Pricing the PlayStation 3 below its production cost caused Sony to lose $2.16 billion in 2007 and $1.16 billion in 2008, the company revealed today.
Sony's fiscal 2008 annual report delineated potential risk factors to its investors, outlining that "the large-scale investment required during the development and introductory period of a new gaming platform may not be fully recovered." The loss figures were provided as an example of the "significant negative impact" introducing a new platform can cause at first.
.Sony taking another hit for the best for true gamers again.
I wish. Looks to me this gen they eschewed pleasing the gamers in favour of doing what was best for HD movie buffs.
They might have made some of it back if the LCD TV market hadn't become so cutthroat. They wanted to not just sell their hardcore PS2 userbase a PS3, but a high end 1080p Bravia to go along with it as well.
They took that loss because they care about the game industry. Losses were needed to ensure that the gamers got the best possible enjoyment out of their consoles.Losses, not games.
Sony taking another hit for the best for true gamers again.
Powerslave, have you ever played a PS3? Its gaming capabilities are far from impressive.
Sony taking another hit for the best for true gamers again.
except that sony decided the gamers should take a hit too
First year was slow yes, but they needed the extra time to perfect the games they were/are working on. They don't release pre-mature games. Full satisfaction is a requirement before a game is released.And the second year.
i think we'd all buy the games if they were there, they just aren't. And there in lies the problem.
They took that loss because they care about the game industry. Losses were needed to ensure that the gamers got the best possible enjoyment out of their consoles.
First year was slow yes, but they needed the extra time to perfect the games they were/are working on. They don't release pre-mature games. Full satisfaction is a requirement before a game is released.
i think we'd all buy the games if they were there, they just aren't. And there in lies the problem.
Even some more good games wouldn't justify that $499 pricetag.
It'll be interesting to see what they do with the price this fall. Even with a price cut last fall, they were able to cut their loss in half year-over-year. There may be some other factors at work as well. But, theoretically they could afford to cut their price again and cut their losses in half again.
smh @ Powerslave trolling
Where's abrader in this thread?
They took that loss because they care about the game industry. Losses were needed to ensure that the gamers got the best possible enjoyment out of their consoles.
QuoteWhy on earth would you choose to say $499 when you damn well the most common sku on the shelves today is $399? Not to mention we all know that $399 Sony sku offers a hell of a lot more bang for your buck compared to the $350 Xbox sku. When you add the $50 for live to any Xbox sku it also makes that conversation a lot more interesting.
don't forget to add in $50 for rumble too
and $100 for a HDD big enough hdd to install all the games on ;)
i agree with what you are saying actually, but i'm guessing that people are looking at the line up of the x360 and going for that. So it's probably the existing games bases selling the machines, and that seems to have more steam that people looking for a convergence device.
But that still doesn't explain why you choose to keep talking about the $499 PS3, when you know damn well it sells for $399 everywhere.
But that still doesn't explain why you choose to keep talking about the $499 PS3, when you know damn well it sells for $399 everywhere.
The $399 version is the 40gb version and it does not have backwards compatibility correct?
The $399 model is equivalent to the closely priced X360 at $350.
If the X360 had better BC it would be more like the $499 PS3 model.
If you're paying $50 for live you're paying $70 for an HDMI cable off the shelf.
And $55 for a Dual Shock, and how come 360's 20GB fills up slower than PS3's 40GB? How much does it cost to get Live's capability on PS3 btw, if we're acting like shit is 1:1?
The only thing that makes 40GB PS3 more palatable than $350 360 is Blu Ray. Everything else is a wash or arguable. And of course if you actually look at the games available on your games console, PS3 keels over.
All I'm doing is the reverse of the shit you pulled. Until PS3 matches the XBL featureset the $50 is a matter of preference, not a con. And I never pay $50.
Wifi is lame but not everyone needs it and it is more advanced than PS3's in-box wifi. It's hard for me to dog 360 for that when I paid $70 for its adapter and $50 for a bridge for my 20GB PS3.
People say PS3 costs $499 because you'd have to be a fucking idiot to buy a 40GB. And you obviously missed the point of my post.
I am aware that Sony's handling of SKUs is abominable and agree that it is a major component of why PS3 sucks.
edit: You just do straight costs, not costs vs value. XBL costs more but you get a better product, same for Wifi. You ignore that PS3 lacks an HD cable, that constant game installs make its 40GB seem paltry, that they still won't pack in a Dual Shock.
The only irrefutable advantage PS3 has over 360 is Blu Ray. Everything else might be better or worse for one consumer or another. The #2 problem is Wifi but again, not everyone needs it and those that do find a better product for the higher price. Though they could just get a $50 bridge like I did.
I recommend PS3 to casual gamers with HDTVs who I know, I recommend 360 to people who are actually into gaming.
It's a rule of thumb, obviously they need to decide what games suit their tastes. Since 360 has more games in every genre outside of MGS4 it's not really an issue.
PS3 is for people who want to be able to upscale their movies and watch Blu Rays and don't really care how full featured their online experience is or if their multiplatform games are up to par because they don't know what frame rate and resolution are. And who are only going to be buying 4 or 5 games per year anyway so they don't care if the PS3 has half as many exclusives and a several of them reek of shit. If you need proof look at the attach rate.
