Kaz Hirai: PlayStation 4 Planned 10 Years Ahead of Release

Mr. Hirai answered: "Well I think in any given moment, you need to think both short-term - so, what are we doing next fiscal year, how do we grow the current business - but at the same time, you also need to look four or five years out as well. To say, OK, what is the consumer wanting to do in interactive entertainment five years from now, what can we as a platform holder propose, if you will, to the consumers, to say maybe we should so this or that, and make sure that we keep the consumers engaged, and really also make sure that we are leading the market as opposed to following it. So discussions are happening all the time, about both our short term plans - what are we doing this fiscal year, next fiscal year - as well as, what is the world going to look like, what is the landscape going to look like five years from now, or ten years from now."

This last sentence would be referring to the PlayStation 4 planning. So the Kikizo interviewer asked what happens with the PlayStation brand in this rapidly progressing technology landscape.

Mr. Hirai answered: "I think so, I think so. But at the same time, I think we have proven with two consoles already that when you say it's a ten-year lifecycle, it's a ten-year lifecycle. And we have the luxury I think of being able to keep that long lifecycle going, which means that we don't need to be talking about our next-generation platform, because again we have a very stable [current] platform. And we certainly don't want to confuse the consumers once again, by talking about something that may or may not happen five years from now. And that's something we're talking about and discussing up here [taps his head] in the company, but it's not something we talk about openly, again for fear of confusing the consumers. And quite honestly, I think the PlayStation 3, we've repositioned it, and it's got quite a long way to go. I mean we're just starting here."

Source

Yup. Atleast Sony makes good hardware that they will undoubtedly continue to support. Unlike some other companies...

Bad hardware + 4 years + next console + new halo. Rinse, repeat.

Yup. Atleast Sony makes good hardware that they will undoubtedly continue to support. Unlike some other companies...

Bad hardware + 4 years + next console + new halo. Rinse, repeat.

AC-360

[QUOTE="AC-360"]

Yup. Atleast Sony makes good hardware that they will undoubtedly continue to support. Unlike some other companies...

Bad hardware + 4 years + next console + new halo. Rinse, repeat.

Eltroz

well its easy to forget once its left the competition almost a year and a half in the dust...

Bad hardware + 4 years + next console + new halo. Rinse, repeat.

AC-360

Beautiful phrase. Sig worthy

Seems like they're going to need to plan it 10 years ahead

MS has put up a decent fight, and Nintendowned

If they plan ahead so much then why the RSX only have 256mb of ram...maybe this time then will stop with all of this annoying "new" and "innovative" technology that does nothing special at all and focus on using hardware this is useful for...you know...games.Kahuna_1

Keep in mind they had to cut development of the PS3 short because Xbox only lasted 4 years instead of the normal 6. The original specifications for PS3 had two Cell processors, both clocked faster and with more SPE units. Since X360 launched early this gen Sony had to make cuts to bring the production cost of PS3 down. So they cut out one Cell processor, lowered the SPE count and bolted on the RSX to compensate. Remember PS2 was still improving when X360 launched. Sony did what they had to do to meet a changing market. Too bad actually because the original PS3 vision would've rocked

[QUOTE="Kahuna_1"]If they plan ahead so much then why the RSX only have 256mb of ram...maybe this time then will stop with all of this annoying "new" and "innovative" technology that does nothing special at all and focus on using hardware this is useful for...you know...games.EmperorSupreme

Keep in mind they had to cut development of the PS3 short because Xbox only lasted 4 years instead of the normal 6. The original specifications for PS3 had two Cell processors, both clocked faster and with more SPE units. Since X360 launched early this gen Sony had to make cuts to bring the production cost of PS3 down. So they cut out one Cell processor, lowered the SPE count and bolted on the RSX to compensate. Remember PS2 was still improving when X360 launched. Sony did what they had to do to meet a changing market. Too bad actually because the original PS3 vision would've rocked

Yeah, but they should have had most of it worked out before MS could launch...and had a real backup plan incase they did not. They let MS dictate their moves when they had complete control of the market. It just seems that they did not start prepping the PS3 soon enough and made critical mistake after critical mistake...and now, instead of a powerhouse, we get a system with the same strength as the 360 despite launching a year late. It is just frustrating to think of what it should have been, and what it really is.

