A problem with PS3's 2 SKUs

[onanie]

I'm not upset, I just find it humorous that Sony one month can proclaim dominance of next-gen console due to their not only supporting 1080p but having two HDMI outputs, and the next month quietly killing not one, but both HDMI out, on their lower end model. If they were only crowing about 1080p, then please clue me in on all the 1080p games that will be released.

Anyway, I find Sony's PR manuvering and back-peddling as annoying as I do Microsoft's "all 720p + AA" proclamations. But annoyed doesn't equal upset--I just don't like revisionism.

You certainly came across as such. The point about "TrueHD" is 1080p, not necessarily HDMI. Certainly, if a developer wishes to use 1080p, he could. http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/707/707248p1.html

 

[Sis]

You certainly came across as such. The point about "TrueHD" is 1080p, not necessarily HDMI. Certainly, if a developer wishes to use 1080p, he could. http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/707/707248p1.html

You keep repeating the 1080p comment as if it will distract from the larger issue, that Sony did indeed play up the dual HDMI out, when they are now releasing a version lacking in HDMI entirely.

 

[onanie]

And what value is that? $600 is ok. How about $1000? $2000? I mean, at some point too much is just too much. For me, $400 bordered on "too much", but it had the added benefit of being the first next gen console. Adding two hundred dollars to that price for a system that eventually will give me unique and compelling games is really not that great of a deal, IMO.

The way I look at it is like this: there're consumers who would buy the PS3 at any price--and it sounds like you fall into that category. But that group is very small; think first gen Xbox size. The hardcore Playstation fan. It's a sizable chunk, but Sony must reach the rest of the market, and at their current pricing and SKUs, I don't see that happening. Nor do I yet see how they will achieve that pricing in a timely-enough fashion to fight off Xbox 360 and Wii.

You'd agree that it is rather subjective. For me, the two hundred dollars won't be just for games that I find unique and compelling, it is also a blu-ray player (among other things). It is well worth it. I do not feel that I represent such a small group (if that's your opinion).

 

[onanie]

You keep repeating the 1080p comment as if it will distract from the larger issue, that Sony did indeed play up the dual HDMI out, when they are now releasing a version lacking in HDMI entirely.

No, the larger issue seems to be 1080p. Why do you think differently, if in the end, even the "game" SKU plays the same as the "entertainment" SKU?

 

[Sis]

You'd agree that it is rather subjective. For me, the two hundred dollars won't be just for games that I find unique and compelling, it is also a blu-ray player (among other things). It is well worth it. I do not feel that I represent such a small group (if that's your opinion).

Indeed, very subjective, and I may be making the mistake of confusing my personal preferences with the average consumer.

However, I think I have history on my side. I'd love to hear of counter examples; consumer devices that retail for $500 dollars and above and yet sell a hundred million. Computers are one, I believe. Maybe televisions. Perhaps it's not a stretch to add a gaming console into this mix (perhaps as long as it also doubles as a Blu-ray device).

 

[onanie]

Indeed, very subjective, and I may be making the mistake of confusing my personal preferences with the average consumer.

However, I think I have history on my side. I'd love to hear of counter examples; consumer devices that retail for $500 dollars and above and yet sell a hundred million. Computers are one, I believe. Maybe televisions. Perhaps it's not a stretch to add a gaming console into this mix (perhaps as long as it also doubles as a Blu-ray device).

Perhaps that is Sony's positioning (what they believe) in the current market.

 

[expletive]

Indeed, very subjective, and I may be making the mistake of confusing my personal preferences with the average consumer.

However, I think I have history on my side. I'd love to hear of counter examples; consumer devices that retail for $500 dollars and above and yet sell a hundred million. Computers are one, I believe. Maybe televisions. Perhaps it's not a stretch to add a gaming console into this mix (perhaps as long as it also doubles as a Blu-ray device).

I think we can forget about the launch price beuuase thats not really Sony's problem. I think their real problem is what can they AFFORD to sell the PS3 for when MS is selling the 360 for 199 and the Wii is 149. Thats when marketshare will be won or lost.

The real black box for me is if Sony actually has a cost disadvantage through the next 3 years and if theyll still be bleeding money on the hardware when MS can comfortably sell the 360 at 199 or 149. Blu Ray will play a role in this but honestly theres nothing stopping MS from making the premium with a built in HDDVD or BR player down the line and keeping the DVD-only core.

 

[JasonLD]

I think we can forget about the launch price beuuase thats not really Sony's problem. I think their real problem is what can they AFFORD to sell the PS3 for when MS is selling the 360 for 199 and the Wii is 149. Thats when marketshare will be won or lost.

The real black box for me is if Sony actually has a cost disadvantage through the next 3 years and if theyll still be bleeding money on the hardware when MS can comfortably sell the 360 at 199 or 149. Blu Ray will play a role in this but honestly theres nothing stopping MS from making the premium with a built in HDDVD or BR player down the line and keeping the DVD-only core.

I think Blu-ray drive itself is something that will go down quickly in terms of price when they ramp up the production..initial cost might be a killer, but we have seen optical drives' price go down quickly....I don't think there are big price difference between PS3's and Xbox360's chips because they aren't much different in terms of transister count. I think it will depends on demands, not the production costs.

