| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (149)

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 12:28PM sapient2k7 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Scotty P

by all counts PS3 does NOT have dismal attach rates. Please cite your source.

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 12:28PM BPMOmega XBL PSN Steam said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I find it funny he's comparing the CURRENT price of the LOW-END model to the ORIGINAL price of the HIGH-END model.
In otherwords, today's 80GB model (when there's also a 160GB model) with the original 60GB model (when there was also a 20GB model).
Granted, the only difference between today's two models is the HDD size (they're equally "gimped"), unlike the older models that had actual hardware differences.

Even so, he'd be a fool to announce a price cut, or a new model, before they were ready to roll it out. It's a simple business move, folks.

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 12:32PM R Planteer said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
I could afford a PS3. As my econ teacher would say, I have the means, but not the motivation. Before I dropped $400 on a ps3, I would drop it on 360 games, or computer components.

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 12:38PM moshin said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
thats why i didnt buy an xbox... i waited for my ps3
Reply

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 12:38PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@vidGuy

"What made the PS2 a success wasn't Gamer X who bought it at launch, but Mom who bought it for Billy when it hit $199. Sony seems to have gone after the niche gamer market, not the core market that makes them money."

And I absolutely love the Ps3 for these exact reasons. They went after the core gamer's out there, us who read video game blogs and love to play great quality games, not Billy's and his mom.

Of course they wont be as successful as the Wii this gen, and thats fine. I believe when the dust has settled the PS3 will be remember as the best console this generation. (Not highest selling, but best in quality)

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 12:51PM Mr Khan said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
In the dim future, PS3 will be remembered like the Atari 7800 is remembered
Reply

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 12:54PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Its just sucks that while making one of the best and most powerful game consoles ever produced imo, they alienated alot of gamers out there who couldnt afford or were unwilling to shell out that kind of money, which i understand.
Reply

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 5:07PM The Punisher said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Long Duck Dong @ Jul 8th 2009 12:54PM
Its just sucks that while making one of the best and most powerful game consoles ever produced imo, they alienated alot of gamers out there who couldnt afford or were unwilling to shell out that kind of money, which i understand.


LOL, too bad the internet wasn't bigger when the 3DO came out, because I'm sure there are people that bought that saying the exact same thing you are.
Reply

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 1:10PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Paul no game is worth the price of a console. But that's your taste. The majority of the market wants value upfront not a select few games. If 90% come out on both consoles and the console is 200 bucks cheaper you'll go with the cheaper console.

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 12:47PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Dell has the Playstation 3 System Bundles available with this 15% off coupon code 65G7RQ11J?M2LH [Exp 7/31].

# Playstation 3 80GB System Bundle for $339 shipped
# Uncharted Playstation 3 160GB System Bundle for $425 shipped

http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?sku=A1985585&cs=19&c=us&l=en&dgc=CJ&cid=24471&lid=566643&acd=1049547 6-404255-

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 12:55PM Mr Khan said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Really, you're only looking at a $100 price drop over 3 years, comparing entry-level systems, which is mostly due to their moving-target system of SKUs. Certainly you're getting much more value for $400 now than you were putting down for $500 back in 2006, but it's still $400

Consumer perception is all about the bottom line. That's why the $250 Wii looked so appealing, despite the fact that, on a straight dollars to MHz scale, Wii is worth nowhere near $250 when compared to its competitors, but that doesn't really factor into consumer psychology so much

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 1:01PM StormEagle said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Exactly. All the basic consumer sees is that price tag compared to what's in their bank account. Isn't just a little convenient that, in these times, the cheaper, less powerful systems, are selling better than the more expensive, more powerful systems? I'm telling you, they drop the price $100 and PS3's start flying off the shelves. I've said it before, I'm trying to buy another one!
Reply

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 5:10PM The Punisher said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
But that was the case last generation when the Xbox came out right after Sept 11 and it was way more powerful then the PS2 and offered a lot more like online game play out of the box, HDD, in game custom soundtracks.