[QUOTE="EmperorSupreme"]

[QUOTE="Kahuna_1"]If they plan ahead so much then why the RSX only have 256mb of ram...maybe this time then will stop with all of this annoying "new" and "innovative" technology that does nothing special at all and focus on using hardware this is useful for...you know...games.Kahuna_1

Keep in mind they had to cut development of the PS3 short because Xbox only lasted 4 years instead of the normal 6. The original specifications for PS3 had two Cell processors, both clocked faster and with more SPE units. Since X360 launched early this gen Sony had to make cuts to bring the production cost of PS3 down. So they cut out one Cell processor, lowered the SPE count and bolted on the RSX to compensate. Remember PS2 was still improving when X360 launched. Sony did what they had to do to meet a changing market. Too bad actually because the original PS3 vision would've rocked

Yeah, but they should have had most of it worked out before MS could launch...and had a real backup plan incase they did not. They let MS dictate their moves when they had complete control of the market. It just seems that they did not start prepping the PS3 soon enough and made critical mistake after critical mistake...and now, instead of a powerhouse, we get a system with the same strength as the 360 despite launching a year late. It is just frustrating to think of what it should have been, and what it really is.

The only thing I think they could've done is launched before X360, but that's not really how Sony is. They've built a good reputation for supporting their systems. It's also a reason I switched from Xbox last gen to PS3 this gen.

[QUOTE="Kahuna_1"]If they plan ahead so much then why the RSX only have 256mb of ram...maybe this time then will stop with all of this annoying "new" and "innovative" technology that does nothing special at all and focus on using hardware this is useful for...you know...games.EmperorSupreme

Keep in mind they had to cut development of the PS3 short because Xbox only lasted 4 years instead of the normal 6. The original specifications for PS3 had two Cell processors, both clocked faster and with more SPE units. Since X360 launched early this gen Sony had to make cuts to bring the production cost of PS3 down. So they cut out one Cell processor, lowered the SPE count and bolted on the RSX to compensate. Remember PS2 was still improving when X360 launched. Sony did what they had to do to meet a changing market. Too bad actually because the original PS3 vision would've rocked

Yup. Atleast Sony makes good hardware that they will undoubtedly continue to support. Unlike some other companies...

Bad hardware + 4 years + next console + new halo. Rinse, repeat.

AC-360

And everybody loves it!

so what about that PS9 commercial they showed during the PS2 era..where you sniff game spores into your nose and go into a gaming world..talk about HD..lovemenow

Don't worry it's coming

Check out this link: http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg18624944.600

And no sniffiing required. :)

[QUOTE="AC-360"]

Yup. Atleast Sony makes good hardware that they will undoubtedly continue to support. Unlike some other companies...

Bad hardware + 4 years + next console + new halo. Rinse, repeat.

Eltroz

[QUOTE="AC-360"]

Bad hardware + 4 years + next console + new halo. Rinse, repeat.

beinss

Beautiful phrase. Sig worthy

If it were actually accurate. The Xbox was discontinued because nVidia pulled their contract. Microsoft was *legally required* to stop making it, it's not as though they wanted to.

-

I think it's a bit rich for a company who can't figure out how to launch a console for under $500 to talk about their "next move". Maybe, I dunno, spend that time delivering all the unfulfilled promises for the PS3 first? Right now Sony sounds like some kid who is failing high school talking about what he's going to do when he gets out of grad school. Stop daydreaming and turn in your ****ing math homework Sony - yeah, y'know, the games, features, and software you promised for the PS3 back in 2005 that we're still waiting for?

[QUOTE="lovemenow"]so what about that PS9 commercial they showed during the PS2 era..where you sniff game spores into your nose and go into a gaming world..talk about HD..EmperorSupreme

Don't worry it's coming

Check out this link: http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg18624944.600

And no sniffiing required. :)

There would be casualties lol

[QUOTE="EmperorSupreme"]

[QUOTE="lovemenow"]so what about that PS9 commercial they showed during the PS2 era..where you sniff game spores into your nose and go into a gaming world..talk about HD..mccoyca112

Don't worry it's coming

Check out this link: http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg18624944.600

And no sniffiing required. :)

There would be casualties lol

yeah red rings of death would actually mean death :lol: oO NOEZ MY BRAIN ISNT WORK NEED HELPS..:lol: imagine that for a thread :lol:

[QUOTE="mccoyca112"][QUOTE="EmperorSupreme"]

