mckmas8808 said:
I guess you weren't around when people were saying that the PS2 would be $500+ or the PSP would be $400-$600? I guess you just didn't see those comments either though?
Why is it that everytime Sony releases some Playstation hardware everyone thinks that it's going to cost hundreds of dollars more than it really comes out to be? Sony has shut people up about the PS2 and PSP. Shouldn't Sony get the benefit of the doubt here at B3D of all places because of this history?
You need to take your attitude along with that sizeable chip on your shoulder to a system wars forum where rolling eyes smilies impress the other 12 year olds posting there.
Psp pricing was made in context of DS pricing. When you're entering virgin territory against a dominant competitor, you're not going to make much headway pricing yourself hundreds of dollars above their price point. For a large segment of the market, the psp is still way too expensive to consider. While the hardware cost of the psp may not be that bad, their inflated accessory, umd movie and game pricing more than makes up for it. Consumers are far more sophisticated than they're being given credit for and people look at total cost of ownership for a product now. On that basis, the psp is a pricey piece of consumer electronics.
As for what uninformed media journalists estimated the psp price would be, that's no concern of mine. As it is, a number of aspects of the psp were grossly exaggerated by the media, starting with the plasma like screen of the psp. The lcd screen of the psp has a pretty miserable pixel response time, which equates to low quality in my book. The viewing angle was mediocre and it's virtually unviewable in daylight. Aside from the size and the aspect ratio, I was underwhelmed by the plasma like qualities.
Sony went for a glossy black matte finish to give the impression of quality, when in reality, it was a terrible decision, as the finish showed off fingerprints, dirt and grime in pristine detail.
As for the ps2, sorry, but I don't keep five year old articles on whatever speculative pricing for the ps2 might have been. What I've pointed out, is that sony is NOT a price point leader, that is not part of their overall company strategy and it isn't. If sony feels that they can get $499 and above for a ps3 based on the feature set they'll be offering, then that's what they'll do. They're not going to price the ps3 to fulfill some fantasy of a sony ******. When you analyze the giga pack for the psp and ask what the point of the gigapack is, you need to think revenue streams. Sony competes with sansdisk in the memory stick pro duo market, except sansdisk's products are less expensive and from one report I read, offer superior performance to boot. Sony is basically looking to cut out sansdisk and nab that revenue stream for themselves by offering the gigapack.
Sony has been very anxious to convey the impression that the ps3 is more powerful than the 360. They'll feature bluray as standard, built in wifi as standard, dual hdmi ports as standard, multiple memory card support along with other features. I have a hard time seeing sony lowballing the ps3 when they're comfortable creating an even more expensive psp pack which ran contrary to most people's expectations. And its not even like the psp is that hot as a consumer item anymore if it ever actually was to begin with.
If MS can sell a $399 xbox 360, then why wouldn't sony ask $499 and above for a product that can not only play games in high def but usher in an era of high dev movie watching on bluray as well. Built in wifi alone on the ps3 is $100 extra cost option on the 360.
As for these reports, let's be blunt here, some unknown blogger quoting an upcoming issue of famitsu from an unspecified source at sony concerning what they might be thinking along the way of pricing? This is ****** rumor stuff, not news. When I look to what a company might or might not do, I look at recent precedents not some rumor mole mongering.
