Support NeoGAF

[Banjo64]

Nope but I recall a $600 PS3 that launched on its own timeline

£425 was a sky high price ($800 equivalent) but it was half the price of other Blu Ray players and sold at a big loss for PlayStation.

It was a disaster class in design from Sony from a cost perspective.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

You think PS3 cost $600 because of inflation?

You think that PS3 cost $600 because Microsoft wasn't there to hold Sony's prices down?

 

[Banjo64]

You think the PS3 cost $600 because the Wii cost $199?

 

[DeepEnigma]

You think the PS3 cost $600 because Stone Cold said so?

 

[The Pleasure]

You think the PS3 cost $600 dollars because the Shamwow guy said WoW every time he played lair?

 

[Topher]

You think that PS3 cost $600 because Microsoft wasn't there to hold Sony's prices down?

No idea what you are trying to say there. PS3 sold at a massive loss due to the sheer amount of tech they packed into the thing. Blu ray, Cell processor, media card slots, and an entire PS2 system board. Certainly had nothing to do with inflation.

 

[adamsapple]

You think the PS3 cost $600 because Stone Cold said so?

 

[bitbydeath]

I remember back then, a standalone bluray drive cost 400-500 USD. It's crazy that Sony was even taking a loss on the launch PS3

$1000 for a decent brand.

 

[DeepEnigma]

 

[Unknown Soldier]

No idea what you are trying to say there. PS3 sold at a massive loss due to the sheer amount of tech they packed into the thing. Blu ray, Cell processor, media card slots, and an entire PS2 system board. Certainly had nothing to do with inflation.

I mean yes, but that doesn't change my point that game consoles and individual games have been held at an arbitrary price point for decades while inflation has made literally everything else get more expensive. Not to mention that all of these things don't require Microsoft to hang around and play pretend "competition" which is what I was replying to in the first place.

 

[Topher]

I mean yes, but that doesn't change my point that game consoles and individual games have been held at an arbitrary price point for decades while inflation has made literally everything else get more expensive. Not to mention that all of these things don't require Microsoft to hang around and play pretend "competition" which is what I was replying to in the first place.

It doesn't require Microsoft specifically but it does require real competition. And Nintendo isn't the company that is keeping either Microsoft or Sony in check. Microsoft keeps Sony in check and vice versa.

 

[IFireflyl]

I mean yes, but that doesn't change my point that game consoles and individual games have been held at an arbitrary price point for decades while inflation has made literally everything else get more expensive. Not to mention that all of these things don't require Microsoft to hang around and play pretend "competition" which is what I was replying to in the first place.

I think the rub is that you implied the PlayStation 3 cost $600 due to inflation, and that was not at all the reason for the $600 price tag.

 

[DeepEnigma]

It doesn't require Microsoft specifically but it does require real competition. And Nintendo isn't the company that is keeping either Microsoft or Sony in check. Microsoft keeps Sony in check and vice versa.

Well, they used to, until they sucked at it and are now buying everything up. Who's there to keep that in check? Certainly not corruptible sorts.

 

[Solidus_T]

$1000 for a decent brand.

Oh yeah that's the whole bluray player. I was talking about just getting a drive for your computer, which was nuts

 

[Topher]

Well, they used to, until they sucked at it and are now buying everything up. Who's there to keep that in check? Certainly not corruptible sorts.

Yeah, and it sucks too because Xbox 360 humbled PlayStation and taught Sony a lesson about their own arrogance in trying to push a $600 into the market just because they could. Think that was the point HeisenbergFX4 was making. But now there is no keeping in check Phil Spencer getting the green light from the powers that be at MS to utilize that fat bank account and transform the console and PC market into an MS wholly owned entity.

Oh....except for regulators who some of us have been hoping will get in Microsoft's way and prevent an oncoming disaster. If I needed vindication for opposing Microsoft's acquisition ambitions (which I don't) then I can simply point to a single email from Phil Spencer who envisions buying Nintendo and chunking their Switch hardware aside, all for Spencer's personal glory.

How did he put it? It would be a "career moment".

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

Yeah, and it sucks too because Xbox 360 humbled PlayStation and taught Sony a lesson about their own arrogance in trying to push a $600 into the market just because they could. Think that was the point HeisenbergFX4 was making. But now there is no keeping in check Phil Spencer getting the green light from the powers that be at MS to utilize that fat bank account and transform the console and PC market into an MS wholly owned entity.

