Comments on: PlayStation 3 playmaker

Sony's Jack Tretton takes long-term view for console wars, says consumers won't balk at PS3's price.

[techguy83]

better not be too high of a price

Or several people won't pick one up until it does drop in price.

[HalfEmptyGlass]

Gosh, talk about evasive!

I wish these kind of interviews never got published.

The guy didn't give any meaningful answer, what is all that supposed to mean? Hey Sony when you have a real answer for our questions let us know. Until then please keep quiet and don't waste our time!

[ajbright]

The price will matter

He keeps talking about long term, and in the long term if the price of the PS3 is over $500 they will hand their market share over to Nintendo and Microsoft.

Short term they could get away with selling a PS3 at $1000. They'd sell out on their launch day whether they had 1 million, 2 million or even 3 million.

But long term, parents in particular, are not going to care whether the PS3, XBox 360 or the Urinate is the better spec'd console (that's console, not consul - someone needs to learn to spell or spend less time txt messaging), they're going to care about providing their kid with a coolish Christmas present.

Ofcourse if the only console available next Christmas is the XBox 360, then the current lead of about 3 million is going to be peanuts compared to what Microsoft will have by summer '07.

The only saving grace here for Sony is that they have successfully marketed their box to the 25-35 yr old game player. Nintendo have yet to achieve this, and by naming their product Urinate, lowering the specs to achieve better value for money will not help them now that they've alienated their product from the only group of people that will bother to buy their console in English speaking countries - parents.

Parents still see Nintendo as kid-friendly, ie. no gore, violence or nudity. Although this is not particularly true, Nintendo's products are generally viewed as consoles for kidz.

So if the long term is as important to Sony as this guy claims, in the end the price will have to be competitive with the XBox 360. People buy consoles for games - not movies, not internet connectivity, not to view photos and definitely not to play music. Those things do increase the attractiveness of something that costs over $400, but in the end the game playing public are not going to overspend if they can get roughly the same game playing experience on something that costs hundreds of dollars less.

If the PS3 is within a hundred dollars of the XBox 360, I'll get one because the blu-ray player makes it worth the extra cost. But blu-ray or HD-DVD is not important enough to me to spend more than that, even if a standalone player costs between $1500-$2000. Anyone who spends that on a next gen dvd player is a complete moron. Your TV won't be able to display a better picture than the current HD movie channels deliver right now, which can be recorded commercial free to your dvr right now, and for a lot less money than some hokey piece of hardware that looks like it belongs in the a '70s retro electronics store.

[Sure Thing]

that was one useless rant

and calling a system Urinate doesn't make you sound like an adult either.

[bobby_brady]

I read the whole article, but nothing was said

why was this even published?

[scrumbus]

I agree, nothing said

I hate interviews like that, it provides no insight whatsoever. Also, he's mistaken if he thinks everyone is going to ante up just because they see value.

[Sure Thing]

That was one useless rant

and calling a system Urinate doesn't make you sound like an adult either.

[Sure Thing]

Oops my mistake

trying to reply to ajbright's comments but instead replies to the whole story.

[Tomcat Adam]

They were first.

I really can't believe they treat the Dreamcast as part of this generation. Or the not to be named vaporware.

They were first, and they established a nice base on top of that of the already massive PS1 player base. This was definitly a factor in the previous/current 'console war'. Not the biggest, but a damn important one.

The reason I believe that launching first doesn't matter this time is because they already have a player base. However, if they have a massive price tag (anything above the X360, for instance; 500$ CND---IMO) then the casual gamers will go flocking away.

That said, this article was just another big bowl of nothing. Time to wait out E3...

[nonicks]

This Sony guy sounds soooooooooooooo NERVOUS

Goodness... was he trying to hide everything and wasting the very basis of this interview or the only hope Sony has for it's SALVAGE with PSP3 is ----- it's glorious past.

I was sick of listening that 10yrs lifecycle and the heritage of 103 million units.

I think, the interview was about getting some news on PSP3 and SONY's plans with it.

The guy couldn't even name the Games on PSP3.... Simply Pathetic.

Looking at it from the strategic view point - if the guy was hiding everything for it to be unvieled at E3 .. still he did the worst job. Seems, as if he was soooooooooo UN PREPARED for the interview. or as if, the interview was kind of a liability.

Would have been much better, instead of that 10yr jargon, he had answered in some Technical terms.. throwing some text on cell processor.. the new experience with PSP3 and all that.

To Summarize - it was an excuse of an Interview. The worst I ever read at CNET.

IMPROVIZE guys...