Slashdot Mirror
PS3 Price Drop Won't Happen Anytime Soon
1up is reporting on comments from SCEA's Jack Tretton, who responded to the question "Will we see the PS3's price drop?" with the point blank answer of not anytime soon. Mr. Tretton responded with what has now become the Sony party line: it cost a lot to develop, and gamers are getting a lot of machine for their money. Therefore, the high price is justified if you consider what is being offered. From the article: "By way of comparison, the PS2 dropped a hundred bucks in price during the first 550 days of its lifespan -- from $299 to $199 USD. Tretton's words would seem to suggest that the PS3's price point may take significantly longer than a mere year and a half to reach the same threshold. Given that scenario, one would really hope that Sony has some kind of ace-in-the-hole for keeping our collective attention (and purchasing enthusiasm) squarely focused on the PS3."
In before jokes that the PS3 won't be around that long!
"This thing does science so hard, you say, 'I've never seen that much science.'" -Sam
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
How about a price drop on the Wii to $250, without having to buy a bundle of useless games, an even more useless $70 "warantee", pay an extra $100 to a scalper, or wait in line at 3 AM?
Test your net with Netalyzr
Sony's trying to find out if there really is no such thing as bad publicity.
While it may be true that a PS3 price drop from Sony is not in the near term, what about things like rebates? Technically a rebate or other incentive, like free games with purchase, are not price drops. I think it is a safe bet that if PS3's continue to lounge about on shelves as some have reported, we'll see some kind of deal sweeteners that effectively reduce the price of ownership for consumers. Once those sales plateau, then the real price drops will come.
To the making of books there is no end, so let's get started
This story isn't really news. Everyone knows that, even at $600, Sony is selling the PS3 far below cost. It's an expensive product to manufacture that includes a lot of new technologies. It will take a while for their costs to drop. If Sony were to reduce the price, it would certainly increase sales. However, increasing sales and increasing your losses at the same time is not necessarily a good thing since it obviously leads to significantly more money lost.
There is always a fine line to walk when balancing your prices with your volumes. When every sale is essentially an investment in the future (for the company, not for the idiots who think buying a $600 console now is an investment for when there will be better games out), then that line is infinitely thinner. People can argue all they want about how smart Sony was to pick such complicated components for their console. However, that decision is in the past now and Sony has to make their future decisions regarding pricing based on the product they have.
Based on recent behavior you may think that Sony isn't the brightest company in the world, but they certainly know enough to not divulge even a rumor of a price drop until said price drop is imminent. Nobody pre-announces price drops, because the first-order effect of doing so is to reduce your current sales. With PS3s sitting on the shelves, do you think they want to bring sales to a complete halt while people wait for the price break? There are probably enough people doing that already on the assumption that a price drop will occur; that would be everyone if they knew the price was going to drop at a specific point in time.
Now companies do pre-announce price drops near to the actual change, in order to get people who might also be interested in the competitor to wait for their product, but in a narrow enough time window to not significantly harm their own sales at the previous price.
So basically all this means is that Sony is definitely not dropping the price this month. In three months, if they truly aren't selling and Xbox continues to build its lead, then you'll maybe see something.
The enemies of Democracy are
I brought this up one time in a forum and most people just blew me off, but I still believe it to be true. Some people say they will not get a PS3. Others have a wait and see approach. And others will "wait for the price to drop" (a lot). It's only a sliver which actually bought them.
So what's the problem here? With everyone WAITING for the ps3 to drop in price, no one is purchasing them so economies of scale will actually ramp up. Sony is probably already loath to produce units for much longer since they're already sitting on the shelves just about everywhere. Unless that killer game comes out pretty soon, the price hit for the ps3 may last longer than Sony anticipated - which would probably make the ps3 even more of a financial liability.
I was under the impression that the XBox360 was a far better value for $399. Especially since games look the same and that many game developers (including Carmack) are whispering that the 360 performs better than the PS3.
But then I realized that if you want to connect the 360 via 802.11, they want an additional $99 for a WiFi adapter!! Now we are up to $499 and getting to the PS3 price range. And WiFi is included with the PS3...
This story comes hot on the heels of this story about the prices dropping in Japan.
He doesn't want to piss off the early adopters or cause people to wait for the price drop, so obviously he's going to say "No way is there going to be a price drop." However, the reality is that the PS3 are not moving. Yes, they don't want to lose even more money on the consoles, but losing $400 as opposed to not only losing $600 but losing mindshare and losing the support of video game manufacturers that won't develop games if not enough people buy the PS3.
Reality dictates that unless there's a miraculous sudden spike of PS3 sales they will be *forced* to drop the prices.
