I think sony could counter that by setting a release date much later like 2013 (after 2 or more years, it doesn't matter when the other console released) And not only will it probably be the same price as the new 360 at launch but have significantly better technology. munu9How is Sony doing at the moment? Are they making healthy profits? Can they afford to release another console in say 2011? Have they gambled that the PS3 would last until 2014/2015? In its heyday the PS2 accounted for nearly half of Sony's profits - back in 2003/2004 i think - that includes license fees etc. Can you see that happening again?
Microsoft have a chance to sink the PS3.
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="munu9"]I think sony could counter that by setting a release date much later like 2013 (after 2 or more years, it doesn't matter when the other console released) And not only will it probably be the same price as the new 360 at launch but have significantly better technology. 4u70How is Sony doing at the moment? Are they making healthy profits? Can they afford to release another console in say 2011? Have they gambled that the PS3 would last until 2014/2015? In its heyday the PS2 accounted for nearly half of Sony's profits - back in 2003/2004 i think - that includes license fees etc. Can you see that happening again? No, but how does that have to do with what I posted, I said sony releasing a console much later than MS if MS decided to release their's early: 2013
Also, another flaw in your plan would the new 360 would cost at least $400 to beat the PS3 in every way. And by that time, the PS3 could be $300. (cheaper) If Microsoft upgraded to blu-ray, sony could still brag they have blu-ray, too. munu9Yes a hypothetical 2011 console from MS would cost 400 - 600 dollars but by then the 360 would cost less than a hundred. 3 pronged attack from a previous post in this thread. So MS uses bluray for its next console. The consoles after the next gen will have transitioned to flash or downloaded distribution methods. Optical media has a decade or 2 left with the global proliferation of high speed broadband internet access.
They can't really do this as bringing out a new console so soon will make people question the value of their 360 purchase, the idea of a console is cheap and long lasting as apposed to a PC which constantly needs upgrading to keep up.sumner1456If they shoot for 2011, then what difference is it between the 360 and PS2 in terms of time on the market as the top of the range the company offers?
[QUOTE="4u70"][QUOTE="munu9"]I think sony could counter that by setting a release date much later like 2013 (after 2 or more years, it doesn't matter when the other console released) And not only will it probably be the same price as the new 360 at launch but have significantly better technology. munu9How is Sony doing at the moment? Are they making healthy profits? Can they afford to release another console in say 2011? Have they gambled that the PS3 would last until 2014/2015? In its heyday the PS2 accounted for nearly half of Sony's profits - back in 2003/2004 i think - that includes license fees etc. Can you see that happening again? No, but how does that have to do with what I posted, I said sony releasing a console much later than MS if MS decided to release their's early: 2013Sony would have to rethink their strategy with regards to their architecture complexity and developer unfriendliness. The same people who adopted early this gen will be itching for a new machine(I got mine a few months after launch and it already feels like I've been gaming on this gens hardware forever)by 2011, it's unlikely they'll hold out 2 extra years. Then Sony would have launch games going against the "720" 2nd or 3rd generation games, and probably not look much better, yet be a fair bit more expensive. You'd also have Sony back in the cycle of hitting pricepoints LONG after everybody else does, AGAIN. Time and time and shown that extended your generation much beyond 5 years is deadly to your business. In fact, every single time there has been a new market lead has been becuase the old one tried to hang on to their old system too long.
1 - M$ is not about to drop the 360 anytime soon.
2 - M$ doesn't take a loss on 360 sku sales anymore
3 - M$ charges for online services.
4 - Halo 3 sold 8.5mil units on the 360 (highest selling 360 game).
1 - $ony can't afford to drop the PS3 price anytime soon.
2 - $ony makes a loss on every PS3 sold.
3 - $ony offers free online services but this costs them money
4 - GTAIV sold 5ml (i rounded that up) on the PS3 (highest selling (PS3 game).
So for the buisness student who posted on here he knew so much about buisness studies who's buisness model looks better?
