Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

BigDaddyDW — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 13:20:07 GMT

He got you there, N'Gai. Personally, I don't consider backwards compatibility to be a huge issue here, for two reasons. One, if you spent hundreds of dollars on a library of PS2 games, you certainly have a PS2 to play them on. Second, as Mr. Tretton said, you can go into any retailer and buy a PS2 for $129 and a PS3 for $399. This seems to be a win-win: For those consumers that want to play PS2 and PS3 games, they can buy both systems for $529; For those consumers that don't want to play PS2 games, they can get a PS3 for only $399. At this point, if you don't have a PS2 and are ready to jump into gaming by buying a PS3, do you even care about those older titles?

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

joeboy101 — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 13:32:12 GMT

N'Gai, this is a gaming blog I thought, so please try to keep the political commentary to a minimum unless your going to explain why you think the SCHIP program in place should be expanded to families 400% (thats close to $80K a year) over the poverty line and 'children' up to 25 years old. Program was not vetoed, the expansion was.

As to Tretton's comments on backwards compatability - (Today, for $399, I'm able to get all the same technology in the Playstation 3, and for $129, if I don't own a PlayStation 2, I can buy that as well at any retailer in North America. So for a total investment of $529, I've got two machines that do everything the same machine did a year ago at $599. So it's hard for me to see that as a negative for the consumer.) - This attitude is precisely what is costing Sony their market share. If this guy cannot see the negative to the consumer, he needs to go to LensCrafters. Who wants to buy two consoles to hook both up to their TV, just so you can play all your old games? Furthermore, what if you were someone who didn't have a PS2 but wanted to try one of those old games, like God of War, for example. Sorry, outta luck.

And this is not an absurd scenario. I bought a Xbox 360 without ever owning the original Xbox and never played Halo 2 before. With backwards compat though, I was able to get into it. Also, if you got the backwards compat, that would've helped address at least some library issues for the PS3. I'm no MS fanboy, but they are at least trying to do right by their customers currently. Sony simply refuses to bite the bullet and give their audience, past the fanboys, what they want.

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

Jomolungma — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 13:36:42 GMT

I thought the whole point of backwards compatibility was to eliminate the need for multiple consoles on your A/V shelf. If I had a separate device for each iteration of media technology my house would spontaneously combust from all the heat, not to mention my dog would strangle herself in all the cords.

Someone should do a linguistic study of how gaming executives can say absolutely nothing in so many words. It's truly an artform. I'm sure it goes on in other industries, but I think gaming execs have taken it to a whole... nutha.... level. What's the difference between "relevant" and "incredibly relevant"? Is it the same difference as between "I object" and "I strenuously object"? If the PS3 is so "incredibly relevant", how come nobody is buying it? Technology becomes relevant at a price, and Sony still hasn't reached it with their PS3 offerings.

Right now I compare Sony to any one of countless industry juggernauts over the years that missed the evolution train because they were too busy congratulating themselves on the tracks they just put down that the train was running on. If they don't figure out a way to catch that train and get on board, they're going to be left at the station, miles behind the competition and no longer "incredibly relevant".

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

ColbyCheese — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 14:35:33 GMT

I think this illustrates just how overpriced the PS3 actually was in terms of market acceptance or "bang for the buck" mindshare. To quote from Tretton:

"So the goal was trying to reduce the price point of the Playstation 3..."

In plain English, that means "It was too expensive." Having said that, I think the point about language raised by one of the other commentors points to something very...Relevant (Sorry :) I don't think people would be so upset about backward compatability if Sony hadn't been trying to beat Microsoft about the head with it as if it were som sort of primitive cudgel. I believe it demonstrates how overtly hypocritical the folks at Sony seem on occasion. Remember the astroturfing they were doing with that fake website for the PSP?

Most large megacorps are full of crap, but Sony seems much less concerned with hiding it. Either that, or they're just horrible at it. The point is NOT that I can get a PS2 and a PS3 for under $600. The point is that I was told that backward compatability was an important feture that would be around for a while. "Forward Thinking" and whatnot.

