Slashdot Mirror
PS3 Prices in Europe Revealed
fistfullast33l writes "Ars Technica is reporting that the VP of Sony Computer Entertainment Europe revealed pricing for the Playstation 3 on a French radio show today. From the article: 'Strict currency translation suggests that American pricing may be in the range of US $605 to $726, but currency exchange alone can't tell the story. Case in point: the Xbox 360. In the United States, the Xbox 360 retails for $399, which is only 320 [euros] in exchange. Yet the Xbox 360 is priced at 399 [euros] throughout most of Europe.' The article goes on to speculate that 'the days of multi-console ownership may be coming to an end for many gamers' based on the Xbox 360 and the PS3 prices."
If I get just one of the next generation consoles, I'll still be a multi-console owner; I just need to buy the Revolution.
><));>
That is way higher than I expected. Even with the console Euro-flation seen by the Xbox 360 ($399 vs. $460), that means a $500+ PS3 here in the states.
Goodbye, PS3 marketshare.
What do y'all think? Is this price point as huge a blunder by Sony as it appears to be on the surface?
They act like the only way to own multiple consoles is to buy them both right when they come out. They will both eventually drop in price, so even if someone doesn't pick up both at launch, down the line they could quite possibly pick up the other.
PlayStation 3 will sell for between EUR 499 and EUR 599...
There. I think that says it. The rest of the article that is about ps3 prices in europe talks about xbox prices in the US. wtf.
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
The article goes on to speculate that 'the days of multi-console ownership may be coming to an end for many gamers' based on the Xbox 360 and the PS3 prices.
This is why I think the Nintendo Revolution will really take off. I've come to the conclusion that I am done with consoles and moved 100% to the PC. If I'm going to spend a lot of money on something that will entertain me I want it to have something that I can use for other then entertainment. Which is why I'm much happier buying a PC. Yet Nintendo's game consoles are cheap enough for me to pick-up and not feel like I wasted a ton of money on it if I only play it once a week at most.
...and the snippet only gives us the US equivilent, not the actual european prices.
I am not on your continent on inside your quaint monetary system you insensitive clod!
Actual european prices: "between 499 and 599."
Not on inside of our monetary system: "US $605 to $726."
This must the most nonsensical post I've seen on slashdot all week.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
The same is true of Blu-Ray as a whole. Numbers like $1000 and $1500 for simple players have been thrown around.
Either Sony bite a very big bullet and swallow hundreds of dollars in cost (which they probably are already at $599), or accept that it would be a minority console for several years until prices could fall - giving XBox 360, Revolution and HD-DVD a massive headstart.
Maybe this will be a nail in the coffin of Sony. I can't see any easy route out for them that will be acceptable to the stockmarket. Maybe they will be worth more in bits and someone will force that on them?
For those too lazy to read TFA...
499 Euro - 599 Euro
Out of my price range...
Viva la Revolution!
Read my blog posts on usability.
Normally I'd just tell you to RTFA, but since you asked so politely I'll add another F or two...
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
and the snippet only gives us the US equivilent, not the actual european prices.
I read the article, and it stated the following: "In a radio show with France's Europe 1, Fornay said that the PlayStation 3 will sell for between 499 and 599." Must I be new here?
I understand Sony's stance that even at $500 that it represents a good value since you get BluRay. I also understand that the early adopters won't blink an eye over that price (the 360 launch is a good example of this). But I would venture to guess that if Sony is not able to get the price down south of $400 _quickly_, that they WILL lose this round. Around $300 seems to be the magic point where people can fairly easily justify a purchase, it can be an impulse buy. North of $500 is just plain no-mans land, a place that you absolutely do not want to be.
Yes, for those who don't know I do mean approximately between Sorbitan monopalmitate and Ferrous lactate.
Not really, my keyboard is not cut out for all these fancy new characters, I have a symbol for 'ovelos' on my keyboard. but not euro. or a shift key it appears.
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
Well, I guess you won't see the lower price as an argument in favor of the console during the PC vs Consoles jousts on internet forums much longer.
