Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Sony CEO Confirms Limited $499 PS3 Stock

Posted by Zonk on Sat Jul 14, 2007 02:09 PM
from the please-make-the-prices-stop-spinning dept.
If you were confused about yesterday's stock announcement, you wouldn't be the only one. Thankfully Kaz Harai, SCEI CEO, has clarified the situation: the $499 60GB PlayStation 3 is a limited offering. They'll only be selling it here in the states until their current stock of the system is cleared out, at which point the only SKU remaining in the states will be the $599 80GB + Motorstorm bundle. The catch is that there is probably enough stock in hand for several months of sales at this price; hence the confusion yesterday about a 'fire sale'. Hirai confirmed this to a Norwegian videogame news site, and the video of the interview is available online. For some perspective, Next Generation has a commentary piece on this strange matter. "Now Sony looks as though it's been spinning consumers. The smart thing to have done would have been to come out and say that the 60Gig version is being discounted and discontinued, and that the bells-n-whistles PS3 at $599 is better value than ever. That didn't happen, and what many have seen as a pretty successful E3 for Sony has been marred by confusion over the future of the platform's strategy. So in those meetings next week, Sony will have cause to look back and consider how things might have been done better."

Related Stories

[+] 60GB PS3 Price Cut Not Just a 'Fire Sale' 246 comments
Heffenfeffer writes "Those excited about the $100 price cut that the 60 GB PS3 recently received should act quickly — according to an interview from SCEE president David Reeves: 'All they're doing is taking their stock in trade that they've got at the moment of the 60GB model, marking the price down and it will all be gone by the end of July.' When asked if the 60GB PS3 would be no more after the fire sale, he confirmed, 'In America, yes ... what the US are offering from the 1st of August is a USD $599 version with one game.'" Meanwhile, the EU won't be getting the 80GB system at all. Instead, they'll be getting a new starter pack bundle pack with two games and an extra controller for the same cost as the current system on its own (£425, or $862). Update: 07/13 17:17 GMT by Z : Okay ... it's really challenging to understand what's going on when Sony as an entity is saying two different things. Despite the above coming from a Sony executive, it looks like this is completely untrue. Says a Sony of America spokesperson: "SCEA has reacted with puzzlement to the European perspective, suggesting that there may have been an incorrect interpretation. The spokesperson said, 'Those quotes from David Reeves are not accurate.'"
[+] Retail Ads Hint At $50 360 Price Cut 113 comments
Following closely on the heels of Sony's $100 cut in price for the PlayStation 3, retail ads seem to indicate an upcoming $50 price drop for the Xbox 360. Gamespot investigates the rumour: "It's clear that a number of retailers are expecting an Xbox 360 price cut next week, so much so that they're willing to buy print advertising for it. If that's the case, Microsoft almost certainly told them to expect a price cut, and when it would be fine to start promoting it. When Microsoft actually decides to announce it remains to be seen, although sources close to the software giant are grousing through back channels that the discounting's cover has already been blown." This comes right on time for the annual release of Madden, Bioshock, and Blue Dragon.
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.

Sony CEO Confirms Limited $499 PS3 Stock 50 Comments More | Login /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login
Keybindings Beta
Q W E
A S D
Loading ... Please wait.
  • Does anyone know the status of the backwards compatibility on the new PS3 model they're coming out with? Because I heard they were thinking of ditching it at some point. Will that be happening in the 80 gig model?
    • Re:Backwards Compatibility (Score:5, Informative)

      by Alaren (682568) on Saturday July 14 2007, @02:25PM (#19861055)

      Backwards compatibility remains, but it will be in the form of software emulation (a la Europe's PS3s) instead of an in-built Emotion Engine chip. In other words, Sony is doing their best to stop hemorrhaging money on these systems.

      Price cut, indeed. Talk about trying to have your cake and eat it, too... all I can figure is that Sony must be trying to push units faster by letting everyone know that the $499 PS3 is a limited-time offer. I guess their PR machine just has too many cooks to get the broth right.

