Network now...NEWS
Sony Set to Post First Annual Loss in 14 Years
Sony is set to post an operating loss of some $1.1 billion for 2007-2008, according to business publication Nikkei.
If true, it would mark the company’s first annual loss in the past 14 years, and the second since the company went public in 1958. Sony had previously forecast a profit of around $2.2 billion for the same period, whereas Nikkei claims that Sony’s loss could stretch as far as that figure.
The reasons behind this anticipated loss are typical of many markets in Japan. A global recession continues to curb foreign demand for Sony’s luxury items, while the strong Yen continues to interrupt the company’s trade.
Nikkei’s claims come from a source close to the matter, it is said. Sony has yet to make a revision to its forecasts, and it may turn out that the company won’t need to, yet shares in the business sunk some 8 percent after the news broke.
Back in early December, Sony announced it was going to cut 16,000 permanent and part-time jobs from the business in an attempt to save £740 million. Yet Nikkei’s report has sparked speculation that Sony may have to take further restructuring steps as its savings from that cut appear negligible for a business enterprise that spreads across numerous sectors.
Sony is scheduled to announce its quarterly earnings results on January 29.
Back in October, Sony had forecast a full-year operating profit of ¥200 billion for the 2007/08 fiscal year, a sum which fell from the previous year’s figure of ¥475.2 billion.
Sony’s only operating loss was reported by the group for the year ending March 1995. Primarily responsible for this was a heavy one-time charge connected to the firm's US film studio enterprise.
Contact Us / About Us / Advertise With Us / BeltwayBlips / TechBlips / MassiveBlips / GamerBlips / FAQ
Subscribe To Edge Magazine / Corrections / Terms & Conditions / Privacy Policy
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW
England and Wales company registration number 2008885
Subscribe To Edge Magazine / Corrections / Terms & Conditions / Privacy Policy
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW
England and Wales company registration number 2008885
This is bad, really bad. More people are going to lose their jobs, it`s terrible.
But more nervracking are the state of economies in export-driven countries. For the first time in almost two decades, major Japanese firms are losing money, and they are losing it fast. Sony went from a projected 400 billion yen profit margin to a loss of almost 200 billion, which is just crazy, unreal.
If you can name a major company that made money during 2008, please, be my guest and post them here. It is a hard and scary recession we are facing, of the likes we have never seen in our generation.
Personally, I am glad that I am currently studying and will not graduate until 2012. It will give me a chance to see where the major trends are going to flow towards during the coming years. But for all of you who are losing jobs and feeling the pinch... we all feel for you, and have faith that this will eventually pass and we will see a new market structure in maybe three to five years time. It will be hard, but in the meantime, it will also be exciting to see where the capitalistic system will go next.
Wow, it's like I had a crystal ball or something. I mean what are the chances that I'd be spot on?
Couldn't happen to a more deserving company, remember when they told you to go get a second job to buy a ps3?
In light of what you have said, it's made me ponder a while longer on Sony's situations. Correct me this is overly simplistic... But it seems to me. Sony's work, in terms of hardware is done. All the R&D has paid off, the hardware set it finished, it's been release, it been out in the wilds now for the best part or 2-3 years (territory dependant) all Sony need to do now is continue to manufacture it, based on its popularity. But we know it's got legs :D So why are we worried?
Even if they have lost a billion, the money has been invested into the PS3 and the results are on the shelves. Even if Sony have to make a price drop of 50quid say to make it more attractive in these troubled times. So in that respect Sony losing so much money, will maybe make them tighten the purse strings, but it won't effect what already out there. They've already told us that the Sony Playstation 3 has now paid for itself in terms of development costs. So what they get now is all money in the bank, even if it's not the most popular box in your home. Sony aren't in the best position but it certainly not time for drastic measures just yet.. Just like everyone else, they're going to need to ride out the storm.
One of the main responsibilities of Sony now in year 3 in Japan and approaching year three in the in PAL territories, is to show development studios that the PS3 is worth their time effort and investment. which is going to get squeezed with developers all ready dumping formats to save on cost, so it's double important that Sony suceed in proove that it's a viable format in it's own right.
