Topic: PS3 Estimated at $400

[ABlueflameA]

Hey, I just read an article that said Merril Lynch released its estimates for how much PS3 would cost, as well as how much Xbox360 would cost.

They said that PS3 would retail for about 400 dollars, and the system itself would cost approx 500 dollars to make.  It notes that the disc drive, the processor and graphics card each costing over 100 dollars to make.

Est. price for the 360 is $299.

All i gotta say about the price for PS3 is...ouch.

-Blueflame

Comments?  

[Spak-Spang]

Blue:  Merrill Lynch is a respectable source, so that rumor is much more believable than anything else we heard.  It still reminds me of the estimated price of PSP and the actual price.  Nobody believed the PSP would launch as inexpensive as it did.  

If Sony launches the PS3 at $400.00 I think Sony will have priced itself completely out of the market.  I don't care about how great the graphics look, or High Defination movies...if the cost is $400.00 most gamers and most families desiring a DVD player won't be able to afford the new system.  

If this is true I completely expect Sony to faulter like they are with the PSP in Japan.  Yeah, the PSP is a superior product to the DS and even offers alot of exciting and nifty additions the DS doesn't...however the cost for games and the product itself isn't worth the price according to the consumer.  This will be even worse for Sony when most people won't be able to tell a graphical difference between the Xbox 360 and PS3, except one system is $100 less.

Last, if Microsoft launches the Xbox 360 at $299 it will be a great success.  Not neccessarly this year, but next year when you have 3 systems out...probably priced at $199-250 (Nintendo), $299 (Xbox), and $399 (PS3):  Xbox seems like the best middle road hardware purchase.  A great balance between price and hardware advancements.

This coming generation will be very interesting to watch unfold.  

[couchmonkey]

I definitely think Sony could hurt itself with pricing, but it's wise to remember, like Spak-Spang said, that the PSP launched much cheaper than analysts were predicting.  I've also come to realize that Sony can make a lot of mistakes without getting "knocked out".  I was expecting Sony to take it on the chin this generation after it lost exclusivity for Resident Evil, Crash Bandicoot, Oddworld, Tomb Raider, Ridge Racer, and a bunch of other games...yet it still easily beat Nintendo and Microsoft.

$400 is a lot, but Sony has the better part of a year to make that decision, and Microsoft will be testing the waters for it.  If Xbox 360 isn't doing that well, or if Microsoft cuts its price before PS3 launches, Sony has time to be flexible with its pricing.  Sony also still has the chance to offer one of the first High Definition disc players on the market, which may be worth even more than $400 to hardcore film geeks.

The worst news for Sony is that it may lose tons of cash on the systems even at $400.  That would suck for everyone because I think Sony and Microsoft's willingness to kamikaze their hardware into people's homes hurts both them and Nintendo

[Spak-Spang]

 CouchMonkey:  I really think this kamikaze approach to hardware is completely bad for the entire industry.  Right now Microsoft and Sony are willing to take huge losses just to penetrate the market and have their system be the most popular...but you can't just take those huge losses every year without eventually making that money back.  

They will either have to raise game costs, charge for online gaming, or raise the royality fee for 3rd party developers...or worse varing degrees of all three.  

I believe we are getting to a point where the gaming industry is going to be hurt by these shorter hardware generations, increased costs in gaming and more.  I don't believe it will cause a crash.  But I do believe it will not alot of smaller players from the equation and really prevent the more creative and original concepts from being made.  Any high risk game will be considered a liability.  

This is why I personally praise Nintendo to be designing hardware to be easier to program for, and less focused on power, especially this HD debacle.  Nintendo is making the right choice about HD, but many won't see it...but they will later I believe when gaming for Nintendo is cheaper and the graphics are similarly impressive.

[Ages]

While it's true that $400 is an astounding amount of money for a game system, keep in mind that every Playstation launched at $400 in Japan.  Obviously, that will not deter the Japanese market, however, it will stop the American market in its tracks.

[Ian Sane]

$400 would be very expensive.  Sony would be taking a huge gamble with that.  The Playstation brand is strong but is it THAT strong?  Would people be willing to spend that kind of dough on it?  The PSP has better graphics than the DS, has the Playstation name, and launched with a bigger a better launch lineup than the entire DS library at the time.  Yet the DS is the current market leader and is holding that position well.  The PSP could have creamed the DS but it didn't because it was too damn expensive.  The PS3 could have a similar problem especially if the Xbox 360 is the normal $300 price.

If Sony got screwed by the price it would be very interesting because we would likely have a situation where a different company would be number one in the US than in Japan.  I'd say MS would clearly take the US market.  The Japan market probably would still be Sony's unless they really overpriced it there too.  If Sony lost the leadership position in Japan I guess Nintendo would take the top spot before MS but it's hard to say since we don't know enough about the Rev.

