Tretton has giant enemy crabs defeating Nintendo DS

...continued from 50......Will the PS3 be a DS, popularized a year after released because only then were games that utilized its hardware and were fun released, an iPOD, which was very expensive but caught on eventually because it was so danged cool, or a Dreamcast, frickin great but ignored because people thought something better was coming along?

"Anyone who says the PS3 cannot last 10 years is a fool"

You have heard of downloadable content right? You seriously think physical media, like DVD, will be around in TEN YEARS? You, sir, are the fool.

Of course physical media will be around in ten years....otherwise how will my mother buy movies in insert-standard-retail-chain here?

J B cougar, Which is why sony has Blu-ray, so that it can support things like higher capacity storage. And sony has already stated that they beleive downladable content will be around soon, and they are planning for it with standard and upgradable HDDs.

54 continued......I should mention that until satellite internet becomes as cheap as cable television or until the ENTIRE US is wired with fiberoptic--any of you been to Wyoming, Montana, Dakotas?--we must have physical media, especially with DVD's being phased out by HD formats.

You think the PSP is good on weed? Try the DS on weed.

Mikelx215: So, how's the test going?
Pothead friend of Mikelx215: Dude there are like 2 screens... I'm totally tripping out.
Mikelx215: You do that, Brad.

@49 "The PS2 is still outselling the 360 worldwide, and that is on its 6th year compared the the xboxs 4th."

Illogical comparison. Either compare the entire PlayStation line's existance to the entire Xbox line's existance or compare the PS3 with the Xbox 360. Comparing the PS2 existance's to the entire Xbox line's existance does not make sense.

ABigSmall, Why? when the PS2 has sold teice the consoles that the entire xbox line.

@ABigSmall, welcome to fanboy land: Where it is perfectly acceptable to make shit up and pass it off as an intelligent argument and succeed on a comment forum.

ABigSmall, illogical or not, that the PS2 is outselling (fact?) the XB360 is quite a powerful pfeat, age or no. Imagine if the NES had outsold the Jaguar in its first year......wait, it probably did, didn't it?

it's difficult to compare the 360 to the PS2. one has a library built over one year and a couple hundred backwards compatible titles, the other has a combined current and last-gen library of a couple thousand titles, at least. one is the only entrant so far into the next-gen arena, and a lot of potential buyers are waiting to see what the other guys have coming out, and the other won the last generation years ago and sits at a price low enough to entice even the most casual gamer.

I don't believe Sony pitching the marathon plan is surprising: honestly, I wondered if they'd ever resort to copping to it. but it's still a bad plan. Sony is betting the entire future of the company on Blu-Ray, and they're going to need a huge PS3 push to help Blu-Ray get past the medium's disastrous launch and even the field in the war against HD-DVD. telling gamers that the system will be a good deal in the future wouldn't be an awful move for Sony if they hadn't tied the system to the success of Blu-Ray; Sony seems to get third party support from a lot of people even when it doesn't seem to make sense for those developers to pledge exclusivity to them. but unfortunately, Sony has to be a lot more careful this time, and I'm surprised they'd issue a press release that amounts to "buy it later because it'll be worth it for a long time."

ABigSmall, I think the comparison makes sense when we look at it this way: We're talking about sales, not generation or power. The older less powerful system is still the choice of more people than the new super system from Microsoft. Of course, the PS2 is cheaper, but if you want to point that out, then why aren't people running out to buy the original XBox? What is troublesome for Microsoft is that the same people opting for a PS2 are deciding to pass on the original XBox, likely because of the lack of support. When the PS3 ships, it's likely that the PS2 sales will sink, although nothing like the ol' XBox sales have since the 360 was released - the Xbox never reached the total market saturation (6 PS2s for every Xbox sold) that the PS2 has, and a lot of people will be playing their PS2s for the next year or beyond, until they finally decide what to buy next.

People not involved in this 'console war' and just want to play some games continue to buy the PS2.

