That's why people usually end up going with Samsung because the brand is reliable but it won't break the bank either if you're not looking to spend too much.

This feeds into my point about low ends and, sadly, gets into some of Sony's biggest flaws. Like, Sony's absolute lowest end is a single 32", followed by a 40", three 43" and eight 48" to 50". On the other hand, Samsung has two 24", two 28", five 32" and a fair number of options above 43".

The main reason why I bring this up is, when compared to Samsung, similar TVs are not that different in price, Samsung simply has a wider array of lower tier options.

You would think that with how successful the PS4 was due to its initial price, that they'd realize price is a major factor to having a successful product.

I respect Sony tries to do high end at the low tier, like the 43" 800E is easily the best television without an absurd fee (Samsung's Frame is potentially better at about twice the cost), they just need to embrace more options. Well, that and I do feel like Samsung does a good job of throwing things in that sound better on paper/to the consumer than Sony.

Like I have the Z9F soundbar and that thing easily sounds better than the MS-750, yet you're still paying more for the Z9F with three speakers and a sub than 11 speaker with dedicated amp system. But I digress.

We're getting pretty far away from gaming, so I'll just bring it back. They should seriously look at dropping the things that don't work, expand on what does work (seriously, low end Sony televisions would sell, if only for the name) and avoid some of their odder choices (I have an A8F and the only thing I hate more than the stand is the A1E's stand).