[QUOTE="lovemenow"]so what about that PS9 commercial they showed during the PS2 era..where you sniff game spores into your nose and go into a gaming world..talk about HD..lovemenow

Don't worry it's coming

Check out this link: http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg18624944.600

And no sniffiing required. :)

There would be casualties lol

yeah red rings of death would actually mean death :lol: oO NOEZ MY BRAIN ISNT WORK NEED HELPS..:lol: imagine that for a thread :lol:

I keep thinking this is what we will all look like:

[QUOTE="Kahuna_1"]If they plan ahead so much then why the RSX only have 256mb of ram...maybe this time then will stop with all of this annoying "new" and "innovative" technology that does nothing special at all and focus on using hardware this is useful for...you know...games.EmperorSupreme

Keep in mind they had to cut development of the PS3 short because Xbox only lasted 4 years instead of the normal 6. The original specifications for PS3 had two Cell processors, both clocked faster and with more SPE units. Since X360 launched early this gen Sony had to make cuts to bring the production cost of PS3 down. So they cut out one Cell processor, lowered the SPE count and bolted on the RSX to compensate. Remember PS2 was still improving when X360 launched. Sony did what they had to do to meet a changing market. Too bad actually because the original PS3 vision would've rocked

any links to say it was going to run two cell cpus :roll: if you see the video of the PS3 being taken appart and you see the size of the heat sink they put in the PS3, it makes me wonder how big it would need to be to remove heat from two CPUs.

[QUOTE="beinss"][QUOTE="AC-360"]

Bad hardware + 4 years + next console + new halo. Rinse, repeat.

subrosian

Beautiful phrase. Sig worthy

If it were actually accurate. The Xbox was discontinued because nVidia pulled their contract. Microsoft was *legally required* to stop making it, it's not as though they wanted to.

-

I think it's a bit rich for a company who can't figure out how to launch a console for under $500 to talk about their "next move". Maybe, I dunno, spend that time delivering all the unfulfilled promises for the PS3 first? Right now Sony sounds like some kid who is failing high school talking about what he's going to do when he gets out of grad school. Stop daydreaming and turn in your ****ing math homework Sony - yeah, y'know, the games, features, and software you promised for the PS3 back in 2005 that we're still waiting for?

Did you even read the article? They are in the planning stages they are not talking about it just yet like he said in the ariticle PS3 is fairly new and they still have a long ways to go with it.

[QUOTE="EmperorSupreme"]

[QUOTE="Kahuna_1"]If they plan ahead so much then why the RSX only have 256mb of ram...maybe this time then will stop with all of this annoying "new" and "innovative" technology that does nothing special at all and focus on using hardware this is useful for...you know...games.toxicmog

Keep in mind they had to cut development of the PS3 short because Xbox only lasted 4 years instead of the normal 6. The original specifications for PS3 had two Cell processors, both clocked faster and with more SPE units. Since X360 launched early this gen Sony had to make cuts to bring the production cost of PS3 down. So they cut out one Cell processor, lowered the SPE count and bolted on the RSX to compensate. Remember PS2 was still improving when X360 launched. Sony did what they had to do to meet a changing market. Too bad actually because the original PS3 vision would've rocked

any links to say it was going to run two cell cpus :roll: if you see the video of the PS3 being taken appart and you see the size of the heat sink they put in the PS3, it makes me wonder how big it would need to be to remove heat from two CPUs.

He is right about Sony originally wanting to use two Cells but he is wrong on why they did not. The Cell CPU is just not good enough to do what GPUs do so that is why they didn't use it and they had Nividia through together a GPU in the final years of development.

Sony seems to know how to plan ahead with it's hardware, and not just it's consoles. If you look at all the hardware Sony makes, everything is integrated one way or another and the hardware supports each other. We will see that in the PS4 as we saw it with the PS3 and PS2. dream431ca

Actually they planned to have cell render things, and last moment they went with RSX, talking about integration and planning, Sony is pure failure at least in PS3

Also planning PS4 ... 10 years before release, is a joke, technoclogy changes yearly, so the last year before release they have to reevaluate everything, which means 10 years planning is pointless, or will lead to using lower end hardware they planed too years before !!!! becuase it was the only thing available

[QUOTE="subrosian"][QUOTE="beinss"][QUOTE="AC-360"]

Bad hardware + 4 years + next console + new halo. Rinse, repeat.

