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

Forums - Sony - Kaz Hirai Isn't Sure How Long The XBOX 360 cycle is...

Linkzmax on 26 July 2008
HappySqurriel said:
Dno said:
HappySqurriel said:
quimicomortal said:

HA. If you have to make two consoles to compete against one, no matter the final numbers, adding cost of production and marketing you have already lost.

And you can put Wii an twice the sales of the gamecube and still be swept agaisnt the sales of PS2 (unlike gamecube, still selling and still getting games).

Obviously you have still to recover from las gen olympical defeat against PS2.

 

I'm not sure I understood anything you said in your post ...

The fact is that the PS3 and PSP erased all profit made by Sony with the Playstation and PS2 (and the Wii, Gamecube, and N64 were all amazingly profitable even though they were the trailing console) so it really depends on which two consoles you add together if it will be a losing or wining combination.

The one thing that Kaz Hirai doesn't seem to understand is every leading console has had a long life, and no trailing console has ever seen long term third party support

thats not true i want a link.. it erased all the profits sony made off the ps2 hardware not software. this is incorrect intill i see a link.

And the psp was very proftable last i heard.

 

Someone (BengaBenga or Sqrl I think) created a post awhile back that added up all of Sony's Game Division's profits from 1996 through 2007 and the losses from the PS3 erased all profits gained by the Playstation and PS2 ...

Now, the PSP hardware may turn a profit when sold but that wasn't always the case (and it had huge R&D costs before it was released) and its software sales are amazingly awful ... When you factor in marketing costs, I highly doubt Sony has turned a profit on the PSP.

 

You may be thinking of http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=16119 by bbsin.  And it shows that they haven't erased all profits from both generations. Information on losses for the 2008 fiscal year can be found here http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/fr/07q4_sony.pdf

From 1996-2000(Pre-PS2) $3,117,826,000 profit
From 2001-2006(Pre-PS3) $2,282,000,000 profit
2007&2008 $3,213,644,000 loss

So they've wiped out all the profit from either generation, but the Game Division is looking to break even this fiscal year(ending Mar '09) and in future years SHOULD be profitable.  Though with increased costs all around this generation and few sources for increased revenue it's unlikely that this generation will be profitable overall.



VGC Mafia Archives

Around the Network
Smashchu2 on 26 July 2008
Linkzmax said:
HappySqurriel said:
Dno said:
HappySqurriel said:
quimicomortal said:

HA. If you have to make two consoles to compete against one, no matter the final numbers, adding cost of production and marketing you have already lost.

And you can put Wii an twice the sales of the gamecube and still be swept agaisnt the sales of PS2 (unlike gamecube, still selling and still getting games).

Obviously you have still to recover from las gen olympical defeat against PS2.

 

I'm not sure I understood anything you said in your post ...

The fact is that the PS3 and PSP erased all profit made by Sony with the Playstation and PS2 (and the Wii, Gamecube, and N64 were all amazingly profitable even though they were the trailing console) so it really depends on which two consoles you add together if it will be a losing or wining combination.

The one thing that Kaz Hirai doesn't seem to understand is every leading console has had a long life, and no trailing console has ever seen long term third party support

thats not true i want a link.. it erased all the profits sony made off the ps2 hardware not software. this is incorrect intill i see a link.

And the psp was very proftable last i heard.

 

Someone (BengaBenga or Sqrl I think) created a post awhile back that added up all of Sony's Game Division's profits from 1996 through 2007 and the losses from the PS3 erased all profits gained by the Playstation and PS2 ...

Now, the PSP hardware may turn a profit when sold but that wasn't always the case (and it had huge R&D costs before it was released) and its software sales are amazingly awful ... When you factor in marketing costs, I highly doubt Sony has turned a profit on the PSP.

 

You may be thinking of http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=16119 by bbsin. And it shows that they haven't erased all profits from both generations. Information on losses for the 2008 fiscal year can be found here http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/fr/07q4_sony.pdf

From 1996-2000(Pre-PS2) $3,117,826,000 profit
From 2001-2006(Pre-PS3) $2,282,000,000 profit
2007&2008 $3,213,644,000 loss

So they've wiped out all the profit from either generation, but the Game Division is looking to break even this fiscal year(ending Mar '09) and in future years SHOULD be profitable. Though with increased costs all around this generation and few sources for increased revenue it's unlikely that this generation will be profitable overall.

It's interesting. The years Sony's released a console have always been bad, but they usually make it up. However, the PS3 and, if HappySquirrle is right, the PSP have been eating at profits. A lof of the profit for 07 was the PS2 (I assume). This may not boad well. I doubt Sony will be able to break even. With price cuts on the PS3 probably still hurting, low game sales, and the MGS4 bundle, that Sony is going to continue to go into the red.

But I'd like to see the thread HappySquirrle is talking about.

 



fayewong on 28 July 2008

who cares about the PS3's lifecycle. I will be playing my PS5 and arguing with people on the forums about the Xbox 1080 in 10 years.



NJ5 on 28 July 2008

I smelled the fail in this thread just from reading the title. The Xbox wasn't discontinued because Microsoft wanted it to, Nvidia stopped producing Xbox GPUs which they owned.



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

Profcrab on 28 July 2008

The only part that the console makers have definite control over the span of time between the release of new consoles. This time is usually about 5-6 years. This has been the release cycle since the late 80's. I don't expect it to change now. How long a console sells after that time is another story. A console maker will continue to support a console as long as it sells. The 10 year lifecycle comments have always been bullshit. It has never meant that the PS4 was going to come out 10 years later because the PS3 is so awesome and Sony will only produce and support PS3's as long as people are buying them. Since Microsoft owns the chip designs for the 360, now they have a choice as to when then end production. To sum it up, Kaz is talking out his ass.

I give this thread a 9.3.



Thank god for the disable signatures option.

Around the Network
colonelstubbs on 28 July 2008
Domicinator said:
When discussing the supposed "console wars", I still don't understand why PS3 supporters think the ten year life cycle has anything to do with anything. The PS2 is still around, yes. How many of you are banging down Sony's doors demanding new PS2 games? If you own a PS3, do you really give two s#$%s about the PS2 anymore besides those nostalgic moments when you want to go back and play your favorites?

I realize that the PS3 is a powerhouse machine. You can't deny that. But technology moves along SO fast, and eventually the PS3 will become a dated piece of hardware, and I think it will be sooner than people think. It won't be in the next couple of years, but beyond that, who knows?

Again, yes the PS2 is still around. But if I still had an old PS2 lying around and a PS3 with all these new games coming out, I probably wouldn't even be THINKING about my PS2 anymore. If anything, I would probably be really pissed that my PS3 won't play my favorite PS2 games.

Well, a lot of people are begging for BC so i think there are a lot of people who care about the PS2

 



I hope my 360 doesn't RRoD
         "Suck my balls!" - Tag courtesy of Fkusmot