Plus there were games that simply couldn't be done on the PS2 like Half-Life 2, Chronicles of Riddick and Doom3 for instance. While some of the exclusive PS3 games look pretty good, they're just not that good to make you think they can't be done on the Xbox 360.
Reply

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 12:56PM Shadowbender said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think we can all agree that Sony is in a CRAP-LOAD of trouble.

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 2:29PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Hey you guys can shout from the rooftops " how great the ps3 is " but the fact is , the ps3 is in 3d place in world wide consoles sold , jack tretton can feed you that ten year life cycle bullshit ! the ps3 is almost 3 years old an its still getting its ass kick buy microsoft and nintendo , you sony fanboys should face the horror ! the ps3 will never sell the same number of consoles as the ps2 did in its time , sony may have to settle for the bronce this console generation .

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 1:03PM StormEagle said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Thank you for contributing nothing and spelling "bronze" completely wrong in the process. Also, I'd like you to meet a friend of mine:

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2002/10/11/
Reply

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 1:24PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I always fail to see how the # of consoles sold argument some how equals one console is superior in quality to another. It simply isnt true in any medium, not just games.

Is Titanic the best film? No.
Is Thriller the best album ever made? No.
Is Wii Sports the best game of this generation? Fuck no.
Reply

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 2:04PM vidguy said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Not superior in quality, per se, but a better purchase. # of consoles sold dictates where developers put most of their time. We see this in the many cross-platform games that utilize none of the PS3's extra power over the 360 because it's not worth the extra time and effort. # of consoles dictates # of games. Quantity itself isn't what we want, but with more games there is a higher likelihood of more worthwhile games. Just look at Final Fantasy - the number of 360's sold induced a port of the game to the console with the larger share of market.

Also, # of consoles creates a very important business measure called ROI. With a successful console, the company can invest in a better next-gen outing. With a poor consumer response, the next-gen is a harder sell to investors and presidents. This means that gamers who might buy the next console (e.g. PS4) should care about how the PS3 sells.
Reply

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 5:04PM The Punisher said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ Vidguy

You're right, just look at what happened to Sega with their misses with the 32X and Saturn. Consumers felt burned causing developers like EA not to put games on that system.
Reply

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 1:06PM oxzide said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"...that price cut alone won't net Sony the customers it wants."

More customers is worse then less?



Epic Fail

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 1:08PM spin cycle said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The platform was $499, now it's $399, Jack. It's only fair to compare cheapest (20G) versus cheapest (80G).

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 1:19PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
While Sony's sticks to it's 10-year life span for it's PS3 the next XBox will launch and the groundhog effect will happen all over again to the next chapter of the console wars.

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 1:20PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well we know Sony is losing money on every PS3 sold they can't really lower the price. Sony has lost all the money they made off of the PS2 with the PS3. I don't think Sony is evil, it's just that is business and survival.

But this better vaule PR bullcrap is all circumstantial and you only benefit if you fall unders certain circumstances. Some people have wired connection a non HDTV and don't have acsess to bradband, I could easly say the PS3 has the worst Vaule out of all 3 consoles.

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 6:54AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You sir are correct. You can't really say that X has better value than Y because consumers tastes and preferences are different. While Bluray may be important to some, it is not important for those who just want to play games on their consoles. I am one of those "cheap people" who just can't justify owning two consoles especially since the ps3 is too expensive for me considering i don't really want Bluray, I just want to play metal gear, killzone and uncharted. The Best Buy bundle would be great, however taxes are a bitch and by the time that bundle lands here in my country that would mean another 100$ to the price tag which i just can not justify.
Reply

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 1:34PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm tired of ponies making this claim. A $200 console is marketing. It's mindshare. A $200 console can play 360 games. Period. Defend "value" all you want, but not everyone sees that and that's exactly te point.

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 1:31PM Shadowbender said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
A part of me says "Sony is a wonderful company and provides great games" and the other part says "Sony is a company of jerk-off crooks that find pleasure with bull-crapping everyone with their pompous defensive remarks that angers everyone".