If M$ do release a new unit they'd do well just to improve the current model with more memory, faster CPU and GPU so it can play current 360 games but also play future games better than the current 360 but the current 360 will still play them well enough, much like Crysis on the PC.
Phil
if M$ does exactly what they did to the 360 like they did with the original xbox then i will not support themnjean777will people stop with this! If they did that I wouldn't support them either, but they WON'T do that because there will be no reason TO do that. The 360 is profitable NOW, and will likely be HUGELY profitable then. You don't kill a cashcow.
Why do people think MS can burn billions? Believe it or not, they have limit to their amount of money. And I seriously doubt they would spend billions, as if it were spare change, on taking out Sony. Actually, isn't Sony bigger than MS?
Also, Sony is the least of MS's problems.
[QUOTE="4u70"][QUOTE="munu9"]I think sony could counter that by setting a release date much later like 2013 (after 2 or more years, it doesn't matter when the other console released) And not only will it probably be the same price as the new 360 at launch but have significantly better technology. munu9How is Sony doing at the moment? Are they making healthy profits? Can they afford to release another console in say 2011? Have they gambled that the PS3 would last until 2014/2015? In its heyday the PS2 accounted for nearly half of Sony's profits - back in 2003/2004 i think - that includes license fees etc. Can you see that happening again? No, but how does that have to do with what I posted, I said sony releasing a console much later than MS if MS decided to release their's early: 2013 Effectively writing off the PS3 - the original thread post - Sony will be in a state of perpetual 'catch up' if MS is allowed to be first out of the gate each generation, and risks its reputation as leader in console technology. 2 or 3 years of only being able to compete technologically with the second tier offering of its primary competitor.
[QUOTE="killab2oo5"]:? I hope not. The games aren't looking like they're gonna slow down anytime soon...so I plan on getting a few more years out of my 360. -.- Them releasing a new console and cutting off support of the 360 and getting devs to make games exclusive to the next xbox for 6 months instead of the 360 would just ruin everything...Steppy_76A new console doesn't mean killing the 360...unlike last time the 360 will be making them money. They'll want both consoles going at the same time just like Sony did with the PS1 and PS2. Exactly. Learning from the competition/enemy ... art of war....etc.
Why do people think MS can burn billions? Believe it or not, they have limit to their amount of money. And I seriously doubt they would spend billions, as if it were spare change, on taking out Sony. Actually, isn't Sony bigger than MS?
Also, Sony is the least of MS's problems.
Sony is broader, i dont know if they make as much money though... And TC, thats the worst theory EVER. All the people who just got 360's are screwed, we would end up with another system with RROD, and the fact is all the devs will hate MS for doing that to them.With the 3 pronged attack from an earlier post. A new console (soon) threatens from above, the 360 threatens from its own level, MS aggressively courts 3rd party devs and the wii mops up from below.MS couldn't sink the PS3 when it was at $599, lacked a great deal of functionality and had little software to buy the system for.
How can they hope to sink it now?
