Slashdot Mirror
Ken Kutaragi's Famous Last Words
When we look back on this E3, I think one of the moments we're most clearly going to remember is the dead silence in the Sony press conference following the price announcement. Eurogamer and GameDaily has coverage of Phil Harrison's spin work, trying to recover from that moment, discussing how Sony is not ripping off Nintendo and Microsoft probably won't meet their 10 million units goal. More interestingly, they discuss an interview with Ken Kutaragi conducted by a Japanese website. From that piece: "SCEI president Ken Kutaragi has defended the PlayStation 3's high price tag once again, declaring that not only will consumers be prepared to pay the cost but that the console is 'probably too cheap.' In an interview with Japanese website IT Media, partially translated by IGN, Kutaragi said: 'This is the PS3 price. Expensive, cheap - we don't want you to think of it in terms of game machines ... For instance ... Is it not nonsense to compare the charge for dinner at the company cafeteria with dinner at a fine restaurant? It's a question of what you can do with that game machine. If you can have an amazing experience, we believe price is not a problem.'"
In the last 120 days, the value of the dollar has gone from about 120 yen to under 110. If this trend continues, it could give the 360 a pretty decent home-field advantage. Granted, all components are made outside the US (and possibly outside of Japan), but demonimating the wealth in dollars is probably much easier than doing so in Yen.
You know, Ken, if the gaming press is saying that's probably too expensive, and a lot of hard-core gamers are looking at your price and honestly wondering if they can even afford it, maybe you should listen.
On the other hand, by E3 it was already too late to change course on that.
It's amazing how badly E3 went for Sony. I'd say Microsoft at least broke even, Nintendo scored in a big way, almost entirely at the expense of Sony, which lost big.
On Slashdot, digg, and other gaming sites I've been looking at, the Sony fanboy has overnight become an endangered species. That is what is really telling me Sony has a problem. If even the Retardusfuckwitis Internetus, a species Sony nearly owned last week, is defecting, you're gonna die.
IF you see the PS3 as more than a game console, and intend to use it as a Blue-Ray disc player and/or whatever other features Sony decides to add to it, then it might be worth it. From a purely gaming perspective, unless there is some game only on the PS3 you can't live without, it just ain't worth it.
If you can't beat them, embrace and extend them.
I think it depends on the situation, and the person. If you're hungry, and you just want food, it would be nonsensicle to go to the fancy restaurant when you could get a filling burrito from a value menu.
On the other hand, if you're trying to impress a guest or a boss, you don't bring them to Taco Bell, you bring them to a fancy restaurant.
But just how fancy are we talking here? I don't think this analogy is valid, ESPECIALLY in today's world. 'Fancy' usually amounts to an Olive Garden or some other such chain restaurant, whose prices are reasonable. If we were talking about the 1600's, this would be a different story, of course. Fancy restaurants were all the rage, because it wasn't about being full, it was about impressing people. Then again, everyone had head lice in the 1600's. Go figure.
In the modern world, people want what is cheap and gives them the most for their money. Sony's not doing well on this point: if we extend the analogy, our 'hunger' is for games, not for music or movies or dancing and singing. It's wonderful that the fancy restaurant has live music or dancers or a movie or whatnot, but I'm not about to pay extra for it when all I want is food (games).
I'll take the cafeteria, thank you very much. Oooh, look! Pudding cups!
No, Mr. Green. Communism is just a red herring.
Or at least, that's what I'm getting out of the whole thing. We already knew the PS3 was going to be expensive to produce. The only question was how much Sony would charge for the machine.
Right... no one's ever seen next generation graphics before, or even various services via the network.
Seriously, I never had any intention of buying any of the next-gen consoles when they were released (that includes the Wii; by the time it comes out, I may finally get around to getting a DS :)), but the more I hear about the PS3, the more I realize I'm definitely not going to be buying any of the first-generation PS3s. Two versions, one an un-upgradable "cheap" version, weird controllers without force feedback, and the $500/$600 price tag all are making me that much more willing to wait for a PS3.
I'm more than willing to wait until the PSThwii gets released, with a single version that supports everything, and hopefully with wireless controllers that support force feedback. Oops, sorry, that's supposed to be "PSthree" in the style of the "PStwo" and "PSone" rereleases.
And to think, if anything, I'm a Sony fanboy...
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
Sony has done the worst possible thing, they built the Titanic of consoles. It is big, it is expensive, and it is going to sink. It tries to cator to everyone but ends up being something no one wanted.
