Playstation 3 to pull a Playstation 2?
by Ben Zackheim 
{ May 25th 2005 at 7:49AM }
Gamespot is asking the same question we all are…will the Playstation 3 be the same price as the PS2 was when it was released? The first two Sony efforts went for around $368 USD, and lightning may indeed strike three times. Though Sony has said the console will run at $466 USD, they recently told business partners that it would be closer to $370 USD. If true, this could mean more money in our pockets for actual games. If not true, we can always sit and stare at the cool console design until the next paycheck comes in.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Mark @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
If the PS3 launches at around $350 its gonna make the decision alot harder on what I should get but I think I still will be going with the 360. I cant wait for the next generation consoles to get here.
Sander @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
Cool console design? Your kidding, right?
God I hope that its cheaper, I mean, its kinda sad how for the price of 3 games you can get a hardware upgrade for your PC, which is the REAL gaming platform =p
Domino @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
With inflation and all, I doubt any legitimate console can be priced under $400. Besides, Sony has proved that consumers have the expandable income when they sold the PSP for $300+.
I love the design personally (controller is very suspect though). Both M$ and $ony did well in the design department if you ask me. Sony did somthing smart though.
Think about this: if you buy both consoles, which looks like it should/could be stacked on the top of the other?...
sandro @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
I think the PS3 is well worth $399 on the other hand the Xbox 360 so far worth’s $299. Ill buy both *-)
Brian @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
They didn't say it WOULD be $465, they said it would be less than $465. $368 is 97 bucks less than $465.
joey @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
here's an idea...no one buy them until the price drops!!
GamerHeaven @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
Great, Sony screw me (the gamer) again, why couldn't that one year old interview have been true about two different versions - one for games and one with all the crap.
I'm an older gamer, I don't want to rebuy (inferior) "media" functions that I have in my house. What I want is to play the odd great game on the PS3 and at a cheap price.
Give me a games console at a good price and I'll be there at midnight getting it, but give me a rip off convergant media system and Sony can shove it.
I'm with (#6) joey here, sadly it'll be two or three years before I'll grab myself a PS3. Thank god for Nintendo is all I have to say.
Rocket Punch @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
Well, if you can't afford a BWM drive a Kia.
If you want a discount, buy it a year after its launch.
People are so "cry babies" when it comes to the price of gaming consoles.
Well, here is an idea. From this day forward, find a way in your life to save $1 each. By launch day you will have about $400 for the console.
Please keep in mind that $1 is less than 1/2 gallon of gas, by slowing down (doing the speed limit) on your daily trip, you can save more than $1 a day.
It is always funny to see how people complain about the price of what they want, when they are all so willing to loose a lot more by speeding tickets, and credit card interest.
mike @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
I think the real indicator will be what the Xbox 360 is at when the PS3 launches. If the 360 is $299-399 or somewhere around there, then I would think that conventional wisdom would put the PS3 right around that price. The only reason I could see Sony price it up more would be to tout the fact that it has a next-gen DVD tech in it (Blu-Ray).
The only wild card is Nintendo; if they undercut Sony and Microsoft significantly on the price of their console, then things will be very interesting...
Bmpressed @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
Who gives a crap about a next-gen drive when we all know that Blu-ray will not take off? The reason the price of the PS3 is so high is because of that damn drive. HD-DVD will be the next medium of consumer choice anyway...mark my words.
Blu-ray = Beta (higher quality)
HD-DVD = VHS (consumer favorite)
stiill @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
I hate this: every time new hardware is released, everyone pretends they know the launch price, from various factors like super-vague statements or the price in another country.
Well, guess what: they price things differently in different markets, and they probably don't even have a final price at this time for any market.
And when the hell was the PS2 $368? I bought mine on launch day in the U.S. for $300.
And when did Sony say the PS3 would be $466? Oh, that's right, never. They mentioned a maximum possible price in Japan.
# 10: they merged. It's one standard now.
Chris K @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
Wow, you could buy a REAL refrigerator for that price!
It's not the absolute price that's the problem. It's the assigned cost we tag to consoles. I would not spend $20 on a hamburger, but I have no problem spending $20K on a car. With a console, I'm not going to head to Best Buy and plunk down $500 (console, second controller, "AV Pack", a game). Not when I already have a PS2 and XBox with a whole library of games.
BTW, if you can save 0.5gal gas per day simply by driving more slowly, you most likely drive for a living. I drive 20 miles a day on my commute... even if you were to say I used a gallon a day, dropping 5mph would not cut my gas consumption by 50%.
Todd @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
I agree with #9 that Nintendo could be a wild card. Especially if they have good launch titles with their most popular game icons and a drastically reduced price. PS3 and Xbox 360 are going to have to have killer apps to begin with to have a large number of opening sales with that steep of a price tag. I personally don't see a reason for paying a premium for a game console with multimedia functions that I already have. Convergent devices that sell well are usually portable ones. I think that's the only time that convenience of a single item weighs out over quality of multiple. I don't think that's the case in the living room.
Also remember when the PS2 came out there were a large number of DVDs already available. I wonder if that will be true with Blue-Ray disks. People will be less willing to buy a PS3 because of that feature if there are only a handful of Sony movies available.
