250°

Can PS3 Live Up To The Expected 10+ Year Lifespan? | GameBlurb

GameBlurb writes, "With the mouting rumors of the next Xbox coming daily and the impending release of the Wii U, can Sony afford to wait another 5 years before releasing a new console?"

Read Full Story >>
gameblurb.net
PimpHandHappy4949d ago

doesnt mean the PS4 wont be out at year 8 but i know i can play my PS3 for years 2come... Sh!t my backlog of games that i want to play is a year long easy

darthv724949d ago (Edited 4949d ago )

I mean the PS2 did because there wasnt anything to challenge its popularity until the 360 came out.

In some ways if something comes along and steals market share (even a bit) it can force the hand of a company to up their release time frame.

Even if a new system were released at year 6 doesnt mean they would stop supporting the previous one. It does tend to spread things a bit thin though.

One hurdle holding back the ps3 was in fact the PS2. Now it is selling quite well and those who held off are now starting to buy into it.

Sony isnt the kind of company to drop support once the new system comes out. MS did that with the xbox when the 360 launched. Then again, it proved pretty lucrative for them in doing that.

edit: even further thinking.....it may be that sony would slow support for the ps3 if they released the ps4. By that it would allow them to refocus efforts on the new system and support would continue for the old via 3rd parties.

You know sony was probably shaking their heads watching the 360 continue to sell and the ps3 sell less than they expected it to for the first few years. Internal meetings probably concerned dropping ps2 support in favor of full speed ahead on the ps3. Whatever happens next gen it will DEFINITELY be different than this gen.

sikbeta4949d ago (Edited 4949d ago )

"I mean the PS2 did because there wasnt anything to challenge its popularity until the 360 came out"

Nop, if that was the case, the sole announce of a new Console from Sony would "kill" the current one, like the wii-u did to the wii :P PlayStation Systems are introduced in the market this way, every 6 years a new console is released, all developer power move to the new console but the "old" one is still supported and manufactured to complete its life cycle, PS1 was 10 years, PS2 was 10 years, but still manufactured, meaning it reached 11 years in the market and keeps going, PS3 will do the same, so I don't know why doubt it

firefoxprime4949d ago (Edited 4949d ago )

true words. I just bought my PS3 back in May 2011. Worked fine for me. A huge backlog of awesome titles from 5 years.

Picked up my PS2 back in 2005, so I'm clearly a late adopter. Gotta tell ya though, real nice pickin up Mirror's edge for $10 vs. $60 :)

off topic: I don't like buying "BROKEN GAMES". Screw mediocre patches and overprice DLC! I really believe people are WAY to comfortable with rushed launches. Just my op.

saladthieves4949d ago

With such a large library of PS3 games that is available, I say we'll see this machine live up to its 10 year lifespan and beyond. It has something that the PS2 didn't really have: Internet.

We can get extra features, support, DLC, patches etc. on things that we couldn't do with the PS2. We get to shop for online games, watch movies and chat with our friends, all from the PS3. It's still a gaming console, but it's more than that this gen.

I can easily say that all these features undoubtedly easily increase the PS3's lifespan of more than 10 years. I can still see the PS3 still selling in 2016 and after that.

BitbyDeath4948d ago (Edited 4948d ago )

Every 6 years a new playstation is born: one console in all the world, a chosen one. It alone will wield the strength and skill to fight Nintendo and the forces of Microsoft; to stop the spread of their evil and the swell of their number. It is the Playstation.

[Enter Drums & Guitar]

Kiroe4949d ago

I too have a feeling that the system will last for 10 years, especially with strong exclusives. But, I do foresee the PS3 and PS4 coexisting just like the PS2/PS3. I just hope Sony has a good plan on migrating all of my PSN games over to the PS4...I'd hate to lose them.

frostypants4949d ago

If they stick to the Cell architecture, that should be a somewhat trivial task for them.

Majin-vegeta4949d ago

It means Sony will keep supporting it just like the ps2 look how old it is and it's still kicking @$$ :D.

Ezio20484948d ago

after all....PS2's power is OVER 9000!!!!! =D

death2smoochie4949d ago

Of course it will. The PS2 lasted...
Sony will bring out the PS4 during the time the PS3 is out...just as they did with the PS3 and the PS2.
The PS4 will be released and the PS3 will still be supported.
Common sense.

Ducky4949d ago (Edited 4949d ago )

PS3 not being backward compatible with PS2 games is part of the reason the PS2 didn't die so quickly.
(Granted, the early PS3 models had BW compatibility)

It leaves an incentive for people to buy a PS2 and play what is arguably the best software lineup for any single console.
If the next PS4 can do everything the PS3 can do plus more, then I don't see the PS3 making it to the 10 year mark. (It is currently 5 years old)

MysticStrummer4949d ago

You disproved your own argument by acknowledging the backwards compatibility of the early PS3s. Price was the reason PS3 didn't sell well in the beginning, and the low price of a PS2 plus it's great catalogue of games kept it viable. PS3 will be supported for that 10 years, if only to avoid all the "What Happened to the 10 Year Plan, Sony?!?" articles that would certainly follow.

MizTv4949d ago

as long as there is games i cant play anywhere else ill b happy

Show all comments (42)
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.

dveio23h ago(Edited 23h 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.

BeHunted21h 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

anast23h ago

The Dutch gov. wants a piece of the pie.

Eonjay23h 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.

BeHunted21h 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.

djl348520h ago

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

BeHunted16h ago(Edited 16h 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/...

Killer2020UK21h 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
1Victor42d ago

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

S2Killinit42d ago (Edited 42d 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.

darthv7241d 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)

S2Killinit41d ago (Edited 41d ago )

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

darthv7241d ago (Edited 41d 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

41d ago
S2Killinit41d ago (Edited 41d 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?)

darthv7241d 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.

S2Killinit40d ago (Edited 40d 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 40d ago
drivxr42d ago

I wonder why they are shifting focus to MAU.

RaiderNation42d ago

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

Profchaos42d ago (Edited 42d 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.

42d ago
DarXyde41d 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.

Z50141d ago

Because the PS4 also has users and not necessarily sales

Obscure_Observer39d 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 39d ago
42d ago
41d 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
CrimsonWing6942d ago

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

Redgrave42d ago

Who downvotes the truth?

Even PSN itself is too damn high.jpg

S2Killinit42d ago

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

toxic-inferno41d 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.

S2Killinit42d 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.

Eonjay42d 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.

darthv7241d ago (Edited 41d 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.

S2Killinit41d ago (Edited 41d 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.

TheKingKratos42d ago

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

CrashMania42d ago

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

lawox42d 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.

41d ago
Bathyj41d 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.

41d ago
BeHunted42d 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.

S2Killinit42d ago

I think gamepass is already paying that much.

42d ago
drivxr42d ago (Edited 42d 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

rlow142d ago (Edited 42d 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?

CrashMania42d ago

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

lawox41d 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.

41d ago
S2Killinit41d ago (Edited 41d 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 41d ago
Lightning7742d 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.

crazyCoconuts41d 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.

red2tango41d 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.

S2Killinit41d ago (Edited 41d 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.

Lightning7741d 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.

crazyCoconuts41d ago

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

S2Killinit41d 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.

Lightning7741d 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.

S2Killinit41d ago (Edited 41d 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 41d ago
Show all comments (46)