This is a myth plain and simple. The logic below explains why.

If it was not (a myth), BD CE corps would have released players at the 5-600 USD price range. Whether at cost or subsidized, it would be necessary to do cos the PS3 would not serve the market-segment that demanded a player at 5-600 USD and would not buy a console for that function.

Those who say that the BD corps have no reason to do so are wrong cos they need to capture that market, if it existed in any subtantial form. They could not afford to let this group be without BD players.

But, as things stand, BD corps are selling their players for profit and intend to bring the price down to 5-600 USD when demand / economies of scale dictate and not before.

They obviously think that PS3 will be bought by those who want a cheap BD player. If they did not think that or their post-launch market research showed that this was not happening, they would have released a cheaply put together player with a sub-set of the stand-alones' features.

If one of the BD corps releases a cheap BD player, provably at cost or loss, then the myth would no longer be a myth since the evidence would point against it. But, as long as that does not happen, there is no reason to perpetuate the myth that a substantial market-segment will not buy the PS3 to use as a player.

Sure, there are HT enthusiasts who would bridle at the thought but they are a niche of a niche and thus, unable to affect the final outcome of this war.

Ok, since it was felt that this needed it's own thread, let me ask a question.

Do you believe this exact same formula when it came to the Playstation 2 and DVD?


They obviously think that PS3 will be bought by those who want a cheap BD player. If they did not think that or their post-launch market research showed that this was not happening, they would have released a cheaply put together player with a sub-set of the stand-alones' features.

They? You mean Sony? If that was the case, why is Sony putting out their own $999 standalone that doesn't do that much more than the PS3??

The PS3 is a game machine. I don't understand how this isn't recognized. It's a game machine that happens to play BD movies. The same way the PS2 was a game machine that happened to play DVD's.

The vast majority of those who purchase a game machine primarily play games on it. That's why the thing is called a PLAYSTATION, and not a Sony Blu-ray Disc Player. Yes, some will buy it to get an average priced HD disc player. But as someone who covered the game industry for 10 years, I am confident in my beliefs that those who are relying on the PS3 to be the de-facto BD player and will drive all this Blu-ray business is not thinking in real world terms.

The problem with the PS2/DVD analogy is that it was released in 2000, not 1998 which would be a more fair comparison. By the time it was released, it wasn't any cheaper than low-end DVD players. Also, clearly Sony is trying to market the PS3 as more than a "playstation" (just as MS is with Xbox360). Whether either will succeed is yet to be seen. My guess is the 'universal appliance' breakthrough won't happen until the early part of the next decade. The technology is there, but not really the paradigm shift for the consumer (a la what happened with the iPod).

Personally, I find it hard to believe that PS3 owners who drop $60 a game will balk at buying a few movies for $25-30 each (or adding BD titles to their Netflix queue). And once there are 5 million PS3s out there, a few movies each starts to add up. Of course, the same applies to the 360 add-on, so maybe it's a wash.

The PS3 is a game machine. I don't understand how this isn't recognized. It's a game machine that happens to play BD movies. The same way the PS2 was a game machine that happened to play DVD's.

The vast majority of those who purchase a game machine primarily play games on it. That's why the thing is called a PLAYSTATION, and not a Sony Blu-ray Disc Player. Yes, some will buy it to get an average priced HD disc player. But as someone who covered the game industry for 10 years, I am confident in my beliefs that those who are relying on the PS3 to be the de-facto BD player and will drive all this Blu-ray business is not thinking in real world terms.So, do you know how this played out in Japan with the PS2 where it was reportedly released at a time when it was the cheapest DVD player? I wasn't paying much attention then, but I've read that it actually had quite an impact on getting DVD going in Japan, while in the US it came out later where the cost differences were much different.

It would be nice on this forum if we could get beyond the "most people won't" and the "vast majority won't" kinds of things to ideas about percentages. Especially the "most people won't" kinds of things I've seen from other people because most people won't buy a Toyota vehicle, most people won't buy HD DVD, most people won't ..., etc. where lots of successful things don't need "most people" to do anything. I think most reasonable people can agree that most PS3 owners won't be Blu-ray movies buyers. But some percentage will. I think even an effective 20% over the next couple of years would be very significant to this war. By "vast majority" I don't know if you mean 80%, 90%, 95%, or some other number. The difference between 5% and 20% would be significant even though both are down well below the most point.

