teigaga said:
1. The aquisition of Gaikai cost $380. Sony sold $1.9 billion of convertable bonds to fund this and OTHER expansions. I think they've already found the capital. 2. Simply because they aquired a cloud gaming service, it does not mean that they plan on going 100% cloud in the next few years, the infastrature is not readily available for even the vast majority of the rich, western population to be have this content work in a way which replaces console gaming. 3. Of course they have been investing more into mobile, so has every other eletronics company in the world. Cloud will provide some very cool opportunities for mobile devices and especially any dedicated Handhelds, but popular mobile device don't have any buttons, so this doesn't need be discussed any further. 4. They're removing all of the companies who haven't produced successfull games in a while, whilst they're core teams (there are still a lot) are expanding (Naughty Dog is now 2 teams). We also do not know that they are not working with even more developers. Sony do not necessarily own the developers who make exclusives with for them (quantum dreams, insomniac). 5. By "everything" are you opting to ignore hundreds upon hundreds of articles reporting new versions of Orbis Dev kits, game development and leaked concept documents. |
1. That logic might work if the reason for the issuing of the bonds had not been specified. They were released to fund acquistions, and to expand imaging sensor facilities. These are Sony's words not mine. So you still need to find a billion dollars somewhere, and while Sony has cash reserves. The reason they issued these bonds in the first place. Was so as not to cut too deeply into them. Those reserves are after all proof that Sony can pay off its short term debts
2. Your probably giving Sony more credit then it deserves, or is it less credit then it deserves. Your laboring under the assumption that Sony needs total market penetration on day one, and that isn't something they even get with consoles now anyway. That hasn't stopped Sony from selling their consoles in market with poor broadband. Hell it didn't stop them from selling a wireless internet enabled console in markets where that technology was far from the norm. The point being that they don't need to have a hundred million users on day one. They can just exploit improvements in infrastructure as they arrise.
3. No they have keypads, touch screens, arrow keys, and tilt sensors. Unless a game has a terribly complicated control scheme. You can play it on most portable devices. I can't believe you even tried to make that argument. Besides your missing the point in that Sony isn't a company that has the resources to be out there playing the whole field. Kaz Harai said it himself they would start to focus their efforts.
4. Where have you been this generation. Microsoft has stolen most of Sony's third party exclusives, and has even lured Sony's second parties into developing for the Xbox. What did you forget that Insomniac is developing a game for both the 360 and the PS3. You might have a point if you were talking about Microsoft, because Microsoft is willing to fund third party exclusives. Sony has stated publicly however that they refuse to do such a thing. Here don't take my word for it here is a direct quote.
"We have a very different approach to exclusives than some of our competitors. We don't buy exclusivity. We don't fund development. We don't, for the lack of a better term, bribe somebody to only do a game on our platform."
Right now Sony has about sixty percent of the strength that Microsoft has in first party studios. Sony doesn't have a lot when compared to Microsoft. Which has according to Wikipedia seven more studios then Sony. Closing studios doesn't make Sony more competitive. It makes them less competitive. At their current rate of attrition. It is conceivable that Sony will end up having at best one exclusive for every two that Microsoft will have. They don't need to match title for title, but they need to be closer to be competitive.
5. You shouldn't listen to rumors. Ask around I accidentally started a rumor on these forums no less. That was reported on a hundred different sites, and was even responded to on television. I even said in the body of the post that it seemed like complete bullshit to me. Yet somehow I became a reliable enough source to make headlines. The point of the story is the gaming media has almost no journalistic integrity. The fact that they print rumors should be proof enough of that. Once one of them reports something. That seems to be all that it takes to get the ball rolling. So all you really need to start a rumor is to have a bullshitter with almost no skill.
Look rumors can be fun, but any volume of them is never going to be a substitute for hard facts. These stories aren't independently verified. One guy reports on a rumor he heard. Which he may have well just concocted all on his own, and every site out there just copy pastes that story.
