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.
Re:it's been ongoing for a while (Score:5, Informative)
Re:it's been ongoing for a while (Score:5, Interesting)
Conceded defeat? they never did that. Sony simply took the BetaMax and refined it to BetaCam and BetaCAM SP and owned the professional video market ever cince. Only now is sony losing it's fooding in the pro video market with the digital standard set up by JVC called MiniDV and DVCAM. Which is robust enough to handle the HD signals on the new HD camera systems.
Sony even tried to wedge in there with their own tiny digital camcorder tape. It died a horrible death just like SACD did.
In pro video Sony is still the defacto standard. Live events still use a DME9000 editing suite made by sony, most remote live semi-trailer studios are mostly sony gear as well still to this day.
Re:it's been ongoing for a while (Score:3, Insightful)
remember Trinitron (Score:4, Interesting)
BTW, I feel really sorry for Sony's engineers: they often develop brilliant things that die undeservingly because of inadequate marketing, licensing, etc.
Re:it's been ongoing for a while (Score:3, Interesting)
Agreed. The thing with Sony is that when their products aren't built to be absolutely unreliable pieces of shit (PS2), they're built to last. The Trinatron was the TV of choice amongst my friends in the Dreamcast days. And about the MD - while it tanked as a pre-recorded format (as has everything since the CD, for the basic reason that the CD does all that "most people" are looking for), as a way of making field recordings, it is second to none. It's che
Re:it's been ongoing for a while (Score:5, Insightful)
Hmmm -- ATRAC, "Connect" software -- never mind.
Re:it's been ongoing for a while (Score:3, Interesting)
It worked for about two weeks before the screen
Remember Betamax? (Score:5, Interesting)
Sony's philosophy of overpricing takes a toll with other items as well. For example, I find their computers vastly overpriced, thanks to their short lifespan. Unless you are producing a truly superior product, you shouldn't charge premium prices.
On the other hand, I'd like to mention one Sony product I fell in love with. A long time ago, I got one of their early Sony Clie PDAs. This was at a time before Sony realized they had a gem on their hands. The retail price of the Clie was $99; I guess they were selling it only as a platform for their memory sticks. I'm still using it on a daily basis, and I got a replacement unit, just in case.
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:Remember Betamax? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Remember Betamax? (Score:3, Funny)
.
.
.
Ensign Chekov?
Re:it's been ongoing for a while (Score:4, Informative)
They pioneered the MMOG, in a significant way, with Everquest, but since then, they seem to be dedicated to destroying valuable intellectual properties.
Star Wars Galaxies (SWG) was one of the most hyped games of all time. As the first Sony follow-up to EverQuest, with one of the best SciFi properties out there, EVERYONE expected this game to be great. The pre-launch registered users who contributed to the SWG forums daily was ridiculously high. Every gamer was desparate for info about SWG because it just looked so hot. Sony bragged on and on about all the features the game would have: you could occupy any planet, play any race, take up a multitude of professions, buy a starship, go into politics ... etc.
Well, as the launch date approached, strange things started to happen. First, the features that were cut were small. I think the first thing that was cut was owning property. Everyone said, ok, you won't be able to buy a house at launch, but with all the other features, who cares? Then came the deluge.
Amid a sea of rabidly eager fans, Sony cut the feature list in half about a month before launch. Needless to say, the release was a fiasco. Even the features that were left in were buggy, and the development team was slow to react.
The impression from the Dev team was: the higher-ups forced us to release a product that wasn't ready yet, just to get the revenue flowing. So the game was stagnant; eventually they fixed a lot of the bugs, and the addons added some of the features that were left out, but by then it was too late. Now the game is all but dead.
Outside of the MMOG arena, Sony has been similarly unsuccessful; they have some great licensed games (God of War, GTA), but the games developed in-house tend to be god-awful crapfests (imho).
I also boycott Sony products btw, but more as a response to SWG, EQ2, and rootkitgate than anything else.
