Sony's New CEO Aims For Top Position in Games Market

Kaz Hirai is set to become Sony's new CEO on April 1. But he was already in the spotlight today at Sony's quarterly earnings briefing.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
decrypt2238d ago (Edited 2238d ago )

Isnt he the guy who claimed, Sony makes hard to code consoles so that developers can only yeild its full power by the end of gen.

That statement made him look pretty retarded. If i bought a car today, i would expect it to perform as advertised. If its advertised to run at 170MPH and only does 100MPH,I would be furious if i had to wait 10 years before the car performed at its advertised specs, Same way if i bought a PC GPU i would be upset if it performed as advertised 10 years later.

Anyways i sincerely hope he has changed his ways of thinking.

Edit: Lol i found his comment:

"We don't provide the 'easy to program for' console that (developers) want, because 'easy to program for' means that anybody will be able to take advantage of pretty much what the hardware can do, so then the question is, what do you do for the rest of the nine-and-a-half years?"

Haha that comment is epic in a retarded sort of way.


The comment was from Kaz hirai, but yea Kutaragi was on some fine crack to develop the Cell, instead if they would have invested in a better GPU from Nvidia things would have been way better. A 8000 series GPU would have stomped what the PS3 can currently do, also they wouldnt have wasted all that money on the Cell.

Now PS3 fanboys here will disagree and praise the Cell, sure most of you have been brainwashed how Cell offloads some of the tasks from the GPU. Yes it does however that wouldnt be needed if the PS3s GPU wasnt so gimped to begin with. Infact all the data going back and forth from the GPU to the Cell is a waste of bandwidth. If a better GPU would have been used it would have been a much more effiecient overall design. Sony Designed the Cell to be a GPU, however they failed very badly at it. Which is why the had to run to Nvidia at the last moment for help. Since Sony designed the Cell to be a GPU and a CPU, sure it helps in offloading some of the GPUs tasks, however overall its a disaster and a inefficient design.

Mikhail2238d ago

I believe that he made that comment because he can't backtrack on their investment on the cell. Seeing what he did for the vita by just choosing relatively common components that they finally realize what is more important.

Right now, they seem to be going the Apple route wherein software would be of primary importance rather than hardware. Perhaps they would develop their own ecosystem. Still, it would be quite hard to turn things around. But of course, who expected Apple would be dominant right now. They were on the verge of bankruptcy before the i-products. Let us wait and see.

DigitalAnalog2238d ago (Edited 2238d ago )

"That statement made him look pretty retarded. If i bought a car today, i would expect it to perform as advertised. If its advertised to run at 170MPH and only does 100MPH,I would be furious if i had to wait 10 years before the car performed at its advertised specs, Same way if i bought a PC GPU i would be upset if it performed as advertised 10 years later."

Your analogy is flawed. Unlike a car, even a game developer could not exploit 100% of the system regardless of whether or not how easy it is to develop for.

Take the 360 for instance, why is it by now we are seeing better looking games considering (according to you) is advertised to run at XXX performance out of the box? Were the developers pulling a fast one on us? Why is Geow3 better looking than Geow1, according to your logic this shouldn't even happen in the first place.

Let's face it, even with the "hard-to-develop" mentality the PS3 has offered is consistently beating the "easy-to-code" when it comes to game and tech performance year after year. Which in turn proves 2 things:

1. It really wasn't that "hard-to-develop" for.
2. PS3 studios are pushing 150% more effort in order to demonstrate better tech in the same amount of time it would take for the "easy-to-develop" console route.

kaveti66162237d ago (Edited 2237d ago )

Yeah, but the point you're making basically refutes the CEO's argument as well. He said that they don't make the easy-to-program-for hardware because then everyone would exploit it immediately.

The 360 shows that this isn't true. It is considered to be easy-to-program-for, yet over times games have gotten more sophisticated for the 360, as a result of the developers optimizing their code and engine software.

Thus, Sony didn't need to make the PS3 harder to program for. As long as people develop for the same console for a number of years, they will become better and better at it.

