Will They or Won't They? - PS3 Price Cut Mooted by Sony

[fitbabits]

Another day, another PS3 price cut tidbit. This time, though, it comes straight from the horse's mouth (where the horse in question is Sony).

Next Generation (http://www.next-gen.biz/) has more on this peculiar game of cat and mouse here (http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4649&Itemid=2).

The launch of the PlayStation 3 has driven Sony’s games division deep into the red, but the company says that a price cut is already being examined closely; SCE fiscal year losses could be worse than expected.

"We may look at the [PS3's] price as part of our strategy to expand the market when the timing is right," senior VP Takao Yuhara told the Associated Press.

However, Sony's price-cutting plans remain vague. No actual reduction timeline has been announced, as the company aims to break even in its games business during fiscal 2008, which begins in April.
My opinion? Sony has to cut the price of the PS3 to remain competitive.

[Mdot23]

if anyone wants them to cut the price, let me know. because i'm sure that as soon as i buy one, they'll drop the price the next day.

[camberiu]

Let the denial postings begin....

[fitbabits]

I also think that Sony should kill off the 20GB model as they apparently lose more money on that than on the 60GB version.

[Draconis]

Agreed Fits. They should only have the 60 GB model out there. Period. It's the only one people are going to be interested in really.


Sony's releasing only the 60GB version in Europe shows this.

[Siraris]

From the things I've read it seems like they are going to take this route. As I said yesterday, I think they will take the route of most CE devices, bringing it out for a high price at first, and then dropping the price frequently over it's lifetime.

Most likely, in the beginning, they knew that it would be a huge price to swallow for a gaming machine, so they talked all this shit about how you need another job to buy it so it would seem totally worth it, so people would be prepared, and whatnot. If it caught on at that price, terrific, and they could keep it at that price as long as there was demand and people buying it for $600. Seeing that people aren't appreciating the high price, they are going to have to cut prices sooner rather than later.

I think it's GREAT news, as dropping the price will generate a lot of sales, which means more games!

[Tel Prydain]

Siraris, I'm always surprised and impressed at your optimism.

[EternalGamer]

Agreed Fits. They should only have the 60 GB model out there. Period. It's the only one people are going to be interested in really.


Sony's releasing only the 60GB version in Europe shows this.

This is only true if you assume people are blind consumers and always follow the motto that if something costs more then it is better. When I buy a PS3 it will be the $499 model (whatever the price is at the time). There is nothing on the $599 model that they average consumer would need. Unless you plan on storing a ridiculious amount of downloadable content or desperately want to use your PSP as a rear view mirror in Grand Turismo for some reason, there is very little reason to buy the more expensive model.

[RMan]

Ehh, for me personally if they decreased the price by $100 to make it competitive with the 360 it still wouldn't get it any closer to a purchase for me. It's still just hardware, and until the media is more interesting to me it really doesn't matter what the price is.

[Siraris]

Siraris, I'm always surprised and impressed at your optimism.

I try. No point in being negative like everyone else on the net.

[fitbabits]

For anyone who cares, here's my prediction:

The $499 20GB model will be scrapped completely and the price of the 60GB model will be reduced to $499.

This may not happen before the PS3 is unleashed in Europe, but I believe it will happen this year.

[MrWonderstuff]

Nice to see Sony swallowing their arrogance.

[Wyrm]

Ehh, for me personally if they decreased the price by $100 to make it competitive with the 360 it still wouldn't get it any closer to a purchase for me. It's still just hardware, and until the media is more interesting to me it really doesn't matter what the price is.

And you win the thread.

That's exactly the point I try to make. Even though the price is fucking ridiculous, I'd gladly pay it if there was a game worth the price of admission, just as most people would I think. The software just isn't there yet, and until it is, price drop or not, I don't need one.

[Draconis]

This is only true if you assume people are blind consumers and always follow the motto that if something costs more then it is better. When I buy a PS3 it will be the $499 model (whatever the price is at the time). There is nothing on the $599 model that they average consumer would need. Unless you plan on storing a ridiculious amount of downloadable content or desperately want to use your PSP as a rear view mirror in Grand Turismo for some reason, there is very little reason to buy the more expensive model.


True EternalGamer. Very true, and whilst I have no love of Sony, as long as I have worked in IT and also from my previous years in the Retail enviroment, game stores included, I have learned two things

1: Never underestimate the stupidity of the human race

2: Never underestimate the blind carelessness of a very ill informed consumer, around any type of sales person touting the 'upgraded' version.


Sadly, the two statistics, the Blind consumer, and the general sheer stupidity of alot of people, or rather, Apathy if you will, seem to go hand in hand.

[Roc Ingersol]

cut the 20gig and cut the price $100 and nothing's changed.
It'd still be $500 to get your foot in the door.


I don't see Sony touching the price until Microsoft does. Cutting their price first would be seen poorly on 'the street'.

[Wyrm]

For anyone who cares, here's my prediction:

The $499 20GB model will be scrapped completely and the price of the 60GB model will be reduced to $499.

This may not happen before the PS3 is unleashed in Europe, but I believe it will happen this year.

