Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Sony PlayStation (Games) The Almighty Buck

Sony Looks to 'Refine' PS3 Price 182

Posted by Zonk
from the that's-corpspeak-for-price-cut dept.
Via GameDaily a Financial Times interview with with Sir Howard Stringer, Sony's CEO, gives fans the first hope that price cuts may be coming soon. Lauding the Wii's performance in last month's NPD numbers, Stringer says that Sony is looking to 'refine' the PS3's pricepoint. "'Nintendo Wii has been a successful enterprise, and a very good business model, compared with ours . . . because it's cheaper,' Mr Stringer said in a video interview. 'That [price cuts] is what we are studying at the moment. That's what we are trying to refine.' Sir Howard said he expected 'energy [in PS3 sales] by Christmas, and then you will begin to see break-out games'. Sony is launching a virtual-world game called Home this year, and up to 30 other games."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sony Looks to 'Refine' PS3 Price

Comments Filter:
  • by morari (1080535) on Friday June 15, 2007 @11:01AM (#19519247) Journal
    By about $350...
  • oh oh (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Gorkamecha (948294)
    When ever a company adds "refined" to a product it tends to get more expensive not less.... Playstation 3, it's for more refined tastes...not like some cheap Wii. Hey this sort of thing works for bottled water companies! What could possibly go wrong?
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by sqldr (838964)
      1) cheap Wii....
      2) Hey this sort of thing works for bottled water companies...

      I sincerely hope that wasn't deliberate..
  • by realinvalidname (529939) on Friday June 15, 2007 @11:13AM (#19519413) Homepage
    Maybe the fact that a PS3 with one game costs as much as a 360 and a Wii combined?
    • less games than a xbox360. Cost more than 360 and Wii combined. lame

      oh, wait ...
      • by Bobartig (61456)
        An x360 without a harddrive is a big mistake. Your forgetting, as Penny-arcade said, "the core system does not exist " Wii + x360 is $50 more than a PS3.. but having ample experience with all three systems, I can say that extra $50 is well worth it for two great systems compared to a ps3.

        • by trdrstv (986999)

          An x360 without a harddrive is a big mistake. Your forgetting, as Penny-arcade said, "the core system does not exist " Wii + x360 is $50 more than a PS3.. but having ample experience with all three systems, I can say that extra $50 is well worth it for two great systems compared to a ps3.

          Actually, I suspect he meant the Premium since he said "Costs less than a PS3 and a game". Which is actually a more fair comparison as the Wii comes with a game already.

          In US Dollars a Wii = $250 + a $400 premium is

  • So... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by brkello (642429) on Friday June 15, 2007 @11:14AM (#19519435)
    It is about every 2 days when we get someone from Sony talking about price cuts then someone else at Sony saying that there won't be price cuts. Now come all the posts on how it is stupid for a company to announce a price drop until they are ready to actually drop the price. blah blah blah...news worthy? blah blah blah. It's Friday morning...I need something better than this to get me through the rest of the day.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by EggyToast (858951)
      Well the caveat that they shouldn't announce until they're ready to drop the prices implies that people would actually buy the console at the current price :)
  • 'Nintendo Wii has been a successful enterprise, and a very good business model, compared with ours . . . because it's cheaper'

    Wow, this guy needs to win the "Captain Obvious" award of the year!
    • by Daniel_Staal (609844) <DStaal@usa.net> on Friday June 15, 2007 @11:25AM (#19519567)
      Actually, it's not obvious. The XBox 360 for instance is also cheaper, and not getting as much buzz at the moment. (Perhaps just because it isn't 'new' at the moment, but also because it isn't as 'different' as the Wii is.)

      Yes, the Wii is cheaper, and yes it is sucessful, but is it sucessful just because it is cheaper? I sincerly doubt it. I think Sony and Nintendo intentionally aimed for different target audiences, and Sony found out that the audience they targeted at didn't exist in the numbers they thought existed. Now they will have to scramble to market a product to an audience it is not designed for. Meanwhile, Nintendo judged their market quite well.
      • by Applekid (993327)
        Yes, the Wii is cheaper, and yes it is sucessful, but is it sucessful just because it is cheaper?

        Unfortunately, the ellipses in the TFS are also in TFA. I think they might hide a little more than that.

