PlayStation VP sez PS3 will cost between 499 and 599 euro

[Tsunamii]

"Don't worry, that faint screaming sound you hear in the distance is just the sound of a million Sony fanboys. Looks like those rumors of steep PS3 pricing weren't so far off after all, since in a radio interview yesterday with Générations Europe, Sony Computer Entertainment Europe VP George Fornay mentioned that the PS3 will cost between €499 and €599, which is around $613 and $736 USD. He excused the price with the fact that it's a real steal for a Blu-ray playback system, but we're not so assured. Of course, Europe always gets a little screwed when it comes to console pricing, with the premium Xbox 360 going for €399 there while it rings up at a mere $399 here. If that logic holds, we might see the PS3 for $499 in the states, which happens to match up with the current buzz going around the developer community. It's always possible that Sony is just throwing out wild and crazy numbers to make us all surprised when the console hits for the regular $300 Sony price point, but it's looking less and less likely."

http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/05/playstation-vp-sez-ps3-will-cost-between-499-and-599-euro/

 

[Spiffyfast]

i'd probably buy one for 500 just so I could use it as a blue ray player.... any more than that....don't think so

 

[Methost]

$500 is the max that I will pay for one as well. And that's IF I can get one when they come out. If I can't find one and have to wait that number starts to drop.

 

[sdy284]

I can't believe sony has he balls to ask $750 for PS3. They should know that pricing it that high will prevent hundreds of thousands of people from buying it. Even $500 is sort of high, IMO they should get it to $450 or as close to the premium xbox 360 as possible

 

[Herr D]

If it's anything Sony advertises it to be, I'll pay whatever the **** they ask for it. Provided it has Tekken 6. What's a couple of hundred euro's anyway? I wipe my *** off with a couple of hundred euro's. In theory.

 

[mikeyj92]

The PS3 will not be for the casual gamer. It will be for the person who loves to play games and does so nearly every day.

Go price what it costs to build a solid, high quality gaming PC. It's hard to do for less than $1800.00 and easily can go above $3000. I'm talking hard core gaming machines.

The PS3 will be a hard core machine AND a Blu-Ray player (not to mention other goodies). I was expecting a price point around $700 myself, which will still probably be at a loss for Sony.

If you don't want it, don't buy it. If you want it bad enough, save up for it.

This isn't targeted at the 13 year olds anymore, it's targeted at the post-college grad, working young adults who grew up as a gamer and continue to be. I personally prefer gaming to most television broadcasting (not including sports) because alot of TV is pure crapola.

Gaming on the PS3, in 720p/1080i/1080p is going to be so fricken sweet on a 50"+ HDTV, and the games, once the developers de-mystify the machine, are going to be mindblowing.


This isn't ATARI or Nintendo or Genesis people. This is the cutting edge machine to make people drool. Yes, costs will eventually come down, but probably not for 18-24 months or so. If the cost is too high, buy a 360 or stick with your PS2.

No one is putting a gun to your head to buy this. I don't understand the anger around how much this will cost. Cutting edge processing power and video capabilities cost a ton. The best Video Cards on the market today are in the $600.00 neighborhood...and that is JUST a video card.

C'mon people.

 

[doomguardian]

For your information: Consoles are always for the casual gamers, especially the Playstation series.

Second of all, the PS3 is already outdated by PC hardware - just look ATI's X1900XTX and Nvidia's 7900GTX. It's 7 core Cell CPU won't even come close to matching the new PPU cards (Physics Processing Unit) coming out this May - allowing the CPU gain considerabally higher performance.

And the PS3 will never achive 1080p gaming, it's just not possible.

The Killzone 2 footage that you've seen was entirely bull **** pre-rendered crap. If you we're here around when the PS2 was in the hype you'll know that Ken Kutargi (Playstation Pres), said that playing the PS2 would be like entering the matrix, he said that it would be Toy Story level graphics. But no, it's all just hype.

I would also like to add that this is a bargain, it costs Sony 930$ per CONSOLE to just make the PS3.

 

[Herr D]

Ok but a console has the benefit that the hardware does not evolve every 5 minutes as tends to be the case in pc-world, so the developers have a uniform platform on which to create their games, pushing the limits and taking every advantage.

I've just purchased Black on PS2 and it looks fantastic imo, better then a lot of pc-games. Pc hardware is always going to have the edge on consoles, but the software that comes out that fully takes advantage of the new hardware on the pc only comes out years after the hardware.

