Sony Losing Money on PSP, PS3

[geizr]

...
No one seems to give a damn about the Wii U and no one really seems to be jumping for joy about the next PS or Xbox consoles. Seriously I think a lot of people have given up hope for console gaming. They got greedy and tried to become home entertainment devices instead of video game consoles.

It might also be that gamers feel they are just seeing the same ol' shit for games coming out for these systems, and they're just tired of it all. You can only make the same game just so many times before people are just no longer enthused about its release. It's hard to get excited for the upcoming Call of Duty: Ad Nauseum or the next Mario Bros.: Aren't They Dead, Yet? when one has already played the last umpteen releases, which all turned out to be the same game with a different coat of paint each time.

 

[chuckman1]

Maybe nows a time to cut the psp price?
I used to have one but it was stolen I've been wanting one but 130 feels like a lot to invest especially considering I still need a memory stick too.

 

[Trishbot]

This sounds starkly familiar to Sega's Dreamcast days, and the lead-ins from their GameGear/SegaCD/Saturn days as well...

... Do you think Sony would ever go third-party?

They might as well, I mean it isn't like we're living in the 90's when each platform is almost made of exclusive titles. It may be more profitable for Sony to sell what rights they do have and just go into software development. It would get us one step closer to the Everyone vs Everyone fighting game we may eventually get one day. The only major strength PSP, PSV and I think PS3 has is the lack of a region lock and that's only really applicable to people who like to import the games Japan doesn't want to share.

For years it's baffled me that every single movie came out on DVD, but games couldn't do the same. You'd never hear the end of it if Sony only released Sony movies on their Sony-brand Sony-produced DVDs or something...

I'm with you. An "everyone vs. everyone" style market is what the games industry is heading towards. And I think that's a good thing.

 

[GonzoGamer]

You mean that the Online Pass Scheme didn't solve all their problems with game sales?!
That's Shocking!!!

it would be a damn shame if Sony backed out of the console market, they've had the best exclusives this generation.

That's true (I still think Valkyria Chronicles is the most original game to come out this generation) but they've also had the worst firmware support this generation. If they really opened up the ps3 and gave it some of the great features we've seen on other consoles, I might've gotten a Vita.

 

[sunami88]

Couldn't have happened to a nicer company...

 

[ivc392]

And there goes the PS4... I still think that Sony could have avoided such an abysmal defeat (lets face it, the PS3 was this generations Dreamcast) by putting a little more effort on the PS3 online experience.
Seriously, no custom avatars, limited library, no sales or discounts, late release dates for PSN games. What the hell??

Not to mention the whole Linux thing...

Unless the next gen console turns up to be something like the PS2 Sony will probably drop out from console manufacturing market (assuming there still is a home console market by then).

 

[Albino Boo]

This sounds starkly familiar to Sega's Dreamcast days, and the lead-ins from their GameGear/SegaCD/Saturn days as well...

... Do you think Sony would ever go third-party?

I don't think so because Sony isn't a console company only. They make a whole range of other products so I think they will either be in the hardware side or not in the market at all. They are not reliant on gaming, so they can just simply walk away and still have a company.

But that's my point. Prior to the Playstation, Sony had a games division making games for Sega and Nintendo, and even after the Playstation, Sony's got a sizable game market in PC gaming (Everquest, DC Universe Online, etc.)

The thing hurting them most is their systems. They lose a lot on each system they make and sell, and they bank on their games to cover the cost. But if they went games-only, they cut out the huge risk of consoles. Sony has not made a profit on PS3s in over four years... but they have made money on their games.

Now, granted, that would hurt consumers in the long run. Competition is what keeps prices down and companies competitive. I think Sony needs to stick around, if only to give Microsoft and Xbox competition.

But this generation in particular has not been kind to Sony, who ruled the roost with the PS2 a generation ago. The PS3 is still sitting at third place globally (and is far more expensive to make than the 360 or Wii), the PSP is all but dead outside of Japan, and the Vita has failed to deliver thus far. Sony's not dead by a long shot (they have their many other businesses to help bolster costs), but their game division is certainly in some trouble.

Which, well, is the same boat Sega faced with the Dreamcast. They continued to make games that sold well, but the system support wasn't there. They determined that going third-party, games-only, would be more profitable, and they were correct.

Sony, however, still believes their own words that the Playstation brand alone will sell regardless based on its name recognition alone. That's the folly they had with the PS3, the PSP Go, and the Vita. Games sell systems, not company loyalists.

I just think, with how little product they're selling, how expensive and costly their systems are (and they're not recouping those losses), their lone profitable sector is software at the moment.

You forget one thing Sony as whole company needs money. They may be losing money on each unit but PSN and the playstation brand is worth money. They could simply sell the rights to the PS3 and the playstation network. Someone like Foxcon could easily stump $250 million for the name and EA etc could buy their PC gaming stuff. I think they will either invest heavily in the next gen or just sell their gaming division in general for maybe $350 million.