This, of course, is really bad for sony with it's apparently much higher price, lateness to the game, and DRM shenanigans. The only way for the PS3 to come out a winner is because of anti-microsoft mentalities, sony fanboyism, or a really killer exclusive title. One of the big reasons Sony came to the forefront of consoles is because it effectively stole the Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest franchises away from Nintendo. Unless they can invent a breakthrough franchise a-la GTA or Halo that will be exclusive to them, they're essentially dead in the water.
Nintendo, on the other hand, has essentially re-invented the console for the Revolution. Not only is the controller revolutionary, but also the game distribution and game compatability platforms. The idea that I can buy one console, play both new games and old games, and not even have to go to the store to buy many of the games is going to put both the Xbox 360 and PS3 to shame. Because of this Nintendo doesn't compete directly with Sony or Microsoft.
Nintendo has more exclusive franchises, more backwards compatability, and will cost less. Even when you compare the 360 and PS3 directly Nintendo comes out ahead. Screw polygon count and cpu speed; give me my Revolution.
><));>
I don't doubt that the Blue Ray might be a thing of the future but that sure is a heavy price when you are technically an early adopter of the technology. What will happen is that the tech will catch on, become cheaper and improve. Then you are left with an aged PS3 that you paid way too much for. That or Blue Ray will not catch on at all . . . cough . . . cough . . .UMD media . . . cough. I think Sony is taking a major risk here. Not only are they fighting a console war, they are taking on a format war. I think they have the deck stacked against them.
The PS3 price is probably what I thought it would be. It was never going to be cheap. In some respects, if I can get 3 good years out of the console, then the price is OKish. But the real problem with the next-gen for me is the price of games. I love gaming. I earn a decent amount. But at this rate, I'm not going to be buying many next-gen games. They will be at least 25% more expensive than titles from this generation. That much is clear from the 360 games that are out already. I'm only going to be able to buy a handful of games a year at that price. Or I'm going to have to wait until they come out on budget. Pfft. Great.
I'm more worried about this generation transition than any other before. The cost of games is going to mean fewer games sell. And of course, games will cost loads more to develop. That means that publishers/developers focus on "guaranteed" sales, which means more sequels, more licenses and more cynically marketed crap. And less innovation and risk. Yeh, yeh, I know we've heard it all before, but I'm feeling pretty down about it. Maybe I'll just stick to mariokart on the SNES.
If this is true, I honestly can't see the PS3 being a player in the current gen console wars. Sitting next to the sub-$200 Revolution or the re-release of the Xbox360, the pricetag will scare many people away regardless of the games they offer.
Indeed, their only justification seems to be that "it's not an expensive console, it's a cheap Blu-Ray player that ALSO plays games." While that may have worked for DVD and the PS2, when America was just beginning to move en masse to DVD and the jump from VHS was dramatic and simple, it's a recipe for disaster with the PS3 and Blu-Ray.
I remember a story not too long ago that showed fewer than half of Americans with HD capabilities had it hooked up correctly. Market penetration for HD in general is stagnant, and a multidude of ever-changing standards exist. Couple this with the fact that, while Blu-Ray is better than DVD in many ways, it's not better enough. This is nothing like the jump from VHS to DVD, and there's no way Blu-Ray alone will drive sales.
Not to sound like a fanboy, but Nintendo stands to hit the ground running and comein second or even first this round. (A lot depends on how well the Revolution controller works, what games come out for the 360 in the coming months, and if/when Microsoft releases a cheaper or updated 360).
GeekNights!
Late Night Radio for Geeks!
and I own all three current (previoius?) gen consoles. it's almost as though the console itself is becoming more significant than the games, and for me that's a bad thing.
I still have a few (!) games left to finish from the last few years, so I'll be ok for a while.
In other news, a deck of playing cards is still a dollar and change.
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
"Fornay said that the PlayStation 3 will sell for between 499 and 599. Fornay acknowledged that the price may seem steep, but he emphasized that that price should be seen as inexpensive when one considers that the console will also play Blu-ray movies."
For people who won't be buying Blu-ray movies, that's a 499 to 599 piece of gaming hardware.
