PS3 price range given by Sony

GFLPraxis

macrumors 604
Original poster
Mar 17, 2004
7,091
404
NEW YORK (FORTUNE) - More than 90 million PlayStation 2 consoles have been sold worldwide since the PS2's debut in 2000, compared with some 25 million Microsoft Xboxes sold since 2001. Even if the new Xbox 360 is a rousing success, Sony's dominance of the console universe is likely to continue, and there's a powerful new PlayStation coming next year.

The PS3, scheduled to be introduced in Japan in mid-2006 and in the U.S. a few months later, is expected to be technically more advanced than the Xbox 360 in many ways. Notably, it will include a high-definition DVD player intended to capitalize on the growing market for HDTV sets, which, of course, Sony also makes. (The Xbox 360 supports HD games, but it lacks the ability to play next-generation, prerecorded HD movies.)

Sony's CEO, Sir Howard Stringer, said recently that Sony will sell the PS3 at a loss in order to populate the world with Sony's favored high-definition DVD standard, known as Blu-ray. If millions of Blu-ray PlayStations find their way into living rooms, Sony figures, movie studios will be compelled to embrace it over the rival standard, known as HD-DVD. Yes, brace yourself for another Betamax vs. VHS standards war.

Sir Howard said the PS3 will sell for $300 to $400 and will come with a bundle of games, movies, and TV shows, many of which Sony also makes. The question is whether the titles will be bundled on Blu-ray DVD discs or on a built-in hard drive.

Because the first standalone Blu-ray DVD players are expected to cost $1,000 or so, Sony is essentially giving a free next-generation DVD player to every PS3 customer. That eases the pain (a little bit) for people faced with buying new, high-def versions of their favorite DVDs.

Of course, nothing is stopping Microsoft from adding a high-definition DVD player to the Xbox down the road, once the standards battle has been resolved.

How else does the PS3 stack up against the Xbox 360? It's based on a bodaciously powerful Cell processor developed by IBM and Toshiba, which appears to outmuscle the IBM PowerPC custom chip used in Microsoft's Xbox 360. Sony has also tapped nVidia to supply the graphics engine in the PS3, and it's going to be a whopper, with nearly double the rendering power of the top graphics card that nVidia now supplies to PC gaming enthusiasts. Again, on specs alone, the PS3 should have a graphics edge over the ATI-based Xbox 360.

Fancy hardware doesn't mean anything, though, if the people who write the games for the hardware can't take advantage of it. (Exhibit A: The PlayStation 2 is technically inferior to the original Xbox, but it's still the world's most popular gaming platform based on the selection of compelling game titles.)

At its launch the PS3 will be backward compatible with thousands of earlier PlayStation titles. But Microsoft knows software, and game developers are praising it for providing them the tools and support to build new titles for the Xbox 360.

So should you wait a year for the PS3 or buy the Xbox 360 today? Current Xbox owners are likely to upgrade to the 360, and current PS2 owners will probably stick with Sony. New gamers, however, have little reason to wait nearly a year for the PS3, and Microsoft is almost certain to gain some ground on Sony.

The one wild card: Sony could slash the price of the current PS2, perhaps to $100, making the $400 Xbox 360 seem less attractive.

Strike, counterstrike: It's all playing out like a good videogame. Only in this game, billions of dollars are at stake
Source


"PS3 is a subsidized Blu-ray play that will sell 20 million units. The first HD player will be on the market for $1,000. PS3 could be at $300 or $400. Sony will be selling them at a loss the first six months to a year just to get Blu-ray players out in the market. So studios realize they need to have their content on it," he said.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20051105-5530.html
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001393147


And the older article,
Japanese Web site Impress PC Watch reported that SCE has told its business partners that the PS3 will be under 40,000 yen ($370) at launch.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/05/24/news_6126410.html


Looks like the latest statements agree with Sony's older statements. They've always said under $400 and are now confirming $300-$400 range. The whole $500 thing was just analysists.

A PS3 for $300 would kill the 360, but I'm expecting $400, $350 at absolute best but unlikely.
 

shadowmoses

macrumors 68000
Mar 6, 2005
1,821
0
Very interesting article.....Nice to have an idea of how much the PS3 will cost, also the fact that it will come with a built in Hard Drive and bundled with games will really work in its favour....

