Please some explain this to me

[radha]

d21lewis said:
The Price: PS3 anticipation was so high that Sony was drinking their own Kool-Aid. They figured that the Playstation brand alone was so strong that everyone would just accept the console for $600. For what it offered, maybe the price was justified, but a lot of that stuff meant NOTHING to the average consumer.

The Cell: Since the days of the PS2, Sony figured that since they were number one, developers would have to figure out how to create on their systems or be left in the dark. The 360's games at the time weren't at the level that they were during the PS3's development/launch. Sony figured that they were still the only game in town.

Dev Kits: I have no opinion on this.

Competition has a lead: Sony was never the first console to the market. The Saturn and the Dreamcast beat the PS1 and PS2 to the market. Sony even said that the one year head start was no big deal. A member of their PR said that they would overtake Microsoft's lead as quickly as possible and move on. Sony was an expert at kicking Sega's ass, but Microsoft has a lot more resources to draw from.

Blu Ray: Sony's consoles have always launched with the next big media phenomenon. This time, it was the Blu-Ray. Only this time, Blu-Ray is a harder sell to the average public. The difference between CD's and Cassettes or DVD's vs. VHS is not the same as Blu-Ray vs. DVD. Many consumers just don't see the difference. A lot are just content to see a movie. All of the bonus features in the world couldn't justify the upgrade. Even now, while I have a Blu-ray player I'm more inclined to buy a DVD. It's just easier to watch on my laptop, portable DVD player, other rooms, or a friend's house, rather than being confined to my one Blu-Ray player. Sony over estimated the consumer. Not everyone appreciates HDTV yet.


At launch, I was extremely dissapointed buy the Xbox 360. It seemed to be nothing but a slightly more powerful Xbox. By the time the PS3 rolled around, the second generation of 360 titles were able to keep up with what the PS3 was promising. Other factors like online and third party exclusives/multi-plats were unforseeable. Sony just took too much for granted.

This here is a great explanation, SMcc1887 has a good one to, i make this questions because is hard to believe they are  improvising (but i think they are), it all seems as if they had a big plan but it didn't work so now the plan is to stay low the entire gen. Anyway i do have some concerns about the ps3's future since it is very hard for me to get another console.  the thing is this 17+ million ps3 owners( i don't know how many are gamers), have made a bigger and riskier sacrifice than the one sony is willing to take and seem unfair to me. Sony is talking about loss but ps3 owner have given them 3 billion dollars in hardware alone, i think maybe 3 billions in software so from the gamers point of view this investment becomes a lost if the system gets less exclusive and games with lower quality.

So if they have some giant plan B and this is it, not cutting the price for the holidays, delaying the best games(GT5 winter 2009??), no advertising, etc. where is the light at the end of the tunnel?????

To the dude saying am trolling, i own a PS3 and no other console.