Blu-ray Will Lose and Killed the PS3
28 August 2007, 06:03 PM
#1
Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Not all those who wander are lost
Posts: 17,863
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blu-ray Will Lose and Killed the PS3
From Rob Enderle on TechNewsWorld: All Tech, All the Time:
I was one of the folks who thought that Blu-ray was going to eliminate HD-DVD and by this time HD-DVD would be toast. In fact, I was one of the analysts who helped convince Time Warner to hedge its bets and go with both formats.
However, this was all before I knew the cost of the Blu-ray technology, and it was based on the assumption that Sony would never be stupid enough to price itself out of the game console market, effectively giving it to Nintendo and Microsoft.
Not only was Blu-ray too expensive, the technology wasn't as far along as Sony led us to believe. The delays not only make the PS3 too expensive; they made it late. That was effectively a one-two punch, knocking Sony out of the lead so far in the game console business. Now, Sony is dead last by a significant margin.
This means that developers, instead of favoring Sony with their best stuff, are now concentrating on the Xbox first, and increasingly the Wii. That's because both have more homes, and thus represent a greater revenue opportunity, than Sony does.
So instead of the PS3 ensuring Blu-ray's success, right now it appears that Blu-ray may have effectively killed the PS3, at least in terms of market leadership. We'll have to wait until the PS4 before Sony has a chance to come back.
I think all realize, or should, time isn't unlimited either. We are already talking about what comes after HD-DVD and Blu-ray, and scalers are getting so good that increasingly many are arguing that you don't need either now.
In other words, while Blu-ray can't win, in my view, there is still an excellent chance the market will simply bypass both if one doesn't ramp to high volume this year. In that instance, everyone loses.
Full Story: TechNewsWorld: All Tech, All the Time
Interesting comments, although you wouldn't expect any less from him considering some of his past clients.
Fanboy trolls need not comment
I was one of the folks who thought that Blu-ray was going to eliminate HD-DVD and by this time HD-DVD would be toast. In fact, I was one of the analysts who helped convince Time Warner to hedge its bets and go with both formats.
However, this was all before I knew the cost of the Blu-ray technology, and it was based on the assumption that Sony would never be stupid enough to price itself out of the game console market, effectively giving it to Nintendo and Microsoft.
Not only was Blu-ray too expensive, the technology wasn't as far along as Sony led us to believe. The delays not only make the PS3 too expensive; they made it late. That was effectively a one-two punch, knocking Sony out of the lead so far in the game console business. Now, Sony is dead last by a significant margin.
This means that developers, instead of favoring Sony with their best stuff, are now concentrating on the Xbox first, and increasingly the Wii. That's because both have more homes, and thus represent a greater revenue opportunity, than Sony does.
So instead of the PS3 ensuring Blu-ray's success, right now it appears that Blu-ray may have effectively killed the PS3, at least in terms of market leadership. We'll have to wait until the PS4 before Sony has a chance to come back.
I think all realize, or should, time isn't unlimited either. We are already talking about what comes after HD-DVD and Blu-ray, and scalers are getting so good that increasingly many are arguing that you don't need either now.
In other words, while Blu-ray can't win, in my view, there is still an excellent chance the market will simply bypass both if one doesn't ramp to high volume this year. In that instance, everyone loses.
Interesting comments, although you wouldn't expect any less from him considering some of his past clients.
Fanboy trolls need not comment
28 August 2007, 07:36 PM
#3
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Throwing myself down a mountain at every opportunity...
Posts: 6,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That paragraph above is, seriously, the biggest load of misguided guff I have ever read. And he calls himself an analyst? He obviously doesn't talk to the right CEO's or really have any understanding of the cycles the games market works to. I know some think (wrongly) I am biased towards Sony, but I am fortunate in my position to have a genuinely unique and privelidged overview of the entire market and the guy is obviously utterly clueless 
28 August 2007, 07:38 PM
#4
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Throwing myself down a mountain at every opportunity...
Posts: 6,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just can't believe people are seriously talking about the PS3 being 'dead'!
It's utterly, utterly laughable! These people are going to look very, very stupid in a couple of years.
It's utterly, utterly laughable! These people are going to look very, very stupid in a couple of years.
28 August 2007, 07:56 PM
#5
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 12,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It may be ok in two years, but two years is a long time in console land.
Two years is two years that your competitors and there formats are ahead of you..
We all know Betmax (incidentally the better format) was killed off by one major supplier outputting to VHS, the others followed suit.
