digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

PlayStation 3 losses now over $1 billion

blogs.guardian.co.uk — BusinessWeek has now pointed out, "Sony's gaming division has just lost $848 million -- double the figure from last year -- and first-half losses reached $1.1 billion."

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • secondwheel2, on 11/06/2007, -60/+175Am I the only one here that thinks the PS3 would have sold like crazy if it didn't have a blue ray player

    • Okari, on 11/06/2007, -21/+150Actually, a lot of the sales are because it's the cheapest Blu-Ray player.
      • giveer, on 11/05/2007, -29/+150Yeah but isn't saying you've got "the cheapest blu-ray player" kinda like saying you're dating the hottest fatty?
        • volacide, on 10/29/2007, -26/+6No, that's ridiculous, especially considering the PS3 has all the outputs you'd need to deliver that pristine 1080p picture and excellent audio. It's got HDMI, Component, and even optical audio out. It upscales DVD movies to 1080p as well. Not at all in this case.

          Buying a more expensive Blu-Ray player with the same features and a couple more outputs and inputs just isn't worth it.
          • giveer, on 11/04/2007, -3/+13The comment was reflecting that a cheap player is still pricey. Boy, I love explaining things about as much as I hate the guy next to me checkin' out my wang when I pee.
          • imneveral0ne, on 11/04/2007, -9/+4and volacide was letting you know that your comment was incorrect.
          • xXGeechXx, on 11/04/2007, -1/+5You sound like your doing an infomercial for PS3. Good Work!
      • radicaldementia, on 10/30/2007, -11/+73people buying your game console just because it is the cheapest blu-ray player is not a good sign at all. Sony is depending on game sales to get revenue and if a lot of people are buying a ps3 just for blu-ray, then Sony is in some serious trouble.
        • masterm1nd, on 10/30/2007, -21/+12You don't think getting more consoles in peoples homes boosts game sales?
          • Cwo655321, on 10/30/2007, -5/+23not if they are buying it as the 'cheapest blu-ray player'
          • bCabulon, on 10/30/2007, -5/+2Mabey they'll buy it as a cheap bluray player and then see a game they like. The people who buy it as a cheap bluray player are having a game system slipped into their home. I'm sure it will translate into a few non-gamers buying a couple games.
        • Okari, on 10/30/2007, -7/+34You're forgetting Sony is a movie company as well.
          • Elektriq, on 10/29/2007, -2/+7Electronics, games, music, movies, financial services
          • Daniel591992, on 10/29/2007, -2/+15Even toilets!




            (well, not really..I just wanted to say that)
          • mrFREEZE, on 10/30/2007, -1/+4Don't forget about their manure salesmen (aka "PR department") :P
        • mike17032, on 10/29/2007, -14/+4"You don't think getting more consoles in peoples homes boosts game sales?"

          Not in a meaningful way, no. Thats why you had to buy a remote add on and stuff for the PS2 and first Xbox, the last thing the companies wanted was people to buy the thing as a cheap DVD player.

          If the PS3 is just canabilizing sales from other Blueray players (and chances are most of the sales are), then haivng the PS3 be so cheap isnt helping their cause much.
          • ChildeRoland420, on 10/30/2007, -0/+5You didn't HAVE to buy a remote for the PS2, just the XBox.
        • craterburnsu, on 10/30/2007, -2/+13You did not have to buy a remote for the ps2. You could use it just fine without it if you A. were close enough to control it with a controller, or B. Had a wireless controller. And the Xbox was a different matter. When you were buying the remote you were paying the licensing fees for the dvd codec, which is why it was required to play DVDs. Microsoft saved a decent amount of production money by doing it that way.
      • mike17032, on 10/30/2007, -4/+11Yep, but that has its downside for Sony. It does push Blueray for them, but how many of them are people that would just have gotten a slighlty more expensive one if the PS3 was not around?

        The downside is that anyone getting it just as a player isnt going to buy any games, and thats where game companies recoup the loss on the systems.
        • boombye, on 10/30/2007, -5/+12I've had atleast 3-4 friends sell their PS3s because it just became a blu-ray player, with titles that sucked.
        • boombye, on 10/29/2007, -7/+2damn double posting.
      • Konstantino, on 10/30/2007, -3/+17But if it didn't HAVE a Blu-Ray player, it'd have been a heck of a lot cheaper. Even now it's rivaling the 360 in terms of price (although there is a lot of losses because of that).
        • munkyxtc, on 10/30/2007, -2/+6I wouldn't call $499 rivaling the 360's price. $349 gets you the xbox premium with 2 games; holiday shoppers are buying up all those packages nationwide; even if Sony throws in a free game @ $499 it is still $150 more expensive than the 360 & $250 more expensive than the wii.

          Honestly I can't say I'm shocked it's not selling that well. I have played the PS3 and it's a decent system and I'd like to get one but honestly for the money and when comparing the game libraries it's a pass for me and obviously I'm not alone.
      • Hazardc, on 10/30/2007, -2/+2well even if it doesnt sell games, it's selling blu-ray, which is more lucrative to them as well

    • chocobomog, on 10/30/2007, -17/+55And the blu-ray player is going to be a major factor in Sony recouping this loss. Before the PS3, blu-ray sales were terrible. One year later, blu-ray is outselling HD-DVD 2:1 or more. Give it a few more years (and a few million more PS3s) and Sony will be making bank on all blu-ray sales as the standard high-def disc.
      • spawnfree, on 10/30/2007, -5/+12truth.
        a few good games wont hurt either.
        • volacide, on 10/30/2007, -8/+5Ratchet and Clank is so much fun! Just good classic platforming and then we have Uncharted in November which I think could be even better and of course MGS4.
          The PS3's line-up is looking pretty sweet.

          Oh, and I love Blu-Ray, 1080p movies kick ass. I was tempted to buy the HD-DVD drive for my 360 the other day when I saw that deal at Best Buy with Heroes but then I realized that I'd just get Heroes later on when it's released on Blu-Ray eventually... :P
        • Kavok, on 10/30/2007, -2/+6If we are talking about Heroes the TV series then I don't think it will be out on Blu-ray.
          Heroes is owned by Universal Studios which from what I've read is exclusively backing HD-DVD.
          • thatsmyaibo, on 10/30/2007, -3/+3Yeah they have a contract. but things will be interesting when that contract runs out.
      • Optimaximal, on 10/30/2007, -5/+22It doesn't matter if Blu-ray is outselling HD-DVD 2:1... Nobody is going to take either format seriously until one wins this stupid format war.

        HD-DVD keeps dropping in price down to the level where consumers will actually purchase it. The savings in manufacturing costs coupled with consumer desire for the cheapest goods will see HD-DVD sales pick up again.
        The format war has entered its 'rabid discount' phase, which is often where battles are won.
        • bCabulon, on 10/29/2007, -1/+2There is no savings in manufacturing costs now that bluray disks are in production. Most of the cost in producing optical media is in setting up the tools to make the disks. Once that is done, the disks are extremely cheap to produce. Licensing could be a cost difference. I don't know what sort of royalties are being payed for the use of either standard.
          • ChildeRoland420, on 10/30/2007, -1/+3I love how HD-DVD loves to argue that their discs are cheaper to produce, but then release movies that cost more than their Blu Ray counterparts.
      • pasta2000, on 10/30/2007, -0/+3Where did you get this new of Blue Ray outselling HD:DVD 2 to 1? This link: http://www.deeko.com/news/?p=4963 is reporting "HD-DVD players began outselling Blu-ray models starting in mid-September and regained a year-to-date lead of a little over 50% through the rest of the month, said Jodi Sally, Toshiba VP of marketing of digital A/V products. Year to date, according to NPD figures she cited, HD-DVD players command 53% of sales; Blu-ray players, 44%; dual format players, 3%."
    • masterm1nd, on 10/29/2007, -17/+7Yes.
    • mszunefan, on 10/29/2007, -27/+3@Okari I sold PS3s at Target when it was launched and when I asked what Blu-Ray movies they wanted to pick up with their new PS3 they said none, so I don't see your point. But the Blu-Ray drive is causing delays in all the big cross platform titles recently it was the cause of the delay of GTA4. Thanks Sony
      • senatorpjt, on 10/29/2007, -3/+13None of the Blu-ray movies I have were likely available at Target anyway.
      • Okari, on 10/29/2007, -0/+13At the time it was launched Target didn't have much for Blu-Ray or HD-DVD. Also, more than likely, all those PS3's you sold on day one went straight to Ebay so there was no point in buying a movie.
      • toefer, on 10/29/2007, -1/+12"But the Blu-Ray drive is causing delays in all the big cross platform titles recently it was the cause of the delay of GTA4."

