Sections

Sony: “A lot more headroom left” in PS3, says it’s not “slipping behind the times”

Thursday, 9th June 2011 16:30 GMT By Stephany Nunneley

Kaz Hirai has said some people though a 10-year life cycle for a console like PS3 “sounded great,” but were still a bit skeptical over the possibility of it actually happening.

Speaking with the Guardian, Hirai said PS3 is growing with the times and will continue to do so.

“One of the things that we always talked about is the 10-year life cycle,” he said. “When we launched the PS3 back in 2006, one of the questions I kept getting asked was why we were putting so much technology into a piece of equipment that was basically a games console. At the time, I said we were looking at a 10-year life cycle. We wanted to make sure we could adapt as new technology was brought on board. A lot of people at the time said that while it all sounded great, they didn’t believe it.

“The plain fact is, the PS3 has grown with the times. The most recent example was the firmware upgrade for all of the PS3s to be 3D compatible, which is something no other console could do. And to this day, there’s still a lot more headroom left in the PS3. That, again, is a function of the initial investments we made, both in terms of technology as well as financial investments for the components.

“You probably hear a lot things about the PS3, but one thing you won’t hear is that it’s slipping behind the times.”

Hirai goes on to say that since Sony is “not in the hardware business,” whether or not PS3 is profitable or not is a “moot point,” because Sony is in the entertainment business.

“We look at the totality between hardware, software and peripherals and whether it’s profitable as a platform,” he explained. “Having said that – because everyone is so interested – yes, we are profitable on the PS3 hardware and we’ll continue to be profitable on the PS3 hardware… Whether we’re profitable or not in the hardware alone, that doesn’t really address the bigger picture.”

Latest

18 Comments

  1. pukem0n

    “The most recent example was the firmware upgrade for all of the PS3s to be 3D compatible, which is something no other console could do. ”

    since the 360 is 3D capable out of the box or why? ^^

    i still think 10 years is too long and boring, but i guess it saves a lot of money for them.

    #1 3 years ago
  2. Blerk

    Ten year life-spans are entirely possible. The trouble is, the software supply tends to run out long before that. They’re still selling PS2s, for instance, but bugger all has come out for it in two years aside from the odd movie tie-in and FIFA.

    #2 3 years ago
  3. Erthazus

    Milk it baby.

    This year showed that PS3 is outdated as hell. Not enough innovation and PS3 games that use a potential of the CPU which PC can do it like for 8 years already.

    Since proper Dual core was annonced, Cell Microprocessor was a toy.
    Now we live in the era of 500 series of Geforce with Intel i7 or AMD 6-8 core of microprocessors.

    Next year Intel and AMD will introduce something more powerfull.

    3D? So what? Your 3D Sony makes every game look WORSE. Nvidia 3D vision was before and still much better then in PS3 by a mile.

    #3 3 years ago
  4. Bluebird

    For all I care they don’t have to bring out a new machine any time soon. Plus, if there isn’t any new hardware devs could maybe try to come up with better stories, better gameplay and more unique looks.

    #4 3 years ago
  5. wishdokta

    #4
    Agreed. Gaming istn’t about hardware.

    #5 3 years ago
  6. OlderGamer

    To me it feels a bit like the Video Games “crash” after the Atari 2600.

    The biggest reason is the games themself. We get the distinct impression that there is nothing new. Everything feels “been there and done that”. No freshness.

    Inovation is out there. Like it or not Kinect and Move both offer inovation. So does the Wii, and even more can be had in WiiU.

    But no one seems to want that.

    Look at the what the Core gamers are asking for. More of the same but better. Once you have something nearly perfected, how do you inovate that?

    What would make CoD better? Bigger stages? More players? Vehicles? Wait that version of warsime fps is called Battlefield.

    Well, what would make BF better? Samller, more action packed stages? More personal combat with fewer players? No dominating, unstopable vehicle rampaging? yep, that wartsim is called CoD.

