bit-gamer.net

Sony dismisses price cut demands

Sony dismisses price cut demands

Sony's CEO Sir Howard Stringer has responded to demands for a PS3 price cut simply and bluntly. He says no.

Sony's CEO Sir Howard Stringer has directly responded to threats from Activision boss Bobby Kotick that the publisher, which is currently the largest in the world, would cease to support Sony platforms unless there was a price cut.

Simply put, Stringer accuses Kotick of making meaningless noise in an attempt to put pressure on Sony, which Stringer says is just part of the business and not something that gamers should really take too seriously. From what Stringer says, it seems there's no current plans for a PlayStation 3 price cut after all.

Last month Activision's Bobby Kotick said that he would abandon the PlayStation 3 and PSP platforms unless Sony cut the price of the consoles and were able to attain a larger market share. Kotick claimed that developing for Sony platforms was very expensive compared to other consoles and indicated that if Sony didn't do something by 2010 then Activision would simply stop developing for the platform - meaning no Guitar Hero, Tony Hawk or Call of Duty games on the PS3 to say the least.

"He likes to make a lot of noise," Stringer said to Reuters when asked about the comments. "He's putting pressure on me and I'm putting pressure on him. That's the nature of business."

Asked if there were any plans for a PlayStation 3 price cut in the future, Stringer said that the idea didn't make any sense and that lowering the price would put Sony into greater loss.

"I (would) lose money on every PlayStation I make -- how's that for logic," he asked.

What's your opinion on Sony and the cost of the PlayStation 3? Let us know your thoughts in the forums.

56 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
docodine 8th July 2009, 13:16 Quote
...Because apparently Sony thinks that people like to pay full price for hardware that was released in 2006.

:-/

Sony didn't take this long to drop the price of the PS2, did it?
PT88 8th July 2009, 13:18 Quote
It may be the most powerful of the consoles, but unless sony hack the price down to 100-150 quid then sales are neva going to pick up....
kosch 8th July 2009, 13:27 Quote
I just use my PS3 to playback blu-rays and stream media from my windows box doesnt get used for anything else, although on the odd occassion have to break out the XBMC to playback some files it doesnt like.
Gunsmith 8th July 2009, 13:31 Quote
great hardware in need of some steller titles, tbh couldnt care less about the price, puts it out of reach of the dole dossing chavs which makes online a bit more of a tollerable experiance.
mjm25 8th July 2009, 13:36 Quote
there is only a handful of games that tempt me, imfamous being at the top of the list really. the PC doesn't seem to be catered for so much with that sort of game (please no one say Prototype) however i do get to use one 4 or 5 times a year when i visit my mate in London... they love it in their house but it really doesn't grab me at all.

Also i was appalled by the quality of the graphics on Rainbow 6 Vegas 2 and the shocking amount of slowdown on Splinter Cell Chaos Theory which made the game unplayable for me.
lewchenko 8th July 2009, 13:54 Quote
Sony would do better to pump more money into development studios to create exclusives for the PS3. So far... the console does not have many 'killer' games for it to warrant choosing it over the cheaper Xbox 360.

And we all know that cross platform games are probably the same (if not better.. ahem GhostBusters) on the 360.

Bluray is a nice exclusive to be honest... but even that is not holding much sway now. My mate recently bought a standalone Bluray player instead of a PS3 because the difference in price was substantial enough to notice now, and he already had a 360. Plus we all know Bluray movies are simply overpriced than their DVD counterparts. (I still buy DVD's now despite owning a PS3)

I also think the Xbox Live / Arcade games are a cut above (in volume and diversity) the PSN PS3 titles out there too. Sony HOME 2nd life clone was a complete and utter waste of time in my opinion too.

The big battle for number 2 console crown is going to come from the unique motion control games that land on each platform. PS3's motion control is very different from the 360's Natal... and which ever is best may result in a huge boost in sales for the final leg of this generation's sale numbers.