        Um. Sorry. No.
      • Nobi-Wan, on 10/29/2007, -1/+9Everyone buying a PS3 on day 1 was selling it on Craigslist or Ebay. No one was probably even buying any games, either.
      • PhoenixCE, on 10/29/2007, -5/+20Get your facts straight. The delay in GTA4 is because they can't fit everything on a standard DVD disc for the 360.
        • MWeather, on 11/09/2007, -4/+9Thanks, Microsoft!
        • bdorry, on 10/29/2007, -5/+6Nice work refuting an uninformed opinion with another uninformed opinion, you sure showed him.
          • Ajajadude, on 10/29/2007, -3/+10There are two reasons why it's being delayed: They're having problems fitting everything onto the DVD9 and they're having problems figuring out how to use the PS3's memory efficiently.
          • boombye, on 10/29/2007, -4/+3Assassin's Creed was the one with problems fitting onto a DVD9. GTA4 is merely being delayed because they couldn't meet the last deadline for the fiscal quarter, so they'll release it for the next one.
        • boombye, on 10/29/2007, -4/+8The delay for GTA 4 had to do with deadlines and not having both versions not even close to ready, and plus the ps3 version of any game takes longer to code because of the unfriendly devkit. Get your facts straight, the delay in GTA IV is because it's not even close to being done, not because it can't fit. That's something you'll likely hear about 2 months before it goes Gold. Try knowing how the process works atleast. At this stage in development, nobody is trying to fit the game onto any dvd, and that's not going to take til Spring to fix. Also take into account that file compression gets better over time. It seems that people who compare dvd/hd-dvd/bluray don't really ever think about file compression. They seem to think that file sizes stay the same.
    • uziko, on 10/29/2007, -9/+25i would not but blu ray or hd until one of them are dead
      • JammoBlammo, on 10/30/2007, -16/+16And those of us with an XBOX 360 (standard DVD player) can rent and download HD movies without a next-gen disc platform. I'm in no rush either :)
        • JammoBlammo, on 10/29/2007, -8/+14I'm confused as to why I'm being buried. Not having to settle on a disc platform and downloading content from the XBOX Live Marketplace is freeing me from dropping hundreds of dollars on a platform that could ultimately fail.
          • thatsmyaibo, on 10/29/2007, -2/+6Because I bought a PS3 and wouldn't have ever purchased a Blu Ray disc. Since it was built in I started taking advantage of it.
          • ChildeRoland420, on 10/29/2007, -3/+2Instead you're dropping all that money to have a movie for a few days on a console that is more than likely to red ring eventually.
        • MWeather, on 10/29/2007, -1/+12So how many movies can you fit on that hard drive?
          • JammoBlammo, on 10/29/2007, -5/+4~20? Why does it matter, if you only have a 24 hour license to watch them?
          • boombye, on 10/29/2007, -2/+9It doesn't matter how many it stores, since he's renting the movies off the marketplace, not purchasing them.. Thus once he starts playing a movie on there, he has 24 hours to finish watching it before the license to view it is revoked. You can leave it on the console for 14 days if you don't watch it all, but once you play it, you have 24 hours to view. So tell me, why would it matter how many movies he can fit on to his hard-drive? 120 GB on the 360 anyways + IPTV
          • MWeather, on 10/29/2007, -3/+524 hours? Screw that. I'll stick with Netflix.

            Now to go watch Planet Earth on Blu-Ray. I've had it for a week so far. Thanks for helping remind me :)
        • Bamborzled, on 10/29/2007, -3/+11And those of us with a DVD player can just play DVDs on our DVD player. Wow!
    • Christbait, on 10/29/2007, -28/+3Screw Blu-ray. Keep that poorly designed media out of a console that can't even handle it's massive capacity.
      • spawnfree, on 10/31/2007, -1/+13lol wut?
        i play 8gig dvds on my pc but i dont need 8gig of ram to do it.
      • Rileyper, on 10/29/2007, -1/+3Poorly designed...Blu ray was made by 24+ companies (including apple for you fanboys out there) and HD DVD was only made by 2 companies.
        • Nobi-Wan, on 10/30/2007, -2/+1It wasn't MADE by 24 companies. It was SUPPORTED by 24 companies...a few of which have dropped support since. And supported doesn't mean exclusive, either. The companies can also choose to SUPPORT HD-DVD if they so choose.
    • CheezIt9109, on 10/30/2007, -7/+26If the delay was truly due to Blu-Ray (as reported by Sony) and not issues with the Cell Architecture, I would completely agree.

      All you folks pointing out that Blu-Ray is being helped by the PS3 may be correct, but I for one wish a cruel and painful death upon the person(s) responsible for ***** the gaming customers in the ass in an attempt to launch a new medium.
      • Optimaximal, on 10/29/2007, -1/+11Isn't that Sony's mission statement?
        • rarson, on 10/29/2007, -3/+5 Beta, SACD, Minidisc, Memory Stick, Memory Stick Duo, UMD, Blu-Ray...
          • ChildeRoland420, on 10/29/2007, -4/+3You forgot CD, DVD which Sony also supported.
          • rarson, on 10/29/2007, -0/+3Yeah, but I was talking about extraneous formats that Sony needlessly created to be able to force consumers into proprietary Sony formats.

            Sony helped create CD and DVD (as they did the audio cassette format), but both were huge improvements over the previous popular formats. None of the ones I listed really did anything aside from force you to buy all new *****, especially in the case of MS Duo... what a ***** screw job!
          • ChildeRoland420, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1Minidisc was also a huge improvement over the alternatives, it was just not accepted by Americans the way that Sony offered it. Seriously tho, Sony doesn't own Blu-Ray (which is also an advancement, despite what you may say), if you're going to include it you should include the other formats that Sony helped develop and supported (Audio cassette, CD, DVD).

            If you really don't think Blu-Ray is an advancement then you need to come over to my house and watch Planet Earth in 1080i on a 42" screen.
        • Shaflugi, on 10/29/2007, -1/+2Were those first five things ever used for games?
      • bCabulon, on 10/29/2007, -2/+3How were they screwing over customers any worse than microsoft? I bought a PS3 back in may. After pricing out a 360 set up the way I would want, 2 wireless controllers, batteries, charger, one year of live, 20gb, and either a wireless network adaptor or a new firewall/router (all the ports are full on my router/firewall), The 360 came out as slightly more expensive than the 60gb PS3 + extra controller. For a little less money I got a free bluray player, 40gb more hard drive space, and the abilityafter the first year to buy one more game a year over the life of the system (no paying for live).
      • Nobi-Wan, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1Dude, the delay WAS mostly because of the Blu-ray drive. They couldn't manufacture the blue lasers fast enough and actually had to halt production of standalone Blu-ray players in order to get more lasers to the Playstation division. This was only a year ago and it was a huge issue because everyone was really getting pissed at the fact they were forcing the Blu-ray drive on PS3 customers.
    • mark_in_bc, on 10/30/2007, -14/+36Without Blu ray the Platation 3 would have launched before or at the same time as the 360 and would have smoked the it on the reputation of the PS2. The 360 has proven that HD gaming works on DVD and does not require HD disk space.