And in a way, your comparision of the 360 and the PS3 doesn't make sense either: The PS3 isn't out yet.

#43 Anoymouse Rep:

A truly fascinating tale! I can see it...

The following is a narrative interpretation, rather than hard research fact; Bear that in mind.


A Sony boardroom. Say, 2002-2003. It comes time to decide a budget. The Playstation department, not resting on its laurels, begins to pitch the project to design the PS3. As the PS2 is a positively runaway success, an elderly, balding Japanese executive decides, with a sage nod, that Kutaragi can have whatever he wants or needs to make the PS3 just as big a success.

It is when that pen hit the paper, those fingers hit those keys, and all in favor said "Aye," that a small, evil smile crossed Kutaragi's withered lips, and the stage was set for disaster.

Every grandiose plan that was cooked up by the development teams could be implemented, because we had billions to play with! Cell processor? Seven Bluetooth controller connectors? Multiple ethernet ports? We can do it all with this budget! Heck, don't we have this new DVD format we're cooking up that we could easily enforce on the market with this thing, especially since it'll sell as well as the PS2?

They spoke long into the night, plans were drawn, and with drunken giddiness the engineers, delighted to be permitted to work on this glory of gaming, worked and worked...

Until the sobering realization that they had done too much hit them. This machine they had put so much work into developing cost $800 to manufacture using current technology. All the delays in trying to make this system gave Microsoft's new system a full on year of a head start - while the developers still hadn't receieved their dev kits.

What could they do?

Well, taking out the Blu-Ray player would have allowed it to compete at the same graphical level without sacrificing that price advantage to the 360. But Sony was adamant.

And now we have the situation as it stands.

Sony's third party developers are pulling out, because the cost of development for the vaunted Cell Processor is too high. Their PR department is uninspired, if not in total disarray, as Phil Harrison tries to find words to describe a product he, if not Sony, sure as hell doesn't believe in. Gamers, save a few diehards, are enraged; Parents turn away from the system the moment I tell them the price. The launch list is filled with titles, none of which have the gameplay or the graphical superiority to justify the price of the system.

And meanwhile Sony's debts continue to mount.


I sincerely hope that Sony concocts some way to pull themselves out of this mess, and thus leave a Sony in existence - one that's learned from this mistake.

I fear that may not be what happens.

"Anyone who says the PS3 cannot last 10 years is a fool," said one of those few diehard, slavering fans, but it sounds like the big question is not whether the PS3 can last, but whether Sony itself can last in the face of all its debt and financial mismanagement.

Lol, I just had to take a second to laugh at the comments.

Now are you guys video game players or politicians, ok to put it this way, I really don't care about how much power you can cram into a system and wat cd's and what not it plays, I really only care if a good game will come out of it.

First of all, quit with the Sony sucks, Nintendo sucks, Microsoft sucks comments, and if they'll be around in 2010+ if that even matters to what game you'll be getting in november or later.

Really, I've got to say, when a game company comes out and tells me that their system can run HDMI and Blu-Ray or HD-DVD, I just plug my NES back in and start going back to old school games.
Do I really want to hear a bunch of boring people in suits talk to me about entertainment, they probably read software magazines to entertain themselves, how can I take their words as anything pertaining to me.

Then going on to Nintendo's side of things;
First of all (despite owning a Ps2) I've got to say I'm a Nintendo fan now, they're innovators in their own right, they took a spin on something simple and let that go a long way, with no loss of capabilities to their competitors except for graphics and processor (as if any game uses the maximums anyways). I don't really think Nintendo is at any loss with graphics, etc... cuz I've seen some games look better on a weaker system than on their competitors more powerful systems, like Burnout Revenge on Ps2, that seriously looked like the 360 version to me.
To me developer companies are just lazy, or more supporting of the new system so they can gain some cheap cash by catching buyers of the new consoles, like how SSX got big on the Ps2 or Call of Duty 2 on the 360, these games are just cheap shots, and I seriously have more fun playing Goldeneye 007 on my N64.

