Sony Playstation 3

Woo Elephant Yeah · Post by **Woo Elephant Yeah** » June 13th, 2005, 10:14

For discussion of the PS3

spoodie · Post by **spoodie** » June 30th, 2005, 19:36

PS3 to sell for $399, cost $494 to make

From these numbers it sounds like Sony have a lot to lose and this should be an interesting console war

get ready to be owned by Sony's marketing dept.

brains

viper_2090 · Post by **viper_2090** » June 30th, 2005, 22:50

spoodie wrote:PS3 to sell for $399, cost $494 to make

From these numbers it sounds like Sony have a lot to lose and this should be an interesting console war

get ready to be owned by Sony's marketing dept. brains

That report is a bit too approximate and esimatey for my liking....

shot2bits · Post by **shot2bits** » July 2nd, 2005, 23:13

$400!!! holy poo, change to to english money and....... prob about sumwhere between £250-£300 but it cant posible cost that much for em to make, pah, i will just have to wait for the price to drop, meh im more interested in revolution and xbox 360.....

Puggers · Post by **Puggers** » August 21st, 2005, 22:04

I seriously doubt that Sony would sell something this anticipated for less than it costs to make it. To me thats bad business sense.

I also doubt that it would cost that much to make a games console unless they are taking into account the wages of the people brought in to do marketing etc. per unit.

But hey, I still can't wait to see what new things they give you to blow up

cashy · Post by **cashy** » August 21st, 2005, 22:06

the real money with any console lies in the games. without them then its just a box. im sure they will make a proffit in the end, in my opinion its good marketing, people will buy the box for the cheapness, and then they have a ps3, which as you may emagine needs a game or two to go with it

Puggers · Post by **Puggers** » August 21st, 2005, 22:09

cashy wrote:the real money with any console lies in the games. without them then its just a box. im sure they will make a proffit in the end, in my opinion its good marketing, people will buy the box for the cheapness, and then they have a ps3, which as you may emagine needs a game or two to go with it

$399 is still rather steep for, as you put it, a box. also, for all the roughly $100 losses they make per unit, how much more expensive are the games going to have to be?

cashy · Post by **cashy** » August 21st, 2005, 22:40

well, if they can get their foot in the door and take a monopoly on the market, they can charge whatever they like for the games. because who is going to stop them when they have the rights over pretty much every game because microsoft or nintendo wont have the same amount of people who will be able to buy it, giving the game developers a bigger proffit available and making them seem more attractive to do business with? i know who i'd sell my game to thats for sure. if a 10 year old offers to buy the rights to your game for the same price a major corporation does, taking the same cut they do who would you choose?

having said that, microsoft being the wealthiest business in the world wont exactly run out of funding, and it will be very hard to push them out of business so as long as sony keeps the upper edge there will always be some healthy competition. howether if microsoft take the monopoly here, were all screwed plain and simple

also bare in mind it only takes a few quid/dollars to make a cd. if they keep at £40 a game it would take 3 games an average user to make a profit

Post by **FatherJack** » August 22nd, 2005, 15:08

That doesn't quite add up - there is a cost associated with making the game, and a large number of the games are not published by the console manufacturer, although they presumably take a license fee.

I agree that whichever one has the best games will "win" and that exclusive deals with the game producers help secure this.

I also agree that if Microsft "win" it's all but over for everyone else. I'd think this a real shame, while some might think it cheaper to just have to buy one console and get all the games I would miss the variety.

Post by **TezzRexx** » August 22nd, 2005, 21:13

I Don't know what all this "OMFG! XBOX OUT 6 MONTHS BEFORE PS2 = WIN!!" is. What happened to the days when people used to by the next generation about a year or two after they'd first been released?

cashy · Post by **cashy** » August 22nd, 2005, 22:56

TezzRexx wrote:I Don't know what all this "OMFG! XBOX OUT 6 MONTHS BEFORE PS2 = WIN!!" is. What happened to the days when people used to by the next generation about a year or two after they'd first been released?

ive done this with every single console ive ever bought. waste of money paying loads of money for a console that has hardly any games for it, when you can buy it later with better and cheaper games. also it gives you a chance to read the reviews and such to decide which is actualy better

Puggers · Post by **Puggers** » August 22nd, 2005, 23:53

But I suppose then the console market would be a hell of a lot more sensible. At the moment it's a hurry to get the console out with two or three decent games for christmas then let the rest come in good time. Most of the time, unless I really want, no <i>need</i> a game will I buy it until it goes platinum or at least comes down in price.

The cheapest alternative of course is to ask for it as a present. Minimum spend, maximum gain.

Now Tezz that is Win

Post by **FatherJack** » August 23rd, 2005, 10:58

Puggers wrote:The cheapest alternative of course is to ask for it as a present. Minimum spend, maximum gain.

No-one spends that amount on presents for me anymore. Nor did they ever, in fact.

I've been saying all along that I'll wait for the games, and get the cheaper option without hard disk - but that's what I've done before: I bought an xBox last April, and 18 months later it's being replaced - I think this time I won't wait so long.

Now I'm kind of thinking that I won't be able to stop myself and just go and buy the £300 version on the day it comes out, games or no - which would be bad. At least I could give my sister a nearly-new xBox with 6 months live on it for Christmas...

Puggers · Post by **Puggers** » August 23rd, 2005, 23:15

FatherJack wrote: At least I could give my sister a nearly-new xBox with 6 months live on it for Christmas...

You cheap bastrad. Oh well, a man after my own heart

Post by **FatherJack** » August 24th, 2005, 9:15

Bah. I'd give it her anyway. Maybe get her some games for Christmas, Barbie Horse Fucking Adventures or some shit like that.

Totally wrong thread, there. Oops.

Puggers · Post by **Puggers** » August 26th, 2005, 22:18

FatherJack wrote: Barbie Horse Fucking Adventures or some shit like that.

Totally wrong thread, there. Oops.

You mean Barbie fucking horses? Is that even legal in <b>ANY</b> country?
I always knew there was something twisted about that little plastic bint

Post by **FatherJack** » August 27th, 2005, 19:54

It's very big in Japan, here's a screenshot.

shot2bits · Post by **shot2bits** » August 27th, 2005, 21:06

FatherJack wrote:It's very big in Japan, here's a screenshot.

dare i click it??

*clicks*

AHAHAHAHAHA

i thuaght barbie was blonde

mrbobbins · Post by **mrbobbins** » August 27th, 2005, 21:18

FatherJack wrote:It's very big in Japan, here's a screenshot.

pixie pie · Post by **pixie pie** » August 29th, 2005, 12:19

Does this thread show the future of the PS3 already.. The fact that its all about Barbie horse fucking already?..

Anyway, I've decided.. I will not buy any consoles. Because, I don't want to?

. If I had £300 spare.. it'd probably end up in a computer upgrade -- Much more useful than a fricking console that I can't afford to pay for the games for. That was my downfall with the PS2 I couldn't be arsed to pay at least £40 a go for the games. who else is betting that they go up to £50? maybe even more this time around.

I expect the Xbox360 to be a more successful product all in all, mainly because Microsoft are business cunts and have enough money to wipe out any opposition, but the PS3 will probably be a much nicer machine. *Phhhewww*.