(Note that the wii will remain on top in terms of sales, but will pale into insignificance in terms of gaming... its hardware is simply running out of steam, its online network/gameplay/sales channel is a joke and 1:1 motion seems to make bugger all difference to games... but Mario 4 / Zelda 8 / Wii Fit 3 will still rack up the sales. Yawn)
freedom810 8th July 2009, 14:11 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by docodine
...Because apparently Sony thinks that people like to pay full price for hardware that was released in 2006.

:-/

Sony didn't take this long to drop the price of the PS2, did it?

The PS3 has already had two price cuts.
Skiddywinks 8th July 2009, 14:24 Quote
To be honest, there could still well be a price cut. If you had one planned for (say, Christmas) would you really announce it this early? People would just hold off buying the things, and Sony would lose a lot of money.

It would also explain why he doesn't seem to care or take the threats seriously.

I hope for their sake I am right. A price cut at Christmas could make a world of difference.
Psy-UK 8th July 2009, 14:59 Quote
Quote:
"I (would) lose money on every PlayStation I make -- how's that for logic," he asked.

I'm pretty sure that's been happening since it came out.
Mcmonopoly 8th July 2009, 15:12 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by freedom810
Quote:
Originally Posted by docodine
...Because apparently Sony thinks that people like to pay full price for hardware that was released in 2006.

:-/

Sony didn't take this long to drop the price of the PS2, did it?

The PS3 has already had two Component cuts.

Or do you mean when it went from 700$, to 600$ then down to 500$ when it should've cost 399$ max at launch.. Riiiiiiight...
Bursar 8th July 2009, 15:14 Quote
Quote:
Activision would simply stop developing for the platform - meaning no Guitar Hero
Fingers crossed it would slow down the proliferation of GH titles in general! That poor old cow has no more milk left!
Lepermessiah 8th July 2009, 15:23 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by PT88
It may be the most powerful of the consoles, but unless sony hack the price down to 100-150 quid then sales are neva going to pick up....

That's the rub, it is NOT the most powerful, it has newer tech, that is more expensive (And terrible to code for nor really meant as gaming tech), unfortunately that does not make it more powerful when it comes to gaming. It is more reliable, and you do get more for the money, ill give them that, but the average red neck doesn't care or know about that, lol.
Lepermessiah 8th July 2009, 15:25 Quote
I disagree on the exclusives, the PS3 has a great lineup that rivals and you could say even beast the 360 now when it comes to exclusives:

Killzone 2
MGS4
Gran Turismo
Resistance
God of War III is gonna own
Infamous
Little Big Planet

That's just a few, the 360 has some good ones to, but to say the 360 has better games is no longer true, depends on the types of game you prefer, the biggest issue with Sony is perception, cost.
Mcmonopoly 8th July 2009, 15:37 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lepermessiah
I disagree on the exclusives, the PS3 has a great lineup that rivals and you could say even beast the 360 now when it comes to exclusives:

Killzone 2- Good game Short SP, MP Is OK for console I guess.
MGS4- Not as strong as past games, but a solid one none the less.
Gran Turismo- You mean the 40$ Prologue thing? Seriously to take with a tube of KY
Resistance -meh, not bad but a bit generic.
God of War III is gonna own- Not out, so moot point
Infamous-Ok game but not a flagship game.
Little Big Planet- Really nice game concept and all, but catered to casual players, which IMHO PS3 as the least of.

That's just a few, the 360 has some good ones to, but to say the 360 has better games is no longer true, depends on the types of game you prefer, the biggest issue with Sony is perception, cost.

Here, so your "exclusive" games list is quite thin in girt compared to the 360, but mind that I don't own a PS3 nor 360, but If I had the choice between the 2, i'd go Xbox for price and user base for online play.
Lepermessiah 8th July 2009, 15:38 Quote
thin? No, it isn't, the 360's list is also quite thin, exclusives are not too common now adays, plus, those are just the ones I listed, i missed a lot.
Mcmonopoly 8th July 2009, 15:44 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lepermessiah
thin? No, it isn't, the 360's list is also quite thin, exclusives are not too common now adays, plus, those are just the ones I listed, i missed a lot.

