A look at how the PS3 got to be $600
While the entire internet (at least the gaming part) continues to reel from Sony's $600 price announcement, we have to consider just how it came to be that the video game console leader decided to create such an expensive piece of machinery. There's no confusing this: Sony has known for some time that the PlayStation 3 would cost more than any game system before it (two jobs, remember?). But what corporate machinations influenced that decision?
Last week, Next Generation ran a fascinating article written by David Cole, of strategic market research firm DFC Intelligence, following the circumstance that resulted in the unpopular price tag. With the growing homogenization of consumer technology, and increased competition, Sony -- under the direction of Ken Kutaragi as head of Sony's semiconductor operations -- looked to custom-built technology like the Cell processor and Blu-ray to distinguish their product from the others (compare this to Microsoft's more nimble strategy of outsourcing the 360's chip-design to IBM).
Kutaragi was demoted after being passed over for the role of CEO and, when former Sony Pictures head Howard Stringer assumed the position, the relationship between the content and technology divisions of Sony became even more intimate. Stringer "quickly dubbed the PlayStation 3 as one of the company's 'champion' products." Kutaragi's desire to stratify the console market with Cell technology in effect wed Sony to the unpalatable prospect of charging an unprecedented price. Coupled with Sony's desire to not only push their own content on HD discs, but to control that medium with their proprietary Blu-ray format, the final price was escalated by two very advanced (and very expensive) pieces of Sony technology.
Continue reading for some thoughts on why the price may not matter ...
During the hectic Xbox 360 holiday shopping craze, Slate's "Everyday Economist" Tim Harford wondered, considering the prices they were fetching on eBay, "Why doesn't Microsoft price them at $700 instead?" Microsoft was already losing money on every console sold and, as a public company, that's got to be a hard thing to shrug off. If 360s were netting in excess of $700 on eBay, shouldn't Microsoft have taken advantage of that demand to help offset the initial investment?
Like consumer electronics (DVD or, perhaps, Blu-ray players), prices start off high -- appealing to the early-adopter audience who absorb the brunt of the cost -- only to lower to more palatable mass-market prices once efficiencies of scale are reached and manufacturing processes are streamlined. Sony could be modeling their admittedly very high-tech PS3 after this model (which has earned them some small amount of success in the similarly competitive world of consumer electronics), opting for more gradual price adjustments instead of the long term static prices we're used to today.
The problem is, if Sony chooses to follow this model (that is, if the price will drop after initial peak demand is fulfilled and then continue to drop) will consumers know enough to base their purchasing decisions on that future possibility when an Xbox 360 will cost them significantly less now? In a follow up to his Xbox 360 piece, Slate's Harford returned to the question with some more input on the high demand on eBay being related to the paucity of gamers willing to resell their newly earned 360s: "only a few consoles are up for sale and only the most desperate buyers compete for them. If more people put their consoles up for auction, the price would drop."
If consumer perception reflects a belief that Sony's price will remain static, a larger worry for Sony may be waning publisher support. With next-gen development costs increasing, it will be proportionally difficult to persuade publishers to isolate their titles to one platform, especially when that platform is being sold as a (relatively cheap) next-gen movie player and not a gaming console. As Cole concludes in Next Generation, "The PlayStation 3 needs to justify its price difference as a game machine." They haven't done that yet ... but there's still time.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 5)
Pardon my grammer @ May 27th 2006 4:07PM
It got blu-ray, that's why it cost to much.
Myke @ May 27th 2006 4:13PM
seriously folks, i'm not going to be purchasing a ps3, i'll get a Wii and a 360 but still, i'm getting pretty tired of hearing about how much the playstation will cost and why and what makes it a good value and what makes it a rip-off, etc. it's getting old, lets find something else to talk about eh?
Draco @ May 27th 2006 4:14PM
The Blu-Ray drive isnt even the most expensive part. isnt the Cell chip costing more to make?
the way I see it is, like blu-ray players and HD-DVD drives, within a couple years the PS3 will be really cheap, probably on par with the Xbox (which will be much cheaper by then) it's only really the first 10 million or so consoles that will probably cost that much.
