Valid points, yet there are many people out there that do not want a video game player with their blue ray player or vice versa. My father and quite a few other people I know dislike using the gaming consoles as a movie player. Instead, they go and get DVD players. Go figure. That said, companies should not expect this mentality to change overnight, and no, they do NOT like buying extra peripherals to get game consoles to provide a regular DVD player experience. I' m looking at you in particular, M$.

The early rumours have the PS3 pegged at $599 U.S. That is around $800 CAD! There is no way I' m spending that much for a PS3, in particular at launch. If Sony really wants me to buy, their lineup must be huge in such a short time frame. Ask me now, and the priority consoles are Nintendo Wii, X-Box 360, and then PS3. Mind you, if I get the money in a month or two, I' ll get the 360 first... but wait, M$ announced smaller CPUs for ' 07 360 models. Less fan noise! I' ll bide my time, patiently.

did you not hear of the surposed 322 euro launch price of the ps3? not 100% oficall, but its a smart move from sony. And good news for us!

322 Euro? Euros are more valuable than US dollars, aren' t they?

USD>CAD, therefore the visible price here is higher than in the States.

Still, this is incredible if true for you guys in Europe, since traditionally the true cost of systems there were more than the equivalent North American prices.

Lemme do conversion now...

Thank you Google!
322 Euro = 404.3998 USD = 454.059874 CAD

*blink*

Retrieving X-Box 360 price from Bestbuy.ca
$499.99 + tax.
Lesse... Canadian tax = 15% = 7% GST + 8% PST.
$574.99 CAD

*blink blink*

versus 454.06 + tax.
$522.17 CAD

You wa SHOCK!
" Omae wa mo shindeiru!"
*My head explodes*

If that price applied here, it would be $52.82 CHEAPER to buy a PS3.
Mind you, I don' t believe for a second that this is the North American price. It will be a minimum of the 360' s price. Still... wow. I think my console priority will shift to favour Sony again if this is the final cost.

it' s quite possible - 399 might be the price especially if you consider that Sony expects a huge loss (billion fuckin dollars!!) - maybe they' re going to loose a lot of cash on each PS3 sold?

MS loses 126 $ on each 360 - 360 sales are better = bigger losses for MS - that' s what we' re seeing right now.

While MS want' s to cover these losses later when production costs lower and there are some nice incomes from licensing, Sony has a bigger plan - if they succed in pushing Blue-ray forward with PS3 they will not only cover their losses , they will fuckin OWN Next GEN DVD market.

It' s funny how stable and winning company - Sony - takes such a huge risk on so many levels (DVD division,PS3 crew) after first move from MS.

Ironically their actions (Sony) are exactly the same as those they had when DC came out - " make them want to wait, at all cost" .It' s a proven strategy and once again - it works.

Yeah, but Microsoft can afford it.

If Ps3 launches at a realistic price of:

- $399 in the US

- 400 Euros

- £299 in the UK

Then yeah, Sony will be taking a bigger loss than Microsoft is at the moment ($126). But you guys are thinking in just 1 dimension. If Sony launch at $399 (whatever), then Microsoft will drop 360 by $100.

It' d be $399 for a PS3 or $299 for a 360, maybe $249. And if Microsoft make Xbox Live Gold free...

Heck, by the time Sony comes out, Microsoft will be ready to release the batch with smaller CPUs, bringing quieter, and cheaper, 360s to market. They will realistically be able to drop the price without increasing the amount lost per console too much, therefore, a $100 price drop, while being somewhat unlikely, is still possible.

Live Gold for free? Keep dreaming... man, what a dream.

actually price of 299 vs 399 might give consumers reasons to believe that 360 is less powerful - it happened once , with GameCube

It sure is great to be able to get it for 299 though

while being somewhat unlikely, is still possible.

It actually is very likely to happen - it' s rumoured on gamestop and MS rumours always turn out to be true :)

In the words, and voice, of Mr. Burns:

" Excellent!"

The 360, spec-wise, is slightly less impressive, but really, it is not that big a difference for most. You are right that consumers WILL think 360 is weaker. Then again, if a so-called weak console can crank out RE4, I don' t think it matters much.

Time to save a grand just for the point where that scenario does come true. I' m already saving quite a bit, and I' m currently working from home. Therefore, I can be on the boards (although not as persistently as I am today) and earn $ at the same time. So nice.

