Sony clears up some PS3 confusion

What all the PS3 fanboys fail to grasp is that almost always the cheaper, less powerful option wins. Look at some examples:
Ps2 to Xbox
PS1 to N64, 3D0, Neo Geo
Snes to Genesis
Gameboy to Game Gear
NDS to PSP
VHS to Betamax
AMD to Pentium
PC to Mac

Very rarely does something that is more expensive, and perform esentially the same task outsell a cheaper alternative. When both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray can hold HD movies with all their special features and have room to spare, and Blu-Ray cost more, what would make anyone choose Blu-Ray? When a PS3 and Xbox 360 can play the same games, at near identical graphic levels, what would make you buy a Ps3?

I'm not sure about right now, but when I was doing Television research (I stopped in early December)... the ONLY tv that could do 1080p through HDMI was an HP tv. The rest of the "1080p" were all bullshit. The $ony, and Samsung tvs claiming that they were 1080p, was b.s. They were not able to output 1080p through HDMI. The tvs coming out this year will be able to do 1080p through HDMI. The reason I'm typing this, is because since it is a new feature in the United States to do 1080p through HDMI, the tvs will not likely be any less then $3,500. Are you willing to spend that much to play games in 1080p? Sure $ony says the console can do 1080p, but who knows how many developers will take advantage of this when the tvs that will allow 1080p are barely reaching the market and there still aren't enough HDTV owners yet. They're whole 1080p arguement is moot if there is probably less then 1% with a 1080p tvs. The Japanese market has had 1080p tvs for a long time, so I'm assuming they are targeting them. The whole future proof thing is also moot because by the time people take the plunge and buy a 1080p tv, its gonna P$4 and NeXbox time.

I bought another HDTV this past November and am thrilled with it cuz 360 games look great. I will buy a 1080p tv, but maybe next year. As for the P$3, I most likely won't be getting one at launch. I'll probably wait a year or two. I am a fickle person so me saying I won't get one at launch means that I could. However, having been burned by $ony, going through 2 psones, 2 ps2s, exchanging my PSP 6 times (I have the receipts to prove it), and all the lies they have told (toy story graphics, hard disk drive, web browser for ps2, "real time" graphics at last years E3, and countless others), if I do get a P$3, I will probably buy one off of ebay after a couple years of it being on the market. The reason why is because I wouldn't want to give $ony anymore sales.

The PS3 is a great investment, you get blue ray,wifi, an upgradeable hardrive and hdmi for 600.00. The 500.00
is also a very good deal since you can upgrade it to whatever you like. For me the 60gb is the clear choice is a solid price for all the features that I need.

Now take a look a the 360, premium 400.00 dvd drive, 20gb hardrive that's it. I need a next gen player I'm getting a brand new HDTV, sony of course, and would like to take advantage of the PS3 bluray movie playback. I also need wifi in the 60gb is included, if I were to get a 360 I have to pay 100.00. Now the 360 is 500.00. With the PS3 I get a 60gb hardrive so now I can have everything I like in my computer on my PS3, with the 360 there isn't nearly enough space. So that's another 100.00 for an ultra expensive propietary drive that if I wanted to upgrade my 20gb ps3 would be a lot cheaper. Now the 360 is 600.00. Xbox live 50.00, PS3 free. Now the 360 is 650.00 without hdmi and a next gen player.

The 20gb doesn't seem like a bad deal after that and the 60gb is just an great deal. Like some would say the 360 gives you a choice, but the PS3 gives you everything you need and more for a much better price than MS.

Also bluray isn't just for movies in the PS3.

Some thoughts:

1) Arguing over 1080p is like arguing about Louis Vitton bags being only in one pattern. Of the 10-12% of people in the US who have an HDTV, significantly fewer have a TV capable of even taking a 1080p signal. Sony is future-proofing here, and generally this is a non-issue for everyone except future capacity.

2) The advantage of HDMI that appears to be being overlooked here is that it condenses five cables to ONE. If Sony is looking at the PS3 to become the core of an entertainment center, fewer cables are better.

3)20 Gb is more than enough for some needs, and far too small for others. For a DVR, 20GB is way too small, unless Sony is using a super-compressive format. Will it record HDTV broadcasts?

4) Sony's enforcement of DRM is a source of concern. The PSP's major firmware enhancements have consisted of minor tweaks and continual attempts to lock the system down. With the PS3 being mostly online, does anyone doubt this will happen just as often?

