PS3 has cost Sony 3 BILLION DOLLARS!

[Funk]

http://videogames.yahoo.com/feature/...he-ps3/1223467

Could be because the PS3 SUCKS.

Solid Snake, your mission is to save Sony! IT'S SHOWTIME!

[Denmo]

Re: PS3 has cost Sony 3 BILLION DOLLARS!

companies routinely lower prices to sell more units and thus stimulate software sales.

WHAT SOFTWARE HUR HUR HUR HUR

[Valkysas]

Re: PS3 has cost Sony 3 BILLION DOLLARS!

no big deal. the only company to routinely sell consoles at a profit is Nintendo. I'm sure 3 billion is nothing compared to how much microsoft has spent on the 360, including all the hardware replacements and revisions.

[Riotsword]

Re: PS3 has cost Sony 3 BILLION DOLLARS!

They felt pressure to stay competitive with Microsoft by following suit with their own "next-gen" console.

So far it hasn't worked out for them.

no big deal. the only company to routinely sell consoles at a profit is Nintendo. I'm sure 3 billion is nothing compared to how much microsoft has spent on the 360, including all the hardware replacements and revisions.

This is very, very true.

[Chad]

Re: PS3 has cost Sony 3 BILLION DOLLARS!

Just 1 billion to go.

[Llednik]

Re: PS3 has cost Sony 3 BILLION DOLLARS!

no big deal. the only company to routinely sell consoles at a profit is Nintendo. I'm sure 3 billion is nothing compared to how much microsoft has spent on the 360, including all the hardware replacements and revisions.

Yea, true, but you'd might think they would earn all the money back from revisions and replacements from Xbox Live memberships and download crap.

[orius]

Re: PS3 has cost Sony 3 BILLION DOLLARS!

companies routinely lower prices to sell more units and thus stimulate software sales.

WHAT SOFTWARE HUR HUR HUR HUR

That's about right. I don't even know what PS3 has going for it besides MGS4.

no big deal. the only company to routinely sell consoles at a profit is Nintendo. I'm sure 3 billion is nothing compared to how much microsoft has spent on the 360, including all the hardware replacements and revisions.

True, but Microsoft I think was expecting a hardware loss, and Sony wasn't.

Microsoft's big problems with hardware profit loss isn't the manufacturing costs, but the RRoD.

Then again too, Nintendo can certainly turn a profit on the Wii if rumors about them keeping manufacturing down are true. From what I've read on this issue though, the Big N just seems to be doing things overly conservative again, and aren't bothering to ramp up manufacturing because they're afraid of losing money.

They felt pressure to stay competitive with Microsoft by following suit with their own "next-gen" console.

So far it hasn't worked out for them.

Yup, they really got suckered by Microsoft this time around, IMO. This happened in two ways: they responded to the original XBox by making a ridiculously overpowered system, and they rushed to release the PS3 a year earlier because the 360 got released earlier than expected. And Microsoft might very well be paying for that early release with the whole RRoD mess.

OTOH, the PS3 is probably one of the big factors in helping Blu-Ray win the high-def format war.

[Jeroak Nelave]

Re: PS3 has cost Sony 3 BILLION DOLLARS!

Might want to take a look at the games available and coming up for the PS3 before making assumptions about 'what the PS3 has going for it'.

[Valkysas]

Re: PS3 has cost Sony 3 BILLION DOLLARS!

Jeroak, they were just joking around.

Sony was expecting a loss. Sony took losses with the PS1, the PS2, and the PSP. again, nintendo is the ONLY company I know of who doesnt plan to take losses on hardware. they keep development within a specific budget.

Nintendo isnt limiting manufacturing either. they're trying to crank out as much as they can. there's no benefits from scaling back manufacturing with the Wii. it's 2 years old now, and it's still flying off shelves. they're losing money off potential sales for each Wii that they don't produce.

[gray]

Re: PS3 has cost Sony 3 BILLION DOLLARS!

if you're a big, rich, company, who gives a crap how much money you're losing on your projected cash cow


worked for xbox



it's what seperates the sonys from the segas

[Smurvis]

Re: PS3 has cost Sony 3 BILLION DOLLARS!

Might want to take a look at the games available and coming up for the PS3 before making assumptions about 'what the PS3 has going for it'.

How come in every topic where there is ANY Sony negativity you always treat it like someone called your mother a whore? It's not a personal attack on you man. No need to feel insulted.

[Biggie]

Re: PS3 has cost Sony 3 BILLION DOLLARS!

Because Sony is his uncle and he doesn't want to feel guilty for gargling his balls.

And besides, Microsoft has in fact made a profit on the 360 with Halo 3.

Still, like it or not, Sony doesn't have alot going for it besides MGS4 right now.

[Perversion]

Re: PS3 has cost Sony 3 BILLION DOLLARS!

