Why buy Sony's new $599 Blu-ray player when a PS3 costs the same ?

For Blu-ray to be a success, Sony needs players in people's homes, and that's where the new BDP-S300 comes in at US $599 – 40% less than the previous $999 model. Wouldn't the PS3 be the preferred option for most digital consumers?

[TheMART]

Buy neither, Sony's disc laserlens is known to give up and give errors after a short period of time. Watch the PS2 horror stories. PS3 probably will get it also.

Get some high quality stuff. Like the HD-DVD, it's cheaper, better image, better content

[Merovee]

Can you explain why my launch day PS2 still works just fine? Apparently propper care has more to do with some things than does the company that makes it. Now if we really want to go into massive hardware failure...

[big_tim]

have purchased the $1000 version when the PS3 was cheaper? Now they can buy them both for the same. The articles tile is stupid. It was similar to the DVD player when the PS2 was 150 or so. Why would people buy a standalone for 150 when you could get the PS2 for the same?

The PS3 will continue to sell. It is a game machine first, player second no matter what The Mart says. Not the other way around.

Cheaper Blueray players means better competition with HD-DVD. It puts it around the same price as a HD-DVD stand alone. This is good for those who are not interested in games.

[MikeGdaGod]

this is the same point me and all my buddies have been making months ago.

[GaMr-]

You will see more moves by Sony make more sense and come to light as time goes by. And guys like TheMart (who I would like to point out has the first post here as in every Sony article) will get more and more desperate. Look at his post. Its like he gave up He has no more reasoning. Now he's just blaintenly throwing pointless hate and ridiculous statements.

Guys in all honest. I seriously think TheMart is Peter Moore.

[MikeGdaGod]

i can't look at his post cause i already ignored him

[Boink]

maybe some people don't want a game console?

maybe some people don't want a 12 pound behemoth in their living room, especially if they just want movies?

but hey, good news, the 600$ blu-ray player, play's CD's. the 1000$ did NOT. sad...

[True Gamer]

The PS3 is $600 and can play CD's, DVD's, and Blu-ray Disks.

It can also play PS1, PS2, and PS3 games.

So I guess the PS3 has the best value right now for people looking for a Blu-ray Player and Games Console.

[Boink]

you mean it can play SOME ps1 and ps2 games, (especially if you live in europe):)

the point is buying a ps3 because it's the cheapest blu-ray player, is no longer a valid argument.

people who don't want a games console, won't buy it as they have a choice now. I think sony shot themselves in the foot with this one, although it was inevitable, blu-ray players will soon be cheaper then the ps3, which will cut into their market share.

[HaKeRsCanRotINHEL]

I was in my local Gamestop this morning and had the chance to try out the machine, WOW :~)! No more stupid Sony jokes from me. The PS3 is the real deal and Lair, Motorstorm or absolutely amazing. ;~0 PS3, here I come.

[Covenant]

This is a bit off-topic (although related), but has anyone seen a 20GB PS3 recently? My BB store has not seen a shipment of them in more than 2 months, and friends of mine who work for Circuit City and Gamestop say the same. Our store system lists the model as "discontinued." Did I miss something? Did Sony do away with this model? The reason I'm posting it here is that although the $600 PS3 is a good value for Blu-Ray, so was the $500 model, and the differences between the two (bigger HD, Wi-Fi, etc) didn't seem to matter to most buyers. $100 goes a long way towards another controller and game. Has anyone seen any recently?

[timmyp53]

try a different store dude-good luck.

[timmyp53]

it all depends if your a gamer or a videophile movie type of person.

[whengeeksgobad]

I think this may cause a backlash for them. I mean, not many people want to pay 600 bucks for a console. I at least am one of those people. Now the argument becomes, "ya but I just want the console. why would why don't you just make a console without BR, you have a $600.00 BR player on the market now?" In my mind, what this says is: just think how cheap the ps3 could be if it wasn't a BR player too. If they can shave $400.00 dollars off the price of their old players just to simply compete with themselves at the moment, how much could they save/shave off the price of the ps3 to make it an affordable console? Are they taking a loss on the bdp-s300 as well? I mean, in essence haven't they just forced themselves to implement a price cut somewhere? I don't see *anyone* opting for simply the player and NOT the ps3. Yes it makes the ps3 look better but on the same note it really makes their new BR player look like it isn't much of a value. So they'll likely need to slash prices on the player if they want to sell any. Seems a little risky to me.

[timmyp53]

.

[DJ]

"Why do Blu-ray players cost so much?"

-The drive itself is relatively cheap, in the neighborhood of $100 to manufacture. It's the decoding equipment, CPU, motherboard, RAM, etc, that adds up to such a high price. Try running a 1080p movie trailer on your PC and see how well it holds up. It takes a lot of processing power to handle that video resolution.

"The PS3 would be $200 cheaper if it used DVD instead."

-The drive costs around $100, but there were no additional components used for Blu-ray movie playback. It's all done via the Cell CPU and RSX GPU. The movie playback is technically free since it's all done through software. Blu-ray was put in for games, and luckily Sony has given their customers an extremely expensive function for free.

[deadeyes99]

how bout u smarten up and get a good kick in the ass and neither durr