These days consumers are more savvy, and will make there own choices..
however if Supplier A offers his proprietary system at price A which is much lower than Supplier B's proprietary system, and supplier B doesn't have much else to go with his system, then you don't need to be a rocket scientist to work out where punters are going to sink there money.
We know MS hasn't done itself any favors with the reliability issues of the system it supplies, but likewise Sony have to some extent done the same with its system.
Two years is enough time to seriously damage a blue chip company, no matter how big they are.
Mart
28 August 2007, 08:01 PM
#6
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Location: In my house, Dunstable
Posts: 1,194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only thing I will say is Sony have a pretty poor record with proprietory formats and they did release the PS3 before the Blu-ray disc was finally ratified.
Will the PS3 be able to play future Blu-ray discs or is it not affected? As if you were an early adopter a lot of future discs will not play, not sure if this something that can be corrected with a firmware upgrade.
Will the PS3 be able to play future Blu-ray discs or is it not affected? As if you were an early adopter a lot of future discs will not play, not sure if this something that can be corrected with a firmware upgrade.
28 August 2007, 08:37 PM
#7
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Surviving as a soldier of fortune on the Los Angeles underground...
Posts: 7,181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem with Betamax was that Sony didn't give it the advertising budget it needed, whereas VHS did get it.
Sony learned from that mistake when they put the PS1 up against the Saturn which effectively killed off Sega's hardware plans.
BluRay is getting a lot of advertising, more studio's are exclusive to it and its the technologically superior format - and this time it's not limited to Sony hardware unlike the PSP's UMD format.
Really don't see how HD DVD has a hope, Sony has more Hollywood clout than Universal and Paramount need their heads looking at - when they announced last week they were going HD DVD exclusive Steven Speilberg & Michael Bay went apesh!t - and now the supposed "exclusivity" doesnt cover any of Speilberg's films, considering Paramount's biggest franchises will be Indiana Jones that only leaves the Jurassic Park Trilogy as HD DVD's exclusive Trilogy, Where BR's will include Spiderman, Pirates OF The Carribean, Star Wars, Die Hard & Aliens... and 3 of those 5 will be out by Christmas.
Sony learned from that mistake when they put the PS1 up against the Saturn which effectively killed off Sega's hardware plans.
BluRay is getting a lot of advertising, more studio's are exclusive to it and its the technologically superior format - and this time it's not limited to Sony hardware unlike the PSP's UMD format.
Really don't see how HD DVD has a hope, Sony has more Hollywood clout than Universal and Paramount need their heads looking at - when they announced last week they were going HD DVD exclusive Steven Speilberg & Michael Bay went apesh!t - and now the supposed "exclusivity" doesnt cover any of Speilberg's films, considering Paramount's biggest franchises will be Indiana Jones that only leaves the Jurassic Park Trilogy as HD DVD's exclusive Trilogy, Where BR's will include Spiderman, Pirates OF The Carribean, Star Wars, Die Hard & Aliens... and 3 of those 5 will be out by Christmas.
Trending Topics
28 August 2007, 08:37 PM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Throwing myself down a mountain at every opportunity...
Posts: 6,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wise words? or regrettable quip?
It may be ok in two years, but two years is a long time in console land.
Two years is two years that your competitors and there formats are ahead of you..
We all know Betmax (incidentally the better format) was killed off by one major supplier outputting to VHS, the others followed suit.
These days consumers are more savvy, and will make there own choices..
however if Supplier A offers his proprietary system at price A which is much lower than Supplier B's proprietary system, and supplier B doesn't have much else to go with his system, then you don't need to be a rocket scientist to work out where punters are going to sink there money.
We know MS hasn't done itself any favors with the reliability issues of the system it supplies, but likewise Sony have to some extent done the same with its system.
Two years is enough time to seriously damage a blue chip company, no matter how big they are.
Mart
It may be ok in two years, but two years is a long time in console land.
Two years is two years that your competitors and there formats are ahead of you..
We all know Betmax (incidentally the better format) was killed off by one major supplier outputting to VHS, the others followed suit.
These days consumers are more savvy, and will make there own choices..
however if Supplier A offers his proprietary system at price A which is much lower than Supplier B's proprietary system, and supplier B doesn't have much else to go with his system, then you don't need to be a rocket scientist to work out where punters are going to sink there money.
We know MS hasn't done itself any favors with the reliability issues of the system it supplies, but likewise Sony have to some extent done the same with its system.
Two years is enough time to seriously damage a blue chip company, no matter how big they are.
