By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Is cutting the PS3's price cheating?

Paying 50 million for GTA IV is cheating.
Releasing it a year early is cheating.
Having Bill Gates is cheating.
Having Halo is cheating.



"Why isn't samus in a mario kart game?"

Around the Network

nah i live in canada leo-j. 360 rapes ps3 here.



Your friends are crazy. Price cuts, or lower prices, aren't cheating in any conceivable notion.......however, I deem it cheating or unfair if big retail chains are trying to get rid of small mom and pop stores (but this is beside the point).

Sony can be called cheap however for pirating software (hypocrites!).



Not cheating at all, if it helps them put more units in peoples homes, which in turn will sell games, movies and enhance their brand name. Then it's more like MISSION ACCOMPLISHED



www.talkxbox.com - It is what it is!

Actually in the earlier days of capitalism, there was a common practice whereby companies would sell products below cost for the purpose of undercutting their competitors. Usually the company doing it is very profitable and has revenue from other sources while their competitors did not and could not compete with the below cost prices. They would eventually go out of business. Standard oil did this a lot to maintain their monopoly.

That practice is still around today, primarily under international law and is called "dumping" or "predatory pricing" Dumping can be defined as:

"the act of a manufacturer in one country exporting a product to another country at a price which is either below the price it charges in its home market or is below its costs of production."

It is actually an illegal practice under international trade laws but it is extremely difficult to bring before courts (both US and internationally) because there's a lot of hurdles to prove predatory pricing.

However, governments typically will not prosecute based on these laws because unless there's a clear cut case of an monopoly occurring or antitrust behavior, usually its beneficial to consumers. This falls under that category.



Around the Network
leo-j said:
CaptainPrefrences said:
@ gebx

no, we were in a heated discussion about ps3 and 360.

If you live in the US, the 360 will always be better, dont even try to argue.


 That is the second time I have heard you say this, and I am wondering why.

You seem to be very jaded about the fact that a lot of Americans like the 360. It was the only next gen system around for almost a year, can you blame them? 

They will come around.. give it time. the tides are slowly changing, and I think the younger (and therefor poorer) audience such as other people your age will be some of the last to join the PS3 bandwagon.

Some people are just blind and ignorant to factual analysis. By mid 09, I would be suprised if PS3 wasn't consistantly outselling the 360 in the US by a wide margin. 



̶3̶R̶D̶   2ND! Place has never been so sweet.


it's not cheating
360 has cut the price before and u can't expect the consoles to remain at the same price for the entire lifetime



Be quick to point out a simple fact: if MS didn't have to set aside over $1bn to cover future RROD defects, the 360 would very likely have seen a more aggressive pricing strategy in the interest of maintaining hardware market share.

That is the real reason why we've seen only one very modest price drop across the product line after 18 months of sales. Not because "it's been selling so well we have had no need for more aggressive price cuts!"

Just going by historical console pricing, the 360 should be retailing for less than what it is. If it hadn't been for the RROD extended warranty, it would be.



^ so true.



Trying to be competitive in the market place when the competition has a head start, those sneaky, underhanded bastards.