| AaronSOLDIER said:
Ok yeah, it doesnt have much of a chance in beating the PS2, but beating PS1 maybe. I think they'll drag out this 10 year thing, they are talking about it a lot, I dont think Sony thought PS2 would last this long, but PS3 could last just as long because the technology it has is built to last. It is currently the most powerful console, however, next gen, it will likely be the least powerful, becoming the PS1/2 once again, and by that time, It will be $200 at most.
Just my speculation, but if Sony wants the PS3 to be a success, they should do the above, and this is why they dont need to drop the price immediately, maybe mid 2009, or $50 now and $50 towards the end of the year. They just need to start profitting first. |
The bold is irrelevant. Consoles last a long time based on certain principles.
Consumer interst.
Developer/publisher interest.
Retailer interst.
All 3 are inherently related.
The actual components in the console have very little to do with either. Look at history for what I speak. The "10 year plan" is marketing 101 and nothing more. Sony, or any comapny, can not make their console last arbitrarily longer than the market accepts it.
The rEVOLution is not being televised