--Darin

Ok, since it was felt that this needed it's own thread, let me ask a question.

Do you believe this exact same formula when it came to the Playstation 2 and DVD?

Things were a lot different back then. The PS2 came out in October 2000 (3 years after DVD's introduction) at a retail price of $299. By that time, the AVERAGE price for a standalone DVD player was only $201 (according to the Consumer Electronics Association website).

http://www.ce.org/Research/1219.asp

They? You mean Sony? If that was the case, why is Sony putting out their own $999 standalone that doesn't do that much more than the PS3?? .

Maybe they thought it would be good to have at least one BD model that they could sell for a profit? AVS Forum is living proof that there are people out there willing to pay a premium for a dedicated standalone player. Why would they possibly ignore this market?

EDIT - Yikes! Moore and Darin beat me to the punch.

So, do you know how this played out in Japan with the PS2 where it was reportedly released at a time when it was the cheapest DVD player? I wasn't paying much attention then, but I've read that it actually had quite an impact on getting DVD going in Japan, while in the US it came out later where the cost differences were much different.--Darin

This is true. In fact, I'm grinning as I type this because we just went to a friend's family home for New Year (which is a really BIG holiday here). He moved out on his own a couple of years ago and left his old first-generation PS2 for his parents to use as a DVD player since they refused to buy a new one. They are STILL using it to this day! My wife and I kept teasing him, "What, you can't even spend 10,000 yen (about $85) for real DVD player for your folks?" His parents said they don't need one since it still works.

Its a double edged sword for Sony at this point. IF sales of PS3 settle down and it continues to be outsold by Xbox 360 and the Wii then Sony is at risk of loosing the lead in the next gen video game market. IF PS3 is bought by a large percentage of people intending to use it for Bluray then again the video game side of things get worse because now software sales are lowered. Given the dismal numbers of dedicated players sold OEM manufacturers must conclude that a Bluray player is not worth it at this point due to not only the low total of units sold but also the high number of competitors out there.

Sales of Bluray needs to reach 'critical mass' that is high enough for both sides of things to be profitable (games and movies) otherwise you have your own machine competing against itself in terms of content (A person may buy a game instead of a movie or vice versa). This was expected to happen on launch but the numbers of available PS3 kept getting lower and lower - Toshiba is still in it.

Its a double edged sword for Sony at this point. IF sales of PS3 settle down and it continues to be outsold by Xbox 360 and the Wii then Sony is at risk of loosing the lead in the next gen video game market. IF PS3 is bought by a large percentage of people intending to use it for Bluray then again the video game side of things get worse because now software sales are lowered. Given the dismal numbers of dedicated players sold OEM manufacturers must conclude that a Bluray player is not worth it at this point due to not only the low total of units sold but also the high number of competitors out there.

Sales of Bluray needs to reach 'critical mass' that is high enough for both sides of things to be profitable (games and movies) otherwise you have your own machine competing against itself in terms of content (A person may buy a game instead of a movie or vice versa). This was expected to happen on launch but the numbers of available PS3 kept getting lower and lower - Toshiba is still in it.

they are outsold by XBox 360 10:1. I just think its rediculously stupid for PS3 exclusive game developers not tap into the potential 10mil XBox 360 market ! ;)

I generally wait for a console for at least a few months ( I never attempted to get a 360 before I saw it sitting in the store in March or April 06) because the launch titles near always suck.

PS3 was the first exception to that rule, as I wanted a BD player since I was missing out on titles I desparately wanted, and knew I would be getting a PS3 sooner or later. I've since caught up to the number of HD-DVD's I've bought (8 each) and have ended up with 4 PS3 games (1 of which was a gift on Xmas from my better half).

I dont disagree with those who say that less than x% of PS3 owners will buy BD movies.

My point with this thread is to banish the myth once and for all that "there isn't a market-segment out there that will buy a PS3 as a 'cheap' BD player only (and never play games on it)".

The argument I offer is that if the myth were true, the BD corps would have released a cheaply made but functional BD stand-alone for 5-600 USD.

And since this is months after launch and not a peep, I think this myth can be put to bed for good. The 5-600 USD BD player segment is being served more than adequately by the PS3. If some of those buyers buy a game or two or buy a stand-alone in a couple of years, thats cool but for now, there are buyers looking for BD playback only who are taking home a PS3, probably the 20GB SKU.

