Why would a senior manager of playstation be saying that playstation is causing the company to lose money when they're posting profits?

it's going to be fine i will buy one so there's that

I'm not sure what you are so upset about. I never did anything that should harm the reputation of glassdoor, and I intended from the start to simply prove my point and delete it, which preceded your little meltdown here.

There are plenty of bad reviews on glassdoor for Sony. This one specifically had glaring omissions and mistakes in it that point to the conclusion that it was fake. For instance, why blame Playstation Execs for failing when the division is posting profit? A senior manager should have actually been taking pride in that, not cutting his own support.

Why would a senior manager say the ps3's main strength is the "core" audience, when it was actually the act of moving closer to the core that hampered its progress this gen? Its casual games, like LBP, and secondary functions, like netflix, kept the ps3 relevant to a larger number of people.

Why would he say that he 'thinks there will be more layoffs', when it has already been in the books for quite a while? It is definitive, not speculative, that more layoffs are coming.

Move didn't fail because it was poor. Move failed because it was poor AND far too late.

He says Vita is failing because of its price and games. Yet it's getting a price drop and has 2 big core games coming out in the next 3 months. None of what he's saying makes sense from the perspective of a Senior Manager at Sony Computer Entertainment of America. And like I told Kasz already, if he really was what he claims to be, then he is exactly the reason Sony is doing poorly. He demonstrates a fundamental disconnect with the market, and a misunderstanding of his own product.

Why did he say i loved to work at playstation? Its devision name is not playstation. The division is named and always has been, Sony Computer Entertainment(SCE). If this guy worked at Sony and senior management at that, he should have known this. He should have said "i loved to work at Sony Computer Entertainment(SCE)" not playstation

Why did he say orbis won't sell well? If he worked at Sony as a senior management, wouldn't he not know it's not named orbis anymore, its named omni now not orbis and he should have known that too. it should have went "omni won't sell well"

The review has some good points but he is not a past Sony employee. Those mistakes he wrote in the review should have not been there if he did work at Sony

Interesting if it's true about Orbis and the casual market target. Beyond that, I don't really think much of it. I would think Sony would have to be mad to try to release another $600 graphics monster system. Not sure if they've learned their lesson yet (cough: Vita's price)...

I simply wish they would get over leaving backwards compability out of their systems. I own two PS2's just for the back catalogue of PS1/PS2 games I have. They're not going to put the entire catalogue on PSN...

Actually if it were Dodece there would probably be about 2-5* as much writing. The guy is verbose and the post we're talking about isn't.

@theprof00

You cannot debunk an opinion with another opinion. There aren't any logical contradictions, or anything that is even remotely false about what was presented. You can argue that this persons opinion is wrong, and that they deserved to be fired, but that is aside from the point. What we were presented with was a management level position at what amounts to a software studio that is focused on co development of titles with second, and third party studios.

The real problem with this entire debate is that everyone is acting as if this person in question was a member of the inner circle. Given where they claim to have worked, and what position they claimed to have occupied. Were we to place it in the context of military ranks. We would be talking about a Captain, and not a higher rank like a General. Thus their perspective should be limited to what they have to deal with in their immediate situation. It doesn't make sense for them to know the grand plan.

In this case the reviewer claims to have worked at ground zero of a cluster fuck. I guarantee that if you worked in that studio. You would probably hold a equally dim view of Sony. In the same way that a few ex Rare employees have expressed equally dim views of Microsoft. Every company has its own expression of the shit works. Where all the shit flows. It is usually the place that is underpowered, overworked, and given impossible tasks, and just about everyone is viewed as expendable.

All this person sounds like to me is someone who feels like they got shit on by their employer. It isn't terribly uncommon, and there isn't any reason to assume that it is some convoluted plot, and your little stunt doesn't disprove anything. All it proved was you could manipulate the system. It doesn't prove that was what this person was doing. All you did was encourage people to manipulate that system in the future. Which does hurt that sites ability to do its job, and does discredit that site. Even if the fact that libel is a crime you can be prosecuted both in civil or criminal proceedings isn't enough to dissuade you. Then the fact that they are innocent bystanders should have. It doesn't matter if you shit on their lawn, and then cleaned it up.

@hawkeyejonjon

It actually makes complete sense to me. For the author to use the brand name as opposed to the technical name for the division. When most people hear Sony Computer Entertainment they draw a blank. It is actually a pretty poor descriptor. Worse it can actually be misleading. The name can be confused for Sony Online Entertainment. Which though it is part of Sony Computer Entertainment has a rather abysmal reputation that engenders a great deal of near psychotic hate in some circles.

Anyway it seems more practical then pragmatic. If you take pride in your work. You should want to use the name for your work that most people are familiar with. Besides the author identified the studio they worked for by its proper name. I don't know about you, but most people I know refer to the name of the location they work at rather then the name of the division that workplace is located within. People generally don't go with the longest possible name. It just comes across as pretentious, and self conscious.

@topic

What I don't get is why anyone would assume that Sony doesn't have disgruntled employees. I don't know why anyone should take this personally, or expend a lot of energy disproving it in the first place. It seems entirely too needy for me. I know why I commented, because sometimes I get a kick out of being a contrary asshole. The real question seems to be, and it is probably the only truly relevant one in this thread. Why does anyone feel such a overwhelming need for this to be fake. Can anyone tell me why they need for this to be fake.

you have points but everyone can tell the difference between soe & sce

it could be real or it could be fake to get attention. i could claim on that website that i worked for microsoft or nintendo and write a review about them and make them look bad while making the review look real and it would get attention. all they would do is approve it within a day. its easy but nonetheless it could be real or fake but no one actually knows.

Wow 17 pages of discussion because of an artikle some reporter with fanglasses put onto the internet. Lol.

Is there any proof that this ex sony employee really exists
Is there any reason to believe any rumours that coming out every day for X360 and PS4

Seriously guys. Wouldn it be more intelligent to actually wait for some facts than always discussing some rumours from Person x and Person Y.

Casual Focus? Losing 3rd party? Anyone else is thinking Wii? Sony winning next-gen confirmed!!!!