SCEE VP says PS3 will cost 499 to 599 euros

My prediction:

Sony launches with a US pricetag of $549 US...

They only have 1 Million units WORLDWIDE to sell and most if not all stores are sold out weeks before Xmas.

Most mommy's seeing little johnny wanting a PS3 (but not being able to find one), see the LOWER PRICED 360's now EVERYWHERE on the shelves and buy one.

MS sells another 2 million over the Xmas holidays and moves even further ahead.

Sony shoots self due to realizing that they should have kept the PS line about gaming and NOT push the media war aspect (UMD anyone?)...

Just my .02

The truth is, the PS3 overwhelms the Xbox 360 in every aspect except price. It's still 2 to 3 times cheaper than a laptop and will be able to do a lot of the stuff that people want to do. It's worth waiting to get the money, and as time moves on, the price WILL go down. You just have to have a little faith.

All of the people that thing sony fans are gonna rush to Microsoft's console just because of the price, then they don't realize how many people have already pre-ordered it, including myself. So far, there have been almost as many pre-orders for the PS3 as there have been Xbox 360s sold. That's an important fact to look at.

1) There isn't as big a difference as the leap from VHS to DVD.

There is a MUCH BIGGER difference!
VHS: 480i
DVD: 480p
BD: 1080p
Between VHS and DVD the resolution and quality are barely any different. DVD to Blu-Ray is a 4x increase in resolution.

2) It is actually MORE expensive to produce Blue-Ray discs, than DVD's (VHS is much more expensive then DVD).

Not, a BD costs only slightly more to produce than a DVD.

3) My regular TV shows a big difference between VHS and DVD quality. My TV cannot see a huge difference at all between Hi-Def and Standard Def. The cost of entering the "HD-Era" is way too friggin high right now.

I guess it is useless for people like myself who don't have an HDTV.

4) You CANNOT push a medium and then 5 years later offer a newer medium that has VERY FEW ADVANTAGES, and MANY DRAWBACKS and expect everyone to buy it.

5)Downloads are (unfourtunately?) the future.

Well, maybe in Japan and Korea where you have 100Mbps internet connections. With most people having lower than 5Mbps download speed in North America, people do not have the patience to wait 12 hours for their 20GB movie download to finish.

Well I already have a 360, and it was well worth the $400 + TAX + EB Warranty (Total - $465). Sony has said PS3 will not be LESS than $425! Considering 360 costs $400 retail, and $525 for MS to manufacture......well PS3 at $500-$600 US dollars seems correct. Imagine a 360 with a 60GB HDD (3x the price of 20GB HDD), Blu-Ray drive (20x price of DVD player), and CELL (most liklely more than 360s CPU in price).....Xbox 360 would cost $800-1000 for MS to naufacture, and retail would HAVE TO be $500. Sony, I hope you make the PS3 EXPENSIVE......I hope Microsoft tkaes you out. Then MS can buy Sony, put Microsoft on all Sony electronics, end Playstation, and put all of the good (not many) PS games on 360, where they belong. PS3 sucks anyways, and Blu-Ray is nothing special because it doesnt affect gaming.

PS3 will sell out regardless of price on the first day; it is so easy to see that a blind person can not miss it.
By E3 Sony is going to show it hands and Xbox 360 will feel its wrath and Nintendo will get its bronze medal for its third place.
When it is time to launch Sony will pack a demo disk with a playable Killzone level with the same insane graphics as the video from last E3.
That Grand Turismo video from last E3 was from PS2 not PS3, when they finally show the real thing nothing will compare to it. You know it, I know it, and every body knows it. Nobody beats Sony on quantity and quality! MGS4 anyone??
I am still getting a Rev to go with my PS3, love the direction that Nintendo took with the Rev. I think it will give me a lot of those Holly crap moments.

im not really all that excited about Blu-ray. i mean i want the PS3 because its a game console. im more excited about streaming my media 2 my PSP from it (if this is in fact included) than the Blu-ray player. i mean yea the DVD player was a great plus on the PS2 and it was my first DVD player but i dont think Blu-ray is that revolutionary. i mean the DVD was a successor to the VHS basically, and that was a HUGE step for quality and functionality and stuff. and Blu-ray is a successor to the DVD but all it really does that DVD doesnt is hold more info and add more copy protection. and yea i know more space makes 4 clearer pictures an wat not but i just dont think thats revolutionary enough 2 carry the sale of this console like Sony wants it 2.