Cost are a hot topic and another thing to take into consideration isa certain amount of time is needed to get up to speed with developing for the hardware and techniques used to get the best results, which also might hinder smaller operations breaking into the Playstation3 brand. This suffice to say doesn't happen overnight. Dev's in the US, Japan and here in the UK had access to PS3 kit long before the consumer did just to enable them a head start, so it that respect a lot of the investiment has been made. But like with the Play station 2 before it, it was slow going before the hardware really started to flourish ICO and Shadow of the Colossus stand as testimony to this.
So we enter/near year three and things aren't looking to rosy.. Sony have taken a kicking and the world is in the grips of a financial depression and who'd have thought a Nintendo Wii would out sell both of the big boys.. But hey, look at the schedule for next quarter, Heavy Rain, Infamous, Final Fantasy 13. I reckon just those will keep me going for the rest of the year and that doesn't include the PS2 games that I'm still looking for that will be cheaper now that Sony have finally put the PS2 to bed..
Surely there is something to happy about!! come on were two week into 2009 and already the negativity has crept in :D
piss poor management and giant risk-taking for already-obsolete format-dominance........yep, sounds about right to me.
still make a heckuva TV though. maybe they'll stop being so arrogant when charging for brand name alone in light of the worldwide recession.
oh, and the PS3 price cut's a'coming. All ye sony faithful shall see in due time -- they will succumb!
Comfy is it.... on that bandwagon?
I'm a founding member. Inflated price = poor market penetration = poor software support = buy 360. Knew it the moment they announced the price at E3 years ago.
Buy a 360? Surely after all the problems with RROD I find it hard to see even that being, shall we say, "fit for purpose".
=ohwell
Sony would have had a financial loss the last two years if they hadn't done such things as:
* Sell Toshiba the Cell chip production factory for $835 Million
* Issue corporate stock to raise money
* Sell production factories throughout the world
The bottom line is that things are really going to get bad for Sony from this point on.
Firstly, and off-topic, does anyone else hate the way comments are laid out on this site? I have to keep scrolling up and down in order to read them in order. Is there a personal setting I can change to make comments appear chronologically?
Okay, secondly;
The bottom line is that things are really going to get bad for Sony from this point on
This is very true. But it's actually very true for a ton of companies right now. We've seen huge financial companies collapse, US automakers, even some smaller countries.
At this point it's probably safe to say that we'll start seeing companies that we never expected to ever disappear do just that if this world recession doesn't start to turn around.
Let's hope that things do start to get better, so that Sony can get some momentum behind itself again and make one hell of a comeback starting this generation with the PS3. I'd hate to have to wait for the next generation for Sony to be a contender again.
Agreement with you off topic Comment .... I hate the layout... none of the frame fit right when you have endless replies. hard to keep context. Edge should really sort themselves out a nice forum... anything would be better than this..
What I would love to see is an end to all that @SuchandSuch stuff.. it's so rude.. a simply laid out reply would surfice....
1 or even 2 billion is bad but Im sure there worth like 50 billion so its not that big of a loss to Sony and I doubt its all due to just the gaming division if this happened b4 and they were all right then Im sure they'll make it through again .
The last few years have been the perfect storm of unfortunate events for Sony. Arrogance, hubris, mismanagement, misuse of massive R&D funds to develop unnecessary technology (Cell) and formats (UMD/Blu-Ray) have combined with the severe recession and unfavorable exchange rate to severely impact Sony negatively. Combine this with a penchant for outlandish comments (i.e. lies), offensive/ineffective ad campaigns and generally poor PR and you have a global consumer base fed up with old school Japanese business practices.
Sony deserves this misfortune more than most companies and will only pull out if they accept blame for their problems and learn from them. To date, it seems like for every small step they take in this direction they turn around and shoot themselves in the foot yet again though. They'll survive, but not as the same electronics giant they were. It's not the end of PS3 by any stretch, but I'm not so sure we'll see a PS4 any time soon - if ever (unless they pull a Nintendo and simply repackage the PS3 as a PS4 with some gimmick like the GC/Wii).
Right, I keep reading the same comments from you, more Sony bashing again and again, and I have to ask...
Exactly why you think investment in cell and Blu-Ray is such a bad thing? What does UMD have to do with anything?
Did a Sony TV fall on you and hurt you as a child?
