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

Forums - Sony - ps3 loss vs. blu-ray / HD profits?

voty2000 said:
fps_d0minat0r said:

thats whats gonna make ps3's keep selling long after 360 and wii are dead.

a lot of people will pick the ps3 over a dedicated blu-ray player.


Why?  I can get a blu-ray player from Amazon for under a hundred bucks and by the time the PS3 is that cheap blu-ray players will be even cheaper.  The majority of people aren't going to fork a couple hundred bucks more to get a system that plays games because they will never use that feature.  People used to get a PS3 because it was the cheapest option, not anymore.


I did buy a PS3 over 360 because of the Blu-ray. I wanted to see our wedding recording on Blu-ray :)

Also in addition to Blu-ray, PS3 is also acting as Trojan horse for 3D. That's an added incentive and return for Sony.



Around the Network
thranx said:
osamanobama said:
voty2000 said:
fps_d0minat0r said:

thats whats gonna make ps3's keep selling long after 360 and wii are dead.

a lot of people will pick the ps3 over a dedicated blu-ray player.


Why?  I can get a blu-ray player from Amazon for under a hundred bucks and by the time the PS3 is that cheap blu-ray players will be even cheaper.  The majority of people aren't going to fork a couple hundred bucks more to get a system that plays games because they will never use that feature.  People used to get a PS3 because it was the cheapest option, not anymore.

well that hundred dollar player (which i doubt costs $100, it probable around 130) wont be 3d, wont have netflix, vudoo, mlb network, nhl network, stream movies, have a movie online store, and many more features, nor will it have as good of picture or sound quality. the only bluray player that youll find better than the ps3, is one that is twice the cost, and then it still doesnt play games

I think you forget people are looking for a cheap movie player not a movie player plus for more money. Also a blu ray player that can play as clear as the ps3 is not twice as expensive, its cheaper. thats why they are saying why bother with a ps3. It used to be cheaper to get s ps3 than a good blu ray player but that is no longer the case.


actually no, cnet.com just recently switch from using the ps3 as their test bluray player, because the $500 Oppo player, just past it up in picture quality. ps3 has the second best picture quality.

but your point still remains, people will likely not choose the ps3 over a cheaper one, especially becasue it seems like the ps3 is never advertised as a bluray player, and when you go to places like amazon.com the ps3 isnt even listed in the bluray section, only under games.

so people would have to preemptively know that the ps3 is a bluray player, because no store has it listed, or in the section of bluray players



normal people won't buy a PS3 just to play movies,too complicated

they shoukd make a fully BC ps3 later at a good price that should keep sales chugging along for people interested in the PS family lineup alongside whatever they release next



                                                                                                                                        Above & Beyond

   

Raider84 said:

Definitely a good 'move' for Sony. Everyone I know loves watching movies in Bluray, including myself. Who cares if they 'won' or 'lost' the console war or lost a tiny bit of money, they will come out on top in the long haul as bluray will be around for quite a while. 


Yeah, I could never see the point in having a DVD collection, but, even though some say there isn't much difference, Bluray has me more excited than I've ever been about starting a collection. I periodically buy nature documentaries on BD, and I watch them over and over and over simply because its SO beautiful.

I hope BD sales go from strength to strength.



kowenicki said:

well... er...

Samsung didnt make a PS3, neither did Panasonic, Philips or LG etc

But they are all making money from Blu-Ray too.

I'm sure they all think it was worth it for Sony to make it  


Yep, this makes LG so ungrateful!   



Stwike him, Centuwion. Stwike him vewy wuffly! (Pontius Pilate, "Life of Brian")
A fart without stink is like a sky without stars.
TGS, Third Grade Shooter: brand new genre invented by Kevin Butler exclusively for Natal WiiToo Kinect. PEW! PEW-PEW-PEW! 
 


Around the Network
Fufinu said:
voty2000 said:
fps_d0minat0r said:

thats whats gonna make ps3's keep selling long after 360 and wii are dead.

a lot of people will pick the ps3 over a dedicated blu-ray player.


Why?  I can get a blu-ray player from Amazon for under a hundred bucks and by the time the PS3 is that cheap blu-ray players will be even cheaper.  The majority of people aren't going to fork a couple hundred bucks more to get a system that plays games because they will never use that feature.  People used to get a PS3 because it was the cheapest option, not anymore.


