Sony delay PS3 until November

[scooby_dooby]

Sony can make the case that the PS3 is a better value than a X360. Then MS would lose the advantage of a price cut. [Sony has used this stragety]

Except I highly soubt Sony will be able to make that case. Consumers will see x-platform games that look the same, they will see that 90% of the game libraries on both systems are the same, and they'll see 360 exclusives that are as just as impressive as anything on PS3.

Most consumers aren't stupid, they will realize the 2 systems are basically equivalent.

The only added value Sony will be able to sell to the consumer is BluRay, which is a genuine advantage. But I don't see what that has to do with affecting the percieved 'value' of the $199 core console with composite cables, obviously that is not aimed at the HD enthusiast.

 

[expletive]

On the 360 Price cuts:

http://arstechnica.com/journals/thumbs.ars/2005/9/19/1284

I'll save someone the trouble and point out the Holmdahl says "cost reduction" and not "price reduction" but almost every reference to the interview I found links it to cutting the price every year.

Bottom line is if they want to, they can without losing any more than they are today. I also know that at some point they want to be profitable, i dont know if that meant on the hardware or just the division in general. If it is on the hardware, then a few of these price cuts are going to be used to get in the black on the box itself.

The first thing they need to do is put a wireless controller in the core. If sony doesnt ship with a hard drive, that would make the core an apples/apples comparison with the PS3, if they want to compete on price, the consumer cant have the perception that theyre getting less for less money.

 

[expletive]

I actually agree with you to a certain point. I think there is the risk of consumer fatigue, and for all we know that's what caused Xbox and GameCube to perform so poorly against the PS2.

I dunno, i think the only consumers with fatigue are the ones who have been searching for a 360 the last 3 months. Those with a 5 year old console will surely be able to snap out of it.

You really think there isnt a few million people playing 'wait and see' with the PS3? Theres been so little info out there about the PS3 ive got to imagine quite a few people were holding off before making any decisions at all on a next gen system.

 

[Titanio]

Except I highly soubt Sony will be able to make that case.

I would not at all. This isn't new to them, and they've a lot to work with in PS3. Sony will push PS3 as sophistication-incarnate, and I think they've enough to work with to do so successfully.

 

[superguy]

It mostly matter which machine puts out better graphics. The rest of the debate is fairly irrelevant.

What people mean when they say Xbox could be hurt by a lower price is, if the games dont look as good.

If they do, then it cant be hurt by a lower price. Only helped.

Or if Sony wants to be perceived as technically superior and worth a premium..well that only works if they have better graphics, more or less.

We of course, dont fully know the answers to these questions yet.

 

[Titanio]

It mostly matter which machine puts out better graphics. The rest of the debate is fairly irrelevant.

Nope. Or at least, we have very little indication of what will and won't be relevant to most consumers at this stage. Many of Sony's previous competitors have tried this - addressing the battle as one of pure games machine vs pure games machine, rather than tackling the whole package Sony was offering (which includes more than just physical product even, arguably) - and not to particularly good effect. If Sony establishes PS3 as the standard form for a console or entertainment machine in most consumers mind, figuring out how to make a 360 an equivalent could be both difficult and/or pricey. And Sony generally is good at setting standards and presenting themselves well in this market.

Anyway, I look forward to waking to some juicy news tomorrow One way or another it'll be interesting..

 

[Mythos]

Except I highly soubt Sony will be able to make that case. Consumers will see x-platform games that look the same, they will see that 90% of the game libraries on both systems are the same, and they'll see 360 exclusives that are as just as impressive as anything on PS3.

Most consumers aren't stupid, they will realize the 2 systems are basically equivalent.

The only added value Sony will be able to sell to the consumer is BluRay, which is a genuine advantage. But I don't see what that has to do with affecting the percieved 'value' of the $199 core console with composite cables, obviously that is not aimed at the HD enthusiast.

That is because you're speaking from the church of X360.... Sony has made the case in the past with the Xbox vs PS2 and lest not forget dreamcast. One may also say that Sony has made the case of X360 being only Xbox 1.5.

Sure...while for the most part (things are not fully known about PS3 final Specs.)the two console are in the same ball park (those that look into the issue deeper) it is the general perceiption that is set up by these two for the market that will set the perceived value.

 

[Sis]

You really think there isnt a few million people playing 'wait and see' with the PS3? Theres been so little info out there about the PS3 ive got to imagine quite a few people were holding off before making any decisions at all on a next gen system.

Well, there's definitely people playing wait and see. But Sony did what many thought they would do: give a time estimate of only about 6 months after the Xbox 360 and then come that time announce a six month delay. Basically freezing consumers every six months.

One side of me thinks that this delay is huge, as I disagree with the rumors about launching in NA first--I will be shocked if that happens. So I'm thinking now that NA in spring of '07 is probably likely. That's roughly 18 months after the Xbox 360. It seems huge.

The other side of me thinks it won't matter. People are still buying PS2s in large quantities. Their games still sell really well. The PSP is performing solidly. Does Sony really need to bleed money in order to compete with the Xbox 360? What if they delayed solely to be in a better financial position? That's a good thing, especially if this better financial position allows them to compete better on price.

