Sign on Options
Theme:
To Dark

Report: Sony to post first loss since '95

Japan's Nikkei business news says beleaguered electronics giant will end fiscal year with $1.1 billion operating deficit.

Dour economic tidings continue to pile up for PlayStation 3 purveyor Sony. Citing Japanese business news service Nikkei, Reuters reports today that the besieged Japanese electronics company is girding itself to post its first full-fiscal-year operating loss since 1995, and only the second since the company went public in 1958.

According to Nikkei's report, Sony's operating loss for its fiscal year ending March 31 is expected to settle at around ¥100 billion ($1.1 billion). The figure stands in marked contrast to the company's forecasted operating profit of ¥200 billion ($2.2 billion). Nikkei notes that Sony's losses may soar to as high as ¥200 billion ($2.2 billion), depending on the company's performance from now until the end of its fiscal year.

The clearest indication of Sony's turbulent economic situation came in December. At that time, the Japanese company announced that it would slash up to 16,000 jobs as well close about 10 percent of its manufacturing facilities to save approximately $1.1 billion by the end of its fiscal year. Sony also said that it planned to cut investment by as much as 30 percent in its core electronics operations by withdrawing from unprofitable and noncore businesses.

Last week, The Times of London reported that Sony would soon implement "sweeping" and "sacred-cow-slaying" changes in the lead-up to its third-quarter fiscal report, which is expected January 29. Citing "company sources," The Times said that Sony was likely to expand upon the previously announced staff reductions, though no specific divisions were named as targets. Sony later refuted this report, saying that it had no plans to enact any further cost-cutting measures this month.

As noted by Nikkei, Sony's previous full-year operating loss came during its fiscal year ended March 1995, when the company took a substantial one-time charge related to its film business. As such, the expected loss would be the first attributable to the company's mainstay electronics division.

544 Comments

  • covenan

    Posted Jan 22, 2009 1:06 am GMT

    who care if its loss,..as long as my PS3 playing fine and AAA game release keep going..i am fine

  • ravemonkey78

    Posted Jan 20, 2009 7:17 pm GMT

    A lot of us PS3 owners took a gamble with blu-ray over hd-dvd and it paid off (luckily) in spectacular fashion. I'm happy to pay a little bit extra to get rental blu-rays from somewhere like blockbuster or just to buy them outright (some stores already have a discounted section). Not to mention Sony soon to be offering it's video service that will work with the PSP & PS3 (remote play anyone?) as well as blu-ray disc that will contain a version which can be copied to PSP or memory stick. I've upgraded my 60gb to 320gb just to cope with all the music, videos and photos I have and intend to put on it and it's well over half full already.

    It's taken a while but we are slowly starting to see glimpses of what the PS3 can do regarding multimedia and the benefits of it's disc format. I'm not knocking the Wii (I own 1) or Xbox at all, because I'd happily have an Elite and it's superb selection games sat next to my PS3 and watch the 3 consoles growl at each other. It's just that I, like a lot of other people wanted something that's a bit more versatile, a bit more than just a games console and a bit more future proof.

    It won't take long before Sony can reduce the manufacturing cost of the PS3 and then we'll see a marked as well as more competitive price drop. This happens with all electronic goods after a given period of time.

  • retospectre

    Posted Jan 19, 2009 11:29 am GMT

    i hate 360 fanboys. they should die. and i have a 360 so shut up sony having trouble is bad news for loads of people. not just ps3 owners. stop being childish and go play viva pinata with your mum.

  • e1337prodigy

    Posted Jan 17, 2009 10:17 am GMT

    Not surprised.

  • rmoorevtps3

    Posted Jan 17, 2009 10:08 am GMT

    haha stonecold give me a break you don't have a ps3. The PS3 and 360 have sold the exact same amount since 2006 when the PS3 came out, so sales aren't garbage.

