Sony CEO Confirms Limited $499 PS3 Stock

If you were confused about yesterday's stock announcement, you wouldn't be the only one. Thankfully Kaz Harai, SCEI CEO, has clarified the situation: the $499 60GB PlayStation 3 is a limited offering. They'll only be selling it here in the states until their current stock of the system is cleared out, at which point the only SKU remaining in the states will be the $599 80GB + Motorstorm bundle. The catch is that there is probably enough stock in hand for several months of sales at this price; hence the confusion yesterday about a 'fire sale'. Hirai confirmed this to a Norwegian videogame news site, and the video of the interview is available online. For some perspective, Next Generation has a commentary piece on this strange matter. "Now Sony looks as though it's been spinning consumers. The smart thing to have done would have been to come out and say that the 60Gig version is being discounted and discontinued, and that the bells-n-whistles PS3 at $599 is better value than ever. That didn't happen, and what many have seen as a pretty successful E3 for Sony has been marred by confusion over the future of the platform's strategy. So in those meetings next week, Sony will have cause to look back and consider how things might have been done better."

Comments

Backwards Compatibility

[Icarus1919]

Does anyone know the status of the backwards compatibility on the new PS3 model they're coming out with? Because I heard they were thinking of ditching it at some point. Will that be happening in the 80 gig model?

Re:Backwards Compatibility

[Dr Kool, PhD]

Backward compatibility works great, and it even has 1080p upscaling. Hardware emulation never had upscaling so software emulation is the better overall solution IMO.

Re:Backwards Compatibility

[DrXym]

The status is that it's software assisted. Part of the PS2 is now emulated but the GS chip is still present.

The software assisted BC is not as good as hardware (obviously) but support is still very good.

Re:Backwards Compatibility

[Broken scope]

They do lose some compatibility though.

Re:Backwards Compatibility

[DrEldarion]

Unless they disabled the hardware emulation in the old ones when they rolled out upscaling, yes, the hardware emulated games are upscaled.

Re:Backwards Compatibility

[Anonymous Coward]

Like others said, it's software now, just like the 360.

Re:Backwards Compatibility

[Wordplay]

I believe it's a choice. The "upscaling" in the old ones amounted to rolling out the software emulation and giving you the option to run under it.

Re:Backwards Compatibility

[donaldm]

At the moment PS2 backwards compatibility on the PS3 with emulation software is approx 80% to 90% compared to the Xbox360's 38% as per last week. To put this in perspective from the time of the EU/UK/Aust/NZ released on the 23rd of March 2007 and with firmware 1.8 (23rd May 2007) the PS3 was able to play without issues over 80% of all PS2 games was approx 2 months while for the Xbox360 to get to 38% took over two years. Read in to that what you may.

It is difficult to determine what PS2 games don't play since that to me this would be much more useful, however between 10% to 15% of games do play but they have issues varying from "artifacts" (ie. triangles, intermittent whiteouts/blackouts ... etc) to CGI scenes freezing or being jerky, sometimes this is annoying to easily skipped making the game acceptably playable. From my own perspective I have over 50 PS2 games and only one does not play (Wizardry) while another two (The Bards Tale and Musashi) have artifacts. The rest play perfectly although we did have a minor issue on GT4 (skip the intro and the game plays fine).

What makes it difficult to accurately determine which game is compatible is the product code of a game since some games have two or more product codes for the same game name and on some occasions a game may play fine but a later or earlier release my not play well if at all.

Of course the whole compatibility thing is mute if the game you like does not play. Check out the following PS3 website http://faq.eu.playstation.com/bc/. Still video upscaling does make a great PS2 game even better and very much more enjoyable in replay or if you are like me a new PS2 game while you are waiting for PS3 games you would like. A bad PS2 game still sucks no matter what the graphics looks like. For anyone considering buying a PS3 or Xbox360 a HDTV should be part of your budget consideration (the bigger the better) and while a PS3 or Xbox360 do display well on a SDTV what a waste.

With regard to the 80GB model to the 60GB model, 20GB is not much now and in Australia we can get a 60GB drive for AU$55 (approx US$48) to 80GB drive for AU65 (approx US$56). Actually you are better of with the 60GB model and upgrading the disk to 160GB and keeping the 60GB disk as a potable backup or transfer device.

I have not covered the PS1 backward compatibility but I do have over 20 PS1 games and they all play without issue. Upscaling for PS1 games does make for acceptable graphics on a HDTV but like I have said before a bad game is still bad no matter what the graphics look like but a good game with improved graphics is still a treat.

How Things Might have been Done Better

[MankyD]

So in those meetings next week, Sony will have cause to look back and consider how things might have been done better."

Not to be too cruel, but I think that Sony already had several reasons to do this with the PS3.

Re:How Things Might have been Done Better

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh! How cute! The gentle but oh so biting wit of a teenage fanboy!

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Stop Saying 'SKU'

[hardburn]

Stop using 'SKU' in news stories and posts. The word has no meaning outside internal retail outlets and distributors. Saying it makes you sound like a marketdroid.

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[Anonymous Coward]

This message is encoded ROT0. Decoding is punishable by death under the DMCA. Stop using ROT0 and DMCA in post sigs. ROT0 has no meaning in terms of sigs, and DMCA has no significance outside the US.

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[log0n]

Agreed.. this has been bugging me (and therefore everyone :) for quite a while. Gives the person using it the whole 'buzzword to compensate' impression.

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[Ant P.]

I think we should come up with a backronym that forces people to stop using this worthless term out of embarassment. I'm not good with words though.

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[MaineCoon]

The term is used extensively in the games industry as well.

When a game is being developed for multiple consoles, each target platform version of the game (the PS3 version, the 360 version, etc) is referred to as a different SKU, even though it may be developed simultaneously and we aren't making the game differently for the different consoles (beyond platform-specific code and perhaps minor asset changes).

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[hardburn]

Still, it's an internal-use thing. All organizations develop a shorthand for certain commonly-used things. It tends to make it hard for outsiders to figure out conversations at first, but makes communication very efficient once you catch on. That's fine as far as long as it stays internal, but it should be understood that these terms may have no meaning or a wildly different meanings outside the context of the organization.

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[gEvil (beta)]

Still, it's an internal-use thing.

If by "internal" you are also referring to every retail channel out there (also known as "stores"), then yes, it's an "internal-use" thing. Face it, it's a term that has a specific meaning that is used in many aspects of production and sales. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's not a useful term.

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[hardburn]

And I acknowledged its use in that context in my orginal post. I'm arguing that it's not useful outside that context, which is everywhere except retail, distribution, and manufacturing.

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[SirSlud]

Then what term would you use in lieu of SKU?

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[Yvan256]

600$ for the PS3? No thanks. Help XBox crawl out of a 2 to 4 billion dollar hole? No thanks. Wii? Oui, SVP.

Actually, if you only buy the Xbox 360 (and no games) you help Microsoft dig a bigger hole. ;-)

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[hardburn]

"Box"? "Product"? "Version"? They all work in various contexts.

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"The word has no meaning outside internal retail outlets and distributors."

Really? Do you have to have a license to use that word or something?

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"When a game is being developed for multiple consoles, each target platform version of the game (the PS3 version, the 360 version, etc) is referred to as a different SKU, even though it may be developed simultaneously and we aren't making the game differently for the different consoles (beyond platform-specific code and perhaps minor asset changes)."

I learned what a SKU is because of Sony. Around XMas time, 2005, Sony had a deal where you could get a PSP + a 1 gig memory card + a couple of other doodads for around $299. I bought it. It turned out to be defective. I returned it, but Best Buy wouldn't exchange it because they were all out of the model I purchased. They had plenty of the 'core' systems, but they were different 'SKUs'. Amusingly enough, they said they would have exchanged it if I had purchased the warrantee thing. Whatever. (For the record: They happily gave me a refund, I was just annoyed that I couldn't enjoy the 1-gig PSP deal.)

So, yes, the term SKU is useful. If you ask me, anybody bitching about its use in this context should buy 99 tacos and catch a Doctor Who marathon.

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[ClamIAm]

I call your 'SKU' and raise you a 'price point'.

(GRR marketroids)

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[KDR_11k]

Yes but they are ambiguous. Box can mean differnet box arts already, version can mean 1.1 and 1.2 and product will usually be understood to mean a different game.

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[LKM]

Saying "SKU" instead of something like "model" is an annoying habbit, but I can just read over it. What's really annoying is that every /. post and comment containing the word "SKU" is invariably followed by dozens of posts complaining about it. Just ignore the damn thing.

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[Glytch]

How about "model"?

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[chrisG23]

Then what term would you use in lieu of SKU?

I would use bnudle most of the time. It means the exact same thing, except when the term "configuration" or "hardware configuration" would be more appropriate.

For example, to quote from the post: "at which point the only bundle remaining in the states will be the $599 80GB + Motorstorm bundle." (Now you need to replace the last word in that sentence with something else, like say change it to $599 800GB + Motorstorm game). You now have avoided the temporary confusion that someone who is new to slashdot who has never seen the term SKU may experience after reading a sentence with SKU in it when another word, that is in common use, could have been substituted for it and have the same meaning.

For software developers that say they are coding a game for multiple SKU's, what you are really doing is coding for multiple hardware platforms. You don't quote a game differently for the XBOX360 core, elite, and the other one do you? You dont code a different game for the PS3 20gig, 60gig, and 80gig do you? You are just using the term SKU a little to broadly.

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[Babbster]

What makes the complaints even more deliciously irritating is that they're not really complaining that the term is inaccurate. They, apparently, just don't like the way the acronym sounds/reads. That, to me, is the reason to get over it - the term is being used properly. It would be like getting angry because a person says "pop" instead of "soft drink."

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[nuzak]

Look, when you're talking about a particular model at a particular price for a particular sales period, using "SKU" is actually appropriate.

But yeah, most people use it wrong. "Price point" also irks me the same way.

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[Anonymous Coward]

Please stop saying marketdroid. The word has no significance outside of pseudoanticorporatist techie message boards. Saying it makes you sound like a pretentious half-baked intellectual.

Seriously, though, I never understood the slashdot hostility toward advertisers; I work an entry level job in advertising and also happen to have a pulse. And I don't sleep in a coffin, neither.

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[DeeDob]

Because it's "internal" by your definition, no one should speak the word?

It's not as if you have to be a member of the selective "internal retail outlets and distributors" club in order to be able to understand and speak the "SKU" word.

