Does the PS3 Need a Price Cut?

The PS3 started out with a hefty $600 price tag, but in reality that is a bargain. You get Wi-Fi, a blue-ray/dvd player upconverter package, a game consol, multimedia player with memory card readers as well as a PS2/PS1 package if you got the 60GB Version. With all of this you are looking to spend thousands if bought seperately but you get all of this with the PS3.

But now the PS3 80GB runs you $400. A bundle like MSG4 or the new 160GB version with Uncharted and a free PSN download will run you at $500. Even at $500 you are getting a great deal. Not to mention Sony just released their first wave of Greatest hits with more on the way for $30.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
silverchode4323d ago

yes it does but it still sells strong despite costing more than the other consoles.

UNCyrus4323d ago

as the article stresses, the functionally of the PS3 justifies the pricetag. It is by far the best bargain this gen considering what you get out of the box.

Ben10544323d ago (Edited 4323d ago )

it would be nice
lol, the article said that the ps3 has almost no exclusives

orakga4323d ago (Edited 4323d ago )

On a factual, logical basis, yes, the PS3 is a GREAT deal. The best bang for your buck, so to speak. I own two PS3s, and I paid $1,100 for my first one (at launch), and I don't regret it from an economic perspective (I also own all other systems, btw).

However, that's not the problem here.
Sony are refusing to drop the price because they are insisting on turning a profit on the console TODAY, when they should be focused on doing so over their "10-year lifespan". Somewhere, they are undercutting their own strategy and goals by making the console inaccessible to the market they are seeking to seize.

And it has had a vicious-cycle-effect. Yes, the PS3's biggest weakness is their software lineup (and please don't list their holiday lineup, because it's a tie against the 360's; both sides need to admit this), but it's also by their own fault that they are stuck in this quagmire.

Developers are not putting, of have not until recently put, enough effort toward PS3 development. And it's completely logical for them, because Sony has been patronizing their potential customers by claiming that they are "too stubborn to see the value of the $400 PS3", and thereby created the perception that nobody but the most affluent and dedicated gamers own PS3s.

Yes, the PS3 is worth it. Yes, once people own the system, they appreciate their purchase. But your potential market OBVIOUSLY can't tell. What Sony SHOULD be doing is to solve that perception issue. Instead of giving the customers only one $500 choice (the bundle), give them a $300 option, even if it is FAKE.

Case in point, the Wii is $250, but once you buy all the "necessary" peripherals, you're looking at a $400 investment before you can enjoy your Wii. But people don't care. They go to a store thinking that they want that $250 machine. Then once they've made that mental decision, it's not hard to squeeze an extra $50 here and extra $100 there.

Same goes with the 360. People don't know/care that the $199 core system can't do live, and doesn't have a HDD and headset. All they see is $199, and when they leave their homes they are going to EB Games to buy that $199 system. They don't care/know that they need to spend an extra $60 for the harddrive, $20 for the headset then $50 for live. Why? Because the price that gets marketted is $199, and not $330, which is the REAL cost.

My point? Know your customers. Understand their financial parameters and ACCOMODATE to their lack of foresight and research, and show them a $299 pricepoint. WHO CARES if they need to spend another $150 to actually start playing a game!! THEY DON'T.

Yes, I really, really hate to say this, but it's time Sony learned how to PANDER. Because the public is too stupid to do the math/research themselves. /shudder


Just imagine this. And I'm being somewhat serious here:

"PS3 'CORE' Package"
Price: $299
Comes with:
- Standard AV cable (these people don't even own an HD TV anyway!)
- 20 GB Harddrive
- SIXAXIS controler (make them pay for their own Dualshock 3s)

Honestly, whatever little Sony may lose on the console, they'll EASILY make all that up if they can turn around and make sure the PS3 can once again be seen as "THE" videogame system to own. But they don't get it. And it may not be until they lose the console war before they finally do.

darkstar4323d ago

I'd say a hundred dollar cut would help them tremendously if they could afford to do so.

JoySticksFTW4323d ago (Edited 4323d ago )

then they do need a price cut, if only to keep up with the wii and 360.

Note, I said "this gen"... PS2 is like something from an 80's horror flick. It just will not die. And it's still making Sony money. And the PSP's recent resurgence can't be ignored either. Sony doesn't NEED to win this gen, but I still think they would want to go all-out to protect their marketshare and future in the videogame industry.

M$ and Nintendo seem to be in it for the long run. No push-over victories for Sony anymore


@ Orakga

Well said. Agreed with everything. Bubbles

Ju4323d ago

@oraka. I don't agree. The min specs are useless. The HDD size can be neglected, IMO. How I have seen Sony in the past, is they will lower the price to a level it makes sense. I think they'll shoot for $299 sometimes soon. But usually they'll achieve this thru an optimized production version (Slim?) and better manufacturing (down scaled parts). The 45nm CELL is on the way, CELL/RSX hybrid will be another step, etc. (Smaler PSU, smaller cooler, maybe more cost effective BD drive, etc).

Do we need a price drop from a customer standpoint now ? Absolutely. I'd appreciate it. Can never be to cheap, can it (unless it breaks)? I just don't think they are ready yet. But I guess they have a road map already. Maybe the cheap 360 will speed that up a bit. The PS3 is sure worth the money, but, why would I say no for another $100 cut?

pilotpistolpete4322d ago (Edited 4322d ago )

Awesome post man!

I find that sometimes Sony does tend to "not know the customers", so to speak. They seem to want to do everything right this GEN, but you're right in saying that pandering and hidden costs of our cut-throat economy is probably the best way to make money right now.

Sony probably could of shaved 30-40$ bucks off the initial cost by having to pay to play online for 50$. It would of been the norm with Live. Or much smaller (non standard) HD, etc.

But as an owner for over a year now, I'm very impressed with how much I've got for free. Demo's are just incredible this gen. I'd say its one of the best things. I think I spend more time on the NGS demo than the actual game. And I love how firmware updates just make it better and foolproof.

In that original 400$ ( EB games special with trade-in) there's a loadfull of added features that I never imagined would exist, all free.

But you made a strong point in mentioning that cheap hidden costs are easy money these days. People just seem to accept it better than inital cost.

VF34EJ254322d ago

Sony, instead of making the 40gb an 80gb, should have just dropped the price to $299. Instead of making the 80gb 160gb packed with a game. They should have just made it $399 with no game.

People would have jumped on those like a pack of wild wolves.

Though, by doing what they did increasing the 40gb to 80gb with DS3, and 80gb to 160gb. They are upping the value of the console. And anybody who knows value will see that.

But, "casuals" or regular people do not care. They just want a lower price point. They only see the "initial" price point and that's what trigger they're reaction to purchase.

Microsoft knows this, which is why they wanted to get their console to $199 first. And now they are advertising it with all the new games like Rock Band 2. "Starting at $199."

Microsoft is a shady company with questionable tactics. But there is absolutely no denying that they KNOW how to get the consumers reacting.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 4322d ago
SWORDF1SH4323d ago

sony knew the price tag was high and they knew they would have to get the price down as quick as they could. they will need a price cut in america before christmas but the rest of the world wont see one this year. sony are a buisness and they need to make as much money back from the ps3 as possible so they have to balance out between highest possible selling price that will maximise thier profits but not to high to see them being outsold by the xbox. and thats why they will need a price cut in america because the ps3 will be outsold by the 360 in america until they reduce the price.

Hellsvacancy4323d ago (Edited 4323d ago )

I small price cut will help Sony but i dont think they need to do it now, id wait till after the Christmas holdidays the Ps3 is bound to be a Christmas hit this year - how much of a hit will determine if it needs a price cut or not....

But what do i know?

Salvadore4323d ago

With the introduction of the 40gb model and improving price setting, the PS3 has been selling tremendously well, but I mixed feelings whether it's necessary to issue a price drop. One part of me is saying no as it it's selling well and it set at a reasonable price. The other part of me is saying yes because I'm still one of those people waiting to purchase a system and a cheaper is always good :)

Dannehkins4323d ago

Firstly, I understand where many people are coming from. These days, it's a challenge buying your weekly shopping never mind a Playstation 3.

However, I do believe that the price is fairly reasonable. With all the content of the Playstation 3, I think it's a price which I can agree with. After all, as the article rightfully stated, "With all of this you are looking to spend thousands if bought separately but you get all of this with the PS3. "

PimpHandStrong4323d ago

will it get a price cut? yea


no time soon