  • Stonecoldsam316

    Posted Jan 16, 2009 5:01 pm GMT

    @ darin025

    First off kid "L3ARn 2 TyP3". What I find funny about you kid is your calling others idiots yet you talk in that online "L33T talk" and can't even spell "you" correctly. Kind of contradicting yourself there aren't you?

    Second, I already mentioned I have a PS3. Personally I am happy with it. The PSN network is trash and a part of the reason that PS3's sales are garbage. Also yeah sure it is built for the future I won't disagree however... considering how soon console generations end nowadays by the time our "built for the future" PS3's capabilities are fully utilized and surpass the other two consoles, I'm sure there's going to be another xbox and another Nintendo system... That will be "built for the future" as well. lol.

    Lastly, Killzone is PS3's Halo. EVERY PS fan boy knows that. It's the only reason I brought it up in my last post. Good Game, kid.

  • TehUndeadHorror

    Posted Jan 15, 2009 7:21 pm GMT

    Damn, that sucks.

  • Taosaurus

    Posted Jan 15, 2009 12:45 pm GMT

    Lord, so many of you people are full of it. Mine's bigger than yours. I know you are but what am I? Will you just stop already? The world is insane enough...

  • Compilation

    Posted Jan 15, 2009 11:15 am GMT

    Everything is so fragmented for Sony at the moment. It's just all over the place, one minute this catastrophe is happening, the next, severe losses in finances. I've heard some good news in the past, albeit the majority of it fails to balance or even scrap negative comparisons.

  • Jose_Rizal

    Posted Jan 15, 2009 9:12 am GMT

    "If most developers would take a bit more time ( which most probably don't want too ) a lot of the games on PS3 would look as good or better as MGS4."
    ================
    Honestly, in my opinion, a lot of devs would be hard-pressed to invest more time, money and manpower unless PS3 significantly increases its console sales at least on par with Wii and X360. Do not also forget that some people bought PS3 primarily to watch Bluray movies and not a significant gamer. Not all PS3 console sales would be seen as game consumer potential by devs making it harder for them to justify the cost incurred. As opposed to Wii and X360 which nobody buys them for just for its DVD player significantly improves their chances that owners are all potential game consumers and hopefully buy their games.

  • HiroArka

    Posted Jan 15, 2009 4:56 am GMT

    Something I just thought about ... StoneCold said something about Graphics not being as good on PS3. Metal Gear Solid 4 is a good example of what can be done or done better with the PS3. If most developers would take a bit more time ( which most probably don't want too ) a lot of the games on PS3 would look as good or better as MGS4. There is a lot more that can be done with the PS3.

  • bennae66

    Posted Jan 15, 2009 1:53 am GMT

    oh but when i did watch the wrestling back in the day, i did hate stone cold. WHAT?

  • bennae66

    Posted Jan 15, 2009 1:53 am GMT

    stonecold: i dont like wwe wrestling anymore, i prefer ufc now that im older. however: i own all 3 systems and i think you have your head screwed on right. if i cheated thumbs ups and downs i would have given you 10 thumbs up but since i dont cheat i gave you only one.

  • doc18

    Posted Jan 15, 2009 12:19 am GMT

    sad to see that sony are posting losses, ur probably wondering why i actually give a crap about a company run by souless corporate executives, but it's mainly because it means the chances of the ps3 dropping it's price is becoming more and more unlikely. Sony already make a loss with every console they sell, and the losses they have made this year mean that they can't afford to lose any more money on the PS3. ..

