Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Lower-Price PS3 Mostly Upgradeable 253

Posted by Zonk
from the define-mostly dept.
jchenx writes "One of the biggest questions remaining after the Sony press conference and E3 last week was whether or not the core PS3 package could be upgraded to the premium one. It looks like that question has been answered. GI.biz reports that the core version can upgraded with WiFi and memory card adapters, as well as a higher capacity hard drive. However, HDMI output will be non-upgradeable."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Lower-Price PS3 Mostly Upgradeable

Comments Filter:
  • by PSXer (854386) * <psxer@msfirefox.com> on Wednesday May 17, 2006 @01:39PM (#15352300) Homepage
    Although, I suppose it is always nice to get confirmation, didn't we know this stuff already?

    Wi-Fi- Even if there was no sony specific adapter, you could always use an Ethernet bridge.

    Card reader: I suppose it is nice to hear confirmation on this one. Still, it's not something I'd use that often.

    Hard drive: Wasn't this announced to be removable a while ago? And if it's removable, you can be damn sure that Sony will let you spend more money than a hard drive actually costs to upgrade it.

    HDMI: What's this about "mostly upgradable"? Maybe it's just me, but of the features on the $500 PS3 that're missing, this is by far the most important one. Granted, the studios don't seem to be using HDCP at the moment, but if they do eventually, you're screwed. Hello near SD resolution without buying a whole new player.

    • I'm not a PS gamer so I'm not sure but wouldn't the card reader be nearly necessary if you wanted to play your older games on your new system (the whole backwards compatibility thing they brag about)? I guess you could just start over from scratch but that'd be frustrating to some people at least.
    • "but of the features on the $500 PS3 that're missing, this is by far the most important one."

      Correct me if im wrong, but isnt HDMI just another word for 'protected signal path DRM'? why would you want this?

    • Granted, the studios don't seem to be using HDCP at the moment, but if they do eventually, you're screwed. Hello near SD resolution without buying a whole new player.

      If they do that you're screwed anyways. We're all screwed. PS3 notwithstanding.

  • by fusto99 (939313) on Wednesday May 17, 2006 @01:46PM (#15352358)
    Of course it can be upgraded to the premium version. There are two easy steps:

    1. Sell the core unit on ebay.

    2. Buy the premium version.
    • I already bought an Xbox 360:
      1. Ignore the daily PS3 & Wii stories
       
      2. Become a fanboy, act like an ass and lie to myself
  • Foolish (Score:4, Informative)

    by eldavojohn (898314) * <.moc.liamg. .ta. .nhojovadle.> on Wednesday May 17, 2006 @01:46PM (#15352369) Journal
    Lower-Price PS3 Mostly Upgradeable
    So, if you haven't seen these charts [curmudgeongamer.com], view them ... now.

    The PS3 price is insane.

    It's not insane historically speaking (see the charts) but it's insane to price it at $500 or $600.

    The Wii is rumored to come out at $200-$250, so that's two for the price of the minimal PS3. But to compare the PS3 to Xbox 360, we have can look at it's price percentage. Between min and max, PS3's percent difference is (600-500)/500 or approximately 20%. The Xbox 360 has a difference of (400-300)/300 which is 33%. What's the point of upgrading later when another 20% of the bill will get you the full thing? To me that sounds foolish. I can definitely see that working with the Xbox but not when you're talking about prices around $600. If I'm going to pay that much, might as well throw on another $100.

    I'm not concerned if it's upgradable and, frakly, I won't be too concerned with the PS3 until I see what it can do. Can it do twice what the Wii or Xbox 360 can? That remains to be seen.
    • Re:Foolish (Score:5, Insightful)

      by RemovableBait (885871) <slashdot@@@blockavoid...co...uk> on Wednesday May 17, 2006 @01:55PM (#15352455) Homepage
      What is most interesting about those charts that you linked to is that fact the the 3 most expensive consoles (Neo Geo, 3DO and Saturn) flopped, while their cheaper competitors (such as PS2 and SNES) were highly successful.

      Sony should clearly see that releasing the PS3 at $600 is suicide born out of arrogance.
      • well, the fact that previous consoles who sold for a high price failed is not a guarantee that selling a console for a high price will make it fail. What these consoles failed to prove is that a higher price would provide a higher customer experience, a better gaming experience.