Mart
Unfortunately I'm just too busy to go into this in detail right now, as much as I would dearly love to point out all the flawed 'logic' on all this, but Sony works on a 10-year lifespan for PlayStation hardware, so 2 years is a dot.
People also keep forgetting 360 is over a year ahead in terms of sales, product development etc. Freeze 360 now for 15 months and see where PS3 is after that.
Sony has some killer mainstream franchises coming with incredible services to back them up, like Singstar with the built-in itunes-esque singstore, some amazing eyetoy functionality and products...Xbox just doesn't have any experience of 'mainstream'...that chunk of market from 30m to 100m barely know what a 360 is, because MS killed Xbox dead instead of creating a long tail like Sony did with PS1 and is doing with PS2, so kids literally grew up with the PS brand. The 'PlayStation Generation'.
The US has a higher proportion of 'core' gamers who will buy the 360, but Europe is fast becoming the key territory, and Sony has MS licked here by a long long way. Couple that with Japan (Sony all the way) and then wait til the big guns like GT5 start to hit next year in the US and it'll be a different story.
There is so much more to it than all of this but as I say I just don't have the time now
28 August 2007, 08:56 PM
#10
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wellingborough
Posts: 1,107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a PS3 and the small amount of game's available is really starting to **** me offf now i must admit i'm considering flogging it. The new Superbike game is available on PS2 but not on PS3 pathetic!!!
28 August 2007, 09:00 PM
#11
You, like the 'analyst' are missing numerous facts!
Unfortunately I'm just too busy to go into this in detail right now, as much as I would dearly love to point out all the flawed 'logic' on all this, but Sony works on a 10-year lifespan for PlayStation hardware, so 2 years is a dot.
Unfortunately I'm just too busy to go into this in detail right now, as much as I would dearly love to point out all the flawed 'logic' on all this, but Sony works on a 10-year lifespan for PlayStation hardware, so 2 years is a dot.
28 August 2007, 09:04 PM
#12
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Throwing myself down a mountain at every opportunity...
Posts: 6,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nope, it's just not tenable to keep doing that, consumers get pissed about having to change and developers and publishers need big installed userbase before they start making money from anything other than top 5-selling games, MS pissed off a lot of publishers by killing Xbox so quick, they simply can't pull that trick again and again.
28 August 2007, 09:37 PM
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However what is pathetic is the same old drival from the same people about the PS3.
28 August 2007, 10:02 PM
#14
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Bedfordshire
Posts: 4,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This time around the adult industry recognises they need to be ubiquitous and not tied to any one platform which is why most adult dvds are region 0 and play on any hardware and all titles will be available on both blu-ray and hd-dvd.
I dont know anything about porno's a bloke down the pub told me.
28 August 2007, 10:09 PM
#15
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,519
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Truth is nobody knows which way its going to swing. History is litttered with console manufacturers that have dominated and subsequently lost the plot - no matter what their market share was. And as for the so-called big game industry CEO's - they're as clueless as anyone else!
Its all fascinating to watch though!
Its all fascinating to watch though!
28 August 2007, 10:46 PM
#16
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 12,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, the Ps1/ 2 brand. Agreed, That that was a concept that worked, however as for a long tail, Sony dumped on Europe big time, and effectively stuck two fingers up at its loyal user base. backward compatibility? don't make me laugh, over 50% of games don't play on the PS3! Why?
oh hang on, Europe got a cut down version without the emotion engine chip, hence any backward compatibility would be carried out by software as opposed to hardware...
The recent price cut heralded by Sony... if you live in the USA
if you live in Europe. tough ti**y you don't get a price cut.
The alternate spec PS3 console that they went on about at launch, if you didn't want the all singing dancing version...
I don't recall seeing one on the shelves to date? do you?
Yes i have a PS1 & 2 and yes i would like a Ps3, however i,m not prepared to pay for a product that is cut down in comparison to what the rest of the world get, and a price that is ridiculous.
Mart
28 August 2007, 11:16 PM
#17
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How is the price of the console ridiculous.
£280 for a next gen console with HDD...Same as a 360 Premium
£100 for a Blu-Ray player....................£100 for the HD-DVD add on
£40 for a stand alone Internet Browser..360 has limited online usage but is bloody fantastic at gaming but this costs £40 a year to subscribe to where as the PS3 is free for its online gaming. The price stacks up pretty well for a machine that is reliable and whisper quiet
As for the backwards compatibilty. If i want to play a PS2 game i put it in the PS2 and play it and plus the 360 is not 100% backard compatible.