 

[ChildishLegacy]

To be honest, I don't care now. I took a punt at picking up the PS Vita early because it looked like a really nice, well designed piece of hardware (which it is!) and had a few unique quirks to it. It had a few decent games on launch and I was quite impressed that they could make an uncharted game work on it. I thought that they'd have quite a few decent games coming soon since the launch line up wasn't too bulky.

Then I waited.

And waited.

Aaaaand waited.

And almost NOTHING was released for it. Gravity Rush didn't seem to be my sort of thing and their promised PSOne classics are nowhere to be seen. The only redeeming thing about it seems to be that you can buy old PSP games over the internet that you wouldn't be able to obtain otherwise. Even then it's overpriced and it takes up so much storage space, which the Vita doesn't have by default and it only accepts vita only memory cards which cost a bomb compared to Micro SD cards. Way to motivate people to buy games by making them pay even more to store them. I really want to use my Vita but I just can't!

This was my first Sony purchase since my Playstation One. And my god am I disappointed. If they think releasing a handheld without having anybody saying "yes, we will make games for it" is a good business strategy, this doesn't come as a surprise to me.

 

[grigjd3]

Owning a PS3, I can tell you exactly why their gaming division is flailing: they make slow, boring products. I get so bored of waiting for my PS3 to load something, download something, install something, go through some ridiculous update process and so many more mundane tasks that it decides it must do before I play a game that by the time it moves on to what I want to do, I am already playing a new game that I downloaded onto my PC in that time. If I am given a choice of what platform to play on, I always choose the PC. It looks better, starts faster and runs smoother than anything the PS3 does. What Sony hasn't figured out is that the digital era isn't about having the best hardware or some sort of format victory. It's about providing the best experience to the player and that's the part they have completely ignored.

 

[KoudelkaMorgan]

I have a PS3, had to buy a 2nd one after the first died suddenly. I have no intention of EVER getting an Xbox, or a PSP/V, and my Wii is gathering dust having played maybe 8 games on it since I got it.

That being said, Sony has had their head so far up their ass that they almost beat EA's current record.

The list of their failed hardware is growing. While PS1 and PS2 did phenomenally, PS3 has more or less barely squeaked by in comparison.

Initially things looked great. When I got my first one I was super excited. I picked up Oblivion Goty, Heavenly Sword, Resistance, and Folklore as my first games. Three of which were PS3 exclusives.

Leaving aside the fact the I've still never finished Folklore like 7 years later, I was really happy with my purchase. It also had an online store and played bluray *yay*

Over the years I've played and loved numerous games, but few of them were PS3 only. More often than not we get the shitty port from Xbox, whose inferior disk storage medium and hatred for multi disk games has been dumbing down this generations games to fit on one DVD. Sony has the superior bluray media, yet they have gotten screwed over time and again because their system is some kind of "impossible to develop for" torture device.

Rarely are games on both systems on par with each other.

Also M$ simply bribes just about everyone to withhold DLC, make games XBLA exclusive etc. so that Sony is left with shit like our version of The Orange Box, Oblivion, and without games like Shadow Complex.

With almost no decent 1st party games (I cant even think of a franchise atm) and an online store that month after month fails to have anything I would even impulse buy...I'm just kinda waiting for something decent to play again.

Alongside the PS3's gradual downward trajectory they have tried and failed to make the case now the existence of the PSP family of handhelds. They are usually overpriced, underpowered, lacking any playable games, and about as durable as a Faberge egg if you actually intend to take them somewhere. I speak from my friend's experience as he is the only one that I know that got one. He got like 4 games, and traded everything in for a fat DS back at the time.

The new Vita may be underperforming by their expectations, but the fact that it is selling at all exceeds my own considerably. I mean it has touch screens on both sides of it...what exactly is the fucking point of that?

Playstation Move...do I need to elaborate on how it is a total Wii copying cash grab that has ended up costing them more in R&D/Marketing and consumer confidence in their business direction than it has benefited them? At least when M$ thought to simply copy Nintendo's success they made something innovative. Sony's big contribution to motion control was to add colored balls and require you to buy A SECOND WAND! Brilliant!

Sony's only current saving grace is that Nintendo has loooong since gone insane and chosen to take wild stabs in the dark when designing their hardware. Everyone, myself included took one look at the original DS and thought WTF. It was heavy, battery life was crap, and it had TWO SCREENS. I got the DS lite eventually and have not been happier with any console since probably ever. Despite hating 3D being forced upon us from all media currently, I will even be getting a 3DSXL eventually because thats where the games I want are being made. Or will be made eventually *looks at Etrian Odyssey 4*

The Wii U is currently 78% guaranteed to fail spectacularly and take Nintendo out when it does. They have been held up by Miyamoto's series pretty much for their entire modern life, and after Twilight Princess, Skyward Sword, Other M, and increasingly redundant Mario games that cash cow is almost out of milk.