        Then again, considering the audience of the article, cost cost cost price price price seem to be the major motivations.
        • Yes, the Wii is cheaper, and yes it is sucessful, but is it sucessful just because it is cheaper?

          Unfortunately, the ellipses in the TFS are also in TFA. I think they might hide a little more than that.

          Yeah, I noticed that as well. I suspect the speaker knew what he was talking about, and that 'cost' is just the variable Sony is most able to change at this point. (And that he tailored his speach for his audience...)


      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by CastrTroy (595695)
        While the target audiences are different, the target audiences overlapped. Nintendo chose to build a console that almost everyone would like in some way. Sony chose to build a console that only a small portion of people would like. Sony limited their market by making it cost so much, that even a lot of people who would probably want one, aren't buying one. Same thing happened to NeoGeo. Everybody that I knew who saw the thing said they wanted one, but I don't know anybody who actually bought one. I wo
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by stratjakt (596332)
          AH NEO GEO now you're talking.

          Actually, Neo Geo was originally designed as a rental machine, the idea was you'd go to EB and rent one for your birthday party, so you could play real arcade games at home. Hence, the high prices. They put the cartridges on a different physical format so arcade operators couldnt use them, otherwise the hardware and games are identical.

          Anyways, once they started showing up, people wanted to buy them - so EB started selling them. The prices never dropped, once again, they we
          • by CastrTroy (595695)
            I didn't know the Neo Geo was supposed to be a rental unit. Anyway, the only place I ever say it was at my local rental shop. My local video game rental shop had set up their own arcade. They had a bunch of SNES/Genesis/Neo Geo machines set up, and you payed by the hour to play the games. I think you could buy time in 15 minute or half hour slots. I'm sure they made a killing this way. First, you could try out the consoles and games before you bought them, and it got people into the store to rent games
  • Games (Score:5, Insightful)

    by strider2k (945409) on Friday June 15, 2007 @11:18AM (#19519491) Homepage
    I don't really care about the price. I'd be glad to pay the $600 US dollars for the premium. The sad part is, what games will I get? The answer is none. I don't have a big HD tv. So unless they release at least 1 big gun soon (MGS4 or FF13) then there's no incentive for me to buy. I guess I'll play my ds/gba (lots of good games) or board games (Settlers or Puerto Rico)!!!

    When they do bring the AAA top tier games, then it'll be World War III in console terms.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      So unless they release at least 1 big gun soon (MGS4 or FF13) then there's no incentive for me to buy.
      I think the major point is that they need to release AAA exclusives. If they lose exclusivity on either (or both) MGS/FF, then there is little reason, if any, for people to buy a PS3 over a 360. Given Sony's woes as of late, how long will the company allow their playstation division to hemorrhage money? It's not like they've got a blank check like the MS gaming division.
      • Re:Games (Score:4, Informative)

        by Lightwarrior (73124) on Friday June 15, 2007 @12:00PM (#19520105) Journal
        It's worse than the PS3 needing just AAA exclusives - there's a general dearth of quality games available. Check out Game Rankings / Metacritic / GameStats / the rating grouper of your choice; the only game above 90% is Oblivion. There are four exclusives in the Top 20: Resistance, Motorstorm, Virtual Fighter 5, and flOw.

        And once you get out of the Top 20, the ratings has already dropped below 80%. That's a serious, serious issue.
    • Re:Games (Score:4, Insightful)

      by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Friday June 15, 2007 @11:52AM (#19519971) Homepage Journal

      So unless they release at least 1 big gun soon (MGS4 or FF13) then there's no incentive for me to buy.

      the sad thing is that they said that the console would heat up for christmas, but the great games wouldn't come out until after that. So Sony has what, one maybe two A-list titles until after christmas?

      That's a long time.

      When they do bring the AAA top tier games, then it'll be World War III in console terms.

      I don't know, will it be? Will they still be in the running by then? I'm kind of thinking that there's some good games on the Xbox 360 right now, that pretty much everyone in the market has a PS2 so back-compatibility is a total non-issue, and that people will be buying Wiis (they are becoming more available even now) and Xbox 360s while they're waiting for Sony to get their shit together and get out some games.

      But, maybe that's just wishful thinking.