nicenator
HA this is such a dumb thread do any of you do business I have done it in college and on my third and last year of it at uni and trust me M$ has not even had a chance to "sink" sony its machine is has been known to break down ALOT!!!! all of its huge games are already out and alot of them went down the drain. Lets take alook someone on this thread said they need to release the console before sony releases their new one... WHAT ON EARTH!!! thats just dumb the last time they released a machine early to get it ahead of sony it broke down all of the time not alot of people are going to want to buy the new console then with the thoughts of the old in the back of the mind. the console didnt win the HD war it lost that by miles they as for money to play online with your games WTF... but then loads of people say yeah but live is so much better...trust me its not that much better lets be honest you just play games online and both consoles dont lag so whats the diffrence one is free the other isnt hmmmmmmm. the idea of xbxo even trying to comepete with the Blu-ray just made me laugh ofcourse it was going to lose both disc are thing same in everyway apart from the blu-ray holds more thats a tough one. plus all of its games were crap this time around compared to last halo3 wasnt anyway near as good as the first halo and fable 2 was a flop and they dont really have many other games coming out soon which are high end when the ps3 becuase they know what they are doing as they have been in the industry since 1995 know what they are doing and take time with it and then release there games later on the dying end on the 360 look at it killzone 2 thats going to huge no matter what lets be honest im not saying its going to be a better game then halo but come on it doesnt have to beat halo does it it has to beat halo 3 which was a disapointment to alot of people and it didnt really set the benchmark high and come that game looks amazing no matter what people say and God of war 2 every good of war game has got huge reviews and always about the 9 mark in the rating that is a huge game ps3 fans are looking for. this is just the tip of the 360 dying end of the console for M$ to still keep their fans on this console and not to be out shine by the ps3 which its up coming games coming out next year it needs to start work on another Triple A game which at the moment doesnt have any coming out and then you lot are thinking about the new console and how its already "won" HA you lot make me laugh so much shoemen22There's always a guy like this: "Well I'm taking a business class....blah blah blah...":roll:
They WOULDN'T be "burning" billions. For the last time 2010 is a 5 year cycle, and 2011 would be a 6 year cycle. There isn't anything rushed about it. And no, Sony is not bigger than MS. MS makes about 4 times the profit that sony does in a given year.Why do people think MS can burn billions? Believe it or not, they have limit to their amount of money. And I seriously doubt they would spend billions, as if it were spare change, on taking out Sony. Actually, isn't Sony bigger than MS?
Also, Sony is the least of MS's problems.
Silverbond
Why do people think MS can burn billions? Believe it or not, they have limit to their amount of money. And I seriously doubt they would spend billions, as if it were spare change, on taking out Sony. Actually, isn't Sony bigger than MS?
Also, Sony is the least of MS's problems.
Sony is broader, i dont know if they make as much money though... And TC, thats the worst theory EVER. All the people who just got 360's are screwed, we would end up with another system with RROD, and the fact is all the devs will hate MS for doing that to them.My god do you people bother to get any sort of knowledge of things you speak about. MS owns all the IP of the 360. A new system doesn't mean they stop selling or making the 360. They also would be taking 2 years longer with the "720" then they did with the 360. Almost none of you are posting with any basis in reality, you're just blindly assuming MS repeats last gen when the situation isn't anywhere close to the same. MS took steps to insure what happened last gen won't happen this one, and sony actually took steps to get stuck in some of the situations that killed MS last gen. The standard HDD is going to bite sony in the butt later this gen when they're trying to drop below 200 bucks.Why do people think MS can burn billions? Believe it or not, they have limit to their amount of money. And I seriously doubt they would spend billions, as if it were spare change, on taking out Sony. Actually, isn't Sony bigger than MS?
Also, Sony is the least of MS's problems.
Sony is broader, i dont know if they make as much money though... And TC, thats the worst theory EVER. All the people who just got 360's are screwed, we would end up with another system with RROD, and the fact is all the devs will hate MS for doing that to them. Lets assume for one second that this new console learns from its predecessors 'wrongs and rights' and does not RROD and keeps a similar or identical dev kit with additional 'horsepower' being the only real difference from a coders POV, as well being back compatible with 360 games.
Maybe I'm the only one, but does anyone think that MS brought on the next gen too early? I mean, I feel like we could have gotten a few more good years out of last gen. When MS released 360, it seems like it made Sony panick, rush, and bring PS3 to market. If MS brings a new console in soon, Sony will need to react, somehow. That's unfortunate IMO because it'll just rush this generationstudster007You do understand that the only reason M$ released a new game console was because the original XBox wasn't making them a profit right? If the original XBox had sold like the PS2 and was making money for them, they would have never released the XBox 360 as soon as they did. That's basically why Sony didn't released the PS3 right away, because the PS2 was doing so well. It was crushing the Gamecube and original Xbox. Microsoft's only mistake was releasing an unrealiable system, not making it 100% B/C and not making enough system for the launch.
