Sony and Nichia share over 800 basic patents for Blue-Viol..

In alt.games.video.xbox Calab <myspam.DeleteThis@csd.ca> wrote:
> > THE XBOX 360 AND PS3 ARE NOT PRIMARILY MOVIE PLAYERS OR DATA
> > STORAGE DEVICES. THEY WERE INTENDED TO BE GAME CONSOLES.

> Except that the PS3 was never designed to be just a game console. Sony
> themselves say that the PS3 was designed to be a media hub.

Which is why it's failing as a game console.

With the exception of blu-ray, the 360 can do all the same media tricks
that the PS3 can do - and I really don't care. I want games.

> > THEY DO NOT REQUIRE HIGH CAPACITY DISKS TO FUNCTION. GAMES
> > WORK FINE ON DVD.

> Except for games that have more than 8 gig of content.

There has yet to be a PS3 game that would not fit onto a DVD. Games like
Heavenly Sword only take up so much space because they put every language
version on the same disc. Normally these languages would appear on
different versions of the game. Other games have to use replicated data
across the disc to help with the PS3's blu-ray drive's otherwise slow data
transfer. This is hardly the evidence slam-dunk that proves that blu-ray
isn't just "nice", but "REQUIRED" for gaming that Sony claims it is.

Also, on the 360 side of things, there's only been one game so far that
hasn't fit on a single DVD, and that's a RPG, which have been been released
on multiple discs since CDs were first starting to make their appearance in
the console game world.

Try again.

Sony may have won the next generation of home video, but they're in real
danger of losing the this generation of game consoles, and have damaged
their chances for the next generation as well. I hope the tradeoff was
worth it.

--
It's not broken. It's...advanced.
 >> Stay informed about: Sony and Nichia share over 800 basic patents for Blue-Viol.. 

"Doug Jacobs" <djacobs DeleteThis @shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
news:13rp960q7gd3470@corp.supernews.com...

>
> Also, on the 360 side of things, there's only been one game so far that
> hasn't fit on a single DVD, and that's a RPG, which have been been
> released
> on multiple discs since CDs were first starting to make their appearance
> in
> the console game world.
>

Actually, there's two, Blue Dragon (I think 3 discs) and Lost Odyssey (4
discs), both are exclusives.
 >> Stay informed about: Sony and Nichia share over 800 basic patents for Blue-Viol.. 

Doug Jacobs wrote:

> In alt.games.video.xbox Calab <myspam RemoveThis @csd.ca> wrote:
>
>>>THE XBOX 360 AND PS3 ARE NOT PRIMARILY MOVIE PLAYERS OR DATA
>>>STORAGE DEVICES. THEY WERE INTENDED TO BE GAME CONSOLES.
>
>
>>Except that the PS3 was never designed to be just a game console. Sony
>>themselves say that the PS3 was designed to be a media hub.
>
>
> Which is why it's failing as a game console.
>
> Sony may have won the next generation of home video, but they're in real
> danger of losing the this generation of game consoles, and have damaged
> their chances for the next generation as well.

Gee...Guess they may just have to take all that leftover game processing
technology and make Blu-ray players that work as well as the PS3,
instead. ^_^

Derek Janssen (somewhere on Gilligan's Island, there's a Japanese
soldier still shouting "The PS3's a game-machine flop!" long after the
War was over)
ejanss1 RemoveThis @verizon.net
 >> Stay informed about: Sony and Nichia share over 800 basic patents for Blue-Viol.. 

In alt.games.video.xbox Derek Janssen <ejanss1.TakeThisOut@nospam.verizon.net> wrote:
> Sony doesn't ask WHY you buy a PS3...

No, but the PS3 comes from the video game arm of Sony - not the A/V
products arm of Sony.

Unlike Sony's TVs or cameras, the PS3 by itself doesn't make money. If
anything, it's sold at a loss to help get consoles into the market.
Although I think right now, Sony is selling the PS3 at about the
break-even point, meaning they're not losing money...but aren't making any
either. Game consoles - which is what the Playstation is - make their
money from the sales of games, not movies. So long as the sale of PS3
games is also increasing along with PS3 console sales, Sony may be OK.
However if too many people just buy the PS3 to use as a blu-ray player -
and ONLY as a blu-ray player - Sony won't be making nearly as much money
from those customers. The licensing fees Sony collects from a single sale
of a PS3 game is far more than what Sony can collect from the licensing
and sale of a single Blu-Ray movie.

