PLAYSTATION 3 PRICE DROP!!!

Sony recently announced that they will release a slimmer, 120 GB model of it's Playstion 3... for $299!! That's a coll $100 below what I paid for my 80 GB model.

Now let's take stock here... Not only do you get a gaming console, but you get a state of the art Blu-Ray player, wi-fi capable internet ready device... and free access to the Plastation Network where you can play your games in Co-op or competitive mode over the web. All of that for what it would cost you to get an XBox and XBL access fior one year....

Ladies and gentlemen... The Playstation 3 Slim


you do the math.

 

Deal-killer. If you can't be arsed to support your existing users, I can't be arsed to buy your new product.

 

While I'm sure this is a plot to get PS2 users to upgrade to the PS3, I have to say that the PS3 is a totally different experience altogether. I never owned a PS2. My last console was the original Playstation. The PS3 truly lives up to the name, IMHO. Games, Movies, Music and Photos along with wireless web connectivity.

I wonder if one were to put a PS2 game on a USB stick and downloaded it to the PS3's hard drive, would it play? The console supports so many computer formats that it would definitely be deliberate for it not to.

It supports *.aac, *.avi, *.vob, *.mpeg, *.gif, etc... Why not Sony's own games?

 

PS3 Slim Review:

 

I wonder if "Slim" is better at not overheating.

 

Microsoft also lowered the price of their 360 Elite console to $299. But I agree that the PS3 is a better value at this price point.

They have nearly the same game catalog, so getting the Blu-Ray with it is almost a no-brainer.

I might buy one down the road, but I'm actually pretty happy with my Nintendo at the moment. I'll probably jump on the Blu-Ray bandwagon when the Star Wars Trilogy comes out for the format.

 

Sweet! Now I can get a piece of crap for only $299!

 

It seems stupid to not offer ANY backwards compatability. People don't want to jam their living rooms with multiple consoles.

Yesterday, I saw a brand new PS2 slim sell for $99. If the PS2 is making them profit at that price point, why don't they just rip the guts out of a PS2 and put it into a PS3? They wouldn't need the other DVD drive, nor the casing, which means they would save money on that.

Then offer a completely 100% backwards compatable PS3 for $349. People would buy that shit! Why they don't do this beyond understanding.

 

The original model of PS3 did exactly that - the PS2 processor was sitting right there on the board, IIRC. Because they were losing a shitton of money every time someone bought a console (which was a rare event in the first place, compared to the competition), they pulled a rip-and-tear on it and kicked it down to software-based emulation. Now, they've become so cheap that they won't even support that.

It is nice that it's no longer the size of a refrigerator, however.

 

Be all were it not for the backwards compatibility

$299.00's a $weet deal.

 

[/thread]

 

They did support their existing customers, and it made the console so expensive that hardly anyone bought it.

Computers do not work that way.

There are a lot of technical reasons relating to bandwidth and the way games used the PS3 hardware that make emulating it very difficult.

 

That's the only thing they took out to make it cheaper?

I find that hard to believe.

 

I wonder how many dollars they are losing per unit by selling it at $299? Or maybe they are past that point and making money on the console now?

 

They'll increase the price of the games to cut their losses!

 

No, they made it cheaper this time through shrinking of various components. The PS2 backwards compatibility was phased out of the previous fat model quite a while ago to save costs.

 

I sincerely doubt that they're selling them at a profit.

Consider a pseudo-PS3 made from off-the-shelf components - BR player, RAM, 2.5" factor hard drive, fancy processor, and controller. The prices easily exceed $300. Now, obviously, it's more fine-tuned than that - a Guardian article estimates that the machine itself costs $250 to manufacture, and that doesn't count costs of stuff going into the box like the controller, printed materials, and packaging, nor does it consider advertising, R&D costs, compatibility testing, the already pathetic margin for retailers, etc., etc.

Further, Sony seems to be operating under the idea that shuffling around components and making things smaller is added value, when really, it's...just smaller. Trust me, nobody went into a store planning to buy a PS3, broke out the measuring tape, realized that it was the size of a VW bus, and decided to buy a Wii instead. Sony pulled the same shit with the PSP Go!, and managed to piss off a good deal of consumers in the process because they killed off their own damn format, which was a fucking stupid idea in the first place.

Now, make no mistake, this'll help spur sales, but I doubt it'll pull the PS3 out of third place, especially when you consider that Sony has demonstrated that it doesn't give a flying fuck about backwards compatibility. They kill it dead with no hope of rebirth just as the PS2 finally starts to wane. Way to go, you idiots.

 

I think you're underestimating how many people feel size matters. If you've got a small apartment, you want things small so you can fit it in the corner of your TV case, and not have to place it on the floor or buy another table for it.

I agree it's certainly not a deciding factor, but it matters enough that some of my friends are considering getting a PS3 Slim to replace their fat PS3.

 

Yep. A big reason I bought a PS2 was because it played PS games and DVDs. If the PS3 played PS2 games and Blu-Rays I'd buy one tomorrow.

 

Would you really? The PS3 used to support PS2 games but you didn't buy one then, or you could buy a second hand launch PS3 now that supports it.

 

Yes, I would buy the slimmer, 120 GB model of Playstion 3 for $299 if it could play PS/PS2 games.

 

And there is Sonys conundrum, because they couldn't afford to sell a PS3 with extra features like that for that price.

I really wish my PS3 had backwards compatibility, but I can't blame them for removing it, the market spoke and they had to respond.

 

So I guess it's a used model with hardware PS2 emulation for me. Would've liked to buy one new, but I'm not compromising on features or paying the ridiculous $700 original retail price.

 

The market spoke at the $700+ price point. If they sold a backwards compatible PS3 today, would it be at that price? I doubt it.

If they taped a PS2 to a PS3, it would raise the price by $100, if that. I can't see how a fully 100% backwards compatible PS3 would be more than $399. I think at that price, it would sell.

 

Yes, but no one is going to base the decision to buy on that. No one is going to say, "Oh, well, I would get a PS3, but it's just too large." Consider that it sold gangbusters in Japan where space is at a premium. It's a "nice to have", but it isn't a "must have." In short, the size of the thing isn't going to bring in new customers - it's an attempt to capitalize on the fans with the fat PS3s (see below ) and try to sell the same thing to someone twice, which Sony is infamous for. Instead, the move to bring in new customers is the price point, and they could have accomplished that without sinking tons of money into a new small-form-factor design.

Well, Sony's always enjoyed the company of those with more dollars than sense .

The thing is, you can't just 'tape it on.' You essentially have to pack an entire PS2 into the case in such a way that it essentially just borrows the optical drive, or you have to devise a way for it to share a large proportion of the hardware components of the PS3. They did it before, but they have to toss out a hell of a lot of that work when they change the entire form factor.

I'd guess $450, at bare minimum, but with the Sony tax, $500.

 

Not to mention that our PS3 *would* fit nicely into our entertainment center, if we didn't have to take it out to keep it from melting whenever we want to play a game or watch a movie.

 

Wow, better not get an Xbox2 then. If your PS3 is hot, I'd hate to think what would happen if you put your 360 in there. It would probably make your place catch fire.

 

We don't turn it on in there anymore since we discovered why it was turning itself off. We keep it completely out in the open now. It still gets crazy hot, but it runs. Our kittens appreciate the warmth in the winter. Also, why would I want an XBox.

 

Would you put your computer into tight quarters without room to breath? Your complaint is rendered invalid by your own ignorance. Might want to watch the long-haired cat around it too.