dont get me wrong, its Sony, people will buy it. i mean there r people who buy a pile of dogshit if it was Sony selling it (hell, i might even buy a Sony pile-o-dogshit lol). i was guessing the PS3 would b somewhere between $425-$475. that price point would b decent since it isnt THAT much more than the 360 and its not quite the dreaded $500. all i know is that im a Playstation fanboy and i will buy 1 (i plan on pre-ordering) but if it comes out and its more than $500, this fanboy is playing the waiting game until they drop it 2 a reasonable price.

i mean seriously, $600-$700? did they 4get about the PSX that fast?

For those of you that think that pointed out how expensive $500 is for a media player, and suggested that you can get a DVD player for $50, please review the following articles on Blu-ray players from engadget.com:

http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/04/samsung-confirms-delays-for-bd-p1000-blu-ray-player/

http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/17/sony-bdp-s1-blu-ray-player-available-for-pre-order/

http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/29/panasonics-dmb-bd10-blu-ray-disc-player-coming-in-september/

The cheapest player will be Samsung's at over $900, followed by Sony's and then Panasonic's will be "under $1500." So yeah, if the PS3 is priced at $500 or $600, it will be a cheap Blu-ray player.

And let's just say that I am not a Sony guy here. Sure, I have a PSP, but I never owned nor played the PS2. I have an original Xbox and a 360. I have a GBA and a Gamecube. In fact, I don't even intend to get the PS3. I've got to wait to see if I am getting an HD-DVD or a Blu-ray player. If I go with Blu-ray, I would definitely consider the PS3 over a more expensive media-only player.

The PS3 won't cost more then $500 when it launches in the U.S. Sony will lose a LOT of customer if it's more then $500. Mom & Dad is not going to pay $600 to get little Jimmy a PS3. Chances are good that they will either get a Revolution for under $300 or grab an XBox360. Only the hardcore Playstation fans will pay over $600 for a PS3. Remember the 3DO? That retailed for $700 and people actually bought it. True, less then 500,000 people bought it in it's first year, but just 6 months later it was only $400. LOL!!

I was hoping to get a PlayStation 3, but due to the pricing, I'm actually glad that I went and bought an Xbox 360.

The PS3 won't cost more then $500 when it launches in the U.S. Sony will lose a LOT of customer if it's more then $500. Mom & Dad is not going to pay $600 to get little Jimmy a PS3. Chances are good that they will either get a Revolution for under $300 or grab an XBox360. Only the hardcore Playstation fans will pay over $600 for a PS3. Remember the 3DO? That retailed for $700 and people actually bought it. True, less then 500,000 people bought it in it's first year, but just 6 months later it was only $400. LOL!!

Neale...

This is such a stupid argument. Every single freaking Nintendo fan always falls back on some kind of illusional argument that playstation games aren't fun. You know, cuz the earth-shattering Grand Theft series isn't fun, or maybe Metal Gear isn't fun. Maybe the God of War series sucks. What about the Burnout franchise or Final Fantasy (for playstation, cuz the branched off not really turn-based RPG gamecube one sucked, look at the sales #'s. I think final Fantasy XI online outsold it, and that one was the worst of the series)?

All of these games are GIGANTIC sucesses selling millions of copies. I don't know what you compare it to? 20 year old Mario 3? Maybe your talking about Mario golf, or mario tennis, or mario soccar, or mario party 37? No, they HAVE to fall back on these characters purely for nostalgic purposes to get people to play their games.

Imagine instead of mario golf, it was "joes exciting put-put..." no one would buy it. Slap on mario and people all of the sudden remember 20 years ago when nintendo made an actual mario without squirting jetpacks or fat italian soccor, and they think, maybe just maybe it will be as good... but sadly no, it's not. Think of the sucessful franchises created by mario? Donkey Kong? Mario, Metriod? And two of those started off in an original game they had to branch off to get people to play.

Now think of how many successful franchises Sony has made; the variety in styles and atmosphere's, the complexity of the stories, getting you involved. It's like the difference between Pulp Fiction or Fight Club and Barney. I don't know what you are arguing.

What's with people getting stars for making stupid comments? PS2 didn't do crap for DVD. Exept give the few people who camped out over night and were lucky enough to get one at launch a cheaper alternative. DVD was already an accepted successor to VHS. Also, it had no viable rival. BR is up against HD-DVD and a general lack of knowledge/interest of the average consumer.