Re:it's been ongoing for a while (Score:5, Informative)
Overall, even with all the faults that SWG had at launch, it still was really one of the most innovative MMORPGs out there. You really could follow your own path in the game. It appealed to all kinds of people, both male and female. If combat was your thing, there was plenty of choice in that path, and plenty of challenge. If you'd prefer to sit on the sidelines, non-combat professions were a very valued part of the community. Even people who just prefered the social aspects of the MMO world could server a purpose. From a community simulation perspective, it was easily the most flexable game around.
But, there was a serious lack of game content at launch. Promised features like player cities and vehicles were conspiciously missing from the game. Other features like instanced battlefields that could support massive numbers never worked correctly outside of the test lab and were abandoned shortly after launch. Quests would lead nowhere (Vader says, "Go speak to the Emperor." The Emperor says, "Go speak with Vader."). The overall point of the game (the Galactic Civil War) wasn't even really implimented, as PvP battles served no purpose other than virtual chest beating and bragging rights, and had no big-picture impact on the game. The game itself was beautiful, but shallow. Players tried their best to make up their own content, with player-hosted events and pointless (but still fun) battles in NPC cities. But by December of '03, the game was really bleeding subscriptions badly.
Then, some brilliant person at SoE decided that what everyone really wanted was to be a Jedi, and that would magically stop the exodus from the game. So, instead of adding the missing content, they dangled the prospect of unlocking a Jedi character in front of every player (something they had promised would not be the case). And it did keep a certain element from cancelling. Thus was born the Great Holiday Hologrind, which severly damaged the social aspects of the game, and also wrecked havoc on what had been a fairly healthy in-game economy.
Eventually it was passed around that the big, mysterious secret to unlocking it was nothing more than just mastering every profession in the game in turn. Now, Jedi were originally planned to be *extremely* rare, even to the point of being random and only a handful on each server. Since god-mode characters are generally not a good idea in an online game, their power would be offset by the threat of perma-death for the character, forcing you to start all over again. When enough people started unlocking Jedi characters, the ritilan-addicted "power gamer" element whined and complained about perma-death, SoE capitulated, and it was removed. Now, you had high-level Jedi running around one-hit killing everyone with no consequences. Even if by some miracle you took one down, it did little good. PvP battles became nothing more than competitions to see which side could pull out the most Jedi. People who had no interest in playing Jedi (otherwise defined as "subscribers with real long-term potential") were forced into hiding.
SoE made one blunder after another after that. Each modification to game balance seemed to throw the game further and further off-base. This can directly be traced to overpopulation of Jedi and the fact that they were never meant to be a balanced profession in the first place. The type of player who was attracted to playing a Jedi (and who could sit there and grind combat XP for 16 hours a day for a month) seemed to be the type of person who had little to no patience for complex combat systems that required forethought and strategy. So, SoE took their unique "HAM" multi-health-bar system, and turned it into EQ-style combat, dumbing it down to simple hack-and-slash.
Eventually, SoE made the amazing decision to eliminate the profession system altogether, and force everyone into clones of the same 8 "classes" and dub it the "New Game Experience". They completely eliminated
Re:it's been ongoing for a while (Score:3, Interesting)
Realy makes you wonder what pond MMOG developers creep out of these days, and why on earth someone dosent give me there job =)
Re:it's been ongoing for a while (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah, that's what I look for in a console. Not fun...seriousness.
Re:it's been ongoing for a while (Score:2, Interesting)
JVC, Kenwood, Aiwa, Sharp, Denon, Alpine, Yamaha, Panasonic, Onkyo and Marantz.
Even granting that Aiwa is owned by Sony, I'd hardly call that "no one was offering the technology other than SONY."
Minidisc was cool, and I last recommended one to a woman who was doing anthropological field research in Africa. Why? The advantages of cassette (vs. an iPod, for example) with the ability to jack it directly to a computer through USB.