First of all, it's my estimation that one of the main reasons that Nintendo is not amping up production is to avoid quality control issues. As far as I'm aware, the ONLY Nintendo system that has EVER had a problem is the NES (blowing in the carts, etc). Everything else has been problem-free. My guess is, they are not ramping up production due to avoid having all the newly-converted Nintendo fans (ie-casual gamers) buy Wiis with problems, and thus get a bad taste in their mouth (of Nintendo, and also of gaming in general). My guess is, a LOT of Xbox 360 owners probably had PS2s at some point, and quite possibly are used to their systems not working properly (DREs, etc), so they take it in stride. That's not to say they are happy about it. But they realize that this is just how things are. Second, I've also read that Nintendo is diverting some of the Wiis originally intended for North America (or maybe just manufacturing fewer for the North American market) to Japan and Europe instead, due to how weak the dollar is here.

So, I give Nintendo props for trying to avoid turning off a whole new generation of gamers to gaming, due to bad experiences with faulty hardware. If you look at it a certain way, Nintendo is sacrificing immediate profits (mass-producing more Wiis that might have quality-control issues) for a longer-term strategy. Also, you cannot fault a company for wanting to make more money (shipping more units to territories other than North America), and I'm not sure how saturated the market in Japan is regarding the Wii. If they indeed ARE shipping more to Japan, and then open up new manufacturing and distribution units, it's obviously going to take some time to get those factories up to full capacity, and the market in Japan might have reached saturation point by then. I've read analysts' estimations that the next Nintendo system is due to come out in 2011, anyway, which is only 3 years away.


Moving on to the PS3. What you people FAIL to realize (you people being the naysayers) is that Sony is also making an investment for the future, and is sacrificing in the short-term. Sure, they are losing money hand over fist on the PS3 right now, but here are some facts to consider. Sony systems, up to this point, have had ten year lifespans (give or take), and Sony has even stated more than once that they intend for their systems to last a decade. If that's true, then the PS3 is still in its infancy, and manufacturing costs will SURELY drop within a few years, at which point they will probably either still be losing money, or possibly breaking even due to an inevitable price drop. Compare this with Microsoft systems, which, so far, have only had a 5 year lifespan (once again, analysts predict a new Microsoft system in 2010). So while Microsoft is spending millions/billions on development of their (next) next-gen system, Sony will be sitting pretty, and will not even need to start development on their next system for quite a few years, at which point, newer technology most likely will be less expensive, and they'll probably be able to develop ANOTHER system who's specs are superior to Microsoft's next system, for the same price Microsoft will have spent on their (now out-of-date) (next) next-gen system.

Second, seeing as how Sony gets some percentage on all Blu-Ray players and Blu-Ray films sold, you really cannot directly look at the losses on the PS3's hardware without also looking at how much money is pouring into Sony's coffers due to Blu-Ray now being the ONLY HD format. Something tells me, when looking at the lifespan of DVDs (which are probably no more than 2-3 years away from going the way of VHS), and looking at the slower (but increasing) adoption rate of Blu-Ray players into American homes, and the rapid increase in the adoption rate of HDTVs, Blu-Ray will probably have the same lifespan as DVDs, which is going on, what....12 or so years now? I do not see HDTVs going any higher than 1080p anytime soon (due to high def cable and satellite still only broadcasting in 720p/1080i because of the massive bandwidth that would be needed to transmit a 1080p signal with uncompressed audio), which would make Blu-Ray probably the only HD format out there for at least another 5-6 years, if not more. And remember, for every Blu-Ray movie or player sold, Sony is getting a percent. You just wait until 75-80% of American households (let alone the rest of the world) have a Blu-Ray player in them, and THEN you can make jokes about how Sony is losing so much money on the PS3.


Not to be a bag of Richards here, but a lot of you people are honestly just really short-sighted, or are living with blinders on.

[JPS]

Re: PS3 has cost Sony 3 BILLION DOLLARS!

Just 1 billion to go.

That article is almost 3 years old, its probably much higher now since RRoD is a common thing now.

BTW Ive owned 2 PS2's since theyve came out, I've owned the original big-box design for 6 years before I sold it and got a slim design, and Ive had that one since December 2004 and Ive never had any problems with it at all.

Actually Ive never had a problom with any system Ive ever owned, guess Im lucky.

[Chad]

Re: PS3 has cost Sony 3 BILLION DOLLARS!

That's about right. I don't even know what PS3 has going for it besides MGS4.

(Warhawk, PixelJunk Monsters, Uncharted, Heavenly Sword, Ratchet and Clank, Folklore, and hopefully LittleBigPlanet)

True, but Microsoft I think was expecting a hardware loss, and Sony wasn't.

I think Valk said it best. Also, the PS3 originally cost over $800 to make the highest price they charged was $600. Hmm... I think they're at least that knowledgeable of simple projections, being a really successful corporation and all. Maybe they expected to recoup the costs a little earlier on sales of software, but they'd still have a hardware loss.

And besides, Microsoft has in fact made a profit on the 360 with Halo 3.

No way, man. It was totally Uno.

That article is almost 3 years old, its probably much higher now since RRoD is a common thing now.

I hope the RRoD isn't bad enough that the original XBox is suffering. That would be a shame.