[QUOTE="studster007"]Maybe I'm the only one, but does anyone think that MS brought on the next gen too early? I mean, I feel like we could have gotten a few more good years out of last gen. When MS released 360, it seems like it made Sony panick, rush, and bring PS3 to market. If MS brings a new console in soon, Sony will need to react, somehow. That's unfortunate IMO because it'll just rush this generationXanderZaneYou do understand that the only reason M$ released a new game console was because the original XBox wasn't making them a profit right? If the original XBox had sold like the PS2 and was making money for them, they would have never released the XBox 360 as soon as they did. That's basically why Sony didn't released the PS3 right away, because the PS2 was doing so well. It was crushing the Gamecube and original Xbox. Microsoft's only mistake was releasing an unrealiable system, not making it 100% B/C and not making enough system for the launch. And if the points in your final sentence are addressed in xbox's 3rd iteration in, say 2010, and Sony cannot compete for 2 or more years, then MS should theoretically be able console-idate (cheap joke sorry) its dominance at that level of console gaming with nintendo being the token competition ala Apple. By the time Sony's response is ready, MS should be plotting its next move.
Why do people think MS can burn billions? Believe it or not, they have limit to their amount of money. And I seriously doubt they would spend billions, as if it were spare change, on taking out Sony. Actually, isn't Sony bigger than MS?
Also, Sony is the least of MS's problems.
Sony is broader, i dont know if they make as much money though... And TC, thats the worst theory EVER. All the people who just got 360's are screwed, we would end up with another system with RROD, and the fact is all the devs will hate MS for doing that to them. Lets assume for one second that this new console learns from its predecessors 'wrongs and rights' and does not RROD and keeps a similar or identical dev kit with additional 'horsepower' being the only real difference from a coders POV, as well being back compatible with 360 games. What about 360 owners who just got a console with the price drop????? Plus devs would be very annoyed, they have not even completely used the 360 yet, why bother making a new more powrrful console when the 360 is not maxed yet???HA this is such a dumb thread do any of you do business I have done it in college and on my third and last year of it at uni and trust me M$ has not even had a chance to "sink" sony its machine is has been known to break down ALOT!!!! all of its huge games are already out and alot of them went down the drain. Lets take alook someone on this thread said they need to release the console before sony releases their new one... WHAT ON EARTH!!! thats just dumb the last time they released a machine early to get it ahead of sony it broke down all of the time not alot of people are going to want to buy the new console then with the thoughts of the old in the back of the mind. the console didnt win the HD war it lost that by miles they as for money to play online with your games WTF... but then loads of people say yeah but live is so much better...trust me its not that much better lets be honest you just play games online and both consoles dont lag so whats the diffrence one is free the other isnt hmmmmmmm. the idea of xbxo even trying to comepete with the Blu-ray just made me laugh ofcourse it was going to lose both disc are thing same in everyway apart from the blu-ray holds more thats a tough one. plus all of its games were crap this time around compared to last halo3 wasnt anyway near as good as the first halo and fable 2 was a flop and they dont really have many other games coming out soon which are high end when the ps3 becuase they know what they are doing as they have been in the industry since 1995 know what they are doing and take time with it and then release there games later on the dying end on the 360 look at it killzone 2 thats going to huge no matter what lets be honest im not saying its going to be a better game then halo but come on it doesnt have to beat halo does it it has to beat halo 3 which was a disapointment to alot of people and it didnt really set the benchmark high and come that game looks amazing no matter what people say and God of war 2 every good of war game has got huge reviews and always about the 9 mark in the rating that is a huge game ps3 fans are looking for. this is just the tip of the 360 dying end of the console for M$ to still keep their fans on this console and not to be out shine by the ps3 which its up coming games coming out next year it needs to start work on another Triple A game which at the moment doesnt have any coming out and then you lot are thinking about the new console and how its already "won" HA you lot make me laugh so much shoemen22You didn't happen to drop out of college did you?
