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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Alternate history: What if PS3 launched without Cell or Blu-Ray at $399?

I don't think they should have ditched Blu-ray. But, if they had gone with a cheaper, more off the shelf CPU, and still taken a hit so they could release for $399, there's no doubt it would have been a similar result to this gen. You wouldn't have had the develop struggles that Cell presented early on, so multiplats wouldn't have been so underwhelming for the first year or so. And there wouldn't have been the drastic $200 price difference that MS was able to take full advantage of.



Around the Network

If the hardware was still well-rounded, and Sony didn’t piss off third party partners, It would’ve been an easy 100+ million seller, and 360 would’ve almost certainly sold a lot fewer than it did.



0331 Happiness is a belt-fed weapon

Cerebralbore101 said:
The entire gaming landscape would be different today. Part of the reason why more and more games went multiplatform, was because they couldn't make enough money selling on just PS3. But if PS3 was easy to code for and at that $400 price point, it would have sold somewhere between 100-120 million. 360 would have been 40-65 million. 360 gained a ton of momentum off of having console versions of PC games that PS3 didn't have, or running those games better if PS3 actually had them.

Imagine the PS3 with...

Left 4 Dead
Mass Effect Not delayed for years.
No Oblivion Delay
No Bioshock Delay
GTA4 exclusivity
Assassin's Creed franchise exclusivity
Ace Combat 6 exclusivity
Dead Rising
DMC4 exclusivity
Final Fantasy franchise exclusivity
Dragon Age
Fallout 3 running smoothly
Fallout NV running smoothly
and a ton more games. Too many for me to remember or list. It would have been almost a complete repeat of the PS2 gen in terms of Sony exclusivity. Any game franchise that was exclusive to PS2 would have stayed exclusive to PS3.

Sony was focused on power so if they went with a traditional CPU they likely would have flat out had the better console as far as graphics comparisons go.

I don't see why GTA or Assassin's Creed would have been exclusive. I also don't think that the PS3's hard to program architecture is the sole reason why games went multiplatform. The fact is, development costs were rising rapidly. Games went from around 5 million dollars to develop on PS2 to 25  million dollars to develop on PS3. I think that many games still would have been multiplatform, but I also think that there would have been less timed exclusives on the 360.



The PS3 could probably have reached 100 million and matched or beaten the Wii for the gen.
But more interestingly the PS2 might not be the best selling console if this was the case. Part of why it reached such ridiciolous sales was that it didn't really slow down at all when the PS3 first launced because it was waay more expensive. A 400 $ launch point might not have made a huge difference in PS2 sales since it was still significantly cheaper, but it could maybe have put it at an even 150 mil, which the DS would then beat later on. Just speculation ofc, but it's interesting to think that consoles can also compete with their own follow up. In the same way the DS might have sold more if the 3DS hadn't gotten its early price cut and maybe the PS4 isn't geting a price cut now because it could hurt PS5 sales (at least early on, in the long run it's harder to say).



UnderwaterFunktown said:
The PS3 could probably have reached 100 million and matched or beaten the Wii for the gen.
But more interestingly the PS2 might not be the best selling console if this was the case. Part of why it reached such ridiciolous sales was that it didn't really slow down at all when the PS3 first launced because it was waay more expensive. A 400 $ launch point might not have made a huge difference in PS2 sales since it was still significantly cheaper, but it could maybe have put it at an even 150 mil, which the DS would then beat later on. Just speculation ofc, but it's interesting to think that consoles can also compete with their own follow up. In the same way the DS might have sold more if the 3DS hadn't gotten its early price cut and maybe the PS4 isn't geting a price cut now because it could hurt PS5 sales (at least early on, in the long run it's harder to say).

I don't think it would have affected PS2 much. The people waiting to buy the PS2 for $149 would be the same people who would wait for the PS3 to hit $149, $199 max.  And once the PS2 hit $79-$99, it became cheap enough to become an impulse buy.  It also sold to many newer, poorer countries that Sony expanded into at the end of the gen. So, max I think it would have lowered it by 1M-2M.



Around the Network

PS3 would do 120-140M in sales, Xbox would have been under 40M and MS would have left the market before trying X1.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

LudicrousSpeed said:
twintail said:

If the architecture could easily have been utilized by the PS4, I imagine you would have PS3 BC out of the gate Whether this means less remasters is debatable since a remaster would, theoretically, be better looking and more content complete. Like, I think TloU Remaster would still be a thing because it essentially acts as a 'GoTY edition'.

In fact, I imagine a similar thing will happen with PS5 (and XSX maybe?). There will be remasters but they will basically be the complete edition of the game, so FF15 with all content or KH3 with all content in a single package etc. While the content itself is not exclusive to next gen, that particular release will be. 

Just my thoughts 

After CDPR announced that people who buy Cyberpunk on current gen Xbone get the XSX upgrade free, I hope it pressures other publishers to follow suit and not make us buy games twice. I’m sure Sony has a similar plan in place.

Start of this gen several games also had crossbuy for little more.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

The lack of the Blu-ray drive makes the extent of success murky. Ditching the cell processor would have virtually no drawbacks. I'd say 100 million would be a lock in this situation. 125 million wouldn't be pie-in-the-sky either.



Lifetime Sales Predictions 

PS4: 130 mil (was 100 million) Xbox One: 55 mil (was 50 mil) Switch: 110 million (was 73, then 96 million)

3DS: 75.5 mil (was 73, then 77 million)

"Let go your earthly tether, enter the void, empty and become wind." - Guru Laghima

Wman1996 said:
The lack of the Blu-ray drive makes the extent of success murky. Ditching the cell processor would have virtually no drawbacks. I'd say 100 million would be a lock in this situation. 125 million wouldn't be pie-in-the-sky either.

I find it almost impossible that making PS3 200 cheaper for the whole gen (which would mean it could have been 149 by the end of the life) would just increase 20% the sales. For me it would certainly do over 120M, X360 wouldn't have had any wind. It would be more dominant than PS4 is since X1 was able to do well enough in USA and UK due to X360 building a good fanbase (that didn't really exist by the time of original Xbox).



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

thismeintiel said:
UnderwaterFunktown said:
The PS3 could probably have reached 100 million and matched or beaten the Wii for the gen.
But more interestingly the PS2 might not be the best selling console if this was the case. Part of why it reached such ridiciolous sales was that it didn't really slow down at all when the PS3 first launced because it was waay more expensive. A 400 $ launch point might not have made a huge difference in PS2 sales since it was still significantly cheaper, but it could maybe have put it at an even 150 mil, which the DS would then beat later on. Just speculation ofc, but it's interesting to think that consoles can also compete with their own follow up. In the same way the DS might have sold more if the 3DS hadn't gotten its early price cut and maybe the PS4 isn't geting a price cut now because it could hurt PS5 sales (at least early on, in the long run it's harder to say).

I don't think it would have affected PS2 much. The people waiting to buy the PS2 for $149 would be the same people who would wait for the PS3 to hit $149, $199 max.  And once the PS2 hit $79-$99, it became cheap enough to become an impulse buy.  It also sold to many newer, poorer countries that Sony expanded into at the end of the gen. So, max I think it would have lowered it by 1M-2M.

Hmm, well you make a good point, but I still think it might have been more than 1 or 2 mil. Part of the reason it kept selling could also be that it kept getting tons of games for a few years after the PS3 came out, but a stronger start for the PS3 (and not using Cell) could have meant that developers transitioned over to that quicker.