By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sales - How Sony could have destroyed the 360 and remained profitable

Demotruk on 10 April 2010
rafichamp said:
You do know that Sony sends out Playstation consoles to sell their other products, without ps3 there would be no blu ray, and Sony would have lost a ton of money there. Weither the Playstation brand is profitable or not is not a big issue for Sony.

 

Yeah, Playstation profitability is clearly not a big deal to Sony...



A game I'm developing with some friends:

www.xnagg.com/zombieasteroids/publish.htm

It is largely a technical exercise but feedback is appreciated.

Around the Network
JGarret on 10 April 2010

Sony should´ve hired you, Rol.



Gilgamesh on 10 April 2010
RolStoppable said:
Gilgamesh said:

Your way off, they should of just stuck with the PSOne, never even bothered making a PS2, PS3 and PSP, make it a 20 year plan. Every 10 years they should introduce a new add on to the console and bring up the price so they make even more money. By now PSOne sales would be around 300 million.

No, that's where the graphics are good enough point kicks in. The PS1 would have eventually lost to a sixth gen system because the hardware wasn't competent enough. GTA3 and its sequels, major games of the sixth gen, would have been impossible to replicate on the PS1. The same holds true for plenty of other games, so gamers would move on. Beyond that, graphics of the sixth gen systems wowed gamers, because a difference to PS1 titles was easily visible, something that is clearly not as present with the switch from sixth to seventh gen.

Besides, add ons don't get a lot of third party support. Sooner or later there has to be a new console, hence why Sony could not go on with the PS2 forever. At one point Sony has to respond to the Wii and an add on doesn't cut it.

The point of this thread is that the PS2 was far better suited to compete with the 360 than the PS3 ever was and will be.

That's where the add on's come in, they could of made an add on to improve the graphics to 6th gen console quality but make it so it's still technically the PSOne, in other words the PSOne could continue to compete with the competition in terms of graphics until console gaming is over. And this is the PSOne it had all the third party support so why would they leave the PSOne if they throw on an add on. They'll continue supporting it and making lots of money because the user base of the PSOne would be around 300 million, so every game released on it easily sells over a million.

Also they wouldn't of needed to respond to the Wii if they kept the PSOne, because there would be no Wii, Nintendo would of dropped out of the console business and would of started making games for the PSOne because they would of been dominated so badly in the 6th, it's simple mathematics here, Sony screwed up, they had it in the palm of there hands and threw it away.



Shinobi-san on 10 April 2010

I dont agree with this. If there was no ps3 most of the ps2 owners would simply buy a 360...i dont beleave the wii factors into this that much. The wii appeals 2 a much larger variety of people and thats why it sold so much, the wii was kind of a gaming revalation in this regard, appealing 2 almost everybody. I dont think theres many people who bought a wii instead of a ps3 or 360 4 that matter...



Intel Core i7 3770K [3.5GHz]|MSI Big Bang Z77 Mpower|Corsair Vengeance DDR3-1866 2 x 4GB|MSI GeForce GTX 560 ti Twin Frozr 2|OCZ Vertex 4 128GB|Corsair HX750|Cooler Master CM 690II Advanced|

supercat on 10 April 2010

It would have worked for a year or two, then the 360's superior technology would force its win.



Around the Network
KillerMan on 10 April 2010

Low spec PS3 (hardware between Wii and X360) without blu-ray and with 299$ launch price. It would have destroyed X360 easily in sales and they would have done profit from day one.



JimmyRay on 10 April 2010

No PS3 means worse blu-ray sales and install base, a media sony developed and part owns and is set to profit off every disk sold.

No current gen console means more developers turn to the microsoft console to make the biggest and best games about, developers like to brag. This would be a BIG loss to Sony and loss of commercial partnerships and ties.

Not participating in the HD conslole race woul have given Microsoft full control over this current gen, probably pushing Sony out of the marketplace completely. BAD move.

That's just a couple of reasons I can think of why this thread makes no sense at all.