-Renegade

Beautiful phrase. Sig worthy

If it were actually accurate. The Xbox was discontinued because nVidia pulled their contract. Microsoft was *legally required* to stop making it, it's not as though they wanted to.

-

I think it's a bit rich for a company who can't figure out how to launch a console for under $500 to talk about their "next move". Maybe, I dunno, spend that time delivering all the unfulfilled promises for the PS3 first? Right now Sony sounds like some kid who is failing high school talking about what he's going to do when he gets out of grad school. Stop daydreaming and turn in your ****ing math homework Sony - yeah, y'know, the games, features, and software you promised for the PS3 back in 2005 that we're still waiting for?

Did you even read the article? They are in the planning stages they are not talking about it just yet like he said in the ariticle PS3 is fairly new and they still have a long ways to go with it.

I read it.

He came across as a condescending jerk talking about "confusing the consumers" as though we're retarded, and haven't figured out that Sony while "supporting the PS3 for ten years" will bail out of its viability as a system by dropping the PS4 at the first sign of something that could give them some marketshare again.

Then he has the nerve to say they're "keeping it up here", when it's fairly obvious that if everyone at Sony is *thinking about it* that it's at least been discussed at board meetings. Which again, is pretty rich. They're saying "we have the luxury of these ten year lifespans" - the PS3 barely has life at this point - give me a break, do something with the damn system you have, please don't open your mouth about PS4, not because it will confuse consumers, but because you are obligated to the people who spent $600 on your doomed system to make it a worthwhile ride.

[QUOTE="EmperorSupreme"]

[QUOTE="Kahuna_1"]If they plan ahead so much then why the RSX only have 256mb of ram...maybe this time then will stop with all of this annoying "new" and "innovative" technology that does nothing special at all and focus on using hardware this is useful for...you know...games.toxicmog

Keep in mind they had to cut development of the PS3 short because Xbox only lasted 4 years instead of the normal 6. The original specifications for PS3 had two Cell processors, both clocked faster and with more SPE units. Since X360 launched early this gen Sony had to make cuts to bring the production cost of PS3 down. So they cut out one Cell processor, lowered the SPE count and bolted on the RSX to compensate. Remember PS2 was still improving when X360 launched. Sony did what they had to do to meet a changing market. Too bad actually because the original PS3 vision would've rocked

any links to say it was going to run two cell cpus :roll: if you see the video of the PS3 being taken appart and you see the size of the heat sink they put in the PS3, it makes me wonder how big it would need to be to remove heat from two CPUs.

I can't find any links, sorry. It would be late 2004 though if you want to find it yourself. The link I had has now been revised with the new specs...

One of the points behind Cell processing is lower power consumption and, in turn, lower heat.

Edit: I could see how that would be helpful for 2.

so ps4 was planned before the ps1 even reached critical mass (like say 20-30m units?) lol wow i wish i could lie as easily as sony seems to be able too do, I mean microsoft atleast keeps the lies hidden most of the time, I don't think there is a lie sony hasn't told that is either obviously idiotic or proven wrong later on.

Why would your company plan the 4th generation of a product before you even know that product will continue to stay popular?WilliamRLBaker

I work in the technology business actually you'd be surprised how far out large companies plan. I see product projections all the time. It doesn't mean they are 100% going to happen, but most companies are working on products several generations in advance. Keep in mind it takes a long long time to bring some of these technologies to market. Especially a company that is like Sony that actually "invents" new technology. Not everyone does that some are just assemblers.

Yup. Atleast Sony makes good hardware that they will undoubtedly continue to support. Unlike some other companies...

Bad hardware + 4 years + next console + new halo. Rinse, repeat.

AC-360

No it was 5 years.

Yup. Atleast Sony makes good hardware that they will undoubtedly continue to support. Unlike some other companies...

Bad hardware + 4 years + next console + new halo. Rinse, repeat.

AC-360

So thats why they took Backward Compatibility out the 40 gigs, discontinued the 20 and 60 gigs, and stop making the sixaxis huh. Nice support there. :|

Sony seems to know how to plan ahead with it's hardware, and not just it's consoles. If you look at all the hardware Sony makes, everything is integrated one way or another and the hardware supports each other. We will see that in the PS4 as we saw it with the PS3 and PS2. dream431ca

Agreed.

[QUOTE="AC-360"]

Yup. Atleast Sony makes good hardware that they will undoubtedly continue to support. Unlike some other companies...

