dallas said:
Kasz216 said:
dallas said:
I dont really view the $600 thing as a "mistake" but rather a question of whether or not to put the Blu-ray drive in, and ultimately if all of the extras that blu-ray will give (like not only blu-ray games, but the entire 3-d thing as well b/c 3-d games/movies are basically required to use blu-ray). Sony basically knew in advance that it would start the 3-d revolution, and reasoned that it first had to lock-in blu-ray. And ultimately, I think that Sony made the right choice, even if it did sacrifice its games division for a few years at the expense of other efforts. Now, Sony has a market for 3-d theatre projectors, cameras for both film and consumer use, TV's and laptops, 3-d blu-ray players , etc. While Samsung leads with the most visible product, the 3-d TV, Sony basically leads everywhere else and are really helping movie makers implement 3-d filming so that it turns out well for the moviegoer. That kind of leadership ultimately makes you a leader of the market and usually, a moneymaker.
|
They shouldn't have needed to though. I mean, it's all only because Sony's division's don't know how to play nice.
I mean, Sony owns a LOT of big studios.
There should of been no way HD-DVD could of won.
But hell, we get Sony Studio based games on Wii and 360. Why doesn't Sony protect it's own intelectual property rather then sell off the liscensing for people making games also for their competitors?
The Sony family of divisions is like a bunch of princes fighting and hindering each other tooth and nail to be named the favorite and successor to the kingdom(company) with no real love and cooperation when it would only help each other.
|
Even today, a large proportion of blu-ray movies are played from a PS3, i've read 60 or 75%. Sony knows that they're going to have to give it all the help they can.
|
Seriously? I had no idea Blu-ray was doing that horribly. I mean, I know it wasn't great but.... yikes.