Although decrypt is spewing a bunch of bullshit as though he's an engineer, he's right about the CEO's retarded defense of the difficult-to-program-for architecture. It was unnecessary. Why punish third party developers whose games attract a large bulk of console gamers?

DigitalAnalog2237d ago (Edited 2237d ago )

"It was unnecessary. Why punish third party developers whose games attract a large bulk of console gamers?"

Looking at the games that has been made for the PS3, I'm have to base my thoughts around that and by no means used as direct references.

I think that the CEO intended for the PS3 to be "hard-to-develop" for not because the resources aren't locked out on them (a lot of games can utilize 100% of the cell and yield extremely very poor results) but rather forcing them to "optimize" their code from the start.

I believe most people think that studios like ND aren't able to use 100% from the get-go, but looking it in another way, the architecture forces them to work around huge assets with the smallest amount of power.

I can see why the CEO would go forward with this. This would mean by the time the PS3's potential is fully realized. We can see jumps upon jumps of tech giving huge value to the system and can easily meet the 10 year support span the company is known for.

You even said it yourself, games get more sophisticated overtime. But since AAA PS3 games were forced to do that from that start, we are now beginning to see the fruits of the CEO's mentality.

But if there's one thing I agree with you, it does leave a lot of 3rd party studios in the dust. MS was the best alternative option to go through and this is where it hits SONY the hardest.

While I don't agree the argument to the CEO is negated, we can't deny the "risks" were just as apparent if not moreso when looking at the 3rd party standpoint.

DA_SHREDDER2238d ago (Edited 2238d ago )

Your right with just about everything Krypt. But one of the most important things that came out of the cell and the hard to develop for hardware was Sony's studios having to be above average when it came to software development. They turned their average studios into AAA beast. Had they made it easy to develop on their hardware, Sony would have just been on par with microsuck cause all they would have been doing is being a third party relying machine. I'm loving my ps3 exclusives. Sony's first party devs are doing things noone could imagine they would be doing on 6 year old hardware.

I agree with Kikhail. I was Ken Kitaragi that made those claims to begin with. Sony Japan has too much pull when it comes to hardware final specs, but to my understanding they are looking twards Sony's western studios and their input to develop their next machines.

tarbis2238d ago

Many PS3 exclusive games already disprove your point =)

CarlitoBrigante2238d ago

Thats always the aim of PlayStation, PS2 was the same, hard to code so the full potential will be achieved during the later years.

Compare early PS2 games with GoW2 and FF12.

Stop being such a hypocrite fanboy and bitch about PS3 fanboys on this site lmao, ignored

gypsygib2237d ago

The dumbest thing sony did this gen was make PS3 so hard/costly to develop for. 5 years in and too many multiplats still have problems.

This must be the first generation ever that a console that released a year later multiplats don't ALWAYS look better than the one that released previously.

PS3 should have just had a better GPU and more ram (but they could have designed PS3 based on MS original 256 MB of RAM thinking that every PS3 game would look better simply based on that)

mayberry2238d ago

For you to type so much, and link other pages proves without a shadow of doubt that you actually think that what he said is negative.
Consoles and cars are inherently different from each other, and Sony has proven that statement absolutly true overe and over. Too many examples to list! #1-uncharted 1 looks better than 360's newer games still. The games are still getting better. Thanks

kaveti66162237d ago

Yeah, Uncharted 1 did look great. But did Naughty Dog ever come out and say that the reason Uncharted looks great is because the PS3 is difficult to develop for? How does the difficulty in developing the game produce a better-looking product?

Software optimization doesn't require the console to be difficult to program for. It requires the developer to work on the same hardware for a number of years, with the external pressure of competing against other game developers for capturing consumer attention.

360 games have gotten better-looking over time and the 360 isn't hard to program for.

The only reasons why PS3 exclusives are graphically superior is because the PS3 is a more powerful machine and probably because Naughty Dog are very good at developing games.

