Sony could be about to announce a PS3 price cut "in the next couple of days", according to one analyst, who says rumours persist that the company's planning to introduce a non-Blu-ray PS3 to the market.
"Recent channel checks indicate increased speculation for a PS3 price cut announcement from Sony in the next couple of days," said Janco Partners analyst Mike Hickey on Tuesday.
"We think the company needs to reduce the current price by $100 to effectively restart unit velocity at retail. ... We believe the market is expecting a PS3 price cut in April or by June (E3) at the latest," he continued, according to Edge.
Perhaps most interestingly, Hickey suggested a PS3 price cut could be enabled by the introduction of a non-Blu-ray version of the console.
"We are also hearing continued speculation that Sony is working on a non-Blu-ray PS3 console, which could enable them to make the aforementioned hardware price reduction," he said.
With all current PS3 retail releases on high-capacity Blu-ray discs, the move would seem a strange one bound to confuse consumers and developers alike. It doesn't seem to make much sense to us at all.
Sony has already sold 21 million Blu-ray enabled PS3s, while one research firm expects Blu-ray sales to top 100 million units in 2009.
A Sony UK representative told us this morning that the company doesn't comment on "rumour and speculation".
It would be a matter of disabling Blu-Ray functionality in the cheap models, and charging for some kind of dongle/remote thing to re-enable it. Thereby Sony get to carry on charging current prices for existing models, whilst gaining more market share with a lower-priced console. I doubt they could get away with charging enough on the dongle to cover the loss they'd make on the PS3 though... Although then there's always the increase in game sales they'd see as a result.
It's a very bad idea for Sony to bring out a non Blu-ray player, I personal feel that they will not bring one out
It makes no sense, how would that console fit in with the 10 year plan. Sony are doing well with the amount of consoles they are selling at the moment with their high price.
That means Sony would need to sell 2 types of games one on blu-ray another on dvd. Some how I don't think that will happen. These analysts talk some rubbish I swear they just make crap up for sake of it.I would love a job as being a bulls***er
It would be a matter of disabling Blu-Ray functionality in the cheap models, and charging for some kind of dongle/remote thing to re-enable it. Thereby Sony get to carry on charging current prices for existing models, whilst gaining more market share with a lower-priced console. I doubt they could get away with charging enough on the dongle to cover the loss they'd make on the PS3 though... Although then there's always the increase in game sales they'd see as a result.
Have you ever heard such twaddle? Just buy a PS2 instead. It'll do the same thing if they release a non blu-ray PS3. Or is this an early April's Fool Day.
a PS3 for Ł149 WITH Blu-Ray makes better sense. With Sony making money off every Blu-Ray film sold why would they want to lessen their capacity to make money?
I agree with mantis, it's BS.
You can read more about it... http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/ps3-price-cut-announcement-in-the-next-couple-of-days-janco
i personally think this is BS but it is consistant with theier recent stratagy for dropping the price of the PS3, generally at the cost of the consumer.
If i remeber rightly first they took out backwards compatibility, then dropped the size of the HDD, waited a while then upped it again after many people bought an inferior version that they canned in the states. Stripping out the Blu ray functionality woulf be the only thing left to make sure it had absolutely no edge over the competition what so ever.
Bravo Sony, I think you need your f**king heads examined.
It would be a matter of disabling Blu-Ray functionality in the cheap models, and charging for some kind of dongle/remote thing to re-enable it. Thereby Sony get to carry on charging current prices for existing models, whilst gaining more market share with a lower-priced console. I doubt they could get away with charging enough on the dongle to cover the loss they'd make on the PS3 though... Although then there's always the increase in game sales they'd see as a result.
The games come on Blu-Ray though.
Sorry, I didn't explain myself very well.
Blu-Ray movie functionality would be disabled, but the machine still has a BD drive. Hence games work, but if you want to play BD movies, you have to buy the remote/dongle bundle in the shops for Ł40. Isn't this what Sony did with the PS2, thinking about it?
Keeping current models at the current price would work well for Sony - they keep selling at a lower loss for high-end consumers, and don't reduce the perceived value of the PS3 and Blu-Ray despite being able to gain a bigger user base with less 'hardcore' purchasers.
Bulls**t all ps3 games are blu ray so how could people play them on that kind of model plus what about upcoming releases that made need the space. I don't believe this fora second and if sony want a cheaper ps3 then drop the price of the current ones they can't keep taking parts out.
If the price of the PS3 does come down, then I expect it to be in the region of a Ł50 reduction. Sony can't afford to give the bloody things away!
And from the looks of their game output this year, a small reduction will be enough to attract new buyers. I mean, we just want to play the games - and the PS3 will have more than enough by the end of the year to seduce anybody.
And if fanboys still moan about it, then it's their loss.
It would be a matter of disabling Blu-Ray functionality in the cheap models, and charging for some kind of dongle/remote thing to re-enable it. Thereby Sony get to carry on charging current prices for existing models, whilst gaining more market share with a lower-priced console. I doubt they could get away with charging enough on the dongle to cover the loss they'd make on the PS3 though... Although then there's always the increase in game sales they'd see as a result.
