190°

Sony: Nintendo should have a broader perspective on 3D

With Nintendo entering the 3D market Sony opens their ears. Sony Worldwide Studios President Shuhei Yoshida said that he would like to cooperate with Nintendo, rather than seeing the company "compete" the 3D experience seen through glasses.

He wants to see Nintendo have a "broader perspective on 3D." Is he hinting that Nintendo should also bring out a Nintendo Wii 2 with 3D graphics to further promote 3D televisions?

Read Full Story >>
translate.google.de
Schneestern5475d ago

I'm curious about Nintendos answer...

GWAVE5475d ago

IMO, Nintendo already has a broader perspective.

Sony's stance is "buy one of our $1500 TVs and a pair of $200 glasses and a $300 PS3".

Nintendo's stance is "we will bring the 3D to you. No new TV needed, no glasses needed, and it fits in your two hands".

With that said, I'm excited for BOTH companies. I just think Nintendo is more consumer-minded.

Information Minister5475d ago

@ GWAVE - You're comparing oranges to apples. The technology deployed in the 3DS (parallax 3D) is unusable on large TV sets because of extremely limited viewing angles. It works on a handheld since you are holding the screen and can adjust it frequently. If the 3DS becomes a huge success and Nintendo decides to jump on the 3D bandwagon for home systems, they will end up eating their own words.

Lawliet5475d ago

Nintendo to bring 3D to us with handhelds and nothing more. With that said, its not bad, just Sony wants home entertainment.. Can't expect them to bring 3D to us with a console that's for sure. Nobody can, and if one could why would you think I'll go for a $1500 TV? I'd just dig it out from a junkie, and have the console do the transformation.

Christopher5475d ago

***IMO, Nintendo already has a broader perspective. ***

That's not really a broader perspective, actually. In fact, it's a narrow perspective specific to just their handheld market. It's a large market, but not as large as the TV user market.

Now, having said that, Nintendo really doesn't need to have a broader perspective. They just need to wait and see how it goes with 3D implemented by Sony and other TV makers and the video games put out in 3D. If it works, then Nintendo can just work on utilizing the standard 3D with their games based on the hard work of other companies who make money off of 3D hardware.

I think Nintendo is in the safe position that Microsoft is in. It's much easier to play catch-up in this are if it is determined to be profitable than it is to spend lots of money on something that hasn't caught on yet and might not go very far as it is.

evrfighter5475d ago

Sony knows if 3ds is successful people will begin to EXPECT glasses free 3d.

Not good for the kind of 3d Sony is going after. They're only stance has to be this. The only 3d I want is glasses free 3d. I own a 3d pc monitor. But I use it for the 120fps it gives me and that's it.

sikbeta5475d ago (Edited 5475d ago )

This is clearly Unfair if anyone think for a minute, Sony can say whatever they want cos Sony Corp make almost Everything Electronic + Entertainment Related, Nintendo in the other hand, just make Consoles/handhelds and Software and by that N can't have a "broader perspective" and just focus on Gaming, while Sony is Pushing 3D with TVs + Gaming + Movies...

@above

You totally missed the point and Glassless 3D will come after Years and Loads of Money put on R&D, Nintendo is not gonna make a Glassless 3D Home Console, if they want to Apply 3D in their next Console is going to be with glasses...

@below

You were proven Wrong One Time by Pennywise and Brutallyhonest, I'll take the links they posted to make this the second time:

http://www.bestbuy.com/site...

http://www.bestbuy.com/site...

http://www.sonystyle.com/we...

hoops5475d ago

Actually its more in the lines of $3000 for a 3DHDTV....
if it were $1500 only for a 50"+ 3dhdtv many people would be all over it

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 5475d ago
al-burrito5475d ago

not convinced of 3D on this little screen yet...

TheViper5475d ago (Edited 5475d ago )

Al-Burrito.

I and thousands of other industry and media attendees at E3 a few weeks ago felt just as skeptical only to get wide-eyed in disbelief at what we say on screen.

I don't think I've heard one really negative opinion from those that played one yet.

sikbeta5475d ago

The Question is What will be Nintendo Answer when it comes to Home Console...

wwm0nkey5475d ago

Hey al take it from people that went to E3, the 3D on the 3DS is amazing! Wait till you get your hands on it.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 5475d ago
BeaArthur5475d ago

Really? You care about this ongoing pissing match? You can't really take either of them at what they say because the side of the argument each of them stands on is based on the product they are selling. It's impossible to know how either of these companies truly feels about 3D.