Naughty Dog makes good-looking games DESPITE the PS3's difficult architecture, not because of it.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2237d ago
Mikhail2238d ago

it was ken kutaragi that claim that..kaz hirai was under him at that time...kaz was the one that change their game plan by using off the shelf components, see the ps vita, rather tham develop it like the disaster that is the cell.


disaster that is the cell...really

I think all the goverment contracts that they have is just one way to show your not well versed in what you speak. Another would be the fact that the cell has proven with a laundry list of 1st party titles that are not matched by any game on the 360 from a tech aspect.

So if you mean a master of disaster then yes you would be correct :)

faysal2238d ago

ahh so its 2 million loss.... other dumbass wrote 2 billion loss on other sony article...

Fishy Fingers2238d ago

Billion.... Million... Whats the difference.... :/

faysal2238d ago

are you joking? you think billion and million has no diffrence? dude you seriosly need to rethink what you just said, in other words learn to do maths

Rush2238d ago


He was clearly messing around stop being such a tard.

MariaHelFutura2238d ago (Edited 2238d ago )

Math NOT maths and he/she was joking.

Wh15ky2238d ago (Edited 2238d ago )

Maths NOT math (it is short for mathematics after all) and yes - he/she was joking.

MariaHelFutura2238d ago

In the way he was using it, it should have been math, NOT maths.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2238d ago
PimpDaddy2238d ago

2,038 million = 2.038 billion. Do some research before you call people names. Sony lost 2 Billion 38 thousand million dollars in the last 3 months.

Did I spell it out for you clearly enough???

lelo2play2238d ago

Yep... 2,038 million is 2 billion and 38 million. That's a pretty heavy loss for any company.

faysal2238d ago

2billion is 2million? WTF are you smoking? didnt you read the article ? kaz said they lost 2million US DOLLER !!! not 2billion us doller. if you can prove kaz saying they lost 2billion i will give you all my bubbles if i can.

PimpDaddy2238d ago

I was trying to correct you and you accused me of drugs. Now give me a bubble...

faysal2238d ago

math not maths bla bla umm sir its maths, in uk we call it maths not math. problem with you people is that you try to correct other when you dont even realise that you are wrong yourself.

Wh15ky2238d ago (Edited 2238d ago )

faysal: "2billion is 2million? WTF are you smoking? didnt you read the article ? kaz said they lost 2million US DOLLER !!! not 2billion us doller. if you can prove kaz saying they lost 2billion i will give you all my bubbles if i can."

Quote from article:

"In the third quarter (October 1 through December 31), Sony Corporation saw a net loss of $2,038 million on sales of $23,370 million."

"$2,038 million"


To put it another way: Two Thousand and Thirty Eight Million Dollars


To put it another way: $2.038 Billion (Two point Three Eight Billion Dollars). You see, there's a thousand million in a billion and in the article that's a comma between the 2 and the 0 - not a point.

It is definately NOT $2 million.


Hand over your bubbles!:)

Wh15ky2238d ago

BALLS! - That's what happens when I try to be a smart arse!!!

"$2.038 Billion (Two point Three Eight Billion Dollars)"


(Two point Zero Three Eight Billion Dollars)

faysal2238d ago (Edited 2238d ago )

how do i give you my bubbles? let me know.. im a man of my word :)

EDIT: now im lost O_O billion or million? make your mind up man

Wh15ky2238d ago

I'm only messing, but kudos for admitting your mistake, you don't see that very often on the internet.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2237d ago
tiffac0082238d ago (Edited 2238d ago )

If Hirai wants Sony to be dominant in the gaming market again then they should drastically cut cost on other markets where they are bleeding money pretty badly (like their freaking TV division, which is killing the whole company) because their financial situation overall is affecting the gaming division which is the only bright spot in the company.

PimpDaddy2238d ago

The PS3 is causing some of Sony's losses the past 2 quarters since they cut the price by 50 dollars. They also mention high costs of marketing and a decline in sales. That doesn't sound too bright to me.

Anon19742238d ago Show
Mustang300C20122238d ago


Can't discuss with u and reply if you have a block on PM

MizTv2238d ago

as long as they have the games they have me!

Show all comments (62)
The story is too old to be commented.