-in. Instead, perhaps that think to themselves, "We have some customers who are willing to buy everything from us. For that scenario, let's rethink (and re-build) the entire infrastructure so that it's totally clean and convenient." Thus, the strong affinity of that company's products for working with that company's other products.
But either way, the result is as the parent describes with SONY: In the end, it's just too risky and expensive for most potential customers do swallow that red pill.
Re:Too much credit for the common man (Score:2, Insightful)
I was going to rip your post, but I realized that you are mostly right. It is an unfortunate trend that most people live above their means in the U.S. and don't save.
However, I'm not too sure that people are going to buy the PS3 as a status symbol. While anyone drools over a nice car, or nice clothes, or an expensive home, a game console sits somewhat hidden inside an entertainment center. Instead of "wow, you have a PS3?!!", the general reaction of the knowing gamer would be "why in the hell did you waste your money on that thing?!!"
DVD (Score:2, Insightful)
The question is whether Blu-Ray will make people choose the PS3 rather than another system; I personally think it will not because:
1) Blu-Ray dramatically increases the cost of hardware because of how new the technology is and how high the licencing fees are.
2) Blu-Ray dramatically increases the cost of games to consumers; this is the one that hasn't been demonstrated yet. People forget that there is always an extra cost associated with new formats because the volumes are low and the companies involved had to build new factories (or retrofit old factories) to produce the new media; this cost is usually $10 per disc. When Sony announces that their Blu-Ray based games will cost $60-$70 per game.
Re:Tunnel Vision strikes again (Score:4, Insightful)
Apparently you missed the thundering herd of people abandoning their PS3 plans in favor of Wii and Xbox 360.
Who is wearing the horse blinders again? Also I find it rather amusing that you write SONY with all caps.
I smell a plant.
"MILLIONS of blu-ray readers will already be in the clutches of PS3 owners. They'll get a next generation HD format with the bonus of a next-generation game machine."
Again, this is assuming that those MILLIONS actually want BluRay and PS3 at all, when they are tempted by competing products with much better prices.
Both HD-DVD and BluRay are a waste of time, but nonetheless, HD-DVD is already off to a big head start. The prices will drop faster than BluRay, and let's not forget that M$ has an add-on device for X360 which will still keep the price lower than PS3. Atleast with the X360 route you have a CHOICE whether to be flogged or not.
Let's also not forget that NEC backs HD-DVD while Sony backs BluRay. NEC is a true technology leader and pioneer, they will outweigh the cash-strapped Sony in this fight.
"They have a cool UI, online distribution, etc. But so will SONY."
Don't put the cart in front of the horse just yet. Sony has only announce plans, they don't have anything to show for it yet. If precedent is any indication, they will come up short against Xbox Live.
I would challenge that PS3 owners will own more games per console.
That's quite an assumption. For $600 people could get a Wii and 8 games, or an X360 with 6 games.
"The difference is that people with gaming PC's won't see much original (or better looking) content on a 360. They'll get unique titles on a PS3."
OK, by now it's obvious that you are a lunatic fanboy, or an astroturfer.
The unique games will be on Wii, not PS3. The best looking games will be on X360, as we learned from this E3. For all of Sony's hype, they won't be able to surpass X360, because X360 developers are a generation ahead and most Japanese devs haven't figured out how to use a pixel shader yet.
16 terraflops on a dead man's chest. (Score:2, Insightful)
the PS3 is an unbeatable number cruncher. The question is only if they can wrangle it into a game with enough differences to matter to the consumer's experience.
As for costs, the POWER chips and Intel CPUs you find in an Xbox or a desktop will never ever be able to match the price per performance. Ever. There's no way to go from ten gigaflops to terraflops with those general purpose CPUs. And the Sony's will only get cheaper with time, and the games get better at taking advantage of it.
So really it's more like a race. Will Sony be able to hang on with early tepid sales till the games become worth it? Will developers come to their rescue?
It's not a question of the PS3 being overpriced. it's prices inexpesively for what it is.
Re:Think the PS3 is one year too early (Score:3, Insightful)
Here's a flaw to your theory: In that same year, assuming HD-DVD player prices drop, and drop at a rate similar to Blu-Ray, HD-DVD players will not only be cheaper than the PS3 but will also be cheaper than the Xbox 360.
I know the gaming market is big, but it's still not near the home movie market. Those people who decide to upgrade on the home movie front are going to be looking hard at HD-DVD because it's half the cost of Blu-Ray. The PS3 might be able to provide an early-adopting gamer market for Blu-Ray, but unless they can get the cost of that tech and/or licensing down then BR in general is going to crash into niche territory.