Everyone understands what a SKU is, therefore the word HAS meaning outside the limited use you want to give it.

"Two PS3 models" is the same as saying "Two PS3 SKUS" as they are effectively a different product.

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't give up the fight.

I don't give a fuck if every single person in the video game industry has bought into their own "let's sound like professionals" bullshit. Shiggy himself could say it and I'd spit in his face. (Though I'd probably say an Act of Contrition afterwards.) It's wrong, and it sounds stupid coming from the mouth of anyone who isn't speaking of the internal stock for an individual retailer (since SKU #s will vary among retailers).

I can't wait to see how the idiot [American] games industry intends to coopt and misuse other retail terms like "gobacks" and "shrink." Product recalls and console redesigns, perhaps?

Re:Stop Saying 'SKU'

[Anonymous Coward]

False. People misuse the term here as often as "price point," and it is being misused in this case. This is not to-MAY-to vs. to-MAH-to. This is tomato vs. SKU.

PROTIP: Best Buy's SKUs are different from Circuit City's, which are different from mine, which are different from everyone else's. Even UPCs on the same damn item may vary according manufacturer's fancy. But the point is that product manufacturers have nothing to do with the Stock Keeping Unit numbers of the retailers that sell their wares. I could use the same SKU for every different item I sell if I wanted to. Sony wants to talk about my internal stock? They should talk about things under their control instead of talking retail-talk to non-retailers. Realize how stupid it sounds for them to talk about UPCs, and you'll see why talking about SKUs (which makes even less sense) is stupid.

There is a [good] reason that people in the games industry were not using the RETAIL term "SKU" as little as four years ago. I know this from years of experience of working with industry people from the retail side (as in, I owned, not just managed, a B&M store).

There is also a [depressing] reason that people in the games industry are using it now. The reason is the same one that explains the misuse of the term "price point" and the prevalence of the term "consumer" instead of "customer."

Great Move by Sony

[Dr Kool, PhD]

This will spark interest in the 60GB console, and when all the supplies are moved they will cut the price of the 80GB console to $499. I don't see why people are upset about this.

Re:Great Move by Sony

[_xeno_]

This will spark interest in the 60GB console, and when all the supplies are moved they will cut the price of the 80GB console to $499. I don't see why people are upset about this.

Oh please, you know exactly why people are upset about this. It's become clear you're a Sony astroturfer. You've posted in the other story on this topic and people were pretty clear why there were upset about it.

But to make it clear, it's that "cut the price of the 80GB console" part. There's no proof that's going to happen. People have been clamoring for a PS3 price cut for ages. There's clearly demand for the PS3, but not at the $600 price point. People have been wanting to see a pricecut.

So what Sony has announced is that there's a pricecut, but then they're going to sell a version that has about $20 worth of storage extra and a version that's not as backwards compatible with PS2 and PS games. (That's assuming $1/GB, which is high - it's closer to $0.75/GB.)

So, ultimately, Sony is announcing a new, worse version of the PS3 for the same price. That's why people are upset.

That assumes, of course, you're interested in playing PS2 games on the PS3. At this point in time, with the PS2 game library dwarfing the PS3 game library, it's a fair assumption that people would want to do that. You can also debate how much worse the PS2/PS emulation is, especially since the new emulation is already used to enable upscaling in the existing model.

However, this still comes off as Sony saying that they're selling a new, worse model for the same price, while trying to ditch the old model. Not completely true, but it sure sounds like it.

Re:Great Move by Sony

[Pluvius]

This will spark interest in the 60GB console, and when all the supplies are moved they will cut the price of the 80GB console to $499.

Well, I'd certainly hope that that's true, but remember that this is Sony we're talking about. The sales and marketing part of the company hasn't exactly been attentive to the wishes of the consumer in the recent past.

Rob

Re:Great Move by Sony

[grogdamighty]

So what Sony has announced is that there's a pricecut, but then they're going to sell a version that has about $20 worth of storage extra and a version that's not as backwards compatible with PS2 and PS games. (That's assuming $1/GB, which is high - it's closer to $0.75/GB.)

Well, the word on the street is that Sony is moving to 80GB HDs not because of the extra space, but because they're cheaper in large quantities than the old (and now less-standard) 60GB HDs. So Sony is actually trying to unload the more expensive stock at a lower price. On the one hand, this lends credibility to the idea that they will drop the 80GB version to $499, but it also leaves a nasty aftertaste in my mouth knowing that people are essentially giving Sony $100 or more (the Motorstorm Blu-Ray can't cost much to produce) that would be better spent on buying an off-the-shelf HD to put in the 60GB version.

Re:Great Move by Sony

[Jeff DeMaagd]

Sony could have crippled a 80GB hard drive and sold them as 60GB with drive firmware that only uses the first 3/4ths of the drive. Sony would have kept the same model number and marketing, gotten a lower price, and few people would be any wiser about it.. It probably helps them better to standardize the machines though, dropping the EE chip harmonizes the US model to be more in line with the rest of the world.

Re:Great Move by Sony

[FritzTheCat1030]

Yes, you think this is a great idea. We get it. EVERY SINGLE POST you make is plugging the PS3. Cut it out, you aren't fooling anyone here, shill.

Re:Great Move by Sony

[Southphillyman]

People have been asking for a price cut for "ages"? Has the PS3 even been out for a YEAR? Stop trolling. And how is the 80GB a worse system for the same price? You get a "free" game, more HD space and upscaling........

Re:Great Move by Sony

[Anonymous Coward]

Time to get life guy.

The handful of fanboys desperately trying to claim anyone is 'upset' about Sony moving to a new model is really getting pathetic.

Just give it a fucking rest. You and the other fanboys are getting nowhere with this bullshit. Move on and find some other FUD to work with. I understand that you poor sods are feeling bitter after Sony won E3 by a landslide, but come on, get over it.

Re:Great Move by Sony

[KDR_11k]

Yes but you lose the option to use hardware emulation for games that aren't supported by the software.

Re:Great Move by Sony

[Anonymous Coward]

PS2 emulation is about 90 percent for EE software emulated European PS3s and almost every firmware update is adding new games. At the rate Sony is updating games it is very likely that PS2 emulation will be up in the 95 percent range this year.

And, unlike Xbox emulation on the 360, those 90 percent of PS2 games run exactly the same as with real EE equipped PS3s.

Re:Great Move by Sony

[Khaed]

People have been asking for a price cut for "ages"? Has the PS3 even been out for a YEAR?

People have been bitching about the price since it was announced, before it came out. As a PS1 and PS2 owner, I'm one of them.

In the world of electronics, this has been "ages." Especially with the ass kicking Sony is taking in console sales.

And how is the 80GB a worse system for the same price?

It's not. But the point is: The 60GB version isn't selling at $600! The Wii -- with it's ridiculous name and much more limited capabilities -- is outselling it 3:1. The 80GB version probably won't sell. And the "free" game? It's not all that appealing.

Re:Great Move by Sony

[Anonymous Coward]

My god, where do these idiots come from?

The PS3 is selling at roughly the same rate as the PS1 and PS2 were worldwide...Slightly faster than the PS1, and slightly slower than the PS2.

The 80 gig will be moved down to 499 when they have sold through the 60 gigs. Are you really that fucking stupid not to understand that?

And, yeah, that waggle hype is gonna last for another five to seven years...

Re:Great Move by Sony

[Khaed]

My god, where do these idiots come from?

I don't know, but by your inability to read my post fully or comprehend the words, I'm guessing you work for Sony.

The PS3 is selling at roughly the same rate as the PS1 and PS2 were worldwide...Slightly faster than the PS1, and slightly slower than the PS2.

I didn't compare it to either. I said as someone who owned both, I wanted it to be cheaper. Is "cheaper" too big of a word for your dumb ass?

The Gamecube and X-Box both "lost" to the PS2. As it stands now, less than a year in, the Wii has sold almost half what the GC did, and the 360 has reached that point as well almost two years in. The PS3 has sold roughly ONE THIRD of their numbers. It doesn't matter how fast the PS1 and PS2 sold if DEVELOPER SUPPORT goes to shit.

The 80 gig will be moved down to 499 when they have sold through the 60 gigs. Are you really that fucking stupid not to understand that?

I don't take the word of AC Sony Shills on /. and expect some sort of proof. Are you really so fucking stupid not to understand that? (Sorry "that" twice in your sentence bugged me, so I upgraded it.)

And, yeah, that waggle hype is gonna last for another five to seven years...

I'm assuming, at this point, you're talking about the Wii. I will now point to the X-Box 360 -- which, before anyone accuses me of being a fanboy for, I don't own. They're getting a great many "exclusives" to be ported to their system. Sony doesn't just have to compete against Nintendo, and Nintendo isn't even trying to compete with the same demographic -- yet they're still kicking Sony in the teeth. The PS3 may or may not be selling at the same speed as the earlier systems, I don't trust anything you say as you're a) stupid and b) back nothing up. But all sales numbers indicate the Wii is roughly outselling the PS3 three to one. So by your own argument: The Wii is selling three times as fast as the PSX and PS2.

Even if you're right, and they drop the 80GB to $499: It's. Still. Ridiculous.

And it'll really piss off anyone who buys the 60GB unaware of the impending "upgrade" at that price range.

"Ridge Racer! Riiiiiidge Racer!"

Re:Great Move by Sony

[hchaput]

"So, ultimately, Sony is announcing a new, worse version of the PS3 for the same price. That's why people are upset."

Sorry, but that's a pretty dumb reason to be upset. If you already own a PS3, who cares? If you never intend to buy one, who cares? If you want to buy one, you can get the better one for cheap! What is everybody so upset about? This is such a non-issue.

Re:Great Move by Sony

[tepples]

PS2 emulation is about 90 percent

So what happens to the customer who happens to own a copy of several of the 10 percent of titles, after the optical drive in the PS2 in the other room wears out? Particularly, the six single-player Final Fantasy games in PS family formats (VII, VIII, IX, X, X-2, XII) are said to have emulation problems. Nintendo, on the other hand, has over 99 percent compatibility from GB to GBA SP, from GBA to DS, and from GameCube to Wii.

Re:Great Move by Sony

[TikiTDO]

That's a rather worn our argument. Sure Nintendo may have better compatibility from system to system, but they don't necessarily have games everyone would want to play. As an example I'll use the games you mentioned in your post. The PS3 might have problems with the FF series, but that brings up the point, at least the PS family of products HAS the FF series. If you happen to be someone who likes the more recent entries to Final Fantasy then even 100 percent Nintendo backwards compatibility won't help you much. At the same time the PS3 can at least play all of the FF games since VII.

