Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Sides With Nintendo Against Sony
rafemonkey writes "Looks like Microsoft loves the Wii. The Washington Post has an article in which VP Peter Moore says that since the PS3 is so expensive, gamers might as well get an Xbox 360 and a Wii for the cost of one Sony console." From the article: "Microsoft predicted on Tuesday it will have 10 million Xbox 360 consoles in the market before Sony launches the PS3. The high-end Xbox 360 sells for $399, but it does not include a built-in high-definition DVD video player that comes with Sony's PS3. Sony plans to sell a premium PS3 model for $599 when it debuts in North America on November 17, and Nintendo has not yet disclosed pricing for Wii." On that last note there is much speculation that Nintendo is aiming for a $249 price point. Sony's Kaz Hirai has in turn responded that the PlayStation 3 is priced for consumers, who are getting a lot for their money.
Uh, not yet.
<grrr
Still, it's not a financial or software alliance, it's really just talk. Otherwise I'd be worried about Nintendo.
"MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
http://www.ucomics.com/foxtrot/2006/05/09/
I'll foist over few extra bucks to avoid this in the future.
Sounds like they are trying to generate more positive press for the 360 by riding Nintendos coattails from the Revolution presentation.
turn up the jukebox and tell me a lie
I dont know about the rest of you, but Nintendo really made it easy to choose which next gen to invest in.
Invexi - a Phoenix, AZ based web design and web development company.
dare I say it? the man is right. The games which come out for the 360 will be pretty much the same as those for the PS3, they have been for the xbox and ps2. There are very few unique games between those two consoles. The Wii will sport unique games from the other two so for me it's a must, also the 360 and PS3 will have similar styles of play, the Wii will be different. If you were to want both styles then it is only logical to get the Wii and 360 for the price of a PS3.
Personally I can only afford one - and because I live in the UK I'll be paying twice what you are anyway *shakes fist* - so for me it'll be the Wii
*''I can't believe it's not a hyperlink.''
"Hirai said different versions of gaming machines will likely be the norm from here on out, likening it to buying a computer today, where buyers can select from different configuration options to what best suits them."
There's a reason I play games on consoles nowadays. Consoles are simple. I really don't want to start having to study the game box to see if my console will play game X for that console.
Of course Microsoft is going to endorse Nintendo over Sony, because the Wii is not as much of a direct competitor to the 360 as the PS3 will be. So MS pushes a "360 for the bling, Wii for the party games" solution.
Microsoft's thinking is that every swing of the club/bat/racket Wii remote will send a cooling breeze of air over the Xbox 360, ensuring a longer lifespan for it. Of course this logic is flawed because users of the Wii remote will get so infuriated with the voodoo, not quite in sync gameplay of Wii games that they'll throw the Wii remote and nunchaka with great force, likely hitting the Xbox 360 in the process.
--- What?
If you really think about it, the xBox360 and the Wii are more complementary than they are competitive. The 360 will of course sate anybody's need for HD gaming (and, when the time comes, HD-DVD as well with the add-on) and (though I'm personally not a fan) Halo 3. The Wii will offer gameplay experiences not available elsewhere.
All for roughly the price of a system with a three-generation old controller (but crappier - no rumble support and unresponsive 3D movement) that will offer no visual improvement over the 360. Unless Blu-Ray really IS all it's cracked up to be, I really don't see the advantage of buying the PS3 over the competition.
Microsoft has said this before. When Nintendo first showed off the controller, MS called it "innovative" (the same buzzword they used when they were trying to protect themselves from the Justice Department, e.g. "freedom to innovate"). In every interview I've ever read since then, the interviewers hit hard with Sony/Microsoft questions then always toss in "So what do you think of Nintendo?" You always get "Revolution/Wii's innovative" and "I can't wait to play X Mario, Y Zelda, etc."
:P ). I'm sure if Nintendo hung up the towel they would have no problem letting them develop on Xbox 460 and a Halftwist, but I don't think they're serious about buying them out or forming a partnership.