I think you're really reaching for a price drop that big. 50 bucks is probably the sweet spot for an initial price drop. Don't get me wrong, I hope you're right, but I think they'll think it'd be utter insanity to drop it that much.

[Disgustipated]

For anyone who cares, here's my prediction:

The $499 20GB model will be scrapped completely and the price of the 60GB model will be reduced to $499.

This may not happen before the PS3 is unleashed in Europe, but I believe it will happen this year.

...And yet, it'll still be too expensive. Especially if the 360 comes out with a 120GB model.

[Philonious]

cut the 20gig and cut the price $100 and nothing's changed.
It'd still be $500 to get your foot in the door.


I don't see Sony touching the price until Microsoft does. Cutting their price first would be seen poorly on 'the street'.

I think how their seen on 'the street' is why they have to do something fast... This ship has only so much time to sink before it is lost completely. While software will help the console, software and a price cut would be better. Problem is that they're already eating a loss, a price cut (even after cost cutting measures) isn't going to help.

[Tel Prydain]

I have to come across as mean here, but I really want the PS3 to bomb. The idea I might need to buy one to get games I cant play on my 360/Wii annoys me.
But I am a slave to the games - if some awsome games came out that required a PS3 I'd buy one the same day, even if it was at current prices. No price drop will win me over until that awsome software shows up.
And as I'm a western RPG fan the PS3 doesn't look like it'll produce what I'm looking for.

[Commissar Rob]

Well, it doesn't make a lot of business sense to announce something like this without having a reduction (even a token reduction) planned for the very near future. Why pay $600/500 pounds, etc. now when a Sony VP is talking a price cut?

[RMan]

I have to come across as mean here, but I really want the PS3 to bomb.
Besides nationalism, why would you want that?

[Philonious]

Besides nationalism, why would you want that?

Because Sony's attitude towards gamers needs to improve. They have been arrogant and seem not to care what developers or gamers want and this is bad for everyone.

Invoking nationalism is asinine.

[Zacharai]

I can't believe Sony's publically admitting they're considering a price cut. Of course they're considering it, they have to, but no way in hell should they admit it. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

Philonious -- do you really want Microsoft to have a monopoly on high-def, hardcore gaming?

[outontheporch]

Daaaaa Bears

[Morangie]

Most likely, in the beginning, they knew that it would be a huge price to swallow for a gaming machine, so they talked all this shit about how you need another job to buy it so it would seem totally worth it, so people would be prepared, and whatnot.
That worked out great for them.

[Captain Awesome]

lol, P$3 sux!

[bitwise]

I don't want the PS3 to fail and be removed from the market completely, but I do want a much more even distribution of game consoles this go around, and I think it's high time Sony got some humility beat into them. It should be clear to everyone that whenever there is a "market leader" in consoles their interests invariably conflict with their consumers' interests. It happened with Nintendo after the SNES, and it happened with Sony after the PS2. If the 360, Wii and PS3 wind up having a more even marketshare, it will foster competition, a good thing for game developers and for people who buy games.

Then again, Sony really seems to want to shoot themselves in the foot this generation. If they decide to fall on their proverbial sword, there isn't much anyone can do to help them.

[Kamalot]

PS3 does not need a price drop. All it needs is some killer apps. Once it has killer apps, people will buy the system, no matter how much it costs.

Besides, the PS3 can sell the first 5 million units without any games available, cause fans will buy it no matter what it is. Once they reach 5-million sold (not shipped) then they should start looking at ways to attract non-Sony fans.

[gzsfrk]

This is the first time I recall reading something stated by ANYONE from Sony that even slightly hinted that they are facing some stiff competition and need to adjust accordingly. I think the Wii doing really well in Japan and both the 360 and Wii pounding the PS3 thus far in the States has finally pierced the thick armor shell of arrogance that Sony has seemed to display for nigh on 3 years now.

In any case, I'm ALL for a price cut--the bigger the better. The reason being, it will likely accelerate price cuts from MS and Nintendo as well. I'm seriously hoping for a $399 deluxe edition 360 with IPTV support and a 120gb hard drive before the end of the year.

[Philonious]

I can't believe Sony's publically admitting they're considering a price cut. Of course they're considering it, they have to, but no way in hell should they admit it. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

Philonious -- do you really want Microsoft to have a monopoly on high-def, hardcore gaming?

LOL. Hey Zach, check out my posts... I'm in serious danger of coming across as a Sony shill. I thought for sure I'd be accused of that LONG before someone accused me of siding with Microsoft. In no way do I want the PS3 to fail, in fact I was inches away from picking one up last weekend, and still plan to in the next couple of months. But Sony has seriously lost touch with gamers and developers. The price is astronomical, Cell is awkward and the inclusion of Blu-Ray self-interested and so far they have done nothing to demonstrate how any of this benefits me as a gamer. They need to eat some humble pie before the PS4 is released. (But like I said, I don't want them destroyed, just humbled).

While I agree that it is WAY out of hand, there is no reason to invoke nationalism, racism or xenophobia to explain the anti-Sony sentiment going around.

