Sony cuts price on PS3--is it enough?
The Spider-Man 3 Blu-ray will ship with the $400 PS3 on November 2nd.
(Credit: Amazon)Way back on September 12, we reported on rumors that Sony would be releasing a $400 40GB PS3/Spider-Man 3 Blu-ray bundle for the holidays. The not-so-secret new system has now been officially announced by Sony, with a November 2nd launch date in the North America. At the same time--effective immediately--the current 80GB model will be available in North America for $500.
In Sony's press release, CEO Jack Tretton is quoted as saying, "We're pleased to offer the consumer a lower price point without sacrificing the core technology components that make PS3 the most advanced high-definition entertainment system available. Every PS3 comes with a Blu-ray drive, HDMI output, an integrated Wi-Fi connection, Cell Broadband Engine and a built-in hard-drive." As previously reported, however, the new 40GB PS3 won't offer any form of backward capability with PS2 games. (Read John Falcone's earlier post for a full report on the issue).
As I've said before, if Sony hoped to compete with the XBox 360 and Wii during the holiday season, it had to hit the $400 price point. Some readers scoffed that the inclusion of the Spider-Man 3 Blu-ray wasn't exactly a big selling point, considering the movie sucked. Also weighing heavily on Sony is the lack of a true breakout (exclusive) title that gives fence-sitters a little more sense of urgency to buy the system.
What do you think? With the XBox 360's reliability problems, is $400 the magic price point for the PS3 and its built-in Blu-ray player? Or are the games what matter in the end (i.e., Halo 3, BioShock, and the upcoming Mass Effect)?
Hunkered down in New York City, Executive Editor David Carnoy covers the gamut of gadgets and writes his Fully Equipped column, which carries the tag line "The electronics you lust for." He's also the author of "Knife Music," a novel. E-mail David. Follow David on Twitter.
1. No "killer app." Sony needs a system seller game for PS3 and so far that hasn't appeared.
2. No Backward compatability. It's software emulated, what's the point of leaving this out? The code has been written.
3. Goodwill. Sony has gone a long way toward destroying the goodwill of thier user base. (The $600 dollar console, the bait and switch "price drop")
I'm not saying that Sony can't catch up but it's gonna be an serious uphill fight.
PS2 is what made owners interested in ps3, not the ps3 games...at least not the launch and near future titles. Backward compat. is a must for the third iteration of psx.
Of course I am waiting on MSG4 and FFXIII, before I buy a ps3, but man looks like i'll be waiting longer because I want the version that can play the God of Wars, FFXII, and RE4. I have to save more cash. its not easy to just plunk down $500+.
gosh, I supposed that's how they'll make more money, buy 'forcing' hardcore gamers to purchase the expensive model.
Anyway the 2008 is the year of the PS3, if now is selling imagine with the games it will come, metal gear, tekken 6, final fantasy, gran turismo, kill zone and the social networking HOME and for people that that will not work on a console look at the folding@home. Not to mention that Drake, rachet and Haze are comming too...
Sony needs more updates, really need it, and the xbox too... just lets see the fall update in what they bring us...
And really... after halo and all that... what the xbox have? gears of war 2? just let see...
First game selection all I heard was how great Gears of war Was and how much better Xbox live was than anything the PS3 had.
Next was the controller sorry but the Microsoft controller fits your hand allot better than the PS3, and this is the only part of a video game you actually touch so it is a major part. Sony you need to redesign that controller it just feels and looks cheap.
So what I saw was the fact that the 360 had better games, better user interface (the controller), and a better online service and since I was buying a gaming platform and the 360 was better.
On the cost issue the Xbox 360 actually costs more than the PS3 and before you write your responses listen to this logic.
Lets say you are going to keep the system for say 4 years.
PS3 cost $400 online for four years free
Xbox 360 premium $350 plus $200 for 4 years of xbox live total cost $550, not to mention that if you have two gamers in the house you each need a live account if you are playing split screen and want to talk.
One last thing was that I felt like I was paying for a Blue Ray player in the PS3. As a consumer I have grown tired of Sony trying to push their products down my throat by bundling them. First was beta, then that stupid memory stick and none of their devices did SD cards, and now the blue ray. When I decide I want to buy a High Definition dvd player I will buy one I don?t want to be forced to pay for one that I may not want.
I think Sony forgot that the PS3 was a gaming platform first and foremost and they need to remember that for their next gaming console venture.
If the PS3 had been a better gaming machine I would have paid more money for it. Because in the end I will end up paying allot more for my 360 with live accounts, adding a HD dvd player, and in the end I?m so glad I have a 360 over a PS3.
And the guy who said all they need is a couple of games and they will be on there way... Well sorry but no... Gaming systems are made to be a hit right away and not something that gets popular after a year its been out. No matter how much games will come out on PS3, more will be out for 360...
I am a Xbox person but i was excited about the PS3 when it was coming out... All i got was more evedence that it sucks..., And think about it... If the HD DVD is cheaper than BLUE RAY, and The cheapest HD DVD is for the 360., Then how much is the BLUE RAY worth in the PS3?? Its either extremely cheap and is crap or also cost around 200 (like the HD DVD for the 360), so if you take that price away the PS3 is worth as much as 200 dollars...