Does this mean a deathknell for Nintendo? Not at all. At their core, Moore, Allard, etc. are gamers. They're MS businessmen, but they're gamers. They know what good games look like and try to court the best talent (well, except Rare...
if microsoft wasn't scared of the ps3 they would stand on their own two feet and say, screw the wii, screw the ps3, we're gonna win all by ourselves.
but now they're saying oh crap we need a buddy cuz the ps3 scares the pants off us.
microsoft complaining about the ps3 price is dumb, the xbox360 premium's market price was $800-1000 on ebay for the first 5 months. if tons of people are willing to pay that much for an xbox360, (which does not have a 60gig hdd, hi-def DVD drive, integrated wi-fi) then people will easily pay $600 for a ps3 that has a 60gig hdd and a BluRay DVD drive and integrated wi-fi.
Skip the 360 and get the Wii! You'll not only save money, but also the time involved in shopping until you actually find a 360 for sale (and none of that "Core" crap either).
My sig is too lon
"We felt that if you want to save something on your Memory Stick, most people have those readers on their PC, which is easily adaptable to the PlayStation 3 with a USB cord," said Hirai. "The only difference is HDMI - and at this point, I don't think many people's TV's have that. The ultimate result, to my eyes anyway, is there's not a discernable difference between what you get between HDMI and other forms of high definition."
This seems utterly bizarre. Over the course of the PS3's development, Sony has promised quite a bit, and yes they did include most of what they said (Cell, Blu Ray), but one of the biggest bits of HD. And now the president says there aren't enough TV's to warrant putting HDMI on the low end PS3?
Wasn't Nintendo getting flak for just this for the entire time that they said that HD wasn't yet the norm? Granted... Nintendo's max resolution still pales to the PS3's max resolution even without the HDMI.. but BluRay movies with the DRM bit set won't even work at max resolution on the low end PS3. Perhaps this was the point of the delay over the DRM announced previously.
After seeing things like the recent real-time trailer for Metal Gear Solid 4, Sony could ask for my left nut and $600, and I'd still go for it.
Ex nihilo nihil fit.
This little PC goes to market, this little PS3 gets none, and this little one goes "Wii wii wii" all the way home.
The PS3 will cost $599 WITH a Blu-Ray drive.
XBox 360 costs $399, how much will will you pay if you want to add on the HD-DVD drive? I would think it would cost at least $200 dollars.
$399 + $200 = $599!!
Microsoft's decision to speak out publicly against Sony and in favor of Nintendo has to do with only one thing: HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray. I mean, you are essentially getting your moneys worth when buying a PS3, considering the price of a standalone next-gen DVD player. Just look at the amount of money Sony will be losing per console--and keep in mind, this is money lost at wholesale value. The customer is getting a $900 value at Sony's $400 expense, according to estimates claiming that the cost to produce the PS3 sits somewhere around $900. While this isn't uncommon for a company to lose money on each console sold, Sony has more to lose than anyone else. If Blu-Ray does not become the defacto standard of next-gen DVD, Sony will be facing a huge loss creating what will be considered just another proprietary format used primarily in Sony's hardware.
Similes are like metaphors
Nintendo has really set themselves apart. Whether people buy two or not, a lot of people are going to be buying the Wii. It will be the console to have and then people will have to decide which other one they get.
It's not surprising that MS would side with Nintendo. In fact, it's a good sign for Nintendo. Last round MS practically ignored Nintendo thinking they weren't a threat, when in reality Sony was so far ahead of them Nintendo was their only real competition, and they lost by a slight margin. Now they're recognizing that Nintendo is the big fish this time around and they have nothing. I don't see them saying, "After buying a 360, buy a Wii instead of a PS3." I see them saying, "After you've bought a Wii, think about a 360."
Speaking of the PS3, what is Kaz Hirai saying? Sure it's priced right for what it has, but the same would be true if it was just a PSX studded with diamonds. But few people are going to want to pay that much money for it. Then he says this:
"What we're presenting to consumers is future-proofed. It's not going to fall by the wayside."
And then goes on to say:
"The only difference is HDMI - and at this point, I don't think many people's TV's have that."
Way to make it so future proof that when peoples's TV's do have that, it won't be available to them without having to buy the console again, albeit cheaper by that time, but how much is any one's guess. Then this:
Some observers have questioned whether Blu-Ray movies will be playable on the PS3 once motion picture companies enable copy protection on the discs.
Hirai said it was "too early to speculate at this point" about such problems.
Even more future proofing.
Stop Global Warming!
Just say no to irreversible processes!