Those who would commit harikiri (spelling?) before using a console for playback have every right to their view and my related view is that such people are typically the HT Enthusiasts who will buy the 1000 USD sony anyways, what with the 24p output and all, EVEN IF a 5-600 USD stand-alone was available without hdmi 1.3 and 24p output.

Sound fair? If so, lets bury this myth. Plenty of AVS ink has been shed on this topic and not much more is needed, hopefully.

I reiterate that if a BD corp releases a bare-bones stand-alone by say March, its a sign that either the PS3 is not being bought to be used as a standalone BD player OR that its possible to make a profit on a cheap BD player at that time.

they are outsold by XBox 360 10:1. I just think its rediculously stupid for PS3 exclusive game developers not tap into the potential 10mil XBox 360 market !

The PS3 just launched! They are selling all the units they can.

The 360 is STILL outsold by the PlayStation 2!

The PS3 just launched! They are selling all the units they can.

Then why are they now sitting on shelves?


The 360 is STILL outsold by the PlayStation 2!

360 = $299-399
PS2 = $99

If you don't see how that is easy to deduce, can't help you much.


It would be nice on this forum if we could get beyond the "most people won't" and the "vast majority won't" kinds of things to ideas about percentages. Especially the "most people won't" kinds of things I've seen from other people because most people won't buy a Toyota vehicle, most people won't buy HD DVD, most people won't ..., etc. where lots of successful things don't need "most people" to do anything. I think most reasonable people can agree that most PS3 owners won't be Blu-ray movies buyers. But some percentage will. I think even an effective 20% over the next couple of years would be very significant to this war. By "vast majority" I don't know if you mean 80%, 90%, 95%, or some other number. The difference between 5% and 20% would be significant even though both are down well below the most point.


But when you are talking about video games, you can't do that. Sure, with standalone machines, it serves one purpose. You can talk about usage there because an A2 doesn't do anything else besides play DVD media.

Let me reframe my thoughts. Ok, let's say the PS3 was to be counted in with total Blu-ray player numbers at 100%. That means that because there were 2 million Xbox 360's sold in Nov-Dec, there were 2 million more DVD players sold. So between that and the PS2 there are 10's of millions more DVD players out there. And of course, just like the PS3 markets itself with the ability to play BD, the PS2 and Xbox have also marketed themselves as DVD players.

That's where my POV lies. You can always inflate numbers because the game consoles do it too. But you'd have to assume 100%, and you can't. Historically, video game consoles were not bought with the purpose of playing DVD's. And that's why I said what I said.

Where WhatsHD I think is going a little overboard is in the notion that people here think no one is buying consoles as media players. I don't think anyone is saying that. I agree with him that it would be niave to think that. HOWEVER, this idea that it's "en masse" or of a significant amount are doing so is equally naive.[/quote]


The argument I offer is that if the myth were true, the BD corps would have released a cheaply made but functional BD stand-alone for 5-600 USD.

Or perhaps the BD corps, I assume being everyone not making a PS3, doesn't think the PS3 is having that big an effect on the BD market, and therefore they don't need to make a cheaper model to compete in the player marketplace, and $999 is a good price point for them.

I thought one of the big advantages to having so many CE's on the market was to spur competition between them and bring prices down. I would think if Samsung was afraid the PS3 was cutting into their BD player sales, they would bring out a model that is competitively priced to it. That part of your logic I think you have reversed.

Of course the PS3 will be used as a Blu-ray player, and a few will even buy it specifically to watch Blu-ray movies. Nobody with any common sense will question that. The question is what proportion of PS3 owners overall will buy significant numbers of Blu-ray discs.

It's not a stretch to think that PS3 owners on average are much less likely to buy hi-def movies than those who purchase standalones.

ie. The myth isn't actually something most people believe. It's just used a strawman argument by some people so they can refute it.

I think most of the american buying public made a statement. The PS3 is a game console that is too expensive. Instead the Wii is still sold out at almost every outlet that doesn't have a bundle. If the case being that the PS3 is also a blu ray player, then not many people want one. They are not flying off the shelves like the Wii (many here predicted that after the "fanboys" get their unit the price will keep many away) for the reason of price.