Very disapointing...
The competition between the Nintendo, MS, and Sony reminds me of another competition totally outside the gaming realm. If any of you Gen Xrs out there remember the retail chain Kmart; they tried to compete with Wal-Mart on price. Then Target came from no where and did something no one expected¡Knot compete with Wal-Mart. Right now I see the 360 as Wal-Mart (strong market share, solid consumer base, cheaper than PS3), the PS3 as Kmart (CURRENTLY going up against MS soley on price), and the Wii as Target (trying something totally new and not even trying to compete with MS or Sony). Now, I don¡¦t think Sony is at all going to go belly up like Kmart (or Sega!) because their product mix is huge(TVs, computers, audio, etc.).
Having said all that, (Wii disregarded) I did purchase the PS3 over the Elite. I realized that both systems are what they are. Why try to be a hard core gamer when I¡¦m not? My interests in the system differ from the market Sony is trying so desperately to attract, the 360 gamer. After months of comparison and skimming pages and pages of Internet chatter, disecting review upon review, I decided to purchase the PS3. This coming from an avid original Xbox owner since 2002. I'll admit that I was a fanboy of Xbox over PS2 based on (in my eyes) technology Xbox had over the PS2. This after knowing the PS2 had a larger library of games. For me, it was the sheer HD capabilities the original Xbox had over the PS2. I felt lost when I went over to friends homes and held their tiny PS2 controller in my hand or when I saw the PS2 games stretched out from a 4:3 ratio to 16:9. The choice was always clear to me as was the choice to have the PS2 was to my friends. I didn't understand why people chose the PS2 over the Xbox. Then I realised people bought the systems for different reasons. It was the gaming community that pit the systems up against each other. Think 2-Pac vs. Biggie.
When comparing the Elite and PS3, I thought back to Halo/Halo 2 on my Xbox. I remembered having friends over and them immediately asking if we could play those. I would grudgingly put in the disc and play for hours upon hours in non-stop FPS action. It only took me a few hours to realize that I despised FPSs. I owned Halo and Halo 2 purely for company. I never played on my own. When I purchased my PS3 (on Sept 25 no less), it was almost a rebellion against Halo 3, better yet FPSs. Halo is the epitome of the FPS. I don¡¦t hate MS, nor do I harbor any sore feelings toward Halo 3 fanboys. The Halo factor just wasn¡¦t there for me.
Pricing has been listed a few times in this thread and I know that factors weigh different consumer to consumer , but here is how I broke down the cost based on features important to me and how much I wanted to spend.
**These figures are based on pricing at the time that I compared systems:
PS3 60 GB $499:
Wireless network card-incl.
Next Gen HD disc drive-incl.
Online play-incl.
HDMI cable-$7
Total = $506
Elite 120 GB $449:
Wireless network adapter-$99
Next Gen HD disc drive-$169
Online play-$49/year
HDMI cable-incl.
Total = $766
Looking past the HDD space, the PS3 beat the Elite in price based on the factors that influenced ME not John Q. Gamer. Sony was betting on bundle. That hasn't worked out too well for them. I bought the PS3 for all the reasons that Sony hasn¡¦t marketed it for and I love it. The way I see it, in the gaming world the tables have turned this round. MS has a jem (aside from RROD) of a system. They will probably stay on top of the PS3 in sale figures and game titles. No, Sony will not crumble and fall (to the utter disgust of 360 fanboys everywhere), but will continue to hold out in second place until the next-next-gen consoles come out. Both will continue to release games and both will still have their strong customer bases. If one must say that there is a ¡§winner¡¨, it will probably be 360 and I don¡¦t think it¡¦s too early to say that.
To sum up, Gamer X (hard core gamer) has chosen the 360, Gamer Y (undefined gamer yet to be categoriezed) has chosen the Wii. All that leaves is Gamer XY (casual gamer) that chooses hardware, features, and the every now-and-then fun game. Heck, the game doesn¡¦t even have to be a PS3 exclusive. Enter GTA IV. Who cares if it¡¦s on both systems. ?º
if you continuously compare the systems, compare them on a apples to apples basis. talk about sales during the same start up period, or compare what the 360 game reviews where when the red ring of death machine first launched.
it's very easy to talk about game quality when programers have had a chance to work with the systems for some time. there's always a learning curve (check some of the ps2 comments when that system initally launched) rfom was awesome, warhawk is great, the ratched demo was just insane, drake's fortune. and then you have the exclusive games that are being released next year. oh yeah, and you can watch hd movies and basically run your entire living room entertainment through it. check the sales numbers on the ps3, especially now with the price drop (up 175% in europe i believe). oh yeah it's a disaster....
- Competition
-
by Univern72
October 18, 2007 4:54 PM PDT
- The PS3 and Xbox360 are about the same value at this point in time. PS3 has a lot of potential, lots of good games coming out for it. Blu-ray player for $400? Good deal. Xbox360 has great games and comes with two at this moment. It costs more with Xbox Live, but then it's the same price as PS3.
-
Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 3 pages (66 Comments)