    • by DrXym (126579)
      The release schedule is cranking up significantly. Major games like The Darkness, Rainbow 6: Vegas, Ninja Gaiden Sigma are imminent, with Stranglehold, Lair, Warhawk, Singstar, Heavenly Sword, Assassins Creed appearing in the next 2 or 3 months. In total there are something like 70 or so titles appearing before the end of year many of which are exclusives.

      I think if Sony knocked off $100 or $125 that combined with the busier release schedule they'd probably quadruple their sales.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by amuro98 (461673)
        The PS3 needs exclusive games that are "good" or better. Darkness isn't exclusive, nor is Assassins Creed.

        I don't know why people keep mentioning Singstar. Do you honestly think a karaoke/DDR game is going to convince anyone to buy a PS3? Even fans of those games aren't going to spend $600 (or even $500) just to get a single game.

        Warhawk is very confusing, as it was first a Blu-ray game, then was a online only deathmatch type game that you would download, for free even. Now it's supposedly both a BR AN
        • by DrXym (126579)
          The PS3 needs exclusive games that are "good" or better. Darkness isn't exclusive, nor is Assassins Creed.

          Not really. It needs a constant stream of titles, including hits, including downloadable content. I mentioned those games because they're coming out soon. The second half of this year is very full. Sony has plenty of exclusives lined up too for that period..

          I don't know why people keep mentioning Singstar. Do you honestly think a karaoke/DDR game is going to convince anyone to buy a PS3? Even fans o

          • by LKM (227954)

            The Wii does have strong sales, but the fact is that its no more powerful than an Xbox. It's last gen and nothing will change that. It doesn't have the legs to carry it more than a few years.

            A lot of the points you make are good, but this one isn't. It's ignorant and moronic. First, the definition of "current gen" is that it came out during this generation. The Wii came out during this generation. That makes it current-gen.

            Second, even if you go with the "metaphysical" definition of "current-gen," you'd come up with something like "significantly different from last gen." Now tell me, what games are the most different from last gen? Ninja Gaiden Sigma is basically a hi-res Xbox game. Most 360

      • by prockcore (543967)
        Well, two of those "imminent" games are going to be on the 360 as well. The PS3 has to do BETTER than the 360... it can't just be "as good".
      • by LKM (227954)
        Taking out ports and remakes, we have Lair, Warhawk and Heavenly Sword, two of which are at least somewhat questionable. Warhawk had major issues during development, Lair seems to have issues with control. I have high hopes for all of these games, but even if they deliver, I doubt these are the kinds of games that sell consoles. The PS3 needs an exclusive GTA, it needs a new MGS, and it needs FF. Then it will be able to compete with the 360.

        The Wii is another story altogether. For the Wii, the PS3 needs exc
    • by donaldm (919619)
      Well you can do like I did and look arround for a good bargin on the PS3 since I got mine for AU$499 (approx US$410) with a working PS2 plus 10 PS2 games. Granted there are not many PS3 games I am intersted in but then again there are not many games I am interested in for the Wii or the Xbox360 either.

      It may come as a shock to many but there are plenty of used and new games for the PS2 and since firmware update 1.8 most PS1/2 games work (Australian PS3 uses emulation unlike the US/Japan one that uses hardwa
  • Yes the price is high but I am not sure it's the price stopping a lot of people. When someone is going to buy a system now they aren't thinking I will buy this machine now and hope the game I want comes out, they are thinking I am buying this because they are games out now I want to get.

    Sony needs games and fast. Good games that are exclusive. That will solve their biggest problem. If the ps3 dropped to 300 bucks would anyone outside the I want blue-ray/linux running on it/etc. crowd buy one? I'm n
    • by Floritard (1058660) on Friday June 15, 2007 @12:01PM (#19520117)
      I'll tell you right now, the price is stopping me. And that is all that is stopping me. I had a Wii for a few months. I bought it on an impulse (right place right time), partly because I was intrigued by the new control scheme, but mostly because it's waaay cheaper than the other "next-gen" systems. I have since given it away to a friend of mine because I promised to buy her one at some point, but also because there are no games out for it that I really want (yet). While I did get bored of it already, the lack of games wasn't something that stopped me from buying it in the first place. And the Wii is so cheap that I'll easily pick one up again when they become more available. Not so with that wallet monster PS3. I can build most of a new PC off newegg for the price of that little bastard. Games or no games, it gives me pause dropping $600+ on a fucking console, they're supposed to be the cheap alternative to PC gaming. As it stands now I really don't know what to do, there are games coming out that I am looking forward to but luckily they aren't here yet. I'm on the fence here, I'll definitely get another Wii, but I will also want either a 360 or a PS3 for those truly next-gen games. Despite Sony's incompetance of late, I really dislike Microsoft's history of foul play and would prefer to stop buying into their products, especially after this power-grab Vista/DX10 business. I'm not especially excited about giving Microsoft so much control over the gaming world. But that PS3 is so damn expensive that I'm worried if I buy it I'll be stuck with a failed system. An expensive failed system. This whole gen is off to a bad start if you ask me. Too much risk. I'm waiting, and the industry isn't getting my gaming dollar.
      • by svendsen (1029716)
        I can respect that. Question though: if the price was still $600 BUT they where say 10 triple AAA games you really wanted would that effect your decision at all?