I don't disagree with the original poster as I bought one mainly as a player but I think that outside of this forum and a few videophiles the PS3 is still thought of as just a gaming console. This is where Sony is to blame. How many of us saw a PS3 display where the display unit is playing a Blu Ray movie? Yes, they advertise the HD movie playing capability but they sure aren't demonstrating it as a movie player.

If the standalones were cheaper, using a $499 ps3 for bd would be unthinkable. But the way things stand today, if you're just dabbling, the $499 (or even 599) price is pretty enticing for someone who just wants to watch movies on his new bargain HDTV lcd.

As for marketing or positioning. Who knows?

Sales of the PS3 are already starting to slow down outside of North America. I suspect they will pick up again once it's released in Europe and other parts of Asia or when the price goes down.

[QUOTE=Michael Mullis]Then why are they now sitting on shelves?[\QUOTE]

A Best Buy near me had a stack of roughly 20 on Tuesday Jan. 2. When I wandered through again on Thursday all of them were gone. Although it is not as hard to get as it was originally it still is selling. Big factor: Sony has ramped up production more quickly than MS was able to do with the 360.

I have a few comments:

1) Until Christmas you could not find a PS3 on shelves easily in every market. There were some around in some markets and there were some models available (20 gig or 60 gig). However, everyone who wanted one could not buy one before Christmas. Even today, MOST cannot walk into a big box store and get whichever model they want. The PS3 is available online and in some stores but there are still reports of people not finding what they want. Even a place like Best Buy online doesn't have the 20 gig available. It seems that Sony is meeting demand to some degree.

2) The PS3 is weak as a launch console just as was the Xbox 360 and original Xbox. To compare it to the Wii is just crazy. The market segments are different (all gamers in all age groups are not the same). A comparison to the Xbox 360 is more appropriate. Additionally, Sony made a bet about the console and BD demand. Only the most hardcore gamers would buy a $500-$600 game machine that has few exclusives. As with most consoles, it is a wait and see game unil the developers figure things out and release titles. Even then, the price will have to drop to attract gamers.

3) To the original poster, the Samsung BD player is on Amazon for $589. I'm not sure whaqt that does to your theory.

The bottom line is that there is a PS3 owning population that bought it to use it for movies and will buy movies. We will likely never know how large that population is. Clearly, if BD sales are near HD DVD sales and standalone BD player sales are much lower than HD DVD standalone player sales then the PS3 owners must be buying discs.

[QUOTE=Michael Mullis]Then why are they now sitting on shelves?[\QUOTE]

A Best Buy near me had a stack of roughly 20 on Tuesday Jan. 2. When I wandered through again on Thursday all of them were gone. Although it is not as hard to get as it was originally it still is selling. Big factor: Sony has ramped up production more quickly than MS was able to do with the 360.

Exactly...people think just because a product is available at a given outlet at a particular point in time it is not selling well.

For all we know, the PS3 is selling right on target for Sony and production and distribution is meeting demand. There is an equilibrium for supply and demand that is a sweet sopt for Sony and we just do not know what that is.

OTOH, the way I view the Wii is 1) Nintendo has a production issue, 2) They wanted to crush MS and Sony, 3) They left money on the table because thee console is selling at a premium on Ebay when that money could have gone to Nintendo via a higher price. Any or all those things and a few others could be true.

I would by a PS3 if I could find one!

I think most of the american buying public made a statement. The PS3 is a game console that is too expensive. Instead the Wii is still sold out at almost every outlet that doesn't have a bundle

Considering that BOTH consoles moved as fast as the stores could get them in, no statement was made except that a lot of people wanted both of them. Nintendo simply could produce more consoles because they essentially retrofitted the Gamecube, a 5 year old technology with known production methods.

I would by a PS3 if I could find one!
Best buy.com had them up yesterday for quite some time, looks like as of this moment they do as well. Not too hard to find. :rolleyes:

Myth: There is a myth that says A Console won't be bought as a Player

I run a video gaming business and I can tell you that it is far, far easier to find a PS3 right now than it was a 360 this time last year. What does that mean? Nothing

People, it's $500 minimum, and that's if you happen to find a rare 20gb model, like I did. Most of the ones available are the $600 60gb ones. Throw in sales tax, an extra controller, and a single game or Blu-Ray movie and you top $750 without even trying. That is a lot of money for the vast majority of people who live in this country (I'm in the US) and that's a price that is going to stay at that level for many years. These are not commodity prices. At that price point the PS3 is not going to have that much of an impact on Blu-Ray "winning" or not, ok? It isn't.