It would be rather odd, but not surprising, if the PS3 ended up near the
top in terms of hardware sales, but near the bottom in terms of software
sales.

--
It's not broken. It's...advanced.
 >> Stay informed about: Sony and Nichia share over 800 basic patents for Blue-Viol.. 

Doug Jacobs wrote:
>
> It would be rather odd, but not surprising, if the PS3 ended up near the
> top in terms of hardware sales, but near the bottom in terms of software
> sales.

In fact, it would be rather astonishing.

Derek Janssen
ejanss1.DeleteThis@verizon.net
 >> Stay informed about: Sony and Nichia share over 800 basic patents for Blue-Viol.. 

In alt.games.video.xbox Derek Janssen <ejanss1 DeleteThis @nospam.verizon.net> wrote:
> If you buy an S300 that doesn't work, or if you buy a PS3 that does, for
> movie-watching only, and play a Sony disk on either one, why should that
> trouble their sleep any?

Sony makes more from the sale of the S300 vs. the sale of the PS3.
They're also different departments, so while Sony's studios may make money
from the sale of blu-ray discs, Sony's video game department loses money
on the sale of the PS3, and then more money when the customer fails to buy
any games for it.

--
It's not broken. It's...advanced.
 >> Stay informed about: Sony and Nichia share over 800 basic patents for Blue-Viol.. 

"Doug Jacobs" <djacobs.TakeThisOut@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
news:13rp9noguo3po21@corp.supernews.com...
> In alt.games.video.xbox Derek Janssen <ejanss1.TakeThisOut@nospam.verizon.net> wrote:
>> If you buy an S300 that doesn't work, or if you buy a PS3 that does, for
>> movie-watching only, and play a Sony disk on either one, why should that
>> trouble their sleep any?
>
> Sony makes more from the sale of the S300 vs. the sale of the PS3.
> They're also different departments, so while Sony's studios may make money
> from the sale of blu-ray discs, Sony's video game department loses money
> on the sale of the PS3, and then more money when the customer fails to buy
> any games for it.
>

But they are buying games for it Doug. If you go back just 5 months ago,
the PS3 had only 2 games sell a million+ to that date and no other games
over 500K. Now fast forward to now, and you have 8 game that sold a million+
and a total of 20 games over 500K. How is this not selling games, even if
they are cross-platform, the PS3 versions are still selling which is MAKING
Sony money. Worldwide, the PS3 has been on par with the 360 in selling
games, this with the fact that the 360 has a 7mil+ install base over the
PS2. If the PS3 had the same sales totals in consoles, you wouldn't want to
see the disparity. So tell everyone how Sony isn't selling games.
 >> Stay informed about: Sony and Nichia share over 800 basic patents for Blue-Viol.. 

Doug Jacobs wrote:

> In alt.games.video.xbox Derek Janssen <ejanss1.TakeThisOut@nospam.verizon.net> wrote:
>
>>If you buy an S300 that doesn't work, or if you buy a PS3 that does, for
>>movie-watching only, and play a Sony disk on either one, why should that
>>trouble their sleep any?
>
>
> Sony makes more from the sale of the S300 vs. the sale of the PS3.
> They're also different departments, so while Sony's studios may make money
> from the sale of blu-ray discs, Sony's video game department loses money
> on the sale of the PS3, and then more money when the customer fails to buy
> any games for it.

Um, let's ask a nice, smarmy and despicably insufferable question Doug:
Just who WON the damn war, anyway? As in, "Who"?

Samsung? Panasonic? The Sharp players we never got? Those LG
dual-players (which they still intend to make)?
How about the studios?...No, wait, as you point out, disks are
meaningless unless there's something to play it on.
Oh, wait, I know!--Maybe it was all those fine, cutting-edge Sony
S300's, and their expert "Future of entertainment is here" craftsmanship!

Hmm, well, we *know* it couldn't have been the PS3, because it flopped
as a game machine.
Gee, that's puzzling. Maybe nobody won the war. Maybe it never
happened. ^_^

Derek Janssen (whew, man, I'm worn out; this denial stuff's a workout,
how do you manage it??)
ejanss1.TakeThisOut@verizon.net
 >> Stay informed about: Sony and Nichia share over 800 basic patents for Blue-Viol.. 

>> Maybe in your world, but Sony is laughing all the way to the bank now
>> that
>> HDDVD is dead.
>
>Again, what does HD-DVD dying have to do with the PS3 as a successful
>and PROFITABLE game playing device?