Those are all pretty mediocre games.
No I didn't lol
But I did forget a bunch of less high profile stuff like Saints Row, Fight Night R3, and stuff like Alone in the Dark.
It's easy to find 360 games to buy beyond the big name tentpoles, for PS3 you either like those tentpoles or you watch movies.
iirc it wasn't even Charlie who made the post you flipped out on. But yes he is a special kind of fan. I guess imitating him makes you feel better.
edit: Yup, it was siamesedreamer. Shame on him for not citing the PS3 SKU that you admit is one of Sony's major blunders.
I've played all those games, they're all mediocre period. The ps3 was a collosal fucking waste of money.
2 years ago I planned on buying a PS3 and skipping 360 and Wii lol
I don't know what makes you think you're above it all, you seem to have 1 purpose here yourself
I own the fucking console, I paid for it with my cash money, don't tell me what to think of it, its features, or its games
2 years ago I planned on buying a PS3 and skipping 360 and Wii lol
I don't know what makes you think you're above it all, you seem to have 1 purpose here yourself
I own the fucking console, I paid for it with my cash money, don't tell me what to think of it, its features, or its games
It appears that way because there is sooooo much PS3 bullshit spewed on this board, that for someone like msyelf, who doesn't like bullshit, I'm gonna say something.
It's funny, but somehow I never see anyone quoting the 360 as costing $430 on this board. Therefore there isn't a need for me to set the record straight. That's what I do. If someone did say something ridiculous about the 360, you'd see me respond the exact same way. The funny thing is you'd probably see 5 other people respond before I did, but you don't see that type of careful attention paid when someone screams "The PS3 kills children".
No I didn't lol
But I did forget a bunch of less high profile stuff like Saints Row, Fight Night R3, and stuff like Alone in the Dark.
It's easy to find 360 games to buy beyond the big name tentpoles, for PS3 you either like those tentpoles or you watch movies.
iirc it wasn't even Charlie who made the post you flipped out on. But yes he is a special kind of fan. I guess imitating him makes you feel better.
edit: Yup, it was siamesedreamer. Shame on him for not citing the PS3 SKU that you admit is one of Sony's major blunders.Quote from: Genghis CohenI've played all those games, they're all mediocre period. The ps3 was a collosal fucking waste of money.
There is simply no context for anything you two say. It's just robot like repeating of the same lines you've fed each other on boards like this for the past 2 years.
Instead of choosing your words wisely, you shoot off your mouth without ever admitting there could be some exceptions to any rule. For instance, the claim that all multiplatform games are better on 360. It's just pure bullshit, but you'll say it anyway. Why do you feel the need to do such things?
Or the statement that all the PS3 exclusives suck. Do you really think people think you're credible when you say that? That you just happen to hate everything they've released. You just look dumb saying stuff like that. Just stop it, and save your self a little credibility sometimes.
You can hate on the PS3 without making yourself look dumb. Do you also notice that in all this talk of consoles, that I never feel the need to shit on the 360? That's because I like the 360, and I also like the PS3. Has that idea ever crossed either of your minds? That people might actually like both machines?
Tiger, Cohen is not part of the Xbot army. He has spoken out against EB's Xfaggotry many times before.
I think the ps2 is the best gaming console ever, the ps3 is just crap. Except for movies.
yea but your response to that one guy saying that one thing is to lash out at other people, and then do exactly what he did by ignoring the quality and number of 360 exclusives, the benefits of XBL, the problems with PS3, etc etc
And it all goes into the toilet when you admit that the $399 model that you DEMAND that he acknowledge is a fucking mistake by Sony!
I got on you because you're being a hypocrite, dcharlie and others make no secret of their preference. Like I said, my first post to you FLEW RIGHT OVER YOUR HEAD
Me too, I def want more legit Sony fans here. The ones that come here to draw a line in the sand and tell other PS3 owners why it is inarguably the best console are lame though.
the fuuuuuck
I never said PS3 didn't have any good exclusives either. You need to stop combining the words of everybody
the fuuuuuck
I never said PS3 didn't have any good exclusives either. You need to stop combining the words of everybody
Ok, you never did make the statement "the PS3 doesn't have any good exlusives", but you said just about everything besides that.
There were games on X360 I liked - but the Game TR listed are must haves - Ratchet and Clank? Resistance? Motorstorm? Uncharted?
Frankly I have a hard time remembering titles on the X360 that match up.
There were games on X360 I liked - but the Game TR listed are must haves - Ratchet and Clank? Resistance? Motorstorm? Uncharted????
Frankly I have a hard time remembering titles on the X360 that match up.
the fuuuuuck
I never said PS3 didn't have any good exclusives either. You need to stop combining the words of everybody
You bend the facts to make your statements, as I've said many times now. Cohen is just a little more loose with his words than you.
the fuuuuuck
I never said PS3 didn't have any good exclusives either. You need to stop combining the words of everybody
Ok, you never did make the statement "the PS3 doesn't have any good exlusives", but you said just about everything besides that.
