Xbox 360 could cost only half PS3's price by 2006

by Ross Miller { Nov 2nd 2005 at 3:00PM }

Analysts Merrill Lynch have delved into the hardware of two known next-generation consoles, PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360, broken down the console cost part-by-part, and have come to a conclusion so diabolical it seems like perfect Microsoft strategy: towards the end of next year, Microsoft could easily sell their console for half the price of the PlayStation 3.

The biggest reasons, according to their breakdown, concerns the CPU and the Optical Media Drive. At launch, they estimate Sony�s system costing $495 to manufacture, compared to the $340 for each Xbox 360. Sony is paying $75 more than Microsoft for its use of a Blu-Ray drive, and $60 for its Cell processor. With each console�s launch so far spaced out (at least 7 months, maybe more), the cost decay for the Xbox 360�s parts will lower it beyond the estimated $140 difference, and after 3 years Merrill Lynch estimates the cost of the PlayStation 3 to be $195, and the Xbox 360 $145.

This is all speculation, but if it were true, Microsoft could be poised for a hefty price drop for the Christmas season of 2006. Establishing a customer base with its hardware is Microsoft�s first priority, as they can recoup most expenses via Xbox Live and software sales. If Sony�s system were to really cost them $495 at launch, how much money do you think they will sell it for commercially? How much of a loss is Sony willing to take on each console sale?

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

BS Police @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

Console price is not that important to us, gamers. GAME price is important. Console you buy just once. Games priced at $59.99 or $69.99... it adds up pretty quickly!

Dave @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

Well, unless it's as reliable as a PS2. Then you end up buying it multiple times.

agent864 @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

Sony has the track record when it comes to cost cutting so we'll see if this is true or if this is fud.

Embassy @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

umm..console price is a BIG deal to us who have bills and dont have mommy and daddy buying them for us...and i think that price drop will convert alot of people..especially if the difference between the 2 console's gamplay/visuals are as minimal as peoople say...i refuse to pay 400 + for a console that doesnt even come with a hdd...

Andrew @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

Xbox has the advantage, though, coming to market first. Because it's out by X-mas '05, casual gamers who DON'T buy every system will be picking up a 360 this Christmas. Meanwhile, if they undercut the PS3 NEXT Christmas, that's more casual gamers who pick up a shiny new 360 instead of a PS3.

Serious gamers will likely get both. And, uh, price is definitely an issue, especially for younger gamers whose parents are spending this moner.

DJ @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

Wow... if these numbers are correct - smart move by Microsoft. Their core system is $300... but who really is goin to buy that? Even if they do.. you all know they will just end up purchasing the accessories they dont receive with it at a later date for even more money. And then figure in all the games at $50-$60 a piece.

Everyone figured they would be losing money / console, but its starting to look like they may be able to make some money here afterall.

As for PS3... too early to tell since we have no idea what they will be selling for. I would guess an even 500.

BS Police @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

Funny how people make a big deal over a difference between a $300 and $400 console then they buy 15 games for $50 = $750 lol.

Jake @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

How do the analysts know exactly how much these components cost? I'd say there's a pretty big cushion either way. Some of those components are probably up to + or - $20 off. I guess what I'm saying is, speculation like this shouldn't be done so early, because the margin of error is likely huge.

Kuyu @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

I'd say this is pretty likely. The cost of the components which make up a console generally diminish overtime. With absolute certainty I can say that the cost of DVD will be less than that of Blu-Ray in both the short and long term. As well, the inclusion of wifi hardware will further separate the relative production costs of the two consoles.

The only way the PS3 will match 360's price is by slashing margins to the point at which they either match or fall below production costs. This leaves the profitability of the Sony console (assuming the same price point as the 360) up to licensing revenues from game sales. Of course, these are dependant on units shipped, which Sony hopes will excede that of the 360 because of PS3's technical superiority.

It's definately a gamble on Sony's part, and one that will be interesting to see play out over the next 5 years. I'm getting both, but I predict that the 360 will ship more units worldwide, with Sony continuing their dominance in the Asian markets. Both will produce another console in 2010, although we'll see them on equal footing in terms of marketshare at that time.

Andrew @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

"6. Posted Nov 2, 2005, 3:30 PM ET by BS Police
Funny how people make a big deal over a difference between a $300 and $400 console then they buy 15 games for $50 = $750 lol."

