Playstation3 Hardware *Rumours* from PSM (grains of salt are on me!)

[PC-Engine]

..mmmhmmmmm...

How much to do you think it costs to build a HTPC?

 

[Carl B]

How much to do you think it costs to build a HTPC?

I think he was just responding to your '...uh...yeah...' with an equal non-answer.

I think we should all just step away from the brink of nonsense here and return to the discussion at hand.

Whatever the PS3's price, I'm sure we can all agree it's not going to be $1000.

 

[3roxor]

For $1000 I could buy a Xbox 360 and a HTPC with both a BR and HD DVD drive.

I could potentially buy the Xbox360 for less than $80 but that's not the point. It's all about which platform offers the most and people will pay for it.

 

[mckmas8808]

What if, now this is a big what if. What if Sony did release the PS3 at $300? Wouldn't that make everybody think that they will be getting the PS3 at a deal? Could this be clever marketing on Sony part? Remember they are one of the best advertisers in the world.

 

[Pozer]

I could potentially buy the Xbox360 for less than $80 but that's not the point. It's all about which platform offers the most and people will pay for it.

Only to a certain point. NeoGeo offered the most but people couldn't afford it so it never caught on in the mainstream. 3d0 was somewhat similar minus NGs good software support. If the visuals are clearly superior and the software is good it can succeed well at a higher price point. Somewhat similar to Xbox over the GC in North America. There is always a market for people wanting the 'best' or most expensive. Bling Bling Factor.

But there are limits. A console priced at $599-$699 would become a 'niche player' very fast if a competing console offered similar visuals and games for $299. Those hypothetical price points are alot more contrasting than the price points we saw this past gen ($299, $199, $149, $99).

Nobody can afford to buy it, no devs will maKe games for it, no games and nobody wants to buy it anyway.

Bottom line, I personally dont know know anyone who would feel comforteable investing $599 in just a console itself without accessories. I guess it depends on the price of blueray players at the time of launch and if Sony is comfortable with a slow ps3 adoption rate.

Maybe cell yeilds are bad and Spring launch availabilty is gonna be shaky so Sony is turning that into lemonade by pricing it out reach for the masses. The ps3 gets a mystique in the meantime, then when yields pickup they'll price it competatively and people will think its a miracle and they'll own xmas '06. Trixie $ony

 

[darkblu]

I would have said the eDRAM is actually removing a buffer (from addressible RAM), ergo it does affect the quantity of usable system memory (especially where AA is concerned).

ok, i did forget about the tile buffer downsampling on-the-fly, in which case you do save system ram at fsaa. my bad.

 

[dukmahsik]

no way, sony isn't going to sign their own death warrant by releasing ps3 anything more than 399 in the US

 

[Powderkeg]

Only to a certain point. NeoGeo offered the most but people couldn't afford it so it never caught on in the mainstream. 3d0 was somewhat similar minus NGs good software support. If the visuals are clearly superior and the software is good it can succeed well at a higher price point. Somewhat similar to Xbox over the GC in North America. There is always a market for people wanting the 'best' or most expensive. Bling Bling Factor.

But there are limits. A console priced at $599-$699 would become a 'niche player' very fast if a competing console offered similar visuals and games for $299. Those hypothetical price points are alot more contrasting than the price points we saw this past gen ($299, $199, $149, $99).

Nobody can afford to buy it, no devs will maKe games for it, no games and nobody wants to buy it anyway.

Bottom line, I personally dont know know anyone who would feel comforteable investing $599 in just a console itself without accessories. I guess it depends on the price of blueray players at the time of launch and if Sony is comfortable with a slow ps3 adoption rate.

I don't know anyone who would feel comfortable paying over $400 for a console, even with accessories. Even $300 is too much for most people, which is why sales jump so much after a price cut.

I have trouble believing that Sony would launch at anything higher than $350, and I really believe it will be $300, just like the 360. I don't think the people at Sony are so bold as to believe they will once again dominate if they cost significantly more than their competition.

 

[PG2G]

I think I paid around $700 for my 3DO shortly after it came out. I think I'd be pretty much willing to pay whatever price up front, as long as the games aren't in the hundreds as well (like Neo Geo).

 

[jvd]

Does anyone here really think that the ps3 will be cheap to make ? Everything we've heard (anyalists , KK and others ) have been telling us that its going to be very expensive to produce . I hiighly doubt they are going to put another 256 megs of xdr ram into it . Perhaps another 256 of gddr ram. Even then i'm a bit doubtfull .