If they "lied" about that, or were even just plain mistaken, then why should I believe them when they tell me that they will keep my appetite sated with AAA games for the life of the machine? For that matter, should I believe that they won't axe the current Playstation and try to sell me the next iteration? When you purchase a console (at least in MY case), I can't afford to just throw money at anybody who asks, so I'm making an "investment" with the console manufacturer. Sony just seems to be demonstrating (at least so far) that they aren't a very stable investment for my time and money. I'm still rather "salty" about my Atari Jaguar. I was one of the 8 people who bought one in the first month it was released.

As for politics, I'm actually happy to see a little "political" perspective being brought into the gaming sphere. I prefer that over "OMG! Let's open the Rockband Box!! OMG! OMG!". Besides, this is NEWSWEEK, not EGM. This is one of the websites where "grown folks" get their news. And you'd better believe that political issues like "Net Neutrality" and the "Internet Tax" can have a profound effect on our little gaming ecosystem. Did you ever stop to think about how much you'd have to pay for one game of Halo 3 if you were being charged by the KB/MB? What would happen to voice chat on your PS3 or Xbox360 if it were considered a VOIP connection and taxed as such?

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

joeboy101 — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 14:52:45 GMT

To Colby - Oh, don't get me wrong. As long as the politics are... relevant (GAHH!), rock on. Your points on the Internet tax and Net Neutrality are posts in and of themselves (nudge,nudge Mr. Croal), though not strictly gaming. I was pretty burned after my last two previous consoles (Atari Jaguar and then Sega Dreamcast; just paint the big 'L' on my forehead).

Thing is that Sony has dumped SO many resources and money into the PS3, I don't think they can limp along to the next generation of console in a few years. Nintendo did after the Gamecube, but the Gameboy helped keep things afloat and then the DS practically financed the Wii. Frankly, I figured that other than swimming in a large vault of gold coins ala Scrooge McDuck, Nintendo's creative minds are already sitting down try to envision the next console. Sony just doesn't have that luxury. If the PS3 doesn't gain some traction soon, like right this minute, then there might not be a next console. Sony lives off their PS division and if the cows stopping making milk, there isn't a point for your Dairy company to keep making cheese. This analogy brought in just for you, Colby :-).

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

theCHONGO — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 15:06:58 GMT

relevant 10 times....what a funny funny guy. ps3 blows.

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

Makatak — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 15:21:33 GMT

The fact that this system hasn't had a 'birthday' yet hasn't dawned on alot of people. Like the majority of gamers out there I am a current PS2 owner waiting on the right time to jump ship. Personally, I think my time has come. BC should be a big issue because most of the people being targeted already have a PS2, and personally I think the current PS3 library is great and would be better before the system turns 1 year old. Good job N'Gai. Thanks for giving your readers a voice

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

harrison25 — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 15:55:01 GMT

divorcing the so far massive failure known as the ps3 from the massive success known as the ps2 is a no no in my opinion...

and rumble support... that should have been implemented yesterday. And why pass up the advanced rumble tech that immersion is offering? I have no idea...

also, congrats on the most confusing sku's ever.

one with 40 gigs and PS1 hardware BC and no PS2 BC

one with 60 gigs and full hardware BC - now canceled, i presume

one with 20 gigs and full hardware BC and no wifi - now canceled

and one with 80 gigs, the 'premium' model with PS1 hardware BC and PS2 Software BC, which is obviously soon to be canceled based upon his multiple evasions of N'gai's questioning.

- N'Gai, great interrogation =), but i'm not so sure SCHIP is a good idea... government run programs are always a mess, because nobody is personally responsible for keeping track of the money being doled out. Also, if you offer to give anyone free health care for their children as long as they make under 80K a year, what is the incentive for them to improve themselves?

it leads to people trying to reduce their livelihood in order to qualify from the program, which negatively impacts society in a number of ways...

not only that, but when you offer to pay for people's children, they don't have to think about the consequences of having children.