I'm also curious as to what makes you believe that Microsoft is this lovely fluffy company that always thinks of their customers and is so nice and honest with everyone?
No companies deserve this mis-fourtune, what a disgusting thing to say, I would not wish this on anyone! It won't be the end of Sony, but that is still a rediculous thing to say!
Sony deserves this misfortune more than most companies and will only pull out if they accept blame for their problems and learn from them That's a bit harsh isn't it Grognard?
How could things have been different? It's really not that bad, how exactly, without the aid of a crystal ball was Sony supposed to know that there would a global financial meltdown that would trigger a recession. Up until the point when the credit crisis first took hold Sony hardware was picking up nicely.
Everybody has been losing money recently, lots of big software and hardware house announcing massive losses in revenue and cutting jobs. It was only a matter of time before the big boys were going to be effected. Sony has weathered financial storms before and it will do it again.
But it doesn't stop the doom mongerers , spreading the negativity in the mean time. Big first quarter for Sony so it'll be interesting to see what happens, but the worst that will happen? Sony pulls the plug on the PS3, it become another Dreamcast. But like Dreamcast it'll never die it'll remain popular with enthusiasts and home brewers alike.
There are plenty of companies that deserve misfortune. They are not warm and cuddly creatures existing for the benefit of mankind. Note that I said the companies deserve it - not the employees who will bear the brunt of the pain for the executives mistakes (who doubtless will get golden parachutes for their mistakes).
Yes, almost every industry is struggling now, but Sony is hurting more than many in their respective industries for the reasons cited. Cell was an arrogant attempt to create a Japanese PC when perfectly viable alternatives already existed which they could have incorporated for far less money. Blu-Ray is a format in search of a purpose and continues Sony's decades long obsession with controlling a format for the royalties while failing to see what was obvious to most others (that the internet/downloads were the next format).
It is no surprise that Sony and the Playstation brand are struggling as consumers remember the comments Sony made stating that people should be willing to get a second job to buy a PS3 and should buy one even if it launched without a single game. Ironic, considering many people are now getting second jobs to pay the mortgage, utilities and food. It was arrogant for Sony execs to ever suggest otherwise - they weren't doing anyone a favor releasing the system and needed to prove its worth.
I personally do not think PS3 will be another Dreamcast. It is selling enough to keep plugging along for several more years, but there is no question that from a business perspective it was a disaster for Sony, who will be lucky to break even on it and will end up losing over 60% of their market share compared to last gen . MS makes plenty of mistakes too (notably quality control, over-priced accessories and monetizing everything on marketplace even when the publishers/developers don't want to charge for something), but Sony took the cake the past few years.
Good post. I wholeheartedly agree with all the points you made (Sony's cockiness, PS3 won't be a business failure of Dreamcast proportions, and MS has made some boneheaded choices as well).
I'd like to add, for all those who do not think the PS3 had anything to do Sony's financial problems, you're blind to the facts. The PS3 no doubt wasn't the only area in the company hemorrhaging money and most likely it isn't even the major cause of the company being in the red, but it is most definitely a contributing factor.
I'm really interested from a business perspective what moves Sony will make. They're in a bit of a catch 22, with the PS3 being too expensive to have healthy growth of the install base, but cutting the SRP means losing money.
I also wonder if the company's financial status is why there doesn't seem to be any significant marketing for Killzone 2. Regardless of how the game turns out (whether it's on par with the first Killzone or is a game that deserves to be put alongside the best console Shooters COD4, Halo and Gears), with how much money they've put into development and how good it looks, this the type of game you get as much widespread exposure that you can. The thing about the demo being only a pre-order bonus, pre-release is setting the stage for another missed opportunity.
Thanks, Peter. Regarding advertising, to be fair to Sony, it's my understanding that companies in most industries have slashed advertising recently (one of the reasons these gaming websites are downsizing so drastically recently). A Catch 22 is precisely where Sony finds itself. Being a selfish gamer, I hope they make cuts to their other divisions and not the gaming side. While it would probably hurt them long-term, I wonder if it wouldn't make short-term sense to sell of their music and/or movie divisions. These are quite lucrative, have a good track record and could probably command a decent price helping to shore up finances until the economy turns.
