Think about that. I don't know about PSone, but with early PS2 years and with PS3 Sony had losses. Huge ones according to some. Current situation of the PS3 might be better with the slim model, but before that Sony was in the black. Pitch dark black.

Would Sony be a better, more competent and profitable company if it's gaming division was focused only on game development for thirds?

I cannot see a Sony IP failing if properly implemented honestly. Games like Gran Turismo, Uncharted and Killzone would sell amazingly well on a console as the 360, while Ape Escape and Jak and Daxter would be the best games on a console like the Wii.

Sure they would also sell on their own hardware (and sells)... but the losses on hardware minimize such profit.

Sony as a company, stock holders, both Nintendo and Microsoft, gamers... Wouldn't it be better to everyone?

They only lose so much money on hardware because they realize the moral imperative of giving their customers the most for their money. Sony's only problem as a company is that they're guilty of caring too much!

Yes, you're probably right.

Sony is a company for the customers, i agree with badgenome. They gave us way too much for my money and they are welcomed to continue their business in hardware. They are the ones pushing boundaries this generation.

Seeing as how the PS1 and PS2 not only won their perspective markets, but blew them away, I'm going to say no. The PS3 might not be where many thought it would be, but it's far too early to consider what you're talking about. Sony brought in boat loads of cash from third party licensing fees with PS1 and PS2.

So, no.

honestly, if anything nintendo would be the better third party..
i was actually hoping after GC they'd become one;
imagine zelda on the PS3 today and Metroid on Xbox360

'nuff said

Uhh black means recording a profit. Maybe you meant some other color?

You guys are thinking just about you and not form the stock holders and company prespective.

What do you prefer:
1 - Have a company that actually makes profit on almost everything.
2 - Have company that has huge losses because you're selling goods for a lower price that it costs you.

I think the obvious choice is obvious.

And at Sony pushing boundaries this gen, shouldn't that be Nintendo? The Wii move is a 4 years late copy of the Wiimote, not the opposite. They just made a more powerfull and complex machine with a new media and sold it for a loss. I see no boundaries being pushed here...

Nintendo doesn't sell their hardware for a loss, being a very profitable company, while others are quite the opposite.

Dropping on profitable hardware sales to focus just on software? I don't think that would generate more money than their current strategy,

I meant the color of profit fail and huge losses. If it isn't black for you I'm sorry, it's just the way I'm used to read and hear things that are going bad.

They might make some more short term profits but I think the hardware could help them long term. They would loose out on all the money the get from games that sell well on the console that aren't made by them.