"What about 360 owners who just got a console with the price drop????? Plus devs would be very annoyed, they have not even completely used the 360 yet, why bother making a new more powrrful console when the 360 is not maxed yet???"
Well the thread is about a possible opportunity for MS to sink the PS3 and possibly eliminate its main competitor (something theyre well known for in the software industry).
If they continue to support the 360 and make its games compatible with the new console (like PS1-PS2 or PS2-PS3 ) then 360 owners should be happy yes?
Devs complain because they must learn a dev kit every gen. If the dev kit remains unaltered or only slightly so, then they should be happy yes? MS could lower the cost of a 360 license to nothing to pacify them.
How many games on the 360 and PS3 cannot output 720p without sacrificing eyecandy - or have frame rate issues? (clue - alot - google is your friend)
[QUOTE="studster007"]Maybe I'm the only one, but does anyone think that MS brought on the next gen too early? I mean, I feel like we could have gotten a few more good years out of last gen. When MS released 360, it seems like it made Sony panick, rush, and bring PS3 to market. If MS brings a new console in soon, Sony will need to react, somehow. That's unfortunate IMO because it'll just rush this generationKungfuKittenActually if ms releases a new console early on i don't think it would be successful at all. I could see sony not reacting at all, just prolonging the PS3's lifespan until nintendo or ms releases a console after that. There's still plenty they can do with PS3. Why do you think it would not be successful?
Good grief, the fools couldn't sink the PS3 when it cost $600, had no games and a very basic online. Should have done more price cuts and sooner if they were serious about sinking the PS3, if you ask me.Floppy_JimTrue. That was then - this is the possible future. MS either freaked out at that time due to various governments investigating their aggressive business practices (EU, for example, shook a few billion out of them). Last thing they wanted was to undercut Sony using huge profits from software sales to cushion losses that would crush most multinationals risking an AT&T or StandardOil style government enforced break up. But now the wii can be the token competition. It has sold very well this generation suprising many. MS can just point to the wii and say 'there is our competition'. See previous posts for the rest.
They could do that, but people might not yet be ready to buy the next generation of console. This is what happened with the Sega Dreamcast - releasing technically superior console whilst the Sony Playstation and Nintendo 64 were battling it out - and look how it turned out. Whilst it is a slightly different scenario because Microsoft is Sony's competitor and by releasing another console they would be competing with themselves, which isn't necessarily a good idea.king_boboThe difference here is that MS, unlike sega, can swallow several dreamcast scenarios solely to eliminate its only real competitor.
[QUOTE="Silverbond"]They WOULDN'T be "burning" billions. For the last time 2010 is a 5 year cycle, and 2011 would be a 6 year cycle. There isn't anything rushed about it. And no, Sony is not bigger than MS. MS makes about 4 times the profit that sony does in a given year.Why do people think MS can burn billions? Believe it or not, they have limit to their amount of money. And I seriously doubt they would spend billions, as if it were spare change, on taking out Sony. Actually, isn't Sony bigger than MS?
Also, Sony is the least of MS's problems.
Steppy_76
I was responding to the OP where that guy said MS can burn billions...
[QUOTE="NinjaMunkey01"][QUOTE="Silverbond"]Sony is broader, i dont know if they make as much money though... And TC, thats the worst theory EVER. All the people who just got 360's are screwed, we would end up with another system with RROD, and the fact is all the devs will hate MS for doing that to them.My god do you people bother to get any sort of knowledge of things you speak about. MS owns all the IP of the 360. A new system doesn't mean they stop selling or making the 360. They also would be taking 2 years longer with the "720" then they did with the 360. Almost none of you are posting with any basis in reality, you're just blindly assuming MS repeats last gen when the situation isn't anywhere close to the same. MS took steps to insure what happened last gen won't happen this one, and sony actually took steps to get stuck in some of the situations that killed MS last gen. The standard HDD is going to bite sony in the butt later this gen when they're trying to drop below 200 bucks.Why do people think MS can burn billions? Believe it or not, they have limit to their amount of money. And I seriously doubt they would spend billions, as if it were spare change, on taking out Sony. Actually, isn't Sony bigger than MS?
