Who here thinks ps3 is Sonys' last videogame console?

[Pristine20]

johnlucas said:

Jeronimo66 said:

I think it is, because Ken Kutaragi is no longer at Sony, he was the one that pushed for PSONE, PS2 and PS3, he is no longer at Sony, and the way Sony Computer Entertainment is talking, is that they will try to get as much money from ps3, and had to convince Sony that the ps3 is worthy investment, that tells me that the big heads at Sony doesn't see the Playstation business as important, that if anything is an indication to me that the ps3 will most likely be Sonys' last console.

 

DISCUSS!

I do.

And the point you made about the importance of Ken Kutaragi in SCE is one I have made before.

HE'S the one who with great struggle pushed Sony into the games business & so long as the division was profitable they stuck by it. The videogaming business is ripe for software piracy & is complicated due to retailer conflict & buyer apathy toward certain titles. It's a tough business to make money in which is why Sony used the lossleading business model to break into the biz like Microsoft did in the grandest fashion with the original XBox.

Think about it. These corporate giants struggle to break even on their expenditures bringing their consoles to market. Meanwhile a company much smaller manages to make money on every angle with profit margins far proportionally larger than its mega-sized competitors.

If the PS3 has already according to some reports blown through the equivalent of the profits of the PS2, the best-selling console in videogame history, and still hasn't closed the production loss gap yet, then SCE is in bad shape to try for another console.

When Gamecube failed Nintendo was still flush with money. That brief 2003 loss was probably expenditure for R & D for the then-upcoming DS & Wii. Sony Corp. is much bigger than SCE, true. But do you really think Sony would hang on to a business as rough as the videogame business at the detriment to the entire corporation? ESPECIALLY without Kutaragi in the mix??

In truth, Microsoft shouldn't have stuck with a product that cost them nearly $4 billion. Their motivations to stay in this business show that they seek to waste as much as it takes to secure a larger goal. They want to take over the living room & folks like Sony are in the way. Sony wants the same thing as Microsoft only in a different method. Microsoft also is desperate to diversify their portfolio before their computer operating software empire gets disrupted. But if it gets too bad for them they'll leave too.

They're doing much better than XBox 1 but they still haven't fully mastered the scene. Internationally they're weak but in the biggest market in the world (USA) they're solid. Should Nintendo ratchet up the pressure on them, watch Microsoft respond & learn what all challengers to Nintendo eventually learn: Nintendo are the masters of this business.

Nintendo has redefined how consoles should be done philosophically as well as technically. The other two can't continue on this path which has given them only limited success if that. New competitors & dark horses will emerge to complicate the scene even further so all of this crowds out a struggling Sony. Apple is the immediate example.

The market really can't support 3 major competitors as it is now so somebody's going to be replaced if a newcomer makes a compelling product. Whenever Microsoft decides to turn up the heat on Sony, Sony will find it harder to hold on. I don't think Sony will have the heart to have a chance at TWO $3 billion losses back to back. There's no guarantee a new system will wow the crowd. The PSP while resurgent in Japan did not accomplish its ultimate mission even though I'm sure by now it's recovered the production loss gap. Even with the PSP & PS2 combined, SCE cannot significantly hold off the losses of the PS3.

People will expect not only a new PSP but a new PS for the home. How will they pull this off with a schism in the international markets which see Japan as handheld first & rest of world as home console first? Can they make an internationally appealing handheld and home console? Can they stop the momentum of the incumbent market champion, Nintendo? Can they diminish the impact of new competitors trying to enter the scene?

If they can, then yes there will be another PlayStation. But if they can't, it would probably be wise not to gamble the whole company on a sector like videogames. They would probably have to make a new brand too since the name PlayStation may have run its course & sequel numbers like 4 begin to look tacky.

2009 is gonna be rough for SCE internationally. Japan's their best hope right now. If Nintendo ever reverses their rise there, that could be it. Unlike Nintendo, Sony's not making money from SCE. If the division's losses become so great that it affects the entire company on the balance sheet, the shareholders will revolt if they DON'T cut SCE loose.

John Lucas

Honestly your post totally bases of the assumption that "ps4" will stick to ps3 loss-leading powerhouse model while at the same time recognizing that ps3 losses are because of that very model. If the ps3 hardware wasn't sold at a loss, SCE would be profitable despite the ps3's relatively poor performance. If the business model changed, SCE can remain profitable even if profits are not as great as hoped for. Also, ps3's model is responsible for the other sector of losses, R&D, as well. Putting the facts together, it's obvious that getting rid of the model solves 90% of profitability issues.

Secondly Kutaragi is still at sony although he doesn't have a "real" job. Considering the fact that the gaming industry was once sony's cash cow, I don't see them pulling out. People like to compare sony to sega but the difference here is that sony has tasted some serious profit in this industry that sega never did. The fact that nintendo still tastes this kind of extreme profit signals to a corporation (which are built to make money lest we forget) to emulate or invent whatever model it takes to achieve success that once was.

You also mention sony getting basically choked out by M$ yet most people who understand SCE's failure this gen know it was self-made and had nothing to do with M$. M$ just benefited off what sony did to themselves. This also gives Sony motivation to keep SCE. Why? Failure was majorly due to controllable internal causes not uncontrollable external factors.

Lastly, you talk like the industry belongs to nintendo and anyone who steps in "challenges" them. The truth of the matter is even ninty themselves was on the verge of quitting after the underperformance of the GC and N64. They basically bet it all on the wii and lucked out. Thats not the attitude of people who have the thing in the bag. They sure do have it in the bag now but as we've seen over and over, with time comes change.