    How about we take it into a scifi setting, with aliens, and future … oh wait…Halo, Resitance, Warhawk/Starhawk, Crysis, and so on.

    Almost everything you can think of has been done, to death.

    The software is stale. Franchises rule the roost, too bad if you played the other 9 versions already. The new one will be almost exactly the same, but with a tweak here or there.

    As for hardware. That could be the answer. But it won’t be. And judging by the reaction to the WiiU at E3, most people would reject true inovation anyways. See it won’t do us any good at all to see new, more expensive PS4/XBNXT system come out if the only thing they will do is play the exact games we already have now.

    Better graphics won’t make for better games at this point, take that one to the bank from OG. The graphical leap going forward will be minimaly noticable for the average gamer.

    Things like native 1080P instead of upscaled 1080P. 60fps instead of 30fps. Sure that sounds great on paper, but how many gamers will be able to tell the difference unless they see it running side by side? And even then, that big of a deal?

    I think we will see slightly better textures, frame rates, and resolutions in the next gen from MS/Sony.

    But that isn’t revolutionary. Not inovating.

    Right now things are just stagnet. And why wouldn’t they be? We keep telling game pubs that we like things this way everytime we buy another game in this or that franchise. And yearly franchise updates have got to be the exact definition of anti-inovating.

    In the end I welcome new hardware. I am VERY much looking forward to WiiU, because it looks to me like it will have inovation AND still have core games that I will be interested in playing. But, and this is a big one: new hardware doesn’t by itself = better/more inovated/fresh gaming.

    Again, ask yourself, what is it that you really want?

    We already have games out there that are indeed inovative. But if all your asking for is more of the same, who fault is that?

    This was aimed at no one individualy, btw. I have NCAA Football 12 and Battlefield3 and Starhawk all on preorder myself. Just one of those we vote with our wallet type things, and by looking around we seem to vote for the very things we are tired of playing.

    #6 3 years ago
  7. Erthazus


    Well, what would make BF better? Samller, more action packed stages? More personal combat with fewer players? No dominating, unstopable vehicle rampaging? yep, that wartsim is called CoD.”

    more then just 64 players (which was possible in Battlefield 2 era) and building destruction. You can try do destruction not only on buildings but environment aswell.

    Current Console version is just going to have 24 players and smaller maps and etc. on Battlefield 3

    so yeah, we need NEW hardware.

    Much better campaigns, then linear stuff that Battleifield or COD offers. Why this is the generation of linear FPS games? Because consoles does not have enough power to make it more open world, alive and interactive.

    You get an experience where you go on the one road and shoot shit.

    #7 3 years ago
  8. jldoom

    “@OlderGamer But, and this is a big one: new hardware doesn’t by itself = better/more inovated/fresh gaming.”

    Not that this is the only valid point of your whole argument, but this is the one I agree with the most. Regardless, the hardest thing to do is to come out with a product that makes a larger part of their consumers happy rather than the minority. Simple fact of the matter is that you can’t please everybody no matter what game you put out.

    It’s funny because like you said although I’m not the one that rejects new type of hardware, I’m still “stuck in the stoneage” then by the looks of it because I’ve yet to properly enjoy playing with a Wii because of the motion controls, or move/kinect for that matter. I prefer the same old gamepad whether it’s PS3/Xbox I don’t care! I like to feel in control when I play. And give me the same formula, as long as it’s dressed differently, because you know what? I play the videogames to be entertained, and if that’s what I find entertaining, I won’t want the developers to try and change it to something I won’t enjoy as much. I feel like there is a reason why CoD keeps selling year after year, although it’s basically the same game with new killstreaks/some weapon mods/etc…People just know what they’re buying and they’re comfortable with that.

