PS3 for $499 or $599

[kaseaman]

Wow. This is the most a game system has ever tried to sell for. I think that this will be interesting because sony's new system will come with blue ray, so in reality this is a real steal right now (blue ray players will be around the same neighborhood). so in reality the consumer gets either a free blueray player or a free game console (whichever way you want to look at it). Just thought I would voice my opinion, what does everyone else think?

 

[Anborn]

The difference in price isn't all thats different. $499 - no HDMI, 20gig HD, no Wifi, no ability to use memory sticks, flash memory cards, or the like. To get HDMI, Wifi, the 60gigHD, and the ability to use memory cards, you'll have to splurge for the $599 version (the controllers for neither system have the rumble feature).

The only way this product becomes even close to a viable choice is that if BluRay wins out over HDDVD (but we won't know that for a couple of years), and then only if the cost of BluRay players is through the roof. The only people buying this will be Sony hardcore fans. For the average game player, the pricetag alone excludes it as an option. An X360 for $399 (or less, as MS is rumored to drop the price in early 07), a Wii for $199-249... hell you could potentially buy both for the price of a PS3.

The home console market is now a 2 company race (Microsoft/Nintendo). The DS is/will continue to outsell the PS3 (especially with the release of the DSLite in the US market and the continued nonuse of UMD) to dominate the handheld market. And Sony will be left wondering what went wrong.

 

[BMXTRIX]

It's a pretty bold statement to think that it is a two company race. I wouldn't dare make any such predictions as it is far more likely that all 6 million units will sell out by March. I am not a hardcore Sony fan, but I want HD movie playback and the throw in of a killer gaming system makes it seem like a real bargain to me. I have NOTHING against Micro$oft or Nintendo. But, they give me a lot of typical gaming - only.

As for PSP vs. DS - I really could care less, but with a million units selling a month, it seems like the PSP is doing alright, even if it never crushes DS.

Is it possible that PS3 sales may be very weak? Sure! But, I don't think that it is likely. Kids and parents have extraordinary ways to come up with funding as necessary.

 

[Rob Babcock]

The difference in price isn't all thats different. $499 - no HDMI, 20gig HD, no Wifi, no ability to use memory sticks, flash memory cards, or the like. To get HDMI, Wifi, the 60gigHD, and the ability to use memory cards, you'll have to splurge for the $599 version (the controllers for neither system have the rumble feature).

Could be worse...you could buy an Xbox 360 and not be able to get HDMI at any price! It's stunning that it offers no real HD support at all. And if you want any type of hi def drive, it'll have to be outboard. How much does that suck?

BTW, "rumble" totally sucks IMOHO. I always turn it off. It especially blows with wireless controllers. It sucks down battery power like Ron Jeremy's fluffer.

 

[10010011]

Quite frankly they have priced it out of my household.

I don't care if it has Blue Ray or not, I am not buying any HD-DVD player until one format wins or looses.

I ceartainly do not want to end up with a Betamax.

Also before you argue the merrits of Blue Ray over HD-DVD or whatever the other format is called. Remeber Betamax had better picture quality than VHS. So the best technology is not always the sure thing.

 

[hifiman]

I don't think the Blu-Ray capability makes the PS3 an winner. I also don't think that the lack of HD-DVD on the Xbox 360 automatically makes it a loser either. I'm primarily basing this on my opinion that both HD formats are doomed before they hit the shelves. The general public simply won't care that much about the new formats to begin with. Add to that yet another format war that will only serve to confuse and irritate everyone, and the many compatibility/copy protection issues and it's a mess I don't want any part of.

I actually think that Microsoft has the smarter strategy here. Omitting HD-DVD support keeps the price down and within the reach of more households. If the format war shakes out and there is a demand for it they have the option of selling the add-on device I've heard mentioned. This, plus getting to market sooner will go a long way towards Microsoft possibly becoming dominant in this field.

 

[THX_5.1]

no PS3 for me

I have been very happy with the 360 and the games in 720p and 1080i are breathtaking. HD-DVD and Blu-Ray are dead in the water as far as I am concerned. Sony can bite me, I've seen game company's do this before.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3DO

 

[BMXTRIX]

? - I'm sorry, you are saying that the 3DO already had major market share, was providing an unprecedented new HD technology, and had tons of games coming out for it at a (inflation adjusted) price tag of well under $400?