Next wave of MP3 player/recorders may make this redund
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:it's been ongoing for a while (Score:5, Informative)
While you are quite right with regards to IBM's general attitude back then, MCA isn't a very good example of it, it is actually an interesting incident.
As you may know, some companies (Appricot comes to mind inmediately) produced MCA machines as well. Compaq could have if they wanted to, but had its own reasons for wanting an alternative.
What happened was that those companies that actually produced, or could produce MCA machines had settled outstanding licencing issues regarding dma and some other patents used in pcs. This was basicly a requirement for obtaining a licence on MCA technology.
It never caught on for various reasons, the fact that you could mostly get IBM hardware for MCA was an important of them (I do have MCA cards from quite a few other companies here, including 3com, creative, adaptec and intel).
(former IBM employee during the late 80s and all of the 90s)
Sony needs a Re-Org... (Score:4, Interesting)
I would not be surprised to see a Re-Org happen as soon as July, but probably no later than December. If Sony is smart, they'll spin off their record company and get back to doing what they do best.
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.
Re:Article Summary (Score:5, Funny)
Unless their server can pick up its own pieces and reboot, that would be all of us.
Re:Article Summary (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Article Summary (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Article Summary (Score:3, Informative)
"None of us had the chance to seriously evaluate PS3 and the experience it has to offer."
Not that that is a good sign about the PS3, but the early adopters of the PS3 have already decided to buy or not, and, if sony wants to tell the other media people to go rot in hell, they're free to. It won't affect sales more than a few units, probably units that aren't at market yet due to shortages.
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:16 terraflops on a dead man's chest. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:16 terraflops on a dead man's chest. (Score:5, Funny)
And reality has a well known anti-Sony bias.
Common misconception - it's 200 GFLOPS (Score:4, Informative)
No-one (outside the Sony troll "community") claims "16 terraflops", but it's not uncommon to see claims that the Cell can pump out a solid 2 teraflops. However, this is inaccurate too, and is based (surprise) on Sony marketing.
Each SPE in the Cell can manage a more humble 25.6 gigaflops [wikipedia.org], when running at 3.2 GHz, and that only if it's doing nothing but matrix multiplication. Similar for the PPE, giving a total of 204.8 GFLOPS for the PS3's 7-SPE Cell. Reality, of course, usually involves fetches, stores, branches and pipeline stalls, bringing the useful total down to a rather smaller figure, and that's assuming you actually have 8 separate things to do all at once.
The difference between the Cell's performance and Sony's claimed 2-TFLOPS figure for the PS3 is of course mostly made up by the RSX GPU. Since it has 48 pixel pipes each bristling with shader ALUs, texture samplers, blend units, depth comparators etc, it's total theoretical performance is around 1.8 teraflops. Not that it's particularly useful for anything except rendering 3D graphics, and likewise never gets fully utilised in reality, rarely even faintly close.
Fact is, any single PC with a modern high-end GPU has a total compute capacity similar to the PS3, but if that was actually useable, universities everywhere would be tossing out their expensive supercomputing clusters in favour of a couple of quad-SLI machines.
Re:16 terraflops on a dead man's chest. (Score:3, Insightful)
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:Well...yeah. (Score:2)
This is a perfectly valid argument for 2006, but what about 2008? When HDTV hits critical mass, the choices of pre-recorded medial are either HD-DVD or Blu-Ray. Period. If Blu-Ray becomes VHS and HD-DVD becomes Beta (we'll see) then the PS3 is going to have a very nice selling point over the competition, especially if the price of stand-alon
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 pa
Re:Well...yeah. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Well...yeah. (Score:3, Insightful)
Blu-Ray is Sony and it's more likely to be the Beta than the VHS [wikipedia.org] as Sony has a long history crippling innovative ideas by holding to tightly to intellecual property.
Now they are trying use the success of PlayStation to push this format into consumer homes. Unfortunately it cripples the un
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: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.
Re:Well...yeah. (Score:3, Funny)
I don't say this too often: you're a douchebag.