I expect the price to manufacture the Cell Proccessor to drop very quickly, same with the Blu-Ray drive if it the medium gets any traction.
I wouldn't be suprised if by 2008 they are selling PS3's for 200$ US and the Xbox360 is like 179-189$ (premium for both)
cyrix_0 @ May 27th 2006 4:14PM
People Do understand there is a $499 version aswell..
So whats the fuss over this $599
I mean if you want the Extra features then pay the Extra to get it...its worth it for the extra $100 if you looking down that route..
I mean this moaing about the price is just getting pointless fanboy banter...
Is the PS3 worth it for $499....
my answer would be YES...
Look at what you getting before you start comparing...
andrew smith @ May 27th 2006 4:20PM
i'm not sure about the rest of you but i would pay well over 600$ to be able to place a cell processor and a blu ray drive into my computer.
maybe that just how i see that its worth the money
LuckyT @ May 27th 2006 4:21PM
Blu-ray may become more important as part of the games machine, and not just as a HD movie player, than people think. There's rumours floating around about some of the games that have been mysteriously announced for PS3, and not other platforms - rumours that their developers are hesitant to confirm other versions because of disc space concerns. If these are true, well..Sony was right to put it in there, for the sake of PS3 as a games machine if nothing else.
Myke @ May 27th 2006 4:22PM
#4, if you dont WANT what they've added for "value" then there's no point in buying one for that amount of money. Yes, if you're looking for the bells and whistles then it makes it affordable and a value but if you just plain DON'T WANT anything besides a good, next-gen gaming machine then you won't be buying a PS3.
Lenbot @ May 27th 2006 4:25PM
uhhh ya tell us something most gamers didn't know :P
the console isn't even out yet if The graphics blow 360 of the water and developers want to develope on it because it's easier than the 360 all this speculation will be blown away because developers will want to because it's easy and people want to own it because its digital perfection.
voice of reasonn @ May 27th 2006 4:26PM
personally i believe the main reason that most of the casual audience bought the ps2 at all was only because of the dvd player, but the jump from dvd to blue-ray means pretty much nil to the avaage person and a large portion of the ps2 userbase probably will not find that the ps3 is even worth 600 bucks to them.
Someone @ May 27th 2006 4:33PM
I'm guessing that most Xbox 360 owners and PS3 owners here will want online play.
Xbox 360 + 4 years Xbox Live Gold = $600
PlayStation 3 + Free online play = $600
Nick Simpson @ May 27th 2006 4:37PM
I guess I agree with number 7. The idea of the ps3 and 360 being under $200 by 2008 seems pretty ridiculous to me, seeing as the ps2 and xbox are still about $130 each.
I just figure the more work developers have to put into using these new graphics and technologies, the less work will go into good scripts, ideas, and mechanics.
Also its a serious hurt to the casual and younger gamers who can't afford anything near that. I dunno, blu-ray good... cell bad. Couldn't they have found a cheaper way to do 1080p and HDMI?
Momus @ May 27th 2006 4:37PM
8. Lenbot,
The PS3 has already garnered a reputation for being a nightmare to develop for.
ac @ May 27th 2006 4:40PM
The only thing that i like bout microsoft is that they made their nxt gen dvd player OPTIONAL, so we didnt have to pay 500-600 bux @ launch, maybe sony should do the same
Pedro @ May 27th 2006 4:41PM
I knew joystig had to make something anti-sony for today. You can't just leave the PS3 alone can you. What has sony done to you, if you don't like the price don't buy it. You know the PS3 is worth every penny. We are tired of your whining and negativity towards the PS3 this needs to stop.
Is funny how you throw in the 360 nimble strategy. Sony wants to inovate not delegate, cell and blu-ray are examples of that, even if you don't want to admit that they are. Developer support is neve going to wane. The PS3 is going to sell stop being microsoft bitches, this is geting old. Every day you got to make some shit up, why I don't know. You are not going to change anybody's mind about the PS3 people are going to buy it. But you are changing our opinions about you. You are nothing but MS bitches doing your pimp's demands.
