Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

$499 PlayStation 3 Confirmed

Posted by Zonk on Sun Jul 08, 2007 10:24 PM
from the finally-come-down-a-bit dept.
Gamespot is reporting that the rumoured price drop from earlier this week is a reality. Starting on July 10th, the current 60GB model will sell for $499. Coming to US shores in August is the 80GB version only available in South Korea at the moment, which will retail for $599. They're bundling that unit with Motorstorm, so it's not just another 20 gigs for $100. "The price drop further indicates that, after a slow start, Sony is now aggressively trying to expand its customer base in the US. The move comes none too soon. According to the latest figures from industry-research firm the NPD Group, the PS3 only sold 82,000 units in the US in May, compared to the Xbox 360's 155,000 units and the Wii's 338,000 units." So, is this it? Will this price drop make you buy a PS3, or are you still holding off for the big games this fall?
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Both Sides of the PS3 Price Cut Rumor 257 comments
So here's the deal: Kotaku has a flier for an upcoming Circuit City deal on the PlayStation 3, putting the price at $499. There's some confusion about whether this is just a sale from Circuit City, or an actual price drop from Sony. Next Generation has Sony saying 'no', indicating that this isn't a sign of an across-the-board price cut. Meanwhile, GameDaily says 'yes', with sources in the retail industry indicating this is the price adjustment we've heard coming for a while now. "As it turns out, a merchandising manager (who wished to remain anonymous) at one of the world's biggest retailers has confirmed to GameDaily BIZ that the price drop is indeed retail-wide and it's scheduled to take place on July 12, although the first wave of ads to promote the PS3's new price won't kick in until Sunday, July 15. Many analysts have speculated that Sony would drop the price on the expensive console this year, and some even predicted that it could happen this summer. It's starting to look like they were right. We're sure to find out much more next week when Sony holds its press conference at E3." Luckily we won't have to wait long to see what's the real story here.
[+] Microsoft Readies Cheaper 360 249 comments
Officially Microsoft is putting on a brave face, saying they won't drop the 360's price even in the console's weakest market: Japan. Just the same (probably in anticipation of Sony's PS3 price drop), the San Jose Mercury news says the company is secretly working on preparing a lower cost Xbox 360 SKU. Called 'Falcon', it's a cost-reduced system using 65nm chips instead of the at-launch 90nm electronics. This ties right into Michael Pachter's expectation of such a cut; it should be noted he doesn't see the DS or Wii prices moving any time soon. Related to all of this, Newsweek's LevelUp blog has two great interviews today: a Peter Moore discussion harkening back to last week's warranty announcement, and a chat with Jack Tretton about the price cut and the 360's hardware issues.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Blu-Ray (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Brad1138 (590148) * <brad1138@yahoo.com> on Sunday July 08 2007, @10:26PM (#19795369)
    I want one for the Blu-Ray player. I have a 61" DLP set that is just screaming for Blu-Ray or HD DVD, Personally I like Blu-Ray. Currently stand alone Blu-Ray players are $650+ (from a quick Google search). From the reviews I have read [pcworld.com] it holds up fairly well against them. Plus an awesome gaming machine.
    • Re:Blu-Ray (Score:5, Insightful)

      by wawannem (591061) on Sunday July 08 2007, @10:34PM (#19795445) Homepage
      As a parent of a child that *really* wants a PS3, I can say that the price has been the biggest barrier. It's hard to justify this sort of expenditure for a twelve-year-old... I sort of feel like he'll grow up like his gaming-geek old man if I give in and buy one. I'm glad to see that they are coming down in price. -W
      • Re:Blu-Ray (Score:5, Insightful)

        by poot_rootbeer (188613) on Monday July 09 2007, @09:37AM (#19800305)
        It's hard to justify this sort of expenditure for a twelve-year-old...

        A twelve-year-old boy is probably old enough to mow lawns, run errands, etc. to earn his own income.

