Playstation punctured: Sony's games business deflates again

[Sub-stance1]

Was more or less my point, hense why I don't really care about their financial woes atm.

As a consumer you may not care but finances play a factor in any business. Sony does care. As consumers we may not see it but behind closed doors you can bet that this is priority one.

[radgamer420]

What ever happened to that ten year plan MS and sony had for their consoles? LOL The PS3 is making a profit and a super slim model will def help slow the bleeding while the Vita is trying to get a foothold on the market. Im good with the PS3 but depending if microsoft reveals a next gen console those plans for ps4 may have to be pushed out sooner than sony may like.

What Sony means is that they will continue to support the PS3 for 10 years even if PS4 launches during that time. It doesn't mean that Sony wont launch another console for 10 years. Sony has always operated that way. They supported PS1 even after launching PS2 and supported PS2 after launching PS3. So many people seem to misunderstand this 10 year plan. As for the second part of your post I agree. I think Sony would like to put off PS4 as long as they can right now but if MS launches their next console then they will have to get PS4 out there in the market asap. Sony isnt going to want to let MS have the next gen market to themselves any longer than absolutely neccessary.

[Old Man Gamer]

As a consumer you may not care but finances play a factor in any business. Sony does care. As consumers we may not see it but behind closed doors you can bet that this is priority one.

Exactly. We don't need to worry about it but to imply that it doesn't matter is putting one's head in the sand.

[davin_g]

I just don't understand how a company can sell 65 million consoles, hundreds of millions of games, hundreds of millions in psn games and services and still operating at a loss. They have way to high overhead. Why spend billions on R&D of devices or on a chip that only makes your console marginally better in theory...and basically inferior in implementation of games by most developers. I really see them rethinking that with the PS4. I think they are going to go with a much more basic design that will keep costs down but allow it to be on par with whatever Microsoft comes out with.

The products that Sony has...are almost always very solid offerings...and sales should be good enough...but their organizational structure and overhead and amounts they poor into R&D...just not worth it IMO. I know its hard for me to say that because that R&D gives us great new products and stuff...but a year or so and everyone else has it too and usually does it cheaper than them...I just really feel like sometimes Sony is like the worlds R&D and then they reverse engineer it and then send it off to China and Korea to build it cheaper lol.

[Old Man Gamer]

I just don't understand how a company can sell 65 million consoles, hundreds of millions of games, hundreds of millions in psn games and services and still operating at a loss. They have way to high overhead. Why spend billions on R&D of devices or on a chip that only makes your console marginally better in theory...and basically inferior in implementation of games by most developers. I really see them rethinking that with the PS4. I think they are going to go with a much more basic design that will keep costs down but allow it to be on par with whatever Microsoft comes out with.

The products that Sony has...are almost always very solid offerings...and sales should be good enough...but their organizational structure and overhead and amounts they poor into R&D...just not worth it IMO. I know its hard for me to say that because that R&D gives us great new products and stuff...but a year or so and everyone else has it too and usually does it cheaper than them...I just really feel like sometimes Sony is like the worlds R&D and then they reverse engineer it and then send it off to China and Korea to build it cheaper lol.

Their strength is so many first party studios but that comes at a very, very high price (literally). I don't see them compromising there.

Where I do see them compromising is in the design of the CPU for the PS4. For the edge it gives them over the 360, it wasn't worth the extra cost.

I applaud them for going with a blu ray drive, that was an excellent decision. I do question the R & D cost of the Cell. The chip itself does doesn't give the PS3 enough of a boost over the 360 to justify it's overall cost.

[radgamer420]

I'm sure there are also losses due to supporting a free online network. PS+ subscriptions I'm sure help but I doubt that the amount of PS+ subscribers that there are is enough to absorb those costs.

[Old Man Gamer]

I'm sure there are also losses due to supporting a free online network. PS+ subscriptions I'm sure help but I doubt that the amount of PS+ subscribers that there are is enough to absorb those costs.

Great point. I don't suspect PSN will be free forever. There is too much infrastructure cost to absorb.

[DeviousOne]

I wonder what are the cost for the PSN free site. If they want to improve they are going to have to charge in the next gen.

[radgamer420]

Great point. I don't suspect PSN will be free forever. There is too much infrastructure cost to absorb.

I agree. And like Devious said that cost will only rise if Sony is going to improve their online service next gen.

[F34R]

I wonder what are the cost for the PSN free site. If they want to improve they are going to have to charge in the next gen.

That's why they introduced PS Plus this time around.

[HellsJester]

I wonder what are the cost for the PSN free site. If they want to improve they are going to have to charge in the next gen.

If to play online multiplayer costs money next gen i will only buy single player games on PS4.

[Kauldron]

If to play online multiplayer costs money next gen i will only buy single player games on PS4.

Seconded.

Don't forget that PC is still free. You'll get the multiplats there with better graphics.

[Ghost-Rhayne]

Seconded.

Don't forget that PC is still free. You'll get the multiplats there with better graphics.

Thirded. Will NEVER pay to play online.

[radgamer420]

LMAO All these PS fans on the internet claiming they will jump ship if Sony charges are just lying to themselves. I dont buy it for a second.

[Ghost-Rhayne]

No one is saying they will jump ship, just not buy MP games. I'm not a big MP gamer, I don't need it...

[radgamer420]

No one is saying they will jump ship, just not buy MP games. I'm not a big MP gamer, I don't need it...