Nick @ May 27th 2006 4:42PM
Interesting point 10... And while I realize online play is the main aspect of Xbox Live, theres more to it than that which I'm skeptical of Sony being able to pull off.
voice of reasonn @ May 27th 2006 4:42PM
nintendo wi-fi looks promising...
Xbox 360 + 4 years Xbox Live Gold = $600
PlayStation 3 + Free online play = $600
Wii + free online play = $200
Ianc02 @ May 27th 2006 4:45PM
PS3 is $lots. Yeah yeah.
Everyone and his wife has complained, yeah yeah. WE UNDERSTAND ITS CHEAP FOR WHAT YOU ARE GETTING. Trouble is, not everybody wants whats inside the PS3. Quite a lot of PS fans just want a souped up PS2 with online-ability. Sony you are foolish, as it seems Microsoft are doing now what you should have been doing in the first place. You should do a non BD-Rom version for say $349 and keep your $599 version as is.
As for the eBayers, FOOLS.
So anyway, Cell, Blu-ray, HDMI, HDD, Bluetooth, RSX etc etc etc $599 is cheap, be honest haters. I'm no fan really, but this IS good value, seriously.
vidGuy @ May 27th 2006 4:48PM
The hardcore gaming community, Sony fans or not, would buy the PS3 if it was $1000.
But does anybody outside that group realize what they are getting for $599? No. I've never heard anyone outside a select group quote tech specs as a reason for getting a gaming console. Hell, the general public doesn't care what their computer processor is or how much RAM they have in a PC, they just want to be able to do things: Internet, email, word processing. They could have a 4.0 GHz processor and 2 GB of ram, and they would still do the same low-level tasks.
The reason everybody is up in arms about the PS3 price is because, generally speaking, people don't look at the specs but only the fact that it is a "video game system". To the general public, XBOX 360 and PS3 are equals; neither is missing out on a feature that is important to play games. With very few successful 1st party titles on either system (number of franchises, not sales dollars), there's only a hand full of games that an owner of one console would be missing out on by not owning the other system as well.
When you aren't making it clear what consumer benefit the price premium over the competition is delivering, you are setting yourself up to be a market loser. When the benefit you are delivering is something that consumers in general don't want, you are setting yourself up to be a market failure.
I don't think the PS3 will fail. However, I do think it will have the worst launch of the three consoles. There needs to be a compelling reason to plop down that much cash, and Sony isn't providing that reason, as far as I can see.
Once the PS3 can be had for sub-$400, sales will sky-rocket, aided by the swelling library that will no doubt be available. But I look for Nintendo to kill them for the next year or so, aided by a market-friendly ~$200 price tag and positive news-spin. The 360 will no doubt see sales rise even further when the price drops and in the weeks around Halo 3's release.
Capt. Castellanos @ May 27th 2006 4:50PM
to #16
yes, the nintendo wi-fi DOES look promising.
and thats a reason i'm of course getting it.
but i dunno.
PS3 online play is sure to do better.
and so might XBOX 360.
but i know that the Wii WILL be more fun.
at least... i hope so!
my list of gaming!
Wii
PS3
Computer
no XBOX.
voice of reason @ May 27th 2006 4:51PM
oh no, its that stupid sony fanboy again....
i guess i must submit myself to his ultimate source of all wisdom and knowledge.
please no fanboyism.... it helps no one, least of all yourself
C. Grant @ May 27th 2006 4:52PM
#1 & #2: YEAH GUYS LETS NOT TRY AND UNDERSTAND WHY THE SYSTEM COSTS AS MUCH OR WHY THEY MADE THAT DECISION IF ITS BETTER THEN YOU CAN BUY IT I MEAN REALLY LOLLERZBBGROFLWAFLWTF?
#3: According to ML's (admittedly dubious) study, BR is more expensive than Cell.