I'm not looking at "exclusive" games only, look at the catalog as a whole, and you see that the 360 as more appealing games (to me, at least) than the PS3, and part of that is due to the fact that the PS3 came out a year late compared to the 360...

The only games that were missing were the FF games that Sony had exclusivity on them, but now well see how this pans out.
SMIFFYDUDE 8th July 2009, 15:49 Quote
Keep those prices high SONY, if you would.

I would like all publishers to abandon support for all consoles. And then for f*ckwits (sorry, "casual gamers") to abandon gaming all together. Then maybe i'll be able to play a truly decent and original new game for the first time in ages.
devdevil85 8th July 2009, 15:53 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mcmonopoly
I'm not looking at "exclusive" games only, look at the catalog as a whole, and you see that the 360 as more appealing games (to me, at least) than the PS3, and part of that is due to the fact that the PS3 came out a year late compared to the 360...

The only games that were missing were the FF games that Sony had exclusivity on them, but now well see how this pans out.
PS3's exclusives include pretty much every genre. On top of that its exclusives, as a whole, rank higher on Metacritic than 360's. Lastly, if you want to get a good comparison for what exclusives are out for each console just go to wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_3_games
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Xbox_360_games

360's is much thinner. Also, how many of those 360 "exclusives" are going to turn up on PS3 after their timed exclusivity runs out?
Lepermessiah 8th July 2009, 16:03 Quote
The 360 has a WEAK lineup this year, the PS3 has some biggies coming, the exclusive argument really is not one anymore, eprception, dumb americans (LOL), and prioce are Sony's only issues now. It comes down to what games you prefer, but Sony has Just as many top AAA exclusives if not more now.
Lepermessiah 8th July 2009, 16:05 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mcmonopoly
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lepermessiah
thin? No, it isn't, the 360's list is also quite thin, exclusives are not too common now adays, plus, those are just the ones I listed, i missed a lot.

I'm not looking at "exclusive" games only, look at the catalog as a whole, and you see that the 360 as more appealing games (to me, at least) than the PS3, and part of that is due to the fact that the PS3 came out a year late compared to the 360...

The only games that were missing were the FF games that Sony had exclusivity on them, but now well see how this pans out.
"TO ME". Case in point, to you maybe, but Sony has a big library, and its exclusives are every bit as good, if it ain't exclusive its on the PS3, so how is that even relevant. I am actually amazed people keep buying 360's with its hardware issues, and all that comes with Sony's box TBH, but hey, Americans are Americans.
themax 8th July 2009, 16:10 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mcmonopoly
Or do you mean when it went from 700$, to 600$ then down to 500$ when it should've cost 399$ max at launch.. Riiiiiiight...

Nobody complained when the Xbox 360 was $500 at launch and had a $400 basic model requiring nearly $200 in accessories to equal what the Premium came with out of the box.

I'm assuming your launch prices were canada's. Because the 60GB model I paid for at launch was $600. Current pricing for 40GB and 80GB as far as I know is $399-$499. I don't know why any of you would expect an announced price reduction if they planned on one. That would be shooting themselves in the foot because nobody would buy through the current inventory until the price dropped.

And I'm still suprised that 2 1/2 years later, people still throw out the fanboyish "it has no games" remark. The PS3's catalogue includes nearly every multiplatform game released since it launched (it's a given the Xbox 360 enjoyed a full year worth of released exclusively since there was no other console to compete so it's library is bigger) including it's own growing exclusive library which isn't dwarfed by the 360's exclusive catalogue at all. You're going to need a new straw to grab at. Price point is the only real arguement here and I agree it is still too expensive and needs a reduction soon.
Mcmonopoly 8th July 2009, 16:26 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by themax
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mcmonopoly
Or do you mean when it went from 700$, to 600$ then down to 500$ when it should've cost 399$ max at launch.. Riiiiiiight...