The games come on Blu-Ray though.
Sorry, I didn't explain myself very well.
Blu-Ray movie functionality would be disabled, but the machine still has a BD drive. Hence games work, but if you want to play BD movies, you have to buy the remote/dongle bundle in the shops for Ł40. Isn't this what Sony did with the PS2, thinking about it?
Keeping current models at the current price would work well for Sony - they keep selling at a lower loss for high-end consumers, and don't reduce the perceived value of the PS3 and Blu-Ray despite being able to gain a bigger user base with less 'hardcore' purchasers.
I see what you're saying, but that wouldn't drop the costs that much as the technology would still be in the machine.
I realise the Blu-Ray is the reason for the hefty price tag, but to most people this would lead to confusion. Surely it would also seem like Sony losing confidence in Blu-Ray as a format.
To be honest The inclusion of Blu-Ray didn't influence my decision to get a PS3 whatsoever (LBP and a lot of gift vouchers caused it), but as a slogan "Blu-ray, you don't have to have it if you don't want to" just seems like a bad business move.
wasn't a key selling point of the ps3 was it would be a blu ray player? If you haven't got that, it will bring a whole world of problems. The money saved from not having a blue ray player will be spent making dvd versions of a game.
Is this guy saying that Sony are considering releasing a none Blu-ray machine that has a DVD drive installed instead which obviously would mean that current and future titles having to be released on multiple disks?
Sure it would make it considerably cheaper but messy as hell!
I think this is specifically about disabling bluray movie playback, not replacing the BD ROM drive with a DVD drive (which would make the machine utterly useless unless you want to spend Ł200+ on a machine purely for upscaling PS1 games...).
Given that, removing bluray playback would seem to be an entirely arbitrary decision that wouldn't actually affect production costs in any meaningful way. I just don't see that there's any advantage, unless there's specific hardware included in the machine purely for bluray playback. But if so, removing it would surely be more trouble than its worth for a token price reduction.
I just can't see it. If by some miracle they managed to bring the price down to, say, Ł179, I would definitely buy one.
Everybody seems to be going a bit mental about this, but it isnt gonna happen.
Its clearly just something the analyst made up as an Idea. Its an awful, impraticle idea that'll never see the light of day, and pretty much illustrates what this 'analyst' actually knows about the games industry. Nothing.
Create a new PS3 without the capacity to play any current games? Ridiculous.
I think this is specifically about disabling bluray movie playback, not replacing the BD ROM drive with a DVD drive (which would make the machine utterly useless unless you want to spend Ł200+ on a machine purely for upscaling PS1 games...).
Given that, removing bluray playback would seem to be an entirely arbitrary decision that wouldn't actually affect production costs in any meaningful way. I just don't see that there's any advantage, unless there's specific hardware included in the machine purely for bluray playback. But if so, removing it would surely be more trouble than its worth for a token price reduction.
I just can't see it. If by some miracle they managed to bring the price down to, say, Ł179, I would definitely buy one.
Removing the blueray drive would decrease production costs a lot. Thats the whole point.
DVD drives are much cheaper to get hold of than blue ray ones.
developers wont be catering for two formats on one system.
say a DVD ps3 came out... owners couldnt buy any existing games for a start.
it would cause more problems than it would solve. a bad move in every way - probably costing them more, not less. whoever came up with this needs shot for being so stupid.
Removing the blueray drive would decrease production costs a lot. Thats the whole point.
DVD drives are much cheaper to get hold of than blue ray ones.
You're right, that's exactly what it would do.
However, it would also remove the ability to play PS3 games... Now I know the general census of opinion is that Sony see the PS3 as a media hub rather than a games console, but that's taking things a little too far
how would this work? if they remove the blu-ray drive then all future games need to be on dvd and existing games simply wont work so that's a non starter. if they remove blu-ray movie playback only how can that reduce cost as surely the manufacture cost will be the same?
incidentally, who would buy a ps3 without blu-ray movie playback? not me.
how would this work? if they remove the blu-ray drive then all future games need to be on dvd and existing games simply wont work so that's a non starter. if they remove blu-ray movie playback only how can that reduce cost as surely the manufacture cost will be the same?
incidentally, who would buy a ps3 without blu-ray movie playback? not me.
I'd still buy one as I'm all about the games. My physical movie collection is quite small as the genres I'm more likely to buy (Kung Fu/Anime)tend to be more expensive and limited when compared to the usual Hollywood stuff.
I think this is specifically about disabling bluray movie playback, not replacing the BD ROM drive with a DVD drive (which would make the machine utterly useless unless you want to spend Ł200+ on a machine purely for upscaling PS1 games...).
Given that, removing bluray playback would seem to be an entirely arbitrary decision that wouldn't actually affect production costs in any meaningful way. I just don't see that there's any advantage, unless there's specific hardware included in the machine purely for bluray playback. But if so, removing it would surely be more trouble than its worth for a token price reduction.
I just can't see it. If by some miracle they managed to bring the price down to, say, Ł179, I would definitely buy one.