    Eventually, there will come a point when we’ll all get tired of that same shit, and REALLY demand something new. Until that time though *grabs PS3 controller, boots up Fallout: New Vegas*

    #8 3 years ago
  9. Erthazus

    “Not that this is the only valid point of your whole argument, but this is the one I agree with the most. ”

    Except that you don’t know what new hardware can offer in terms of innovation, gameplay and of course visuals.

    #9 3 years ago
  10. jldoom

    @9 True, which is exactly the reason why I usually wait a couple of months to a year, before even purchasing a new system just to see what they have to offer.

    Only one I don’t regret doing this for was my PSP and thats because of the CFW I was able to put on it, because I definitely got my money’s worth out of that one for the year that it spent collecting dust in my drawer.

    #10 3 years ago
  11. lexph3re

    I agree with og on this one. Its all about the gameplay at this point, new consoles wouldn’t improve anything for US as gamers it would just crash our pockets. I see to much potential in this gen of consoles to move to a new. That’s the thinking of a pc gamer that I have to constantly update sometimes its better to just sit back and perfect what you have. Move,kinect, vita and the wii u controller are going to all innovate gaming for the console base this gen and won’t cost the current install base much money at all.

    I would rather buy vita and the wii u before I buy a new console with slightly better graphics. seeing how I’ve already invested over 2k in my ps3 on games and peripherals alone.

    #11 3 years ago
  12. DSB

    @6 You can’t compare it to an almost fatal recession that nearly killed the market, when publishers have never been selling as many games as they do today.

    The market is healthy, but the selection isn’t. I think there’s a general lack of imagination, mostly in the larger genres, which is being excused by socalled advances in game design.

    I mean if you take BC2 which is the military FPS with the most features right now, so many of those features are only skin deep. You have armored personel carriers that can carry 7 fully equipped troops and tonnes of rocket launchers in real life, but in BC2 it’s really just a vehicle with a gun.

    Compare that to a game like Planetside, which of course didn’t have APCs either, but certainly did rely heavily on players picking up what were essentially paratroopers and dropping them in enemy territory. To me that’s a hundred times more rewarding than anything we see today.

    I can’t explain why nobody wants to do those things, but it just seems to me like everybody’s rushing for the lowest common denominator, instead of putting a bit of faith into peoples imagination and willingness to do things that are a bit more complex, but ultimately a lot more rewarding.

    I still wouldn’t say it’s all grim. Even if the biggest FPSes don’t do very much, you still have people like Valve and Gearbox doing different things, and Splash Damage, even if they failed with Brink.

    #12 3 years ago
  13. G1GAHURTZ

    I’m not too fussed about visuals.

    I would, however, like lag free online gaming, instant cloud based patches/updates, no load times and more immersive/precise/intuitive ways of controlling games.

    Consoles have a veeeeeeeeery long way to go technically.

    It’s not just about the games themselves.

    #13 3 years ago
  14. ManuOtaku

    Guys i compare this with the mortal kombat series, you know the first games were good, then we have better graphics 3D fights etc, adding other franchises like DC, etc but when the developer find the time to see what did work and build from that on, and evolving with added features that really enhance the game and fit very well with the old style gameplay without any interference on the overall balance, i think the graphics did came in last place of importantce, i love the new mortal kombat and is not for the evolution in graphics or physics etc, it is becuase the dig in the soul of the game and bring the mechanics that were great and they put they heart and soul into it, something that todays is missing because they are aiming at shining graphics and new way of physics, that sometimes tends to make the game easier, therefore something that most of the time they shouldnt took at aim at it IMHO

    #14 3 years ago
  15. OlderGamer

    “You can’t compare it to an almost fatal recession that nearly killed the market, when publishers have never been selling as many games as they do today.”

    I wanted to write more about that but figured I already was gonna write “book” with the post as it was.

    What I meant was the carefree attitude that was had during the 80s in regaurds to making what they damn well pleased. They rehashed games. Rushed games. There were still gems, but so much of what was put was just started to look and feel the same. It was very uninspired.

    Thank god for the Nintendo and the NES.