Bad hardware + 4 years + next console + new halo. Rinse, repeat.

ReverseCycology

So thats why they took Backward Compatibility out the 40 gigs, discontinued the 20 and 60 gigs, and stop making the sixaxis huh. Nice support there. :|

You can STILL BUY those models at many online retailers. Gamestop for example, sells them, refurbished.

[QUOTE="ReverseCycology"][QUOTE="AC-360"]

Yup. Atleast Sony makes good hardware that they will undoubtedly continue to support. Unlike some other companies...

Bad hardware + 4 years + next console + new halo. Rinse, repeat.

VERTIGO47

So thats why they took Backward Compatibility out the 40 gigs, discontinued the 20 and 60 gigs, and stop making the sixaxis huh. Nice support there. :|

You can STILL BUY those models at many online retailers. Gamestop for example, sells them, refurbished.

That's not support, Sony discontinued them, they stopped manufacturing them, they stopped shipping them to retail. The only reason these online retailers have them is because they're left overs.

[QUOTE="VERTIGO47"][QUOTE="ReverseCycology"][QUOTE="AC-360"]

Yup. Atleast Sony makes good hardware that they will undoubtedly continue to support. Unlike some other companies...

Bad hardware + 4 years + next console + new halo. Rinse, repeat.

ReverseCycology

So thats why they took Backward Compatibility out the 40 gigs, discontinued the 20 and 60 gigs, and stop making the sixaxis huh. Nice support there. :|

You can STILL BUY those models at many online retailers. Gamestop for example, sells them, refurbished.

That's not support, Sony discontinued them, they stopped manufacturing them, they stopped shipping them to retail. The only reason these online retailers have them is because they're left overs.

Indeed its not support, but what difference does it make? It plays PS3 games right out of the box. If someone were to opt for those models, and really wants to play PS3 games, or PS2, they can very well buy them.

Most gamers, if they're smart enough to search, are not exactly restricted to the 40g model.

[QUOTE="ReverseCycology"][QUOTE="VERTIGO47"][QUOTE="ReverseCycology"][QUOTE="AC-360"]

Yup. Atleast Sony makes good hardware that they will undoubtedly continue to support. Unlike some other companies...

Bad hardware + 4 years + next console + new halo. Rinse, repeat.

VERTIGO47

So thats why they took Backward Compatibility out the 40 gigs, discontinued the 20 and 60 gigs, and stop making the sixaxis huh. Nice support there. :|

You can STILL BUY those models at many online retailers. Gamestop for example, sells them, refurbished.

That's not support, Sony discontinued them, they stopped manufacturing them, they stopped shipping them to retail. The only reason these online retailers have them is because they're left overs.

Indeed its not support, but what difference does it make? It plays PS3 games right out of the box. If someone were to opt for those models, and really wants to play PS3 games, or PS2, they can very well buy them.

Most gamers, if they're smart enough to search, are not exactly restricted to the 40g model.

Those smart enough gamers would rather buy a 360 and/or a Wii.

[QUOTE="AC-360"]

Yup. Atleast Sony makes good hardware that they will undoubtedly continue to support. Unlike some other companies...

Bad hardware + 4 years + next console + new halo. Rinse, repeat.

ReverseCycology

So thats why they took Backward Compatibility out the 40 gigs, discontinued the 20 and 60 gigs, and stop making the sixaxis huh. Nice support there. :|

You want BC go can get an 80gb or just buy a PS2 it's still being made. Unlike Xbox or X360s laughable BC.

PS3 20gb was $499 and 60gb $599. Now the PS3 40gb costs $399 and 80gb $499. Giving more for less how's that bad again??

The SixAxis is still supported and its included in the DualShock3.

[QUOTE="ReverseCycology"][QUOTE="AC-360"]

Yup. Atleast Sony makes good hardware that they will undoubtedly continue to support. Unlike some other companies...

Bad hardware + 4 years + next console + new halo. Rinse, repeat.

EmperorSupreme

So thats why they took Backward Compatibility out the 40 gigs, discontinued the 20 and 60 gigs, and stop making the sixaxis huh. Nice support there. :|

You want BC go can get an 80gb or just buy a PS2 it's still being made. Unlike Xbox or X360s laughable BC.

PS3 20gb was $499 and 60gb $599. Now the PS3 40gb costs $399 and 80gb $499. Giving more for less how's that bad again??