        I guess all we can do right now is speculate and wait to see if the PS3 will deliver, I can't see myself buying it for the blue-ray or the HDTV capability since i dont even have a HDTV, but if sony proves me that their Ps3 will deliv
        • Re:Foolish (Score:3, Interesting)

          by molarmass192 (608071)
          What these consoles failed to prove is that a higher price would provide a higher customer experience, a better gaming experience.

          Actually, the NeoGeo was MILES ahead of the competition at the time (1992). By far, a superior console. However, nobody was willing to pony up the scratch to purchase one. I rented one with my roommate at the time, and we spent the entire weekend on it, SLEEPLESS, it was that good. However, there was no friggen way I was parting with that kind of money.

          As for the PS3, I mak
          • Re:Foolish (Score:5, Insightful)

            by SophtwareSlump (595371) <jamie@f r e akscene.net> on Wednesday May 17, 2006 @04:32PM (#15353776)
            I knew plenty of people that wanted to buy a Neo-Geo and even a few that were going to buy one.

            But then they/we factored in the $200+ cartridges. That's what killed the Neo-Geo for even the die-hard gamers. The one video store here would rent out a Neo Geo with 5 cartridges for $40 for the weekend. Bargain of a lifetime.

            In one way, I have to congratulate Sony for milking the early adopters, but the parents that see the PS3 for $600 this Xmas will remember that $600 when Johnny asks for it next spring or summer for his birthday. I remember the 3DO at $700, not later down the road at $500, or even at $399 when it was treading water in the worst kind of way. Initial pricing sticks in people's minds.

          • True. Given the limited supply of early 360s, Microsoft could've gotten away with charging that much too, but not since production finally caught up a few months ago. Unfortunately for Sony, I don't think they can afford to cut prices that soon with that expensive Bluray drive.
        • Re:Foolish (Score:5, Insightful)

          by ImTheDarkcyde (759406) <ImTheDarkcyde@hotmail.com> on Wednesday May 17, 2006 @04:40PM (#15353837) Journal
          not to mention MS and Sony being so money orientated. I don't recall hearing an announcement that there would be 2 Wii's. Only the expensive one gets the cool controllers.

          This whole xbox360 'core' and 'premium' and then ps3 'high' and 'low' thing is RIDICULOUS. Good job Nintendo for giving everyone the same thing with a reasonable price, rather than a crippled machine for a lower price.
      • Re:Foolish (Score:2, Insightful)

        What the hell did the PS2 compete with that was in that list?

        The reason why the 3DO and Saturn failed are games. The reason why the NeoGeo is ocnsidered a flop is the fact that the games cost as much as the system itself.

        The problem here isn't price, it's games. Between Virtua Fighter 5, MGS4, and god knows what else for PS3... I'm buying a PS3 when I can afford it. The 3DO never had a killer app. The Saturn never had a killer app. The Neo's killer apps were just too damned expensive...

        Let's get real
    • Opportunity costs (Score:4, Interesting)

      by UbuntuDupe (970646) on Wednesday May 17, 2006 @02:09PM (#15352579) Journal
      It becomes even clearer when you compare opportunity costs. For the price of a PS3 and one game (~$660), you could buy a Wii and 10 games! (Charitably favoring the PS3 by assuming the Wii starts at $250 and has $40 games.) And to even notice the HDTV difference, you have to buy such a TV, which will cost you $1000, which could have bought 25 Wii games. (!) Yes, this ignores sales tax, but since it's an opportunity cost comparison, the conclusions hold regardless.
      • Re:Opportunity costs (Score:2, Informative)

        by Saige (53303)
        Wii60! [wii60.com]

        Based on the fact that you can get BOTH of the other consoles for the price of the PS3.
    • So, if you haven't seen these charts [curmudgeongamer.com], view them ... now.

      Immediately afterwards, superimpose the "how did this do in the marketplace" chart. From where I'm standing, it's pretty clear why we argue over Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo, not Philips, SNK, and 3DO.
    • I'm not concerned if it's upgradable and, frakly, I won't be too concerned with the PS3 until I see what it can do. Can it do twice what the Wii or Xbox 360 can? That remains to be seen.