5) Consumers have, so far, unilaterally rejected BOTH blu-ray and HD-DVD. No one wants to spend money on the next Betamax, and so far there is no compelling reason to switch. To anyone without an HDTV, there is virtually no benefit to upgrading. To anyone with an HDTV, there is little benefit until something shifts in the market. DVDs, in addition to being a single format, had tangible benefits over VHS. Extra content, the ability to jump instantly through scenes, better picture quality that could be seen on any TV, long shelf life, extensible interfaces and more appealed to all consumers. The HD disc formats don't have that, yet. Sony may be banking on consumers backing into the technology...since you have a PS3, and you got an HDTV, why not get a blu-ray disc? Will this work? Only time will tell if it's the next DVD or UMD.

6) Sony's duplicity last year makes everything they do suspect this year. The killzone trailer (as it clearly wasn't a demo) makes everything they do short of a playable demo hard to trust. Assassin's Creed was mentioned earlier in the thread. All we've seen so far is a rendered movie and a few jaggy screenshots that look somewhat better than Prince of Persia 3...but without seeing them in motion, it's hard to judge. And this is where Sony's bogus trailers of last year bite them on the ass.

7) Microsoft and Sony both need to stop their dick-waving contests and start bringing the goods. Microsoft's most popular games remain on Live Arcade. Sony's 'Sony will r00l j00' puff-talk is just as annoying as Microsoft's nudge-nudge-wink-wink sideways comments about Sony. At least Nintendo's blunders are entirely their own animal.

The PS3 is sure to succeed in Japan. Look at Famitsu's recent post-E3 survey of its readership. The Wii didn't even make the top of the list; that was reserved for the PS3 and Final Fantasy. Most likely, Sony will sell out its initial run of machines, while simultaneously experiencing shortages. The PS3 will NOT fail...Sony can't afford for it to do so. Just like MS really used the original X-box to push Live; Sony wants to be able to push a format that it can control. The problem is that while this is in the best interest of Sony's movie and music divisions, it's not in the best interest of the video game division. Whether it proves to be a minor problem or a major one remains to be seen.

I feel sorry for all of those people that believe Blu-ray is going to be the "next gen" DVD. HD DVD has all of the right components to beat out the competition. HD DVD players are far cheaper: Toshiba has them for 799.99 and 499.99 compared to Sony's at 1000.00. The physical media for HD DVD is cheaper to manufacture. Not a lot of funding needed to change the manufacturing process as well. Toshiba's HD DVD players have already been in the market. Ethernet input for firmware upgrade, Sony's player doesn't have that. The name "HD DVD" is consumer friendly. Triple layer HD DVD can hold 45GB. HD DVD is accepted by the DVD Forum. Several companies claiming blu-ray exclusiveness have switched to both camps.

All of these factors lead me to foresee HD DVD as the winner. REMEMBER VHS VS SONY BETA-MAX?

@ DBX

You Said:
"[Best Buy] Associate: You can choose between the PS3, XBOX 360, or Wii. The PS3 will give you the latest and greatest in graphics, a high-definition player, browse the internet, chat with friends, and store all your photos and home movies. It'll also connect to the PSP you bought him last year. The XBOX 360 came out last year, but it simply just for gaming. The PS3 is more of an all around entertainment hub for the living room."

HA! I am the gaming department at my store (and one of the best sellers in my district). I most certainly will NOT be saying that. That might be what the Sony rep wants me to say, but it's not what I'm going to say to Joe Average Consumer... Not unless I figure out that he's got $1000 to spend, anyway.

I'll tailor the sale to the person, and if they want high definition movies, I'll either lean them toward an HD-DVD player, an upscaling DVD player, or a 360 plus HD-DVD add-on. I won't be shilling the PS3 to anyone who initially balks at the price. I feel no need to do so. If the item can't sell itself, then I'm not going to bust my ass selling it when the profit margin on game systems is damn near ZERO. Why would I sell a PS3 when the customer is SO much less likely to purchase any accessories at the time of the sale? We live on accessory sales in the video game world- Not console sales. If the customer blows their wad on the console itself, how am I (or any salesperson) going to attach an extra controller, service plan, cables, or other accessory to the sale? The customer will feel ripped-off already, and won't be in the mood to spend more than the $700-$800 they're already spending on the console + games + tax.