Oh....except for regulators who some of us have been hoping will get in Microsoft's way and prevent an oncoming disaster. If I needed vindication for opposing Microsoft's acquisition ambitions (which I don't) then I can simply point to a single email from Phil Spencer who envisions buying Nintendo and chunking their Switch hardware aside, all for Spencer's personal glory.

How did he put it? It would be a "career moment".

A number I found interesting was MS dipping into the "war chest" to the tune of 1.5 Billion subsidy in the first year alone to hit target prices

 

[laynelane]

I don't understand people wanting MS out of the business but wanting healthy competition

Where does the healthy competition come from if MS bows out?

I think the definition of what "healthy competition" actually is may play into this. For some, it's become increasingly apparent that this is not possible with the maneuvers MS has been making (namely acquiring IPs and making them exclusive in an attempt to strong arm people into their ecosystem). Some people call this disruptive and some call it damaging. For me, I view it as the latter. As well, I don't see this changing which introduces a no-win situation for many customers/gamers. That may be where some of the wishing for MS to exit the industry is coming from.

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

I think the definition of what "healthy competition" actually is may play into this. For some, it's become increasingly apparent that this is not possible with the maneuvers MS has been making (namely acquiring IPs and making them exclusive in an attempt to strong arm people into their ecosystem). Some people call this disruptive and some call it damaging. For me, I view it as the latter. As well, I don't see this changing which introduces a no-win situation for many customers/gamers. That may be where some of wishing for MS to exit the industry is coming from.

I am just not sure if MS left that Apple or Amazon would play "fair" either if they decided to go head-to-head with Sony

If fact its what scares me the most with what MS is trying to do because what then stops say Apple dropping a $1000 console and buying some huge names and make their games exclusive to this new system

 

[azertydu91]

I am just not sure if MS left that Apple or Amazon would play "fair" either if they decided to go head-to-head with Sony

If fact its what scares me the most with what MS is trying to do because what then stops say Apple dropping a $1000 console and buying some huge names and make their games exclusive to this new system

Understandable fear considering Iphone pricvces compared to equivalent android phones....That being said I'd be curious what they can achieve with their own chipset designed for gaming.
I still think Valve would be the better new "challenger" even sthough the steambox were a flop a more streamlined dedicated hardware (ala steam deck but for consoles) would probably be viable for a time ....Until emulated by the likes of Asus, razer etc...
It could potentially segment the market and prevent a new big 3rd in the industry but on the other hand would encourage aggressive pricing.That would certainly be an interesting series of events to witness.

 

[quest]

I am just not sure if MS left that Apple or Amazon would play "fair" either if they decided to go head-to-head with Sony

If fact its what scares me the most with what MS is trying to do because what then stops say Apple dropping a $1000 console and buying some huge names and make their games exclusive to this new system

Exactly people want everyone to play on Sony’s turf were they have the huge advantage. You think Apple or amazon is playing the money hat game agaist Sony where sony only pays a fraction of the cost. Where a new competitor might have to pay 200 million plus against Sonys 25 million. I know i know everything from major studios must be day and date on Playstation or it isn't fair.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Exactly people want everyone to play on Sony’s turf were they have the huge advantage. You think Apple or amazon is playing the money hat game agaist Sony where sony only pays a fraction of the cost. Where a new competitor might have to pay 200 million plus against Sonys 25 million. I know i know everything from major studios must be day and date on Playstation or it isn't fair.

 

[Topher]

Exactly people want everyone to play on Sony’s turf were they have the huge advantage. You think Apple or amazon is playing the money hat game agaist Sony where sony only pays a fraction of the cost. Where a new competitor might have to pay 200 million plus against Sonys 25 million. I know i know everything from major studios must be day and date on Playstation or it isn't fair.

Are you really crying about how much trillion dollar corporations have to pay to enter a market where billion dollar corporations are already established? Nice job making up those numbers though.

 

[quest]

Are you really crying about how much trillion dollar corporations have to pay to enter a market where billion dollar corporations are already established? Nice job making up those numbers though.

Making up numbers Microsoft with 20% or so market share had to pay 100 million. With inflation and zero marketshare im probably under estimated the cost for apple or Amazon. I do think its funny cry about Microsoft trying to build a monopoly but Sony using money hats to keep out any new competition is cool.