      Well, that's easy. It will play (insert infinite number here) more High Definition movies than any other console out of the box. Love it or hate it, this is an integral part of the HD movement. by having an HD capable delivery platform, HD will take off. HD sets will fall in price, and so will the cost for movies with volu

      • It will play (insert infinite number here) more High Definition movies than any other console out of the box.

        Only if an infinite number of Blu-Ray movie titles are offered for sale, which I would have to say is unlikely. If there's more than even 100 titles released on BR-ROM in the first year, I'll be surprised.

        Love it or hate it, this is an integral part of the HD movement. by having an HD capable delivery platform, HD will take off.

        HD broadcast and cable TV capabilities have been around for a while now,
        • HD adoption is one of those chicken-and-egg paradigm shifts like you see ever so often. It's really no different than the DVD adoption was. First you have to have media available (dvd movies/hd cable or satellite content) then you have to have something to view it with (dvd player/hdtv). Now, the media powerhouses don't want to blow alot of money on something like HDTV cameras and editing equipment, and the enormous storage required, without getting much of a return on their investment.

          HD will remai
    • I like the way you're thinking, but you're not taking it far enough.

      The real answer here is to say screw it to pri$ey consoles like the Wii and just pick up a DS. Imagine how many DS (or GBA!) games you could afford to get with your DS for the price of a Wii!

    • Sony's always said that this was 'early adopter' pricing.
  • The truth (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DorkusMasterus (931246) <dorkmaster1&gmail,com> on Wednesday May 17, 2006 @01:49PM (#15352386) Homepage
    The truth here is that Sony has made a mis-step. First of all, they've got time to work on a better core system. However, if the only real thing driving the price from the core to the super-duper is the Blu-Ray Drive, then they should have exact same specs, but with no HDMI output.

    I mean, I can understand that.

    But to have other things crippled too? Lower hard drive (by that little amount of gig space) is not going to affect the price that much. And if you're losing near $400-500 per unit already, what's another $50?

    But really, there's no excuse to not have the other bells and whistles, when WE KNOW that the reason for the cost justification is that HDMI output stuff. THAT'S the cost (well, at least 80% of it.) So I can justify that a little more. But the upgrades will likely be like the 360's where it will cost more to upgrade piece by piece than it would to buy the higher priced system. To have that, WITHOUT the ability to ever do HD graphics(which, IMO, is what next-gen is about, at least for Sony and MS), well, it's just sub-par.

    I am NOT a fanboy of any of the three systems (actually I really liked the Turbo Grafix 16 back in the day :)) but Sony really is making some hardcore mistakes that will cost them in the long run in the gaming division.

    I don't think they're out of business by ANY stretch of the words, but between the loss of rumble (for a less than stellar motion sensor) in the controllers, the price, and the lack of TRUE functionality on the core system, they're going to piss a lot of loyal customers off, enough to check out other systems (or at least NOT buy the PS3).
    • HDMI port or not, you can still play your games in up to 1080p via component [if your cables are good enough and your HDTV supports it]. you can still watch blu-ray movies on it; at least for the far foreseeable future.

      half of us dont own tvs that do more than 720p, or 1080i anyways. the other set of us only have component or [simple] DVI input. HDTV owners with HDMI connectors are in the minority for now. if you dont plan to replace the $1500 - $3000 HDTV you /just/ bought in the last 2 years or so, why wo
    • What a lot of people seem to overlook when they're trashing the high price point of the PS3 is that it will be a fully functional Blu-Ray player too! Sure, the 360 is $200 cheaper but how much do you think that HD-DVD player they're promising is going to cost? Mark my words it won't be a penny below $200. Microsoft is just setting everyone up for a one-two punch: Now: "$400 for a 360 isn't bad... I think I'll buy it." Next Christmas: "$300 for an HD-DVD drive Xbox add-on isn't bad... I think I'll buy it."
  • by cheap_tibet (964336) on Wednesday May 17, 2006 @01:52PM (#15352418)
    I'd still rather buy the cheaper and more innovative Wii, which I won't need to spend more money to upgrade.
    • I'm no fanboy, but I've got to admit that Nintendo's offerings in the Wii and DS are looking a lot more attractive. I like to keep things simple and inexpensive, and right now the PS3 offerings have me thoroughly confused, as I'm sure some of the developers are as well. When the system configurations and price are getting more press than the games, there could be trouble. As for me, unless I see something compelling or a big price drop in the 360, I'm going to wait until the Wii comes out and then decide wh
    • I'd still rather buy the cheaper and more innovative Wii, which I won't need to spend more money to upgrade.