We gamers that are on these blogs will account for the launch units. But after that, Sony's gotta sell these things to the average consumer. This price can't be the final price because it will be suicide for Sony. I don't care if it does have a built in mini-disk, beta-max, umd, blu-ray player. The DVD on PS2 was a bonus not the main selling point. And even with the latest cutting edge video player at the time, that console was $300 at launch.

Look, Sony is not going to jack up the price like that. They are going to take a huge hit on the PS3 hardware but make it all bac+revenue in the long run from their software. Anyone can predict the price but in reality we are all just gonna have to wait for an official statement from Sony before we even have an idea to what it is. Also, the PS3 will have huge 3rd party support just like the PS2 did and therefor it will have a gigantic library of games. Lastly, Sony currently controls %70 percent of the gaming market, that is a huge figure. It will be impossible for Microsoft to come out supreme in the round of battle. Maybe, if Sony screws us all over really bad this time, and then does it again, and again, Microsoft will reign supreme, but not until then.

Listen people.......WE ARE GAMERS........nothing more and nothing less. Ever since this whole dvd format war started to surface ive been pissed off. Not because i dont know which to choose, but because im being made to choose. If i want the ps3 i automaticly have to adopt their blue ray shit. That shows me exactly what sony thinks of us. To them were no more than mindless zombies that will adopt anything as long as the playstation logo is on it. Dont get me wrong i like all systems, they have great games and offer me exactly what i desire........fun! The thing is when you dont have your most valued customer as a top priority in mind when developing your next gen its almost a betrayal.


I would of like it better if they would have just done what microsoft is doing and just offered me the add-on. Sure the only reason microsoft is doing this is so they can have a counter claim against sony and blue ray but hay, at least there not taking away one of my freedoms that me and many of my fellow americans enjoy.........CHOICE!

Many are willing to spend more on PC gaming. New gfx cards more memory etc, and you still don't get all the things that the PS3 has to offer.

Number 102

i was guessing the PS3 would b somewhere between $425-$475. that price point would b decent since it isnt THAT much more than the 360 and its not quite the dreaded $500.

Well a price between 425-500 dollars is pretty decent, yes indeed pretty descent in the eyes of an hardcore gamer or playstation fan no doubt At that price you get a built in hardrive with a little bit of pc capabilities plus media capabilities and supposdly high end gaming graphics for a price around 500 bucks is descent let me repeat again descent for the hardcore gamer. But if the ps3 is priced anywhere between 400-500 dollars will totally alieante the casual gamer. Nintendo gamecube sold 20 million unites a total of 20million hardcore gamers bought a gamecube and xbox sold about 22 million that means 22million hardcore gamers bought an xbox. Nintendo and microsoft can live off of hardcore gamers hell nintendo made a profit from hardcore gamers. Sony needs the casual gamers. Without casual gamers nothing buying a ps3 sony will be totally screwed, There are more nintendo and microsoft hardcore gamers then playstation hardcore gamers. If the ps3 is 400 dollars or more casual gamers will be upset. Watch november 18th casual gamers will bring 300 dollars with them just to buy a ps3 until they find out that they are a couple of hundred bucks short. Sony needs the casual gamer and casual gamers need sony, casual gamers dont like nintendo or microsoft unless there is a mario kart or halo. I do feel sorry for soccer moms living in the bible belt, to black people living in marcy projects in Brooklyn, to some upperclass folks living in the o.c, they all want ps3 but only at 299.99 but they aint hardcore enough to shell out another benjamin or two. With that said casual gamers are doomed, and home console gaming will probably come to an end. Lets not forget Casual gamers dont know anythign about blu ray, and blu ray wont took off because digital distribution is the future of movies. Apple will take the mpaa under its wings like what apple did with music and itunes. Tough luck sony.

Man ouch.... It's good to see people footing the bill for this. It's like the second coming of the neogeo or some thing with out sam showdown. I mean lest face it sony is right their competeting against pcs and apples now. Thats what they wanted any way right? I mean standard pc stuff isn't surpose to run very well on this system but I bet they make this the new japanese pc system of choice... Hell if I could use it as a render farm then i'd get one. Me my self, I'm waiting for the pc version of this system to come out. You can get blades right now but at that price they are entering pc territory. I mean I'd rather buy a video card with that money. Man is this going to be jacked up. HEY BUT i WANT TO THANK ALL OF THE GUYS ABOVE WHO CLAIMED THEY ARE GETTING ONE ANYWAY! Thanks to you I''l be able to get one used...LOL I don't know but some thing is about to happen in gaming... It doesn't look good either....