Despite incredible Wii sales and an obviously stronger install base, the major FF titles will still be for the more powerful systems. First, the Wii is marketed for the casual crowd, and without a doubt the casual crowd is the one showing such strong sales. Unfortunately these aren't the people who buy FF. The majority of FF fans on the other hand simply care too much about presentation to accept the loss in quality a weaker system would bring. Sure, Square Enix will likely make a few Wii entries, but unless you're happy with playing the I-VI games and spinoffs from the real major title, you'll still have a PS3 or 360.

That said, I would say the best idea would be to buy the system that will have the most games you want to play. If said system has backwards compatibility then you get a nice bonus of having access to may old games. If, on the other hand, the system does not play quite as nice then go to the other room, take the PS2 out to get the optical drive replaced, or even get a new one (or perhaps just go get an emulator that plays just as well).

Re:Great Move by Sony

[_xeno_]

Well, for a while, it sounded like the cheaper 60GB version was only going to be available for about two weeks. (Starting... now!) So it was like a brief price cut followed by the price jumping right back up again. In other words, it sounded like it wasn't really a price cut, just an attempt to dump a few old units before selling the new ones at the original price.

Re:Great Move by Sony

[tepples]

If, on the other hand, the system does not play quite as nice then go to the other room, take the PS2 out to get the optical drive replaced, or even get a new one For how many years will SCEA continue to offer repair and replacement on PlayStation 2 consoles?

Re:Great Move by Sony

[Babbster]

He's certainly the person to ask since he simply has to work for Sony. I quote:

That's a rather worn our argument. Sure Nintendo may have better compatibility from system to system, but they don't necessarily have games everyone would want to play.

That's some serious "shillery." :)

Re:Great Move by Sony

[TikiTDO]

This is why I also included the emulator option. By the time Sony stops offering replacements, PCSX2 and various other emulators should run more or less any game the PS2 can with better upscaling options than PS3 will ever have.

Re:Great Move by Sony

[TikiTDO]

Cute assumption. Normally I wouldn't feed the trolls, but I am bored. Though I'm not the most hardcore gamer, I own PS3 and 360 both of which have games I want, or in the PS3 case will have when Sony gets it's ass in gear and starts releasing some of those cool titles. Then of course my PC which is in fact my primary gaming rig. With Wii on the other hand, I have played several titles at friend's houses during parties and have not seen a game I can sit down and lose myself in for a few hours/days (Yes, Zelda included). That said, I have been thinking of getting the Wii just so the family could also have a few games they can enjoy. If there comes a day when I walk into a store and it's just sitting on the shelves I may decide to grab it.

Finally, I doubt a Sony shill would ever suggest emulators as a valid replacement. Strange as it may seem there really are people in this world that don't fall into the casual gamer area. Is it that big a stretch to believe that those people would not like a console not designed and marketed toward them?

Re:Great Move by Sony

[Babbster]

You decided to paint the Gamecube and Wii as somehow having inferior games (while the Gamecube had fewer games there were many that were excellent and didn't have Mario, Link or Samus in them), and I called you on it. Man up and admit that you were being a tool.

Re:Great Move by Sony

[Babbster]

PS- Take that "Normally, I wouldn't feed the trolls" line and jam it in your 759,782nd bunghole.

Re:Great Move by Sony

[tepples]

By the time Sony stops offering replacements, PCSX2 and various other emulators should run more or less any game the PS2 can But then how would one dump a BIOS to use with these emulators? Are the 3DO console, Atari Jaguar, and Sega Saturn emulated fine yet?

Re:Great Move by Sony

[TikiTDO]

I think you failed your basic reading comprehension test. No where in any of my posts did I say that Nintendo consoles have bad games no one should like. Fortunately I understand that your little brain may not truly grasp the concept that your opinion is not the end all of the universe, and that not everyone is obligated to share your beliefs so I will explain. What I did say was they do not have games EVERYONE will like, there is simply no perfect game or perfect system. The same can be said for each and any gaming platform in the world. I do not like Smash Brothers, I do not like Mario Cart or Mario anything really, and I do not like Meteroid. If I don't even like the flagship games, is it that hard to grasp that I might not like the majority of Nintendo games? Sure there may be a few that I would like should I actually dig though the multitudes of hype and reviews about Pokemon Deulxe Ultra Happy Pink Bend Over And Buy The 500th Version Of Our Game, but that would honestly take a lot more effort than just opening the PS2 reviews page of IGN and seeing many of the games I like gracing the top of the list.

Find me a decent Final Fantasy game for the GameCube or Wii (And please don't start spouting about the older system emulator, I've played those though too much on PC emulators to even consider going back to a console for them.) How about a playable RTS or TBS? Any MMOs? How about a really pretty shooter where I can feel amazed at the minute detail in a crawling exploding monster before it kills me?

P.S. Why don't you take your trolling at stick it up your 107076th asshole? If you want to piss over UIDs first have one that's somewhat impressive, next find someone who would be impressed.

Re:Great Move by Sony

[MeanderingMind]

Except that places such as Ars-Technica would catch on immediately, announce the change, and bring the wrath of the technically inclined on Sony. No one wants to hear that they paid for something that was crippled intentionally.

Re:Great Move by Sony

[MeanderingMind]

If you already own a PS3, who cares?

Probably none of these.

If you never intend to buy one, who cares?

We won't get into the reason why one might never intend on buying a PS3, but some of these people probably don't care.

If you want to buy one, you can get the better one for cheap! What is everybody so upset about? This is such a non-issue.

This here is actually the issue itself. $500 is not 'cheap'. As a minimum bar for entry it is too high for many people. Certainly, what is $500 now is a better value than what was $500 a month ago, but that doesn't factor in for people who (for whatever reason) can't shell out that kind of money on a game console.

What has people upset is that the term "price drop" is traditionally tied to lowering the bar of entry. Sony has not only managed to maintain the bar of entry, but potentially is increasing it when the 60gb PS3s finally sell out. Even if the 80gb PS3 drops in price (depending on how soon this happens, there might be some upset there as well), the bar of entry still remains $500.

That's the jist of what's going on.

Re:Great Move by Sony

[king-manic]

So what happens to the customer who happens to own a copy of several of the 10 percent of titles, after the optical drive in the PS2 in the other room wears out? Particularly, the six single-player Final Fantasy games in PS family formats (VII, VIII, IX, X, X-2, XII) are said to have emulation problems. Nintendo, on the other hand, has over 99 percent compatibility from GB to GBA SP, from GBA to DS, and from GameCube to Wii.

Own them most of those on a EE chip enabled PS3. On software emulation (enable upscaling) XII runs fine and the AA definately helps that game look amazing. X runs fine but I haven't' played it much. The rest I haven't played recently so I don't know.

Re:Great Move by Sony

[king-manic]

Well, for a while, it sounded like the cheaper 60GB version was only going to be available for about two weeks. (Starting... now!) So it was like a brief price cut followed by the price jumping right back up again. In other words, it sounded like it wasn't really a price cut, just an attempt to dump a few old units before selling the new ones at the original price.

There are more then a "few" PS3's in the channel right now. This fire sale aught to last a good month or more.

Re:Great Move by Sony

[AvitarX]

Some fun links:
PS2, PS3, and Wii Japan, America. and All Other combined

It is worth nothing in the other you have to mentally align the launch (for the big jump) to see the Wii slightly winning, and unfortunatly there is not PS2 to compare.

The PS3 sales are tracking PS2 world wide sales, only if you look here, you see the PS2 worldwide sales were Japan for a while (delayed US release). If we assume trends continue like last year, the toal Japan PS2 base is 22m (still growing quicker than PS3), putting the projected PS3 sales just ahead of GC, not matching PS2.

Re:Great Move by Sony

[buffer-overflowed]

VGCharts is fun. Unfortunately I think they're missing all of the european PS2 data, so you have to go country by country.

But here's some fun ones:
Japan PS3 vs. PS2 vs. Wii - Note that the Wii is tracking like the PS2. The next chart demonstrates how bad the PS3 is doing in glorious Nippon.
Japan PS3 vs. Gamecube vs. Wii - I left the Wii in instead of the PS2 because the lines are really close. You'll note it's at this point the PS3 is doing worse than the GAMECUBE.
US PS3 vs. PS2 vs. Wii - This looks familiar...
US PS3 vs. Gamecube vs. Wii - So does this! Worse than the gamecube again!

So, that leaves Europe. Where, well, everything is dominating the PS2, because VGChartz doesn't have the data.

See, here. The Wii is still spanking the PS3. Everything is beating the PS2 though.

PS3 sales are tracking PS2 sales in no country on earth, except maybe europe. It's a fantasy.

Just to be clear...

[Yvan256]

This 60GB PS3 will be the last available model in north america with the PS2 compatibility 100% in hardware, no software emulation?

Anyone playing FF XI on a PS3? Any screenshots comparison with the Xbox 360 version?

Re:Just to be clear...

[Reapman]

No, and I haven't even bothered... basically FFXI runs just like on the PS2... you'll get upsampled, but if you want the gorgeous graphics of the 360, you'll NEED a 360 (or PC)

I'd kill for a PS3 port of it, but I know I'm one of the few.

Re:Just to be clear...

[Yvan256]

Well, if you take into account that I'm playing on a 4:3 36" CRT in 480p, I don't know if I'd see much of a difference given the upsampling of the PS3. All I know is that FF XI keeps the DVD drive active and my Xbox 360 sounds like a jet about to take off. I know it's mainly the DVD drive, but still, it sucks - I'm used to the silence of my Mac mini.

Re:Just to be clear...

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone playing FF XI on a PS3?

People still play that game?! WHY?! World of Warcraft has been out for almost three years now! Good God man, upgrade! You can buy a PC that'll play WoW great for less than a PS3, and WoW doesn't charge you extra for having more than one character.

Or if WoW isn't quite your thing, there are plenty of MMORPGs that are better than FFXI. FFXI is an old, outdated game that hasn't been able to modernize because its tied to the PS2. Try a modern MMORPG and see what you're missing! (Macros, keybindings, regions that use more than one texture, armor sets that aren't identical, more than five races, actual character customization versus a preset level pattern...)

Seriously, there's a reason Sony didn't bother continuing to support FFXI on the new PS2s.

