Sony Says the PSP2 Won't Be Unaffordable

[mpavao81]

and it better be more durable than the PSP

 

[stingstang]

[citation][nom]neo_aeon666[/nom]I would go up to 349.99$PsPs are usually not that bad to buy when they come out. I still have a 1000 Model and it is still very comparable to 3000... But I will wait for the 3ds light or 3ds i XL light Micro before jumping on the 3DS boat. People are talking about very bad battery life in 3D mode and much lower frame-rate.And I learned my lesson with the first DS model. God when DS Light came out I was pissed it was so much better and you could actually see stuff thx to brighter screens and even better battery life lol... Felt ripped off.My advice wait 6 months for a 3ds light with better everything to come out. And buy PSP whenever you see fit because it probably will stay good till the end.[/citation]
The reason your first gen is similar to the 3rd gen is because it's the same hardware inside.
My concern is the speed of that processor. Is it going to be the same speed of the psp, but 4 times? Or will be be 4x1GHz? If it was that, then it those specs would last another good 6-8 years with just random peripheral hardware upgrades. Seriously, the 300 MHz proc lasted far longer than I thought it would.

 

[elysiumsoul]

somewhere between 299 and 349

 

[mayankleoboy1]

just spending that much money on a 2x gtx 570

 

[theshonen8899]

Why not just say "Will be affordable,"? Not getting the double negatives.

 

[Guest]

well the ps3 is $300. so if its gonna be the the same price as its cousin, it seems like too much

 

[rohitbaran]

Make it $300. Not a penny more.

 

[belardo]

Considering what people are spending just to go to the superbowel... is $350 too much?

The PSP2 has 4 times the resolution for a slightly bigger screen that is packed to the gills with communications hardware. Its seems to be typical SONY engineered for long-term market... look at todays PSP-3000 models. I don't think $300~350 is unreasonable, but it'll effect sales never the less. While Nintendo continues to sell a complete product line of DS models at $120, $150, $180 and soon $250 that all run the same software. Sony doesn't have the library or product spectrum of Nintendo.

It's best that it doesn't cost more than $300, but theres way too much hardware in there to meet that price point.

Also, we'll continue to view the PSP as more of an ADULT portable console compared to the DS. Its still has far higher res than the DS and even the DS3D. Its construction design is aimed at adults.

Yes, I would want a PSP2 or even a PSP... someday. My kid loved the DSi. Today, the PSP is $150 and goes against the DS Lite & DSi models.

 

[belardo]

[citation][nom]alidan[/nom]actually oleds are EXTREMELY cheap. i believe once you have the whole manufacturing process set up, the screens cost next to nothing to produce.the reason they arent cheap yet, is price gouging, to put it simply. they have an a screen that can be thinner than a piece of paper, uses relitivly little power, and is "new".~~~ i have giant hands, i prefer the original xbox controller to the smaller one, i like the original ds too. sadly when i got one all they have is the dslite, to put it in prespective, when i hold the dslite with one hand, you almost cant see the thing at all[/citation]

A) AMOLED technology is also a bit expensive as they are recouping their R&D. 5 Years ago, a BluRay player was $600~1000, now you can buy them for $75 at WalMart. AMOLED screen are amazing, they are head to head with Apple (High Dot pitch vs. High contrast & color) - so when Samsung get around to making higher res versions... oh wow, that's going to be hot. I have a Samsung GalaxyS series and the screen is top notch.
The Screen Res:
PSP1 = 480 x 272
PSP2 = 960 x 544
DS = 256 x 192 (Not even close to the quality of a PSP screen, but you get two! LOL )
DS3D = 800 x 240 (400x240 per eye)

I'm not viewing one as better than the other, they are marketed for different people.

B) Why do you have a DSLite for? That sucker is tiny, but perfect for girls and kids. My kid has the DSi... we played with the DSxl for a bit, but it was WAY to big for his hands. The DSi is strangely lighter than the DSlite - yet has bigger screens and has two cameras.

 

[belardo]

[citation][nom]dirgle[/nom][citation] When the PS3 first came out the build cost was estimated at $841 for the 60GB unit. But Sony was only going to charge the consumer $599. Sony seemed a little confused when people couldn't see the incredible value this was.[/citation]

And somehow the PS3 is a failure? While its in 3rd place, there are 45million PS3s on the market, 5 million behind the 360. Does that mean 4 years ago, when there were under 20 million units for each of them - that they were failures? NO.

The PS3, like the 360 were originally sold at a loss. The PS3 hit the market 1 year after the 360 and MS had already done a price drop to $400 for the 20GB model. Meanwhile, the 360 was rushed to market in order to capture market share... which is good and bad.
GOOD: it gave MS a 7 Million unit head start. A whole 12 month Christmas season.
BAD: Low quality parts, design defects in the board and cooling system that took YEARS to show up and to fix. How many "suckers" have replaced their 360's 3~6 times?

So during this time, the 360 came and went with HD-DVD - which is an ugly add-on. The built in DVD drive is NOISY. Currently, there are 5 or so Cooling system add-ons for the old 360. These were needed more in the old days.

Value, the PS3 always had more value over the 360. What MS countered with is the $300 HD-LESS 360, which in the real world.. how many PEOPLE actually use such a configuration before pulling out their hair and dropping $80~130 for the HD upgrade?

