Sony's Stringer. 'You Are Paying for PlayStation 3 Potential'
Future-proofed games machine pledged.
The entire industry baulked when Sony announced the pricepoint it had decided for its PlayStation 3 games console. US pricing (the only territory to receive on-the-record costings at time of press) was set at a whopping $500 - $600 - a huge leap on what many had predicted, in spite of Sony's pre-conditioning of the market.
However, Sony is sure that the machine is way too cheap (which in component real terms, it actually is) with SCE president Ken Kutaragi outlining as much in a follow-up to the firm's E3 announcement, full details of which you can catch here.
Recently-crowned Sony CEO Howard Stringer has added his weight to the project, explaining that early adopters will be paying for the "potential" of the machine, rather than what it will deliver on day one. Speaking to assembled press in Tokyo, Stringer said, "The price of the PS3 is high, but you're paying for potential. Obviously, it's a higher-risk strategy - as all new inventions are - but if the PS3 lives up to its total potential, then I don't think anyone will be worried about Nintendo or Xbox's cheaper price": these comments made to assure investors that the masses of cash invested in the next-generation of PlayStation will see returns comparable with previous iterations. This comes on the back of widely-publicised concerns over the project, led by jittery analysts forced out of their investment comfort zone by the PlayStation 3. Indeed, Merrill Lynch Japan issued a warning in December of last year that launching the PlayStation 3 would cost Sony a whopping $1.18 billion to just manufacture, with millions more required for a massive global marketing campaign. You can read Sony's response here.
Stringer continued with a question to consumers. "Do you go for a cheaper transitional [product], or do you take a chance on future-proof, higher technology which will keep you going for many, many years?"
As to how the public reacts to PlayStation 3 will be very interesting, to say the least. Let us know what's in your very own minds in the forum below.
However, Sony is sure that the machine is way too cheap (which in component real terms, it actually is) with SCE president Ken Kutaragi outlining as much in a follow-up to the firm's E3 announcement, full details of which you can catch here.
Recently-crowned Sony CEO Howard Stringer has added his weight to the project, explaining that early adopters will be paying for the "potential" of the machine, rather than what it will deliver on day one. Speaking to assembled press in Tokyo, Stringer said, "The price of the PS3 is high, but you're paying for potential. Obviously, it's a higher-risk strategy - as all new inventions are - but if the PS3 lives up to its total potential, then I don't think anyone will be worried about Nintendo or Xbox's cheaper price": these comments made to assure investors that the masses of cash invested in the next-generation of PlayStation will see returns comparable with previous iterations. This comes on the back of widely-publicised concerns over the project, led by jittery analysts forced out of their investment comfort zone by the PlayStation 3. Indeed, Merrill Lynch Japan issued a warning in December of last year that launching the PlayStation 3 would cost Sony a whopping $1.18 billion to just manufacture, with millions more required for a massive global marketing campaign. You can read Sony's response here.
Stringer continued with a question to consumers. "Do you go for a cheaper transitional [product], or do you take a chance on future-proof, higher technology which will keep you going for many, many years?"
As to how the public reacts to PlayStation 3 will be very interesting, to say the least. Let us know what's in your very own minds in the forum below.
People:
Sir Howard Stringer
Read More Like This
Comments
Showing the 20 most recent comments. Read all 26.
jadnice 27 Jun 2006 12:25
7/26
They want us to spend $600 on Potential...HAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHhA
HAHAHAhAHAHAha....
The more Sony tries to justify the price is the more they sound stupid. First your paying for next gen DVD...as if we asked for it, then is a new age PC (hahahahahaha) and now they want us to pay for potential. That tells they have some fear of a massive let down.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHhA
HAHAHAhAHAHAha....
The more Sony tries to justify the price is the more they sound stupid. First your paying for next gen DVD...as if we asked for it, then is a new age PC (hahahahahaha) and now they want us to pay for potential. That tells they have some fear of a massive let down.
tyrion 27 Jun 2006 12:26
8/26
YenRug wrote:
Here's one reason why it's "future-proof": Sony do not produce HDTV's capable of displaying 1080P yet, so you're going to have to wait until sometime in the future before you can actually exploit its capabilities!