#4: The PS3 costs $500 like the Xbox 360 costs $300. There's $200 price delta between the two, that's the point. That withstanding, $500 is an unprecedented price for a console, a 25% premium over the next highest console.
Rob X. @ May 27th 2006 4:52PM
"Like consumer electronics (DVD or, perhaps, Blu-ray players), prices start off high -- appealing to the early-adopter audience who absorb the brunt of the cost -- only to lower to more palatable mass-market prices once efficiencies of scale are reached and manufacturing processes are streamlined."
This strategy seems like it could only work for a couple of launches. If people get the idea that this is the new normal launching procedure, then the demand will be reduced for every subsequent launch while more people wait for the price to drop. While this seems to be taking advantage of the more traditional law of supply and demand, another company will price their system as a major loss leader again and we'll end up where we were before.
"Xbox 360 + 4 years Xbox Live Gold = $600
PlayStation 3 + Free online play = $600"
Except Sony's non-support of online connectivity doesn't even compare to X-Box Live. I hate to sound like an MS fanboy, but Live is possibly the best online experience for connectivity with friends across games (and in the future, across platforms).
SuicideNinja @ May 27th 2006 4:53PM
"Look at what you getting before you start comparing..."
That's the problem. What are we getting? E3 didn't show us that we are getting much. I'm ready to play some FFXIII and all, but that was about it from E3. But I already knew that before I even saw the game. We get weak motion sensing. Yippee.
Bluray and HD-DVD are both an over-priced crock. There are cheaper alternatives but they want to do it the hard way. If I wanted a damn Bluray or HD-DVD player, I would buy a quality dedicated one.
The $499 model without HDMI cripples it future-wise. To my chagrin, HDMI (with HDCP) are going to end up being the standard for A/V connections. If that stupid security token ever gets implemented (likely), then kiss 720p & 1080p goodbye for the core model. At least that won't happen for a couple of years.
Sony is pushing all sorts of things that we don't need. We want to game. We don't need a media server/linux box/bluray player frankensteined mediocre-at-everything-quality-at-nothing device (like the PSP I just bought). We just want to play the damn games.
They should have just dropped the damn bluray player and put dual Cells in there. Imagine 2 cores and 12-14 usable SPE's. Then not only would it justify the price, it would kick the competition's ass.
Myke @ May 27th 2006 4:55PM
"All these people talking about BluRay not being needed are the same idiots with VHS in 1999 saying they didn't need DVD in the PS2."
Yeah, and all the people standing in line for a Blueray Player, i mean a PS3, will be the ones that were first in line for the Betamax....by the way, how well did that do?
As FatSonyFanboy said, History Repeats Itself
Joebediah @ May 27th 2006 4:57PM
Anyone who gets defensive about anything they have yet to throw their own money at and experience is a dumbass.
Just like what you like, and dislike what you dislike. This isn't sports people, you don't need to attach yourselves to videogame companies.
You don't need to stick up for these multi-billion dollar companies!!
Masaki @ May 27th 2006 4:57PM
At that price it better come with a happy ending!
...And a monitor!
voice of reason @ May 27th 2006 4:58PM
the problem i have is that a large portion of what you are paying is not giving us any better of a gaming experience than we had last generation.
sure you are getting a good deal for what you are buying, but in a few years time when blue-ray is more practical and wide spread it will cost MUCH less. and then you can buy a blue-ray player for $200. the ps3 will only be a good value until blue-ray players are more wide spread, and until they are more wide spread, you really wont be getting as much usage out of them because not everything is conveniently able to make the jump to blue ray until everyone has a player.
Thain @ May 27th 2006 4:59PM
I'm just interested to see if Carmack's predictions prove true. If the Cell is as difficult to program for as he predicts, Sony's going to lose all but their most ardent third-parties, and the library shrink is REALLY going to hurt their long-term sales.
leojsoap @ May 27th 2006 5:02PM
Hmm, how many people here have an HDTV?
not me, I know two people that have HD, only one is a gamer.
Will I have HD in five or six years from now?
yep, prices will go down,
Will the PS4 be here in five or six years from now?