Also, Sony is the least of MS's problems.
Steppy_76
You're assuming MS won't make the same mistakes. Please, inform of the steps MS took to make sure this won't happen again. What steps did Sony take to screw themselves?
[QUOTE="Steppy_76"][QUOTE="Silverbond"]They WOULDN'T be "burning" billions. For the last time 2010 is a 5 year cycle, and 2011 would be a 6 year cycle. There isn't anything rushed about it. And no, Sony is not bigger than MS. MS makes about 4 times the profit that sony does in a given year.Why do people think MS can burn billions? Believe it or not, they have limit to their amount of money. And I seriously doubt they would spend billions, as if it were spare change, on taking out Sony. Actually, isn't Sony bigger than MS?
Also, Sony is the least of MS's problems.
Silverbond
I was responding to the OP where that guy said MS can burn billions...
please google 'microsoft cash reserves 2008' knock yourself out.I don't think any of the gaming companies would be foolish enough to even start thinking about releasing a new console during the current world-wide recession...especially when they are still making money off the old one and can probably easily milk it for another 4 years or more. Ilikemyname420A recession is the perfect time for a company to attack if they are not affected to the same degree as their victim. Still making money? Milk it for another 4 years? And after this? You dont empty 20 rounds into someone online in deathmatch have 90 health left and then let them go find some healthpacks or powerups do you?
Microsoft owns all the IP in the 360, the CPU design, the GPU design, etc. They can manufacture these parts forever AND use it in future consoles for BC. The entire machine can be cost reduced through manufacturing reductions. They aren't buying the parts from the manufacturers, who may decide to stop producing parts(ie Nvidia stopped producing the original Xbox GPU in mid 2005). Lastly, the xbox was losing them money still for each machine being purchased even in 2005, the xbox was a money pit that would have continually gotten bigger. The 360 unlike the xbox now makes them money for each unit sold. To stay at the same price as the PS2 they HAD to lose money. That situation is reversed this generation, Sony will end up having to lose money if they want to remain competitive in price with the 360, and if they DON'T want to compete on price, we've seen that they can't catch up to the 360. It's a lose lose proposition for sony. Including a standard HDD is very difficult, because they don't continually get cheaper and cheaper as time goes on. The low end capacities drop to a certain price, and then stop being produced and a larger drive replaces the old size at that price point. Let's set a price to show you an easy example. In year 1 a 20 gig HDD costs them 50 bucks, and a 60 gig costs 75 bucks. In year 2 rather than having the 20 gig cost them 30 bucks, there is no longer a 20 gig drive, but there is now a 40 gig drive they get for 50 bucks. In year 3, a 60 gig is now 50 bucks, etc etc etc. The HDD price is gonna be fixed for the life of the console, it will merely get larger. When you are selling your machine for 400 bucks that's not a big deal, but when you get later in the gen and you want to sell your system for 150 bucks, that 50 dollar HDD now is a third of your "budget" to merely break even. The situations aren't the same because the xbox wasn't profitable, and was never going to be profitable. The 360 is ALREADY profitable, and will be profitable for the rest of the gen. The PS2 was profitable, while the PS3 isn't and doesn't appear like it can be profitable unless they keep the price high and sacrifice userbase which drastically reduces the profitability at the end of the gen. Sony didn't keep the PS1 and PS2 around because they're nice guys, they did it because they were making them money. If the PS3 doesn't, it won't be kept around.You're assuming MS won't make the same mistakes. Please, inform of the steps MS took to make sure this won't happen again. What steps did Sony take to screw themselves?