      Karma burning time...

      I really, really hope the Wii lives up to the expectations set for it. I really do. Because if it sucks in any way, Nintendo is on such a pedestal in the community right now that they are going down hard if the Wii is not exactly what you are imagining.

      I am extremely interested in that console, but specifically I want to know what its like to play for over an hour. I could

      • True, there might be more limits on what people 'feel' like doing with such an interactive game. However, their controller still have normal buttons and can be used in a normal way.

        Also, how long do you think people can play DDR for? I'm sure I've seen some play that for hours and I wouldn't doubt that it's far more tiring than any other games.

        I would prefer to see games that allow people to enjoy their game for 20-60mins then that person can feel good, put the thing down, and get back to interacting

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 17, 2006 @01:56PM (#15352465)
    So it's 'almost' fully upgradeable?

    When was the last time you paid for something you 'almost' got?

    Maybe I'll 'almost' buy a PS3...

  • Here's to hoping... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gEvil (beta) (945888) on Wednesday May 17, 2006 @01:58PM (#15352485)
    Here's to hoping that the lack of HDMI on the low-end model will keep content providers from ever implementing the ICT flag on movies. There's a slim chance that this move by Sony will keep that from happening.
    • Sorta offtopic If either Blu-Ray or HD-DVD gain a foothold in the market it's nearly guaranteed that ICT will be coming.

      The studios won't be using ICT initially because they don't want to piss off the only people who will be interested in the "negt gen" DVDs to begin with, the early adopters. The people who bought early HDTVs are also likely candidates to purchase early HD-DVD and Blu-Ray players.

      My prediction: Once one or the other wins the format war (doesn't matter if it's HD-DVD or Blu-Ray) and next ge
    • Here's to hoping that the lack of HDMI on the low-end model will keep content providers from ever implementing the ICT flag on movies. There's a slim chance that this move by Sony will keep that from happening.

      I think Sony has done Microsoft a big favour, in a way.

      Because neither the X360 in any config, nor the PS3 in the lower-end config, will do digital HD output (as opposed to analog component HD output, which is frankly fine)... there is an excellent chance that these two choices have basically st

  • What makes you think I can afford to upgrade the crappy PS3?

    Logic: 1, Sony: 0
  • All irrelevant (Score:2, Insightful)

    by pla (258480)
    How much it costs at launch really makes almost no difference. If you want a better idea of its "real" price, we need to ask how much will it cost 13 months after launch.

    I expect we'll have the exact opposite opinions then... Because, while the Wii will probably only come down by 20-30% (a drop of around $50), the PS3 will most likely plummet to half its original cost.


    $600 for a game console... Sony apparently learned nothing from NeoGeo's lesson.


    However, Sony's mistake does have one positive side.
    • IT was a home system with perfect arcade replicas. Not ports but exact same hardware... They weren't going for a mainstream console for every home like sega and nintendo. Otherwise their system wouldn't have been priced upwards to $800 with $200+ dollar cartridges. Yeah you could by a supernintendo with the price of one neo geo game.

      With inflation stats it'd look even more pricy with today's dollars.

      I don't think they intended to compete in the same market.
      • Actually, the Neo games were ports. But both carts had the same program data on them, and the system selected which program data to use. There's a problem when using something like the UniBios or a Debug bios to switch a NeoGeo AES into MVS mode on certain carts. Some of the attract screens will be garbled because the AES lacks the fonts and other data used during the attract screens.

        See: http://unibios.free.fr/knownissues.html [unibios.free.fr]
      • I don't think they [NeoGeo] intended to compete in the same market [as SNES/Genesis].

        Correct, they didn't. SNK marketed the NeoGeo as an upscale form of home gaming; one that not every customer could afford, but promising (and delivering) a rarefied and special gaming experience for those that COULD afford it.