      [ Parent ]
    • Re: (Score:2)

      The status is that it's software assisted. Part of the PS2 is now emulated but the GS chip is still present.

      The software assisted BC is not as good as hardware (obviously) but support is still very good.

    • Compatibility goes down... (Score:5, Informative)

      by WIAKywbfatw (307557) on Saturday July 14 2007, @04:24PM (#19861943) Journal
      Here, as I understand it, is the situation. Hopefully, if I get anything wrong someone will correct me...

      Backwards compatibility goes down with the newer 80GB US models.

      As others have pointed out, the newer systems lack an in-built Emotion Engine chip, so they rely on software emulation rather than hardware emulation.

      The emulation is decent, but it's far from perfect. Sony themselves quote a figure of 88 percent compatibility with the software emulation rather than 100 percent with the hardware emulation.

      And, even amongst those 88 percent of titles that work there are some glitches: it's not the case that 88 percent of titles work perfectly while 12 percent have some problems or won't run, rather it's the case that 12 percent won't run at all and 88 percent will run to some degree.

      You can read that many ways, but to me it seems to suggest that 88 percent is a marketing person's figure more than anything else: if a game won't get past a fixed point, it has audio or visual glitches all over the place, or if it falls over all the time then you're stretching things if you consider that game in your 88 percent.

      Of course, Sony isn't exactly advertising the fact that the newer 80GB models aren't as backwardly compatible as their predecessors. Granted, it won't matter to everyone, but it will matter to some, and those people won't thank Sony for their penny-pinching and shortsightedness.

      I don't know what the hell is going on with Sony. When it came to the original PlayStation they ran a flawless campaign and sucked millions of new users into the console market. With the PS2 they didn't put a foot wrong and cleaned up again. But with the PS3 it seems like they've decided to see how much they can piss away the goodwill generated by their previous two generations and opted for one boneheaded move after another.

      If they're not careful they're going to end up as yet another sorry story on fuckedcompany.com.
      [ Parent ]
      • More info... (Score:5, Informative)

        by WIAKywbfatw (307557) on Saturday July 14 2007, @04:37PM (#19862059) Journal
        More info, from Wikipedia's PS3 page:

        On March 20, 2007 Sony released a compatibility list; 1,782 of the 2,451 PS2 games (72%) released in Europe had noticeable issues, minor issues or no known issues, with the remainder being incompatible with the console.

        As I understand it, the European PS3's only had software emulation. So, by Sony's own admission, backwards compatibility is at 72 percent, and may actually be even lower than that.

        If I had any Sony stock I would have sold it a long time ago. These guys are finding new lows of stupidity every other day.
        [ Parent ]
        • Re:More info... (Score:4, Informative)

          by RzUpAnmsCwrds (262647) on Sunday July 15 2007, @02:20AM (#19865203)
          To be fair, the 360 doesn't have great compatibility either (Wikipedia puts it at 42% with the July update). However, there are some differences:

          • Despite the fact that the 360's compatiblity is only 42%, the vast majority of that list works more or less perfectly. That's not to say that there aren't exceptions, but Microsoft appears to have at least tested the titles that they support
          • Microsoft never represented backwards compatibility as a major feature. Sony has taken every opportunity to trash Microsoft's poor compatibility and play up their better support. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, Sony is a lot more humble


          Honestly, I think that the BC on the non-EE PS3s is perfectly acceptable. Most people who are buying a PS3 at this point already have a PS2. Those who buy the console when it is more mature (e.g. cheaper) will have a good library of PS3 titles to choose from, and BC may be better by then.

          However, Sony's marketing is shit. The PS3 is actually a pretty damned good console. It has a lot of nice features (Blu-Ray, Linux, web browser, upgradable HDD, built-in WiFi) that the 360 lacks, but it has two problems: it's too damned expensive, and Sony's hubris has shot themselves in the foot.

