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

Forums - Sales - Its time to admit it. PS3 will NEVER overtake 360.

jarrod on 07 July 2010
joeorc said:
jarrod said:
joeorc said:
Killiana1a said:

As I stated earlier in this thread, Sony took a $4.7 billion loss from when the PS3 was released until it started becoming profitable, which was around 2009.

That $4.7 billion was a real cost incurred by Sony and until they manage to recoup that $4.7 billion and then some from Walkman sales, television sales, or whatever, then the PS3 cannot be considered a worthwile, profitable venture that beckons a PS4.

All of that profit the PS3 is making now is what Accounting 101 calls a "credit" and that $4.7 billion loss is what Accounting 101 calls a "debit." Sony has a lot of credits to make from the PS3 in order to remove the parentheses from the red (4.7) billion.

I am just wondering what kind of uninformed investor invests in companies such as Sony who have shown with the PS3, that they are willing to take a $4.7 billion loss and still have another $5 billion loss via the PS4 in the next 5 years?

Now, I am assuming: 1. There will be a PS4 and 2. Sony and Kaz Hirai will try to 1up Nintendo and Microsoft by putting out another overpriced vanity machine (PS4) at a price all except the most fervent of Sony supporters will not buy.

I don't wish death on Sony as I have been a consumer of their product in my younger years, I just wish they would own up to their past mistakes, chop some heads off in their company, and get back to the basics by prioritizing what products are making a profit, continue to make those profitable products, and shut down the products and company divisions who are running at a loss, while being subsidized by the more profitable product divisions.

YET MORE DIATRIBE: LOL....

Playstation does not just = the PS3

yes let's just to choose to ignore the PSP profit's, the PS2 profit's and software from those 2 other platform's including the PS3 software profit's and PSN digital sales and the profit's from Home, and now PSN plus.....

PSP,PS2,PSN,PSN(PLUS),Home,psp software, PS2 software,ps3 software

is greater than just the

"PS3"

Actually, those were all considered and accounted for, he's talking SCE's overall loss.  In a very real sense just the "PS3" was greater than "PSP,PS2,PSN,PSN(PLUS),Home,psp software, PS2 software,ps3 software" in terms of loss/profit.

We'll never know the real scale of PS3's massive hardware losses because as you pointed out, those profitable sectors were helping pull up the division...

no it's not!

read what he stated! he's not talking about their entire profit's, he was just talking about the PS2's peak sales year's for the PAST 5 year's

" Sony has lost more money selling PlayStation 3s than it made selling PlayStation 2s during the entire five years of its peak."

the profit's that The PS3 ate into was the profit's for the PS2 for the last 5 year's when he made that statement  5 year's is not the entire profit's for the PS2 all together:

Hell he's not even including the PS1 or the PSP.

he's trying to point out just one aspect of the situation to say it = the entire profit loss of the entire playstation platform which is not true at all.

One product in their catalog does not = the entire catalog's sale's/profit's if there is more than just one product

the PS1's which had 10 year's worth of sales, the PSP now over 6 year

just because you want to concentrate on just one product does not mean you just ignore the other's in the catalog!

and why would they not help, their still playstation product's!

The PS3 is now profitable on it's own, now Sony has 3 Playstation Hardware Product's on the market that sell @ a profit!

Er... you don't seem to grasp though, PSP, PS2, etc are automatically figured in given he's using division profit/loss figures from SCE.  That $4.7B loss figure he's throwing out?  That already has PSP's profits, and PS2's concurrent profits, and any profit from PS3 software/HOME/etc figured into it.  The truth is PS3 lost SCE far more than $4.7B.  PS3 has actually lost more than PS2 and PSP ever made (and also counting PS1's latter 5 years of pure profits), all combined.   Forget PS2's "peak years", PS3 has lost that and then some.

If we only had SCE figures from 93/94/95/96, we could judge if the PlayStation division has been profitable or not overall... going from 97-on though it's already close to a loss overall.



