Sony considers slashing price of PS3 console

[Tondog]

Maybe so. Maybe so. But still. PS3 is looking to be the right console for me this time around. I really don't see much, if anything on 360, and I've always liked Sony's first party titles the most.

[The Metamorphosing Leon]

Even all this "bad news" isn't driving me away from PS3. I'm still getting one this fall for Ratchet and Clank Future, and nothing will change that fact.

That's fanboy vision at its best.

I'm getting one along with GTA: 4. Started allotting $5 of my paycheck a week towards it.

[Tynstar]

Even all this "bad news" isn't driving me away from PS3. I'm still getting one this fall for Ratchet and Clank Future, and nothing will change that fact.

That's fanboy vision at its best.

I'm getting one along with GTA: 4. Started allotting $5 of my paycheck a week towards it.

In 1-2 years you will be set!

[The Metamorphosing Leon]

Hehe, well it's just so i have a chunk of change by the time october rolls around, not the whole bundle.

[hXd]

I really feel bad for Sony.

One because I like Metal Gear Solid and Final Fantasy and both new games are PS3 games, but that isn't enough to make me drop 600 bucks on a PS3.

Two because they are retarded not to look at their own doing and say "Hey, maybe if we cut the price of PS3 to compete with, maybe, the Wii, the most popular system out there, we might not continue to cripple ourselves."

But hey, what do I know.

[Ghost Soldier]

Reminds me of a 32bit venture in the 90's that went south.  They released the biggest, baddest thing around with a whopping price tag and no big name games.  Then the system price was cut so many times that it was affordable.  By then though newer, more powerful system's had come out and it was too late.  Maybe sony will look back on a guy named Trip and wonder if they should slash now before something better comes along in the next couple of years.

[phoenix1967]

You're right. They're playing a very dangerous game right now. The initial release rush/sell out was good for the bottom line and for the hype machine, but the recent stats show it dead last in next gen console sales per April's report. A trend likely to continue at least through the summer months.

They really need to hope that MGS4 and/or FF13 don't cross-platform. Ninja Gaiden: Sigma and Lair may help. But it's still not likely to convince casual gamers to buy a $600 machine when the Wii and 360 are on the market at much lower prices.

The other aspect that I agree with is that technology is still advancing (and rapidly!) to the point that if we look 4 yrs down the road (2011), there will likely be a new Microsoft system and possibly a new Nintendo system. If the PS3 price drop doesn't hit until 2009 (as rumored), they're still going to be in the precarious position of being the highest priced console (considering that Nintendo and Microsoft will likely also have price cuts in 2009) with only about 2 years or so left in this console generation to make up the ground it's lost to the competition (which may be getting ready to release it's next consoles).

Doing the market share math, the last generation spelled out Sony with a 70% share with Microsoft and Nintendo splitting the remaining 30%. This new gen is starting out the exact opposite, with Nintendo and Microsoft having a combined 70% or so and Sony about 30%. Conclusion: Sony has pissed away 40% of the console market share; and with the most expensive of the 3 consoles, with limited exclusives, they've got a serious hill to climb if they're going to get some of that back.

The big question is: How much is Sony going to be willing to lose per console in order to get back into the game? Right now they're losing about $150 or so per console (attributable to the Blu-Ray player). Are they willing to go to $350 per console?

[hXd]

The big question is: How much is Sony going to be willing to lose per console in order to get back into the game? Right now they're losing about $150 or so per console (attributable to the Blu-Ray player). Are they willing to go to $350 per console?

But that's the thing- they won't actually lose money by slashing the PS3 price, they'll make more money because they'll be selling more systems. It'll balance itself out in the longrun.

Another thing- Get rid of that damn Blu-Ray player. I don't know of anyone that has a regular Blu-Ray in their home, let alone only 1 person I know of that has a PS3. It's just not the market trend right now- Everything is still DVD.