Reference for the thread title, has Blockbuster in the States not stated that they will only stock BR as its next gen format of chice
£280 for a next gen console with HDD...Same as a 360 Premium
£100 for a Blu-Ray player....................£100 for the HD-DVD add on
£40 for a stand alone Internet Browser..360 has limited online usage but is bloody fantastic at gaming but this costs £40 a year to subscribe to where as the PS3 is free for its online gaming. The price stacks up pretty well for a machine that is reliable and whisper quiet
As for the backwards compatibilty. If i want to play a PS2 game i put it in the PS2 and play it and plus the 360 is not 100% backard compatible.
Reference for the thread title, has Blockbuster in the States not stated that they will only stock BR as its next gen format of chice
28 August 2007, 11:41 PM
#18
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Throwing myself down a mountain at every opportunity...
Posts: 6,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, the Ps1/ 2 brand. Agreed, That that was a concept that worked, however as for a long tail, Sony dumped on Europe big time, and effectively stuck two fingers up at its loyal user base. backward compatibility? don't make me laugh, over 50% of games don't play on the PS3! Why?
oh hang on, Europe got a cut down version without the emotion engine chip, hence any backward compatibility would be carried out by software as opposed to hardware...
How many people fork out for a new console that is a generation ahead of the last, to then play games they already played on the old system?!
I have never, not once, ever used this feature, and I'm sure a tiny proportion of users have done it out of more than just curiosity.
28 August 2007, 11:42 PM
#19
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 12,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How is the price of the console ridiculous.
£280 for a next gen console with HDD...Same as a 360 Premium
£100 for a Blu-Ray player....................£100 for the HD-DVD add on
£40 for a stand alone Internet Browser..360 has limited online usage but is bloody fantastic at gaming but this costs £40 a year to subscribe to where as the PS3 is free for its online gaming. The price stacks up pretty well for a machine that is reliable and whisper quiet
£280 for a next gen console with HDD...Same as a 360 Premium
£100 for a Blu-Ray player....................£100 for the HD-DVD add on
£40 for a stand alone Internet Browser..360 has limited online usage but is bloody fantastic at gaming but this costs £40 a year to subscribe to where as the PS3 is free for its online gaming. The price stacks up pretty well for a machine that is reliable and whisper quiet
i want one £40 for a stand alone internet browser... why? i have a pc to surf, i have a console to play games... i have an ipod to play music...
And a separates system & DVD player to listen too and watch films on...
why do i want another box to do it? sorry a box to watch films in greenscreen..
Mart
28 August 2007, 11:42 PM
#20
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Throwing myself down a mountain at every opportunity...
Posts: 6,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How is the price of the console ridiculous.
£280 for a next gen console with HDD...Same as a 360 Premium
£100 for a Blu-Ray player....................£100 for the HD-DVD add on
£40 for a stand alone Internet Browser..360 has limited online usage but is bloody fantastic at gaming but this costs £40 a year to subscribe to where as the PS3 is free for its online gaming. The price stacks up pretty well for a machine that is reliable and whisper quiet
As for the backwards compatibilty. If i want to play a PS2 game i put it in the PS2 and play it and plus the 360 is not 100% backard compatible.
Reference for the thread title, has Blockbuster in the States not stated that they will only stock BR as its next gen format of chice
£280 for a next gen console with HDD...Same as a 360 Premium
£100 for a Blu-Ray player....................£100 for the HD-DVD add on
£40 for a stand alone Internet Browser..360 has limited online usage but is bloody fantastic at gaming but this costs £40 a year to subscribe to where as the PS3 is free for its online gaming. The price stacks up pretty well for a machine that is reliable and whisper quiet
As for the backwards compatibilty. If i want to play a PS2 game i put it in the PS2 and play it and plus the 360 is not 100% backard compatible.
Reference for the thread title, has Blockbuster in the States not stated that they will only stock BR as its next gen format of chice
28 August 2007, 11:50 PM
#21
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 12,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love this quote.
How many people fork out for a new console that is a generation ahead of the last, to then play games they already played on the old system?!
I have never, not once, ever used this feature, and I'm sure a tiny proportion of users have done it out of more than just curiosity.
How many people fork out for a new console that is a generation ahead of the last, to then play games they already played on the old system?!
I have never, not once, ever used this feature, and I'm sure a tiny proportion of users have done it out of more than just curiosity.
that was Sonys selling point with the PS2, it was totally backward compatible... Just because you don't use the feature, doesn't mean everyone else doesn't....
Some people Ed, don't want to shell out over and over again for the same stuff, because the new all singing / dancing stuff isn't compatible.