The government will pay for everything, so i think i'll have 15 kids even though i'm working for minimum wage at Mcdonalds. Taking personal responsibility away from people just encourages people to do stupid things. now society carries the weight, which negatively impacts the economy.

the end result is inevitably loads of people having children who can't afford them because they don't have to pay for them, which just exponentially adds to the amount of children the system is having to take care of... so you initially had 4 million kids whose parents wouldn't pay insurance, now you've got 50 million kids whose parents won't, and of course, the cost on the economy from the taxes needed to pay for such a endeavor has thus multiplied incredibly. the program shuts down, and now you have 50 million uninsured children.

that, or the government goes bankrupt trying to fund the program.

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

SpaceShot — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 16:10:06 GMT

Is there a market of people out there just waiting for the PS3 to drop so they can play... well, whatever you can play on a PS3? MSFT went last in the "last-gen" and we saw the result. Going first did not necessarily cement MSFT as the winner this time, but the games lineup between 360 and PS3 seems to be no contest at all. Why do I want a PS3 at $399 again when I already have a 2 year old Xbox 360 with dozens of games that I've enjoyed and more yet to enjoy?

My Wii is collecting dust (yes I was fooled byt he slick marketing, too), but I count five 360 games that I am waiting to buy in the next three months,

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

AckeheceKoheo — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 16:54:52 GMT

Three Things I would have asked

1) B/C is actually important - The Ps3 Can upscale your PS2 and PS1 games to better utilize HD-TVs

2) Didn't the introduction of a limited functionality SKU 20gig get outsold by the more expensive SKu 10:1? What makes them think this will be different? (points at UK sales for last month... up 175% but mostly of the older more powerful version)

3) what happens to those who own versions that are 99%+ B/C like the 60 and 20 if warrenty issues occur? do you replace them with the less powerful version?

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

SM5555 — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 18:08:03 GMT

The "relevant" discussion is oddly reminiscent of the (in)famous Allen Iverson "Practice" interview.

Sony's really underestimating the mainstream pull BC represents, I think. Every mom who bought their kid a PS2 during the first couple of years was usually talked into it with some form of the "well, all these games you've already bought for me are on the PS1 still going to work on it" argument. If you listen to talk among normal, non-net-game-site-savvy purchasers, that's usually one of the first questions they ask because it's a value proposition, even if the old system's still perfectly fine for playing those games.

[For those of you who are too young to remember, Nintendo got beat up pretty badly in the press over the SNES not playing NES games back in the day]

Sony's stuck facing a lot of consumer problems in this situation: either they come right out and clearly admit that the low-end PS3 is no longer BC, or they keep it quiet and hope 20/20 or some sort of similar program doesn't start pulling together the facts into a slam-the-deceitful-Japanese-company piece after parents who don't understand the difference start complaining.

"At this point, if you don't have a PS2 and are ready to jump into gaming by buying a PS3, do you even care about those older titles?"

Until the PS3's library comes up with something even close to the high-end PS2 games... very much so. Who'd choose, for example, Heavenly Sword over God of War II? Especially a God of War II which has been upscaled?

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

daunda — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 19:02:11 GMT

Let us get one thing straight right now this is a business these people are out to make money first and the world happy second. You people want something for nothing and that’s the biggest problem for the PS3 right now most of you cats are just plain cheap and don’t want to pay for quality product. The PS2 cost 299 for a reason when it first dropped in the early 90’s Sony presented us with new technology for cheap. When DVD players first came to the market the price range was from 300 to 800 dollars depending on the brand so looking back was the cost of the PS2 (299) really that outrageous? Of course not, fast forward to 2007 Blu-ray players are going for about 300-600 dollars depending once again on the brand. Sony is introducing a PS3 for 399 (the CELL processor, the Blu-Ray drive, Blu-Ray movie playback capability, HDMI, built-in Wi-Fi all for that price. Damn!) Now you’re saying well “I don’t want Blu-ray I just want to play games forget that next-gen crap.” Well I hate to break it to ya but you’re either going to convert or get left behind because as of February 2009 ALL U.S. BROADCASTING NETWORKS will be required by law to stop sending standard definition signals and begin sending high definition signals. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21344084 once you read that article you will see why the PS3 is not only FUTURE proof but worth every cent. You cried about price. They lower the price. Now you people whine about BC? Come on! If that ain’t (I know ain’t ain’t a word by the way.) some people with ax to grind I don’t what is. Every last one of you have the money to buy this product but because you are cheap and sheep you choose not to until you’re special friend says it’s ok to get one. I’m an early adopter and proud of it. And guess what I paid 600 bucks and got all the bells and whistles like I’m supposed to. You want to pay 299 you are going to get the 299 version minus some of the bells and whistles. (Unlike apple Sony is respects the early adopter because we understand and appreciate what we are buying) Get over it you are either down with PS3 or not as usual it the people who have no clue who scream the loudest.