[Deathwave]

What happens when Sony's employee's aren't busy selling PS3's? ;)

http://www.nintendopedia.org/images/d/d1/Sonywii.jpg

[Metal Jesus]

Honestly, they HAVE to cut the price this year, or risk losing serious ground to Microsoft.

[RMan]

Because Sony's attitude towards gamers needs to improve. They have been arrogant and seem not to care what developers or gamers want and this is bad for everyone.
Well, they hardly need to bomb to change that, they just need to not own the lion’s share of the market. Nintendo was the same when they were on top, and MS is the same in the OS market.
Invoking nationalism is asinine.
I actually agree, I said it because there are a large number of people here who seem to think that's the primary reason Japanese don't buy the Xbox.

[Kamalot]

This is the first time I recall reading something stated by ANYONE from Sony that even slightly hinted that they are facing some stiff competition and need to adjust accordingly.
You are right. This is strange. Perhaps someone is feeling ill cause last I heard, Sony does not care about rivals (http://www.tiscali.co.uk/games/news/2006/09/29/sony-does-not-care-about-rivals.html), and market share is not important (http://www.engadget.com/2006/06/03/sony-not-so-concerned-with-market-share-ah-that-explains-it/).

Someone at Sony must be delusional. Cutting the price of the PS3 wouldn't instill discipline (http://ps3.qj.net/Funny-Ken-Kutaragi-Quotes-a-fan-boy-litmus-test/pg/49/aid/79353) in anyone, as people could buy one without working harder.

Crazy Talk!

[Philonious]

I actually agree, I said it because there are a large number of people here who seem to think that's the primary reason Japanese don't buy the Xbox.

Sorry for misinterpreting. And I agree, no Sony death... Just humble pie.

[Zecon]

They may be trying to goad *** into a price drop, or worse yet, Nintendo. But how that would actually BENEFIT Sony is beyond me.

[AversionFX]

My opinion? Sony has to cut the price of the PS3 to remain competitive.

Obviously, but can they? I think they can't. They're bleeding so much money off this, and if figures about number of software sales needed to break even are true, they would shoot themselves in both feet if they dropped the price.

Of course the consumer wants a price reduction. But because Sony's already losing a boatload of money on the PS3, a price cut would be that much worse. Sony's business practices definitely need to be thought out, because losing money on your product is definitely not how a business should operate. And then to intentionally cause an even bigger loss? Incomprehensible.

Although, after Sony's PR this generation, it'd be really nice to see them fail. Maybe then they'd re-think their strategies and get their collective heads out of their asses.

[RMan]

Sorry for misinterpreting. And I agree, no Sony death... Just humble pie.
Well, technically I'm not sure you misinterpreted, it was bait :). Yea, I understand the arrogance comments, but I'd still like to see Sony get an edge over MS because of the OS thing, other than that, they're all the same if they get the power (including my currently beloved Nintendo).

[Citizen Philip]

No one here who currently doesn't like Sony would buy a PS3, if the price equalled or was even slightly lesser than a 360. People are buying them now, either because they are optimistic about future releases or wanted a blu-ray player: people are waiting because they want some good titles.

If the price was equal the whining and complaining would be equal except instead of reading "too expensive" you would see more "too arrogant" and "not enough titles" instead.

If you like strawberry jam you don't fucking care what those crazy shit-house rats that eat raspberry jam are doing.

[Yeti2005]

I can't believe Sony even hinted at a price cut. Now anyone who was half way considering getting a PS3 is going to hold off. If a price cut does occur it better happen across all regions (vs just Japan like last time).

I can basically get a PS3 for free (with my Sony point on my Sony CC) but what's the point when there's currently no good games (no games that aren't already on the 360 that is). A price cut will help sell more PS3s but good to great games will really sell some units.

[Sensei-X]

Funny thing is the 20gb is the only one selling at all, all stores I go to have the $599 60gb model stacked up and collecting dust, or at very least still have the 60gb model while the 20gb are always out of stock. If they remove the 20gb model they better replace the $499 PS3 with a 60gb model (as was already mentioned) not just say "It's $599 or no PS3 for you", because that would be financial suicide.

I also think that Sony should kill off the 20GB model as they apparently lose more money on that than on the 60GB version.

[Kamalot]

No one here who currently doesn't like Sony would buy a PS3, if the price equalled or was even slightly lesser than a 360.
That simply isn't true. Any company that is going to put out a good product at a good price supported by a healthy library of fun titles will get my cash. The thing is that the company needs to EARN my business, not EXPECT it.

I'm not into buying premium products just for the sake of spending more. If I'm spending more, the product needs to DO more. Right now, the 360 and the PS3 do about the same amount of stuff, just different stuff. They play games that look just about the same. One plays high-def movies and has some kind of tilt sensor. The other has a layer of social networking, communications, downloadable movies, rumble-feedback, and custom soundtracks. They are roughly equal in capabilities, but each does things a little differently.

Yet one has a larger library and a cheaper price tag.

WTF?

Sony can EARN our business by dropping the price to be competitive, or they can simply expect people to pay more for a similar product and scratch their head when they don't sell as many units as Microsoft and Nintendo do.

I would totally buy a PS3 if it had a library of games I was interested in, AND it was priced competitively. OR, I would buy a PS3 if it had a library of games I was interested in, AND it did everything the 360 does and then some. Instead, it simply does different stuff.

