Typically generation systems last about 9 years (though the past few generations have seen shorter spans). The ps3 could make it 10 years I believe, but the negative stigma and relatively poor sales will probably force their hand to the ps4.
Typically generation systems last about 9 years (though the past few generations have seen shorter spans). The ps3 could make it 10 years I believe, but the negative stigma and relatively poor sales will probably force their hand to the ps4.
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
I think at $149 a lot more than power users will care about those features. |
Proud member of the Sonic Support Squad
Only around 20 more months until the Playstation 2 is 10 years old maybe that's when it gets discontinued.
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
Nope, at sub-$200 (eventually, later half of the cycle), with its game library and movie download service and hard drive and media center capability and Blu-Ray player and free worldwide videoconferencing, it will continue to sell. |
You have to think that if the PS3 ever gets to this price-point, and assuming Blu-Ray has become the "standard', everyone and their dog will be making dirt cheap blu-ray players a la the current state of the DVD player industry. Also, by the time it gets to this price point it's very likely Nintendo and MS will have jumped the gun on their next round of consoles and force Sony to play their cards with the PS4. BUT, who really knows until it happens right? ;)
Sony COULD continue to support the PS3 long after the PS4 comes out but they won't.
It's simply really. The PS2 was so successful and still sells today because it has wide appeal amongst casual gamers - who are often the last to purchase a system. PS3 is a core system in every respect. As soon as the next gen launches the PS3 audience will very quickly abandon it for the newer model and the PS3's sales will drop like a rock because casuals gamers have no interest in it.
If anyone thinks the PS3 can last for ten years due to it being "future proof" just shut up now you look like a fool.
I believe the PS3 can make 10 years, as can the 360 and Wii, only because this generation IMO is going to last much much longer than others have.
The PS2 is alive due to its massive userbase. That is it.
It goes without saying that a console's predecessor will be released before the end of that console's lifespan. So I do see the PS4 being released before the end of the PS3. But I also see the PS3 still being pushed for some time since they are about to make a profit on the hardware. Why invest so much R&D on a new console when they are about to profit from the PS3 hardware? And with the current economy, all software parties will financially benefit by not having to spend more resources in learning to develop for newer hardware. The projection for the PS3 is 10 years which is understandable because of the success of the PS2. But the PS3 is not quite acheiving the same succes of the PS2at the current rate. But then again ironicly because of the economic turn down, I see the higher potential of a 10 year PS3 lifespan because it would be most cost effecient to push and develop for a product as much as you can to maximize profits. So if it takes the PS4 longer to come out, they so be it. It's make the PS3 more worth the purchase, and it potentially make the PS4 a better system as technology improves over time.
Hackers are poor nerds who don't wash.
seece said: If anyone thinks the PS3 can last for ten years due to it being "future proof" just shut up now you look like a fool. I believe the PS3 can make 10 years, as can the 360 and Wii, only because this generation IMO is going to last much much longer than others have. The PS2 is alive due to its massive userbase. That is it. |
But with that PS2 massive userbase comes a variety of quality software and an eventuality of consumer friendly pricing due to mass adoption. So the reality is far greater and pleasing than you'd care to express. Stop being such a PlayStation hater. There is no excuse.
:)
Hackers are poor nerds who don't wash.
I actually think the reason PS2 is still supported is because the PS3 failed to take off as well as Sony had originally expected. It is assinine to think that the last place console will command 10 years of attention, the more sluggish the sales the less attention it will receive.
Bet between Slimbeast and Arius Dion about Wii sales 2009:
If the Wii sells less than 20 million in 2009 (as defined by VGC sales between week ending 3d Jan 2009 to week ending 4th Jan 2010) Slimebeast wins and get to control Arius Dion's sig for 1 month.
If the Wii sells more than 20 million in 2009 (as defined above) Arius Dion wins and gets to control Slimebeast's sig for 1 month.
Arius Dion said: I actually think the reason PS2 is still supported is because the PS3 failed to take off as well as Sony had originally expected. It is assinine to think that the last place console will command 10 years of attention, the more sluggish the sales the less attention it will receive. |
In regards to the PS2, this is partially true due to the profits earned from buying PS2's and their peripherals. Because the PS2 was still in high demand and the PS3 was so costly to produce, SONY was forced to take out backwards compatibility from the PS3 to reduce the production cost AND to earn extra profit from PS2 and PS2 peripherals that would not have occured because a backwards compatible PS3 owner would have less reasons to buy a PS2 and PS2 peripherals. But in reagrds to a last place console (PS3) to "command" 10 years of atttention, this gen has been the most unconventional gen of all console history. What you are saying is normally true, but given the current circumstances, you never know by examples I've stated in previous posts.
Hackers are poor nerds who don't wash.