          It's OK to be enthusiastic about your product. But don't piss on us by doing a non-price-drop-price-drop. You're clearing out old inventory of 60GB PS3s, which is fine, but don't dick us around by pretending it's a price cut and then later "clarifying" that it's a limited time thing. This is a firesale. Don't dress it up another way because you produced too damn many 60GB PS3s and they are going to take months to sell at your current lousy rate.

          Your hardware is fine, Sony. But your customers will only take so much shit.
          [ Parent ]
          • Re:More info... (Score:4, Insightful)

            by WIAKywbfatw (307557) on Sunday July 15 2007, @01:03AM (#19864895) Journal
            Over a quarter of games aren't going to run. Many of the rest are going to have some problems. What are the odds that all your favourite games won't be among them.

            When a company sells a product as being backward compatible then it should be backward compatible. For all titles, not just some. I don't care if they acheive that through hardware emulation or software emulation (there's no reason why Sony shouldn't be able to make a 100 percent effective software emulator, they do have unlimited access to all the hardware, source code, etc) but if they make a promise to their end-users then they should stick to it.

            In Sony's case, that promise was broken from day one in Europe and South Korea. Units for those markets never had in-built Emotion Engine chips, so not even early adopters in those markets had the chance to buy a totally compatible unit.

            Notice how Sony didn't pull that stunt out of the gate in either Japan or the US? Why do you think that might have been? Perhaps because it felt that it couldn't pull that kind of shit in either of those markets? Or perhaps it thought that if European and Korean gamers were crazy enough to pay its inflated prices (£425 in the UK, which is $850!) then it could shaft them further by removing hardware to cut costs.

            Now it seems, by stealth (because they sure aren't trumpeting the fact), Sony have done the same in the US. And, somehow, me pointing it out is offensive to you?

            I've owned more consoles/gaming PCs than most in my time. I have (or have had) an Atari 2600, a Commodore 128, an Atari ST-FM, an Atari STE, two Sega Megadrives (Genesis to you), two Atari Lynx (one of each model), a PC Engine, a PlayStation, a Dreamcast, and a PlayStation 2. I've also lived with friends that owned other consoles. There are few major console titles that I haven't played.

            Yet so far, I've yet to buy either a PS3, an Xbox 360 or a Nintendo Wii. Why? Because, so far, none of them has really engaged me in any way. I'm trying so hard to want to buy another Sony console but Sony itself seems to be coming up with more and more reasons why I shouldn't ever do that.

            It's a shame. All Sony had to do to earn my money was to not try to rip me off with a less than compatible unit (why didn't a single European PS3 have hardware emulation) and a price tag that was, even after accounting for taxes, 45 percent more than US gamers were paying for the same system.

            Thanks for the fanboi Sony vs Microsoft rant though. The all-caps "SONY"s were a nice touch.
            [ Parent ]
  • by MankyD (567984) on Saturday July 14 2007, @02:24PM (#19861047) Homepage

    So in those meetings next week, Sony will have cause to look back and consider how things might have been done better."
    Not to be too cruel, but I think that Sony already had several reasons to do this with the PS3.
  • Stop Saying 'SKU' (Score:3, Insightful)

    by hardburn (141468) <[hardburn] [at] [wumpus-cave.net]> on Saturday July 14 2007, @02:26PM (#19861057) Homepage

    Stop using 'SKU' in news stories and posts. The word has no meaning outside internal retail outlets and distributors. Saying it makes you sound like a marketdroid.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      This message is encoded ROT0. Decoding is punishable by death under the DMCA.
      Stop using ROT0 and DMCA in post sigs. ROT0 has no meaning in terms of sigs, and DMCA has no significance outside the US.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Agreed.. this has been bugging me (and therefore everyone :) for quite a while. Gives the person using it the whole 'buzzword to compensate' impression.
    • Re:Stop Saying 'SKU' (Score:4, Informative)

      by MaineCoon (12585) on Saturday July 14 2007, @03:28PM (#19861491) Homepage
      The term is used extensively in the games industry as well.

