-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Kaz Hirai: "PS4 hardware is already profitable"
- Thread starter Spiegel
- Start date
Metalingus5150
Member
Forgottonone making really stupid posts is what is going on.
I don't like it, and I wouldn't buy it. I don't have a problem discussing it,. Is this enough trolling to report to a mod? Not sure if I can't do it since I'm still a junior.
MS are lucky the gaming public rejected their always online DRM immediately giving them time to do a 180 before launch. If it had gone ahead and people started getting kicked out of single player games when their internet flaked out Sony would have totally killed them in sales, instead of just comfortably beating them.
I lost track some time ago. Around the time people started bringing PC into the mix :/
Forgottonone
Member
I posted my statement about how the ps4 is profitable now.. (price raise in several countries) and no one even noticed it.,.
boredandlazy
Member
Then why would you live there?
Forgottonone
Member
Sorry to hear that.. I should just stop. I love you gaf never forget/
neotokyo360
Member
Good job Haz.
ReBurn
Gold Member
I've had Time Warner Cable for Internet for more than 15 years and I experience maybe one outage per year. I must really be an anomaly.
Zeuanimals
Member
Might be because of where you live.
Yeah, why would anyone live there?
EdReedFan20
Member
This will never happen (probably), but imagine the insanity that would ensue if Sony dropped the price of the PS4 to $299.99 and introduced a new PS4 SKU at $399.99 that bundled in the new Vita Slim at E3.
LegendofDragoonLives
Member
Huh?
If a company makes a product that you enjoy, why wouldn't you be happy that they're turning a profit from said product?
Dirk Benedict
Gold Member
Congrats Sony PlayStation.
That looks delectable! I want to know what ingredients went into that PlayStation + cake.
Citizen_Insane
Member
Value, hype, and a whole lotta love.
Mohonky
Member
.....because I am not emotionally invested in the company itself, just the experience their product affords me.
Unless I am a shareholder, then I might give a shit.
Basically Sony group is on the verge of bankruptcy. Sony and Nintendo going down means MS monopolizes the console space.
So it's enlightened self-interest to cheer them on.
killatopak
Member
Sorry if you were offended. I'm not calling you a douchebag here, I just wrote it that way because that's how I originally read it from another poster.
You can just replace 'douchbag' with 'wrong' for example.
Anyway, sure the original Xbox policies could have been the future but it was the future that the consumers don't want. Either it's because the consumers weren't ready yet or because they just don't want to be forced in a policy that disadvantages them, I don't know. The only fact here is that when MS' 180'd their policies, people seemed to have calmed down a bit and began to think of buying the Xbox One again objectively.
I dunno, but I'm scared.
Okay, but if you really like their product, don't you want them to do well so they can keep making good things? Also, don't you want the employees who worked on the product to be rewarded for their good work?
HORRORSHØW
Member
ultratruman
Banned
The Bill Gates quote about being willing to sell off Xbox and Bing, actually came from a Fox Business 1 hour interview with directed audience questions. One of the questions was directly "Would you approve of Xbox and Bill sell off if Satya Nadella wanted it. Bill Gates first defended Xbox and Bing as vital, but also said that he would support Nadella's choices. Which is good because they just named him CEO and saying "No we don't support Nadella on that" would be a baaaaad start to a new CEO's term.
Interview is here:
http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2014/05/05/buffett-leery-social-media-stocks-ipos/
The source of all the Elop selling Xbox details, actually came from a Bloomberg article, which Microsoft responded, quoted in the same article via Frank Shaw, saying, "We appreciate Bloombergs foray into fiction and look forward to future episodes."
Here is the article in question:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...andidate-elop-said-to-mull-windows-shift.html
This is the single source for all Xbox sales rumours surrounding Elop. The single one. Investor calls from outside of the company to sell are nothing new, they've been calling the sale of everything that isn't windows and office for decades. Not only that, the article is vague on it sources, and calls them, "the people". Look at the copy:
"Stephen Elop, a candidate to replace Steve Ballmer as Microsoft Corp.s chief executive officer, would consider breaking with decades of tradition by focusing the companys strategy around making the popular Office software programs like Word, Excel and PowerPoint available on a broad variety of smartphones and tablets, including those made by Apple Inc. and Google Inc., said three people with knowledge of his thinking."
"He would consider ending Microsofts costly effort to take on Google with its Bing search engine, and would also consider selling healthy businesses such as the Xbox game console if he determined they werent critical to the companys strategy, the people said."
The article doesn't quote any sources other than "People will knowledge of his thinking". Elop never said it publicly, no other article surfaced, with sources, based on this info. However, almost all Elop related calls to sell Xbox came from this article, or articles quoting this article.. or articles quoting those articles.. and so on. The unsupported rumour, based on heresay without sources, became a source, became fact. And now everyone thinks MS was considering to sell Xbox.
Hope that clears that up.
That's a good rebuttal for any supposed evidence of Microsoft's intention to dump Xbox, but it doesn't negate the fact that Microsoft lumps all Xbox revenue into the same division as its absurdly lucrative android patents, so it's virtually impossible to know if Xbox has ever made MS money. There has been speculation that Microsoft does this intentionally because Xbox has been a money pit and they want to avoid the ire of shareholders.
"Bill Gates first defended Xbox and Bing as vital" - This part isn't really true because if you watch the video you will get a sense as to how he feels about both as an integrated part of MS. He completely defends Bing and says it's an useful tool that can be used in other MS products and doesn't see it going away. With Xbox he only talks about it when he is questioned further by the interviewer and then goes on to talk about PC graphics and how they are bringing Xbox and PC closer(DX12) but how the Xbox division is handled will be up to Satya Nadella however, he will fully support a spin off of the Xbox division if Satya Nadella chooses.
TLDR - Bill thinks Bing should stay and made a strong case for it, Xbox is in full support of spinning if Satya Nadella decides and didn't make much of a case for.
Sorry for Off topic.
OT - Good to hear they are already profitable on just hardware.
With the move of playstation becoming more service based and Kaz believing in that motive going forward. How do you think they will handle PS5? Streaming box? There is also VR to think about because the whole industry is making a push for that and it might actually become the next big thing and more powerful hardware will benefit from that but will be impossible with streaming? due to things like latency and such. So how would they handle it because dedicated hardware then become less desirable if internet infrastructure catches up and ISP's often better plans (In places like US/Canada) then people could get access to a good to great gaming experience from almost anywhere.
I think context is important here. What degree of emotional investment? Is it healthy or is it unhealthy.
From a macro view, looking at the industry and having an understanding of how all the gears work, I think its understandable how someone could be 'happy' that a console is profitable. We all enjoy this hobby and that in itself requires some investment. If you like a game or product the basic equation of that product requires that it have some sort of financial success. It suggests that you'll see continued support and the proliferation of that product and the experiences it provides. While its simple to look at Sony as some big monolithic company, it is composed of smaller entities...entities consisting of people. People who are performing their job for pay; but also impart some degree of art and self into their project/vision. And while I would hazard to guess that most people aren't necessarily thinking about the people-side of things when they say they're 'happy'; they are talking about continuation or fulfillment of that project/vision being realized.
A lot of people bemoan the popularity of first person shooters or even the first person perspective in AAA game development today. Those genres or perspectives have become commonplace because they have been viewed to be more likely financially successful. Business seek to repeat successes...and expand on them. There is clear evidence in the game space...games or products fail to garner attention and sales and those games/genres/ideas often times get abandoned. You've lost the experience you received 'happiness' from. Its all connected. But I assume you know that. I assume you're talking about ridiculous emotional attachments that result in 'fanboyism'...which is explainable, but is really unhealthy.