Reeves uncertain over PS3's 10 year lifespan

NowGamer: SCEE boss David Reeves has expressed uncertainty over the PS3's proposed 10-year-life span.

During an interview in an upcoming issue of Play magazine, Reeves said Nintendo and Microsoft will have new models on the market before Sony would, but that he doesn't know whether the PS3's lifespan will be "eight, nine, or ten years..."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Fishy Fingers3548d ago

What? Get out your Crystal ball and give me an exact date Reeves! Obviously I'm being sarcastic, they cant be that specific this early in the consoles life, who knows what the future holds.

"“I don't know whether the PS3's lifespan will be eight, nine, or ten years”

^That is basically the article and either way, whether its 8, 9 or 10 years, I'll be ready for a PS4 well before then, just like the PS2, even if they support it for ten years it doesnt mean a lot of us wont have already moved onto the next thing.

creeping judas3548d ago

I think a lot of people misunderstand when sony is talking about the life cycle of the PS3. Doesnt mean that at the end of 10years, they are going to release the PS4. The PS4 will be released before that, it's just that SONY will support the PS3 for 10years, even while the PS4 is out.

edgeofblade3548d ago

I totally understand that Judas. But think about what this is. This is a batter pointing at the stands. If they fail, they will have to admit they failed. Sony's not particularly good at doing that gracefully.

ericnellie3548d ago

Who wants to play on a console thats 10 years old. As fast as technology improves, 10 years is a long time. Just think - if I was playing games on a 7 year old cool would that be? Not very. I honestly think that a 5 to 6 year life span is reasonable...but 10, not so much. I don't mind enjoying my PS3 for 5 years and buying a backwards compatible PS4 4 years from now;)

IdleLeeSiuLung3548d ago

PS2 is on it's what eight year?

Sony wants it to be 10 year cycle, but I highly doubt it. I enjoy a faster console cycle, 4-6 years is fine by me with a lower initial cost. On average, I get more value for my money. It is like buying a PC, do you jump out and spend $1000-1500 on a relatively high-end PC or $800 for a budget and replace it in two years? I know I do the latter, never buy the latest and greatest. See what happened to the Intel quad cores, 2-years later we are still barely taking advantage of them.

Mr Tretton3548d ago

creeping judas, I say that all the time, but people are stupid. Just look at your disagrees. (I'll be getting some too)

umair_s513547d ago

I don't need 10 years, 6 years of high quality gameplay and graphics reign is all I want

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3547d ago
chidori6663548d ago

ummm... ps3 died in 2011?

SixTwoTwo3548d ago

Teh PSTri dy3d 1n oh6. Its 21 million consoles sold and Killzone 2 are just an illusion. --__--

pixelsword3548d ago

...New Console + no money to buy consoles = console failure.

I don't care if the console will be one dollar; if you don't have that dollar to spend on a console, you can't get it.

TheColbertinator3548d ago

David Reeves,the most incompetent man in Sony Europe lol

BLUR1113548d ago

uncertain because the next Xbox would kill the PS brand if sony just sticks with the PS3 for ages. LOL it's not the PS2 days anymore king Kaz

cryymoar3547d ago (Edited 3547d ago )

it's still gona wipe the floor with the xbox 360.
2008, the year the price difference was $200, and the PS3 still sold the same amount as the "cheaper" competition [not counting the Wii].
That should ring a bell as who is truly the better company.

oh and you misunderstand what life cycle means to Sony and Playstation fans.
Let me give you a hint, the PS2's life cycle still isn't over, and the PS3 has been here for 2 and a half years.

3548d ago
Show all comments (53)
The story is too old to be commented.