 

[Clintizzle]

Sure, but if they overshot their hand people would just go with mobile, Nintendo and PC/handheld PCs.

Mobile - At this stage is only big for a certain type of game. Not games that PlayStation and Xbox are known for.
Nintendo - I might be wrong but Nintendo does not care about anything other than handheld and I can't see them going back to home console.
PC/Handheld PC - PC gaming is huge now (or always has been?) I would like to see the crossover of Console owners who have a PC that is SAME or MORE capable in gaming. Otherwise, I think the performance per $ on console cannot be beaten and will not naturally translate to people moving to PC.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Making up numbers Microsoft with 20% or so market share had to pay 100 million. With inflation and zero marketshare im probably under estimated the cost for apple or Amazon. I do think its funny cry about Microsoft trying to build a monopoly but Sony using money hats to keep out any new competition is cool.

 

[laynelane]

I am just not sure if MS left that Apple or Amazon would play "fair" either if they decided to go head-to-head with Sony

If fact its what scares me the most with what MS is trying to do because what then stops say Apple dropping a $1000 console and buying some huge names and make their games exclusive to this new system

That's difficult to answer because of the whole "what if" scenario surrounding it. I do agree that a precedent is being set now, though, for companies like Apple and Amazon in terms of how they could operate (especially since regulators en masse have done very little to impede MS' actions) in the console business. I'm a bit ambivalent about it due to the lack of information but also because one thing that should be taken into account is customer feedback and push back. In the PS3 example you used in another comment, it wasn't just XBox that put Sony in check. It was also their own customers giving them feedback and, most importantly, not buying their console. That sort of reaction could, theoretically, happen to anyone who tried to introduce extremely expensive consoles (even with exclusive IP attached which, possibly, would make matters worse). If it could happen to Sony, there's an implication no company would be exempt in a similar scenario.

 

[DeepEnigma]

That's difficult to answer because of the whole "what if" scenario surrounding it. I do agree that a precedent is being set now, though, for companies like Apple and Amazon in terms of how they could operate (especially since regulators en masse have done very little to impede MS' actions) in the console business. I'm a bit ambivalent about it due to the lack of information but also because one thing that should be taken into account is customer feedback and push back. In the PS3 example you used in another comment, it wasn't just XBox that put Sony in check. It was also their own customers giving them feedback and, most importantly, not buying their console. That sort of reaction could, theoretically, happen to anyone who tried to introduce extremely expensive consoles (even with exclusive IP attached which, possibly, would make matters worse). If it could happen to Sony, there's an implication no company would be exempt in a similar scenario.

That's a good point as well. Fans at the time did hold them accountable.

 

[Topher]

I am just not sure if MS left that Apple or Amazon would play "fair" either if they decided to go head-to-head with Sony

If fact its what scares me the most with what MS is trying to do because what then stops say Apple dropping a $1000 console and buying some huge names and make their games exclusive to this new system

The last thing I think gamers want is for this part of gaming (console and PC) to become a battlefield for the tech titans where spending a $100 billion doesn't break a sweat. We see that already with Microsoft. I truly hope Apple stays in their iOS, MacOS lane.

Making up numbers Microsoft with 20% or so market share had to pay 100 million. With inflation and zero marketshare im probably under estimated the cost for apple or Amazon. I do think its funny cry about Microsoft trying to build a monopoly but Sony using money hats to keep out any new competition is cool.

I'll leave the fiction to you. I'm citing facts as relayed by Phil Spencer himself on Microsoft's designs on buying Nintendo and Valve. But if Sony's moneyhatting is what you believe is keeping Apple and Amazon from becoming yet more trillion dollar players in the gaming industry then get on your knees and thank Sony. Of course, it's bullshit and I don't buy any of it, but since you do.....be thankful.

 

[Astray]

Apple might buy some publishers or devs, but they know entertainment extremely well (look at how well received AppleTV+ content already is, it's basically a new HBO in some ways), they also have a far greater insight into consumers' and are much more tapped in than Microsoft or Amazon is, like, they already have knowhow about how people hold devices or how to make a graphics chip that's powerful af yet efficient.

Amazon entering the field would probably deliver worse results than Microsoft's, they already have quite a few gaming blunders on their hands, but if Apple enters gaming they will absolutely obliterate Sony within time because they already know consumers and entertainment and can compete on tech.

 

[laynelane]

That's a good point as well. Fans at the time did hold them accountable.