Maybe cell yeilds are bad and Spring launch availabilty is gonna be shaky so Sony is turning that into lemonade by pricing it out reach for the masses. The ps3 gets a mystique in the meantime, then when yields pickup they'll price it competatively and people will think its a miracle and they'll own xmas '06. Trixie $ony

I don't know about that . Launching a console at 400$ and then not even a year later dropping its price by 100$ or so will not look good in the media . Many will feel something is wrong . You generaly don't cut just released products of less than a year in price . It just doesn't happen unless the product is not selling .

I have trouble believing that Sony would launch at anything higher than $350, and I really believe it will be $300, just like the 360. I don't think the people at Sony are so bold as to believe they will once again dominate if they cost significantly more than their competition.

What would u have them do ? They built a console and its apparent by the specs that they are stuck with it . If it costs 494 to produce as is with no upgrades do you think they can sell it for 200$ less than it costs them ? They are bleeding money nad have another launch they are recovering from (and its not over for the psp launching )

Its also apparent that any changes made to the system are going to leave it underpowered .

Disabeling another spu isn't going to help much on yields . Droping memory size or speed will hurt it greatly . Reducing the speed of the gpu will also affect it , though not as greatly as the ram foot print .

So they are stuck . Not much you can do they will either take massive htis if what everyone is saying is true , or sell it at a higher price point .

 

[Powderkeg]

What would u have them do ? They built a console and its apparent by the specs that they are stuck with it . If it costs 494 to produce as is with no upgrades do you think they can sell it for 200$ less than it costs them ? They are bleeding money nad have another launch they are recovering from (and its not over for the psp launching )

I expect them to take a loss for the first year or two until manufacturing costs go down, and then they will make the money back in game sales. That's a more sensible plan than pricing the system outside of the range people are willing to pay for it.

And while Sony is "in debt" they are paying their bills on time and posting a profit every year. If you've bought a house, car, or anything else on credit you are "in debt" too, but that doesn't mean you are broke or can't afford to spend a little money on an investment.

 

[overclocked]

If it costs 494 to produce as is with no upgrades do you think they can sell it for 200$ less than it costs them ? They are bleeding money nad have another launch they are recovering from (and its not over for the psp launching )

Its also apparent that any changes made to the system are going to leave it underpowered .

Disabeling another spu isn't going to help much on yields . Droping memory size or speed will hurt it greatly . Reducing the speed of the gpu will also affect it , though not as greatly as the ram foot print .

So they are stuck . Not much you can do they will either take massive htis if what everyone is saying is true , or sell it at a higher price point .

Well its as you say about absorbing costs but in this case on a longerterm.
One thing you have to remember is that in the EU we pay this high prices although with tax/in sweden 25% and its interesting to se that the shares is almost the same divided(EU/NA). I think this is something to consider with price and what anybody wants to pay is this infected on global scale.

 

[jvd]

I expect them to take a loss for the first year or two until manufacturing costs go down, and then they will make the money back in game sales. That's a more sensible plan than pricing the system outside of the range people are willing to pay for it.

It will take a very long time to make back the money through game sales . Just look at psp and game sales and the ds and game sales . You would most likely need to sell 4-8 games just to make back the moeny lost if not more games (depending on price) this will take alot of time till this ratio is hit and as they sell more consoles the time to do it takes longer .

And while Sony is "in debt" they are paying their bills on time and posting a profit every year. If you've bought a house, car, or anything else on credit you are "in debt" too, but that doesn't mean you are broke or can't afford to spend a little money on an investment.

Lets see 10 million systems (lets figure as this is ms's goal for a year ) at 100$ loss = 1, billion . 200$ loss is 2 billion . That is in the first year and a half . That is just the ps3 . Don't forget the psp will also be loosing money (though i doubt anywhere near as high ) add in the fact that most other parts of sony are lossing money and you have to ask , will that not cripple sony esp if ms is able to steal a chunk of the market thus making it take longre for sony to make the amount of money they are currently making off the ps2 ?

This however if they loose these amounts per console and if they can produce 10 million in its first year and a half .

This is with out upgrades and if they add in another 256 megs of any kind of ram i can believe the 494$ price point alot easier .

Well its as you say about absorbing costs but in this case on a longerterm.
One thing you have to remember is that in the EU we pay this high prices although with tax/in sweden 25% and its interesting to se that the shares is almost the same divided(EU/NA). I think this is something to consider with price and what anybody wants to pay is this infected on global scale.

That is true . However is it going to be a big enough diffrence to make up 200$ ? OR 100$ ? I highly doubt it .

There are alot of factors and its wrong to just will them away . Sony can't afford to take massive hits on hardware . They can take large losses but not massive .

 

[overclocked]

But everything is relative..
And you have a question...

