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

Forums - Sony Discussion - [Opinion] Why Sony Should Exit The Console Hardware Business

NobleTeam360 on 13 October 2012
VGKing said:
No, Sony leaving the hardware business WOULD NOT benefit gamers. There is a reason I stuck with PS3 this generation.

1a. I don't like Microsofts business practices.
b. They are new at making hardware, hence the RROD epidemic.

2a. I'm not too fond of Nintendo. In fact they are simply too Japanese for my taste.(Keep in mind that I am a big fan of anime)
b. Nintendo makes "good enough" hardware marketed through gimmicky controls.
c. Their focus is clearly on kids and families which leads them to make stupid decision like Friend Codes.

So why do I support Sony?
1. They make amazing state-of-the=art hardware.
2. They have the amazing 1st party studios to show it off.
3. They care about the gamer. Free PSN being a prime example.(Free online gaming is a RIGHT, not a privilege)

Anyway if you look at the sales charts, the highest selling games on PS3 are actually 3rd party. If Sony didn't make the hardware they publish their games on, they would make a lot less money. I'm not even mentioning the fact that Microsoft and Nintendo are not going to play nice with Sony if they ever became multiplatform. Sony would get crushed. A game like Uncharted would never sell on a Nintendo console, and a game like Killzone would be overshadowed by Halo.


Actually free online is a privilege. They can easily charge you for it if they feel like it. 



Around the Network
SOLIDSNAKE08 on 13 October 2012
NobleTeam360 said:
VGKing said:
No, Sony leaving the hardware business WOULD NOT benefit gamers. There is a reason I stuck with PS3 this generation.

1a. I don't like Microsofts business practices.
b. They are new at making hardware, hence the RROD epidemic.

2a. I'm not too fond of Nintendo. In fact they are simply too Japanese for my taste.(Keep in mind that I am a big fan of anime)
b. Nintendo makes "good enough" hardware marketed through gimmicky controls.
c. Their focus is clearly on kids and families which leads them to make stupid decision like Friend Codes.

So why do I support Sony?
1. They make amazing state-of-the=art hardware.
2. They have the amazing 1st party studios to show it off.
3. They care about the gamer. Free PSN being a prime example.(Free online gaming is a RIGHT, not a privilege)

Anyway if you look at the sales charts, the highest selling games on PS3 are actually 3rd party. If Sony didn't make the hardware they publish their games on, they would make a lot less money. I'm not even mentioning the fact that Microsoft and Nintendo are not going to play nice with Sony if they ever became multiplatform. Sony would get crushed. A game like Uncharted would never sell on a Nintendo console, and a game like Killzone would be overshadowed by Halo.


Actually free online is a privilege. They can easily charge you for it if they feel like it. 


yea well the FACT is they're not.



NobleTeam360 on 13 October 2012
SOLIDSNAKE08 said:
NobleTeam360 said:
VGKing said:
No, Sony leaving the hardware business WOULD NOT benefit gamers. There is a reason I stuck with PS3 this generation.

1a. I don't like Microsofts business practices.
b. They are new at making hardware, hence the RROD epidemic.

2a. I'm not too fond of Nintendo. In fact they are simply too Japanese for my taste.(Keep in mind that I am a big fan of anime)
b. Nintendo makes "good enough" hardware marketed through gimmicky controls.
c. Their focus is clearly on kids and families which leads them to make stupid decision like Friend Codes.

So why do I support Sony?
1. They make amazing state-of-the=art hardware.
2. They have the amazing 1st party studios to show it off.
3. They care about the gamer. Free PSN being a prime example.(Free online gaming is a RIGHT, not a privilege)

Anyway if you look at the sales charts, the highest selling games on PS3 are actually 3rd party. If Sony didn't make the hardware they publish their games on, they would make a lot less money. I'm not even mentioning the fact that Microsoft and Nintendo are not going to play nice with Sony if they ever became multiplatform. Sony would get crushed. A game like Uncharted would never sell on a Nintendo console, and a game like Killzone would be overshadowed by Halo.


Actually free online is a privilege. They can easily charge you for it if they feel like it. 


yea well the FACT is they're not.


Yeah well I KNOW THAT. 



Play4Fun on 13 October 2012
SOLIDSNAKE08 said:
Play4Fun said:
VGKing said:
RolStoppable said:
CChaos said:
I've read the article twice now and...I think the biggest problem is I don't think I'm able to figure out what he's getting at. Sure, the games would sell if they were all made multi-platform, but I can't really see them making as much money as would offset the loss of hardware income. I mean, even thinking about that doesn't make a tonne of sense, especially with the Super Slim and what I imagine is a better margin for the PS3.

Is he trying to say that if Sony cut hardware out of the mix, it'd somehow make the company profitable again directly through games? Cause, if so, that's one of the most bizarre things I've heard in a while.

Sony has traditionally been using the razor and blades model (selling hardware at a loss, making the money back on software), so there isn't much hardware income to speak of. The PS3 lost billions on hardware over its lifetime, so that's what the suggestion to go software-only is based on.

Whoever wrote that article seems to overlook the fact that the sales of 3rd party games is MUCH larger than that of 1st party games on the PS3.
So any increase in 1st party sales on Xbox 720/Wii U would be offset by the loss of all the profits they are gaining from the 3rd party games. PS3 should be profitable by now, so those are profits they won't have. PSP is profitable and PS2 is still selling. 

