Alby_da_Wolf said:
Except for Nintendo, all other competitors always sold HW at a loss for at least two years, to make 2 and 1/2 or even 3 years initial HW losses acceptable Sony must stick with a long lifecycle plan (that doesn't mean not releasing PS4, in its later years PS3 can still exist as entry level console, just as PS2 did and is still doing).
|
LOL I am very much aware of this. But I am sure the intent of this topic was to somehow credit the PS3 with some achievement and discredit the Gamecube. Which I think is pretty pretentious considering the Gamecube cycle will more than likely be more profitable than the PS3 cycle, which is what investors care about. Investors do not care if selling hardware at a loss is the traditional business strategy for the industry, but they do care about profit. I just find it funny that the grounds of this topic is a console taking massive losses selling better than a console that actually made money. But I guess there really isn't much logic to Sony fanboy syndrome.
And I do not think it is appropriate to compare the PS2 with the PS3. The PS3 will never be what the PS2 is.
I'm not a fanboy, I just try to tip the balance in favor of logic and common sense.
