-
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.
IGN rumour: PS4 to have '2 GPUs' - one APU based + one discrete
- Thread starter gofreak
- Start date
I don't really use those apps on the Vita. It may be a case of devs figuring out how to use it effectively but I'm triggered enough black holes in Super Stardust to know that in many cases, I'm not even trying to touch it. It may work for scrolling or manipulating a camera in a non-action game but for actual gameplay it's less than ideal.
I don't get it. Sony losing money and firing people is old?
Did you read the post I quoted? There was a thread a couple months about the losses.
*smh* A generational gap with regards to console specs does not need to rival or usurp the current PC tech. An intelligent plan (one that can be realistically followed through) would include a tenure where Sony either sells each console at a certain loss amount (nothing like PS3) followed by breaking even and then getting into green. With Vita, Sony went directly for the green. As such, the next gen is all about balancing power with turn around time for cutting the production cost of the HW. It's all about shortening the time period within which reaching the green is possible.
Given that PS brand was one of the few profitable divisions they'll ensure that it remains the same way and prosper further.
Maybe Sony is in less trouble than you seem to think?
I actually think these are smart specs. They are cheap and a reasonable jump from the PS3. You're looking at about 1.2 TFLOPS of theoretical power between the 7670 and the 6550D. These provide traditional architecture for developers to work on and eventually optimize. I hope with these specs we could see a $299 console in 2013.
If 182cm is short, then I am short.
profitable for now.
Hiro_Kunimi_80
Member
you sure, after Vita's launch ?
Then I don't see why the current state of Sony is of much concern.
Common sense would indicate they continue or expand where they make money.
can you provide proof that sony is losing money on Vita? Would really like to see it.
Because they lost all the money they made of PS2 in first two years on PS3. Last 2 or 3 decent years can't erase all the loses they had in the first couple of years.
bigtroyjon
Member
Got combined with tv's last year, so the division it's in is losing money. All we know about the Game unit is their profits were negatively impacted last quarter due to the PS3 price cut. Don't know if that drop cause profits to turn negative or if they are still positive.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
As of Feb. 1, 2011, the Playstation division had lost $4.7 billion since launching the PS3.
That has only just recently become profitable and I don't believe has come anywhere close to eliminating those losses.
REMEMBER CITADEL
Banned
Yes. After the restructuring, nobody but Sony knows how the PlayStation business really stands.
Sony said:
Hiro_Kunimi_80
Member
as soon as they release Q4 fiscal year data.. we will soon find out.
anyway a " platform " launch on worldwide scale is not just limited to " how much is profitable, or not" the hardware..
there are many more additional cost to handle ( mktg & adv, starting entire business unit on each HQ, for example.. and many others)
Kazuma Kiryu
Member
income seems to be going up, we'll see how vita changes things
The operative adjective there was "less".
It was profitable way before that date and the original losses were about 6bln. So they've recovered a little more than a bill if your numbers are right.
bigtroyjon
Member
$50 million launch marketing campaign in the US is more than $100 per Vita sold so far. It has without a doubt lost money up to this point. Really too soon to judge though, need to wait till the end of 2012 to get a better overall picture.
You usually don't count marketing numbers in the equations. Also software was supposed to be one of the Vitas main money makers. There really is no way you can say either.
I remember reading that the wifi model was losing a small amount while the 3G model was sole at a small profit.
They are. The game and camera divisions are where Sony is pouring most of its efforts now.
frankie_baby
Member
Funnily enough its the wifi model that people prefer so that wont be doing them any good
Off topic:
What Vita needs in JP- Monster Hunter
What Vita needs in EU: Sports games preferably more Fifa titles and GT
What Vita needs in NA: (Unfortunately) CoD
bigtroyjon
Member
Of course you count marketing if you are determining if a product is making or losing money.
PS1 = 2mb ram
x16
PS2 = 32mb ram
x16
PS3 = 512mb ram
x16
PS4 = 8gigs ram
Anything less is bullshit!
It doesn't need that much RAM. A bigger number does not mean it will be a better console. Sony is a business, and as such it needs to balance cost with appropriate hardware. There is no need for 8GB of RAM. I'm not going to lie, at first I was underwhelmed by these rumored specs, but I think the A8-3850 and the 7670 is appropriate and provides enough power to continue graphics and physics progression for another five years beyond 2013.
Of course you count marketing costs when looking at the profit/loss status of a product. You even count in shipping, packaging, financing, insurance, warranty, etc. Anything directly attributable to the cost of a product is part of the analysis if you want a true reading of whether or not the product is profitable.
