Did Sony screw up with initial pricing for PS3?

I think NOT, PS3 is truly next-gen, they added so many features in the earlier models that it was impossible to bring it lower than 500$.should, sony have released a low priced console for market penetration first? with crappy hardware like the Xbox360 which cannot be called next-gen because it doesn't have cell nor blu-ray or sixaxis,

which is truly next gen and an innovation.

People, who buy a ps3 are secured for the future because of the extra storage of blu-ray, while xbox360 users have to keep changing disks, because of bigger, better and massive games. Why don't people understand this? and keep flaying the price tag and the ps3.they want a console to be cheap as well as next-gen thats not possible is it? xbox360 is very fun with good features online but is it a next-gen? certainly not.

So, the ps3 price is justified.  If u dont want a next-gen console and want to enjoy now, just get a 360. but dont flame the ps3.The PS3 is coming to age now with awesome games, great online support and everything is an innovation.

Home isn't next gen? come on, its a huge, innovative idea, I have a PS3 and a Xbox360, so am not a fanboy FYI, 360 is a good gaming experience, but PS3 is a better hardware and reliable,

.

Still mad Sony lost Final Fantasy XIII and Tekken 6?AHUGECAT

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]Still mad Sony lost Final Fantasy XIII and Tekken 6?kar008

Microsoft is a tough competitor because their competitor charged $599 for a console.

[QUOTE="kar008"] [QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]Still mad Sony lost Final Fantasy XIII and Tekken 6?AHUGECAT

Microsoft is a tough competitor because their competitor charged $599 for a console.

$600 is too much to ask for anything , but for $400 and what you are getting now is a fair deal imho.

I almost wished they had released just one sku at launch for $500 (80 gig - no ps2 b/c) , and charged $20 a year for online play ... lol. Then just dropped price by $100 the first year , and then another $100 this holiday. Better for the masses that way.

Still mad Sony lost Final Fantasy XIII and Tekken 6?AHUGECAT

Are You Serious? Sony lost this gen because of it's console's price and it's lack of games!CleanPlayer

What good is a great processor though if you don't have enough RAM and a powerful enough graphics card to match? They did the same thing with the PS2-- strong in one area, hamstrung by the others. & this is from a PS3 owner... it costs so much to make a game for it that there's no reason to put the time and money that you need to make the best PS3 game possible. Even MGS4 got delayed a long time because it was hard to deal with the hardware.

Still, anything above $400 is too much for a game console, no matter how many bells and whistles it has.

What good is a great processor though if you don't have enough RAM and a powerful enough graphics card to match? They did the same thing with the PS2-- strong in one area, hamstrung by the others. & this is from a PS3 owner... it costs so much to make a game for it that there's no reason to put the time and money that you need to make the best PS3 game possible. Even MGS4 got delayed a long time because it was hard to deal with the hardware.

Still, anything above $400 is too much for a game console, no matter how many bells and whistles it has.

MAILER_DAEMON

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

[QUOTE="kar008"] nope, i have xbox360 and ps3 both i want everyone to enjoy epic games like MGS4 and maybe ff13, but it is sickening that ps3 is in the negative news always, and microsoft is a tough competitor because of $$kar008

Microsoft is a tough competitor because their competitor charged $599 for a console.

Cell is not next-gen. Blu-ray is not needed.

[QUOTE="kar008"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

 

Microsoft is a tough competitor because their competitor charged $599 for a console.

AHUGECAT

Cell is not next-gen. Blu-ray is not needed.

Cell still beats the 360 cpu and Blu-Ray helps MGS 4 uses almost all the disc space of a dual layer blu-ray ...

[QUOTE="kar008"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

 

Microsoft is a tough competitor because their competitor charged $599 for a console.

AHUGECAT

Cell is not next-gen. Blu-ray is not needed.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"][QUOTE="kar008"] 599$ for blu-ray and cell and emotion chip because it is next-gen not like xbox360.nVidiaGaMer

Cell is not next-gen. Blu-ray is not needed.

Cell still beats the 360 cpu and Blu-Ray helps MGS 4 uses almost all the disc space of a dual layer blu-ray ...

Cell does not beat the 360's CPU, and MGS4 has annoying installs - thus, multiple discs wouldn't hurt it (plus wasn't Metal Gear Solid 1 on multiple discs? *Grabs case* indeed it was!).