EDIT: I've mostly been playing Skyrim, or at least making new characters obsessively for months now. When I actually use my PS3 that is. September 18th, and Borderlands 2, cannot come soon enough Q_Q

 

[RJ 17]

Well what'd they expect when their main platform this generation was an over-priced, under-supplied blue ray player that also just happened to play a few games?

 

[Doclector]

The PSP news doesn't surprise me. I haven't seen a new PSP in ages, I picked one up pre-owned earlier in the year for £20 in the wake of GAME's struggles. Neither does the PSP games, because they're pretty much in the same position. At most, I've seen ten "chart" new PSP games in a store recently. Honestly, I thought they had already left the PSP alone.

PS3, however, is worrying. It's been cut down to a reasonable, if still expensive, price. It's got a host of great exclusives. Some of it's downloadable stuff is on the cutting edge of gaming innovation. Yet, still sales aren't doing well.

As much as the thought of sony franchises coming to other platforms excites me, sony backing out of the console race would leave microsoft without competition for the hardcore console market. This can't be good. So here's hoping they turn it around.

 

[insanelich]

Sony cannot die fast enough.

Their relationship with their customers is antagonistic at best - and even people who try their best to avoid being their customers sometimes get caught in the crossfire.

 

[dnazeri]

No big game releases,no big console draws. This is a barren time of year for gaming, ironically when a fair portion of the population has the most time. It's hurting everyone.

I know Ive never understood why console release were so barren this time of year. It seems counter-intuitive.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

No big game releases,no big console draws. This is a barren time of year for gaming, ironically when a fair portion of the population has the most time. It's hurting everyone.

I know Ive never understood why console release were so barren this time of year. It seems counter-intuitive.

Maybe it's some holdover from a long gone system, or they try and get us stoked for the return, in the fall. Maybe it's like sports, and the industry needs an off season, while they let their moody cousin Cinema have some time. Maybe they just don't realize how much money we want to give them during the summer. Baffles my mind, that's for sure. It is a great time to play catch up, though.

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

This sounds starkly familiar to Sega's Dreamcast days, and the lead-ins from their GameGear/SegaCD/Saturn days as well...

... Do you think Sony would ever go third-party?

Sony would need some first-party titles before they could offer them as 3rd Party games. ;P

 

[Beautiful End]

I have to admit, I don't really understand how Sony can be losing so much money. They aren't doing much differently from Microsoft's gaming division, and we've seen a few reports about how the 360 is making money hand-over-fist, outselling the other consoles, and so on. Sony even has the edge in a few areas; more high-quality exclusives on the PS3 than the 360, and free online play. It's arguable that XBL is a superior service to PSN, sure, but "free and good" is a much easier sell for a service than "paid but better".

The two consoles are similarly priced and, while the 360 may have a moderate lead in the West, the PS3 has the entirety of Japan pretty much to itself. It just makes me wonder how badly Sony is managing the whole thing if they're managing to make a loss while Microsoft is doing so well.

Well, my theory is this: Accessories.

Let's see, if you've got the Elite 360: You need Xbox Live (Let's say $60), a HD ($20, the cheapest), a headset because, you know, if you have friends or play online, you just gotta get one ($20), the network adapter ($70) and batteries for your controller ($3 per week? Depending on how much you play), but if you wanna avoid that, then you need a Play and Charge kit ($20). So we're looking at around $200 extra that a single xbox owner has to shell out at some point. So really, buying a $200 console is more like buying a $400 console.

If you've got the slim model: You still need Xbox live, maybe headset and Play and Charge kit. But if you wanna upgrade your 4gb, you got two choices: 250gb HD ($100) or 320gb HD ($130). So...around the same thing.

I think M$ was smart/greedy about it because they make their money off accessories. Look at the PS3, you can buy any laptop HD and replace it, you don't need a network adapter, you don't need a Play and Charge kit and so on. Microsoft makes up for the people that choose Sony over them with their accessories.

Again, just a theory.

OT: Dang, that sucks. I love my PSs a lot. I'd hate to not see a PS4.

 

[Pearwood]

I think it's more likely they'll not be going so overboard with tech for the PS4. Didn't they put a ridiculously huge CPU in the PS3 that just wasn't necessary since you could just use one similar to the 360 CPU and get similar results? Blu-ray player, DVD player, that fancy system for putting games into the console, stuff like that gets expensive.

 

[Easton Dark]

It's like I'm reading every monetary report on the PS3 since 2007 in one news post.

It's not really a question of if they're losing money.

 

[ArkhamJester]

right now i mainly use my ps3 to charge my iphone and for netflix because there's no interesting games for it like back when i first got it, all there is now is just call of duty clones and just junk. if they were smart they'd release old school classics onto the psn store like kingdom hearts 2 final mix and the ratchet and clank series for uber cheap like a steam sale

Erm... You do know that the ratchet and clank collection for PS3 is out right? Also i've heard that square plans on rereleasing kingdom hearts uno and dos at some point, plus they are putting PS2 classics on the store (trickling but it is coming) speaking of which have you played Odin sphere or Persona 3? Both are on the PSN.