The additional feature of DVD playback in the PS2 was a good move- because DVD was the next logical step from VHS. DVD to Blu-Ray, which is basically a glorified, more expensive DVD, is not a logical step. If they absolutely have to include it, make it optional.

[captain_nintendo]

Make more money by losing more per console?

Thats so genious, that it just might work?

[James]

The big question is: How much is Sony going to be willing to lose per console in order to get back into the game? Right now they're losing about $150 or so per console (attributable to the Blu-Ray player). Are they willing to go to $350 per console?

But that's the thing- they won't actually lose money by slashing the PS3 price, they'll make more money because they'll be selling more systems. It'll balance itself out in the longrun.

Another thing- Get rid of that damn Blu-Ray player. I don't know of anyone that has a regular Blu-Ray in their home, let alone only 1 person I know of that has a PS3. It's just not the market trend right now- Everything is still DVD.

The additional feature of DVD playback in the PS2 was a good move- because DVD was the next logical step from VHS. DVD to Blu-Ray, which is basically a glorified, more expensive DVD, is not a logical step. If they absolutely have to include it, make it optional.

But surely the next "logical step" is more storage space. The PS2 used DVDs not just for movies. Look where we've come since the days of CDs. Some games are filling DVD-9s, and that was the last generation.

I always get annoyed at people complaining about the PS3 having BluRay. If you don't want BluRay then the PS3 isn't aimed at you, so just leave it.


I'm sure Sony knows what they're doing more than anyone not working there.

[Tondog]

\Another thing- Get rid of that damn Blu-Ray player. I don't know of anyone that has a regular Blu-Ray in their home, let alone only 1 person I know of that has a PS3. It's just not the market trend right now- Everything is still DVD.

EVERY PS3 game uses Blu Ray as the disc format. It allows for more space on one single disc. Blu Ray is in the system mainly as a means of storage and to avoid something like Blue Dragon on the 360 which is 3 DVDs.

[captain_nintendo]

It allows for more space on one single disc. Blu Ray is in the system mainly as a means of storage and to avoid something like Blue Dragon on the 360 which is 3 DVDs.

Because that's such a horrible thing?

[Tondog]

Sure is when you start filling up 50GB Blu Ray discs which will take up 6 dual layer DVDs.

[phoenix1967]

Someone wake me up when we're back on topic...

 

[hXd]

EVERY PS3 game uses Blu Ray as the disc format. It allows for more space on one single disc. Blu Ray is in the system mainly as a means of storage and to avoid something like Blue Dragon on the 360 which is 3 DVDs.

But surely the next "logical step" is more storage space. The PS2 used DVDs not just for movies. Look where we've come since the days of CDs. Some games are filling DVD-9s, and that was the last generation.

I always get annoyed at people complaining about the PS3 having BluRay. If you don't want BluRay then the PS3 isn't aimed at you, so just leave it.


I'm sure Sony knows what they're doing more than anyone not working there.

Well apparently they don't know what they're doing because their product is sinking fast.

So the PS3 isn't aimed at me. But I want it to be. I don't wanna miss out on Metal Gear Solid 4 and both Final Fantasy XIIIs because Sony wants to push technology that the market and myself aren't ready to pay for. Sure, extra storage space is always a good thing, but it's the cost of putting this extravagant technology into the PS3 that makes it so expensive. So, to me at least, it would make sense to cut back a little bit to save your dying product.

Xbox 360 and PS3 are pure powerhouses, but the Wii has far surpassed both in terms of sales. Of course, the novelty of the WiiMote has a lot to do with that, but Nintendo priced the Wii quite reasonably. Graphics-wise, the Wii pales in comparison to the other two and runs on DVDs, but since it's a fresh, unique and inexpensive alternative, people are opting for that instead. Just going to your local game store and asking about Wii to PS3/360 availibility will tell you that much.

I'm not against change, but when you start to see that something isn't working, you've got to take a step back and look at the big picture.