        As for the not wanting to support MS because you don't like them obviously that's a valid point for you. For me I bought one when there was at least a few games I really wanted (oblivion was my first) and that was back in Aug. 06.
  • as they cost more then ps3 and they are missing a few blue ray features and it plays games as well as running linux.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by seebs (15766)
      You're sort of begging the question, there. You're assuming that a blu-ray player is worth buying at "full price", and looking at this as a discount.

      If I open a store called "McDucks" that sells bad hamburgers for $500, and then McDonalds starts selling them for $90, does the fact that they're more than 80% cheaper make them a good deal? No.

      Blu-ray isn't worth the money, so getting it for only way too much instead of WTF are you thinking too much is not a big deal.
    • by DeeDob (966086)
      But for HD movies, HD-DVD players are way cheaper than a PS3 (which is in turn cheaper than a BluRay player, like you said).

      Why buy a PS3 for BluRay if i can have HD-DVD for less?

      It's not as if any of those two formats has already become a, and i use the term loosely, "winner".

      The, again i use the next term loosely, "smart" people buy their HD movies in digital, downloadable format through various online marketplaces. That way, no matter if a format fails or is discontinued, they will still be able to watch
  • This just in... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by pragma_x (644215) on Friday June 15, 2007 @11:29AM (#19519633) Journal
    ""'Nintendo Wii has been a successful enterprise, and a very good business model, compared with ours . . . because it's cheaper,' "

    In a recent shake-up within the Japan-based electronics juggernaut Sony, Captain Obvious was promoted to the position of CEO.
  • by tonywestonuk (261622) on Friday June 15, 2007 @11:31AM (#19519663)
    erm, I could buy a C64 from ebay, and play "break-out" games...
    • Yeah, but sliding the SIXAXIS back and forth is going to make the PS3 version kick ass.
  • by MrAngryForNoReason (711935) on Friday June 15, 2007 @11:42AM (#19519841)

    Nintendo Wii has been a successful enterprise, and a very good business model, compared with ours...

    Oh yes the revolutionary business model of selling a product for a reasonable price while still making a profit. Opposed to Sony's excellent method of selling at a staggeringly high price and *still* making a loss on each unit sold. Genius.

  • by Fross (83754) on Friday June 15, 2007 @11:51AM (#19519953) Homepage
    A common argument for the high price of the PS3 is that "hey, it includes a blu-ray player!" Which is true, and changes something.

    The PS3 isn't the most expensive console, rather, it is the cheapest available Blu-ray player.

    So not only does Sony have part of the market for the next-gen console market with the PS3, but it also has the vast majority of the HD-video market as well.

    The sales figures are testament more to the fact that nobody wants HD video at the moment, and forcing people to take it in a bundle is crucifying them. The PS3 may be better than the 360 (the games look about the same to me), but it costs $300 more (at least here in the UK) - that's a lot to a gamer. You can make a car with a gold steering wheel for an extra $50,000, but if nobody *wants* a gold steering wheel, then your car isn't going to sell at all, as good as it is, unless you can sell if without the steering wheel.