A slightly more minor thing is that I don't believe either PS3 version has onboard decoding and 5.1 output of the new audio formats (Dolby Digital Plus, Dolby TrueHD [lossless 2-channel] and DTS-HD) to be used in Blu-Ray and HD-DVD. That's the kind of issue that could push home theater folks right over the edge, opting for an HD-DVD player because they can get all that for half the price of a similarly equipped BR offering.
Re:Tunnel Vision strikes again (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: The format war.
First off, the low-end PS3 does not have HDMI output. If the studios choose to enable the ICT (on a per-title basis) Blu-Ray movies will NOT be watchable at full HD resolution. At best, you get 720p resolution over component cables. At worst, you get DVD resolution, making your investment into a movie player worthless.
Second, Blu-Ray is an extremely new and extremely untested technology. To compare it to DVD ca. fall 2000 is a fallacy.
A. Timeline. By the time the PS2 came out, DVD players were not $50, but the format had been established for years. You could buy thousands of DVDs. When the PS3 is out, Blu-Ray discs (BRDs) will be out for a few months, and you can buy maybe a 100 titles. Selection will be similar to UMD, and we know how well that does.
B. Incremental benefits. DVD offered clear benefits over VHS.
DVD benefits over the previous format winner (VHS):
How many of those benefits are delivered by BRD and HD-DVD? Zero. Read through that list again. If anything, BRD/HD-DVD will introduce higher pricing for new releases ($5-$10 more on average) and have more DRM.
To suggest that people are buying PS3s as replacements for Blu-Ray players is nothing short of insane. For years, Blu-Ray and HD-DVD will be fringe technology enjoyed by the same people who have D-VHS tapes, SACD players, Kaleidescapes, laserdiscs, and 7.1 surround systems today. Consider that the top selling movies on HD-DVD barely crack the top 600 DVDs sold for the day. This will continue once BRD players hit the street.
Look at Amazon's page on the BDP-S1 [amazon.com], (Sony's flagship BRD player) under "What do customers ultimately buy after viewing items like this?"
- 5% buy the Sony player
- 23% buy the HD-DVD player
- 63% buy a regular DVD player
That to me says, very strongly... "Oh... movies on HD are here. Wait, I don't care."
You seem to share the same blind optimism that Sony has.
Re:16 terraflops on a dead man's chest. (Score:5, Insightful)
You're making the same mistake Sony is making. It's a game console, there's no excuse for it to cost six hundred bucks. It didn't work for Neo-Geo (which was by far the most powerful console in its day) and it won't work for the PS3. It'll work better than it did for the Neo-Geo, because it will have the shiny SONY emblem on it, but it's still going to hurt 'em, and bad.
Re:Well...yeah. (Score:5, Insightful)
One of the basic tenets of business is that the quickest way to go from the #1 spot to the #2 spot is to act like you're #1. The best way to stay in the #1 spot is to keep acting like you're #2, always driving to improve your products and your methods of business.
Sony clearly does not have a handle on this principle.
Re:it's been ongoing for a while (Score:2, Insightful)
hmm, why does that sound so familiar? oh wait I know, Microsoft did the exact samething! as does every company to ever "create" something.
Re:Tunnel Vision strikes again (Score:2, Insightful)
You smell the marijuana you are smoking. What thundering herds? The Wii hasn't shipped yet! Slashdot is hardly a large demographic. Go outside. (And by the way, "SONY" is how the brand name is traditionally written.)
Both HD-DVD and BluRay are a waste of time, but nonetheless, HD-DVD is already off to a big head start. The prices will drop faster than BluRay, and let's not forget that M$ has an add-on device for X360 which will still keep the price lower than PS3. Atleast with the X360 route you have a CHOICE whether to be flogged or not.
Ah, yes, of course. The choice to buy the additional HD-DVD drive, the optional WiFi, the optional digital output for video. This is a choice, I'm not being facetious. But you're gonna pay either way, BluRay or HD-DVD. It nets out the same if you ask me.
Let's also not forget that NEC backs HD-DVD while Sony backs BluRay. NEC is a true technology leader and pioneer, they will outweigh the cash-strapped Sony in this fight.
NEC vs SONY? Are you for real? WTF has NEC ever done that is innovative in this area?
How about: let's not forget, 4 of the 5 major studios have gone with BluRay, and that includes Disney (and Pixar). That fight is far from over.
Don't put the cart in front of the horse just yet. Sony has only announce plans, they don't have anything to show for it yet. If precedent is any indication, they will come up short against Xbox Live.