      We have both consoles and the PS3 is only used once in a while to play the odd Blu ray movie. We have the HD DVD drive for the 360 and we find that it looks better than the Blu ray on our equipment. Mind you we've had to send one Xbox back due to the three rings of death.
      • Nobi-Wan, on 10/30/2007, -3/+18That's probably the most true and unbiased statement about the PS3. If Sony had focused on getting their GAMING machine out the door instead of trying to push some new media format they would have sold ridiculous amounts of consoles. Plus the shortage would have been MUCH less because they wouldn't have worried about trying to get enough blue lasers in time for production. I'd probably have both a PS3 and a 360 if that was the case because both systems would have been much cheaper due to competition in the same price range.
        • thatsmyaibo, on 10/30/2007, -1/+4Point taken. But Blu Ray will also be a contributing factor in storage space for gaming. The medium is not just being used for HD movies. If developers will stop being lazy and learn how to program for new mediums, Blu Ray could be huge for the gaming market. I work in the gaming industry and having to compress everything for DVD9 will eventually catch up to MS.
        • Shaflugi, on 10/30/2007, -0/+3PC developers have all the hard drive space in the world, but most games still seem to fit on a single DVD and don't usually decompress past 12 or so GB. I don't think having a new disc medium is all that important.. yet.
          • ChildeRoland420, on 10/30/2007, -1/+1"have all the hard drive space in the world,"
            Exactly. That means that they can decompress everything ahead of time, which means that they can use much stronger encryption.
          • apoc06, on 10/29/2007, -1/+1you realize that the hard drive is not standard on the xbox360, right? DL DVDs formatted for the xbox360 holds less data than its PC equivalent at that. so your mention of the need to decompress 12 GBs average just partially made the case for blu-ray.

            keep in mind that we are 1, maybe 2 years into this console generation, its not gonna get better folks.
      • ZenMojo, on 10/30/2007, -16/+8Sony's not a gaming company, they're a multimedia company. They won with the DVD by selling the PS2. They're winning with the Blu-Ray 2:1 against the HD-DVD by selling the PS3. A billion dollars in losses means little when you're recouping several times that from other avenues that would have suffered and that few people can compete with you in.
        By the way, Ubisoft admitted they were having trouble fitting Assassin's Creed onto the Xbox 360's DVD less than two years into its lifespan. The Blu-Ray has more than 10 times that storage capacity. Not to mention that, three years into the Gamecube's life it had already used up the space it anticipated for its games with Resident Evil 4 three times over. By 2008, Xbox will likely be on 3-DVD sets just to keep up with the Blu-Ray and will force complete downloads onto the Hard Drive.
        One thing you can say about Sony...they consistently insist on giving companies the resources available at the time to do everything they can, first with the PS1, then the PS2, then the PSP, then the PS3, it's always about available resources. It costs an arm and a leg, but they recoup their investments in other avenues.
        • rarson, on 10/30/2007, -0/+8"They won with the DVD by selling the PS2."

          You've got this completely backwards. Sony didn't push the DVD format to success with the PS2. Rather, the PS2 gained much-needed market share by offering a cheap DVD player that also had some good games for it.

          The PS3 strategy MIGHT have paid off if the software was there.
        • fognozzle, on 10/30/2007, -0/+2Buried for inaccurate. Blu-Ray is 25GB per layer, DVD is 4.7GB per layer (and both are capable of multiple layers). That's not 10X the size.
      • michael1406, on 10/30/2007, -10/+5I don't know why people dugg down ZenMojo's comment there; he's right. Give it time, and you'll see how much of the BD a full game fills up. Turn back the clock 15 years, and games were a few MB.
        • Optimaximal, on 10/30/2007, -2/+73D games don't need a lot of space on a disk, since most of the content is a lot of numbers used to build the 3D meshes. The space is taken up by textures (which can be optimised/compressed with no lossiness), sound files (again, compression) and video files (guess what?).

          Massive storage media just encourages lazy encoding and the usage of video rather than the 3D engine to generate cutscenes and stuff. Digg me down, but given the PS3s shortcomings with memory, maybe the use of HD Video is intentional to offset the inability of the console to do proper close up 3D rendering because it can't fit massive textures into available space.

          For a good example, compare Baldurs Gate to Neverwinter Nights - the former came on an untold amount of CDs (6 I think) whilst the latter fitted on 2 CDs. Both games were long and full of content, but BG had to have loads of sprites for every conceivable animation. NWN was just a load of animated meshes, which take up less room.
      • Kavok, on 10/29/2007, -5/+9Regarding all the people saying Blu-ray is selling 2:1 over HD-DVD:

        1. Blu-ray and HD-DVD combined make up under 5% of the total DVD sales(2007). The vast majority of the population has not gone to one format or the other yet.
        2. The numbers are actually 2.6mil to 1.4mi for Jan-Sep 2007 which is not exactly 2:1. (1.4*2 = 2.8)
        3. Sony's losses reported in this article completely obliterate projected Blu-ray sales for 2007 and 2008, they aren't making any money off this - at least not yet.
        4. A HD-DVD player that is under $200 was recently reported on by Ars Technica. A player in the $50-200 range is a much better 'trojan horse' than a PS3 for format dominance.

        Its pretty unrealistic to declare a winner on either side, it doesn't look like Blu-ray is going to benefit Sony any time in the next 2~3 years though. By then we might have a format that will completely dwarf both of them!
        • thatsmyaibo, on 10/29/2007, -0/+1You can't look at number for Jan-Sep. You have to look at Sep and Jan separately and see what the difference is. If BR has a higher ratio now than then, you can make an accurate assumption of where it's going.
        • dethsesh, on 10/29/2007, -0/+1i have no intention of purchasing blu-rays or hd-dvds, at 30 bucks a movie its ridiculous. I just use netflix for 17 a month to get as many hd dvds as I want. whats the point of buying these movies
    • SillyRabbits, on 10/29/2007, -2/+14I think it would have sold like crazy if they released it 1 year earlier like they originally planned.
    • vertinox, on 10/29/2007, -7/+17I'm fine with the BluRay player. Its the price tag that is keeping me away.
      • aogail, on 10/29/2007, -1/+12What do you think is causing that price point? You can't even buy a stand-alone blu-ray player for less.
    • GenoBaby, on 10/29/2007, -3/+3Actually the Blu-Ray may be the reason it has sold that amounts it did. At $600 I figure only hardcore gamers would buy it. Motorstorm and Resistance is the only 2 games that has sold over a million with a 4.5 million install base. So I thought those games would have sold as least 3 million copies so it looks like the majority of it is sold because of the Blu-Ray player. I think what they should have done was really work on Home so that it can be release on launch... sell ads like crazy on Home to help make up the cost for ever console that is sold and sell the PS3 at $399 on launch.
      • digghugger, on 10/29/2007, -1/+4People buy used copies and rant games now. You will never see a game selling over 50% of a system's install base. (Unless it's a packed in or a ***** wii play)
    • zybch, on 10/29/2007, -10/+15The PS3 was just a Trojan Horse for bluray anyway!
      It was NEVER about the games, only bluray!
    • LuCiFer6, on 10/29/2007, -1/+4Yeah I agree with everyone that one main reasons why is sold this many is because of the Blu-Ray player. I think it hasn't sold due to the lack of good/great games. Yes I do I give it a pass for it's first year games but it's now the 2nd year and the best they have to show is a game with a rodent carrying a big gun?
      • bCabulon, on 10/29/2007, -3/+1It won't hit it's second year untill mid-november. Including the games that come out the week the PS3 turns two in the US, there are still the following releases to add: Guitar hero 3, Cars Mater-national, Stranglehold, the Simpsons game, Blacksite:Area 51, Call of Duty 4, Bladestorm, Assasins Creed, Lego Star Wars the complete saga, Beowulf, Need for speed pro-street, Soldier of Fortune: Pay Back, WWE SmackDown! vs. Raw 2008, College Hoops 2K8, Medal of Honor: Airborne, Elder Scrolls IV: The Shivering Isles, History Channel: Battle For the Pacific, Kane & Lynch: Dead Men, Rock Band, Time Crisis 4, and Uncharted: Drake's Fortune.
        • dethsesh, on 10/29/2007, -2/+2yea but only like 2 of those games arent coming out for the 360 with better online play and probably smoother framerates. I am very disappointed with the lack of exclusives coming out anytime soon for the ps3
    • AzraelKans, on 10/29/2007, -0/+2Hmmm.. I dont know, those were my feelings exactly when the ps3 came out.

