| Galvanizer said: I think they see Wii U as just the same power as PS3, so they don't plan to release PS4 in an attempt to compete with it. They see Wii U as competing with the second half of he 10 year life cycle of the PS3. Seeing as PS3 came out in 2006, I see PS4 launching in 2015 or 2016. |
The "10 year plan" means they are going to support the console for 10 years. It never meant (and Sony never said) they'd hold off the successor for 10 years.
A product's lifecycle can be broken down into different phases: Introduction, Growth, Maturity and Saturation. The PS3 is very clearly somewhere between Maturity and Saturation (we'll see after this holiday season). After that profits will go down and sales as well. And with Microsoft definitely planning to launch their next console in 2013 (everything points to that, we even have developer contracts saying they'll have to release games for the NextBox in late 2013), how will PS3 get enough support to profitably stay Sony's main console until 2015?
Yeah, Sony could delay the PS4 to 2015 but only if they really, really want to lose an aweful lot of money.
As for the OP: Nintendo had no other choice but to launch their next console this year. Again, the Wii entered the Saturation stage around 2010 and there was no way for them to stay profitable that way - the only thing they could've done was to slow down the death of the Wii a bit more (which they should have... but hey, Nintendo will never change in some regards). And look at how much money they lost already! Imagine them launching the Wii U even later. Are they at a disadvantage because of this? No, why should they? Launching early proved to be very good business practise in the past and Nintendo success isn't depending on 3rd party support or tech specs - Nintendo's biggest enemy is... Nintendo. Because for some reason they tend to screw up really badly once they've been on top for a while, doing stuff like launching $250 handhelds with a focus on graphics or trying to compete with Sony and Microsoft on their turf (graphics and core games).
There's one more thing I want to add to this discussion as people won't stop talking about graphics when it comes to the success of consoles and it is once more something Clayton Christensen described in his book "The Innovators Dilemma": When he started work on the book Christensen thought of companies as climbers scrambling upward on crumbling footing, which is referred to as the "Technology Mudslide Hypothesis". Basically, this theory says that companies stumble and fail because they can't keep up with technology (it's really popular: Analysts thought Nintendo would fail because they couldn't keep up with the technology of their competitors!) but Christensen discovered this was not true and didn't reflect reality. According to him there are "Technology Leaders" focused on latest tech and "Innovation Leaders" who focus more on disruptive products and innovations.
What Christensen discovered was that "Technology Leaders" may offer the best tech available and are usually first to implement state-of-the-art technology but they almost never are the market leader. On the other hand companies that only implement mature technology aren't seen as high-tech or leaders but they usually have higher sales. In other words Nintendo releasing outdated hardware works in their favor and releasing cutting edge technology hurts Sony. Of course this isn't always the case but it is definitely a better way to look at things than "better tech = better sales". It also explains why Nintendo's sales always drop once they focus on graphics and why the most advanced console never wins a generation.
BTW, I don't write posts like this because I want Sony to fail. I actually want them to succeed because I really like their consoles and games. But they are not in the financial position to start another arms race with Microsoft. Microsoft, on the other hand, could very well release an expensive console again and lose billions on it because, frankly, they can afford it. If we, as gamers, want Sony to succeed we should stop telling them things that will lead to their implosion. Listening to your customers is often great but in Sony's case listening to their most vocal customers is really dangerous (which won't stop them from doing so).