    • by SparkyFlooner (1090661) on Friday June 15, 2007 @12:08PM (#19520243)
      I have the 360 add-on HD-DVD player, and I find myself ignoring HD-DVD titles and just renting regular DVDs. (and yes, I have an hdtv) Regular DVDs still look good, you know? Even 200 bucks on an HD player seems like too much for what you get. I would've been content watching regular DVDs until the price of an HD player came down to 100 or less.
      • by DarkJC (810888)
        I don't get it. If the movie is available on both HD-DVD as well as DVD, then why would you pick up the DVD for rental because it "still looks good"? They may still look good, but if you've spent $200 on the player and have an HDTV to take advantage of, why not get something that looks better? Obviously some movies are still only available on DVD, but I assume you're not talking about that.
        • by prockcore (543967)

          f the movie is available on both HD-DVD as well as DVD, then why would you pick up the DVD for rental because it "still looks good"?


          Probably because HD-DVD/Bluray rentals are more expensive than DVD rentals. That and blockbuster and friends don't even carry HD-DVD/Bluray rentals.
      • Do you really have an HDTV, or do you just have a 480p TV? DVDs do generally look nice, but even on an XGA screen, HD-DVD is noticeably nicer, much nicer on higher resolution screens. On something that's 1080p, there is simply no contest, it's not worth passing over the HD discs.

        I'm in the market for an HD player because of how nice the 1080p trailers look when I play them through my HTPC, basically looks like a film projection, but without the drawbacks of film projection.

        I personally would expect to see
    • by afidel (530433)
      Well, at $300 more than the 360 it's $100 more than the 360+HD-DVD combo, so they are screwed even if you are looking for a next generation movie player. I personally plan to get the 360 HDDVD drive for my PC, I already have all the gaming I want, plus excellent media center capabilities on the PC, why not add next generation movie capabilities for a third the cost of a PS3 =)
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by DarkJC (810888)
        You're applying American prices to UK prices.

        In the UK, it costs £381.96 on Amazon for a 360 Premium + HD-DVD player...381.96 GBP = 755.107 USD
        It costs £399.99 for a PS3...399.99 GBP = 790.754 USD

        Hardly $100. The 360 is slightly discounted on Amazon at the moment as well, otherwise they'd turn out to be the same. And that's with a 360 that lacks an HDMI port..if you wanted one it'd end up costing you more than the PS3.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by DrEldarion (114072)
      There's a lot more to using blu-ray than just promoting a new format (though I'm sure that's part of it). With gaming this gen, games are going to be LARGE. We already saw PS2 games spanning multiple DVDs, so it makes sense to move to a bigger storage medium as standard. It's already been stated that Resistance would have had to be on two dual-layer DVDs, and Rockstar said they're having issues with storage space on the 360 version. Not including a better drive in the 360, to me, shows a pretty big lack of
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        Agreed. More space can only be a good thing. The problem is if PS3 doesn't really land many exclusives, all the 'cool' games will be designed for multiple consoles using the least common denominator, which is DVD. So sure there's more space on a Blu Ray disk, and the games could look and sound better on a PS3, but the space wouldn't really be used for gameplay.
    • by toolie (22684)
      The PS3 isn't the most expensive console, rather, it is the cheapest available Blu-ray player.

      So not only does Sony have part of the market for the next-gen console market with the PS3, but it also has the vast majority of the HD-video market as well.

      The sales figures are testament more to the fact that nobody wants HD video at the moment, and forcing people to take it in a bundle is crucifying them.


      One of the biggest problems I see with using the PS3 as a Blu-Ray player is its form factor. It won't fit in
  • Hope... (Score:2, Interesting)

    I sincerely hope Sony doesn't believe Nintendo is beating them simply because of price.

    I sincerely believe they aren't that silly, but these days you never can tell.
    • by Chris Burke (6130)
      One thing at a time, man. They can only have so many revelations at a time.

      Obviously the price is significant, only complete morons thought it wasn't, by which I mean Sony execs. They're slowly figuring out that a $600 console is inherently unappealing and will never be mass-market.

      Once they've wrapped their head around that concept, then they can start figuring out the other problems with their strategy.
    • Re:Hope... (Score:4, Informative)

      by Pluvius (734915) <[pluvius3] [at] [gmail.com]> on Friday June 15, 2007 @04:44PM (#19524429) Journal
      Certainly Sony knows that the Wii is currently selling because of a combination of price and hype. Hype wasn't mentioned because the question Stringer was asked was about the PS3's price. You'll notice that Sony is trying to combat the hype problem elsewhere, like in their new blog.

      BTW, here [ft.com] is a transcript of the interview in question. You'll also notice that Stringer did counterargue the idea that the Wii is selling better because it's more fun.