Playstation is an iconic brand. Without Playstation, millions and millions of people would never have played any games. Sony brings affordable gaming to low-income families in 3rd world countries with the PS2. Would Microsoft ever do that? Nintendo? No. Sony cares about the gamer.

BTW, PS4 could easily be sold at a profit from Day 1. Sony could just make a console equal in power to a Wii U, and it would sell purely based on better 3rd party support, PSN and brand recognition.


And people say Nintendo fanboys are bad...

your just as bad as him. he'll blindly defend sony and you'l blindly defend nintendo. its how fanboys are supposed to work. anyway sony aint going anywhere, so anyone that wants this to happen can carry on having wet dreams about it.

Care to show me how I am as bad as him  and blindly defend Nintendo or are you just talking out of your ass and basing your comment on nothing?



miz1q2w3e on 13 October 2012

Not sure... It might be good for them to let go of the part of their business that loses them money (i.e. the hardware) and focus on the part that gets them profits.



Around the Network
DanneSandin on 13 October 2012
miz1q2w3e said:
Not sure... It might be good for them to let go of the part of their business that loses them money (i.e. the hardware) and focus on the part that gets them profits.

Oh, you mean the 3rd party support their consoles get? ;)



I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!

Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.

miz1q2w3e on 13 October 2012
DanneSandin said:
miz1q2w3e said:
Not sure... It might be good for them to let go of the part of their business that loses them money (i.e. the hardware) and focus on the part that gets them profits.

Oh, you mean the 3rd party support their consoles get? ;)

If that was enough, they wouldn't have lost all their PS2 money.

This gen: SW profits - HW losses = negative (i.e. net loss, and it was a huge deal too, lost most of their profits from earlier gens).

If it were just SW, then SW profits = positive (i.e. net profit).



Play4Fun on 13 October 2012
ClassicGamingWizzz said:
Play4Fun said:
SOLIDSNAKE08 said:
Play4Fun said:
VGKing said:
RolStoppable said:
CChaos said:
I've read the article twice now and...I think the biggest problem is I don't think I'm able to figure out what he's getting at. Sure, the games would sell if they were all made multi-platform, but I can't really see them making as much money as would offset the loss of hardware income. I mean, even thinking about that doesn't make a tonne of sense, especially with the Super Slim and what I imagine is a better margin for the PS3.

Is he trying to say that if Sony cut hardware out of the mix, it'd somehow make the company profitable again directly through games? Cause, if so, that's one of the most bizarre things I've heard in a while.

Sony has traditionally been using the razor and blades model (selling hardware at a loss, making the money back on software), so there isn't much hardware income to speak of. The PS3 lost billions on hardware over its lifetime, so that's what the suggestion to go software-only is based on.

Whoever wrote that article seems to overlook the fact that the sales of 3rd party games is MUCH larger than that of 1st party games on the PS3.
So any increase in 1st party sales on Xbox 720/Wii U would be offset by the loss of all the profits they are gaining from the 3rd party games. PS3 should be profitable by now, so those are profits they won't have. PSP is profitable and PS2 is still selling. 

Playstation is an iconic brand. Without Playstation, millions and millions of people would never have played any games. Sony brings affordable gaming to low-income families in 3rd world countries with the PS2. Would Microsoft ever do that? Nintendo? No. Sony cares about the gamer.

BTW, PS4 could easily be sold at a profit from Day 1. Sony could just make a console equal in power to a Wii U, and it would sell purely based on better 3rd party support, PSN and brand recognition.


And people say Nintendo fanboys are bad...

your just as bad as him. he'll blindly defend sony and you'l blindly defend nintendo. its how fanboys are supposed to work. anyway sony aint going anywhere, so anyone that wants this to happen can carry on having wet dreams about it.

Care to show me how I am as bad as him  and blindly defend Nintendo or are you just talking out of your ass and basing your comment on nothing?

you like to attack in peoples walls when they say something that you didnt like against nintendo, is that proof enough? anyway i dont know how you get away when calling other people fanboys , you must be special.

Aw, look at you...still bitter about that.

Not my fault you like to start arguments and then run out of threads with your tail between your legs when things don't go your way.



DanneSandin on 13 October 2012
miz1q2w3e said:
DanneSandin said:
miz1q2w3e said:
Not sure... It might be good for them to let go of the part of their business that loses them money (i.e. the hardware) and focus on the part that gets them profits.

Oh, you mean the 3rd party support their consoles get? ;)

If that was enough, they wouldn't have lost all their PS2 money.

This gen: SW profits - HW losses = negative (i.e. net loss, and it was a huge deal too, lost most of their profits from earlier gens).

If it were just SW, then SW profits = positive (i.e. net profit).

I actually think the equation is a little bit more complicated: FEWER 3rd party SW=less SW profit. But yeah, PS3 wasn't good to them - in any way.



I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!

Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.

Play4Fun on 13 October 2012
ClassicGamingWizzz said:
Play4Fun said:
 

Aw, look at you...still bitter about that.

Not my fault you like to start arguments and then run out of threads with your tail between your legs when things don't go your way.


bitter about something a random internet guy said ? LOL

This is the second time you've bought it up after it happened. Your denial doesn't hide the fact that you hold some bitterness still.

Let it go, man. Let it go and let's both move on.