I think I'll be getting a Revolution. The 360 doesn't do much for me, and while the PS3 does look good, it isn't $700 good. I may wait for some price drop on it and maybe get it in late 2007. Wow.

I'm just wondering... How the F^!k is sony planning to beat xbox 360 sales with this price and a year late?.....

Dude, for the amount of stuff that's going to be in that box, that is totally worth it. I paid $AU400 ~US$290 for my PSP when they first came out. I expect this to be about double and a bit AU$800 ~US$582 to AU$1000. I remember when PS2 first arrived, anyone have any idea how much that cost? It was AU$988. Now this is going to be better than that in terms of capabilities and cutting edge technology, so i'd expect the same or higher price. If you don't like it, play super mario on your revolution while you wait for the inevitable price drop!

just checked out, that France, where the comments were allegedly made, uses SECAM not NTSC nor PAL as its TV standard. now that may mean that there is a difference in price for that area. I know that xbox 360 had identical PAL prices, and NTSC prices. maybe this is the factor that is being overlooked? anyways, sony won't screw the USA on pricing, they love you guys too much, one of there biggest markets. Australia on the other hand...

#69

Try to sell a product in Europe, then compare that experience with selling the same item in the US. The EU is a regulatory nightmare and getting worse. This makes for highers costs on top of the product itself. Europeans live in the system they've chosen for themselves, unelected bureaucrat mandarins and all.

#72

Of the aspects that make the PS3 learning curve an expensive proposition, Blu-ray is not one of them. From a game programmer's perspective it's just a really big file store. On the movie side Blu-ray (and HD-DVD) has a much more sophisticated environment for creating interactive content than DVD but that is entirely moot for PS3 game development.

#91

My launch day PS2 is still going strong. The idea that the average PS2 owner goes through several units is just nonsense. What are you more likely to find? A group of people in a forum complaining about their failed console or the much larger group of owners with no such complaint?

On the main subject, only so much of the PS3 price can be attributed to Blu-ray. Only two parts of the system serve solely the movie playback function: the BD-ROM drive and the portion of the firmware flash memory containing the Blu-ray interactivity layer software. (Assuming that isn't being stored on the hard drive and loaded as needed. I doubt that but it is possible.) The remaining functionality needed to play Blu-ray movies, which is the hardware acceleration for the required codecs, is equally desirable for a modern game console. It is a given that any decent video chip these days will provide substantial acceleration for MPEG-1/2, if not a complete decode solution. At the current high end, where the Xbox 360 and PS3 compete, acceleration for the operations needed by MPEG-4/VC-1 and similar codecs is necessary.

A dedicated Blu-ray has two big reasons for being more expensive. The big one is that it has to be sold at a profit. The manufacturer, unless it is one of the major patent pool contributors, doesn't get a piece of the action on software sales. The deck has to be worth selling all by itself. Second, all of the silicon in a dedicated player is there solely for Blu-ray movie playback. It has no shared silicon for producing spectacular games, either in the GPU or CPU. IT's all there for one task. The amount of transistor real estate consumed is far less than the game console but the game console has multiple roles for its chips. It will still get plenty of use from being able to play good quality video without dealing in playing content from Hollywood. This is in comparison to a low end movie player. Those sold to videophiles have all sorts of features, real and imaginary, to qualify their price to those with the money.

U all guys want all for nothing?

Get a job, earn some money and buy it instead of complaining why the heck the device which includes a 1k$ BRD-player and some state-of-the-art gaming hardware costs some 600 bucks.

I ain't no whatever-sony-makes-next-fanboy, but i do think that PS3 will make 360 bite the dust.

Sony has my vote until someone else makes a better driving simulator than Grand Turismo and with GT Vision sounding & looking INSANE you have to look past the price tag!
Keep in mind they selling blueray DVD players for between $800 - $1000

noway i'm spending that much. expect m$ to lower the 360 premium sale price at the same time releasing halo3 (which will be $50 since it's a micro title) and that's going to squash any parent's thought of plunking down over $500 for a first gen bluray system. games for the ps3 ontop of that expected sale price is going to be sticker shock for alot of people too since the bluray disks are going to be more expensive. if you thought $60 for a title was alot, think again... ps3 games are going to be ~70-75 a pop.

no thanks.

wow...