Removing the blueray drive would decrease production costs a lot. Thats the whole point.
DVD drives are much cheaper to get hold of than blue ray ones.
Yes, but my point was, if they did so it would make it f**king useless for playing PS3 games. Try reading the damn post before replying.
how would this work? if they remove the blu-ray drive then all future games need to be on dvd and existing games simply wont work so that's a non starter. if they remove blu-ray movie playback only how can that reduce cost as surely the manufacture cost will be the same?
incidentally, who would buy a ps3 without blu-ray movie playback? not me.
I'd still buy one as I'm all about the games. My physical movie collection is quite small as the genres I'm more likely to buy (Kung Fu/Anime)tend to be more expensive and limited when compared to the usual Hollywood stuff.
Yeah but without the blueray drive you wouldnt be able to play any of the existing games.
Its an awful idea to be honest.
If Sony do anything to cut costs then they may release a PS3 without a hard drive, like the Xbox Arcade version. I cant even see them doing that though, cos they've spent so much money re-modelling the machine over the past couple of years that they probably dont want to spend the money doing it all again.
I still think that they never realised how much backwards compatitbility helped the PS2 shift so many units. If they had done that with the PS3 (For all titles), then I think many more people would have been willing to pay such a high price.
I think this is specifically about disabling bluray movie playback, not replacing the BD ROM drive with a DVD drive (which would make the machine utterly useless unless you want to spend Ł200+ on a machine purely for upscaling PS1 games...).
Given that, removing bluray playback would seem to be an entirely arbitrary decision that wouldn't actually affect production costs in any meaningful way. I just don't see that there's any advantage, unless there's specific hardware included in the machine purely for bluray playback. But if so, removing it would surely be more trouble than its worth for a token price reduction.
I just can't see it. If by some miracle they managed to bring the price down to, say, Ł179, I would definitely buy one.
Removing the blueray drive would decrease production costs a lot. Thats the whole point.
DVD drives are much cheaper to get hold of than blue ray ones.
Yes, but my point was, if they did so it would make it f**king useless for playing PS3 games. Try reading the damn post before replying.
Woah! Easy tiger, I was just replying to this part of your post..
'Given that, removing bluray playback would seem to be an entirely arbitrary decision that wouldn't actually affect production costs'
how would this work? if they remove the blu-ray drive then all future games need to be on dvd and existing games simply wont work so that's a non starter. if they remove blu-ray movie playback only how can that reduce cost as surely the manufacture cost will be the same?
incidentally, who would buy a ps3 without blu-ray movie playback? not me.
I'd still buy one as I'm all about the games. My physical movie collection is quite small as the genres I'm more likely to buy (Kung Fu/Anime)tend to be more expensive and limited when compared to the usual Hollywood stuff.
Yeah but without the blueray drive you wouldnt be able to play any of the existing games.
Its an awful idea to be honest.
If Sony do anything to cut costs then they may release a PS3 without a hard drive, like the Xbox Arcade version. I cant even see them doing that though, cos they've spent so much money re-modelling the machine over the past couple of years that they probably dont want to spend the money doing it all again.
I still think that they never realised how much backwards compatitbility helped the PS2 shift so many units. If they had done that with the PS3 (For all titles), then I think many more people would have been willing to pay such a high price.
I was on about movie playback. Which was the question Pishers posed. As Jimsteele told you; Read the posts before responding.
I think someone is confusing "bluray playback" (ie the playback of MOVIES on bluray) with the ability to read bluray discs, ie, game data. The former is not a prerequisite of the latter.
Perhaps I should have been more clear, but frankly, I thought the context in which the term was used made it pretty obvious.
how would this work? if they remove the blu-ray drive then all future games need to be on dvd and existing games simply wont work so that's a non starter. if they remove blu-ray movie playback only how can that reduce cost as surely the manufacture cost will be the same?
incidentally, who would buy a ps3 without blu-ray movie playback? not me.
I'd still buy one as I'm all about the games. My physical movie collection is quite small as the genres I'm more likely to buy (Kung Fu/Anime)tend to be more expensive and limited when compared to the usual Hollywood stuff.
Yeah but without the blueray drive you wouldnt be able to play any of the existing games.
Its an awful idea to be honest.
If Sony do anything to cut costs then they may release a PS3 without a hard drive, like the Xbox Arcade version. I cant even see them doing that though, cos they've spent so much money re-modelling the machine over the past couple of years that they probably dont want to spend the money doing it all again.
I still think that they never realised how much backwards compatitbility helped the PS2 shift so many units. If they had done that with the PS3 (For all titles), then I think many more people would have been willing to pay such a high price.
I was on about movie playback. Which was the question Pishers posed. As Jimsteele told you; Read the posts before responding.
I was just pointing out that the games are on Blue rays too. You said you would buy a PS3 without a blue ray player as you are 'all about the games'.
So if you are 'all about the games' then you wouldnt be able to play them.
Jesus, looks like a fair few people got out of bed on the wrong side this morning. That was one non offensive sentence in a 3 para post and you still flamed me for it!