This argument will run for ages, so i,m calling it a day now,
just one last parting thought...
if Sony have so much stuff in the pipeline....
why are they waiting so long to release it? surely the best way would be to start trouncing the opposition as soon as possible
Mart
29 August 2007, 12:19 AM
#22
With all the news going around about how the PlayStation 3 helped push Blu-ray well in the lead, one thing that may come as a surprise to Sony is just how many PS3 owners actually watch Blu-ray movies on their console. According to a survey of 6,260 people carried out by the NPD Group's study of "Next Gen Functionally & Usage", it appears that around 40% of PS3 owners didn't realise their console could play Blu-ray discs. Also, around half those who knew about this capability have no interest in watching movies on their console.
So, with only about 1/3 of PS3 owners actually making use of their console to watch movies, it looks like it is time that Blu-ray backers should start to focus more on encouraging PS3 owners to watch movies on their console than trying to sell more players and consoles. What is more amusing is that despite all the effort Sony has put into the PS3's high definition capabilities, not to mention all the delays involved ensuring it launched with an internal Blu-ray player, just 50% of PS3 owners surveyed actually knew their console had high definition capabilities! This figure was worse with just 30% of Xbox 360 owners knowing that their console has HD capabilities.
As pretty much expected, it seems that most of those who bought a PS3 or Xbox 360 done so for one main reason - to have the latest console to play games on. Further info can be read in this Guardian article.
So, with only about 1/3 of PS3 owners actually making use of their console to watch movies, it looks like it is time that Blu-ray backers should start to focus more on encouraging PS3 owners to watch movies on their console than trying to sell more players and consoles. What is more amusing is that despite all the effort Sony has put into the PS3's high definition capabilities, not to mention all the delays involved ensuring it launched with an internal Blu-ray player, just 50% of PS3 owners surveyed actually knew their console had high definition capabilities! This figure was worse with just 30% of Xbox 360 owners knowing that their console has HD capabilities.
As pretty much expected, it seems that most of those who bought a PS3 or Xbox 360 done so for one main reason - to have the latest console to play games on. Further info can be read in this Guardian article.
29 August 2007, 09:11 AM
#23
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Surviving as a soldier of fortune on the Los Angeles underground...
Posts: 7,181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't say I've used the backwards compatibility of the PS3 yet, although I did get addicted to Hexic on the 360, as did a lot of others...
29 August 2007, 09:18 AM
#24
Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Not all those who wander are lost
Posts: 17,863
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's the direct link to the full article again for those whose clearly didn't bother to read it before attacking the thread title.
Technology News: Commentary: Blu-ray Loses, Rhapsody/MTV Target iTunes Weakness, Product of the Week
Technology News: Commentary: Blu-ray Loses, Rhapsody/MTV Target iTunes Weakness, Product of the Week
29 August 2007, 09:22 AM
#25
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's the direct link to the full article again for those whose clearly didn't bother to read it before attacking the thread title.
Technology News: Commentary: Blu-ray Loses, Rhapsody/MTV Target iTunes Weakness, Product of the Week
Technology News: Commentary: Blu-ray Loses, Rhapsody/MTV Target iTunes Weakness, Product of the Week
Of course, all it is, is one mans opinion, not fact, so you agree with or not - it doesn't make a jot of difference.
29 August 2007, 09:28 AM
#26
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Swindon, Wiltshire Xbox Gamertag: Gutgouger
Posts: 6,956
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Backwards compatability doesn't interest be either. From a ps2 point of view, I never found that many games that I actually liked, and the ones I did, I've already finished
I personally think that Blu-ray will eventually win, but I expect the war to last at least a couple of years yet (a rerun of vhs and betamax)...
I personally think that Blu-ray will eventually win, but I expect the war to last at least a couple of years yet (a rerun of vhs and betamax)...
29 August 2007, 09:33 AM
#27
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In some respects the consumer is the winner, as competition drives down prices, in others he is the loser, as there is the potential to buy into the "wrong" technology.
It does annoy me that neither side backed down - But then I suppose we could have had the situation we had with DVD, and been waiting long after the technology was there before getting the product in homes whilst consortiums sorted out thier differences.
29 August 2007, 09:42 AM
#29
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to ad more woes to your attempt to justify the high price, the Premium is now £240 or £230 if you look on Play.com.
And with the next gen player, MS aren't forcing me to commit to the next gen film format, i'm appy to wait and see which way it goes.
So that's £160 at the least i'll have to spend on something else [HD-DVD cheapest price £110].
29 August 2007, 09:49 AM
#30