        It shouldn't take him much of that to understand how much money $500 actually is.
    • Re:Blu-Ray (Score:4, Interesting)

      by White Flame (1074973) on Monday July 09 2007, @04:01AM (#19797639)
      I've seen a few places like the Fry's Electronics store near me that had 2 identical Sony 1080p displays next to each other, playing the same HD movie, one in HD-DVD and the other in Blu-Ray, both stand-alone players. The HD-DVD version always had MUCH less compression noise and blockiness than the BR one. Then again I'm a real pixelophile and am far more offended about such things than the average person (I think that the visual quality of both suck dung and aren't worth the money; don't get me started on digital cable vs analog ;) ). I haven't seen BR movies on the PS3, but I suspect it'll have the same or worse quality than a standalone player.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        Thing is ... both formats support the same codecs and have ample transfer rate for 1080p in both MPEG-4 or VC-1. Side by side comparisons tell you about the quality of the encoding and of the player, not of the capability of the format.

        If I were in the market, I would personally go HD-DVD on price alone (about $250 last I looked). The theoretically superiority of Blu-ray (in capacity and transfer) means fuck all in the common case. To exceed the practical limit of HD-DVD you've to do something like encod
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      The PS3 can do so much more then play Blu-ray movies although I do have to admit a Blu-ray movie played to a HDTV looks great. Even DVD movies are upscaled via the PS3 to a HDTV via HDMI and the result is impressive. My son has a PSP and he can put MP4 movies onto his 2GB Memory Stick, ripped from his DVD's and play them back via his PSP though the PS3 and the output is also upscaled with impressive results. We have not played with this much so although I think it is possible to put the MP4 directly to the
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            I gotta say, the PS3 as a blu-ray player is excellent. I've talked with several retailers, they want this war to end quickly. They're sick of stocking both formats. They say the blu-ray products move a ton more than the HDDVD stuff. They're fairly confident in a bluray victory.

            When I had learned that Microsoft was entering into the video game industry I had several predictions, and they've all happened and we as the consumers are the ones who suffer.

            Microsoft has enough cash to drown out any compitition
            • Re:Blu-Ray (Score:4, Insightful)

              by lucas teh geek (714343) on Monday July 09 2007, @02:37AM (#19797111)
              so bluray is good? so what? I dont want a hd video player right now, I want a video game console. I have a perfectly good upscaling dvd player that sits there unused because basically everything I watch is kept in digital formats on my home server and then streamed to my TV via HTPC. sure, the upsampled picture doesnt have the definition of bluray, but seeing as it's only being played back on a 26" 720p tv the difference is ignorable. it seems impossible for sony apologists to say why the ps3 is good value for money without resorting to it's wonderful "blue rays", something that most consumers neither need or want.

              microsoft may be evil but at least they arent trying to jam their stupid hd format down my throat, and charging me more for the privilege.
              • Re:Blu-Ray (Score:4, Interesting)

                by FatherOfONe (515801) on Monday July 09 2007, @10:10AM (#19800777)
                So you have a multi thousand dollar PC sitting there holding your ripped DVD's. I have a 24" LCD and I can tell a HUGE difference between 720P and 1080P. Now having said that, it appears that the PS3 isn't for you, nor is it for anyone who has a standard def tv at the moment. However, if you have a HDTV and a large library of PS2 games then this isn't a bad buy at all.

                Now for your argument that Microsoft isn't trying to "jam" something down my throat with the 360... Well I don't want or need another freaking DVD player, so why did they include it? Wasn't CD good enough... It is for me :-) Some people don't have HDTV's so why are they trying to cram HD down EVERYONES throat? You see the argument can go both ways... Sony included Blu-Ray in the PS3 and basically killed any chance of HD-DVD becoming the standard, but the cost of it may cause Sony to come in 3rd place with regards to console sales. Then again, some development shops are starting to fill over a 9GB DVD and like the 50GB of extra space that the PS3 provides, so in the next 3 or four years when the Xbox 720 or Wii 2 or whatever needs to come out, people can still use and buy a PS3. It is a tactical decision and I honestly don't know if it is the correct one, but I am not about to fault a company for pushing new technology.