Let me correct your statement (changes in ALL CAPS):

"Associate: You can choose between the PS3, XBOX 360, or Wii. The PS3 will give you SIMILAR graphics TO THE XBOX 360, a high-definition player (WHICH IS ALSO AVAILABLE OPTIONALLY ON THE 360), browse the internet (WHICH THE 360 WILL LIKELY DO VIA UPDATE IN THE NEAR FUTURE), chat with friends (WHICH HAS BEEN A FEATURE OF THE 360 SINCE LAUNCH), and store all your photos and home movies (WHILE THE 360 WILL NETWORK WITH YOUR COMPUTER AND STREAM THEM, SAVING CONSOLE HARD DRIVE SPACE). It'll also connect to the PSP you bought him last year (UNLESS YOU SAW THE WAY THE WIND WAS BLOWING AND BOUGHT A NINTENDO DS). The XBOX 360 came out last year, and it is for gaming, WITH OPTIONAL SUPPORT FOR OTHER FEATURES. The PS3 is more of an all around entertainment hub for the living room, WITH THE PRIMARY GOAL OF GETTING A SONY FORMAT FOR HIGH DEFINITION INTO CONSUMER HOMES. GAMING SEEMS TO BE A SECONDARY THOUGHT WITH THE PS3. OF COURSE YOU CAN ALSO GET A WII. IT'S CHEAPER, MORE FAMILY ORIENTED, AND HAS LOTS OF COOL ACCESSORIES."

I'm not alone on this one. Most associates I've spoken to have said that they feel no real desire to sell the PS3 when it's going to screw with our accessory sales and leave customers with a $600 system that they'll feel buyer's remorse over. Now, if we get a rich guy who wants it NOW, we'll sell the PS3 to that customer, because he's the one who can afford to spend the extra on accessories and other purchases at that time. These guys are not the primary customer in most stores, though. The most extreme customer in the gaming department doesn't want to spend more than $600 in an outing. They consider anything past that to be a "waste" for a "toy."

If they move the PS3 to the computer department (where it belongs) or the home theater/video department, it might do better. In the gaming area, though, it's going to flop because there's absolutely no incentive to recommend it, from a retailer's point of view.

Why would I sell a $600 console alone when I can sell a $400 console plus $200 worth of accessories and earn a raise for myself?

Salespeople the world over are thinking the Exact. Same. Thing.

Many have already picked up on this (I haven't read all of the 100+ comments) but sony is now calling this thing is a computer. While in the technical sense it is (well.. a pocket calculator is one too) a computer, I don't think that they should be calling it that unless you can load pc games and other computer applications to it. I might actually be interested in buying one then. But that's only because my current ibm is a real piece of shoe and I dropped the horrable service to it ages ago.

I said might be interested because I have yet to find someone who's happy with their sony vaio computer. Admittedly I don't know very many who have one, but all (well... both) the people I've talked with who admitted to having a vaio, were more fed up with it than I am with my ibm(boy they went downhill too). So the big question is: seeing as though their video game console business is way more popular and profitable than their pc business, why in the hell would they want to make people think of this thing as a computer?

A Sony computer at that. It's not like they repaired the damage the vaio did to the sony name.
It's as if they called the PSP the new mini-disc player. I never found anyone happy with the minidisc player either.

#8: "If i wanted a "computer" I would spend $600 on a damn computer. I want a gaming console."

I really hope you're able to step back and see the ignorance displayed in that statement.

Yes Pedro, thats why I buy gaming consoles...for the "investment." :/

ZeroCorpse.....Bravo. Well said. Most people forget that it is the front line sellers that do a lot of the work. You have the power to suggest. We all sit here and chat about features, but the average consumer doesn't have a clue beyond the marketing materiel and the word of the Sales Associate.

i want a ps3, i'm just sad that i'll have to wait till 2009 to get one. follow the games, not the brand.

@ Canadian Geese:

#1 link: points to a blog site. This is neither technically correct or accurate as far as I'm concerned.

#2 Dennis Barker is a tool. He has provided inaccurate information in the past. Such as the last "story" I read from him stating the "PS3 Lite" won't even ship with a Bluray player. He reports that information as innacurately as you are. Nowhere does he state factual evidence and his articles are clearly laced with pure opinion.

#3-6 links: These all point to different products. Just because my Mazda comes with a rotary engine doesn't mean that your Mazda will. Pointing to another Bluray player and saying that it doesn't support this feature doesn't specifically mean the PS3 will also do the same. In fact, I'll wedge a bet to say that the drive in the PS3 is a later model than the one currently on the market. Not to even mention that the drive in the PS3 is completly different from the player.

yeah but if someone works at best buy... or gamestop... as i did, they really dont give a crap if one things sales or not since they get paid the same anyway. I'm sure most retail places in electronics are usually the same. So there is no difference in a PS3 sale or a Xbox360+200 worth of accessories sale anyway. The salesperson wont see a dime of that.