Let me just get on to point here, what the Ps3 really is to me is just another game system, not some legacy or renaissance of a console where innovation takes over, it's just a remake in a sense, like when you we're a kid, was Freeze Tag, TV Tag or Tag with a Base that much more fun than the original game, no matter what game it was it only made things a little more interesting before you stopped playing all together, and basically I see this with consoles like the Ps3 and the 360, even the same for the Wii a bit, but the self-updating game features and controller may hold gamers a bit longer and plus Nintendo is only a game company not a multi-market business, plus they can still make more consoles in the future.
Sony and Microsoft in the future will just be making remakes of the systems they have now just with new motion sensing capabilities and a new feature that Nintendo has released at the Tokoyo Game Show 2011.

@ 26, daryyl

"The PSP is double the price and is selling huge... just not to kids. I for one would certainly not buy my kids a PSP. The DS is perfect for job, that's why the numbers are so high. Every PSP owner I know is at least 12 or 13 and up. There is hardly a "smack-down" going on... The DS sells to completely different markets, children being #1. It's obvious..."

1) Every person I know with a DS or who wants one is no longer in high school.

2) Saying, “Every PSP owner I know is at least 12 or 13 and up.” does not properly show how the PSP is for mature audiences, I think you should change it to read 22 or 23 (maybe even older than that).

3) The cool thing about the DS is appeals to many markets. My 50 year old parents sat down with it and immediately started playing games and having fun with it. Let’s see them do that with any other gaming system on the market (console or portable)


Well one thing is obvious; I wouldn't buy my kids (when I have them) a PSP either. Not when I could get them something that is less expensive, more fun, more innovative, and has more accessible games (as my wife has proven).

The DS lite actually more than anything got me interested in the Wii. Nintendo has shown us that they know how to do it right and make something fun, even if it is just grade school math.

Guys lets stop arguing

yes sony talked alot of shit
Yes the Ds is currently crushing the psp


but look at it this way

The guy HAS to twist his words around
because NO game company would go "WE'rE DOING PRETTY BAD"

we all know sony has there money issues
but it doesn't mean the psp was a failure, not as great as expected but still pretty good

Um. Okay guys. I'll just shut up and head onto my corner now. :D

Corners ARE better outside than inside.

@2 "I think he meant the statistical standpoint of how many non-gamers buying each of those handhelds"

Right. Many early adopters bought PSPs for it's portable media player capabilities. They saw all these movies coming out on UMD (more movies than have come out on BluRay) and thought it was a serious media player. But all those people who bought PSPs primarily as media players bought relatively few games for their systems, which is why PSP games sales have been so low.

In other words, Sony sold the PSP to a lot of non-gamers, but failed to convert those non-gamers into gamers.

@13 "the PS3 is too powerful to just get a new system after a few years..... nobody will match the PS3's procesing power before im dead prolly"

Didn't you learn anything from the hype over the PS2's "Emotion Engine"? Sometimes I think Sony chooses these alternative processors just for the hype.

PCs surpassed the PS2's "radical" "supercomputer" Emotion Engine the day it came out, and they'll do the same for the PS3. In 2~3 years, PCs will make the PS3 look like a toy, just like they did to the PS2.

@21 "What is left to experience in gaming in 10 years? What haven't we experienced a hundred times over in current gen form?"

That's the question that Nintendo has pondered.

@53 "And sony has already stated that they beleive downladable content will be around soon, and they are planning for it with standard and upgradable HDDs."

First, Microsoft already has downloadable content.

Second, How exactly are we going to upgrade the PS3's HDD when it appears to be built in? At least Microsoft's HDD is easily removable.

You know what the advantage of being a video gamer for 25 years is? I can shake my head and cry when I see how many people totally screw up history.

Let's settle one thing right here and now - Nintendo never had any market to themselves except for two stretches - the portable format from the death of the Nomad until the arrival of the WonderSwan, followed by the death of the WonderSwan until the arrival of the PSP.

