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

Forums - Sony Discussion - How much money Sony really lost with the PS3

Lawlight on 20 April 2013
archbrix said:
Max King of the Wild said:
archbrix said:
Max King of the Wild said:
archbrix said:

While I'm pretty sure you're well aware of what I meant and are just finding anything to argue about, allow me to spell it out for you.

When referring to products in the generic sense in popular media here in NA, such as "Coke" when referring to a soft drink or "Kleenex" for facial tissues, "Xbox" has become the term for video games that "Playstation" once enjoyed. That, along with hardware/software sales, points to the brand recognition of Xbox showing significant growth in NA whereas Playstation has shown decline. When you consider the utter dominance the Playstation brand had in the 6th generation, wowzers indeed...

1.  The 360 is not nearly as dominate as the ps2 was in US. 

2.  On top of that people dont say coke when referring to soft dring they say soda or pop. Hicks from Texas call it a coke.

3.  And no... people dont say "360" when referring to gaming. They are literally talking about a 360

1.  I never said it was.  Perhaps you should re-read people's comments before responding...

2.  Wow, you'll reach for anything, won't you.  And you're wrong.  Many people say coke when referring to soda; if "hicks from Texas" do it too it just adds further weight to my point. 

3.  I didn't say "360", I said "Xbox".  Again, see point 1.



1. naw. In order for it to "replace the ps2" for people calling gaming "xbox" then it would need to be as dominate. If you think people are referring to their Ps3's or Wiis as xbox then you my friend are on crack. The reason why so many people referred to Playstation as gaming is because the sheer dominance. For every 4 ps2's you would have a xbox or GC (yes combined)

2. No it doesn't add further weight to your point.

3. Who cares? interchangebale in my opinion.

1. Clearly it doesn't have to be as dominant, since yes, the term "Xbox" has largely replaced "Playstation" when referring to gaming in a general sense. It's not about referring to a Wii or a PS3 specifically as an Xbox, it's about the terminology when referring to gaming in general.

2. Yes, it does, because not only "hicks in Texas" say this, which is what your point here was based on.

3. Well, you should care, since the specifics you're quick to disregard now was what your point hinged on, lol. "Xbox" is the terminology I'm referring to not "360". Same way people generally referred to "Playstation" as gaming last gen, not "PS2".


Worldwide, Playstation is still the brand that's synonymous with gaming. 1 year late and already passed the 360 saleswise.



Around the Network
Slimebeast on 20 April 2013

MS crushed Sony in this generation, but Sony earned lots of goodwill and made millions of core gamers happy and I'm sure that Sony will recover in next gen and the PS4 will be as profitable as the Nextbox.



slowmo on 20 April 2013
Max King of the Wild said:
slowmo said:
CGI-Quality said:
slowmo said:
DanneSandin said:
2 things has to be admitted; PS3 did in fact an incredible come back after it's fiasco of a launch. It did quite poorly to begin with, but turning that ship around, and now being a VERY close third is very impressive. That's one thing

The other thing we have to admit is that PS3 cost Sony A LOT of money. It's profitable now, and it'll continue to make money for some years to come, but it'll never TRULY offset the money that it lost. It might have earned back every cent and dime it initially lost, but it will never be a big financial success. Never. It has lost too much money for that.

What we as gamers all can hope for, is that Sony learned a great deal of things by the PS3; let's hope PS4 kicks ass!


We keep getting told that it did so awful at the start yet launch aligned we are also told it outsold the 360 so it obviously was never that bad to begin with.  Its a lie spread by Sony fans to make the situation appear worse than it was.  

Here's the easiest way to look at it - the PS3 may have always been set-up to outsell the 360, but BECAUSE of the failings of its launch (really till about 2009), it held itself back from such a reality, sooner.

Make no mistake, it is this gen's biggest loser (regardless of passing the 360), but it isn't a lie that it had a bad launch. 