Uh, this might just be me, but I've only ever bought ONE video game at release price: Halo 2. And I had a $30 gift certificate for FYE anyway, so the most I've spent on a video game is still the $30 I dished for Ninja Gaiden.

People who buy 15 games for 50 bucks each, they're not the ones concerned about these prices. But even so, we're talking lump sums here -- that is, when you buy a PS3 or an Xbox, you're gonna be spending $300 or $400 or $500 all at once, whereas the costs of the games are spread out over time.

Jago @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

Oh yea...and we know how knowledgable these "analysts" are about the video game market and it's workings...

...gimmie a break...

xbox360-forums.com @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

Kuyu has it right.

The price will make a large difference too. With the xbox 360 having a large range of games, Sony have their work cut out.

ro @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

The console price is only one factor - let's not forget the games. Not the game's price, but the variety and quality. Can Microsoft compete with Sony's established franchises and third party exclusives?

mike @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

I cant see sony daring to put the PS3 on the market for more than $399, if its with a HD then they will more than likely lose $130-150 on each one sold

it makes you wonder thought with the sony saying the life of the ps3 will be 8 to 10 years if they will take the hit early on and keep it on the market for longer

the only issue u can see is that within sony the only shining light is the gaming business and can they affoard to lose that kind of money on the console for a few years?

after all losing $100 on 20 million consoles is 2 billion dollars

if sont make $10 on ech game they need to sell 200 million just to break even or 10 games per console

bah numbers we will see

i hop they take the hit as i wont be willing to paying mor ehtan $400

Geof @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

Jago

I agree with you on one aspect that analysts just make wild guesses almost, but....

One analyst said the 360 will most likely come in two SKU's, and everyone, including me, said nope, no way in hell that would happen. Guess what, he/they were correct.

All im saying is this guy might (read: slightly posable) be correct. Then again, he could just as easily, if not more so, be incorrect.

bandit @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

Agreed #7 the sheer manufacturing cost dictate that if Sony for anything below $500 they will lose money. Two things come into play at this time. 1) Sony CANNOT afford for its game department to lose money as currently its one of the few division making substantial income.
2) Sony has charged heavy royalties on Ps2 games because it could. It had 80% market share and thus was nearly a monopoly in the videogame arena.

For Sony to make money it must repeat this process in the coming war, however there are several barriers.

1) Royalty costs
- In order for Sony to make ANY money in this coming generation it needs to charge royalty fees and likely heavy ones. This is in shape contrast to the 360 where MS has waived many developers fees and in some instances co-developed and published the game.

2)Development cost
Again a developer issue. The cost of development of the PS3 has been reported by the vast majority of developers as more expense then the 360s.

3)Uncertain issue base.
-Despite what some may believe the projected install base for the PS3 is not certain. So what you get are developers who are leery of developing for an uncertain install base with higher royalty fees, and development costs.

The solution would be for Sony to grab developers and titles by waiving royalty fees but then they would be forced to charge a premium on the console or risk a large finanical drop. Thus to generate an initial install base they will keep the console price as low as possible and woo developers by claiming their market share will be enough so that they will want to develop for the PS3 despite the higher cost. This is all theory and remains to be seen. Im not saying that Sony cant do it but from working with developers the scenario Sony paints is a once in a lifetime opportunity and Sony already got theirs last generation.

Princess Zelda @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

I'm with andrew too I don't pay full prices for games or buy consoles on release.
I'm in Canada the Xbox 360 with HD is $500 and each game is $70 plus 15% for taxes. They only way I can afford to game is to be patient.

I wait untill the $200-$150 price point for the console and $30 games.

Jago @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

Wakeup people...whenever a new console is released, the manufacturer NEVER makes money on it from day one. It takes a couple years before they start seeing a profit from the sale and production of the actual hardware.

EVERY system maker tries to cover the cost of the new system with royalty fees for games being developed on their platform...why do people seem to forget this?

mike @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

bandit youve pretty much summed it up its almost as if they designed the ps3 as a white night for the whole sony business incorporating technology that while very good does not seem to have gone throught the final to market process for example, who needs 6 usb ports or 4 wthernet ports? two HDMI ports, who are they appealing to its a confused solution

and lets not forget that sony will be hoping the blue ray players can generate some income but if the proce the ps3 too low and make a loss they will be damaging that business aswell

soco @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

Sony has an extra advantage that only mike has touched on. Sony has tons of IP behind blu-ray, so not only will they make money on the PS3 games, but on every single blu-ray disc sold.

kinda makes people wonder why they're wasting
money on reading cards other than the memory stick. they could still get the same through a usb adaptor, or by just allowing people to connect the camera to the PS3.

sandro @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

If price is that important factor no one will buy the xbox 360 this christmas but the PS2 instead *-)

Kevin D @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

All the PS3 lovers better see what SONY is REALLY LIKE!!!!

http://www.sysinternals.com/blog/2005/10/sony-rootkits-and-digital-rights.html

Thats right, read it and see how 'honest' they are (I sure as He.ll dont want my CD drive frying because they are insane - and illegal)...