Sure, it's easy to say that the various Game Boys had no competition. But Nintendo had to fight tooth and nail to get that dominance of the portable game industry.

It's not like there was no-names going at the Game Boy, either. Sega had two different handhelds in the market (the Game Gear and the Nomad). There was the Turbo Express. There was the Lynx. In each case, Nintendo had to deal with a competitor producing a much more robust system (albeit ones that had huge energy expenditures) while Big N was playing with a monochrome brick.

And on top of that, Nintendo stuck with portable gaming even as it was repeatedly declining in signifigance. Quite simply, portable gaming was a distraction, a lark, until Pokemon came along. Laugh all you want, but portable gaming is just a distraction even today without the burst of attention from trying to catch them all.

I know fanboys like to pretend that Sony is the first competition Nintendo has had in the portable realm. But history doesn't support it. In fact, if you compare Sony's hardware advantage over the DS versus the hardware advantages other companies had over the various Game Boys, Nintendo has never had a portable system as close technologically to their competitors as they do with the DS vs. the PSP.

To be blunt, Nintendo has never been this close to having a level playing field in terms of specs. And for all the talk of something different, this really looks like Game Boy Brick vs. Game Gear all over again.

If history is repeating, Nintendo stands to be on top. Especially since Pokemon moved millions of systems... and the next Pokemon games are about to come out. I know it's apparently the "in thing" to ridicule the series, but nobody can deny that it sells like ice cream in the Sahara.

Adoption rate, Schadoption rate. What does it matter how the DS did initialy. Is the PSP gonna outselll the DS at anytime? YEs or No. The PSP will die off, why? Because go to any PSP site and it is rife with Emulator talk, Downgrading talk, ripping games, iso's, roms, etc. So not only is Sony losing money on every PSP and isn't the UMD format dead? Maybe it is struggling in Japan because of the UMD price cut. But they are not making money on games because just like MP3's it takes one person to buy the game, rip and upload and everyone and their mother is now getting the latest PSP game for free. Wait until the so-called PS1 download feature, pirate city.

Post # 49. Ethan:

You said: "Anyone who says the PS3 cannot last 10 years is a fool" & "I know when I invest in their consoles, that I am getting a quality product"

Here's a few questions for you:

(1) What is the warranty on the PS3?
(2) How many class actions have been leveled against Sony for poor quality? (hint: two have been settled in the past twelve months alone)
(3) Sony is currently in the middle of the worlds largest product withdrawal in history with poor quality batteries blowing up notebooks - true or false?
(4) Sony says it is satisfactory quality for how many pixels to be dead in their PSP screens?
(5) Will the majority of Cell processors have fully functioning SPE's?
(6) What is the replacement cost of a blown blew ray drive in PS3?
(7) Blow-ray has a lower transfer rate than DVD - true or false?
(8) According to Seagate & Hitachi; SATA production is scheduled to be retired (in favor of SAS) by 2009 - Does PS3 support SAS?
(9) Will PS3 cure Parkinson's Disease? and can you really launch nuclear missiles using the Super-computer like PS2?

Re: next ten years

Note that Sony's manufactured and sold the PS1/PSone for eleven years (late 1994 - early 2006) and will likely do the same with the PS2 (2000-2010?). It's quite possible that Sony will manufacture the PS3 for a ten year period (2006-2016) as well.

Of course, PS1/PSone software releases slowed to a trickle after the 2000 holiday season, apart from a trickle of licensed children's titles and sports games (Madden 2005, etc.).

Laughingtarget:

I'm familiar with the figures. On an annual basis, the FYE March 31, 2006 cash from operating activities was only about 2/3 what it was in either of the prior two years.