It makes no difference in making the PS3 profitable. It makes a big
difference in making SONY profitable.
 >> Stay informed about: Sony and Nichia share over 800 basic patents for Blue-Viol.. 

>Again, what does HD-DVD dying have to do with the PS3 as a successful
>and PROFITABLE game playing device?

Actually... If HD had won the war Sony would still need to manufacture and
support BluRay or else drop the PS3 completely. This would mean higher media
and hardware costs in the long run.

Now that BluRay is mainstream for movies, it should drive the cost of media
and hardware down.
 >> Stay informed about: Sony and Nichia share over 800 basic patents for Blue-Viol.. 

In alt.video.dvd Tom <noway RemoveThis @nothere.com> wrote:

> Actually, there's two, Blue Dragon (I think 3 discs) and Lost Odyssey (4
> discs), both are exclusives.

I wasn't aware that Lost Odyssey was multi-disc. Ok, so there's 2.
However multi-disc JRPGs are nothing new.

(and the fact that both are exclusive to the 360, when the Playstation 1 &
2 totally dominated in the JRPG genre is rather baffling...)

--
It's not broken. It's...advanced.
 >> Stay informed about: Sony and Nichia share over 800 basic patents for Blue-Viol.. 

In alt.video.dvd Derek Janssen <ejanss1.TakeThisOut@nospam.verizon.net> wrote:
> > Because Sony loses more money on selling you a $400 PS3 as a movie
> > player than selling you the $400 S300.

> What, because you're "not playing games"?

That's only partially correct. The main reason is that the PS3 costs Sony
more than $400 to build. This is a common tactic for game consoles, since
the hardware manufacturer (Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft) charge licensing
fees to the game developers, and also collect a royalty on each and every
game sold. At the very best, Sony is about breaking even on each PS3 sold
- which is a vast improvement on the estimated $250-300 they were LOSING
on each PS3 sold when the console was first released in the US and Japan.

Either way, a PS3 that never plays a game is a failed sale as far as Sony's
video game division is concerned, even if that same PS3 ends up playing
1000s of Blu-Ray titles.

> Well, um....play a game then. Or not. Knock yer freakin' self out.

The folks who are only interested in the PS3 as a blu-ray player aren't
buying games. And those who are interested in games, aren't necessarily
buying a PS3...

--
It's not broken. It's...advanced.
 >> Stay informed about: Sony and Nichia share over 800 basic patents for Blue-Viol.. 

In alt.video.dvd Tom <noway.TakeThisOut@nothere.com> wrote:
> But, Sony (as well as MS) make their money on peripheral hardware and
> software sales, so if they sell more PS3s, they also are going to sell both
> movies and games. From a marketing standpoint, they cannot lose on this
> scenario.

That's only partially correct. Sony makes more money via
licensing/royalties per game than they do per movie. I believe the
amounts are about $20 for a $60 game, compared to $2 for a $25 movie.
There's also the problem that "Sony" isn't a single entity. The money
made by selling blu-ray movies doesn't go to the same department that's
responsible for the PS3 and PS3 games.

In the begining of its lifecycle, the PS3 was being sold for a net loss to
Sony of about $200. That meant that to break even on those sales, each
consumer would have to buy about 10 PS3 games..or 100 blu-ray movies.
While advancements in manufacturing and whatnot have brought costs down,
Sony is - at best - breaking even on each PS3 console sold. This doesn't
mean that Sony needs only 1 sale of a blu-ray movie in order to declare a
profit, however. During the development and construction of the PS3, Sony
incurred a huge amount of debt which - so far - Sony's Computer
Entertainment division (responsible for the PS3 and games) has not managed
to start paying off.

Sure, sales of blu-ray movies to PS3 owners who never play PS3 games could
still manage to make the PS3 profitable, but it's going to take A LOT of
blu-ray movies to do that.

One final point. While this group may not care about the PS3 as a gaming
machine, the game publishers DO. There continues to be many worries about
the PS3 being able to attract enough sales to make releasing games for the
PS3 financially viable for the publishers. If the PS3 goes down in
history as being a great movie player, but has poor game sales, when Sony
comes out with the PS4, publishers may decide not to risk it, and simply
go with other gaming platforms. Obviously a game console with no games
isn't going to sell very well... The last time that happened, it was with
the Sega Dreamcast, which ended up being their last console. Sony may
have won the video market with blu-ray, but they may end up losing the
game market - maybe permanently.

--
It's not broken. It's...advanced.
 >> Stay informed about: Sony and Nichia share over 800 basic patents for Blue-Viol..