Silverbond
[QUOTE="Silverbond"]Microsoft owns all the IP in the 360, the CPU design, the GPU design, etc. They can manufacture these parts forever AND use it in future consoles for BC. The entire machine can be cost reduced through manufacturing reductions. They aren't buying the parts from the manufacturers, who may decide to stop producing parts(ie Nvidia stopped producing the original Xbox GPU in mid 2005). Lastly, the xbox was losing them money still for each machine being purchased even in 2005, the xbox was a money pit that would have continually gotten bigger. The 360 unlike the xbox now makes them money for each unit sold. To stay at the same price as the PS2 they HAD to lose money. That situation is reversed this generation, Sony will end up having to lose money if they want to remain competitive in price with the 360, and if they DON'T want to compete on price, we've seen that they can't catch up to the 360. It's a lose lose proposition for sony. Including a standard HDD is very difficult, because they don't continually get cheaper and cheaper as time goes on. The low end capacities drop to a certain price, and then stop being produced and a larger drive replaces the old size at that price point. Let's set a price to show you an easy example. In year 1 a 20 gig HDD costs them 50 bucks, and a 60 gig costs 75 bucks. In year 2 rather than having the 20 gig cost them 30 bucks, there is no longer a 20 gig drive, but there is now a 40 gig drive they get for 50 bucks. In year 3, a 60 gig is now 50 bucks, etc etc etc. The HDD price is gonna be fixed for the life of the console, it will merely get larger. When you are selling your machine for 400 bucks that's not a big deal, but when you get later in the gen and you want to sell your system for 150 bucks, that 50 dollar HDD now is a third of your "budget" to merely break even. The situations aren't the same because the xbox wasn't profitable, and was never going to be profitable. The 360 is ALREADY profitable, and will be profitable for the rest of the gen. The PS2 was profitable, while the PS3 isn't and doesn't appear like it can be profitable unless they keep the price high and sacrifice userbase which drastically reduces the profitability at the end of the gen. Sony didn't keep the PS1 and PS2 around because they're nice guys, they did it because they were making them money. If the PS3 doesn't, it won't be kept around. Good post - more like this please. Last 2 sentences. Begs the question - If it doesnt, and isnt kept around, what will they replace it with? Can they afford to replace it at all?You're assuming MS won't make the same mistakes. Please, inform of the steps MS took to make sure this won't happen again. What steps did Sony take to screw themselves?
Steppy_76
HA this is such a dumb thread do any of you do business I have done it in college and on my third and last year of it at uni and trust me M$ has not even had a chance to "sink" sony its machine is has been known to break down ALOT!!!! all of its huge games are already out and alot of them went down the drain. Lets take alook someone on this thread said they need to release the console before sony releases their new one... WHAT ON EARTH!!! thats just dumb the last time they released a machine early to get it ahead of sony it broke down all of the time not alot of people are going to want to buy the new console then with the thoughts of the old in the back of the mind. the console didnt win the HD war it lost that by miles they as for money to play online with your games WTF... but then loads of people say yeah but live is so much better...trust me its not that much better lets be honest you just play games online and both consoles dont lag so whats the diffrence one is free the other isnt hmmmmmmm. the idea of xbxo even trying to comepete with the Blu-ray just made me laugh ofcourse it was going to lose both disc are thing same in everyway apart from the blu-ray holds more thats a tough one. plus all of its games were crap this time around compared to last halo3 wasnt anyway near as good as the first halo and fable 2 was a flop and they dont really have many other games coming out soon which are high end when the ps3 becuase they know what they are doing as they have been in the industry since 1995 know what they are doing and take time with it and then release there games later on the dying end on the 360 look at it killzone 2 thats going to huge no matter what lets be honest im not saying its going to be a better game then halo but come on it doesnt have to beat halo does it it has to beat halo 3 which was a disapointment to alot of people and it didnt really set the benchmark high and come that game looks amazing no matter what people say and God of war 2 every good of war game has got huge reviews and always about the 9 mark in the rating that is a huge game ps3 fans are looking for. this is just the tip of the 360 dying end of the console for M$ to still keep their fans on this console and not to be out shine by the ps3 which its up coming games coming out next year it needs to start work on another Triple A game which at the moment doesnt have any coming out and then you lot are thinking about the new console and how its already "won" HA you lot make me laugh so much shoemen22
Everyone point and laugh:lol:
You are bragging about all this Uni/School and yet you dont know how to write properly.
