The next feature to be removed from the PS3

[ProgrammingAce]

If you want to go back to the launch, we'll take a look at the initial price breakdown. Let's assume Sony could source a dvd drive at the same price as the 360.



If we take the lowest estimated cost for the bluray drive, the PS3 would have cost $24 more then the $360, but would have come with built in wireless. At the highest prices for CPU and drive, it still would have been $200 more then the 360.

So yeah, they pretty much shot themselves in the foot with the bluray. The other problem is that the CELL was 50% more expensive with no real benefits. And that's not including the R&D costs.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

http://kotaku.com/5147616/ps3-moving...r-cheaper-chip

Sony's traditional internal cost-saving hardware revisions begin.

This is where they'll begin to recoup cost and losses in the long-term.

It's how they did it with PS1, PS2 and PSP.

Par for the course.

[Sonicwolf]

The next feature to be removed from the PlayStation 3 - THE ABILITY TO PLAY GAMES, PERIOD. lol

[scooterb23]

The next feature to be removed from the PlayStation 3 - THE ABILITY TO PLAY GAMES, PERIOD. lol

Which would affect approximately 7 people.

[MrRoboto19XX]

The next feature to be removed from the PlayStation 3 - THE ABILITY TO PLAY GAMES, PERIOD. lol

You know, Apple did that about 15 years ago, and it's worked out pretty well for them since then.

[Sothy]

I heard they are getting breakout 2!

[jajaja]

If you want to go back to the launch, we'll take a look at the initial price breakdown. Let's assume Sony could source a dvd drive at the same price as the 360.



If we take the lowest estimated cost for the bluray drive, the PS3 would have cost $24 more then the $360, but would have come with built in wireless. At the highest prices for CPU and drive, it still would have been $200 more then the 360.

So yeah, they pretty much shot themselves in the foot with the bluray. The other problem is that the CELL was 50% more expensive with no real benefits. And that's not including the R&D costs.

I am sorry for the late reply here, i forgot to check this thread after i posted my post :\

Thanks for that price breakdown chart! I think it depnds on how you look at it, about if Sony shot themselves in the foot with the Bluray. I mean, if you look at the price on the PS3 (at least the launch price), and if you look at how the PS3 is selling compared to how the PS1 and the PS2 sold, then it look like including a Bluray drive in the PS3 wasnt exactly the best decition, i agree.

But what would have happend to the Bluray format itself if it wasnt included in the PS3? Would HD-DVD still be on the market now? Or was the PS3 a big reason for why Toshiba stopped producing HD-DVD players? Could it be a chance that HD-DVD became bigger and that Bluray was stopped being supported?

If the Bluray format itself sometime becomes the new standard for disc based movies like the DVD is today, then it might have been a good decition to include a Bluray drive in the PS3, at least in my opinion

If the Bluray becomes the new standard for disc based movies like the DVD is today, then Sony might make alot of money on this, and maybe more money that they would have made on the PS3 if they used a DVD-drive in the PS3 instead. But we would have to wait and see how popular the Bluray format itself becomes in the next years to come.

EDIT: Maybe the Bluray format could still become the new standard for disc based movies even if the PS3 did used a DVD-drive instead of a Bluray-drive though, unfortunately i have no idea.

[Sonicwolf]

Which would affect approximately 7 people.

Ouch. 2 more people than the Gamecube userbase.

[Sudo]

Which would affect approximately 7 people.

At least those 7 people will still be able to play their PS3s long after every 360 on Earth has self-destructed.

[zektor]

At least those 7 people will still be able to play their PS3s long after every 360 on Earth has self-destructed.

Wait, there are still functional 360's in the wild?

To get back to the HD theory:

Yes, I think it would be really as simple as molding a casing without the HD panel. The launch system had (at least mine did) a pretty lengthy sticker on the panel. Then I saw versions that just had a sticker that said "HDD", now the latest model has no sticker at all. Probably nothing, but still...makes you think. I would not be at all surprised if one of these days (maybe when the new 45nm models are released), somebody buys one and discovers there is simply no HD panel to remove. This would not mean that the HD could not still be upgraded of course, but it WOULD mean that the user would have to break the seal and open the system to do so, effectively voiding the warranty. We'll see down the road I suppose...

[Solertia]

Fortunately, I have the 80GB PS3 (from MGS4 bundle), with flash card readers, 4x USB ports, and PS2 backwards-compatibility. I'm all set.

[jajaja]

Which would affect approximately 7 people.

I am sorry for the late reply here.

I dont think the PS3 software sale is that bad, if that is what you mean with that it would approximately affect 7 people if Sony removes the ability to play games on the Playstation 3? Please correct me if i am wrong, but isnt the PS3 software sales not that much different than the Xbox 360 software sale if you take the console installbase into account? At least in USA. Take the sales of Call of Duty: World at War in USA for example:

--------------------------------------------
Call of Duty: World at War for the Xbox 360 = 2.74 million copies sold
Call of Duty: World at War for the Playstation 3 = 1.13 million copies sold

(these software sales are couning for November and December in 2008, unfortunately i dont think that we dont have the January 2009 numbers yet).