      However, the PS3 was sold at $600 if it were sold at $500 would it really have made a difference?

      The PS3 was sold one year earlier than it should and had one of the worst marketting campaigns ever. If those 2 were different and it had been sold globally, maybe there would have been a difference.
    • Vicujozobenaxod, on 10/29/2007, -0/+1No, it's a valid argument. However, having Blu-ray was a big part of the design. It's still a big advantage, if only there wasn't a heated HD-DVD vs. Blu-ray war raging, I think it would have been a bigger success. Nevertheless, it wouldn't have made all the difference. With the Cell processor, it's still very difficult to develop on the platform.
  • kirashira, on 10/29/2007, -28/+104Higher Playstation 3 losses = Higher sales, which is what sony wants.
    • TyroPyro, on 10/30/2007, -15/+36Except it isn't selling much compared to everything else: http://www.vgchartz.com/
      Microsoft is selling more 360's and actually turned a profit last quarter
      • kirashira, on 10/29/2007, -19/+24360's sales during its first year was slow as well. Just wait until the ps3's exclusives come out like MGS4, im sure sales will pick up.
        • mike17032, on 10/29/2007, -15/+17MSG4 and what else? There are very few worthwhile exclusives left for the PS3.
          • sadilak, on 10/29/2007, -11/+5Even though I own a PS3, I dont see this console doing much because a) development cost is high(according to most of the 3rd party developers) and b) all the third party developers clearly seem to prefer developing games for the other 2 consoles and c) Negative media for the PS3 . It will ultimately end up playing the role of the Gamecube albeit for the current generation of consoles. Final Fantasy and Metal Gear Solid may not be enough to save the console. On the other hand , if LAIR had not sucked so bad, it might have been a different story. After all the hype that sony created around this game, it was a disaster to the effect that Heavenly Sword got sucked into the Disastrous blackhole created by Lair. Also, They have been fooling around with Gran Turismo for a long time, I am sure that the final game is going to be a letdown and Forza 2 will end up being the better game.
          • Ameenakel, on 10/29/2007, -1/+2Final Fantasy XIII
          • apoc06, on 10/29/2007, -1/+1gran turismo? killzone? FFXIII? god of war3? littlebigplanet? tekken6? socom? not to mention region specific franchises that sell well, like singstar, everybody's golf and buzz.

            geez, every console has its own niche of great games, pretending that sony doesnt is stupid.
        • toefer, on 10/29/2007, -3/+14Everyone that says this never really cares to include the amazing 360 exclusives. You can count them on one hand, and then half of those are, or will be, on PC.
          • JayD16, on 10/29/2007, -1/+10True, and you can bet all them are shooters.
          • Optimaximal, on 10/29/2007, -0/+3Maybe because Microsoft have their fingers in both console and PC gaming pies. It's not in their financial interest to alienate their core market (after all, whilst they're second place in the console market, they ARE the PC gaming market, so sticking 2 fingers up to the crowd that give them half their business is stupid).
        • Myonosken, on 10/29/2007, -11/+4MGS4 and FFXIII?

          Those are not going to make PS3 some sort of huge god, no matter how good the series are.
          • MWeather, on 10/29/2007, -2/+11Steve Ballmer himself would suck Hideo Kojima's dick if he thought it would get MGS on the 360. Don't even get me started on what he'd do for FFXIII
          • ZenMojo, on 10/29/2007, -1/+3I think FFXIII would make him a catcher. FFXI sold big on the Xbox amazingly.
        • DarkDx, on 10/29/2007, -4/+12killzone 2, gran turismo 5, ratchet and clank, etc.
        • volacide, on 10/29/2007, -2/+8Why dig him down? He's right, there are numerous articles that show just how close the first years of both consoles resemble each other. Ignorance is bliss...
          • heinousjay, on 10/29/2007, -3/+2Here's what you don't seem to understand - that doesn't matter. The competition is now against now, not now against a year ago. Playing games with time variables is just a way to make the fanbitches feel better about themselves.

            Both are being creamed by the Wii. Bow down to Nintendo all over again.
          • thatsmyaibo, on 10/29/2007, -1/+3Wii and the other 2 are in different categories. Women and children love the Wii. Nintendo has got people outside the average gamer involved in the Wii.

            As far as sales in the same time frame...it DOES matter. That's like saying the Transformers DVD is selling more than Jurassic Park DVD this weekend thus Transformers was a better movie.
          • apoc06, on 10/29/2007, -0/+1re: heinousjay:

            true, however none of sony's major signature franchises have been released until now with ratchet and clank. MS has released its equivalent major franchises: halo3 and forza, already. its difficult to predict the next breakout hit from an unestablished franchise [gears of war for example]. so you need to leave room for the curve following the release of those type of titles. sales will spike whenever a major franchise is released. in order to find out how large a spike there will be, you have to wait like the rest of us.

            as for the wii, i wont bet either way. alot of owners are disappointed with them, but if sales continue to be brisk following the release of mario galaxy and smash brothers brawl, it will be in good shape. if sales fall or level off, the other two companies could sweep in and reclaim the lead. the wii is leading, but they havent swept the title yet.
      • Ajajadude, on 10/29/2007, -15/+9Once again, they're actually a little bit ahead of the 360 in it's first year. Remember, the Wii is a cheap "gimmick" (not knocking on the Wii, it's a good system, but, c'mon, would it sell that well if it were $300-$400?) so that's why it's blowing everyone away and the 360 came out well before both the PS3 and the 360.
        • JammoBlammo, on 10/29/2007, -2/+15Buy the time you buy the Wii and enough accessories for 2 people to have fun, it DOES cost $400.
          • bdorry, on 10/28/2007, -2/+3Thats true, but I'd be suprised if it doesn't break even at some point for most people considering the games are sold for $50 instead of $60
          • ZenMojo, on 10/29/2007, -2/+2Yeah. It breaks even after 10 games. (I don't even have 5 games for the Gamecube....)
      • kenvsryu, on 10/29/2007, -5/+12http://digg.com/gaming_news/PS3_Outsells_Xbox_360_ ... - It's outsold the xbox 360 for 2007 so far.
        • bdorry, on 10/29/2007, -5/+4Is that really suprising considering it's launch window was within that time frame? The week to week sales are a much better indicator of retail performance at this point
        • FutureGuy, on 10/29/2007, -1/+1PS3 launch had a lot to do with that, it surprising that it only outsold 360 by such a small margin in spite of the launch spike, the rate at which PS3 sales are going even that won't be true by end of year.
      • Kishoba, on 10/29/2007, -0/+2It's been a while since I've looked at vgchartz - but wow has Japan moved away from consoles. They are DS maniacs!
    • Birdoftruth, on 10/29/2007, -18/+11Tyro, The sales in Blu-ray (which is kicking HD-DVD's ass right now) is making up for it.
      • Shanobi, on 10/29/2007, -6/+4Neither format is selling well, which is why they're both trying to drive down prices on BOTH players. The adoption rates for new gen movie players about about zero.
    • Dysarthria, on 10/29/2007, -10/+35Selling at a loss and losing market share was not their intent.
      • MWeather, on 10/29/2007, -5/+14Selling at a loss was ALWAYS their intent.
        • Dysarthria, on 10/29/2007, -3/+6But not selling the machine at a loss to lose money! The idea is to sell the machine for a loss, the games at a sick mark-up, and capture market share. They're selling machines for a loss, losing market share, and they don't have a single "must have" title. The PS3 may turn out to be the best machine nobody bought.
          • staticneuron, on 10/29/2007, -1/+4A must have is all based on personal opinion. You may think a title is a must have and others may not. All I know is that I now own more PS3 titles than 360 titles. I expected that. Even if they interest you or not games like resistance, motorstorm, warhawk, heavenly sword, lair (yeah I said it), ratchet and clank, eye of judgement and others give a compelling reason to own a the PS3. I pity the people who claim to purchase a system for one game only. And I thought I had no life.
        • michael1406, on 10/29/2007, -5/+2Dysarthia, there's not that many PS3 games yet...because the best games are obviously yet to come. It's release was much later than the 360s, which is what you must be fuelling your 'no must have game' comment on. The PS3 has a multitude of titles coming which will jack up sales. Everyone looks at the here-and-now, but consoles have a ~7 year life cycle. Why is it that no one sees this?
          Oh, and Sony isn't losing money, it's profits are up despite the PS3 selling at a loss.
    • KrazyA1pha, on 10/29/2007, -3/+11If Microsoft wants Sony to lose enough money to leave the business, they need to do nothing more than buy ***** of PS3s.
    • ubergeek09, on 10/29/2007, -9/+9The PS3 has horrible games, and it just isn't selling.. I don't think that's what Sony was going for.
      • thatsmyaibo, on 10/29/2007, -6/+3From the guy with the Half Life icon. Just because you are into shooters doesn't mean everyone is.
        • shrimp199, on 10/30/2007, -6/+2you are a ***** idiot
          Half life and half life mods own..
      • bCabulon, on 10/29/2007, -3/+5A larger percentage of PS3 games score decently (70 or better) on metacritic than 360 games do.
    • daridave, on 10/29/2007, -0/+2Not really. They dropped the price, so higher losses equals identical sales, they just get a bigger hit now... and it would be what they wanted if they could get money back out of games, but from what I've seen so far, that's not really happening...
  • kenvsryu, on 10/29/2007, -9/+62For the last quarter of FY2006 - Consequently, the Entertainment and Devices Division (EDD), which is home to the Xbox business, posted an operating loss of $1.2 billion for the fourth quarter and nearly $1.9 billion for the full year. http://biz.gamedaily.com/industry/feature/?id=1686 ...
    • yoinkdigg, on 10/29/2007, -21/+9Righto, because a gaming division and a entertainment division are the same thing. Those losses include the Zune and all of Microsofts other endeavors. These numbers for sony reflect the money they made from the PS2... which shows they lost those profits and THEN some.
      • Nossie, on 10/29/2007, -0/+8a billion of that is for the 360 recalls I think?
      • zeromous, on 10/29/2007, -1/+2That is correct, so let's extrapolate for a moment.... without recalls, Microsoft lost 600 million on a console & Zune (which I don't think is a big loss-leader for them)...so pretty much that 600 million is all Xbox and only slightly less than what they've lost yearly since entering the market.
        Meanwhile Sony lost 1 billion on PSP, PS2 and PS3 for the first time in 13 years.