This all boils back down to blu-ray, and the response from E3 maybe sony's first really good test of how receptive thier customers will be to the product. Basically for Sony Blu-ray added one year and 200$ to thier console. They probably should have done a little bit better market research if they were expecting better product reception. Sony intermixed too seperate markets of thier company hoping to leverage the success in one to bolster the other. It's too early to call but it certianly very clear now how risky this is for them.
:) ) however Microsoft and Nintendo seem to both be positioned well. Sony however seems to have only it's current last gen user base (no small factor though) to help bolster demand for the PS3. I think Blu-ray may have been too risky a bet for them.
In a wierd ironic twist Microsoft will now start leveraging its dominance in the OS market with Vista's support for live anywhere to help it's console and this strategy seems to be very well concieved (as oppossed to Sonys). Then agian its not so wierd to expect Microsoft to be the Master at leveraging its OS effectivly (like they haven't done that before).
It's too early to call this whole console war (but it sure is fun to speculate isn't it
Ves
$199 in 1984 dollars is $368.34 in 2005 dollars according to this inflation calculator. (2005 is the latest year for which they have data.)
Insert witty sig here.
Anyhow, I already enjoy honest-to-goodness free online with my DS. Nintendo's probably got my money for the next gen, though I'll keep Microsoft's proposal here in mind in case I feel a need for more "hardcore" games in the future.
--- Bwah?
We all thought MS would die because you couldn't get a lot of games for the console and it wasn't as cool as PS2. Now, Sony is making the blunder that will allow MS to be entrenched. Not that I mind competition, but two monopolistic behemoth making odd, stupid moves is not my idea of competition.
Sony is trying to push their High def DVD standard so as to gain acceptance and market share. They are constantly trying to introduce new formats to gain acceptance. However, their latest standard is not exciting. We are still using DVDs and still want to use DVDs, we don't need a high def standard any time soon.
The mistake is trying to entrench the standard by basically making the console overpriced. That will drive marketshare to Xbox, who already is out ahead with consoles and games in the next generation, despite the overheating issues. The console now costs as much as a midrange PC which is ridiculous, and now they are competing for people's money who are trying to consider if they want a PC or an PS3.
Sony's only hurting themselves. Hopefully Nintendo will get some benefit out of this in marketshare and more people and games will come to their console.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
You mean like these:
Activision - Tony Hawk's Downhill Jam, Marvel: Ulatimate Alliance, Call of Duty 3
AQ Interactive - Boxing Action
Atari - Dragon Ball Z Budokai: Tenkaichi 2
Atlus - Trauma Center: Second Opinion
Buena Vista Games - Disney's Chicken Little: Ace in Action Disney's Meet the Robinsons
Capcom - Resident Evil series
D3Publisher - SIMPLE series
Electronic Arts - Madden NFL '07, Medal of Honor Airborne
Hudson - Bomberman
Koei - Sengoku Action
Konami - Elebits, Soccer game
Majesco - Bust-a-Move Revolution
Marvelous Interactive / Natsume - Harvest Moon Heroes, Legend of the River King
Mastiff - Mr. D Goes to Town
Midway Games - The Ant Bully, Happy Feet
MTO - SAN-X All-star Revolution
Namco Bandai - Final Furlong, Mobile Suite Gundam, Digimon, One Piece Ulimited Adventure, Tamagotchi
SEGA - Super Monkey Ball Banana Blitz, Sonic Wild Fire
SNK - Metal Slug Anthology
Spike - Necro-Nesia, Jawa
Square Enix - Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: Crystal Bearers, Dragon Quest Swords: The Masked Queen and the Tower of Mirrors
Taito - Turn it around!, Let's go by train!, Cooking Mama -Cooking with International Friends
Tecmo - Super Swing Golf Pangya
THQ - Avatar: The Last Airbender, SpongeBob SquarePants: Creature from the Krusty Krab, Disney/Pixar Cars
TOMY - Battle Action
Ubisoft - Open Season, Rayman Raving Rabbids, Red Steel
Yeah, I sure with they had at least some third-party support. While I'm not necessarily defending the quality of some of these games (I'm not necessarily a Spongebob fan), the point it that third-party support exists.
Slashdot: where repeating an article in a post is "+5 Insightful"
I believe he is refering to MemoryCard readers that plug into a PC via a USB port, so all you need to do is stick the USB cord into the PS3 instead, and Viola, Memory Stick reader for your PS3
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
My housemate has an Xbox 360.