I expected it to be hight...but jeez. Looks like I won't be playing MGS4 until I am as old as snake in those fancy-dancy trailers.... Guess its going to be some tactical espionage with my old friend mario.
my site of misleading and incorrect information!
Sweet zombie Jesus. I do believe I'll be waiting on the much more sane $199 price-point. I have no desire to invest in a Neo*Geo.
because they usually include VAT (in Germany you can't advertise prices without including VAT) and you may also have a mandatory warranty period (2years in Germany) which some companies use as an argument to increase the price. That's why you often have differences to the simple currency conversion. Of course some companies just arbitrarily set a different price in Europe depending on what they think the market may yield.
Especially for CDs, DVDs and games the prices a arbitrary and they try to artificially seperate the markets via region codes and other such things.
***Quis custodiet ipsos custodes***
But based on Nintendo of Europe's average level of competence in getting Gamecube and DS games to Europe, I hope you're ready and willing to import all your Revolution games from the states...
Nobody wants another 3DO, but it is quite possible... (The 3D0 was about $500-700)
Xbox360 non-gimped version is $399. Seeing as how the PS3 is throwing in blu-ray and better specs, I could see $499 as being somewhat reasonable, but still on the high end. But there is no way I'm paying over $500 for a console. I could get a revolution and a 360 for that price. And who cares if the PS3 has blu-ray? In a couple years (when more than a dozen HD movies are out) dual HD-DVD and blu-ray players will be out, and most TVs only have one HDMI slot.
This, of course, is really bad for sony with it's apparently much higher price, lateness to the game, and DRM shenanigans.
Because, of course, Microsoft are such anti-DRM pro-consumer crusaders and all.
I'm also not sure why you think Sony's "lateness to the game" is a problem, in the same post you state your preference for the Nintendo Revolution? The Revolution will probably be coming out at about the same time as the PS3, probably novemberish of this year. That's not a bad thing-- I think november of this year will be a time many people will feel ready to buy a new game console. It just seems to me that either coming out "late to the game" in November 2006 is going to be a problem for both Sony and Nintendo, or it will be a problem for neither of them.
It seems to me you really specifically have something against Sony. While you make a number of good points, the worth of your post is significantly brought down by the fact that throughout your post you attack Sony for sins you absentmindedly absolve the other consolemakers of, and you absentmindedly assume that what advantages Sony has will magically disappear. You say "Unless [Sony] can invent a breakthrough franchise a-la GTA or Halo that will be exclusive to them, they're essentially dead in the water."-- What about the four or five franchises that are already exclusive to the Playstation console, a couple of which have already seen early versions demoed running on PS3 hardware, and more of which we are likely to see at E3?
If you don't like or want the Playstation 3, that's fine and reasonable; everyone has preferences. But it seems unreasonable to me that you show signs of such a blatant agenda against Sony in the same post you have the gall to accuse other people of being biased or "fanboys". I hope in future you can try to be more objective on these subjects, because your vendetta against Sony is seriously distracting from the meat of your posts and may turn people away from what good points you do make.
If this is true, it means you can purchase a 360 and a revolution for the same price as a PS3, which seems a much better deal than a PS3 alone. Honestly, the revolution seems gimicky to me, but it will be aweseome if Nintendo can pull it off. I think I'll feel more optimistic once some videos come out of people playing actual games on it. I also wish they were doing HD, maybe at least they will support widescreen 480p. If they pull it off and add widescreen support, I'll pick one up. The 360 looks interesting to me because of the downloadable arcade games and achievements. The only thing that interests me about the PS3 is the better hardware and greater game base, but I don't think that is going to be worth shelling out over 1/2 a grand.
Unfortunately this means that Microsoft definitely isn't going to feel compelled to drop 360 prices anyways. I have a couple of friends who were hoping for a bump down to $299 for the premium versions in a move by MS to get more of an early lead on the PS3.
Or maybe this is all an elaborate play from Sony to keep 360 prices up until they can release the PS3? Get your conspiracy hats on...