I've literally never seen it in any fiscal report from the companies. Marketing is a sunk cost while profitability is an ongoing analysis. It can change everyday.
Like I said marketing is a sunk cost. Shipping, packaging, financing, insurance, warranty, etc are all variables that change frequently.
It's true. I am short. About 5'6" or so.
frankie_baby
Member
a sunk cost is still a loss
evil solrac v3.0
Member
PS1 = 2mb ram
x16
PS2 = 32mb ram
x16
PS3 = 512mb ram
x16
PS4 = 8gigs ram
Anything less is bullshit!
that's not how it wor--- oh, forget it.
I feel you bro. I am only 5' and so I know. I'll never be as "urbane and tall" as Hirai.
Just to keep in mind, if Sony are to use GDDR5 then going beyond 2GB is a massive technical challenge and one that they may not want to overcome due to associated cost and time, especially, if MS aren't doing the same. If, however, they go the way of GDDR3 then the maximum limitation is 4GB without increase costs significantly.
Memory density per chip:
GDDR5 (atm)- 256MB
GDDR3 - 512MB
ThisWreckage
Banned
Sony is tough to read. The Vita is an absolute beast in terms of hardware, but then one could turn around and say, "Cell was a money sink and Sony will NOT go down that road again."
I recall reading some comments in the past where Sony took pride in having great hardware and someone within the company stated that that won't be changing any time soon.
I recall reading some comments in the past where Sony took pride in having great hardware and someone within the company stated that that won't be changing any time soon.
AgentP
Thinks mods influence posters politics. Promoted to QAnon Editor.
So you know how much they made off games and accessories then?
A sunk cost is not meant to be recovered so they are not usually counted in profit analyses.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_cost#Loss_aversion_and_the_sunk_cost_fallacy
I expect PS4 and the next Xbox to be more architecturally similar than ever. One might have a little more ram, xbox might have sli while ps4 has apu+gpu, and those details remain to be seen. But if they're both AMD cpus, and probably AMD GPU tech as well, we're looking at "HD Twins" indeed.
The Vita is based off of customized off the shelf GPU and CPU without being completely bespoke as is the case with CELL. Also, afaik, Vita sells has sold at a profit (Hardware only) from introduction as opposed to PS3. Making a powerful system without breaking the bank is absolutely possible. The question is whether Sony will once again sell PS4 initially at loss and if so then it would be an absolute imperative to have a roadmap for turnaround from red to black to green within a specified time which would have to significantly shorter than last gen. Either that or they'd selling at a break even point or even profit at launch. It all depends on the final hardware and the specs uncovered are not so.
frankie_baby
Member
then marketing is not a sunk cost, it is a cost most definately intended to be recovered through sales
bigtroyjon
Member
If you are talking about whether or not a product has made money, sunk costs count just the same as everything else.
Now if you want to talk about how a product will do in the future, you can go ahead and discount sunk costs since they won't be recurring however marketing isn't a sunk cost as they will have marketing costs every quarter. Every company on the planet has marketing costs included as an operating expense.
Lion Heart
Banned
It was so much more enjoyable to speculate on next gen when you were a kid because you didn't understand the tech and thought anything was possible. Now you can almost see what the games would look like in your head.
PS1 = 2mb ram
x16
PS2 = 32mb ram
x16
PS3 = 512mb ram
x16
PS4 = 8gigs ram
Anything less is bullshit!
x16
PS5 = 128gigs ram
Anything less is bullshit!
REMEMBER CITADEL
Banned
Read my previous post in this thread, there's a quote from Sony's fiscal report blaming losses on increased marketing, among other things.
That old marketing spend is a sunk cost, but marketing is an ongoing expense. Sony didn't just stop advertising after their initial ad buy.
But yeah, marketing costs are absolutely a factor in determining the viability of a product. Stuff like marketing and R&D are crucial costs to take into account before determining if a product will ever actually be profitable or not, and whether or not the product itself is even worth pursuing.
Just ignoring that and looking at it on a day-to-day basis is fine for the current quarterly accounting records, but you've now got that loss (and debt) sitting on your books for years to come.
Yay, I'm making 5 cents per unit. I'll just happily ignore the fact that I'm now $3 billion in the hole because of all the marketing and R&D I did - but hey, I'm making that 5 cents per unit! (sarcastic comment not referring to Sony in particular here).