NYC_Gamer5475d ago

they should work together to promote 3D

Fefe5475d ago

I don't see me playing a Wii 2 on a 3D TV. No1 knows if this 3D-thing is going to be a good idea. So I doubt that Nintendo is working on a 3D-Wii.

portablegaming5475d ago

But hopefully without 3D glasses. Because they are silly. Nobody likes them. They look weird, the are uncomfortable and if you already have glasses, they suck totally.

pwnsause5475d ago

3DTV with 3D glasses are going to be around for a loonngg time. unless you have 10,000 to spend on Glasses' 3DTVs, then ok then....

ALFAxD_CENTAURO5475d ago

3DTV's without Glasses don't depends on Nintendo.

There are already 3DTV's to use without Glasses, but are more expensive.

Make sense why Sony, Phillips and other Companies are pushing 3DTV's to use with Glasses, because is more cheaper and the development is more advanced.

table5475d ago

Sony would love for nintendo to go 3D with a wii 2 as it would promote sony's 3DTV range. They are pushing the TV's more than anyone out there so if 3D does not catch on sony will lose a lot out of all this.

I'm not at all interested, 3D with glasses just feels like old tech to me because it has been around for so long. That coupled with the very high price for the tech. I'm perfectly happy waiting for glassless 3D, albeit that is many years down the line.

gamerz5475d ago

Until 3D comes to Wii, trashing Sony on price and the glasses is a winning strategy.

MariaHelFutura5475d ago

I love it, hopefully it drives them both to progress further.

Show all comments (56)
140°

Sony Faces Class Action in the Netherlands Over Allegedly Inflated PlayStation Store Prices

Mass Damage & Consumer Foundation in the Netherlands has filed a class action against Sony for inflating PlayStation Store prices.

dveio3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

My personal opinion:

Manufacturers and publishers have indeed inflated the industry.

From $700 million development costs for games like Call of Duty, to digital (store) prices for games and DLCs, online multiplayer fees on consoles (why can you play Helldivers 2 online for free on PC but not consoles?) or still preventing sell/lend digitally purchased games.

Sometime in the future, this bubble will collapse.

They should know better, but they just can't help themselves and suck even the last penny out of our wallets.

BeHunted3d ago

Because Sony knows people will be forced to pay those prices for single player and multiplayer games, not everyone prefers PC gaming. Sony also has a monopoly on PlayStation digital games. In 2019, they stopped allowing retailers and game key sellers to sell PlayStation digital games, making them available only through the official PlayStation Store

anast3d ago

The Dutch gov. wants a piece of the pie.

Eonjay3d ago

They should be suing the individual publishers increasing the prices to $80 instead of suing the store. There are plenty of publishers still selling game for like $50 with much success (like E33). But this proves that the publishers are the ones setting the prices.... so again nothing changes because they aren't even going after the main offender. How is suing Sony going to make Microsoft not charge $80 for the next COD? Sony being the number one store in the market doesn't mean that publisher have to charge us an arm and a leg. Again the industry is laughing at us because consumers never get real representation. Just these fake platitudes that are meaningless.

BeHunted3d ago

"How is suing Sony going to make Microsoft not charge $80 for the next COD"

Because Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly, I can purchase Call of Duty at a huge discount from CDKeys or other gaming retailers. The only way to purchase digital PlayStation games is through the PlayStation Store.

djl34853d ago

Weird, I swore GoW, Stellar Blade, Horizon Zero Dawn, TLoU, etc. were on the steam store....uh.....

BeHunted3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

@djI3485

I'm talking about PlayStation games that you can only purchase on PlayStation. I can purchase Steam and Epic games from 3rd party retailers and key stores.

"Sony to stop selling full-game download codes at retailers"

https://www.videogamer.com/...

Killer2020UK3d ago

About time. There is zero fair reason why digitally distributed products that you cannot recoup any value when you want to dispose of them, should be priced higher than that of physical copies that entail all of the costs and the benefits of owning.

Show all comments (12)
170°

Sony Aims To Sell 15 Million PS5 Units This Year, but Is Shifting Focus to Monthly Active Users

Sony CEO Hiroki Totoki and CFO Lin Tao talked about the state of the PlayStation business and the strategy and targets going forward, including how they're responding to the tariffs.

Read Full Story >>
simulationdaily.com
1Victor45d ago

I wonder how the USA tariffs war will affect that projection. 🤔

S2Killinit45d ago (Edited 45d ago )

I think they take that into consideration when they announce their projections. Currently, after the xbox price increase, the PRO is cheaper than the series x! That is ridiculous, and it can’t last.

darthv7244d ago

you keep saying that but the price of a PS5 Pro is S699.99 (US) and the price of a Series X is $599.99 (US)

S2Killinit44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

The series x with 2 TB storage space is more expensive than PS5 PRO which also has 2 TB storage space.

darthv7244d ago (Edited 44d ago )

Oh so you are pitting a regular Pro with a special edition X... got it. If you are going so far as trying to compare apples to apples... please add in the optical drive and stand to the Pro. Seeing as the X has both of those by default.