On the face of it, it appears that 360 is cheaper than PS3 by a hefty margin. Until you factor in that the 360 can't play HD DVD media and the drive to do so costs $200. You add that price in and the 360 basically costs the same as the PS3.
Of course, you do have the option of passing on the HD-DVD addon for the 360 if you only want to play games. However, like with the PS2, I'm guessing Sony's banking that people will view the PS3 as not just a game machine but also as an introductory Bluray DVD player.
So while Kutaragi could use a degree in tact and spin, he does essentially have it right when he says you're getting value for your money.
Personally, I'll get a Wii and then wait a year or two for Bluray manufacturing to get cheap and the PS3 price to drop with it.
I was thinking of getting a 360 but didn't because I wasn't going to pay $400 for a console without games that I saw as must have (still none in my eyes, although there are games I want to play).
I probably would have bought a PS3 at $400.
There is no way I'm paying $600 for a console. When the non-crippled version is available for $400 I'll probably buy it. If I can get it used for $350 I'll buy it. I'm not paying $600 unless it comes with 5 games of my choice.
And let's forget that stupid "it's also a blu-ray player" argument. That's a great argument... for anyone who wants a blu-ray player. I don't want a blu-ray player. I don't care. I don't have a HDTV so it doesn't make a difference to me. It's like saying "buy a Sega-CD because it's also a LaserDisc player (I know it wasn't)". That's how useless it is to me (and I'm willing to bet most everyone).
When the PS2 came out the DVD player argument was actually quite good. DVD players were in demand and there was a very noticeable leap in quality over VHS, along with the convenience (no rewinding, better sound, random access, doesn't degrade with repeated playings, etc). The market was starving for DVDs so they were being bought. The ability to buy something that cost a little more than a DVD player that also played excellent games and PS1 games was a good one (not why I bought mine, but a good reason).
No one cares about Blu-Ray or HD-DVD except a few early adopters. For the rest of us, you're just asking us to buy a $600 toy (plus games at $70 or $80 a pop). No sale.
I thought MS's pricing was bad. MS is going to do very good this holiday season. All those people waiting for PS3s? Lots will buy a 360 and a couple of games instead (especially if there is a price drop or redesign, say the new 360 full version (not core) for $300 or so). The Wii will be under $300, with many rumors placing it at $150 or $200.
Billy wants a video-game system for Christmas. Do I buy him the one with Mario for $200, the one with Halo for $350, or the one with Warhawk for $600. Guess how many average american families will choose that last one.
Sony, you lead for 2 generations. Obviously, it's time for you to step aside for a while so you can look at your play book and get a clue. I hope Nintendo can put it out and get a big lead, but Sony is shooting themselves in the foot with a RPG.
The 3DO launched at $700 and could play Video CDs and do all these other things too. It died, pretty much completely due to the price (it could have been a good also-ran like the DC if the price was better). The CD-i was the same thing, and it cost $400 (when other consoles were $150-$200). It bombed too.
Sony: it was nice knowing you. Come back in a generation or two.
Go Nintendo!... and Microsoft's price suddenly looks sane and like a bargain.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
Fortunately for Sony, the PS2 came out at a time when a lot of people still didn't have DVD players so Sony was somewhat vindicated by that. But Sony has a habit of overhyping and under-delivering (i.e. using cut scenes in product promos and passing them off as real graphics). I think that this round, the PS3 is going to have a tough sell since no one seems to really want to be an early adopter of Blu-Ray / HD-DVD.
I had high hopes for this latest round of next generation systems. I bought a 360, and while it's pretty impressive there still isn't a huge library of games, let alone decent ones, for it. I want to get a PS3 but I am not going to buy one right away if there aren't any decent launch titles (learned my lesson on the 360). I still think the Wii is too gimicky but I might be proven wrong. I want to actually play with one before I decide.
I am starting to wonder if we aren't about to have another video game crash. But maybe I'm being too melodramatic. Either that or Nintendo is about to make a triumphant return to the "good old days". Will be interesting to see...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You mean DualShake, not DualShock. "Dual" referred to the two analog sticks, which the DualShake has. "Shock" referred to the force feedback, which Sony removed from the DualShake.
According to Sony, this has nothing to do with their losing a patent case with Immersion Corporation and is because their motion sensing technology would be "confused" by the force feedback technology.