If it was me, i'd sell them the system that has the types of games they buy in abundance. If they just play madden and live... i'd say get whichever one you want. If they play a lot of JRPG's or such i'd say get a Ps2/3 whatever, if they like FPS and such get an Xbox/360. Simple as that and i never had one upset customer or return...that i knew about anyway heh.

Though this has probably been mentioned here before: if I'm not mistaken, the PS3 includes built-in wi-fi, which requires a $99 add-on for the 360 if you want the snazzy snap-on version. The PS3 will also have a hard drive three times the size of the 360's drive. So if you're really looking for parity, you'd need the 360 ($399) + wi-fi ($99) + HD-DVD (unclear, but probably not far below $199) + a larger drive (the 20GB model is $99 separately, so a 60GB upgrade could easily be $199). Bought separately, those things could add up to almost $900, and that still doesn't address the difference in things like USB ports, HDMI, and the fact that HD-DVD is ultimately an inferior format.

Of course, Microsoft will bundle many or all of those things in its next edition, and probably even shoot for beating the PS3's price, but then they'll be eating as much or more cost as Sony is, and I doubt they'll beat the price by much. Sony's pricing isn't so insane when you think about everything the PS3 will do.

What I find amusing is that so many people in a position to care about these things spent thousands on an HDTV that, for the most part, plays the same shows and movies (only bigger); many of whom sunk further thousands into high-end audio equipment; many of whom probably own multiple PCs; and yet are up in arms about paying a few hundred dollars for a device that does so much, which they'll probably use for the next five years.

PEDRO--

Love the artificial inflation, there.

You don't need WiFi in the 360. It's a 15-pound console. An ethernet cable works better, is cheaper, and most customers go with that and NOT with WiFi, as most people don't even have a wireless network at home. So scratch $100 from your silly little list.

The 20GB hard drive on my 360 is storing tons of saves (mostly for oblivion), Around a dozen game demos, around a dozen XBLA games, and a couple 720p movie trailers. No problem. I'm not too worried about getting a bigger hard drive yet. With the PS3, the hard drive size IS a concern because it's a DVR, and the hard drive will fast fill up with TV shows. On the 360, it's not a concern because I can always stream all that sort of thing from my computer's 150GB hard drive instead... Or I could attach a standard external USB drive... Or I could attach a 60GB iPod... etc. So saying storage space is an "added expense" is idiotic.

Live Silver is FREE. That's about the same as the "free" service on the PS3. I'm willing to bet that Sony's "Live-like" online service has plenty of fees for various things, but since we don't know, we can't say "it is free." -- So, for those who want to play online games, Xbox Live Gold is $49.99 a year, or $7.99 a month, while Sony's price remains to be seen. For people who just want to download demos and trailers and Live Arcade games, Xbox Live Silver is FREE.

Out the door, the premium Xbox 360 is $440 (figuring average tax). This is everything a person needs to play HD videogames, SD DVDs, and music CDs, as well as stream their music, movies, and pictures from their computer.

Out the door, the premium PS3 is $650 (figuring an average tax). This is also everything a person needs to play HD videogames, SD DVDs, and music CDs, with the bonus of playing Blu-Ray DVDs (but if you want high HD quality on those, you need a $50 HDMI cable, not included most likely).

The average customer is going to look at these and say "Why do I need blu-ray? What's that? Why does it make the game system $200 more?" and they'll opt for the 360, because at this point, about 75% of the people buying 360s (in my store, at least) don't even have an HDTV. What the hell do they need Blu-Ray for if they won't even be able to watch HD movies?

For the videophiles, the PS3 will be a hit. For the other 75% of the population, it will flop like a pancake.

Well that's good news to me. As much as I would love to plunk down $1000 plus to kick my entertainment habits into the HD era - I can't...at least not without the ensuing divorce papers. So, by Sony allowing all but the HD factor to be upgraded with their "core" system, I figure I'm saving a bit more than a hundred green backs for sure. Though there is still the matter of that other $500. Well, I do have a pretty comfortable sofa...

TO EVERYONE:

We'll see...

I keep seeing people bring up BetaMax but there is more recent history that fits what we are seeing so much more....