  • XanderZane

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 11:08 pm GMT

    Well, I knew this was coming. lol!! People still thinking there will be a price cut for the PS3 in April are dreaming. See Sony, this is what happens when you give PSN for free. The fact that Sony's software and hardware sales were less this year, then last year really shows that the public aren't going to shell out $400 - $500 for a game console that has less quality games then it's competition. Even is Europe where the PS3 is suppose to be the sacred game console of all European gamers, the Wii and XBox 360 crushed it during the holidays in that country. That's even with big hitters like Resistance 2, LBP, Motorstorm: Pacific Rift, Valkyria Chronicles, MGS IV and several other PS3 exclusives on retail shelves. Sony decided to chose Blu-Ray as it main focus of the PS3 so they could win the media war with HD-DVD. So they did that, but they got completely smoked by the Wii and XBox 360 in the gaming genre. I think lesson has been learned in this case. If Sony loses another holiday, I don't think they'll catch the XBox 360 or Wii this generation. At the end of the year the 360 could easily be $150 for the Arcade. Consumers will buy that without even caring what games are on the console. It's going to take a lot for Sony to turn things around. I wish them luck.

  • Jose_Rizal

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 10:59 pm GMT

    Everybody got slammed this year including electronics sector. Sony could have made PS3 as their saviour in this slow times had been it made favorable to consumers. Sony has basically targeted 2 main buyers for their system. Movie buffs for its Bluray movie playback feature (my reason to snag a PS3) and gamers (I'm more partial to X360 in this area). Unfortunately, Bluray hasn't caught the wildfire that they hoped. A lot of people still swears that DVD is good enough ad does not warrant to pay for extra money to buy this new format movies. I don't buy movies but rent them. I see subtle difference in them enough to justify my expenses on a Bluray hardware and definitely think Bluray is better, but for most people, they look the same. If I were to buy my movies, honestly, I would stick with DVD because of their price difference. On the gamers side, the addition of Bluray hasn't really brought sufficient marked improvement in the actual gameplay to justify the need for it in most games. It looks like programmers are not so thrilled either. I feel like the new format was pushed in expense of us gamers being sacrificial lambs. Sony had an ace up in their sleeves, being the PS brand, and its sad they haven't made it to their full potential. After the huge PS2 fan base and brand name recognition, how could anybody mess it up? I feel bad for these people losing their jobs. Oh well we learn from our mistakes...

  • bob1387

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 10:50 pm GMT

    Sony should stop inflating their prices. That's part of their problem - That and the fact that they came out with a 160gb PS3 while the 80gb PS3 STILL wasn't selling as well as they had expected. Hopefully things will turn around for'em...

    And P.S. I enjoyed Stonecoldsam316's comment on here; I don't care if fan boys throw a fit and "thumbs down" me or not, what he said made a lot of sense. It's not his or anyone else's but Sony's own fault that they're doing so horribly. Bash me all you want, but I mean come on.

  • Sil3ntStRik3R

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 7:56 pm GMT

    I COULDNT AGREE W/ darin025 LAST PARAGRAPH POSTED ABOUT TEH PS3 BEING BUILT FOR THE FUTURE.......

  • zacattack214

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 7:44 pm GMT

    @hatieshorrer

    No, I wouldn't buy a Wii (I don't like Nintendo), and I'm unhappy with my 360 purchase, hence my reasonings for wanting a PS3. I am more interested in the exclusives coming for the PS3 and that are already out for it (ex. Heavenly Sword, Folklore, Echocrome, Heavy Rain, FFXIII Versus, Demon's Souls, and of course the new Team ICO project, ect.). I'm not your typical gamer--I have very specific tastes, I don't buy many games each year, and I'm not looking to spend much money. Anyway, I don't go with most of the fads, instead I go with what I like... but right now I am stuck with what I can afford. So far the 360's exclusives don't interest me at all and I couldn't care less about the online content. I'm not just making this random decision out of the blue, it's something I've wanted to do ever since I bought a 360.

  • hatieshorrer

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 6:42 pm GMT

    @zacattack214

    Its a rumer so far but if the PS3 has a bad year for exclusives and that same year is a good year for Wii (and/or) X360 exclusives will you then consider saling your newly bought PS3 for the other console?