"13...Even with the Xbox 360 as overpriced as it is, I can't see Sony being stupid enough to price the PS3 even one cent over the 360."

Xbox 360 is overpriced? Not really. The PS2, XBox, and NES were overpriced consoles. What, do you want it to cost as much as the PS2 currently does or something? It's hard to get through any PS2 game after playing the Xbox 360 (or even the XBox for that matter).

Sony is still up to their tricks of charging for a quality product but selling a substandard one. Any bets on how long it will take for rampant "Disc Read Errors" to appear on the PS3? I give them a week. Bluray sounds cool and all, but Sony couldn't even get the DVD lasers right, let alone a new blue-laser type.

I've decided that Sony officially doesn't want anyone's business anymore. Overpriced consoles, low-quality products, and unjust over-hyping of those products.

Nintendo seems to be the only company doing it right (reasonable prices, and focussing on fun).

Sony, the PS3 isn't worth a cent over $400.

Sony has already stated that EVERY game for the PS3 will be on a Blue Ray disc. Now, if Sony decides to release the games at the same price of $59.99, developers and Sony will have to eat the loss difference on EVERY SINGLE game manufactured for the PS3 for at least the 1st year. That's a lot of money. Those blu-ray discs are not cheap.

To all those going on about Blu-Ray, If you get an Xbox 360 then you can plugin whatever HD player you like. Either the Microsoft HD DVD player or someone elses. 90% of consumers dont have an HD display to benefit from it anyway.

Bear in mind that BluRay looks in serious danger of being Betamax V2 with vendors already starting to jump ship to support HD DVD - e.g. HP, Disney, Liteon to name a few.

If you buy a PS3 you run a real risk of being landed with obsolete and expensive kit.

Then of course there is the massive capacity advange of HD DVD - you get 45 GB as a triple layer disk on one side for commercial movies and then a standard DVD on the flip side. Blu Ray can only manage 25 GB single layer for commercial dual format movies.

#103 you said:

"There is a MUCH BIGGER difference!
VHS: 480i
DVD: 480p
BD: 1080p
Between VHS and DVD the resolution and quality are barely any different. DVD to Blu-Ray is a 4x increase in resolution"

Actually VHS was 250 - 300 lines resolution at best. With a much higher noise figure.

Visually the jump to HD is MUCH smaller than the jump from VHS to DVD.

imo - The real kiss of death for BluRay is that Windows Vista will support HD DVD out of the box but not Blu Ray. Say hello to 200 million PCS that require a manual installation and $30 worth of codecs installed to run a BluRay player, but run HD DVD out of the box.

1) There isn't as big a difference as the leap from VHS to DVD.

2) It is actually MORE expensive to produce Blue-Ray discs, than DVD's (VHS is much more expensive then DVD).

3) My regular TV shows a big difference between VHS and DVD quality. My TV cannot see a huge difference at all between Hi-Def and Standard Def. The cost of entering the "HD-Era" is way too friggin high right now.



You sir are an idiot and your post proves it. You have obviously never seen a HD program.
A brand new VHS on a brand new VCR looks 95% as good as it does on DVD (unless progressivly scanned). The differance between 480P and 1080P is huge. Try settig you PC resolution to 640*480(aprx 480P) and watch a movie or look at a picture, then change your setting to 1600*1200 (aprx 1080P) and tell me you don't see a HUGE differance. On top of that once you play a move in 1080P it is even 10X better than that!!

HD is here to stay. I am not sure if HDDVD or blueray will win out but the standard DVD movie of today is a dead tech. I belive this so much that last year I bought at least 80 DVD's, this year knowing that DVD is dead I have bought 4 (all for my 5 year old). I would rather watch the movie on demand pay per view in HD that rent a DVD that is not.