        PANIC PANIC OH NOES OH NOES!!!11!!

        Sony is hurting but these constant threads are self-fulfilling prophesy at worst and at best, alarmist crap.
  • doshindude, on 10/29/2007, -22/+8I think "lol" and "I told you so" are the only words to describe that.
  • bigbadgoat, on 10/29/2007, -20/+18How many more billion does it have to lose before its as unprofitable as the xbox franchise.
    Not sure of the numbers , maybe you guys can fill them in.

    PS loss = (loss of PS3) - (HUGE profit of PS1) - (HUGE profit of PS2) + (loss of xbox) + (loss of xbox 360)

    Last time I checked, wasnt the xbox division still 6 billion in debt? I'd say Sony has to lose/ Microsoft has to gain about another 40 billion before they're doing as poorly as microsoft at making and selling game consoles.
    • Shanobi, on 10/29/2007, -10/+0Huge profit off of PS1 and PS2???

      This is news to me, since they barely eaked "profits" on either system, and neither profit ever overcame the billions and billiions in losses.
      • bigbadgoat, on 10/29/2007, -1/+4I'm sorry, but if you're not making a hefty profit on each console after selling well over a hundred miillion (and counting) or each, something is wrong. They're makign a huge profit on each ps2 sold, and have for quite some time, same thing with the ps1. Sony has made hundreds of millions, probably billions/year most of the years since they released the ps1, with the exception being the launch year for each.
    • DrThunder, on 10/31/2007, -5/+9It is sad that you point out a fact and the Xbots digg you down for it. Business wise the Xbox has been a huge failure. With all the hardware issues, the initial losses and the losses on the original Xbox. Microsoft would be lucky to be in the black in the middle of the life cycle of the next Xbox.
  • DarkSamus, on 10/29/2007, -24/+59the game is far from over so this is nothing
    • wilhel1812, on 10/29/2007, -7/+11true, we'll just have to wait for the big, good games like gran turismo.
      • duccodude, on 10/29/2007, -9/+3In the mean time, lets all come over to my house and play Forza on my 360.
        • dasdef, on 10/29/2007, -1/+4now why would we do that when guitar hero just came out?!
      • staticneuron, on 10/29/2007, -3/+5I hate to break it to you but other than the photoshop car painting aspect of the game..... forza 2 sucks. I tricked out my car and got very tired of the game.
        • Robbothehood, on 10/29/2007, -0/+0Forza 2 is rated slightly higher than GT4 on both Metacritic.com and Gameranings.com. You can submit your reviews if you like, and see if you can tip the scale.
    • shrimp199, on 10/29/2007, -4/+6said the sony fanboy to his plummeting market shares
    • Robbothehood, on 10/29/2007, -0/+0It isn't nothing, but the PS3 and Wii are still less than a year old. This stage of the plan didn't necessarily require unbridled success, so in the grand scheme of things, it may not bear heavily on the final outcome (when the PS3 is replaced).
  • Adonai, on 10/29/2007, -7/+90With the exception of the Nintendo Wii, basically every console sold for the first half of it's life comes at a loss. The original Xbox, if I remember correctly, NEVER sold for profit (the system itself). Sony has a GIANT financial loss in each platform sold, upwards of $300 depending on estimates, and that was before price drops. Ironically, however, the Xbox 360 extended warranty has cost Microsoft more in 1 fell swoop than Sony has lost total, so it's not as though Sony will just "give up" because they are 1 billion in debt. If you get enough systems out there - or, in their cases, Blu-Ray players as well - you can end up making it all back on software and movie sales.

    It's unlikely, given even the PS3's slow pick-up rates, that Sony will go out of the gaming business anytime soon. Technically speaking, if the PS3 were to sell out constantly (and not sell significantly more first party games, so obviously this fact is a little biased towards the hypothetical) then Sony would be even more in debt than they are now... and people would instead be impressed at being the "console leader". Go figure.
    • dukeeeey, on 10/29/2007, -2/+16with modern consoles its quite common to sell the hardware below cost, ie the hardware is subsidized. The money is made back on the games.
    • BlueSkyfish, on 10/29/2007, -3/+14Actually, most Game companies (Nintendo, Sega, Atari, etc) sold their systems at a profit. Sony was the first to sell at a loss in order to get their system on the market quicker. They were able to do this because they had other divisions of the company making a profit. Microsoft followed suit because they have their software division to back them up.
    • vertinox, on 10/31/2007, -3/+17Game Cube sold at a profit.
      • sampson123, on 10/29/2007, -8/+1Not at launch.
        • spoonard, on 10/31/2007, -2/+13Yes it did. Nintendo has NEVER sold at a loss except for the VirtualBoy.
    • DrThunder, on 10/29/2007, -3/+7It is funny how every Xbot acts as if Microsoft has endless money and can take all the losses but Sony is strapped for cash and is going to have to fold because the losses. Well Microsoft right now is only worth a few billion more then Sony, both in the middle 100 billions, so financially they are pretty much in the same boat.
      • ImTheChaz, on 10/29/2007, -0/+3I would be interested to know how you possibly came to the conclusion that Microsoft is only "worth a few billion more then Sony".
    • Zuggy, on 10/31/2007, -2/+2The reasoning that the more in debt Sony is the more consoles they are selling is flawed. Sure every console is sold at a loss, but there is a much greater loss for every console made that isn't sold. Example:
      $1000 to make and bring to market and they sell it for $500, they lose $500 on each console.
      If they spend $1000 to make one and it doesn't sell then it's just a $1000 loss.
      • apoc06, on 10/31/2007, -0/+3thats not how manufacturing works.