  • zacattack214

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 5:45 pm GMT

    I'm going to ask a question because I actually heard an interesting rumor: Is the PS3's price supposedly going to drop in price by $100 sometime during April-August 2009? To be honest, that would be enough for me to sell my 360 (at a loss) and buy a PS3--which I would do because honestly, I like Sony's product better and they have an interesting list of exclusives coming their way soon. I'm not really a "fanboy" but I had a better experiance with the PS2 than I have with the either the Xbox original or the 360 (or the Gamecube but that doesn't really count).

  • Arkady_Husky

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 3:47 pm GMT

    They didn't put the Blu-ray player in it to keep the price up, they put the Blu-ray in in order to use the brand, their most popular, to win a format war.

    They won that war, but it looks increasingly like they sacrificed the Playstation brand in order to do it. Maybe that was the plan.

    I remember when the Dreamcast ruined Sega. That disappointment was mitigated by the fire-sale prices of hardware and games following its discontinuation. Fire-sale prices of hardware and games still won't be enough to persuade me to buy Sony's big black turd. For, you see, a turd is still a turd, no matter how cheap it is.

  • jtthegame316

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 3:40 pm GMT

    they derserve to lose money putting blu ray in it as an excuse to keep the price up disgraceful. sony i don't need blu ray and that is coming from someone with hd tvs in the house. besides all the ps 3 games i like are on the 360 which is why i own a 360 and not a ps 3 i can wait with metal gear 4 i am sure konami will come to there senses and make it multi-format. sonys games like killzone you can keep. ok good of war is good but i can live with out it when playing games like gears 2.

  • bluefishhead

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 3:35 pm GMT

    360/ps3 fanboys should just stfu, i own both and they are pretty much equal, true XBL is slightly better than PSN, but that doesn't make PSN bad, and each console has plenty of exclusives that make either console a valid choice, although if i had to choose 1 of the 2, i would go for 360 simply because more people i know own a 360 than a ps3, play halo3 with like 15 friends or resi 2 with like 2, simple as that

  • team_deathtoall

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 3:04 pm GMT

    brendanhunt1 u said:
    ps3 does bad in america because they dont have alot of hd tvs unlike europe which 55% own a hdtv.
    The UK only has 700,000 households with a HDTV and thats more than France, Germany and Italy combined. So where dose 55% figare come from. My source is http://www.ofcom.org.uk/media/features/icmrmain.

    I don't know why the PS3 is doing so well in EU as 360 has a starting price of £130 compared to £300 of the PS3.

  • swimbearuk

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 2:16 pm GMT

    So what...... Sony can afford to make a loss. It probably won't stop them investing in new technologies, a lot of which will probably never catch on. The only losers in this will be the staff being laid off. Maybe some of the more affordable brands will catch up a bit at this time, if they don't go bust.

  • Darrius117

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 1:58 pm GMT

    all is forgiven lol :]

  • Generalmojo

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 1:55 pm GMT

    @StonecoldSam
    u shud stick to not posting here, ur post was absolutly pathetic!
    u bashed the ps3 like no manz business!
    plz dont do it again

  • StarlightHunter

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 1:54 pm GMT

    deadkingda i like this guy. yeah sony, the psone and the ps2 were awsome but now what you hell have you made. you see nintendo and microsoft have got it right, they have made GAME CONSOLES. the ps3 could have done better if all this **** wasnt added to it in the first place. you have had your time and in the future make something that entirley for gaming.

  • darin025

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 1:51 pm GMT

    Lol not angry just pissed at people who come on here talkin bout crap they dnt know anything about. Haha I swear im a pretty happy person

  • Darrius117

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 1:44 pm GMT

    2 darino25 i think your a very angry person :]

  • deadkingdg

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 1:34 pm GMT

    "Sony give up on making consoles...."

    Yeah. Great idea. They made the 2 most successful consoles ever (The Wii is catching up, but it won't be the most successful console for a few more years) and their third one, even if it is doing poorly, is going to soon beat the GC in sale, and soon after that, the X-Box.

    Great thing for you that those two didn't give up after wasting money on a console.

    Also, Sony isn't just about PS3. It's also about a lot of things, such as electronics and movies. People aren't buying much HDTV in a recession...

  • Duck454545

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 1:30 pm GMT

    Ha ha darin025 you've just made yourself look a bit silly!!! Slightly hypocritical methinks!!!!

  • brendanhunt1

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 1:27 pm GMT

    ps3 does bad in america because they dont have alot of hd tvs unlike europe which 55% own a hdtv

  • brendanhunt1

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 1:25 pm GMT

    berzerker92
    You know nothing about gaming

  • darin025

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 1:24 pm GMT

    LOL I can plainly see why STONECOLDSAM316 had NEVER posted on here b4! After his HUGE rant and rave on basically how he hates the PS3 and loves his xbox haha. It just goes to show that sum people arent ment to EVER post! Thanks stonecoldnobrainsam316, u were a GREAT example!! As for ur idiot percentages on people who own an HDTV go to http://www.gamercenteronline.net/2008/04/24/18-percent-of-people-bought-a-hdtv-for-gaming/ AND that should put a cap on ur bottle of retardedness. Now moving on! U apparently have nvr used the PSN or u would find out its actually quite great! Sure its not totally up to par with xbox live BUT with each firmware update it gets closer and closer buddy, ha an mines all free. To say PSN is "complete trash" is outrageous. Now HD DVD vs Blueray... are u kidding? Is that evn a fair match? Considering HD DVD got slammed way back when, face it Blueray is the future and ur xbox doesnt have it. Now as for the PS3 being "sub-par" I think u might wanna find out wat that word means. Lets see; high failure rate, loud, big, controller hasnt changed (has less battery life than a PS3 controller), no bluetooth, no wifi, once agn no blueray, no Cell processor, limited on how many things that can connect to each system: PS3 u can connect 7 diff things ranging from controllers to ur PSP even your home computer or laptop ALL via wifi VS not jack crap with the xbox: wireless controllers and headsets, LOL and u call the PS3 "sub-par" lmao get a clue!!

    Yes Gamespot did campare them on their system wars barely beating the ps3 in most the aspect BUT they did take into count that the xbox is doing a lil better because its been out longer, and we all know that unless its a first party dev they wont use the PS3's real power b/c its to hard, tho that will be not issue as it becomes more mainstream. So im not worried spec for spec the PS3 will overcome... I should know, my dad was one of the main developers for the Cell processor. Cell is also the future so to call the PS3 "dying" hahaha is just retarded, ha speaking of dying might wanna go check ur xbox i think i see the RROD lol.

    Now about the exclusives, yea sony has lost alot but still has plenty, for u to say it has like 2-4 games going for it, is like me saying ur right... yea pretty stupid huh! Sony still has more exclusives than xbox WAY more than u mentioned. Now according to this site(and others) the PS3 beats the Xbox in the most "10 out of 10" hmmm the PS3 has more? Well like u said "numbers dont lie"! The wii is kewl but its not my thing... moving on.

    Are seriously going to compare Killzone 2 to Halo3 right now?? Hahaha it not evn out yet man, Halo 3 has been out over a year now OF COURSE ITS GONNA HAVE MORE FAN BASE DUH!!! nice job Sargent obvious, you've just been promoted to captain. But according to this site Killzone 2 is the best looking console game to date ever, and its not evn out yet.

    So have fun playing your already out-of-date "next-gen" console, while we play our PS3's which has great things going for it and plenty more in the future. Sure Xbox my have a lil bit of the upper hand but only for a short time more, my PS3 was built for the future, while your Xbox is falling to past.

  • bobthegoat2001

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 12:12 pm GMT

    Quote: "Plus theres some good games to come for the ps3"

    That's also what the PS3 fanboys like to say. True, the PS3 may get some good games in the future, but while they do the 360 is also going to be getting some good games too.

  • Stonecoldsam316

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 11:04 am GMT

    First off let me start by saying I never post, this is the first time I have ever posted here. I just have to comment on Darth_Doggy's ignorance. I also want to add I own all 3 consoles, the 360, PS3, and Wii.