I'm tired of this argument and I even own a PS3 and some Blu-Ray titles. Fact is I'm tired of this whole format war taking over any attempt at reasonable discussion here at AVS. This forum sure isn't what it used to be. Once I came here and posted and got in to discussions because they were interesting and fun. Now I just post when I'm bored at work. Case in point: This one.

I have had a PS3 for about a month now. I have used it to watch the Blu-ray movies that I already own. I have not played a single game on it yet. I eventually will, but right now I am too busy watching all the movies I have not had a chance to watch yet.

I am still pissed that Sony didn't put an IR sensor on the thing though. My Harmony 880 controls everything else in the room, including the lights and fan, but I've got to use the goofy playstation controller to watch a Blu-ray movie!

I would by a PS3 if I could find one!

Try using iTrackr (http://www.itrackr.com). It's spiffy, though it only tracks items they put into it, but the PS3 and Wii are both in it right now.

I am still pissed that Sony didn't put an IR sensor on the thing though. My Harmony 880 controls everything else in the room, including the lights and fan, but I've got to use the goofy playstation controller to watch a Blu-ray movie!

Count me as another person who primarily bought my PS3 as a BD player, though I've been a gamer for around 22 years. The reason I bought it as a BD player was because it was cheaper than a standalone and could play the PS3 games I was interested in when they finally come out. But for now, it's a movie player. And I completely agree about the lack of IR. I hate not being able to control everything from one remote anymore.

I also bought my XBOX 360 as a means to play HD-DVD with the add-on drive. There is currently only one game I'm interested in on that platform that's been released at this time.

I'm not quite sure I understand this whole "you're either a gamer or a movie enthusiast" attitude, as the cross section between the two grows larger as gamers get older. But then again I never understood the whole "you're either an XBOX or PS2 fanboy" either when I've always owned every generation's consoles so I could enjoy the best games of each console. And for all those who counted out Nintendo in the last generation because of their lack of 3rd party support and lackluster market share, it's important to remember that they made more money than both the Sony and Microsoft gaming divisions combined, so having the Wii be popular isn't a shock at all. It makes absolute sense.

People don't normally use their game consoles for a movie player. But a game console is normally not the best and cheapest movie player available.

they are outsold by XBox 360 10:1. I just think its rediculously stupid for PS3 exclusive game developers not tap into the potential 10mil XBox 360 market !And the PS2 has outsold the Xbox 360 10:1. Why would anyone develop for the Xbox 360? Oh, and Windows outsells the Mac OS 20:1. Why would anyone developer exclusively for the Mac?!?

Sheesh.

they are outsold by XBox 360 10:1. I just think its rediculously stupid for PS3 exclusive game developers not tap into the potential 10mil XBox 360 market ! ;)

Are the extra 2 million in space because the userbase is 8mil.

http://www.vgcharts.org/

And the PS2 has outsold the Xbox 360 10:1. Why would anyone develop for the Xbox 360? Oh, and Windows outsells the Mac OS 20:1. Why would anyone developer exclusively for the Mac?!?

Sheesh.

Most games are going multi-format this time around. Exclusivity is soooo last century.

I bought the PS3 specifically for BD playback and am thoroughly impressed thus far. Bought a couple of games for my sons to play but this beauty is in my HT for the immediate future.

As I purchased a 360 w/ HD-DVD add-on for all the reasons one would (gaming, online, media serving AND movie playback), I'd say a resounding "Yes, some insist on promoting the tired myth that folks won't buy consoles as an end-run around dedicated set-top purchases".

And as an intended future purchaser of a PS3...can I get two votes? I think there are many more like me than some 'old-skoolers' would like to admit. I'm happy to wait for a dedicated set top. These consoles will perform just fine for the next couple of years...until a reasonably affordable combo player (and preferably combo 'recorder') set-top makes it to the US market. That's when I'll bite--when a set-top HD disc player will give me all the functionaility I have w/ DVD, but w/ the added benefit of HD resolution.