Here's what I'm looking at:

http://finance.google.com/finance?fstype=ci&cid=33095

Flip over to the balance sheets, and you'll see Cash and STI of 1,240 billion yen for FYE 31 March 2006, which is right up there for their recent history. Net issuance and retirement of debt for the last fiscal year resulted in inflow of less than 100 billion yen, so, IMHO, we're not talking about a major cash crunch here. They don't seem to have overextended their credit quite yet.

My point is that they aren't going under this year. Once they start actually selling hardware, and stop building factories, their cash flow is almost inevitably going to improve. This console cycle would have to be incredibly disastrous for Sony to be out of the business in the next cycle, and I don't think we'll see that. Maybe next time.

Full disclosure, I own a 360, and have never bought any Playstation console, I don't buy Sony products, because I think they're shit.

More Laughingtarget:

Sony should be at their lowest point in their cash cycle right now. Their flagship product in their most productive segment is in prelaunch. They're spending money and not taking it in because they are (maybe) producing units and definitely rebuilding lines and factories.

This is probably a decent time to buy Sony stock. People are in a tizzy because they aren't going to be make their holiday projections, but it's probably irrelevant. If they can actually ship 6 million units to channels by March, then their earnings will overperform (no one thinks they can), and the price will go up and you'll take a tidy profit.

If not, then Sony's still a solid stock to hold onto because of their history. You can wait a year or two on Sony and not have to worry about them going out of business. Even though their products fall apart, their brand is getting a shelacking, and their year-late next gen console has games that look like they could be handled with ease on Microsoft's year-old next gen console.

J.Goodwin -

It is important to see HOW Sony is getting the cash. The two important line items, Operating and Investing, are the ones that determine the future strength of a company. Each of the two, with the exception of 2003, resulted in a net loss, which Sony required to build up additional short term loans, listed as financing cash flow items, to try and make up for the loss.

Also, the Issuance (Retirement) of Debt, Net line item is only in regards to bond holdings. While it is true that long term debt only resulted in 96.5 billion in new bond issuances, new short term bank notes pulled in 288 billion. But that still wasn't enough to counter the 471 billion shortfall between financing and operating activities.

Sony is in a cash crisis. Their ONLY source of cash income is from bonds and notes. It has been that way for the better part of the decade. Sony IS in a huge cash crunch. The PS2 failed to bring in positive cash flows for Sony where it matters and the PS3 is unlikely to turn around the trend, especially that it is more expensive to produce and, because of such, will unlikely reach the same install levels as the PS2. Sony IS in trouble with the PS3. They've spent too much on it, took out too many loans, and converted too much of its cash stock into phantom assets like patents and goodwill.

If the cheaper and more profitable PS2 was unable to turn the company's cash woes around, the grossly overpriced PS3 won't either. Sony's only option at this point is to not sell the unit for a loss to avoid any disaster.

For the record, I really don't like how Google lays out its financial record information. They don't have options to explain what each line really means. It is a common mistake to see the debt line and assume that line is the only liability generated, when the entire section is a liability.

General Public:

It is important to remember that the cash flow sheet is NOT an accumulation account. Every year the entire thing starts at zero. That means you can add up each year along the line to find out just how much debt Sony has piled up in the past 5 years, and how much of it is the result of one, single product. This is a textbook case of poor corporate governance.

j

they are selling the console at a loss. sot hey will be taking a huge hit either way. the mroe consoles they sle the more in the whole they go

but the kicker is if they sale poorly than they are realy in trouble. they need to recoup money thru software sells. somthing u canlt do if u donlt havea huge installed base liek that of the ps2. so they have a 5 year plan to recoup all loses. if that plan fails and they ahve any other major issues they very well could tank. its always a possibility when ur in a cash crunch and releasing a prodcut that will cost more to make than ur selling it.

the key here is software sells. now mayabe they will have a high software attch rate say y7-8 games per console but tha takes years to achieve. it took ps2 4 years to achieve 6.2 games per console.

either way the road is not smooth no matter how u look at it.

