Sony Strategy Thread: Third Party Sony (PS NOW)

[nordlead]

theprof00 said:

nord,
like I said, the ps1 and ps2 were just steps.
Do you remember when Ken Kutaragi said he had like 7 generations of PS planned out already?
They've been on this from day one.
Sure they ended up disrupting other things as well, but I didn't want to create a Malstrom-length article either.
And console games never synced up with pc games until the ps1/n64 generation. Both were capable of giving very similar graphics and ability whereas previously, console games were very limited.

To summarise: you make some good points, but I could eventually show how my OP is just a simplified version of what you said. I just didn't want any tl;drs

I only remember stupid comments from Sony like "I will work 2 jobs for a PS3", "$1500 for finding a PS3 on shelves" and stuff like that. I don't really like Sony as a company as they generally make 2nd/3rd best hardware, but always charge #1 prices in pretty much every category of electronics just because of the name Sony. They are good at some things, but only ok at others. Also, I doubt they really have 7 generations planned out as they don't know what technology will exist in 25 years. Yes you can have a long term goal to still be making home entertainment in 25 years, but I wouldn't say I have 7 generations planned.

You point out that the PS1 and PS2 didn't really disrupt PC other than unified hardware (which isn't new to home consoles), but then go on to say that the PS3 is disrupting PC through the webbrowser (which sucks horribly) and online (which I wouldn't really say is disruptive at all), and then they tried to redo the DVD disruption with Blu-Ray to some success. So if they were disrupting the PC market, does the realtive failure of the PS3 (to the PS2) mean that their disruption failed and PC is regaining "market share"?