    Short Version:
    Darth, The PS3 has the least to offer out of all 3 consoles.

    Long Version:
    Hey Darth you want to know why Sony bombed? Simply put, it has nothing but a Blu-Ray player and Bluetooth going for it and let me add that only about 20% of the U.S. owns a HD TV. So for a lot of people DVD is all they need. The PS3 also lacks innovation and is sub par in just about every single category with the exception of graphics.

    Gamespot has even done comparisons of the PS3 and 360 and found that the games on the 360 look sharper and more vibrant. I forgot the name of the article but they compare several games that are out on both consoles. But just for the sake of this conversation so I don't your "fan boi" ego to badly, I'll give Sony's system the better graphics... even though we have proof on this site they aren't as great as they claim to be.

    Online game play... we all know the xbox completely dominates this category. The Playstation network is complete trash. Always has been always will be. Xbox live is where it's at. Any gamer can tell you that, unless they are ignorant like Darth.

    Innovation goes to the Wii hands down. You know why the Wii sells so much? That's easy, it's unlike any other gaming system and the closest thing to virtual reality. I wouldn't be surprised if 2 or 3 generations from now someone comes up with something like virtual reality. If it happens you can thank the Wii for shifting video games in that direction. Sure the graphics aren't that great. But all you have to do is look at the last generation to see that graphics aren't everything. Remeber the Xbox and PS2? If we go by your standards Darth the first Xbox won the last console war, which we all know isn't the case.

    Lastly, people buy consoles for exclusives. Now let's see... Xbox has Halo, Gears of War, and XBL Arcade . The Wii has all it's unique titles that sell like hotcakes such as Wii fit, Zelda, and Mario. Then the PS3 has Final Fantasy... oh wait nope they lost that exclusive. Its also coming out on the 360. Hang on I'll think of another... Devil May Cry 4... oh sorry they lost that exclusive to. It also came out on the 360. Wait I got it! Grand Theft Auto... aw damn that's right, it also came out on the 360 with exclusive download content that the PS3 IS NOT getting... hmmm. Ok then the PS3 has Metal Gear and Gran Turismo thats about it. Kingdom Hearts 3 will be amazing when/if it ever comes out. Im not adding Resistance to this list because we all know that Killzone is the PS3's shooter but even that is nothing against Halo's huge fan base.

    So all it really comes down is what people consider funner and has more variety is what is going to sell. Numbers don't lie. Obviously the PS3 has like 2-4 games going for it and that's it. Just like you said in your closing line... "I buy the console I want because I want it." Well so does the rest of us and the world. So you keep having fun on your dying console. The rest of us will have fun on our prospering 360's and Wii's.

  • Andy9Beans

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 10:46 am GMT

    I too bought my PS3 second-hand, but I did it because I wanted the discontinued UK 60GB model with the PS2 emulation software. As I have commented before, Sony have done themselves no favours by deciding to remove this functionality. Instead of stimulating sales of the PS3, I reckon this actually set the market against them; a trend which could be reversed by releasing the emulator software as a PSN title and thus recoup the losses on the system without detracting from the PSP successes.

  • HiroArka

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 10:28 am GMT

    I bought my 40 Gig PS3 Used and Refurbished from Gamespot ( Got a Refurb 360 for a good price as well ). If you don't wanna pay such a high price for a PS3 buy it used if you want. Owning both consoles is realy nice because there are games on both systems I like to play a lot. I will admit that the 360s Online is great, but I have never had much problems with Sony's online. I do own an LCD HD tv that goes up to 1080P and Notice a big Difference with HDMI on PS3 as well as 360. I just wish Sony would try a lot harder.

  • Shivercraft

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 10:23 am GMT

    berzerker92,

    The only people that say PSN or XBL is better than the other are blatant fanboys. The services are identical except that the PSN doesn't offer an independent chat channel for people to talk with each other during different games. Ask people who routinely use both and you find out that they are basically the same.