You decide...

BS Police @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

I wouldn't count on having "quality" games for PS3. So far the games on my PSP suck big time.

Ross Miller @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

The generation is a key concept too - sure, you could look at it in the way sandro alluded to by saying if price was important, people would opt for the Sony PS2 (or, dare I say it, the Nintendo Game Cube). However, it is not just price but also the "next-generation" buzz.

Most people will have already bought a PS2, because it is current generation: but Microsoft is releasing a brand new generation console. And only PS3/Revolution will be compared in that tier.

I am one of the maybe 10 people in the US to still be considering a PS2, but most gamers see the Xbox 360 as a step to the next generation, and only next-generation consoles will quench their appetite.

Shashwat @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

BS police, i dont mean to be a Sony fanboy but actually the psp does have som good games now... The con, lumines, fifa, SSX, pursuit force are pretty good. i agree with you that the first gen of psp games wer crap...Coded arms,NBA street,NFSU R i own them all and am not proud to do so...but games like MDC3 and the above mentioned are really amazing. they show the power of the psp.(shooting games still sux though...i no cause i own SOCOM beta and Coded Arms)

Shashwat @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

srry bout double post... but i think its the peoples patience that counts...ppl who can wait will wait...ppl who cant will buy the x360 for whateveer price..i personally am waiting for all 3 consoles to prove themselves to me as i as of now am undecided.

Mr. Microsoft @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

"This is all speculation" nuff said...

Slashbunny @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

Largely irrelevent. Both companies will take any losses if they feel it's needed. MS needs to really compete with Sony this time around. Not lose 4 billion and sit next to a profiting Nintendo. I wouldn't be surprised if they dropped the damn thing to $150 at PS3's launch just so they don't end up in the same position they are now. MS is at a natural disadvantage because the Playstation 3 is a Playstation and Playstation has been a strong #1 in gaming for years now. That alone is a sufficient argument for PS3's success, assuming everything else is at least up to par. And it is. We could compare specs and features all day, but the fact of the matter is- they are close. It doesn't matter which is better. But one thing isn't close- the brand names and current install bases.

If Xbox360 is just a new version of Xbox, and PS3 is just a new version of PS2, then the PS3 maintains absolute market dominance. What is new that is going to change that? Online play perhaps? Some extra media features? These don't seem like essential things that will change the majority's perception of either console. Again, think from the average purchaser's viewpoint here. Don't dig too deeply in specifics when considering this.

The install base of the PS3 seems certain to me. Simply because Xbox360 doesn't seem to be generating suffiicent hype or interest with the majority. New "Nintendo" and new "Playstation" will sell hardware. Not every console generation is a fresh start and a fair war between competitors. Ideally it should be. If we were simply comparing consoles with no regards to the present or past, then you could easily see a situation where the Xbox360 and PS3 are competitive, and even a situation where 360 has a small edge. Then again, when comparing the Xbox and PS2 you could say the same thing, couldn't you? But a new "Playstation" will fly off the shelves as long as Sony doesn't do anything royally stupid. They just need to keep doing what they are doing and it should be in the bank unless MS does something huge to change the situation. Xbox2 vs PS3 is currently not looking much different than PS2 vs Xbox.

Tighty Whities @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

Hardcore gamers will likely own both consoles and dont really care about $100 difference between them. However, the reason this console war is so bloody is because gamind is in the midst of a transition into mainstream. That means lots of people buying console will not be gamers like in the past. And come next christmas when both consoles are on the shelf and mommy is shopping for little johnny's christmas present, the $250 (or thereabouts) xbox360 will look mighty good compared to the $450 (or thereabouts) PS3. My guess is mommy isn't subscribed to EGM and doesn't know how awesome the cell is. Odds look good for xbox360 this christmas and next. It will be interesting when you add Revo into the mix next christmas.