God I sound like a Sony apologist today, but whatever - the course of truth never runs smooth.
Sony produce and sell a 1080p native resolution projector with HDMI - the VPL-VW100.
Now that's a bit expensive at over £5,000 I admit, but it's a home theatre projector, that can be used as an HDTV, that you can buy now, made by Sony.
more comments below our sponsor's message
YenRug 27 Jun 2006 12:36
9/26
tyrion wrote:
YenRug wrote:
Here's one reason why it's "future-proof": Sony do not produce HDTV's capable of displaying 1080P yet, so you're going to have to wait until sometime in the future before you can actually exploit its capabilities!
God I sound like a Sony apologist today, but whatever - the course of truth never runs smooth.
Sony produce and sell a 1080p native resolution projector with HDMI - the VPL-VW100.
Now that's a bit expensive at over £5,000 I admit, but it's a home theatre projector, that can be used as an HDTV, that you can buy now, made by Sony.
It's not an HDTV though, is it? Means my point still stands, I'm afraid, in the context of the discussion. Mind you, this is the company that thinks people should work harder/do overtime/take a second job to be able to afford to buy the PS3; talk about arrogance, or what, they want you to buy their product but then not have enough time to actually use it. Another way of future-proofing, it will be ten years before you have the spare time to take it out of the box it came in. ;)
SPInGSPOnG 27 Jun 2006 12:49
10/26
YenRug wrote:
It's not an HDTV though, is it?
What (TF) is it then?
Only losers put up with pathetically small 50" screens when 100" of magnificence is the same price (often less).
You might still be using CRT/TFT/Plasma, but the cool kids moved on years ago.
DoctorDee 27 Jun 2006 13:01
11/26
YenRug wrote:
Here's one reason why it's "future-proof": Sony do not produce HDTV's capable of displaying 1080P yet, so you're going to have to wait until sometime in the future before you can actually exploit its capabilities!
Excellent point. Or it would be if:
a) PS3 only worked with Sony TVs.
b) No-one else made TVs capable of displaying 1080p.
As it is, the same logic says the Xbox 360 is useless, because Microsoft doesn't make ANY TVs capable of displaying 720p. Wii? Rubbish because Nintendo doesn't make TVs capable of displaying SDTV.
tyrion 27 Jun 2006 13:20
12/26
YenRug wrote:
It's not an HDTV though, is it?
So what is your definition of an HDTV? "Must have a tuner"? Given that most people in the UK have Sky, cable or freeview, a tuner isn't really required to watch television these days.
A projector hooked up to a sky box is as much a TV as a CRT hooked up to a Sky box. One that displays HD resolutions is an HDTV.
questworld 27 Jun 2006 13:59
13/26
The only future proofing I need is for a system that doesn't break within a year or so (and something that won't "eat" my games). Give me that guarantee then I'll buy a PS3. Heck, I'll take a replacement warranty from now to the far future.
At any rate, what guarantee do we have that Blu-Ray will be the standard in the future? Don't get me wrong, it's a very interesting format, I just don't want to have a format that only lasts so long.
At any rate, what guarantee do we have that Blu-Ray will be the standard in the future? Don't get me wrong, it's a very interesting format, I just don't want to have a format that only lasts so long.
The Hero of Time 27 Jun 2006 14:17
14/26
Even if it is 'futureproof', even if it has amazing games, even if blu ray takes off. It's still six hunderd friggin dollars. It doesn't matter if it's worth it or not. Six hundred dollars is six hundred dollars.
That is putting huge amount of faith in thier brand, to think people will shell out that much on a GAMES CONSOLE, even if it's worth the extra crap you get. The core PS2 user doesn't give a s**t about that stuff. They just want to play games.
God, just when you think they cant say anything more stupid, they out do themselves again. Bravo, Sony.
That is putting huge amount of faith in thier brand, to think people will shell out that much on a GAMES CONSOLE, even if it's worth the extra crap you get. The core PS2 user doesn't give a s**t about that stuff. They just want to play games.