Nobody complained when the Xbox 360 was $500 at launch and had a $400 basic model requiring nearly $200 in accessories to equal what the Premium came with out of the box.

I'm assuming your launch prices were canada's. Because the 60GB model I paid for at launch was $600. Current pricing for 40GB and 80GB as far as I know is $399-$499. I don't know why any of you would expect an announced price reduction if they planned on one. That would be shooting themselves in the foot because nobody would buy through the current inventory until the price dropped.

And I'm still suprised that 2 1/2 years later, people still throw out the fanboyish "it has no games" remark. The PS3's catalogue includes nearly every multiplatform game released since it launched (it's a given the Xbox 360 enjoyed a full year worth of released exclusively since there was no other console to compete so it's library is bigger) including it's own growing exclusive library which isn't dwarfed by the 360's exclusive catalogue at all. You're going to need a new straw to grab at. Price point is the only real arguement here and I agree it is still too expensive and needs a reduction soon.


I'm talking about actual prices of the consoles, right now, I can go and buy a arcade 360 for 249$CND, the cheapest PS3 is still 400$ for the same slimmed down bundle..

The only "essential"(IMO) accessory you had to buy was the HDD unit, since if you compare the cheapest version of both consoles do only come with 1 controller each, nothing else. So 249+100$ for HDD sill fares better than 399$ base price.

I'm not bashing at all, but from a "potential" buyers point of view, as much as I hate M$, I would still go for their product, since I don't own/rent/use any BD media, I stream My HD stuff from Digital HD providers.
perplekks45 8th July 2009, 17:51 Quote
I got a 360 Elite for £230 with 2 games. How much would I pay for the PS3 top model again? I rest my case. Thanks for the attention.
devdevil85 8th July 2009, 17:59 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by perplekks45
I got a 360 Elite for £230 with 2 games. How much would I pay for the PS3 top model again? I rest my case. Thanks for the attention.
Do you game online? Did you have to buy extra battery packs for your controller(s)? The 160GB PS3 offers more space/features than the Elite so that's not a fair argument to say the Elite > 160GB PS3. I would bet that there is some kind of rival deal in the UK for the PS3, too, isn't there?
glaeken 8th July 2009, 18:08 Quote
But if you want wireless internet don't you have to buy a $100 add-on for the 360 arcade? Add that on and then you about equal the base PS3 model. Wireless, to me and many others, is quite important.

Also, you don't have to pay a monthly subscritption to use on-line services...
perplekks45 8th July 2009, 18:17 Quote
I got 12 months Xbox Live Gold for free, I don't consider wireless necessary but a premium feature for a console, and you made my day by saying that by buying the 360 top model PLUS the wireless dongle I'd equal the PS3 BASE model. :D

Oh, and last time I checked the PS3 was £299 in the UK. It might be cheaper now or I just didn't see the cheapest offer but still expensive if you ask me.
glaeken 8th July 2009, 18:28 Quote
Xbox360 Arcade (199) + 60GB HDD(99) + Wireless(99) = 397~ PS3 Base Model(399).

Both of those for me are manditory (even the Wii has buit-in wireless). I'm not a PS fanboy or anything - I mostly play PC games. These features and a few exclusive titles (Killzone 2, MGS4, Infamous, etc) are why I bought the PS3.

The biggest feature that interests me for the 360 is that I can develop on it through XNA.
cyrilthefish 8th July 2009, 19:01 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by glaeken
Xbox360 Arcade (199) + 60GB HDD(99) + Wireless(99) = 397~ PS3 Base Model(399).

