Ken Kutaragi:" I can produce the PS3 anytime"
- Thread starter mckmas8808
- Start date
seismologist
Regular
At first they will have a loss leading box in order to push blu ray. I dont see it as being a problem since again, this has been the plan from the start.
By the way the rumor has it than RSX is also modular in order to improve manufacturing yields. That's one area where Sony seems to be doing the right thing is setting themselves up for a highly manuafacturable system a few years down the line. Which I'm sure has ben part of the goal from the start considering the volumes they are expecting.
I dont see any reason why the PS3 would be expensive to produce.
By the way the rumor has it than RSX is also modular in order to improve manufacturing yields. That's one area where Sony seems to be doing the right thing is setting themselves up for a highly manuafacturable system a few years down the line. Which I'm sure has ben part of the goal from the start considering the volumes they are expecting.
I dont see any reason why the PS3 would be expensive to produce.
Poised* and what sort of argument is that? Would $6B have been a success for 20M gamers ($300 spent gaining each consumer). Would $8B ($400)? Would $10B? Would $20B?Hardknock said:
When does the amount they spend per consumer become prohibitive. In the long run as long as they can turn a profit at some point and continue from there onwards making profit they'll eventually make money back, but if it takes them 10-years to make $1B (profit over costs for the entire project to date) is that a good investment? What about 20-years?
They aren't even sure they'll make money on the X360. Thats ~10years in the business and they mightn't have made a profit on their newest console, let alone recover losses from the original Xbox.
Avon_Implosion
Newcomer
sounds like nothing more than a reassuring comment to the fans with no real proof or credibility.
im not offended by it, nor do i blame him for it-but im indifferent towards it. Come spring, im prepared for disappointment.
im not offended by it, nor do i blame him for it-but im indifferent towards it. Come spring, im prepared for disappointment.
borntosoul
Regular
i have a question, if ms lost 4-5 billion on xbox or 1 billion or whatever that amount is, is that money lost only on hardware or does that include the xbox games software department too.
Microsoft is in this business for only one reason, and that's to prevent other companies from eroding it's OS monopoly. They see a threat, that consoles are getting more powerful, and thus one day, can be your personal computer also. Most people on this forum, don't think the PS3 is a threat in that area, as they will always claim it's a game console, and will have limited appeal as a computer. That maybe so, but with each succeeding generation, a game console will be a little bit redefined, and Microsoft has help bring that about, by including a HD with each console sold.
Now MS will not release a keyboard, mouse, and browser for the 360, because they live in mortal fear, that a person will then not buy an OS for a PC. Sony has no worries in that regard, and so are in a position to offer consumers more choices.
Microsoft believes they can dominate this business in time, given they have the reserves to buy marketshare. Only problem with that plan, is that if Sony continues to make a profit, they will continue to be in this business. If Sony makes a mistake, MS will be there to capitalize on it, but Sony has done everything right so far. The company is making enormous profits off of the PS2, that will pay for the factories to manufacturer the PS3.
Sony engineers are very good at reducing die sizes, so the initial cost of the PS3 chipset is a very poor reflection on what it will cost to produce in three to five years time, and that is the important time when Sony makes it's massive profits off of the hardware. There is no question that Sony makes massive profits off of the PS2, as the cost estimate at this time for the PS2 is around $50 US.
Sony is a position going from strength to strength. The PS2 sales are not low at all, as matter of fact last December Sony outsold the original Xbox by almost 4:1, when Sony usually out sells it 2:1 or 3:1 each month. Microsoft main advantage this generation was in being the more powerful of the two consoles, and thus attracted a certain segment of the market. The perception with the PS3 is that it not the weaker of the next generation consoles, but the strongest, with the perception surrounding CELL helping that. Microsoft failure in Japan will be very telling on Japanese software houses, and thus Sony is in a position to repeat it's market dominance. I don't see anything to change that. Of course Blu-ray will just strengthen's Sony position even more, and that's why Microsoft is throwing it's full weight in trying to stop it. They know Blu-ray is important to this fight, or they would not have been so vocal in their HD-DVD support.
All these arguments now being said about Sony will be said again in 5 years time. Nothing will change, and people will still believe that Sony will fail simply because MS has practically unlimited money to lose. Microsoft frustration will be completely born by the fact, that as long as Sony continues to do everything right, they will continue to dominate this business.
Now MS will not release a keyboard, mouse, and browser for the 360, because they live in mortal fear, that a person will then not buy an OS for a PC. Sony has no worries in that regard, and so are in a position to offer consumers more choices.
Microsoft believes they can dominate this business in time, given they have the reserves to buy marketshare. Only problem with that plan, is that if Sony continues to make a profit, they will continue to be in this business. If Sony makes a mistake, MS will be there to capitalize on it, but Sony has done everything right so far. The company is making enormous profits off of the PS2, that will pay for the factories to manufacturer the PS3.
Sony engineers are very good at reducing die sizes, so the initial cost of the PS3 chipset is a very poor reflection on what it will cost to produce in three to five years time, and that is the important time when Sony makes it's massive profits off of the hardware. There is no question that Sony makes massive profits off of the PS2, as the cost estimate at this time for the PS2 is around $50 US.