      When a game is being developed for multiple consoles, each target platform version of the game (the PS3 version, the 360 version, etc) is referred to as a different SKU, even though it may be developed simultaneously and we aren't making the game differently for the different consoles (beyond platform-specific code and perhaps minor asset changes).
      [ Parent ]
      • I never do this, but I must. The parent is correct. SKU is a game industry term, this is a story about the game industry, stop complaining about our vernacular. 3 SKU means there's three different versions of a product/game (3 platforms, 2 platforms, 1
        • Re: (Score:2)

          Still, it's an internal-use thing.

          If by "internal" you are also referring to every retail channel out there (also known as "stores"), then yes, it's an "internal-use" thing. Face it, it's a term that has a specific meaning that is used in many aspects o
            • Re: (Score:2)

              Then what term would you use in lieu of SKU?
              • Re: (Score:2)

                600$ for the PS3? No thanks. Help XBox crawl out of a 2 to 4 billion dollar hole? No thanks. Wii? Oui, SVP.
                Actually, if you only buy the Xbox 360 (and no games) you help Microsoft dig a bigger hole. ;-)

  • This 60GB PS3 will be the last available model in north america with the PS2 compatibility 100% in hardware, no software emulation?

    Anyone playing FF XI on a PS3? Any screenshots comparison with the Xbox 360 version?

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      No, and I haven't even bothered... basically FFXI runs just like on the PS2... you'll get upsampled, but if you want the gorgeous graphics of the 360, you'll NEED a 360 (or PC)

      I'd kill for a PS3 port of it, but I know I'm one of the few.
      • Re: (Score:2)

        Well, if you take into account that I'm playing on a 4:3 36" CRT in 480p, I don't know if I'd see much of a difference given the upsampling of the PS3. All I know is that FF XI keeps the DVD drive active and my Xbox 360 sounds like a jet about to take off.
  • Good Ole Sony (Score:3, Interesting)

    by dunezone (899268) on Saturday July 14 2007, @02:54PM (#19861269) Journal
    What I found awesome about this how situation is how Sony presented it to us.

    On Monday they announced the price cut of the console. Gamers were excited.

    On Wednesday they showed off whats to come to the console. Gamers were amazed.

    By Thursday, early reports were coming in that the price drop was limited.

    At this point we were all fooled by Sony once again. They showed us all their new products and I will admit some of which look really cool. Then they tried to slip this under the radar without anyone noticing. That would of worked ten years ago without much notice but its not that easy today

    Whats worst of all though, when their done selling the 60gig model, all you have is a 80gig model which is actually more crippled then then the launch model which had the emotion engine for backward compatibility.
    • Re: (Score:2)

      Whats worst of all though, when their done selling the 60gig model, all you have is a 80gig model which is actually more crippled then then the launch model which had the emotion engine for backward compatibility.

      So you had better go and buy the 60gig $500
  • Sony sells a bunch of PS3s at $500, getting their marketshare up and bolstering the confidence of third-party developers, then when they've done that they sell a slightly better PS3 exclusively at $600, hoping that the better line-up (and, hopefully, bette
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      I think that their best bet would be to sell the currently available 60 GB models at $500 until their supply runs out and then immediately drop the 80 GB model down to $500, or possibly even lower in time for the holidays. Sony has a lot of inventory to mo
        • Re: (Score:2)

          Given that the "fire sale" will last probably over a month, should it really be considered one?
    • Re: (Score:2)

      Well, considering that a game disc costs next to nothing to produce, by including it and adding $50, they've just made $50 on every console, or at least insured a sale of Motorstorm with every console. "Leaving Motorstorm Out" doesn't save them any money.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        BTW: WTF is o great about Motorstorm anyway? I played it in a GameStop, and it basically seemed like a less-fun version of Excite Truck. Kinda sad when one of the biggest games for the PS3 is comparable to one of the lower-rated games on the Wii.