"Revolution + Xbox360 is greater than the PS3" is what the title was supposed to say, but the symbol got edited out by /.
the days of multi-console ownership may be coming to an end for many gamers' based on the Xbox 360 and the PS3 prices
That may be true if you are only considering the PS3 and Xbox 360, but with a predicted price as low as 99 USD (although 149 USD is more likely) the Revolution is going to be the second, and indeed "must have" machine for those not wanting to miss out on the novel and exclusive games which it will bring to the party. And this is exactly why Nintedo has repeatedly stated that they are not competing with the Sony and Microsoft. Whilst the press seems to have a hard job believing this, it's very likely true. Nintendo won't care which if any of the other consoles players own, as long as they buy a Revolution.
It's may in fact be difficult for many people to justify paying out for Sony or Microsoft's latest offering, especially when you consider that you can buy a decent PC base unit from Dand just add a good powerful graphics card for around the same money. The Revolution on the other hand is a no brainer. It's a console that's actually priced like console, and people will be much more comfortable paying that kind of money.
Let's be honest, the graphical capabilities and raw processing power of the current generation consoles are largely going unused in most current titles. So do you really want to be paying four times the price just for the extra visual gloss on the same old games? Most gamers can easily see the potential in the Revolution's new controller, and so won't want to be without a Revolution. The question they'll be asking themselves, is do they really need any more than it's offering, and more importantly, are the other two actually worth the money?
Let's face it, with the development costs involved in producing games for the PS3 and 360, it'll be impractical financially for studios to release titles for just one of the two, which equates to very little exclusive content between them. However, with it's significantly lower development costs, both in terms of development tools and the man-hours required to master new hardware and produce games, and unique controller, the Revolution is going to be the only console the studios will really be able to afford to create original games for. It'll be the only console the smaller studios will be able to turn out good games for.
The Revolution is apparently being written off as being underpowered and not a massive leap in terms of power/architecture from their current generation console, but Nintendo themselves aren't stupid, and I suspect things are playing out exactly as they expected. They'll let the other two blow phenominal budgets on competing with each other to sell consoles which they've priced way outside the traditional console market, and then give the people what they want - a good low cost console with an excellent range of games. Add into the picture a massive range of downloadable legacy titles, and they'll clean up. How can they not?
My gut feeling is that much of the apparent "public" disappointment that is apparent from the media is in fact being seeded by Microsoft and Sony, who need to make people feel they need their new shiny consoles. I really can't see the Revolution being anything other than a phenominal success.
And now for the analysis: use a computer.
Why is this a good case to cite? Is it the norm? If so, why? That's just the case of the XBox 360, but why would it apply to any other console? It doesn't even make sense for it to apply to the XBox 360.
Suddenly the inclusion of Blu-Ray doesn't seem like such a great idea. I know I'll be thinking twice when I look at the price tag and realize that a lot of that will go to recoup the loss on the drive and not towards gaming goodness which is primarily what I will buy the console for.
Twinstiq, game news
That's a lot of money, but I'll still buy one.
but don't worry, you can have mine
Blah blah Sony's doomed blah blah Revolution for t3h w1n, blah blah something about the 360 blah blah blah.
Pretty sure I covered all the points there.
Chicken fried butter sticks? Do
Although the Euro is a more expensive compared to the US dollar, in Europe we pay Value Added Taxes when we buy virtually everything.
The VAT is 16%-19% depending on the country.
So 399 Euros is actually 335 euros for the console + 64 euros tax.
For god's sake, some critical reaction is not an automatic troll post. Parent raises some intellegent points and is hardly a troll.
Maybe the reason that Sony is pricing so high is they learned a lesson from a basic economics class(or Rollercoaster Tycoon). They saw that the Xbox 360 sold at a relatively low price point, but that meant that more people were willing to buy it at launch, resulting in a shortage of XBox 360's.
Keep in mind that Microsoft is losing money with each console sold (which they expect to recoup in software sales), so they really could have raised the price at launch and still sold out of 360's because of the high demand. Now this may have helped their short-term bottom line, but not without the risk of the strategy backfiring through a loss in brand perception. For example, the public thinks that the 360 is too expensive or trying to screw customers, so only the hardcore buy it, resulting in a season of fair profitability at launch, but at the expense of mass adoption. By avoiding this strategy Microsoft also built the perception that the 360 is a must buy because people are on a waiting list to buy it.
