Playstation 3 revealed! (1 Viewer)

[Ryan Peter]

How much is it going to cost?

 

[Kelly Scott Rickards]

That is a difficult question to answer for several reasons:

Is the PS3 going to be a stand alone console??

Ken Kutaragi has been interviewed as saying the PS3 may or may not be a "Console" per se.

KK is alluding to the fact the "PS3" tech may be intergrated into TVs, STBs and god knows what else...

If the PS3 is a stand-alone device like its predecessors then perhaps it will launch at the same price the PS2 did...

On the other hand, SCE's has other ideas for their vision of "Computer Entertainment" (and this is what I DO NOT like about SCE) which encompesses all manner of "entertainment content"...

SCEI is evangelizing the idea of a "home entertainment port" that would have a built-in HD/Tivo in the hardware where you could/must download CDs DVD movies and games and the PS3 could be this device (god knows how much THIS version of PS3 would cost)...

Basically, this SCE plan is all about control...

They control the servers...

They control the distribution of content (1st 2nd AND 3rd party software, be it games, movies or music)

They control who gets what, when, why and for how much!!!!

*THIS* is what I don't like about SCE and I am not quite sold this new "Computer Entertainment" business model...

I Just wanna play great games, and I DO NOT like the idea of Sony having this much control over this much content and I can only speculate how nervous a 3rd party dev may be handing all that power over *their* product to SCE....

 

[Ryan Peter]

I can't see how this expensively R&D technology could launch for $300 in 2006. Wonderful if it happens, though.

 

[Sean Oneil]

Kelly, I notice that this chip is in the absolute extreme planning stages only. It does not exist according to those press releases, and any speculation of it's final power is just that ...speculation.
Those press releases and articles are full of sentences like "If everything works as planned" and "The companies HOPE to develop Cell devices capable of multiple teraflops". They are full of "We Will's" and "We Plan to's". They are obviously EXTREMELY optomistic about what kind of power their R&D team (which has yet to even be assembled) will be able to pull out of that new 'cell' concept. Those press releases seem to simply strive to get stockholders excited with the prospects of investing in IBM and those other companies involved.
Also, the technology to build chips with that kind of power will require a huge advancement in manufacturing equipment technologies -such as lasers, etc.. and is another reason that IBM is being overly optomistic, because they have to wait for other technologies to move forward that they have no control over before they can even begin to build their new chips. You see, they can spend all the money they want on new Fabrication plants, but the equipment that they will need to etch those chips will still have to exist before it can be purchased. And once that kind of manufacturing technology does exist, then everyone will be using it in their new chips, (meaning Intel, AMD, and various other chip makers).
I am not saying that it can not happen, but I still maintain that they are exaggerating and hyping things up a bit to the extreme, and that if the PS3 does end up with a chip that powerful, then there will be a Microsoft X-Box 2, or a new Nintendo system right next to it with comprable power.

 

[AllanN]

Xbox was twice as powerful as the PS2....whoooooo. Take that Japan

Im sorry to say that it is not technology that makes the X-Box faster its economics. If Microsoft wanted to make the profit margins that Sony makes on the PS2 console, they would have to sell the X-Box at twice its price. Microsoft did design a system that is much more powerful but at a significant increase in production cost over the PS2. That is how technology works, there is always something faster it just costs more. The secret is that Microsoft is loosing money on the X-Box consoles. There plan is to sell a superior product to the competition at the same cost even though they are loose money on the individual consoles. Then when they have taken over the market they will make a killing on the software. Microsoft can do this because they are a huge bloated cash cow and can afford the initial loss while they are breaking into the market. One of the reasons I did not buy the X-Box, other than I loathe the controller, and I don't like Microsofts closed strategy for online gaming.

 

[Andre F]

I was about to get real pissed! This whole system war had better be over! Lets enjoy what we have for a few years. PS2 and the X-Box should be fine for at least 5 years!

I couldn't agree more...