Official PlayStation 3 Thread

[marwan]

so apparently the new PS3 controller is called "SIXAXIS" .....SIXAXISOFEVIL?

[RoleTroll]

From what I read in that article, it sounds like Sony was going for a model of making money on the console and little/no money on the games. (The 3DO model.) Now they want to lower the console's cost and increase the cost of the games.

I don't buy any of that. The high console cost was due to Blu-Ray.

Can't Sony just make people pay for a $100 gizmo that allows you to play Blu-Ray movies on your PS3? Then, after a year or so, provide an OS upgrade over the net that allows all PS3s to play Blu-Ray DVDs without the gizmo?

[Brand X]

What the hell are you talking about?

[MechDeus]

What the hell are you talking about?

He thinks they were insinuating that Sony was trying to inflate the price of the console to make money instead of just taking the loss as usual. Where he got that from I have no idea. The second part was him asking for a Blu-Ray player add-on like the original Xbox had, where even though a DVD player was built-in you had to purchase an attachment to "unlock" it solely as a way to make extra money. This way instead of the previously mentioned mythical idea they could recoup their losses in a different manner.

According to that article, Sony was trying for a dev-friendly environment (lol, failed) and since they weren't going to charge royalties on indie games they were dropping the licensing fees for real companies. (This would also help prevent a possible issue that occured back in the days of the NES stranglehold, where companies would make dummy companies to get around regulations.) However, the former proved impossible (at least for this point in time) so they nixed the latter and ended up with a situation they had hoped to avoid, as that's the corner their finances backed them into.

[Brand X]

Thanks for the clarification, because what he said made absolutely no sense.

[RoleTroll]

Sorry, I do that sometimes With Sony dropping the price of the console in Japan and higher royalties and game prices, it sounded to me like they are pushing the costs back onto devs who are passing it on to customers. The link says:

"There's a deeper story to this price hike. According to the article, Sony was, as of E3, planning to alleviate cost pressures on 3rd parties by lowering royalty costs.... The company would want to offer 3rd parties a similar pricing environment, with the savings from royalty costs passed on to consumers in the form of lower software prices.... With the delay in progress towards an open platform, the site speculates that Sony is switching to a more traditional business model where the PS3 will be sold at a "surprisingly low price" and losses will be recouped on software royalties. This is the business model that was used for the PlayStation and PlayStation 2."

Thus, the connection between the price of the console and the price of the software, the claim that Sony is using currently using a different model than the traditional model, and that Sony's return to the traditional model is going to lower the price of the console and (indirectly) raise the price of software to fund it.

Personally, I think Sony is using the traditional model but is hamstrung by the Blu-Ray costs, and doesn't want to undercut the $1000 Blu-Ray players by releasing a $300 Blu-Ray playing PS3. IIRC, when the PS2 was released, the DVD players were around $300.

[MechDeus]

Alright, I see where you got that from, and there's still no confirmation on game pricing and which supposed scheme the supposed $70 games are from so it's hard to tell where that stands. Regardless, I think their entire intent was to not make developers jealous of the indie developers and try to make the games priced around 360 levels.

If the price does drop I'll bet it has absolutely nothing to do with the lack of open development and everything to do with the backlash against $600.

Personally, I think Sony is using the traditional model but is hamstrung by the Blu-Ray costs

Agreed, and early price guessing on parts supported that (although it does still remain as just guessing). Sony's taking a hit no matter what, it's a matter of how big of the initial loss will be and how they want it to play out. Lower cost + shitty launch titles = more units sold but more money lost until the second year when software begins to regain cash flow. Higher cost = less units sold but less of an initial loss during the first year, and tougher to get market integration when the flow of actual good games does hit.

Or so I would guess, not being a business major and all.

[marwan]

so lets assume the PS3 will have some killer games within a year or 2(we all know it will), what is the maximum price you guy are willing to shell out to get the PS3?

In my case i can afford to get the PS3 day one, but i must admit im really dissapointed by the negativity surrounding the system, and the lack of killer games so far. Ofcourse i can still wait, but i'm the type that has to have every new electronic gadget out there...i'm just a gadget whore. Heck i bought the 3DO and Neo Geo cart system(the premium one) the day they came out.

also, i'll try to get my PS3 online, cuz the import shops here(UAE) will rape me....$600 aint so bad considering the bastards here will charge no less than $1200 for the PS3 when it launches....the shortage might even drive that price even higher!

When the xbox 360 came out, it was being sold for $1400 for the premium package....luckily the price kept droping almost by the week. I bought my 360 for $590, this was about 9 months ago, but now the price finally settled, and it costs $400.

ofcourse, that's for american systems....real gamers dont bother with the euro systesm since they're always behind.

[Joust Williams]

599 US dollars

[Bacon McShig]

599 US dollars

ibtn