Let's recap
"360 has more games" = "PS3 has no games"
"PS3 has the better lineup of games" /= "360 has no games" (you always take the high road, of course)
"The defining characteristic of the 40GB is a mistake" /= "The 40GB was a mistake" (making dishonest statements is not your forte)
the fuuuuuck
I never said PS3 didn't have any good exclusives either. You need to stop combining the words of everybody
Ok, you never did make the statement "the PS3 doesn't have any good exlusives", but you said just about everything besides that.
Let's recap
"360 has more games" = "PS3 has no games"
"PS3 has the better lineup of games" /= "360 has no games" (you always take the high road, of course)
"The defining characteristic of the 40GB is a mistake" /= "The 40GB was a mistake" (making dishonest statements is not your forte)
What? Give some context to what all that means, and who said what.
You bend the facts to make your statements, as I've said many times now. Cohen is just a little more loose with his words than you.
I'm actually just trolling.
I really don't give a fuck dude, my first post was poking fun at you.
But you're doing EXACTLY what you're criticizing.
-Forum poster uses highest priced PS3 to make point - you act like everyone buys 360 wifi and full priced XBL
-I say 360 has the better lineup (which honestly should be a stone cold fact, it simply has more games on it) - You accuse me of saying PS3 has nothing on it
-You insist that the PS3 has the stronger lineup, yet obviously you are not implying anything negative at all about 360!
-You beat around the bush ripping on the entirety of Sony's 40GB strategy - but don't let it be said that the 40GB itself is a problem!
You bend the facts to make your statements, as I've said many times now. Cohen is just a little more loose with his words than you.
I'm actually just trolling.
Congrats on intentionally wasting your time.
Would writing several pages defending the ps3 be a better use of my time ???
There were games on X360 I liked - but the Game TR listed are must haves - Ratchet and Clank? Resistance? Motorstorm? Uncharted?
Frankly I have a hard time remembering titles on the X360 that match up.
Well, it's kinda hard convincing a guy that liked Lair
Every single game I've played this gen on any system is better than Lair. Real talk.
Ace Combat is in the same genre.
What are you talking about?
But instead of wasting more time - why not just tell me what games on the X360 match up to..
- Ratchet and Clank
- Resistance
- Uncharted
- Motorstorm
Well?
Man I wish I could get Bullet witch on PS3. Most X360 players dont give that game the respect it deserves.
the thing that makes me laugh with Resistance is that it basically feels like COD mixed with Halo. Without the AI that makes Halo what it is.
It was amazing seeing the Halo haters all splooge over Cheddar Gorge, which as a level could have dropped straight out of Halo.
I really enjoyed Resistance though, i loved the boss battles, and i thought the online was good. but it's not as good as Halo 3. And i really don't see how people can love Resistance and -hate- Halo, that's just willfull wankery.
I can't believe Abrader's supporting his argument with the fact that there's no 360 equivalent of Lair.
:rofl
QuoteFull Auto II >>> Full Auto
um, this is basically : Shit on left shoe smells slightly less worse than shit on right shoe.
I like Halo Trilogy and Resistance.
Halo is one of the few great exclusives on the XBOX.
Quoteedit: Full Auto. Guns on cars. How in the hell did that manage to not be cool?
(http://andysarcade.de/images/sega_logo.jpg)Quotebut there are plenty of kittonwy equivalents in both "camps."
that's the problem - i expressed love for Resistance and Uncharted, but that's not enough. The ''camp" demands that you proclaim it game of the year/century, or else you are a troll.
What mall zombie killer is available on the PS3? Or beach bimbo game? Or seriously, decent J-RPG?
BUWAHAHAH - the 40 and 80 GB PS3 models have more JRPGS than times you have eaten at the Y.
Duckman, what online shooters do you play on the PC?
QuoteSo what car combat game released this gen is better?
jesus, is there any other car combat games?
by the way , i didn't clarify it, but the FIRST one is better than the SECOND one in the Full Auto series. So can we chalk that up as a victory for the X360? (actually, that's a lie, ;) )
Duckman, what online shooters do you play on the PC?
BUWAHAHAH - the 40 and 80 GB PS3 models have more JRPGS than times you have eaten at the Y.
Dummy, I didn't buy a PS3 to play PS1/2 games.
Threads like this prove you can take the people out of GAF, but you can't take the GAF out of people.
:'(
Threads like this prove you can take the people out of GAF, but you can't take the GAF out of people.
:'(
:lol
For the record, I think Halo 3 is a much better game than Resistance.
BUT JRPG? JRPG?
BUWAHAHAH - the 40 and 80 GB PS3 models have more JRPGS than times you have eaten at the Y.
You still haven't explained the blanket statements and your undying love and allegiance for an antiquated box that uses RF, IR and DVD technology!
UE3 with 29 WAD files doesnt make a console library!
You still haven't explained the blanket statements and your undying love and allegiance for an antiquated box that uses RF, IR and DVD technology!
UE3 with 29 WAD files doesnt make a console library!
Because the "anitquated" technology provided better graphics, faster load times and less controller dropouts?
For the record, I think Halo 3 is a much better game than Resistance.