PS3 is a "great machine" but pricey, says Gamestop !

[Toxa]

Gamestop chief executive Daniel DeMatteo labelled Sony’s PlayStation 3 as an impressive piece of kit, but ultimately feels the black behemoth is a tad experience compared to rival machines in the current economic climate.

A company press release detailing the retailer’s sales boost over the festive season reads: “DeMatteo called Sony Corp.’s PlayStation 3 a “great machine,” but said it is just a bit pricey for the current economic environment. The cheapest Xbox 360, which comes without a hard drive, costs $200 and the Wii is $250. Sony Corp.’s 80-gigabyte PlayStation 3 console, which includes a Blu-ray player, sells for $400.”

Sony previously commented this week that it feels PS3 offers better value for money than its competitors.

http://www.psu.com/PS3-is-a-+quot;gr...0006069-p0.php

[silversnake]

I saw it yesterday and decided not to post it. It's not pricey when you realize what's in it or if you compare how much a video card on a PC cost.

[Cyorg]

Originally Posted by silversnake

I saw it yesterday and decided not to post it. It's not pricey when you realize what's in it or if you compare how much a video card on a PC cost.

Yeah, I know... I was looking into building a nice gaming rig, and after I priced everything, I realized I could buy a PS3 for every TV in the house.

[Simplayer]

Originally Posted by silversnake

I saw it yesterday and decided not to post it. It's not pricey when you realize what's in it or if you compare how much a video card on a PC cost.

It's pricey compared to it's competition, ie, other game consoles.

[silversnake]

Originally Posted by Simplayer

It's pricey compared to it's competition, ie, other game consoles.

For sure , but the other competition isn't in the same class as the PS3. PS3 is a home entertainment machine compared to just a gaming machine. Apples to oranges.

Now if you focus on just the gaming aspect than ya it's pricey.

[Simplayer]

Originally Posted by silversnake

For sure , but the other competition isn't in the same class as the PS3. PS3 is a home entertainment machine compared to just a gaming machine. Apples to oranges.

Now if you focus on just the gaming aspect than ya it's pricey.

Indeed, it has better value if you're looking for a great Blu-ray player and gaming machine, but that's not what everyone is after, or possibly can't afford to spend that sort of money.

[Bad8511]

Originally Posted by Simplayer

It's pricey compared to it's competition, ie, other game consoles.

The PS3 is like the Louie Vitton of gaming consoles. LOL

[ehaser]

I bought my 40GB PS3 for $320 on Nov 2007, Thats a next gen console with true 720P and 1080P games, Wifi, a Blu-Ray player, and bluetooth compatible with my keyboard and mouse. (for select games) Thats not to mention the 6 FREE Blu-Ray movies that came with it...

I don't know how anyone could possibly tell me thats a bad deal. If you're getting into HD and don't get a PS3, imo you're not doing yourself any favors.

[Semp1]

The problem is besides the people who bought it when it came out as a blu-ray player like myself others want it for video games, and as a game machine it just doesn't cut it. The 360 is a better game machine hands down from selection and quantity of quality and it's $200 cheaper for the Arcade version and that's what the mass market sees, and in reality all they need to play games. Dollar value, a great video game system for a great price. So if I'm the average customer who walks in and hear the 360 is $200 and has all these must have exclusives like Gears of War and Halo, and has the best online service for game playing now, and even has NetFlix streaming now and is a DVD player too, all for only $200 I'm sold. Then you got the PS3 and the average customer sees it and is like ok every thing the 360 does minus the most popular exclusives presently out, no NetFlix and a fairly decent online experience but nothing compared to XBOX Live, and oh yeah a blu-ray player but I don't need that I own 5 DVD's and a hi-def TV I don't even care about blu-ray. Basically what I'm saying is the mass market doesn't care that the PS3 has a blu-ray player, to the mass market you get less for the money not more, and for the people who did care already bought it for that reason and Sony will not lower the price anytime soon atleast not enough to matter. The reason they're keeping the PS3 high is if they lower it than how much will companies including Sony charge for stand alone's. The PS3's price effects all SAL players, and the blu-ray market in general . What they need to do is release a blu-rayless PS3 but Sony never will because they need the PS3 to push the blu-ray format and they need blu-ray to push the PS3 too.

[Simplayer]

Originally Posted by Semp1

What they need to do is release a blu-rayless PS3 but Sony never will because they need the PS3 to push the blu-ray format and they need blu-ray to push the PS3 too.

That would be a bad idea. All new users won't be able to play any catalog titles.

[Semp1]

yeah I forget games are on blu-ray discs, lol, another example of how silly it was for them to do that I bought Ps3 as a blu-ray player when it came out I have owned less than 5 games for it so I forget that it has games only on blu-ray, and not for nothing you realize that Sony has still not proven that blu-ray was necessary for gaming and now they can't sell a cheap video game system for that sole reason. A blu-ray drive will keep that system expensive...

[silversnake]

Originally Posted by Simplayer

Indeed, it has better value if you're looking for a great Blu-ray player and gaming machine, but that's not what everyone is after, or possibly can't afford to spend that sort of money.