Around the Network
jarrod on 07 July 2010
joeorc said:
jarrod said:
Mr Puggsly said:
Solid_Snake4RD said:
Mr Puggsly said:

5) I wonder how much they'll make off Bluray royalties. Was it worth making the PS3 a disaster?

do you even have any idea what you can make from a formaty royalties.the losses made by the PS3 will be easily wiped out

Were the standard DVD royalties that worthless?

they weren't worthless but they were dying and slowly decreasing in amount to as DVD forum cuts the royalty fees to continue demand

and if they didn't go with BLU-RAY then HD-DVD would have won and they  would have got nothing.

but now they are getting both DVD and BLU-RAY royalties

5) Seems like a lot of people get royalties from Bluray. Lets all hope their share is enough to cover the PS3.

"Easily wiped out" is something I've never seen supported by hard numbers, anywhere.  Sony's take on Blu-Ray royalties is said to be under 30%, and even less than rival electronics maker Panasonic (who also supplies Nintendo's optical formats btw).  Sony & Phillips basically had to bring so many companies on board to ensure the format's victory (including rival content firms like Disney and initial HD-DVD backer Warner), that they've locked themselves out of the lucrative sort of royalties they started the platform for... the way things went, they might as well have gone with DVD Forum submission.  Sony's still getting a bigger take than they did from DVD (they barely got anything there, Toshiba's standards really took most) but far, far less than they got off CD-ROM (whose patents, and thus royalties, expired in 2001), and worse they had to basically sacrifice their most valuable product line (PlayStation) in a needless format war of their own making.

Also, the BR Group has been steeply dropping license fees to help further drive adoption, try to bring Chinese manufacturers back on board (after CBHD has decimated them in Asiaq) and due to content provider outcries (many of whom now sit on the same board), they've been precipitously dropping fees (far faster than DVD did), meaning even less return from Sony's perspective.  At best I think Blu-Ray can be seen as a pyrrhic victory for PS3's failure, most analysts agree the format won't be as lucrative as DVD, CD or VHS, digital content delivery is on the verge of taking over for film and emerging as a force for games, and I'd say it's very arguable if Sony in the long view has actually gained more from Blu-Ray's victory than they have lost from the downfall of and damage to the PlayStation brand...


that's not true At all and that Diatribe is getting rather Silly.

You do know that unlike HDDVD Blu-ray was already decided by 22 of the largest CE manuf. back in 2002 because The Blu-Ray format was ready to go 3 year's before HD DVD was even ready with it's first Device.

any thing to get a jab in on Sony keep it up ..

lol.  Looks like your grasp of Blu-Ray's history is about as firm as your grasp of SCE's financials. ;)

But please, don't let my "Diatribe" stand in your way.  You just keep on defending that hive...



iWarMachine on 07 July 2010

damn...this is the most derailed thread ever! and LOL at the guy saying that exclusives doesn't matter... dude, the exclusive games are what makes you choose between consoles...yeah, sure you can play bayonetta in the 360 instead of god of war 3...but in the ps3, i can play both, and with the 360 i can't.



I'm Back! - Proud owner of the best doomed handheld of all time!

jarrod on 07 July 2010
iWarMachine said:

damn...this is the most derailed thread ever! and LOL at the guy saying that exclusives doesn't matter... dude, the exclusive games are what makes you choose between consoles...yeah, sure you can play bayonetta in the 360 instead of god of war 3...but in the ps3, i can play both, and with the 360 i can't.

Well, in that case you'll also be playing a gimped Bayo. :/

Not all multiplatform releases are created equal, literally, and this is something that at least historically has tended to favor 360.  Of course there are also cases where the PS3 rev comes out ahead (Burnout Paradise, FFXIII) but those tend to be exceptions for the most part. 



Kynes on 07 July 2010

It seems that this link is always relevant:

 

http://neogaf.net/forum/showpost.php?p=19625436&postcount=90



Around the Network
Acevil on 07 July 2010
Kynes said:

It seems that this link is always relevant:

 

http://neogaf.net/forum/showpost.php?p=19625436&postcount=90


I love how nintendo always has to offset sony's loses in total.  At least in 10Q1 and Q2.