I have no doubt that the library of games will eventually get there, but it may take a long time. That's okay for me, as I'll eventually have a PS3 anyway. It may take a while for the price to come in line with the exclusives that are really worth having though. I eventually picked up a Sega Saturn too, but it was for cheap at a pawn shop.

The point is, that Sony CAN get people to buy the PS3. They have to try though. Saying that they don't care about the competition, that market share isn't important, that people will buy their console regardless of cost or the library, is not the right kind of attitude to convince people to spend money on your product.

[Zecon]

Well, technically I'm not sure you misinterpreted, it was bait :). Yea, I understand the arrogance comments, but I'd still like to see Sony get an edge over MS because of the OS thing, other than that, they're all the same if they get the power (including my currently beloved Nintendo).
OK I know that I may get bitchslapped into tomorrow for saying this, but do you really want Sony's console to beat out the 360, because of windows? I know everyone hates Ms's OS, but personally I have never used Linux, nor do I feel I need to, and it's free!
My point? I want the 360 to succeed, and why? Because Sony, in my opinion, would seriously Fuck the gaming world. $600 game console?! $200 handheld?! Then since the game companies have to support their own servers, that will jack up game prices even more, so maybe $70-75, and how fair is it to the people who don't even play online? I prefer the direction MS is going with, just paying for what you want. Honestly I want my child to be able to AFFORD videogames when they are my age.

[Rock Bandit]

It would be nice to see Sony realize how level the playing field is for all three systems this go-around. I wouldn't be surprised if when it's all said and done the amount seperating 1st, 2nd, and 3rd is around 2-3 mil.

[Captain Awesome]

If you like strawberry jam you don't fucking care what those crazy shit-house rats that eat raspberry jam are doing.

Are you fucking kidding me? Have you ever had "real" homemade preserves? They're amazing!

Only one man would ever give me the raspberry!

[lockwoodx]

My opinion? Sony has to cut the price of the PS3 to remain competitive.



But but....I was willing to get a second job just because I wanted one!!!

[51|RandoM]

My point? I want the 360 to succeed, and why? Because Sony, in my opinion, would seriously Fuck the gaming world. $600 game console?! $200 handheld?! Then since the game companies have to support their own servers, that will jack up game prices even more, so maybe $70-75, and how fair is it to the people who don't even play online? I prefer the direction MS is going with, just paying for what you want. Honestly I want my child to be able to AFFORD videogames when they are my age.

A. The PS3 is more expensive because it does more. The PSP is more expensive because it does more. Offering additional functionality isn't "fucking the gaming world", imho. If you don't want the additional functionality, buy a 360, buy a wii, buy a ds, buy whatever you want and VOILA!!! you're still gaming. Considering you can't/won't pay $600, why on earth aren't you mentioning the $500 version which doesn't have a couple features you're not interested in anyways? So many bullshitters out there. As soon as they spout the $600 figure, you know they're full of shit.

B. The only servers that have to be maintained are the matchmaking lobbies and stat trackers. Low bandwidth, low activity, low cost. The real server is your 360 in most games, and your own bandwidth, not Microsoft's. Live integration costs the developers money too, you know...

C. Microsoft isn't going that direction. I can't just pay for what I want. If I could, I wouldn't have to pay for all of the extra junk in Live! that I never use, I could just pay for multiplayer gaming.

D. If you want your child to be able to afford videogames, educate them. Unless you're dead set on raising a set of welfare babies, you don't really have to worry about the cost of gaming being out of their grasp. lol.

What you don't seem to grasp is that Sony isn't the only option and that Sony doesn't set the pricing for all other options.

[lockwoodx]

A. Offering additional functionality isn't "fucking the gaming world", imho. If you don't want the additional functionality, buy a 360, buy a wii, buy a ds, buy whatever you want and VOILA!!! you're still gaming.




LOL sony is trying to cram "functionality" down everyone's throat. Other companies want to just make a fun system that plays good games.

U loose

[Kamalot]

A. The PS3 is more expensive because it does more.
Uh, no. It does DIFFERENT things. It does not carry voice-chats across games atop of custom soundtracks while inviting friends to play. It does not include rumble-feedback. It does not have a marketplace of downloadable HD movies and television shows.

The PS3 plays Bluray discs, has a tilt-sensor in the controller and has a web browser.

The PS3 does DIFFERENT things, not MORE things, and that's the problem with asking people to pay more for it.

[Johan]

I'll be getting a PS3...when the PS4 is out. ;)

Until then, I'm quite content with my 360, DS, PC and, soon, Wii. That's enough for me.

As soon as they spout the $600 figure, you know they're full of shit.

I think you just spouted the "$600 figure." :D Oh noes! So did I!

The PS3 does DIFFERENT things, not MORE things...