Tighty Whities @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

EL INDIANO @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

playstation is going to go the way of sega.

this could be the last playstation that we will ever see. if there is a ps4, it will flop. microsoft has more money that God and can afford to loose money to take sony out of the gaming market if the desire.

nintendo will still stay around for innovation just like apple. microsoft has to keep innovators around so they will have someone to steal ideas from.

seacrest out.

Mark @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

Andrew said: "casual gamers who DON'T buy every system will be picking up a 360 this Christmas"

I'm a casual gamer and I plan on waiting for the PS3. Mostly because I want to be able to play the next metal gear and if I have to limit my choices, it's going to be in that direction. Plus, casual gamers can "wait and see" because they're not so addicted to games that they're jonesing for something this christmas.

I'm surprised so many of you forgot that when the X-Box came out, Microsoft was taking a *heavy* loss on each console sold (over $100 if I remember correctly) just to get them into people's living rooms. Selling below manufacturing costs is a _common_ strategy. You make your money back on licensing & subscription fees.

Tighty Whities @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

Also, to add to indianos post, Nintendo has made money on gamecube from the start. Nintendo has always made a profit on hardware the the entire lifecycle of production. Sony and MS are the only ones who lose money on consoles. Thats why sony kicked the crap out of nintendo (among other reasons) because they gave away sweet hardware. Well, MS is doing the same things so it adds an element of competition that sony hasnt seen before. Another company big enough to pay people to buy their product. They are bloodying each other up and its good for the consumer. It may end up being good for nintendo.

joss @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

I know the only reason I'm buying a psp is because im a gta addict.
Shashwat- SSX, fifa and lumines are good games, but you might want to check out these reveiws on pursuit force: http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=61473

...and The con: http://psp.ign.com/articles/661/661429p1.html

I warn you, you might be disapointed.

darryl @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

"Xbox 360 could cost only half PS3�s price by 2006"... and loose many, many billions to end up in 3rd place, again. Maybe they will finally learn that they can't own the game console market by throwing cash at it, not matter how much. The decline of Microsoft looms.

Master x 24 @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

Mircosoft them self said that the would reduce the cost of the 360 every year and thats why im not getting one this year 400 no in may in will drop trust me and than again a xmas maybe plus there arent any must have games till gears of war

EL INDIANO @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

darry is right....the ps3 will launch at a prospected cost between 499 and 599. while the xbox will have dropped by late next year to 299 (hd version) and 199 (basic version).....but with a huge price gap like this, ms may only take 50 dollars off the total price.

Shashwat @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

joss, dont trust all reviews... i personally own the Con and i no ppl who played pursuit force(i m getting it next week). the con is awesome...i really like it...dont trust a book by its cover...eg DDR, lumines, ect...they look crap but are awesome games. u shud play the games be4 sayin they are crap. personally i only trust gamespot reviews. As for pursuit force, i no ppl who play it(in the psp community) and they all say its awesome(thought it has bugs and is f*kin hard).

BTW i mean no disrepect or any flaming. just want to get my opinion across.

still u are entitled to ur own opinion. my advise is try it firsthand.

sscooterguy @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

Um, last time I checked, the AVERAGE gamer is 29 y/o. I think this is what MS and Sony are counting on. On average, at least by my assumption, is that for a working 29 y/o $300-500 will not break the bank; sure its expensive, but still affordable.
However, $60-80 for a next gen game is a tad pricey, but for the average gamer this won't be completely out of reach.
For me, as a med student, both are way too pricy NOW, and I'm enjoying my xbox that I purchased used, as well as my $10-20 per used game just fine. Once I get into residency though, making $40k a year, next gen gaming will be well within my, as well as other mid to late 20's gamer's reach.

I think an interesting question not many people talk about is, how much are USED next gen games going to be? Will it take 5 months after release for a USED game to be under $50? Now that's what I'm interested in.

Engo P @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

I can see sony releasing the the PS3 at the $400 of the top of the line Xbox360 bundle and leaving it there for several years since, after all, they plan on it being around for the next 8-10 years. This would be doing what they did with the PS2 where it stayed at $300 for about two or three years. It would probably even make the most sense to do this too since they can make profit elsewhere (PS2, PSP, other Sony products) while they take the time needed to reduce cost of PS3 development. Eventually, there will come a point where the PS3 would have made them enough profit to warrent a price drop. But then again, all that I just said could be straight up wrong.

sscooterguy @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

I want to add something, as I have read in this and other blogs that average people are unwilling to pay for these consoles because of the high price.

