I agree but I think this doesn't abstract the problem quite enough.
The true crux that their strategy hinges on is the architecture of the PS3 itself.
I mean why would they need to make excuses and find ways to quickly cut cost if not for the original architecture designs. Just to be clear I am not saying that a powerful architecture is always going to produce these sorts of problems but what I am saying is that their decision to develope their own specialized architecture has been the root of most if not all of their problems with the PS3 this generation.
1) Software development cost is increased due to increased development difficulty, which provides incentive for companies to look elsewhere, not exclusively elsewhere but at least to consider their options
2) High cost of developing new architecture from the ground up necessitates higher profit margins to recoup losses in standard opening window.
3) Required High profit margins enforce a required high starting price for consumer
4) High consumer starting price turns potential users off to the product
5) reduced user base further turns off 3rd party developers
6) Situation requires major PR work so PR spin ensues....
7) PR spin results in a less than desirable impact
8) Only option that remains is to cut price to stay competitive and play for the long term.
I am sure I missed some steps in there but I think that illustrates where the problem is truly coming from. And once again I feel I need to stipulate that I am not saying the PS3 is weak or slow or anything of the sort. I believe it is a very capable architecture. But where it fails to be an ideal gaming architecture is it's price, meaning price to purchase and cost to develop for.
 |
| To Each Man, Responsibility |