In the early 90's Sony and & Phillips backed the MultiMedia Compact Disc (MMCD). JVC, Philips, and others backed the Super Density Disc (SDD). Each side stood to gain significantly from royalties if their product was to become the standard. IBM's president brokered a deal between the two groups to avoid a format war. The MMCD standard was abadoned by Sony & Phillips after the SDD consortium made certain conscesions. Shortly later the SDD was rechristined the Digital Versitile Disk. Sony still gained financially off of the DVD but in no way close to if their format was the standard. With Sony still struggling financially (after a corporate shake up that ended up with our friend that thinks the PS3 is cheap being demoted) Sony is banking on the royalties from Blu-Ray.

Also here is a great article I came accross today about the PS3 price.
http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3030&Itemid=2

@ JJ-

I used to manage a FuncoLand... There's a world of difference between being a salesmonkey in GameStop and a salesperson in Best Buy, CompUSA, Circuit City, et. al...

Basically, in GameStop, they hire people, pay them crappy wages, and let the games sell themselves.

In big box stores, sales people are either on commission (Circuit City, if I'm not mistaken) or are heavily influenced by accessory sales. We know the profit margin of most of our product. We have to push for high accessory sale numbers to get better budgets for the department, and better raises for ourselves.

So, no... We most certainly do not "get paid the same either way." If I sell lots of accessories, my department gets praised, I get praised, I get rewards, and I get raises. In the big box stores, the salespeople are an asset. In GameStop/EB Games, the clerks are usually college kids who will be gone in a year or two, so they have no incentive to keep them around. They're expendable, cheap labor.

At FuncoLand, they rarely gave raises, and they made their profit by selling Naki cleaners and subscriptions. Now, at GameStop, you make your profit by selling subscriptions and discount cards. That's your upsell item. If you don't sell it, they write you up or you get sacked.

In big stores, we have to upsell a dozen different things with any console sale. Replacement plans, subscriptions, accessories of every kind, cables, batteries... It's all part of the bottom line, and YES they do pay attention. The people who remain in high positions in these kinds of stores are the ones who are good salespeople, who can keep profit margin high (which requires selling more than consoles alone. Consoles and games are PRICE LOCKED by their manufacturer. We make next to nothing on consoles) and who can get return business by offering knowledge and good customer service.

GameStop makes it by being a used/resale/pawn shop. Your mark-up on games you purchase from people is SO high, that there's no question of the company making a profit. Add in subscriptions, and there's little need to put GameStop clerks through extensive sales training. The place takes care of itself.

Been there, done that. It's a world of difference.

ZeroCorpse -- though you weren't referring to my post, let me clarify: I'm talking about parity with the PS3, NOT the likely "sweet spot" for the average consumer. Most people don't need HDMI, HD-DVD or Blu-ray, wi-fi or a larger hard drive, and for those people, the 360 may look like a better deal. The issue I and some others are addressing is what you get with the PS3 vs. the 360, in terms of features, and what it would cost to get the same features on both. Most people don't *need* to upgrade from their current console, at least until they retire this generation in a few years, so it's really a discussion of what enthusiasts want vs. what the average consumer wants anyway. I'm sure a lot of people will still end up owning every console of the next generation, as was the case with the current generation.

TC. You're right there are more recent examples of Sony formats and often failures. Off the top of my head there are;
-Betamax
-MMCD (as you stated)
-Mini-Disc (never took off)
-UMD (currently dying a slow death as studios abandon it)

What amazes is that Sony could get any backing for Blu-Ray based on past format history.

jason - My cell phone can play games, has a calculator, shows pictures, and can even access the web, but I'd never think of labeling it as a computer. In the same way, a game console is not synonymous with computer in the standard lexicon.

let me tell u how it is, how the average consumber thinks. not all this hdmi business.

the bottom line is ps3 is cooler than xbox 360.

and remember quality comes at a price, sony hdtvs are expensive, but everyone wants them because of their style and their quality.

even if u just look at the consoles. xbox 360 looks outdated and old in the designs, the ps3 looks sleek and expensive. as with the games, looks nicer. and you do realise the xbox 360 will never achieve 1080p x 60 frames per sec ever.

does the 20gb have the IEEE 802.11b/g (Wi-Fi)

don_sf.