God, just when you think they cant say anything more stupid, they out do themselves again. Bravo, Sony.
thane_jaw 27 Jun 2006 15:53
15/26
Potentially, if I hooked up my computer with a fancy card that let me output tv signals to my monitor you could argue that was or was not a tv depending on your definition. Of course I'd be ignoring you and watching lost, so it would be academic in purpose. In the broadest sense any device allowing me to watch high def broadcasted content can be considered a tv. But you're not really talking about tv's when you're complaining about 1080p output, rather devices that can output at 1080p.
YenRug wrote:
Here's one reason why it's "future-proof": Sony do not produce HDTV's capable of displaying 1080P yet, so you're going to have to wait until sometime in the future before you can actually exploit its capabilities!
Or, like the 360, there could be an option to put it through your fancy computer monitor negating further purchase of expensive equipment for the time being and bringing the future home to you today.
YenRug 27 Jun 2006 15:58
16/26
Yeesh, some of you have to stop taking the wind-ups so seriously! A projector is a projector, it's not a TV, that's my position; a TV displays on it's own screen/display, not on the wall across the other side of the room (no, a dedicated projector screen in front of that wall doesn't make a difference).
As to the point of my comment, Sony is going on about HDTV being the be all and end all, yet they don't produce an HDTV that allows you to get the best out of their own system. It's just another thing that show's how much crap they're talking, that's all.
As to the point of my comment, Sony is going on about HDTV being the be all and end all, yet they don't produce an HDTV that allows you to get the best out of their own system. It's just another thing that show's how much crap they're talking, that's all.
tyrion 27 Jun 2006 17:26
17/26
thane_jaw wrote:
Or, like the 360, there could be an option to put it through your fancy computer monitor negating further purchase of expensive equipment for the time being and bringing the future home to you today.
Much as I like my 23" wide-screen monitor that is attached to my PC, I'd hate to have to try and play my PS3 through it in my lounge. There's a reason that I bought a projector and that reason is a six foot diagonal on the screen!
All I need is for the price of the VPL-VW100 to come down to Earth or someone else to produce a sensibly prices 1080p native projector and I'll have 1080p goodness at 72 English inches. That's High-def gaming, not sitting 18 inches away at a desk watching a monitor.
YenRug wrote:
A projector is a projector, it's not a TV, that's my position; a TV displays on it's own screen/display, not on the wall across the other side of the room
So what about a rear-projection TV? That's just a projector and screen in an all-in-one box? Do we have to go back to CRTs for it to be a TV or are LCDs and plasmas included too?
Get with the now! Projectors are becoming more and more common and are the only choice for that at-home movie theatre effect. I feel like getting out the opera glasses when I visit my family or friends without projectors. :-)
The fact is, Sony produce a 1080p-capable display, which will be able to be hooked up to a PS3 via HDMI when it comes out. This makes your cheap-shot original post even cheaper.
I'd also be willing to bet that Sony will have a 1080p capable Bravia TV out by the time the PS3 is released, even if it's just to show the PS3 off in Sony Centres.
thane_jaw 27 Jun 2006 21:15
18/26
tyrion wrote:
Much as I like my 23" wide-screen monitor that is attached to my PC, I'd hate to have to try and play my PS3 through it in my lounge. There's a reason that I bought a projector and that reason is a six foot diagonal on the screen!
All I need is for the price of the VPL-VW100 to come down to Earth or someone else to produce a sensibly prices 1080p native projector and I'll have 1080p goodness at 72 English inches. That's High-def gaming, not sitting 18 inches away at a desk watching a monitor.
Unfortunately for myself that's my only option for high def gaming at the moment, I lack the luxury of a free wall for a projecter and the money for a HDTV. I have my 360 and PC rigged up to a monitor which I see clearly from my bed, its not the best solution but is currently my best option for "seeing the future" now and makes me feel a lot better about shelling out for my 360 compared to playing it on a comparatively large t.v. screen.
DoctorDee 27 Jun 2006 21:45
19/26
thane_jaw wrote:
Unfortunately for myself that's my only option for high def gaming at the moment, I lack the luxury of a free wall for a projecter and the money for a HDTV.
Personally, I take a lorgnette with me when I sojourn at Tyrion's abode, finding - as I do - his penchance for diminutive screens charming, but droll.
