Print

[mas10]

well its no good for games. Atleast its good for something else..... I think Sony paid more attention to bluray than it did on games. Thats just my 2cents  

[bigjimmy]

QUOTE

well its no good for games. Atleast its good for something else..... I think Sony paid more attention to bluray than it did on games. Thats just my 2cents

Agreed. Too bad i dont have any blu-ray movies.....

[mlmadmax]

It better be a good blue ray player, that is what the cell processor was desighned for. Now if sony can just tighten everythign else up about the system and i will be happy.  

Oh and start using better techniques to master blue ray so it looks as good as HD-DVD

[Kamasutra318]

QUOTE(mlmadmax @ Dec 27 2006, 08:23 PM)

Oh and start using better techniques to master blue ray so it looks as good as HD-DVD

There's really nothing to differentiate the encoding techniques for either format since both use the same audio and video standards. The choice of several studios to use MPEG-2 is an unfortunate one in my opinion, but mainly because it leaves less space for all the (HD) special features I'd like to see. From what I've seen and from the reviews I have read, Blu-ray doesn't seem to look any worse than HD DVD (anymore). But then, considering this very review, it seems that the hardware was a limiting factor for picture quality (as well).

[Pheidias]

Wich studios are you talking about again, exist2resist?

[cardboardbox]

QUOTE(iforbes @ Dec 28 2006, 01:45 PM)

Cost of PS3 cheaper than standalone BD player?

People have forgotten that Sony is spearheading the Blueray technology. Sony is the one manufacturing the BD Diods for sale in their PS3s and OEM blueray players, Sony is the one who will benefit the most due to licensing fees for both BD and PS3. So Sony has to construct some type of elaborate and believable marketing strategy.

Has anyone considered the fact that Sony, Samsung, etc as cartels are price fixing to make it SEEM that the ps3 is a bargain compared to 'intentionally vastly overpriced' standalone players?

Remember, 12 executives at Samsung were found guilty by the DOJ for unfair price fixing.  

I say that the PS3 is IMHO a great next gen HD media entertainment center with alot of (potentially) exciting capabilities - but then again , so is the xbox360 which is readily available, proven and from a company that not only has deeper pockets then Sony but also has mastered game/software design.

The PS3 is sold at a loss.  Samsung has to profit off their bluray device.

[Exist2Resist]

QUOTE(Pheidias @ Dec 28 2006, 03:44 AM)

Wich studios are you talking about again, exist2resist?

I'm not exactly sure which ones, as i read the article a few weeks back. There are a couple that have only agreed to develop for the 360 and PC.

QUOTE(cardboardbox @ Dec 28 2006, 11:17 AM)

The PS3 is sold at a loss.  Samsung has to profit off their bluray device.

If the PS3 is sold at a $200 loss then there is no reason the BD Plaers should cost $1k. PS3 hardware vs Player Hardware, this means that the profit margin on the standalone players is enourmous mor than likely 200% + profit. Anyone buying a standalone player is a chump.

[iforbes]

I don't believe for a second that the PS3 is sold at a loss. Yet another marketing ploy to encourage the early adapter (the beta testers who don't mind paying a premium to be the 1st of the block to own) to feel that he/she is getting value. Nothing more than a complimentary feel good splurge on a very high priced item from Sony.

As time moves on, and the initial demand diminishes, Sony will lower the prices (and still profit per machine)

Sony while being full of sh$t when it comes to marketing/selling their products, also know how to wheel and deal with manufacturers and governments to get the best prices on materials, fabrication and child labor.

[darklord999]

QUOTE(Exist2Resist @ Dec 28 2006, 11:58 AM)

If the PS3 is sold at a $200 loss then there is no reason the BD Plaers should cost $1k. PS3 hardware vs Player Hardware, this means that the profit margin on the standalone players is enourmous mor than likely 200% + profit. Anyone buying a standalone player is a chump.

PS3 is sold at a loss comparing to the BOM costs, that is just the manufacturing costs, without adding in the resarch amortization, admin and all the bonus paid to the execs.  If priced as a normal electronic equipment, PS3 could easily be sold at twice as much.

Say the BOM costs of is about $900, add in retailer's profit, shipping cost, Sony's old operating and admin cost, plus a reasonable profit margin, it's scary to think how much PS3 would cost under normal circumstances.

Thanks Sony for adoption the razor blade model on consoles, I bought it mainly as a Blu Ray movie player and cannot be happier.

[davbere]

I bet that article sparked some interest for some people to purchase a ps3.
 I didnt buy my ps3 to play blue ray but I'll definatly be taking advantage of this option once I get my HDTV.