Thank you for at least posting a reasoned argument to try and debunk my point, shame Max didn't have your civility.  Lie was a strong word but I think its fair to say there are some fans who paint the launch as being far worse than it actually was.  The console was too expensive and lacked games, 2007 when the 40GB was released saw the start of it being fixed.  That's less than 12 months really.

The shame is you are paranoid and always blame Sony fans for something and used flawed logic to get your conclusions. Such as 2 consoles launch badly. One console beat the other console. Therefore it didnt launch badly.


Wow, it looks like paranoia is catching...



archbrix on 20 April 2013
Lawlight said:
archbrix said:
Max King of the Wild said:
archbrix said:
Max King of the Wild said:
archbrix said:

While I'm pretty sure you're well aware of what I meant and are just finding anything to argue about, allow me to spell it out for you.

When referring to products in the generic sense in popular media here in NA, such as "Coke" when referring to a soft drink or "Kleenex" for facial tissues, "Xbox" has become the term for video games that "Playstation" once enjoyed. That, along with hardware/software sales, points to the brand recognition of Xbox showing significant growth in NA whereas Playstation has shown decline. When you consider the utter dominance the Playstation brand had in the 6th generation, wowzers indeed...

1.  The 360 is not nearly as dominate as the ps2 was in US. 

2.  On top of that people dont say coke when referring to soft dring they say soda or pop. Hicks from Texas call it a coke.

3.  And no... people dont say "360" when referring to gaming. They are literally talking about a 360

1.  I never said it was.  Perhaps you should re-read people's comments before responding...

2.  Wow, you'll reach for anything, won't you.  And you're wrong.  Many people say coke when referring to soda; if "hicks from Texas" do it too it just adds further weight to my point. 

3.  I didn't say "360", I said "Xbox".  Again, see point 1.



1. naw. In order for it to "replace the ps2" for people calling gaming "xbox" then it would need to be as dominate. If you think people are referring to their Ps3's or Wiis as xbox then you my friend are on crack. The reason why so many people referred to Playstation as gaming is because the sheer dominance. For every 4 ps2's you would have a xbox or GC (yes combined)

2. No it doesn't add further weight to your point.

3. Who cares? interchangebale in my opinion.

1. Clearly it doesn't have to be as dominant, since yes, the term "Xbox" has largely replaced "Playstation" when referring to gaming in a general sense. It's not about referring to a Wii or a PS3 specifically as an Xbox, it's about the terminology when referring to gaming in general.

2. Yes, it does, because not only "hicks in Texas" say this, which is what your point here was based on.

3. Well, you should care, since the specifics you're quick to disregard now was what your point hinged on, lol. "Xbox" is the terminology I'm referring to not "360". Same way people generally referred to "Playstation" as gaming last gen, not "PS2".


Worldwide, Playstation is still the brand that's synonymous with gaming. 1 year late and already passed the 360 saleswise.

Yes, I agree, but I'm talking about NA specifically with this guy...



archbrix on 20 April 2013
Max King of the Wild said:
archbrix said:
Max King of the Wild said:
archbrix said:
Max King of the Wild said:
archbrix said:

While I'm pretty sure you're well aware of what I meant and are just finding anything to argue about, allow me to spell it out for you.

When referring to products in the generic sense in popular media here in NA, such as "Coke" when referring to a soft drink or "Kleenex" for facial tissues, "Xbox" has become the term for video games that "Playstation" once enjoyed. That, along with hardware/software sales, points to the brand recognition of Xbox showing significant growth in NA whereas Playstation has shown decline. When you consider the utter dominance the Playstation brand had in the 6th generation, wowzers indeed...

1.  The 360 is not nearly as dominate as the ps2 was in US. 

2.  On top of that people dont say coke when referring to soft dring they say soda or pop. Hicks from Texas call it a coke.

3.  And no... people dont say "360" when referring to gaming. They are literally talking about a 360

1.  I never said it was.  Perhaps you should re-read people's comments before responding...

2.  Wow, you'll reach for anything, won't you.  And you're wrong.  Many people say coke when referring to soda; if "hicks from Texas" do it too it just adds further weight to my point. 