Seriously, what did you expect? Look back before the PS2 price drop: mere days before, there officially wasn't going to be one. Then it happened.
Anyone would be shooting themselves in the foot to announce a price drop, especially for a product like this, anytime early. What are you expecting? "Yeah, a year from now, it's going to be $299. Why don't you all just hold off buying one til then?" This would kill their market. Idiotic self-deluding fanboy fantasies to the contrary, this isn't going to happen; but that doesn't mean they won't drop the price a year or two from now.
Right now they're sticking to the "this is worth a lot, you're getting a lot when you buy it" mantra, which, mathematically speaking, still holds true.
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
Sony shipped a massive amount right at the end of the year - everyone remembers the one or two photos that fanboys took by going into a store the morning one of the massive shipments arrived and taking photos. But PS3s are nowhere to be found now - stock is selling out as quickly as it arrives. The only place you can get non-bundled PS3s right now is supposedly Circuit City online - non of their stores have them instock.
Resistance is the number one online console game right now. And both Virtua Fighter and Motorstorm are about to be released. And most likely Heavenly Sword. With the PS2 scaling issue fixed and the European launch about to happen the first half of 2007 is going to be huge for Sony.
The Wii was tough to find until about a week or two ago but now Wiis are everywhere. Now that the Christmas buying season is over gamers are looking at the paltry 2007 release list for the Wii and having second thoughts about the console. Third parties are just dumping cheap ports to the system and many of Nintendos big titles are either getting pushed back or are still up in the air as to if they will make 2007. Sales will probably pick back up once Nintendo makes the release timeline clearer.
There are, of course, still the giant stacks of 360s sitting in stores from late November when Microsoft flooded the channel to try to make their 10 million 'sold' announcement.
But would you want to have to run Windows on this 1.5 terabyte fileserver? Or has Windows XB 360 been updated to be able to stream media from any HTTP or SMB server, not just Microsoft Windows Media Center Edition?
With the high price tag and the lack of games, not too many people are going to be burned by buying now.
to get me to replace my PS2 or add to my plethora of gaming options. I'm happy with my current - PC/PS2/NDS/X360/GCB setup. And counting all the great old SNES titles and other emulation games I barely have time to play if any - why do I need a PS3 or even want one? There's no reason really. Sony and it's partners have to convince me to buy it and they're doing a piss-poor job of that. A haughty, defiant attitude from Sony, exhorbant price tag and lack of titles doesn't cut it this day and time and I think we're going to see price drop if they can't get some great exclusive titles out in the next six months. They should have had the backwards PS2 compatibility thing ironed out by release and they definitely should have had a handful of -exclusive titles of high calibre- to sell the system in these first months. Unless they come up with the later they're not going to have a choice but to lower the cost of the unit to increase their base in the nextgen market. They've really screwed up on all fronts with the PS3 other than the superior firepower of the comnsole itself, which is what will save it eventually I think (if they get some games out) otherwise it's like a high performace, expensive engine in a pinto station wagon - what good is it?
Gaming for over 25 years
What are you babbling about? Every store that I've gone to looking for a Wii has had PS3s available. The Best Buy on the way home has at least 20 something in a stack. The Fry's also on the way home has at least 15. Even my local Costco is now selling PS3 bundles ($699 for the 60 Gig version, an extra controller, and Genji).
Meanwhile, no one has a Wii. At my local GameStop, the employees treat the phone with apprehension because of people still calling constantly to ask if they have a Wii.
Everyone I ask about the availability of a Wii says, "No, but we have these..." and gestures over at the PS3s. They are repeatedly unsurprised and often chagrined that nobody wants one, and most will agree that the price is a bit high or try to feebly up-sell you on one with a look that says they know that I'm not going to buy their pitch even as they timidly start into it.
The PS3 is a dog and will be until someone puts out a game that people care about (e.g. Final Fantasy XIII) or the price comes down. Meanwhile, if you've got Wii's everywhere -- put the dang things up on eBay for the rest of us already!!
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
...within the next year or so, and it's that damn blue laser. If the supplies get much more plentiful and the price on those go down, then the price on the PS3 can go down, too.
A re-design to remove the PS2 chipset would also result in a price drop, but that's probably not going to happen for at least a year.
So how long did it take Sega to lower the Saturn from its initial price? If Sony takes longer than that, I think they're screwed.
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
Does anyone remember the NeoGeo? It was a great system around the time of the Super Nintendo. It was 24 bit as opposed to the Nintendo and the Sega at 16 bits each.. It did have a couple good games, but it was a complete flop. Why? It cost 600 bucks, and no one I know ever had one. It had a lot of power under the hood, but the price point was way too high. And now Sony is at the same price point. I have always loved my playstations, but 600 bucks is to steep just to play games, even if it does have other features. I can always use Linux on my home computer, after all..
