| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (83)

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:30PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Shit, now even I feel sorry for them...
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 6:06PM arttemis said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I don't. It's their fault for stripping away a marketable (and dirt cheap) feature from their new flagship consoles.

Perhaps NOW that the PS2 profits aren't recouping their PS3 losses, reintroducing full-fledged backwards compatibility might stir up some purchases.

They need to either improve the emulation or reintroduce the PS2 GPU and EE.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 6:10PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
They're talking *hardware* profits and losses. The *hardware* profits from the PS2 isn't where Sony made their money. It's the software, dummies!
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 6:25PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Y? Blu-ray players in so many homes, they won that format war, the CELL is being used in laptops and other electronis, life is good for SONY, their future looks bright, especially with the videostore and the singstore (they should probably offer music like itunes to everyone). But they really need to rethink strategies next gen as well as microsoft. Nintendo is dominating right now, but if SONY didn't take risks, then we wouldn't have the playstation.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 6:26PM LaughingTarget said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
PS3 hardware vs total PS2 profits. Seems to be pretty big. And the backwards compatibility isn't their biggest marketable feature, the system was over-engineered from the start.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 6:26PM arttemis said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Hardly! The cost to produce a PS2 and its near-decade old technology has to equate to pure profit for Sony.

Yes, selling PS2s at $100 has to be a major source of revenue for them.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 6:32PM arttemis said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@LaughingTarget - I won't argue with that. I was merely responding the comment about feeling sorry for them when they're clearly still milking the pure profit in selling PS2s.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 6:35PM Hyams said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
LaughingTarget: No, read the article. It's PS3 hardware losses versus PS2 hardware gains during the years it's been profitable.

(ie. the years the PS2 hardware lost money aren't taken into consideration, nor are any software profits for either console.)

Here it is in the article:

"But Sony's PS2, the best selling videogame console of all time, was making a healthy profit on each unit sold as of a few years ago. Seemingly all of that went to fund the PS3 hardware that Sony has been selling -- and for the foreseeable future will continue to sell -- at a loss."
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 6:36PM Hyams said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
LaughingTarget: No, read the article. It's PS3 hardware losses versus PS2 hardware gains during the years it's been profitable.

(ie. the years the PS2 hardware lost money aren't taken into consideration, nor are any software profits for either console.)

Here it is in the article:

"But Sony's PS2, the best selling videogame console of all time, was making a healthy profit on each unit sold as of a few years ago. Seemingly all of that went to fund the PS3 hardware that Sony has been selling -- and for the foreseeable future will continue to sell -- at a loss."
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 6:37PM Hyams said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
(Hey, the new comment system is problematic too. Yay!)
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 7:40PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Browntown, the Cell isn't being used in anything except the PS3 and Sony's new video editing computer... Also known as a PS3 in a different case...

Anyway, the fact of the matter is, the Cell sucks in it's current form, Blu-Ray won due to Sony and company buying out various studios, and the price of Blu-Ray players is going up with the loss of HD-DVD... Sony's having issues, and it's all their own fault.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:30PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Dayumn.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:33PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
8 billion cumulative losses, that could have bought quite a few fanbois.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 7:14PM gatorboi352 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The real winner in this struggle? Nintendo. It has been churning a profit on that little Wii since it hopped out of the gate. Rassin' frassin' wand-wagglin' profiteers.

And that's all that matters children. PROFIT PROFIT PROFIT.

If Sony's game division and Microsoft's game division weren't under a corp. umbrella protective blanket, Nintendo would be running their own gaming monopoly. *sigh* One can only dream....
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 7:47PM DeadPlasmaCell said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@ Cody
"Nintendo would be running their own gaming monopoly. *sigh* One can only dream...."

Dream? Try nightmare. Nintendo already doesn't have to answer to anyone and look at all the garbage (hardware & software) that's out on the system.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 7:54PM greyseal said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah... I'm as big a fan of Nintendo as anybody else, but there was a time when they DID have a monopoly. Their arrogance directly led to the production of the Playstation and Sony's eventual dominance for two hardware generations.