Both of those for me are manditory (even the Wii has buit-in wireless). I'm not a PS fanboy or anything - I mostly play PC games. These features and a few exclusive titles (Killzone 2, MGS4, Infamous, etc) are why I bought the PS3.
um...
why are you listing the arcade + a HDD when the premium is far cheaper than the two of those added together?

anyway (UK prices here, off the game.co.uk website)
60GB 360 console pack + wifi adaptor = ~£220
cheapest PS3 = £290

fairly huge difference still :|

not trying to be a fanboy here, but they were some seriously misleading figures there :S
cyrilthefish 8th July 2009, 19:10 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mcmonopoly
I'm not looking at "exclusive" games only, look at the catalog as a whole, and you see that the 360 as more appealing games (to me, at least) than the PS3, and part of that is due to the fact that the PS3 came out a year late compared to the 360...
the different levels of platform exclusive games depends a lot on peoples tastes

personally theres only 1 PS3 exclusive i'd possibly want to play vs 4 on the 360, but you often hear other people saying the exact opposite :)

(ideally i'd prefer every game on the PC, that way i wouldn't need a console at all )
Mcmonopoly 8th July 2009, 19:20 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by devdevil85
Quote:
Originally Posted by perplekks45
I got a 360 Elite for £230 with 2 games. How much would I pay for the PS3 top model again? I rest my case. Thanks for the attention.
Do you game online? Did you have to buy extra battery packs for your controller(s)? The 160GB PS3 offers more space/features than the Elite so that's not a fair argument to say the Elite > 160GB PS3. I would bet that there is some kind of rival deal in the UK for the PS3, too, isn't there?

Ok first off, the 360 controller that comes with the cheapest bundle is wired, so no need for battery pack.

I know 20 people that own X360s, and as far as wireless adapters go, not one of them have one, they instead all asked their internet providers to install the cable modem next to the console, and put @ 30$ wireless G adapter in their home computers, or go with the built-in wireless adapter in laptops, so no wires, and 100Mb Ethernet instead...

Oh, and you still can play original Xbox games on the 360(most games i was told), which you can't do with the cheapest PS3...

Oh and as far as having free acess to the PSN, that's the worst selling point i've seen, I mean it's ages behind XBL, and they just introduced the PSN cards in game shops last month ( I live in Canada, in one of it's largest cities mind you), since a lot of people weren't able to use their credit cards to purchase games off of it. Wow great effort Sony...
glaeken 8th July 2009, 19:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyrilthefish
um...
why are you listing the arcade + a HDD when the premium is far cheaper than the two of those added together?

anyway (UK prices here, off the game.co.uk website)
60GB 360 console pack + wifi adaptor = ~£220
cheapest PS3 = £290

fairly huge difference still :|

not trying to be a fanboy here, but they were some seriously misleading figures there :S

The 360 that comes with a hdd is $299 (360 Pro), which is the price of an arcade + hdd. So, no, they're not misleading.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyrilthefish

(ideally i'd prefer every game on the PC, that way i wouldn't need a console at all )

I wish :) Gaming rig and console = expensive.
Mcmonopoly 8th July 2009, 19:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyrilthefish
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mcmonopoly
I'm not looking at "exclusive" games only, look at the catalog as a whole, and you see that the 360 as more appealing games (to me, at least) than the PS3, and part of that is due to the fact that the PS3 came out a year late compared to the 360...
the different levels of platform exclusive games depends a lot on peoples tastes

personally theres only 1 PS3 exclusive i'd possibly want to play vs 4 on the 360, but you often hear other people saying the exact opposite :)

(ideally i'd prefer every game on the PC, that way i wouldn't need a console at all )

Yeah exactly what I think in general about exclusive title, I think the PC market gets skrewed too often when games aren't released or are delayed on the PC (I'm looking at you Bioware)...
cyrilthefish 8th July 2009, 19:32 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by glaeken
The 360 that comes with a hdd is $299 (360 Pro), which is the price of an arcade + hdd. So, no, they're not misleading.
hmm... looks like some currency conversion and/or pricing shenanigans are happening there.
I'll let you off then :)
devdevil85 8th July 2009, 19:46 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mcmonopoly
Quote:
Originally Posted by devdevil85
Quote:
Originally Posted by perplekks45
I got a 360 Elite for £230 with 2 games. How much would I pay for the PS3 top model again? I rest my case. Thanks for the attention.
Do you game online? Did you have to buy extra battery packs for your controller(s)? The 160GB PS3 offers more space/features than the Elite so that's not a fair argument to say the Elite > 160GB PS3. I would bet that there is some kind of rival deal in the UK for the PS3, too, isn't there?

