Can Sony drag itself into oblivion?

[PoolCleaningRobot]

Phones is tricky, they seemed to be carving a nice niche market with the water proofing stuff, but now that Samsung and other companies are picking it up they have lost all momentum.

Sony puts way too much bloatware and software addons onto their phones, they have incredible hardware specs but run like absolute ass, they're new z3 compact could be a winner though, with the iPhone's moving away from the small form factor, somebody has to pick up this market (which is bigger than a lot of people think).

It wouldn't be a bad move for Sony to drop phones altogether though, the 2 Korean powerhouses (Samsung, LG) are all over Sony in that department.

I wouldn't say its so cut and dry with phone features. Sony's phones also look amazing (though maybe uncomfortable to hold) while Samsung's and LG's look like ass. There's also another caveat: SD card support. Most people like myself won't so much as look at a phone without it and LG doesn't put it in their flagships and its not that common anymore. The nexus line doesn't have it and neither does motorola. They're also the only ones with dedicated camera buttons

TL,DR: Sony has the best phones on the market, they need to get straightened out to sell more.

Their real problem is how they sell them. I really want the Z3 compact but they don't sell it at any carriers in America and their Z line is exclusive to T-Mobile, the smallest carrier in America! I'm glad they sell them unlocked but they can still iffy to get working on other networks, and I won't be able to use AT&T's upgrade program to get it (damn this Asus phone)

The other ridiculous problem is that their phone's specs are in some ways worse than their competitors. I hate Samsung's phones, but they put damn good cameras in them. My sister's GS3 actually took clearer pictures than my HTC One with its big photo sensor. Sony's won the megapixel race, but the quality isn't good. I was disappointed by my friends Z2 which took whitewashed pictures compared to my M8. Even the Z2's screen looked worse than my M8. And this company sells TV's and cameras

I love what Sony are doing with the compact and like that they held back a little and only used a 720p screen so the phone is fast and battery lasts for days and its screen quality has been improved, but they need to get their shit together so I can actually buy it

 

[PoolCleaningRobot]

As consoles cost loads and are sold at a loss. It would be great if Sony, MS and Nintendo got together to make an awesome console with all the games. It would get rid of fanboyism and people can try other games they normally would never buy due to exclusivity on another console.

Wouldn't that just be a monopoly? Also, would they make other models of consoles like the ps vita baby-console tv streaming thing (I think the market could use a $100 game console) and a handheld system?

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

If they die, and the playstation dies that could be the death knell for console gaming. Do we really think japan would stick around for the xbox? Though it would probably help nintendo.

I guess it would depend on what console the Japanese developers go for. I think FF7 being released on Playstation instead of Nintendos machine helped boost playstation sales. I guess if Nintendo released a powerful console they could take all the developers. But as for MS, they might not be interested in releasing in Japan again. I guess they could act all "fuck you japan" but then business is business.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

As consoles cost loads and are sold at a loss. It would be great if Sony, MS and Nintendo got together to make an awesome console with all the games. It would get rid of fanboyism and people can try other games they normally would never buy due to exclusivity on another console.

Wouldn't that just be a monopoly? Also, would they make other models of consoles like the ps vita baby-console tv streaming thing (I think the market could use a $100 game console) and a handheld system?

No, all the companies can release what they want, and it costs them all a third in costs. Just means we as gamers get a better console and an amazing set of titles to play on it. Those 3 companies would sell way more games because there will be no brand loyalties. Also i dont see why the companies cant release hand helds still as well as they are a whole different market to consoles.

I do wonder if the future could be that, its an expensive business and not many companies can afford that amount of cash. But then i remember when the idea of their never being a Sega console and Sega titles released on their competitors consoles was something that was impossible and would never happen.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

If they die, and the playstation dies that could be the death knell for console gaming. Do we really think japan would stick around for the xbox? Though it would probably help nintendo.

This. Consoles exist because japan likes them, regardless of what the white man likes.

If Sony dies, it shows that Japan no longer cares for console gaming. When that happens, all support is dropped and console gaming dies off.

Its an all or nothing game.

When people say we are near a crash, they weren't kidding. Anything that shakes confidence in japan's fervor for consoles can have a ripple effect in the entire industry that causes people to start running.

Japan can't afford to fail.

And that kind of scares me as most of my games are made in Japan for Sony systems. Lord knows whether the devs would finally go to the PC or would bet all their chips on Nintendo. Pretty much every western release having a version of the game on the PC, it would solidify how redundant the Xbox brand really is (it is the reason I sold my 360 after I finally got a gaming pc as I realized every game I owned for the 360 was also on the PC or PS3).

 

[PoolCleaningRobot]

No, all the companies can release what they want, and it costs them all a third in costs. Just means we as gamers get a better console and an amazing set of titles to play on it. Those 3 companies would sell way more games because there will be no brand loyalties.

Yeah but would they? If Microsoft and even Sony to an extent could get away with it, this gen would have been always online consoles. Microsoft already subsidizes their consoles with ads and gold subscriptions. Even if things cost less, there's no guarantee its going to be sold for less. With this "one console to rule them all" I could easily see there being digital only games from their only storefront and 24 hour connection limits

Also i dont see why the companies cant release hand helds still as well as they are a whole different market to consoles.

Its just that you said you wanted "one" console but I feel like handhelds can vary based on what people want. I'd totally buy a 1080p handheld for a bunch of money but someone else might want a cheaper one

I do wonder if the future could be that, its an expensive business and not many companies can afford that amount of cash. But then i remember when the idea of their never being a Sega console and Sega titles released on their competitors consoles was something that was impossible and would never happen.

I think the only thing they can do is find a way to make it work. Someone already said the consoles are being sold at a loss this gen, but I thought that wasn't true? I believe Sony is making a small profit on each ps4 and that in itself is a step up. If you can't spend the money, you just gotta spend less. Its a big market and this should be one of the biggest generations yet. If you can't sell it as just a console, maybe Sony could bring back the other OS feature so people can make a hometheater/Linux box. I'd love a console I could also emulate on (without significant hacking)

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

No, all the companies can release what they want, and it costs them all a third in costs. Just means we as gamers get a better console and an amazing set of titles to play on it. Those 3 companies would sell way more games because there will be no brand loyalties.

Yeah but would they? If Microsoft and even Sony to an extent could get away with it, this gen would have been always online consoles. Microsoft already subsidizes their consoles with ads and gold subscriptions. Even if things cost less, there's no guarantee its going to be sold for less. With this "one console to rule them all" I could easily see there being digital only games from their only storefront and 24 hour connection limits

Also i dont see why the companies cant release hand helds still as well as they are a whole different market to consoles.

Its just that you said you wanted "one" console but I feel like handhelds can vary based on what people want. I'd totally buy a 1080p handheld for a bunch of money but someone else might want a cheaper one

I do wonder if the future could be that, its an expensive business and not many companies can afford that amount of cash. But then i remember when the idea of their never being a Sega console and Sega titles released on their competitors consoles was something that was impossible and would never happen.

I think the only thing they can do is find a way to make it work. Someone already said the consoles are being sold at a loss this gen, but I thought that wasn't true? I believe Sony is making a small profit on each ps4 and that in itself is a step up. If you can't spend the money, you just gotta spend less. Its a big market and this should be one of the biggest generations yet. If you can't sell it as just a console, maybe Sony could bring back the other OS feature so people can make a hometheater/Linux box. I'd love a console I could also emulate on (without significant hacking)

Great points. It could either be the best thing ever or the worst thing ever. But it may never happen. The PlayStation only happened by luck because their work with Nintendo failed - think it was a disc addon or something. I guess Google or Amazon have the money to jump into the console market.

Can you imagine the up roar online if Sony went bankrupt and MS bought their Entertainment department. lol

 

[PoolCleaningRobot]

Great points. It could either be the best thing ever or the worst thing ever. But it may never happen. The PlayStation only happened by luck because their work with Nintendo failed - think it was a disc addon or something. I guess Google or Amazon have the money to jump into the console market.

Can you imagine the up roar online if Sony went bankrupt and MS bought their Entertainment department. lol

Anything but that! I read a post here once: "I knew console gaming was doomed the second Microsoft entered the market".

I would actually love for more companies to step to the console market. Google and Amazon are seriously competitive with their products and Google has allowed users a lot of freedom with their products so a console from them would pretty interesting. Samsung was also mentioned in this thread. Given that they're a tech powerhouse I could see them more than capable of making a good console, but I don't think Koreans are into console gaming

But that would probably mean more exclusives

 

[Matthew Jabour]

I'm not an Amazing Spider-Man fan, but let's do some math.

First movie cost $230 million and grossed $760 million.
Second movie cost $200 million and grossed $710 million.

The profit for the first movie was 330% (gross revenue x 100 / original budget)
The profit for the second movie's was 355% (idem)

So not only did the second movie cost less to make, it also grossed an exponential 25% over the first movie.

I don't know where you're getting your numbers, (unless it's Wikipedia) but the movie had a production budget of $255 million That's also ignoring the cost of marketing, which was around $180 million. That kind of profit is a lot more...marginal.

Source: http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/07/08/should-sony-panic-about-the-amazing-spider-man-2-b.aspx

"They didn't make THAT much money"?
Anyway, to answer your title question: Nintendo's the closest to Sega. No need to worry about Sony

You misunderstand. Sega collapsed because, in addition to weak Dreamcast sales, their company was going bankrupt because of a bunch of other divisions, like pachinko machines, that were dragging them down. Nintendo only has games, and they can stay afloat as long as either their consoles or handhelds sell well, which they are.

 

[stroopwafel]

I think the only thing they can do is find a way to make it work. Someone already said the consoles are being sold at a loss this gen, but I thought that wasn't true? I believe Sony is making a small profit on each ps4 and that in itself is a step up.

Yeah, they're making some money off PS4 hardware sales but it isn't much. And the only reason they are making some money and not selling it at a loss is b/c PS4's architecture is based on PC hardware. This obviously makes for a more developer friendly system but in the long term I think this might stifle innovation. Sure, the exotic Cell processor might have been ridiculously expensive to develop and manufacture but it was unique, and without such a 'dare to dream' attitude I doubt we'd ever seen walkmans, blu-ray discs or Playstation. Innovative technologies don't always have immediate profitability or even a lasting appeal, but without there is no real way forward.

I think this is also the reason so many tech giants don't care about the console industry. It's not like the market isn't there(if there was any doubt the ridiculous PS4 launch sales have proven there is) it's just that it takes a long time for companies to make a substantial profit off them, and with impatient shareholders and a restless market unless its a company with the foresight of say Sony this just isn't gonna fly. At a fraction of the cost and a multitude of the profit they can just make a phone or TV and call it a day. You don't have to wait 5 or 6 years or sell subscription services just to recoup some of your investment costs.

Say the worst case scenario would come true and Sony exits the market than the 'death of consoles' would have nothing to do with an absence of demand but only b/c eg. phones and TVs are easier to manufacture at a fraction of the costs and with a much higher return on investment(espescially short-term).

I don't even think PC gaming will be immune to this, as espescially big-budget game development is largely driven by market appeal of consoles. Without corporate partners that help develop, finance and market your game its nigh impossible for any developer/publisher to deliver the kind of high-end games we've come to expect.

Even without Sony in the picture some company will most likely jump into the vacuum at one time or another, but damn, the gaming landscape will be a wasteland for many years to come. For that reason alone I hope Sony will stay in business.

 

[Suhi89]

It looks like they are going towards a corporate breakup, which is a real shame. They are competitive in every market they put out products for, and get no respect in none but gaming.

The one that upsets me most is their smartphones. I imported a Z1 because I wanted it that much more than a Samsung S4 or HTC One or LG G2. I've been using the phone for almost a year and it has met or exceeded my expectations in every way. But because Sony doesn't have the market presence of Apple, Samsung, or HTC they are unable to get relationships with supplies necessary to saturate the market. The Samsung S4 and S5 are not that good phones, but they rule the roost because Samsung has built its supply chain to the point that it can just crank out phones.

It looks like Sony has been trying to do this with light-revision 6-month cycles instead of 1-year cycles. Unfortunately this seems to have backfired as public perception is that Sony has to put out that many just to compete and that your phone will be outdated even faster. The truth, when you look at the launch of the Z, Z1, Z2, and pending Z3, is that Sony is getting their ducks in a row. The Z barely dented the market, the Z1 suffered from major supply issues, the Z2 sold well abroad but was kept out of the US due to supply issues. The Z3 is getting a more-or-less global launch, but supply issues kept it from launching until 2 months after announcement. Sony was one of the first on stage at IFA, but among the last to release their device.

My hope is that the Z4 will come out globally the month of launch in the spring of next year, maybe later if that allows it to launch with the new Snapdragon 810 processor, but not behind the competition. Sony has improved their supply chain with each revision, if they get it to the point where they can have a solid product launch they can finally play with the big boys, and maybe turn a profit. Which would be great, because whether people know it or not, Sony has the best phones on the market.

TL,DR: Sony has the best phones on the market, they need to get straightened out to sell more.

I have the Z1 compact. Best phone I've ever used. Perfect size for me (now even iPhones are too big - and I have big hands) but still as powerful as the Z1, unlike the S4 mini which doesn't have the same power as the S4. Great battery life, waterproof, nice screen. It does everything.

My only criticism was the screen protector it came with, which I had to take off after it got a chip in it, but I understand the later phones have done away with that piece of idiocy.

So yeah, I hope they don't leave the phone market.

 

[JayRPG]

TL,DR: Sony has the best phones on the market, they need to get straightened out to sell more.

Even objectively that is just not true...

All companies have their strengths and weaknesses but there are some things Sony just can't compete with.

I have already mentioned their Android overlay being the worst of the big 3 by far, even the much maligned touchwiz is smoother and less buggy/laggy.

Sony usually take the camera cake but they fall down in other areas.

The Galaxy Note 4 has the most impressive display of any smartphone ever tested, 1440p, AMOLED with a new subpixel arrangement called "diamond pixel" - the first of it's kind, it has the best and most accurate colour reproduction of any phone or tablet ever released (for both Adobe sRGB standards and others), and it is so good that is can be used as a virtual reality display. Objectively, the Galaxy Note 4 has the best display on the market.

Sony usually fall slightly behind in the processor department too but that doesn't matter a whole lot when we are only talking about 0.1-0.2 Ghz.

Where they usually fall down flat is software features, Sony has the best camera of the lot in terms of quality, but you can do so much more with the Samsungs and LGs. Dual video recording, time lapse, dual shot, sound and shoot, drama shot, smile detection, eraser shot etc etc

And then there's things like the free dropbox, free garmin navigon, Knox, LGs amazing translator app. Sony make great phones, but they are definitely not the best on the market, at least that wasn't the case with the z1 and z2 and I have doubts the Z3 with it's 1080p display, slower/older processor and GPU, and camera with no OIS will be able to take the cake from the Note 4 or G3 (it might possibly beat the G3).

I had a Z1 and Z2, and I did like them, especially the water proofing (which is why I bought the Z1 in the first place), but I ended up going back to my Galaxy Note line in the end. Though I did prefer my Z2 to my LG G2, and I definitely preferred my Z2 to any of the windows phone and apple offerings I had at the time.

 

[gigastar]

It would be great if Sony, MS and Nintendo got together to make an awesome console with all the games. It would get rid of fanboyism and people can try other games they normally would never buy due to exclusivity on another console.

If Valve succeeds in bringing the PC experience to a home console setup then thats pretty much what you describe.

Just without the desparingly obvious flaws of 3 rival companies working together.

 

[Suhi89]

TL,DR: Sony has the best phones on the market, they need to get straightened out to sell more.

Even objectively that is just not true...

All companies have their strengths and weaknesses but there are some things Sony just can't compete with.

I have already mentioned their Android overlay being the worst of the big 3 by far, even the much maligned touchwiz is smoother and less buggy/laggy.

Sony usually take the camera cake but they fall down in other areas.

The Galaxy Note 4 has the most impressive display of any smartphone ever tested, 1440p, AMOLED with a new subpixel arrangement called "diamond pixel" - the first of it's kind, it has the best and most accurate colour reproduction of any phone or tablet ever released (for both Adobe sRGB standards and others), and it is so good that is can be used as a virtual reality display. Objectively, the Galaxy Note 4 has the best display on the market.

Sony usually fall slightly behind in the processor department too but that doesn't matter a whole lot when we are only talking about 0.1-0.2 Ghz.

Where they usually fall down flat is software features, Sony has the best camera of the lot in terms of quality, but you can do so much more with the Samsungs and LGs. Dual video recording, time lapse, dual shot, sound and shoot, drama shot, smile detection, eraser shot etc etc

And then there's things like the free dropbox, free garmin navigon, Knox, LGs amazing translator app. Sony make great phones, but they are definitely not the best on the market, at least that wasn't the case with the z1 and z2 and I have doubts the Z3 with it's 1080p display, slower/older processor and GPU, and camera with no OIS will be able to take the cake from the Note 4 or G3 (it might possibly beat the G3).

I had a Z1 and Z2, and I did like them, especially the water proofing (which is why I bought the Z1 in the first place), but I ended up going back to my Galaxy Note line in the end. Though I did prefer my Z2 to my LG G2, and I definitely preferred my Z2 to any of the windows phone and apple offerings I had at the time.

Best is subjective unless you're talking about raw stats. It really depends on what you need. Sony's compact line is exactly what I want - high end specs in a smaller phone. When I was looking around, the Z1 compact was the only phone that met this criteria except the iPhone 5S, which was far more expensive and the screen, ironically, was too small. The battery life is also superb, seemingly much better than the high end phones owned by my friends, and that is important to me. Shame about the stupid shipped-on screen protector.