By initially pricing the PS3 at $499 and $599(USD) Sony can control their lossses during the frentic launch season (when their supply will be exceeded by the demand at any sub-$1000 price), and then have room to cut the price later (when manufacturing gets up to speed) and let the mainstream feel like they are getting a deal. Of course, they risk alienating those same mainstream customers that they need to pick up later (so that the whole economies of scale thing works).
My brother and I share a PS2 that he bought used two years ago(probably for about $200 w/ games). And although I like some of the Sony games and the whole variety out there for the PS2, I really can't see myself buying a PS3 until a full version gets down to $299.
Nothing can beat the ambience of the entire console itself. The best games ever existing were Road Rash and Street Fighter 2 Turbo and Twisted and a few others. The 3DO was the era when they were trying to use real picture content on a CDROM with an optimized software engine to deliver that content together. It wasn't a verry dynamic console, but they did it correct and superb for what year it was delivered. The 3DO has the best implementation of blue-screen artisanry that I have ever seen in any of the recent consoles to this day. 3DO was also a platform that was popularly licensed, and perhaps evinced it as a platform ready to be more "open" than what was offered by Nintendo and Sega and Atarii at the time; Panasonic and Goldstar and a few others were licensed to produce their own consoles.
You all need to experience Road Rash on the 3DO -- it's the ultimate in comparison to a game of quick wit, cut-scenes that make Night Trap look like diahrea, it used the better garage-music of the day that included Sound Garden, and the intermission between races was such a Kai's Power Goo nightmare. Oh andFIFA soccer was on that platform too, and it was...soccer (yay team-Antarctica). FIFA soccer on 3DO was our cup holder while we were entertained by what few titles were put on the 3DO. I can't remember it too well because I haven't used it in 6 years, ever since someone decided to consolidate all the compact discs into one of those bullshit disc-folders that make it easy for someone to steal or lose the entire collection. All in all, it's a good thing that having the documentation to a title is higher standing in law to download the data and re-burn on a homebrew disc: thereby being that anyone with a compact disc is not the owner, even if it's the disc from the box; the title is in the evidence, and paper/dead-tree-protocol wipes more corporate judge-ass from their tresspass than a compact-disc cup holder.
without prejudice
If sony was smart, they'd position the ps2, or an enhanced version of it, against the revolution.
Well, there's the 480p, but nothing yet on whether there'll be support for 848x480. Will be interesting to see. At least it has progressive scan.
Lalala
I think I just heard a big freaking pin drop somewhere.
And the Sony fanboys go crazy...
Seriously, if this is true, I won't be surprised. Kuturagi has been saying for a while now that this was going to be "expensive".
This is going to prove how much people are willing to pay for their systems.
A very stark contrast to what Nintendo is saying and planning.
Insert Sig Here
Your math needs help.
Last gen, avg game cost = $50. $60 for "special edition" versions.
Next gen, avg game cost = $50-$60. $70 for "special edition" versions.
50-50/50 = 0%
60-50/50 = 20%
70-60/60 = 16.7%
So you're looking at UP TO 20% more expensive; a far cry from "at least" 25% more expensive.
Um, spend about 6 months cracking different versions of firmware only to have Sony update it regularly whenever you put a game/movie in? Then realize that its no longer worth the trouble of cracking version X.00 and beyond only to have your PS3 turned into an oversized, overpriced paperweight because you can't play anything official without destroying all your homebrewed software on it?
No, posse up a few grand
Few grand!? Whoa! If I had a few grand I'd simply buy a PC!
Professional developers are already bitching about how new, complicated and difficult it is to code for the Cell processor already. What makes you think the open source community is going be crack the firmware and then be able to code for it like some homebrewed Linux box?
nt
I think the better question is this... Do people want the added features enough to justify the console price? More specifically do people really want Blu-Ray? If not, then at that price, they will have only the hard-core gamers buying. If people actually do want Blu-Ray, then the price is fairly reasonable. So ask yourself that question. The gaming point is a given. Do the extra features matter enough to you? If I were Sony, I would start demand by offering Blu-Ray discs for the SAME price as DVDs. If they don't, then I myself am skipping this generation of HD and video games.