It's true, but I think it is still a missed opportunity. When a company invests so much for a new product's development (I pretty much consider Killzone 2 new IP as the first was not very well regarded), they have to advertise. I believe Killzone 2 is the perfect candidate if there ever was one to splurge on marketing. Taking queues in how Gears 1 was marketed would go a long way, as Killzone 2 definitely has the graphical chops to have in engine graphics present well in commercials.
I'm with you, I hope the cuts don't effect the game division, as I'd like to pickup a PS3 at a price cut for the few things I'm interested in. Though I have to admit, "Special Edition" new release DVDs being at par or more than the Blu Ray versions has me tempted lately to pick one up before the price cut and God of War 3 comes out.
Surely the employees make the company, and wishing this kind of thing on anyone is just wrong? As has been mentioned.
Okay, I agree that the stuff they said about getting another job etc and the stupid predictions they have before release was arrogant and foolish, but that was a long time ago, I think they realised their mistakes from then. Did it actually ever do you any harm? Like I said, did a Sony electrical lash out at you at some point or something? It just seems strange that you hold some kid of grudge against them for no real reason... I don't like Microsoft hisorically as a company , it didn't however stop me buying their console, and I would never wish them to go under...
How was the Cell an arrogant attempt at a "Japanese PC", do you even understand how the Cell works or what it is? You realise that they are not just using them in the PS3? I'm a software developer and programming for this kind of architecure is fantastic, and I'm only breaking the surface.
I think the only developers that disagree are the ones that are scared of having to learn to program for it.
Blu-Ray drives are now beginning to be shipped with High-End PCs.
If you look at the adoption rate, it's actually higher than DVD was this far into it's life, and there's a global recession at the moment! Digital downloads may be the future, but not for a long time because;
- The infrastructure is not ready for everyone to be downloading 1080p hd movies and all of their games, an will not be ready for a long time.
- As much as you don't see it, most people prefer to have something they have bought on a physical medium.
All the info about Blu-Ray above is fact!
"How was the Cell an arrogant attempt at a "Japanese PC", do you even understand how the Cell works or what it is? You realise that they are not just using them in the PS3? I'm a software developer and programming for this kind of architecure is fantastic, and I'm only breaking the surface.
I think the only developers that disagree are the ones that are scared of having to learn to program for it."
The Cell is great for number crunching, but to really make it live up to it's potential in a specialized application like video games it is very time consuming, which is not a good thing in a time when games cost huge sums of money to develop, and meeting milestones on time is a must if a company is going to continue to be funded. The symetrical core architecture of the 360 CPU, plus the development tools they provide, make the downside of the Cell even more apparent.
Regardless of that, the PS3 was a trojan horse for the Cell, although not to the extent the Blu Ray was. I remember Sony talking about how home appliances would be using the Cell and when the PS3 was released all the Cell powered devices could form a distributed processing network, giving your PS3 more power.
I think grognard66's underlining point was that Sony made the decision to use the Cell processor not because it was the best hardware for the intended application, but because Sony had a invested interest in it.
But now the developers are starting to get the hang of it, the new mult-plat games are identical and the first party studios are starting to use the cell properly, which isn't bad after only 2 years.
When a game is designed from the ground up for the Cell the amount of benefit it can offer post processing is phenominal.
Sony have "recently" released a new SDK to help developers and they will continue to do so, this then allows the developers to harness the power more easily as well.
"I think grognard66's underlining point was that Sony made the decision to use the Cell processor not because it was the best hardware for the intended application, but because Sony had a invested interest in it."
I agree that they used the Cell because they had a vested interested in it, but in that situation, who wouldn't have, and as above, who are you to say that the processor was "not the best hardware for the intended application"? Thats my point this hardware has been out 2 years and you expect developers to be pushing it right to the limit.
You guys seem to be so fixated on your dislike for Sony that you seem to think everything they do is cloak and daggers! I give up.
The thing is Sony's release of a new SDK and Insomniac making some of their PS3 tools freely available will not bare fruit until sometime next year most likely, since most games have around a 2 year development cycle. Really the improved SDK and the better developer support should have been in place before the PS3 came out. Considering the Cell's core architecture deviating the symmetrical standard and that Microsoft's 360 SDK is very fleshed out and utilizes Direct X, a standard long time PC developers are very familiar with, someone should have been aware that they would be starting in a disadvantage, from the developer perspective.