It's worth noting that the Wii controller will support rumble technology along with motion detection. Personally, I'm curious if the hastely-added "motion" technology wasn't the only reason force feedback was removed, and if it weren't also due to battery concerns, since the new controller is wireless. I have a feeling that the motion feedback was added for three reasons:
Although this is all wild speculation on my behalf.
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
But the way he's saying it makes it sound like he's doing us consumers a favor by selling it so "cheap." No one is going to think that $600 is a bargain because Sony is losing money.
"This thing does science so hard, you say, 'I've never seen that much science.'" -Sam
I really don't know what the fuss is about.
Sony will charge high prices for the initial release of the PS3 and they will sell them as fast as they can make them. After demand decreases at that price, they will adjust the price to match the competition.
They can do this because there are people that will pay the initial release price and be happy to do so. The XBOX 360 was arguably underpriced on release: how many were sold on ebay for prices way above the MSRP?
Freaking about the price of the PS3 is meaningless, because the price is temporary, and will come down when it makes sense for it to do so. In the meantime, Sony will recoup their costs on a production line that is still scaling up to volume production, early adopters will voluntarily get screwed and appreciate the experience, and life will go on for everyone else.
Until then, I'll be playing games on my GameCube, PSP, and PS2, and will be generally chilling out. I suggest everyone else do the same.
-Nurf
---
not true. people don't always want what's cheap and gives them the most for their money.
the ipod is the perfect example of this. there are boundless examples of DAPs with more features at or below ipod costs. nonetheless, the ipod is synonymous with digital music in 2006 in popular culture.
I live in New York. Fancy here definitly does not amount to Olive Garden. lol. You'd be drawn and quartered before being ceremoniously fired for taking a client there.
All of which is to say - if people associate the PS3 as the premium must have gaming device, price might not be an issue. Also, if Sony gets 70% retention of the PS2 installation base, PS3 will be an awesome success. I just don't see that not happening.
un burrito me trampeó.
You want a fancy restaurant? Buy a PC.
If I had created the world I wouldn't have messed about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers
It seems that everyone has taken the "probably too cheap" statement out of context. By reading the interview it is clear that Ken means that the console is probably too cheap because Sony expects it may not be able to keep up with demand at that price.
From Sony's last quarterly earnings report, it is clear that the company is spending massively on the development and launch of the PS3. By pricing the console as high as the market will bear, they can recoup some of that money.
In other words, it doesn't make sense to sell out of your console at a lower price point when you can make more from the same number of sales by pricing it higher.
What all this means is: Expect availability numbers to be low this November if the PS3 price is very high.
Personally, I don't care about Blue-Ray and I won't care for at least a couple of years (if it makes it at all). In the meantime, I'll be enjoying the Wii and the 360 this holiday season.
Jay Bibby reviews Flash and casual Web games at... http://jayisgames.com
Ever actually *tried* escargot? Seriously, its good stuff. The texture's a bit unusual, but the flavor is amazing. Calamari's another food people go 'ew' at until they actually try it. (Of course, it doesn't hurt that I've got a gourmet chef for a friend.)
I really like the restaraunt analogy...
Yes, there is merit in eating at a "Sony" 4 or 5 star restaraunt when the situation calls for it. They are certainly prestegious and beautiful in presentation, and they have some very unique flavors to offer. But, to be honest, I have neither the stomach nor the wallet to sustain such a habit on a daily basis.
Microsoft is now in the position of "Sit-down Casual Dining Chain." That is, MS has become the Applebee's or Olive Garden of the game industry. Everything looks nice and clean, but is still moderately overpriced and entirely predictable. The management counts on a large percentage of customers coming in for a "cheap" entree, but then spending excessively on the appetizers, drinks, and desserts. These restaraunts, like the XBox360, are wildly popular with the upper middle class who are too lazy to cook (or think) for themselves, and tend to follow whatever happens to be popular at the moment. The mixed blessing of this establishment is that while you know exactly what you will get and it is generally satisfying, there really isn't as much variety as you might originally think. Every restaraunt just has a slightly different take on the same generic menu.
And then there is Nintendo. They are positioning their Wii console to be the corner bar and/or family-run "hole in the wall" ethnic restaraunt. Sure, the quality may vary wildly from place to place, and the "interface" may be lacking (or take some time to get used to)at some restaraunts. However, taken as a whole, it is this class of eating establishments where one is most likely going to find the places that have the best -- that is, the most authentic in a given genre -- food, and more often than not, it will be at a very reasonable price, because these restaraunts don't have to worry about all the overhead and expenditures on image.