The 360 is gorgeous, and the $500.00 PS3 may be a bit much for some gamers. But, the $400.00 360 sold out instantly, it is not unrealistic to expect the same from the PS3 at $500.

The $600.00 likely will as well for all of those people who want not just the gaming aspect, but more, including (especially) HD with Blu-ray and HDMI gaming. While it has been blown off by many, Blu-ray is the SOLE reason I am getting a PS3 and NOT getting a X360. I respect the incredible image and gaming quality of the X360 and think it is a great gaming console.

But, that is all it is. Even with a HD-DVD add on, which will add ZERO gaming compatibility or features... it's not the same level.

Give me the PS3 - yeah - $600... I can do that.

 

[naisphoo]

? - I'm sorry, you are saying that the 3DO already had major market share, was providing an unprecedented new HD technology, and had tons of games coming out for it at a (inflation adjusted) price tag of well under $400?

The 360 is gorgeous, and the $500.00 PS3 may be a bit much for some gamers. But, the $400.00 360 sold out instantly, it is not unrealistic to expect the same from the PS3 at $500.

The $600.00 likely will as well for all of those people who want not just the gaming aspect, but more, including (especially) HD with Blu-ray and HDMI gaming. While it has been blown off by many, Blu-ray is the SOLE reason I am getting a PS3 and NOT getting a X360. I respect the incredible image and gaming quality of the X360 and think it is a great gaming console.

But, that is all it is. Even with a HD-DVD add on, which will add ZERO gaming compatibility or features... it's not the same level.

Give me the PS3 - yeah - $600... I can do that.

yeah me too, i can do that for $600...no hesitation. Xbox? no waste of money

 

[nate dog]

$600 sounded like a lot of money until I started thinking about it. Our current playstation 2 probably gets used 320 days out of the year (we use it for our DVD player). Our RXV1500 cost more than that and probably gets used 100 times a year. The speakers were even more. Our digital camera camera cost about 70% (of the PS3) and probably only gets used 25 times a year. The point I'm getting at is that $600 sounds like a lot for a "game" system, but in reality it will probably be used for a lot more than just games. It will also, more than likely, get used much more frequently that our other home electronics. Of course we would all prefer that the PS3 only cost 19.99 but for the amount of use it will probably see and the technology behind it, $600 seems like a fair price.

Just my .02

 

[STRONGBADF1]

$600 sounded like a lot of money until I started thinking about it. Our current playstation 2 probably gets used 320 days out of the year (we use it for our DVD player). Our RXV1500 cost more than that and probably gets used 100 times a year. The speakers were even more. Our digital camera camera cost about 70% (of the PS3) and probably only gets used 25 times a year. The point I'm getting at is that $600 sounds like a lot for a "game" system, but in reality it will probably be used for a lot more than just games. It will also, more than likely, get used much more frequently that our other home electronics. Of course we would all prefer that the PS3 only cost 19.99 but for the amount of use it will probably see and the technology behind it, $600 seems like a fair price.

Just my .02

Excellent point.

I sometimes wonder why I don't think twice about paying $1800 for a computer that has all sorts of features we never use and my family may use 7-8 hours a week but the idea of a TV that gets used 30-40 hours cost more than $800 bugs me. Then I realize that everyone places values on everything. Computers are supposed to be expensive and there are still $20 dollar TV's on the market. The capabilaties the buyer wants and use will dictate the value of the PS3. My advice would be to wait on reliable reveiws of the real world quality of the device. Then place your value mark.

SBF1

 

[kaseaman]

Sony In trouble?

I stumbled upon this article this morning on ign. AIt is pretty interesting, maybe sony is much more relient on the PS3 than everyone thought. Everyone already knows that they are selling the new system at a loss; if that flops, Sony could have a major problem on thier hands. I guess we will have to wait and see.....http://gear.ign.com/articles/709/709082p1.html

 

[zoran]

Any pre orders in SFO BAY AREA, PS3 or Wii

 

[Rob Babcock]

I stumbled upon this article this morning on ign. AIt is pretty interesting, maybe sony is much more relient on the PS3 than everyone thought. Everyone already knows that they are selling the new system at a loss; if that flops, Sony could have a major problem on thier hands. I guess we will have to wait and see.....http://gear.ign.com/articles/709/709082p1.html

All of the console companies have almost always sold the machine at a loss. MS lost around $175 on each Xbox in the beginning and still losed money on each one. Sony lost less on each P2, but they still lost money. Even in the older days it was that way. Software is where all the money is.