 

huaxiong90 on 07 July 2010
jarrod said:
iWarMachine said:

damn...this is the most derailed thread ever! and LOL at the guy saying that exclusives doesn't matter... dude, the exclusive games are what makes you choose between consoles...yeah, sure you can play bayonetta in the 360 instead of god of war 3...but in the ps3, i can play both, and with the 360 i can't.

Well, in that case you'll also be playing a gimped Bayo. :/

Not all multiplatform releases are created equal, literally, and this is something that at least historically has tended to favor 360.  Of course there are also cases where the PS3 rev comes out ahead (Burnout Paradise, FFXIII) but those tend to be exceptions for the most part. 

Does a few minor graphical differences really matter? lol.

People say RDR on PS3 is gimped. When I played both versions, the ONLY differences I noticed are a loss of shadows in the intro scene for the PS3 version, and more foliage in the Xbox 360 version. But at the end of the day, both versions are flawed.



Rockstar: Announce Bully 2 already and make gamers proud!

Kojima: Come out with Project S already!

jarrod on 07 July 2010
huaxiong90 said:
jarrod said:
iWarMachine said:

damn...this is the most derailed thread ever! and LOL at the guy saying that exclusives doesn't matter... dude, the exclusive games are what makes you choose between consoles...yeah, sure you can play bayonetta in the 360 instead of god of war 3...but in the ps3, i can play both, and with the 360 i can't.

Well, in that case you'll also be playing a gimped Bayo. :/

Not all multiplatform releases are created equal, literally, and this is something that at least historically has tended to favor 360.  Of course there are also cases where the PS3 rev comes out ahead (Burnout Paradise, FFXIII) but those tend to be exceptions for the most part. 

Does a few minor graphical differences really matter? lol.

People say RDR on PS3 is gimped. When I played both versions, the ONLY differences I noticed are a loss of shadows in the intro scene for the PS3 version, and more foliage in the Xbox 360 version. But at the end of the day, both versions are flawed.

Bayo PS3 is more than just graphical differences, it's actually performance based (the engine chugs) and it impacts gameplay.  Sometimes the differences are small, or purely visual, but that's not the case for Bayonetta.



Solid_Snake4RD on 07 July 2010
Kynes said:

32nm where? TSMC ditched it, Globalfoundries ditched it.


you really don't follow gaming news

 

they ditched it when PS3's were on 65nm and they directly tried to go to 32nm and skip 45nm(currently in PS3)

but then it was taking too much time and SONY's wanted it early so they abandend it and went back and did 45nm

 

YOU SHOULD REALLY FIRST CHEAK WHAT YOU ARE COMMNETING AND THEN SPEAK



Solid_Snake4RD on 07 July 2010
jarrod said:
huaxiong90 said:
jarrod said:
iWarMachine said:

damn...this is the most derailed thread ever! and LOL at the guy saying that exclusives doesn't matter... dude, the exclusive games are what makes you choose between consoles...yeah, sure you can play bayonetta in the 360 instead of god of war 3...but in the ps3, i can play both, and with the 360 i can't.

Well, in that case you'll also be playing a gimped Bayo. :/

Not all multiplatform releases are created equal, literally, and this is something that at least historically has tended to favor 360.  Of course there are also cases where the PS3 rev comes out ahead (Burnout Paradise, FFXIII) but those tend to be exceptions for the most part. 

Does a few minor graphical differences really matter? lol.

People say RDR on PS3 is gimped. When I played both versions, the ONLY differences I noticed are a loss of shadows in the intro scene for the PS3 version, and more foliage in the Xbox 360 version. But at the end of the day, both versions are flawed.

Bayo PS3 is more than just graphical differences, it's actually performance based (the engine chugs) and it impacts gameplay.  Sometimes the differences are small, or purely visual, but that's not the case for Bayonetta.

talking about BAYONETTA,you should also take into advice that the devs didn't do a good job porting so don't blame PS3