The PS3 cures cancer...leave it alone! ;)

[Zecon]

REALLY? you know I think that $50 bucks a year is a paltry sum for having a decent unified online multiplayer service, everything else is really just a bonus.
And heres the best part, Don't ever tell me not to talk about the 600 dollar version, unless you want to explain it to the europeans who dont even get the $500 dollar model. And I'm sorry that I'm a blue collar working who doesn't make a whole shitload of money to furnish my home with a new Sony 1080p Tv, a overpriced GAME CONSOLE, or computer or whatever Sony wants to call it at the time, I'm surprised they haven't come out and call it a Center of Media by now. I bought My 20 gig 360 at launch with 2 games, a controller, rechargeable battery pack and a Play and charge kit for what it would cost me to buy the PS3 with no games. Although it was a hit to my budget, it was doable. So fuck off 51Random, unless you, in all your wealth, is going to buy my peasant ass a PS3

[Tel Prydain]

I have to come across as mean here, but I really want the PS3 to bomb. Besides nationalism, why would you want that?

The reason was in the same post, right after the bit you quoted.

I have to come across as mean here, but I really want the PS3 to bomb.
The idea I might need to buy [A whole new $600 consle I wouldn't otherwise need] to get games I cant play on my 360/Wii annoys me.

Please read the whole post next time.

[Pumped'Up]

Current price of the PS3 is a BARGAIN. It simply does everything, a true next-gen all-in-one entertainment system, not just a simple gaming console like many of you Wii fanatics see it.

What Sony needs to do is cut their dev fees (and even the $$$ dev console) to get more developers on board and start making damn games for the system. The best weapon a console has, regardless of specs, is it's software.

[Kamalot]

Current price of the PS3 is a BARGAIN. It simply does everything, a true next-gen all-in-one entertainment system, not just a simple gaming console like many of you Wii fanatics see it.

What Sony needs to do is cut their dev fees (and even the $$$ dev console) to get more developers on board and start making damn games for the system. The best weapon a console has, regardless of specs, is it's software.
Your post is sigworthy

[Tel Prydain]

Current price of the PS3 is a BARGAIN. It simply does everything, a true next-gen all-in-one entertainment system, not just a simple gaming console like many of you Wii fanatics see it.


When I first read this I thought you were being ironic! :D


Never mind.... I'm sure the PS3 is a super true next-gen all-in-one entertainment system. You enjoy that while we foolish "Wii fanatics" are over here... we'll just have to settle of playing fun games instead.

btw: sigged!

[Zanzibar]

Current price of the PS3 is a BARGAIN. It simply does everything, a true next-gen all-in-one entertainment system, not just a simple gaming console like many of you Wii fanatics see it.

What Sony needs to do is cut their dev fees (and even the $$$ dev console) to get more developers on board and start making damn games for the system. The best weapon a console has, regardless of specs, is it's software.
Are you under the impression that the dev fees are contributing to the low amounts of PS3 titles announced?

Wow. I always thought you were a troll, I just didn't realize you were a clueless troll.

Devs/publishers will develop for any platform with a large install base. They stayed away from the Xbox early last gen because Sony had such a ridiculously large lead that it made no sense to take the risk on an untested console. Once the Xbox developed a decent install base, they went after it.

Devs/publishers now are scared to death about the PS3's low sales numbers. It's expensive, it doesn't have a lot of games right now, and there is no killer app - Resistance is good, but it's no Zelda TP. So, sales will likely be low until either the price drops, or a PS3-exclusive killer app comes along.

[bitwise]

No one here who currently doesn't like Sony would buy a PS3, if the price equalled or was even slightly lesser than a 360. People are buying them now, either because they are optimistic about future releases or wanted a blu-ray player: people are waiting because they want some good titles.

If the price was equal the whining and complaining would be equal except instead of reading "too expensive" you would see more "too arrogant" and "not enough titles" instead.

If you like strawberry jam you don't fucking care what those crazy shit-house rats that eat raspberry jam are doing.

People aren't buying the PS3 because for whatever reason they don't deem that they will recieve enough value in exchange for their $600. All of the shit Sony has pulled essentially increases the price. It's not "just $600" anymore. Now it's "$600 and I'm giving my money to the people who strongarmed Lik Sang into shutting down, forced malicious rootkits onto peoples' computers resulting in the destruction of property, jacked the Wii's motion sensing capabilities and then claimed them as their own, etc. Also, I understand that $200 of my dollars are going to support Sony's pet DVD format which I don't really care about or have the equipment to fully enjoy."

So in a lot of ways, you're right. There are probably people who would not buy the PS3 if it had the same price as the 360. There are probably people who would, too. But you seem to think that the people who complain about Sony don't have a good reason to, that somehow they're just being assholes for the sake of being assholes. Make no mistake, Sony has done plenty of things to put them on the bad side of many gamers, and people take this into account when making purchasing decisions. It's not a freaking conspiracy, it's economics.

[Neosho]

Current price of the PS3 is a BARGAIN. It simply does everything, a true next-gen all-in-one entertainment system, not just a simple gaming console like many of you Wii fanatics see it.

What Sony needs to do is cut their dev fees (and even the $$$ dev console) to get more developers on board and start making damn games for the system. The best weapon a console has, regardless of specs, is it's software.
lmao.

Genious post, if it's sarcastic. If it's not...wow...humanity... :(

All in one entertainment center? What the hell does it do besides play blue ray? Surf the internets? Steam music? Allow IP voice chat? Anything? yes? no?