Even if the versions of all top tier multiplatform games looked similar (they don't all yet, Fallout 3 is a pretty obvious and significant example), still it appears that development on the PS3 versions of most games takes longer to get about the equivalent fidelity/performance of the 360 version.
With the install bases at what they are and the 3rd party multiplatform game sales on the 360 eclipsing those of the PS3's, what third party publisher/developer is going to build a game from the ground up for the PS3?
Fully utilizing the asymmetrical, specialized core architecture of the Cell, complicates the programming significantly, as tasks have to be specifically divided up such that they make full use of the Cell's "SPUs". As well, most game related engines and tools, are designed to execute threads on general purpose cores (or a single core CPU where processes share CPU time).
At this point in time, I don't see the Cell as being a good choice, since it's potential performance makes a variety of assumptions. As well, I don't know for sure, but I would imagine the cost of the Cell, at least in it's first year or two, was/is much more than it would cost them to have have Intel or AMD manufacture equivalent CPUs. The choice of the Cell was one they made to potentially see long term benefits to the company as a whole, but that success is predicated on the PS3 being very successful. In that sense, it is very similar to the reason why the PS3 has a Blu Ray (the Blu Ray format won't have any true gaming benefits until the machines themselves can handle textures/game assets that are of a higher resolution), it was to benefit the company as a whole, not make the best possible game console.
The architecture paradigm the Cell utilizes, may very well be the future of CPUs, but there will need to be a bridge where increased complexity of code isn't a side-effect.
The PS3 retail price and the inherent development challenges are both things that have been a determent to the PS3's success thus far (the retail price being a more significant cause), the choice of the Cell
Changed my reply to short and sweet one as I'm done now. I'm just don't want going to start arguing threading techniques with you over a games comment section. And I'm going home. :)
I've played fallout 3 on the same 1080p 40" screen on both machines and the PS3 version had a couple more bugs and jaggies. 360 more pop-in and textures don't look as clean. Sorry.
Fair enough bud, that's your opinion and I agree to disagree with you. I believe there is a lot of untapped potental in the cell and I don't see how people seem to think a compressed texture looks the same as an Uncompressed texture.
I'll keep my reply shortish (for once heheh) as well.
As far as Fallout 3 goes, the difference is more than that. Lighting, shadows and other visual effects are not as high quality in the PS3 version. Check out http://www.gamespot.com/features/6202552/index.html?tag=result;title;0 the first pic is esspecially telling, notice the lack of reflection of the overpass in the water on the left? This is not some sort of "win" or whatever (PC would've won the battle in photo realism here anyways heheh), it's just a specific fact. You won't catch me making claims which make absolutely no sense (like how PS3 fan boys call Gears 2 a terrible game that looks like garbage and how I'm sure the xbox fanboys will say Killzone 2's graphics are terrible).
And for the record, I don't agree that Sony reaped what it sowed in a celebratory manner, I was agreeing with the specific comment that Sony made mistakes in the hardware choices they made, and these choices, have become negatives with how the market has unfolded.
With regards to the Fallout thing, I'm more inclined to believe what I have seen with my own eyes bud, surely you must understand that. I googled and found two other websites in a couple of minutes that argued the PS3 verions looked better... with screen shots. You will always get people claiming either way and you can always get screen shots to look different, movement, settings, slight direction change etc.
The truth is they look almost identical, one is stronger in one sense the other in another. I have no reason to lie about it, some multiplat games I have seen look worse on PS3 I agree, but that is why I said in the last post fallout was a bad example. You say you won't make claims that aren't fact, yet you have no experience in what you are talking about otherwise you wouldn't be sending links to some screen shots on gamespot. Download HD direct feeds from both console, and compare them yourself with moving feeds.
"And for the record, I don't agree that Sony reaped what it sowed in a celebratory manner, I was agreeing with the specific comment that Sony made mistakes in the hardware choices they made, and these choices, have become negatives with how the market has unfolded."