People spend more and more on purely entertainment electronic gadgets/appliances/consoles each year, period. On average, people buy new computers every 2-4 years, costing $600-2000 each time. On average, people who love music buy MP3 players every 2-4 years, ranging from $100-500, plus cost of accessories. For average movie buffs, they buy a new (I'm talking regular, not HD) DVD player every 1-5 years because of advances in technology as well as $30 a movie (I'm counting the $8 they pay to see the movie in the theater, and the $20 to get it on DVD). On average, EVERYONE gets a new cell phone every 1-3 years, ranging in price from $0-400, but with subscription fees between $30-80/mo.

In comparison, a new console, say $300-500 with on average $60-80 once a month (for 1 new game or 2 used games) doesn't sound so bad any more, especially since the console will last 4-5 years until the next next gen comes out. The gaming industry is huge now, with over $10 billion in sales in 2004, when there was a SHORTAGE of hardware during holiday season. I still can't believe that "average gamers" will not invest this much in a game, rather than a really nice cell phone with a pricy subscription plan. In the end, the price between the two consoles won't be the last driving force between which one wins out.

Price will HELP sales, as we have seen with xbox and ps2, but in the end it won't determine the winner. I don't think technological superiority will make a huge difference either. Take xbox and ps2, xbox was released much later and lost money, although it may have been (in some minds) technologically superior. I think xbox 2 will build a good market by its earlier release and keep it by cutting prices appropriately, as ps2 originally did. However, PS3 will do well too, because of possible technological superiority, as well as exclusive games.

In the end, I hope neither is a true "winner", driving the other out of business. This is the only way we will get a fire under both companies (and all three if you count nintendo in the mix) to continually fight for our money, drive innovation and quality game production, and bring prices down.

Embassy @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

some of you people give the " playstation" name too much credit...yeh sony has brand appeal to consumers but when they see that hefty " 499-599" next to it they will look the other way and wait for it to drop or go with MS ...microsoft is really puttin everything on the line...the tested the market with xbox...lost shit loads..learned alot..and are ready for round two well aware of thier competition..sony on the other hand is so arrogant i dont think they even gave a shit about the 360 till after E3 when they saw wat MS was offering and for wat price and other features etc etc...right now the 360 is the most bang for the buck...at least until we see some actual ps3 gameplay and some rev stuff too...and if the ps3 graphics dont blow the 360 out of the water ( which i highly doubt it will) then sony is in big trouble becuase they underestimated MS...MS has the potential gain to more ground this generation...i see sony taking a backseat to MS in a few years...MS just has limitless finances to push and push this monster...

Kevin @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

There are several things working to Microsoft's advantage here. Not only is the price of the 360 going to be cheaper when the PS3 launches, but there will be way more games available. Also, many of the games that are being released now will be in the bargin bin by then. Add to that the Revolution that will surely be much cheaper that the PS3 and Sony is not looking good.

Miguel @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

One thing to add that I haven't read.. by the time the price drop comes.. games will be starting to utilize the other 2 processing cores.. So visually the 360 will be coming into it's own, no? So sony will walk into halo 3, a price drop AND more processing utilization.

George @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

Below are the official specifications for Xbox 360:

Custom IBM PowerPC-based CPU
3 symmetrical cores running at 3.2 GHz each
2 hardware threads per core; 6 hardware threads total
1 VMX-128 vector unit per core; 3 total
128 VMX-128 registers per hardware thread
1 MB L2 cache

CPU Game Math Performance
9 billion dot product operations per second

Custom ATI Graphics Processor
500 MHz
10 MB embedded DRAM
48-way parallel floating-point dynamically-scheduled shader pipelines
Unified shader architecture

Polygon Performance
500 million triangles per second

Pixel Fill Rate
16 gigasamples per second fillrate using 4X MSAA

Shader Performance
48 billion shader operations per second

Memory
512 MB GDDR3 RAM
700 MHz DDR
Unified memory architecture

Memory Bandwidth
22.4 GBs memory interface bus bandwidth
256 GBs memory bandwidth to EDRAM
21.6 GBs front-side bus

Overall System Floating-Point Performance
1 TFLOP

Storage
Custom detachable and upgradeable 20 GB hard drive, sold with Xbox 360 tier, or separately from the Core System.
12X dual-layer DVD-ROM
Memory unit support starting at 64 MB

