Avinash_Tyagi said:
MikeB said:
MikeB said:
steverhcp02 said:
I could die happy if Sony neevr says the phrase "10 year life cycle" ever again. They only said it because they started so slowly out of the gate they needed to save face. |
To be fair and accurate, they first stated this before the PS3 actually launched.
Of course they knew they had a high spec console thus with a high entry pricing compared to rivals.
|
Quotes from July 2005 (PS3 first launched at the end of 2006, these comments were made well before any of the new consoles launched):
"We're looking at a life cycle of 10 years with the PlayStation 3. We're currently shifting from standard TVs to HD TVs," said Kutaragi.
"I'm aware that with all these technologies, the PS3 can't be offered at a price that's targeted towards households. I think everyone can still buy it if they wanted to," said Kutaragi.
"So we're going to have to do our best (in containing the price)."
So I think it's a bit sad to read such comments from many people (usually from rival console fanboys).
|
ROFL, I can't believe they didn't see the fail in what they were saying
|
The PS3 is far from a failure.
Of course, if you consider a platform with seventeen games over 90 on metacritic, owner of exclusive game of the years for 2 years in a row, with a free online service that is nearly at par with xbox live, a pay service, with just as many if not more stellar games on the horizon, with an excellent 299$ price point offering more for the consumer for their dollar spent than any other console known to man is a failure then I guess it is.
the ps3 is the only console to ever gain such steam after being behind so much. even then, its already outsold the entire lifetimes of the N64 and the gamecube.