    Hardware wise the PS3 is far superior to the 360, to claim otherwise is, again, fanboy reasoning. The 360 is much easier to program for though and is almost identical from a programming standpoint as the PC. Sony's Playstation brand isn't what has them in the red either. Their PS2 and PSP market have more than covered up the losses from the PS3 market, that loss coming from selling consoles cheaper for the price it actually costs to make them by the way. The home electronics side of Sony has been in trouble for a while as has the computer department. VAIO and Walkman and Cybershot and VEGA are all brands that are pricey and have cheaper and just as reliable competition now. Those are the things that are making the bulk of the red for Sony.

    Playstation and Blu-ray are pretty much the only thing making them any money right now.

  • berzerker92

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 10:09 am GMT

    wow sony fanboys are out today.

    Sony sells an inferior console for $400, I own both a Wii and a Xbox 360, and I was totally sony fanboy before that, but I can honestly say I will not buy a ps3 until the price is at least down to $250. I have no use for a blu-ray player (i dont own a high def tv) but i do know someone who has a nice 1080i tv and blu-ray disks on his ps3 are nothing special. Xbox live isnt a buggy mess unlike the ps3 online service (again my neighbor friend tries to play online and has nothing but problems).

    how on earth is the ps3 controller any more reliable then any other controller? if its anything like the ps2's was its garbage (every 3 months like clockwork i had to buy a new ps2 controller). Microsoft seems to have gotten their hardware issues fixed now, with the newest version. Peer-to-Peer as its known, is true. but at least the games on 360 online work. (with the exception of gears of war 2.

    As for the Wii they hit a huge unknown market share in the family/party/casual gamer. the Wii is popular because it is 1 cheap, 2 motion sensitive, 3 great for parites or smaller children, 4 any retard can use the dashboard set up with it. What is it with people needing their game system to everything. I'd rather they concentrate on building an actually good gaming machine instead.

    and as for the storage question, I havent seen any games that were must-haves for playstation 3 since its release despite its huge storage capacity, which was supposed to make the game longer, better, faster, and look prettier. I havent seen any games that werent better on 360, or had a better alternative on 360 or wii. and look at all the let downs even some of the really hyped ones like GTA 4 and uncharted werent really all that good looking back
    Haze
    Lair Socom: Confrontation are the main ones in my mind that pretty much sucked. sony needs to step up their game if they wanna get back into the black.

  • LarSam

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 9:57 am GMT

    Actually Darth_Doggy the average gamer is well aware that PS3 is the most advanced console out there. We just don't care about Blue-ray and all the other high-tech bull because we don't need it. Oh and don't even talk about PS3's online because it sucks. I mean until the Price drops to below 300 bucks I won't even consider getting a PS3. I'm happy with my Wii/360 combo and PS3 just isn't going to sell as much as the other two until it drops the price.

  • Darth_Doggy

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 9:45 am GMT

    I think this whole gaming generation has been quite unfair really because the lack of knowledge by most of the current generation gamers is killing companies like Sony, because they see the price of a PS3 more than a Xbox 360 and a Wii and they think Sony is just a rip off instead of asking why it is so much more. They don't consider at all that it has a Blu-Ray player that sells for hundereds of dollars on it's own, or that it's online play is free unlike the Xbox 360, or that it supports more dependable hardware such as the Dualshock 3 using bluetooth. And they seem to totally forget that the 360 has a long history of crashes and errors. Or on several games you are paying for on Xbox Live are actually per-to-per. PAYING FOR PER-TO-PER? Please what a rip off. And I think this point is proved solely by the huge Wii sales. The Wii doesn't even have a DVD player much less HD-DVD or the even more advanced Blu-Ray Disc. And it's controls are unstable and it's graphics that of an arcade game. It's absurd for anyone to say that one console is better based on it's sales figures now days because so many gamers these days are so extremely ignorant. But if you wish to truely believe this I guess the Wii is better than the Xbox 360 and PS3? Lol it's just stupid to even begin to think that way now days. The sad truth is Sony's and Microsoft's consoles are losing them money to a substantually inferior console sold by Nintendo just because of a smaller price tag for a piece of junk. I mean would you rather buy a car for 20,000.00 dollars or get a scooter for 5,000.00. OH I'LL TAKE THE SCOOTER IT'S 15,000.00. Not to mention it isn't even compareable to a car. And really people need to understand Blu-Ray, a DVD can hold 15 GBs a Blu-Ray can gold 50 GBs in the long run who do you think is going to have better games with more content? Xbox 360 with their DVD or PS3 with Blu-Ray? Exactly. The sad truth is the average gamer now days is so ignorat that just because a few more friends of their's has one console they will buy that one. Just because one of my friend's wants to jump off a mountain doesn't mean I'm going to go oh cool I gotta try it!!! Of course I'm going to buy the console I want not the console my friend wants.