The problem is, gamers DON'T want all in one-ness when it means there's an additional 200$ or so on top of the cost as a result. Add a cheap blu-ray addon, or something like that...just like microsoft has done...attempting to piggy-back your console on your media format, or vice versa, is a bad idea when your console doesn't have anything going for it at the moment.

[bitwise]

Current price of the PS3 is a BARGAIN. It simply does everything, a true next-gen all-in-one entertainment system, not just a simple gaming console like many of you Wii fanatics see it.

That's right, it filets, it chops, it dices, slices,
Never stops, lasts a lifetime, mows your lawn
And it mows your lawn and it picks up the kids from school
It gets rid of unwanted facial hair, it gets rid of embarrassing age spots,
It delivers a pizza, and it lengthens, and it strengthens
And it finds that slipper that's been at large
under the chaise lounge for several weeks
And it plays a mean Rhythm Master,
It makes excuses for unwanted lipstick on your collar
And it's only 599 US dollars, step right up, it's only 599 US dollars, step right up

[GunnyMo]

Unless you plan on storing a ridiculious amount of downloadable content

Well, we all know that will never happen. PS3 online is teh suxxors when compared to Live!!! :p

obviously joking so hush

[rein]

Holy fuck what a stroke fest. Do you guys really get off on this garbage?

[RMan]

The idea I might need to buy [/b] [A whole new $600 consle I wouldn't otherwise need] to get games I cant play on my 360/Wii annoys me.
Well, since that logic can be applied to the exclusives on all three systems, what you're saying is that you want the PS3 to bomb so you personally don't have to buy one? I guess that's a reason besides nationalism, but it's far less noble. Oh, and again, since it seems to never get through, it’s $500 unless you want to pay more.
OK I know that I may get bitchslapped into tomorrow for saying this, but do you really want Sony's console to beat out the 360, because of windows?
Absolutely.
Then since the game companies have to support their own servers, that will jack up game prices even more, so maybe $70-75, and how fair is it to the people who don't even play online?
Have you even heard of PC games? Since when do companies run all their own multiplayer servers if they’re not charging a fee?
I prefer the direction MS is going with, just paying for what you want. Honestly I want my child to be able to AFFORD videogames when they are my age.
Again, you may prefer MS’s direction, but if it’s for the reasons you state, you aren’t thinking it through. Sony’s approach is the same as PCs have been using for many years, there’s clearly nothing wrong with it. As far as who’s using the more expensive approach, it’s clearly MS (whether or not it’s the better/worse choice for most, however, remains to be seen).
The PS3 does DIFFERENT things, not MORE things, and that's the problem with asking people to pay more for it.
Technically, in terms of hardware, the PS3 does do more. Besides rumble, the 360 only excels in the software department. I’d say it’s perfectly reasonable to say the PS3 does more, but that their services fall short of the 360’s. You could argue the overall experiences are comparable because of this, but at the same time, MS will never patch in a HD player.

[Philonious]

So this has gone off track... Who'd have thunk it? Forget whether or not it's worth the money, fact is the thing is expensive. The questions at hand are: Will there be a price drop? When? How much? What will it mean?

Spring would be nice... But would probably tick people off unless Sony handed out some free Sony dollars for the online store to make up for it. Christmas is more likely. Games are what is really missing, but a lower price point might get more people on board early.

[bitwise]

A. The PS3 is more expensive because it does more. The PSP is more expensive because it does more. Offering additional functionality isn't "fucking the gaming world", imho. If you don't want the additional functionality, buy a 360, buy a wii, buy a ds, buy whatever you want and VOILA!!! you're still gaming.

I wasn't aware the PSP had a touch screen nor was I aware that the PS3 had rumble and a pointer device. I also didn't know that the PS3 had a fully integrated online infrastructure in every game. Geez, why doesn't Sony advertise this stuff more? The PS3 would be a smash hit if people knew about all that stuff. Wait, what's that you say? It doesn't have rumble, doesn't have a pointer device, and doesn't have the cool online thing? Wow, it sounds to me like even though the PS3 can do things the other two consoles can't, there's a fairly long list of things the other two consoles do that the PS3 can't. Almost as if they were designed with different things in mind.

Sony's console isn't the Wii + 360 + additional features. The PS3 has a different focus. It focuses on Hi Def movie playback and having a high density disc format. It also has limited motion sensing through gyroscopes. If it was Wii + 360 + additional features, you could easily argue that the PS3 was superior hardware-wise to the other two, but since it's not Wii + 360 + additional features, that argument can't be made. Instead, people are going to decide which consoles to get based on the features exclusive to each one. For most people, the Wii and 360 exhibit clear value while bluray and gyroscopes are not worth $200 extra. As many others have pointed out, the available games for the system add to the value, so as the PS3 gets more games, people will be more likely to buy it. The question is whether the "traditional" playstation exclusives will remain exclusive given Sony's poor marketshare showing at the current time.

Considering you can't/won't pay $600, why on earth aren't you mentioning the $500 version which doesn't have a couple features you're not interested in anyways? So many bullshitters out there. As soon as they spout the $600 figure, you know they're full of shit.