[KDR_11k]

I wonder what if Nintendo filed an antitrust lawsuit against Sony for "dumping"?

[BlackNMild2k1]

Just remember that Sony isn't in the best of financial situations right now.  For them to take a HUGE loss on PS3 for about the first year(or two) would put them in some serious trouble, especially if games take longer than expected to make, cost as much as expected to make and are priced at what they are expected to be priced at.

[Toruresu]

$400?! That's just crazy. My guess is they will at least match the X360 price in the US, otherwise it would be suicide. I'm afraid that Nintendo's system will be the cheapest, and people in the US won't buy it, because its "inferior" to the others in their minds.

[Spak-Spang]

I doubt that the cost will influence what people think about hardware superiority this year.  It worked so well this generation because Xbox made it a piority to appear superior, and the gamecube looked like a toy...so image really hurt.  

However, next generation will be different, and I think people everywhere around the world are more cost conscience now.  People may decide that it is better to buy the affordable system with the affordable software they may or may not be as powerful.

[Ian Sane]

"I'm afraid that Nintendo's system will be the cheapest, and people in the US won't buy it, because its "inferior" to the others in their minds."

I think that depends on certain factors.  The Cube looked inferior because it didn't have DVD playback and only cost $100 less.  Most people assumed it was only cheaper because it didn't have a DVD player and the gap wasn't big enough to make a difference (in 2001 a DVD player for only an extra $100 was a big deal).  So if Sony's charging $400 and Nintendo's charging $300 and has skimped on hardware for that (HD being an example though it's not as big of a deal as DVD playback was) then they'll look inferior.  But if there's like a $150-200 difference the lower price will be a bigger deal.  That combined with some really killer games and a console that doesn't look like a toy can make a big difference.

Plus the Cube's "cheaper so it's worse" image didn't really become a big deal until MS pulled ahead of Nintendo during Christmas 2002 and Nintendo panicked and started bundling in a free game and then the GB player and then cut the price to $100.  That came across as desperate like they couldn't give the things away.

[Invincible Donkey Kong]

"Our ideal [for the PS3] is for consumers to think to themselves, 'OK, I'll work more hours and buy it.' We want people to feel that they want it, no matter what." - Ken Kutaragi

That's nice of you, Kutaragi-san.

I'd say this gamble is just as big as Nintendo's, except Sony isn't doing anything new.  All they are doing is losing money on making their hardware the best, and hoping people fall for it.  Sadly, it may work, but they will still incur significant losses.

Iwata-san said before they Nintendo is aiming to get all third party games that on other systems to the Revolution, and if that is possible, along with a price tag of up to 200 dollars less than the Playstation 3, Nintendo shouldn't have too much trouble closing the gap.

[nickmitch]

Would 3rd parties comply with increased royality fees? Sony does have the most market share, but still that could just hurt Sony more. That would then force an increase in game cost and the casuals would definately go to the 360. There are just too many people who pretty much buy sports titles and if they're at a cheaper price for a cheaper system then that'd be it for Sony.
The only question is if Nintendo could pick up some of Sony's lost market share.

[Flames_of_chaos]

Man, if the PS3 cost 400 when it comes out then I wont be looking forward to it also another keyfactor is that Rev has 512MB flash memory built in  and Xbox 360 comes with a 20GB HDD while PS3 comes with no storage solution and this means if PS3 does costs 400 then potential buyers would have to spend 50 - 200(?) more dollars for a memory stick,SD card or a HDD with linux installed ouch.  


If so this would mean that Rev will be my primary console and Xbox 360 could potentially be my secondary console.

[stevey]

Nintendo, sony, and ms are taking huge gambles. nintendo with it's ceap game, small & ceap  system, ms with it's expensive game expensive & big system, and sony with the most expensive & biggest system so it be very hard to tell what will happen. It all depens how people will put up with paying more for the same thing intell they boy~cot it like they going to do with gasoline.

[Spak-Spang]

TVman:  3rd parties will put up with increased fees IF they are making games for the number one system.  You said Xbox would just get the exclusives...I am not quite sure Microsoft won't pull the same stunt and increase fees for their system.  They are going to have to make money back from their hardware loses as well...and If MS gets a sold lead to where they feel they are a strong second, or even first place licensing fees will go up quicker than you can say: "I should have bought NIntendo."  

Nintendo however, is in a different boat.  If they make a profit on their games, hardware, and aggressively price fees they will do great.  As well Nintendo can use the download service fees with 3rd parties to also help make money with the revolution.  

It all helps Nintendo be at a better position at the end of the day than MS or Sony.

[Spak-Spang]

stevey:  If you actually think that buy alling does anything to lower price of goods then your dreaming.  Supply and Demand is what dictates prices.  Businesses RARELY just increase the price for no reason...specially when another company can come in and undercut them and grab a piece of the pie.

buy alling works if you get a large enough group together that you actually effect the demand of the product.  How often does that happen?

