By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
johnlucas said:
your mother said:
johnlucas said:
 

*PS3 will not see life beyond the year 2009

Ouch, I don't know about that one. Sony backs the PS3 and with the amount invested, the losses outstanding, and the bets hedged on it (both the games division and Blu-Ray), I somehow think it will last longer than the 3DO, as it also had a 3-year lifespan.

Any reasons why for your pessimism? Just want to know.


Man seriously I hate how this board doesn't allow Firefox users to snip out all those extraneous quote trails! Internet Explorer is a distant memory for me now ever since I got hipped to Firefox.

What you said right there is basically the reason why PS3 won't make it out of the year 2009. Too much investment, too little returns. And they are losing their hold on the console market with each passing day. Their dominance of the past decade didn't yield them proportional returns. Even Sony fan Hus was shocked by that.

The greatest selling system of all time and it only made 2 billion profit??? A lot of expenditure for little payout. In sheer dominance they were *just* able to make it worth their while. In drought they will not be so fortunate. This company cannot survive as an underdog. And Microsoft being in this business will continue to pressurize Sony as XBox 360's headstart allows them to siphon away all of Sony's potential customers. They will continue to sucker Sony into this financial game of chicken until Sony spends themselves out of the business. Microsoft can play the lossleading game better than Sony can because they got more loss to lose. Microsoft is trying to replace Sony in the worst possible way. They want them out of this field first so as not to encroach on MS's territory and so they can be better able to leverage this videogame strategy into their corporate diversification.

If MS wasn't here even Sony's mistakes wouldn't necessarily doom them just severely hurt them. Microsoft on top of all the rest makes it fatal. Just my take on it.

Oh & the Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD battle is ultimately irrelevant. It will at best be an enthusiast/connoisseur format whoever wins that. People are not gonna toss out their just acquired DVD collections overnight just to buy 'em all back in the new more expensive format. Not to mention the DRM backlash. And some left field format in the near future may render both of those formats obsolete anyhow.

The switch from VHS to DVD had a lot of practical points; the case is just not the same for this sudden format shift proposal. 

John Lucas


Man there are some ignorant people posting here. Anyone who says the PS3 won't make it beyond 2009 simply doesn't know what he or she is talking about. You are the typical Sony hater that doesn't understand the market at all. Now I don't claim to be an expert, but I know enough to say that console cycles don't get decided this early. You make it seem like the 360 is taking over the world, when even in it's best market, the US, it gets beat by the PS2 on a monthly basis. In Europe the 360 is underperforming, and it's still irrelevent in Japan. The 360 is doing better than the PS3 right now, but not by enough that's it's building anything near an insurmountable lead. And Sony's brand name image in the gaming industry still kill that of Microsoft's. The 360 is selling because it's the only option now for that hardcore gamer that wants great graphics and actually wants more than 1 or 2 games worth buying. Once the PS3 gets some games the brand name of Sony will really start to kick in. I'm not going to say it's inevitable that the PS3 will overtake the 360 worldwide, but I still think that's what probably will happen.