E3 Vox Populi: What are your thoughts on the PS3 prices?

I never really consider myself a fanboy, but a videogame collector/technology whore. I am that guy who is the first to buy any shiny knick-knack that will in no way improve my life. I own nearly every console dating back to original pong, and even some of the obscure ones (can you say vetrex?) For the first time in a nearly 2 decades, I have no intentions of waiting in line for the next big thing. Will I pick one up eventually? Probably, but I am very unimpressed. The really crazy thing about that is that I have paid more for less in the past. Hell, I bought an IBM PC Jr. with 128k for nearly $2000 back in the early 80's!

The point of all this is not that I have adopted a "wait and see" mentality. It more of a "when will I feel like the price has dropped enough to let this thing sit in my game closet" mentality. I just have so little interest.

I collect a lot of systems simply as a part of the gaming timeline. Some succeeded, some didn't. A lot of people compared the Xbox360 to the Dreamcast prior to launch. Based on what I own and have seen, I would have to compare PS3 to the Phillips CDI. High price, new technology, lots of promises, no delivery. Here's hoping they fair better than that, but I'm not holding my breath.

First off, for scab and other poster about his original post, the xbox doesn't have a reset button, so MS didn't steal that. Second, the main reason people are complaining about Sony stealing isn't that someone else did it first, it's that they steal it and then call themselves innovative. When they announced the version of Live, they acted like they were innovating and doing something original. Xbox had Live, though I never had broadband to use it. Now I do and can use it with 360, and it is great. I was able to watch a bunch of vids from the show on my TV and that was pretty cool. The main problem that I had with the selection was only that I could watch PS3 content on my TV, though that is understandable since MS wouldn't want to show their competition on their system. MS did all the work getting Live to where it is, and also has a great plan to take it even further, then Sony comes along and copies everything. I do like the fact that PS3 will have something comparable to Xbox Live, but to call it innovative is bull.

Personally, I am on the fence at current as to whether I will buy the PS3 at launch. I mean $600 is alot of money for some of us, and that is without any games. Also Gavin, you mention the $500 version and say that people are forgetting that, but the fanboys have no desire to buy a crippled machine. It's the same basic thing with the 360. Nobody really wanted the $300 version, but were forced to buy it because there were any premium systems available. At least that was easily remedied with the Hard Drive. The $500 PS3 can't be fixed that easily.

Though I don't believe that the PS3 will fail like the 3DO, I do think that it will suffer a bit. They will have a harder time trying to get as many systems sold. The good thing about that, is that they won't have the assured victory this round, and they will have to fight for it, which makes me happy to be a gamer. I think that this generation could see competition as good as the days of genesis and SNES. MS is bringing some great original Japanese games to the market and I think that will help them, I know I'm excited for Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey. I also hope that Square will bring more games to the 360.

My last point, will Blu-Ray be like UMD or will it be more successful? At least Blu-Ray will be playable on more than just the PS3, which should help, but it most likely will take time. Someone said it wouldn't be until next year that the common comsumer would be looking into Blu-Ray. I disagree. It took DVD 3-4 years before the common comsumer was buying it, which was around the time that the PS2 came out with it built in. My sister, who would definitely be a common comsumer when it comes to movies, is upset that this is happening. She doesn't want to buy a new player to watch her movies. Also, she couldn't care less about the High Definition, and I don't think she ever will. DVD is as good as she really would want. I think that most comsumers would feel this way. A movie is a movie and can be enjoyed in low definition as easily for most as in high def.

Well, I guess we'll just have to see how things go, but I am very interested to see how this generation plays out. Hopefully we will see some good competition, and because of that, have some of the best games ever.

Sony is getting too arrogant over their domination of the non-gaming world (TVs, Stereos, DVD players, etc) that they think they can incorporate their scams -$500-600 for a game system!?!- into the gaming industry. I predict they will fail utterly, not due to games, but prices alone. And am I the only one to get sick of the Playstation name? PS1, PS2, PS3, I don't know about you, but eighty years from now I don't want to be hearing about PS26.

Nintendo - Most innovative, even though sony went and Copied (not stole), their motion sensing.