I was one of them. I still remember the excitement of the PS3 release turning into disappointment when they announced the price (and the attitude surrounding it from Sony). I didn't get a second job or work more to pay for a PS3, I simply didn't buy a PS3 and stuck with my PS2 for longer.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Apple might buy some publishers or devs, but they know entertainment extremely well (look at how well received AppleTV+ content already is, it's basically a new HBO in some ways), they also have a far greater insight into consumers' and are much more tapped in than Microsoft or Amazon is, like, they already have knowhow about how people hold devices or how to make a graphics chip that's powerful af yet efficient.

Amazon entering the field would probably deliver worse results than Microsoft's, they already have quite a few gaming blunders on their hands, but if Apple enters gaming they will absolutely obliterate Sony within time because they already know consumers and entertainment and can compete on tech.

Apple is one of the few companies that could actually acquire Sony and then Microsoft would find themselves trying to pick on someone their own size and that would go badly for Microsoft

 

[Schmick]

Its crazy to me to think that a £800-£1000 Apple console would actually sell and appeal to the majority of console gamers.

 

[Jigsaah]

Wait...a wild Jigsaah appeared...

I thought the deal was in jeopardy now because how the CMA did their scheduling. I'm probably late as hell with this, but there's only so much of this I can take. What's the latest?

 

[DeepEnigma]

Wait...a wild Jigsaah appeared...

I thought the deal was in jeopardy now because how the CMA did their scheduling. I'm probably late as hell with this, but there's only so much of this I can take. What's the latest?

These are the newest posts so far.

Tom Warren says CMA decision is coming next week.

Odd timing, should have stood up for the CMA much earlier.

UK minister defends CMA's decision to block MS/ABK

UK business minister Kemi Badenoch has defended the Competition and Market Authority's decision to block the Microsoft-…

www.gamesindustry.biz

 

[Astray]

Apple is one of the few companies that could actually acquire Sony and then Microsoft would find themselves trying to pick on someone their own size and that would go badly for Microsoft

They don't need to acquire imo, they have all the tech and entertainment know-how to slowly build out their market position. And they already have strong brand evangelism on their side too.

 

[bitbydeath]

Making up numbers Microsoft with 20% or so market share had to pay 100 million. With inflation and zero marketshare im probably under estimated the cost for apple or Amazon. I do think its funny cry about Microsoft trying to build a monopoly but Sony using money hats to keep out any new competition is cool.

It never occurred to you that they’re just shit at what they’re doing, which is why they’re paying exorbitant prices?

 

[DeepEnigma]

It never occurred to you that they’re just shit at what they’re doing, which is why they’re paying exorbitant prices?

Thyre literally the guy on the bicycle with the stick meme.

 

[Topher]

They don't need to acquire imo, they have all the tech and entertainment know-how to slowly build out their market position. And they already have strong brand evangelism on their side too.

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple stayed out of the publishing realm and depended entirely on third parties like they do (mostly) with their other devices. I think anything Apple does is going to be part of the Mac, iOS ecosystem and if they had a device dedicated to gaming then it could be a cross between Apple TV and a Mac mini but running games optimized for CrossOver, while also full integrated into the Apple ecosystem for music, TV, movies, etc. I agree with you, the evangelists would eat that shit up.

 

[Drell]

Making up numbers Microsoft with 20% or so market share had to pay 100 million. With inflation and zero marketshare im probably under estimated the cost for apple or Amazon. I do think its funny cry about Microsoft trying to build a monopoly but Sony using money hats to keep out any new competition is cool.

For the love of god, are you still trying to defend MS with that Sony bad/Sony too argument? Are you still trying to say that moneyhatting temporary exclusives (something MS does too) is worse than buying the industry? Do you realize this poor argument has been overuzed so much it's rotten?

 

[SRTtoZ]

Have a laugh at this:

I've been off GAF for a while before I came back and I forgot all about this motherfucker. Biggest shill known to man.

 

[kvltus lvlzvs]

when i was a kid, they would charge 15 dollars for 4 maps and no new weapons in COD. now all of that is free and afaik mostly unlockable by just playing the game. different generations, but i think we're much better off now than 10-15 years ago.

20-25 years ago, though, those were the golden days, when we called dlcs expansions.

 

[Topher]

I've been off GAF for a while before I came back and I forgot all about this motherfucker. Biggest shill known to man.