P.S. last but not least Microsoft’s next machine will be a knock off of the PS3 just YOU wait and see. They got it wrong again and they know it.

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

lightningcandy — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 19:06:21 GMT

N'Gai, you are doing gamers a service with interviews such as this one. You're in a fairly unique position among gaming journalists (you're not beholden to the game companies for your advertising revenue, and companies can blackball you only if they don't want to get covered by Newsweek), and you're making the most of it by not backing down in the face of such unrelenting spin-doctoring and making people realize that they can no longer push the promises of last year under the carpet. Keep it up--you're our only hope.

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

bandstand — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 19:17:03 GMT

You have to ask yourself, which console is the best value considering they are now roughly the same price?

Compare the PS3 80GB with the Elite. For $50 more you get a Blu Ray Player, wireless adapter, card readers, an extra USB port and free online gaming, all built into a single box. For the same functionality, that could be up to $280 for the XBOX.

With the elite you get another 40GB and a HDMI cable but even that advantage is negated by the fact you can upgrade the PS3 drive the cheapest laptop drive you can find and only if you need to.

For only $50 dollars I would guess a lot of people in the high end of the market are going to buy PS3. And that's $50 dollars you may have spent on XBOX Live anyway.

The 40GB vs. the premium is much the same story, it has a blu-ray player, an extra 20GB, again upgradeable, wifi adapter and free online gaming.

Of course the XBOX ARcade is very cheap but then you are in the same price bracket as a Wii or a PS2.

On top of all this the PS3 seems to have a much better build quality I.E. later version of HDMI, Gbit vs 100Mbit networking and considerably less reliability problems.

I think that if you are reasonable you have to admit that PS3 is finally in the game and are now providing very effective competion in the marketplace.

It will be interesting to see how this pans out now that the Sony and MS are offering consoles at effectively the same price.

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

joeboy101 — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 19:51:02 GMT

bandstand & daunda - So the argument is that the console is so powerful I should buy it? A crey computer is power ful too, does that mean I need to run down to Buy More and pick on up? OR the argument of, 'this much tech is a fantastic deal'. This is a better argument, but if it invalidates an entire game library someone has and makes the entertainment center a mess, do they really want it? For example, my entertainment center for my 56' DLP HDTV (yes, had to brag), has a Receiver, CD player, DVD player, Xbox 360, Wireless Router, and Cable Converter. Unless I started stacking, I could not fit 2 consoles in there. Besides, who buys the consoles for the tech? They buy them for playability. Period. For god's sake, Wii is the weakest technologically by far of all three right now, barely beating the PS2, but is slapping the snot out of the other two in sales.

Sony is coming to a hard truth that seriously hardcore early adopters will simply not hold them up until the console has gained enough traction. A cheaper console in the beginning could have. A stronger game library could have. Backwards compatability at least gave hope that it could. When you lose that much money on each machine, you make money on the peripherals and games. What games justify it? None right now. You say, wait for 2008, but Sony is losing money now. This second, and unlike Microsoft, they are relying on that money. The only good news is the strong PS2 sales.