        if they dont have enough orders from retailers, sony wont make them. if the retailers are sitting in their warehouses looking at tons of unsold ps3s, they wont place an additional order for more. if the retailers place orders for x amount of systems, the loss you imagine is paid for at that exact moment by the retailer. thats why sony used to only concern themselves with "shipped" units. sony gets paid WELL before a ps3 actually gets purchased by a consumer.
  • rmeddy, on 10/29/2007, -15/+9I think MGS4 maybe their Hail Mary play.
    • Christbait, on 10/29/2007, -14/+5MGS4 looks so silly! Thanks Sony for making Kojima butcher a vintage games series.

      from now on it will only sell on the premise laid by crap like the Halo series: Hype.
    • DontCountToday, on 11/02/2007, -9/+12MGS and Final Fantasy are going to rule the gaming world. At least my gaming world
      • TotalHalibut, on 11/02/2007, -6/+5Keep me out of your generic world please.
        • thatsmyaibo, on 11/02/2007, -3/+5"Dur...me like to shoot gun. Bang bang. No room for intelligent gaming"
    • Brian48216, on 10/30/2007, -0/+8I was gonna say Gran Turismo 5
    • triplehelix, on 10/30/2007, -0/+3or little big planet.
    • duccodude, on 10/29/2007, -2/+4or folding @ home.
  • IDIGTHEDIGG, on 10/29/2007, -39/+6ahhaha

    Xbox 360>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>PS3
  • robjohnston, on 10/29/2007, -2/+35there is a fair difference between 1 billion and 1.1 billion, believe it or not.
    • uziko, on 10/29/2007, -17/+4when they have already lost a billion, 100 million is not a lot
      • JammoBlammo, on 10/30/2007, -0/+19No matter how many billions you have, $100 million is definitely a lot. It takes a lot of time and work to amass that kind of money.
        • uziko, on 10/29/2007, -5/+1oh my god dude that is the point I was making, when you have the capability to lose or make billions, it DOESN'T TAKE A LOT OF TIME AND WORK TO AMASS THAT KIND OF MONEY, IN FACT IT'S QUIT EASY FOR A LARGE CORPORATION TO DO THAT, seriously take a second look at your comment because it makes absolutely NO sense.
        • dobbinmon, on 10/30/2007, -0/+4@uziko: CAPSLOCK - UNLEASH THE FURY
  • AmusedToDeath, on 10/31/2007, -14/+83Why is everybody so surprised that a $600 (debut price) game console didn't sell well? Some of us actually have to use our paychecks for things like food, shelter and clothing. I know the live-in-mom's-basement types can just save a couple of months worth of paychecks from their pizza delivery job and buy one, but for most people, $600 is a lot of money for such a frivolous item.
    • santasing, on 10/29/2007, -4/+20I wouldn't say it didn't sell well. Its already solde 5.6 million and that's sales for a console which does not have heave hitting games yet.
      • Robbothehood, on 11/05/2007, -1/+0Nintendo and Sony are fortunate enough to have the brand power and respect to drive early sales.
    • MaidenFan2358, on 10/31/2007, -5/+3You should have worked overtime like the man said.
      • bCabulon, on 10/31/2007, -2/+2That is how I got my PS3. I worked lots of overtime. Even then it felt decadent spending $600 on console. I payed all my bills a month ahead before I would let myself buy one.
  • alefox, on 10/29/2007, -11/+2w00t!!!
  • soot, on 10/30/2007, -9/+34http://i23.tinypic.com/2aamxy0.jpg
  • neeyo, on 10/30/2007, -14/+34Dude, consoles aren't profitable. They make their money on the game licenses. When you think about it, the only console that _could_ be profitable is the Wii because it's essentially a rehashed gamecube that didn't take years and years with millions of dollars to develop. But the fact that a console maker lost money on its consoles is absolutely no surprise.
    • mike17032, on 10/29/2007, -8/+13But when your console is far behind, and still selling in 3rd place with a much higher pricepoint than the other two, you have some problems.
    • vertinox, on 10/29/2007, -6/+16Then why did the Gamecube, Wii, and DS all turn profit from day one?
      I'm not a Nintendo fan, but eating a profit loss to sell games will eventually kill you (3DO and CD-i rest in peace)
      • imsteve22, on 10/29/2007, -6/+3nintendo never strives to make the best systems. they always try for a system that is easy to develop for, and so far its worked great. x-box and ps3 are going for great graphics, which costs a lot to make. so they HAVE to rely on game sales to get in the green
        • triplehelix, on 10/29/2007, -0/+8no, not so far. only the last attempts with the DS and wii were home runs.
        • MrSteamTank, on 10/29/2007, -0/+10Actually the n64 was a graphical powerhouse when it came out. It had triple the power of the ps1. Honestly, if the n64 used cd's rather than super-expensive cartridges I bet we'd all still be playing Nintendo consoles.
        • Optimaximal, on 10/29/2007, -1/+5No, it had DOUBLE the power of the PS1. Surprisingly, the N64 was 64-bit, next to the PS1's 32.
        • cgruber, on 10/29/2007, -3/+232 bit vs 64 bit doesn't mean double the processing power.. If anything it has more to do with the size of numbers and the memory it can address.
        • Hobofuzz, on 10/29/2007, -2/+2And the N64 had a 32-bit data bus, so 64-bit code was impractical.
        • Shaflugi, on 10/30/2007, -0/+5Nintendo never strives to make the best systems? What about "Playing with Power" and all that *****? The Gamecube was actually quite a bit more powerful than the PS2, believe it or not.
    • databoy, on 10/29/2007, -0/+0You do not known anything about business and manufacturing. The losses are accounting losses based on projected sales. The actual manufacturing costs of an electronic device are 10% of the retail price.
  • Christbait, on 10/29/2007, -12/+4Console losing money, games being held back/cancelled, developers bashing it's power left, right and center. Not a good few weeks for our beloved PS3s, huh.
  • Andres84, on 10/29/2007, -7/+1At first sight I thought the guy on the pic was Willy Tanner
  • AuburnTigers, on 10/29/2007, -10/+4ugh, I hope this news doesn't translate into less and less exclusive content for Playstation. That's really what's killing the PS3, lack of exclusive content. If Sony wasn't retarded and could have secured exclusivity for GTA IV, things might be a bit different.
  • LawSchoolBound, on 10/29/2007, -2/+17Both the 360 and PS3 sell for a loss, the difference is the 360 has a lot of games that are selling very well, from which they can recuperate some of their losses, not to mention they also make money off of xbox live and their video downloads.
    • staticneuron, on 10/29/2007, -1/+2Yes, lots of games selling well after a year. This really means nothing. I am surprised at this number. When the PS2 first launch sony took losses on that one as well. If I am not mistaken they lost the same amount of money back then as they did now. Makes me wonder what type of miracle plays they are doing if they are supposedley losing more on the PS3.
  • TechCF, on 10/30/2007, -3/+19If the PS3 is going to sell for as long as the PS2 it will still make money
    • MWeather, on 10/29/2007, -2/+9It'll certainly outlast the 360. I can't see DVD working well for games 5 or 6 years from now. Not that Microsoft will be selling them that long. We'll be playing Xbox 720s by then. And PS3s.
      • spoonard, on 10/29/2007, -1/+6Sony says the PS3 will be good for 10 years. In 10 years Microsoft AND Nintendo will be 2 generations ahead of Sony. Microsoft and Nintendo agree on one thing. The average lifespan of a console is only 4-5 years. Any longer than that and the platform become no longer economically or technologically viable. In 10 years the 360 AND the PS3 will be so far behind what would be current graphics technologies they would be laughable.
        • bCabulon, on 10/29/2007, -1/+2I played PS1 games 10 years in. I still buy PS2 games. I'm still playing gamecube too. I like the PS model of 10 years with system overlap. Xbox and Gamecube aren't going to have any more good games come out, but the PS2 will.
        • enforcerpsu, on 10/29/2007, -0/+1That was never their model. Never. Ever. It just has a 10 year span because IT HAD THE GAMES TO SUPPORT IT FOR TEN YEARS. Now Sony is spewing BS so it looks like it all makes sense. THey don't even want you to buy the PS2 anymore.
        • apoc06, on 10/29/2007, -0/+1if MS and nintendo were not losing so badly to sony last generation, they would have been perfectly content to wait a while before releasing their successor consoles.

          look at how long nintendo held onto the NES until the genesis took its marketshare. look at how long nintendo held onto the original gameboy. look at how long nintendo held onto the gameboy advance. in fact, if the psp was never rumored to be released, nintendo would never have created the ds. competition is good.
  • rusty123jimi, on 10/29/2007, -6/+8Both consoles are lossing money. 360 happens to have a lot of stong games at the moment that are helping them with their losses. Sony may lossing a lot on every console sale, but that what they want in order to sell more consoles, which equals more blu-ray sales, more game sales, and for better AAA games to be made for the console. Either way, both companies are lossing a lot of money, and with the 60's large failure rate, I wouldn't be suprised if they've lost more then this in repairs a lone.
    • Cwo655321, on 10/29/2007, -2/+3you are a bit losser!
    • MaTT2011, on 10/29/2007, -1/+1Both?