I agree with a poster earlier on page 1....when the new Pokemon RPG Diamond and Pearl (the sequals to Emerald, Sapphire...etc)are released in Japan this and next week....the DS Lite sells will gain significant numbers on the PSP. What title does the PSP have that will generate sells for it like Pokemon for the DS Lite? The true Pokemon RPG will sell huge.

@ #13

Please, just stop typing. I have a little quest for you. Go to Google and look up the technical specs for the PS2 and the Gamecube. Might as well go for the Xbox specs as well. The only real reason the PS2 sold well is because of the games that were released for it. It is by far the weakest system in that generation. I mean, try running smash brothers on the PS2(I'm saying, imagine they ported only the code to work with the PS2, no changing the rendering techniques or lowering of resolution output) and you'll notice that it's not going to come close to the speed of the gamecube. It really wouldn't be as fun either. Now, I own a PS2, but only because DDR, Beatmania, Megaman X, etc. is in it. See? It's the games that sell the system. We'll just have to see what happens when it happens. It's pretty much useless to argue over anything before it happens. Let's leave the arguing until after a few months of release.

Just for a comparison, Sony should take a look at how Microsoft does business because they're doing it without having to rely on outside loans:

http://finance.google.com/finance?fstype=ci&cid=358464

As we can see, Microsoft has been in a debt reduction mode for a long time now, which is a very smart move on their part. If they can operate with zero debt and do it because of massive cash inflows from operations and investments, then they'll have reached corporate nirvana. They only took out $89 million in debt this past year and have been in stock-buyback mode for a while. This means that Microsoft isn't going to overburden itself with short term debt and have to refinance it every year and reduces the amount of money it has to pay out in interest. Also, Microsoft's investments have actually been paying off, something that Sony hasn't had, well, ever this decade, and are pulling in positive cash flows from investing activities as well as operating activities. Microsoft's investment activites are doing so well in fact that the expenditures they've put toward the 360 aren't even registering as a flea bite on how much they're pulling in.

Microsoft's last, large decline in cash was because of a $36 BILLION dividend, which is absolutely massive and speaks volumes of just how well business is for them.

Sony is betting the entire farm on the PS3, the 360 is just a small, pet project for Microsoft...relatively speaking.

"Let's settle one thing right here and now - Nintendo never had any market to themselves except for two stretches - the portable format from the death of the Nomad until the arrival of the WonderSwan, followed by the death of the WonderSwan until the arrival of the PSP."

Since the Bandai WonderSwan line was never released in North America (or if it was, I blinked and missed it), from my perspective that's just one long span where Nintendo had the portable console market to themselves. 1996 to 2005. A full two generations' worth of gaming.

@ 32_Footsteps

Exactly. Pokemon (whether you love it or hate it) is the perfect example of simple addictive gameplay that both sells systems AND has other revenue channels (i.e. merchandising, cartoons, etc.) to perpetuate its power.

When I first played Pokemon: Fire Red (when I was 20-21 I think) I was immediately hooked for days. Graphics didn't matter, simplicity didn't matter -- all I knew was that I was having fun playing and my nephew was pissed because I "borrowed" his system and wouldn't give it back.

To be honest, I haven't played much Pokemon since then, but to deny it as a gaming juggernaut is pointless and futile.

To that end, Nintendo has key franchises that they can space out over time to keep gamers interested (Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, etc.) and then release "non-traditional" games to grow their product line amongst "non-gamers". Sounds like a solid 1-2 punch and shows with the success of the DS.

Rootbeer said: "Since the Bandai WonderSwan line was never released in North America (or if it was, I blinked and missed it), from my perspective that's just one long span where Nintendo had the portable console market to themselves. 1996 to 2005. A full two generations' worth of gaming."

You did blink and miss it. However, that doesn't change the fact that Nintendo had several competitors in that time frame.

The Neo Geo Pocket/NGP Color was also released in the US during that time frame. You apparently also forgot the N-gage and the Tapwave Zodiac (2003 and 2004, respectively). That you don't consider that fact that the Gamegear was still actively supported until 1998 inidicates how much of a failure they really experienced.