The only reason i can see going for a 360 instead would be Xbox Live, as i don't think sony's online play will be able to compete....

Shadow
 

GFLPraxis

macrumors 604
Original poster
Mar 17, 2004
7,091
404
How do you know that they won't be able to compete? Last we heard officially from Sony, they're building a centralized online network to rival XBox Live complete with an online P2P network, network storage and the ability to access content on your PS3's hard drive from other systems (including a PSP) over the internet.

For many people, Live is a disadvantage, because you're required to pay monthly fees that no one else charges to play online.
 

Aarow

macrumors 6502a
Jun 14, 2005
592
0
I hope it's $300! I just set up my PS2, which was in storage/ at a friends house since New Years last year. Now I remember how much fun it was.
 

shadowmoses

macrumors 68000
Mar 6, 2005
1,821
0
GFLPraxis said:
For many people, Live is a disadvantage, because you're required to pay monthly fees that no one else charges to play online.
That's not really an issue, as most people do not mind paying the small fee for 1 years online play, especially whent he service offered by xbox live is so good.

I hope PS3's online play will be on par with xbox live, but i seriously doubt it will be.....

ANyhow im in no rush to buy a next gen, so i'm willing to wait and see,

SHadow
 

GFLPraxis

macrumors 604
Original poster
Mar 17, 2004
7,091
404
*shrug*, well, it's something that bothers me. Many people don't mind, but I personally have an inbred hate of subscription fees. I don't play any MMO's for that reason. I hate the fact that MS is talking about switching everything to subscription fees in the future (even Microsoft office); I can only imagine the insane monthly bills that will come about for that, as we pay for broadband, television, XBox Live, MMO's, and anything else they charge for. I much prefer to pay for it and be done with it.

Especially when you consider that over five years you'll pay $250 in subscription fees just to play online, without any MMO's, and on a PC, Revo, and most likely PS3 that would be free.

Imagine of PS3 charged; crap. That's $10 a month if you have both consoles.
 

Chaszmyr

macrumors 601
Aug 9, 2002
4,265
76
GFLPraxis said:
*shrug*, well, it's something that bothers me. Many people don't mind, but I personally have an inbred hate of subscription fees. I don't play any MMO's for that reason. I hate the fact that MS is talking about switching everything to subscription fees in the future (even Microsoft office); I can only imagine the insane monthly bills that will come about for that, as we pay for broadband, television, XBox Live, MMO's, and anything else they charge for. I much prefer to pay for it and be done with it.

Especially when you consider that over five years you'll pay $250 in subscription fees just to play online, without any MMO's, and on a PC, Revo, and most likely PS3 that would be free.

Imagine of PS3 charged; crap. That's $10 a month if you have both consoles.
I've never minded subscription fees much, but I've never played more than one game at a time that has subscription fees. $10 a month is really not very much for a quality game, imo. However, games with subscription fees tend to be highly addictive even if you're not having much fun (which is a big problem, imo.. that way you're wasting both time and money). Furthermore, lets say you're a hardcore gamer and paying for WoW, Tabula Rasa (upcoming MMORPG), Xbox 360's online service, and PS3's online service... I'm sure you can see these charges are really adding up, especially when you put them on top of the system and game prices.
 

GFLPraxis

macrumors 604
Original poster
Mar 17, 2004
7,091
404
Chaszmyr said:
I've never minded subscription fees much, but I've never played more than one game at a time that has subscription fees. $10 a month is really not very much for a quality game, imo. However, games with subscription fees tend to be highly addictive even if you're not having much fun (which is a big problem, imo.. that way you're wasting both time and money). Furthermore, lets say you're a hardcore gamer and paying for WoW, Tabula Rasa (upcoming MMORPG), Xbox 360's online service, and PS3's online service... I'm sure you can see these charges are really adding up, especially when you put them on top of the system and game prices.
That's exactly what I was thinking.

Those MMO's are generally $15 a month, or $180 a year. Throw in $50 a year for Live and IF Sony charged, $50 a year for that, plus your broadband bills, and another $180 for any other MMO's, and we're talking about hundreds of dollars yearly.