I would expect such.
I just don't understand, HDTV has such a small share in home television right now, by the time it matures the next gen of gaming will be here, making the PS3 fairly pointless as far as mass appeal goes.
Rob X. @ May 27th 2006 5:03PM
18:"All these people talking about BluRay not being needed are the same idiots with VHS in 1999 saying they didn't need DVD in the PS2.
Too bad Sony was solely responsible for bringing DVD into the mainstream when stand alone players were $200+ and the technology wasn't even certain to stick around."
Incorrect, it was very certain to stick around. As a technology that was very much a major step forward from VHS and did not require a whole new television for most people, DVD was guaranteed to succeed. The technology had already been around for a year once the PS2 was released. Including DVD playback in the PS2 at a price point of $300 made DVD a great bonus for people who didn't even want to play games.
In Blu-ray's case, it's not a major step at all. The average consumer does not have the TV to take advantage of it. Sony is pricing it so that the player is no longer "free" and there is already competition out there that features less DRM, is cheaper and, for the layman, has a better name (HD-DVD for your HDTV is so much better than Blu-Ray).
james f. @ May 27th 2006 5:07PM
Wow the ps3fanboys have come out swinging in these comments!
And man you really have to be a fanboy to be supportive of the egofest that's giving birth to the ps3. To comment on the actual post at hand it's pretty easy to see why the Ps3 reached it's dangerous price point. Even at $499 it's non competitvely high and everyone knows that. As far as the price coming down, dont count on it. As it takes lots of sales of those proprietary components to drive costs down.
Sony has just gotten plain arrogant across the board. As much as they seem to want to be Apple they just can't seem to make it happen. Ten years ago every consumer electronics item in my home was either sony or "to be replaced" by sony. Now I can't think of one sony item on my wish list. Why? Beacuase quite simply there's no Sony anything that isn't better value or better constructed somewhere else.
Id like a ps3 for a small few games but not enough to plunk down 500+ dollars on. Blu-ray is nice but the blue laser format war is one that everyone will lose on.
If anyone could plainly show me(not usuing the word "if") that Sony ISN'T arrogant(not greedy because obviously ms, nintendo and sony are all greedy) and anti-consumer/gamer Id really like to believe it. By pushing their proprietary tech on us they are quite likely to cripple or kill thier companies very last golden goose, the playstation name.
SymetriX @ May 27th 2006 5:13PM
Does the PS3 play games?
Jerome Demers @ May 27th 2006 5:15PM
#27 - first of all they won't have a PS4 because 4 is a bad luck number in japanese or chinese.
I agree with number #18 people see the PS3 has a gameconsole and that is it.
I wonder if sony will drop the price for november.
Right now people all over the web are talking about the ps3 price! Everywere! If the price drop people will be like WOW MAN! A sort of publicity stunt... :)
kyle @ May 27th 2006 5:17PM
ps3's cell chip is the most expensive thing in it, it costs 300$+
the blu-ray is the next expensive
and after tht is the hd and motherboard and stuff
tht is y it is so god dam expensive
Myke @ May 27th 2006 5:24PM
Fat Sony Fanboy - I'm sorry that I'd rather spend my money on something like a vacation to Hawaii or doing things with my friends instead of living in my mom's basement staring at a 56" screen and a $600 dollar console like you. Get off your lazy ass and do something with your life. Videogames are supposed to be a fun hobby, not something to center your life around. Maybe you need to walk outside and let the sun shine on your acne-ridden face and snap back to a reality where people dont blow thousands of dollars on consoles and tv's just to be able to USE those consoles.
Fat people make me sick.
du_ma @ May 27th 2006 5:27PM
most of the people here are missing something very vital. THE XBOX 360 IS NON-EXISTANT IN JAPAN!
There is no way that the PS3 will fail. it could survive (but not prosper) on Japanese support alone. People are forgetting about the Japanese here. The theory that John Carmack throws out is a BS view by an American game designer. Sony can pretty much take all Japanese developers and let M$ take all of the US publishers and Sony would come out on top. FPS is considered a joke in Japan and that is the majority of 360 titles produced by American companies, just as the Anime style game characters are considered a joke here in the US. Japanese developers are never going to develop games on the 360 because the Xbox has been a complete failure in Japan and the user base in relation to the PS3 will be a huge dispartiy over there. Sony will never lose their Japanese 3rd-party support because of this fact alone.
Laughing is Optional @ May 27th 2006 5:32PM
I was in the Sony camp until the price was announced. Sorry, too expensive. Maybe I'll catch you guys in the next generation. But this time around i'm in the Nintendo and Microsoft camp.
Dave @ May 27th 2006 5:34PM
Wouldn't people who could afford PS3 also afford a 360? Poor people make me sick as well, but I doubt anyone involved in this industry is poor.
vidGuy @ May 27th 2006 5:35PM
du_ma, you have a point but you are forgetting Nintendo. XBOX won't sell in Japan but Nintendo will (the DS lite is selling for more than the 360 over there).
Sure, Japan will be big sales for the PS3, but not as big as they want and hope for. And with all the wacky games that come out of Japan, I'd imagine that most gamers are going to be falling over themselves to get ahold of the Nintendo Wii.
Rob X. @ May 27th 2006 5:37PM
34. "most of the people here are missing something very vital. THE XBOX 360 IS NON-EXISTANT IN JAPAN!"
Which is why I think Nintendo will be the worldwide leader in the gaming industry though the 360 will be first among the Western world. The issue is that Sony is focusing at trying rule the next-gen video media industry by abusing their position as the current worldwide #1 video game system. They may end up losing both battles.
JetJaguar @ May 27th 2006 5:39PM
For the most part I'm with James F... except for one point: Sony haven't gotten arrogant; they've always been arrogant (and I'm a PS2 owner and fan, by the way).
What's changed, as James F points out, is the quality (and price) of the products manufactured by their competitors and consumers' awareness of this.
We all now know that a cheap, no-name-brand DVD player costing £29 will last as long and work as well as Sony's finest £80 effort. Indeed, it may last longer and work better ("disk read error" anyone)!
The same thing, of course, has happened in the car market. Mercedes used to be a byword for quality (witness the large number of Mercedes used as taxis around the world). But now the three pointed star is a byword for cheap parts-bin components and recalls. Instead, if you want a car that's going to start come rain or shine you buy a Toyota or a Honda (when I bought my 'lude a couple of years ago my friends mocked the velour interior and the absence of alloy wheels, but conceded that it would always turn over when I turned the key).
But I digress... My main point, my hobby horse, is that Sony is beginning to embody everything that marks out an 'old economy' company. They're trading off a reputation that fewer and fewer consumers (not gamers, I might add) care about. To my mind their best bet is to either go mass market and quit charging the premium price, or to move upmarket and compete with the B&Os and Boses of this world. It's clear to me that they're trying, unsuccessfully, to have the best of both worlds.
The other thing they need to do, and I've bored for England on this point before, is separate their content and hardware arms. This obsession with proprietary software is a clear sign that the content tail is wagging hardware dog.
theone @ May 27th 2006 5:41PM
i dont know if yall have actually seen ps3 screen shots but they look amazing. All in all the ps3 is worth 500 or 600 hundred dollars. It is just a matter of whether or not you want to spend it. And i would say it is a bad idea to make hd dvd or blueray or even a hard drive optional cause if they were optional then game developers cant use them. Last who cares if game developers have a hard time make games. These games are 60+ dollars. I hope they work their asses off for those prices.
du_ma @ May 27th 2006 5:43PM
vidGuy, your point is correct but in my opinion, the Wii and PS3 cater to two different markets. I have no doubt that Wii will succeed in Japan because of the success of the DS. Japanese love their quirky game titles. On the other hand, PS3 caters to the crowd that wants the top of the line gadgetery and hi-end HD graphics. there is no competition for Sony in this regard in Japan. Both Nintendo and Sony are going to do very well this generation. They arent competitng against each other.
