I don't see the point in the PlayStation 3 Slim

The size doesn't matter. It's not like you are going to carry it around with you. If someone wanted a portable PlayStation, they would just buy the PlayStation Portable.

Thanks for the input brah.

Smaller size, less components = cheaper for everyone to buy. Nuff said in my book.

I accutally prefer my bigger ps3. Making it smaller would make it, to me, feel like a wii of sorts. I want the console to look like what it is, a powerhouse.

Smaller size, less components = cheaper for everyone to buy. Nuff said in my book.

joseph_mach

And it is chepaer for Sony to make the slim as well.

[QUOTE="joseph_mach"]

Smaller size, less components = cheaper for everyone to buy. Nuff said in my book.

And it is chepaer for Sony to make as well.

Actually it is smaller size= more effecient shipping. They are lighter tighter and you can ship more out at a time. Shipping is the most expensive part.

The size doesn't matter. It's not like you are going to carry it around with you. If someone wanted a portable PlayStation, they would just buy the PlayStation Portable.

GAMESHARQ

No, nobody is going to "carry it around." But for most gamers, space in their home entertainment system is an issue. I have a Wii, my big PS3, cable box, DVR and a modem in my small cabinet and it is completely full. My older consoles have to sit in a box in the basement because I have no other room for them. From a gamer perspective, making the console smaller means more space.

From a Sony perspective, the PS3 being smaller means it is now cheaper to build. SO they can lower the price to a more publicly acceptable (and competitive) $299. This means more sales which in turn attracts more developer support. It also cuts down on shipping and storage costs as the manufacturing plants ship them to regional storage facilities, which is where retailers order them from.

From a retailer perspective, having a smaller package takes up less retail shelf space...which is ALWAYS in short supply. If the PS3 takes up less space, then retailers are more likley to order more for the same amount of shelf space. This means the PS3 is more readily available in stores, which is important is the price is down to $299 which will spark higher demand.

Its cuz sony could. They decreased PS3 unit costs by 70% i think... So if they can make it smaller they will lol :D

The size doesn't matter. It's not like you are going to carry it around with you. If someone wanted a portable PlayStation, they would just buy the PlayStation Portable.

GAMESHARQ

I don't see a point in this retarded thread. The answer is so obvious even my dumb blonde sister would know.

Smaller, cheaper. Seriosly I've got a DVR a DVD/VCR a XBOX360 and a PS3 Slim, I can hardly fit them all on the TV stand as is, I don't need the PS3 to be any bigger.

This should be in the sticky too.

The size doesn't matter. It's not like you are going to carry it around with you. If someone wanted a portable PlayStation, they would just buy the PlayStation Portable.

GAMESHARQ

[QUOTE="joseph_mach"]

Smaller size, less components = cheaper for everyone to buy. Nuff said in my book.

Sean2moore

And it is chepaer for Sony to make the slim as well.

Why is it that your first reaction in regard to the slim's size had to do with carrying the damn thing around? Ever heard of cutting costs? That's basically the whole idea behind the slim... not just in terms of production due to fewer and cheaper components (which is the primary reason), but even in areas such as storage and shipping.

Cutting costs was the only way Sony could have introduced a new price point to draw in more customers and at the same time keep its already squeezed margins in tact. If Sony would have only reduced the asking price but kept their marginal costs at the same level as before they would have only incurred more losses or worse...

Didn't you notice that Sony has been cutting costs this entire time, even before we ever heard of the slim? and not just in terms of components removed from the PS3 (or replaced by cheaper ones), but in terms of cutting the labor force; all so that Sony could stay competitive... and that eventually led to the creation of the slim (or more specifically, made the slim a necessity), which allowed for the most efficient way for Sony to save per unit produced and pass those savings onto the customers (i.e price cut).

Don't get me wrong, if Sony could have charged moreit would have done so in a heartbeat, but matching the price of rivaling companies is the name of the game at this stage of the console's life-cycle if you want to win out in the long run, or at the very least, keep your remaining market share...

but yeah, i guess no one would be carrying the PS3 around any way so Sony fails :roll:

I dont see the point of this thread.

ITs cheap, its lighter, its smaller, it uses less electricity, it dosnt need a power brick or transformer, it has a bigger harddrive, it has real buttons on it, and it has better internal cooling.

The size doesn't matter. It's not like you are going to carry it around with you. If someone wanted a portable PlayStation, they would just buy the PlayStation Portable.

GAMESHARQ

It's ok, buddy! We all have made bad threads.

The size doesn't matter. It's not like you are going to carry it around with you. If someone wanted a portable PlayStation, they would just buy the PlayStation Portable.

GAMESHARQ