    But today when I go to the store and look at the shelfs I feel like I did back then. Nothing stands out, very little anyways.

    The games industry is much bigger today so I don’t think a shear number comparison is fair.

    I focused on content ans quality of content rather then how many of this or that sell. The number of TV channels today are greater then ever, however said quality content is a different story.

    “Except that you don’t know what new hardware can offer in terms of innovation, gameplay and of course visuals.”

    Erth, that can be true. But you should also admit that it doesn’t always mean that. What changed from Xboxone to XB360? Better graphics, enhanced store front/marketplace mostly. There wasn’t much in the way of real inovation, unless you consider more DLC to be inovative hehe.

    I see VERY little room for / or maybe reason for inovation with the next PS4/XBNXT. Other then with Kinect or Move/Eye Toy. Gameplay really won’t change.

    And:

    “And give me the same formula, as long as it’s dressed differently, because you know what? I play the videogames to be entertained, and if that’s what I find entertaining, I won’t want the developers to try and change it to something I won’t enjoy as much. I feel like there is a reason why CoD keeps selling year after year, although it’s basically the same game with new killstreaks/some weapon mods/etc”

    jldoom is very correct. There is a little bit of that in each of us.

    So it becomes a question of what do we really want and are we sure we want it? Its hard to complain about stuff being the same ole, and then turn around and complain about something that truely is inovative like Wii Motes. Move. Kinect. And now WiiU.

    And honestly we need to reject a notion that there is some drastic difference between a core(simply adapted from the self indulgent self named “Hardcore” gamer), and a casual one. I enjoy games that are labeled in both catigories. In truth most of us gamers a bit of both.

    I have just found it very sobering to read many folks reaction to the WiiU. Because to me it looks great. The controler is very creative, and I think offers a lot of unique looking things it can be used for. The system will have Online. It has support from Major Pubs. So why not be able to play some BF, some Madden, some Metriod, and some Wii Sports Style game w/ the grandkids? I am excited.

    And admitidly optimistic.

    After Pat, and so many others have started calling this E3 a bad one. Pat said it may well be seen as the weakest one years. And the complaints are almost always the same. No new suprises. Same ole crap. Milking franchises(I guess the new Ass Cred game fits this one), and all of that. I would agree whole hartedly.

    Then people reject the WiiU, don’t want Move, and hate Kinect.

    Leads me all the way back to well, what do people really want?

    The real answer is more of the same please. They will play the same games until they get so tired of playing them they turn away. They just won’t have any magic in them any more for those people. And that DSB is why people stoped buying games way back in the late 70s and early 80s. Uninspired games that left people wanting to do something else with their time.

    #15 3 years ago
  16. OlderGamer

    I really do write too much, geez.

    I remember a few years back when I first got here most posts where a sentence. A long post was two sentences.

    #16 3 years ago
  17. DSB

    I actually read all of that for once, and I widely agree. I just don’t think you’ll see anywhere near the same consequences.

    And I’m also not as much of a pessimist. Most of the genres I loved the most from the glory days of PC gaming are largely cleansed from gaming. You don’t see any clever realtime strategy, you don’t see any clever turnbased games, and you don’t see anything resembling tactical shooters anymore.

    Even the good old tactical RPG has been raped beyond recognition.

    I still don’t feel less enthusiastic about playing games though, and I don’t think it’s all one big stupid cesspool where nothing works. Several things work, several things are moved forward. I mourn the genres that are long gone, but I’m still entertained all the same by what’s left.

    Arguably though, Portal 2 was the best game I’ve played in years, and that is a little depressing.

    #17 3 years ago
  18. OlderGamer

    I agree with ya there DSB. I don’t think the industry is headed for a crash. Maybe a stall or a flat spot until something comes along and really shakes things up.

    I wonder could something like Cloud from Onlive, Steam, or even Microsoft be such a thing? Prolly not for a few more years anyways.

    #18 3 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.