[QUOTE="nVidiaGaMer"]

Cell still beats the 360 cpu and Blu-Ray helps MGS 4 uses almost all the disc space of a dual layer blu-ray ...

AHUGECAT

Cell does not beat the 360's CPU!

Why are you posting when you clearly don't know the truth? Look, it does beat it, but clearly, that fact doesn't stop the 360 because it has a good enough CPU, and a great GPU. 

Did you know the PS2's CPU was better than the Xbox's and GC's?

[QUOTE="nVidiaGaMer"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

 

Cell is not next-gen. Blu-ray is not needed.

AHUGECAT

Cell still beats the 360 cpu and Blu-Ray helps MGS 4 uses almost all the disc space of a dual layer blu-ray ...

Cell does not beat the 360's CPU, and MGS4 has annoying installs - thus, multiple discs wouldn't hurt it (plus wasn't Metal Gear Solid 1 on multiple discs? *Grabs case* indeed it was!).

Your right about the installs and how does the cell not beat the triple core cpu???  Last time I checked the specifications it was 1.8 teraflops vs. 1 teraflop in terms of processing power. 

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"][QUOTE="nVidiaGaMer"]

 

Cell still beats the 360 cpu and Blu-Ray helps MGS 4 uses almost all the disc space of a dual layer blu-ray ...

nVidiaGaMer

Cell does not beat the 360's CPU, and MGS4 has annoying installs - thus, multiple discs wouldn't hurt it (plus wasn't Metal Gear Solid 1 on multiple discs? *Grabs case* indeed it was!).

Your right about the installs and how does the cell not beat the triple core cpu???  Last time I checked the specifications it was 1.8 teraflops vs. 1 teraflop in terms of processing power. 

Nothing more than Sony's hype. Don't listen to a word they say. The 360 is superior to the Cell.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"][QUOTE="nVidiaGaMer"]

Cell still beats the 360 cpu and Blu-Ray helps MGS 4 uses almost all the disc space of a dual layer blu-ray ...

SolidTy

Cell does not beat the 360's CPU!

Why are you posting when you clearly don't know the truth? Look, it does beat it, but clearly, that fact doesn't stop the 360 because it has a good enough CPU, and a great GPU. 

Did you know the PS2's CPU was better than the Xbox's and GC's?

Why are you telling me I don't know the truth when you posted that last sentence?

[QUOTE="SolidTy"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

 

Cell does not beat the 360's CPU!

AHUGECAT

Why are you posting when you clearly don't know the truth? Look, it does beat it, but clearly, that fact doesn't stop the 360 because it has a good enough CPU, and a great GPU. 

Did you know the PS2's CPU was better than the Xbox's and GC's?

Why are you telling me I don't know the truth when you posted that last sentence?

Look, instead of breaking down the nuances of the 128bit emotion engine, and comparing it to the 32-bit CPU's used by Microsoft and Nintendo last gen, and explain how the Other consoles had better graphics (Because they used GPU's, unlike the overworked CPU in the PS2), because there's more to these system's than CPU's...

Why don't you just understand that the Cell's Superiority won't be demonstrated because of Sony's lack of preparation in the PS3's GPU and RAM. Having the same amount of RAM as the year old 360, was a mistake, especially for the Cell.

As far as CPU hype, all companies do it, you knock down IBM's/SONY's Cell numbers, you need to knock down anyone else's as well.

[QUOTE="SolidTy"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

 

Cell does not beat the 360's CPU!

AHUGECAT

Why are you posting when you clearly don't know the truth? Look, it does beat it, but clearly, that fact doesn't stop the 360 because it has a good enough CPU, and a great GPU. 

Did you know the PS2's CPU was better than the Xbox's and GC's?

Why are you telling me I don't know the truth when you posted that last sentence?

Sony put a LOT of money and R&D into the Emotion Engine, and devs were excited. Then the graphics info came, and they scratched their heads, but they made stuff anyway because it sold so much. That's why developers could say that each system had its own strengths and weaknesses-- the PS2 had the best processor, the Xbox had the best graphics card and was easy to develop for if you were used to the PC, and the GC had the best balance and ease of development if you were a console developer (though as RE4 showed, it was no slouch in the CPU or graphics).