MP being multiplayer or MP being multiplatform? And you do realize that if a 360 owner isnt big on multiplayer they can just opt for Silver and pay nothing as well right? And like I've said before I paid 2 bucks for 2 months last time and just renewed with 3 months for 10 bucks. If thats too much for you then you probably need to find a new hobby. Sounds like just another way of reaching for a reason to say my console is better than yours imo.

[Ghost-Rhayne]

MP being multiplayer or MP being multiplatform? And you do realize that if a 360 owner isnt big on multiplayer they can just opt for Silver and pay nothing.

Multi player. And ja I'm aware of that, but I prefer to have the multiplayer option available and free of charge should I decide to have a go. I'm a consumer of principles, I have expectations and limits. Paying to play online is a huge turn off for me and something I will never pay for. I'm pretty sure online will be free next gen too, but Sony will have a shit load of services, bells and whistles that will be incorporated into a sub, such as access to gaikai etc.

[radgamer420]

Multi player. And ja I'm aware of that, but I prefer to have the multiplayer option available and free of charge should I decide to have a go. I'm a consumer of principles, I have expectations and limits. Paying to play online is a huge turn off for me and something I will never pay for. I'm pretty sure online will be free next gen too, but Sony will have a shit load of services, bells and whistles that will be incorporated into a sub, such as access to gaikai etc.

A consumer of principles? So because I dont mind paying a few bucks to enjoy Xbox Live I have no principles? lol Whatever. And as far as being pretty sure Sony wont ever charge I say never say never. They propably wont imo but you never know.

[Ghost-Rhayne]

A consumer of principles? So because I dont mind paying a few bucks to enjoy Xbox Live I have no principles? lol As far being pretty sure Sony wont ever charge I say never say never.

No, everybody has different principles. F34R stated ages ago that he doesn't buy games with online passes. That was one of his principles. I don't mind them. He doesn't agree with getting a code to play online, I don't agree with paying to play online.

[radgamer420]

No, everybody has different principles. F34R stated ages ago that he doesn't buy games with online passes. That was one of his principles. I don't mind them.

Ok I see what youre saying. My principle is if heavily discounted Live ever becomes unavailable then I'm done because I wont ever pay full price. Then I'll stick solely with PSN. But as long as I keep getting these super cheap deals on Live then I'm good.

[HellsJester]

LMAO All these PS fans on the internet claiming they will jump ship if Sony charges are just lying to themselves. I dont buy it for a second.

I didnt say i would jump ship for that reason.
I will jump ship if the controller sucks though.

[*goo]

Principles was probably the wrong word but I mostly agree with the point.

I prefer to call it nominal value. Everyone's is different. My X360 doesn't play online, ever. Single payer games all the way as I don't like having to pay for access to a closed system. I wouldn't pay for it on PS3 (or any other platform) either.

The difference though, is I have less than 10 games for X360 and more than 100 for PS3 so is the free service a good or bad thing? The PS3 is a system I see more value in due to free PSN access so the bulk of my console purchase go there. It would easily change with a subscription requirement.


Obligatory Tapatalk Signature

[Super_Lilith]

Principles was probably the wrong word but I mostly agree with the point.

I prefer to call it nominal value. Everyone's is different. My X360 doesn't play online, ever. Single payer games all the way as I don't like having to pay for access to a closed system. I wouldn't pay for it on PS3 (or any other platform) either.

The difference though, is I have less than 10 games for X360 and more than 100 for PS3 so is the free service a good or bad thing? The PS3 is a system I see more value in due to free PSN access so the bulk of my console purchase go there. It would easily change with a subscription requirement.


Obligatory Tapatalk Signature

Sony have to weigh in, is there enough people that DON'T think like you for pay to play online to be more profitable? 360 live suggests there is.

[Ghost-Rhayne]

Sony have to weigh in, is there enough people that DON'T think like you for pay to play online to be more profitable? 360 live suggests there is.

I don't know. I don't think Sony need to go down that path to be honest. They have offered about €200 worth of retail games since the instant games collection promo kicked in, for €50 on PS+. This doesn't even take all the savings from discounts into consideration. As I said before, I highly doubt that online play on PlayStation will ever cost. It's free on PC, it'll be free on Wii and it's free now on PS3/Vita.

I've said it before about Guild Wars. There was an interview AGES ago where Anet were asked if GW2 would have a sub. They said that people had come to associate GW as a sub-less MMORPG in a sea of subbed MMOs, and that this was part of their heritage and one of their strengths and so the model would carry on to the sequel. Free online on PlayStation will be the same. It's too big a part of the PS heritage and identity for them to back track.

A subbed service giving access to gaikai and other temptations is all they need imo. However, no one can really say until next gen, so we#ll just have to wait and see.

[F34R]

Multi player. And ja I'm aware of that, but I prefer to have the multiplayer option available and free of charge should I decide to have a go. I'm a consumer of principles, I have expectations and limits. Paying to play online is a huge turn off for me and something I will never pay for. I'm pretty sure online will be free next gen too, but Sony will have a shit load of services, bells and whistles that will be incorporated into a sub, such as access to gaikai etc.

Sony will charge for online play with their next PS; if they offer a shit load of services, bells and whistles...

No, everybody has different principles. F34R stated ages ago that he doesn't buy games with online passes. That was one of his principles. I don't mind them. He doesn't agree with getting a code to play online, I don't agree with paying to play online.

Since then, things have changed a bit. I've purchased a handful of games that incorporate online pass schemes.

Sony have to weigh in, is there enough people that DON'T think like you for pay to play online to be more profitable? 360 live suggests there is.

There are plenty of people that will pay to play online with their PS.