I/O
Support for up to four wireless game controllers
3 USB 2.0 ports
2 memory unit slots

Optimized for Online
Instant, out-of-the-box access to Xbox Live features, including Xbox Live Marketplace for downloadable content, Gamer Profile for digital identity, and voice chat to talk to friends while playing games, watching movies or listening to music.
Built in Ethernet Port
Wi-Fi Ready: 802.11 A, B and G
Video Camera Ready

Digital Media Support
Support for DVD-Video, DVD-ROM, DVD-R/RW, DVD+R/RW, CD-DA, CD-ROM, CD-R, CD-RW, WMA CD, MP3 CD, JPEG Photo CD
Stream media from portable music devices, digital cameras, Windows XP PCs
Rip music to Xbox 360 hard drive
Custom playlists in every game
Windows Media Center Extender built in
Interactive, full screen 3D visualizers

HD Game Support
All games support 16:9, 720p and 1080i, anti-aliasing
Standard definition and high-definition video output supported

System Orientation
Stands vertically or horizontally

Customizable Face Plates
Interchangeable to personalize the console
Parental Controls
Parental Controls to restrict the games and movies that are played; Xbox Live controls to manage Friends List, voice and video communication, and Gamer Profile sharing

KINGOFNOOBS @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

sigh it doesnt matter anyway. because people WILL HAVE TO BUY A PS3 anyway because if they want to watch Blu Ray movies so basically EVERYONE will eventually have a ps3 even if they dont want one.. same as ps2 and ps people wanted ps2 because it was the cheapest DVD player at the time and people wanted Playstation because it was the cheapest CD player at the time so it doesnt matter anyway because Sony will win again by default, and bedies this stupid guy doesnt even know wht hes talking about and we cant confirm it costs 500 dollars to make, and even if it does thats right now... in month it could be 1/2 that much or less

Invocator @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

Stop complaining... in my country (MX) they (retailers) are always ripping off the gamers wallets... Example (in equivalencies) PSP with Game and Movie 520 USD!! GAMEBOY MICRO 200 USD!! NINTENDO DS with game 300 USD!!!.... Now I expect the XBOX360 will sell at 450 USD!... and the PS3 may reach the 600 USD!. Now somebody have some extra dollars to lend me?? This country sucks for gamers.

Sorry for my bad english

dhicks @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

first off microsoft has had pretty smart approaches on everything they have done in the marketplace thus far (in my opinion). and i am definetly getting an xbox360. and the "analysts" some of you people think don't know much is Merrill Lynch one of the whealthist and most successful investment firms in the world. so its not just anybody making these predictions.
P.S. im not some sort of microsoft tool:)

DoubleThink @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

Microsoft learned from mistakes made the first time around. Does that mean they're perfect? No, but they're a little more conscious about cost and how to cut cost into the life of the console, something they struggled with the last time around, because they were subsidizing the cost. Microsoft is basically following Nintendo's model. Release a gaming system, without any radically expensive hardware, for gaming. What a concept! Sony on the otherhand, is wrapping it's head around the whole entertainment system concept. Look at the PSX! It struggled to achieve any success because it was too expensive. And promised features came too late. The PSP which should be a highly successful portable game player (Hello, based on the PS2), is far more successful playing movies. What went wrong?

This is the first time Sony will have serious competition in advance of their launch. For some reason, I don't think they'll be as successful this time around. And I think they're going to struggle with controlling costs if they release such an ambitious system.

G @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM

If the other branches of sony are any indication, PS3 sales are going to hurt bad.

In all their other products sony execs have been extremely reluctant to sacrifice profits in order to increase market share. The first sony mp3 player that actually played mp3s from the factory came out what, this year? 2004? What about their computer peripherals? Blah tech squeezed into sexy packages and sold for twice as much.

Sony just isn't daring enough to discount the PS3 to the point where it will grab a huge chunk of market share, and because of that they will slowly die out. Market share is king in an industry that is still emerging to mainstream consumers. Microsoft learned that with the xbox 1, which is part of why they went for a release date so much earlier than the PS3. If they can court the right software people (sony's only advantage in the current console war, other than having been released much earlier), the 360 can dominate the same way PS1 did over it's competitors, or the way the ipod does in the DAP market.

| 1 | 2 | Most Recent | Next 50 Comments