It is by far way too expensive for the average gamer.. Of course the hardcore gamers and sony fanboys are gonna buy it but believe me we make up a small % of the consumer as a whole. I think Microsoft is to gain by all this especially if they drop the price just before ps3 launches. hmmmm Iwonder what the games will cost???? guesses anyone? I'm thinking 69.99

When i first saw the $499 i thought it was a fair price for a blu-ray player.... but the $499 version doesnt even come with the HDMI output!!! How much will that accessory cost??? Sony keeps saying that the ps3 is not just for gaming and were really trying to sell the blu-ray drive.... but the $499 version is pretty much only good for games! And no wireless built-in!!! That leaves a bad taste in my mouth that there will be 2 different versions out there (different internally)... at least with the 360 all versions are the same.... all with add ons... but all the hardware is the same! This is really going to hurt sony.... especially when people start to figure this out... imagine someone spending $500 and coming home expecting to watch HD blu-ray and find out he cant!!! lololll that blows!!!!

Sony is setting themselves up for extreme disappointment with the release of thier new system... Not only are they going to be late out of the gate, after the 360 and Wii, but they're pricing themselves out of the range of the majority of gamers. Certainly there are those spoiled kids and fanboy bachelors who will go get the system at release, but I have a feeling pre-orders in general will be rather weak.

On top of this, I'm wondering if Sony will continue it's trend of "peripheral gouging" which they employed with the PS2...so you perchase the core system, but then still have to shell out for an ever-increasing number of system add-ons. By the way, is it too much to ask to package TWO controllers with a system??

I think I'll pass on Sony with this current iteration...

It may be cheap for a Blu-Ray player, but who cares?
Only people who have already bought an already ridiculously expensive High-Definition TV will be able to tell the difference between that and regular DVDs anyway.

By the time enough people have HDTVs for that line of reasoning to work, something better will have come along.

The thing that blows my mind is that I can buy both a 360 AND a Revolution for that much money.
I already have a 360, so next up is a Revolution(or Wii, I suppose...). When the PS3 manages to make their system as good as both those sytems combined, that's when they can expect to see my dollars, which to say the least, won't be anytime soon. Zelda + Elder Scrolls = zero need for Final Fantasy (which may not even be made for the PS3 at this rate)

You yanks and euros have it easy... try living o nthe far side of the world... In New Zealand I am expecting launch PS3's to be $1000+ with a new PC being about 1500-2000

Heh. I think it should be noted that the Xbox 360 is $400 dollars, and the Wii is going for $250. With the PS3 at $600, you could basicly get the 360 and the Wii for the price of the PS3.

So, new one in the console wars this year: Price-wise, the battle is not between Sony, MS or Nintendo. The choice this time is between Sony or MS AND Nintendo. Frankly, that's a choice in the way that jumping onto the road in rush hour is a realistic option.

I choose game systems for games. In the past, I've chosen Nintendo again and again because they have more exclusive than the others. Xbox games and PS games are also more likely to make it onto the PC. This is even more true with the new generation due to the vast differences between the Wii and... well, everything else.

So consider it this way: If you take your $600 and get a PS3, you miss out on Xbox and Nintendo exclusives. Titles like Halo, Zelda, Smash Brothers, Mario, Sonic and Farcry rush to mind, along with many others. But if you put in an extra $50 and get 360 and Wii, you only lose PS exclusives. So... Guitar Hero, Final Fantasy, and GTA a few months early. NOT worth it.

Thank god for the weak american dollar eh?

1) the price is high but it is less then the cost of a hd-dvd player or blue-ray player
2) all new US TVs will be capable of using the high def content come the end of 2007 (including little 13 inch ones (not that you would be able to tell since everything would be so tiny)
3) the Xbox 360 will be getting a HD-DVD drive which of course could add 200-300$ on to it's price
4) the top PS 3 price would include a 60 gig harddrive, wi-fi, bluetooth and the HDMI connects
5) HDMI/DVI are required formats to avoid content providers from downconverting content to a lower resolution because of lack of copyprotection methods.
6) Higher Resolution = Better Picture
gca

#4: "...especially with so many PS2 users having to buy a SECOND machine after the first one dies."
Even up to a 4th or 5th in many cases.

Most people don't have 700 to throw down for a PS3 along with 70$. Unless blu-ray makes itself more prevalent in the near future, no one will care. Like the PSP's ability to play UMD movies. How many people care? How many people will buy a PS3 for the Blu-ray? honestly.

It doesn't make sense to spend 700-800$ on a PS3 and ONE GAME when you could get so much more for the 360, and EVEN MORE if you buy a Wii.

