^ it's small. Only like 5%

JEDE3 said: Now as I said. Yes it is for the slim. Just because it isn't on shelves doesn't mean it isnt current numbers. Sony is already manufacturing these things. It is the present for them. Not the future.

Right again. Of course it is for the slim.

Night surge - sony didnt shrink anything. isupply was just an estimate. and they were close... but still wrong.

JEDE3 said: ^ it's small. Only like 5%

Only 5? Bad for them, good for the players. So, what´s your predition on slim´s price ? 300?

JEDE3 said: Night surge - sony didnt shrink anything. isupply was just an estimate. and they were close... but still wrong.

But you don't know they didn't shrink anything, and you also don't know how far off iSuppli was.  What if iSuppli estimated lower than actual?  The actual figures didn't come out till 5 months later.  I doubt iSuppli would be off by $50+ overall so something likely was changed in the PS3.  It is also funny how we all use iSuppli's estimate of the $850 launch cost, but don't want to use their later estimate of $450?

ruimartiniman said: JEDE3 said: ^ it's small. Only like 5% Only 5? Bad for them, good for the players. So, what´s your predition on slim´s price ? 300?

5% For 400 dollars is still 20 dollars. That is a good amount for retailers. That would mean Sony sells it for 380 and from the CFO quote from may they still lose about 10% per ps3. Which would put it at about 420 to manufacture. Yes, I believe they can cut to 300 and still make profit per system sold. When I said this a while ago people called me crazy. They thought it was all the Ps3 draining Sonys money but months later we can see the picture more clearly. Sony not only had Ps3 making a loss but they were also funding projects such as PSP Go, PS3 slim, PS wand, and most likely Ps4 and PSP2. That is a lot of money on items that aren't on the market making anything for them just being drained.

nightsurge said: JEDE3 said: Night surge - sony didnt shrink anything. isupply was just an estimate. and they were close... but still wrong. But you don't know they didn't shrink anything, and you also don't know how far off iSuppli was.  What if iSuppli estimated lower than actual?  The actual figures didn't come out till 5 months later.  I doubt iSuppli would be off by $50+ overall so something likely was changed in the PS3.  It is also funny how we all use iSuppli's estimate of the $850 launch cost, but don't want to use their later estimate of $450?

I know because Sony announces when they make progress towards making the Ps3 profitable. And no, isupply wasn't off by 50 but rather only 20. And again... it was an estimate. a very accurate one. And the reason we don't use isupply's estimate of 440 is because more accurate numbers have been released.

wholikeswood said: Hehehe, I'm amused at Slimebeast's deluded belief that the average Sony 1st party title loses money. Industries differ; there's no way marketing for a game is as much as 50% of the title's budet (notable exception being Halo 3). Also, in general throughout your posting, you just pull figures from your arse and even at times don't follow your own logic. You suggest Pacific Rift had a budget of $15 million (lol - it was Motorstorm 1 in a jungle setting) and then suggest that its marketing was $10 million (lol #1 - it was not marketed heavily at all, lol #2 - that's not even following your own ridiculous "50% rule"). Oh, and really pointless suggesting that Warhawk didn't at least break even. Hardly the most expensive game ever created, and even without PSN sales and with poorly-tracked disc numbers we know it passed the half million mark (and all PSN and disc combined, I'd be confident of ~ 1 million). Only Lair was a real stinker, and even then, if we estimate EU sales, it probably broke 500k...

Well, lol@you for believing that every Sony game including Lair made a profit.

JEDE3 said: nightsurge said: JEDE3 said: Night surge - sony didnt shrink anything. isupply was just an estimate. and they were close... but still wrong. But you don't know they didn't shrink anything, and you also don't know how far off iSuppli was.  What if iSuppli estimated lower than actual?  The actual figures didn't come out till 5 months later.  I doubt iSuppli would be off by $50+ overall so something likely was changed in the PS3.  It is also funny how we all use iSuppli's estimate of the $850 launch cost, but don't want to use their later estimate of $450? I know because Sony announces when they make progress towards making the Ps3 profitable. And no, isupply wasn't off by 50 but rather only 20. And again... it was an estimate. a very accurate one. And the reason we don't use isupply's estimate of 440 is because more accurate numbers have been released.

Why do you keep saying 440.  iSuppli said $450!  And the newer "more accurate" numbers were not released until 5 months later.  Also, Sony does not always release information right away about every change.  You also have no proof that iSuppli was off by $20 back in December.

sabby_e17 said: @Slimebeast: Maybe if you gave us reliable sources we could believe you but what your saying at the moment sounds ridiculous. Serioulsy the marketing for Uncharted or Motorstorm could not have been above $5 million. I highly doubt that Sony fist party exclusives that sell over 1 million do not break.

You're just doing like the rest in this thread - replying with a knee jerk reaction, instinctively just defending Sony.

Why u ask me about sources when u pull out a $5 million marketing number for two games?