Until then, it's a foolish waste of money as they are still developing these systems. Smartest bank is on boxes with features/playback that can be enhanced and firmware upgraded over ethernet connection--i.e. computer drives and consoles...and maybe a couple of Gen 3 players. But if those Gen 3s still cost double a console, hmmm.

As I purchased a 360 w/ HD-DVD add-on for all the reasons one would (gaming, online, media serving AND movie playback), I'd say a resounding "Yes, some insist on promoting the tired myth that folks won't buy consoles as an end-run around dedicated set-top purchases".

And as an intended future purchaser of a PS3...can I get two votes? I think there are many more like me than some 'old-skoolers' would like to admit. I'm happy to wait for a dedicated set top. These consoles will perform just fine for the next couple of years...until a reasonably affordable combo player (and preferably combo 'recorder') set-top makes it to the US market. That's when I'll bite--when a set-top HD disc player will give me all the functionaility I have w/ DVD, but w/ the added benefit of HD resolution.

Until then, it's a foolish waste of money as they are still developing these systems. Smartest bank is on boxes with features/playback that can be enhanced and firmware upgraded over ethernet connection--i.e. computer drives and consoles...and maybe a couple of Gen 3 players. But if those Gen 3s still cost double a console, hmmm.
My sentiments exactly.. thanks for the feedback.

The support in this thread (from all of you) towards getting rid of this Myth is much appreciated.

WHD,
myth-destroyer,
BD-supporter

The support in this thread (from all of you) towards getting rid of this Myth is much appreciated.

It's been sort of easy because the only one who thinks this is a "myth" is you. You're still no closer to proving that mass amounts of people are buying the PS3 as a movie player.

You've merely made yourself feel better that someone out there did, which no one has yet to dispute.

So I think your signoff should have been:

WHD,
myth-creator
BD-supporter


Actually, come to think about it.........I can actually create your myth for you. I currently have absolutely positively NO plans to purchase the Playstation 3, especially as a BD player. If I buy a PS3, it will be for the games. And right now I am more than happy with my Xbox 360.

So really, based on your thread title, I have just proven your title true. "A console won't be bought as a player." Now you know who it is that isn't going to buy it. ;)

It's been sort of easy because the only one who thinks this is a "myth" is you. You're still no closer to proving that mass amounts of people are buying the PS3 as a movie player.

That's not the claim. The claim is that "people who own PS3 will likely buy blu-Ray movies for it"

Not that people are buying a PS3 for BR and no or limited games. That's a handful.

Never thought I would own a PS3, but I do. Mainly for watching Bd, though a nice side deal is that I love the hockey game. Got 4 BD movies so far, and based on some of the rumors, will have many more by mid year. :D

I'll still probably buy a standalone by year's end too. Just haven't seen anything that strikes my fancy yet.

That's not the claim. The claim is that "people who own PS3 will likely buy blu-Ray movies for it"

Not that people are buying a PS3 for BR and no or limited games. That's a handful.

Already proven false. 1M "players," by your definition in the field and you can't even sell 1M copies combined of all software sold.

This is a myth plain and simple. The logic below explains why.

If it was not (a myth), BD CE corps would have released players at the 5-600 USD price range. Whether at cost or subsidized, it would be necessary to do cos the PS3 would not serve the market-segment that demanded a player at 5-600 USD and would not buy a console for that function.

Those who say that the BD corps have no reason to do so are wrong cos they need to capture that market, if it existed in any subtantial form. They could not afford to let this group be without BD players.

But, as things stand, BD corps are selling their players for profit and intend to bring the price down to 5-600 USD when demand / economies of scale dictate and not before.

They obviously think that PS3 will be bought by those who want a cheap BD player. If they did not think that or their post-launch market research showed that this was not happening, they would have released a cheaply put together player with a sub-set of the stand-alones' features.

If one of the BD corps releases a cheap BD player, provably at cost or loss, then the myth would no longer be a myth since the evidence would point against it. But, as long as that does not happen, there is no reason to perpetuate the myth that a substantial market-segment will not buy the PS3 to use as a player.

Sure, there are HT enthusiasts who would bridle at the thought but they are a niche of a niche and thus, unable to affect the final outcome of this war.

