Sony criticizes Xbox 360 movie and TV downloads

@fiasco8

You fail at analogies. Here let me help you out.

It's like selling a customer an Acura (Xbox) or a BMW (Sony). One comes with luxaries standard, the other you pay for each luxary you want. Sure the Acura starts off lower in price than the BMW, but thats because the base BMW model has everything in it. After you put in everything [the BMW has] the Acura, you get a more expensive car in the Acura. Then, you also have the option to step up to the next model of BMW. The Wii would be a civic hybrid (Can't leave out the wii :) . All in all, They all do the same thing, ride you around (Play games), just in different way/style with different extras/luxaries.

lol you guys still supporting the PS3? allrite, check out Kotaku's "PS3 Vs Panini Iron", http://kotaku.com/gaming/ps3/ps3-vs-panini-iron-212573.php

I really think people are missing the point on the whole Core vs Premium 360 vs 20Gb vs 60Gb PS3.

Essentially you're getting the same thing with the two PS3's. They've taken the 60Gb and looked for cost savings rather than aiming at a specific market segment. In an ideal Sony world the 20Gb wouldn't have been considered and we'd all pay top dollar for the 60Gb single SKU - but that makes Sony look bad (worse), because a single SKU at a high price point gives them little marketing leverage over the 360.

Having two SKU's with very little differences allows them to say 'even our cheaper unit beats the Xbox360'.

The Core vs Premium on the other hand should be viewed in a totally different light. The difference between the two SKU's is much more pronounced - and that's a good thing as they can tackle two different market areas.

Sure hardcore gamers will ignore the Core unit, but for someone just wanting to play a few games, and maybe invest in overpriced extras later, they can.

Sony gives consumers the option of the expensive version, or the borderline rip off version.

MS gives the option of the reasonably priced or the cheaper one.

Total cost of ownership for the Xbox360 may indeed be higher when you take in to account the extras a Core or Premium 360 owner may invest - but at least they had the option of spreading those costs. The pain of the initial purchase cost of my 360 Premium has certainly diminished to the point where I may pick up the HD-DVD drive as an impulse purchase.

I'm not saying either company have got it wrong/right, in fact I would say both companies have missed the mark with their two SKU's - perhaps MS have underestimated the market for a device with an HDD as standard, and Sony overestimated the value that consumers perceive the PS3 provides at their chosen price-point.

As market leader in consoles Sony has no need to bash Microsoft, it looks petty and gives the impression they are running scared. MS are adding features for little cost and therefore adding value which can only be viewed as A Good Thing.

Bottom line: $400 Xbox 360 Premium is CHEAPER than $500 PS3 20gb. You get a headset and HD component cables included with the Premium pack. What do you get with the PS3? No headset, composite cable!

Gamers dont want Blu-ray movies, get a clue Sony. Didnt you learn anything from your UMD failure? Gamers bought the PSP to play games, not to buy UMD movies.

Which system has the bigger library and more worthy exclusives? Xbox 360 baby! Which system has the more comfortable controller, especially for FPS games? Xbox 360! Which system has the best online service? Xbox 360! Finally, which system has already SOLD 6 million units to date and growing? Xbox 360! What about the PS3? "400,000 units" for US launch and 80,000 units for Japan launch. Wow 3rd party publishers sure love those PS3 launch numbers(sarcasm)! thats why you already see support DROPPING for the PS3. Why do u think WWE Smackdown Vs Raw 2007, that was originally supposed to be a PS3 exclusive, has been dropped altogether for the PS3? Because the PS3 launch install base is a joke! that game will now appear on the 360 this november!

*Agent MOO: "Microsoft, how dare you let the consumer choose what to buy!"

Nice one.

*Ill Trooper: "Well, really, who sticks to their core system without a harddrive?"

It's questionable whether anyone who has a core system is interested in HD movies, anyway.

DBX00: "Both systems are upgradable, but the PS3 allows me to have the basic system and still take advantage of all the services available."

This is my feeling as well. It's mostly a war of volume with the PS3, but with the XBox, there's major functionality differences between the choices.

On that note, just why do you need a hard drive that is 60GB? At this point in time, it's a little silly to decide what system you need, because it's not clear just how much hard drive space will actually be used in real-world practice.