        While I personally agree that Motorstorm (at least at first) feels like a slow, boring version of Excite Truck, the two games aren't really comparable. Despite both being arcade offroad racers, they are very different games. Excite Truck is a fast and in

  • Sony's marketing plan: (Score:5, Funny)

    by Hawthorne01 (575586) on Saturday July 14 2007, @03:01PM (#19861319)
    1. Load gun.
    2. Aim at foot.
    3. Shoot.
    4. Repeat as often as possible.

    (Yes, I know, "Step 5: Profit!" should go there, but seriously, have you looked at their quarterly reports recently?)
    • Yes, I know, "Step 5: Profit!" should go there, but seriously, have you looked at their quarterly reports recently?

      No, but having a glance at their net profits for their past fiscal year ending on 3/2007, they're still making over $1 billion.
      • Re: (Score:2)

        Look just at the game division and the picture isn't very rosy - net loss of $1,969M for the fiscal year.

        The final quarter of their 2006 fiscal year was also ... disappointing, with a posted loss of $573M.
  • You know... a lot of the problems that Sony has had recently are not necessarily the action they took. Discounting this version of the product so you can introduce an improved* version can be a great move. The quote in the summary brings up a good point, though - it's about their PR! They had a chance to make this great PR, or at least "neutral", but they instead choose to confuse everybody with this idiocy.

    I think this has been typical of a lot of their boneheaded moves in the last few years; they have some brain-damaged idea they want to accomplish with the PR, and end up totally screwing the entire announcement. Someone needs to fire the entire PR department over there. It's really damaging their reputation in ways way above and beyond their "normal fuck-ups".

    (*) - for some definitions of "improved", which is not really relevant to this point
    • Hold on a second. (Score:2, Insightful)

      Hey, I'm no expert, but I'd imagine that this *isn't* the PR departments fault. I imagine that Sony execs do whatever bullheaded nonsense they want (like this fiasco) and then when PR goes, "Whoa, whoa! If you do that you're really going to piss people o
  • by grapeape (137008) <jpope1@NoSPam.sbcglobal.net> on Saturday July 14 2007, @03:30PM (#19861501) Homepage
    If I was Howard Stringer the first thing I would do is fire the entire marketing staff. So far their advertising and handling of everything related to the PS3 has been bungled. From the crying baby advertisements that were outweirded only by Sega's Dreamcast campaign, the early arrogance in the press, to the latest price cut, its not a price cut debacle there hasnt been one element of their PR that has worked in their favor.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      You left out the "Goat Sacrifice" event to promote "God of War II". And just about every recent public pronouncement of Ken "PS3 is too cheap" Kutaragi.
      • Re: (Score:2)

        Uggh I had blocked the goat thing from my mind. After thinking about it things have really been going downhill on the PR side since that whole black vs white and graffiti PSP campaigns long before the PS3, you would think after those they would have shift
          • Re: (Score:2)

            Does Sony pay you to post this crap? I'm pretty sure your the same clueless shill that posts anytime anything less than sunshine and rainbows is posted about Sony since the language of an unsupervised 12 year old seems to be the highlight of each little c
  • New Rumor (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mrshowtime (562809) on Saturday July 14 2007, @04:02PM (#19861765)
    There is a new rumor that the 360 will drop to $199 for the core and $250 for the "real" 360. If this rumor holds true, then Sony might as well pack it in, as there is no way a $599 system will be able to compete against a system that is 90% it's capability at more than 1/3rd the price. Sony Bots have been touting the "Incredible capability" of the PS3 and what an awesome value it is. My biggest question is why the PS3 is not significantly better than the 360, especially given the year's lead time? I own a PS3 and a 360, so don't mark me as a flamebait. I am still smarting after this past Christmas day when my friends (all in their 30's, who have owned every game system ever, like me) came over to see the PS3 and play Resistance: Fall of Man. They could not stop laughing at me and the game. The consensus was, "You paid $800 for this?!"
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      "My biggest question is why the PS3 is not significantly better than the 360, especially given the year's lead time?"