        Which is EXACTLY how Kutaragi is defending the PS3's pricing today.
  • by onebitcpu (682182) on Wednesday May 17, 2006 @02:06PM (#15352551)
    The real deal on this is not compared to a XBOX360 or a Wii, its when compared to a blu-ray player. The PS3 is $400 less than a blu-ray player, and its also a next-gen game player. I can see a lot of people who want to get a blu-ray player going for the PS3 instead, and then you have $400 to spend on games or movies.
    • You know what I can see? I can see people (especially the non-gaming movie watchers, who outnumber the gamers) asking themselves what the real difference is between an HD-DVD player and a Blu-Ray player, realizing that it's the price and skipping Blu-Ray altogether. The "flagship" HD-DVD players from Toshiba and RCA are $500 - half the cost of a Blu-Ray player and already matching the announced low-end PS3 price. And the HD-DVD player prices will inevitably go down much faster than the PS3 prices...
    • This is exactly what Sony is hoping for, sacrificing PS3 sales to try to push their Blu-Ray agenda. Unfortunatley it may be ultimately successful in establishing Blu-Ray as the winner in the next-gen DVD format wars.

      Alternatively it could backfire and cause both Blu-Ray as well as the PS3 itself could end up failing.
    • Except that people aren't chomping at the bit to upgrade to a Blu-Ray right now.
    • It'd be nice if we could get a version without the Blu-Ray plyaer for $300 then. Unfortunately, that's not the case.
    • If a PS3 is $400 cheaper than any other blue-ray player out there, why in the world would any other MFG want to build a blue-ray player? If I am Panasonic or someone Sony has created a format and is selling the cheapest player for it. They have killed their own market.
    • The PS3 is $400 less than a blu-ray player, and its also a next-gen game player. I can see a lot of people who want to get a blu-ray player going for the PS3 instead, and then you have $400 to spend on games or movies.

      And I can see a lot of Blu-Ray player manufacturers (all three of them?) saying "O shit! The PS3 is stealing all our sales!" and reducing the MSRP of their standalone players to the $500-600 range. So much for that "value" argument -- especially since it's still to be determined whether Blu-
    • I bought the "PS2 is not so expensive because you don't have to buy a DVD player" argument. And then the DVD playback from the PS2 turned out to suck and I ended up buying a DVD player anyway. I'm not falling for that scam again. Besides, at least DVD was a huge step up from VHS, and I didn't have to worry about some titles being released for a competing standard. On my 34" HDTV, HD is only a small step up from DVD progressive.
  • HDMI Confusion (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 17, 2006 @02:33PM (#15352792)
    I think some people are confused about HDMI [wikipedia.org] here. You do NOT need an HDMI cable/connection to view high def (1080p). You can get high def with component video [wikipedia.org] as well, which supports up to 1080p resolution. Both PS3 versions will have component out (AFAIK). From what I've read and seen, a high def signal looks the same in HDMI or component.

    In regards to the PS3, you should only care about HDMI if a) that's the only input your TV supports (mine has 1 HDMI, 2 component) or b) you're concerned about buying a DRM burdened Blu-Ray movie that only allows a HDMI connection.
    • I think some people are confused about HDMI here.

      To hack together your own sentences...

      You do NOT need an HDMI cable/connection to view high def (1080p).
      [unless you buy] ...a tv with only hdmi connectors or a DRM burdened Blu-Ray movie that only allows a HDMI connection.

      So you are saying you don't need it unless you do need it. And given we don't know whether analog hidef tvs or unprotected blu-ray discs will even be available a few years from now, how can we decide if we do or do not need it?

      No wonder peop
  • Hard drive (Score:4, Interesting)

    by payndz (589033) on Wednesday May 17, 2006 @02:34PM (#15352803)
    20Gb hard drives? Are we back in 2001? I wouldn't be surprised if the base PS3's '20Gb' drive is actually exactly the same as the non-crippled PS3's 60Gb, just with two platters disabled...
    • by blackmonday (607916) on Wednesday May 17, 2006 @02:45PM (#15352897) Homepage
      I wouldn't be surprised if the base PS3's '20Gb' drive is actually exactly the same as the non-crippled PS3's 60Gb, just with two platters disabled...