 

[V3]

Well Sony has painted you (and me) into this corner though by building up HDMI (or DUAL HDMI even) and all the other removed features to the point where they were perceived as differentiators and 'must haves' this generation. When you read the media reactions, most of them are calling the PS3 $600, not $500, because theyve been convinced that HDMI is intrinsic to what the PS3 'experience' was supposed to be. In the end, $500 should get me the PS3 experience theyve been selling me for the last 16 months.

The solution for Sony is to bite the bullet and put HDMI on the $500 unit, problem solved. People dont seem to care about no wifi or CF slot on the 360 and they wont miss it here either.

There some confusion over the cost of HDMI though with prices ranging from $5 to $12, either way its a solution that will cost them hundreds of million of dollars over the next 5 years.

Here's the problem with that (for Sony anyway), Sony WANTS people to buy the $600 unit cause theyre clearly losing less on that unit and they figured by taking out HDMI that would drive 60G sales.

They tried to pull off a 2 SKU model like MS but made the big mistake of the 20G never being upgradeable to the 60G so people buying the 20G end up feeling that they paid more money for something that would provide a suboptimal PS3 experience.

Doesnt the Core seem like an absolute steal now? Funny how it took Sony to point that out to everyone.

This is the gist I get from second hand information. The $600 is the Ken's version of PS3. The $500 is the other Sony's executives version of PS3 after Ken's reveal the BOM and suggested the $600 price tag to them (while still taking quite sizeable lost per console).

The HDMI included in the $600 PS3, isn't just any HDMI too, its the latest spec. It meant to offer superior picture quality compare to the older spec (provide you have the panel to go with it). Kutaragi obviously saw the improvement that he scrap the two older HDMI port.

KK must be pissed, after he championed the HDMI, newer spec even, to have a lesser SKU without it.

 

[Powderkeg]

Minor change of subject here.

Since the $499 PS3 doesn't have Memory Card slots, does that mean PS3 game saves are now non-transferrable? You won't be able to take your saved game to a friends house and play it on his system now? (At least if you own the $499 PS3)

Or am I just mis-understanding how the memory cards work on the PS3?

 

[PeterT]

How about using an USB thumb stick (I think they even put them in cereal boxes nowadays )? Or sending them via the network? I don't know if either is/will be possible with PS3, but there are certainly lots of ways to do it in theory with the "cheap" PS3.

 

[rounin]

I would like the PS2 save transfer issue to be resolved as well. I was actually under the impression that the memory slots, even in the original design, were never intended to support PS2 memory cards in the first place, hence losing them in the 20gig version has no relation to this.

That said I don't recall hearing any official mehtods on how it could be done or if it can be done.

 

[Dave Baumann]

Phil Harrison comments on the two SKU's:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4760553.stm

 

[PeterT]

I would like the PS2 save transfer issue to be resolved as well.

Now that is a completely different issue, and a very important one as well. I have about 100 MB of PS2 saves archived here (on my PC, no way I could afford that many overpriced memory cars ), and I would be very disappointed in Sony if there was no way to transfer them to PS3 and use them with BC. Overall, we heard very little about backwards compatibility so far at E3 and the conference, it makes me fear the worst.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Phil Harrison comments on the two SKU's:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4760553.stm

Not very useful comments. What about BRD playback? And if the two machines are identical in function, why add an HDMI port to the more expensive unit? And will the lower-end machine be upgradable? PR fluff and avoiding the issue

 

[wco81]

Now that is a completely different issue, and a very important one as well. I have about 100 MB of PS2 saves archived here (on my PC, no way I could afford that many overpriced memory cars ), and I would be very disappointed in Sony if there was no way to transfer them to PS3 and use them with BC. Overall, we heard very little about backwards compatibility so far at E3 and the conference, it makes me fear the worst.

Well you could transfer them to SD or CF cards. But that would mean you'd have to buy the higher-end SKU.

Do you really expect to play all those old game saves?

I got a bunch too saved up, many of games I no longer have or just rented. Can't imagine going back to look for them.

 

[PeterT]

Well you could transfer them to SD or CF cards.

But that presupposes that there exists some (open)format the PS3-based PS2 emulator can access. I highly doubt that. (Every way of getting saves off of PS2 memory cards is completely unofficial)

Do you really expect to play all those old game saves?

All? In no way. I also have > 1 Terabyte of anime fansubs. It's about obsessive collecting and the existence of the possiblity of revisiting, not the actual act of doing so

 

[wco81]

I just assume you'd be able to mount an SD or CF card on the PS3 like a volume (since they're goign to use so much RAM for this PS3 OS).

Then you could drag copy the contents, whether they are PS2 saves or photos.

If they're going to provide BC, they should be able to read PS2 game save files no?

Maybe a store will let you try to copy these game saves to a demo unit and try to load a PS2 game.

In the US, some stores let you return consoles (but not opened games).

 

[Powderkeg]

Phil Harrison comments on the two SKU's:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4760553.stm

Funny, I thought these were Phil Harrisons comments on the two SKU's.

"Are there two versions of the Xbox 360 that people want to buy? I don't know," he said. "I look at those formats. I think it just confuses the audience. They don't know which one to buy, developers don't know which one to create for, and retailers don't know which one to stock... So I think we wouldn't take that strategy. We wouldn't create confusion."

 

[PeterT]

Funny, I thought these were Phil Harrisons comments on the two SKU's.

The first and third point are clearly contrary to his new position, but at least the second one (IMHO most important) is still fulfilled with the 2 PS3 SKUs.