      Because they held up delivery and screwed themselves over by sacrificing themselves on the altar of the entertainment division (a common th
  • WTFH (Score:4, Interesting)

    by shoptroll (544006) on Sunday July 15 2007, @08:02AM (#19866353)
    You know, it's no wonder the PS3 is selling as bad as it is. How can anyone take this company or division seriously when you have an executive in Europe saying "they're doing this to clear out units", the American executive saying "it's not a fire sale" and then the head executive in Japan saying "the Euro guy was right but he forgot to mention we have enough stock to last a few months". I'll admit Nintendo's done some stuff like this before, like when people were trying to find out if the Wii was region-free, but when you have a system that isn't selling, it's not the time to be displaying confusion and incompetence of this magnitude.

    It's really starting to get really hard to understand the truth in any news that comes from Sony these days. These guys should run for Congress.
    • Re:Great Move by Sony (Score:5, Insightful)

      by _xeno_ (155264) on Saturday July 14 2007, @03:06PM (#19861355) Homepage Journal

      This will spark interest in the 60GB console, and when all the supplies are moved they will cut the price of the 80GB console to $499. I don't see why people are upset about this.

      Oh please, you know exactly why people are upset about this. It's become clear you're a Sony astroturfer. You've posted in the other story on this topic and people were pretty clear why there were upset about it.

      But to make it clear, it's that "cut the price of the 80GB console" part. There's no proof that's going to happen. People have been clamoring for a PS3 price cut for ages. There's clearly demand for the PS3, but not at the $600 price point. People have been wanting to see a pricecut.

      So what Sony has announced is that there's a pricecut, but then they're going to sell a version that has about $20 worth of storage extra and a version that's not as backwards compatible with PS2 and PS games. (That's assuming $1/GB, which is high - it's closer to $0.75/GB.)

      So, ultimately, Sony is announcing a new, worse version of the PS3 for the same price. That's why people are upset.

      That assumes, of course, you're interested in playing PS2 games on the PS3. At this point in time, with the PS2 game library dwarfing the PS3 game library, it's a fair assumption that people would want to do that. You can also debate how much worse the PS2/PS emulation is, especially since the new emulation is already used to enable upscaling in the existing model.

      However, this still comes off as Sony saying that they're selling a new, worse model for the same price, while trying to ditch the old model. Not completely true, but it sure sounds like it.

      [ Parent ]
      • Re: (Score:2)

        So what Sony has announced is that there's a pricecut, but then they're going to sell a version that has about $20 worth of storage extra and a version that's not as backwards compatible with PS2 and PS games. (That's assuming $1/GB, which is high - it's closer to $0.75/GB.)

        Well, the word on the street is that Sony is moving to 80GB HDs not because of the extra space, but because they're cheaper in large quantities than the old (and now less-standard) 60GB HDs. So Sony is actually trying to unload the more expensive stock

        • Re: (Score:2)

          Sony could have crippled a 80GB hard drive and sold them as 60GB with drive firmware that only uses the first 3/4ths of the drive. Sony would have kept the same model number and marketing, gotten a lower price, and few people would be any wiser about it..
        • Re: (Score:2)

          People have been asking for a price cut for "ages"? Has the PS3 even been out for a YEAR?

          People have been bitching about the price since it was announced, before it came out. As a PS1 and PS2 owner, I'm one of them.

          In the world of electronics, this has b
            • Re: (Score:2)

              My god, where do these idiots come from?

              I don't know, but by your inability to read my post fully or comprehend the words, I'm guessing you work for Sony.

              The PS3 is selling at roughly the same rate as the PS1 and PS2 were worldwide...Slightly faster than t
    • Re: (Score:2)

      This will spark interest in the 60GB console, and when all the supplies are moved they will cut the price of the 80GB console to $499.

      Well, I'd certainly hope that that's true, but remember that this is Sony we're talking about. The sales and marketing pa
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      It's long past time to call Sony's tactics for exactly what they are, from the PS3's beginning to right now: "Bait and switch." First, they released the $500 20GB version in such small quantities that people couldn't find them, then they discontinued the