EDIT - No, I see, I understand now, soz. I have no idea why you are talking about it, or why it would ever happen, but yeah, I do now understand. A PS3 with a Blue Ray player, but no blue ray movie playback? Im sorry, i just think that is a bizarre notion.
Am I right in saying that most games on the PS3 are copied multiple times on one disk for fast disk access? I am just going on what I have read on here before. If that is the case it is not entirely impossible that it may happen that a non blu-ray version of the machin be released. That would obviously mean that 2 versions of the games would need to be produced of course which is rather daft, but still not impossible.
All Sony need to do this year, just like MS did last year, is take 50 off the pricetag, and market the sh*t out of the thing. Start selling it as a Blu-Ray Player AND a premium game console! In these economically harsh times, you'd be getting a great deal (that's what the marketing banner would real )
Shove in Spiderman on Blu-Ray, some PSN titles and a copy of LBP, and you're good to go!
I think someone is confusing "bluray playback" (ie the playback of MOVIES on bluray) with the ability to read bluray discs, ie, game data. The former is not a prerequisite of the latter.
Perhaps I should have been more clear, but frankly, I thought the context in which the term was used made it pretty obvious.
I just couldnt understand why we were having a conversation about disabling blue ray playback for movies!
Its just totally pointless! How would that help anyone? It wouldnt reduce costs for the machine, so I thought anyone with half an idea of whats going on would just discount it as an option.
From there I just presumed everyone was talking about getting rid of the Blue ray drive, as is mentioned in the article.
I dont believe that for 1 sec, like everyone said, theres only Blu-ray games. If such a console exsisted, then the only games it will play are PS1s and games from the PSN store. A PS3 that doesn't play PS3 (disk format) games isn't a PS3. Total rubbish if you ask me.
Am I right in saying that most games on the PS3 are copied multiple times on one disk for fast disk access? I am just going on what I have read on here before. If that is the case it is not entirely impossible that it may happen that a non blu-ray version of the machin be released. That would obviously mean that 2 versions of the games would need to be produced of course which is rather daft, but still not impossible.
Yeah but wouldnt that just ramp up the costs of making the games, and so therefore make reducing the production cost of the console pointless?
The problem is that there is no problem.
Either they go for broke and reduce the price of the existing hardware, or wait a bit longer. Theres no point in changing it in my opinion (Thought Id better put that there in case someone goes mental at me again! )
I think someone is confusing "bluray playback" (ie the playback of MOVIES on bluray) with the ability to read bluray discs, ie, game data. The former is not a prerequisite of the latter.
Perhaps I should have been more clear, but frankly, I thought the context in which the term was used made it pretty obvious.
I just couldnt understand why we were having a conversation about disabling blue ray playback for movies!
Its just totally pointless! How would that help anyone? It wouldnt reduce costs for the machine, so I thought anyone with half an idea of whats going on would just discount it as an option.
Exactly. That's the point. It's kinda why everyone thinks this is bulls**t.
From there I just presumed everyone was talking about getting rid of the Blue ray drive, as is mentioned in the article.
The article doesn't exactly make it clear either way.
It's possible that having BluRay Movie Playback incurs a licence cost - disabling this feature would therefore remove this cost - thus reducing the price...
However - I'm pretty sure that if there is a licence cost - then Sony would get some/most of it... so if they do stop paying the licence - then the cost reduction would not be as big as it would first appear. (i.e. they'd be cutting their own nose off to spite their face)
Am I right in saying that most games on the PS3 are copied multiple times on one disk for fast disk access? I am just going on what I have read on here before. If that is the case it is not entirely impossible that it may happen that a non blu-ray version of the machin be released. That would obviously mean that 2 versions of the games would need to be produced of course which is rather daft, but still not impossible.
No that's not true, just another urban myth. How would having multiple copys of data on a disc speed up disk access for a start?
Sony announced two weeks ago that they are going to make PS3 specific Blurays with film and game content and now you're expected to believe that they're going to release a PS3 without a Bluray drive?
how would this work? if they remove the blu-ray drive then all future games need to be on dvd and existing games simply wont work so that's a non starter. if they remove blu-ray movie playback only how can that reduce cost as surely the manufacture cost will be the same?
incidentally, who would buy a ps3 without blu-ray movie playback? not me.
I'd still buy one as I'm all about the games. My physical movie collection is quite small as the genres I'm more likely to buy (Kung Fu/Anime)tend to be more expensive and limited when compared to the usual Hollywood stuff.
Yeah but without the blueray drive you wouldnt be able to play any of the existing games.
Its an awful idea to be honest.
If Sony do anything to cut costs then they may release a PS3 without a hard drive, like the Xbox Arcade version. I cant even see them doing that though, cos they've spent so much money re-modelling the machine over the past couple of years that they probably dont want to spend the money doing it all again.
I still think that they never realised how much backwards compatitbility helped the PS2 shift so many units. If they had done that with the PS3 (For all titles), then I think many more people would have been willing to pay such a high price.