Now look at the gasoline.  I am sure there are several nationwide buy alls but do you see the price changing.  No because Supply hasn't increased and demand is still high.

If the government would actually allow us to build new refinerys around the country and possible drill for oil in new location in the US then we would have a supply that will increase to meet the demands and prices will drop down again.

[Flames_of_chaos]

Spak another reason why gas prices are rising is because the American dollar is also weakening thanks to the bad state of the economy.

[Epitaph]

Now unless I remember this incorrectly I recall hearing that sony was going to do something similar as to what they are dooing with the psp as they will not do price drops on there consols keeping it at a constant price to make up the cost. Now if this is true then I have a fealing sony will have a very hard pushing the ps3.  

[nickmitch]

Hey, politics are taboo in these forums. Besides, it doesn't matter where we drill for oil because there will always be people complaining about it.

Anyhoo, if both Sony and MS put out games at $60 then MS will gain market share. If it's just Sony then MS will gain more and if it's just MS then who knows.

[Spak-Spang]

TVman:  Sorry about the politics.  

Yeah, I fully expect to see game prices rise...because before the age of CD gaming America didn't blink at $60.00 game...as long as it was an epic.  The old carts were expensive and we understood that.  Sony gained marketshare because the Playstation provided cheaper games...but I think the industry is ready for a price increase and they have been waiting for a new hardware generation to impliment it...because it is easier to sign people onboard to the new techology reason, and not the neccessity of development costs.

Here is where Nintendo comes in.   If there system is less powerful but still manages a way to keep game prices $10.00 cheaper or more....I see that having a huge effect on the marketplace and help position Nintendo into gaining a large chunk of marketshare.  

I know people think I am crazy and figure Nintendo would also follow suit with the price increase, and they could...but I have a gut feeling Nintendo is trying to avoid that and in fact possibly make games even cheaper.

I believe this because of many reports Nintendo is trying to take gaming in a different direction and create smaller games along side the epic games.  

[Ymeegod]

$400 isn't to much IMO for the inital year anyhow.   Budget graphics card are $200 nowadays which used to be the price of a top-of-a-line card.  

And two, it's not the price of the PSP that's hurting sony--it's the software.  Just look at the last three months and what the released--utter crap.  Vrs the DS which is getting two-three titles per month that are decent.  Kinda a total flop side of the console wars.

[Spak-Spang]

Ymeegod:  I think the price is definately a factor for the PSP.  People bought the DS even when the games were few and far between.  The PSP wasn't bought when their weren't alot of games.  People were willing to buy a cheaper DS for the potential of games to come, but they weren't willing to invest more money for PSP who arguably had more potential for the future.

Also, when you start to talk about computer games you start getting into a completely different market than console gamers.  Computer gamers are truly niche games...but the fans are devoted.  They love to tech out their computers and are willing to pay that much money.

Casual gamers aren't techies.  Console gamers do not have to be techies.

$400.00 dollars for a video game system is alot.  It completely knocks it away from the casual gamer, or the impulse buyer.  You have to be wanting to buy a PS3 to spend that money.  $400 becomes an investment not just a game system.

[ABlueflameA]

I agree with Spak-Spang, $400 dollars is still a lot of money, especially as computer prices keep getting lower and lower.  One could probably even buy a budget computer with monitor for around that price.  Casual gamers, with possible exeption to the few rich ones, IMO aren't going to drop that much cash for something they won't put a lot of time into.  Also, as Microsoft and Sony are attempting to put all kinds of extra features into their systems, the added complexity will turn a lot of people away.  The simplicity (hopefully?) of the Revolution should draw crowds of people who are either:
1.) On restricted/real-world budgets
2.) Scared away from the complexity of the other systems.

In addition, b/c you can play NES, SNES and N64 games on Revolution, games which, for the most part, are much more simple (and cheaper), will only serve to reinforce those 2 points.

I see the Xbox 360, (assuming that PS3 retails for 400 and Xbox 360 for 300) being sort of the middle-man in the  next iteration of the console wars.  With probably? inbetween graphical quality and inbetween price of Revolution and PS3.  The fact that Revolution launches so much later than the 360 could even negate the graphical difference between the two.

In my opinion, there are just too many things to go wrong with the PS3 and the Xbox 360 due to all of the crap that their respective companies are/are going to cram in their respective consoles.  I'll take a simple system that plays games and dvds with a revolutionary controller, thank you very much.  

[Spak-Spang]

Blue:  Those are my setiments exactly.

I sold all my old Nintendo games for budgeting reasons...most people do.  And to have one single system that I can go back and collect all my favorite games cheaply is the greatest thing in gaming history to happen to me.  As I stated I will probably spend more money on collecting the classics than new games.  (And I will be buying the new stuff too.)

Nintendo is creating the first system you will hold on to until it breaks, and potentially by another because it is too valuable for gaming to not have a Revolution.