Reply

Posted: Aug 20th 2008 1:23AM Foetoid said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Deadplasmacell

I dont see any problem with thier hardware or software bar the lack of internal storage. I've got 11 Wii games, 12 VC games, 2 WiiWare games and 13 GC games, all of which are A+ titles. Im a picky hardcore gamer who refuses to buy shovelware or minigame compilations and i've still managed to find tons of A+ games to play without even owning Brawl, Mario Kart, Battalion Wars, The Godfather, Geometry Wars, Galaxy or NMH. So many many good games to play overshadowded 10:1 by crap. You just gotta find the right rake to plow through the crap to find the many gems hidden among the garbage. Most hardcore gamers are so blinded by thier HD that they wont take the time to sift through the garbage on Wii to find the good games.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:35PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Can you put a price on winning a format war? How many blu-ray discs does an average PS3 owner have? How much does a company have to pay in order to manufacture BD players? How would the scenario be different if the PS3 was expensive enough to break even, or if the 360 had out of the box HD-DVD capability?

Sure, they may not be too happy with losing $3 bil, but imagine how much they're making because they took that loss.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:43PM Mr Khan said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
While Sony has a prominent place on the Blu-Ray Council, or whatever the hell its called, it is not exclusively their format, and they don't exclusively make players for said format

That being said, the PS3 had minimal impact on Blu-Ray's victory. The overwhelming support from major movie studios, which Blu-Ray was getting even as the PS3 was taking its first faltering steps, was already there
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:59PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Are you joking? The PS3 had a HUGE impact on Blu Ray winning. With the PS3 in so many homes, that was the reason the Studios switched to Bluray. The Ps3 had an indirect and direct role in insuring victory for Blu Ray.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 6:01PM Jacksons said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
At the same time, I wouldn't sell the PS3's impact on Blu-Ray's success short.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 6:31PM shoan said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
i own absolutely no blue ray movies. Netflix FTW :D
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 6:31PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
How many people held off buying a BD player or HD-DVD player until the format war was over? How many of them owned PS3s, and bought blu-rays anyways? How many questions will I end up asking?
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 6:34PM LaughingTarget said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
BluRay may have beaten HD-DVD, but it still isn't a viable format when dealing with profitability. It'll take a few more years to do this.

Sony has a particularly poor business model. Taking massive losses for a short term profit in the future is a major mistake. DVD was only around for 8 years before it was deemed necessary to replace. Wiping out 5 years of profitability just to get a new format on the market isn't exactly intelligent. Sony is turning around, not because they won the HD format war but because many of the old guard that made all those dumb decisions have been effectively removed from the company (see Kutaragi).

Sure, they may have profits sometime in the future, but elite businesses don't think that way. It's better to make $1 billion a year for the next four years than it is to reach that same $4 billion after eating through huge losses. Nintendo has it right. More total profitability and more money when factoring in present values.

Sony will always be in the hole when compared to a more prudent business model. Even a best case scenario would have been whipped by making a product that didn't manifest huge losses.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 7:23PM Iwa said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Sony had a invested interest to replace DVD with Bluray due to licensing royalties that they missed out on DVD. Sony didn't have a seat on the DVD consortium, they passed on it to avoid a format war with DVD.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 8:56PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Sorry. The Blu-ray council flexed their muscles to get exclusive deals with studios, and Toshiba was screwed. If the PS3 won Blu-ray the format war, then why didn't the 360 win the war for HD?

Hell, as long as I can still buy a regular DVD and put it in my 1080i upscaling player, I don't need a BR player
Reply

Posted: Aug 20th 2008 1:19AM Starcade said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Sony had a invested interest to replace DVD with Bluray due to licensing royalties that they missed out on DVD. Sony didn't have a seat on the DVD consortium, they passed on it to avoid a format war with DVD."

Yes, and no. Sony's created a competing format to DVD, back when DVD was first created. Basically there were two camps-- much like HD DVD and Blu-Ray. At the time, IBM's president negotiated a deal between the two formats to unify. Nobody wanted another VHS and Betamax war. The DVD as we know it today was Toshiba's (et al) design with some of Sony & Philips's technology added. So Sony did have a part in DVD. And Sony was an original member of the DVD Forum, which later became the DVD Consortium. I do believe Sony is paying licensing fees to Toshiba though, as is everyone else.