I will help you if you are unable to do so.
PS5 Pro 2tb: $699.99, Optical Drive: $79.99, Stand: $29.99 = $809.97
Xbox Series X Galaxy Black Special Edition 2TB: $729.99

44d ago
S2Killinit44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

The PS5 PRO has 2TB storage. The series X with 2TB storage and much weaker, is… more expensive! So yeah, Im pointing out that fact.

Also, the PRO does not require a stand.

Ps: regular series 2TB is $749 (where did u get 729?)

darthv7244d ago

Its right here on the official XB site: https://www.xbox.com/en-US/...

Okay, so no stand for the Pro, but you might still want the optical drive. So $779.98 vs $729.99. A properly outfitted Pro is still more $$ than a 2tb X.

S2Killinit43d ago (Edited 43d ago )

Do I need to mention that the series x is not nearly as powerful as the PS5 PRO?

And no, the PS5 PRO runs just fine without a drive, and people don’t have to buy the drive right away, assuming they want it.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 43d ago
drivxr45d ago

I wonder why they are shifting focus to MAU.

RaiderNation45d ago

Because that's where the real money is made, in microtransactions.

Profchaos45d ago (Edited 45d ago )

People are spending less time playing is a typical trigger for this.

The less time spent playing the less likely you are to spend more money on games and services including subs or even the next console.

Increased engagement equals more money.

45d ago
DarXyde44d ago

Same reason Microsoft does it: it looks better to investors and it's a solution when unit sales slow down.

Personally, I'm not a fan of this metric; and by using it, you're kind of signaling that you're moving into the "This is a PlayStation" era.

Z50144d ago

Because the PS4 also has users and not necessarily sales

Obscure_Observer42d ago

"I wonder why they are shifting focus to MAU."

Because they´d finally realized that MS wasn´t wrong after all.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 42d ago
45d ago
44d ago
310°

Sony Announces Large Profits Growth for PlayStation; Expects Further Wins in Current Fiscal Year

Sony announced its financial results for the fiscal year 2024, and things are certainly looking up, despite a decline in PS5 sales.

Read Full Story >>
simulationdaily.com
CrimsonWing6945d ago

Expect sh*t to slow down if prices aren’t kept in check.

Redgrave45d ago

Who downvotes the truth?

Even PSN itself is too damn high.jpg

S2Killinit45d ago

Gamepass is already at 20$ per month if im not mistaken.

toxic-inferno44d ago

@neutralgamer1992

Not all of us. I'm a big PlayStation fan, and have been since the PSOne. But I can't begin to defend what's happening currently.

At least Nintendo release a large number of games from their major franchises. Sony is just not banking on their established franchises, and yet are raising prices. Not great.

S2Killinit45d ago

Im pretty sure we are going to see a price increase for PRO. I mean think about it, its currently cheaper than xbox series x! That cannot last.

Eonjay45d ago

I'm absolutely sure we will not see a price increase. I don't think we should 'expect' to see price increase because it just adds validity to what Nintendo and Microsoft have done.

darthv7244d ago (Edited 44d ago )

Sorry to pop that bubble but the Pro is not cheaper than a series x... generally speaking (like you are). It is cheaper than one specific version, and doing so by not including the optical drive and stand like the X has by default.

So keep on trying to convince people you are right when everyone knows it's quite the opposite. A stock Pro is $699.99 and a stock X is $599.99. A special edition galactic black 2tb X is $729.99. And if you really want to compare apples to apples... adding the aforementioned optical drive and stand brings that Pro to $809.97 and then they would be on equal footing.

Twisting truths to fit a narrative... I expect better from you S2.

S2Killinit44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

The PS5 PRO has 2TB storage. And the series X with 2TB is more expensive. Which in my opinion is insane conseidering how much more powerful the PRO is. The PS5PRO does not need a stand, it can be used without a stand.

TheKingKratos45d ago

So the Pro is not offering any push in sales at all ?

CrashMania45d ago

It's still an expensive, niche product ultimately. And they exceeded their sales projections for units sold by half a million.

lawox45d ago

"18.5 million units have been shipped during the full fiscal year. This is actually ahead of the 18 million units target set by the company."

They beat their yearly estimate. It's not broken down by device, but it's clearly performing well enough. Since it's been released it's consistently been the second best selling SKU on Amazon only after the the Slim with disc.

44d ago
Bathyj44d ago

18 million a year is in the toilet?
I remember when 10 was considered good
Hell Microsoft would take that right now.
Probably pay $100b for it.