Take english again is my advice?
Sony would have to rethink their strategy with regards to their architecture complexity and developer unfriendliness. The same people who adopted early this gen will be itching for a new machine(I got mine a few months after launch and it already feels like I've been gaming on this gens hardware forever)by 2011, it's unlikely they'll hold out 2 extra years. Then Sony would have launch games going against the "720" 2nd or 3rd generation games, and probably not look much better, yet be a fair bit more expensive. You'd also have Sony back in the cycle of hitting pricepoints LONG after everybody else does, AGAIN. Time and time and shown that extended your generation much beyond 5 years is deadly to your business. In fact, every single time there has been a new market lead has been becuase the old one tried to hang on to their old system too long. Steppy_76Yes they will be itching to get a new machine. But if sony waits long enough that feeling in consumers might return right about 2 or 3 years after the 360 launches. Even if sony launches against the 720's 2nd or 3rd year games 2 years is a long time. Sony's hardware would be about twice as powerful at the same price as the 720's launch. Meaning 1st gen PS4 games would easily match or beat the 720's 2nd or 3rd gen games (as long as sony's hardware isn't too difficult) And they could easily just make the PS4 1.5 times as powerful as the 720 and start beating it in graphics within a year while keeping about the same price point. And remember, history is not GUARANTEED to repeat itself.
[QUOTE="shoemen22"]HA this is such a dumb thread do any of you do business I have done it in college and on my third and last year of it at uni and trust me M$ has not even had a chance to "sink" sony its machine is has been known to break down ALOT!!!! all of its huge games are already out and alot of them went down the drain. Lets take alook someone on this thread said they need to release the console before sony releases their new one... WHAT ON EARTH!!! thats just dumb the last time they released a machine early to get it ahead of sony it broke down all of the time not alot of people are going to want to buy the new console then with the thoughts of the old in the back of the mind. the console didnt win the HD war it lost that by miles they as for money to play online with your games WTF... but then loads of people say yeah but live is so much better...trust me its not that much better lets be honest you just play games online and both consoles dont lag so whats the diffrence one is free the other isnt hmmmmmmm. the idea of xbxo even trying to comepete with the Blu-ray just made me laugh ofcourse it was going to lose both disc are thing same in everyway apart from the blu-ray holds more thats a tough one. plus all of its games were crap this time around compared to last halo3 wasnt anyway near as good as the first halo and fable 2 was a flop and they dont really have many other games coming out soon which are high end when the ps3 becuase they know what they are doing as they have been in the industry since 1995 know what they are doing and take time with it and then release there games later on the dying end on the 360 look at it killzone 2 thats going to huge no matter what lets be honest im not saying its going to be a better game then halo but come on it doesnt have to beat halo does it it has to beat halo 3 which was a disapointment to alot of people and it didnt really set the benchmark high and come that game looks amazing no matter what people say and God of war 2 every good of war game has got huge reviews and always about the 9 mark in the rating that is a huge game ps3 fans are looking for. this is just the tip of the 360 dying end of the console for M$ to still keep their fans on this console and not to be out shine by the ps3 which its up coming games coming out next year it needs to start work on another Triple A game which at the moment doesnt have any coming out and then you lot are thinking about the new console and how its already "won" HA you lot make me laugh so much Tragic_Kingdom7
It may be hard to spot due to the wall of text, but the obligatory Killzone 2 mention is buried in there.
I just used ctrl + f and typed Killzone 2. Yeah, you're right! :lol:
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment