KylieDog said:
For a gaming machine it was too high a price, doesn't matter how much it cost to make and how much loss they were taking.
Should have designed something cheaper to produce. |
Exactly. It wasnt that paying 600 bucks wasnt worth the money it was just that its a lot of money regardless of value.
If sony decided to push 3D gaming and its obvious costs next gen theyd be fools.
I think sony just assumed the following.
DVD for PS2 would be BD for PS3: The flaw? BD was in a format war that dragged on and it wasnt as much of an obvious upgrade as DVD over VHS. The Good? BD may hit its stride in 2010 thus bringing great value and penetration for future PS3's with its new price point and no HD DVD.
Playstation 2 users just wanted a PS3: The flaw? Gamers are gamers. They had access to the 360 a year early, and PS2 gamers were enticed byt the PS2's modest pricing early in its life cycle and capitalized on the lack of success of the gamecube, dreamcast and xbox was late to the party. The good? Not really one to be honest, theres a alot of differentiation and the PS3 isnt head and shoulders above its competitors liek the PS2 was, its an uphill struggle.
Hopefully next gen sony learns from its mistakes, and the success of the Wii and 360 push sony to really make good consumer decisions.
If anything the PS3 has been good for gamers all over because it was humbling for sony and will drive intense competition next gen across the industry because MSFT made leaps and bounds, nintendo made what will probably go down in history as teh most successfully financial and commercial console and Sony will want to get back on top. All three companies will be closer to parralell ground without a single front runner next gen.
Nintendo will have an obvious headstart in mindshare and marketshare and by the end of th egen Sony and MSFT will probably be neck and neck. Great for the industry overall imo.
Sony wont f*** up. Heres hoping.