You speak nonsense. There is no precedent. Sony has never launched a service like this before. Cart before horse indeed.
That's quite an assumption. For $600 people could get a Wii and 8 games, or an X360 with 6 games.
Again, you make your own point without knowing it. You don't know the price of the Wii, it isn't announced. Its probably true but you are assuming and that is not a good way to make such an argument.
OK, by now it's obvious that you are a lunatic fanboy, or an astroturfer. The unique games will be on Wii, not PS3. The best looking games will be on X360, as we learned from this E3. For all of Sony's hype, they won't be able to surpass X360, because X360 developers are a generation ahead and most Japanese devs haven't figured out how to use a pixel shader yet.
Haven't figured out...... wow. Just... wow. I need to walk that off.
I dont even know what to say to that. Now I feel stupid for having wasted so much text on a ambulatory leafblower such as yourself. Look, I'm glad you like your Xbox 360, I like mine too, but clearly you weren't paying attention or lack the capacity to do so.
Worse Than Damn Lies (Score:5, Insightful)
from google finance
Sony (ADR)
2006 Revenue (USD): 67.53B
Net Profit Margin: 1.47%
2006 Employees: 152,700
Microsoft (MSFT)
2005 Revenue (USD): 39.79B
Net Profit Margin: 31.59%
2005 Employees: 61,000
What do these basic, high level overviews tell me?
Not much, really. I don't even know how revenue is calculated, and based on the posts I've seen, neither do you. It's okay. If you think the PS3 costs too much, that's fine. If you think Blu-Ray will fail, that's fine. But please, pretty please even, don't confuse your convictions with actual knowledge.
There are three kinds of ignorance: ignorance, abject ignorance, and quoting random statistics.
Re:Remember Betamax?.. A little perspective (Score:5, Insightful)
We still have a Sony Trinitron television that is is over 10 years old but still runs as good as new. Those trinitron picture tubes were truly revolutionary and the quality of electronics that went in was excellent as well, which is why they still run like new and give the best of LCDs a run for their money. Looking at a product like that, i would gladly pay through my nose for it. The modern day equivalent would be, i guess, to drop $500 for a pair B&W (or equivalent) speakers, i guess.
The problem is, these companies end up suffering from hubris more often than not, and things get dramatically worse if say, they miss a couple of key innovations. Now, you have a company that's a little behind the technology curve, and is still pricing itself way more than the market. Perhaps, the company will ride on the strength of its brand for a few years but not for too long.
Intel is, i feel, in a very similar situation. Like Sony, it too considers itself not as a market competitor but as a market creator or as a visionary. Both these companies actually walked the talk for quite some time, but slid real bad when they missed a couple of key market signals. The only difference is that Intel has a sufficiently strong senior management to learn from its mistakes, or at least from the really horrible ones. It's really trying to turn itself around after it has got shafted in the backside with its NetBurst offerings. In fact, i predict that it will come back stronger than ever after it successfully ramps on Woodcrest, Conroe, and Merom. I'm not so sure if Sony ever will recover OTOH, but then i only say that with the stereotype of Japanese bureaucracy in mind.
Lastly, i see this growing trend of flaming or dissing companies like Sony or Intel. Remember, these might be giants poised to fall, but its only a very very lucky and nimble David that manages to beat a very dumb and complacent Goliath. Another thing is that these Goliaths have also been responsible for creating markets and pioneering technology. Give them some respect for that, at the very least. It's easy to leech off market share AFTER a market is created, but the pioneer at least deserves the credit for having the cojones to take the first step.
Re:Tunnel Vision strikes again (Score:3, Insightful)
That is more or less irrelevant as long as Sony can sell their consoles as fast as they can produce them. The price is Ok (from a business POV) as long as they announce a lower price by E3 '07. Microsoft had to sell at $299/$399 because those analysts criticising MS didn't see that it was less about making money and more about making a point. I assume Sony did a quick calculation, saw that the 360 would sell out Xmas 06 no matter what, and decided to milk the early adopters instead of trading money for future market share.
Both HD-DVD and BluRay are a waste of time, but nonetheless, HD-DVD is already off to a big head start. The prices will drop faster than BluRay, and let's not forget that M$ has an add-on device for X360 which will still keep the price lower than PS3.
And you're basing all this on what? Now who's the fanboy?
Let's also not forget that NEC backs HD-DVD while Sony backs BluRay. NEC is a true technology leader and pioneer, they will outweigh the cash-strapped Sony in this fight.