He's a bearded, long-haired, late-twenties guy who can usually be found swigging a can of Strongbow while he blows seven shades of hell out of *whatever* on his Xbox.
I could imagine him doing exactly the same thing if it were a PS3. However, I just can't see him rushing out to buy a Wii so that he can wave his arms around like a demented orchestral conductor to the tune of 'Bubble Bobble'.
He's just not the type, and he'd only end up knocking his can of cider over.
I reckon the intersection of 'possible Xbox 360 gamers' and 'possible PS3 gamers' is a lot larger than either of the two intersected with 'possible Nintendo Wii hand-wavers'. Regardless of the low price point of the Wii.
Will host for cash.
How about contextual use of language? I have an evil cat. He's never toppled a major world government. For a cat, he's still evil.
BTW, your hyperbole? That's "Nazi." Being a malicious shithead and/or conducting one's self in an antisocial manner for personal gain has been evil since, say, religion. Genocide is not required and I think there's little danger of confusion.
you can have my violent video games when you pry them from my cold, dead hands.
Prime UID Club
Maybe it is time for a new definition of next-generation that isn't simply based on graphics and processing power. A Prius is less powerful than a ferrari, but I would still say it is a next-generation car due to the hybrid engine. At the time of the Model T, new cars with better engines and more features were important, but the auto industry has hit a point where they needed to innovate rather than just build machines that could race 0 to 60 at a faster speed, because only a small segment of the market really wanted that. Gaming consoles seem to be headed down the same path. What could be more next-gen than a whole new way of approaching games?
The stripped down 360 costs $399, the higher-end costs $499
Nope.
The core is $299, the "regular" is $399. There are bundles that go even for $800+, but that's not the point.
and that's without the HD-DVD.
For now. MS is already losing money on the XBOX hardware, they'll add an HD-DVD player when the time comes, right now most people don't even have HD-TV, why would you need the HD-DVD? Not to mention games will also be more expensive for HD-DVD since the disks cost more.
Plus, Sony's online play is free,
Sony has an online play? I wouldn't compare the fact that it's free compared to $50, but how much you actually get for it. Given XBOX Live already has built a large community, and is rapidly increasing, the $50 are worth it. Plus Sony is _announcing_ it's free, given the greedy bastards they are we'll see. They'll have a free sign-up but get very little and probably charge the same or more for the equivalent.
All Sony has to do is throw in a couple games and they'd have MS beat already.
Wrong...all Sony has to do is release a console, and then they can actually start playing catch-up
I tend to agree with the article. PS3 has so far nothing to offer me the XBOX360 doesn't. The people who buy Nintendo consoles do it cause they're huge SmashBros et. al fans. The market targeted by Nintendo is different than the one MS/Sony is going after.
This is one of two things:
I may be a Nintendo fanboy, but I am a capitalist first. Wii...
The cancel button is your friend. Do not hesitate to use it.
That's an interesting link... just for kicks I plugged in the 'typical' launch price for a console, $299, at year 2000 inflation... this is what I got back:
What cost $299 in 2000 would cost $332.05 in 2005.
That's what the low end PS3 should cost. All other things being equal. $330 and $399 for low and high-end configs respectively would have looked pretty good.
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
And then there are people like me. I would pay $400 more for the HD player, and definately NOT as an add-on. If it is an add-on like Microsoft is going to do, then little to no developers will ever develop for it. However, I do have an HDTV (1080i, and 720P) and was planning on buying a new HD DVD player, so now I can try a poor mans player out before I drop extra cash on a "better" one. To me this is similar to what a lot of us did with the first PS2's. We got a "cheap" DVD player that also played games.
The real question is this. Will Sony sell all 4 million units as fast as they can make them? Does anyone here honestly think that they won't? It appears that Sony has a clue on pricing their hardware and there is nothing saying that they can't or won't lower the price by next Christmas, "IF" they need to. That is a big "IF". People here in the Indianapolis area are already trying to pre order their systems every day at EB in the malls. They know the system will cost them well over $500, and they don't care.
Now, the market that Sony AND Microsoft seem to be ignoring is the children under 12. I see families with children under 12 getting the Wii (what a stupid name), because neither Microsoft OR Sony seems to have an abundance of good games for younger children AND the new system is going to cost around $250.