Ok first off, the 360 controller that comes with the cheapest bundle is wired, so no need for battery pack.

I know 20 people that own X360s, and as far as wireless adapters go, not one of them have one, they instead all asked their internet providers to install the cable modem next to the console, and put @ 30$ wireless G adapter in their home computers, or go with the built-in wireless adapter in laptops, so no wires, and 100Mb Ethernet instead...

Oh, and you still can play original Xbox games on the 360(most games i was told), which you can't do with the cheapest PS3...

Oh and as far as having free acess to the PSN, that's the worst selling point i've seen, I mean it's ages behind XBL, and they just introduced the PSN cards in game shops last month ( I live in Canada, in one of it's largest cities mind you), since a lot of people weren't able to use their credit cards to purchase games off of it. Wow great effort Sony...
I wasn't referring to the wireless adapter. What I was saying was you will need to add the cost of XBL membership + rechargeable battery packs for each controller in order to get what you would with a PS3 since online gaming is free with PSN and all Dual Shocks recharge out of the box. Wired controllers are not the norm and most people I know can't since they sit too far from the TV. Wireless is not something you have to have (I don't), but IMO most people expect online play and they expect to use wireless controllers (hints the rechargeable battery packs vs actual batteries). Lastly, stating that XBL is ages ahead of PSN is just as moot as saying the PS3 has "no good exclusives".
Elton 8th July 2009, 19:48 Quote
I laugh at their logic, cheaper prices = more purchases, more purchases = money!
Mcmonopoly 8th July 2009, 20:17 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by devdevil85
........Lastly, stating that XBL is ages ahead of PSN is just as moot as saying the PS3 has "no good exclusives".

Uhm. have you used both services without owning either consoles? I did, and it took me a while to get use to PSN (after having problems connecting to it altogether), also like I stated above, they did not care about the fact that some people that actually wanted to buy stuff form PSN couldn't because of the lack of alternate ways to purchase points/add money to account.

Also just to get back to the Wireless Internet connection thing, go and try to watch a full HD movie over Wireless networking (if you download it off the PSN it'll be even worse since you have to factor in the speed limit of your ISP) and see that wireless connections aren't all they need to be ATM...
Mcmonopoly 8th July 2009, 20:20 Quote
Oh and BTW I never said they don't have any good exclusive, I just stated that there aren't any worth buying a 400$ console for, that's all.
devdevil85 8th July 2009, 20:57 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mcmonopoly
Quote:
Originally Posted by devdevil85
........Lastly, stating that XBL is ages ahead of PSN is just as moot as saying the PS3 has "no good exclusives".

Uhm. have you used both services without owning either consoles? I did, and it took me a while to get use to PSN (after having problems connecting to it altogether), also like I stated above, they did not care about the fact that some people that actually wanted to buy stuff form PSN couldn't because of the lack of alternate ways to purchase points/add money to account.

Also just to get back to the Wireless Internet connection thing, go and try to watch a full HD movie over Wireless networking (if you download it off the PSN it'll be even worse since you have to factor in the speed limit of your ISP) and see that wireless connections aren't all they need to be ATM...
First off, I do not own a 360, but do I play it every other week? Yes, and I have since its launch (my best friend owns it). Have I played online on both. Yes. Now that we have that out of the way, I will again say that your PSN/XBL statement doesn't make sense. What learning curve do you need for either service? I don't find either service to be any more complicated than the other.

When you say HD, are you talking 720p, 1080i or 1080p? My friend streams 720p/1080i content over his wireless connection and has no problems with downloading or playing mulitplayer games, so what are you trying to get at here? He does have a really nice Linksys router sitting about 25 feet from his PS3, but still....My internet speed averages ~22Mbit/sec and I can start a download of a Pulse and watch it the whole way through without any buffering and that's at 1080i, too. Now whether or not it's true HD like your stating, idk, but it shows up as 1080i on my Projector. I have yet to purchase a movie from PSN since I prefer BR movies or purchasing them from my cable provider just like yourself.
perplekks45 8th July 2009, 23:19 Quote
22Mbit? That's a bit higher than the averag of 8 in Europe or 6 in the UK. So you can't really compare that, can you?

