[PS3] PlayStation 3 Discussion Thread

They should have realized a long time ago that gamers are not necessarily rich and don't necessarily want to spend thousands of dollars on stuff so they can watch pretty movies.

If they're trying to convince my parents that video games are a cool thing to spend money on, they're going to be pretty hard pressed. My dad is stupid and could never win at video games if his life depended on it (unless it's a Wii game, which anyone can win, which is why Nintendo is making billions of dollars). However, my dad likes to spend thousands of dollars on HD TVs and likes to watch movies.

They should have kept the entities separate instead of trying to force Blu-Ray on the population of "installed" gamers. Granted, Sony has more title support for Blu-Ray than Toshiba does with HD-DVD from movie companies (but that's because Sony has more money to throw around than Toshiba does, on top of owning their own motion pictures studio).

But still, they should have at least given gamers the option to buy a system that didn't have the DVD player included. Then they would likely still be on top. I know people have argued that there isn't a lot of added cost in including the DVD player, but it's likely enough that it could have made a difference in the number of systems sold. Microsoft had the right idea with the 360, releasing different versions of their console for different price brackets, and they're reaping the benefits.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

The real problem Sony is likely to face is that the sales of digital direct media from resources like AppleTV and TiVo are looking likely to eclipse the market need of a higher density optical disk format. High definition downloads of movies are much cheaper and faster for the consumer. BluRay and HDDVD discs are still an expensive format (and that's why the movies cost $20-30 instead of the typical $10-20 for regular DVD titles).

So, unless Sony can release a PS3 at somewhere around half the current price (with or without a BluRay player), the consumer demand for PS3's with BluRay is never going to be great enough to justify the added cost to what everyone still views as ultimately a video gaming system.

You can ride the coattails of "console exclusive" titles, but unless the PS3's sales pick up, you're likely to see most of the 3rd party titles go multiplatform... and I don't know if Ratchet and Clank is a good enough reason to buy a PS3.

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by Ultima

A PS3 without Blu-ray isn't a PS3, since PS3 games kind of require it. There's no real way to make PS3s cheaper right now as 1) Sony is already producing them at a loss and 2) Newer technology is more expensive. As the parts get older, it will become cheaper to produce because the methods of production will be better-known and improved upon.

Yeah, I kinda figured, but wasn't entirely sure. Basically, Sony shot themselves in the foot. Again (betamax, minidisc).

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Solis

Digitally distributed HD content is neither cheaper nor faster, since a 5+ GB file will take a very long time to download on any typical internet connection, and prices for HD content seem very similar to store-bought movies.

With current mediums available. It'd really only take the support of your local cable provider to be able to deliver HD content almost instantly. Certainly faster than it takes to drive to the store and buy a movie.

Quote:

Also, removing the Blu-ray drive from the PS3 would only save around $100 at this point, and would be an impossible feat since all PS3 games are on Blu-ray discs. Even if they could, I don't see the point in removing it since the Blu-ray playback is the main advantage the PS3 has for its price. If people won't spend $600 for a Blu-ray PS3, they sure wouldn't pay $500 for a Blu-ray-less one. Not to mention it seems that the previous $500 (20GB) PS3 wasn't even a popular option.

Yeah. Ultima just said this, in a lot less words. I didn't realize that all PS3 games had to be made on BluRay discs.

No matter how it's justified though, it all still adds up to the consumer seeing a product that costs a fairly large amount of money, that supports a movie medium that also costs a fairly large amount of money. And these things are all bad for consumers, and therefore, bad for Sony.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?