44d ago
BeHunted45d ago

If their profits fall next quarter, we'll probably see more price hikes. I can't imagine having to pay £20 a month for PlayStation Plus.

S2Killinit45d ago

I think gamepass is already paying that much.

45d ago
drivxr45d ago (Edited 45d ago )

Decline in hardware sales.
Behind on lifetime sales and decline in first party sales.
Third party content and PSN came through to save the day.
Things will improve starting with the next Ghost game.

Hopefully a steady flow of first party content by end of '25

rlow145d ago (Edited 45d ago )

I guess you get downvoted for stating facts from Sony’s own lips. What I’m curious about is what their top games of the year were and how much Xbox games contributed to the increase?

CrashMania45d ago

Well, generally 3rd party publisher games contribute the most anyway, so no different to capcom, EA and so on contributing to this figure.

lawox44d ago

That's because the report is actually really good.

They beat the console sales estimate that they set last year March, they have increased users both due to the record numbers of PS4 users and strong PS5 sales which is leading to great profits in sales and user spend.

This report is about the financial health of the PlayStation brand and as a platform PlayStation is stronger than ever. Heck they even have Microsoft putting their biggest franchises on the platform.

44d ago
S2Killinit44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

Well, the facts in the article are positive. Nothing wrong with his comment, but in my opinion it doesn't correctly indicate all the facts and nuances that give context to the reality of things. I downvoted for that only.

Make sense?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 44d ago
Lightning7745d ago

This is exactly what happened to Xbox year's ago. They had no first party and started seeing decline in 1st party sales, which effected their third party games which eventually effected their console sales. A slow decline across the board.

Calm down PS fans I'm not saying PS is becoming like old Xbox. I'm showing examples of the importance of first party output. Look how Xbox finally has compelling first party and things are on a up swing(despite years going on a downswing). I know thanks to PS releases which helps a ton, (which is why Xbox hardware only dropped 6% instead of 30+% like it usually does) The point still stands despite what Genz Trends may go, first party and compelling games sell hardware and software still. Sony's financial quarter is an example of this, of what lower First party output looks like.

No matter they'll be right back on track in due time any time especially with DS2 (not my type of game but I know many like it) and Yotei. They're not Xbox and let things get bad for so many years on end.

crazyCoconuts44d ago

"I'm showing examples of the importance of first party output. "
First party is mostly relevant for the sole purpose of creating EXCLUSIVES that are needed to stay competitive. With Xbox consoles collapsing and no more Xbox exclusives, first party is way less important. PlayStation as a platform now has free reign to profit without the high expense of needing exclusive first party titles.

red2tango44d ago

Sony has been very lazy with 1st party games compared to the PS4 era. And even the PS4 era was nothing compared to the PS3 era in terms of games.

S2Killinit44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

We have Ghost and Intergalactic coming. And then Marathon which is not exclusive to PlayStation. I think Covid and that chip shortage put a speedbump in game development because game manufacturers dont want even more risk that their game will arrive to too little hardware, but the games are starting to show up.

Lightning7744d ago

"With Xbox consoles collapsing and no more Xbox exclusives, first party is way less important."

Absolutely not. If that was the case then Nintendo would put Mario on Sega Genesis and Sonic on Super Nintendo. I know things are way different 30+ years later but not much has really changed in terms of exclusives and their impact on hardware. Especially early in the console life cycle.

Sony made all the money this quarter handover fist. Profits isn't a issue for them right now. I was just saying lower hardware sales and lower first party sales will hurt them or any console manufacturer of they don't have the compelling games in the long run. Just like it hurt Xbox. IF Sony keeps up not having lower first part output. Which we know they're not.

crazyCoconuts44d ago

Well no big exclusives in the last two years yet PS is doing great. What are people gonna do? Buy an Xbox?

S2Killinit44d ago

I agree with you. But they have had plenty of exclusives so far. Has it been ideal? Nope. I have a feeling we are seeing a resurgence with the effects of covid and that chip shortage now behind us.

Lightning7744d ago

No it's just like 360 where they had no games yet ppl still bought it because they sold ppl on the games early on that gen the fans were locked in and invested. They were riding the good will and was dubbed the shooter, racer box. The games dried up and they never recovered from it which hurt them in the long run. Same here with PS they still make the big bucks because they had games early on and the fans locked in and will continue to lock in for a little while longer despite lacking in first party.

S2Killinit44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

I agree. But the problem with xbox was that for some crazy reason MS thought game development wasnt all that important to a platform holder. They literally did not fund games with their own studios. When they lost marketshare they couldnt justify paying for exclusives with large install bases making it too expensive. That is not the scenario with PlayStation.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 44d ago
Show all comments (46)