Re:Just to be clear...

[Reapman]

Hmm well no idea how FFXI as a PS2 game would handle the PS3, but in general my PS3 is VERY quiet. It does get a bit loud if I'm playing something intense, but it's quieter then the 360's I've played (just my own experiences talkin here) I'm guessing a PS2 game isn't that intense so it might be a lot quieter.

Re:Just to be clear...

[Yvan256]

It's more the fact that FF XI seems to keep the DVD drive active no matter what the game is doing (at least on Windows and Xbox 360), I've never seen FF XI on the PS2.

Re:Just to be clear...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd kill for a PS3 port of it, but I know I'm one of the few.

I'd kill for them to just axe the current version and write a new version that uses the PS3 as a baseline.

Seriously, the PS2 support was holding the game back years ago. It still is. It's time for them to create a new Final Fantasy Online, one that takes advantage of modern hardware and that learns some of the lessons that World of Warcraft taught.

Apparently one of the major new features in a recent patch is that Alt-Tab no longer crashes the game on the PC. It's 2007. The game is what, six years old? That's just ridiculous.

Re:Just to be clear...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not such a great game but it has its qualities. It really excels in gameplay and story. Graphics and sound, not so much. Interface-wise it is awful. Overall, I rate it better than WoW because graphics aren't that important to me. Maybe I'm spoiled, but WoW seems too simple.

By the way, FFXI does have macros. Thank goodness it does, because changing equipment mid-battle would have been a real pain otherwise.

Re:Just to be clear...

[Cutriss]

Good weather effects, horrible resolution, choppy framerates with effects on. No need to have the disc in to play. In short, it's useful if you've got a spouse that doesn't care so much about the bells and whistles but just wants to play, or if you want a power-cheap machine to idle-bazaar with.

Why the 360 version requires the disc inserted to play is utterly beyond me.

Good Ole Sony

[dunezone]

What I found awesome about this how situation is how Sony presented it to us.

On Monday they announced the price cut of the console. Gamers were excited.

On Wednesday they showed off whats to come to the console. Gamers were amazed.

By Thursday, early reports were coming in that the price drop was limited.

At this point we were all fooled by Sony once again. They showed us all their new products and I will admit some of which look really cool. Then they tried to slip this under the radar without anyone noticing. That would of worked ten years ago without much notice but its not that easy today

Whats worst of all though, when their done selling the 60gig model, all you have is a 80gig model which is actually more crippled then then the launch model which had the emotion engine for backward compatibility.

Re:Good Ole Sony

[Rosyna]

Whats worst of all though, when their done selling the 60gig model, all you have is a 80gig model which is actually more crippled then then the launch model which had the emotion engine for backward compatibility.

So you had better go and buy the 60gig $500 version now, before they go out of stock.

Re:Good Ole Sony

[Anonymous Coward]

Hilarious!

http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/videogames/

Crippled? The EE emulation on the new, and current European PS3s, is at 90 percent and growing rapidly with each firmware update.

"At this point we were all fooled by Sony once again."

Gotta love the fanboys still trying to pretend anyone is 'outraged'. Give it a rest.

Re:Good Ole Sony

[Doctor_Jest]

And yet Microsoft admitted in a conference call recently that _EVERY_ 360 that has been sold has the potential for the RROD, and they are taking a $1 billion charge against having to fix _ALL_ of them. That's as close to admitting a severe design flaw as I've seen so far... Of course it doesn't fix the problem... because what of those consoles that last beyond the warranty by a week or a month? The flaw manifests itself differently and some people will _STILL_ be SOL... but removing the EE from PS3's is a big deal... yeah... right.

Picking solely on Sony is a bit one-sided and fanboyish (even unintentionally) by most press and blog sites. Has anyone seen that amount of coverage on MS's foible as we get on this? There's a few sites complaining, but most are "ooh, look! HALO 3!!!" and sweep this disaster under the rug. It's made it so whatever comes after the 360 from MS will remain on the shelf. I won't buy it. I like my 360, but this is ri-goddamned-diculous.

I like my PS3. They could do some things better (like releasing some of their PS1 fighting games over here at the store) and they have been accused of hubris... (odd that MS hasn't... I mean, c'mon...) but to write them off this generation for these things is silly. Stupid stunts and dumb ideas didn't stop Microsoft from crawling back out of the hole they were in with the xBox... And one generation hence they may be right back in the hole.... (Replace that with Nintendo and you'll see an even more dramatic turnaround) It's competition and the nature of having a healthy marketplace for advances and fun that benefit us.

Nixing one or more players because of some silly stuff they say in the press is short-sighted... Are they stupid at times? Yes, but what corporation isn't? They're run by old men in suits for chrissakes... they aren't always staffed by the brightest souls in business.... (Microsoft is no exception *cough* ballmer *cough*)

And the 80gig model sans EE chip will actually benefit in the long run because it will allow AA, scaling, and other advances to PS2 games (and PS1 for that matter)... that are not possible with a straight HW emulation. Calling it "crippled" isn't true... I think that was the idea all along... but I can't be sure of that.

Wonder what the failure rate of PS3's are? I bet it's not even _CLOSE_ to Microsoft's, or we'd be having 30 different bloggers and reporters claiming the end of time as we know it... babies are being killed by PS3s'!!!!! RUN!

Re:Good Ole Sony

[elrous0]

Sony has a LONG history of hype, and a long trail of broken promises. This is hardly unique to this generation. Another hidden secret of Sony's glitzy presentation was the well-disguised fact that most of the games they showed don't even have released dates yet (and most of the ones that do are slated for "sometime in 2008"). Contrast that with the MS show, where almost every game shown is coming out THIS YEAR. Not as much flash to MS's show, but WAY more substance.

An interesting ploy

[Pluvius]

Sony sells a bunch of PS3s at $500, getting their marketshare up and bolstering the confidence of third-party developers, then when they've done that they sell a slightly better PS3 exclusively at $600, hoping that the better line-up (and, hopefully, better press) at that point will keep sales going.

I don't know if this will work or just bite them in the ass. I think it would've been a good idea to sell the new PS3 at $550 and leave Motorstorm out of it, and maybe a better idea to just sell the 60GB PS3 at $450 and stop trying to screw around with the market, but only time can tell.

Rob

Re:An interesting ploy

[alvinrod]

I think that their best bet would be to sell the currently available 60 GB models at $500 until their supply runs out and then immediately drop the 80 GB model down to $500, or possibly even lower in time for the holidays. Sony has a lot of inventory to move and if they're hoping to meet their sales goals that they set at E3, they really need to drop the price down to about $400.

I can easily see Microsoft releasing a new version of their hardware in time for the holidays and having a firesale of their own on the old models around the holiday season, which would really cut into Sony's sales. Sony is going to look bad selling at $500 when you can get an Xbox 360 at $300.

I honestly think that Sony should slash prices down to at least $400, which would get a lot of consumers to purchase one. This would help to turn things around for them and to catch up to the lead of the Xbox 360, but more importantly it would give Blu-ray a big advantage over HD-DVD and might allow that war to come to an end. I think the short term loses would be worth it in the long term.

Re:An interesting ploy

[Osty]

I can easily see Microsoft releasing a new version of their hardware in time for the holidays and having a firesale of their own on the old models around the holiday season, which would really cut into Sony's sales. Sony is going to look bad selling at $500 when you can get an Xbox 360 at $300.

Microsoft is releasing a new "version" of their console with Halo 3, but I assume that's just a re-paint of an Elite. As for dropping the price, why should they? Sony is doing a good enough job of shooting themselves in the foot. Anything Microsoft would add via price drops on the 360 would just be a drop in the bucket compared to Sony Marketing's own damn incompetence.

Oh yeah, and you can get an Xbox 360 for $300 today. You'll have to spend another $100 for a hard drive, $50 for a wireless controller, and $30 for component video cables for a grand total of $480 to match the $400 premium console, but you can do it that way if you want :).

I honestly think that Sony should slash prices down to at least $400, which would get a lot of consumers to purchase one.

If Sony would slash prices down to a sustained $400 rather than a fire sale $400, they'd probably triple their userbase overnight. $400 today is generally a consumer electronics "sweet spot", where it's just cheap enough to justify buying. Anything over $400 requires real thought to purchase.

Re:An interesting ploy

[7Prime]

Well, considering that a game disc costs next to nothing to produce, by including it and adding $50, they've just made $50 on every console, or at least insured a sale of Motorstorm with every console. "Leaving Motorstorm Out" doesn't save them any money. Remember, this is all about them, not about us.

BTW: WTF is o great about Motorstorm anyway? I played it in a GameStop, and it basically seemed like a less-fun version of Excite Truck. Kinda sad when one of the biggest games for the PS3 is comparable to one of the lower-rated games on the Wii.

Re:An interesting ploy

[ravenshrike]

Given that the "fire sale" will last probably over a month, should it really be considered one?

Re:An interesting ploy

[Osty]

Given that the "fire sale" will last probably over a month, should it really be considered one?

Okay, maybe "closeout sale" or even "going out of business sale" would be more appropriate, since those usually last a few months (when the CompUSA stores were all closing around here, they ran a going out of business sale for something like 4 months). Anyway, if the current stock of 60GB PS3 consoles is enough to make the sale last for several months, that's a pretty good indicator of how unpopular the console really is (at least at $600, anyway). The real question is, will the sale last that long because there's so much stock available, or because even at $500 nobody wants one?

I'll be waiting for a more substantial and permanent price drop before I buy one (and even then, I won't bother unless there are exclusive games I have to have).

Re:An interesting ploy

[LordVader717]

People seem to have forgotten that there already was a $500 PS3, right at launch. The 20 GB version. Basically it wasn't worth paying out the extra hundred bucks for what the 60GB version came with.
That didn't seem to do any wonders to their sales numbers, so I doubt if this will.

Re:An interesting ploy

[donaldm]

In Australia the PS3 is now selling with "pack-ins", however while this effectively brings the PS3 down to approx AU$830 (US$721) including GST the pack-ins may not be what you want. The Xbox360 plus 20GB disk and Gold online subscription on the other hand sells for approx AU$650 (US$564) with Halo 3 when it comes out but if you want a 120GB disk you can't get it although a good guess on price when it comes out is approx AU$200+ (the 20GB disk sells for AU$160) although it would not surprise me if the 120GB model sells at AU$750. Get a HD-DVD drive and you are up for another AU$200, of course in Australia you are hard pressed to get HD-DVD movies (there are some but not many) compared to Blu-ray which is all that most big department stores and EB's sells.