I was on about movie playback. Which was the question Pishers posed. As Jimsteele told you; Read the posts before responding.
I was just pointing out that the games are on Blue rays too. You said you would buy a PS3 without a blue ray player as you are 'all about the games'.
So if you are 'all about the games' then you wouldnt be able to play them.
Jesus, looks like a fair few people got out of bed on the wrong side this morning. That was one non offensive sentence in a 3 para post and you still flamed me for it!
EDIT - No, I see, I understand now, soz. I have no idea why you are talking about it, or why it would ever happen, but yeah, I do now understand. A PS3 with a Blue Ray player, but no blue ray movie playback? Im sorry, i just think that is a bizarre notion.
a ps3 is only Ł40-Ł50 more expensive than a 360 elite. you try buying a descent bluray player for Ł50
(please note a standalone PS3 now costs Ł260 and the elite is Ł210-219 depending on retailers)
A B S O L U T E B O L L O C K S
And by the same token, it's about Ł130 more expensive than a 360 Arcade and you certainly can get a decent bluray player for less than Ł150.
See? We can all use half truths and skewed numbers to support our bulls**t.
And what does this have to do with the topic at hand anyway? Who mentioned the 360?
i was using the elite as a benchmark for a proper games console that has HDMI out and a large hardrive that can be comparable to a PS3 you Moronic xbot. if you want a console with poor AV connections and a tiny harddrive like you intellect i'm not stopping you. but otherwise be quiet and let the grown ups talk
As most people have said it makes absolute rubbish business sense.
I reckon a price cut is on the way. Well at least it should be. If Sony can undercut the Elite, at what Ł220? That is only reducing the current RRP by Ł80, but placing them cheaper than a top-range 360, which has poorer specs than the PS3 on a basic level.
All those people who would buy an elite for it's 'eliteness' would think again when they could get the added bonus of free online and a blu-ray player.
Haha, it would have been classic if Sony said 'PS3 price cut - Ł220 with RE5 collectors, 13th March' to b******s up the Red Elite bulls**t.
a ps3 is only Ł40-Ł50 more expensive than a 360 elite. you try buying a descent bluray player for Ł50
(please note a standalone PS3 now costs Ł260 and the elite is Ł210-219 depending on retailers)
A B S O L U T E B O L L O C K S
And by the same token, it's about Ł130 more expensive than a 360 Arcade and you certainly can get a decent bluray player for less than Ł150.
See? We can all use half truths and skewed numbers to support our bulls**t.
And what does this have to do with the topic at hand anyway? Who mentioned the 360?
i was using the elite as a benchmark for a proper games console that has HDMI out and a large hardrive that can be comparable to a PS3 you Moronic xbot. if you want a console with poor AV connections and a tiny harddrive like you intellect i'm not stopping you. but otherwise be quiet and let the grown ups talk
i bet you think stopping a ps3 from playing blurays but still having a bluray drive is cost effective? production costs won't decrease at all. R and D will be an overhead expenses Sony won't want to see on their books!
i bet you think stopping a ps3 from playing blurays but still having a bluray drive is cost effective? production costs won't decrease at all. R and D will be an overhead expenses Sony won't want to see on their books!
No I don't think it would be cost effective, which I've stated earlier in this thread.
a ps3 is only Ł40-Ł50 more expensive than a 360 elite. you try buying a descent bluray player for Ł50
(please note a standalone PS3 now costs Ł260 and the elite is Ł210-219 depending on retailers)
A B S O L U T E B O L L O C K S
And by the same token, it's about Ł130 more expensive than a 360 Arcade and you certainly can get a decent bluray player for less than Ł150.
See? We can all use half truths and skewed numbers to support our bulls**t.
And what does this have to do with the topic at hand anyway? Who mentioned the 360?
i was using the elite as a benchmark for a proper games console that has HDMI out and a large hardrive that can be comparable to a PS3 you Moronic xbot. if you want a console with poor AV connections and a tiny harddrive like you intellect i'm not stopping you. but otherwise be quiet and let the grown ups talk
Xbot? I love how fanboy accusations are almost exclusively thrown by dribbling fanboys. On the subject of our intellects, mine affords me at least a basic grasp of grammar and punctuation, so if mine is "tiny" and therefore equal to 20gb, yours must be akin to an 8mb memory stick. Chortle.
My premium has HDMI out, 20gb is perfectly sufficient for me so far and you clearly missed the point so good day to you, asshole.
In all seriousness its a fact that all new platforms come down in price eventually, this would appear to be borne out by the fact that u can now pick up a brand new blu-ray player for nigh on Ł150. 18 months ago you would be lucky to pick one up for under Ł600. PS3 price will drop and will still have Blu-ray unless of course the moon is indeed made of cheese
Well someone has to say it. When there is any artical about the 360 the sony fanboys come out and say its the end of MS. Well here it goes. RIP Playstation as we know it. They are certainly getting desperate now. Sega was not in this much s**t when they stopped producing the dreamcast. At least the dreamcast is remembered fondly. The ps3 will be remembered as an expensive piece of crap that is the symbol of the arrogance of sony.
