PS3 launches 11/17--$499 for 20GB, $599 for 60GB

[Zigma]

fucking expensive (but then again, i paid $700 for my 360....)


When I buy this, Chances are the blue ray is gonna play a major factor in it.

[Nyxx]

Apparently the Rumble seems to interfere with the dynamic controller thingy so they just took it out and put this feature in. Though i will miss the rumble, i guess i'll enjoy the dynamic part of the controller D;

They took it out because they got their asses sued for their implementation of it, which was patented. The company that held the patent is now owned by Microsoft. Nintendo developed their own way of doing rumble so they are in the clear. It does not mess up the new tilt feature as the Wii's controller is even more motion sensing and still has rumble. It's just Sony PR spin.

Also this 600$ price tag is ludacris. I really don't like how it's that expensive just to push blue ray into consumer's living rooms, at the expense of gamers. If I wanted to get a blue ray player I would, but now I have no choice if I want to play some of the franchises I love. I'm willing to bet a ps3 w/ out a BR player would be 400$ or so.

[SephYuyX]

The BR that Sony uses cost a bit over 300$, actual BR players will cost around 1,300$ when it goes mainstream.

Sony really went over the edge this time, and I hope they crash and burn.

[Eaglestrike]

Not sure if anyone else noticed this:

At the PlayStation 3 briefing on March 14, 2006 in Japan, Sony revealed that the PlayStation 3 will display legacy recoded PlayStation titles in high-definition resolutions.

From Wikipedia...does this mean FF games and such?

[Elemmire]

I'm sure Sony will pull through, theres only one app for the psp movie format and yet they still make those, but its still an interesting hypothetical in the console wars.

They've (the movie companies) have slowed down production of the PSP UMD movies, because they aren't for the large part selling that well. I read the article on gamespot a while back, and the business isn't making a lot of money. And can you blame anyone for not buying them?

You can only play the PSP movies on the PSP, there is no home UMD player, and secondly, they usually cost as much, if not more than the DVD movies, and come with far less extras (if any) on them.

Theres a reason microsoft wants HD-DVD to win the format war, its a hell of a lot cheaper to switch production from DVDs to HD-DVDs than to Blu-Ray, which requires different technology to create.

huh.. the Gamestop near me sells DVDs and UMDs as a pack for about 20-25 dollars. Thought that's what most places were doing now with UMDs to try and increase their sales ah well. You don't need a UMD anyways. Just download and store it on a card for the PSP and you can watch a movie fine. And you can just delete the movie off the card and put another. Not a big deal.

[Not Kuno]

hey guyz wuts going on? lol

[Robert]

http://nyhc0.blogstation.fr/images/h...noldlol2xr.gif

[Xavier]

You don't need a UMD anyways. Just download and store it on a card for the PSP and you can watch a movie fine.

Thats pretty much my argument for why UMD fails. The only hardware you can play a UMD movie on currently is the PSP, and you don't even need to use the UMD format to play movies on the PSP.

Buy the DVD, rip it, put it on the card, and you just bought the video on a universal format, with more features, for roughly the same price as the UMD version.

Funny video above me.

[ertyu]

you know its not all about orgazmic graphics, id rather have a game with good gameplay over a shitty game with good graphics anyday.

gameplay and replayability >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> graphics

[Elcura]

you know its not all about orgazmic graphics, id rather have a game with good gameplay over a shitty game with good graphics anyday.

gameplay and replayability >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> graphics

Would you play a game like KH2 with 16 bit graphics? I wouldn't.

Graphics are important, for lots of reason, most important would be to SELL the game to the generally masses who only look at face value, that and it's a nice thing to look at.

But a bad thing would be to put graphics over gameplay, a good game would have good gameplay, a great game would have good gameplay AND graphics.

[ertyu]

you're taking it to the extreme. Did I say anything about having 16 bit graphics?

I mean i hate it when they focus so much on graphics and making it look nice that the game is shitty. I mean I'd rather play a game with standard graphics that keeps me entertained than some really suipre pretty game that sucks.

[Elcura]

you're taking it to the extreme. Did I say anything about having 16 bit graphics?

I mean i hate it when they focus so much on graphics and making it look nice that the game is shitty. I mean I'd rather play a game with standard graphics that keeps me entertained than some really suipre pretty game that sucks.

Gameplay+Replayability >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> graphics isn't extreme?

You didn't have to say anything about 16 bit, but the point still stands.

But I do agree with the 2nd part, which is pretty much what I said in my other post...

[ertyu]

I know, but these days very few games are able to pull that off great graphics+gameplay

but yeah, i concur

[Marquisate]

This is a repost of what I said in the other PS3 thread, clearing up some of the confusion regarding Sony's launch price for the system.

Sony is simply following a widely-accepted pricing strategy called "cream-of-the-crop" pricing. The first 5 million people to buy a PS3 will have no problem paying $600. And if you look at the company's distribution schedule, by this time next year when around 10 million PS3's are in circulation, it isn't unreasonable to expect that the price of the system will be lower, to appeal to the general market.

When a new gadget comes out, smart companies charge the first adopters the highest price, because they're willing to pay it. When supply outstrips the first adopter demand and you have to start marketing it to the general market or even late adopters, you drop the price.

This happens for two reasons: first, these new folks aren't willing to pay top dollar, and secondly, your production facilities have begun to achieve economies that lower the cost of producing your project. Maybe they've advanced further along the experience learning curve, or maybe you've redesigned the internal components of the system to be less expensive; fact is, it will get cheaper for Sony to make the PS3 over time because they're an electronics company and designing and building systems is what they do best.

By the time most people in this thread, excepting those who are very wealthy and/or well-connected with a major retailer, get their hands on a PS3, they won't be paying $600 for it. Not even close.

PS1 and PS2 have outsold every nintendo system ever made, put together. Of course there are 5 million people in the world waiting to pay $600 for a PS3. There are probably 5 million people waiting to pay $1000, but beyond a certain point you start to get really bad press and anger the first adopters who see people buying a system they got one year ago for half the price (in late 2007). Sony isn't arrogant, it's smart, and it's following tactics that anyone with an education in business has learned in basic production management and organizational strategy classes.