Codejoy @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
Blue ray means nothing to me, I dont plan on getting into it as DVD is great for me for now. The ps3 really holds no interest to me, penny arcade said it best in their monday comic I think. I saw them both at e3, and the xbox 360 was far more compelling. Free xbox live out of the box that rocks no matter how you cut it. If i want to play RPG games that will suck 100 hours of my life, sure the ps3 is probably going to win there. But all I really want to be is entertained. Last gen wars each console had a game I just had to have and thus bought each console for them. This new gen, only the xbox 360 has me wanting it based on the games i have heard of being relesed on it, Ghost recon 3 will be worth the price of admission i think.. I am eagerly awaiting to see what if anything the ps3 or revolution will offer for me to want to buy one of those consoles...this will be an interesting time in console wars me thinks.
ill trooper @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
Someone here once pointed out that by putting Blu-Ray in the PS3, it could help establish it as THE standard, as no other drive format will hit as wide and as fast as when the PS3 ships... So think about that, but sure, guy, I'll "mark your words."
Whatever HD format wins, no big deal, the PS3 will still play PS3 GAMES, which is what I'm looking forward to.
Tom @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
#11 - HD-DVD and Blu-Ray unfortunately haven't merged, the fight is still on. The negotiations broke down a few days ago and also increased capacities for both formats were just announced. Toshiba announced a 45GB three-layer HD-DVD and TDK just countered that with the news they have developed a 100GB four-layer Blu-Ray Disc. Word is that Toshiba is afraid of upsetting their partners who are already retooling production lines by making them retool again to support Blu-Ray which will also cost more to manufacture.
Those of you who think HD-DVD will win the format wars or that there will be few Blu-Ray titles available must realize that not only does Sony own Columbia, but they recently bought MGM. That is a huge catalog of movies they have control of and almost all the major studios have pledged their support in addition. I'm hoping Blu-Ray wins if they don't restart negotiations, but I'm perfectly happy with the hundreds of DVDs I already own and don't look forward to replacing any of them. They should closely examine the SACD/DVD-A war to see just how bad of an idea it is for competing formats.
Now back on topic, the prices in the article are what they charged in Japan. I also paid $300 launch day for my PS2 and can't recall how much for the Playstation which I bought shortly after launch, but it sure wasn't more than that.
Barb @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
They have come up with a way to rip off the gamers again 1st they put the hardware up high for the xbox and the 360 and ps2 and ps3 thenthey stick it to you buying the games to play on them.there shoud be a price cap on this stuff.because we will be paying $1.000 for something to play the games on in a few yrs.most of the things they put out are not that much better then the last one.
multipurpose workermonkey @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
when was the last time nintendo asked for more them 150$ for a system? you're talking about sony and microsoft asking 3, or 4 hundred for a system, and the only difference is they have some crazy multimedia function that no one uses anyway that drives up that cost. i want to play games. i own a computer, i don't need a picture/audio/video/crap machine to do all that. there are plenty of good games coming out for the gamecube that will keep me happy until the revolution arrives, plus i'll have time to let the PS3 and 360 sort themselves out. i'm happy with my gamecube for now. and it only cost 150 at launch. a 299 PSP or a 150 DS? i want a game machine. period. all that fancy stuff is fine, but it's not going to replace my computer.
and blu-ray is going to win, hands down. PS3 will be a big boost but the studio backing is the big thing. every new release will fall into the companies preference and if the big studios go with blu-ray its all over. plus it is a better technology. end of story
Marty @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
PS3 v Xbox 360(Specs Compared)
CPU:
PS3 - Cell Processor PowerPC-base Core @ 3.2GHz.
7 SPE @ 3.2Ghz each.
1 VMX vector unit per core.
7 x 128b 128 SIMD GPRs.
7 x 256KB SRAM for SPE.
512kb L2 Cache.
1 of 8 SPEs reserved for redundancy.
Xbox 360 - 3 Power PC Cores @ 3.2Ghz each.
1MB L2 Cache.
Memory:
PS3 - 256MB 3.2Ghz XDR RAM(Main) & 256MB GDDR3 700MHz(Video).
Xbox 360 - 512MB GDDR3 RAM 700 Mhz DDR(Shared).
Graphics:
PS3 - Custom NVidia Card @ 550Mhz.
Xbox 360 - Custom ATI Card @ 500Mhz.
Storage:
PS3 - HDD Detachable 2.5" HDD slot x 1(capacity TBA).
Memory Stickstandard,Duo,PRO x 1.
SD standard/mini x 1.
CompactFlash(Type I,II) x 1.
Xbox 360 - Rmovable Hard-Drive(20GB).
Game Controllers:
PS3 - Wireless Bluetooth(up to 7).
Xbox 360 - Wireless(up to 4).
Display:
PS3 - 480i,480p,720p,1080i,1080p.
Xbox 360 - 480i,480p,720p,1080i.
Network:
PS3 - 1000mbit Ethernet. Wi-Fi. Bluetooth 2.0.
Xbox 360 - 100mbit Ethernet. Wi-Fi.
Audio:
PS3 - 5.1 Digital.
Xbox 360 - 5.1 Digital.
Backward compatiable:
PS3 - Fully PS1,PS2(13,000+ Games).
Xbox 360 - Not Fully(Top Games Only,And They Have To Be Recompiled To work)
Disc Media:
PS3 - CD-ROM, CD-R, CD-RW, DVD-ROM, DVD-Video, DVD-ROM, DVD-R, DVD-RW, DVD+R, DVD+RW, SACD, Blu-Ray.
Xbox 360 - CD-ROM, CD-R, CD-RW, DVD-ROM, DVD-Video, DVD-ROM, DVD-R, DVD-RW, DVD+R, DVD+RW.
System Floating Point Performance(CPU & GPU):
PS3 - 2 Teraflops.
Xbox 360 - 1 Teraflops.
Release Date:
PS3 - Spring 2006
Xbox 360 - November/December 2005
Which Is The Better System?:
PS3 - Without A Doubt.