Microsoft - Already has a head start, but fewer gaming franchises (IE: Sony has MGS, Grand Turismo, FF. Nintendo has...well, you know, too many if possible)

Sony - Too pricy, why buy a Sony core pack for 600, when you can buy a microsoft core pack for 500? (The Sony Premium)

Keep in mind this is all IMO. Feel free to comment.

Wii will rock you.

Xbox 360 premium 399.99 PS3 60gb 599.99
Wifi connector 96.95 Wifi con 0.00
Hd Dvd Player est 200.00 Blue Ray 0.00
2 20gb Hardrives 200.00 60gb hard 0.00
Hdmi connectors N/A Hdmi conn included
Motion controller N/A Motion con included

Total 360 896.90 Total Ps3 599.99

Difference xbox 360 296.91 more than the Ps3 even if you took out the hd dvd player it still going to be 96.91 more. Plus, the PS3 is the superior machine of the two, the PS3 with all that it brings to the table is a great deal. Microsoft is a despicable company that offers nothing to gaming, the Playstation brand has taken gaming farther than we would have ever hoped for. All of you who bought a 360 are going to regret wasting 400.00 plus for a rushed console that isnt worth a damn. The Ps3 is more than the Wii and the 360 combined yet you get it for less.

PS3 WORTH EVERY PENNY

Alot of you here are missing the point or really are not very good at judging value (either that or are just very poorly informed). Remember, these price points are aimed at early adopters and will come down in a year (or less) from launch.

A PS3 is $500 or $600, depending on configuration.

A Xbox360 is $400 for premium & $600 for premium+HDDVD

Compared to XBOX360 (which is a fine machine in its own right), this is what you get:

$400 XBox360 features vs. $500 PS3 features
-2nd best hardware -best hardware on market
-1080i thru component -1080p thru component
-20 GB HDD (proprietary) -20 GB HDD (ATA standard)
-3 usb ports -4 usb ports
-4 Prop. wireless devices -7 Bluetooth wireless devices
-Rumble Controller -Motion Sense Controller
-2 Prop. Memory Card Slots-usb thumb drive as M.C.
-Media Extender -Media Hub
-Built in Ethernet -Built in Ethernet
-Xbox Live -PlayStation Network
-DVD Player -Bluray Player (movies/games)
-Location Free Server
-Linux PC
-Mouse/Keyboard/PC peripherals
-optical out surround sound

$600 XBox360 features vs. $600 PS3 features
-2nd best hardware -best hardware on market
-1080i thru component -1080p thru component/HDMI
-20 GB HDD (proprietary) -60 GB HDD (ATA standard)
-3 usb ports -4 usb ports
-4 Prop. wireless devices -7 Bluetooth wireless devices
-Rumble Controller -Motion Sense Controller
-2 Prop. Memory Card Slots-usb/magicgate/SDflash/etc.
-Media Extender -Media Hub
-Built in Ethernet -Built in Ethernet
-Xbox Live -PlayStation Network
-HDDVD Player(leaked $200)-Bluray Player (movies/games)
*only for movies -Location Free Server
-Linux PC
-Mouse/Keyboard/PC peripherals
-optical out surround sound
-Wi-Fi built in

Cross-platform games will look nearly identical on both platforms (PS3 might look slightly better or run at a higher, more consistant framerate). Exclusives will definitely look better on PS3 a year or two down the line (remember, 2nd gen Xbox360 games vs. pre-launch PS3 games at this year's E3). Both are comparatively good machines for the money. Standardised HDD in the PS3 will allow for games to make better use of it, as will the built in Bluray Player. PS3 HDD is a standard 2.5" SATA HDD and is swappable with any laptop hdd (it's not proprietary - yay!). Plus, PS3 has two bootable Operating systems...standard PlayStation XMB and PlayStation Linux/Lindows (a fully functioning open-source Windows like environment where you can get tons of computer applications for little money and do homebrew development...pc peripherals such as keyboard, mouse, printers, scanners, etc. work in this environment...keyboard/mouse also functions in XMB).