      Dude, it's even worse than you imagined. Instead of crippling 2 platters, they actually removed them!

    • No, the same drive but with a smaller partition hehehe... Seriously, I've bought a Western Digital 80Gb hard drive in 2005 and it already has only one platter (maybe even single-sided!)
    • by oGMo (379)
      Yeah, 20GB, that would never fly today. Apple ditched the 20G iPod ages ago, and would never think of selling 1-4GB ones. It's pretty clear that 60G is where it's at, given the 50G+ capacity of Blu-Ray you'll need a 60G drive to get all the games you own on there at once. It's not like they'd read off the disc and merely cache some data and savegames or anything.
  • So basically they'll take off all the interesting stuff, and then make you buy it later? Let's hope Sony doesn't start selling cars... they'd probably sell them for $2000 new, engine, seats, transmission, and wheels extra.
  • Kind of expected (Score:3, Insightful)

    by DrXym (126579) on Wednesday May 17, 2006 @03:13PM (#15353141)
    The PS2 shipped with a removable backplate that you slot in a network adapter and hard drive. It makes sense that the wifi and smart card readers for the PS3 will be done in a similar way, possibly in the same module. It means Sony can flog wifi for $50, the larger HD for $150, the wireless controllers for $50 etc. and make the $100 difference between the two systems look like a good value proposition (of $200 value!). You'd might even find that the HDMI is some kind of internal daughterboard.

    Microsoft did the same with the XBox 360, withholding things from the "Core" model to make people buy the regular model. At least all PS3s have a harddrive which will encourage games to make use of it.

  • $750 out the door (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mrshowtime (562809) on Wednesday May 17, 2006 @03:21PM (#15353204)
    One thing that everyone is forgetting is the total REAL cost of getting the damn thing (ps3) out the door. Obviously you would want to have at least one game and one extra controller. Let's just round it off at $100 for the two, which is about right. So we are now up to $700, before tax. Most states, including local, are around 8% on average, if not more, but lets round that down, which adds another $50 or so bucks to the pricetag. This bumps the price up to $750 out the door; $650 if you buy the useless cheaper one. That's a lot of freakin' change, man!

    If gas jumps up because of Iran, Hurricanes, mutant clowns, then $750 bucks on a game system that really is only a hair better than it's primary competitor is looking very unattractive come Christmas. That is if Sony actually makes it out the gate this Christmas, which personally, I am having less faith in every day.

    The Wii/360 combo is actually sounding better as the days go by.

    Nintendo is certain to release the Wii at $199 and if the core price for the 360 drops to $249 (which would be the smartest more ever by M$) there is absolutely no way that Sony could ever gain enough marketshare to be anything but number three. The only people buying the PS3 at that point would be the Japanese, the hard core Sony nuts, the Final Fantasy XIVVIXXI nuts, and rich people who own really expensive home theater systems.

    I predict that the PS3 will sell for about $2,500, or more on ebay the day it's released and pretty much stay that way for a long time. In fact, it's going to be a huge joke; only rock stars and the insanely rich will be able to afford it. The PS3 will become a status symbol. One thing is certain, history does repeat itself and last time around with the PS2, it took Sony 18 months to finally catch up with demand. To Sony's chagrin, this time it has serious competition already dug in and by the time Sony ramps up production to meet demand the next gen war will already be onto the next-next gen war. That's assuming that there will be demand for a $750 system.

    Sony is strangling the golden goose because it wants it to lay platinum, gold and uranium eggs. Sony's goals for the PS3 are too great. It wants to be the magic black box that all consumer electronic manufacturers have dreamed of. Unfortunately, it's arriving about four years too soon. The smartest thing that Sony could do is drop Blu-Ray, forget about it, parnter up with HD DVD and call it a day and then chalk it up to another blunder and release the PS3 with a dvd drive and sell it for $299.