To the sony fanboys: Is a 4 minute clip of MSG4 really so impressive that you'll fork 700$ immediatly? Do you really need new paint for all the same, hackneyed games?

My god, get over it, its ganna be pure 700$ quality and worth every cent. all this 'xbox is ganna love this' garbage is crap too, look what everyone said about the first xbox, who lost to the classic playstation, and who wants to play a system that ruins your games if your cat walks by your system anyhow, xbox is and always will be garbage, and sony is SONY, you think they care if it takes them MAYBE afew extra hours to sell out every PS3 they make(because they will), not like they still dont rake in the money from everything else they make.
And the Wii is nothing but a party system with a stupid gimmick controller that I pray will be replacable with a real one, only game that looks any good is SSBB, same reason I own a gamecube, one game, smash bros. but Im not ganna play it with a sex toy thank you.
so cry whine, complain and flame, but PS3 WILL sell out, WILL own all, and WILL make you cry over the fact you cant afford one, which is the real reason your all so mad.

At E3 Sony announced that the US price will be $499 for the 20GB hard drive model and $599 for the 60GB model.

If that's the case, then, judging by how companies usually disregard the dollars == euros rule, it should come to ?499 for the base unit and ?599 for the 40GB more in your hard drive.

I seriously hope everyone who buys one of these at launch is stuck with worthless obsolete crap, especially with the large movement towards HD DVD.

It's amazing that people seem to be forgetting a few things

Blueray is far from standard fare. Finding them isn't going to be easy and the numbers will be limited until it becomes more mainstream

The player might be able to go HD, but the developers will struggle to do that for quite a while (usually takes about 5 years for games to reach peak quality in terms of using hardware on a system) In effect a blueray player is exactly what this is going to be, cause the graphics ain't gonna improve for quite a while

A fancy blueray player may cost $1000 (770 euros, only 170 more than the higher estimate for the PS3. Way to double your money Sony! Keep selling those sets!) but so were DVD players when they came out. Now that dvd is the common format you get them for $50. *If* blueray does become standard then in 5-10 years the same will probably happen. This is pretty unlikely though since

3. HDTV isn't actually noticable until you get to tv sizes of around 28" and above. Most people playing DVDs have no *reason* to switch to blueray, cause on their TVs high definition will just be more expensive for the same quality.

Actually, there's a point there. How many of the PS3 fanboys have their own 28" HDTV to play this thing on? I'd be surprised if many did.

Me? I'm waiting till all three consoles come out. Then I'm going to decide based on the reduced price tag that alwasy ends up on a console after a year and the games that are out on the system. Till then I'm going to pick up a DS (waiting till DS lite comes out, since DS price will drop. Hey, if neither is going to fit my pocket then why spend more for smaller?)

Before all the PS3 fanboys get all worked up about how awesome their machine is, let's not forget that that doesn't mean anything.

If the PS3 is technically superior, that's great. But what if the devs have a hard time coding for it? What if it simply costs far too much money and time and effort to make "mo' betta" games on the PS3, than to just churn out stuff that is cheaper and of marginally similar quality on the 360?

I hear how folks talk about how the PS3 will totally destroy the 360.

Yeah, right.

Go ask Steve Jobs how he totally pwned Microsoft back in the day. I'm sure you'll find the history lesson illuminating.

Lets repeat this. BLU-RAY is not a bargain, BLU-RAY is not MAGICAL, BLU-RAY is an UN-Proven Technology, BLU-RAY is not gonna make the PS3 sell. People want a gaming console not a Media player. specially Media player that has a totally unknown future. (note Sony's infamous ability to make flopped standards, UMD, Beta-Max, MD discs, Proprietary audio formats etc etc) all of them 100% failures. why would blu-ray any different? because its strapped on a PS3? they assume the majority of people will buy a 600% player is rediculous and unrealistic.

60% of the movie industry is going with HD-DVD, the majority of those are the Major players while sony has the minor players. your Wasting your time and money with Blu-ray. infact Sony has never garnished the attention of the Movie industry since Beta-Max. okay?

the only People who masturbates at the thought of blu-ray is SONY themselves. As for now I'll just play with my PS2 and gamecube games. I might even get an Xbox360 if I really want those hardcore games. they'll end up on the Xbox360 anyways due to the larger marketshare. Larger marketshare more sales for GAME DEVELOPERS. game developers do NOT GIVE A DAMN about fanboys seriously NONE OF US DO.