Sony has movies, lots of movies, NEC doesn't. NEC is important but it's a hardware company. To cite NEC as the big reason HD-DVD will prevail is not very convincing.
OK, by now it's obvious that you are a lunatic fanboy, or an astroturfer.
Did you actually read your post? First rule of astroturfing: Accuse others of being the astroturfers. So could you please cut back on the accusations and improve your reasoning?
The unique games will be on Wii, not PS3.
Yes, the Wii will have lots of unique games, especially Nintendo's unbeatable first-party support but Nintendo tries to pitch the Wii as a console you buy in addition to a PS3/360 or as a console you buy if you otherwise wouldn't buy a console at all. Considering the 360's rather limited library if you don't like fps/sports games the fact that you can buy (most likely) a 360 *and* a Wii for the price of a PS3 is actually quite convincing (to overcome Sony's own exclusives, FFXIII, MGS, etc come to mind), therefore Moore himself proposed that you do just that
The best looking games will be on X360, as we learned from this E3
?? Do you have any non-fanboyism induced fever dreams to prove that. Everything I've heard said that at this point there's virtually no difference between the two
most Japanese devs haven't figured out how to use a pixel shader yet.
If everything else fails, play the jingoism card.
Re:it's been ongoing for a while (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm pretty sick of all of this (Score:3, Insightful)
On top of this PS3 may have an 'arcade' service that allows you to develop on Linux with OpenGL, and other easy to use APIs. That was mentioned during a Japanese interview during E3, but I'm considering it as a rumor for now.
If you think the PS3 is the doom of Sony it will only be due to the fact that they sold the console too cheaply for having too many features.
I'm not even leaking super secret information here -- this is all in public anouncements no one seems to read.
Re:16 terraflops on a dead man's chest. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Well...yeah. (Score:3, Insightful)
Just yesterday I spent over $2K CAD on a new system (still waiting for the parts to ship in
I'm one of those "hardcore gamers" who would drop $500 or more on a video card... but I still wouldn't touch a console, $600 or not, with a 10-foot pole, regardless of the games that are out for it.
By the time you buy a good HDTV (I can't stand SDTV resolution, never could), the overpriced games, receivers and/or speakers, and the console itself, the costs are the same either way. A high-end PC gaming rig, or a good home theater/console gaming system... it's roughly the same in terms of initial cost.
Of course, life-span comes into play here. A high-end PC 'degrades' from bleeding-edge fairly quickly. A good home theater system and console will last several years before being considered obsolete. PC games allow you to lower graphic and detail levels, extending the use of old hardware.
Given the flexibility that PCs offer outside of a pure gaming machine (I use my machine for development work as well), I feel that it's a good value for my money. Expensive? Undoubtedly. But I don't own a TV at all, let alone a full home theater system, so it works out in the end.
The Death of Sony? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Worse Than Damn Lies (Score:3, Insightful)
Profit margin is the amount of the revenue the company keeps vs. the amount they spent.
Profit is the amount of money that the company keeps after expenses.
By your figures:
Microsoft made $12.57 billion in profit.
Sony made $1 billion in profit.
Xbox 360 price: $287.00 (Score:3, Insightful)
The PS3 is going to face some real price resistance. For most kids, it's only slightly better than the PS2, and for the parents, it's more than twice the price.
It's the Games stupid! (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm definately not alone in saying, "Screw Blu-ray! Just give me a GAME console!" Do I own an HDTV? Heck ya. Am I one of the few that notice a difference between 480p DVDs and 720p HD TV shows? I'll even admit yes to that. But do I really want my game console playing HD movies, *especially* if it's going to cost me an extra few hundred dollars? Most definately NOT.
I am not going to invest in any HD movie format until it's well established which format wins, and I'm not alone (how many times did Beta/VHS get mentioned today?). Even if I did get a PS3 (and I will be getting one, but not till the price drops heavily), I wouldn't get any Blu-ray movies until I know which format to get. Additionally, I would probably just invest in a Blu-ray or HD-DVD standalone player. I know my PS2 was barely adequate as a DVD-player, so I don't have high hopes for the PS3, nor should I. Anyway, by the time the format is decided, standalone players will be a lot more affordable AND probably have a lot more features than the PS3 anyway (better audio capabilities, holds multiple discs, etc.).
Gamers said much the same thing when MS touted all of the media capabilities of the 360. It can stream music, videos, even watch TV. Woo, whatever. Now I've played around with those options on my 360, and sure it's neat. But at the end of the day, I use my 360 to play games. It'll be the same with the PS3. I just wish I didn't have to pay >$200 more dollars because some Sony execs had the same ideas you did.