If Sony launched the ps3 without Blu Ray and the Cell for $299-350...

[QUOTE="kenshinhimura16"]

BD costed Sony a fortune, but in the long term, it will give them, a fortune. Yes, with a lower price SW would be dead as of now. Even the Wii would be having a tight fight.

But Sony opted to push their new techs for future incomes, companies work that way, they think of the longer picture, and not so much in short time.

We will have to see what happens in 4 years when the next gen launches.

mephisto_11

this is exactly where i think sony went wrong. the wii is the crappiest in terms of tech but it is killing. even the ps2 is still selling well and only 40k units behind the ps3. the mass market isn't interested in blu ray, cell, blu tooth etc. they want decently priced hardware with greeat content.

Just a question.......where is this great content you speak of (for the Wii)?

As to the whole guessing game of what would have happened if Sony did this or that.......look in the end this was a cluster ****. They could have got away with one mistake maybe.....MAYBE two.....but not all the giant mess they have right now. People would have been upset at the high price IF Sony could ahve provided some of the top notch franchises the first year. Now we are nearing the end of it's second year and you still have yet to have any of the big franchises that made the PS2 a hit. Where is GT5 (the real version).....where is God Of War 3.......where is their role playing games (like FF or even Kindom Hearts)? It took a year and half before they released their first good exclusive (MGS4).....too bad it wasn't a mainstream title (meaning bringing in new casuals that owned the PS2).

Sony is dealing with too much.....PSP, PS3, PS2, Blu-ray.........they really are the most **** SOB's to think they can bite off that much at once and not have problems. The problem is they are letting the lack of content for the PS3 effect the content they are making for the PSP. They have allowed and are allowing the high cost of Blu-ray dictate how well their console sells. Bottom line is they need to do what's in the best intrest for the PS3. Screw Blu-ray if need be, start slashing the price of PS3 to better compete with the compeition. Sure you might undercut other Blu-ray manufactures which will cause a ruckus.....who the hell cares, save the games division before it's too late. I assure you if the PS3 is $399 at the end of this year it means the PS3 is dead sales wise. How in the world can they honestly think people are giong to walk in and see X360 at $199 and PS3 at $399....with basically the same software......and not come to the conclusion that PS3 is a waist of money?

Yep, a and the huge game selection MS has over Sony wouldn't exist because there would have been a ps3 on the market. People think that MS just got those exclusives, but its hard not to get a exclusive for your system when your the only new console on the market lol. Sony just didn't say make a game for the ps3 a year later. And I'm glad cause they had other games on their minds aswell as they knew most of those were just shovel ware.

But none the less, Sony said they wanted to provide a next generation experience. So they put a new type of processor in the ps3 and a new media format in the ps3 (Bluray). And these 2 things is what makes the ps3 a ps3. Honestly if there wasn't a bluray player in the ps3, I would have just upgraded my pc and been done with it. But as it was I was able to play next gen games on my couch and have a bluray player aswell for my home theater setup with my 50" Plasma :) As far as I'm concerned Sony made the right call. Wii went for casuals and kids, 360 went for the "just games" crowd, and Sony went for the Gamers and Home theater buffs, knowing that HD sets have been on the rise when they launched the ps3 and they knew where the future was (HD).

Also would like to state that VHS tapes were on the market for quite sometime before DVD actually took over for anyone that thinks bluray isn't doing well. Or that bluray isn't hurting dvd. Remember this is the first half of year that there has only been one new format (bluray)on the market, and that HD sets are now as cheap if not cheaper than old crt sets of same size. Example 32" Panasonic crt $899 maybe 8 years ago (my dads), you can now get a 32" hd lcd for around $600 maybe less. Hd sets and its buyers will be looking for that special dvd player (bluray)to go with it, I promise you that :)

P.S. GT hit the ps2 in its 3rd year :) God of War hit the ps2 in its 5th year or 6th year maybe? MGS hit the ps2 in its 2nd year. People need to stop fast forwarding time and look at the facts. The ps3 with its games and hits coming is on par with any of its earlier consoles. Please go and watch E3 conference he actually outlines exactly where the ps2 was and where the ps3 is in its same time frame. Its just that MS basically squirted everything it had in a year and a half.

I believe bluray was a good choice but the cell was not. hakanakumono

I think the cell would've been a good choice if Sony had put atleast 1gb of RAM in the console. I'm sure the cell is a great processor but 512 really bottlenecks it and doesn't let dev's explore it fully, I feel like that was Sony's #1 mistake for gamers.

But with out its processor and disc drive it would essentially be a useless brick :P.

Sony had already lost face with the PSP, I would start by blaming that, they should never have entered the handheld market its a death sentence (Nintendo also lost ground in the home console market during the GB's reign).

Great post , i completely agree, all they had to do was bring it out on the same day with teh same specs and yeah, the name playstation would have destroyed the 360

Shame the 360 has now ammassed a great library of games and exclusives

Some companys go for kids and some companys go for the people who like to have the finer things in life.

Some companys go for kids and some companys go for the people who like to have the finer things in life.

GreyFoXX4

rofl, can't help but wonder who this is geared towards.

cd was already out and well popular and dvd was on the rise at least in america a year before the ps2 came out, they basically picked formats that already were rising, they didn't create the sucess of the cd at all. Microsoft1234

Youre funny, I was too young to know if CD was on the rise, but DVD was definately not on the rise like you're saying, PS2 launched it into success very quickly.

Great post , i completely agree, all they had to do was bring it out on the same day with teh same specs and yeah, the name playstation would have destroyed the 360

Shame the 360 has now ammassed a great library of games and exclusives

scottiescott238

Its funny you say ammassed so many exclusives for the 360 but yet your sig only shows 1 exclusive for the 360. And then you put a ps2 title in the ps3 spot lol. Since going with a launch title you could've atleast put Rfom there lol.

If you noticed, Sony just doesn't put out anything right away. They look at the future, like they did with CD and DVD. They're innovators, and they also know that it doesn't matter how it begins but how it ends. And that's why it will outsell 360 this gen.

SolidGame_basic

No what the TC is saying, is that Sony should have stripped down the ps3 to be like the 360 and Sony could have launched at the same time as the 360. So not to have let the 360 get a head start and the price advantage.

Your probably right... Near the end of last gen, I only owned a gamecube, and was dead set on getting a PS3. The 360 came out in the UK Christmas 2005 and I thought I'd just wait until next Christmas and get a PS3.

But during 2006 I found out that the PS3 would cost £400 (or something like that) compared to the £270 for the 360. It was also then delayed for an easter 2007 release. So by Christmas, I just decided to get a 360, considering it had some excellent looking games, it was cheaper, it was released earlier and because the gamecube was so dead I couldn't possibly have waited for the PS3 to come out.

So if the PS3 came out at the same time as the 360 and cost the same price, I'd have a PS3. But as of right now, I'm sure I made the right desicion.

If Sony had done that they would be broke.Dreams-Visions

sony lost 3.2 billion dollars with the ps3. i don't know how much worse it can get

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]If Sony had done that they would be broke.mephisto_11

sony lost 3.2 billion dollars with the ps3. i don't know how much worse it can get

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]If Sony had done that they would be broke.mephisto_11

It won't since they are actually profting from the PS3 now and have been outselling the rival 360 for most of 2008 so far.

sony lost 3.2 billion dollars with the ps3. i don't know how much worse it can get