And thats why, any time I can avoid a subscription fee, I do.
 

Piarco

macrumors 68030
Jun 24, 2004
2,529
0
Londinium
I can't day I'm a fan of the Playstations games, Gran Turismo the exception, (but I'm not an MS fanboy - the 360 will be my first console since a brief flirtation with a PSone) but I think this will definately swing the HD/Blu-Ray war in Sony's favour - a next gen DVD player for under $400? I'd be tempted just to get a PS3 for that alone - if the next gen players are indeed retailing around the $1000 mark at first.

Time will tell..... but Sony just got my attention.....
 

XNine

macrumors 68040
I don't mind paying 50 a year to XBL for ALL games, considering each PC/Mac game costs 1/4 of that a MONTH to play online, and that's jsut ONE game.

SOny needs to eliminate people who connect via dial up. That's one of their biggest problems. There's so much lag in those games because of dial up players. People who have dial up should not be allowed to play these games.

If Sony can build a great online experience, I'll gladly shell out 50 a month. I'll definately be getting a PS3 as well. After Christmas, my first paycheck will include a down payment on a pre-order.
 

GFLPraxis

macrumors 604
Original poster
Mar 17, 2004
7,091
404
Onizuka said:
I don't mind paying 50 a year to XBL for ALL games, considering each PC/Mac game costs 1/4 of that a MONTH to play online, and that's jsut ONE game.
Uhm, since when? Each PC/Mac game costs 1/4 of that a month to play online? Every single game in my library is free. Microsoft is charging 50 a year to play the games you normally get FREE online, then you have to pay for the MMO's (the ones you pay for on a PC/Mac) on top of that.
 

XNine

macrumors 68040
GFLPraxis said:
Uhm, since when? Each PC/Mac game costs 1/4 of that a month to play online? Every single game in my library is free. Microsoft is charging 50 a year to play the games you normally get FREE online, then you have to pay for the MMO's (the ones you pay for on a PC/Mac) on top of that.
Sorry, I should have said "a lot of the games" like the MMO's and some others charge you monthly just for that one game, where as all XBL games are under the same fee.
 

GFLPraxis

macrumors 604
Original poster
Mar 17, 2004
7,091
404
Onizuka said:
Sorry, I should have said "a lot of the games" like the MMO's and some others charge you monthly jsut for that one game, where as all XBL games are under the same fee.
Actually, no; the XBL fee covers all the games you normally get free online. For MMO's and the others that charge, you have to pay for them on top of XBox Live. It says so on Microsoft's web site.
 

XNine

macrumors 68040
GFLPraxis said:
Actually, no; the XBL fee covers all the games you normally get free online. For MMO's and the others that charge, you have to pay for them on top of XBox Live. It says so on Microsoft's web site.
I ahven't come across a singl;e game that I have played (which is dozens) that charge on top of XBL. So I'm still not affected at all. I don't think I've even heard of an XBL game that does do this. If there are some titles, can you name a few so I know what's what?

Thanks
 

GFLPraxis

macrumors 604
Original poster
Mar 17, 2004
7,091
404
Onizuka said:
I ahven't come across a singl;e game that I have played (which is dozens) that charge on top of XBL. So I'm still not affected at all. I don't think I've even heard of an XBL game that does do this. If there are some titles, can you name a few so I know what's what?

Thanks


Well, I'm talking about the XBox 360 in this case, not sure about the current XBox. If the current 'Box doesn't charge for MMOs, that's great.

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/features/massivemultiplayer.htm
MMO games will come with their own subscription plan, so even if you’re not a full-fledged Xbox Live Gold member you’ll be able to participate in this growing phenomenon.
...
MMO titles may require an additional subscription fee.
 

xli_ne

macrumors 6502a
Mar 3, 2005
788
0
Center of the Nation
Because the first standalone Blu-ray DVD players are expected to cost $1,000 or so, Sony is essentially giving a free next-generation DVD player to every PS3 customer. That eases the pain (a little bit) for people faced with buying new, high-def versions of their favorite DVDs.

god that is something i don't want to think about.
 