Personally I am very pleased I jumped at the chance to pick up a PS3 for US$407 (at the time) with a trade in of a 5 year old PS3 and 10 old games. At least I was able to buy what I wanted, although I did get a free Blue-ray movie (The latest Casino Royale) four weeks later which I did not expect - nice though. At the moment 60GB is enough for me but if I want to I can put in a 160GB or larger disk for just over AU$120.

I think the AU/NZ/EU/UK people have more to complain about the price of consoles than the US since we actually pay more than you do and as far as the population goes the US has a population of 301M compared to EU/UK 720M which seems a snub to a much larger population which has a standard of living that is close and sometimes higher than that of the US. For those that are interested the Nintendo Wii sells for AU$400 (US348) so you cannot just point the finger at Sony and say they are ripping us off. Actually it is the Government and department stores that are ripping (import duty, sales tax, tariffs, GST/VAT ... etc) us off.

Re:An interesting ploy

[LKM]

BTW: WTF is o great about Motorstorm anyway? I played it in a GameStop, and it basically seemed like a less-fun version of Excite Truck. Kinda sad when one of the biggest games for the PS3 is comparable to one of the lower-rated games on the Wii.

While I personally agree that Motorstorm (at least at first) feels like a slow, boring version of Excite Truck, the two games aren't really comparable. Despite both being arcade offroad racers, they are very different games. Excite Truck is a fast and insane with huge jumps. Large parts of the game are played in the air, and often, you don't control your car as much as trying to constantly do damage control at superhigh speeds.

Motorstorm is much more of a simulation. You have to read the tracks, try to negotiate the dirt and your opponents correctly, take your own vehicle into account when deciding where to go. It's a lot slower and a lot more tactical. I can see why some people prefer Motorstorm over Excite Truck.

They are both awesome games, in my opinion, and both are worth owning.

Re:An interesting ploy

[Pluvius]

People seem to have forgotten that there already was a $500 PS3, right at launch.

That's probably because it might as well not even have existed considering the low quantities in which it was produced.

Rob

Re:An interesting ploy

[Anonymous Coward]

An 80 GB PS3 that lacks the Emotion Engine is a decidedly worse value than a 60 GB PS3 that contains it. For it to cost $100 more in a forced bundle with a mediocre game only worsens the relative value.

The $500 60 GB model will do absolutely nothing for software developers, not to mention the publishers.

Beyond these facts, I really believe you have overthought this "ploy."

Sony's marketing plan:

[Hawthorne01]

1. Load gun.
2. Aim at foot.
3. Shoot.
4. Repeat as often as possible.

(Yes, I know, "Step 5: Profit!" should go there, but seriously, have you looked at their quarterly reports recently?)

Re:Sony's marketing plan:

[Looshi]

Yes, but that doesn't mean Step 5 is not in their plans. It just means they're not doing step 4.5 very well.

1. - Load gun.
2. - Aim at foot.
3. - Shoot.
4. - Repeat as often as possible.
4.5 - ????
5. - PROFIT!

Re:Sony's marketing plan:

[the_humeister]

Yes, I know, "Step 5: Profit!" should go there, but seriously, have you looked at their quarterly reports recently?

No, but having a glance at their net profits for their past fiscal year ending on 3/2007, they're still making over $1 billion.

Re:Sony's marketing plan:

[Wdomburg]

Look just at the game division and the picture isn't very rosy - net loss of $1,969M for the fiscal year.

The final quarter of their 2006 fiscal year was also ... disappointing, with a posted loss of $573M.

Re:Sony's marketing plan:

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/videogames/

Gee, sorry, I just made you look like just another idiotic fanboy...

Re:Sony's marketing plan:

[drummerboybac]

Wow way to pick the site where Wii's sell for $100 over MSRP to help artificially support your point :-D

Re:Sony's marketing plan:

[Anonymous Coward]

Too bad reality is actually like this:

1) Move manufacturing over to the cheaper in bulk 80 gig drives and the less expensive EE software emulation PS3s

2) Introduce a 599 80 gig with Motorstorm bundle in August

3) Sell through existing 60 gig PS3s while continuing to sell the 80 gig

4) Once the 60 gigs are all sold drop the 80 gig Motorstorm bundle down to 549 and an bundless 80 gig at 499

Shooting themselves in the foot? They just utterly dominated E3 and the PS3 is a top seller or sold out at stores all over the US.

Re:Sony's marketing plan:

[Anonymous Coward]

Who gives a shit about the Wii, it really isn't even a game system. Wiifit??? WTF???

What is funny is how badly the 360 is bombing. The US is supposed to be the 360's one strong territory? You have to wonder if the 30-40 percent failure rate and shitty graphics in games like Halo 3 is having something to do with the poor 360 sales? Naw....couldn't be...

sounds like Sony's typical problems of late

[Endymion]

You know... a lot of the problems that Sony has had recently are not necessarily the action they took. Discounting this version of the product so you can introduce an improved* version can be a great move. The quote in the summary brings up a good point, though - it's about their PR! They had a chance to make this great PR, or at least "neutral", but they instead choose to confuse everybody with this idiocy.

I think this has been typical of a lot of their boneheaded moves in the last few years; they have some brain-damaged idea they want to accomplish with the PR, and end up totally screwing the entire announcement. Someone needs to fire the entire PR department over there. It's really damaging their reputation in ways way above and beyond their "normal fuck-ups".

(*) - for some definitions of "improved", which is not really relevant to this point

Re:sounds like Sony's typical problems of late

[Anonymous Coward]

Just shut the fuck up dimwit.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/videogames/

I honestly can't imagine what it must be like to actually such miserably fuck as you clearly are from your posts.

No one gives a shit about your juvenile attempts at spewing garbage about Sony. The rest of the gaming world is going nuts over Killzone 2, Ratchet and Clank, Uncharted, Heavenly Sword, GT, MGS 4 and laughing at the pathetic looking Halo 3 and insultingly lame Wiifit crap.

Go fuck yourself you piece of shit fanboy. Sony just made miserable little cunts like you their bitch.

Re:sounds like Sony's typical problems of late

[evilbessie]

You make sense, but then I like to think I have a brain. The point is that much of the 'news' we hear is not what the average consumer hears or cares about. So best hold off on any rash statements, although we would like sony to fail with their peculiar formats again. That being said Sony have made a complete hash of this one.

Re:sounds like Sony's typical problems of late

[MeanderingMind]

I know you're happy about that Amazon best seller list, but it is not adaquate refutation of the original point. It's not some magic key that can be used to destroy anything bad said about Sony or the PS3. Stop using it like it is.

Is it good news? Sure. Does it mean that Sony execs aren't screwing up their PR? Not at all.

Price points

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems likely that once the 60s run out that they'll sell an unbundled version of the 80 at the 499 price. It'd be insane for them to ditch that price just in time for the holiday sales.

Can Sonys Marketing Dept Possbily Do Worse?

[grapeape]

If I was Howard Stringer the first thing I would do is fire the entire marketing staff. So far their advertising and handling of everything related to the PS3 has been bungled. From the crying baby advertisements that were outweirded only by Sega's Dreamcast campaign, the early arrogance in the press, to the latest price cut, its not a price cut debacle there hasnt been one element of their PR that has worked in their favor.

Re:Can Sonys Marketing Dept Possbily Do Worse?

[rlp]

You left out the "Goat Sacrifice" event to promote "God of War II". And just about every recent public pronouncement of Ken "PS3 is too cheap" Kutaragi.

Re:Can Sonys Marketing Dept Possbily Do Worse?

[grapeape]

Uggh I had blocked the goat thing from my mind. After thinking about it things have really been going downhill on the PR side since that whole black vs white and graffiti PSP campaigns long before the PS3, you would think after those they would have shifted gears a bit.

Re:Can Sonys Marketing Dept Possbily Do Worse?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just shut up dipshit.

Some teenage fanboys posting fake outrage and disgust at nothing more than a drive switch in the PS3 on fucking Slashdot is going to do nothing to further your cause.

Re:Can Sonys Marketing Dept Possbily Do Worse?

[grapeape]

Does Sony pay you to post this crap? I'm pretty sure your the same clueless shill that posts anytime anything less than sunshine and rainbows is posted about Sony since the language of an unsupervised 12 year old seems to be the highlight of each little comment. You should really try harder and at least post something to do with whatever thread your cussing about, we were talking about PR and Marketing with Sony while your ranting about the drives. I fail to see the "fake" outrage or for that matter any outrage at all, I couldnt care less, I dont own Sony stock, I just find it hard to believe that after this much time in the game business they keep finding more and more ways to alienate or irritate their audience (excepting for unsupervised 12 year olds which they are evidently hitting fairly well).

Re:Can Sonys Marketing Dept Possbily Do Worse?

[Khaed]

Does Sony pay you to post this crap?

I don't think they do. These comments, if anything, are more flamebait and annoying and wouldn't win them any fans. However, people like Dr. Kool? I think he's paid. I didn't, until the last few posts about E3 and the price drop, but I do now.

I think the ACs are two or three young PS3 fans. 14-17 or so. They're pissed off at the way their system is doing in sales. They post the same inane drivel in every thread, calling people names, and don't back up anything they say. Shills would at least provide links to back their statements up, or not call potential customers names.

There are Wii/360 fanboys, too, but I've seen far, far fewer ACs posting in the same reactionary, angry, and generally stupid style in support of the Wii/360. When even twitter looks sane by comparison you have a serious problem. They're just angry and flailing because we're so stupid we can't see how GREAT a deal the PS3 is and the majority don't care to part with five hundred (or six hundred) dollars for a games system.

If the PS3 turns out to be the Saturn of this generation -- and even I would be surprised if they did so badly -- I wonder what these people will say? Not much, in my guess. Or they'll blame the naysayers, but they won't place any blame on the shoulders of Sony. Sony, of course, is loading the AK-47 aimed at their feet. They've completely screwed up every opportunity, starting with "$600!" and then "$600 is too cheap!" It might be less than it costs, but it's certainly more than the thing is worth.

Re:Can Sonys Marketing Dept Possbily Do Worse?

[Kelbear]

Don't forget the PS3 ad with the football(soccer) fanboy sitting naked except for a jockstrap on his bed fapping to a football game.

And the busty blonde in a pink bikini telling audiences a story about her mom while sitting on the porcelain throne, panties down.