Keep in mind that the original Gameboy remained on the market for 9 YEARS until they brought out a color unit. Think about that for a moment. Units that had color and more powerful processors and graphics came and went, failing to unseat it by a vast margin. In fact, Gunpei Yokoi, the gameboy's designer, couldn't unseat his own design (guess who designed the Wonderswan?)

Nintendo has had challenger upon challenger in the handheld arena...but almost universally, they fail to understand what drives the market. The PSP is a good PMP, but it has some shortcomings in the games competency. My friend's PSPs are all gathering dust while they play on their new DS-lites, instead. They still use the PSP for playing videos occasionally, but when it comes to gaming on the go, the DS wins hands down for us. Maybe if Sony wasn't so distracted with trying to tie the PSP's hands behind it's back with continual DRM updates, they might have a better chance, I don't know.

What I do know is that Nintendo currently has two DS games that have sold over 3 million copies. That may be more than all of the PSP games sold IN TOTO.

@27 - LaughingTarget

I'm sure Tretton has more reliable market data at his disposal than you could ever dream of getting your grubby paws on. It's his business - his market, of course he would have this information.

As for the lasting power of the PS3 - just look at what history has taught us... The PS2 which runs at what, 250 Mhz? is outselling the X-Box 360. The PS2 has been out for 6 years....

I think it's funny how people read things into it when Sony says the PS3 will have a 10 year lifespan. Like it will stay top of the line hardware for that 10 years - which is NOT WHAT THEY'RE SAYING people. Look at the PS1...look at the PS2 which will very likely last AT LEAST 10 years.

The PS3 is not some magic box that will remain top of the line hardware forever - but it will last the full 10 years in the same way the PS1 and PS2 did. Start thinking things through logically people - the thing isn't going to make breakfast or serve you hot coffee in the morning.

It is yet to be seen if they truly will back up their claim that the price reflects the value.

@84 - Dan

Comparing a $100 Playstation to a $400-500 Xbox 360 is not apples to apples at all. You will have to compare PS3 to Xbox360 sales, much like comparing Xbox to PS2 sales (in which the PS2 spanked the crap out of the Xbox). Of course PS2 sells better than the 360, for the same reason that Toyota will always sell better than Lexus.

Just saying if you want others to think logically you should make logical comparisons.

"Comparing a $100 Playstation to a $400-500 Xbox 360 is not apples to apples at all. You will have to compare PS3 to Xbox360 sales, much like comparing Xbox to PS2 sales (in which the PS2 spanked the crap out of the Xbox). Of course PS2 sells better than the 360, for the same reason that Toyota will always sell better than Lexus.

Just saying if you want others to think logically you should make logical comparisons. "

I cannot compare PS3 sales to X-Box 360 sales for obvious reasons, and that was not my intent. =)

Logically speaking, what we have is current generation systems outselling next-gen systems.

The lasting power of a console is not dependant on how fast they are in comparison to next-gen systems. That was my point, please follow along....

logically yours,

Dan

Dan -

It is unlikely that Tretton has access to that kind of data. No actual study has been done on that. The most imporant piece of information needed is access to a database of DS owners, something that Sony would have to petition Nintendo for, and even they only have access to such information if the consumer sends in a warranty card or other form of registration to Nintendo directly.

Afterwards, Sony would then have to send out surveys to each of those DS owners. Even IF Sony did manage to obtain such information from Nintendo, it is difficult to assume they would build a fair and non-biased survey (survey results can easily be swayed to whatever end the surveyor wants by properly phrasing questions).

When it comes down to it, Sony has no such data at their disposal. Any third party research would be publicly available (none exists at the time of this writing, because they actually sell this stuff to those who want it, not hide it away for key corporate competition) to either counter or support this. Tretton provided no support and even ignored counter evidence like the sales of non-gamer related titles like all the brain training titles, English titles, cookbooks, etc.