Anyways, XBL ain't ages ahead but it's been around for quite some time. In the end it's all down to personal preference.
i7lova 8th July 2009, 23:27 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mcmonopoly
Oh and BTW I never said they don't have any good exclusive, I just stated that there aren't any worth buying a 400$ console for, that's all.

Exactly what I was thinking. And to all these arguments about ps3 comes w/ wireless and blah blah blah. Microsoft has made it so if you dont want those things you don't HAVE to buy them and pay the extra premium like you do on the ps3. Consoles and gaming in general has changed alot and it's not just the hardcore gamers buying consoles now, so why in the hell would you want to have just a couple of consoles on the market that you have to pay premiums for that have a bunch of features most people don't even want or use? That's why microsoft built the 360 the way they did. They are trying to cater to all audiences not just hardcore like Sony. I own a 360 and I USED to own a PS3.

I only played the exclusives MGS4, Uncharted, and Resistance. Didn't care for resistance much MGS4 was great and so was uncharted. My main problem with the console is the controller. My hands are big and that tiny playstation controller just doesn't cut it for me! i like the feel and comfortability of the 360's controller much better. Not to mention I only own 1 blu ray disc and it will probably be my last till the prices come down. And none of my friends own a PS3 so playing online was not near as enjoyable as on the 360. The are just my views and of course everyone will have different views. Just giving my perspective on all this.
papalarge123 8th July 2009, 23:48 Quote
I personally think that sony will bring the price down eventually,
i have to admit that the price is still a bit steep, although with the features that come as standard, u will probably pay the same, if not more to get the samefeatures on the x-box 360.
i personally wanted both consoles for specific games, although being a hardcore PC gamer, i decided to get the PS3 first as my partner wanted Little Big Planet.
i now have over 7 games for it and a second controller, but the main thin here is that it all cost me £84 brand new.

the reason for the low price is that i was due a new phone contract upgrade, i searched around for the phone and contract deal that suited me at the right price, and found that the PS3 was one of the offers available (which also meant a reduction in the contract on the same tarrif),

so there are ways and meens to getting one on the cheap.

as for streaming HD vids over the internet and wireless, i do it all the time on my laptop, and since i got the PS3 i have been doing it on that also (my main gaming PC is connected via cable)

so the price and streamingissues can also be put asside if looking at mine and probably so many other peoples situations.

if u want a PS3 or Xbox 360 and u live in the uk and spend roughly £40 a month on ur mobile bill, then goto an e-tailer and purchase a top of the range phone and high capacity memory card, with rediculas amounts of minutes and texts per month and a free console (or other products of ur choice).

i personally dont see a better option to get the PS3 especially at the retail price atm.
mjm25 9th July 2009, 01:08 Quote
I THINK THE MEGADRIVE IS BEST!!!!!!

[SIZE="1"]that is all[/SIZE]
carlosmessi 10th July 2009, 00:02 Quote
Ok, I think you are not doing well because of the economy, maybe lowering your price will be a good thing. People would like to play but when you are losing your house you are not thinking about a Playstation for your kid. Idem if you are a kid and your parent is loosing the family house.
Saivert 10th July 2009, 04:00 Quote
I'm so happy I don't care about any console exclusive games. I just own a PC and that's it. Works for me. And I don't have to deal with the console madness.
mikeuk2004 10th July 2009, 07:43 Quote
Another none news article about sony. You do these on a monthly basis and all it does is spark the crap about no exclusives and high price tag which is just rubbish.

Get over it people. If its too expensive for you then dont buy it and stop moaning.
kenco_uk 10th July 2009, 12:43 Quote
Xbox360's eat children and dogs.