It'll be the only console the smaller studios will be able to turn out good games for.
I stopped reading when you said this. Anyone ever here of Marble Blast Ultra or Geometry Wars for the Xbox 360? Both really good, unique games, one of which is made by an indie developer. So your point is already invalid.
Microsoft is all about making game development easier with it's XNA tools and is hunting down indie developers to put new games on Xbox Live Arcade. You may want to hate on Microsoft, but they have already demonstrated that they what gamers want and have already delivered products that meet that need.
People talk like only Nintendo innovates these days, and it simply is not true.
I've seen some research data snips here and there, and data shows that items prices over 500 drop in sales from simply being 450 or 475. I'm not in marketing or the sort, but most marketing people can tell you in the market research that price POINT, is more important than the price its self. In other words, once it goes over a certain invisible line in price, it instantly turns off consumers no matter if its just a little or alot over.
So if it's price is over 500, parents in paticular will pick a 360 over a p3 just because of the cost, figuring their kid will be happy with either one.
But of course, common sense says if its not worth the price then people wont buy it. But we wont know until its on the market. I did see the SDK ps3 at GDC though, its huge! haha.
As for me, and many people, I will stick to PC, where the costs are becoming much lower. To a degree. Video cards are expensive for the high end cards.
But the best thing about the pc is all the FREE Games!!! And BETA testing is awesome imo. Like right now, im beta testing this awesome, er I mean Alpha testing this awesome little game called Armada Online, and it's open Alpha, so that means you can all go play for FREE TOO!. Seriously go play it so I have some people to play against. honestly. plz...
Anyways Microsoft is probably happy about the news, and the fact they are bringing in the millions while ps3 figures out how much it will cost.
Black Sky
2D Elite Inspired Game
no one doubts this piece of revelation by an obscure Euro guy brought to you by the BS factory called Ass Technica?
Death to Sony. Nintendo should've never brought this non-gaming Medusa (nice term - Sony is multi-tentacled) into the industry.
:P
Perhaps MS will lose another $4 billion and leave the industry to real gaming companies, instead of megacorporate Goliaths with ulterior motives..
One can wish.. right?
THREE YEARS?
Are you even REMOTELY a "real" console gamer?
That's absoloutely Microsoft style pitiful (release the Xbox "last" in the last race and the replacement first in the next gen race) value for money, not good (compared to PS2)
Consoles are generally a 5 year item give or take a year, implying 3 is good, no just no.
Not once you factor in high quality video cables / addon memory cards / addon peripherals / games / etc etc not even close.
A high priced ps3? You guys know what this means right?
1. Pre-order a ps3
2. Get it the day it comes out
3. Sell it off EBay
4. Profit!!!
This is a financial situation where I can only see that both Sony screws itself over.
(For the sake of argument, let's say the PS3 costs $600 USD.)
1. Sony scares people away based on price point alone.
2. Sony is going to take a gigantic loss per console sold, and must compensate by matching or surpassing the already unacceptable price of Xbox 360 games, scaring even more people away.
Casual gamers who just buy Madden and GTA year after year (read: the majority of the market) will be able to do so on the 360, let alone the possibility of Madden getting on the Revolution. I'm not sure what Sony is trying to prove by making their product the most expensive. Whatever it is, I hope it doesn't work. This uptrend in the cost of games and console hardware is one that has to stop.
Long live Nintendo--innovation and reasonable price points for all.
This guy is obviously a corporate shill working for sony. Plus, he tries to turn the tables on someone else! LOL!
fucking douchebag.
15 years ago, when I was 10, everyone hated Nintendo and how their stuff was overpriced, and how Sega was better. (Remember $75 for Mario 3?) Now it has turned around and everyone on Slashdot (then, BBS's) is praising Nintendo and badmouthing Sony.
