Would it make sense for Sony to add an UHD drive in 12 months?

[Kerotan]

Mr Puggsly said:

Kerotan said:

Let's not rewrite history here.  If ps3 had a dvd player and cost a lot less than it did it wouldn't have stumbled out the gate.  

You say Sony won and consumers lost.  By thet logic consumers lost with the Wii and the 360. Well on the 360 those who bought the HD dvd actually did lose.  

You're wrong to say consumers lost.  You'd be right though if you specified that a really small percentage of consumers have lost.  Because UHD is niche in its market.  

Sony won,  yes,  all consumers didn't lose,  a small niche did,  and all consumers won in terms of price.  Happy days.  

I'm not rewriting history, the Cell was a super processor and compeltely unnecessary for a game console. Using a more traditional, low end, processor would have been easier for developers to work with and cheaper. Perhaps they should have spent more on the GPU and less on the CPU. The processor change alone could have kept the price lower.

Okay, consumers benefit from not having UHD in their 4K box. That's obvious.

No you're conveniently ignoring the fact the ps3 went with blu ray when others didn't. We can shift the goalposts to CPU and GPU but we're talking about blu ray drives so why go off on a tangent?  

 

If xbox 360 went with a blu ray drive and so did the Wii but the ps3 didn't,  they both would have sold less and the ps3 sold more.  It didn't help Sony as much as it damaged them.  And it helped their opposition. 

 

The mass market didn't care then and this gen the mass market will care even less.  UHD is more niche then blu ray was then.  

 

Good job Sony.  Cater for the masses and not a small percentage.  Saving us money.  I appreciate that because with so many awesome games and psvr coming,  every little helps.