Huge sigh...I just don't know.

I mean, Storm Eagle, you made a good point, but do you honestly think Sony purposely tried to make that much of a good value? Look at the psychology of Sony.

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 1:31PM NIck PSN ID Rattlehead91 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Of course Sony Execs will say that a price cut isn't coming any time soon. They want to give the impression that the price is going to stay that way for awhile so people will continue to buy it. When a price cut comes we'll know about it only a short time before it happens.

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 1:31PM bluerei said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Funny how people with an xbox or wii will have a huge library of games that total well over the price of a PS3, yet they still complain that they have no money to afford a PS3.

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 2:15PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
because they should totally not buy games for the system they have, they should buy all systems and not have money left over for the games.
Reply

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 4:41PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
u realize you added $ 400 - $ 600 to the equation there ??
+ HDMI cables.... + 2nd controller + ps3 games
= much more than before.

and u realize that more games are available on the 360 than ps3 and most every playable ps3 game can be found on the 360, and most ps3 ports before 2008 were inferior to the 360 versions at the time. 360 games are generally cheaper.

if a kid or adult has $ 60 to spend on friday and own a 360 are they bound to buy more games or save up for a new console and have many less games?
Reply

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 1:37PM Johnny Neat said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Although I agree that the PS3 is one topnotch machine. I can't agree
that things are looking good price wise in this economy. For them 10
years sounds like a good business model from a point of view of
numbers carried over by projected maybes. The fact is 10 years down
the road is far far away in too many ways. Tech moves quicker than
people's interests mr. Tretton. Just saying since you haven't gotten the memo.

Anyhow must be damn hard sailing on a battered & possibly sinking ship once run by a stir crazy captains focused on heading towards that mythical candy island
still a hopeful 10 years away while Nintendo lives back on known dry land in their selfmade & safe kingdom and Microsoft wanders happily around from one
known reliable merchant port to another on safe routes all the while collecting wealth.

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 2:04PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Sony needs to focus their next console on developing countries,like China,for example.Let's say that out of the 1.3 billion population,100-200m can afford to buy a modern game console-that's the same as the USA.What are these new consumers going to buy-a 200 Xbox or 250 dollar wii, or a 400 dollar Ps3 or whatever comes after that? If Microsoft and Nintendo do some serious ad campaigns in China,Sony is a goner.

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 2:43PM Edge of Blade said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Broken. Record.

"10 year plan"

"people aren't seeing what we are doing here"

"Blu-ray, yeah baby"

We've heard it all before.

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 3:00PM dargondarkfire said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
did he really say, and the most important thing: the shiniest finish imaginable.?
can he say it in a way that makes it sound even more like he thinks we are stupid?!

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 3:30PM Ashitaka said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
He didn't say that. Read again -_-'
Reply

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 3:37PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Any hardcore online gamer will tell you that an internet cord is better fot hardcore online competitive games than wifi ! thats why microsoft doesn't include it in the xbx360 out of the box.

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 3:27PM ColorblindMonk said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The current price point isn't making any more customers either. >_>

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 4:15PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I have money. I HAPPILY pay my 30 bucks a year for a good online experience. What use is free when it's mediocre? Can you pay Sony for an awesome online experience? No? That doesn't make any damn sense!

The 360 is cheaper to start and more expensive if you piece everything out. Luckily almost everyone doesn't need to. Online wireless cost me $0 because I aleady have equipment. And thankfully, UNLIKE Sony, ms actually gave me component cables. Whose stupid idea was that? HD out of the box? Not quite, Sony!

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 4:08PM MLC said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think that the PS3 is a deal @$399. I mean, hell, I thought I was getting a great deal @ $599. People (family, friends) thought i was insane for buying a console at that price but it was my choice. As what everybody has already stated, consumers dont want value, they want a cheap and simple base price.

I think Sony will cut the price, just not this year. Before I get my head chew off, I just think that they will wait and cut it in March of next year. Sony is always looking ahead so w/ the releases of GoW3 and (hopefully) GT5 in early 2010 , those titles will make up the loss from the price cut.

