|
Originally Posted by Gallant Pig
That's a pretty juicy rumor would be cool if it's true, hard to play "what if" off of it though since it doesn't seem realistic. I don't see how they will be selling it for less than $500 but we'll see.
why can't you see how they will sell for $400? If they were to sell 10 million units before they can ramp up production and streamline production costs, that would be a billion dollars difference. I think they are willing to do that to get blu-ray into homes. I honestly am getting to the point where I'm not sure Sony gives two craps about the PS3 as a gaming machine. They want to penetrate the market with blu-ray and PS3 making blu-ray the de facto standard for high def dvds, where they will get a cut of EVERY disc sold. PS2 market penetration is 100 million? If they can get that kind of PS3 distribution in 5 years, the HDDVD vs blu-ray thing is over.... |
Originally Posted by kakihara1
Absolutely, there need to be more artistic titles I don't know if it's because of the capability to closely copy real life environments or what but imagination is being abandoned for cloning reality. :( of course that should wear off quickly and we'll see some truly amazing inventive games soon enough. :D
To be honest, I'd love to see a game like Monster Hunter come out on a next-gen console, and I can't wait to see what Metroid looks like on the Wii. The whole photorealism thing will always be around, but it's going to be most prevalent around launch. On a different subject, there's no way MS will drop its live prices. It has no need to. Anyone who has done a marathon GRAW session will tell you that there is plenty of value to be had on live for $50 a year (less if you buy the 12+1 month card). Also, the only free downloads on the marketplace are promotional fluff and a few demos, the bulk of stuff on there does cost money, it's just translated into marketplace points. I am certain Sony will follow suit and offer downloadable content for a price. As long as the content is good, people will buy, and that will help pay for their free service. |
Originally Posted by SteelgearX
Well, I guess we'll find out next week at E3, but as always let me present you with a "what if" situation. Rumor has it the PS3 will launch at $399 with a 60 gig hd, and free online service. Oh, and something about blu-ray;). Now, what do you think MS is going to have to do to match that kind of value.
I think they would do well to price them at $799 as people seem to be willing to pay that on ebay, etc. if they don't get one at launch. Then drop the price to $599 in 6 months. Sure it might irritate some people, but they will still sell them and we will still buy them. |
Originally Posted by SoonerDoc
I honestly am getting to the point where I'm not sure Sony gives two craps about the PS3 as a gaming machine. They want to penetrate the market with blu-ray and PS3 making blu-ray the de facto standard for high def dvds, where they will get a cut of EVERY disc sold. PS2 market penetration is 100 million? If they can get that kind of PS3 distribution in 5 years, the HDDVD vs blu-ray thing is over....
|
Originally Posted by kvrdave
I agree that they really want the PS3 out for BR penetration, but I also think that they (should) realize that BR (or HD-DVD) probably won't have nearly the impact that DVD did. While I think it will enjoy more success than the SACD did compared to the CD, I don't think it will have the rapid success. And it will also depend on how good the player is. If it is no better than the dvd player of the PS2, I don't think they will sway many people over.
|
Originally Posted by Jimmy 345
Not true. The Playstation 2 may have been a pretty lousy DVD player but it was still far better then a VCR and got a lot of people to switch over.
San Jose (CA) - Last week, Sony announced to launch its Playstation 3 in November and blamed the delay on technical problems such as the ongoing work to finalize Blu-ray's copy protection technology AACS. At GDC we got a glimpse how far the PS3 may be still away from production, as Sony was not able to run the console through HDMI at 1080p resolution. One of the reasons to buy an Xbox 360 or an upcoming Playstation 3 is the fact that Microsoft and Sony promise the beginning of a high definition gaming era - a new stage for gaming that will bringer higher-quality audio and video to the screen. On 15 March, Sony conceded that it was forced to delay the launch of its contender because a series of technology delays. The console has been touring the country for more than a year - without being actually demonstrated in detail - and it was our expectation that we will see at GDC a version that would come close to a production unit - as Sony will have to start mass-producing the console in late summer. In fact, Sony had a few consoles on display at GDC, which were demonstrating video and audio demos. But surprisingly, these boxes were showing hardly any of the PS3's expected capability, including a screen feed that was not delivered through the HDMI interface, but through Sony's "AV MULTI OUT" connector,which has S-Video and component analog ports. Two different PS3 prototypes were used in the demos; one was a slimmer box with dual HDMI outputs, while the other was a PC case with a video card in the back. Both devices were connected to identical Sony model television sets, which had HDMI ports. All graphics demos were played on the slim boxes, while the audio demos were played on the larger PC-sized boxes. The graphics demo units were connected to the televisions via Sony's AV Multi-Out connector (black cable in photo), which is an analog connector that can split into S-Video or RCA connectors. The two HDMI ports right below the AV Multi-Out port were unused. Of course, we were interested in why Sony did not run the units with HDMI. There may be an obvious explanation, but we received some surprising answers from Sony's staff. First, we were told that it isn't easy to get a hold of HDMI-equipped TVs. We found this to be very strange, because after all we were at the Sony booth and all the television sets had HDMI inputs. On the second try, we were told that the reason for not using HDMI was that Sony did not have any HDMI cables and that "they are difficult to find". Matt Butrovich, a former intern with Tom's Hardware and who walked the show floor with us, offered the staff to use one of the HDMI cables he actually had in his car and connect the PS3 with the TVs. Sony officials turned down the offer and we were left without seeing the demos in HD. ( :lol: ) Somehow we feel that there was another reason for not showing the PS3 with HDMI. In fact, the explanation could be as simple as the PS3's HDMI wasn't compatible with the HDMI spec integrated in the TVs. Recently it was announced that the PS3 will use HDMI 1.3, which will use an expansion of the audio channels and offer Dolby TrueHD as well as DTS-HD. Current TVs generally use HDMI 1.1, which do not support these extensions and create significant audio noise when connected to a HDMI 1.3 device. In the end, we do not know the real reason of avoiding HDMI in the GDC demonstrations. But it certainly highlighted that Sony has still work to do - not only to finalize the AACS spec, but also to accelerate the availability to HDMI 1.3 and to educate customers that they only can run HD video and audio if they have a HDMI 1.3 capable TV. Again, hopefully it gets worked out. I find it unbelievable that they would put in an HDMI that doesn't work with all the HDMI out there today....even on their own tvs. All I'm saying is that the BR PS3 won't have the same difference from DVD as DVD did from VHS. And if it is a relatively poor BR movie player, I don't think it will help them much with beating out HD-DVD, which is bad for us all as we will have to wait a long time for the format war to end. |
Originally Posted by kvrdave
I agree with that, but DVD to BR (or HD-DVD) is not nearly the leap that DVD was from VHS. It is much more similar to the leap from CD to SACD, with the exception that most of us are better at noticing differences visually rather than audibly. If BR were as big a leap from DVD as DVD was from VHS, then I think Sony would be in great shape. But if the PS3 doesn't have the little things that actually make HD great, it won't matter as much. Here is an example, but hopefully they get it figured out.
All I'm saying is that the BR PS3 won't have the same difference from DVD as DVD did from VHS. And if it is a relatively poor BR movie player, I don't think it will help them much with beating out HD-DVD, which is bad for us all as we will have to wait a long time for the format war to end. |
The other side to the numbers coin is number of media sales. Sure there may be 3x as many BR drives available than HD (I don't buy that 1,000,000 number at all), but if HD owners buy more movie software, that will speak to studios more than an installed base number.
|
There are now rumors of a $699 PS3 launch. I don't care what's in the box, anything over $500 is suicide for Sony this generation.
|
Originally Posted by IIG
There are now rumors of a $699 PS3 launch. I don't care what's in the box, anything over $500 is suicide for Sony this generation.
|
Originally Posted by kvrdave
I agree with that, but DVD to BR (or HD-DVD) is not nearly the leap that DVD was from VHS. It is much more similar to the leap from CD to SACD, with the exception that most of us are better at noticing differences visually rather than audibly. If BR were as big a leap from DVD as DVD was from VHS, then I think Sony would be in great shape. But if the PS3 doesn't have the little things that actually make HD great, it won't matter as much. Here is an example, but hopefully they get it figured out.
All I'm saying is that the BR PS3 won't have the same difference from DVD as DVD did from VHS. And if it is a relatively poor BR movie player, I don't think it will help them much with beating out HD-DVD, which is bad for us all as we will have to wait a long time for the format war to end. |
Originally Posted by Jimmy 345
Actually VHS has a resolution of 320 x 240, DVDs resolution is 720 x 480, Blu-Ray has 1920 x 1080. If you do the math you will see that the difference between Blu-Ray and DVD day one is actually greater then DVD to VHS. Though greater in terms of resolution DVD had the advantage in terms or all other technology. First of all VHSs quality decrades DVD and Blu-Ray doesn't. The difference between DVD and an old VHS will be greater then DVD to Blu-Ray. Plus numerous other tech advantages over VHS that Blu-Ray just won't have over DVD.
blah blah blah. ;) What matters is the difference the consumer sees. DVD provided a clear upgrade for all users at the time over VHS do the the TV's ability to display a better resolution the DVD was possible of. HD-DVD and Blu-Ray offer increased resolutions that over 85% market won't be able to see on there present TVs. HDTV adoption is much slower then anticipated (minus Bass model projections) and won't be a major force in the industry for at least 4-5 years. My only real point is that either new standard, and HDTV's in gneral have a long way to go before anything is certain. I believe they can make the best initial inroads by appealing through content advantages as opposed to picture quality. For example: All the "Friends episodes on 1 disc instead of 7, or whatever. Regarding the PS3 price: I say, Sony price it high! Screw over the ebayers. |
Originally Posted by Jimmy 345
Actually VHS has a resolution of 320 x 240, DVDs resolution is 720 x 480, Blu-Ray has 1920 x 1080. If you do the math you will see that the difference between Blu-Ray and DVD day one is actually greater then DVD to VHS.
|
Five hours until Sony's conference. Here's hoping the PS3 is cheap. (Sub $500).
|
Originally Posted by The Bus
Five hours until Sony's conference. Here's hoping the PS3 is cheap. (Sub $500).
|
Originally Posted by Mr. Cinema
So they are definitely announcing the price today?
Their news conference is today (at 7pm EST it seems) and it makes sense to do it today. They might give a range or a target, but I can't imagine they would wait more to do it. Retailers are waiting until E3 to do pre-orders, etc. and they need to get that info from Sony. |
Originally Posted by The Bus
I would say that with certainty they need to do it during E3. They will get the most coverage on a price announcement during E3. E3 is perhaps the only time of the year where all the mainstream media is paying attention to video games. (When NYT has a blog devoted to it, it has to be a pretty important event).
Their news conference is today (at 7pm EST it seems) and it makes sense to do it today. They might give a range or a target, but I can't imagine they would wait more to do it. Retailers are waiting until E3 to do pre-orders, etc. and they need to get that info from Sony. Although retailers are only waiting to hear their allocations before taking preorders. |
Id guess they won't announce the price. With the high price of Blu-Ray players announcing a sub-$500 Playstation 3 might hurt Blu-Ray player sales. They might hold off the price in hopes that it will help the sales of stand alone Blu-Ray players. Of course I really really hope Im wrong since I really want to know the price.
|
I'm really anxious to find out the price just to see what it's going to be like at launch to get one. I still maintain regardless of price, that it will be hard as hell to get, even with a 500 plus tag. I'll probablly have to wait 6 months to be able to find it just like my 360.
|
I would say there is a high probabilty they won't announce the price.
|
This is exciting. I don't think they will announce a price either.
|
Sony has nothing to gain by announcing a price this early.
|
Originally Posted by darkside
Sony has nothing to gain by announcing a price this early.
Personally, I don't think any pricing information will be presented until mid-summer, regardless of all these E3 shenanigans. |
Originally Posted by Flay
I agree and disagree. Sony has nothing to gain announcing a price over $399 this early. But Sony could convince people to keep "sitting on the fence" waiting for the PS3 if they announce a price on par with the 360. My guess is that they will use some ambiguous language about being "price competitive".
Personally, I don't think any pricing information will be presented until mid-summer, regardless of all these E3 shenanigans. |
Originally Posted by The Bus
If Nintendo announces a low price then you're right -- Sony has nothing to gain. If they don't announce the price, it's a pretty good chance that the console will be $499 or more. By not announcing that, they are acknowledging it.
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:44 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.