Re:Can Sonys Marketing Dept Possbily Do Worse?

[Anonymous Coward]

The only problem is that the marketing department isn't the major problem. The problems seem to arise from a level higher, the Sony Execs. From Ken Kutaragi's "It's probably too cheap...", Jack Tretton's "If you can find a PS3 anywhere in North America that's been on shelves for more than five minutes, I'll give you 1200 bucks for it." and Phil Harrison's "Nobody will ever use 100% of PS3's capability", as well as the recent interview with David Reeves, you've pretty much got all of the major execs aiming at each other's feet.

By the way, if you want a bit of mild amusement, here is a list of Sony quotes:
http://www.destructoid.com/blogs/Snaileb/sony-s-gr eatest-quotes-laugh-for-a-week--33323.phtml

Only a retard or MS troll would suggest Sony won't

[Southphillyman]

drop the price of the 80GB before Christmas. The PS3 is finally selling like it *should*. Sony would have to be complete idiots to give up this momentum, this just seems like a strategy to unload the 60GB hardware. I'm looking forward to some kinda offer or incentive to unload PS3s even more, like trade in your PS2 and get an extra $100 off the price of a 60GB. I think 2 million 60GB are still unsold I expect them to be moved before Christmas and then the 80GB will have a "price cut". This combined with the upcoming games has me excited for Sony

Hold on a second.

[AmericanPegasus]

Hey, I'm no expert, but I'd imagine that this *isn't* the PR departments fault. I imagine that Sony execs do whatever bullheaded nonsense they want (like this fiasco) and then when PR goes, "Whoa, whoa! If you do that you're really going to piss people off!" they just get a cold reply of, "Well, we're going ahead with it. You're PR. You fix it."

And that's why you see Sony PR guys always desperately spouting whatever bullshit they can muster to defend Sony. They know Sony is being ludacris, but their job depends on them somehow spinning Sony's actions in a positive light.

I mean, otherwise, you'd think for like $500 a call, they could call anyone of us and we'd be like, "Ummm... you know Sony, I just really don't think that's a good idea, you know, to screw your fan base like that," and they'd be like, "Oh... really? Ok, cool. I guess we won't do it then. Thanks for the advice."

New Rumor

[mrshowtime]

There is a new rumor that the 360 will drop to $199 for the core and $250 for the "real" 360. If this rumor holds true, then Sony might as well pack it in, as there is no way a $599 system will be able to compete against a system that is 90% it's capability at more than 1/3rd the price. Sony Bots have been touting the "Incredible capability" of the PS3 and what an awesome value it is. My biggest question is why the PS3 is not significantly better than the 360, especially given the year's lead time? I own a PS3 and a 360, so don't mark me as a flamebait. I am still smarting after this past Christmas day when my friends (all in their 30's, who have owned every game system ever, like me) came over to see the PS3 and play Resistance: Fall of Man. They could not stop laughing at me and the game. The consensus was, "You paid $800 for this?!"

Re:New Rumor

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, gamers are going to rush out to buy the worst console in history because it got a price drop.

Got any more funny stuff to post?

The only people dumb enough to buy 360s are the most hardcore existing Xbox owners in the US. And the hardware problems and crappy graphics in Halo 3, Forza 2, and other 360 graphics turds is leading to slower sales than the first Xbox disaster for Microsoft.

250 dollars for the piece of crap 360 base unit
250 dollars for online play over five years
100 dollars for WiFi

Yeah, what a great system!

Re:New Rumor

[R. Chance]

Give it a break. I play PC games (I leave the console games for my kids -- 2 Wii's so far, no PS3 or 360) so I don't really have an axe to grind. I have friends with both systems and have seen both in action. Graphically I'd say they were on par. And if you think Halo 3 graphics suck you haven't seen enough of it. Of course if you have a 360 you have a lot wider choice of next-gen games to see. Apparently 11 million or so people (give or take a few thousand and including about 6 million in the US) have bought 360s... and I don't see a stampede for PS3s. The only console still selling out is the Wii, and it doesn't really have that much appeal for hardcore gamers. My kids got it for Zelda and thanks to its "last gen" tech it is fully backwards compatible with their old Gamecube games. Fanboi rants aside, I don't see Sony losing the console war, but they don't look like a winner either...

Re:New Rumor

[Anonymous Coward]

A $150 dollar price cut? I smell bullshit.

Re:New Rumor

[senatorpjt]

The worst console in history was the Atari 5200.

Re:New Rumor

[tjrw]

"My biggest question is why the PS3 is not significantly better than the 360, especially given the year's lead time?"

Because they held up delivery and screwed themselves over by sacrificing themselves on the altar of the entertainment division (a common theme at Sony, sigh). If they had said "to hell with Blu-Ray" and just aimed to get a games machine out there, they would have had it to market much earlier. But therein lies the tragedy of the PS3. They wanted everything. They wanted it to be the trojan horse to force their version of hi-def DRM-laden crap down your throat (as opposed to the other hi-def DRM-laden crap), and forgot that first and foremost, it's *still* supposed to be a games console.

To anyone still unable to understand why Nintendo are cleaning up, I give you the one simple word - "FUN". It may not be high-tech, it may not be , but it is FUN! Something the other console makers seem to have forgotten. Ho hum.

Re:New Rumor

[LWATCDR]

Worst controllers maybe but it had great games and graphics for the time.
The controllers and it not being 2600 compatable killed it. Too bad really I think it was better than the NES in many ways.

Compatibility goes down...

[WIAKywbfatw]

Here, as I understand it, is the situation. Hopefully, if I get anything wrong someone will correct me...

Backwards compatibility goes down with the newer 80GB US models.

As others have pointed out, the newer systems lack an in-built Emotion Engine chip, so they rely on software emulation rather than hardware emulation.

The emulation is decent, but it's far from perfect. Sony themselves quote a figure of 88 percent compatibility with the software emulation rather than 100 percent with the hardware emulation.

And, even amongst those 88 percent of titles that work there are some glitches: it's not the case that 88 percent of titles work perfectly while 12 percent have some problems or won't run, rather it's the case that 12 percent won't run at all and 88 percent will run to some degree.

You can read that many ways, but to me it seems to suggest that 88 percent is a marketing person's figure more than anything else: if a game won't get past a fixed point, it has audio or visual glitches all over the place, or if it falls over all the time then you're stretching things if you consider that game in your 88 percent.

Of course, Sony isn't exactly advertising the fact that the newer 80GB models aren't as backwardly compatible as their predecessors. Granted, it won't matter to everyone, but it will matter to some, and those people won't thank Sony for their penny-pinching and shortsightedness.

I don't know what the hell is going on with Sony. When it came to the original PlayStation they ran a flawless campaign and sucked millions of new users into the console market. With the PS2 they didn't put a foot wrong and cleaned up again. But with the PS3 it seems like they've decided to see how much they can piss away the goodwill generated by their previous two generations and opted for one boneheaded move after another.

If they're not careful they're going to end up as yet another sorry story on fuckedcompany.com.

More info...

[WIAKywbfatw]

More info, from Wikipedia's PS3 page:

On March 20, 2007 Sony released a compatibility list; 1,782 of the 2,451 PS2 games (72%) released in Europe had noticeable issues, minor issues or no known issues, with the remainder being incompatible with the console.

As I understand it, the European PS3's only had software emulation. So, by Sony's own admission, backwards compatibility is at 72 percent, and may actually be even lower than that.

If I had any Sony stock I would have sold it a long time ago. These guys are finding new lows of stupidity every other day.

Re:More info...

[antek9]

Wow, what are you smoking today? ;) If 72% is not enough for you (I won't go into details about how much it matters WHAT games are within that number, if the 28% of incompatible games is just horrendous crap, then I won't shed any tears about it. So far, my Metal Gear Solid games worked flawlessly, ALL PS1 games seem to work, FFXII is what I started playing on the PS3, which had minor glitches at first, which are gone after the recent updates), then how does that compare to BC on the 360? Like, 20% at best? (Sorry, I just made that number up, but it can't be that much higher, right?)

I don't know about you, but even if it were only 1,782 PS2 games that were ever BC on the PS3, that would be more than I'd ever be able to play for the rest of my life. That number must have grown considerably since march (that was the status for the very first European update, 1.60, mind you!). All that issue is really about is anecdotal pity, if I may call it that: If your beloved fav PS2 game that your dysfunct PS2 won't run any longer, won't run on PS3 as well, you _might_ get angry, and I would sympathize. Apart from that, just move on: there's more than enough content concerning old games that will run flawlessly, plus, you could even go out and buy some real PS3 game, or download great stuff from the Playstation Network.

BTW, new lows of stupidity is something I'd rather locate within the Microsoft hardware design department than at SONY's. SONY sure have their funny ways, but usually their stuff works (well, except notebook batteries, maybe).

Re:More info...

[WIAKywbfatw]

Over a quarter of games aren't going to run. Many of the rest are going to have some problems. What are the odds that all your favourite games won't be among them.

When a company sells a product as being backward compatible then it should be backward compatible. For all titles, not just some. I don't care if they acheive that through hardware emulation or software emulation (there's no reason why Sony shouldn't be able to make a 100 percent effective software emulator, they do have unlimited access to all the hardware, source code, etc) but if they make a promise to their end-users then they should stick to it.

In Sony's case, that promise was broken from day one in Europe and South Korea. Units for those markets never had in-built Emotion Engine chips, so not even early adopters in those markets had the chance to buy a totally compatible unit.

Notice how Sony didn't pull that stunt out of the gate in either Japan or the US? Why do you think that might have been? Perhaps because it felt that it couldn't pull that kind of shit in either of those markets? Or perhaps it thought that if European and Korean gamers were crazy enough to pay its inflated prices (£425 in the UK, which is $850!) then it could shaft them further by removing hardware to cut costs.

Now it seems, by stealth (because they sure aren't trumpeting the fact), Sony have done the same in the US. And, somehow, me pointing it out is offensive to you?

I've owned more consoles/gaming PCs than most in my time. I have (or have had) an Atari 2600, a Commodore 128, an Atari ST-FM, an Atari STE, two Sega Megadrives (Genesis to you), two Atari Lynx (one of each model), a PC Engine, a PlayStation, a Dreamcast, and a PlayStation 2. I've also lived with friends that owned other consoles. There are few major console titles that I haven't played.