Quite true. And....welcome back.

 

[HoofHearted]

Nope but I recall a $600 PS3 that launched on its own timeline

I remember people getting shot for those $600 PS3s

 

[PaintTinJr]

You said a whole lot of nothing.

How do you come to that conclusion? You implied that a decision is just phase 1 preliminary, as those a block would still have plenty of wiggle room to change, and I was filling in the context that this isn't the same as the original merger at phase 1 and the current status quo of the original deal being blocked in finality is the foundation by which this new offshoot proposal is assessed, and in the event of it being blocked preliminarily at phase 1, will likely need a new, new ex-Activision merger proposal to move from block to approve.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

You think the PS3 cost $600 because the Wii cost $199?

You think the PS3 cost $600 because it cost $600?

 

[Ginzeen]

How do you come to that conclusion? You implied that a decision is just phase 1 preliminary, as those a block would still have plenty of wiggle room to change, and I was filling in the context that this isn't the same as the original merger at phase 1 and the current status quo of the original deal being blocked in finality is the foundation by which this new offshoot proposal is assessed, and in the event of it being blocked preliminarily at phase 1, will likely need a new, new ex-Activision merger proposal to move from block to approve.

you're just talking. CMA approves it or they don't. highly likely to be approved.

 

[Varteras]

You think the PS3 cost $600 because it cost $600?

You think $600 is $600?

 

[PaintTinJr]

Yeah, and it sucks too because Xbox 360 humbled PlayStation and taught Sony a lesson about their own arrogance in trying to push a $600 into the market just because they could. ...

I think you can look at that another way, and maybe see it in the same light as Microsoft trying to spend $70b here.

In an optimal situation the PS3 would have cost just slightly more than a launch PS2, absent the blue diode shortage, absent the poor yields of Cell BE and pressure from IBM getting first dibs on chips for Roadrunner, etc, and absent the console coming out 12months too soon for Sony, forcing them to re-design, losing the 2nd Cell BE plan, and losing the cost effective Toshiba Reality Synth GPU, losing the cost and performance benefits of 512GB of XDR, and instead got screwed by Nvidia for the RSX and end up with half XDR and half GDDR3.

But because Microsoft had blown a huge wad on the original Xbox 2years after PS2 released and with higher storage and RAM specs that they flat out subsidized, the very expensive HDD - which was absent from the base 360 - and the expensive RAM and integrated network adapter were all beyond the realms of lesser companies than Microsoft could afford for a console, never mind selling the box as low £100 at time.

So for Xbox to fail quickly, and then them double down on losses and launch a known flawed Xenon chip console to market two years or more before PlayStation was ready, the arrogant stance by Sony wasn't by choice, but a necessity to project marketing strength from a very uncertain and weak position against a company that was burning money to gain market share. The timing for PlayStation was brutal in regards of RAM and high speed persistent storage, because while the PS2 was having Wii/Switch level success, the short turn around for losing billions by Microsoft on OG Xbox and 360 meant PlayStation were massively out of position without their originally intended PS3 design, timeline and BoM.

Had the RRoD situation not occurred Microsoft could have potentially put PlayStation completely out of business that gen with just two massively subsidized loss console investments IMO.

edit: Sony getting caught out of position so badly is probably why a Pro design happened, and is probably always going to be in the works even if they don't release it some gens.

 

[PaintTinJr]

you're just talking. CMA approves it or they don't. highly likely to be approved.

It is 50:50 by chance without knowing what influence might be taking place, but I'd argue by logic, for anyone reading the original inquiry group reasoning in a pragmatic way would conclude it has more chance being blocked than passed.

The new offer needs babysitting, and doesn't displace the power from Microsoft in merged entity to alleviate any possible SLC that was deemed problematic, and the offer fundamentally fails to understand the inquiry group decision and follow their advice to remedy unblocking the merger.

 

[Ginzeen]

It is 50:50 by chance without knowing what influence might be taking place, but I'd argue by logic, for anyone reading the original inquiry group reasoning in a pragmatic way would conclude it has more chance being blocked than passed.

The new offer needs babysitting, and doesn't displace the power from Microsoft in merged entity to alleviate any possible SLC that was deemed problematic, and the offer fundamentally fails to understand the inquiry group decision and follow their advice to remedy unblocking the merger.

It's not 50/50. most people think it's highly likely .