Sony is a position going from strength to strength. The PS2 sales are not low at all, as matter of fact last December Sony outsold the original Xbox by almost 4:1, when Sony usually out sells it 2:1 or 3:1 each month. Microsoft main advantage this generation was in being the more powerful of the two consoles, and thus attracted a certain segment of the market. The perception with the PS3 is that it not the weaker of the next generation consoles, but the strongest, with the perception surrounding CELL helping that. Microsoft failure in Japan will be very telling on Japanese software houses, and thus Sony is in a position to repeat it's market dominance. I don't see anything to change that. Of course Blu-ray will just strengthen's Sony position even more, and that's why Microsoft is throwing it's full weight in trying to stop it. They know Blu-ray is important to this fight, or they would not have been so vocal in their HD-DVD support.
All these arguments now being said about Sony will be said again in 5 years time. Nothing will change, and people will still believe that Sony will fail simply because MS has practically unlimited money to lose. Microsoft frustration will be completely born by the fact, that as long as Sony continues to do everything right, they will continue to dominate this business.
360 already supports "Most USB mouse devices and USB keyboards".Edge said:
Dave Baumann said:
That's interesting. Now the important question is, will it allow a browser and using the 360 as a computer? I think both you and I know the answer to that one, and that was the key to my point. Anyway thanks for pointing out that Keyboards and Mice work with the 360. Maybe some FPS will allow that control method.
It will be interesting to see what
really is in the PS3 { [link]http://www.devstation.scee.com[/link]}. If they offer what an average consumer uses from a budget PC that will impact MS. A browser and the ability to download music and content, not just from Sony but from others.
Sony has to play their cards right, rushing and making mistakes will cost them dearly. Plus the fact that many are waiting for the PS3 because it appears to be more powerful and the fact that MS is doing so terrible in Japan, will likely ease their minds.
Speng.
seismologist said:
The expense comes with the investment required to start production. They've got new production plants, new staff, and new equipement that still has to be paid for and maintained. They'll only start making money after that investment has been covered.
That's why new technologies are normally introduced with extremely high prices. Once the investment has been at least partically recovered then costs can be dropped to more reasonable levels while the company retains the same profit margin.
In time the PS3 will be quite cheap to produce, but for the first couple of years it's going to put a serious dent in Sony's profits.
Mintmaster
Veteran
The reason I think that's BS is that if he could, he should do it now.Ken Kutaragi said:
Once PS3 is out on the market, XB360 sales will slow down heavily. Obviously there is something stopping him from releasing now, be it the state of software, manufacturing limitations, cost, whatever.
The only reason XB360 will do well (better than the original XBox, anyway) is timing. Sony has too powerful of a brand in Playstation, regardless of how good XB360 actually is.
MS has a history with flopped products that they didn't abandon straight out, everyone knew they were in this for the long run (except maybe Ken).Laa Yosh said:
That said, XBox Did flop in Japan, Korea, and most of Europe - and this would still be the case even if MS sold it at a profit.
Serenity Painted Death
Regular
I think the obvious implication implicit in Kutaragi's statement is that he doesn't feel any pressure to release the PS3 as a reaction to the 360s early launch, or whenever the Revolution may hit. Not that, literally, he could have the thing on store shelves tomorrow. He just doesn't feel any pressure from outside forces to release the thing any other time than when he is ready.
This could also be read as a potential warning for a delay, or more likely the first official sign that PS3 will be coming out first in Japan, and later in other regions (as most have suspected.
This could also be read as a potential warning for a delay, or more likely the first official sign that PS3 will be coming out first in Japan, and later in other regions (as most have suspected.
Nick Laslett
Regular
Inquisitive_Idiot said:
This is exactly what Sony did with the PSOne, entered a new market and within 5 years became the market leader. Before them Nintendo did the same thing and before that Atari created the market in the first place.
That's 3 other companies all doing what MS has failed to do. The measure of their failure is this respect is quite large. Sony were actually more successful this gen than in the one before. MS just helped fragment the competition. They effectivily killed the Dreamcast by not supporting Sega and diminished Nintendo's market share. They had very little impact on Sony.
Thats the only part you noticed?Sethamin said:
Inquisitive_Idiot said:
Cant disagree about the first paragraph.
But I wasnt implying that because they couldnt buy everything in 5 years that means they failed.I understand that its impossible to get the first spot from Sony.I wasnt expecting them to acieve that in five years.What makes things different though is the fact that the product wasnt bringing revenues and forced itself without necessarilly doing well.
The second paragraph: No not at all.I am not saying such a thing.Unless you believe that the Saturn and the DC didnt establish quality games which isnt true.What I am saying is that the Saturn and the DC started with many many AAA titles.Especially the DC but it died unfairly.It had TONS of great games, and enjoyied GREAT sales.But why did it die?Why did the Saturn die when both DC and Saturn begun with great titles?Why couldnt SEGA keep the Saturn in the market with the inefficiencies?
Why hasnt the XBOX died when although it started with AAA titles, they were fewer at the beginning and generated losses of billions?
Simply because SEGA didnt have accumulated capital revenues to cover inefficiency or losses.
At the end the XBOX remained in the market, established its brand name and managed to increase its library of quality titles no matter how many losses it generated.