The same thing goes for all those people who are buying 2GB memory cards for the Wii at launch. Wouldn't it make more sense to wait and see just how much space you actually need? The total price isn't going to be any higher if you wait, and it may take months before you'll acutally need anything more that what the base system offers (hey, I still only have one memory card for my PS2, and I have 14 games).

DBX00: "Everyone talks about how nobody has high definition televisions and then demand that they include cables to support the minority group."

True. Most people who invest in HDTVs with HDMI connections are home theater nuts, and will probably want their own cables, at specific lenghts, too.

What REALLY bugs me about the PS3 is the inclusion of A/V cables. YECH! S-Video looks damned good with my PS2, and A/V is wretched. They could've at least given an A/V and S-video combo cable with the $500 version. Hell, ALL the console manufacturers should be doing that. It's hard to say what should be bundled with the $600 version, as component cables would probably desaude people from getting HDMI cables.

DBX00: "It's a digital cable, the quality of the cable is irrelevant."

Only to a point, man. I wouldn't pay more than $15, though. That's less than component cables for most last-gen systems, let along "next-gen."

*Kenneth Powers: "Xbox 360 + HD-DVD and no wifi = $600"

Yes, but you do get component cables, a remote control, and a headset. The PS3 gives you... an A/V cable and an awful bundled movie nobody wants to watch. Wow!

PS3 lower price no HDMI out. Done

@gamerx

"Gamers dont want Blu-ray movies, get a clue Sony. Didnt you learn anything from your UMD failure? Gamers bought the PSP to play games, not to buy UMD movies."

I don't get it. Why must gamers pigeon hole themselves into only having games for entertainment? You may not want the feature, but I sure do, as do many others. Don't go assuming that you are the all-mighty-omnipresent being that knows what every "gamer" wants and does not want. I didn't get a psp just for games, I do other things with it as well, video, music, and *gasp* games. It's multifunctionality is what appeals to me and many others as does the ps3's.

The price points are where sony is failing. Sony has always been an expensive brand and not many enjoy expensive when there are cheaper alternatives. After seeing what the psp does I've had many friends say that "They'd get one when it drops to $150". Quotes like that doesn't imply that the psp sucks, it implies its too expensive. Hell, Only reason I picked up a DS lite, after watching my friend play with his, was because it was only $130.

Many still complain about $500 ps3, looks like the missed that magic number ($400). Over time the price will drop and people, who were waiting for it to go down, will buy it.

Lastly, Get off the freaking launch. Not many consoles have ever had the great successful launch that you are expecting. Sony missed the mark, OH NO!. Not like the launch determines the success of a console anyways. History shows us that.

@bearattack79

Welcome to a few months ago when Sony announced both units will have HDMI out. Done

@ fiasco8

Ok word of advise before you plot an attack against me make sure that your point is a counter point against my point and not against the prior point your were tryin to defend. If you read what you said supposedly to me and the post that your supposedly defending carfully (Like i did) you'll see that your more proving my point than detracting from it.

Not because you think i am what you think i am that doesn't give you any right to not make sense.

Incase your still unable to comprehend what i was sayin is. The young man would clearly feel better for sellin either configurations of the PS3 because clearly it offers better value for money. If he has to save his customers from makin bad purchases by way of the Xbox360 core then clearly Microsoft has made a mistake. What i don't get is why isn't he upset about havin to do more work because of that, Instead of attacking Sony which has a better offering?

Am not evil guys an you say am an idiot (Well Maybe) but all i really want is a logical explanation instead of fanboyish and biased attacks.

Jamaicangmr your the being very hypocritical saying that we need to stop the fanboyish attacks. No matter what your are always saying Sony is the best and Microsoft sucks. First off it wasn't stupid for Microsoft to make two xboxs. Yes the core system dosent have all the stuff that the premium system does ie. wireless controllers and harddrive. Do you really think that if people want the hard drive they would buy the core sysytem No. Also its not like it was a suprise to people when they opened up there core system and there was no hard drive it was advertised. Also why is sonys PS3 a better deal $500 for the basic system and $600 for the good one. The basic xbox 360 was $300 and $400 for the good system. Point is you get what you pay for people aren't gonna buy the basic system expecting the same stuff as the premium.