Sony's Ken Kutaragi announces plans to retire

[Tondog]

What's so funny?

I'll admit he did a good job with the releases of the PS1 and PS2. But it seems like a very convenient coincidence that he's retiring after the PS3 launch...and I find that funny.

Even if he said a lot of the same things during the PS2 launch?

"You can communicate to a new cybercity. This will be the ideal home server. Did you see the movie 'The Matrix'? Same interface. Same concept. Starting from next year, you can jack into 'The Matrix'!"

[Fuyukaze]

Am I the only one that gigles and says "cooter" everytime someone talks about Kutaragi getting fired/resigned/asked to step down/replaced/entombed/sent for repair/replaced with big blue/finding jesus/lost in space/placed in a retirment comunity/finding his inner woman/abducted by aliens?

I'm not the only one am I?

[The Metamorphosing Leon]

He was also right about PS3 being underpriced.

That's right, he was right.

Chew on that.

[Tynstar]

Consumers disagree with you.

[The Metamorphosing Leon]

For what you get,  a blu-ray player, a mini-supercomputer, it's an incredible price. Problem is that while it is cheap for what it is, that what it is may be too much.

[Tan]

For what you get,  a blu-ray player, a mini-supercomputer, it's an incredible price. Problem is that while it is cheap for what it is, that what it is may be too much.

The PS3 is like one of those hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. High tech, expensive, maybe even ahead of it's time. But it also has limited use right now and the availability of products it can use is very small, it's just can't justify it's own price regardless of what's under the hood.

Maybe by christmas, definately in the next 2-3 years there will be enough Blu-Ray movies, and PS3 games to say it's worth it. Of course by then it'll probably have dropped in price. Sony may say otherwise but that's to keep people from holding out for a while. Once the Wii drops and the 360 drops as well the PS3 will either have to follow suit or risk being put out into a price range of it's own far above the others.

After all even the hardcore Sony fans and all gamers alike think with their wallets. Most of the staunch supporters of the PS3 on this site and others don't have one yet, go figure. 

[phoenix1967]

For what you get,  a blu-ray player, a mini-supercomputer, it's an incredible price. Problem is that while it is cheap for what it is, that what it is may be too much.

The PS3 is like one of those hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. High tech, expensive, maybe even ahead of it's time. But it also has limited use right now and the availability of products it can use is very small, it's just can't justify it's own price regardless of what's under the hood.

Maybe by christmas, definately in the next 2-3 years there will be enough Blu-Ray movies, and PS3 games to say it's worth it. Of course by then it'll probably have dropped in price. Sony may say otherwise but that's to keep people from holding out for a while. Once the Wii drops and the 360 drops as well the PS3 will either have to follow suit or risk being put out into a price range of it's own far above the others.

After all even the hardcore Sony fans and all gamers alike think with their wallets. Most of the staunch supporters of the PS3 on this site and others don't have one yet, go figure. 

Exactly!

Since many of the hardcore gamers that HAD to have a PS3 have already purchased one, the more discerning/casual gamer is the next tier that may buy one. However this group of consumers is not going to purchase technology that they're either not going to use or not be able to get the most out of. $600 may be cheap for a Blu-Ray player, but not for a gaming console. And that's why the Wii is selling out EVERYWHERE...even 6 months after launch.

People see a $250 price tag for a next gen system and don't CARE that it can't even play movies. They don't care about the Blu-Ray vs. HDDVD format battle, they care about the fact that they'll have another $350 left in their pockets for games and additional controllers.

$600 is $600! And that's without a pack in game. It's tough to sell a new technology to a general consumer if their logical questions cannot be answered satisfactorily. If a discerning consumer says: "I don't have a high def TV", "I'm not interested in buying a new DVD format", or "I just want to play games, is there a model that doesn't have a Blu-Ray player that's less expensive" they're not likely to buy into the $600 price tag.

[The Metamorphosing Leon]

We've said all these things several million times. I know why it's not selling out and I know why I don't have one, I know Sony dropped the ball by not having ANY games that ANYBODY wanted on release.

However, this doesn't mean that it's not an incredibly advanced system that has every right to charge "ZOMG" $600.

I really could go on to articulate what it is I'm trying to get across but I don't feel like it right now, maybe later.

[Tan]

We've said all these things several million times. I know why it's not selling out and I know why I don't have one, I know Sony dropped the ball by not having ANY games that ANYBODY wanted on release.

However, this doesn't mean that it's not an incredibly advanced system that has every right to charge "ZOMG" $600.

I really could go on to articulate what it is I'm trying to get across but I don't feel like it right now, maybe later.

Your right they do have the right to charge $600. If it had some games worthy of the system other than ports it would be with it. Much in the same way a Neo Geo AES is worth every penny if you love the games it's got, or a high-end gaming PC if you play PC games allot.

I think most people's problem with Sony is their arrogance that they expect everyone will run out and buy one because it's a Sony Playstation product. Sony tends to be weak in the 1st party games category so they've developed a stance where they sell the system, others make it worthy with their games. Nintendo is the exact opposite where 1st party games support the hardware the most, and Microsoft is in the middle mixing 1st and 3rd party games equally.

Of course this time around allot of developers are choosing differently because they need systems with established fanbases to make money with copies sold, PS3's high price scares a few away to other systems. When the numbers reflect consumer confidence publishers will bring the games back around.

[Tondog]

"I just want to play games, is there a model that doesn't have a Blu-Ray player that's less expensive" they're not likely to buy into the $600 price tag.

The games all use Blu-Ray. They included it on there for increased storage capacity for the games, not for movie playback.

[The Metamorphosing Leon]

Halfway through writing a lengthy reply I realized I don't care anymore...

Now I'm going to go play WoW, maybe by tomorrow I'll care again.

[captain_nintendo]

Aww man! Now 1/4 of the SCE Clan is gone! At least we still have (Krazy) Kaz Hirai, (Muthaduckin) Phil Harrison, and Jack (The Rippa) Tretton  ready to kick ass and take names.

I wish you best of luck Killa Kutaragi. I'm gonna miss you.

Hopefully the new guy can adequately fill in Killa K's boots. As for now, I bestow the name of Killa on Kaz Hirai. Congratulations Killa Kaz.

   I LOL'd

[Tynstar]

"I just want to play games, is there a model that doesn't have a Blu-Ray player that's less expensive" they're not likely to buy into the $600 price tag.

The games all use Blu-Ray. They included it on there for increased storage capacity for the games, not for movie playback.

My guess is only exclusive games will take advantage of that and exclusives are going bye bye. Other then 1st party of course.

[Tan]

If I'm not mistaken, the extra storage capacity isn't to allow for bigger games persay, it's to allow 1080p which needs allot of space for textures.

The difference in this between the PS3 and the X360 is that the 360 has a 1080p scaler chip called "Ana" and doesn't need the extra disc space, while the PS3 can use it's huge storage capacity to put 1080p on disc. Advantages for using both to be sure.