Archive for July, 2006
I’m constantly seeing/hearing/reading people complaining about the price of the PS3, claiming it’s too expensive for a gaming machine. Well it’s time I explained why I feel the PS3 is worth the £425 price tag even though I will be using it mainly for games & DVDs.
When I hear someone say “I’m not paying £425 for a games console!” I immediately think they are looking at it the same way your parents probably viewed gaming when you were a kid: “Oh they will grow out of it once they become adults & join the real world”.
Gaming should no longer be viewed as “being for kids”. According to ESA (Entertainment Software Association), the average age of gamers in North America is 33 & they’ve been playing games for 12 years.
I’m 26 (27 very shortly) & I’ve been gaming since I was 6. So why do people keep saying “I’m not paying £400+ for a games machine!” actually belittling a hobby that brings them a lot of joy & actually treating it as if it’s a toy, when they are more than happy to pay similar amounts for other (more adult classified) electrical equipment that they will also use on a regular basis!
The PS3 is a top of the range gaming machine (well depending on which camp you’re in ) and if you wanted to buy a top of the range DVD recorder/PC/Laptop/mobile phone/MP3 player/TV etc, most people are quite willing to pay the asking price or close to it. These can range from £200 – £4000.
With products like MP3 players, mobile phones, PCs/Laptops they will usually last around 1-2 years before you need to replace or upgrade to a better version.
Using an MP3 player as an example, you pay £220 for the 30GB video iPod & it lasts 1-2 years before it either dies or you decide to upgrade to a better MP3 player. Let’s just say the newer, upgraded version costs another £220 so in the space of two years you could’ve spent £440 on MP3 players plus whatever it costs for the songs to go on it. This is just an example.
The PS3 should last around 5 years (yeah I know, some people are on their 3rd or 4th PS2, heck I’m on my 2nd PS2 in 6 years but the 2nd one I bought cost me £100) so that £425 you paid for the machine is all you should have to pay until the next super console is launched, possibly 5 or more years down the line. No need to pay more money to upgrade the machine every couple of years.
Now the PS3 plays PSone, PS2 & PS3 games, DVDs, CDs, Blu-ray movies, and you will more than likely be able to browse the web with it. Not bad for something that costs £425. Name one other piece of equipment that can do all that for the same price?
Now I earn a poor wage yet I still believe that £425 for the PS3 is a fair price considering what the machine is capable of even if it couldn’t play Blu-ray movies.
The PS2 cost me £299 when I bought it not long after launch so is the PS3 worth the extra £125? I think so.
Sony isn’t aiming the PS3 at kids, I don’t view it as a toy & I certainly don’t think anybody else should view gaming as a hobby for kids. It should be viewed along the same lines as DVD recorders/PCs/Laptops/MP3 players etc & I think that’s how Sony is trying to market the PS3, as part of your main entertainment hub in your home.
When I get my PS3 it will be going in my living room alongside my TV & DVD recorder & not hidden away in the bedroom or a spare room. I know people have different requirements with different views, but these are my views as to why the PS3 is worth the £425 price & why it should not be viewed as a toy.
Feel free to share your views.
In theory a store would get say 50 PS3s & the first 50 people that pay the deposit of £150 would get a PS3 at launch as long as that store gets those 50 PS3s.
If I remember correctly Sony did a similar thing for the PS2 but through Sony themselves & it didn’t cost you £150 to guarantee yourself a PS2. I can’t remember exactly what Sony did with the PS2 launch because I picked mine up from a shop.
I think it’s an excellent idea & it would mean the people that pre-ordered first would stand a very good chance of getting a PS3. Any ideas that prevents the PS3 launch from mimicking the terrible 360 launch is a good thing in my book.
GameTrailers.com has an awsome looking gameplay trailer from PS3 launch title MotorStorm & it actually looks like a next-gen racing game. It’s great when you see the bodies flying from the impact of other vehicles.
Check it out for yourselves. Just click the Jul 22nd gameplay trailer found at the link below.
I have a hunch that Henning will be pleased…
Thanks to ET for bringing this little beauty to my attention.
Future Publishing is launching magazine PSM3 on August 3rd. Of course, this magazine will cover the PS3 and will include two discs every month.
PSM3 will feature two covermounted discs every month with the first DVDs including recent PlayStation 3, PSP and PlayStation 2 video game trailers and footage with voiceover commentary. The second DVD includes PSP game saves, games tips, a game review database, wallpapers, and PSP applications and audio files.
As a bonus, the first issue includes a free PSP charger/data cable allowing readers to charge their PSP from their computer or laptop. The price is set at £3.99, which means that they’re talking about the UK release. Can the North American release be at the same time?
BusinessWeek reports that Hirokazu Hamamura of Enterbrain says that developers are shying away from the PS3 because of the PS3′s high price. They note that on July 13th, EA mentioned more Wii games than PS3 games. Recently in an interview Jeff Brown said that EA will no back all next-gen consoles equally. He said, basically, that they go where the marketshare is. If the Xbox 360 has a much higher marketshare, then that’s where EA will have more games. That makes sense. EA’s supposed better support for the Wii is a little confusing to me, however. First, looks can be deceiving. EA may be just as much behind the PS3 as the Wii, and we might be none the wiser. But let’s say they are in fact backing the Wii more. Is it really because they see the PS3 as the super-expensive console that won’t sell?
BusinessWeek’s made the mistake of saying the PS3 is $200 more expensive than the Xbox 360. It’s not. It’s $100 more. Yes, that’s comparing the more expensive Xbox 360 with the PS3 Jr. But it’s not fair to compare the 360 with the PS3 Sr because the PS3 Jr is the one that’s actually closer in functionality.
So what you’re really talking about is a $100 difference. And in some markets, like Canada, the difference is even less (here, if the Xbox 360 price remains the same, the difference will be $50.)
Joe Sixpack really seems to get around, and he’s making an appearance here again. Joe goes to the store to buy his son Billy a console. “Hey Billy boy! What’s that gaming machine you got?” “It’s a PS2 dad!” With 70% marketshare, chances are it’s a PS2. Mr. Clerk at the store tells Joe that he can choose between the 360, PS3, or maybe the Wii. Mr. Clerk’s commission on the Wii isn’t so big, so he’ll flog the big consoles first. Joe will probably ask about the PS3 because his boy already has a PS2. But whoa, would you look at that price! $600! Mr. Clerk points out that the PS3 Jr. is $500 – only $100 bucks more than the 360, which it’s very comparable to, and it will play all of Billy’s PS2 games. Plus it has a built-in BD player and has free online games. Joe, of course, has no idea what a BD player is so his mind blanks for a moment while it erases that piece of information from his memory. So the choice comes down to $400 for a 360, or 25% more ($100) for the PS3 which will play all of Billy’s PS2 games, has free online gaming, and is a known brand. Everyone knows the Sony PlayStation! In Canada, it’s just 10% ($50) more. If Joe were Canadian, I think the answer would be obvious: get the PS3. It’s only $50 more. In the States, where it’s $100, I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch to suppose Joe will choose the PS3 there as well. Do you, given those circumstances?