                As far as your argument of a streaming server... How many content providers are up for you doing that? I don't see many jumping at putting their HD content on iTunes, and ripping a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD disk is illegal so I imagine your HD content selection pretty much sucks now. Also, not that you care but you can use your PS3 to get that media off of your server and display it to your TV and then also stream it to your PSP over the internet if you wanted. Just to clarify, you can at this time download movies to your PSP OR have them streamed to your PSP. That to me is much cooler than say an iPod because I don't have to carry some 80GB ipod around with all the movies I "may" watch. I can keep them on a PS3 with some huge HD on it and then stream those to a PSP when I want to watch them. Granted, much like the iPod I could download them to the PSP and watch them locally, but I am not locked in to syncing. Again, not that you care but you could also take remote control of your PS3, download some new movies and then stream them to your PSP also.

                Ok, enough for video crap. You may or may not care about that. The game lineup for the PS3 is poor, but there are some great games out. Motorstorm and Resistance fall of Man are two very good titles. The downloadable games Calling all Cars and Super Star dust and very good for under $10. Home looks to be a great way to interact with users online and if done correctly it will be (in my opinion) the best online experience of any of the new consoles. Little Big Planet looks to be a great game that may be out this fall. Ninja Gaiden Sigma (also on 360 but not as well done), appears to be a very good game, and Oblivion (also on multiple platforms but well done on PS3 with very low loading times... nice to have a HD in every system). Obviously future games like MGS4 and FF will be system sellers but those are not out yet and probably won't be out this year. In short there are quite a few very good games and some are on other consoles (primarily the 360). What I have found out is that the games developed for the 360 first and then ported to the PS3 look bad (not Wii bad), but bad, however games developed for the PS3 first look fantastic and play very well. I will also add that playing PS2 and PS1 games works very well. Seeing that the PS2 is still selling like mad, and developers are not going away from it, that is another nice option for "kids" games.

                So I just laid out some very good games and there are quite a few more. Sony had and has some major issues but they are addressing them somewhat quickly. Would I love a PS3 for $200? Yes! But at the expense of quality (less than 1% of PS3 consoles are defective as opposed to another m
  • by rolfwind (528248) on Sunday July 08 2007, @10:28PM (#19795387)
    It's the only game I need that's only for PS3. I might even wait until they port it though. $500 for one game is too expensive.

    Also going to wait to see what Wii games are out this Christmas. With the immense popularity, I expect Wii will get a surge of games - but knowing that games take time to make, I wonder when it will happen. Perhaps Fall of '08.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      I was going to wait as well for Metal Gear. However, I might pick one up. I have a 46" 1080p Sharp that would love to have BluRay to watch on.

      As for the Wii and new games, I would love to see more games on the Wii, being that I have had one since release day (was up in line at 5:45am). My only concern is that the games will be horrible ports from other systems. The uniqueness of the Wii controllers is not something that makes it easy to slap on any old game that was designed for something else. You need to
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        Hear, hear. But even Nintendo fell into this trap with Twilight Princess. They used shaking as another button which triggers attacks, since the Wii game is more or less a direct port from the Game Cube.

        To date, only a few game actually use the controller in a proper game (I'm not counting Wario Wares and Mario Party 8 type games): Wii Sports, Tiger Woods golf and maybe one or two more that I've forgotten.

        Also disappointing to me is the fact that there aren't any RPG's for it yet. No, I'm not talking about

      • by Zantetsuken (935350) on Monday July 09 2007, @02:19AM (#19797003) Homepage
        Its not a whole lot more number-wise, but heres a few more [wikipedia.org] that are set to be PS3 exclusive, and these are series highly reputed for the game play, not just graphics.