You're being a bit unfair here. The Europeans are only going to be able to buy the $600 version. Many people think its highly likely Sony will phase out the $500 version since apparently they lose more money on it.

[Kamalot]

Technically, in terms of hardware, the PS3 does do more. Besides rumble, the 360 only excels in the software department. I’d say it’s perfectly reasonable to say the PS3 does more, but that their services fall short of the 360’s. You could argue the overall experiences are comparable because of this, but at the same time, MS will never patch in a HD player.
Perhaps you mean that the PS3 is capable of more, but it does not DO more.

If the overall experience is the same, then why would someone PAY MORE for the PS3? :rolleyes:

Who the hell would pay more for the same experience? can't you download HD movies to the 360, thereby making it an HD player?

Edit: The experience isn't the same. the software isn't there for the PS3 yet, thus providing a better experience for the 360, at a lower cost.

[BlackPete]

I'd buy a PS3 if I felt that it was worth it. I don't, so I haven't bought it.

It really is that simple.

However, right now the price really isn't the issue, the lack of content is. Actually, let me nuance that a little bit: The high price directly affects the number of "system sellers" the PS3 must have before I'd consider buying one.

[RMan]

If the overall experience is the same, then why would someone PAY MORE for the PS3? :rolleyes:
If I really wanted a HD movie player, that would likely be the tie-breaker for me (again, I'm not close to the point where I'd buy one, just saying). What I'm saying is the overall experience is only the same if you feel that the PS3 won't have these features, which I feel it will. I'd still say if most of the players buying these systems are told they'll only get what they can do with it now (IOW, no new games) they wouldn't get either, so I think it's fair to consider reasonable assumptions about the future (at least I do as a consumer, and I think most others do as well).
who the hell would pay more for the same experience? can't you download HD movies to the 360, thereby making it an HD player?
Hehe, yea, but in that respect so is my PC, but the selection and general convenience doesn't compare to a disc player. I think most people wouldn't call them comparable just because they're technically similar.

[Morangie]

You're being a bit unfair here. The Europeans are only going to be able to buy the $600 version. Many people think its highly likely Sony will phase out the $500 version since apparently they lose more money on it.
Well if you want to be exact, here in the UK we can only buy the $835 version.

[cp#]

Of course they will... eventually. Until they do they will continue to get raped by Nintendo and Microsoft

[Lord Dongkey]

The PS3 does more, so it's more expensive... hmm, let's think about this.

I'm going to market a toaster oven that also sings italian opera and produces teal paint.

I'm going to price this toaster at a 50% premium above the next top-of-the-line toaster. This other toaster does a damned fine job toasting... well, just as well as my Pavarotti-Painter, but it doesn't sing or paint!

My toaster sings and paints!

50% premium... and... that's right, I expect my toaster to sell more units than the next toaster in line. Oh, and I'm going to expect all companies to go ahead and make some specifically formed bread that only fits in my toaster. This is going to be difficult and complicated and take more money on their part, but the proprietary bread shape used in my toaster is theoretically more powerfully flavored than regular bread.

My toaster sings and paints, and has properietarily shaped bread that theoretically tastes better than regular bread, assuming people take the time to form their bread for it!

...

I think we can all see where I'm going with this.

The PS3 does more. Whooptee-fucking-doo. It does more things I don't want it to do and I don't feel like paying for.

It's the Playstation 3. The PLAY-station 3. Not the Movie-Station 3, not the Linux-Station 3, not the home-entertainment-center-station-3, not the Home-Media-Hub-3.

It's a goddamned video game system, and there's no compelling games for it.

SUPER TOASTER FTW!!1!

[Tel Prydain]

Well, since that logic can be applied to the exclusives on all three systems, what you're saying is that you want the PS3 to bomb so you personally don't have to buy one?
Yes.
I guess that's a reason besides nationalism, but it's far less noble.
Since when did being noble have anything to do with gaming?
And for that matter, what does nationalism have to do with gaming?

And wanting to not buy a third console is still a better reason then: "I hates teh miCRo$oft wINdoze!!!1!1!one1!"
Oh, and again, since it seems to never get through, it’s $500 unless you want to pay more.

Unless you live outside of the US and Japan... you know, like most of the world does.

[RMan]

Since when did being noble have anything to do with gaming?
Didn't say it did, just figured there'd be something better than that, especially since all that's necessary for you to get your wish is that the PS3 not get exclusives you want, or for you to ignore it, you don't have to wish failure on every product you don't own (I think it's a given that people don't want to spend money on anything, but have accepted that the world doesn't work that way).
And for that matter, what does nationalism have to do with gaming?
Not much, IMO, that's just stated often around here for Japan's apathy towards the Xbox.
And wanting to not buy a third console is still a better reason then: "I hates teh miCRo$oft wINdoze!!!1!1!one1!"
In your mind, perhaps. Your reasons for wanting another product to fail is because you are somehow shackled into buying it if it doesn't, I actually have long term, logical reasons why I'd want balance or even Sony's coming out ahead of the 360. On a personal level, I have the ability to only buy things that are worthwhile to me, but that may not make sense to you either :).

