If sony is selling the product at a loss doesn't that imply value?

There is synergy. PS3 runs on BR, it's not like BR is just some bonus on the side.

For me, yes (that's why I own one).

For the rest of the world, clearly no.

Wifi built-in and free online is great (for me), but it means nothing if you don't have a wireless network at home (not everyone does) AND if you don't have internet fast enough to support online gaming.

Blu-ray is great for extra content on discs, but if games and movies are becoming more expensive to make, and the blu-ray discs/players more expensive to produce then what was available before, it leads to less content, uncompressed which leads to slightly better viewing for much less viewing time.

The average everyday John Doe won't give a shit. Other than that, yea I'd say it holds up.

The way sony is comparing the consoles indicates that the person buying is a hardcore gamer. The arcade isnt targeting the hardcore gamer but the casual who wont upgrade his system, for sony to make any type of comeback they will have to embrace the casual gamer simply by making the price lower as microsoft has done. Evidently, microsoft hasnt made any changes in which games it has been producing, kill em up games, so the casual consumer is only attracted by price not by a game lineup or value. Sony needs at least a $100 dollar price cut if it wants to get back in the game, the only way to get back in the game is to target causals who only care about up-front price

ymeaga1n said: greenmedic88 said: It's extremely safe to say that onboard WiFi isn't adding $100 to the price of a PS3. The Wii has it. Even the $130 DS has it. It's a standard feature these days whether used or not. The question should really be why the hell doesn't MS add it to the next MoBo redesign? Answer: to sell $100 adapters for a $200 console. As for Blu-Ray, that's what the games are published on. If you want to use it watch BD movies or not, whatever; it's there. And there lies the biggest mistake sony made this generation. Forcing bluray adoption at the expense of its playstation franchise. Bluray wasn't necessary for gaming and is inferior to DVDs for gaming in all regards except space. It astounds me that people actually argue bluray adds value when the only reason it was put in the ps3 is to push sony's agenda. Forcing consumers that don't care for bluray to fork over the extra several hundred for the PS3.

Pushing SONY agenda includes trying to protect themselves from piracy.  I'd say they did a very good job with that for now thanks to BLU-RAY.  With the amount of amazing in house developers to protect I can see why this is so important to them. 

 

I think the value argument holds up well, but only to a segment of the market.

Yes it does.  For everything that is included in the system (even it's current configuration), it is a good deal.  The problem is with the general publics perception of what a console should cost.  Twenty-five years ago the NES released for $199 dollars.  It's now 2009 and people still think $199 is what a console should cost. 

 

 

 

 

 

numonex said: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-10197958-17.html Read the article and comment in here with your valuable feedback.

the general consumer doesnt look at what they are getting in consoles, it will be very hard for sony to advertise the value included. last knight i saw a res5 add for 360 stating consoles from £129 but in reality you need a hardrive so the best package to compare is the pro at £169 and with a years live it racks up at £210 ish..............so for £90 with ps3 you get bluray player wifi and free online. ^but thats very difficult to advertise like that in a nutshell you deffo get much more for your money with a £299 ps3 over any bundle of 360 imo

ymeaga1n said: greenmedic88 said: It's extremely safe to say that onboard WiFi isn't adding $100 to the price of a PS3. The Wii has it. Even the $130 DS has it. It's a standard feature these days whether used or not. The question should really be why the hell doesn't MS add it to the next MoBo redesign? Answer: to sell $100 adapters for a $200 console. As for Blu-Ray, that's what the games are published on. If you want to use it watch BD movies or not, whatever; it's there. And there lies the biggest mistake sony made this generation. Forcing bluray adoption at the expense of its playstation franchise. Bluray wasn't necessary for gaming and is inferior to DVDs for gaming in all regards except space. It astounds me that people actually argue bluray adds value when the only reason it was put in the ps3 is to push sony's agenda. Forcing consumers that don't care for bluray to fork over the extra several hundred for the PS3.

Lol, wtf?

- Mostly region free, unlike DVD which has 9 freaking regions;

- Mandatory hard-coating, ie no disc scratching by drivers;

- I assue you're talking about PS3 drive, since you need only a 6x bd drive to outperform 20x DVD. 8x BD drivers are already on the market and soon we'll see 10-12x.

 

Among others, BD allows 7:1 lossless sound and high-res cutscenes/CGI on PS3.

 

 

The Value argument is fine, but of course in most cases value purchases are more expensive and target a smaller percentage of buyers than the price argument.

I do think the article is right in as much as Sony really does have to bite the bullet on this. It's either:

Stick to value, accept its aiming for a smaller demographic than mass market and focus on profit.

Cut the costs, drop the price and go after mass market with an acceptable up-front cost (which is what mass market purchasers look at primarily).

Right now (understandably) Sony would love to get both, but that's not going to happen, and the current Credit Crunch is making things a lot worse as it tends to drive more consumers to use price in preference to value to make decisions.