        Of the exclusives on this list, I know the following to either be historically good franchises or good games for a new franchise (or at the absolute least have heard a few of them to be good):
        • Castlevania (not much into it myself, but its a longstanding franchise)
        • Genji: Days of the blade (I've played the demo, which made me rent it - its a great game with gameplay like the Onimusha series if you've played those)
        • God of War 3 (never played 1 or 2 myself, but since just about every review site gave great critiques for months on end, it can't be too bad)
        • Gran Turismo 5 (not a fan of racing games, but I know enough to know its big)
        • Gradius (the latest in a great line originating with the side-scrolling NES space shooter)
        • Haze (sounds decently fun, even if it only turns out to be an average FPS)
        • Hot Shots Golf (if you like playing golf or other casual party games like this)
        • Killzone 2 (I found the first to be fairly fun as even as a somewhat generic FPS)
        • MGS4 (as you 2 have listed)
        • Mobile Suite Gundam: Crossfire (looks like a fun clone of Armored Core with destructable buildings)
        • Resistance: Fall of man (rented it, is extremely fun and is hard enough to suck you in and make you at least try)
        • SOCOM (personally only the first was nothing short of spectacular, the second was mediocre, and the 3rd was just horrible - hopefully this will remedy that)
        • Tekken 6 (not a fan of fighting games, but the only one I know of more popular than Tekken is the Guilty Gear franchise)
        • Time Crisis 4 (everybody's favorite Peter Piper rail shooter with a guncon, this guncon model is supposed to have analog sticks and allow the player to roam freely the level)
        • Warhawk (never played the original, but it sounds like there are legions of people waiting to sell their souls when this comes out)
        • Zone of the Enders 3 (now I thought this series was finished, so the existence of this is news to me, but the first 2 were great fast action with superb mechanical designs on the mecha - this is definitely one to pick up if you like fast action that makes you have to really pay attention to where you are, not to mention where the enemy is)
  • "aggressively"? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TheSHAD0W (258774) on Sunday July 08 2007, @10:31PM (#19795423) Homepage
    Calling a $500 price "aggressive" may not be appropriate, really. Realistic, perhaps; it's still $200 pricier than an HD-DVD player or a basic XBox 360. I'd call it barely reasonable, but not aggressive.
    • Re:"aggressively"? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by _KiTA_ (241027) on Monday July 09 2007, @01:41AM (#19796765) Homepage
      Calling a $500 price "aggressive" may not be appropriate, really. Realistic, perhaps; it's still $200 pricier than an HD-DVD player or a basic XBox 360. I'd call it barely reasonable, but not aggressive.

      Personally, I'd use the word "desperate" not "aggressive."

      It's not really aggression when the entire game retail industry comes to you and says "either you drop the price on these pieces of crap or we will do it for you / or we're taking them off the shelves."
      • Re:"aggressively"? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by TheSHAD0W (258774) on Sunday July 08 2007, @10:36PM (#19795457) Homepage
        Not considering the original price, and not considering they've been staying on shelves in droves.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          Exactly - the damn thing was too expensive in the first place. They are only now coming back to reality. Not completely, but they are getting there. $100 off is a good start. Get the thing to $350 and I'd start to think about it. $600 was just ridiculous.
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            All of my guy friends wouldn't listen to me when PS3 and the Wii came out last year. I kept saying the Wii would do really well and that the PS3 was doomed to failure. They were all like, "The Wii is okay, but PS3 has this and that and this and that..." I was like, "Look. You're a small portion of the market. Parents are only going to see two numbers. The cheaper Wii and the $600 PS3. Which do you think they are going to buy for a Christmas gift for their younger kids? The Wii. You may have a lot o
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          And you know that $299 is the price of the 360 core. But you wandered off like PS3 fanboys always do. What you (and Sony) forget is that some people buy a game console just to play games.

          And you did what MS fanboys always do. You assumed someone can play games on the $299 Core. The Core system doesn't have a hard drive or memory card, which is necessary [xbox.com] for online play or to play original Xbox games. So you have to pay extra for either of these if you want to play online games. A hard drive is required to
          • Sir, your post is really funny, stupid funny.

            You start with:
            And you did what MS fanboys always do. You assumed someone can play games on the $299 Core.

            and after a random anti-Microsoft rant you finish with:
            So yes, you can play games on the Xbox 360 Core system for $299, assuming...

            So, your rant is completely out of place, if someone wants to play the new Xbox-360 games he just have to pay the $299 + a memory stick which as someone else state is about $20...

            Not that I care about the systems being discussed
            • How is that shady? Anyone who looked at the differences between the models would know this already. If they didn't, then who's fault is that? What's wrong with giving your customers and upgrade path?
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            You are rooting for Sony? Betamax? Minidisc? Sony Memory Stick Pro Duo? Sony is the KING of proprietary hardware, I'm glad MS has spanked them a bit on PS3, Sony is the one company that can take a Linux based game console with so much potential and fantastically fuck it up.

            Cheers.
          • Wow, that's the craziest "advantage" I've ever heard anyone cite :-) "PS3 is slow right now because it's hard to program for, but you should buy it anyway because one day hopefully they'll figure it out" - where do I sign?