Melissa
"Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let's move on and steal the Java language." - Visual J++ Product Manager
Screw them. There really is nothing on offer with the 360 or PS3 that would convince me to part with that kind of money. I'm much happier building up a collection of quality titles for my xbox and PS2 by purchasing them on ebay for £2-£3 each. Maybe in a couple of years when the price drop and my current consoles give up their magic smoke I might think about buying one of them but for now I'm happier to have my bank balance looking a bit more healthy than it would.
To err is human. To forgive is not company policy.
Well the young people in spain have an income of 700-900(universitiers). If they expect that we can buy a ps3 for 500 they are a little crazy.
Sorry for my english.
Imagine, all that power. The possibilities. And what will the open source community do?
Run gentoo on it? Build a beowulf cluster?
No, posse up a few grand to get someone with too much time on their hands to get windows fucking xp and or vista to run on it.
Hi Tod, I realise that this is a personal question, but are you fucking schizophrenic or something?
I mean was that supposed to make any fucking sense at all?
The Open Source community is going to try and get Vista running on the PS3 are they? I suppose that made sense to you when the voices in your head were saying it, did it Tod? Or was it the version of Jesus that lives in your icebox that told you to say those words?
What the World needs is an anti-psychotic drug that has the side effect of preventing people from typing.
I can still own multiple next gen consoles. I'll just do what I did this time: wait until the NEXT nextgen consoles are starting to make a buzz in the news and the prices of the OLD nextgen consoles drops to $150 used. By then the good games will be cheap, the console battle will be over for that generation and I'll know which one to buy, and all I have to do is thank the early adopters for conducting the best type of market study out there: the real one.
The only thing that interests me about the PS3 is the better hardware and greater game base, but I don't think that is going to be worth shelling out over 1/2 a grand.
How the fuck do you know how good the hardware and game base are going to be? Do you have some clairvoyant shit going on there, huh?
Do you work on the psychic hotline? Is that why you call yourself "Nightspirit"? I assumed you were just a dick, but maybe there's a spiritual reason?
Ah, the sweet tears of Sony fanboys. We have had to listen to them say "Oh, it will be faster and cheaper and better then teh stupid 360!!! Down with Micro$oft!!!!" over and over again. As I read these comments, the fanboys seem quiet....
~nate
I'd like to know where you're pulling the $99 and $149 figures from. Last I heard, it was expected to be between $200 and $250.
Nintendo does themselves a disservice if their price makes the Revolution look like a "disposable" console, and it will at a price that low.
I've seen those prices in a couple of Slashdot articles, or at least in articles linked directly from Slashdot.
As I've said, I firmly believe Nintendo intend to clean up in the sub-$200 console market. A unit which is only roughly the price of 2 or 3 games for one of the current generation of consoles will likely sell phenominally well. The GameCube is selling at $60 or so, and by all accounts, aside from the controller, the technology incorporated in the Revolution is nothing special, keeping production costs down to a minimum, so it's not unreasonable to suppose they could sell the console at $149 or less.
They hardly do themselves a disservice by selling a console at a price point where it's easily within the reach of every gamer, especially those who've traditionally not been interested in gaming, who Nintendo have singled out as a very important target audience. In fact I strongly believe that it's very much part of the plan they've had all along. Ultimately, like Microsoft and Sony, they'll make their money on the games, and having as large an installed base as possible is therefore a good long term strategy.
The decision to buy a $400 or $700 console is quite a big one, and as the original article says, it means that owning both is going to be something relatively few people will do. But, at a low price point, the Revolution will be a perfect second console for the serious gamer, or an ideal low cost single console for those with less of a budget or lust for games.
From the hardware details released so far, I think it's very likely that they'll be able to sell the units at a sub $150 price point and still make a profit, maybe even sub-$100, although I do think that's pretty unlikely.