[Tel Prydain]

Didn't say it did, just figured there'd be something better than that, especially since all that's necessary for you to get your wish is that the PS3 not get exclusives you want, or for you to ignore it, you don't have to wish failure on every product you don't own (I think it's a given that people don't want to spend money on anything, but have accepted that the world doesn't work that way).
Products I don't own and people I don't like!
In your mind, perhaps. Your reasons for wanting another product to fail is because you are somehow shackled into buying it if it doesn't, I actually have long term, logical reasons why I'd want balance or even Sony's coming out ahead of the 360. On a personal level, I have the ability to only buy things that are worthwhile to me, but that may not make sense to you either :).
Balance!! Pfft!

There is no room for balance on Ev Av!

[Kamalot]

Funny thing is the 20gb is the only one selling at all, all stores I go to have the $599 60gb model stacked up and collecting dust, or at very least still have the 60gb model while the 20gb are always out of stock.I've read that only 20% of models shipped to stores are of the 20gig variety. It isn't a real option as there are so few of them in the wild. It goes to show that people want the 20 gig model more, probably cause it is cheaper.

[Yeti2005]

The article isn't about whether the PS3 is worth $500-600, it's about whether Sony will make a price cut in 2007 and the obvious answer to that question is "No Sony will NOT cut the price of the PS3 in 2007 in the US or UK...Japan ehhh maybe". If Sony does make a significant price cut in the US in 2007 then I'll eat my hat.

[Crenor]

YEA, they should drop the price $300 so that Sony dies a fast death, and not the slow painful one they are going through now.

[Skyelan]

The 500 dollar PS3 becomes a viable option when Sony actually treats it like one, instead of a paltry amount of their systems being them.

Until then, the only one you can find readily is the 600 dollar one, because Sony produced far far more.

You'll pay 600, not 500. If you get LUCKY you'll pay 500, but expect to pay 600. Stop bullshitting and flailing your arms whenever someone DARES to mention the 600 dollar model and being so UNFAIR to poor little Sony, because 600 dollars is what the PS3 costs.

Just with the ocassional 100 dollar bargain, if you're lucky enough to actually find one. :rolleyes:

[Citizen Philip]

People aren't buying the PS3 because for whatever reason they don't deem that they will recieve enough value in exchange for their $600. All of the shit Sony has pulled essentially increases the price. It's not "just $600" anymore. Now it's "$600 and I'm giving my money to the people who strongarmed Lik Sang into shutting down, forced malicious rootkits onto peoples' computers resulting in the destruction of property, jacked the Wii's motion sensing capabilities and then claimed them as their own, etc. Also, I understand that $200 of my dollars are going to support Sony's pet DVD format which I don't really care about or have the equipment to fully enjoy."

So in a lot of ways, you're right. There are probably people who would not buy the PS3 if it had the same price as the 360. There are probably people who would, too. But you seem to think that the people who complain about Sony don't have a good reason to, that somehow they're just being assholes for the sake of being assholes. Make no mistake, Sony has done plenty of things to put them on the bad side of many gamers, and people take this into account when making purchasing decisions. It's not a freaking conspiracy, it's economics.

Your right, Nintendo and Microsoft are both angelic and never do anything evil, they are goodness corporate incarnate. Neither of them are/were monopolistic entities or been brought to court for their business practices either. Angels.

[Kamalot]

Your right, Nintendo and Microsoft are both angelic and never do anything evil, they are goodness corporate incarnate. Neither of them are/were monopolistic entities or been brought to court for their business practices either. Angels.
I don't think that anyone said that. Ever heard heard the 'lesser evil'?

[Gorvi]

Your right, Nintendo and Microsoft are both angelic and never do anything evil, they are goodness corporate incarnate. Neither of them are/were monopolistic entities or been brought to court for their business practices either. Angels.

Damn straight! MS and Nintendo have great PR! We love them because they blow sunshine up our collective asses while they rip us off!

[Kamalot]

Damn straight! MS and Nintendo have great PR! We love them because they blow sunshine up our collective asses while they rip us off!
Well, maybe YOU like having something blown up your ass, but that's not what I base MY purchase decisions upon. :rolleyes:

[Citizen Philip]

Damn straight! MS and Nintendo have great PR! We love them because they blow sunshine up our collective asses while they rip us off!

I've heard that the 'sunshine up the ass' results in severe constipation. I'm sure someone more clever can tie that in more cleverly with 'talking shit' or something, but it's too early in the morning - and i've decided to change the channel when it comes to this gamer soap opera.

[bitwise]

Your right, Nintendo and Microsoft are both angelic and never do anything evil, they are goodness corporate incarnate. Neither of them are/were monopolistic entities or been brought to court for their business practices either. Angels.

Dude, did I ever say that? My post was about Sony and the PS3. Just because someone is a devil doesn't mean their opponent(s) are also angels. Focus, man, focus.

[TheFlyingOrc]

Your right, Nintendo and Microsoft are both angelic and never do anything evil, they are goodness corporate incarnate. Neither of them are/were monopolistic entities or been brought to court for their business practices either. Angels.
Yamauchi WAS the devil. He is not in charge anymore. Iwata appears to be an actual human being.