Support NeoGAF

[WrathOfOtaibah]

PS3 for $500? Hardly. Its said that its $494 to make the machine.

X360 - $299
PS3 - $349 or $399
Rev - $199 or $249

 

[Flo_Evans]

Sony will not sell the PS3 for much more than MS is selling the 360 for. At least not here. They know this is MS strongest territory and also the largest market. My guess is that it will be the same or $50 more.

>$100 more than 360 = DOOM in the USA*

*IMHO

 

[golem]

looks like sony is really intent on increasing the pricepoints for consoles.. first psp now this.

 

[DCX]

Ps3 200 dollars more expensive than 360? That would be like Sony handing MS #1 console position on a silver platter.

Yeah but what isn't told is what the PS3 will come with...since Blu-Ray is Sony's baby, no doubt we'll get Spider-Man 1, 2 or both on Blu-Ray, 128 MB Memory Stick and maybe a game demo or even a game itself for 499. It will be around what you'll get 360 for if you bought the wi-fi thing, a game and a DVD or so..

DCX

 

[fse]

The games look better it seems than X360. I wouldn't mind paying more for better visuals.

 

[jetjevons]

I'm expecting $350 to $400 for PS3.

 

[Pimpwerx]

I have always been saying... 360=299.99 PS3=499.99 Rev=249.99 maybe 199


DCX

It's your opinion, but that's just a dumb guess. The PS2 (and I believe PS1 as well) cost close to $400 in Japan at launch with the exchange rate. It launched for $300 here. I can see maybe $350 b/c of the shit they're pulling with the PSP. But $500 is like not learning from the 3DO and Saturn. It will be DOA at that price. Hell, it might be DOA at $350 too IMO. As an OG, I'm used to paying no more than $300 for a system at launch. I will not pay more on principle. Now, Sony has been aggressive in the past, and I see no reason why they won't come in at a $300 price and basically stamp their foot down from Day 1. It could just stay there for a year and a half or however long the PS2 stayed at that ridiculous price. The key is to start the machine. They have the momentum, it won't take much more than a solid $300 pricetag to get the gears spinning, and then they can ride that momentum for as long as they want. But if they go with $350+ and MS manages to give them a battle, that machine may never get rolling, and it could end up biting them in the ass. I look at the PSP and think of what could have been. But right now, I don't know if it'll ever amount to much b/c of that stupid price. PEACE.

 

[Die Squirrel Die]

Someone's going to have to break the $300 barrier eventually. Inflation says so. It just depends on how much they do it by. I honestly don't think a $400 launch price would sit well with people, but if they can keep the perception (or reality? who knows it's a big argument) of the PS3 being technilogically superior to Xbox360 then they possibly get to $350 without hurting their sales too much, or giving too much away to MS.

I do think if anyone's to do it, it would be Sony. They have the market lead, they have the brandname. Afterall, despite plenty of better value alternatives iPod rules the MP3 player market.

As for game pricing, that's a trickier one. Unlike console prices, which steadily decrease over the generations course, game prices, that upper ceiling of it's absolute highest RRP, stays pretty solid. However I think there is a bit of a hypocrisy here amongst gamers, who demand bigger, deeper, more lavish games, but at increasingly cheap prices. They complain that high development cost lead to less innovation and more reliance on licenses, sequels and proven formulas, yet balk at the suggestion that they may have to pay more for next-gen games.

 

[Version 3.0]

As for game pricing, that's a trickier one. Unlike console prices, which steadily decrease over the generations course, game prices, that upper ceiling of it's absolute highest RRP, stays pretty solid. However I think there is a bit of a hypocrisy here amongst gamers, who demand bigger, deeper, more lavish games, but at increasingly cheap prices. They complain that high development cost lead to less innovation and more reliance on licenses, sequels and proven formulas, yet balk at the suggestion that they may have to pay more for next-gen games.

I'm not opposed to game prices going (back) up when it's time. But it's not time. How can you tell? By looking at who's itching to raise them. EA. Activision. Sony.

Not the small guys who are scraping by--the big guys who rake in the money.

http://www.gameswelike.com/web/rant3.htm

 

[Die Squirrel Die]

I'm not opposed to game prices going (back) up when it's time. But it's not time. How can you tell? By looking at who's itching to raise them. EA. Activision. Sony.

Not the small guys who are scraping by--the big guys who rake in the money.

http://www.gameswelike.com/web/rant3.htm

I understand what the writer of the article saying, but I think they're missing out a crucial point. It's because they are the big, rich publisher that they can be the ones to say that the prices should rise. Even if Sega or Capcom or even smaller publishers were thinking that they want to raise prices, they aren't in a position to be the ones sticking their necks out. They've got to be sure that the market will accept a higher price. They also seem a little too hung up on the cheapness of disc media.

Of course it could all come back to bite them on the arse, and they could raise prices, send more people into bargain bin/2nd hand/ebay games buying, or worse increase the demand for piracy.

 

[Mr Nash]

With all this talk about gaming getting more expensive, all I can say is just don't buy the stuff if you don't like the price. I completely disagree with consoles over $300, and I think this talk of games getting more expensive is taking the industry 100% in the wrong direction (as far as I'm concerned, games should be sold even cheaper, where profits can be made by selling on volume). Everyone just has to get the word out. Tell people not to buy games or systems at inflated prices. If the units aren't moving, the publishers will lower the price. There's a reason places like Cheap Ass Gamer are popular: most people don't like spending huge amounts of money on games. Now, if only publishers would clue in to this...