I really think you need to rephrase how you title these posts. By implying they are a "myth", you suggest they aren't true, when you in fact can present no evidence to the contrary. In the case of this, and your second thread, I believe you are totally incorrect in your statements.

Do you really think Sony did market research and decided a sub-$1000 BD player was needed, and then decided to market the PS3 as a cheap BD player? Do you really think they decided that since they LOOSE OVER $300 on a 60 GB model and LOOSE OVER $100 on a 20 GB model, that they want people buying this as a standalone BD player? Consoles sell at a loss, or break even point and they profit from the sale of games (where often they make 400-500% above cost for each disc sold). So do you really think Sony's grand scheme was to sell this as a standalone where BD discs are making less than 200% above cost for Sony? Basically three catalog releases will sell for the same price as one game, and those three movies will make less than half the profit of a single game. So basically, six BD-25 movies will make the same profit for Sony as one PS3 game. It takes one or two more where BD-50 movies are concerned. Do you honestly believe they want many of their PS3's to be used as standalones? If it turns out that many of them are, then Sony is in dire straights with their PS3 game system. If the percentage is very high (let's say 50% of PS3's or more), then you could actually see Sony INCREASE the price of their PS3, which would destroy that whole platform.

Now do you think Sony really wants this machine to be used only as a player?

Do you really think Sony did market research and decided a sub-$1000 BD player was needed, and then decided to market the PS3 as a cheap BD player? Do you really think they decided that since they LOOSE OVER $300 on a 60 GB model and LOOSE OVER $100 on a 20 GB model, that they want people buying this as a standalone BD player?

Sony's loose? They're not tight?

Sony can spell "lose" methinks.

Already proven false. 1M "players," by your definition in the field and you can't even sell 1M copies combined of all software sold.

It still doesn't change the fact that they have sold 1.18 million BR capable PS3s. They count just as much as any other deck that plays BR out of the box

You know that if it was HD-DVD the fanboys would be crowing all over it.

Basically three catalog releases will sell for the same price as one game, and those three movies will make less than half the profit of a single game. So basically, six BD-25 movies will make the same profit for Sony as one PS3 game. It takes one or two more where BD-50 movies are concerned. Do you honestly believe they want many of their PS3's to be used as standalones? If it turns out that many of them are, then Sony is in dire straights with their PS3 game system. If the percentage is very high (let's say 50% of PS3's or more), then you could actually see Sony INCREASE the price of their PS3, which would destroy that whole platform.

Point of contention

Those 3 catalog titles are likely in the black, where a new PS3 or 360 game can easily cost in excess of $5-10 million to create (and 15 is not unheard of). So while it may take 3 catalog titles to equal the same SRP, it only took say $100,000 to put those on the shelves, which at a $20 wholesale price means they only need to move about 5000 of them total to get to the black

The major money this generation is in microtransactions. Nickle and diming people for quick game downloads ($5-6 for old nintendo, sega titles, Pac Man etc, $8-15 for retooled classics like Mortal Kombat 3 and Street Fighter), extra cars, uniforms, songs for Guitar Hero or map packs($5-10), desktop wallpapers or crappy little quests ($2-5). It'll all add up mighty fast. I know plenty of people who have already blown well over $100 on stuff from Live, and I can't believe the PS3ers won't do the same.

Sony's loose? They're not tight?

Sony can spell "lose" methinks.

Wow. Your brilliant. Too bad about your inferiority complex.

This is a myth plain and simple. The logic below explains why.
...

You are correct, it is a myth. The worst kind of myth, a true one.

Not that another anecdote is going to end this flame war, but I bought my PS3 first-and-foremost as an inexpensive BD player. Since then, I've started gaming and am hooked! Extremely pleased with the PS3 performance to date (especially some of that 1080p60 on my 70" Sony SXRD XBR2).

Now I'm really hoping that those rumors of M$ doing another XBOX 360 SKU with internal optical HD-DVD drive, internal disk drive and HDMI are true. :)

If I can present ONE example which shows a PS3 was bought as a player, it invalidates the myth stated above by me.

Ilka, if you dont mind, you will be the poster-boy (or girl) for banishing this myth.

That's the great thing about generalized, over-expansive claims. They are easy to refute with one counter-example.

wnorris, I appreciate your points but I don't agree with how you have interpreted my stand. My point is simple. Its a myth that NO ONE will buy a console as a player. I think there is a poll somewhere which shows how many (AVS!) people bought the PS3 as their primary high def player.