  • Autolycus

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 9:28 am GMT

    why is it when one posts actual data against sony, all the fangirls start crying they are microsoft fan boys? What if we are just intelligent consumers and don't believe all teh bogus hype called MARKETING? False advertisement is a thing of the past. Nobody gets in trouble for that anymore otherwise XMEN would've been sued out of their mind for showing only CGI clips and calling it in game data during the comericials some 7 years ago.

  • olympicheropaul

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 9:20 am GMT

    Look, the bottom line is the systems are too similar for your average gammer to justify paying an extra $200 for the PS3. Period. You can argue all you want that the 360 is only winning because it came out first but the 360 outsold the PS3 this LAST holliday season. Which means it's STILL outselling the PS3 and has been doing so almost every month since launch. (PS3 sold well right after MGS4 came out.) The PS3 is a great machine, no doubt. But I own a 360, not a PS3. If the PS3 was $250.00 maybe I would own it instead.

  • spiritualchemy

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 8:50 am GMT

    It seems we keep forgetting a major difference in what it means for PS3 to be a good console, and for it to be a successful console. PS2 came out early, built a large game catalog, and was affordable. This "trifecta formula" was hugely successful. However, I get the impression that Sony failed to really understand the needs and wants of its core demographic. The sizable sale differential between PS2 and PS3 indicates that for all of the bells and whistles the PS3 has, it's not what the PS2 owners were asking for. Was Sony gunning for the PC crowd with its latest console???

    Reality is, PS3 is a good console. It's well-built, sleek in appearance, and offers numerous bonuses. Unfortunately, it's not a successful console. (At least, certainly not in comparison to its predecessor). It arrived late, had small game catalog, and was expensive. The difficulty in developing games that take full advantage of its hardware has only worsened the matter. Its business strategy has gone against everything the success of the PS2 was built on, and it's a gamble that unfortunately does not appear to be paying off.

  • JustWiicredible

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 8:46 am GMT

    Sony treated Europe badly when it's release got pulled back into well after xmas. Not to mention it's half arsed ps2 support. It's too expensive for what you get. DD> Blu ray anyway, oh and the store has virtually no decent content.

  • Enforcer246

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 8:39 am GMT

    Well...It was Sony's fault for adding so many useless features, thus making it more expensive than it needed to be. Better luck next time.

  • dasmx

    Posted Jan 14, 2009 8:26 am GMT

    The companies have bad times... this is Sony's bad time (along with the financial crisis)... i want to remember something to the 360 fanboys... The Playstation franchise changed the world of console gaming.. they took the crown from the king (Nintendo) at the end of the 90's... thanks to the Playstation we have met and played some of the greatest games ever made... this is just the 360 hype because is the new kid on the block... PS: Im a Nintendo fanboy... PS2: Sorry for my bad english

Subscribe to GameSpot's YouTube Channel

Hot Stories

Newsmakers

Featured Stories

Tags

sony

Submit News

Got tips? Send them in!