The facts of life are these: 1) HDTV is not being adopted as heavily as it seems. And companies like Best Buy know it too. That's why they have the new HD Done Right campaign. Because confusion over the choices and terms is the number one reason the adoption rate has not accelerated like first thought [And you do NOT need a HDTV, read your linked article!!, ANALOG will no longer work, not all digital TVs are HD sets]. 2) Sony bet the farm on HD. MS also bet heavy on HD, but didn't go all in. They made the HD-DVD drive peripheral so all those non-HD players (yes, there are WAY more than you think) cannot be forced to purchase it [See #1]. 3) Blu-Ray is killing the PS3 right now. Oh sure, its a good format. But its also part of a format war right now, and I'm not going to get into the whole HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray argument, but your going to have a tough time convincing people to settle on a format before the market does. Especially after Beta vs. VHS. So the Blu-Ray causes the console to either be more expensive and a higher barrier to adoption, or you drop the price, and take more of a hit to your company's financial bottom line. Mark my words, instead of backward compatability, it would have been a risky, bold, and prudent move to have had Sony take out the Blu-Ray instead, and drop the price by $100. More units would have sold and Sony would not have lost as much money per console.

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

nen10dough — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 20:38:50 GMT

Translation - The PS3 was always too expensive and we're doing everything we can to get it cheaper, while at the same time trying to appease our bottom line.

From my experience with less enthusiastic gamers, it really just seems that BC doesn't matter that much, so I can understand why Sony is giving it the axe. Of course it matters to me and other gaming dorks out there, but for the average Joe who probably already owns a PS2, if he's told that the cheaper PS3 doesn't support PS2 games it probably won't deter him from buying one if his mind is set. In his mind he already owns a PS2 and can live without that luxury to save $100. It's getting that hypothetical gamer's mind set that's still Sony's biggest problem, and the only thing that can do that is PRICE and GAMES. Cheaper price, must-have games. In my opinion they really should've just bit the bullet and dropped it to $349. Get the system down to at least the same pricing tier as the 360, and then give players a tangible reason to buy the freakin thing. Spend some time in the red now and stand a chance this holiday season, or just barely make it to the black while your grip over the mainstream gaming population slowly loosens to Microsoft.

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

N'Gai Croal — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 20:42:40 GMT

Thanks for all of your thoughtful comments, folks. A few thoughts:

@BigDaddyDW: The point of some of the questions that I asked Tretton is that Sony executives had made repeated statements about the paramount importance of PS3 having backwards compatibility with PS1 and PS2 games. Nowhere in those statements did they ever suggest to consumers that this feature would ever be removed. Moreover, the PS2 has gone through several price drops without ever losing backwards compatibility with PS1. So any gamer for whom the $599/$499 introductory price of PS3 was too high could plan on waiting until the inevitable price cut to get a fully-featured PS3. Now we're being told that they've changed their minds and that backwards compatibility is not "incredibly relevant to the future going forward." That's a big shift in Sony's product philosophy, and since it will have an impact on gamers, I thought it relev--pertinent to ask about it. As for your suggestion that people could buy a $129 PS2 in addition to the $399 PS3, for that same price, I could buy Ratchet & Clank Future, Uncharted Drake's Fortune and Everyday Shooter. If it were my money, I'd rather spend it on games.

@joeboy101: If my political allusions bother you, that's your right. You may not see eye-to-eye with everything I write or how I write it, but hopefully you'll find the balance of my posts worth your while. As for Net neutrality and Internet taxation, I'm not going to promise any posts on those topics--my colleague Steven Levy generally tackles that stuff--but I will keep an eye on it.

@Jomolungma: I'm with you about keeping the number of devices plugged into my TV to a minimum.

@harrison25: You raise a good point about the risk of consumer confusion at retail. Sony's probably assuming that the more knowledgeable consumers will have read up on it enough to make the choice best suited to their needs, while everyone else will just make a decision based on price. Time will tell if they're right.

@AckeheceKoheo: Excellent point about what happens to those of us (like me) who have a fully backwards compatible PS3 should it break down. I guess I'll just have to dig my PS2 out of mothballs and plug it back in if I want to play Ico or God of War or Sly Cooper.

@lightningcandy: I will be sure to tell my bosses what you've said. Thanks!

@bandstand: You're correct about the value of the PS3 for its feature set compared to a similarly priced Xbox 360. But first and foremost, people buy a console to play games, and right *now*, with exclusives like BioShock, Halo 3 and (temporarily) Half-Life 2: The Orange Box, the 360 is winning that battle. So far, games like Lair and Heavenly Sword haven't convinced gamers of the PS3's superior value. We'll see if Ratchet & Clank Future and Uncharted: Drake's Fortune do the trick.