So... lets go back to NOV 2006.

PS3-20GB = $500. It was the cheapest bluray player on the market. It was a double-sided attack to defeat HD-DVD (success), create a new format (success), make piracy difficult (success) and provide a quiet and large medium to store games. It takes at least 6 double-layered DVDs to equal a single DL BlueRay disc. How many 360 games had to be reduced or spread across many discs? Unlike the 360, the PS3 is a home entertainment system, which MS has just recently claimed (yet 5 years ago, MS said 360 was pure gaming). Where is the bluRay for the 360? For $500, the user got a complete system, no silly power brick, wireless, user upgradeable HD to at least 500GB, backup system, wireless controllers etc.

360-20GB = $400. For a pure gaming system, it WAS cheaper... the controllers were wired back then, and if you needed wireless networking, you lose a USB port and $100. If you wanted HD-DVD, that was another $200. If you wanted the 60GB upgrade, that was $120. Total price: $820+ And if you add your $60 a year Gold membership x 5 years ($300) = $1120+ About double over the cost of a PS3.

And when you got your RROD... well, thats time and energy spent getting your unit replaced.
HD-DVD is dead. But theres more to that in the background. You see, HD-DVD's GUI control was developed by (drum roll)... Microsoft. So a reason MS doesn't want BluRay on their consoles today is because (A) they would be paying SONY $$$ for it, (B) SONY software would be required to be installed (C) it would add $100 to the price of a Xbox360.

As of today, the bottom end PS3 is $300, includes a bluRay player. It has a 160GB HD - but hey.. $350 model PS3 has a 320GB unit or buy your own 500GB drive for $60 and put it in yourself. The price of putting in a 500GB HD into a 360 is... oh wait, can't do that... nevermind. But they'll sell you the 250GB drive for $130 for those poor people who bought the HD-less 360-Slim.

There is a market for all 3 consoles. Teens will mostly gravitate to the 360 more than the adults.

 

[TheDuke]

it'll probably be out of my price range
will most likely wait for the first revision

 

[Yuka]

@Belardo

That's a nice comparison/scope, but don't forget the problems the PS3 had at the very beginning (hot, remember?). Not gonna go deep into that, but just for notice.

Anyway, the NGP is going to be a Portable PS3; or so they say it will be... Why would I want a PS3 on the go then I already have one? I've been asking myself that since they said it would be easy to port PS3 games to it, so... I'd have to pay for 2 games to play 1? Will they at least, share saves? Off course there'll be exclusives to both, at least, I think so, but oh well...

I'd say it will be more expensive than a "good" netbook with half it's utility.

Cheers!

 

[jfem]

400 should be the limit.

 

[todicamer]

Then buy the original PSP, more affordable and it plays media and emulators
[citation][nom]XD_dued[/nom]I think 350 wouldn't be unreasonable. I was thinking of getting an android tablet, but this looks like a good alternative. Could use it for a media player and for playing emulators.[/citation]

 

[belardo]

[citation][nom]Yuka[/nom]@BelardoThat's a nice comparison/scope, but don't forget the problems the PS3 had at the very beginning (hot, remember?). [/citation]

Any piece of hardware can overheat. For the most part, what caused PS3 heating issues were that people would put them in cabinets that had no air flow... in which a 360 in the same place would have melted. Both consoles appear to work better standing up. Keep in mind, the PS3 has its PSU on the inside... so to a degree, the PS3 is smaller for transport and has a better cooling management.

Who knows about the PSP2/NGP ...whatever. Since its only 960 x 544, they aren't trying to get 1280x720 or higher out of it... So I'm guessing its more of half a PS3. Personally, I have a Galaxy phone, I play a few basic games on it from time to time. I'm usually to busy to actually sit and play on a portable system, a real console or desktop computer is more usable. NOW, if I lived in a city in which I am riding the subway a everyday (I do ride from time to time), then the PSP2 would be more usable... to make use of 1-2hours of my daily life.

 

[wild9]

“Hopefully when we announce the price, people will see the proper value.”

I'll hope the software won't be extortionate..and price-fixed.

 

[ananke]

Most likely I will not buy it, neither for me, nor for my children. It came too late, tablets are coming...If it is $150 or less, I may consider it, but still it is worthless investment. Games on a touch screen tablet are easier for children to play and they prefer that way. If you are adult - PSP is an extra expense, no time for it, and no unique features, let alone it costs separate collection of expensive games...just it doesn't make financial sense . I have PSP 2000, and that will be my last SONY product, I guess. I learned to hate their proprietorial approach

 

[BinaryCode]

I absolutely have to have it.Anything Sony is good in my book, although I wouldn't pay more than $350 for it and even then that's cutting it a bit to close.

Also what a ridiculous statement "The Psp2 won't be unaffordable" I mean what kind of company says that?Seems like a really stupid thing to say especially at a time when everyone is only just beginning to see the exact details regarding the system.

Again "The Psp2 won't be unaffordable" WTF!???

 

[everygamer]

$300 max, I don't believe any portable gaming device should exceed the cost of a full console. This has to do with the fact that the range of games that are available for portable devices are generally less than consoles so in the end you buy it to play games.

 

[cookoy]

$300 - $350. if it can double as a smartphone, maybe a little more.