If you want an example of J6P, I will ask my friends to sign up and post here when PS3 launches in Singapore. And believe me, they aren't high def-geeks like me. Though, I Am trying to convert them :)

It still doesn't change the fact that they have sold 1.18 million BR capable PS3s. They count just as much as any other deck that plays BR out of the box

You know that if it was HD-DVD the fanboys would be crowing all over it.

I doubt it.

Now HD-DVD is on the same foot with storage: 50GB Discs are going into production.

HD-DVD leads in sales and has already broken the 1M units sold mark, while BD is far behind despite having 1.18M players

Meaning an attach rate of les than one.

Wow. Your brilliant. Too bad about your inferiority complex.

Well if you're going to make unfounded accusations, better have all your ducks in a row.

HD-DVD owners seem to be a lot smarter than their BD fanbaby counterparts.

The BD guys lie, lie, and twist facts. Repeatedly.

Oh please.

You even have HD DVD reps claiming things like 50GB discs are "science fiction" and PiP for Blu-ray is impossible, and you have the nerve to say BD folks lie & twist facts?

Dear Mods, is there a way to extend the 'Ignore' function to include quoted posts? Please look into offering this functionality, as an easy to undo (instantaneously with one click, w/o refreshing pages) option.

Examples such as this gem below are normally ignored out but sometimes they get quoted by people who Rightly respond to such drivel to put it where it belongs, Imo. Except that the person using the Ignore then gets treated to the drivel anyways and it does nothing for the BP or the level of brotherly love one brings to the discussion.

Quote:
"HD-DVD owners seem to be a lot smarter than their BD fanbaby counterparts.

The BD guys lie, lie, and twist facts. Repeatedly."

That's not the claim. The claim is that "people who own PS3 will likely buy blu-Ray movies for it"

Nononono Wicky, you can't claim a technicality on this one. Your thread title is crystal clear:

"Myth: A Console won't be bought as a Player"

That is not the same as "people who own PS3 will LIKELY buy a Blu-ray movie for it. You're in two different myths there my friend.


If I can present ONE example which shows a PS3 was bought as a player, it invalidates the myth stated above by me.

And if I can present ONE example which shows a PS3 will not be bought as a player, it validates the myth stated by you above.

Ilka, if you dont mind, you will be the poster-boy (or girl) for banishing this myth.

And I'll use myself and be the poster-boy for validating the myth.

I find you fairly level-headed WhatsHD, and I don't consider you on the fanboy level of some of the actual fanboys around here. But on this particular thread I just think this whole thread was silly because it's based on a fictional arguement.

Nononono Wicky, you can't claim a technicality on this one. Your thread title is crystal clear:


Not my thread, but it's the myth that HD-DVD people keep repeating, that a console has capabilities that won't be used by most of the purchasers, despite history pointing otherwise.

To all those who are on my Ignore and are apparently saying that the thread title is wrong:

There are people who have bought and will buy the PS3 just for BD movie playback.

1. I dont care what %, I dont claim any number wrt that.

2. I dont care whether they justify it in their head with saying that they will pass it on to their kids for gaming once good BD standalones are cheap. Maybe they do but as long as they buy it for movies, hey, you know what, the myth is shown to be drivel.

3. I dont care whether they check out some PS games in their non-movie time. If they do, woohoo for Sony. But they still bought it for movies.

And for those who claim that the above myth doesn't exist cos no one has ever claimed as much, well, why bother to tell me that what I consider a perpetuated myth has not been perpetuated ever. No harm done then by my thread. I didnt blame any format for the myth. (Hell, I am sure there is a chap somewhere who bought a CORE + add-on just for HD movies.)

OTOH, there are some who in this Very thread insist that the myth is true.

Interestingly, these 2 types of thread-ruiners never argue with each other cos "The Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend" :)

The Truth, OTOH, is definitely their enemy..

Sorry Wicky. I meant to type WhatsHD. Both start with W. I'm tired. :)

But it sounds like What'sHD doesn't like the fact that people disagree with him, so he puts them on ignore and is trying to talk to us from inside the house with the door closed going " LA LA LA LA".

And I called him level-headed??

mod

another thread closed