It's a similar thing with this gen. The 360 is quite powerful, and PC developers have no problem porting things due to using PC-architecture, similar to the Xbox before it (though they're using an IBM processor and an ATI graphics card, unlike the Intel processor and nVidia graphics card of the Xbox, hence the B/C issues), while the PS3's Cell Processor is a great piece of engineering and by far the most powerful processor of the home consoles, it's offset by a relatively weak graphics architecture.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"][QUOTE="SolidTy"]

 

Why are you posting when you clearly don't know the truth? Look, it does beat it, but clearly, that fact doesn't stop the 360 because it has a good enough CPU, and a great GPU. 

Did you know the PS2's CPU was better than the Xbox's and GC's?

MAILER_DAEMON

Why are you telling me I don't know the truth when you posted that last sentence?

Sony put a LOT of money and R&D into the Emotion Engine, and devs were excited. Then the graphics info came, and they scratched their heads, but they made stuff anyway because it sold so much. That's why developers could say that each system had its own strengths and weaknesses-- the PS2 had the best processor, the Xbox had the best graphics card and was easy to develop for if you were used to the PC, and the GC had the best balance and ease of development if you were a console developer (though as RE4 showed, it was no slouch in the CPU or graphics).

It's a similar thing with this gen. The 360 is quite powerful, and PC developers have no problem porting things due to using PC-architecture, similar to the Xbox before it (though they're using an IBM processor and an ATI graphics card, unlike the Intel processor and nVidia graphics card of the Xbox, hence the B/C issues), while the PS3's Cell Processor is a great piece of engineering and by far the most powerful processor of the home consoles, it's offset by a relatively weak graphics architecture.

The Emotion Engine was a wacky CPU that was only 300GHZ compared to Xbox's 700GHZ. "128 bit" are nothing more than numbers that have become so pointless the companies don't even advertise them anymore. Numbers mean nothing when you don't have the performance to back them up - stats are meaningless. EE was overhyped and failed to deliever, while the Xbox and GameCube delievered Day One. GameCube has some of the weakest specs out there but as I said numbers are meaningless and I would say Rogue Leader looks and runs better than any PS2 game ever.

[QUOTE="MAILER_DAEMON"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Why are you telling me I don't know the truth when you posted that last sentence?

AHUGECAT

Sony put a LOT of money and R&D into the Emotion Engine, and devs were excited. Then the graphics info came, and they scratched their heads, but they made stuff anyway because it sold so much. That's why developers could say that each system had its own strengths and weaknesses-- the PS2 had the best processor, the Xbox had the best graphics card and was easy to develop for if you were used to the PC, and the GC had the best balance and ease of development if you were a console developer (though as RE4 showed, it was no slouch in the CPU or graphics).

It's a similar thing with this gen. The 360 is quite powerful, and PC developers have no problem porting things due to using PC-architecture, similar to the Xbox before it (though they're using an IBM processor and an ATI graphics card, unlike the Intel processor and nVidia graphics card of the Xbox, hence the B/C issues), while the PS3's Cell Processor is a great piece of engineering and by far the most powerful processor of the home consoles, it's offset by a relatively weak graphics architecture.

The Emotion Engine was a wacky CPU that was only 300GHZ compared to Xbox's 700GHZ. "128 bit" are nothing more than numbers that have become so pointless the companies don't even advertise them anymore. Numbers mean nothing when you don't have the performance to back them up - stats are meaningless. EE was overhyped and failed to deliever, while the Xbox and GameCube delievered Day One. GameCube has some of the weakest specs out there but as I said numbers are meaningless and I would say Rogue Leader looks and runs better than any PS2 game ever.

Your example of RS isn't valid, as you are equating CPU's to graphics, when they do more than that.

[QUOTE="MAILER_DAEMON"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

 

Why are you telling me I don't know the truth when you posted that last sentence?

AHUGECAT

Sony put a LOT of money and R&D into the Emotion Engine, and devs were excited. Then the graphics info came, and they scratched their heads, but they made stuff anyway because it sold so much. That's why developers could say that each system had its own strengths and weaknesses-- the PS2 had the best processor, the Xbox had the best graphics card and was easy to develop for if you were used to the PC, and the GC had the best balance and ease of development if you were a console developer (though as RE4 showed, it was no slouch in the CPU or graphics).

