It's take more than that to make up for the billions of dollars lost now and potentially in the future on the PS3 though. The video game unit has been the most profitable division of Sony until recently. That's a lot of profit to lose if they only wind up with 30% of the video game market.

That's why I say you have to do a cost analysis. Just saying the movie business is big and you get royalties from that is not a cost analysis. You have to compare what you gain with what you lose. Only then can you figure out if the risk is worth it.

What you said is exactly why Sony can forget about gaming.  If BR wins, PS3 has done its job.  Bye bye.  BR royalty on PS3 games is negligible compared to licensing fee on PS3 games.

BR royalties in general is obviously bigger, but that has no bearings on PS3's future. 

 Dunno.  But Sony isn't the only company that gets royalty monies from BR. 

An estimate of 25% of a disk's manufacturing costs seem about right.   So maybe $1 for the group of companies that own BR patents?

That sounds a bit high. Look at how cheap DVD media is. You can buy 100 for $20. If royaties were more than a few cents, no way the price is that low. I can't imagine the royties would be that much more expensive for blu-ray or hd-dvd but I could be wrong. I would never want to use HD media for my computer if it was that expensive.

yeah, $1 is high. 

 for DVD royalty comparisons, i can only find the following:

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA618849.html

 which is 5 cents per.

"Overall, with patents on hardware included, some industry analysts have put the total DVD royalty costs passed onto the consumer at $700 million over the life of the format. "

Let's be generous and say BR roylaty costs passes onto the consumer is $7 bln.

Say Sony gets $1 bln.  That still doesn't cover PS3 development costs.  It's proof that Blu-Ray is just part of Sony's strategy, and if the PS3 concept as a whole fails, Playstation brand might not survive. 

 Quite honestly, I don't see this being a good thing for Nintendo? I doubt they would ever do it.  Competition in a marketplace is healthy for companies, if there was only one console then I think the market would drop in size rather than grow.

Predictions from Mr. Know-it-all John Lucas.

It will probably be August or September. The Wii gained 200k in US, about 300k in Japan, and probably inbetween for Europe. Even at 300k in Europe, that's a gain of 800k a month. I believe this to be a very high estimate, but if that is the case it will gain 2.4 million in the next 3 months. That's not enough.

About your ABSURD prediction on MGS4:

Not only is it unlikely to be on the 360, there is no way at all it won't be on the PS3. Kinda makes you seem crazy to predict such a thing.

I think you are probably wrong about everything else (except maybe DS beating PS2 for highest selling eventually), but we won't know until at least 2009.

I think Apple-Nintendo would be much more interesting. I think their product lines and direction mesh much better.

 forget abour 4 GT games selling 45 million units ? somewhere around 2 billion at retail.

Who are you kidding.

I have often dreamed of Nintendo and Sony joining forces.  Sony's hardware, Nintendo's innovation, and the 2 best software companies.  If Sony is able to copy and add to everything Live is doing, then the combination would have no flaw.

The only weakness for any company now is the lack of a lot of exclusives.  I think all 3 companies have great first-party exclusives with Sony's being the most varied, Nintendo's overall the best, and Microsoft's improving.  I think Microsoft and Nintendo would be complete opposites joining and would also make a good combination, but judging by what Sony showed today I think Sony would make an even better partner for Nintendo.

That said, the majority of you on this forum think Nintendo is flawless, so this might have been a waste of my time, heh.