One of the main reasons I'd get a PS3 would be for the Blu-ray playback - I've been eyeing up the Band of Brothers boxset and Mad Men Season 1 for a while now. Two of the best shows in 1080p - yes please! As people have suggested if they are going to remove some blu-ray function it would probably be the blu-ray movie playback because there's no way in hell they could remove the game playback - there would be hell to pay for Sony around Christmas time with consumers buying blu-ray games for the DVD PS3, not being able to play them and going mental etc. So, anyway if they did remove the movie playback this would really put me off buying one.
On the other hand, the production cost savings might be passed on to the 80gb model with blu-ray movie playback so might result in a reduced cost for that model as well. Food for thought.
a ps3 is only Ł40-Ł50 more expensive than a 360 elite. you try buying a descent bluray player for Ł50
(please note a standalone PS3 now costs Ł260 and the elite is Ł210-219 depending on retailers)
A B S O L U T E B O L L O C K S
And by the same token, it's about Ł130 more expensive than a 360 Arcade and you certainly can get a decent bluray player for less than Ł150.
See? We can all use half truths and skewed numbers to support our bulls**t.
And what does this have to do with the topic at hand anyway? Who mentioned the 360?
I was gonna say much the same. 'What's that go to do with its' aside, compare the most expensive Xbox to the most expensive PS3 and there's little in it. Cheapest to cheapest though and there's a huge difference. I still don't see the relevance mind.
a ps3 is only Ł40-Ł50 more expensive than a 360 elite. you try buying a descent bluray player for Ł50
(please note a standalone PS3 now costs Ł260 and the elite is Ł210-219 depending on retailers)
A B S O L U T E B O L L O C K S
And by the same token, it's about Ł130 more expensive than a 360 Arcade and you certainly can get a decent bluray player for less than Ł150.
See? We can all use half truths and skewed numbers to support our bulls**t.
And what does this have to do with the topic at hand anyway? Who mentioned the 360?
i was using the elite as a benchmark for a proper games console that has HDMI out and a large hardrive that can be comparable to a PS3 you Moronic xbot. if you want a console with poor AV connections and a tiny harddrive like you intellect i'm not stopping you. but otherwise be quiet and let the grown ups talk
Why is he a 'moronic Xbot'? He's pointing out the truth.
Something you seem to be avoiding (all Xbox360s have HDMI outs now for one).
"Posted by DeejUK Sorry, I didn't explain myself very well.
Blu-Ray movie functionality would be disabled, but the machine still has a BD drive. Hence games work, but if you want to play BD movies, you have to buy the remote/dongle bundle in the shops for Ł40. Isn't this what Sony did with the PS2, thinking about it?" No, it's what Microsoft did with the original Xbox.
Sony did muck up the PS2 DVD playback initially - the famous 'green screen' bug - but that was a technical error, not a cynical attempt to grab a bit more money off the consumer.
Which is what that would be seen as, and thus fail.
as far as I was aware the blu-ray took up 60+ ish percent of the cost of the ps3, the price difference isn't the cost of the blu-ray itself, the price difference is the console as a whole, the ps3 got about a billion bits inside it compared to the xbox but i could just be rambling on here?!?
Really pointless. Not just slightly, REALLY pointless. Since every single PS3 game is on a Blu-ray, this would render the new machine unplayable surely.
a ps3 is only Ł40-Ł50 more expensive than a 360 elite. you try buying a descent bluray player for Ł50
(please note a standalone PS3 now costs Ł260 and the elite is Ł210-219 depending on retailers)
A B S O L U T E B O L L O C K S
And by the same token, it's about Ł130 more expensive than a 360 Arcade and you certainly can get a decent bluray player for less than Ł150. See? We can all use half truths and skewed numbers to support our bulls**t.
And what does this have to do with the topic at hand anyway? Who mentioned the 360?
thats chalk and cheese neebur. they done even compare.
its a bargain for a reason.
why would you buy a fault prone, bottom of the barrel console AND a standalone BR player, when you can get it all in one reliable system?!
even if you dont save anything, it uses up less space, less plugs, tidier etc.
plus the ps3 BR player is better than a lot of standalone cheapos out there.
why would you buy a fault prone, bottom of the barrel console AND a standalone BR player, when you can get it all in one reliable system?!
A woman I work with kids PS3 f**ked up the other day, two days before half term (and 2 months outside of warrantee - she was p*ssed). So they arranged for it to be fixed.
Meanwhile, they are now without a games console AND blu-ray player.
A pretty reasonable reason to keep the two seperate I reckon.
This is the most retarded news I have ever read. If a PS3 were to be released without a Blu-Ray drive, how the hell would you play games?! The only point worth mentioning is that it shows it was a mistake on Sony's behalf forcing Blu-Ray onto PS3 owners. If they had stuck with a regular DVD drive then this could have been a much closer console war between 360 and PS3.
Maybe we should all come to the conclusion that we should NOTbelieve every topic(news) that is presented to us by CVG, honestly i swear they do this to get reaction from "fanboys" just to keep this flame war going.