Well for now it's both but 2009 will use the blu-ray discs more. I'd be curious to see how much is being used for killzone 2 and if it truly is a game that can only be done on PS3. (MGS4 for example) For now it's just a gaming machine and a blu-ray player but when developers start using more of the disc it will become a necessity rather than just a perk.

Originally Posted by Simplayer

That would be a bad idea. All new users won't be able to play any catalog titles.

+1. I read some ridiculous article that said they should do that. That makes no sense. They said the console would come with a bunch of games installed on the hard drive but than what? Horrible idea IMO.

Originally Posted by Semp1

Blu-ray drive will keep that system expensive...

not for long. the cost drastically went down from launch year and it will continue to go down. I'm pretty sure we will see a blu-ray player on the PS4 when that comes out. It's like PS3 was the middle man to get blu-ray out in the mainstream so that when PS4 hits , all components will be so much cheaper.

[Wing Nut Jay]

Originally Posted by Semp1

not for nothing you realize that Sony has still not proven that blu-ray was necessary for gaming and now they can't sell a cheap video game system for that sole reason. A blu-ray drive will keep that system expensive...

The cost of all technology drops. SA players cost as little as $200 now.

However, you are 100% correct in that Blu-ray is NOT necessary for making a game console. Including BR was a conscious decision by Sony in order to drive what was originally a proprietary format. As the 360 proves, you can still put out games on DVD (this is in general terms; not including the obvious differences between BR and DVD).

No matter how much people (or Sony, for that matter) want to downplay it, the PS3 having Blu-ray capabilities is a large factor in BR winning the war over HD DVD. The PS3 provided the same kind of home penetration for BR as the PS2 did for DVD.

[Wing Nut Jay]

Originally Posted by Semp1

What they need to do is release a blu-rayless PS3 but Sony never will because they need the PS3 to push the blu-ray format and they need blu-ray to push the PS3 too.

Sony CAN'T release a Blu-ray-less PS3, because all PS3 games are on Blu-ray discs (excluding downloaded games of course). Check it out. It's right on the back of the game box. Right there above the game's rating. The Blu-ray logo is also impressed into the plastic on the front of the box near the top. Not to mmention the BR logo on the game discs themselves.

The only way Sony could release a PS3 without Blu-ray would be to either completely redesign it, or make all of their games download only. Not exactly a good fix either way.

[Blu Jacket]

Originally Posted by Semp1

as a game machine it just doesn't cut it. The 360 is a better game machine hands down from selection and quantity of quality and it's $200 cheaper

Wrong, wrong, wrong. The ONLY thing the 360 has going for it is being cheaper (both in cost and shoddy construction) and it's one year head start. And cheaper only counts if you want stripped down, bare bones model which will prohibit you from using the full ability of the box. The PS3 has many games that are every bit as good as the 360 has and Xbox only has more games because, once again, they have a head start. I was once an Xbot but saw the light and jumped to the PS3, which is only proving with each passing day to be the right choice.

[Volume11]

Originally Posted by Blu Jacket

Wrong, wrong, wrong. The ONLY thing the 360 has going for it is being cheaper (both in cost and shoddy construction) and it's one year head start. And cheaper only counts if you want stripped down, bare bones model which will prohibit you from using the full ability of the box. The PS3 has many games that are every bit as good as the 360 has and Xbox only has more games because, once again, they have a head start. I was once an Xbot but saw the light and jumped to the PS3, which is only proving with each passing day to be the right choice.

Dude, I love my PS3, but get real. The 360 has way more games to play and stolen more than its fair share of once Sony exclusives to persuade people to make the switch. If it weren't for the shoddy build quality I think it would be doing even better than it is (and its already destroying the PS3 in sales no matter which way you try to explain it away). Personally, I think the PS3 is a much better value (as Im more into movies than games, anyway so the BD player is a no brainer for me) but saying the ONLY reason its besting the PS3 is because it had a year headstart is absurd. Ask Sega how having a headstart on the PS2 worked out for them (and the dreamcast was a lot better in the few months it existed than the comparable time frame for the PS2).

And the Arcade unit + HDD is still cheaper than the barebones PS3 by quite a bit.

[BirdManJr]

yeah the 360 is cheaper...299.99 (for 60 gb ps3 has 80gb for 399.99)

then you buy the wireless adapter...99.99 (comes with ps3 wireless)

then xbox live 50.00 (free on ps3)

Then the plug n play with battery pack for the wireless controller (ps3 comes with a charger cord) 29.99 unless you want to buy batteries all the time...

360 no blu-ray...ps3 has blu-ray (this is where i draw the line)

I have no doubt the xbox 360 is a great machine but in the long run it costs around the same to have the same experience on both systems.

360 seems to have alot of add ons making the system seem cheaper...which is smart....where ps3 gives you everything already installed for a big price which is worth it tho.