So I see the breakdown as this
Nintendo - Ownes the kids market with no real competition. However, real bargan shoppers will skip the new "expensive" systems and buy a cheap PS2. So this market may not be that large.
Microsoft - Fanboys of XBOX and Halo will buy this system this Christmas year. Also "buddies" of people that already own a 360, but that is about it.
Sony - The fanboys alone will buy every unit that can be made. Their only issue will be that people may buy another system "if" they can't get one for their kid this Christmas.
The more I learn about science, the more my faith in God increases.
While I would agree with you that Mario Kart is probably the most static of the series you just cited, I would like to point out that it's probably the least static series in a genre of extremely static games (racing). Seriously, how much do you expect a racing game to change?
That said, all the other games change more between two games then any other two games in their respective genre's (and I would include MarioKart in that statement as well). Just because a game is a sequal doesn't make it any more or less innovative. For the most part, if anything, it just places the game in a particular genre (Zelda is Nintendo's adventure games, Mario is their platformers and family games, Metroid is their sci-fi horror).
As to who to hate, I used to be a big PlayStation fan because of its plethora of RPGs, but now I'm seeing so many companies jumping ship on the PS3, I have to wonder what's really going to happen. Still, it's hard for me to imagine not having the system that Metal Gear Solid 4 and FF13 will be on. MGS4 looks... well... solid. And FF13 is bound to be good (every game in the series I've at least enjoyed, I don't think Square has produced a dog in their main line so far), and from what I've heard about FF12, they're back on their feet again. That said, I won't pay $600 to be able to play two games, so if there isn't a massive catalog to go with the system, it might be time to jump ship. I hate what Microsoft has done to gaming: gone and brought American developers's into the console market, but I have to admit, they have a solid product this time around, although if the Wii is as good as I think it might be, it may be the only system I'll need this generation.
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
I bet Ballmer's looking forward to a chair throwing game on Wii.
I know this is a troll post by a Sony fanboi, but I couldn't resist.
... 4 ethernet ports (now only 1), 2 HDMI ports so you can output to two TVs (now only 1, and that's only on the premium), the boomerang controller is gone (although that's probably a good thing), Killzone 2 with awesome "in-game graphics" mysteriously missing this E3, and a Spring 2006 ship that has been delayed. Furthermore, they scoffed at MS for the 2 SKU model, but then went ahead and did it themselves (and WORSE since the core model is far crappier than the premium). Then during this year's conference, they talked about how their controller was truly innovative, even though everyone in the audience knew it's just a knock-off of the Wii-mote. And finally, their slides of the two SKU model during the conference listed the only difference as the size of the HD. But the press release later showed drastic differences between the two.
:)
It seems to me the company that needs to defend themselves the most from claims of lies and trickery is Sony. Shall we jump into the time machine and see what claims Sony made last E3? Let's see here
I'm not saying MS is amazing, doesn't make mistakes, etc. In fact, I think the 2 SKU model is pretty stupid as well, and the supply issues were pretty damaging. But man, compared to Sony, they look like saints recently.
And if MS is looking saintly, then Nintendo must be God.
-- jchenx
At the same site, you can see the Sony Blu-Ray player "coming soon" for $999. I'm beginning to suspect that the PS3 will be just as bad for playing Blu-Ray movies as the PS2 was (it got better later) for playing DVD movies.
And, let's face another reality. The Toshiba HD-DVD player is the flagship HD-DVD product, the very definition of fodder for early adopters. It won't be long at all before other companies join the fray and those prices are going to come down.
I think they should change "Bust-a-Move Revolution" to "Busting for a Wii".
I was one of the lucky few that stood out all night in the cold so that I could geta 360 on release day. Not because I am a MS fanboi, but because I like gaming, and it was the next gen console. Fast forward to today...
My 360 sits next to my TV getting turned on maybe once a week to check out Live and maybe play some Dead or Alive against my wife. There is a lack of good titles, and titles that have replayability. While I am not disappointed per say, I am going to buy one of the other consoles when they came out. And I am going to follow pretty much what was said... I have a 360, why not a Wii too? The price is great (we all assume), the game play looks fun, and when I need my 'hardcore' fix, I still have my 360.