I've never had a problem with the overlay, I found sense to be worse on my old One-X. Maybe if I flashed a custom ROM I'd notice difference though.

 

[JayRPG]

Best is subjective unless you're talking about raw stats. It really depends on what you need. Sony's compact line is exactly what I want - high end specs in a smaller phone. When I was looking around, the Z1 compact was the only phone that met this criteria except the iPhone 5S, which was far more expensive and the screen, ironically, was too small. The battery life is also superb, seemingly much better than the high end phones owned by my friends, and that is important to me. Shame about the stupid shipped-on screen protector.

I've never had a problem with the overlay, I found sense to be worse on my old One-X. Maybe if I flashed a custom ROM I'd notice difference though.

Oh I absolutely think that Sony has the best small form factor device on the market at the moment. I did forget to put that in my post.

I was mainly replying to the poster who suggested Sony have the best devices overall on the market. In terms of flagships, they lag behind.

Small form factor though, their Z compact line is the best in class, there was that motorola razr m to deal with a few years back, which was actually a pretty good phone, but nothing stands up to the Z3 compact for small (or at least smaller) form factor at the moment.

P.S Don't even get me started on HTC and that dreadful sense overlay. HTC is the only company I find myself consistently unhappy with, on both hardware and software fronts. Sense is the worst overlay overall.

 

[Mangue Surfer]

I'm not an Amazing Spider-Man fan, but let's do some math.

First movie cost $230 million and grossed $760 million.
Second movie cost $200 million and grossed $710 million.

The profit for the first movie was 330% (gross revenue x 100 / original budget)
The profit for the second movie's was 355% (idem)

So not only did the second movie cost less to make, it also grossed an exponential 25% over the first movie.

I know the movies have gotten a mixed critical reception but since the rest of your post is about how Sony is "losing money"... well, not that I'm aware of. Links are welcome. For example:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-02/nintendo-seen-missing-target-as-sony-microsoft-sales-dwarf-wii-u.html
http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/01/17/nintendo-cuts-wii-u-sales-forecast-from-9-million-to-28-million

Nintendo is doing embarrassingly. Its shares have dropped consistently since 2007, having lost 82% of their value so far. It only managed to sell 5% of its target (Wii U) for the fiscal year of 2013 and it has more or less recently cut its Wii U sales forecast from 9 million to 2.8 million. That's 30% (!) of their original intentions. They don't think they'll even manage to make half as much money as they originally thought they would. They've recalculated their profit from 55 billion yen to a comparatively low 25 billion. Hell, the president of the company himself has been quoted as saying

"My duty, more than anything else, is to revive our business momentum"

You revive something that is dead, right?

So, your point is, no matter how powerful a video game brand is, it's always can be drag to oblivion like Nintendo did with the Wii? So you think Sony are doomed?

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I'm not an Amazing Spider-Man fan, but let's do some math.

First movie cost $230 million and grossed $760 million.
Second movie cost $200 million and grossed $710 million.

The profit for the first movie was 330% (gross revenue x 100 / original budget)
The profit for the second movie's was 355% (idem)

So not only did the second movie cost less to make, it also grossed an exponential 25% over the first movie.

I know the movies have gotten a mixed critical reception but since the rest of your post is about how Sony is "losing money"... well, not that I'm aware of. Links are welcome. For example:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-02/nintendo-seen-missing-target-as-sony-microsoft-sales-dwarf-wii-u.html
http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/01/17/nintendo-cuts-wii-u-sales-forecast-from-9-million-to-28-million

Nintendo is doing embarrassingly. Its shares have dropped consistently since 2007, having lost 82% of their value so far. It only managed to sell 5% of its target (Wii U) for the fiscal year of 2013 and it has more or less recently cut its Wii U sales forecast from 9 million to 2.8 million. That's 30% (!) of their original intentions. They don't think they'll even manage to make half as much money as they originally thought they would. They've recalculated their profit from 55 billion yen to a comparatively low 25 billion. Hell, the president of the company himself has been quoted as saying

"My duty, more than anything else, is to revive our business momentum"

You revive something that is dead, right?

So, your point is, no matter how powerful a video game brand is, it's always can be drag to oblivion like Nintendo did with the Wii? So you think Sony are doomed?

No, my point is a "dead console walking" thread like this is more becoming of Nintendo than of Sony.