I have a feeling that you're not correct there. While the coolness factor is important with the younger demographic, the parents that will buy the thing couldn't care less. Older console purchasers mostly don't care, they're interested in getting the best bang for their buck (value). While the case may be made that the multifunctional capabilities of the PS3 give it more value. Until Blu-Ray is a commonly accepted product and established it won't add any value and most, if not all, console purchasers already have a computer with an internet connection. Most people are just looking for something to play games on.

u add HD-dvd to x360= 100
xbox 360 + 20 g HDD= 400
addon 40 gHDD = 50
wifi = 100
online sunscription= 50* 5=300 (6years)
2 games 150

total expenditure = 1100

this is why i called MS xbox 360 as garbage box 360
xbox 360 suxxxx

MS suxxx

in 3-4 years range u wd be able to play a 200gb blu-ray disk on ps3

Prof-KOS - don't forget:

Sony's Root Kit
Sony PDA
Sony Connect online music service
Sony Walkman Bean
Sony Memory Stick

And has anyone figured out what that little IR port in the back of all my Sony gadgests (TV, DVD, ect) is for?

Jerm, while you're right to point that out. I was mentioning just the media formats. Those that you've mentioned would come under bad decisions.

ZeroCorpse

You are thinking like a cheap gamer buys things because of price not quality, functions and praticality. I have a wireless network, I will have a HDTV and I need the big hardrive. To put it bluntly if I am not looking to spend less,which in all theory I won't if I buy a 360, I am looking for the best and that is the PS3. Like, I said before it has everything I need and more, I can not say that for the 360. And reasonably price I might add.

If you want to be cheap buy a 360, if you want the best then buy a PS3.

I see the PS3 as being the dominant console of this generation. Not because of what the industry people have said, but because what people I know have said. In the highschool I go to not many people own a 360 and even less know what a wii is. Most of the people I talk to say they're getting a PS3. All they know is it costs $600, and they don't care. Most of them work summer jobs, and have no problem saving up and buying one. Some plan to wait out in a line for hours to get one, others plan to get one off ebay, a few plan to wait until it drops in price then get one, but of any console they say they want the PS3 the most. Alot of them still believe the PS3's controller is shaped like a boomerang, but don't care and still want it. I'm not sure why this is, but when I ask most have the same answer, PS3.

You all do understand you can still play games in high definition right? I own a HD TV and it dose not have HDMI and I will still be able to enjoy my games in HD. HDMI has nothing to do with that. The only reason you will really need HDMI is for its protection of HD movies incase they start implementing. Any one who says any thing different I would like you to do some research before posting. Oh and yes the price is very high. Sorry if you can not afford it. I still think the Xbox 360 was overpriced for what it is offering so far. Anyways I am not meaning to offend any one. I understand that some of you do not want what the PS3 is offering, but so far I am not interested in the Xbox's lack of offerings. SO can we all just play our games and leave each other alone..

I'm getting a little frustrated by all the complaints about the price from commenters, bloggers, and others. Yes, the PS3 will be very expensive for most people. Yes, you could very well end up paying just as much, if not more for a 360 over its lifespan. NO, neither company is screwing the consumer. We seem to forget a very important fact. These console manufacturers are - drumroll please........................ - businesses. The primary goal of a business is to make money. How can we expect companies to keep putting out great games and great game consoles if they're not seeing much of a profit from their efforts? It's funny how Nintendo will be selling essentially a Gamecube with a wireless motion-sensing controller for at least $120 more than a Gamecube costs now, and everyone raves about the great deal they're giving consumers. Meanwhile, Microsoft and Sony offer huge hardware upgrades, and people constantly whine about paying higher prices (yes, you whined about the $400 360 last year, and you know it). I know I sound really crazy when I say that inflation and monumental improvements in technology SHOULD make consoles today cost more than they did 10-15 years ago.

Also, people keep saying (this or something like it), "I'm a hardcore GAMER. I want a GAMING console." Just to let them in on the viewpoint of someone else... I am also a hardcore GAMER, and I would like a GAMING console with lots of bells and whistles. There is a market for this console, and it will do well regardless of what fanboys on sites such as this (that probably represent

For whatever reason, Joystiq's comment system is not letting me post the rest of my opinion (you know, the one above that ends abruptly and makes me sound retarded). Maybe it's because I mentioned Nintendo in a non-positive manner. ;)

@Jake
It's buggy, I've tried to post several responses but a good chunk seem to get lost.

All I have is component, so I guess I could buy the weaker version, but I would prefer to have the $600 version. So do you think they'll release a HDMI-to-component cable for someone who purchases the HDMI PS3 when all they have is a component HDTV?

I feel sorry for all of those people that believe Blu-ray is going to be the "next gen" DVD. HD DVD has all of the right components to beat out the competition. HD DVD players are far cheaper: Toshiba has them for 799.99 and 499.99 compared to Sony's at 1000.00. The physical media for HD DVD is cheaper to manufacture. Not a lot of funding needed to change the manufacturing process as well. Toshiba's HD DVD players have already been in the market. Ethernet input for firmware upgrade, Sony's player doesn't have that. The name "HD DVD" is consumer friendly. Triple layer HD DVD can hold 45GB. HD DVD is accepted by the DVD Forum. Several companies claiming blu-ray exclusiveness have switched to both camps.

All of these factors lead me to foresee HD DVD as the winner. REMEMBER VHS VS SONY BETA-MAX?

@jake.

Just to clear this up quickly, im no fanboy if you have read any of my posts, but to call the Wii a gamecube + $120 is stupid. Additions, controller, new cpu, new gpu, more 1T-SRAM(the best imo) wi-fi included etc etc.

Anyway, to whoever said that PS3 will sell because people think its COOL, more power to ya because you are right, plain and simple. The average gamer will believe that PS3 is PS2 with mucho bells and whistles, whatever we say on these forums, we are the minority.

Jesus christ! Why are people acting like $600 is like a million fucking dollars? I'm a college student with a little over a minimum wage job and I can AFFORD a PS3 by doing a tiny bit of saving. Now I'm not trying to justify the price because I also think that $600 is kind of steep but it's not the end of the world. I mean these "PS3 sucks!!" comments are probably coming from people that own $400 X360's and buy a new $300 overpriced pice of shit Ipod everytime a new one comes out. I guess what I'm really trying to say is...IF YOU DON'T WANT IT, DON'T BUY IT, AND STOP BITCHING! Show Sony your internet geek-rage by buying a 360 or Wii instead and leave it at that.

The arguements never really seem to change. Addressing the 360 vs PS3 similar graphics. Yes you have seen the videos and devs describing not that much difference from the released 360 and the severly underpowered, not up to spec, PS3 alpha kit.Developers also stated that in comparison to the 360 the ps3 is more difficult to program for. Also devs commented on not recieving better support from Sony. Similar graphics at this stage of the game actually bodes well for the power of the PS3 and its performance.

"I'm not alone on this one. Most associates I've spoken to have said that they feel no real desire to sell the PS3 when it's going to screw with our accessory sales and leave customers with a $600 system that they'll feel buyer's remorse over"

They'll feel buyers remorse over? As we can see you clearly wish the best for the consumer while standing on the fence in this matter.


As stated before and I will bring up this issue until people pay attention, more devs are starting to fill and surpass the space in dvd9 disks. I would rather hd-dvd or blu ray built into the systems. People say they want a gaming console not a all-in-one entertainment device thats why they would rather a HD-dvd add on. But chances are if you do not buy it first, game devs wont plan on making thier games take addvantage of it. So as long as the device remains as an add-on, of course it will not be related to games.


Apparently Sony and Philips dropped thier MMCD because Thier deal makes sure DVD's includes the major differences that seperated the formats in the first place.

"The first one was the adoption of a pit geometry that allows "push-pull" tracking, a proprietary Philips/Sony technology. The second modification was the adoption of Philips' EFMPlus. EFMPlus, created by Kees Immink, who also designed EFM, is 6% less efficient than Toshiba's SD code, which resulted in a capacity of 4.7GB as opposed to SD's original 5GB. The great advantage of EFMPlus is its great resilience against disc damage such as scratches and fingerprints."

And last but not least Sony's failed formats.... I could have sworn I addressed this before but I guess people don't like to leave thier Sony bashing pedastools. This is the last I am going to speak on this subject so I am going to try to make this one as clear as possible.

People are harping on the failed formats but they fail to see why those formats failed and why they do not apply to Blu ray.

Betamax - Proprietary sony tech - Sony's arrogance lead to them not sharing this tech while JVC did effectivly ending the format war.

UMD - Proprietary sony tech - Can only play in PSP. Movies initially cost as much as DVD's. IMO that was the dumbest choice I have ever seen. Obviously those lead to the support of that format dying.

MiniDisc - Proprietary sony tech - Bad choice to market it to consumers. Provided no real advancements in casual performance. Live stage musicians still use this technology in abundance.

Blu Ray - NOT Proprietary sony tech - Has a more Bigger companies supporting this format. The technology is foward moving (just like HD-dvd) and serves more purpose because of larger capacity.