This is the most retarded news I have ever read. If a PS3 were to be released without a Blu-Ray drive, how the hell would you play games?! The only point worth mentioning is that it shows it was a mistake on Sony's behalf forcing Blu-Ray onto PS3 owners. If they had stuck with a regular DVD drive then this could have been a much closer console war between 360 and PS3.
I actually believe Sony would have ATOMISED the 360 if this was the case. They would have been earlier to the market than they were, therefore people would have legitimately waited for the PS3, it would have been significantly cheaper, therefore attracting those currently waiting for a price drop, and if they then kept in true backwards compatibility (which they likely would have given it was stripped out to cut costs - a measure they wouldn't have needed) they'd have had a nigh on guaranteed market of 120 million already.
I truly believe adding Blu-Ray to the PS3 was the single biggest mistake Sony ever made.
This is the most retarded news I have ever read. If a PS3 were to be released without a Blu-Ray drive, how the hell would you play games?! The only point worth mentioning is that it shows it was a mistake on Sony's behalf forcing Blu-Ray onto PS3 owners. If they had stuck with a regular DVD drive then this could have been a much closer console war between 360 and PS3.
I actually believe Sony would have ATOMISED the 360 if this was the case. They would have been earlier to the market than they were, therefore people would have legitimately waited for the PS3, it would have been significantly cheaper, therefore attracting those currently waiting for a price drop, and if they then kept in true backwards compatibility (which they likely would have given it was stripped out to cut costs - a measure they wouldn't have needed) they'd have had a nigh on guaranteed market of 120 million already.
I truly believe adding Blu-Ray to the PS3 was the single biggest mistake Sony ever made.
But what you're forgetting is that the HDD format war and Blu-Ray specifically was far more important to Sony than a games console, and establishing it as the HDD format of choice was their number one priority. Marrying Blu-Ray with the hugely popular Playstation name must have seemed like a marriage made in heaven.
Problem is, they were late getting it to market and the price was prohibitive to a great many people, the rest is history!
why would you buy a fault prone, bottom of the barrel console AND a standalone BR player, when you can get it all in one reliable system?!
A woman I work with kids PS3 f**ked up the other day, two days before half term (and 2 months outside of warrantee - she was p*ssed). So they arranged for it to be fixed.
Meanwhile, they are now without a games console AND blu-ray player.
A pretty reasonable reason to keep the two seperate I reckon.
thats like saying you should buy a seperate DVD player in addition to your 360/ps3. dont be stupid.
also they probably didnt have a single BR.
not as if its a vital function your losing out on... if your ps3 breaks, your not going to think "i cant watch movies now for a couple of days!"
its the gaming you would miss. lets all go out and buy two systems incase that horrifying situation ever materializes.
This is the most retarded news I have ever read. If a PS3 were to be released without a Blu-Ray drive, how the hell would you play games?! The only point worth mentioning is that it shows it was a mistake on Sony's behalf forcing Blu-Ray onto PS3 owners. If they had stuck with a regular DVD drive then this could have been a much closer console war between 360 and PS3.
I actually believe Sony would have ATOMISED the 360 if this was the case. They would have been earlier to the market than they were, therefore people would have legitimately waited for the PS3, it would have been significantly cheaper, therefore attracting those currently waiting for a price drop, and if they then kept in true backwards compatibility (which they likely would have given it was stripped out to cut costs - a measure they wouldn't have needed) they'd have had a nigh on guaranteed market of 120 million already.
I truly believe adding Blu-Ray to the PS3 was the single biggest mistake Sony ever made.
I dont think adding Blueray was the worst thing, as I think it will eventually extend the life of the console. I reckon in 3 or 4 years time we'll be seeing some gigantic games on the PS3 which will justify putting the drive in.
The big mistake, as you actually mentioned yourself, is the lack of universal backwards compatibility.
If it had that then many people would've been more willing to shell out for it I reckon. Its very difficult to justify buying something so expensive that wont play your old games. One of the main reasons the PS2 was so successful was because it had backwards compatibilty in my opinion.
Sony didnt want people to keep buying PS2 games and switch straight to the next gen, but the consumers have responded by just not buying the PS3. It serves them right to be honest. Its an excellent machine, but Sony have treated their customers pretty badly over the past few years, and seemed to think the race was won before it even started.
LAst time i checked PS3s broke down too. Its becoming an ever increasing problem from what i've read. I'd rather have a fault prone machine that broke down within warrenty rather than one that waited untill you have to buy a new one though.
From what i remember its sony that originally had the rep for making shoddily built consoles. Thus the constant redesigns on pretty much everything they make. Both the PS1 and 2 had dodgey Drives in them and over heating issues.
If you want a quality build you have to go with nintendo. never had one break on me ever.
why would you buy a fault prone, bottom of the barrel console AND a standalone BR player, when you can get it all in one reliable system?!
A woman I work with kids PS3 f**ked up the other day, two days before half term (and 2 months outside of warrantee - she was p*ssed). So they arranged for it to be fixed.
Meanwhile, they are now without a games console AND blu-ray player.
A pretty reasonable reason to keep the two seperate I reckon.
thats like saying you should buy a seperate DVD player in addition to your 360/ps3. dont be stupid.
also they probably didnt have a single BR.
not as if its a vital function your losing out on... if your ps3 breaks, your not going to think "i cant watch movies now for a couple of days!"
its the gaming you would miss. lets all go out and buy two systems incase that horrifying situation ever materializes.
Are you aware that many people now have multiple DVD players in their houses.
Of course you're not, you're incapable of acknowledging that anybody could possibly be in a situation different to your own.
Let me guess, you either live alone, or you never leave your bedroom, because anyone who lived with other people could understand the need for having more than one of everything...
Well someone has to say it. When there is any artical about the 360 the sony fanboys come out and say its the end of MS. Well here it goes.
I will get back to this in a moment.
RIP Playstation as we know it. They are certainly getting desperate now. Sega was not in this much s**t when they stopped producing the dreamcast. At least the dreamcast is remembered fondly.
In its four year life the Dreamcast sold 10.6 million units, the PS3 has sold twice as many in a much shorter period of time. Sega also did not have two other consoles selling alongside the Dreamcast to offset initial production losses. Therefore to claim that Sony are in more trouble with the PS3 than Sega were with the Dreamcast is simply not true.
Which leads me back to your first point and this one....
The ps3 will be remembered as an expensive piece of crap that is the symbol of the arrogance of sony.
Ever here of the pot calling the kettle black.
You moan about fan-boys yet then manage to construct a post that in almost pure fan-boy.
I wonder what you have to do to become an analyst.
It seems like a pretty cozy job just sitting there making up things that might happen but probably never will all day...
All you need is some manatees, a giant tank and loads of balls with different gaming platforms on them, some with "loses" and "gains" on them and loads of other random, slightly possible statements and bingo! You're an analyst.
a ps3 is only Ł40-Ł50 more expensive than a 360 elite. you try buying a descent bluray player for Ł50
(please note a standalone PS3 now costs Ł260 and the elite is Ł210-219 depending on retailers)
A B S O L U T E B O L L O C K S
And by the same token, it's about Ł130 more expensive than a 360 Arcade and you certainly can get a decent bluray player for less than Ł150.
See? We can all use half truths and skewed numbers to support our bulls**t.
And what does this have to do with the topic at hand anyway? Who mentioned the 360?
i was using the elite as a benchmark for a proper games console that has HDMI out and a large hardrive that can be comparable to a PS3 you Moronic xbot. if you want a console with poor AV connections and a tiny harddrive like you intellect i'm not stopping you. but otherwise be quiet and let the grown ups talk
Even the arcade models come with HDMI. Was that grown up enough for you?
I wonder what you have to do to become an analyst.
It seems like a pretty cozy job just sitting there making up things that might happen but probably never will all day...
All you need is some manatees, a giant tank and loads of balls with different gaming platforms on them, some with "loses" and "gains" on them and loads of other random, slightly possible statements and bingo! You're an analyst.
wait, don't they write the Family Guy scripts as well? well then my opinion of analysts has just gone up
I wonder what you have to do to become an analyst.
It seems like a pretty cozy job just sitting there making up things that might happen but probably never will all day...
All you need is some manatees, a giant tank and loads of balls with different gaming platforms on them, some with "loses" and "gains" on them and loads of other random, slightly possible statements and bingo! You're an analyst.
I hope they don't lose any of the balls, we wouldn't want the manatees to stop working.
doesnt matter if nintendos dont break. you want to play decent games.
thats like saying if you dont want to crash you should walk everywhere.
by decent you mean racing games and dull military shooters right.
I think in the 23+ years nintendo have been in the market of making games therer is adefinately a large enough catalogue of games to find something worth playing.
I've never played a bad Ninty game. Recent efforts have been a little different but by no means unejoyable. i think if you don't want to crash you should probably keep your eyes on the raod. That said your stupid analogy deos have some merit.
I'd rather have a car that was simply built and reliable that i could fix with a hanes manual and a lump hammer than some overly complicated dick extension that looks like a toaster and when it breaks down needs you to have a degree in computer science rather than a spanner.
so are you telling me there will be a blu ray and a non blu ray version of like every game? GET LOST
no way is this true, its an xbox fanboy stiring some s**te because if say there were hd dvd discs available wot would happen to all the original models like the 60GB's.... LIKE ME
I'd rather have a car that was simply built and reliable that i could fix with a hanes manual and a lump hammer than some overly complicated dick extension that looks like a toaster and when it breaks down needs you to have a degree in computer science rather than a spanner.
Surely launching a non Blu-ray version would be admitting they made a mistake first time around... and Sony would never admit to having made a mistake.
What about games like MGS4 which take up nearly a whole blu ray disc? are they gonna compress the s**t out of it and bring out blu ray ps3 discs and non blu ray ps3 discs? I dunno, it all sounds pretty strange to me...
If they do this though i hope the quality of games after won't suffer because of the non blu ray part.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
)