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

HeartbreakRidge — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 20:46:41 GMT

'Tis not the place, nor am I interested in engaging in a political discussion, but let me say that the political lead-in to this piece is jarring and not particularly relevant (ha! I made a funny!). It detracts from the overall piece.

On a minor side issue, did he really say "consternated"? I checked Merriam Webster and it surprisingly has a definition, but it doesn't make any sense to me in context. Concentrated, maybe?

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

piecz — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 21:23:42 GMT

Why, with all these changes, can they not address the lack of a scaler to support non 720p sets? Sony themselves has sold thousands of such sets in addition to Mitsubishi, etc. These sets have a long shelf life and I personally will not invest in a gaming machine that down converts to 480p.

The Xbox can do this, what is the reason Sony? Look at your own boards with threads from many users who are in this position.

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

SM5555 — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 21:37:17 GMT

Another point against the value argument: while it'll work for the super-hardcore gamers, the vast majority of people won't be able to quantify what console has the greater bang for the buck right now.

The hard drive size is the thing most people will know enough about to care about, since that concept has probably been mainstreamed enough for people to care. But neither HD format is especially mainstream, and won't be as long as there no compelling reason to get a player. For DVD, it was the release of The Matrix that served as the tipping point; as Sony doesn't seem to have any desire to, say, release Spidey 3 as a Blu-Ray exclusive, there's going to be nothing forcing people to sit up and think that they need the new format.

Think back to the original PS3 ads: they were typically Sony in style and execution, namely that they didn't say much while trying to establish the PS3 brand awareness. But has that helped them any? They were probably hoping to have the "this is the hot piece of technology, stores can't keep it in stock" stories provide them a ton of free media publicity, but Wii swiped that out from under their nose. And worse, the most-hyped feature of last Christmas' blitz was the Sixaxis, not the Blu-Ray player, and Wii's ascension into pop culture quickly eliminated any advantage the ads provided. So while the mainstream public are aware the PS3 exists, they don't have a good reason to buy it since its features have been so undersold by Sony since day one.

(Again, this may help them since people may not even realise that the BC was in there in the first place)

Heck, anyone who's worked retail during a Christmas season knows that shoppers are more likely to asking why you can't play Halo 3 on the PS3 (the modern version of the old "why isn't Pokemon on the Playstation?" question) than what type of video output is in either box or what type of wireless networking is supported.

@N'Gai: did you see the quote (I think it's on 1up's front page) from Sony saying that taking out BC was a minimal production cost savings, but was done solely to drive PS3 game sales? I think it was from the WSJ:

"(Tretton C)onceded that removing that capability, along with a few other features, isn't dramatically reducing Sony's cost of manufacturing the console but will instead encourage buyers of the entry-level PlayStation 3 to purchase more games designed specifically for the new system."

Far cry from what Tretton said to you in the answer of the first question. Although much more honest.