            Here's a thought - why not just wait until when/if they do figure it out, and then buy it? It'll be cheaper too.

  • Why should it? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by falcon5768 (629591) <Falcon5768@NosPAm.comcast.net> on Sunday July 08 2007, @10:32PM (#19795431) Journal
    It wouldnt make me bite when it was this much for the 20 gig... why should the 60 dropping 100 buck matter, its till more costly than a 360 which atm has more games.

    And honestly looking at FFXIII despite being a huge FF fanboy doesnt make me bite at all, not for 500 dollars. As for the other PS3 killer apps right now, more than a few are actually out or coming out on the 360, which I already own.

    Im sure a bunch of people are going to jump on me with bluray this, and HDMI that, but quite frankly Sony really think about what made their PS2 a huge seller. They though it was the diehards, and built a system perfect for them. What they forgot was the casuals, of which the 100 dollar PS2 became a big seller not the 300 dollar original pricetag version.

    • Re:Why should it? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by WasterDave (20047) <davep&zedkep,com> on Monday July 09 2007, @12:43AM (#19796377)

      Sony really think about what made their PS2 a huge seller.

      They did, it had a DVD player in it. Critically the PS2 came out and was cheaper than a DVD player, meaning that guys like me could get approval from the domestic commandant with the words "but you wanted a DVD player, right". So they thought they'd pull the same trick again - make the PS3 cheaper than a standalone BluRay player and you either get a free games console with your BR player, or a free BR player with your games console ... depending on how you look at it.

      As far as I can see it, Sony have made two big mistakes with the PS3:

      * Nobody wants a BluRay player.
      * Nobody wants a PS3 either.

      Because both value propositions only make sense if you drop $2k on a new telly at the same time. Furthermore, where the PS2 was a giant leap from the PS1 and where DVD was a giant leap from VHS, the same cannot be said of this new generation. Consequently they're stuffed.

      FWIW after the dead 360 debacle it's becoming clear that the only winner from this round is Nintendo. Who'dve thunk it?

      Dave
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        I wondered about that. "announcing" a price-drop tend to make no sense whatsoever. It'll only ensure that sales (at current price) drop to near-zero since everyone who wants one, but are *not* desperate for one (if they where desperate for one, they'd have it already) will hold off buying atleast until the price actually does drop. I guess when the price-drop is only a short time off this effect doesn't much matter.
  • by rhendershot (46429) on Sunday July 08 2007, @10:39PM (#19795477) Journal

    So, is this it? Will this price drop make you buy a PS3



    no.

    or are you still holding off for the big games this fall?



    no.

  • Panic Time (Score:5, Informative)

    by MeanMF (631837) on Sunday July 08 2007, @10:43PM (#19795523) Homepage
    This just confirms that Sony is in full-blown panic mode... They keep talking about the long-term viability of the PS3, and I can see why since it is a pretty nice piece of hardware. But they're obviously very worried about their near-term prospects so I could easily see how they'd cut another $100 before the end of the year if things don't turn around quickly.
  • are doomed to repeat it.

    Anyone remember the NeoGeo [neo-geo.com]?

    Well anyway it was set to debut at $599 [wikipedia.org] want to know why it didn't do so well? Due to the price. $500 and up game consoles don't sell that well. Sony needs to find a way to lower the price to $299 on the base model and $399 on the advanced model or else the Wii and XBox 360 will eat their lunch.
    • by Pap22 (1054324) on Sunday July 08 2007, @11:07PM (#19795715)
      Get your facts straight, according to your own wiki link:

      However, this plan was quickly scrapped and when the system had its national launch it debuted at $649.99
      $650 in 1990 dollars is $1120 in 2006 dollars. Not to mention the fact EACH neo geo game cost $200 in 1990 dollars ($313 in 2006 dollars).

      http://www.westegg.com/inflation/infl.cgi [westegg.com]

      Compared to the neo geo, the PS3 is a flippin bargain.

      • by freeweed (309734) on Monday July 09 2007, @12:22AM (#19796253)
        And $3000 in 1990 dollars, what a half-decent desktop PC cost back then, is $5169 in 2006 dollars. Except a half-decent PC is 1/10th that price. Could you imagine spending $5000+ on a PC these days? Yet they're faster, have more storage, massive improvements in graphics hardware...