In your opinion, as I said, I'll agree to disagree on this one, I think, as I said in the post below, that it's more down to other reasons they are in the position they're in. If PS3 had released first, sold more and been lead development for most of the 3rd party games, you wouldn't be saying they made mistakes in their HW choices. Sony tried to go in a different direction with their HW, What would have made the PS3 and 360 different if they hadn't?
Just as an example.
"The neverending debate over which console makes prettier pictures continues with Bethesda’s epic Fallout 3. We’ve played a bit of each, scrutinized the footage, and now present you with our findings. For everyone who loves a good fanboy flame war, we’re sorry to say that neither console looks consistently better than the other. It truly comes down to which particular rock or building you happen to be looking at when you make your decision. Some textures look better on PS3, while others look broken. Some colors look more vibrant on 360, but some look more washed out. Draw-in occurs on both platforms, in similar places. We noticed a bit more texture pop in the PS3, but structures seemed to fade in a bit smoother. Let us close by saying how impressive it is that Bethesda was able to put out a game of this scope on PC, 360 and PS3 as a simultaneous release. Both consoles deliver a top-notch gaming experience for RPG players of all affiliations."
http://www.gamesradar.com/f/fallout-3-graphics-comparison/a-200810291427...
Andy,
I am not a programmer, I know very little about any of that stuff if at all. But what I have to go by in regards to the PS3 allegedly being more difficult to program for is what I've read. I've read many times from either developers who wanted to stay anonymous or otherwise is that the PS3 is more difficult to program for. I would say the results of some games' performance validate that. It appears as though games designed for the PS3 from the ground up tend to compete or look better than 360's best offerings (I can't necessarily say from a personal standpoint as I don't own a PS3). But I think it's fair to say that the PS3 is more than capable of graphics offered by the 360 (or arguably better).
I think the problem may lie in the fact that the 360 is the lead platform and with such an installed base lead coupled with the fact that multi-platform games tend to do significantly better than the PS3 version that developers will go with the more wise business decision to design for the relatively easier (more straightforward/traditional) hardware and the one that is historically more lucrative.
I think that if the PS3 had an installed base lead over the 360 even considering the apparent increased difficulty developing for the PS3 that it would be the lead platform and multi-platform games would have an edge on the PS3 instead of vice-versa.
The PS2 was inferior to the xbox-1 in computing power but it (PS2) was the lead platform in almost all cases. Most of the time the Xbox 1, although significantly more powerful than the PS2, usually carried only a modest graphical edge over the PS2 version in most cases. Games like Halo, Chronicles or Riddick, Splinter Cell, were either exclusive and/or designed from the ground up for the Xbox 1 showed a clear increase in graphical fidelity over the PS2. I see the PS3 falling victim to this same thing albeit in a less significant way.
I think it’s more of a lead platform problem more than it is a computing one. Sony is just falling victim to not being the lead platform just like the Xbox 1 did and it leads people to believe the systems (Xbox 1 and PS3) aren't as capable as they really are until a game is designed specifically for that system (Drake's fortune, LBP, Halo 2, Riddick, Splinter Cell series).
Just my thoughts.
But I'm not disagreeing with any of that Nick, I agree, they are in an awkward position. "Most" games are not using PS3 as the lead platform, "some" 3rd parties are allegedly.
My point in this thread started out with saying that I thought it was wrong to wish this kind of thing on a company in this climate, and asked why exactly the guys above thought that it was okay, and what Sony had done to them personally to deserve that kind of thing. As I was curious.
All I got back was a load of personal dislike for the cell chip and blu-ray and nothing else. My point in the post above is that Peter was basically saying that the cell chip was a bad choice. yadda, yadda, yadda. Only did it because they wanted to push it etc.
Yes it's slightly harder to develop for, but that isn't a bad thing, and in my opinion and most others, it is capable of great things, even in a gaming sense. But, as you said it has/is sufferring as from not having the install base, not being released first released and therefore not being the lead plaform, so porting to it does not take advantage of the benefits.
Even the new DirectX thats being developed is going to have Cell Arcitecture routines etc. What does that tell you? If we stuck with the "It's harder to program for, therefore I'm not going to do it" mantra, do you really think we would get anywhere.
I'm not trying to say anything about how the PS3 is going to beat everything, sell more consoles, I couldn't care less tbh. But I don't agree with all the bashing that goes on for what seems to be no apparant reason other than the fact that their console isn't doing as well as the last one, and then people making statements like it's all because of the cell processor and blu-ray. I mean, come on!
Got it Andy.
It's true a lot of the time someone has something to say and people miss their point entirely when replying and don't really reply to what the person was actually talking about.
I agree that no company should have failure/staff cuts wished upon them (within reason, if the company is crooked/doing things illegally, etc.). I do feel though as far as a company’s perspective that a more competitive environment (Sony being in the unfamiliar area of last place with the PS3) will only result in better choices, better products, and less expensive products. If Sony ran away with this generation with the PS3 would they feel the need to try as hard as they have? Would they be adding value to their PS3 while keeping the cost the same? (Example: no Wii price drop yet, no added value/increased internal memory…nothing free essentially or added) Look at the PS3’s lineup for 2009, there's some potential blockbusters in there. I think a lot of Sony's relatively aggressive moves are a direct result of the strong competition they're getting from MS. It would have been nice for all that to have happened without anyone losing their jobs though...I have a family, I can't imagine what it'd be like to be laid off especially when most households live pay check to pay check.
I think it’s easy to get caught up in the whole, “My team is winning and ha ha that your’s isn’t doing so well" console war. People see Sony as a company, a company with a history of at times being cocky and arrogant and they forget that there are real people with real families who work for Sony who will be suffering now. And that should never be wished on anyone. (Sorry to sound so preachy).
Well said that man. :)
Well said.
My question would be (somewhat rhetorical), why would the cell be the future if it’s so much more complicated then what has been out for years with only a mild/moderate increase in benefits. It seems as though the supposed benefit of the cell doesn't outweigh the cost or time it'd require to achieve said benefit. Sony is all about propriety technology and they want everyone paying them royalties and they don’t' have the best record in that area (beta-max, UMD, cells not taking off, and Luray’s success is still undecided). I know Blurry "won" the physical medium format war over HD-DVD but it’s still fair to say that its questionable if it'll ever have anything near DVD penetration or if it'll be able to stave off DD's momentum looking into the future. Sony may fail yet again with their persistence in owning a leading medium.
"Sony have "recently" released a new SDK to help developers and they will continue to do so, this then allows the developers to harness the power more easily as well."
You clearly have never devloped for ps2. The tools are still awful today, after 10 years. PS3 is even worse, developers hate it.
Have I not? As I said, I looked at your past posts a while ago and realised there was no point with you.
First, thanks to Peter for doing a better job than I did of explaining my position! :)
@andyfour - I'm not sure if you've read this in any of my posts, but I have a PS3, PS2, PSP, Sony Receiver and my desktop has a built-in Blu-Ray/HD-DVD drive (it's an HP). I have over 30 Blu-Ray movies. If anything, I have probably supported Sony financially more the past few years than you have! I've loved gaming as a hobby long before any of these companies got into the industry and hope I'll still be able to game long after all these companies are out of it.
I'm old enough to have learned that just because you buy a companies product doesn't mean you have to be an advocate for them - or an apologist. You seem very sensitive about any comments even slightly critical of Sony but have no qualms turning around and bashing MS - a bit of a double-standard. While I do favor MS this generation, I have no reservations criticizing them when they make a foolish decision. Face it, Sony's just been a lot easier to criticize the past few years. ;)
I get the impression that you're one of those people that doesn't actualy bother reading posts properly.
Where have I bashed MS, I've just been looking through my posts to try and find? I have said I don't understand why you bash Sony but seem to think that MS is all sweet and lovely. As far as I'm aware, the only negatives I have said is that it put me out that the 360 didn't have wireless out of the box and that I don't get why you bash Sony all day long and think MS are all flowers and roses.
I'm not sensitive about Sony, I'm asking you, what exactly is your problem that you feel the need to wish trouble on a large company that you have supported, what have they done to you? You seem to feel that you know everything, and that Sony have totally screwed you over and I just can't see why. You say I have a double standard, dude look at yourself? .. I just don't get the mentatlity behind the hate. I understand with fanboys that think I have a 360 so everyone else bought the wrong machine, it must be crap, they are a crap company etc.
I asked you, and Peter directly, seeing as the cell is now starting to be understood properly and we are starting to see it shine, and we know that Blu-Ray holds more data than DVD allowing the use of uncompressed textures etc, why do you feel they have conned you? So they used their machine to push some other useful techology... and?
They have certainly made mistakes, lost market share and said some stupid things, these have all been a while ago, and I feel they are starting to turn around, and I don't see the need to constantly rip into them at every available chance and curse them and say they deserve all the trouble they are having in the current market.
I too have been gaming for a very long time, and will continue to do so in all forms, PC, consoles, hand helds etc. I have spent my entire career in the IT industry and I have been programming since I was old enough to understand what a computer is.
'Nough said anyway, I don't want to start an argument, I just wanted to see if I could find out why you seem to hate them so much, I own all consoles, I'm happy with them, I like the fact the there is more competition this generation. MS and Sony are still very close and it will only mean that they both have to push the envelope to keep competitive. Great! Close competition between them is good!
I'm just grateful I don't live in 1985... what a gaming wasteland that was :P
You got to keep an open mind though guys, you can't believe everything you read and hear, I preffer to keep and open mind about the future of Sony.
Well said. I also remember when that Sony guy said people would get a second job to get a PS3 and would also buy it if it didn't even launch with any games. I also remember him saying the PS3 can run games in 1080p at 120FPS, too (among other exaggerations made by Sony execs pre-launch).
I don't think the employees deserve it either, but this could be good for consumers since Sony has been humbled a bit. Sony may realize that overpricing, overpromising, and underdelivering may not be the best strategy to get consumers through the door. Good price, humbled approach, and quality software will win in the end. No one likes a cocky company (Nintendo better be careful with Reg over there always running his mouth).
Oh come on, All companies are guilty of overzealous pre-release banter..
You can't get the hump with them for wanting to sell their system in the best light.. Nintendo and Microsoft have made their fair share of outrageous claims.
You're might have a point if this were Playstation 3 week one, but it's not.. Playstation has games, hardware is at a better price now than on release and firmware and hardware are at a fair decent standard. Sales are strong in certain territories and rubbish and weak in others, exactly a kin to it's Microsoft counterpart
Sony might not have the sales this Generation, but it's has stiffer competition than ever before. it's not about humbling Sony, if anything that's was done a long time ago when Microsoft released the first generation Xbox. proving that they also had the knowledge and the expertise to give established companies like Nintendo and Sony a run for their money.
Now the Sony and MS kit stand very close to one another in the marketplace, both offering the same service and facilities, but the Microsoft box wins on price.
True the silly claims Sony made were a long time ago and they probably have learned from their mistakes. I just think that the rest of this generation they'll do a better job actually delivering because they've been humbled in the fact that their brand wasn't invincible as they once seemed to think it was, which is only a good thing for us gamers. Competition will only result in better games and better prices.
I'm not trying to say Sony has had a cocky mindset up until now. I think they dropped that certain arrogance about themselves when their sales were less than ideal compared to what they're used to (Early this generation). Being in 3rd place kinda quiets people a bit. It seems they've been trying to do the right thing now for a while and with the beating they've taken in the 2nd half of this year will most likely push them to deliver even more in '09. I'm waiting for that right price and I may join the dark side ^^, but since Tekken 6 is coming to the 360, I may not.
come on Nick Id be happy to have u on my buddy list kick yur ass at some Killzone 2 .
I'll second that, and I promise you that having a 360 and a PS3 next to one another, contrary to popular opinion, does not make the world implode!... well not yet at least!
But it does cause your PS3 to throw a fit of jealous rage, give you a error 80010514 and cease to read disks! Only after much attension and a phone call to Sony and a visit from a nice man bringing new playstation. Was everything right in the world
I should have never bought that Xbox :P
My PS3 sits in the slot directly over my 360 (the one in my living room). While the world didn't implode, I do blame Sony for overheating my 360 and causing it to Red Ring over the Holidays! ;)
It's the END OF THE PS3!!!! ;)
YEAH!!! We can start our tribal dance of victory in TH RED RING OF DEATH!!! :)
No better! Microsoft will buy Sony gaming division and will equip the PS4 with RROD!!!!
Yeah... And monkies might fly out of my arse !! :P