Bottom-line, its about the people choice in the matter. Whether you can afford it or not. Or you can afford it, you just dont want 1. If you want something bad enough, you'll pay for it. Whether its clothes, cell phones, or video games, you'll buy it if you want. Like i said, its to each his own. Hell, i could buy a 360 right now, but personally, its not worth it to me right now. So close in point, people always want a sale and not invest and some people (like me) will buy whatever. Thats just how it is!

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 4:20PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Is it just me or does Tretton come off like a douche in all of his interviews?

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 4:30PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
HOLES IN HIS STATEMENTS:

" the system wouldn't have had the technology to sustain itself at retail for long "

umm.... wireless network adapters are mandatory now?
just removing that 1 accessory would have lowered manufacturing costs, saved space, and also could have been a stand alone accessory which generated its own revenue.
especially given the fact that a lot of gamers, at least myself do not enjoy gaming online via wireless network connection, and I have not used my ps3 wireless adapter.


" It was $599; it's now $399," he said. "

I love how he makes it seem like you are getting the same console for $ 200 less... LOL
it was $ 600 with BC, 4 usb ports, media card reader slots, 60gb HDD, etc..
now its $ 400 with no BC, 2 usb ports, no media card slots, 80 gb HDD,..
differences yes, same console no.


" Tretton also talked about how Sony could've just pumped out a PS2.5 for a much cheaper price "

um yes tretton sony has already done this, its called the new ps3's. I have to purchase or keep a ps2 console in order to play older games on new ps3 consoles, making the ps3 'gimped' the original ps3 has already been chopped down and new ps3's can be considered a ps2.5 or whatever tretton refers to them as.

still love my ps3, but just cant stand these PR statements from swiss cheese land....

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 4:46PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I have a feeling sony keeps these comments flowing is to provide FREE marketing and to also attempt to get more consumers to buy a ps3 console NOW...

everyone hears that a ps3 price drop is coming, so there is less DEMAND to buy a ps3 NOW.

if sony and tretton repeatedly explain that no price drops are coming, they may increase the number of people that buy a ps3 NOW, which is what they need.




Posted: Jul 8th 2009 5:35PM oldschoolgamer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
There is no way that the ps3 stays current and cutting edge enough to stay in the market for 10 years without getting slaughtered by the competition. This is just the higher ups saying we can't afford to drop the price because we are already losing too much from sticking blu-ray players in every system. Another reason why they NEVER should have put a blu-ray player in the ps3. If it was a better designed game machine then maybe tretton's argument would have some weight but since its not then clearly it was never made for the long-term. A system designed for the long-term would have been designed by game developers for game developers. The ps3 was thrown together by a bunch of corporate big wigs who liked the sound of fancy tech on paper and figured if they stuffed all of this technology in a console game companies would just deal with the architecture no matter how difficult it was to work with since it is such a privilege to develop games for this wonderful system. Now that philosophy is biting them in the butt.

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 6:16PM TrumpetDan said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Tretton does realize that in those 3 years he speaks of the economy and job market went from really bad to much worse right?

Posted: Jul 8th 2009 7:59PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I got one for free with my mobile phone contract...no way i would have paid for one at the current price.

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 8:54AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
look at how much money the ps2 is still makin sony and look at how much money the original xbox is makin microsoft money ? get the picture ?? this is what sony does they alright and going to stay alright. xbox360= fast quarter ps3= slow nickle.

Posted: Jul 10th 2009 4:54AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Ten bucks says we won't be seeing a PS4.

Posted: Jul 13th 2009 12:29AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
i was going to buy a ps3 once the price dropped but no price drop F U Sony

Posted: Jul 16th 2009 1:45AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
your article is great,I found a great make money site.
Best 15 ways to earn money by home,make money to easy ways by home.
http://greatmakemoney.blogspot.com/

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

TUAW

TUAW

Massively

Massively

WoW

WoW