XNine

macrumors 68040
GFLPraxis said:
Well, I'm talking about the XBox 360 in this case, not sure about the current XBox. If the current 'Box doesn't charge for MMOs, that's great.

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/features/massivemultiplayer.htm
Yeah, see, I don't think the first Xbox had any, or many of these games. Maybe Fable? I'm sure the likes of Final Fantasy (if the rumors are true of it coming to Xbox 360 are true) will have a fee like they did on PS2, but for the most part, most games will hold under the XBL fee. Which is good. I know Call of Duty and Perfect Dark Zero are under the one fee.

I guess we'll just have to see. :)
 

takao

macrumors 68040
Dec 25, 2003
3,825
432
Dornbirn (Austria)
Onizuka said:
Yeah, see, I don't think the first Xbox had any, or many of these games. Maybe Fable? I'm sure the likes of Final Fantasy (if the rumors are true of it coming to Xbox 360 are true) will have a fee like they did on PS2, but for the most part, most games will hold under the XBL fee. Which is good. I know Call of Duty and Perfect Dark Zero are under the one fee.

I guess we'll just have to see. :)
well on the pc call of duty multiplayer is free ;) ... same for quake 4.. in fact Microsoft somehow managed to make people pay for something which was free before... .. they get marketing kudos for that from me
 

DISCOMUNICATION

macrumors 6502a
Jul 7, 2004
831
2
Cambridge, MA USA
Pricing is still just a rumor

Turns out they never actually discussed pricing and Sony officially today still has no comment on PS3 pricing or release schedule.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=13184

I never trust comments from Sony or Nintendo suits about the status of products in development unless they are actually coming out of JAPAN. If we are going to here something real and concrete it is most likely going to be coming from JAPAN first. It's kind of like Bill Gates making coments about xbox 360 features and then the next day the guy in charge of the xbox division saying Gates was wrong. Actually it's not even like that at all. CNN took the princing thing from a rumor mill. So Stringer never said that pricing bit at all.
I'm thinking that comment out of Sony Computer Entertainment Australia about games being region free might just be wishful thinking and not substancial. The guy only sited the fact that PSP games were region free, but what does that matter. Every handheld console in history has been region free. Although he did make a good point about not having to worry about PAL/SECAM/NTSC if ATSC picks up as a world wide standard for HD.
 

GFLPraxis

macrumors 604
Original poster
Mar 17, 2004
7,091
404
Don M. said:
I think he's allowed to make the same non-factual comments about the PS3 that you continue to spout regarding the Xbox's demise at every turn.
If the PS3 was $300, with Blu-ray, WiFi, better specs than the 360, Bluetooth, the ability to connect 7 controllers and two TV's, and included a bunch of TV shows and movies preloaded, it would do extremely well.

It would also probably bankrupt Sony with the sheer amount of losses incurred ;) I doubt its even possible.

I'm not spouting about the XBox's demise anymore. I think it has a chance of selling pretty well. I just don't like it very much because I don't like the kind of games the XBox generally has, and like the capabilities of the other consoles better; my opinion. But I don't think it will die off like I did in the past.
 

GFLPraxis

macrumors 604
Original poster
Mar 17, 2004
7,091
404
DISCOMUNICATION said:
Turns out they never actually discussed pricing and Sony officially today still has no comment on PS3 pricing or release schedule.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=13184

I never trust comments from Sony or Nintendo suits about the status of products in development unless they are actually coming out of JAPAN. If we are going to here something real and concrete it is most likely going to be coming from JAPAN first. It's kind of like Bill Gates making coments about xbox 360 features and then the next day the guy in charge of the xbox division saying Gates was wrong. Actually it's not even like that at all. CNN took the princing thing from a rumor mill. So Stringer never said that pricing bit at all.
I'm thinking that comment out of Sony Computer Entertainment Australia about games being region free might just be wishful thinking and not substancial. The guy only sited the fact that PSP games were region free, but what does that matter. Every handheld console in history has been region free. Although he did make a good point about not having to worry about PAL/SECAM/NTSC if ATSC picks up as a world wide standard for HD.
You are correct, although the much older GameSpot article is still valid (but being that its older is subject to change).