3.  I didn't say "360", I said "Xbox".  Again, see point 1.



1. naw. In order for it to "replace the ps2" for people calling gaming "xbox" then it would need to be as dominate. If you think people are referring to their Ps3's or Wiis as xbox then you my friend are on crack. The reason why so many people referred to Playstation as gaming is because the sheer dominance. For every 4 ps2's you would have a xbox or GC (yes combined)

2. No it doesn't add further weight to your point.

3. Who cares? interchangebale in my opinion.

1. Clearly it doesn't have to be as dominant, since yes, the term "Xbox" has largely replaced "Playstation" when referring to gaming in a general sense. It's not about referring to a Wii or a PS3 specifically as an Xbox, it's about the terminology when referring to gaming in general.

2. Yes, it does, because not only "hicks in Texas" say this, which is what your point here was based on.

3. Well, you should care, since the specifics you're quick to disregard now was what your point hinged on, lol. "Xbox" is the terminology I'm referring to not "360". Same way people generally referred to "Playstation" as gaming last gen, not "PS2".


Your right. I refer to Ps3 to xbox all the time. LOL

My, my... your lack of reading comprehension is alarming. I sincerely hope you're doing this on purpose just to boost your post count.



Around the Network
JoeTheBro on 20 April 2013
Slimebeast said:
MS crushed Sony in this generation, but Sony earned lots of goodwill and made millions of core gamers happy and I'm sure that Sony will recover in next gen and the PS4 will be as profitable as the Nextbox.


That's the spirit!



Links

Max King of the Wild on 20 April 2013
slowmo said:
Max King of the Wild said:
slowmo said:
CGI-Quality said:
slowmo said:
DanneSandin said:
2 things has to be admitted; PS3 did in fact an incredible come back after it's fiasco of a launch. It did quite poorly to begin with, but turning that ship around, and now being a VERY close third is very impressive. That's one thing

The other thing we have to admit is that PS3 cost Sony A LOT of money. It's profitable now, and it'll continue to make money for some years to come, but it'll never TRULY offset the money that it lost. It might have earned back every cent and dime it initially lost, but it will never be a big financial success. Never. It has lost too much money for that.

What we as gamers all can hope for, is that Sony learned a great deal of things by the PS3; let's hope PS4 kicks ass!


We keep getting told that it did so awful at the start yet launch aligned we are also told it outsold the 360 so it obviously was never that bad to begin with.  Its a lie spread by Sony fans to make the situation appear worse than it was.  

Here's the easiest way to look at it - the PS3 may have always been set-up to outsell the 360, but BECAUSE of the failings of its launch (really till about 2009), it held itself back from such a reality, sooner.

Make no mistake, it is this gen's biggest loser (regardless of passing the 360), but it isn't a lie that it had a bad launch. 


Thank you for at least posting a reasoned argument to try and debunk my point, shame Max didn't have your civility.  Lie was a strong word but I think its fair to say there are some fans who paint the launch as being far worse than it actually was.  The console was too expensive and lacked games, 2007 when the 40GB was released saw the start of it being fixed.  That's less than 12 months really.

The shame is you are paranoid and always blame Sony fans for something and used flawed logic to get your conclusions. Such as 2 consoles launch badly. One console beat the other console. Therefore it didnt launch badly.


Wow, it looks like paranoia is catching...

Except, we can look at your post history and see how often you bring up Sony fans and see that pranoia is not catching.

"The only thing I found out from this debacle is Sony fans have awful internet connections. Moderated, -Mr Khan..."

"Its a lie spread by Sony fans to make the situation appear worse than it was.  "

"At least all the Sony fans who have been relentlessly trolling the Next box this week should have no issues with a negative opinion piece thread about the PS4...."