Yet so far, I've yet to buy either a PS3, an Xbox 360 or a Nintendo Wii. Why? Because, so far, none of them has really engaged me in any way. I'm trying so hard to want to buy another Sony console but Sony itself seems to be coming up with more and more reasons why I shouldn't ever do that.

It's a shame. All Sony had to do to earn my money was to not try to rip me off with a less than compatible unit (why didn't a single European PS3 have hardware emulation) and a price tag that was, even after accounting for taxes, 45 percent more than US gamers were paying for the same system.

Thanks for the fanboi Sony vs Microsoft rant though. The all-caps "SONY"s were a nice touch.

Re:More info...

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

To be fair, the 360 doesn't have great compatibility either (Wikipedia puts it at 42% with the July update). However, there are some differences:

• Despite the fact that the 360's compatiblity is only 42%, the vast majority of that list works more or less perfectly. That's not to say that there aren't exceptions, but Microsoft appears to have at least tested the titles that they support
• Microsoft never represented backwards compatibility as a major feature. Sony has taken every opportunity to trash Microsoft's poor compatibility and play up their better support. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, Sony is a lot more humble

Honestly, I think that the BC on the non-EE PS3s is perfectly acceptable. Most people who are buying a PS3 at this point already have a PS2. Those who buy the console when it is more mature (e.g. cheaper) will have a good library of PS3 titles to choose from, and BC may be better by then.

However, Sony's marketing is shit. The PS3 is actually a pretty damned good console. It has a lot of nice features (Blu-Ray, Linux, web browser, upgradable HDD, built-in WiFi) that the 360 lacks, but it has two problems: it's too damned expensive, and Sony's hubris has shot themselves in the foot.

It's OK to be enthusiastic about your product. But don't piss on us by doing a non-price-drop-price-drop. You're clearing out old inventory of 60GB PS3s, which is fine, but don't dick us around by pretending it's a price cut and then later "clarifying" that it's a limited time thing. This is a firesale. Don't dress it up another way because you produced too damn many 60GB PS3s and they are going to take months to sell at your current lousy rate.

Your hardware is fine, Sony. But your customers will only take so much shit.

Re:More info...

[Anonymous Coward]

That figure was at launch. Software updates since then have improved the situation although I don't know the current figure all my games work.

Re:More info...

[ArtDent]

Notice how Sony didn't pull that stunt out of the gate in either Japan or the US? Why do you think that might have been?

Honestly, I think they had not intended to do software emulation until they had figured out what their price point was, and learned the prices of the competition. At that point, they started trying to figure out what they could cut to bring down the cost of the console. Having made the decision to try software emulation late in the game, it wouldn't have been ready when they began production for the launches in Japan and North America. So, they went ahead with the Emotion Engine in those markets.

It might even be that this was the real reason for delaying the launches elsewhere. They couldn't let 2006 pass without at least a partial launch, but they couldn't bleed like that worldwide. So, they delayed in order to get software emulation working well enough that they could go to market with the cheaper hardware in the rest of the world.

I've got no insider information. This is just speculation, but it makes good sense to me.

Re:More info...

[BrerBear]

Despite the fact that the 360's compatiblity is only 42%, the vast majority of that list works more or less perfectly. That's not to say that there aren't exceptions, but Microsoft appears to have at least tested the titles that they support You've got to be kidding. We've tried running many of our old Xbox games on my 360, and the "supported" titles have major issue.

* Munch's Oddysee is unplayable because the character voices in game are all distorted like they're spoken underwater. Been in their supported list for ages.
* Knights of the Old Republic and lots of other titles have terrible frame rates that make them a chore to play.

We were looking forward to finishing some of our old Xbox games on the new hardware, but just gave up. Granted, the 360 architecture is so different than the original Xbox that it can't be an easy problem to solve. But if you think that Microsoft's titles "work more or less perfectly", you need to take off the fanboy glasses.

Re:More info...

[BrerBear]

Looks like the 360 compatibility page on Wikipedia confirms my experiences... not so great. Lots of slowdowns and bugs.

Re:More info...

[steveo777]

Knights of the Old Republic... have terrible frame rates that make them a chore to play.

Both KotORs had bad frame rates on the XBox anyway. Shouldn't be anything new.

MOD PARENT UP

[kinglink]

I never do this, but I must. The parent is correct. SKU is a game industry term, this is a story about the game industry, stop complaining about our vernacular. 3 SKU means there's three different versions of a product/game (3 platforms, 2 platforms, 1 special edition, or Halo 3's 1 normal, 1 special, and 1 uber special edition). Microsoft has 4 360 Console SKUs in america, meaning there's 4 different versions (core, premium, elite, and now halo 3).

Re:MOD PARENT UP

[Nasarius]

SKU is a game industry term

Uh...no.

Re:MOD PARENT UP

[kinglink]

Uhh Yeah? Us in the industry, use that as an term. It's the same meaning as the retail industry, but that doesn't mean the games industry doesn't also use it in a very similar way.

Or have most of you guys forgot the Games industry deals with retail very closely at the end of a game's development cycle?

Re:MOD PARENT UP

[Lisandro]

KU is a game industry term, this is a story about the game industry, stop complaining about our vernacular.

Um, no. SKU is NOT a game industry term, it's a term used internally by any industry that offers products and/or services to customers. Saying that, and i quote, "at which point the only SKU remaining in the states will be the $599 80GB + Motorstorm bundle", is as retarded as saying that after selling some books you're left with only one ISBN. You are left with a stock of only one product, which happens to be identified internally by its SKU. I agree with the parent poster, using that acronym has no use in a /. story.

Re:MOD PARENT UP

[Anonymous Coward]

You are not in the industry. Stop pretending that you are.

"We'll cut tariffs if you implement a DMCA"

[tepples]

DMCA has no significance outside the US. False. Other countries such as Australia have implemented DMCA clones as a way of getting the United States to reduce its tariffs on goods exported from those countries.

Re:Only a retard or MS troll would suggest Sony wo

[mypalmike]

Sony would have to be complete idiots to give up this momentum, this just seems like a strategy to unload the 60GB hardware.

A product that has "momentum" doesn't have to get "unloaded".

What Sony would be SMART to do is...

[mdenham]

...well, remember the "hook to your TV" era of home computers? As soon as the 80GB model comes out, push through a firmware update that includes, oh, I dunno, something along the lines of BASIC w/built-in 3D graphics commands, and let people upload their software for free to a special section of the online store. I mean, $600 for a game console is insane (I'm still waiting for the price to come down and/or fewer bills) but $600 for a computer which you can develop homebrew games on, share 'em with the world, and, OH YEAH IT PLAYS GAMES TOO... see, that's a little more reasonable (especially if you already have the nice TV to hook it up to). Then again, I was always a fan of the TI-99/4A, so I wouldn't mind seeing things head back in that direction again.

Re:What Sony would be SMART to do is...

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually what they need to do is to make a "PC" version of the PS3. 4GB Ram and open up access to the RSX. They could raise the price to $1200 or so. But a real PC with linux and 3D Graphics, wifi, bluetooth, gigabit, controllers remote control and a plethora of free software. They would not be able to keep up with demand.

Re:What Sony would be SMART to do is...

[mdenham]

TBH, they don't actually need to up the memory beyond 512MB for that kind of version.

If they went that route, though, they would have to support something similar to ReadyBoost in Vista (i.e., you put in an 8GB MemoryStick and congratulations, your system can act like it's got 8.5GB of memory now). While this does make it cheaper (both to produce and for endusers to add memory to), I'm not entirely sure I like it as a solution.

But yeah... they wouldn't be able to keep up with demand for it if they repositioned it as a home PC for "people who are afraid of PCs" (or people who want to avoid MS as much as possible), rather than "ZOMG EXPENSIVE CONSOLE THAT EVERYONE MUST HAVE ONE OF BECAUSE IT'S SO COOL". I mean, I could use a second computer... :-D

Besides, if MS thinks it's worthwhile to get people developing games at home for XBLA (...at like $90/year), Sony should be more than willing to say "You know, since we're already trying to one-up MS by making our online component free... we might as well snag this idea as well, and make it free, and see what people come up with. Maybe we'll get some good titles out of people that way."

Only 1/6 as good

[Tony]

As I see it, the XBox 360 is only about 1/6 as good as the PS3, and isn't that much cheaper.

First, the price: Microsoft charges for XBox Live. A couple of years of XBox live subscription pretty much wipes out any price advantage over the PS3. And I suspect the PS3 will continue to see price drops, but XBox Live will not. So, in the long run, the PS3 will be a bit cheaper. Not by much, but by a bit.

As far as the "goodness" of the system, the 360 is limited by the DVD, *not* by the hardware. The 360 has a better GPU, but the PS3 has quite a bit better CPU power. (Now, taking advantage of the cell architecture is a challenge; but the PS3 has quite a bit more raw horsepower than the 360.)

The 360 has about 8G of data per game. As it is, game companies often have to figure out how to fit their game into 8G. There are sacrifices, and those sacrifices are in *content*. The textures are scaled back, there's less video available, etc.

Blu-Ray can store up to 50G. That's about 6 times more storage than DVD. Sure, many games won't require more than 8G; but many will. Now, will they require 50G? Not many. But, *the option is there.* Game companies no longer have to sacrifice content just to squeeze the game onto a DVD.

So, by my reckoning, the PS3 is more than ( 100/90 )% of the 360. Quite a bit more. And since a lot of the value is on-line play, the price difference isn't that great, in the long run (though the upfront cost of the PS3 is daunting, for sure).

Sony has built a system that will take time to reach its full potential. That means the games will take more advantage of the system, and get better, just like they did with the PS2. Compare the first Rayman title with later titles like God of War or the later Ratchet & Clank titles. R:FOM is akin to the first PS2 Rayman title, in that it hardly makes use of the system.

Not that I'd pay $600 for a PS3. But I'm not a huge gamer.

Re:Only 1/6 as good

[MeanderingMind]

I realize the system is hardcore system, and for that reason the average interest in various features will be different. However, I thought I'd clarify a few things.

1. Live - While online play is increasingly important, the majority of console gamers still don't care. For gamers who don't care about online play, this is a non-issue.

2. Thus far, none of the cross platform games have shown significant differences between the 360 and the PS3. If content is being sacrificed currently, it's being sacrificed on both. This might change down the road, but for the time being that's how it is.