        Technology gets CHEAPER. Far out-pacing inflation. The PS3 pricing is a joke when compared to any other modern consumer electronics - then again, game consoles pretty much have been for a while now.
          • You're about their least-favourite kind of customer - you like their heavily-subsidised hardware, but for running Linux on, not for the games. You'll cost them $200-300 with no hope of making back even close to that on game licence fees.

            leat

            I never really understood why Sony went to the trouble of making Linux available for the PS3 (at least, not why they did it for free). I can only think it was Krazy Ken's engineer training overriding his good sense. Yes, they got some good PR from it, but only in a sma

    • "Well anyway it was set to debut at $599 want to know why it didn't do so well? Due to the price. $500 and up game consoles don't sell that well."

      a.) $600 then is a LOT more than $500 now, and I don't just mean the $100 difference. The PS3 has already way out-sold the Neo Geo.

      b.) The Neo Geo was NOT a mass market device. It wasn't built to be one, it wasn't marketed as one, and the games weren't designed that way. It was a niche device built for a small number of people that wanted to play arcade games at
  • It won't help (Score:4, Insightful)

    by realmolo (574068) on Sunday July 08 2007, @10:47PM (#19795543)
    The PS3 is still too expensive. But the bigger problem is, there just aren't any "must have" games. I was at Wal-Mart the other day, and just for kicks I was looking at the PS3 game selection. There were about, oh, 25 titles or so, and fully HALF of them were crappy movie tie-in games. That's nuts.

    The Wii is slightly better off, in that there are at least 3 or 4 really fun games. But in my opinion, it's not worth buying yet either. But the good Wii games are fun, and they are nice and "console-y". Which brings me to the 360-

    Well, it has the most games, of course. But am I the only one that finds the 360s selection of games really dull? It seems like there are a lot of FPS and sports games, and not a heck of a lot else. I expect this will be the case with the PS3, also. It's almost like they are trying too hard to cater to the "hardcore" crowd. Lots of "heavy" games, not too much stuff that's simple to pick-up-and-play. Well, I guess the Live! Arcade games are. But all of those games could be done on the Wii, easily. Never mind the emulated games, which I refuse to pay for because I've been playing them for free for almost a decade now via PC emulators.

  • by CrazyJim1 (809850) on Sunday July 08 2007, @10:56PM (#19795603) Journal
    My opinion isn't indicative of your average gamer. I bought an Xbox just to see the Halo 2 phenomena. I learned that voice chat lets you know you're playing with 12 year olds who get mad whether they win or lose. I learned that Halo 2 had no depth besides a couple insta-kill moves. I had my fun with it though. I won't buy a next gen system until I find a game that breaks ground with online play because that's all I like.
  • This may be it! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JoeCommodore (567479) <larry@portcommodore.com> on Sunday July 08 2007, @11:12PM (#19795759) Homepage
    I've been debating getting a Game Cube or PlayStation 2, now maybe I'll seriously look at the PS2. :-) Prices are soo much better at the trailing edge.
  • by suv4x4 (956391) on Sunday July 08 2007, @11:14PM (#19795769)
    "$499 PS3 rumored"

    "$499 PS3 denied by Sony CEO"

    "Sony rejects $499 PS3"

    "Sony Spokesman says $499 a hoax"

    "$499 PS3 confirmed"
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      What's the 21st century have to do with it? There is a very simple answer that is always pointed out with price drop rumors. PEOPLE WILL NOT BUY THE GAME SYSTEM TODAY IF THEY THINK/KNOW IT WILL BE CHEAPER TOMORROW. Stores want you to buy things now -- they don't want you think about your purchase. Even if you can do a price adjustment at Target (or wherever), stores would always to prefer the money NOW and not later (see gift cards).
  • AU prices (Score:5, Informative)

    by Nazlfrag (1035012) on Sunday July 08 2007, @11:18PM (#19795813) Journal
    I doubt we'll see anything like this. A typical price, ie. on 'sale' at Big W here w/free game is $987. That's around $847 USD. This is also the European model where they ripped out the hardware backwards compatibility.