I did buy a PS3 over 360 because of the Blu-ray. I wanted to see our wedding recording on Blu-ray :)

Also in addition to Blu-ray, PS3 is also acting as Trojan horse for 3D. That's an added incentive and return for Sony.

What did I type that made you mention the 360?  I'm talking about PS3 vs. standalone blu-ray player.

Since we are giving random information, the shark in my avatar was caught in the causeway in Pascagoula Mississippi on a dead croaker I chopped up on 17 lb test line on a spinning real. 



I do not think they benefitted as much as they thought and I also do not think Blu Ray is being adopted quickly enough. 

For me the real problems for Blu Ray is that simple fact that unlike VHS to DVD, DVD to HD is just not a big enough leap. Couple that with instant HD and HD downloads and you have further competition. Another issue is the premuim being charged for it, I can get instant HD or I can download it and 3D shite but I resent paying this premium.

I think PS3 owners benefitted the most especially those who bought a few years into the cycle, they get HD for free effectively although they still pay the premium for the movies.



W.L.B.B. Member, Portsmouth Branch.

(Welsh(Folk) Living Beyond Borders)

Winner of the 2010 VGC Holiday sales prediction thread with an Average 1.6% accuracy rating. I am indeed awesome.

Kinect as seen by PS3 owners ...if you can pick at it   ...post it ... Did I mention the 360 was black and Shinny? Keeping Sigs obscure since 2007, Passed by the Sig police 5July10.

In 15 years, there's a chance that we will look back and think this strategy paid off but it's unlikely. Sony screwed up, end of story. That doesn't mean the console is bad or that you can own one and enjoy it but they screwed up from a business standpoint by forfeiting their Playstation dominance in favor of a physical media when physical media is slowly dying.

We as consumers won out on the deal, though. Especially those who bought in later when the PS3 was $3-400. We get a great BD player built into a solid gaming console at a fair price.

When you look around and see companies like Apple completely ignoring the existence of Blu-Ray and selling more and more Macs every year while the rest of the computer industry stagnates, you realize just how few people really care about Blu-Ray. And Macs aren't juse expensive computers, they're top of the line equipment. And even the people dropping $2k on a friggin' laptop don't give a shit about Blu-Ray tech! The average consumer gives slightly more of a shit about Blu-Ray than they do about completely ignored tech like 3D televisions (not coincidentally, these two techs are tied at the hip).

In an age where I can go buy a high definition movie digitally from 50 different sources or I can just go pirate the damned thing if I really want to be a bastard, physical media is never going to come close to the dominance it saw during the CD and DVD eras.




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

I don't think anyone expected digital movies to make such huge progress, especially not Sony. When companies like netflix can spend $100 million on their own series for digital distribution, then you know the model has changed significantly. Netflix isn't making that money from renting blu-ray discs, that's for sure. Amazon and Netflix don't see their future in blu-ray. That should tell you something.



Anyone can guess. It takes no effort to throw out lots of predictions and have some of them be correct. You are not and wiser or better for having your guesses be right. Even a blind man can hit the bullseye.

voty2000 said:
Fufinu said:
voty2000 said:
fps_d0minat0r said:

thats whats gonna make ps3's keep selling long after 360 and wii are dead.

a lot of people will pick the ps3 over a dedicated blu-ray player.


Why?  I can get a blu-ray player from Amazon for under a hundred bucks and by the time the PS3 is that cheap blu-ray players will be even cheaper.  The majority of people aren't going to fork a couple hundred bucks more to get a system that plays games because they will never use that feature.  People used to get a PS3 because it was the cheapest option, not anymore.


I did buy a PS3 over 360 because of the Blu-ray. I wanted to see our wedding recording on Blu-ray :)

Also in addition to Blu-ray, PS3 is also acting as Trojan horse for 3D. That's an added incentive and return for Sony.

What did I type that made you mention the 360?  I'm talking about PS3 vs. standalone blu-ray player.

Since we are giving random information, the shark in my avatar was caught in the causeway in Pascagoula Mississippi on a dead croaker I chopped up on 17 lb test line on a spinning real. 


I was looking for a console. And I bought that console rather than another because it had the player.

Btw, you changed to discussion on player after the earlier post was discussing consoles.