His remarks were from out of nowhere. It isn't all that difficult to understand that information.

Dan said: "I'm sure Tretton has more reliable market data at his disposal than you could ever dream of getting your grubby paws on. It's his business - his market, of course he would have this information."

Concerning Sony, perhaps he does...but we don't really know that for a fact. Given that it's also business to sell his products TO his market (and that his company has steadfastly refused to share data to prove his point), I don't see how you can view him as a plain dealer in any discussion of the PSP's position in the market.

Clearly, the Wall Street Journal isn't buying his story...check out the top story on the Marketplace section, page B1, big color photo. Check out recent issues of Businessweek and Forbes.

The PS/2 IS outselling quite a bit in the market...but it's not selling to people who'll be buying the PS3 or the 360, at this late date. It's selling to people who like the inexpensive price coupled with the cheap used-games market, and to people who are either replacing units or buying secondary or tertiary units....in the exact same way that the DS-lite has many people upgrading from their older units.

Statements like "As far as the largest online gaming audience, it's PS2. Despite the popularity of Xbox Live, the largest online gaming audience is the PS2 and it does exceed the Xbox and I certainly think it exceeds the Xbox 360 at this point..." are clearly sophistry. By counting everyone who has a network adapter and everyone who ever registered to play a free game online, he might be able to make this claim. But Xbox-live is a pay service, and I think you'd be hard-pressed to compare customer buy-in of a free, mostly unsupported service against it. I mean, I used the ps/2 online service to try that stupid atv racing game and then the load my portrait into THUG on the ps/2...and then never used it again. Does that match my paying a monthly fee to use X-box live to play Halo 2 and Crimson Skies? How does Nintendo's Wifi Connection factor in? How will Connect24 factor it?

Again: "To do this, we sacrificed the rumble ability, because it would interfere with the new motion sensors. We feel motion sensing technology allows the player to be much more proactively connected to the game, than the passive, reactionary rumble technology. Given this design decision, there are no plans to discuss rumble further with Immersion."

Once more, that's putting as positive a spin as he can on the situation. This is code-speak for: we saw Nintendo's idea and realized that maybe it was a good replacement for the rumble feature we're being sued for using. Technically everything he's saying is true, but it's hardly what I'd call factual. YMMV.

-87 LaughingTarget

Ok - I give. Let's assume Tretton knew nothing and he was pulling numbers out of his arse.

That doesn't change the fact that the staying power of a console is not commensurate with the speed of it's hardware, or we would see little if any sales of the PS2, which by this time in it's lifespan is bringing in a pretty profit I'm sure.

If the PS3 succeeds and delivers on the value they promise for the dollar - then I see no reason why it will not last 10 years or better, especially given the history of the PS1 and PS2.

No argument there, Dan. However, the PS3 reaching a point where it is successful enough to warrant continuation of the business is suspect. Sony cannot sit on the PS3 as a long term option right now. It is financed with short term debt, which means it needs to pull an immediate profit, something not even the most die-hard of fanboy can admit is a possibility. The PS3 needs an attach rate of anywhere from 20-30 titles per unit to simply break even on the manufacturing costs. This means that Sony will only see continued losses over the next year or two, and even they will question the validity of keeping the venture going. Given the PS2 is only at a 6.8 games per unit sold ratio right now, the PS3's future is not looking bright.

The PS2 is doing well because it is still being supported and only costs $130. The PS1 was outselling the PS2 for a while after the PS2 release, so the PS2 outselling the 360 is somewhat irrelevant information. Can't say the same thing about the Xbox, which hasn't been in production for the past 4 months and Microsoft did make the mistake of discontinuing it far too early. However, Microsoft did need to make a decision on that. The second place unit isn't going to live as long as the big guy.

The biggest question is if the PS3 can reach an install base to make it a viable 10 year option, something Sony is going to need based on profit margins to even begin thinking of calling the PS3 a success.