    Or I could get this one imported for $582 AUD but have no warranty. Both options are bad, but the fact I could almost get TWO from America at the same price makes the warranty issue not look so bad after all.

    Sony doesn't stand a chance against the Xbox or Wii(which is still regularly sold out) in Australia any time soon. Even with the best damn games on the planet $1000 is a ludicrous price, next to $350ish Wii or $500ish 360. I could in fact get both consoles and some games for the same price... Bluray doesn't even enter into consideration.

  • Yes, I know, Kaz quit. Still, this YTMND [ytmnd.com] is still good. I still won't by it for that amount.
  • Crappy poll (Score:5, Interesting)

    by suv4x4 (956391) on Sunday July 08 2007, @11:25PM (#19795869)
    "So, is this it? Will this price drop make you buy a PS3, or are you still holding off for the big games this fall?"

    That's it? Where's the third option, "neither of the above". I want my third option, god damn it!!

    Let's see, what does $499 PS3 change. XBOX360 is $399, Wii is $250.
    For your extra money, you get poor list of games, $65 a pop, and Blu-Pending-Disaster support, at around $45 a pop.

    I'm about as excited about all of this, as I would be if Epson released $50 cheaper printers. It's about the ink, people!
  • Incredible (Score:5, Funny)

    by corby (56462) on Sunday July 08 2007, @11:41PM (#19795971)
    This is absolutely fantastic news.

    It will now cost me $100 less to not buy one.
  • Sigh. I know I'm going to probably get modded "Flaimbait" for this, but here goes anyway...

    It's only been two years since the CD rootkit scandal and already it seems the consumers have either forgotten or forgiven Sony. So please bear with me while I just take a moment to point out that there are probably still holdouts like me out there who *really* meant it when we said we would never buy from Sony ever again.

    We now continue with your regularly commercial sheep-like programming existance where electronics are mass-marketed to you as shiny new objects.
  • by DrXym (126579) on Monday July 09 2007, @04:00AM (#19797631)
    As posted on the PS3 blog [playstation.com] - "In short, we're introducing a new PS3 model with a 80GB hard drive which will include a free copy of MotorStorm, all for the retail price of $599. This 80GB package will be available starting in August, just a few short weeks from today. The larger hard drive will give players more of an opportunity to take advantage of all the downloadable games and trailers on the PLAYSTATION Network, including the content from our forthcoming download service which will include videos, movies and other entertainment content."

    In other words expect a full video / music download service and possibly IPTV to be announced at E3. It's been a long time coming seeing as it was such an obvious and natural feature for the PS3 to have.

  • by realinvalidname (529939) on Monday July 09 2007, @04:20AM (#19797727) Homepage

    "Stuff is worth what people will pay for it."

    Clearly, the PS3 isn't worth $600 to very many people. I'll be surprised if it's worth $500 either. Despite all the technology they've crammed in there, the games library has almost zero appeal. Boring, joyless games plus Blu-Ray does not equal $500.

    With the Wii outselling PS3 6-to-1 [engadget.com] in Japan, there's little reason to think third-party software makers will turn this around.

  • by Churla (936633) on Monday July 09 2007, @07:37AM (#19798857)
    I'm not waiting for a specific price point, I'm just not enamoured with the product. They have generated no "need to own that" within me for it. And therein lies the failure.

    If there was just one really revolutionary , fun game for it then I might be swayed. The problem is for me to believe that I would want to play said game somewhere, maybe at a friends house, in order to seal the deal and get me to buy one. And to this point besides one gadget and gaming accumulator where I work I don't know a single person I socialize with who owns one of these things.

    Where is this generations Katamari?
    • You're right on many counts. The PS3 is certainly:

      Blu-ray player
      Upscaling DVD player
      HDMI out

      I'm pretty sure when I want a Blu-ray player, I'll buy a PS3. Right now, I don't, so to me the PS3 is an exceptionally expensive game console, that plays about the same as the Xbox 360, but has fewer decent games. And it looks like the vast majority of people feel this way about it as well - there just isn't the demand for Blu-ray / HDDVD, which is crippling the PS3 sales.

      I mean look at this: http://www.vgchartz. [vgchartz.com]