3. The problem with the PS3 is that its "potential" isn't obvious now. The Wii's potential (still unfulfiled) is highly visible, and the 360 isn't the one that has to prove it will eventually be better. Until the PS3's potential is accomplished, it's going to be a tough sell.

I might eventually buy a PS3, and possibly for the games that are constantly touted for it. However, I'm not likely to buy one until those games come out. Right now, the PS3 would just sit beneath my TV collecting dust.

Can someone explain why the new one is better?

[r_jensen11]

So from what I gather, the 80GB PS3 is going to be like the European models, but with an additional 20 GB. Are there no more benefits other than a larger hard drive and the removal of the emotion chip? I mean, for the 60GB over the 20GB, there was the built-in Wifi, card readers, etc. So what I'm trying to get at here is this: Why shouldn't I just get a 60GB PS3 for $500, then swap the default hard drive with a larger hard drive if the 60GB ever gets filled up?

Re:Can someone explain why the new one is better?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's probably what they are hoping you'll do. It's all a great big marketing scheme, to get people to purchase the 60GB model at the "low" price of $499 before they "sell out" and only the gimped 80GB model exists. It's not that hard to just put in a different HDD when the system can handle different sized HDDs.

But of course that's not the only difference, as the 80GB model is gimped in the backwards-compatibility department moreso than the 60GB model, making the current 60GB model even more appealing. Meaning people (myself included, if I had the budget to do so >.>) will rush out to purchase the 60GB model while they still can, thereby artificially increasing their sales numbers from people who would not normally have purchased a PS3 at this time.

Re:Can someone explain why the new one is better?

[DeeDob]

Why shouldn't I just get a 60GB PS3 for $500, then swap the default hard drive with a larger hard drive if the 60GB ever gets filled up?

Because the 60GB PS3 will no longer be available. When they are sold out, they won't make them anymore, like TFA says. You won't find a PS3 for "only" 500$, you'll HAVE to fork money for the extra 20GB and Motorstorm and forget the fact that you have less BC.

WTFH

[shoptroll]

You know, it's no wonder the PS3 is selling as bad as it is. How can anyone take this company or division seriously when you have an executive in Europe saying "they're doing this to clear out units", the American executive saying "it's not a fire sale" and then the head executive in Japan saying "the Euro guy was right but he forgot to mention we have enough stock to last a few months". I'll admit Nintendo's done some stuff like this before, like when people were trying to find out if the Wii was region-free, but when you have a system that isn't selling, it's not the time to be displaying confusion and incompetence of this magnitude.

It's really starting to get really hard to understand the truth in any news that comes from Sony these days. These guys should run for Congress.

Re:WTFH

[MemoryDragon]

Well it is easy
1. Listen to what the european CEO has to say, and take it seriously
2. Wait for the american CEO to start to cry and start to watch the show with a package of popcorn
3. Wait for the official confirmation of Japan then you know the show is over :-)

Residuals

[tepples]

Well, considering that a game disc costs next to nothing to produce Except for the royalties per copy that go to the composers of music that was licensed for the game, etc.

Like a supermodel?

[tepples]

How about "model"? A model can mean a SKU, but it can also mean a mesh or a booth babe.

Re:Like a supermodel?

[Glytch]

Yes, but when saying (for example) "the 80GB model" in a discussion about the PS3, I highly doubt there's going to be confusion as to whether someone is talking about a 3D mesh, a woman or a game console.

"Price point" means a local maximum

[tepples]

I call your 'SKU' and raise you a 'price point'. "Price point" has a specific meaning: a point on a demand curve at which the price elasticity of demand changes sharply. These tend to coincide with local maxima of revenue minus cost. Can you show me examples of where Slashdot users have misused the term?

Re:"Price point" means a local maximum

[ClamIAm]

Can you show me examples of where Slashdot users have misused the term?

The point is not that people misuse the term; the point is that marketing-speak is annoying as fuck to read.

Re:"Price point" means a local maximum

[tepples]

the point is that marketing-speak is annoying as fuck to read. And sales staff probably think engineer-speak is annoying as intercourse to read too. Your point?

Re:"Price point" means a local maximum

[MeanderingMind]

Since when has intercourse been annoying?

Re:"Price point" means a local maximum

[sanosuke76]

The original quote was "annoying as intercourse to read". It is very annoying to read it, when one would much rather be doing it.

Re:"Price point" means a local maximum

[MeanderingMind]

I guess we looked at "annoying as intercourse to read" differently.

My interpretation: Annoying, like intercourse, to read.

Your interpretation: Annoying as reading intercourse.

My experience with that particular grammatical structure is what lead me to my interpretation. Normally, maybe I'm insane, I've seen it used to implicate that the latter action is as adjective as the former action/object. e.g So-and-so is annoying as hell to live with.

Re:"Price point" means a local maximum

[ClamIAm]

This is a website that focuses on computing/engineering/science. Engineer-speak comes as part of the deal.

Re:"Price point" means a local maximum

[tepples]

This is a website that focuses on computing/engineering/science. Engineer-speak comes as part of the deal. And some of its articles focus on some marketing decision made by a supplier. Marketing-speak comes as part of the deal.

Sony marketing bungle? Where?

[Sephiro444]

From a PR perspective, I completely agree that Sony has screwed the pooch on managing consumer opinions, at least within the industry. Outside, however, the average consumer just sees a $499 60GB PS3 on sale.

I disagree with the people that insist Sony is driving for some "magic" $599 price point. If it were, I think the sales spike the will see from this price drop will convince them otherwise. The reality for Sony is that they have a huge number of 60GB systems collecting dust on store shelves. The still-born 20GB is largely vanished, and the 80GB isn't even available yet.

Now, if Sony was to announce the 80GB system at the same $499 that the 60GB has just been reduced to, how many of those 60GB systems would they be likely to sell, now or in the future? Not many, I'd wager, unless they planned to drop the price on those even further. The company would be foolish to do that, especially since the 80GB won't be around until August. The smart thing to do -- and what I suspect is Sony's plan all along here -- is to release the 80GB at $599 with the no-longer-in-production 60GB at $499 until the 60GB units are either depleted or nearly impossible to find (as opposed to now, where it's the only thing available!), then get another PR boost with another price drop lowering the 80GB to $499 as well.

So if an extra 20GB is worth an extra $100 or a few months waiting for you, go for it. For me, 60GB is plenty, and the hard drive is already pretty damn easy to upgrade way past the 80GB anyway, if one were so inclined.

Re:Sony marketing bungle? Where?

[Babbster]

It's long past time to call Sony's tactics for exactly what they are, from the PS3's beginning to right now: "Bait and switch." First, they released the $500 20GB version in such small quantities that people couldn't find them, then they discontinued them completely. Now, they've managed to convince people that selling a 60GB console at $500 constitutes a "price cut" (kids, if a console is $500/600 at launch and is $500/600 today, there's been no price cut), only to admit that they've discontinued that model, too - with every reason to believe, by the way, that the new 80GB model is costing them significantly less to manufacture than the 60GB model! The PS3's marketing from day one has been a scam, attempting to make consumers pay more for the PS3 than they expected. Bait. And. Switch.

This is good news...

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a different take on the price drop that I haven't heard anywhere yet...I don't like it.
Why?
I have an XBOX 360 and a PS3, and I primarily play online games. When Vegas came out on the 360 I was addicted. When it came out on a few weeks ago on the PS3 I rented it to see the differences... and low and behold the online play on the PlayStation Network was 100x better than that of XBOX Live so I ended up immediately buying it.
Why?
No kids! I'm 28 years old and I can't stand playing games in rooms filled with 12 year olds. To me its like going to a movie and sitting right next to a crying 1 y/o...get a freakin baby sitter already! The lack of immature squeaky voices on the PlayStation Network can only be attributed to the PS3's price point.

So, in the end, I hope the Wii and XBOX 360 keep selling the way they are and making their way into the homes laden with kids because its providing me with a far superior online experience.

Tired of this nonsense

[Mark Gillespie]

"The smart thing to have done would have been to come out and say that the 60Gig version is being discounted and discontinued, "

Can you imagine the field day, that Zonk and his Sony hating buddies would have...

Lets face it, it does not matter what Sony actually does, Zonk and his buddies will find a way to spin it into a negative..

If you want a $499 PS3, go out an buy one in the next month or so, if not, shut the fuck up about it.. It's really that simple..

If you want to talk Firesales, look no further than the HD DUD add-on for the 360...

Re:Tired of this nonsense

[MemoryDragon]

No worries, the press all over the world is similarily negative towards Sony and the PS3.... Zonk is the rule not the exception ;-)

Re:Only a retard or MS troll would suggest Sony wo

[Anonymous Coward]

I know of a particular product that requires a bit of momentum to unload.

Said product resides deep within the bowels. The literal bowels.

Hrm... might have a strong correlation.

Power alone might not help them

[elrous0]

There is little doubt that the PS3 is more "future-proof" (thanks to blu-ray) and has generally more "muscle" than the 360. But that will do them little good if no one buys the damn thing (that $600 price tag is KILLING them) and the games aren't there (so far, they've made a lot of promises in this arena, but delivered on none). For all the glitz of the Sony presentation at E3 (compared to the Microsoft presentation) all the games that MS showed will be out THIS YEAR--and most of the Sony games shown either don't have release dates AT ALL (like Killzone 2) or will be released long after the crucial 2007 holiday season is over (like MGS4).

This holiday season could be a "make or break" for Sony--and the fact is that they have little more to offer for Christmas than just a bunch of promises, titles that will also be released on the 360 (like GTA IV), and a $600 price tag. The 360 has Halo 2, Mass Effect, and a number of other EXCLUSIVES that will actually be sitting on store shelves this Christmas. And if MS lowers its price tag even more, Sony could well be permanently screwed, and see the PS3 go the way of the 3DO.

Re:Only a retard or MS troll would suggest Sony wo

[buffer-overflowed]

So, if they manage to sell 145k systems in the July NPD report, that's selling like it should? Yea, big improvement over the 80k they normally do, but still pathetic and still way under what the PS2 did and the Wii is doing.

Meanwhile, if I invested in entertainment I'd be dumping the stock of any 3rd party dumb enough to give the PS3 an exclusive w/o serious cash incentives from Sony. It's business, Sony is so far behind now that the cycle has already started. They're fucked. It's a failure.

The bright bit is that even the failures get a decent library, so it'll probably still end this as a good or great gaming system, but there's no huge turnaround coming, no when this game comes out it'll push the PS3 to number 1. It's an also ran. Live with it.