How many people would stop buying Nike products if their price suddenly doubled?
Anyway, I figure a large portion of Sony’s fans are teens that still get their money from their parents… How many parents do you think will be willing to buy such an expensive “toy” for their kids? Won’t a rather large portion of them decide to opt for something else as little Timmy’s Christmas present, especially when the salesman shows them the alternatives and how they get a lot of the same software, etc?
Now, obviously, Sony won’t be dieing any time soon but this can certainly be the BIG chance M$ and Nintendo needed in order to gain a larger percentage of the market…
A lot of people who want it on Deviantart are saying that they won’t pay over $400 for it and on Gamespot, the majority of people said if it wasn’t coming with the HDD (which it probably wont) they would only pay up to $300 or go with an Xbox $360. I think not even diehard Sony fans are stupid enough to spend $400+ on something without the HDD, a horrid looking controller (which they are still convinced looks comfortable), spending at least $10 more on a game that they can get for the 360 because of Sony’s chosen Blue Ray format, and other problems. After this, I think Xbox will gain a lot more fans because Sony is loosing its exclusive franchizes to turn to multiformat such as FF, and then there is the fact that Lost Odessey and Blue Dragon are going to get so much attention because of thier developers. Ken Kutaragi is ruining playstation, this is both a good thing and a bad thing. Playstations aren’t really that bad, its the fanboys that are bad, and Ken Kutaragi is trying to cater to them, which is also punching up the PS3’s expected price range. But what he’s forgetting is that these are everyday people, not usually rich enough to afford a $500 machine that they don’t really need and still have money to live on.
Kutaragi is doing what he’s always done - stirring up controversy. He’s actually really good at it. He makes wild statements that he pretty much never has to answer to, and gets everyone talking about the PS2/3/whatever. And see? It’s working.
As to the Nike analogy, prices have significantly increased over the years. They haven’t necessarily doubled, but I doubt the PS3 will be double the price of the PS2 at launch, as well. Remember, at the launch of the PS2, when there were hardware shortages, people were paying over $1,000 to get one on Ebay. Granted, that was only a small percentage, but the hype was out there.
Or heck, look at the iPod. It’s nearly double the cost of a lot of other products, but it’s the MP3 player to have (hell, I have one). Did the exhorbitant price point stop people from buying it?
It’s an absolute joke. I can’t believe he actually thinks people are going to say “Oh I’m going to work extra hours to get this!” No, people are going to get a console which can basicly do the same thing but for cheaper (Xbox 360)
360 in 2005 and PS3 in 2007? Egads, is the world mad? I wouldn’t mind waiting till 2007 for Halo 3 though, if it meant they could actually make it decent.
I don’t think it’s the average consumer that isn’t smart, it’s the ‘gamers’ (i hate that word ><) that still claim the pre-rendered killzone 2 demo is real or at least done to spec that are stupid Al3x made a good point about people that still get money from thier parents (I was never lucky enough to get any :P), they won’t want to spend $500 (just a guess) on something when they could get another thing that’s cheaper and has the same functions. Also, one of the reasons the PS2 sold so well was because it had such a long headstart on all the others, I think that the same might hold up for M$, if only for a little bit.
Eh? The Saturn was released before the PSOne, no? And the Dreamcast got a headstart too… But you know what happened with both when opposed to Sony’s consoles even though those came later on both cases…
And on top of that, Sony seems to be using the same tactics as they did in the Dreamcast era, wanting to make everyone think that the PS3 will be something like ten years ahead of its time and that the rest consoles will pale in comparison so it’s worth the wait
[quote=“Gehpnaet”]
In the end tho how can someone advertize “our console has the best games” when they aim at a 10 year cycle?Sony’s contracts don’t last that long do they.[/quote]
The Playstation 1 had a console cycle of roughly 10 years.
The Playstation 2 is poised to do the same.
I see no reason why the Playstation 3 won’t.
Especially if the cost of system investment, game prices, and development costs are higher than normal.
I guess that is true if we want the “support” Sony is talking about to consist of mainly disney-movie-or-other-cartoon-to-crappy game creations for the last several years of that 10 year cycle…
But I somehow feel that Sony is talking about full on support just as good as within the first two years… Except for the whole ten years they supposdelly are aiming for…
If that is not what they mean, then why would that be the reason they give to justify an expensive product when the ones that came before it also got that much support and weren’t reffered to as expensive?
[quote=“Al3xand3r”]I guess that is true if we want the “support” Sony is talking about to consist of mainly disney-movie-or-other-cartoon-to-crappy game creations for the last several years of that 10 year cycle…
But I somehow feel that Sony is talking about full on support just as good as within the first two years… Except for the whole ten years they supposdelly are aiming for…
[/quote]
Exactly.That’s the big “news” anyways.Or perhaps this is just one big missinterpretation.
Al3x made a good point about people that still get money from thier parents (I was never lucky enough to get any :P), they won’t want to spend $500 (just a guess) on something when they could get another thing that’s cheaper and has the same functions. Also, one of the reasons the PS2 sold so well was because it had such a long headstart on all the others, I think that the same might hold up for M$, if only for a little bit.