So, I don't know about you, but most of my favorite restaraunts fall into the latter category, just as I suspect that most of my favorite games in the next generation will turn out on the Nintendo Wii.
the ipod is the perfect example of this. there are boundless examples of DAPs with more features at or below ipod costs.
People always say this, but the Creative vision:M 30 GB, the player that is most often touted to me as the best DAP, "get this, don't get an iPod" is within $10 of the price of the 30GB iPod with video. And there isn't a 60 GB vision:M. In fact, there are very few 60 GB DAPs... the Gigabeat which is just reaching the market will be one of the first 60 GB DAPs to challenge the 60 GB iPod. Other players which did have 60 GB were either way larger (like the Neuros), or had more clunky screen/interfaces (like the Nomad Jukebox). Unless I missed out on a 60 GB player when I was looking for one (which, admittedly was six months ago), what competition is there in the 60 GB range, and is it really significantly cheaper? If there is a really good, small, cheap 60 GB (or more) player, please tell me about it.
That, my friend, is one of the most underappreciated movies. EVAR.
I am Spartacus
You know, this is a popular myth/meme/assumption that in reality is just not true.
If you go to www.pricewatch.com and search for 4GB mp3 players, you will find that the cheapest 4 gigabyte flash-based DAP (as opposed to hard drive DAP) is the iPod nano.
I picked the iPod nano example because it's the most obvious and blatant one, but if you actually research other categories of DAPs, you will often find that the iPod is cheaper purely in hardware terms.
The iPod is cheaper for the simple reason that it has economies of scale that no other mp3 player manufacturer can match. That's why even Apple haters like me have climbed aboard the iPod bandwagon (although I use Rockbox on my iPod instead of the default Apple firmware, since Rockbox has many features that the standard Apple firmware lacks).
The PC is like a restaurant that also helps you do your taxes, write messages and books, cut an album, and brings you your news and information.
I agree with the original post that the PS3 is an overpriced restaurant. I'd say the 360 is a less pricy place but has food equal to or almost as good as the overpriced one. Meanwhile the Wii offers three star dining at two "$" prices.
Yes, I have seen RE4 on the GC, I happen to own a GC and a PS2. 2 or three really purty games does not a decent library make.
When I say that the Wii is comparable to the XBox, I'm taking into account not just the CPU, which being PPC based is probably faster than the X86 in the XBox, but also the pitiful amount of texture and system RAM. I'm sure, once the developers have had a few years to learn how to tweak the hardware to the max they'll release some really nice looking games, just about at the end of the Wii's service life. Hey, just like RE4 and the GameCube.
The main selling point isn't that these consoles look good on a 'normal' tv, it's that you either already have an HD capable set, or will get one during the service life of the console. In which case, PS3/XBox360 will be rendering some really fine graphics at 1080i, while the Wii will still be stuck at 480p.
So, my comments stand, if games are released for all three consoles, the Wii version will have to be butchered down graphically to work. It's inevitable when the other two consoles have 6X more RAM than the Wii, even if you discounted the other hardware specs.
This is completely wrong. First, as others have pointed, the iPods are well-priced. While they have less features than other players, they're not priced any higher, and often lower. So the iPods can be considered "cheap" in a way, or more accurately well-priced.
Now the other part is "what gives them the most for their money". Why would you buy an mp3-player for? Listening music. Most people do just that, they don't use the mics when they exist, they don't use the radio when they have it, they don't use the snoozes, alarms or whatever feature there is.
They want instant flawless connectivity and integration between their player and their computer, and they want their player to actually... well... play music.
And that's just what the iPod delivers: seamless integration to both your computer environment, and to your life. The iPod's easy, nay, obvious to use, it's sleek and beautiful (think wearable) which means that you don't look like a nerd when you carry yours around (I'm one -- a nerd I mean -- so it wouldn't bother me, but others are less attracted to looking like that), and to the users the ease of use and seamless integration to their existing world is worth much more than the gimmicks they don't even being to understand (32mW output, OGG or FLAC playback, mics, radio, 1253 gazillion band equalizers, ...).
"The way we can tell it's C# instead of Haskell is because it's nine lines instead of two." -- wadler
you paid too much for the PS2.
Shouln't you be comparing the value of then Yen to the canadia dollar?
these prices are starting to hit PC prices. I can do a lot more with a PC then I can the console. They will need to come out with a lot of PS3 only titles that I really want, or I'll go with out.