Let me add one other thing: I felt like Sony was buying up a lot of second/third party developers recently and couldn't quite figure out why. But if they knew they were going to be well behind the Xbox 360, then what better way to balance it than to ensure some exclusives.

 

[Edge]

Most consumers aren't stupid, they will realize the 2 systems are basically equivalent.

They don't care, cause even with an inferior console this generation, Sony was the superior brand.

Anyway, how can consumer's be stupid for seeing things how they are? PS3 is clearly the superior console on a number of levels. If it has more costly components like everyone argues to death on this forum, then obviously it is superior.

The contradictory statements on this forum are pretty funny. It's you Xbox fans who are working so hard convincing everyone PS3 is superior by always going on and on about it costing more. Thanks to Merrill Lynch also! Sony probably paid ML for that report.

 

[Sis]

What people mean when they say Xbox could be hurt by a lower price is, if the games dont look as good.

No, this has more to do with consumer perception. If price was that important, iPod would be a niche mp3 player. Instead, people pay 200-300 to carry around 7 different songs.

But don't get me wrong, $200 is a nice price point for a consumer device, but it's best to achieve that naturally. In my opinion, MS won't cut the price of either Xbox 360's until 2007. Instead, we'll see some value added bundle at the same price. Think "Gears of War" edition.

 

[London Geezer]

They do, Mass Effect, Too Human, Splinter Cell 5, Blue Dragon come to mind. Even lost planet & dead rising look pretty impressive, all exclusive except SC. Also, Forza 2 is definately coming which will be their equivalent to GT5, should be one hell of a graphical showcase.

Why are you always so hung up on bloody graphics, then try to predict what "the people" will choose based on that? Haven't you learned anything? If it were all about the graphics, Xbox and its better looking and sounding games would have trashed the competiton.
MS does NOT have the same caliber of games as Sony, whether you like to admit it or not. And they're showing me nothing to prove they will on X360 compared to PS3.
End of story, it's about the huge franchises Sony has and MS doesn't, not the games YOU think are "on par" with Sony's efforts.

 

[superguy]

Nope. Or at least, we have very little indication of what will and won't be relevant to most consumers at this stage. Many of Sony's previous competitors have tried this - addressing the battle as one of pure games machine vs pure games machine, rather than tackling the whole package Sony was offering (which includes more than just physical product even, arguably) - and not to particularly good effect. If Sony establishes PS3 as the standard form for a console or entertainment machine in most consumers mind, figuring out how to make a 360 an equivalent could be both difficult and/or pricey. And Sony generally is good at setting standards and presenting themselves well in this market.

Anyway, I look forward to waking to some juicy news tomorrow One way or another it'll be interesting..

The only "extra" thing Sony offers of consequence is Blu-Ray.

If Xbox360 included a R580 and a 256 bit Bus (aka a arguable clear power advantage) the last thing I'd care about was that Sony had Blu-Ray. It wouldn't matter.

If anything, Blu Ray may hurt Sony as it already has. When you make the debate about anything BUT games, you hurt the items of core importance. In Sony's case they are driving up costs and causing delays with what..Blu Ray. It may yet hurt them very badly, it may not that remains to be seen.

At the very least, they could have tossed in a Gig of RAM if they tossed out Blu-Ray. Arguably they could have lets say, SLI GPU's too (perhaps, 7900 GT's?).

Which is better?

 

[Megadrive1988]

The only "extra" thing Sony offers of consequence is Blu-Ray.

If Xbox360 included a R580 and a 256 bit Bus (aka a arguable clear power advantage) the last thing I'd care about was that Sony had Blu-Ray. It wouldn't matter.

If anything, Blu Ray may hurt Sony as it already has. When you make the debate about anything BUT games, you hurt the items of core importance. In Sony's case they are driving up costs and causing delays with what..Blu Ray. It may yet hurt them very badly, it may not that remains to be seen.

At the very least, they could have tossed in a Gig of RAM if they tossed out Blu-Ray. Arguably they could have lets say, SLI GPU's too (perhaps, 7900 GT's?).

Which is better?

I somewhat agree with you. I mean I tend to agree with those sentiments, even if I don't agree with the specifics (i'm not saying I don't agree with your specifics).

with that said, I don't expect any major spec changes to PS3, other than minor or modest clockspeed adjustments, tweaks, etc.

 

[superguy]

I guess my point is, sure Blu-Ray is nice, but it isn't free. Not only is it not free, it hurts the gaming system from what it could have been.

Now, it looks like things are set up where that wont matter too much, because both machines look to be in the same class. But, that would be more "luck" than any strategy on Sony's part.

Even now, it remains to be seen how things play out. Sony may yet be hurt very badly by Blu-Ray, you must agree. If not on power, then possibly price.