If you look at Sony, historically, they've never been one to easily embrace other formats when they can introduce their own.

When it came time to design a successor, Toshiba and Sony/Philips squared off again, but this time, Sony had the support of Panasonic (which backed Toshiba the first time around), most major movie player companies, and most major studios of which (cough) Sony owns a few... Columbia (Sony Pictures) and MGM/UA. Toshiba had to rely completely on other studios, but couldn't gather enough support.
Reply

Posted: Aug 20th 2008 2:38AM Iwa said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"(cough) Sony owns a few... Columbia (Sony Pictures) and MGM/UA."

That's a definite no. The only studios that Sony owns is Columbia/Tristar. Sony owns 20%, not even the majority, of MGM/UA. MGM/UA is independent of Sony. Sony doesn't even distribute their films any longer, with the exception of coproductions since 2006.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:35PM xiLeShadow said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
i never got the reason why people buy and/or sell shredded money... =/
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:50PM Mr Khan said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I wouldn't know about legitimate applications, but having the unique kind of material that they use to make bills would go a LONG way towards making authentic counterfeits
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 6:05PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@Mr Khan

Or you could pull a dollar bill out of your pocket
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:35PM mrmobius said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Nintendo even made a profit on the Gamecube. They have the best accountants in the world.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 6:22PM Sora said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Well I'd imagine that they made more profit on the Gamecube than the Wii, because they make profit on the Wii and the Wii is two Gamecubes duct taped together. Thus, they spend twice the amount they do to make Gamecubes, meaning they get less profit from Wiis.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 7:48PM Mr Khan said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
More, though. Since almost no semiconductor R&D had to go into it, pretty much all the R&D was focused around the Wiimote, then they just double the RAM
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:36PM Zertoss said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:38PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This is why i like nintendo... i don't know why but i do.
but then again i am a WiiCast kind of guy
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:38PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
In before people who didn't read the whole article and automatically jump the the conclusion that this is a sure sine of Sony's demise.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:40PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Not to go off on a tangent, but I really hope people don't think this will cos the downfall of sony.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:41PM Zertoss said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I'm sure it'll be tangent to many anti-Sony rants.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:41PM Zertoss said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
God dammit, I got beat.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:48PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Speed is integral lest your comment seem derivative.

OH SHI-... k, enough.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:38PM Jacksons said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Oh, this is just talking about hardware. That title's hella misleading.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 6:31PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I love the part at 2:57 " Real time weapon change.. to uhhhh, flip the crab over...."

What?!?! LMAO What the hell is Real Time Weapon Change anyways? Are you serious Sony?

Nice vid. Funny stuff
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:39PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
DAMN! Well they wanted to win the HD disc format war and they did... now here's to SONY hoping it was worth it.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:39PM Nigeria said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I don't smoke no more.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:43PM AoE said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
but I ain't smokin' no less
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:40PM Asakura H said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
That picture its cruel :(
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:41PM Hyams said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
He's saying that the money Sony made on PS2 *HARDWARE* since it became profitable is less than what Sony is losing on PS3 *HARDWARE*.

For the past few years, the PS2 has cost less to manufacture than it's sold for, so Sony was making a bit of money with each console sold. The PS3 costs more to manufacture than it's being sold for, so Sony are losing money on each console sold. The money made from PS2 hardware since it became profitable is less than what's been lost from PS3 hardware.

This is not surprising.

Money being brought in from game sales, peripheral sales, and PSN download sales are not included in this estimation, for either console.
Reply

Posted: Aug 19th 2008 5:41PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
In all fairness, Nintendo has been profitable even during the N64/GC days...

But yah, I could have seen the lose to be big, they bet on Blu-ray and that is one hell of a expense...but yah, not as big as it is.

Both Microsoft and Sony have been aiming to become the media centerpiece of everyone, Sony spent on a format and Microsoft spent on a medium, hopefully it pays off for both of them.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Rhythm Heaven Fever review: Crazy into you

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 12:00PM

Remedy not done with Alan Wake

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 10:30AM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW