Regardless of the hit they are taking, they're hardly giving away the PS like the razor.

They're not giving anyone outside die hard sony loyalists much reason to buy a PS3, with the system at $500-600 the games at possibly more than $60, and nothing looking much better than what we're seeing on the 360.

You know what's crazy? Outside of the internet, I've not met anyone who thinks the PS3 is too expensive.

Only person I've talked to about it is my brother, and he thinks it's crazy over priced.

None of my friends are into games. I have to imagine Joe Six Pack frat boy that only buys Madden every year isn't thrilled with the price, along with most other extremely casual (and non-spoiled rich kid) gamers think it's to expensive.

That said it will still sell like crazy anyway, as Sony has such a large fanbase. And buy the time they exhaust sales to them, they can probably drop the price and get more casual gamers who aren't die hard sony fans to buy.

Joystiq is reporting a PS3 version of a multi-platform game has been cancelled due to development costs: http://www.joystiq.com/2006/06/29/ps...elopment-cost/
If that's true, the cost must be staggering when many of the resources (graphics, logic, etc) should be platform-independent and we're only talking about porting the game's engine(s).

^ this is when MS needs to swoop in and do what they do best. Throw their money around. Make it exclusive to the 360.

Great analogy.



And I have to agree that Sony is hardly "giving away" the PS3 like a Razor. As for my outside the net connections, the 4 that game(all 30), two single/two married, all four think Sony is insane. One of them is/was? a huge PS fan. Personally, I think they are insane at this point. The price of the console put them on the front doorstep of the asylum, $60-$100 games pushed them through the door.

If development costs are truly this high for the PS3, won't third party companies raise the retail prices of their games even higher to recoup some of these costs?

If the development costs are too high, most smaller companies are going to follow suit and cancel their PS3 games. Loss of third party support was what almost killed Nintendo during the N64 days. Is history about to repeat itself?

I agree completely that Sony isn't "giving them away like razors" and that is the problem. The hardware is so expensive, mainly because of the unneccesary BD drive that even the "give away" price is too high. They are fucked on both software AND hardware fronts. The consumers will only take so much especially when the difference in quality is not that staggering.

Rumor now has it that while there will be no price drop for XBox 360, they will be bundling in the HD-DVD drive into the Premium version.

"Track7games would like to clarify that we never cancelled something that did not exist in the first place. We plan to develop "Theseis" for PC and Xbox360 in the near future. As for the PS3, we simply made a strategic decision to not move ahead because we deemed it not probable at this time."

Yet they also said "If Sony were to offer us assistance in producing a PS3 version we would be more than happy to oblige!"

My theory is that they wanted to make a PS3 version, but because of the steep development costs, they decided not to go ahead with it. The PS3 version was never "canceled" because development on it never actually started; it never got past the intial planning "which consoles to release it on" stage.

Either way, it is a major warning flag for Sony. Unless they can manage a massive install base that developers can project sales from, they're going to have a hard time convincing developers that the PS3 is a profitable platform.

For the price stand-alone BR players will be going for, the $600 price tag on the PS3 will be worth it to some. You're getting a gaming system and a BR drive for $600 -- compare that to a stand alone BR player which will be in the $1000 range. Not a bad deal if you ask me.

The problem is, while it may be a really good deal to some, it's not going to be for the majority of gamers out there. If Sony wants to remain #1 they need to drop the BR drive -- now! Go with HD-DVD and then they can sell their system for $299/399 and they'll continue to dominate the competition. Sure MS has a 1yr lead but its not going to take long to catch and pass them, especially when the PS2 is outselling the 360 as it is. But if Sony continues down the road its going then they can kiss their dominance in the video game market good-bye.

There is no way Sony would drop BR for HD-DVD. They won't even drop it for plain ol' DVD. The whole point of BR inclusion on the PS3 is for market penetration to make BR the dominant format. Sony has a direct, vested interest in BR's success.

And why would dropping the Blu-Ray drive change the fact that its going to cost a lot to make PS3 games? Theres no logic in it. Im buying a PS3 for a BR player first, game player second. I can only say its safe to assume thats what MOST people buying it are after. Once BR stand alone players are more in line pricing wise, the gaming portion will have to shine with some mega exclusives, which shouldnt be an issue since its the only true next gen system the japanese market acknowledges.

Where to start, where to start...

1. Most people will be interested in getting the PS3 for games. If I am wrong (I'm not) then Sony is stupid to throw in the extra game playing features and just SELL THE BD PLAYER FOR $600. The fact these are BD players is probably a very secondary concer to almost anyone interested in a PS3. There are a few HT enthusiasts who are interested in the PS3 for the movie playback features, but they are few and will most likely be dissapointed.

2. Traditionally, game systems are sold at a loss and the company recoups that loss in software sales. The razor and the blades. The problem here is the razor AND the blades are expensive.

3. Wii is every bit as "next generation" as the PS3. In fact, the Wii is probably the first hardware in years truly deserving of the "next generation" title since they are doing something completely different than has been done before. Wii will be the #1 console in Japan this go-round. Sony will be playing the role of the Gamecube this time.

360 and PS3 are "next generation" as they're simply children.

Wii is an evolution.

Totally agree that the BR should be, at most, an attachment to the PS3 as I don't care for a shitty BR player being forced on me. The PS3 should be able to stan on its own merits.

I dont get why everyone is expecting the BR playing capabilities to suck just because its a console. It will fully meet HD requirements, yes?

I think we're expecting it because if it was worth anything, they would charge more. How is Sony going to release a stand-alone player in October for $1000+ and then, a few weeks later, their flagship piece of hardware for $400 less if it is just as good as the stand-alone AND plays PS3, PS2, and PS1 games AND incorporates all the fancy Cell processors and all that jazz. It just doesn't add up.

I guess they are saying that based on the DVD player in the PS2 which has nothing to do with the BR player in the PS3.

The price points could also be a method of getting people to compare the two and say wow I can get a machine that plays BR and plays games too, why not get this one.

Because the PS2 DVD player sucks, and if the PS3 player at $600 is as good as the $1000 standalon, Sony REALLY doesn't know what the fuck they are doing anymore.

Hold on guys. I thought this is the 'razor and blades' theory? The equipment is being sold at a loss! That says nothing about quality alone.

I never had a PS2--can anyone explain why the DVD player sucked? Controls? Software? Drive errors?

The picture quality looks like shit compared to even a cheap stand alone player, and like absolute ass compared to a good stand alone player.

Is the leap from DVD to Blue Ray (technologically speaking) much bigger than CD to DVD? The first go around Im sure there was a lot of things to be worked out to even consider playing video. What I mean is, why dont people expect better, given that its not so revolutionary to be showing movies off a console anymore?

If the were no difference, who in their right mind would get a $1000 stand-alone player? There's two sides to this BR issue. The PS3's inclusion is being used solely as a Trojan Horse in the BR/HD-DVD battle. It can be the shittiest thing in the world as long as it allows software to run, for the time being.

If it is no different that the 1st generation Sony player, then why would there even be a 1st generation Sony player at 166% the cost with at most 50% of the functionality? Even video/audio/techno-philes who had no interest in the PS3 as a game system would pick it up. Then Sony, with one unit, could say they've sold equal numbers of PS3s and BR units and use the same number to shop to both movie and game studios.

The bottom line is it isn't necessary for gaming and it is being shoved down gamers throats because Sony needs BR to succeed. They assume the PS3 is going to sell by the boatload thereby giving BR the edge in the format war. It doesn't have to be a good player or even one that you'll be happy to use in 2 years; it just has to be there. If they offered a PS3 without it, they wouldn't have a very high percentage of adopters and the war wouldn't be as clear-cut. However, I think they're strategy is going to backfire in that they're going to stiffle PS3 sales this way.

Just found this and I can't stop laughing:

http://gametrailers.com/viewnews.php?id=3381

That guy sounds like a crybaby. It is okay for Sony to steal ideas from Nintendo, but he gets upset when Microsoft steals ideas from them?

I believe Kaz stated they had the idea of using motion sensor technology in their controller long before Nintendo.