lol sorry no no not at all...i meant to say that at least half the people who owned the PS2 who are interested in motion controls own or want a Wii....now of course I don't know the exact value and prolly nobody will but all I meant to say was that the idea of focusing on PS2 instead of the PS3 but adding motion controls to the PS2 is just not a sound idea....doing this is just going to further alienate the current PS3 owners, future PS3 owners and possibly Sony customers in general because its telling the customers that "we just dont know what we are doing, so we are going to make several moves, make mistakes, take it back, and further drain your wallet as you buy our products that will soon be obsolete..." I know Sony has to make some moves to sell their consoles and games, but doing too many moves too soon (like having 4 different SKU's in one year) tells the public that they don't know how to make a good products, thus scaring the public from buying one because they don't know when the price drops again, making them feel gipped.

I see what you're saying, but at first I was just like, "WTF?"

Also, while reading your post I thought of an interesting point concerning the ps2 and Wii's relationship. If the Wii keeps getting PS2 ports with tacked-on motion controls (RE4, DBZ: Budokai Tenkaichi 2, now Okami, all the usual EA multiplats, etc.), then what reason would casuals have to get a Wii, aside from the usual Nintendo 1st party stuff? 90%+ of casuals already own a ps2.

Sales aren't everything. At some point you have to demonstrate profit. Constant price cutting doesn't bring you closer to that goal. Software sales may bring some more profit in, but that is by no means given. With all the licensing deals and enormous development costs, profit from software is harder than ever to obtain.

Sony is performing a particular gambit. Whether you agree with the strategy or not Sony had to be committed to it. This is not unprecedented on the part of Sony they are aggressive by their nature. Some might even say arrogant, but they would not be where they are if it were not for that arrogance. The gaming division has always been a gambling enterprise for Sony. They take fantastic risks, and you know what for two generations it paid spectacular dividends.

Sony has basically placed it all on the line this time around. The console is connected intricately with their entertainment, and hardware divisions. They have constructed an elaborate house of cards. Pull out the PS3 and four or even five divisions suffer since those divisions have developed their support towards the PS3.

For instance Sony Pictures has a game division that provides games for the console. They have moved much of their focus from the PC market in order to do this. Their games are designed to be cross platform. Not to mention the loss of licensing fees if they own the format for movie distribution. Sony financial has leveraged many investments to support PS3 development remove the console, and they take a bath. Sony has invested many resources into developing and manufacturing the Cell. At the expense of other products. Sony is also a pioneer in flat screen high definition screens that support 1080P. The PS3 can convince consumers that feature is worth the extra expense.

What your not recognizing is that Sony is pot committed as it were. They put so much on the line that to walk away now would be unthinkable, and would cost them so much in the long term that it could be the worst thing for them to quit. You cannot win if your not in, and if you walk away from the table there might not be room for you when you come back.

They took the gamble and really lost in the short term however if they stick it out for four years, and sell enough consoles, games, and movies they might reduce the losses, and perhaps maintain some market position. Thats a hard road, and they might not make it. However the majority of the losses have come in the past now they are trying to dig their way out.

Anyway there is no way they are going to quit unless the position becomes untenable, or their losses continue to mount to a point where the strain on the company is too great. They are not near that point yet.

I have to say I rarely agree with your posts, but you made a lot of very great points here.

Dare I say I completely agree with the post?
 

Seriously though, I am pretty sure you have expressed my position perfectly, assuming I read it correctly of course.  Everything from the fact that they are in a relatively bad position in regards to their options as a company, all the way to the fact that they are far from assured doom.   

a $99 ps2 with 10 games? core psp far cheaper than a ds? "realistically", put down the crack pipe.

But how would Sony justify billions in losses to investors due to investment in Cell, Blu Ray and PS3 hardware production?  Right now, they can point to the future and say, "we'll put the Cell in everything, win the next gen HD battle, and make huge profits in our game division over years 3-10 with the PS3."

It doesn't have to be true, it just has to be justification.  Whether or not the price cuts would be more beneficial in other areas depend on whether or not you believe the next gen HD war is winnable on short order and whether the Cell will still be a cash cow for Sony after celling their production facilites.

 No, Mars pretty much hit the nail on the head.  Abandoning the PS3 would be an absolutely terrible idea.  Just because something isn't the best or even the second best doesn't mean it's a failure and should be abandoned.  That being said, I do agree that Sony didn't do the right move, but what you're suggesting is probably one of the dumber things I've heard lately.