-Insert PSN Portable ID here-

-Insert XBL Portable ID here-

-Insert Witty Quote/Comment here-

supercat on 10 April 2010
Gilgamesh said:
RolStoppable said:
Gilgamesh said:

Your way off, they should of just stuck with the PSOne, never even bothered making a PS2, PS3 and PSP, make it a 20 year plan. Every 10 years they should introduce a new add on to the console and bring up the price so they make even more money. By now PSOne sales would be around 300 million.

No, that's where the graphics are good enough point kicks in. The PS1 would have eventually lost to a sixth gen system because the hardware wasn't competent enough. GTA3 and its sequels, major games of the sixth gen, would have been impossible to replicate on the PS1. The same holds true for plenty of other games, so gamers would move on. Beyond that, graphics of the sixth gen systems wowed gamers, because a difference to PS1 titles was easily visible, something that is clearly not as present with the switch from sixth to seventh gen.

Besides, add ons don't get a lot of third party support. Sooner or later there has to be a new console, hence why Sony could not go on with the PS2 forever. At one point Sony has to respond to the Wii and an add on doesn't cut it.

The point of this thread is that the PS2 was far better suited to compete with the 360 than the PS3 ever was and will be.

That's where the add on's come in, they could of made an add on to improve the graphics to 6th gen console quality but make it so it's still technically the PSOne, in other words the PSOne could continue to compete with the competition in terms of graphics until console gaming is over. And this is the PSOne it had all the third party support so why would they leave the PSOne if they throw on an add on. They'll continue supporting it and making lots of money because the user base of the PSOne would be around 300 million, so every game released on it easily sells over a million.

Also they wouldn't of needed to respond to the Wii if they kept the PSOne, because there would be no Wii, Nintendo would of dropped out of the console business and would of started making games for the PSOne because they would of been dominated so badly in the 6th, it's simple mathematics here, Sony screwed up, they had it in the palm of there hands and threw it away.

Appreciate the sarcasm.  Also, the lack of critical thinking on this website is occasionally astounding.



belowmeagain on 10 April 2010

the key to either company beating the other at this point is to buy out game development studios causing more exclusive games to come out.



KillerMan on 10 April 2010
RolStoppable said:
Gilgamesh said:
RolStoppable said:

No, that's where the graphics are good enough point kicks in. The PS1 would have eventually lost to a sixth gen system because the hardware wasn't competent enough. GTA3 and its sequels, major games of the sixth gen, would have been impossible to replicate on the PS1. The same holds true for plenty of other games, so gamers would move on. Beyond that, graphics of the sixth gen systems wowed gamers, because a difference to PS1 titles was easily visible, something that is clearly not as present with the switch from sixth to seventh gen.

Besides, add ons don't get a lot of third party support. Sooner or later there has to be a new console, hence why Sony could not go on with the PS2 forever. At one point Sony has to respond to the Wii and an add on doesn't cut it.

The point of this thread is that the PS2 was far better suited to compete with the 360 than the PS3 ever was and will be.

That's where the add on's come in, they could of made an add on to improve the graphics to 6th gen console quality but make it so it's still technically the PSOne, in other words the PSOne could continue to compete with the competition in terms of graphics until console gaming is over. And this is the PSOne it had all the third party support so why would they leave the PSOne if they throw on an add on. They'll continue supporting it and making lots of money because the user base of the PSOne would be around 300 million, so every game released on it easily sells over a million.

Also they wouldn't of needed to respond to the Wii if they kept the PSOne, because there would be no Wii, Nintendo would of dropped out of the console business and would of started making games for the PSOne because they would of been dominated so badly in the 6th, it's simple mathematics here, Sony screwed up, they had it in the palm of there hands and threw it away.

Add ons split the userbase, third parties would rarely put full effort into a device with low market penetration. We've seen that time and time again with all those CD add ons and the 32X. Also, a PS1 with built-in additional horsepower wouldn't cost the same. Third party support does not translate to add ons.

Nintendo remained profitable throughout the Nintendo 64 and Gamecube days, with ease I might add. Therefore it's irrational to suggest that they would drop out of the console business.

They had hugely profitable handheld division though (GB and GBA selling PS numbers)