 

[BMXTRIX]

Pricing was NEVER announced by anyone at any price level. The claim was taken completely out of context with the statement made that the gaming system would be a price bargain for Blu-ray disc and would likely be competitive with current gaming system pricing.

Whether that puts it at $500.00 or $200.00 or $800.00 was not mentioned and no confirmation of pricing at all has been established.

Computers are always outdated by the time they get to the showroom floor. I don't care about that, and while I won't buy into to much of the hype that Sony puts out about the gaming system, I also won't so casually dismiss it as some others are so eager to do.

I'll wait and see.

 

[ca_newbee]

If the PS3 doesn't get released before xmas then its price will not matter... game set and match to the XBox. Without the PS3 the format war could shift quickly back to HD-DVD as the studios start to release stuff on the new formats in the next few months

 

[doomguardian]

Ok but a console has the benefit that the hardware does not evolve every 5 minutes as tends to be the case in pc-world, so the developers have a uniform platform on which to create their games, pushing the limits and taking every advantage.

I've just purchased Black on PS2 and it looks fantastic imo, better then a lot of pc-games. Pc hardware is always going to have the edge on consoles, but the software that comes out that fully takes advantage of the new hardware on the pc only comes out years after the hardware.

Wtf are you smoking? Black doesn't look anything near as good as PC games like F.E.A.R, Doom 3, Half Life 2, Call of Duty 2, Far Cry, Quake 4, Counter Strike: Source, Battlfield 2, Unreal Tournament 2004.

Nevermind - you're probably just a clueless noob. [Edit: That earned you a one week ban. - Admin.]

 

[Jedi2016]

Wtf are you smoking? Black doesn't look anything near as good as PC games like F.E.A.R, Doom 3, Half Life 2, Call of Duty 2, Far Cry, Quake 4, Counter Strike: Source, Battlfield 2, Unreal Tournament 2004.

Nevermind - you're probably just a clueless noob.

Yeah? Show me a 300MHz computer with 32MB memory and 4MB video card that can push Black. No? Didn't think so.

Comparing a console to a PC is the worst sort of useless. Aside from basic construction, they're nothing alike. Believe me, the PS3 (and Xbox360 and Revolution, for that matter) will be able to do things that PCs twice as powerful won't be able to do. It doesn't matter that the hardware is "outdated".. it'll still whoop the *** of any comparable PC. By the end of the PS3's life, you'd need a computer five or ten times as powerful to produce similar quality graphics. Just like it's been for every console generation for the last decade.

You want to talk bargains? How much would it cost to build a PC to the same specs as a PS3? And how often will you have to upgrade that PC over the next six years? And how much money will you spend on those upgrades? Who's spending more money now?

 

[Sheep]

Yeah? Show me a 300MHz computer with 32MB memory and 4MB video card that can push Black. No? Didn't think so.

Comparing a console to a PC is the worst sort of useless. Aside from basic construction, they're nothing alike. Believe me, the PS3 (and Xbox360 and Revolution, for that matter) will be able to do things that PCs twice as powerful won't be able to do. It doesn't matter that the hardware is "outdated".. it'll still whoop the *** of any comparable PC. By the end of the PS3's life, you'd need a computer five or ten times as powerful to produce similar quality graphics. Just like it's been for every console generation for the last decade.

You want to talk bargains? How much would it cost to build a PC to the same specs as a PS3? And how often will you have to upgrade that PC over the next six years? And how much money will you spend on those upgrades? Who's spending more money now?

You have to remember that a computer has to run an operating system AS WELL AS the game. Also, consoles only do 640 by 480 rez.

SheepStar

 

[Jedi2016]

You have to remember that a computer has to run an operating system AS WELL AS the game. Also, consoles only do 640 by 480 rez.

SheepStar

720x480, actually. I believe several Xbox games run at 720p. And at least two PS2 games can run at 1080i, although I don't know the horizontal resolution offhand.

I'm well aware of the reasons why PCs of equivelant power can't push the same game.. it doesn't change the fact that they can't, though. Nor that it takes a HELL of a lot more money to do so.

I spent three hundred dollars on my PS2. That was more than five years ago. Can a PC gamer say that they've spent only three hundred dollars in upgrades over the last five years?

 

[Sheep]

720x480, actually. I believe several Xbox games run at 720p. And at least two PS2 games can run at 1080i, although I don't know the horizontal resolution offhand.