One last thing and lets not forget, anyone wanting to play Final Fantasy (the true series game and not the spinoffs) and Dragon Quest games must own a PS3 in order to do so, meaning that huge system sales will derive based on these games alone.
quezcatol @ May 27th 2006 5:45PM
None of us here is lazy,and btw 600 euro=750USD,and not including high european taxes,could land on 800 dollar+...
I cant afford that,and sure i could lend money from some people or work for it,i wont.
No ps3 titles make me want to buy it for that price in any near future.
MGS4 will prob hit europe in 2008,i can wait until then...
I also hate this talkin about being worth its price for also being a blu-ray movie player.
Well that pisses me off,i could find dvd's for 1000 dollars when xbox and ps2 released,and now i can find decent players for 50-100 dollars.
And no,those dvd's was never worth 1000 dollars.
Stop talk trash sony,you yourself put the value on your blu-ray and then talk about value.
Its like me selling stuff from my junk claiming its worth millions and if you buy it today you can have it for perhaps 10.000 USD.
:P
Anyway i hope SONY realise they made a big misstake and lower their price FAST!
alex @ May 27th 2006 5:57PM
*generic sound of displeasure*
*generic dissection of topic*
*generic self-congratulatory statement*
Darth Pixel @ May 27th 2006 6:09PM
Xbox 360 has all the bells.
Wii has all the whistles.
PS 3 has all the bells AND whistles.
That's why it costs more.
Also Blu-ray is less proprietary than HD-DVD.
Proof:
http://www.blu-raydisc.com/general_information/Section-14009/Index.html
http://www.hddvdprg.com/about/member.html
jigzat @ May 27th 2006 6:09PM
People are stuck in BR-DVD discution. BR-DVD is just a media as HD-DVD DVD and DL-DVD. PS3 ability to play BR-DVD movies is basically a software matter. Today games are starting to fill a DL-DVD and next-get video games with its graphics and content (MMORPGS) will take more space and they all need next gen dvd media. Microsoft plan to add HD-DVD player as an add on is a mistake (read sega genesis, atari jaguar) gamming console believe it or not is not a PC (as is) . I dont want to add stuff like that . Sure PS3 is also a trojan horse into HD Movies just as ps2 with dvd but is not a bad idea after all. i dont have yet a BR-DVD player but sure i want one and if ps3 can do that as good as a dedicated player (not like ps2 lame dvd player wich i acctually use in my bedroom) it worth the money, if not i dont care. Sure i will apreciate a price dropp but if also i get free online playing i have no doubts about me buying a PS3. I am more worried about the absence of DualShock.
Dont need a BR-DVD Player, Flash media reading wi-fi? "buy 499"
Have extra cash ? "buy 599" and "Buy Wii"
Are you insanely rich "buy 360 599 and Wii"
PD: BR-DVDs movies with content protection and downgrade will come in 2012 by then we will start hearing about PS4 and the dead of one gamming console manufacter and you will have a dusty dedicated BR-DVD player on your room
Jim @ May 27th 2006 6:11PM
The 599 price is fine when you consider getting a Blu-ray-player. I on the other hand believe in standalone HiFi-components, so that's a non-factor to me.
As a Blu-ray-Player + Gaming Machine the PS3 price is pricey but OK.
As a Gaming Machine it's simply too expensive.
Platinum Slime @ May 27th 2006 6:12PM
Sony would do well to educate themselves with the tale of Icarus. I know Nintendo has... and I don't mean the inclusion of Pit in the Wii SSBM. =)
alex @ May 27th 2006 6:12PM
Darth Pixel:
Since when does PS3 have any goddamn whistles?
Since you're comparing it to the Wii, I mean.
It's got 'innovative new gameplay' scenarios.
Like Real Time Weapon Switch.
It costs more because Sony hasn't revealed the final secret:
The Flux-Capacitor PRO DUO.
This, along with the newly christened speedholes in every unit will allow for 'unprecedented' reality synthesizing.