But 'tis true, a projector is not for everyone, and sometimes, even those for whom it is are limited by space, like my good friend Tyrion.
But I say to those who can afford it and have the room... rip down that wall paper and splash a little white emulsion (or even better, Screen Goo) on that wall - it's a small price to pay for HUGE high-res goodness.
warbaby 27 Jun 2006 21:47
20/26
Hah... Paying for potential...
I'll pay for it when I see some potential. If it's going to be s**tty now, but good later, then I'll buy it later when its going to be cheaper.
Not going to invest into the sony plan this time.
I'll pay for it when I see some potential. If it's going to be s**tty now, but good later, then I'll buy it later when its going to be cheaper.
Not going to invest into the sony plan this time.
horngreen 27 Jun 2006 23:27
21/26
WOW lol I'll give credit to Sony for FINALLY being honest with the consumer. We are paying for the PS3s "potential". I think many of us recall paying for the PS2s potential and we are still waiting for that potential to emerge. I'm gonna guess it's not going to since the PS3 is about to launch...
crs117 28 Jun 2006 05:15
22/26
I sure hope the snazzy Blu-Ray drive will still spin up and read disks by the time the ps3 starts hitting its potential. With a track record like sony for failed optical drives in their home consoles, it may be better to wait for the potential to come to fruition so that you can enjoy it without having to shell out another $600 for a replacement console.
Besides at this point, screw sony's potential...I actually want to see some functioning ps3 hardware.
Besides at this point, screw sony's potential...I actually want to see some functioning ps3 hardware.
SPInGSPOnG 28 Jun 2006 07:39
23/26
horngreen wrote:
I think many of us recall paying for the PS2s potential and we are still waiting for that potential to emerge.
Dude, that's just the stuff that comes out of the backend of a bull.
The PS2 has lived up to its potential. The kind of people who pretend that it hasn't are just the kinda people who would never be happy with it - even if it manifested the second coming of Jebus Christ our lord and saviour and his hosts of heaven.
The rest of us look at GT4, God of War, Shadow of the Colossus, Burnout Takedown and know that your words are as empty as the mind from whence they came.
thane_jaw 28 Jun 2006 10:14
24/26
crs117 wrote:
I sure hope the snazzy Blu-Ray drive will still spin up and read disks by the time the ps3 starts hitting its potential.
Interestingly enough some reviews of current bluray drives suggest that load times for bluray vs hddvd are favourably comparable, although 1080p produces some niggling choppiness. It has always interested me how Sony is going to deal with load times for games, given the lower spin and larger amount of data being stored on the bluray, but I guess its a mute point until we get our hands on a ps3.
crs117 28 Jun 2006 16:16
25/26
Even more important than load times is how long this expensive new drive will last. Sony consoles are notorious for optical drive malfunction. If it takes a year or two for the ps3 to hit its potential i would be pretty pissed to see my 600 ps3 bite the dust just before it matures. I mean buying 2 ps2's one for 400 and then a replacement later for 200 is the same cost as a single sp3 but the cost for 2 ps3's one at 600 and one at 400 is a grand easy.
Personally I hope that blu-ray dies quickly and takes sony and the ps3 with it. I am tired of sony's crap.
Personally I hope that blu-ray dies quickly and takes sony and the ps3 with it. I am tired of sony's crap.
PreciousRoi 29 Jun 2006 16:34
26/26
Rod Todd wrote:
The PS2 has lived up to its potential. The kind of people who pretend that it hasn't are just the kinda people who would never be happy with it - even if it manifested the second coming of Jebus Christ our lord and saviour and his hosts of heaven.
The rest of us look at GT4, God of War, Shadow of the Colossus, Burnout Takedown and know that your words are as empty as the mind from whence they came.
The rest of us look at GT4, God of War, Shadow of the Colossus, Burnout Takedown and know that your words are as empty as the mind from whence they came.
UR such the fanboy. Your primary exemplar is GT4? A fine game, I'm sure...but "not very" is the answer to the question "How cool is any racing game sans online?" And if GT4 isn't the textbook definition of "waiting for potential" then that must have been some other game that kept appearing at E3 like some bad groundhog only to dissapear back into its hole for another year.