Sony May Delay PS3 Until 2007

GodFather writes "ArsTechnica posted an article that claims the PS3 may be pushed back as far as 2007 if the Xbox 360 launch flops. The reasoning behind it? If Microsoft comes out with a weak set of titles at launch Sony could delay and build a larger launch library to lay the smack down on Microsoft."

Comments

Not the Smartest Idea I've heard

[Adrilla]

I can't imagine this being a good idea, Sony would be giving Microsoft a chance to keep moving next gen units and Nintendo a chance to leapfrog them with the Revolution while they sit idle just so they can have a larger library on launch? Every moment they sit without units on the shelves gives MS the chance to release the next Halo, plus they'll have next gen titles that would've been ported to both systems. Madden '06 may not be the difference maker, but '07 just might, EA will have had time to tweak to the system more, and make the games better on the 360, but Sony fanboys will be stuck with the weaker PS2 game. My suggestion is kill this idea immediately and get that PS3 out as soon as it's ready for production. Even if the 360 doesn't have a good launch, doesn't mean it wont be successful throughout it's lifetime, something they should think about with reference to their own PSP.

Perhaps a response from Sony to MS..

[Sv-Manowar]

Its interesting that this comes quite soon after Bill Gates himself announced that the first next-gen Xboxes would ship with non-HD DVD drives, effectively limiting the launch software to dvd media, and perhaps even limiting all games throughout the lifetime of the platform. If Sony do choose to take extra time in ensuring the launch titles make the absolute most out of the additional storage capacity and performance available on the PS3, it could be enough to provide a killer blow even to a successful xbox 360. If the PS3 manages to blow the xbox away in terms of game visuals/depth, then they'll almost have skipped a generation and taken the fight right back to microsoft.

Personally

[LowbrowDeluxe]

I don't think it's all that bad of a move. First off, both the Xbox 2 (Quick, give it a name with a 3 in it or it'll look bad compared to Sony...feh.) and the PS3 were rushed due to competition with each other. If the Xbox fails because of that, and because they rushed to undercut even Sony's timetable, then it clearly makes sense. Above and beyond that, though, Sony is really more about franchise loyalty and the flavor of games produced for it, and they have plenty of games slated all the way through next year for the PS2. They're not going to lose their core audience to Xbox. Most Playstation fans who want a game that comes out on XBox will wait and buy it for their actual computer. Meanwhile, if they did delay, the PS3 might actually manage to live up to part of it's hype, something I don't have a lot of hope for given the release-date war between Sony and Microsoft. Eventually it reached some obscure level of corporate triple-dog-dare, and Sony called them on it. If they succeed Sony will have to launch, if not they can stand their laughing and calling MS a dumbass for trying it. I can only imagine the screams of pain from engineers everytime MS and Sony's marketing teams released a revised release date.

Nintendo's probably farthest behind of all

[mcc]

There's no indications anyone outside the company even has something looks like a dev kit yet, they haven't revealed what the machine even is to the public and I don't think they've revealed it to most developers. Microsoft's got, like, near-finished games. Sony's got devkits going out and they're publicly apologizing to developers for not being able to manufacture enough of them. Ask Nintendo what they're up to? They talk about the DS and its online plans.

I don't think Nintendo's anywhere near ready to ship this thing.

Also their memory supplier let slip that they believed the revolution would ship in "mid-2006". Take that however you want.

My personal suspicion would probably be that the Revolution is going to be released last. Nintendo's either got the most amazing show of secrecy ever constructed among men, or they aren't nearly as far along as Sony and Microsoft. And I doubt Sony will delay a console release just because they don't have any games. They didn't delay the PS2 launch for lack of games, they didn't delay the Japan PSP launch for lack of games, and when they delayed the American PSP launch (for lack of games at the time of Japanese launch?) it didn't really help them much.

If I'm right about this, though, Nintendo probably won't suffer much for coming out last. They seem to be going for a very different sort of strategy next generation than Sony and Microsoft.

Hello rampant speculation

[DaveCBio]

Wow,once again the clueless analysts have shown us the light. Honestly, if these people were really all that good at spotting industry trends and making accurate predictions they'd be working in the industry.

It's still too expensive for launch.

[Dubpal]

After reading this Inquirer column it could be that Sony are waiting it out until they can make the console cheaper.

From the column:
Merrill Lynch estimated that the cost to produce a single PS3 would be a shade under $500. Considering that the Xbox 360 is expected will be priced at around $299, it was felt that even a $399 price tag on the PS3 meant Sony taking a $1bn hit on hardware costs alone in the first year.

When you consider that they've packed Bluetooth, HDTV (a feature Nintendo ended up dropping because of cost) and the first Commercial release of Blu-Ray in there, it's not too surprising that the earlier they launch the console, the harder Sony's going to get hit in the pocket.