[saprano]

Originally Posted by Semp1

The problem is besides the people who bought it when it came out as a blu-ray player like myself others want it for video games, and as a game machine it just doesn't cut it. The 360 is a better game machine hands down from selection and quantity of quality and it's $200 cheaper for the Arcade version and that's what the mass market sees, and in reality all they need to play games. Dollar value, a great video game system for a great price. So if I'm the average customer who walks in and hear the 360 is $200 and has all these must have exclusives like Gears of War and Halo, and has the best online service for game playing now, and even has NetFlix streaming now and is a DVD player too, all for only $200 I'm sold. Then you got the PS3 and the average customer sees it and is like ok every thing the 360 does minus the most popular exclusives presently out, no NetFlix and a fairly decent online experience but nothing compared to XBOX Live, and oh yeah a blu-ray player but I don't need that I own 5 DVD's and a hi-def TV I don't even care about blu-ray. Basically what I'm saying is the mass market doesn't care that the PS3 has a blu-ray player, to the mass market you get less for the money not more, and for the people who did care already bought it for that reason and Sony will not lower the price anytime soon atleast not enough to matter. The reason they're keeping the PS3 high is if they lower it than how much will companies including Sony charge for stand alone's. The PS3's price effects all SAL players, and the blu-ray market in general . What they need to do is release a blu-rayless PS3 but Sony never will because they need the PS3 to push the blu-ray format and they need blu-ray to push the PS3 too.

Your post is compleat crap, enough with the ps3 has no games. and you named 2 exclusives for 360, thats all everybody ever does, so people are choosing which console to get based off 2 games? haha. all the rest are also on PS3. the 360 is a better game machine hands downs? to who? if you think so thats fine thats what you like, but dont say it like its true and the whole world agree's

And the ps3's price has absolutely nothing to do with SA BD players, the ps3 price is still high because sony can't afford to lower it right now.

I can't believe you guys let this post past for so long.

Originally Posted by matthieuxdetoux

Don't get me wrong I think the PS3 is a decent machine but it will ultimately fail for a variety of reasons. The least of which is the fact that according to Business Week Sony's gaming divisison has LOST $3.8. Billion in the past two years. The price is a big factor considering it came out a year after the 360 at $600 which was way too expensive for the average gamer. I own all three consoles and I use the PS3 the least for gaming.... As has been brought up before with the 360 I can streem Netflix, Synch with my PC to watch all of my videos and listen to all of my MP3's without having to use up the hard drive. Most people I know got talked into buying it as a blu ray player when they got an HDTV which makes sense because it is the most reliable, but we all know gaming systems lose money and the video game sales make the money back, nobody is buying games because they mostly use it for BD. At this rate I wouldn't count on even seeing a PS4.

Im sorry but this is another dumb post.

[BlackLightShark009]

Originally Posted by saprano

Your post is compleat crap, enough with the ps3 has no games. and you named 2 exclusives for 360, thats all everybody ever does, so people are choosing which console to get based off 2 games? haha. all the rest are also on PS3. the 360 is a better game machine hands downs? to who? if you think so thats fine thats what you like, but dont say it like its true and the whole world agree's

And the ps3's price has absolutely nothing to do with SA BD players, the ps3 price is still high because sony can't afford to lower it right now.

I can't believe you guys let this post past for so long.
Im sorry but this is another dumb post.

I agree that its a dumb post and all this bad talk of the PS3 is annoying. Also sick of hearing something else has better games.....I guess i one of the few that likes many of the games and i don't even got all the games i want for it yet.

[Baked]

Originally Posted by Semp1

The problem is besides the people who bought it when it came out as a blu-ray player like myself others want it for video games, and as a game machine it just doesn't cut it. The 360 is a better game machine hands down from selection and quantity of quality and it's $200 cheaper for the Arcade version and that's what the mass market sees, and in reality all they need to play games. Dollar value, a great video game system for a great price. So if I'm the average customer who walks in and hear the 360 is $200 and has all these must have exclusives like Gears of War and Halo, and has the best online service for game playing now, and even has NetFlix streaming now and is a DVD player too, all for only $200 I'm sold. Then you got the PS3 and the average customer sees it and is like ok every thing the 360 does minus the most popular exclusives presently out, no NetFlix and a fairly decent online experience but nothing compared to XBOX Live, and oh yeah a blu-ray player but I don't need that I own 5 DVD's and a hi-def TV I don't even care about blu-ray. Basically what I'm saying is the mass market doesn't care that the PS3 has a blu-ray player, to the mass market you get less for the money not more, and for the people who did care already bought it for that reason and Sony will not lower the price anytime soon atleast not enough to matter. The reason they're keeping the PS3 high is if they lower it than how much will companies including Sony charge for stand alone's. The PS3's price effects all SAL players, and the blu-ray market in general . What they need to do is release a blu-rayless PS3 but Sony never will because they need the PS3 to push the blu-ray format and they need blu-ray to push the PS3 too.

Please do some homework before you post everything in our electronic future will rely on size of memory and process power and DVD's just don't make the grade anymore SORRY neither do 360's or Wii!
I would like to add being in EB Games store yesterday seeing a 360 on a sammy did not impress me at all definition just wasn't the same vs. the PS3 on a Sammy.....life of a 360: from MS to our place back to MS = 360degrees