It's a similar thing with this gen. The 360 is quite powerful, and PC developers have no problem porting things due to using PC-architecture, similar to the Xbox before it (though they're using an IBM processor and an ATI graphics card, unlike the Intel processor and nVidia graphics card of the Xbox, hence the B/C issues), while the PS3's Cell Processor is a great piece of engineering and by far the most powerful processor of the home consoles, it's offset by a relatively weak graphics architecture.

The Emotion Engine was a wacky CPU that was only 300GHZ compared to Xbox's 700GHZ. "128 bit" are nothing more than numbers that have become so pointless the companies don't even advertise them anymore. Numbers mean nothing when you don't have the performance to back them up - stats are meaningless. EE was overhyped and failed to deliever, while the Xbox and GameCube delievered Day One. GameCube has some of the weakest specs out there but as I said numbers are meaningless and I would say Rogue Leader looks and runs better than any PS2 game ever.

Nowhere did SolidTy mention that the PS2 had a better GPU, but when you compare just the two CPUs, the "winner" was clear. Bitrates stopped being advertised because no one did anything with them... until they learned how to utilize 64-bit technology and dual core systems like we have today. Similarly, the Cell Processor 8-core setup has a lof of developers confused.

i think yes, the problem is they don't have good games but the price is still kind of up there. blu ray wasn't really needed there r now going to around $200 http://www.walmart.com/browse/DVD-Blu-ray-Players/Blu-ray-Players/_/N-73g8?catNavId=62055&ic=48_0&path=0%3A3944%3A62055 , 

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?id=abcat0102003&type=category&initialize=false&sp=%2Bbrand+skuid&nrp=15&usc=abcat0100000&prids=&cp=1&qp=crootcategoryid%23%23-1%23%23-1~~q70726f63657373696e6774696d653a3e313930302d30312d3031~~cabcat0100000%23%230%23%23sd~~cabcat0102000%23%230%23%232b~~cabcat0102001%23%230%23%23h~~ncabcat0102003%23%230%23%23a&_requestid=177633

most of these r going for around 200-300 for just a blu ray but the ps3 is going for around $450... 360 r going for $350 (pro model 20gig) 

360 costs as much as the ps3 only thing is u blind lemmings cant see it.kar008

who cares if its truly next gen

the system failed

and the initial pricing was the core reason of that

it was a major screw up 

[QUOTE="kar008"]360 costs as much as the ps3 only thing is u blind lemmings cant see it.yoyo462001

[QUOTE="yoyo462001"][QUOTE="kar008"]360 costs as much as the ps3 only thing is u blind lemmings cant see it.kar008

[QUOTE="kar008"][QUOTE="yoyo462001"]the 360 costs 130 pounds whilst Ps3 cost 300...i think you are wrong here.yoyo462001

[QUOTE="yoyo462001"][QUOTE="kar008"] no the indirect cost such as live and stuff add all that including other accessories.ImOldGreg

Wha? Add the cost of a HDD for PS3, what the sam hill is a swish about that? Lol. You mean add the indirect cost of a HDD for 360, every PS3 has a HDD.

[QUOTE="ImOldGreg"][QUOTE="yoyo462001"]nope, you cant add any costs to any of them, if your arguing that the indirect costs of LIVE+wireless adapter have to be added on, then we should add the indirect cost of a 150 pound hard drive to the PS3 both arn't needed but are acceptable "indirect costs". the fact is the 360 is cheaper alot cheaper.SolidTy

Wha? Add the cost of a HDD for PS3, what the sam hill is a swish about that? Lol. You mean add the indirect cost of a HDD for 360, every PS3 has a HDD.

Um..no. The initial pricing definitely deterred many potential buyers.Zerocrossings

[QUOTE="CleanPlayer"]Are You Serious? Sony lost this gen because of it's console's price and it's lack of games!the-obiwan

Don't you think a good portion of Sony's problem is that they didn't innovate some good games onto their revolutionary system for roughly two years?... And even when they did, the last-gen clunker 360 had (has) an obviously more complete library?Shafftehr

Lol how long will you fanboys keep using that excuse that PS3 has no games? The PS3 has better worldwide sales than the 360. Not to mention a greater 2009 lineup.

[QUOTE="Shafftehr"]Don't you think a good portion of Sony's problem is that they didn't innovate some good games onto their revolutionary system for roughly two years?... And even when they did, the last-gen clunker 360 had (has) an obviously more complete library?joopyme