      Rob
      • by Abcd1234 (188840)
        Certainly Sony knows that the Wii is currently selling because of a combination of price and hype.

        What you call hype, I call positive reviews (and evidence of your pre-existing bias against the system). It makes no sense, six months after the system's release, to refer to the current ferver over the Wii as hype. Hype, to me, implies a lack of evidence. But at this point, it's pretty clear the Wii is delivering on it's promise (though, admittedly, the current game selection is a bit limited... 'course, th
        • by Pluvius (734915)
          What you call hype, I call positive reviews

          Positive reviews of what? Only one Wii game has a score of over 90% on Game Rankings, and it's not an exclusive. Only four others (one not exclusive) have a score of over 80%. Only two games have had enduring popularity among Wii owners, and one of them is the tech demo that came with the system. And in my experience, plenty of those owners have talked about how their Wiis have been gathering dust since they got bored with playing said tech demo. It's just ane
          • by Abcd1234 (188840)
            Positive reviews of what?

            Of the console design and control system, of course. I already addressed the fact that games have been somewhat lackluster (though, relative to the PS3 lineup, the Wii is doing stellar). But the system has demonstrated it's potential, and people are happy with it. Meanwhile, I've yet to see a review that casts the Wii in a negative light. So either the hype continues unabated, and Nintendo is crushing all negative press, or your view of things is just a tad skewed.

            There are a b
            • by Pluvius (734915)
              Of the console design and control system, of course.

              How can you possibly separate discussion of the console from the discussion of its games? A console without games is nothing more than a paperweight.

              I already addressed the fact that games have been somewhat lackluster (though, relative to the PS3 lineup, the Wii is doing stellar).

              The PS3 has several more high-rated games than the Wii does, not to mention better third-party support. Not that that's relevant, since we're talking about the performance of t
              • How can you possibly separate discussion of the console from the discussion of its games? A console without games is nothing more than a paperweight.

                A console without controllers is nothing more than a paperweight.

                That sentence can be reworked for everything from players, to TVs, to Pluto. It is true that a console requires good games, but it is also true that control and design are also important.

                The PS3 has several more high-rated games than the Wii does, not to mention better third-party support. Not tha

                • Bah, I missed the preview key accidentally. Serves me right.

                  Here's the fixed version.

                  How can you possibly separate discussion of the console from the discussion of its games? A console without games is nothing more than a paperweight.

                  A console without controllers is nothing more than a paperweight.

                  That sentence can be reworked for everything from players, to TVs, to Pluto. It is true that a console requires good games, but it is also true that control and design are also important.

                  The PS3 has several more h

  • I prefer to think of my video gaming experience as a fine dining experience, as Sony so helpfully suggested [gamesindustry.biz]. I cannot believe they would betray my trust by discounting their truly unique console to McDonald's-level prices. They've already said it was too cheap, and now they would cheapen it further? Traitorous hounds!
  • by Chelloveck (14643) on Friday June 15, 2007 @01:03PM (#19521081) Homepage

    'Nintendo Wii has been a successful enterprise, and a very good business model, compared with ours . . . because it's cheaper,'

    And here I thought the reason for the Wii's success relative to the PS3 is because the Wii has games that don't suck. What a fool I was.

  • The PS3 is a wonderful device. It has amazing abilities and is a shining example of what one company can do when all the stops are pulled and the horizon is just the beginning.

    Sound familiar?

    Until Sony admits they are selling the console equivalent of the Bugatti Veyron, nothing much is going to change in the marketplace. Consider the commonalities. Exceptional performance; pushing the envelope; losing considerable amounts of money when each one is sold? Rabid fans line up to buy one. Not much you can
    • by Ant P. (974313)

      Ok, Sony - the PS3 is a milestone - sure to go down in history. Nothing can compare.

      Saturn? Dreamcast? Neo-Geo?
      • Dreamcast?

        Blasphemy MOTHER FUCKER! Do you speak it?!

        But seriously, if the ps3 had the possibility of being the next dreamcast, I'd actually buy one!
        • by Ant P. (974313)
          Yeah, sorry about that. Guess I'm still bitter that they killed off Shenmue mid-series.

The more cordial the buyer's secretary, the greater the odds that the competition already has the order.

Working...