    Personally, I can emphasize when the President of Sony says that the PS3 is probably "too cheap". The PS3 is an amazing piece of hardware for $600. It defines state of the art. Plus, it most likely is costing Sony at LEAST $800 to make the PS3, but the consumer does not care about such things.
    --
    • I predict that the PS3 will sell for about $2,500, or more on ebay the day it's released and pretty much stay that way for a long time.
      So what you're saying is that I should invest my spare cash in getting a PS3 (or four) on pre-order & then immediately eBay it?

      Note to self: start saving cash
      • I predict that the PS4 will be twice as powerful, have 6 times the storage capacity, and so pricey only the 5 richest kings in Europe could afford it.
  • by moochfish (822730) on Wednesday May 17, 2006 @03:34PM (#15353323)
    $500 for the *basic* machine, and then the ability to individually upgrade it, presumably at a total higher cost than getting the $600 model is just not attractive to me as a consumer. A ton of reasons to get the PS3 are in the premium machine, and by gutting them out to save a $100 makes the lower end one look like crap.

    Sony made a fatal error here. Allow me to illustrate using cars as the analogy.

    Wii is the Honda.
    Xbox 360 is the Lexus.
    PS3 is the BMW.

    Each targets a different audience, which is most clearly defined as you go lower (Wii) or higher (PS3). The type of consumer that can afford a PS3 is much less common that the type that can afford the Wii, just like with cars. Sony, in an attempt to compensate for their lower end model (a 3 series BMW), offers upgrades that will make it functioanlly the same as its higher model (a 7 series BMW). Unfortunately, the people that CARE about money aren't the type to want to buy the BMW in the first place, let alone dump MORE money on it to upgrade it. When's the last time you saw some guy driving around a tricked out BMW?

    As it stands, the high end Xbox 360 is BETTER than the crap version PS3 since it includes a hard drive, has wireless controller support, has a large and established Xbox Live community, etc. So why is it a consumer is going to choose PS3? Brand loyalty? Banking on that alone is a tough sell, Sony execs. If you're coming late to the market and using HARDWARE as your most intesely marketed difference, you either give us better hardware for the same or lower price, or you start changing your pitch.
  • by guidryp (702488) on Wednesday May 17, 2006 @04:23PM (#15353705)
    I really would prefer to see Sony succeed, rather than roll over and give microsoft another monopoly.

    But the management of this company is out of touch. Rather than use it's content division to help HW sales, it uses it, to poison the brand (DRM rootkits).

    Next up it wants to use it's new game machine as a trojan horse for Blu-Ray. Good plan. Too bad they totally messed it up, but over pricing it and importantly not including digital video outputs (DVI/HDMI) at all, let alone not having HDCP to protect us from that ICT garbage.

    Is there a Sony HD set that doesn't have HDMI inputs? Where is the obvious and needed synergy between product lines.

    A trojan horse mentality works if you get it for free. Ie price it like your competetion, but give them a free bonus of Blu-Ray. If you force people not interested in Blu Ray, to pay more for Blu Ray, you likely just lost a sale.

    If you can't be price competetive. Drop the Blu Ray drive on the base model.
    Base: DVD drive, Flash memory, Component output. $299.
    Top: Blu Ray drive, HD, HDMI output, pack in movie $499.

    Again use the studio as an asset. You should be able to include a movie essentially for free.

    Sony continues to trash its brand value on a daily basis. If I were a shareholder, I would be bailing out fast. No signs of a turnaround on this barge.
  • People who keep talking about how insane the announced price for the PS3 is are conveniently forgetting the $2000 PS2s for sale on eBay during the initial release week. Witness the $1000+ XBox 360.

    The manufacturers have got to realize that if people can go buy one and turn right around and sell it for 2-3x markup, they're underpricing them.

    Maybe if the price is still insane after the first month, I'll say Sony's insane. Until then, they're just pricing it at what they feel the market will bear.

    I *still* b
    • The manufacturers have got to realize that if people can go buy one and turn right around and sell it for 2-3x markup, they're underpricing them.

      The only reason this is true is because of the hype and artificial restrictions on supply. Why was Xbox 360 selling for $1000 plus at release? Microsoft restricted the release to a small number of units. The problem vendors have with setting the release price extremely high is twofold. First, it sours a large part of the market to the product based on price.

"Summit meetings tend to be like panda matings. The expectations are always high, and the results usually disappointing." -- Robert Orben

Working...