Sony Messing with the PS3... Why?

[1991_Vn2nV]

I went to take a look at buying a PS3 today as its almost uni holidays and found there is no 60gb PS3 now?

Also the 40gb version which is the only option in Australia now CAN NOT play playstation 2 games.

WTF is going on? I thought one of Sony's 'core' beleifs was to be able to play your old games on the new console?

The guy at the store said it was because PS3 games are selling poorly and so Sony are now giving people no option but to buy PS3 games.. But hows that gonna work if nobody buys the console?

Also, apparently if you want a rumble controller you have to buy it seperately?

[Boonz]

that is a bit strange.... maybe they should of just lowered the price to up their sales

[azzfox]

If thats true then thats so dodgy. Perhaps it is sonys core belief to play older games on the new console but it all comes down to money at the end of the day sadly enough. Im sure that there will be hacks out there which will allow older games to be played like a boot disc or mod chip. It would just be like a way of saying "screw you!" to sony

[sircruisealotVS]

that is a bit strange.... maybe they should of just lowered the price to up their sales

they have. but in order to do that they removed a few features. quite frankly i think its a good move...who cares if the ps3 is not backwards compatible anymore. the few other changes where, removing 2 usb ports (down from 4 to 2) and removing the multimemory card port (who cares, its got a 40gb hd anyway...)

[Emackulation]

I used to like Sony Playstations but now I think they are just greedy assholes who charge too much for **** products. I say everyone keep buying 360 to show Sony needs to be more competitive and not be greedy. I would now rather buy a 360, my previous choice would be a PS3.

[Low_VX_Taxi]

I used to like Sony Playstations but now I think they are just greedy assholes who charge too much for **** products. I say everyone keep buying 360 to show Sony needs to be more competitive and not be greedy. I would now rather buy a 360, my previous choice would be a PS3.

I think the biggest thing in cometitive pricing between the 360 and ps3 is financial/corporate muscle....

Microsoft.... Was declared a Monopoly and forced to sell off certain assets as there just sooo bloody huge...

Sony, Home and Car Audio and Visual.... there still quite a big company but nothing compared to Microsoft...

So Microsoft can afford to undercut prices of Sony, not to mention that most software/game developers are either owned by microsoft or design software for the P.C...... so have to keep microsoft onside as they control a large portion of the P.C market with Ms Windows...

[Emackulation]

Well it looks to me that Sony needs to decide if they want to make another gaming console because they will keep getting thrashed by Microsoft if they don't pull their finger out.

[sircruisealotVS]

I used to like Sony Playstations but now I think they are just greedy assholes who charge too much for **** products. I say everyone keep buying 360 to show Sony needs to be more competitive and not be greedy. I would now rather buy a 360, my previous choice would be a PS3.

o-k then...
sony's product is far better than the 360, so saying that they are **** and to get a 360 instead is laughable really....the elite 360 is like $50 cheaper than a 40gb ps3 and they have sooooooo many problems with the piece of crap that microsoft rushed through onto the market with. same as the old xbox really....a huge cumbersome p.o.s. that doesnt work!
the choice to reduce the price of the ps3 and change a few features to allow a price drop IS a competitive manuever, one that will really see the 360 struggle...as its cheaper price was the only thing it had going for it.

[sircruisealotVS]

Well it looks to me that Sony needs to decide if they want to make another gaming console because they will keep getting thrashed by Microsoft if they don't pull their finger out.

keep getting thrashed? when have sony ever been thrashed by microsoft?
have you ever looked at how many games there are on the ps2 at the moment? and still games are being released on the ps2...where-as you cant even buy new xbox games, they dont make them anymore and the range is about a third of the size.
thats where the companies make money man, in gaming licences for developers to release a game onto their console...and sony ****s all over microsoft in that department...as i said, have a look and see just how many more games there are on the ps2 as opposed to the xbox.

[albert5268]

PS3 is so much better its hard to compare the two sometimes.... which is why you can only justify your decision to buy one or the other on either price or performance reasons.

I have heard though, that you cannot upgrade the HDD in the PS3 (to say a 200gb or 500gb IDE drive) as easily as you can in the XBOX360? For me they both have too little storage space as i have two 200GB HDD full of MP3's and music videos etc. I also don't like the idea of being taunted by the 360's red ring of death... if i'm gonna fork out cash for a gaming console i want it to last for more than a few months before i have to send it back under warranty.

[AttaBoy]

Xbox is crap, PS3 ftw!!

[STEALTHY™]

Ring Harvey Norman Dylan, i was told by a mate that they are the only retailer in Aus still selling the 60gb PS3 with backwards compatibility, but still at the huge price.

[Low_VX_Taxi]

o-k then...
sony's product is far better than the 360, so saying that they are **** and to get a 360 instead is laughable really....the elite 360 is like $50 cheaper than a 40gb ps3 and they have sooooooo many problems with the piece of crap that microsoft rushed through onto the market with. same as the old xbox really....a huge cumbersome p.o.s. that doesnt work!
the choice to reduce the price of the ps3 and change a few features to allow a price drop IS a competitive manuever, one that will really see the 360 struggle...as its cheaper price was the only thing it had going for it.

I seem to remember ps2s struggling to play dvds and when it did it often froze or jumped..... i dont remember ever hearing of xbox having such problems....

But yes i agree the thing was fkn huge and cumbersome....

[Emackulation]

Im not going to lie, I don't have the best knowledge on playboystation and sexbox but im just trying to say that from what ive seen since the release of 360 it is a more popular choice of system. I did look into the ps3 before it was released to find that they had superior gfx stufs and megaproccessors and whatever that stuff was. With my posts i was trying to compare only PS3 and 360, not the earlier versions, but as you said the game sales for the PS2 were greater and had a greater range, yeah I believe you there but now Sony have discontinued backwards capability which render all those games useless on the PS3.

PS2>Xbox | 360>PS3

[1991_Vn2nV]

o-k then...
sony's product is far better than the 360, so saying that they are **** and to get a 360 instead is laughable really....the elite 360 is like $50 cheaper than a 40gb ps3 and they have sooooooo many problems with the piece of crap that microsoft rushed through onto the market with. same as the old xbox really....a huge cumbersome p.o.s. that doesnt work!
the choice to reduce the price of the ps3 and change a few features to allow a price drop IS a competitive manuever, one that will really see the 360 struggle...as its cheaper price was the only thing it had going for it.

The backwards compatibility cost nothing though, one of the suits from Sony admitted it was nothing to do with cost but lacking PS3 game sales.

The price reduction was done regardless and scrapping features was an excuse for the price reduction.

[1991_Vn2nV]

Ring Harvey Norman Dylan, i was told by a mate that they are the only retailer in Aus still selling the 60gb PS3 with backwards compatibility, but still at the huge price.

Ahhh awesome man, thanks I'll give em a ring today and see if they have any left

[Grennan]

I was under the impression the 60 gig console was removed due to the upcomming release of the 80gig or whatever it was. Either way, im happy with my xbox 360, a ps3 has stuff i dont even want for 500 bucks extra... I also have a Wii sitting around somewhere lol. I only brought it for one game. ZELDA! Now it sits in the cupboard because their games are aimed at 10 year olds.

[Spaced]

This is my view you can agree or disagree.

Wii is still currently the market leader. Crappier graphics than the others yet its competitive price and interesting controls make it a good seller.

XBOX360 had a few issues when first released, microsoft are looking at 600+ million in repair costs because they rushed their product out early. Think it has to do with overheating caused by inappropriate cooling.

PS3 has had a change in configuration to make it more price competitive in the market as it is still behind the 360 for sales figures. The difference in price between a 60GB drive and a 40GB drive at the retail end is like $40 max so it's bs that they needed to do this to cut $300 off the cost of the unit. Sony usually sells all their Playstations at a loss because they make the cost up in licencing costs, both for the software and the discs cd's DVD+R and blue ray (which is why they are against mod chips because they loose future earnings from disc and game licence sales).

The PS3 is not without its faults. Automatically restarting while playing for 30 minutes etc have been reported. The PS3 was not completely backwards compatible same as the 360, only some games where. The xbox360 also has the issues that the HD-DVD drive is external not internal which was a bad marketing move.

As with any first gen technology you will have issues, and they will continue to fight and drop the price of the consoles. The winner at the end of the day will be the customer.

[1991_Vn2nV]

they have. but in order to do that they removed a few features. quite frankly i think its a good move...who cares if the ps3 is not backwards compatible anymore. the few other changes where, removing 2 usb ports (down from 4 to 2) and removing the multimemory card port (who cares, its got a 40gb hd anyway...)

I care that there is no backwards compatibility and so do the 25 PS2 games I have.

I could have traded the PS2 in for $200 store credit on a PS3 but now what good are the 25 games gonna be? I cant play em on a PS3 now anyway.

If its all about competing with the Xbox in price then sure thats fine, but what excuse is there for scrapping the high end model with 60gb that DOES have backwards compatibility?

[calais_304]

lol sounds like the ol sega vs nintendo debate

[1991_Vn2nV]

Can anyone confirm that the rumble controller has to be bought seperately? That the normal controllers dont have a rumble feature on PS3 games?

[Emackulation]

lol sounds like the ol sega vs nintendo debate

GO SEGAAAAAA hahaha. I still got an old sega in the cupboard with alex the kid built in...

[Spaced]

Another reason they changed the size of the hard drive and removed ports is so that people who paid $300 more for the first gen don't get the ****s by feeling ripped off.

[Spaced]

Can anyone confirm that the rumble controller has to be bought seperately? That the normal controllers dont have a rumble feature on PS3 games?

I think the new version comes with rumble feature because when they first released the PS3 they were in a court case regarding the technology. Best place to check would be a ps3 fan site.

[Emackulation]

Another reason they changed the size of the hard drive and removed ports is so that people who paid $300 more for the first gen don't get the ****s by feeling ripped off.

And yet they still will.....hahaha.