The SixAxis is still supported and its included in the DualShock3.

Say you want a cell phone because you just want to simply keep in touch with people, and you walk into a Sony store and they're selling a Playstation phone that includes a megapixel camera, built in mp3 player, web browser, tilt motion controls, hdmi ports, wifi, blu ray player, etc. which make the cell phone more expensive than others. Why would you want that more expensive celly if there's other cell phones out there that can get the job done for less. Same goes with video gaming consoles, there are other less expensive gaming consoles out there that gets the job done, so you can simply play video games. I pretty sure people buy gaming consoles to play games and not browse the internet, cure cancer, etc.

Yup. Atleast Sony makes good hardware that they will undoubtedly continue to support. Unlike some other companies...

Bad hardware + 4 years + next console + new halo. Rinse, repeat.

AC-360

Umm... Microsoft already went on record saying the replacement to the 360 wouldn't come out until 2012...

[QUOTE="VERTIGO47"][QUOTE="ReverseCycology"][QUOTE="VERTIGO47"][QUOTE="ReverseCycology"][QUOTE="AC-360"]

Yup. Atleast Sony makes good hardware that they will undoubtedly continue to support. Unlike some other companies...

Bad hardware + 4 years + next console + new halo. Rinse, repeat.

ReverseCycology

So thats why they took Backward Compatibility out the 40 gigs, discontinued the 20 and 60 gigs, and stop making the sixaxis huh. Nice support there. :|

You can STILL BUY those models at many online retailers. Gamestop for example, sells them, refurbished.

That's not support, Sony discontinued them, they stopped manufacturing them, they stopped shipping them to retail. The only reason these online retailers have them is because they're left overs.

Indeed its not support, but what difference does it make? It plays PS3 games right out of the box. If someone were to opt for those models, and really wants to play PS3 games, or PS2, they can very well buy them.

Most gamers, if they're smart enough to search, are not exactly restricted to the 40g model.

Those smart enough gamers would rather buy a 360 and/or a Wii.

By your Logic, those must be DUMB "smart" gamers who have NO option or NO choice at all. :roll:

poor Sony customers, so easily confused apparently? :?

[QUOTE="Kahuna_1"]If they plan ahead so much then why the RSX only have 256mb of ram...maybe this time then will stop with all of this annoying "new" and "innovative" technology that does nothing special at all and focus on using hardware this is useful for...you know...games.EmperorSupreme

Keep in mind they had to cut development of the PS3 short because Xbox only lasted 4 years instead of the normal 6. The original specifications for PS3 had two Cell processors, both clocked faster and with more SPE units. Since X360 launched early this gen Sony had to make cuts to bring the production cost of PS3 down. So they cut out one Cell processor, lowered the SPE count and bolted on the RSX to compensate. Remember PS2 was still improving when X360 launched. Sony did what they had to do to meet a changing market. Too bad actually because the original PS3 vision would've rocked

[QUOTE="-Renegade"]Did you even read the article? They are in the planning stages they are not talking about it just yet like he said in the ariticle PS3 is fairly new and they still have a long ways to go with it.

subrosian

I read it.

He came across as a condescending jerk talking about "confusing the consumers" as though we're retarded, and haven't figured out that Sony while "supporting the PS3 for ten years" will bail out of its viability as a system by dropping the PS4 at the first sign of something that could give them some marketshare again.

Then he has the nerve to say they're "keeping it up here", when it's fairly obvious that if everyone at Sony is *thinking about it* that it's at least been discussed at board meetings. Which again, is pretty rich. They're saying "we have the luxury of these ten year lifespans" - the PS3 barely has life at this point - give me a break, do something with the damn system you have, please don't open your mouth about PS4, not because it will confuse consumers, but because you are obligated to the people who spent $600 on your doomed system to make it a worthwhile ride.

Doomed system? :lol: Your making me laugh. The PS3 is the next best thing to slice bread right now. It still has tons of room to grow and new games are announced all the time plus there are tons of games we are still waiting for. The PS3 is far from doomed and selling way better now that Blu Ray has won the format war and it has a nice library of games to follow. There is only one doomed console and that is the 360. Nearly 3 years after launch and they have still yet to fix the RROD problem and they loose exclusives on a daily basis. It's also has lost all the ground it gained on PS3 in Europe and it never did stand a chance in Japan. Sorry to set you back into reality.