 

[liolio]

They don't care, cause even with an inferior console this generation, Sony was the superior brand.

agreed

I can believe how the first ps2 looks...
I was playing soulcalibur and sega rally or house ofthe dead, and whoo it was pleinly ugly to me no matter the hype.
Anyway i sell that poor dreamcast before her official dead, would have been stupid to loose money.
Anyway i've never consider bying the ps2, in the time between i've consider the xbox but i've keep up with my PC. The ps2 have always look like a step back for me, is this revelant?
Nope, 100 millions (i can remerber, probably more)) PS2 shoot console gamer don't give a shit about graphics. (i should moderate this because Sega have financial problems and some more time time could have easily open consumer eyes even if the dvd appeal was hight at this time)
(revolution is an interesting bet for Nintendo time will tell).

One thing, i've so a lot of people buying PS2 because of the easy copyed game (sorry for devs) and for the cheap dvd player built in.
At this point, i think hdtv is still an unrevelant part of the market (i don't see bluray have the same impact as say dvd) and we know nothing about the copy of BR.
I think piracy is part of the market, it have to be be keep low, but lot of causual gamers buy 2/3 game per years (i know lot of causual gamers) but need more titles for keep interest in the system.
It's weird for the devs and editors but MS choice (dvd) can helps when both console will reach a reasonable volume (say in 2/3 years).
the basic thinking of causual gamers ok there a lot of guys with this system i can have lot of game for free, does copy easy on that system....GO
online service added value to game is a good way to keep piracy in a reasonable marging.

Sorry it's late i'm going awfully off topic

 

[wco81]

PS2 had flashable firmware and it delivered updates through new games.

So did the ill-fated PSX, which was going to add support for various DVD+ or DVD- formats through a firmware update.

Whether AACS can be flashed via a firmware update remains to be seen, since it's integral to copy pprotection/DRM for HD-DVD and Blu-Ray.

But if initial HD-DVD players are going out based on interim AACS specs, you presume they could be upgraded to the final. However, there are rumors that Toshiba is only making 10k of the initial.

Further, it's reported that AACS may not be finalized because of this MC issue until the end of the year.

 

[Megadrive1988]

http://www.gameshout.com/news/032006/article3406.htm

Sony Confirms PS3 Delay

Posted Mar 14, 2006, 7:40 PM ET

Sony is planning to delay the launch of the Sony PS3 until November of 2006.

It has now been confirmed, Sony has released a statement advising that they have decided to postpone the PS3 because of an issue with the Blu-ray DVD format, The Nihon Keizai Shimbun reported today. The various electronics and movie companies pushing the next-generation DVD format have fallen behind schedule on agreeing to a technology standard to prevent unauthorized copies, the report advised.

One of the key features of the PlayStation 3 is the ability to play Blu-ray DVD discs. Many market analysts expect the PlayStation 3 to help drive adoption of the new disc format by being the least expensive Blu-ray player on the market when it launches.

Sony will hold its annual meeting with PlayStation game developers on Wednesday in Tokyo, according to published reports. Some analysts have speculated that the company will officially announce the delay at that time.

at least semi-confirmed ?

 

[liolio]

question

I live in France, i don't see a real marketting campaign coming from MS.
Is this the same in others countries (NA, Europe)?

Because, We all know that Sony marketting is great, every body speak about hype etc...
But for the causual gamers i know the PS3 and even the xbox360 is still something exotic...

Actually Xbox sell are early adopters, hardcore gamers, the E3 Sony hype, is unrevelant in regard to the whole market (mainly causual gamers, non techy at all).
What i'm trying to explain in my pseudo english, is that if for Sony next gen start when they are on the market (i'm kidding lol) from what i see here in France MS catch with it.

So from my point of vue, Sony will hype his machine but Ms will start to do the same only when the Ps3 will lend, the marketting war is still not there. Lot of people seem to think that MS has already loose the marketing war, but with their money they can do pretty well.
i don't know (except Japan) if mentality in Na and Europe are so set in the stone as lot of persons think.
The ps2 don't have to face reel marketting campaign nor from sega (lol almost dead) nor from MS or in in a very differrent manner MS don't want to let Sony crush Nintendo and stand in every body living room and accept huge loss on purpose to etablish xbox brand.

I don't know if actually we (nor Sony)should rely to much on Sony hype machine.

Anyway i need your answers ( start of the post)

I live in France, i don't see a real marketting campaign coming from MS.
Is this the same in other country (NA, Europe)?

 

[pixelbox]

at least semi-confirmed ?

That's what the other websites said...all they did was slap sony's name on it. Boy, it would be nice if at the briefing, playstation's father said "still spring!".

 

[scooby_dooby]

Why are you always so hung up on bloody graphics, then try to predict what "the people" will choose based on that? Haven't you learned anything?

the guy said 'the 360 needs more graphical showcases' I was simply responding to that, calm down.

as for game library's, we'll see, no-one is in a position now to predict what the respective game libraries will look like in 2006 and 2007. MS is getting tons of 3rd party support, they are building a large install base, and have a high attach rate, and a great dev environment. Publishers will take this all into account. About the only thing that is a sure bet right now is that PS3 will have more japanese support.

Also, I'll point out that these 'huge' franchises tend to change with every generation, only a few remain consistent like FF, GT and MGS to some extent though it wasn't huge on PS1, and one if the biggest franchises in the world, halo, is an original IP from only 5 years ago.