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:Well...yeah. (Score:3, Funny)
I just bought a new card for around $50.. No, its not the best performer out there, but it works well enough with all modern games that they are nicely playable. In a year or 2 I'll get me a new one.. total expense over 5 years.. 2 1/2 * $50.. which doesn't come close to what you suggest spending on one card.
Ah.. you were talking about a hardcore gamer who does spend $400+ on a graphics card? those same people won't have a problem spending $600 on a console either if the gam
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
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: (Score:2)
Re:While Nintendo may have won E3, Sony ... (Score:2, Interesting)
But they can't. Sony PS3 is so hightech (with their 3 cell processors and blue-ray) they are losing a lot of money selling at $599. I think the $499 version is so crimpled is because they know the buyers of this version arn't as likly to buy as many games, so they can't afford to sell
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.
Is it truly the Blu-Ray or the Games? (Score:2)
It's the Games stupid! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Penetration of HDTV... (Score:3, Interesting)
But how many other parents are out there, middle to upper-middle class that also have several TVs and only 1 HDTV that acts as the primary (in the living room or their bedroom).
Then they buy junior an X-box/PS-3 - do they really want to hook it up to their single HDTV and have him hog it all the time? Or will just let him set it up to his (CRT) in his bedroom, and they don't care about BR because the discs cost too much and they just watch HD sattelite anyway:) Or junior just g
Why Sony is ready to self destruct: (Score:5, Funny)
With the combined might of the Slashdot userbase and "cooltechzone.com" aligned against them, how can Sony possibly survive?
Hahahahaha... no (Score:3, Interesting)
You're joking, right? Maybe that's how it works in your inner circle of internet friends, but the tech crowd has little or no sway over the general public. Most people just
Keep dreaming. (Score:5, Interesting)
But they are not today, nor in the next 10 years, at all likely to "Self-destruct". This is a corporation, not a political party. They're not losing money at present, and if they pull off the PS3 thing well enough to set blu-ray as the new hd standard (who cares about the games?), their entire board of directors is going to spend the next decade snorting coke and gold dust off the asses of high priced prostitutes.
They're taking the long view in this situation, and I'll be surprised if we'll know how it worked out for a decade or more. The value of owning the dominant video standard cannot be overestimated.
Re:Keep dreaming. (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Keep dreaming. (Score:4, Informative)
really? [yahoo.com]
and when i do a google search, the 3rd result states that " Sony's profit jumps 68 percent [zdnet.com]".
Sony INSURANCE was the big contributor (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Keep dreaming. (Score:2)
Big corporations don't die. You have no conception of the actual amount of value that is attached to a company the size of sony. If they never made another product, and switched purely to research and liscensing, they'd still be making a nice profit. They employ more people than a small country.
Yea, they'll look stupid if the PS3 flops, and stupid if blu-r
Re:Keep dreaming. (Score:2)
Mini-Disc.
Memory Stick.
Sony has proven that it can't win ANY standard. Beta and Mini-Disc are dead, and the Memory Stick is kept on life support by Sony laptops and cameras.
Re:Keep dreaming. (Score:3, Interesting)
Just because they haven't won one yet, doesn't mean they never will. they're banking on the PS3 to get blu-ray into every home. If it happens, they'll be geniuses. If it doesn't they'll be idiots.
This time, they're trying to do it the right way, which I think is interesting. They're putting the player out before they're putting the media out, and they're attaching cool stuff(games) to the player, which will almost certainly get people buying them. Sure it'll be
Re:Keep dreaming. (Score:2)
Most of Sony's problems in the past 10 years have come from attempts to establish proprietary media standards. DRM has just pushed this stuff into hellish rootkit overdrive.
This is compounded by open civil war between the hardware and content divisions where the company is suing itself repeatedly.
And while they aren't taking losses yet they have had preciptious profit drops, including the notorious 98% drop back in 2003.