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

ykstewart — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 04:42:10 GMT

Great interview N'Gai. I will have to go against the grain of my fellow posters in stating that the political reference was a great lead in to this interview. Why? Because the President's situation is quite similar to the Console Wars of next gen but sort of in reverse. We have Sony represented in this interview as a company who seems to be very full of themselves. I really hope this first year for Sony is just a test of economic concepts, marketing philosphy, and demographic research in order for spring of 2008 and beyond to roll smoothly. Right now the big thing is to look at the PS3 for more than a video game system but as the entertainment hub of the future. Blu-Ray, WiFi, Gigs of HD are all great buzzwords to sell most electronic computing devices (mp3 players, computers, and other gadgets). Sony is diving way to much into the weeds and missing some pretty basic concepts. I think the target audience is around my age. Men in their early thirties. But Sony is failing to realize that they are dealing with grown men now. Not the little boys who gobbled up the PS1 and PS2. We have wives now, kids, full time jobs, mothers-in-law. Who has time to go buy a PS3 when I have my trusty PS2 and a car payment. They are missing that the buyers are the working teens, and undergrads that play these games constantly and have plenty of time to be online. Who buys most of the stuff for these two groups. That's right it's the parents. The hard working mothers and fathers that still consider the video game as a toy. Something that N'Gai has engaged in lively discussion in a prior post. That group( teens, undergrads, mother, fathers) is primarily concerned with games and right now Sony lacks a large library of games that draw enough interest to buy a $400/$500 game system BC or not. That mom is going to go and buy something in the family price range that gives her and her kids more bang for her buck. Right now that is the Wii and 360. All this talk of high technology is going to fly right over that sweet lady's head. This talk of high technology is for the target audience who is the tough sell right now. I'm glad Sony keep reiterating this point but I knew about all these features two years before the PS3 came out. I don't have to hear this again. So how does this compare with the President? Simple, while those who actually follow what goes on with politics and public policy can have an all day discussion about the ills of big government and its relevance to the expansion of SCHIP. The average Joe saw four buzz words "BUSH DENIES CHILD HEALTHCARE." Folks the majority of the voter pool will react to that versus sitting down and trying to understand all sides to Bush's decision. So our president gets more bad press because his reasoning behind taking a closer look at this bill is diminished by the sensationalism of him denying little Johnny a free trip to the doctor. In short, I feel that Sony needs to really re-examine their overall strategy for the PS3. The market is more competitive and it's going to take a lot more to get those 129 million PS2 owners to buy a PS3. Man up and say you don't have a competitive library at this time but things are on the horizon. The target audience of the 30 year old male has a wallet and mind of his own. Right now that person is not running out to get a PS3. Christmas is coming and it's time to start talking to the moms and dads and teens who are actually spending the big bucks to make the video game industry so lucrative. Sony, now is not the time to pound folks in the head with details. That is falling on deaf ears. It's time to start talking in headline speak to simplify your message.

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

wiyum — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 06:48:51 GMT

N'Gai,

The jury seems to have spoken, and politics on LevelUp seem to have been vetoed. But if my vote is being counted, I don't mind you sharing your opinions, whatever they may be. You tied it into the interview very well, so I don't see what the fuss is.

As for the interview, I began to wince (watching-Steve-Carrell's-Michael-Scott-on-The-Office-style) every-time he dropped the "relevant" bomb again. I've heard of on-message, but this was ridiculous.

Consolidation of devices has always been the basis of the Playstation brand. The PS1 was a cd player and a game console in one. The PS2 was a PS2, a PS1, a dvd player, and a cd player in one. The PS3 was meant to be a PS3, PS2, PS1, BluRay, DVD, and CD player in one. Convergence has been the hallmark of the device since day one, and I think this departure is more significant than Sony realizes. One hopes that they can work out a software solution for at least a few key titles, because the consumer they're targeting at $399 is the consumer that bought Guitar Hero, God of War 2, and Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, and also the consumer that ditched their PS1 in order to afford that PS2. When they sell the PS2 and some (but not all) of their games to get the $400 for their PS3, I think more than a few are going to be taken by surprise.

All of that said, they had to do this. At $499, with few worthwhile exclusive titles and against the 360 and Wii's upcoming holiday seasons, it was impossible for the system to gain traction, and after this holiday they could have been so far behind that there would be no hope of recovery. Now it *is* possible for the system to gain traction, and there is *some hope* of recovery. I'm sure it came down to "what can we cut to get the price down for this brutal holiday we're facing?" and backwards compatibility rightly and unfortunately got the axe. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out between now and October 2008.

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

g-online — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:51:42 GMT

People here have made some really good points, definitely this race is just beginning and nothing is certain yet about the winner.

So, Sony isn't stupid, they have done some stupid things for sure, but they're not complete idiots. To me it seems like they're trying to test their customers’ tolerance and preferences one SKU at a time, in a similar fashion to what MS is doing. It started with the 80GB model's %90 compatibility compared to the original 60GB's %98. There was quite a bit of internet noise around the time that announcement was made but for the most part, it has been accepted pretty well even by hard core fans I think.

