PS3 Price Cut Still a Possibility?

[JMcEntegart]

Yesterday Sony made waves with the announcement that the company was lowering the price of the PS2 to just $99.99. While this was better than nothing, the consumer was a little disappointed that rumors about a drop for the PS3 didn’t come to fruition.

PS3 Price Cut Still a Possibility? : Read more

 

[lamorpa]

How about $100. PS2 -> PS3. $99 -> $100

 

[tenor77]

I think we'll see something at E3. Probably $50.
$299 is the sweet spot for the bottom rung PS3 right now IMO

 

[Zoonie]

I read an article months ago saying Sony stopped losing money on each console. Partially because of their move to the smaller die size. Is this not correct?

 

[ImmortalJman]

Hard to say. Even if the price were to drop there also has to be a reason for the people who already bought a 360. For them, all of the games are already on the 360; the better online community is there; and the only exclusive PS3 game worth playing is Metal Gear Solid 4. The only true value that it has the moment is the Blu-ray feature which use to be the cheapest solution and best solution but now is outdone by Sony's newer players that are selling for 274.99 and are almost as fast as the PS3 at loading movies. For instance, I have my PS3 that I use for Folding@home 24/7 unless I watch a Blu-ray and even then I prefer to watch my Blu-rays on a stand alone unit which produces true 1080p as opposed to the internally rendered 720p image which is then upscaled by the PS3 for output. Hmmmm.... what to do? Sony had a hit with the PS2 before the XBOX came in, but since have really fallen behind of their developments.

 

[LATTEH]

if the PS3 was 200 dollars i would save up and buy it other wise i would rather put it in my computer

 

[bin1127]

i don't understand why $99 is necessary? $299 isn't that expensive. It's a gaming system to last for years and years. You aren't going to the wal-mart to buy underwear you wear once or twice. This is a blu-ray player to boot; $299 is a very fair price.

As consumers you want the lowest price possible, but with Sony still losing money, there's not much else to ask for pricewise.

 

[Zenthar]

IMO the PS3 is better value than XBox 360. It cost more, but if you buy the XBox Wireless adapter, it end-up costing the same, but you still have no HD movie player. If you don't want/need wireless connection and HD movie player, than the XBox is great, but otherwise ...

Then there is the game lineup which can make quite a difference. That is why the PS1/2 lasted that long, not because the systems themselves were THAT good.

 

[megamanx00]

As far as I'm concerned one of the main things the PS3 had going for it at launch was it's PS2 compatibility since that allowed it access to a large library of games people wanted to play. Now that feature has been eliminated, and even if it wasn't PS2 games are so old that it wouldn't be considered much of a selling point, and I'm sure that to people who want to play them a $99 PS2 looks better than a $399 PS3 that also plays Blu Ray videos they don't have. Sorry but the PS3 just doesn't have a large library of games, especially of games that are exclusive, that make it a compelling option. I really think that even if they lowered the price to $299 it's too late for Sony to do better than 3rd place. I think at that price it's a good option if you're looking for a blu ray player, especially if you don't already have a 360, but otherwise it just doesn't have the games that are going to make large numbers of players buy it.

 

[danimal_the_animal]

I don't care

i own the PS3, 360, AND the Wii

i have always made it a habbit of getting all the current systems so that I can play any game i wish.....it's more fun that way!

 

[philosofool]

The sweet spot for the PS3 is being price comparable to the XBox 360. Sony can dream about all the value it adds with blu ray, but this is a symptom of Sony being much more excited about its product than consumers (who would like a format that offers some selection to go with the price tag.)

I think Sony's big issue is that it undercuts the Blu Ray market with PS3s at $300. This means that all the companies that have paid outrageous licensing fees to Sony in order to manufacture Blu Ray machines are now getting direct competition from a product that offers a lot more. Sony can't simultaneously expect people to pay $300 for a blu ray player and a allow people to have $300 PS3s.

Sony is a dumb company that's very bad about getting its products the market share they need to be viable.

 

[Spanky Deluxe]

The PS3 is kind of a tough buy right now. If its hd console gaming that you're after then you're better off with a 360, if you want Blu-ray capability then you can get Blu-ray players for under £150 now.

When I bought my PS3 about a year and a half ago, it was a great deal. Mind you, I was buying it as a Blu-ray player first and foremost. Even before I sold the games that came with it on eBay, it was still cheaper than any other Blu-ray player on the market. I don't know what the latest crop of standalone Blu-ray players is like but back then it was the best player on the market. Even now, I think its probably the best player you can buy for a reasonable price.

 

[Hatecrime69]

lowering the price on the ps3..now there's an april fool's joke if i ever heard of one!

 

[alberto_lc]

If the PS3 was around 249 or max 299 it would be a great buy. You get a BR player and great games. Someone mentioned that the BR 1080p is a 720p upscale is this true?

 

[Guest]

Sometimes Sony does not make sense, if they kept the BC in any model of the ps3 it would be well worth it's 399 price tag. How do they introduce a system with BC and then take it away when that was a key selling factor. Only reason I got a xbox360 was because it had BC. At 299 purchasing a ps3 with no BC would be easier to justify.

 

[waikano]

$299.00 and I would really start to get sweaty palms and start pumping Peanut Butter!!

@danimal_the_animal not everyone has endless amounts of money. And no one really likes a bragger.

 

[theuerkorn]

Lower is always better for the customer, while higher is always better for the vendor. Both needs must meet at a defensible price point or the future of the device is jeopardized. In the long run, it doesn't make sense for Sony to sell as many units as possible if they're loosing money doing so. (Obviously not a sustainable business model, and you're just increasing losses with every sale.)

PS3 vs. XBox360 is really not the contest here. Technically speaking the PS3 is superior, but people have their preferences aside from that. (price, games, network ...)

 

[hallic7]

PS3 at $299 and more exclusive games and we could see a difference.

I think the ps3 is a great console, I have the old 20 gb model and the quality of the BR movies is awesome (I use a Full HD TV 1080p), but with the lack of exclusive games it was really a letdown.

PS3 can't depend on Metal Gear Solid 4 for ever... this has been happening and well, take that Sony, last place in sales!

 

[tester3000]

I wouldn't buy a ps3 no matter how cheap it was... PC all the way!! Plus i just watch HD movies off my HTPC.

 

[sonicmachinehead]

$299 is just fine, I'm tired of all the damn poor people complaining about it, the PS3 isn't some kiddy console, thats called a Wii, PS3 does so much more, and it is superior to the Xbox 360, and I don't have to buy addons for wifi and Xbox live service...