The fact that there is not propriatary format for the next gen dvds has me wondering, and will keep me from purchasing a system (the PS3) that has it built in. What happens to the PS3 if HD-DVD becomes the defacto standard? You have an expensive console that can only play games. At least with the Xbox, if Blu-Ray becomes the standard, you can just plug in a standalone player. While I am sure that the PS3 will offer a standalone if it loses with the Blu-Ray, at least with the 360 I am not stuck with a betamax with a VCR plugged into it.
Microsoft has got me pegged. A hardcore system for those days I need it, and a 'fun' system that I can play some great games from the past on, and that my family can enjoy for the same price as a system that might be obsolete in 2 years...
The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel...
I'm not a financial analyst, but who does Sony think it's going to be selling it's PS3 to? Gamers will of course buy it, but they would buy it even if Sony had priced the machine at $1,000. The question is, how will a mainstream consumer respond? Sony is hoping a repeat of PS2 when consumers justified the then hefty $300 price tag because a DVD player was included with the machine. Now Sony wants to cram the new HD blue ray down consemers throats, only 6 years after DVD finally went mainstream. My feeling is, it's too soon. Consumers are not going to justify spending $600 on a machine when the only thing it offers in terms of movie playback, is a prittier picture. Take into account that most people don't have HD TV's, and that makes it even more likely that consumers wont swallow the price markup. My point is, Sony seems to think that the higher price for the machine will be offset by the inclussion of the new DVD playback technology. However they are not likely to suceed this time because all the the inherent advantages of switching from VHS to DVD are not present this time. The only thing the new format offers is greater storage capacity, translating into a prittier picture. A second concern, is that a lot of people simply won't be able to afford the new machine. how many parents would buy their teenage kids a game console for $600? Add in a couple of games, a second controller and other peripherals, and the price quickly exceeds $800. It's to much. You can get a laptop or a fully functional PC for less then that. Sony has over-shot, and i think the market is going to prove me right when their sales don't keep up with those of their previous machine.
Fool me once...shame on you, fool me twice...won't be fooled again (our president)
For those of us who only mildly follow the video game world, how is bringing American developers to the console market a bad thing?
"Oh dear, she's stuck in an infinite loop and he's an idiot" -Prof. Farnsworth (Futurama)
obviously neutral evil. . . though it looks like with this generation they're trying hard to reroll.
disclaimer: I've been known to store numbers in my ass for which to dig out when quantities are required.
Why do people keep trotting out those ebay prices, as if they were statistically significant? How many people actually paid $700 for their $400 hardware? 1000, out of 3,000,000 so far, if that? 0.03% isn't much of a market.
If Sony were to launch at a price that wasn't artificially low, they'd have an extremely disappointing launch and a consumer backlash that would make the current price flap look like a raised eyebrow.
Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
I agree, you do get alot in the PS3.
:)
It is:
1. PSOne game player (yes for us who still love playing old psx games, hey gran turismo 2 is still one hellofa game.
2. PS2 game player (the amount of A+ titles for the PS2 library is above and beyond probably any video game system that ever existed so far)
3. PS3 game player
4. cd player
5. dvd movie player
6. hi-def bluray movie player
7. wifi networking entertainment hub
that is alot. the sheer amount of games from the entire playstation library is staggering, and it looks like sony will always make their next gen system backwards compatible.
for $600 you get an hi-def video player AND a console.
As you point out, it costs $500 for a Toshiba HD-DVD player. What you neglected to mention was that if you want a BR player you have to pay more. If you look across the range of BR and HD-DVD players announced, the BR simply cost more.
Now for BR to beat HD-DVD they need to get more players out there, and more people buying movies in that format. Sony are currently undercutting all their BR licensees with the PS3 - they really really can't be happy about this (possibly why they've deliberately hobbled the cheaper PS3 to at least allow the low-end BR makers to produce an HDMI player for less than Sony's more expensive PS3?)
Overall Sony are pretty much going it alone. They're betting the number of BR players put out there solely with the PS3, will crush the number of HD-DVD players put out there by all the different manufacturers and Microsoft.
It's a brave bet - if it fails though, it's just going to land them making expensive PS3s for a very long time.
Just to have a look at Sony - Betamax, minidisc, memory stick/duo/micro, SACD, UMD blah blah. The have a long history of creating media formats to line their own pockets, that never take off outside of their own product line (and then usually curl up and die). Quite often they're technically better - but they never manage to get other companies to use them. I hoestly can't see why BR will be any different.