I'm well aware of the reasons why PCs of equivelant power can't push the same game.. it doesn't change the fact that they can't, though. Nor that it takes a HELL of a lot more money to do so.

I spent three hundred dollars on my PS2. That was more than five years ago. Can a PC gamer say that they've spent only three hundred dollars in upgrades over the last five years?

I can. My PC was $1300 and it runs most of the new games fine, and WAY better then a console.

Just becaue a console can run a game, doesn't mean it will be playable or look any bit good.

Once you go PC, you don't go back.

SheepStar

 

[Jedi2016]

I can. My PC was $1300 and it runs most of the new games fine, and WAY better then a console.

$1300 vs $300? Consoles FTW.

Hell, let's look at it on a broader scale. 2000-2010, a full decade. If I stick with my Playstations, I'll have spent a total of around $700-800 in hardware over the course of that ten years. That's still cheaper than your one PC. And you'll have to upgrade.

And can a PC purchased back in 2000 play today's games? Not a hope in hell. But my console can.

I notice my earlier question went unanswered.. how much would it cost to build a computer of comparable specs to a PS3?

 

[runninkyle17]

I think everyone is missing the point.

Consoles are DESIGNED to run games and the games are made to run ON THE CONSOLE.

The reason why many of today's PC games require so much power to run correctly is because that is how the code is written. Some games require less power and look better than others. This has to do with the software company that makes the game.

The reason why consoles run games and those games look so good is because the games are designed around the console.

Most of today's PC games just disregard the fact that most people do not have incredibly powerful computers. That way the game can be designed without having to worry about what systems can play it. Consoles do some things better than PC's and PC's do some things better than consoles.

 

[Sheep]

I think everyone is missing the point.

Consoles are DESIGNED to run games and the games are made to run ON THE CONSOLE.

The reason why many of today's PC games require so much power to run correctly is because that is how the code is written. Some games require less power and look better than others. This has to do with the software company that makes the game.

The reason why consoles run games and those games look so good is because the games are designed around the console.

Most of today's PC games just disregard the fact that most people do not have incredibly powerful computers. That way the game can be designed without having to worry about what systems can play it. Consoles do some things better than PC's and PC's do some things better than consoles.

I disagree. You can get a console controller for a PC. BAM! A PC with the controls of a console that looks 10 times better. Not to mention the PC is also a computer, Media Server, and many other things.

How are games designed to run on a console? You can't even adjust the graphics! When ever a game comes out for console before PC its JUNK on a PC. NO options, no reconfigurability, no mouse. Try playing GTA:3 San etc etc on a console and then a PC. Its WAY BETTER on a PC. and much easier too.

Try playing a FPS on a console and then a PC. Or even better, play against someone using a controller, and give them a keyboard & mouse.

YOU LOOSE!

SheepStar

 

[Jedi2016]

How are games designed to run on a console? You can't even adjust the graphics!

That's the thing.. you don't need to adjust the graphics because the hardware is fixed, unchangable.. there's only one configuration of the hardware, and the games can be tweaked to run on that specific configuration.

As for porting console games to PC, or the other way 'round, there's always a degree of suckage involved. Personally, I think the whole idea of multiplatform games is a stupid one.. all the games have to be developed with the "lowest common denominator", generic code that can run on anything, rather than being tweaked for a specific machine. I think as the technology moves forward, we're going to start seeing a much bigger gap between exclusive games and multiplatform games, with the exclusive games being significantly better, because they're so much more optimized. We've already seen it, with old exclusive games that look worlds better than brand new multiplatform games, and more and more games that can be run on only one kind of system.

I do agree with you on the FPS thing. While I never got the hang of the keyboard, I do think the "point and click" method of shooting is far more effective than trying to aim with a controller. That's probably why I don't play many console FPS games.

 

[THX_5.1]

Ps3-1080p

Who says 1080P won't be possible? I seem to remember when the xbox was originally announced almost everyone in the industry scoffed at 5.1 sound during gameplay, "it was not possible", seems to me that wasn't true. I love the xbox and 360 in 5.1, plus this whole argument over PC versus Consoles is ridiculous. If you have a console you are gonna argue console, if you have a high end PC you are gonna PC . . . well never mind, to each his own.
I'll get a PS3 if, now this is a concept, there are good games for it.

I prefer the NES anyway