      Theres more than 2, and of the three only one actually makes money for their creators and can actually be considered "next-gen" if your definition of gaming is based on gameplay and how/what kind of gameplay a console should be able to facilitate. Heres a hint; it begins with a W.

      So don't act like x360 and ps3 are the only consoles worth considering here......rather they are the only two consoles of the three that are almost IDENTICAL when it comes to delivering GAMEPLAY....which is kind of the whole point here.
  • Barnolde, on 10/29/2007, -11/+18The topic is rife for PS3 haters to come and bash it, but PS3's got a long way to go. Just 3 billion+ more to lose to catch up to Xbox!
    http://www.forbes.com/home/technology/2005/09/12/m ...
    • DarkDx, on 10/29/2007, -2/+10a 2005 article...
      • shinythingy, on 10/29/2007, -6/+3so about $6 billion now
      • ChildeRoland420, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1Maybe, but the XBox has had 2 profitable quaters since the system launched in 2002. I'm sure that Sony had quite a few more with the PS2.
  • Misinformant, on 10/29/2007, -23/+10Blu-Ray doomed the PS3

    People don't buy game consoles to watch movies. They buy them to play games.
    • vertinox, on 10/29/2007, -4/+16The PS2 and Xbox was the first DVD players many people owned.
    • DarkDx, on 10/29/2007, -4/+13The fact that the ps3 has a bluray drive is not stopping you from playing games in it.
      The xbox 360 has dvd player suuport, hell, even media center capabilities, and you don't blame it. ***** YOU TROLL.
      • Cwo655321, on 10/29/2007, -0/+6 but the price wasn't jacked up due to the extender, and the dvd capabilities.
      • Optimaximal, on 10/30/2007, -2/+5no, the lack of decent titles (and too many giant enemy crabs) are stopping you from playing games in it.
  • karolgajda, on 10/29/2007, -29/+11SONY SUCKS

    :)
    • akkibaba, on 10/29/2007, -4/+12A very nice and insightful addition to our discourse.

      Seriously, though, go back to commenting on YouTube where you belong.
  • PopularNerd123, on 10/29/2007, -14/+6I dont care what you Xbox fans say, you can love the Xbox all you want, ive been playing playstation (1) since i was a kid and the controller buttons are burned into my mind. When i pick up and xbox controller, i cant remember which buttons to press and overall, it f*cks up my gameplay.
    • JammoBlammo, on 10/29/2007, -6/+0I had the same impression of the original XBOX being a hardcore PSone and PS2 fan, but have you played the XBOX 360? It kills!
    • Syraxis, on 10/29/2007, -4/+5I don't know why people force themselves to be "loyal" to only one console, they miss out on so many great games.
      • JammoBlammo, on 10/29/2007, -4/+0Because we're not rich, and have to make intelligent purchases.
    • MWeather, on 10/29/2007, -4/+4Could you imagine if Microsoft requires you to learn a new keyboard layout with each new version of Windows? I'm sure those digging you down would be just fine with that.
    • ronaldmonster, on 10/29/2007, -1/+4Your rant makes no ***** sense.
    • heinousjay, on 10/29/2007, -0/+5I've been playing games since the Atari 2600, and I still can't remember which button is which on Sony's controllers. No other system has me looking down to figure out which stupid shape (or letter! yay! mix things up!) is where.
  • tuxidomasx, on 10/29/2007, -0/+17i always buy the system for the game(s). So until god of war 3 and FF13 come out, no PS3 for me.
    • spoonard, on 10/30/2007, -16/+10God of War 3 and FFXIII will not be exclusives.
      • bigbadgoat, on 10/29/2007, -3/+13yeah, a Sony made game wont be an exclusive, and people digg you up, what the *****?
      • evozero, on 10/29/2007, -2/+8sony owns the rights to god of war. what makes you think it's going elsewhere?
    • teqonix, on 10/29/2007, -1/+3No MGS4 love? =(
      • heinousjay, on 10/30/2007, -3/+4I don't get what's so good about it. I mean, mild fun is to be had, sure, but it's kinda generic, really. I think people just buy into the hype.
  • mikemil828, on 10/29/2007, -4/+3Only that much? One has to wonder the billions Sony made off of the PS2 to counter the losses they are currently taking with the ps3
    • Optimaximal, on 10/29/2007, -0/+4Well, they're still selling them and the technology in them is so damn archaic these days I can't believe it costs much at all.
    • Robbothehood, on 10/30/2007, -0/+0They listed it as the games division, so I think the PS3 losses are 1.1 billion larger than the gains from the PS2.
  • JapaneseEconomy, on 10/29/2007, -3/+5I sure hope sony can turn things around and improve on its massive losses. If they continue to record $1 billion semi-annual losses we'll probably see in the next 2.5 years whether the ps3 is killed prematurely. It would suck for all gamers, even xbox360 fans if Sony pulls out. Competition is good for the consumer.
    • Optimaximal, on 10/29/2007, -3/+2Well, there's still Nintendo!

      *laughs*
    • Robbothehood, on 10/30/2007, -0/+0I was going to say the industry did well with a two system model, but who's to say the leader won't strong arm every developer to choke the competitor? It might be difficult if the 360 or PS3 are the only system against the Wii, considering the differences in hardware.
  • ghostENVY, on 10/29/2007, -6/+2Sony has to Stop acting Like smart Kids and Put actual Security Into their Firmware Juts Look at The PSP its been dommed ever since it was hacked and soon enough the PS3 will go down.
    • Pikachelsea, on 10/31/2007, -0/+5Do you Get Off on random Capitalization and Laughable splleing? just Wondering.
    • shinythingy, on 10/29/2007, -0/+2Yep homebrew has been nothing but bad news for the PSP. Moron
  • OMGLINUXWOAH, on 10/29/2007, -6/+4And yet a few of those things can take the place of a super computer. Just rip of the Wii controller and hire a few in house teams to make some demos using it. Problem solved.
  • TonyTheTerrible, on 10/29/2007, -2/+3they wanted to sell a multi-use product that could help boost the sales of their blu-ray discs. i think its a great idea, aside from the fact that new technology is expensive and for gamers unwanted if it doesnt alter gameplay AND comes with a hefty price. Microsoft lost big $$$ with their xbox because of the low price point they had to use, but they made a name for themselves in the gaming industry and eventually made their money back in games. sony lost big $$$ because of the PS3 low price point because of poor planning and no games. most of the hot games coming out are multi-platform.
    • spoonard, on 10/29/2007, -2/+2Blu-Ray isn't going to win. More people in the world have HD DVD players than have PS3's. The PS3 owners are the 90% majority who buy Blu-Ray movies.
      • TonyTheTerrible, on 10/29/2007, -0/+2i dont know whos winning right now but yeah i get your point.
  • neocr0n, on 10/29/2007, -2/+16The PS3 isn't even a year old of course they are posting a loss, do you realise what it costs to develope a console?
    • spoonard, on 10/29/2007, -3/+11The dev costs for the PS3 are astronomical compared to the Xbox 360 and Wii. THAT is why Dev's are pretty much ignoring the PS3.
      • bCabulon, on 10/29/2007, -0/+3Neocr0n said "develope a console" not 'develope for a console'.
  • 3leggedHorse, on 10/29/2007, -5/+2 Hardware install base that is what Sony wants then come the film and game sales.
    All games machines sell at a loss to start with. Well most cutting edge machines do. ***** knows about the WII but I was using my PS3 motion controller about 2 hours ago.
  • Grimulus, on 10/29/2007, -9/+8I've got a feeling the PS3 will have a big boost in 2008. I think even Sony expected a big loss during the first year. Developers just weren't ready and/or gave up on making games for them. I think once PS3 games aren't such a task to make they will start coming around.