For some reason I read that as "Xbox360 plus Wii". Would the two of them cost less than a PS3? (Not sure what I'd do with a 360, though...)
"Not an actor, but he plays one on TV."
Yeah, it's not like we see them around everyhere...
Oh wait...
why aren't they dropping it in the US?
Still waiting for $299 USD.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
First off the 'Renew cards' are sold at retail, and often at a discount. I paid about $50 for almost 2 years of live since the old X-box Live cards were being clearenced (but they work for the 360).
Also Live is leaps and bounds better than the Free PS2/3 or Nintendo's network. I use Wifi on the Wii, and my DS, but if I could have a buy up option for a 'Live like service' I would do it.
To say you're 'content' with the free service isn't the same as 'they are of equal value' (Which is the assumption being made).
So what, the "REAL" xbox360(pro $399.99, HD-DVD $199.99) is $599.98, hell $649.97 if you want to play people online(1 year Xbox Live $49.99).
The PS3 HDD is a replaceable 20 gigs, the non-playstation memory card reader stuff is pointless(which I think people here admitted to), and you can probably find a cheaper wi-fi connector(humm another thing to add to the "real" Xbox 360's cost...). But you don't have to pay for the HD-DVD if you don't want it, just like you can buy a PS3 without the $100 extras you don't need(I do admit you are still going to have to have Bluray for the games).
Seriously, all current next-gen systems CAN be expensive when you look at what they do/don't come with, and what you need. For the Wii you might need to get another controller if you want to play Gamecube/Virtual Console games, more Wii controllers for multiplayer, and you will probably at least NEED to get a memory card.
It is funny how people like to throw around the high end price of the PS3, ignores that a lower priced version exists, and don't look at what other systems can end up costing you. Yet if someone here pulled this same shit with Apple and their computers/products...
To say you're 'content' with the free service isn't the same as 'they are of equal value'
Of course not. But if I had the option of getting a PS2/3 style service for free on the XBox I, unlike you, would prefer that. The point is that no matter what level of service one desires from the XBox online offering, one MUST pay the $50 (or whatever deal can be trakced down. I didn't find any such deals and ended up paying %50).
While that isn't technically true (Live Silver is available which includes demo downloads, acheivement points, online leader boards, free expansions like the new Gears of War maps, etc...), In the spirit of this discussion I'll agree with you since if you want to play multiplayer online, you need to pay.
On a cost comparison basis though, one thing Sony fans like to bring up is the pay vs. free online service, but they seem to not mention the composite (non-HD) cables that are included in both Sku's. Souldn't that money for 1st party cables ($30 for Component or $60 for HDMI) also be included in the comparison?
HDMI is an industry standard connector. Go to www.newegg.com and you can find a cable for $30, including shipping and tax that works just as well as the "Monster Cables".
Nice of Sony to include them in both the 20GB and 60GB models.
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
Certainly a price drop would help, but a lot of what people are waiting for are good games to come out for the system. There is certainly lots of potential with the system, with it being the home of mega-hits such as Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy, Gran Turismo, and so forth. However, with more exclusives getting away from Sony (such as Virtua Fighter and Grand Theft Auto), the more likely your average hardcore gamer is just going to wait until a price drop and/or the much-anticipated PS3 games to actually ship. (Well, that's certainly what I'm doing)
With the PS2, it was a no-brainer. You already knew that the Sony console was going to get all the big name games. Not so much with the PS3 anymore, and coupled with the high price, there's a lot of people sitting on the fence this time around.
-- jchenx
If a company were to offer no online multiplayer but to offer the above features would anyone enjoy it? The main (nearly only) reason to bring it online is for multiplayer.
The price for the cables? Yes, but not necessarily first party. If you're going HDMI, they can easily be found for around $10. If your stuck using component, then yes I think the only option is the proprietary PS connector on one end.
We can go back and forth on the exact worth of the consoles' features all day. To me, the PS3 20g is at least as good as the premium 360. So to my mind, for only $50 more (I'm counting XBL as being $50. That's what it cost me) I can get a blue-ray player which is a feature I wanted. For $150 more I got a bigger HD, WiFi, and card readers which are all valuable to me. Obviously different people will have different opinions.
It seems to me that it's a popular criticism on /. that the PS3 is doing poorly based on the fact that it can be found on the shelves.
The ps3 IS doing badly, relative to the Wii, but that ain't why.
HI, MY NAME IS ISAAC.
Sure. Many people sign up for Silver for the extra content on their offline games, and for Demos.
Nintendo also has many people using the Wii's online service despite the absence of online multiplayer games (at least so far).
Super Mario Bros.: The Lost Levels was never sold separately outside Japan. It has always been bundled with either Super Mario All-Stars or Super Mario Bros. Deluxe. The facelifted versions of Super Mario Bros. 2 and Super Mario Bros. 3 were not sold separately until the Game Boy Advance era, and the facelifted versions of Super Mario Bros. and Super Mario Bros: The Lost Levels were never sold separately.
But then you have to buy a second Xbox for playing games online. And do softmods still work on recent Xbox revisions? Or do most people know how to solder and own tools for soldering?
BestBuy has been selling the 60GB version of it at 599 USD for a while now... thats $100 under MSRP...
LOOK AT ALL THE Xbox360 CONSOLES SITTING ON THE SHELVES, thus Microsoft must be doomed!
And don't get me started on all those Gamecubes collecting dust as well...
Bluray players still seem to cost around 1000US$ - without any cell processors. I think that should give a hint towards the real price of the PS3.
I disagree, but I suppose it's a matter of preference. I adore the fact the Wii60 takes AA batteries as Energizer makes 2500 mAh AA's and they last forever. They are $20 for a pack of 8, or a pack of 4 with a Travel charger. That puts them in the price range of a rechargeable battery pack for a controller, except they last longer, are multipurpose, and I can power more controllers for the same $.
If you want a propietary pack so they can't be used for anything else (like if your brother 'borrows them' for his CD player) MS makes 1st party rechargeable packs. Nintendo (currently) doesn't. There are several 3rd party ones for the 360, and some for the Wii are hitting the market shortly. The Wii ones I saw even have a ribbed rubberized grip on the outside.
What the PS3 has an edge on is that the rechargeable batteries are included, however they are not User replaceable, and you must charge them through USB. If you do it through the PS3, it must be powered while you do that. Personally I don't like it and would be much improved IMHO if I could switch out a dying battery as opposed to tethering myself to the system. Wires are so last gen...
Just sayin'
Oh, Shit! Someone warn Sony's PR group before it's too late!
Sony didn't include HDMI cables with either models. In fact, they didn't include component cables, either. So, if you want to play games in HD or make use of the BluRay player, Component or HDMI cables are a separate purchase.
"Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs. We have a protractor."
I wasn't disagreeing that Component or HDMI cables were a separate purchase. I was disagreeing that they cost $60 (or $100 as Monster and BestBuy would have you believe).
$30 cables work just fine, and are easy to find on-line, from reputable e-retailers (would that be e-tailers?).
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
If Sony can't drop the price... they can't do a bundled game without raising the price. Retailers don't want a bundled game, because the margin on the ps3 isn't very good. They need to sell games to make up for it, and with PS3's puny library, there isn't a chance that they want its most popular game getting bundled for free. If Sony pisses off the retailers, they're cooked. Well, REALLY cooked.
They DID do a bundle with ps2, remember? GT3 I think. That was cool, but the ps2 at that point was already price-reduced I think.
What they can do is offer voucher for free downloadable games - maybe a ps1 collection when they finally offer those on the ps3. I'm thinking all first party games or semi-first party games like Crash Bandicoot, GT1 & 2, Ape Escape, Legend of Dragoon, etc.
"But it has a BluRay player and a Cell processor. Seriously, try to build a computer (because that is all it is) with those components and try to get it down to $600."
Way to miss the point. Of *COURSE* it costs more to make these for a guy building 1 or 2, or even a dozen. Build a million and all of the sudden, component suppliers will dramatically decrease prices. So the idea that "gee, I looked up the prices at Amazon, and look how much these components cost" is a pretty jejune way of looking at it, don't you agree?
But let's play your game.
We have no idea how much a bare bluray drive costs in volume for Sony. perhaps $150? A complete guess. A Cell processor? Again, we have no idea of the manufacturing or component costs... IBM may be selling them below costs because Sony guaranteed an order over 3 years. I'm guessing its around $100 tops.
They sell laptop computers with CD+/RW and DVD for under $400 and everybody makes a profit; and that includes $60-100 to Microsoft for the XP tax.
And let's not overstate the sophistication of the PS3. It's essentially an optimized game processor (similar to a DSP for sound), a low to mid level graphics chip (not equal to high-end graphics card), a BD-ROM drive, and a handful of video output, glue and logic chips.
Sony is probably churning the top model out for under $500 (at their cost) and the retailer gets to keep $100. Voila.
That analysis is probably a more sophisticated analysis than the crap from the so-called analysts (who I suspect they get their numbers direct from Sony).
So let's get past this idea that Sony is losing money selling PS3's. It's a marketers spin.