Xbox 360 consoles userbase in the US: 13,857,400
Playstation 3 console userbase in the US: 6,790,000


Call of Duty: World at War for the Xbox 360 got an attach ratio on about 1/5
Call of Duty: World at War for the Playstation 3 got an attach ratio on about 1/6

I think my calculations are correct at least, unless i have missed some numbers or calculated wrong.


EDIT: The numbers that i used are from NPD (www.npd.com). I found the console install base numbers and the total amount of copies sold for Call of Duty: World at War here:

http://vgsales.wikia.com/wiki/NPD_Seventh_generation

The numbers on this website are the NPD numbers though, but this website has calculated the monthly console hardware sale NPD numbers together, so i didnt have to do that maually myself
--------------------------------------------


The Xbox 360 version of Call of Duty: World at War has sold over twice as many copies compared to the Playstation 3 version of Call of Duty: World at War, so the Xbox 360 version has definitly sold more copies compared to the Playstation 3 version. But if you look at the install base and at the attach ratio, then the Playstation 3 version isnt really that far behind the Xbox 360 version, at least in my opinion

But even if the PS3 attach ratio for Call of Duty: World at War isnt really that far behind the attach ratio for the Xbox 360 ration , maybe the publisher/developers mostly care about about how many copies of their game(s) has sold in total though

And this example with Call of Duty: World at War is just one game, unfortunately i have no idea if all the other games got a bigger attach ration on the Xbox 360 compared to the attach ratio on the Playstation 3, but i am under the impression that the Playstation 3 software isnt really that bad if you take the console install base into account, but please correct me if i am wrong

EDIT: I made a big mistake about saying that the PS3 version of Call of Duty: World at War had a bigger attach ratio compared to the Xbox 360 version, but it was the other way around. The Xbox 360 version of Call of Duty: World at War has a bigger attach ration compared to the PS3 version. I am sorry about this mistake! :\ Thanks for pointing this out ProgrammingAce!

[ProgrammingAce]

Call of Duty: World at War for the Xbox 360 got an attach ration on about 1/5
Call of Duty: World at War for the Playstation 3 got an attach ration on about 1/6

But if you look at the install base and at the attach ratio, then the Playstation 3 version actually has a higher attach ratio.

Not to be an Acehole, but check that again...

I don't have the current numbers, but traditionally the Xbox has a much higher overall attach rate then any other current system.

[c0ldb33r]

hey guys, I think he was just making a joke about the 7 people

[jajaja]

Not to be an Acehole, but check that again...

I don't have the current numbers, but traditionally the Xbox has a much higher overall attach rate then any other current system.

Ah, you are right, i made a big mistake. In this case, an attach ratio of 1 of 5 is of course bigger than 1 of 6. Since on Xbox 360 1 out of 5 people own Call of Duty: World at War, but on the PS3 it is 1 out of 6 (which is less than 1 out of 5). I dont know how i mixed that up earlier. I will edit my previous post now. Thanks for pointing this out! I am sorry for the mistake! :\

Ye, about games in general the Xbox 360 have a bigger attach ratio compared to the Playstation 3, and maybe compared to the Wii as well. I just wanted to show that the difference in software sales between the PS3 and the Xbox 360 when you take the usebase into consideration isnt always that huge. Even if my mistake earlier regarding Call of Duty: World at War, i dont think an attach ratio on 1/5 and 1/6 is too big of a difference. It is definitly a difference, but it is not like the Xbox 360 version of Call of Duty: World at War has a twice as big attach ration compared to the Playstation 3 version or. But this is just my opinion

EDIT: For some reason i wrote "ration" instead of "ratio" in my previous post, sorry about that. I have fixed that now in my previous post as well

hey guys, I think he was just making a joke about the 7 people

Ye, i thought maybe that he was just making a joke about the 7 people, but i had to ask him if he ment that the software sale for the Playstation 3 was low There is (or was) a stigma (or what i shall say) that people dont buy games for the Playstation 3. I just wanted discuss alittle around this to see if this is true, if people dont buy games for the PS3.

I just took an example with Call of Duty: World at War to see how the software sales on the PS3 was, at least compared to the software sales on the Xbox 360, and when we take into account that the PS3 has the smallest console installbase in USA beteween the Wii, the PS3 and the Xbox 360.

But this example was just about 1 game though, so i am not sure how the software sales in general are on the PS3. And as ProgrammingAce said, the Xbox 360 got a higher attach ratio than the PS3 when it comes to software sales, but i still think the PS3 software sale isnt really at least that bad if you take the PS3 console install base into concideration, but that is just my opinion

I dont mean to get too much off-topic here either, i am sorry about that :\ But i just wanted to ask about how the PS3 software/game sales are