Re:Keep dreaming. (Score:2)
Here's a link [yahoo.com]
I hate Sony my own darn self, but let's not make shit up, ok?
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.
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
I already made this comment ! (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem with Sony is That the media division control the development division!
They can do thing that can eventualy and may be remove some little part of the profit of the media division !
So Sony will be in 5 (or lest) year a Media company only !(...)
Well if they don't change !
Re:I already made this comment ! (Score:2)
They put a lot of emphasis on a sentance, making them stronger!
Sentances should be strong, don't back down from what you're saying!
Wiiii!
I like exclamation marks too! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I already made this comment ! (Score:2)
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...
One of the things I find interesting about this... (Score:2, Informative)
Nintendo simply didn't have enough games to push the N64, where as the competition (mainly Sony) did. Now Sony is on the losing stick of console exclusives and with the loss of GTA4 exclusivity, I can only see more titles making the leap as developers realize the 360 cant be taken for granted.
Nintendo used a format that was not in the best interest of the market (cartridges). Blu Ray simply isnt goi
Re:One of the things I find interesting about this (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, they'd be lucky if they could get up to Nintendo's position. Nintendo hasn't posted a yearly loss in the last 20 years, despite their "fall from grace", whereas Sony has been oscillating between profit and loss for the last several years, with quite a bit of time in the loss department. Nintendo might not be as popular, but they're far more successful in terms of profit.
Re:One of the things I find interesting about this (Score:5, Informative)
Re:One of the things I find interesting about this (Score:4, Informative)
According to Nintendo's Company History [nintendo.com], the games produced in 1889 apparently looked a whole lot like Japanese playing cards.
(I freely admit that I initially scoffed at the '116+ years' history for exactly the same reason that you did.)
My prediction... (Score:2)
Blu Ray is the PS3's Biggest Mistake (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Blu Ray is the PS3's Biggest Mistake (Score:2)
ha ha sony loses!
I know... (Score:2)
Who cares... (Score:2, Funny)
"Most people, I think, don't even know what a SONY is, so why should they care about it?"
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.
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.
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 w
Re:Tunnel Vision strikes again (Score:3, Interesting)
Yup... that's what my friends are saying. They're going to buy a Wii AND a 360 for the same price as the PS3.
Me, I'll buy one if they come out with a Linux Kit like they did for the PS2 but that's only because I'm a total nerd
Re:Tunnel Vision strikes again (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Tunnel Vision strikes again (Score:3, Interesting)
Sony have stated that they won't enable it because obviously they want the format to take off and for everyone to enjoy the full HD quality of blu-ray discs. It's also debatable who exactly is going to pirate films like resident evil if they haven't already done so. Sony Pictures blu-ray DVDs will play in HD but no other studio has com
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:Tunnel Vision strikes again (Score:4, Informative)
This is untrue. I make plenty of money, I am an early adapter, and I buy video games and video game systems at the drop of a hat, if there's something that I like on it. The price tag for the non-gimped PS3 is really, really high. There's no way I'm buying a cheaper system that is unupgradable to a better version. I am the target audience, and I no longer want it at that price.
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:Too much credit for the common man (Score:3, Informative)
It comes down to parents buying for their kids. If little Johnny can brag to his friends or if Susie Homemaker can tell her neighbor how they bought one for little Johnny it becomes a status symbol. I remember this f
I'm going to start a company (Score:2)
I'll install Rootkits on people's computers, and charge $600 for a game system in 2006, while my competitors chrage less.
Will my company self destruct? 9 out of 10 dentists agree that regular screwing up will result in company decay.
diminishing returns (Score:2)
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.
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.
$600 -- wtf ? (Score:4, Funny)
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: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.
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.
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.
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.
Re:Yeah, sure. (Score:2)
The PS3 seems exclusively targeted at adult gamers (and overwhelming targeted at a subset of adult gamers: young males). To hell with kids, parents, women, families and non/casual gamers.
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:50% FUD, 50% fanboy. (Score:2)