    I also think the Wii will eventually lose it's novelty as well. Gamers will probably turn back to something more traditional that has better graphics. I dunno, just a thought. We'll see. For the record, I'm not doubting the Wii's coolness, just saying that the initial shock is probably getting close to being over.
    • Pikachelsea, on 10/31/2007, -2/+7"I also think the Wii will eventually lose it's novelty as well."

      Wii detractors have been saying this since before the console was even released and yet sales are not slowing down at all. And FYI, the Wii does have traditional games for gamers, and not that the Wii's graphics are terrible by any definition but graphics are hardly the decisive factor in a console war anyway (see: Game Boy vs. Game Gear, PS2 vs. Xbox, etc).
    • 7717, on 11/03/2007, -2/+4I'm glad your feelings are based on absolutely nothing.
      • Grimulus, on 11/03/2007, -1/+1To quote myself, "I dunno, just a thought."

        To say that someone's feeling are based on nothing without knowledge of the person's experiences is hard to do. Also, you may want to express your own feelings to escape the irony that was your post. :)
    • shinythingy, on 11/03/2007, -4/+1They knew they were going to have a big loss
  • ZenMojo, on 10/30/2007, -11/+3http://digg.com/gaming_news/PS3_Outsells_Xbox_360_ ...

    Install base. 4,000,000 blu-ray players sold.
  • rowlodge, on 10/29/2007, -0/+8no wonder they wont lower the price of the ps2.
  • HenvY, on 10/30/2007, -4/+10Don't worry, that's only 10,000 Euros!
  • musntSurfatWork, on 10/30/2007, -8/+1you know, we could have saved this heartbreaking story from Sony, and millions of other rants from ever appearing on Diggs front page, if there only had been a new Final Fantasy Game ready at launch of the PS3...

    then all we would see besides wow just wow, would be, PS3: BEST. PURCHASE. EVER.
  • shogun042, on 10/30/2007, -4/+26uhh let's just forget Microsoft's $1.1 billion bill for xbox 360 repairs, beating out all losses in the PS division.
    • jscrilla, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1Yah, because that hasn't been said numerous times already. And what does that have to do with the Sony losses? I don't get fanboys crying over whether their company makes money or not. I don't get any of it. You don't either.
  • outcast81, on 10/30/2007, -5/+5I'm beginning to think that the folks at Sony care neither about the losses in the gaming division nor about the 3rd place in the console war. What they really care about is their two semi-proprietary technologies (Cell and Blu-ray) getting a foothold in the market.

    The plan seems to be working: Blu-ray is currently ahead of HD-DVD and a ton of programmers are getting familiar with the difficult Cell processor, from both the gaming and the supercomputing fields. Both of these achievements are possible because of the debt-incurring PS3.

    Let's say that in a few years, Blu-ray is the winner of the format war and the Cell processor is the de-facto processor for scientific and multimedia computing. Considering how much Sony will be making off hardware & software sales, licensing, services and support, will you think of these one or two billion dollars as a loss or as a killer investment?
    • Hazardc, on 10/30/2007, -0/+2absolutely true.. sony cares more about blu-ray succeeding right now than winning the console war. if they can win the HD war, the video game situation will work itself out.

      ii personally own a 360/wii combo, and dont plan on ever buying a ps3.. just my opinion...
  • 7717, on 10/30/2007, -13/+6RON PAUL!
  • xTRUMANx, on 10/30/2007, -8/+6Digg, I beg of you, stop this fanboy nonsense. A similar article was submitted a few days back (no idea by whom, didn't bother digging it) that gave the same information but also showed the Sony isn't doing too bad at all due to the PS1 and PS2 sales and the rest of its sales of its corporation. In fact, this figure is such a small portion of the amount of money flowing through Sony's game division that Sony isn't in that much trouble at all (like the final days of yesteryear's gaming companies).

    Digg needs a bury button for fanboyism. In fact, I think I'll send that in as a suggestion.
    • Eldavidos, on 10/30/2007, -1/+3That's the smartest thing I've heard on Digg for a long time
  • bjornski, on 10/30/2007, -12/+9Blu-Ray vs HD-DVD is this generations version of the Beta vs VHS wars.

    A little better quality, and higher costs, but locking you into the overpriced, over-protected format will fail.

    Suck it, Sony.
    • YojimboJango, on 10/29/2007, -0/+1I am torn on the format war side. Blue ray is the technically superior format. However HD-DVD will have lower costs for production and royalties. 10 years from now will we be kicking ourself for the lack of room for all our data, or the fact that a spindle of 50 discs will still cost $60-$70 bucks. We have to choose price or performance here, and Sony is really throwing it's money at us picking price.
  • smacksaw, on 10/30/2007, -7/+1Nice pipe, jackass.

    You are ***** COOL.
  • Setter, on 10/29/2007, -3/+22Now I don't feel as bad... I only lost $600.
  • ubergeek09, on 10/30/2007, -3/+10Not surprising, Sony has made stupid decision after stupid decision for a while now. The PS3 was screwed before it ever came out.
  • BabyWookie, on 10/30/2007, -10/+12The PS3 is an inferior, dying console. Simple facts. Check this out:

    http://biz.gamedaily.com/industry/feature/?id=1793 ...
    • santasing, on 10/30/2007, -2/+15.6 million people tend to disagree.
  • databoy, on 10/29/2007, -2/+2The trouble with all the rants about game consoles and losses is that the people posting them have no idea on the costs involved. Most writers cost the item on buying individual components from a retail store. Manufacturing is costed at millions of units in mass production. The costing structure is different. The general formula is that the finished product sold retail costs 10% of the retail sale price to manufacture. The general cost structure is: 10% production line; 10% R&D; 30% retail margin; 10% Government tax; 10% company profit; 30% warehousing. Warehousing includes all transport and handling costs from the production line to the retailer including warranty and people services.

    In the designed life of the console the price will drop due to volume production and reduction in distribution costs. Warehousing is the biggest overhead in any manufacturing company; if the steps from the production line to the retailer are reduced so are the retail costs.

    As it has been stated if you sell the console at cost, you inflate the price of the games to compensate. Remove the 10% profit margin and write off the 10% development costs on tax, that means a reduction of 20% of the console reduction.

    Don't believe the rants from technical reviews and blogs; do you own research. Cost out the components in your computer at the now prices and three years ago for an equivalent computer using an online computer retailer catalogue. That will give you some idea of the cost reduction over time. Apply the same logic to a gaming console and have a look at the price reductions over the same period. You will see a similarity in price drop.

    The real money is not made selling computers or gaming consoles. The money is in the short term money market. You pay cash for the item. The retailer pays on 30 days invoice. The distribution and manufacturing operations operate between 90 to 180 days credit. The profit is in investing the money before paying the credit invoice. When you are operating with millions of dollars there is pure profit in the short term money market.
  • HumanRecall, on 10/29/2007, -5/+1How can anyone believe the the guy who wrote the article he was the Father on ALF http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Wright

    hahaha :P...but funny he looks like him .......Ps3 deserves everything they get cause they thought they were untouchable
  • Dan11023, on 10/30/2007, -3/+5I can care less. They are still gonna make the games I want so who cares?
    • diggdowner, on 10/30/2007, -0/+2You CAN care less?

      So you DO care about this issue?
  • fakesinatra, on 10/29/2007, -0/+1Nevertheless at this point in time I'm wishing I had not bought a Wii.

    I want a PS3. The games lineup looks promising, the downloadable content is starting to look like it could rival XBLA in a year or so and the BluRay is just a nice bonus.

    I just can't afford one right now.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 69 of 69 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.