Actually for those following the "PS3 saga!" this one is no surprise, even with Sony eating part of the costs, due to the "Cool!" (tm.) expensive components the PS3 uses, like BLU-RAY, 1080p capable 3d card, more USB ports you could shake a stick at and Blue tooth wireless net support, The PS3 is easily going to be the most advanced and most expensive next generation console . (sort of like the PSP of consoles)
The big problem though, is that even with those expensive changes, the PS3 titles havent managed to look all that different from those of their competitors (specially without a HDTV) and I can almost bet most (if not all) first generation titles will be released in regular Dvd's not blu-ray's.
This is the real reason why Sony decided to delay the launch until the costs could be reduced and more interesting launch titles were available, unfortunately the console launch can only be delayed for a time and although the price has dropped quite a bit (From $700 to ($600-$500)) it still manages to top the rest, additionally first generation titles still dont seem to use the PS3 hardware properly. (check out the gameplay videos at youtube.com) and I specially dont expect EA titles to do any different.
To make things worst Sony PR has been bombing fans with "target renders" and "realtime demos" of suposedly "possible" images for the PS3 (they even carried the tradition in the GDC with Motorstorm and a clearly prerrendered Ratchet and clank "preview") far, far beyond the capabilities of the earlier generations titles (KZ2, Motorstorm and maybe even MGS4 itself, etc.) IMO Big mistake, eventually all fans will realize the PS3 is not capable of delivering at THAT level at the time, they probably wont be very amussed.
High price, fraudulent imagery and advetising, no Killer apps (unless MGS4 is ready for deploy of course) and dissapointing First generation titles? the PS3 has a lot of work cut out in front of it. Lets see how the final launch goes in November (my birth month!).
Go ahead MOD my day!
More opinions here
Thank you. The submitter somehow forgot to include the European price of the PS3 in his article summary about the unveiling of the European price of the PS3. Incompetence, or a devious plot to get Slashdotters to actually RTFA before posting?
How much for a Media Drive connected to a Hard Drive and Graphics Card controlled by a simple input controller that can do only a few things ?! ...
Then paying over $49 US for fancy packaging for each title.
Something seems n0t right.
-Fiend-
That'll be today's prices then yes? You try the prices in 2 year's time.
Can you remember the prices for current gen 2 years ago?
So yes, I'm comfortable with "at least".
At least 3 years before something shinier comes is a good return for me. I'll keep the thing forever anyway. It'll go nicely with my SNES, N64, Amiga, Dreamcast, PSone, PS2, Gamecube, Xbox.
;-)
SNES will still be my best value investment long after this gen has finished.
Real console gamer. Pfft. Whatever. Like that affects my ability to decide whether something is a reasonable return on my money.
And a cheap tea-light, perfect for shadow puppets, remains about $0.20 - a lot cheaper than a TV or movie tickets.
I'm imagining your kids don't like you much though.
That is, of course, assuming you don't whip out the free bible you got at a hotel for wild and crazy nights of bible reading.
All entertainment is not created equal. The cool thing about capitalism is that things generally cost what the market will bear. A games console costs around $500 (dropping to $200 a couple of years later) with games around $50-60 because enough people think that's a reasonable price to pay for what they get. A deck of cards costs around a dollar and change because that's what the market will bear for that rivetting form of entertainment. Bibles are free in hotel rooms because Gideons wants the market saturation they'd get with bibles if there's no cost for the market to bear. That, even despite their high costs, more people seem to play console games than play cards or read bibles could be taken as an indicator that, relatively, they're considered quite a bit more fun and thus worth the money.
(And, yes, I realise the first comment was likely a joke - the concept still holds true though)
Are you a moron? The specs for the PS3 are out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ps3
The japanese are not too keen on the 360, so history + developers = likely shitty game base.
Yes I think you just prooved the need of said drug.
that's, like, a lot of dudes. A veritable multidude...
Ok, sorry. I'll be good now.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
So sony is trying to base its large price on the fact that their console can play Blue-Ray movies. Whoo-freaking-hoo. I used to try to use my XBox to play DVDs and I hated it. It just wasn't what I wanted. Blue-Ray movies are probably going to be way more expensive to buy. Plus, HD-DVD may end up being the format of choice at the start. Its just not enough to FOR ME to pay that much for a video game console.
Click Click Bloody Click PANCAKES!