If there are 10 must have games, the I'll consider it, but 600 bucks to play one or two game is not worth it.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
You are a fool. There is nothing wrong with the meat used at Taco Bell. Their Beef is perfectly fine (USDA inspected) and they use pretty good quality/lean chicken meat too.
Obviously you wouldn't want to eat there every day of the week and obviously YMMV depending on the individual franchises employees, cleanliness and quality.
Actually as far as fast food restaurants go TB isn't that bad. Lots of fresh vegetables, Corn/Flour Tortilla's (most are not fried), lean chicken is available in many different items, most items can be had "fresca" style, even the cheese and sour cream isnt bad in reasonable amounts.
Just admit you are ignorant for propogating an idiotic urban legend and you are biased and we can all move on from there.
PS, See Snopes.com link for debunking of the "Grade C/D/F Meat" rumor:
http://www.snopes.com/food/prepare/badmeat.asp
"70% retention of current PS2 customers (over a reasonable time period, given how long the PS2 has been out) will not by itself make the PS2 a success. You think Sony would regard their sales numbers and market share going down an awesome success?"
yes. Given that they are basically using the PS3 as an inroad for the HD-DVD/bluray battle that they belive will insue. THen yes.
The hard core gaming segment of culture most likely makes up a fairly large percentage of the technology early adapters. If they can sell PS3 to 50% of this market, then that means that there is a large segment of the HD market that has NO REASON to buy HD-DVD format. That means that there is only 50% of the market left over to convince -- not bad numbers to start a fight with. IMO.
Foie gras is amazing. It's like warm, meat-flavored butter.
I'm just saying - everyone seems to constantly harp that if you bought an iPod, you got ripped off and are just following trends, there are so many better players with the same features for less money... this is like a mantra on tech sites.
But what other options are there for 60 GB DAPs? When I bought mine, there was the (big AND discontinued) neuros, the (clunky) Zen Xtra, and the iPod. That's all I could find.
I don't see how I got ripped off, if there are no other players on the market with the same capacity/form factor. Now there is, finally, the Gigabeat (which I haven't seen in person yet). But that is more than 6 months after I bought my iPod... though if the Gigabeat is really good, I might switch.
The only way this pricing strategy works is if Sony has calculated there will be enough buyers at the high price to allow component costs to decline. Sony has designed the system to have a long lifespan. Games look pretty good 6 months prior to launch, much better than many existing 360 games. Sony's strategy is to cater to the hardcore and rich for the 1st year to recoup its investment. Subsequent price drops will bring more into the fold. Lotsa people are still picking up PS2s and quality games are still being released for it. Bluray hasn't launched yet no one has really seen its features. Once HD really catches on by 2007/2008 the "I'll get the dual function machine" factor will kick in. Sony seems pretty confident that people are going to really *want* a PS3, and I for one think that will be the case. Just wait. Yes their press conference was a dud, surprising since they did what everyone asked, showed playable games and got rid of the batarang. No force feedback tho is a baad baaad move. I hope they fix it before launch.
Underwhelming 360 showing? Obviously you have seen all of the Halo fanboys having a field day with the new trailer.
I'm not a ravenous fan of either, but I do own an original xbox and a ps2, and I think Sony has jumped the shark with this one. If there's anything next gen in my house, it'll be a 360 and probably a Wii.Oh and that missing HDMI port on the cheaper model pretty much makes it useless for a blue-ray player. Once the studios push the ICT (Image contraint token), every movie played on it will be downsampled to normal DVD quality. I think Sony has made a huge fumble here and after the nasty sutff they've pulled over the last year or so, I think karma might be catching up to them.
Foie gras and veal are great rabble rousers, and, I confess, I don't eat either of them. However, the reasons behind their emergence as foodstuffs challenge the usual presentation of them as "wanton cruelty in action".
Veal arose as a foodstuff because raising male cattle was considered wasteful. Female dairy cows were kept as milk-producers, of course, but keeping a male bull was cruel and wasteful if it was not going to be bred. The modern practice of gelding them to increase fat production is also cruel and wasteful, but steers don't fight one another. Bulls do, and the fights result in unnecessary injuries. Thus, all the animals were slaughtered except for one which was kept for breeding.
The result? Veal.
Similarly, foie gras arose from the feeding of male geese to fatten them for slaughter. Again, you can argue that slaughter is intrinsically cruel; as an omnivore, I'll respectfully disagree. It turns out that the liver of any fattened bird is particuarly luscious, and the net result is foie gras.