By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Jereel Hunter on 14 August 2012
Edit Thread
DanneSandin said:
Jereel Hunter said:
DanneSandin said:
I don't get why journalists are so fearful of Apple getting into the gaming biz. They're all about casual use: iPhone, iPad, iPod - they're all very simple to use. Hardcore games are by definition NOT easy to use/play! It's H-A-R-D C-O-R-E. they might make a casual console (like the Wii was/is) but they'd rely souly on 3rd party: no core gamer would abandon NinSonySoft for some fruit ninjas or angry birds console. That piece of shit really would be a piece of shit console.

I think it's because Sony's business model has always required them to sell to the masses - casual and hardcore - in order to work. PS1 and PS2 were very profitable - because they sold over 100M units each. PS3 is still on pace to lose money throughout the course of it's life (or it MAY break even by the end). Which is crazy for a system that's sold 65M units, and likely to sell 100M. The 360 overall is likely to be more profitable than the PS1 or PS2, but it will never eclipse, or even approach, their total unit sales. Were apple to throw their hat into the ring, it erodes Sony's marketshare even further - something their business model's have been thus far unable to handle.

I don't think the 360 will be more profitable than PS1 or 2: first off, they were sold at a lose for the first years, and secondly: RROD cost MS half a BILLION dollars or something like that... But that's not the point we're talking about =)

I imagen a console from Apple would almost only get casual gamers, and that's not where the big money is at in gaming. Sure, they'd sell a ton of console, but fewer games (think "Wii"), and definetly not hardcore games. Well, not much of 'em anyways. Sure, that would leave Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo to fight over the core gamers - and one of those could surely go, but the market wouldn't be much different than how this generation has been.

the PS1 and PS2 were sold at losses to begin their lifecycles as well - that's built into the business model for the "hardcore" systems. 

And the "big money" in gaming is whatever sells the most. the big money is in getting casual and hard core - but the Wii showed that if you target just one, casual is probably the way to go. (they made more this generation than Sony and MS did combined - not counting handhelds)

The point is, all 3 consoles are set up differently as regards profit. Nintendo systems will always profit, whether they are #1, or #3. They sell at a profit from the get-go. Microsoft requires a fair number of unit sales for their business model to pay off, but the online revenue allows them to profit without selling 100m units. Sony REQUIRES 100M units to break even. The PS3 as a whole is still a couple billion in the red over it's lifecycle. Point is, Sony's model doesn't function unless they successfully capture both market segments - and there's no way that could happen if suddenly a 4th big contender entered the ring.