So now there's a new SKU that's trying to test people's tastes and preferences when they're waving goodbye to $400-$500.

You may have noticed that Sony keeps saying they are "shifting focus" away from backwards compatibility. With all the power CELL has + the NVIDIA RSX, I find it hard to believe that full, software-only PS2 backwards compatibility is not, and will never be possible on the PS3, ever. It’ll take a real huge software-engineering effort to pull it out, but impossible? I don’t think so. Software-only emulation (i.e. without a single PS2 hardware chip used) has been on Kutaragi's game-plan from day 1 and was an integral part of the design of the PS3.

It's more likely to me that it is something that's just costing Sony too much money to get together at this stage of the PS3's life-cycle. I won't be surprised if it becomes a reality (in the form of a downloadable system update) later on in the PS3's life-cycle if the users show a continued interest in the feature. If Sony sees little interest in the 40GB SKU this holiday season, they’re likely to get the message at some point, and possibly invest more in software emulation so that the cost & parts-reduction policy is aligned with the customers’ view of what the PS3 should be.

Finally, to joeboy101: I have a PS3 now but I’ve had an Xbox as my only console since it came out and let me tell you, it really sucked when MS just closed the door on that console. I mean, the 360 obviously rocks but damn, they just threw their Xbox customers to the dogs man. It was like ok people, game over, no more games for you. You don’t need to be a genius to figure out the difference between Sony and MS’s roadmap for their customers as far as the investment they’re making in buying their hardware.

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

joeboy101 — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:56:49 GMT

N'Gai - I feel I must clarify my position. I am ALL for debating politics. I love a good politics discussion with rational people because it renews my faith in the logic of the human race, as well as exposes me to differring opinions. And my mantra is if I can't defend my position, its time to re-think it.

My issue is not with the type of politics, but that it was a bit jarring to work it into a game post. Whether I agreed with it or not. Kinda like when sports columnists and movie critics start throwing around off-hand political commentary. But my apologies if I came off overly whiny,

Now back to the game stuff.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21369262/

YIKES! 3.3 Million copies of Halo 3 driving 528,000 consoles sold of the 360. As good as this is though, I'm going to point out that the 360 only beat out the Wii by 27,000 consoles. I think Nintendo managed to do something scary which is create a console that sells itself, as opposed to other consoles which need the 'system seller' game. Obviously, Halo 3 is a huge leap for MS, and the PS3 at 119,000 is very anemic, but Nintendo is just being flat out scary right now.

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

nen10dough — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:42:42 GMT

The political lead-in was perfectly suited to the subject matter of the article, so really guys what's the big deal? If N'gai had used a lead-in about Britney Spears losing her kids for an article about Microsoft's loss of Bungie, would that be controversial too? Would people be complaining that they don't want celebrity gossip mixed in with their gaming news now?

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

shred — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:10:27 GMT

Jack says, "It's a machine that does things that the PlayStation 2 could never or would never do."

Um...last time I checked, the PS3 played games and played movies.

What else does it do? Those are the only two things I'd ever want it to do.

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

SM5555 — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:44:00 GMT

@nen10dough: I think Nintendo managed to do something scary which is create a console that sells itself, as opposed to other consoles which need the 'system seller' game.

Not exactly - Nintendo's just gone back to the old paradigm of packing in the system-seller game right off the bat, rather than forcing people to purchase it separately (a trend which they themselves basically started with Mario 64). Wii Sports has played a key role in selling 10 million Wiis, and if they keep it packed into the system it's going to go down in history with Super Mario Bros. and Tetris as games that made their systems viable from day one.

(People were going to buy the SNES anyway, so Mario World could probably have been horrible and no one would've noticed)

re: Sony Computer Entertainment America Announces New 40 Gigabyte Playstation 3 for $399; CEO Insists That the PS3 Remains 'Relevant'

ScottHillis — Sun, 21 Oct 2007 06:31:01 GMT

N'Gai--

Does this mean you lost your bet with Ozymandias?

http://ozymandias.com/archive/2007/07/25/Another-bet-on-Sony-Hardware_2E002E002E00_.aspx