Scoobes on 20 April 2013
Mr Puggsly said:
Scoobes said:

They didn't have to though. If they didn't overengineer it so they had a ridiculous selling price at launch it almost certainly would have sold more and generated far more revenue and profit. Sony shot themselves in the foot yet they still managed to sell a decent number of consoles and stay relevant in the market.

And they had to sacrifice billions of dollars for that to happen.

The PS3 couldn't have sold a decent amount or remained as relevant without massive price cuts. The 360 was offering similar graphics and most of the same games, that forced Sony to sacrfice more money to get attention.

They sacrificed the billions before Microsoft forced them into it. Sony were stupid before they even realised that Microsoft and Nintendo were going to give them actual competition this gen.

They may have dropped the price of their console faster than they would have done (arguably they would have had to even if Microsoft didn't have a console considering Nintendo completely trounced them early in the gen), but they also reduced costs by removing features (backwards compatability, less USB ports, no memory card slots) to offset that. By that point, most of the damage had been done. 

Seriosuly, if Microsoft gave up last gen, Sony would still have taken heavy losses on PS3.




Get your Portable ID!

Max King of the Wild on 20 April 2013
archbrix said:
Max King of the Wild said:
archbrix said:
Max King of the Wild said:
archbrix said:
Max King of the Wild said:
archbrix said:

While I'm pretty sure you're well aware of what I meant and are just finding anything to argue about, allow me to spell it out for you.

When referring to products in the generic sense in popular media here in NA, such as "Coke" when referring to a soft drink or "Kleenex" for facial tissues, "Xbox" has become the term for video games that "Playstation" once enjoyed. That, along with hardware/software sales, points to the brand recognition of Xbox showing significant growth in NA whereas Playstation has shown decline. When you consider the utter dominance the Playstation brand had in the 6th generation, wowzers indeed...

1.  The 360 is not nearly as dominate as the ps2 was in US. 

2.  On top of that people dont say coke when referring to soft dring they say soda or pop. Hicks from Texas call it a coke.

3.  And no... people dont say "360" when referring to gaming. They are literally talking about a 360

1.  I never said it was.  Perhaps you should re-read people's comments before responding...

2.  Wow, you'll reach for anything, won't you.  And you're wrong.  Many people say coke when referring to soda; if "hicks from Texas" do it too it just adds further weight to my point. 

3.  I didn't say "360", I said "Xbox".  Again, see point 1.



1. naw. In order for it to "replace the ps2" for people calling gaming "xbox" then it would need to be as dominate. If you think people are referring to their Ps3's or Wiis as xbox then you my friend are on crack. The reason why so many people referred to Playstation as gaming is because the sheer dominance. For every 4 ps2's you would have a xbox or GC (yes combined)

2. No it doesn't add further weight to your point.

3. Who cares? interchangebale in my opinion.

1. Clearly it doesn't have to be as dominant, since yes, the term "Xbox" has largely replaced "Playstation" when referring to gaming in a general sense. It's not about referring to a Wii or a PS3 specifically as an Xbox, it's about the terminology when referring to gaming in general.

2. Yes, it does, because not only "hicks in Texas" say this, which is what your point here was based on.

3. Well, you should care, since the specifics you're quick to disregard now was what your point hinged on, lol. "Xbox" is the terminology I'm referring to not "360". Same way people generally referred to "Playstation" as gaming last gen, not "PS2".


Your right. I refer to Ps3 to xbox all the time. LOL

My, my... your lack of reading comprehension is alarming. I sincerely hope you're doing this on purpose just to boost your post count.

If you think I lack reading comprehension then I honestly dont think you know what you are saying. Or at least, what you say means



archbrix on 20 April 2013
Max King of the Wild said:
archbrix said:

My, my... your lack of reading comprehension is alarming. I sincerely hope you're doing this on purpose just to boost your post count.

If you think I lack reading comprehension then I honestly dont think you know what you are saying. Or at least, what you say means

And therein lies your problem.  But hey, I suppose we're all wrong huh?  Oh, and paranoid...