PS3 is an exceptional value. It is a esentially 3 things:
1.game console
2.Media Hub
3.Linux PC

Write a list as long as you want #100 and 101, but still, you do not seem to understand that this is a little video game system, a toy. $400 is steep enough, but you have to be an idiot to blow at least $500 on what basically is a Xbox 360 with a cheap Blu-ray player.

To everybody who will pay $660, let alone $560, just to play Final Fantasy XIII, let me tell you what I've learned over the years...

Earthbound >>> Dragon Quest/Warrior >>> Final Fantasy

For one thing, you don't have to wade through hours upon hours of a crappy and usually predictable storyline, upone which fanboys will make the same friggin' joke about one single plot point, and still find it funny ten years after it came out. *glares at Aeris's death in FFVII, and then glares at any scene with Toad from Super Mario Bros.

Second: Real-time battles. NO. JUST NO. Does anybody want to wait for a really long time for a bar to fill up before you can finally access the attack menu, wade through your attack options, cast heal, then wait even longer, finally use heal on your ally (usually for a crappy ammount), and lose even more HP because the enemy beat the crap out of you while this was going on? CRAP ON THAT. I'd like to take my sweet time, thank you. Which is kinda' why FFTactics and FFI are the only ones I actually like.

Third: THE FANBOYS. GOOD GOLLY I HATE THEM. THEY'RE EVEN WORSE THAN GUYS WHO FLOCK TO KEVIN SMITH'S CRAPPY FILMS. YEAH, WE GET IT GUYS, YOU THINK FFVII WAS THE BEST AND WILL SET THE STANDARD FOR RPGS, AND YOU PIRATED THE CRAPPY MOVIE THAT SQUARE WAS BEGGING TO HAVE PIRATED WITH THE REALLY UNNECCESARRY DELAY, YADDAH YADDAH YADDAH. I DON'T CARE ABOUT HOW YUFFIE IS A THIEVING FEMALE DOG, OR HOW CAIT SITH IS A LOSER. AND I DON'T CARE THAT YOU COSPLAYED AS CLOUD OR SEPIROTH, OR THAT YOU DUPLICATED THEIR SWORDS OUT OF STYROFOAM AND CARDBOARD AND SPRAYPAINT. AND I DON'T CARE IF YOU THINK WE'RE SPOILING ANYTHING BY SAYING AERIS DIES. WE ALL FREAKING KNOW. AND NEVER MAKE A SINGLE JOKE ABOUT ANY OF THE GAMES IN MY PRESCENCE, OR I WILL HOLD YOU WITH THE SAME RESPECT I HAVE FOR NAPOLEAN DYNAMITE FANS. AND THAT GOES DOUBLE FOR YOU, LEGENDARY FROG. I KNOW YOU'RE OUT THERE, DELAYING YOUR MOVIES FOR MORE GRADIENTS AND TO PUT IN A STICK FIGURE SCENE WITH THE SAME VOICES AND CHOCOLATE.

ARRRRRRRRRRRRGH.

*takes a deep breath

If I see one more person bleating on about the cost of the PS3 for playing games when they're posting from a PC which for a minimum gaming rig costs about $1000 I think I shall scream.

All this hypocritical rage against Sony is fine and well. What really pisses me off is the blind loyalty to Microsoft by the Xbox fanboys and Nintendo by the Wii-fanboys. Microsoft is not exactly the poster child for on-time delivery, quality product or telling their customers the truth. That doesn't even scratch the surface, MS product security is an industry laughing stock, does anuyone seriously think that they can manage to make Xbox360 more secure? Microsoft are out for one thing, and one thing only. Industry dominance in every sector that they are in. Microsoft does not care what it has to do to achieve dominance, but once they do you can expect all the monopolistic abuse in the world, just as has happened with Windows and Office. Without any serious competition Microsoft has release buggy product after buggy product and charged whatever they could get away with. So, Microsoft is obviously the savior of the gaming industry, and not just another evil empire like Sony....Right and the oon is made of cheese.

As for Nintendo, does anyone remember the annoyance, perhaps rage might be a better word, against Nintendo for it's persistent use of PROPRIETARY formats, it's stubborn use of cartridges for games when CDs would have been cheaper and had far greater capacity? All the Zelda/Mario/Metroid games in the world can't make Nintendo any better. Nintendo, when it was top dog, was quite happy to enforce it's will on game makers and peripheral makers. Now it's no longer top dog, it's happy to come across like some maverick company fighting the establishment, when in fact it's simply desperate to have a foothold in this next generation of gaming.

$500 and $600 for a game console, sounds expensive. Hey, guess what it's about what you paid in 1994 for your PS1 (at least in real terms if you bother to remember that everything was cheaper 12 years ago in 1994). But since most of the folks making the pissy comments wetting themselves about the cost of the PS3 are too young to even remember the year 1994, I guess we can't expect them to remember the cost of living increases over time, and prices of game consoles have defied this particular 'rule' for years. The initial launch of consoles is always an attempt by the manufactureers to redress the balance.

Good grief, in a market when PC games cost anythign from $45-60 at launch and routinely require $1000 gaming PCs, with $200-$300 graphics card to play at an acceptable frame rate, is $500 or $600 really that much for a machine that will play every game thrown at it, and playback high definition video?

Truth is one of those things that is very objective and inflexible, opinion is very subjective highly flexible. Many peoples opinions color their view of the truth. For example, the base PS3 coming without the HDMI port. Most people seem to see this as the base model not being able to be a BluRay player. The truth of the matter is that the sole impact is that the PS3 premium model can use a new HDTV with an HDMI port, whereas the base model cannot. their capability is identical. Component video can do 1080p. If the various studios decide to use the ICT in their BluRay releases, then that picture changes. However, since the vast majority of HDTV owners already have displays without HDMI ports, and a large proportion of the installed BluRay player base (and by inference the high definition video player base) will only have component output, thise same studios would be stupid to restrict playback with the ICT any time soon, if at all. If they did they would be excluding a large part of the market instantly, which is never good business sense. Personally I would prefer it if Sony sold a *huge* number of the PS3 base models as it creates a very awkward situation for studios keen to release high definition movie discs. Perhaps Sony's gaming division has an alterior motive removing the HDMI port? HDMI ports are not hugely expensive. Removing it from the box is a minor cost saving. However it does create an obstacle to the use of ICT in movie discs. Interesting, eh?

Anyway, when this feeding frenzy ends and the PS3 actually launches we will see what happens. There are six months from now to then, that's 6 months to finish, polish and enhance game releases ready for launch. Does anyone seriously believe that the crop of games shown at E3 will not improve? Does anyone seriously believe that in 6 months more games will not be completed? Oh, wait, I forgot, it's the Sony bashing feeding frenzy, we can't apply logic just yet...

Just repeating myself:

I own a GC and a PS2 but I play them
almost as much. But I have 2 times more games for the PS2. I like the
console a lot, as I do with my GC. I'm sure there will be a lot of
good games for the PS3 too, and I would like to have the thing. BUT I
don't find the pricetag very attractive (where there are PS2/PS3
fanboys screaming about how the Wii is overpriced at $250,- without
even knowing whats inside *sigh*). At this moment, despite of the
large fanbase they have (including myself)I don't think they will get
the same extremely large market share as they have now. As I
said before:Cons:-No family-support as with the PS2
(DVD-player as backbone)-High price-Not yet clear which new
standard will break through with the HD-DVD or Blu-ray (IF they will
break through to the main audience)-Less expensive 360 as
power-console-Less games than the 360 -In comparison: very
cheap Nintendo-Nintendo more as family-console instead of the PS2
nowPro:-Not expensive for the stuff that's
inside-Already large fanbase (but keep in mind: sega has had a
large fanbase too...)-Good third-party support-Power
graphicsBut in my opinion are, looking only at points that
will effect sale rates, are the cons of much heavier impact.
To be honest, Microsoft has made a wise decision to make the
HD-DVD optional. I suggest Sony would do the same thing to lower
their prices, so they will provide a better competition for the 360
especially (crush them, cruuuuuuuush them! (just kidding)) since that
being the other power-console. Brassnov