I' m glad Sony is taking Microsoft' s X-Box (and Nintendo' s Wii in Japan) so seriously. I don' t like breaking the bank to buy just one thing.

Anybody saying 360 is less impressive spec-wise than PS3 will incur my wrath. It' s not as clear as people seem to think and it' s certainly not how Sony would like you to think.

When PS3 launches, 360 will have Mass Effect, Gears of War and Too Human already out with RE5 and others on the way. Sony won' t have stuff of that quality, if only because 360 developers will have had a year to get the most out of the machine, -- but if 360 has nicer looking games at christmas AND is $100 cheaper, what do you think the mob will do?!

but if 360 has nicer looking games at christmas AND is $100 cheaper, what do you think the mob will do?!

Buy a PS3??

Yeah, people never follow logic. Besides, when people will buy a console for their kids they' ll think:
" Hmm, does my kid want this new thing that' s very expensive that has the same name as another popular machine or does he/she want that thing that' s been out for a year already which probably makes it technically inferior (I' m a parent, I don' t read gaming magasines so I don' t know that the PS3 isn' t much more powerful than the 360)?"
Or " Hmm, I want my kid to get the best so I better buy the new and expensive thing so he/she doesn' t get disappointed"
Now you' ll probably say that parents don' t want to waste to much money and are likely to choose a 360 because of that but, honestly, parents who can afford buying a 360 for their kids likely have enough money to buy them a PS3 if they wish.
If it comes down to the point where a parents decision will be determined by the price difference of the 360 and the PS3 then he/she probably isn' t in a position to buy one at all.
And that' s where the Revolution... sorry Wii, hopefully gets in the picture .

I see what you' re saying but one of the reasons Saturn failed was because of it' s higher pricetag.

If Microsoft lower the game price back to £39.99, or whatever you pay for a current gen title, and PS3' s games cost £50 or whatever, then it' s bound to have an effect.

Yes, but then again, the Saturn was considered to be much weaker than the PS1 simply due to Sonys hype. And I somehow get the feeling that the PS3 has gained a lot of hype .
Maybe we know the PS3 won' t outperform the 360 but regular people don' t know this and they probably never will until they' ve bought one.
I' m not saying a high price tag will have no negative effect on the PS3 sales but I don' t think that it will affect the difference between the PS3 and the 360 sales significantly.

But sega had parts to do with that though, with releasing first the mega cd, then around the same time as releasing the Saturn - or readying to at least, bringing out a new " 32bit" attachment for the megadrive.
It gave them a bad name especially as the add-ons were never really well supported or had any much of a lifespan.

Besides, the Sega Saturn released (from what I and many people I know seem to remember) at a VERY high price. And I doubt Sega' s brand was as well establish in the mainsteam as Sony, or PlayStation is now. (Besides kids these days get what they want, bunch of spoilt, horrid things). And Sony is so well known amoung children, they all have PS2' s and will think like.. " Xbox 360 looks so cool... wait holy crap there is a PS3 out (or coming out) 360 is so crap"
And some gamers might be put off due to the instant kill and shorter life span eXBOX, which is fair, I guess.

Ugh, the 32X was so bad. That by itself would tarnish Sega' s attempt at the Saturn. Addons are never cool. Why did they think that was prudent? Because Sonic & Knuckles, with its lock-on tech, was successful? Gimme a break!

Kids being spoiled - You had better believe it! Quite a portion of the new wave of kids believe they are entitled to everything they get and want. Whenever someone takes their things away, they throw tantrums or go to extremes. Honestly, the notion of entitlement brings about nasty, potentially illegal activities into their minds, prompting them to join gangs and... not that it is the fault of video games... I digress.

Sony is prepared to be competitive by taking the losses per console sold. If they did not want to be in this fashion of losing per console, they would have entered the next gen market already, to terrible results and high cost. By merely suggesting that they will take losses to keep prices competitive is like saying to the fan base " keep the money for when we arrive" . Personally though, I want both, eventually.

Sony will initially take a loss but if the PS3 becomes as successful as they wish for then the PS3 will probably be profitable in a couple of years.
Sony has a long term goal with the PS3.
I think that the inevitable success in Japan will be enough to keep them alive and if they manage to do a good job in other territories then they' ll definately walk out of the next-gen battle victorious, although with a slightly smaller market share than during the PS2 era.