HD DVD

* Canon Inc.
* Digital Theater Systems
* Hitachi Maxell, Ltd.
* Kenwood Corporation
* Mitsubishi Kagaku Media Co., Ltd.
* NEC Corporation
* Onkyo Corporation
* Paramount Home Entertainment
* Sanyo Electric Co., Ltd.
* Teac Corporation
* Toshiba Corporation
* Universal Pictures
* Warner Home Video Inc.

blu ray

* Apple Computer, Inc.
* Dell Inc.
* Hewlett Packard Company
* Hitachi, Ltd.
* LG Electronics Inc.
* Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.
* Mitsubishi Electric Corporation
* Pioneer Corporation
* Royal Philips Electronics
* Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
* Sharp Corporation
* Sony Corporation
* TDK Corporation
* Thomson Multimedia
* Twentieth Century Fox
* Walt Disney Pictures

No Matter who wins I just hope a next gen format "does" win. The arguement you have no use for it now doesn't make sense. People had no use for DVD's when that format dropped but after the prices lowered dramatically everyone uses dvd's and I am pretty sure the majority of people do not want to go back to the VHS format.

Honestly, only a company like Sony would do something like this -- I thought memory cards were a standard with consoles, and hard drives a luxary. Was I inncorrect? And its like a computer -- so what, we have to take it apart and put the bigger hard drvie in there? Isn't that kinda of...well...like a PC? What if you lack the knowledge to do that?

Honestly, Sony, this is just stupid. I honestly was thinking about buying a PS3 -- honestly, I was. But now it's just a rip-off -- and it even RIPPED off The Wii (or, rather, tried. But it looks like Sony just keeps on coping -- and it paid them last time. They can't even have rumble now).

MS and Nintendo will rule.

Some of the complaints here are just ridiculous. The $500 PS3 pack will get you 1080p output over component for games, and 720p/1080i output for movies over component. If you want to be sure of 1080p movie playback - if 1080p Blu-ray movie playback means THAT much to you - then I'm sure you'll have absolutely no difficulty handing over $600 for the HDMI-enabled pack, given that equivalent dedicated players might run you twice as much or more.

Stop the bitching, please, it's getting ridiculous. The $500 should be fine unless you care about 1080p Blu-ray movie playback, in which case - AGAIN - $600 should be a bargain for you.

Oh, and to upgrade the HDD you simply remove the old one from the slot on the side and insert a new one. If you can put a VHS tape into a machine, you can upgrade a PS3 HDD. It's not a closed system you have to open up, there's a slot on the side.

And why do you want proprietary memory cards when you can use a regular USB flashdisk for portable data, and theirs a HDD as standard if you don't need data portability?

No one has mentioned the most important point. When the average consumer walks into the store to buy a next gen console, they are going to walk in to the store look and look at the games. For Sony's sake the games better look $200 better than whats on 360. Given the fact that the PS3 GPU is purportedly inferior to the 360's doesn't bode well for Sony. The average consumer doesn't know what the tech specs are. They will go by their first impression. There are gamers that think the PS2 is more powerful than the Gamecube and X-box. We know this isn't true but these are the people that Sony have to convince to part with $600.

quoted from #46:

"In my opinion, anyone who purchased an XBOX 360 took the same type of gamble that PS3 purchasers will take on Blu Ray. However, with all the major movie companies backing it I don't see that as much of a gamble."


Anybody here remember Dreamcast vs. PS2? Man, these guys have short term memorys. And how short-sighted can you be? PS3 will drop in price in 12 months or less from launch, regardless of sales figures. Take a freaking economics class!!! Wii will do well with their gimicks, but won't translate into the profits that Sony will enjoy yet again over the next 6+ years. Poor Microsoft, I hope they can get it together. They have such great potential. When do you think their Blu-Ray add-on will come out? 2008?

PS2 vs DC? Not the same. SEGA was deeply in debt. They ran out of money. In fact, they practicaly cut the DC's specs in half because they just didn't have the cash. The DC was supposed to have twice the ram and two PowerVR Gen 2 GPUs but thats another topic. The PS3 will drop in price? Of course it will but the simple fact of the matter is that is starting off at twice the price of PS2. It is going to take longer for them to get the PS3 to a mass market price. It will take them longer to make an actual profit of the sale of the PS3 unit itself. This will effect Sony's ability to match the 360 in price. Add to that the PSP which they have yet to make a profit off. They are still losing money on each PSP sold. I think that, more than the Blu-Ray drive is the reason Sony isn't able to come down in price. If the 360 takes of in the US and Europe this fall, and I think it will. Sony will find themselves in an N64 situation. The Wii is poised to have DS like success in Japan. Sony is going to get squeezed from both sides. They have put themselves in an awkward position. No one loses the market leadership in the videogame industry they self destruct by becoming arrogant. It happened with Atari, it happened with Nintendo, and its happening with Sony as we speak.