However is it going to be a big enough diffrence to make up 200$ ? OR 100$ ? I highly doubt it .

My anser is maybe, maybe not.....

 

[Powderkeg]

It will take a very long time to make back the money through game sales . Just look at psp and game sales and the ds and game sales . You would most likely need to sell 4-8 games just to make back the moeny lost if not more games (depending on price) this will take alot of time till this ratio is hit and as they sell more consoles the time to do it takes longer .

Three words...

Ten Year Lifespan

Lets see 10 million systems (lets figure as this is ms's goal for a year ) at 100$ loss = 1, billion . 200$ loss is 2 billion . That is in the first year and a half . That is just the ps3 . Don't forget the psp will also be loosing money (though i doubt anywhere near as high ) add in the fact that most other parts of sony are lossing money and you have to ask , will that not cripple sony esp if ms is able to steal a chunk of the market thus making it take longre for sony to make the amount of money they are currently making off the ps2 ?

But some of that money will be made back on game sales, and 3 years from now, they will be making a profit on the hardware. Add in the game royalties for 10 years worth of sales, and they can still make their money back with ease.

This however if they loose these amounts per console and if they can produce 10 million in its first year and a half .

This is with out upgrades and if they add in another 256 megs of any kind of ram i can believe the 494$ price point alot easier .

I've already said I think the upgrade rumors are bunk. The source is totally unreliable.

That is true . However is it going to be a big enough diffrence to make up 200$ ? OR 100$ ? I highly doubt it .

There are alot of factors and its wrong to just will them away . Sony can't afford to take massive hits on hardware . They can take large losses but not massive .

Sony can afford to "lose" a lot of money on the PS3 if it helps further their Cell and Blu-Ray platforms. There is a lot more at stake here for Sony than just a game console, and if a billion dollar loss on the PS3 translates into a 10 billion return on Blu-Ray proliferation, guess who is going to lose a billion dollars.

 

[EpicZero]

Lets see 10 million systems (lets figure as this is ms's goal for a year ) at 100$ loss = 1, billion . 200$ loss is 2 billion . That is in the first year and a half . That is just the ps3 . Don't forget the psp will also be loosing money (though i doubt anywhere near as high ) add in the fact that most other parts of sony are lossing money and you have to ask , will that not cripple sony esp if ms is able to steal a chunk of the market thus making it take longre for sony to make the amount of money they are currently making off the ps2?

Who says the PSP will also be losing money? According to Sony themselves, it was designed to turn to profit rather quickly, unlike with consoles. Most of the other parts of Sony are not losing money, really, the only part in Sony that is losing massive amount of money is the consumer electronic part, which is probably their biggest part. (Within that, mainly the TV business) They hope that by the end of next year, it should not be the massive sink it is now. (Because their joint venture with Samsung will have begun to take effect, and they would no longer need to purchase as much LCDs from outside sources) The other divisions in Sony are doing pretty well.

 

[mckmas8808]

Lets see 10 million systems (lets figure as this is ms's goal for a year ) at 100$ loss = 1, billion . 200$ loss is 2 billion . That is in the first year and a half . That is just the ps3 . Don't forget the psp will also be loosing money (though i doubt anywhere near as high ) add in the fact that most other parts of sony are lossing money and you have to ask , will that not cripple sony esp if ms is able to steal a chunk of the market thus making it take longre for sony to make the amount of money they are currently making off the ps2 ?

Where are you getting your figures from? You can't just pull numbers out of thin air and make a valid point. I could say what if Sony adapts 65 nm tech mid next year and put it in the system by Christmas 2006? I could say what if Blu-ray is the clear winner as quick as next year and is adopted by the masses and Sony makes millions quick.

What if Sony sells the CELL tech to more companies than they already have and make 5 billion dollars in 3 years? Just saying a bunch a things doesn't really make a good point.

 

[3roxor]

Who is constantly dragging the current state of Sony into topics concerning Ps3..? Got nothing to do with eachother (unless Sony turns bancrupt or something)

 

[-tkf-]

It would be nice if this thread only discussed the rumours from PSM, the price disccusion etc could easily carry a new thread.

And, my 5 cents, some of these "facts" are plain stupid, no save on Harddrive? yeah maybe in 1st gen games since i could imagine that the Harddrive support/spec isn't done yet?

PSP as remote, cool i guess.

So 1080p isn't required anyway? well i guess we all knew it was "bullshit" but hey, the same people that said it was "stupid" because there isn't widespread support will only be happy about this, right?

Somehow i think that the people psm asked did not have the final specs and were not 1st party or in any other way close to Sony, they wouldn't have talked if they were.