PS3's spit unused folding money out.
an4rew 10th July 2009, 14:29 Quote
I love my Xbox, i only want a PS3 for Gran Turismo and i don't want to spend £300 for a George Foreman Grill :(
trig 10th July 2009, 14:41 Quote
sega dreamcast ftw
devdevil85 10th July 2009, 15:01 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeuk2004
Another none news article about sony. You do these on a monthly basis and all it does is spark the crap about no exclusives and high price tag which is just rubbish.

Get over it people. If its too expensive for you then dont buy it and stop moaning.
+1
Quote:
Originally Posted by trig
sega dreamcast ftw
+∞
D-Cyph3r 10th July 2009, 20:48 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjm25
I THINK THE MEGADRIVE IS BEST!!!!!!

[SIZE="1"]that is all[/SIZE]


lol




We all know SNES is king. N00b.
Skiddywinks 10th July 2009, 22:19 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeuk2004
Another none news article about sony. You do these on a monthly basis and all it does is spark the crap about no exclusives and high price tag which is just rubbish.

Get over it people. If its too expensive for you then dont buy it and stop moaning.

I consider this quite interesting news. It's not bit-tech's fault if people feel the (strong) need to voice their opinions about the current range of consoles.

And the argument about people only complaining about it when they can't afford it is a bit moot on a website where a much higher percentage of people are willing to throw money into ridiculous rigs. Mine cost £1800 for example, and the reason I don't have a PS3 is I simply don't want one.

Not everyone is an immature, whiney brat who gets everything from their parents, especially not on this kind of forum. If you don't like the news article, or the arguments that go on in the comments following, simply don't read them.
themax 11th July 2009, 01:06 Quote
You haven't been here very long have you skiddy. This has been going on since launch. You're lucky if you can find a PS3 game reviewed sometimes. And alot of interesting news or even positive news rarely makes it into this discussion unless a reader posts it in the game sub section.
Skiddywinks 11th July 2009, 03:14 Quote
Well, in the time I have been here, I have seen no more or less positive news on either platform, it is all pretty fair as far as I can tell.

As for video game reviews, the majority are multiplatform anyway, so it doesn't matter, and the only one I can think of off the top of my head that was a 360 exclusive is Gears 2. Sure, I would like to see bt's take on inFamous, and maybe Killzone 2, but at the end of the day I really don't care what console games a PC hardware and modding site reviews. Any review is more than it needs, so we should be grateful for what we do get, rather than whinging about biased this and biased that.

Besides, the biggest issue is the people arguing about it, and that is down to the users.
Mighty Yoshimi 12th July 2009, 11:14 Quote
I bought a ps3,

Because it is much better, more reliable, Doesn't Have a failure rate of 1 in 3 in the first year.

And i don't need to pay to play online?

Take the life time of this genration of consoles and work out how much that addds on to the TCOO for the Xbox360 and you'll be shocked.

ATB
an4rew 13th July 2009, 23:37 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mighty Yoshimi
I bought a ps3,

Because it is much better, more reliable, Doesn't Have a failure rate of 1 in 3 in the first year.

And i don't need to pay to play online?

Take the life time of this genration of consoles and work out how much that addds on to the TCOO for the Xbox360 and you'll be shocked.

ATB

I don't have Xbox Live but still enjoy alot of good single player games.... it would be nice to have free multiplayer and built in wireless too!

I've played Xbox live and PS3 at friends houses but the Xbox was super fast at downloading content/updates while the PS3 took ages (some using Bittorrent)
talladega 14th July 2009, 01:12 Quote
hmmm whats this?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/outlawauron/ps3slim.jpg

EUBn3_5IbGE


if it's real then for sure there will be a price cut. But I understand why Sony wont admit to a price cut right now. If they do then even more people will hold off on buying one. If I was wanting to buy one and knew there was a price cut in 3 or 4 months I would wait till then. If I thought there wasn't going to be a price cut anytime soon I'd get one right now.

Besides with the PSPgo so ridiculously expensive it will offset any losses they take on the ps3.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums