In the world of gaming, a system costing $600 (US) would be a virtual death for the console. Many people have looked upon the PS3 as too expensive, not worth it, so on and so forth. The fact that the PS3 is not only a gaming system, has not come across to a lot of people, and what the people who aren't familiar or who are scared by the price, need to realize what is offered in this true home media center.

First of all the infamous blu-ray player included in Sony's next gen console is the most expensive, most troublesome, and the most innovative feature included. The fact that you can play hi-def movies and games right out of the box is a major selling point for Sony, and it may also be worth noting that standalone blu-ray players are (on average) 300 dollars more than the PS3, which makes the blu-ray drive alone a deal.

Next comes the hardware, the RSX "reality synthesizer" graphics chip by NVIDIA can render resolutions up to 1080p, and the cell processor chip has 8 synchronous SPU's running together, and, while developing and programming for this processor has given game developers problems, not being able to utilize it to its full potential, but when they learn more and more on how to use it, the Cell will truly be the best processor in a (so called) gaming system.

One item that i think many people have overlooked is the WiFi capability (of the 600 dollar version). If you want WiFi on an xbox 360, you have to buy a WiFi router and an extra ethernet (cat 5) cable. And then theres the matter of the HDD, which on the 360 is a 20 gigabyte model, but with all of the system files, it boils down to about half that size, while the (60 gigabyte version) PS3 has 5 times the usable space (again, after system files).
Then, theres what I call the "X" Factor, in its inclusion of the OS Linux turning it into a full fledged PC, and as Linux is known for its flexibility as an OS, it truly gives the PS3 an entirely new element.

Xbox 360 is (out of the box) has a DVD drive, 20 gig hard drive, single chip processor, and an unreasonably loud power cord, $300. Seemingly cheaper, but if you want all that the PS3 has, add ons are necessary. An add-on HD-DVD player (the rival of Blu-Ray) which costs an extra $200, WiFi connectivity (the router would cost about $25 and the cable about 10) and a 60 gig external hard drive which would run up about $50. A total of $585, and without the option of being a full fledged PC, and without the Potential future of the Cell processor, is the 360 really worth it?

In my opinion, NO, but don't take my word for it, as I am a semi-bias person, being as objective as possible. Give me your opinions on the subject

no offense, but a wall of text is incredibly hard to read

I agree with Icedtea that the "wall of test" is hard to read.

My opinion though is that its all a matter of personal choice. If the 360 appeals to you then get it and be happy with it. For the Price the ps3 is a "OK" deal depnding on what you use it for. Many people are still using screens that are less then 50" which they will not be able to take full advantage of the 1080p. For now the ps3 is the "best" for the money, but again many people may not use it as a BluRay player but only as a gaming machine. Sony talks about it be an all encompassing machine, yet all the advertisements I see for the Ps3 emphasize the gaming and not the Movie Player, media station side of it.

In the end though you are always going to have fans of both no matter what you do. Personally I am going for a 360 (game selection) w/HDDVD and then maybe the Ps3 as a BluRay player (unless cheaper ones come out).....

Just a final note as far as the price goes for a gaming system (which many people see it as (j6p)) it IS expensive 600 or 500 is a lot of money for a 1 time drop to most people. They do not see the advantages of the new formats (HD Discs) and since we are here on this board (a very small slice of the over all market) we see the enthusiasts point of vew too often and not the "general consumer" . These is JMHO

About 5 days before Christmas, wife found a PS3 and got it for my son. I hooked into my HD70 and am still playing with it.

$600 is a lot of money. Do I think it is a good value? Yes, but still a lot of money. You can argue that a BMW is actually a good value, but it is still a lot of money.

We are enjoying it so far. This is the first time we have bought some "cutting edge" right when it came out. So a little disappointed in the amount and type of games, and wish there were more BD movies (and a little cheaper). But that will come.

We did download a demo verion of Motostorm. That is awesome! I'm not into the war games, but outside of those, that Motostorm should be a big hit for Sony. Think tonight will download a trail of the NBA game. And I got to say Fifth Element is pretty awesome on BD.

Do I think it is "worth" $600? I don't know...tough call, but they certainly packed a lot into that little box.

About 5 days before Christmas, wife found a PS3 and got it for my son. I hooked into my HD70 and am still playing with it.

$600 is a lot of money. Do I think it is a good value? Yes, but still a lot of money. You can argue that a BMW is actually a good value, but it is still a lot of money.

We are enjoying it so far. This is the first time we have bought some "cutting edge" right when it came out. So a little disappointed in the amount and type of games, and wish there were more BD movies (and a little cheaper). But that will come.

We did download a demo verion of Motostorm. That is awesome! I'm not into the war games, but outside of those, that Motostorm should be a big hit for Sony. Think tonight will download a trail of the NBA game. And I got to say Fifth Element is pretty awesome on BD.

Do I think it is "worth" $600? I don't know...tough call, but they certainly packed a lot into that little box.


BD? You mean BR? and you might be the only one to think FE is a good transfer.. Just as a BR Player it's a good buy..

This is the exact reason why I bought the PS3. You can't beat it for what it comes with. And it's all in one box.

This is the exact reason why I bought the PS3. You can't beat it for what it comes with. And it's all in one box.

Yes, it does come with ALOT packed into 1 box for the price but MOST people are not like us who will or have (like I will next month) purchase a unit like this at $600. Remember, this is a game machine FIRST and foremost, BD player second to most people and right now, the catalog of games is pretty bad not to mention even if there were alot of good games out, how many can you buy along with a $600 unit, HDMI cable, maybe a second controller, etc. That purchase will be much closer to $1000... again, game machine first and $600+ games+ accessories is a hard pill to swallow.

You see evidence of how expensive the PS3 is just by walking into stores...
Examples:
East Brunswick, NJ - Best Buy - 6 PS3 60GB in stock ON THE FLOOR
Burlington, NJ - Target - 4 PS3 60GB in stock locked up behind glass
Burlington, NJ Walmart - 4 PS3 60GB in stock locked up behind glass
This was all witnessed by me yesterday!!!

When was the last time a game system was in stock during the first 6 months of it's release? Answer NEVER!! You can argue that Sony is just making much more but the real answer is demand is just not there due to price. Had this unit been priced lower, they wouldn't be in stock til late 2007!!

Now for proof that game systems do still sell out for MANY months at a time... can you find a $249 Nintendo Wii? I know I cannot. Yes, they are VERY different game systems BUT they are GAME systems.

BD? You mean BR? and you might be the only one to think FE is a good transfer.. Just as a BR Player it's a good buy..

Humm really FE not that good of a transfer? It was the 1st movie I bought as it was a movie I liked but never bought on SD DVD.

I just got in mail Mission Impossible III and Underworld, guess I'll have to compare to them.

Yes, it does come with ALOT packed into 1 box for the price but MOST people are not like us who will or have (like I will next month) purchase a unit like this at $600. Remember, this is a game machine FIRST and foremost, BD player second to most people and right now, the catalog of games is pretty bad not to mention even if there were alot of good games out, how many can you buy along with a $600 unit, HDMI cable, maybe a second controller, etc. That purchase will be much closer to $1000... again, game machine first and $600+ games+ accessories is a hard pill to swallow.

You see evidence of how expensive the PS3 is just by walking into stores...
Examples:
East Brunswick, NJ - Best Buy - 6 PS3 60GB in stock ON THE FLOOR
Burlington, NJ - Target - 4 PS3 60GB in stock locked up behind glass
Burlington, NJ Walmart - 4 PS3 60GB in stock locked up behind glass
This was all witnessed by me yesterday!!!

When was the last time a game system was in stock during the first 6 months of it's release? Answer NEVER!! You can argue that Sony is just making much more but the real answer is demand is just not there due to price. Had this unit been priced lower, they wouldn't be in stock til late 2007!!

Now for proof that game systems do still sell out for MANY months at a time... can you find a $249 Nintendo Wii? I know I cannot. Yes, they are VERY different game systems BUT they are GAME systems.

very true but understand that the reason why the ps3's aren't selling as much is because xbox grabbed majority of the highend gamers last year. people are not going to fork another $600+ for an entirely new game system especially with no "must have" titles and bd's at launch. it would be an entirely different story if ps3 launched last year before the xbox. majority feel ripped and have to side with their system console according to hd contents and proprietary games. regardless, this rivalry is good for the consumer/marketplace, and drives the prices down. there won't be a monopoly because they have to stay competitive. but i think the main focus of this thread is that the ps3 is a bargain for what you get - all rolled into one. factor the xbox premium system, hd, wifi, online membership, etc. etc. and you will find that the ps3's price is way more attractive. yeah, there's no games and that's sony's fault. they needed to grab a portion of the market before they loose it entirely. therefore, the launch was rushed and unsuccessful. but to me it didn't matter because i knew i was getting one sooner not later. but like everyone says, give it 10-12 months and see where sony's at. ps3's won't be flying off the shelf but consumers won't be buying anymore xbox's because they already own one at home from the previous year. i see an xbox revision in the forecast. and btw, i have the wii and gameplay and graphics is no comparison.

In the world of gaming, a system costing $600 (US) would be a virtual death for the console. Many people have looked upon the PS3 as too expensive, not worth it, so on and so forth. The fact that the PS3 is not only a gaming system, has not come across to a lot of people, and what the people who aren't familiar or who are scared by the price, need to realize what is offered in this true home media center.

First of all the infamous blu-ray player included in Sony's next gen console is the most expensive, most troublesome, and the most innovative feature included. The fact that you can play hi-def movies and games right out of the box is a major selling point for Sony, and it may also be worth noting that standalone blu-ray players are (on average) 300 dollars more than the PS3, which makes the blu-ray drive alone a deal.

Next comes the hardware, the RSX "reality synthesizer" graphics chip by NVIDIA can render resolutions up to 1080p, and the cell processor chip has 8 synchronous SPU's running together, and, while developing and programming for this processor has given game developers problems, not being able to utilize it to its full potential, but when they learn more and more on how to use it, the Cell will truly be the best processor in a (so called) gaming system.

One item that i think many people have overlooked is the WiFi capability (of the 600 dollar version). If you want WiFi on an xbox 360, you have to buy a WiFi router and an extra ethernet (cat 5) cable. And then theres the matter of the HDD, which on the 360 is a 20 gigabyte model, but with all of the system files, it boils down to about half that size, while the (60 gigabyte version) PS3 has 5 times the usable space (again, after system files).
Then, theres what I call the "X" Factor, in its inclusion of the OS Linux turning it into a full fledged PC, and as Linux is known for its flexibility as an OS, it truly gives the PS3 an entirely new element.

Xbox 360 is (out of the box) has a DVD drive, 20 gig hard drive, single chip processor, and an unreasonably loud power cord, $300. Seemingly cheaper, but if you want all that the PS3 has, add ons are necessary. An add-on HD-DVD player (the rival of Blu-Ray) which costs an extra $200, WiFi connectivity (the router would cost about $25 and the cable about 10) and a 60 gig external hard drive which would run up about $50. A total of $585, and without the option of being a full fledged PC, and without the Potential future of the Cell processor, is the 360 really worth it?

In my opinion, NO, but don't take my word for it, as I am a semi-bias person, being as objective as possible. Give me your opinions on the subject

the biggest problem of the ps3 is the blu-ray drive...it automatically added most of the extra $200 cost over the premium xbox360. people may see it as a bargain blu-ray player, but here is the problem with that. what happens if blu-ray actually gets beat out by HD-DVD and loses the format war? you are STUCK with a blu-ray drive on a PS3, and now you have to go out and buy a HD-DVD drive to veiw all teh newest released movies. MOST people are not willing to buy it for the blu-ray drive at the moment, so in MOST people's eyes, it is a pure $600 gaming console.

also, you compared all the extra money you have to put into the 360 to get the same features, but the ps3 DOES NOT include any cables to allow it to produce a HD picture...so out of the box, you have to spend another $100 on an HDMI cable and so the REAL cost of the 60gig ps3 is closer to $700 just to get it to do what it advertises is supposed to be standard....that in itself is a BIG MARKETING MISTAKE on sony's part by not including the hdmi cable.

as for the wifi, in order to get connected with the ps3, you ALSO NEED to buy a wireless router. the ps3 DOES NOT have a wireless router built-in, only a wireless card to CONNECT to a wireless router, so i can't really see that as a good comparison on that. you need to buy a wireless ADAPTER for the xbox360.

as for the harddrive space, you seem to mention that the 360 has a 20gig hd and half of it is reserved for system files...i really do hope you would have done a little bit of research, because there is roughly 6 gigs for that, so you are left with 14gigs to store games and files on there...yes, the ps3 has a larger harddrive, but it is 3.5 times larger, not 5...larger none-the-less, so i will give you that point

now you say the 360 is not worth the price...hmm, $400 and it is ready to play HIGH-DEFINITION games right out of the box....you need to spend $700 to play the ps3 in HIGH-DEFINITION right out of the box (you need to buy the HDMI cable, otherwise you have to connect it using an s-video cable....weak). plus the fact that the xbox360 has over 160 games for it, with another 100-150 scheduled to be released this year, and the 360 jumps way ahead of the ps3 for bang for your buck.....and currently, it has better grpahics on cross-platform games, not to mention graphics that have set the standard through Gears of War.....

Just a couple of points on both sides of this argument:

You can buy a 10ft HDMI cable from www.monoprice for $7.10. Also, the PS3 can be wired to a router if you don't have a wireless router.

Sony does get you for accessories ($15 for an PS2 memory adaptor)
$50 for a 2nd controller. $15 for a USB cord with the A to B pin adaptor to charge the 2nd controller (plus you will need one anyways as the one with it is like 5 feet long instead of 9 or 10 feet for the one you buy).


Sony is reportedly losing about $200 per console, so they have to make it up somewhere and they are supposedly going to change the HD to over 100gig in the future.

Apple does this also, every time they add features to the i-Pod, they drop what it comes with (no CD, no wall charger and no docking station anymore!). A $249 I-Pod costs over $300 when you add the wall charger, doc and a protective cover (more if you want to play it in the car etc).

All that being said, I love my PS-3 and I-Pod, and I don't own, nor would I probably buy an X-box360.

the biggest problem of the ps3 is the blu-ray drive...it automatically added most of the extra $200 cost over the premium xbox360. people may see it as a bargain blu-ray player, but here is the problem with that. what happens if blu-ray actually gets beat out by HD-DVD and loses the format war? you are STUCK with a blu-ray drive on a PS3, and now you have to go out and buy a HD-DVD drive to veiw all teh newest released movies. MOST people are not willing to buy it for the blu-ray drive at the moment, so in MOST people's eyes, it is a pure $600 gaming console.

also, you compared all the extra money you have to put into the 360 to get the same features, but the ps3 DOES NOT include any cables to allow it to produce a HD picture...so out of the box, you have to spend another $100 on an HDMI cable and so the REAL cost of the 60gig ps3 is closer to $700 just to get it to do what it advertises is supposed to be standard....that in itself is a BIG MARKETING MISTAKE on sony's part by not including the hdmi cable.

as for the wifi, in order to get connected with the ps3, you ALSO NEED to buy a wireless router. the ps3 DOES NOT have a wireless router built-in, only a wireless card to CONNECT to a wireless router, so i can't really see that as a good comparison on that. you need to buy a wireless ADAPTER for the xbox360.

as for the harddrive space, you seem to mention that the 360 has a 20gig hd and half of it is reserved for system files...i really do hope you would have done a little bit of research, because there is roughly 6 gigs for that, so you are left with 14gigs to store games and files on there...yes, the ps3 has a larger harddrive, but it is 3.5 times larger, not 5...larger none-the-less, so i will give you that point

now you say the 360 is not worth the price...hmm, $400 and it is ready to play HIGH-DEFINITION games right out of the box....you need to spend $700 to play the ps3 in HIGH-DEFINITION right out of the box (you need to buy the HDMI cable, otherwise you have to connect it using an s-video cable....weak). plus the fact that the xbox360 has over 160 games for it, with another 100-150 scheduled to be released this year, and the 360 jumps way ahead of the ps3 for bang for your buck.....and currently, it has better grpahics on cross-platform games, not to mention graphics that have set the standard through Gears of War.....

Obviously, you don't own one so you don't know what comes in the box. You can output 1080P through component. You don't have to buy an HDMI cable to hook up to your tv for 1080P. I tried both since I saw virtually no difference in PQ with my new Samsung 1080P so I returned my overpriced Monster Cable (that I was forced to buy from BB) and went with a cheapy Gamestop component cables for $14.99. Monoprice has HDMI cables for under $20. Who doesn't have WIFI? You can get the modem free if you rant and bitch to your data provider. Besides, you can go the cat5 route and run a long ass cable from your office to the living room. Bluray vs HD-DVD. Who knows who is going to win this war. At this day and age, there is no victor and there will never be. Look at Apple and MS OS systems. There's alot of what ifs... what if HD-DVD doesn't succeed? All the people that purchased the external harddrives will be assed out? Doubt it since MFG's for the US are required to support the format/technology for at least 5 years after the last device is sold. So no, no one is going to loose out. There's plenty of money to be made on both sides and we the consumer have a choice. Anyways, please do some research before going on and on... You gotta let go of that secret box of yours and embrace technology. I did and I am very happy.

also, you compared all the extra money you have to put into the 360 to get the same features, but the ps3 DOES NOT include any cables to allow it to produce a HD picture...so out of the box, you have to spend another $100 on an HDMI cable and so the REAL cost of the 60gig ps3 is closer to $700 just to get it to do what it advertises is supposed to be standard....that in itself is a BIG MARKETING MISTAKE on sony's part by not including the hdmi cable.

.....

No offense, but I'm so tired of the "no HDMI included arguement".

First, you do not have to spend $100 for a good quality HDMI cable
2nd, how long of a cable should they have given you? I hooked mine up to a PJ so giving me a 6ft HDMI cable would have added $15 to the cost and I could not have used it.

BTW I bought a CL-2 rated 25 ft, very good HDMI cable from monoprice.com for like $1.50 per LF (and they have even less expensive ones). The cost of cable for the PS3 is a non-issue. There are some good arguement for the PS3 being overpriced, but having or not having a HDMI cable it not one of them.

I'll simply confess that while I've bought none of the "next gen" consoles yet, the PS3 has my complete attention a media hub with the bonus that it plays games. I'd already been pricing a Mac Mini at $500 and a comparable WMC PC at $900, both of which had their downsides. On the other hand, a $600 PS3 that plays DVDS (and eventually BD), can be wirelessly attached to my home network and if I don't like Sony's media features I can turn around and put Linux on it and run Freevo? Yeah, that's a seller. And it plays my kids' PS2 games as well? You just got yourself a spot in my living room. My concern is I'll need 2 now... one for the living room TV and one for the HT. :)

Some various comments I have about 360 and why it's not "all that" even though it's cheaper:

20gig HD? Proprietary, no less? How do I expand it? Buy a $1000 HTPC and run Media Center Extender? So much for streaming media at $400.

HD movies over component video? Isn't that squarely within the "analog hole?" Thus, when the HD-DVD distributors choose to turn on the "content protection" flag, so much for your HD? Hopefully that rumored HDMI 360 comes out before then.

160 games. Okay, it's true that make a console. Though, sadly, a majority of them are remakes of Xbox games. And I'm not an FPS kinda guy. Other genres ("Platform" and RPG games are particularly loved in my house) are not well represented.


That said, if it becomes the console of choice for games, I'll likely have a single 360 to go along with those two PS3s. :D

Ok heres the deal the ps3 isnt worth it. Who cares about the blu ray, you can just buy an hd player for your 360 and it would still be cheaper. And they will soon be comeing out with a 120 gig hd for people who like to buy movies and tv shoes for their 360. And another big factor is that alot of game manufactores are switching to the 360 because the ps3s cell processor is too hard to work with. Thats jsut some of the reasons why the ps3 isnt worth all the money you would put into it.

Ok heres the deal the ps3 isn't worth it. Who cares about the blu ray, you can just buy an hd player for your 360 and it would still be cheaper. And they will soon be comeing out with a 120 gig hd for people who like to buy movies and tv shoes for their 360. And another big factor is that alot of game manufactories are switching to the 360 because the ps3s cell processor is too hard to work with. Thats just some of the reasons why the ps3 isn't worth all the money you would put into it.

Twaller Can Suck My Balls

No offense, but I'm so tired of the "no HDMI included arguement".

First, you do not have to spend $100 for a good quality HDMI cable
2nd, how long of a cable should they have given you? I hooked mine up to a PJ so giving me a 6ft HDMI cable would have added $15 to the cost and I could not have used it.

BTW I bought a CL-2 rated 25 ft, very good HDMI cable from monoprice.com for like $1.50 per LF (and they have even less expensive ones). The cost of cable for the PS3 is a non-issue. There are some good arguement for the PS3 being overpriced, but having or not having a HDMI cable it not one of them.

what do you mean that the hdmi cable is not one of the arguments for the ps3 being overpriced? that is EXACTLY why people would consider it overpriced, if you had to purchase an HDMI cable, even though it SHOULD be included for that price. obviously the HDMI cable is not the ONLY argument for the overpriced ps3, but it is certainly one of them. the unfortunate thing about not including the hdmi cable is that MANY consumers are not aware that you do not need to spend $100 on a monster-brand hdmi cable from bestbuy or circuitcity, but when they go to purchase the ps3, that is EXACTLY what the employees push you to do. i am one of the people that actually know there is absolutely no difference in picture quality no matter what kind of hdmi cable you use...but most people do not, so they will end up spending anotehr $100 for an hdmi cable to connect the ps3 to a new plasma or lcd.

I'll simply confess that while I've bought none of the "next gen" consoles yet, the PS3 has my complete attention a media hub with the bonus that it plays games. I'd already been pricing a Mac Mini at $500 and a comparable WMC PC at $900, both of which had their downsides. On the other hand, a $600 PS3 that plays DVDS (and eventually BD), can be wirelessly attached to my home network and if I don't like Sony's media features I can turn around and put Linux on it and run Freevo? Yeah, that's a seller. And it plays my kids' PS2 games as well? You just got yourself a spot in my living room. My concern is I'll need 2 now... one for the living room TV and one for the HT. :)

Some various comments I have about 360 and why it's not "all that" even though it's cheaper:

20gig HD? Proprietary, no less? How do I expand it? Buy a $1000 HTPC and run Media Center Extender? So much for streaming media at $400.

HD movies over component video? Isn't that squarely within the "analog hole?" Thus, when the HD-DVD distributors choose to turn on the "content protection" flag, so much for your HD? Hopefully that rumored HDMI 360 comes out before then.

160 games. Okay, it's true that make a console. Though, sadly, a majority of them are remakes of Xbox games. And I'm not an FPS kinda guy. Other genres ("Platform" and RPG games are particularly loved in my house) are not well represented.


That said, if it becomes the console of choice for games, I'll likely have a single 360 to go along with those two PS3s. :D


um, i hope you realize that your point about hd movies over compnent video actually goes against the ps3 as well. it is not solely for hd-dvd's that the content protection is going to be implemented, it is for ALL HD movies...blu-ray included. so that kills the argument some people on here are saying that the ps3 can output it's hd movies and 1080p over component cables and therefore doesn't need the non-included hdmi cable.....actually, yes, it will if this goes in affect, so now the ps3 becomes even more expensive because, as i stated in my first post, the ps3 will need the hdmi cable for it's touted 1080p capabilities.

and your argument that the 160 games for the 360 are mostly remakes of xbox games, um, where do you think the games for the ps3 are from? that's right, they are ps2 titles that are remakes. and what do you consider a remake? if madden 2006 was out for the regular xbox, and madden 2007 came out a year later for the 360, do you consider that a "remake"...because then you have to throw your argument out the window completely....a sequal is not the same as a remake, and most of the games on the xbox360 are NOT remakes.

the xbox360 is coming out with a larger harddrive this year, possibly two larger sizes which will be available as accessories. so the 360 has the option of adding larger harddrive...can you do this with the ps3? no, because it's harddrive is internal so you can't simply exchange it like you can on the xbox360.

you like your ps3 as a media center, right? did you know that the xbox360 can do everything that the ps3 can, stream videos, photos, music and all of that stuff? on top of that, microsoft just announced that the xbox360 is going to be capable of IPTV, which would make it a true entertainment center for the technological living room....the ps3 cannot do this. . you can have videos, photos, music, tv, and tivo-like functions all from the xbox360...along with room for expanding to whatever your needs are...

Obviously, you don't own one so you don't know what comes in the box. You can output 1080P through component. You don't have to buy an HDMI cable to hook up to your tv for 1080P. I tried both since I saw virtually no difference in PQ with my new Samsung 1080P so I returned my overpriced Monster Cable (that I was forced to buy from BB) and went with a cheapy Gamestop component cables for $14.99. Monoprice has HDMI cables for under $20. Who doesn't have WIFI? You can get the modem free if you rant and bitch to your data provider. Besides, you can go the cat5 route and run a long ass cable from your office to the living room. Bluray vs HD-DVD. Who knows who is going to win this war. At this day and age, there is no victor and there will never be. Look at Apple and MS OS systems. There's alot of what ifs... what if HD-DVD doesn't succeed? All the people that purchased the external harddrives will be assed out? Doubt it since MFG's for the US are required to support the format/technology for at least 5 years after the last device is sold. So no, no one is going to loose out. There's plenty of money to be made on both sides and we the consumer have a choice. Anyways, please do some research before going on and on... You gotta let go of that secret box of yours and embrace technology. I did and I am very happy.

okay,maybe you need to embrace technology yourself....you are defending a more expensive gaming console that is not able to do anything more than the xbox360 other than play blu-ray movies....and that's IF that format proves successful. you argue that if blu-ray wins, xbox360 owners will be assed out....actually, only the ones that bought a hd-dvd add-on drive...not ALL xbox360 owners....if blu-ray DOESN'T win the format war, then ALL ps3 owners will be affected since they just spent an extra $200 on the wrong format. so your argument doesn't even compare things equally. if the xbox360 had an internal hd-dvd drive, then you would have a valid argument....instead, like i had stated in my first post, sony took a big risk by adding the blu-ray drive internally...if it does not win the format war, then every single ps3 owner just got stuck with outdated technology....hmm, hard to embrace technology if it becomes outdated, dont' you think?

and by buying the xbox360, i believe i did embrace technology since it is actually capable of doing more than the ps3. it was just announced that the xbox360 will be receiving IPTV and therefore become a true entertainment cetner in people's living rooms...this was one thing that sony had tried labeling the ps3 as. the xbox360 has more expanding capabilities than the ps3 also. you CAN'T upgrade the harddrive and are stuck with blu-ray either way...plus with IPTV coming and microsoft having the rights to it, seems like the ps3 is looking more and more average and not next-gen like it was supposed to...i love sony qoute of "the next-gen doesn't begin until we say so"....somebody needs to tell them that the next-gen era has started, and is starting to leave sony behind....

One item that i think many people have overlooked is the WiFi capability (of the 600 dollar version). If you want WiFi on an xbox 360, you have to buy a WiFi router and an extra ethernet (cat 5) cable.

Some people, like myself, don't prefer to use WiFi. Connection can be problematic at times. So I didn't have to pay for something I will never use.

Xbox 360 is (out of the box) has a DVD drive, 20 gig hard drive, single chip processor, and an unreasonably loud power cord, $300. Seemingly cheaper, but if you want all that the PS3 has, add ons are necessary. An add-on HD-DVD player (the rival of Blu-Ray) which costs an extra $200, WiFi connectivity (the router would cost about $25 and the cable about 10) and a 60 gig external hard drive which would run up about $50. A total of $585, and without the option of being a full fledged PC, and without the Potential future of the Cell processor, is the 360 really worth it?

Is it worth it? YES! You get exactley what you pay for. You want WiFi, you get it. You want HD-DVD, you pay for it. Options baby, options. You're not forced to buy anything. You have control. If you don't want any of the fancy bull, don't buy the addons. Simple as that. PS3 buyers that don't have an HDTV are getting ripped off. $500, for HD gaming upgrade. Atleast with the 360 you can take baby steps, a la the CORE system. Choices, Microsoft lets you have that control. What does Sony give you? Great disc space, with noise filled video? A disc format that might not be around for long?

PS- I bet if for some crazy reason HD-DVD is scrapped, MS can put a BluRay addon.

bottom line too much $$$

[QUOTE=swedrows]xbox360 has more expanding capabilities than the ps3 also. you CAN'T upgrade the harddrive and are stuck with blu-ray either way.../QUOTE]

The PS3 takes and standard laptop HD and is easily upgradable.

http://www.consolesource.com/blog/?p=33

I'm not sure what your issue is with the PS3 other then being pricey, but if you are going to cut it down you can at least know what it is you are cutting down.

As for Blu-ray...your argument is not a PS3 issue, it is a for mate issue. Sony decided to go with blu-ray. They wanted to give you (at a cost) one of the HD formats. Had they chosen HD the same argument could have been made.

But making the argument that if blu ray doesn't make it you have outdated technology is stupid. What those, 20, 30, 50, 100 blu ray movies you have will suddenly stop working? Of course not. And Sony would continue to put games out that are so large will need the technology.

And you got to stop with the "what if's". What if BR wins. So all thost 360 owners who bought a HD add on will now have to buy a 2nd add on, doubling the cost of get HD. What if a new format comes out and neither HD or BR wins? You can play what if till the cows come home and it is meaningless.

[QUOTE=swedrows]xbox360 has more expanding capabilities than the ps3 also. you CAN'T upgrade the harddrive and are stuck with blu-ray either way.../QUOTE]

The PS3 takes and standard laptop HD and is easily upgradable.

http://www.consolesource.com/blog/?p=33

I'm not sure what your issue is with the PS3 other then being pricey, but if you are going to cut it down you can at least know what it is you are cutting down.

As for Blu-ray...your argument is not a PS3 issue, it is a for mate issue. Sony decided to go with blu-ray. They wanted to give you (at a cost) one of the HD formats. Had they chosen HD the same argument could have been made.

But making the argument that if blu ray doesn't make it you have outdated technology is stupid. What those, 20, 30, 50, 100 blu ray movies you have will suddenly stop working? Of course not. And Sony would continue to put games out that are so large will need the technology.

And you got to stop with the "what if's". What if BR wins. So all thost 360 owners who bought a HD add on will now have to buy a 2nd add on, doubling the cost of get HD. What if a new format comes out and neither HD or BR wins? You can play what if till the cows come home and it is meaningless.


you just made my argument for me....sony decided to give ps3 owners blu-ray at a cost....microsoft DID NOT decide to force you onto one of the formats and charge extra for it on their systems....sony did, while microsoft gives you a choice if you want to add on an hd-dvd drive.....simple point finished....ps3 owners had to pay extra because sony decided that was the way to go, instead of giving options on future expandability....

[QUOTE=Sdallnct]


you just made my argument for me....sony decided to give ps3 owners blu-ray at a cost....microsoft DID NOT decide to force you onto one of the formats and charge extra for it on their systems....sony did, while microsoft gives you a choice if you want to add on an hd-dvd drive.....simple point finished....ps3 owners had to pay extra because sony decided that was the way to go, instead of giving options on future expandability....

And so? You are trying to make an arguement that there is a perfect system that meets everyone's needs and wants. There is not. There are three different "next gen" systems to meet the needs of what individuals want.

Yes, Sony decided to put in a player and charge more. Saying that is "bad" and "no one would want that" and "they should give you a choice" is like saying it is bad to put an HD tuner in a TV display. Or it is bad to put in stereo speakers in a TV. Or that it is bad to have 7.1 surround included in a HT receiver. Or that it is bad that a DVD player include DTS. Or that everyone one of my components comes with it's own remote, when a univeral works them all, or that it is bad that every component comes with component cable...etc, etc, etc.

Any time you add any feature to a something it adds to the cost. It is a business decision and a business model. And the decision to add something or not is based on what they think people want.

So why did I buy a PS3

1st. My son had a PS2 for nearly five years and has like 35-40 games. How many of those would have played on the 360? So, even with the added cost of the BR player, I coming out way ahead then having to replace even half of those games on the 360. And so far every game we have tried has worked perfect.
2nd. I already had a wireless router, did not want to run yet more wires and am excited about the fact I just had to type in my security setting and it hooked up no problem. It does great from the far end of my house.
3rd. Since I recently upgraded to a HD PJ, I wanted to get a HD/BR player. However I didn't want to spend $400 on HD or $700+ on BR not knowing which (if any) format would win. So the PS3 was perfect! The PS3 is cheaper then a 360 + stand along BR player and very close in price to a 360 + HD add on. And again, who cares what format wins. By the time it will be all ironed out, you will have more money invested in software (movies) then the player (any player) anyway. So you will have plenty watch.

I noticed you glossed over your one argement that was not true about the HD not being able to be upgraded.

If you prefer to buy things that are stripped down and you want to piece meal whatever it is your buying. Hey, go for it. I got not problem with that. But I think it is silly of you to say Sony is wrong. It is different. It was idea for me, and obviously many, many, many others. But that is why there are competing systems, and since everyone wants something different, I wouldn't be surprised if all three do just fine.

I actually feel good about this system. On the PS2 my son and daughter were the only ones that used it. Now the whole family can enjoy the PS3.

I haven't read the entire thread, but when the original guy said

Xbox 360 is (out of the box) has a DVD drive, 20 gig hard drive, single chip processor, and an unreasonably loud power cord, $300.

Which is wrong, the xbox with a 20 GB hard drive is $400





and your argument that the 160 games for the 360 are mostly remakes of xbox games, um, where do you think the games for the ps3 are from? that's right, they are ps2 titles that are remakes. and what do you consider a remake? if madden 2006 was out for the regular xbox, and madden 2007 came out a year later for the 360, do you consider that a "remake"...because then you have to throw your argument out the window completely....a sequal is not the same as a remake, and most of the games on the xbox360 are NOT remakes.


Xbox has always been known for the worst game library of any system. Most of the franchise games are FPS with a couple good RPGs.



the xbox360 is coming out with a larger harddrive this year, possibly two larger sizes which will be available as accessories. so the 360 has the option of adding larger harddrive...can you do this with the ps3? no, because it's harddrive is internal so you can't simply exchange it like you can on the xbox360.

Yes, you can do this with the ps3.

http://www.gamersreports.com/article/43

There is a website(it's down right now) that shows how easy it is to replace the HDD on the PS3. They used a 120GB HDD that costs less than MS charges for a 20GB HDD

[QUOTE=swedrows]

And so? You are trying to make an arguement that there is a perfect system that meets everyone's needs and wants. There is not. There are three different "next gen" systems to meet the needs of what individuals want.

Yes, Sony decided to put in a player and charge more. Saying that is "bad" and "no one would want that" and "they should give you a choice" is like saying it is bad to put an HD tuner in a TV display. Or it is bad to put in stereo speakers in a TV. Or that it is bad to have 7.1 surround included in a HT receiver. Or that it is bad that a DVD player include DTS. Or that everyone one of my components comes with it's own remote, when a univeral works them all, or that it is bad that every component comes with component cable...etc, etc, etc.

Any time you add any feature to a something it adds to the cost. It is a business decision and a business model. And the decision to add something or not is based on what they think people want.

So why did I buy a PS3

1st. My son had a PS2 for nearly five years and has like 35-40 games. How many of those would have played on the 360? So, even with the added cost of the BR player, I coming out way ahead then having to replace even half of those games on the 360. And so far every game we have tried has worked perfect.
2nd. I already had a wireless router, did not want to run yet more wires and am excited about the fact I just had to type in my security setting and it hooked up no problem. It does great from the far end of my house.
3rd. Since I recently upgraded to a HD PJ, I wanted to get a HD/BR player. However I didn't want to spend $400 on HD or $700+ on BR not knowing which (if any) format would win. So the PS3 was perfect! The PS3 is cheaper then a 360 + stand along BR player and very close in price to a 360 + HD add on. And again, who cares what format wins. By the time it will be all ironed out, you will have more money invested in software (movies) then the player (any player) anyway. So you will have plenty watch.

I noticed you glossed over your one argement that was not true about the HD not being able to be upgraded.

If you prefer to buy things that are stripped down and you want to piece meal whatever it is your buying. Hey, go for it. I got not problem with that. But I think it is silly of you to say Sony is wrong. It is different. It was idea for me, and obviously many, many, many others. But that is why there are competing systems, and since everyone wants something different, I wouldn't be surprised if all three do just fine.

I actually feel good about this system. On the PS2 my son and daughter were the only ones that used it. Now the whole family can enjoy the PS3.


this thread is specifically about the price of the ps3, all of my arguments were trying to demonstrate why the ps3 is too pricey as a gaming console, since the xbox360 has everything people need in a gaming console and costs less. for you, if you bought a ps3 because your son had a ps2 and has lots of games for it, that is okay and a good reason to buy one. but this thread is all about the price of a ps3 in general, not whether it is too pricey for ps2 owners that have games for it. things seem to have gone off on tangents when each of us is trying to make their points. again, i am just trying to throw in supportive arguments for why i think the ps3 is too expensive as a gaming console if someone is on the fence between the ps3 and xbox360 or wii

Xbox has always been known for the worst game library of any system. Most of the franchise games are FPS with a couple good RPGs.

Yes, you can do this with the ps3.

http://www.gamersreports.com/article/43

There is a website(it's down right now) that shows how easy it is to replace the HDD on the PS3. They used a 120GB HDD that costs less than MS charges for a 20GB HDD

the xbox has been known for the worst game library? where did you come up with that? i am trying to make points based on facts dealing with hardware that support my statements of why i think the ps3 is overpriced, and you throw in an opinion on the game libraries? show me articles from gaming industry experts that have proven that the xbox has the worst game library, otherwise, please stick to facts in this thread..thanks

and the website you link to for replacing the harddrive, it shows how to put a laptop harddrive inside the ps3 (which yes, i am aware that the harddrive inside the ps3 is already a laptop harddrive), but the article is showing people how to insert a laptop harddrive, which is NOT an authrorized acccessory, into their new ps3's...hardly seems like that is a comparable argument from being able to upgrade with items made specifically by the gaming console company for that system...

[QUOTE=Sdallnct]


this thread is specifically about the price of the ps3, all of my arguments were trying to demonstrate why the ps3 is too pricey as a gaming console, since the xbox360 has everything people need in a gaming console and costs less. for you, if you bought a ps3 because your son had a ps2 and has lots of games for it, that is okay and a good reason to buy one. but this thread is all about the price of a ps3 in general, not whether it is too pricey for ps2 owners that have games for it. things seem to have gone off on tangents when each of us is trying to make their points. again, i am just trying to throw in supportive arguments for why i think the ps3 is too expensive as a gaming console if someone is on the fence between the ps3 and xbox360 or wii

You keep changing your arguments, but lets go with that one.

Trying to say the PS3 is to expensive for a gaming system only is like trying to say the latest Denon HT HDMI receiver is to expensive as a AM/FM radio.

The PS3 does more then gaming so it cost more then a gaming only system. Real shock there. There are folks buying the PS3 with no intention of ever buying a game (using it only as a BR player).

I totally agree with you. If you want to strip every feature of the PS3 (BR player, wifi, hard drive, fast gaming processor, nice video processor, blu tooth wireless controllers, usb ports, net surfing, surround sound, etc) "because you really don't need them for gaming" then sure it is a lot of money if you don't want any of those features.

If you don't want any of those features, then get something else. Totally agree. But for the customer that Sony is after, it seems like (I've had less then a month) a great machine. And if you factor in all the features it does have...doesn't seem all that expensive.

And as I pointed out before, the PS2 was a lot less money. But only my kids could/would enjoy it. Now with the bluray player, the PS3 is something my wife and I can enjoy. So there is more value there. And to my surprise, I played a game on. Yup, thanks to the wifi I downloaded a fee trial version of MotorSport (or whatever it is called). And I have had some fun planning it. I would never buy a game for myself, but those free little trial games are fun!

The PS3 is not being sold as a gaming only machine. So trying to redefine it then saying it is too expensive is about like saying a BMW is too expensive for basic transportation.

and the website you link to for replacing the harddrive, it shows how to put a laptop harddrive inside the ps3 (which yes, i am aware that the harddrive inside the ps3 is already a laptop harddrive), but the article is showing people how to insert a laptop harddrive, which is NOT an authrorized acccessory, into their new ps3's...hardly seems like that is a comparable argument from being able to upgrade with items made specifically by the gaming console company for that system...

Your kidding right? Your saying since Sony doesn't have a PS3 HD as an accessories it doesn't count?

When you install a new HD the system will ask you if you want to format it. So Sony has anticipated that some would replace the HD. Either due to HD failure or for more storage. If Sony didn't want you to replace it, they would have made it internal, non-laptop and for sure the system would error out if you did it.

Funny how you say the PS3 is to expensive, but when they provide a generic HD that are inexpensive (as compared to say MS or what a Sony would cost), then you say they shouldn't have done it.

[QUOTE=swedrows]

You keep changing your arguments, but lets go with that one.

Trying to say the PS3 is to expensive for a gaming system only is like trying to say the latest Denon HT HDMI receiver is to expensive as a AM/FM radio.

The PS3 does more then gaming so it cost more then a gaming only system. Real shock there. There are folks buying the PS3 with no intention of ever buying a game (using it only as a BR player).

I totally agree with you. If you want to strip every feature of the PS3 (BR player, wifi, hard drive, fast gaming processor, nice video processor, blu tooth wireless controllers, usb ports, net surfing, surround sound, etc) "because you really don't need them for gaming" then sure it is a lot of money if you don't want any of those features.

If you don't want any of those features, then get something else. Totally agree. But for the customer that Sony is after, it seems like (I've had less then a month) a great machine. And if you factor in all the features it does have...doesn't seem all that expensive.

And as I pointed out before, the PS2 was a lot less money. But only my kids could/would enjoy it. Now with the bluray player, the PS3 is something my wife and I can enjoy. So there is more value there. And to my surprise, I played a game on. Yup, thanks to the wifi I downloaded a fee trial version of MotorSport (or whatever it is called). And I have had some fun planning it. I would never buy a game for myself, but those free little trial games are fun!

The PS3 is not being sold as a gaming only machine. So trying to redefine it then saying it is too expensive is about like saying a BMW is too expensive for basic transportation.


don't you think you are stretching this thing a bit much? you are trying to compare the ps3's price to a reciever, or even a bmw? think about this...if you go into any electronics store and say you are interested in buying a blu-ray dvd player, do you actually think you are going to be taken over to the ps3??

also, you are not trying to twist words around by the following statement you made:

If you want to strip every feature of the PS3 (BR player, wifi, hard drive, fast gaming processor, nice video processor, blu tooth wireless controllers, usb ports, net surfing, surround sound, etc) "because you really don't need them for gaming" then sure it is a lot of money if you don't want any of those features.

that is completely taking everything we are talking about and twisting it...i am comparing why the ps3 is too expensive compared to the xbox360 since both are capable of high-def gaming, now you want to say that my arguments talks about stripping everything out because you really don't need them for gaming....um, i specifically wrote that i was comparing the pricepoints of how the current systems are configured...how did i even suggest to start stripping the system down? if you REMOVE the gaming processor and nice video processor from the machine, you are NO longer able to play high-def gaming on it....you have just completely twisted everything and are now writing things that i have not said, or even suggested. stick to what we are writing about here. the ps3, as it is packaged and priced, is over-priced. people are NOT buying it as a blu-ray player like you'd like to believe, they are buying it as gaming console...that's is why the sales have not met expectations to this point...if it WAS being marketed as a blu-ray player, they would be flying off the shelf considering it is $400 cheaper than the next blu-ray player...but with your argument, it is a stripped down blu-ray player, so if you are in the market for one, why go for that when you can get a regular player, right? after all, it's like saying a bmw is used for basic transportation, right? so with those words, the ps3 is a stripped down blu-ray player, si why would you buy it when you are in the market for the bmw of blu-ray players, which cost $1000???

I don't know what else to say.

I have shown how the PS3 AS A UNIT is not over priced

-backwords compatible with exsisting games
-built in media server
-built in wireless intenet for gaming and surfing
-larger games to be made using the space on a blu ray disc
-included blu ray
-more value to families who only the kids game/but the parents can watch hd movies

You can go over to threads/forums at this very site and see people buying this for blu ray only. You say if you walked into a store and asked for a blu ray player the salesman would not take you to a PS3. You are right. Probably would not happen. But what if when he took you over to that dedicated Samsung blu ray player that was a $1,000 and you said that was to much money "isn't there anything else cheaper" what do you think would happen? If they were smart, they would take you over to a PS3. And hopefully, a person who was about to drop a grand on a electonic item would be aware of all their choices.

You earlier made the arguement that with the format wars undecided they should not have included the player. I'm saying, with the format wars undecided this is exactly the way you should buy a player like this. Why? If you bought the $1,000 blu ray player and HD "wins" then all that player can do is play your exsisting movies. Whereas if you have this advanced gaming system, media center, even if blu ray fails, you have a lot of "life" left in the machine.

Now personally I don't think it is a big deal either way (HD or blu ray). As I said, by the time the "war" ends, you will have plenty of movies to watch on either one. Heck, most likely there will be a yet new technology to knock them both out. But it still won't effect what you currently have. You can still watch the movies you have, there will be games to play, etc.

I'll tell you what. If you want to say that the PS3 is over priced as a gaming ONLY system. I will agree with you. So long as you agree that the PS3 is NOT a gaming ONLY system.

One problem I see with the 360 which doesnt sit quite right with me is the fact that the HD-DVD drive is an ADD ON. Even if Microsoft wants to make games with 5 times the size of an average dvd (DVD 5gigs to 25 HD-DVD) they'd have to make two versions of the game one for the people who bought the add on and one for the ones who didnt, and if they eventually decide to stop making the DVD games, theyre basically forcing the owners to buy an HD-DVD drive even if they arent interested in the next generation of movies, and thats where I think that microsoft screwed up, hence why I like the built in blu ray player and the value it gives to the PS3.

swedrows, no sense in trying to convince ps3 owners (and future buyers) that what they bought is worthless and bd format won't outlast the next NEW generation console/player. half a million owners out there will disagree. they'd also be buying ps3 games and bluray disc in the next year or so. the # is increasing as we speak. most will take advantage of the dual purpose player and some won't. current ps3 owners will be the early adopters on a retail level - not you. if indeed it fails, most can afford the $500-600 loss just to experience the new technology. computer hardware and software have the same depreciation value, if not worse. you haven't spent a single dime on this technology so what you're discussing here has no validation to me.

i understand alot of consumers are skeptical, like yourself, and use "price", "no content", "problems" and "sony" as the excuse to justify their current console or buying practices. you are entitled to your opinion but understand - the world does not evolve around you or just the USA. there are alot of other mfgs and countries involved and a large portion of licenses, games, movies, and hd content will be ported over/developed vice-versa. vested companies are riding on the ps3 to bring this hd media to the masses. i believe in it. i also believe in hd-dvd and the xbox. it would be nice if everyone prospers since that's what drives economies and sparks technology revision and change.

if you put it this way, let's just pretend that i bought the game console portion for $300 and the bluray player for another $300. ($250 each for a 20gig) anyways, i don't see it as a bad value to pay $300 for each component with a few added goodies that i actually use. when other don't, that's their problem. not yours and not mine. an xbox is $399 and the add-on is $200. - add wifi $100 - add xbox live $60 year. i don't see the advantage with so many add-on attachments stuck next to the box. fugly in my eyes and more of a pain to trouble-shoot. besides, i'd rather testdrive the latest equipment on the block than a model that was tested all of last year. ps3 is not a BARGAIN to ANYONE that doesn't want to pay that kind of cash for one. it's called "mindset" please leave me alone and the rest of the ps3/bluray users that agree...

I'll tell you what. If you want to say that the PS3 is over priced as a gaming ONLY system. I will agree with you. So long as you agree that the PS3 is NOT a gaming ONLY system.

in that respect, i will agree with you that as an overall system for gaming AND movies, the ps3 is not an overpriced system. i think that the ps3 would have had an incredible amount of success if blu-ray was the clear-cut winner in this "format war", unfortunaltey for sony, of right now, the mindset from alot of consumers is that it is a gaming console first, and when their kids ask for a gaming console, parents will no doubt take a look at price first, and then compare features later

in that respect, i will agree with you that as an overall system for gaming AND movies, the ps3 is not an overpriced system. i think that the ps3 would have had an incredible amount of success if blu-ray was the clear-cut winner in this "format war", unfortunaltey for sony, of right now, the mindset from alot of consumers is that it is a gaming console first, and when their kids ask for a gaming console, parents will no doubt take a look at price first, and then compare features later

Fair enough. At least we have some common ground. -time for a beer-

I will say, I'm no geek. And I will admit to 6-8 months ago doing exactly what you said. When my son started talking about the PS3 @ $599, I said absolutely not. But my son (15 at the time) said it was a good deal. So I told him to research it and write me a "white paper" on it convincing me why we should get it. He did a pretty good job. Good enough for me to do my own research and see how much we would enjoy the overall system. The final straw was when I upgraded my poor old X1 to a HD70. I love watching OTA HD, and new that was better then DVD. So wanted to start playing with higher quality DVD.

I also believe (maybe naively) we have only seen the beginning of advertising/software/content, etc for the PS3. IMHO, they wanted to get it out before Christmas no matter what, and many of the media area's, networking, etc will come later.

And I don't want you to think that I think the PS3 is perfect. I'm VERY pissed that they could not have included a IR sensor for universal remote. My family uses the media room so much as I set it up with a Harmony 880 remote. Yet, it cannot control the PS3. This was un-called for. Yea, I'll pick up the Sony remote, but for as much stuff as they put on the PS3, I can't believe adding IR would have been that big of a deal. It's not like Sony could come out with a cool blu tooth universal remote as then it wouldn't work your other components. Maybe they will come out with a dual blu-tooth/IR remote. Tho I have gotten use to using the controller and it is not that bad, even when you use the menu. But I would be nice to have a single remote. I'm hoping someone will make a IR sensor that plugs into one of the USB ports.

I did read a quick thread about a new 360? What is that about? Why are they coming out with a new one already? Is it a replacement or new model?

They might come out with a 360 that has HDMI, it won't anytime this year though. There is also a 120 GB HDD coming out, which is also not likely to come out this year.

They might come out with a 360 that has HDMI, it won't anytime this year though. There is also a 120 GB HDD coming out, which is also not likely to come out this year.

actually i think that it will come out this year since microsoft is bring IPTV to the xbox360 early this fall...they would need to release the larger harddrive for that specific function if they go ahead with their plan on making the xbox360 a fully-functional tivo-like device. we'll see what happens. they are at least coming out with a smaller processor chip which runs cooler, and will be cheaper to manufacture than the current ones....hopefully the savings microsoft gets from this is what will offset the cost of a revised 360 and keep the cost the same as it is now for us

actually i think that it will come out this year since microsoft is bring IPTV to the xbox360 early this fall...they would need to release the larger harddrive for that specific function if they go ahead with their plan on making the xbox360 a fully-functional tivo-like device. we'll see what happens. they are at least coming out with a smaller processor chip which runs cooler, and will be cheaper to manufacture than the current ones....hopefully the savings microsoft gets from this is what will offset the cost of a revised 360 and keep the cost the same as it is now for us

So original 360 owners would not be able to use this feature? Does the original 360 not have HDMI? I assume the HD is user replaceable.

You need the larger HDD so the 360 can act as a PVR, recording TV shows. According to the Major Nelson podcast (he interviewed a guy working on IPTV) you do NOT need a HDD at all to use the IPTV stuff, only if you want to record a show. Obviously the 360 the cable companies will try to sell will be decked out with a large HDD, but it seems likely that if you already own a 360, you can update the software and use it instead. I'm guessing there may be some sort of box you need to add for co-axial input unless the 360 sucks everything through the ethernet connection, which is quite possible. I don't think HDMI is needed for IPTV since they are already pushing 720p content over component.

Hopefully MS drops the price on the 20 gig HDD to something reasonable, like $30, so it can get added to every core system. Once the larger HDD goes on sale e-bay is gonna get flooded with 20 gig HDDs. MS will sell the larger drive for $100 and eliminate the 20 gig from their inventory.

I bet MS's Fall 07 bomb will be a HDMI/120 gig HDD 360 packaged with Halo 3. HUGE seller! I don't see the PS3 seeing a price drop anytime soon, so what could Sony do to spice up the console?

I don't expect MS to ever incorporate a HD drive, either HD-DVD or BD. Too expensive and just not needed. Any game requiring more than 8-9 gigs (the 360 uses DVD-9s) can be split up over several discs. The PS1 has done this with the mega seller FF7, and I think the 360 game Blue Dragon is doing it already.

No PS3 game I'm aware of needs a BD disc. Even Resistance was shown to be a sub 8 gig game padded out with filler data to get the game info on the edges of the BD disc so it could load faster. Sure devs SAY they need the space, but until something comes down that unequivocally uses that space, I don't see the BD as a gaming selling point.

Still, it is all a moot point for me. As a owner of a 1080i only mitsubishi, I can't even use the PS3 for games since it can't push 720p games to 1080i and my TV won't accept 720p input. The PS3 will have to wait till I upgrade my TV, and even then it will need some killer exclusive apps to win me over.

You need the larger HDD so the 360 can act as a PVR, recording TV shows. According to the Major Nelson podcast (he interviewed a guy working on IPTV) you do NOT need a HDD at all to use the IPTV stuff, only if you want to record a show. Obviously the 360 the cable companies will try to sell will be decked out with a large HDD, but it seems likely that if you already own a 360, you can update the software and use it instead. I'm guessing there may be some sort of box you need to add for co-axial input unless the 360 sucks everything through the ethernet connection, which is quite possible. I don't think HDMI is needed for IPTV since they are already pushing 720p content over component.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that IPTV is internet only. It does not go through regular tv cable.

I don't expect MS to ever incorporate a HD drive, either HD-DVD or BD. Too expensive and just not needed. Any game requiring more than 8-9 gigs (the 360 uses DVD-9s) can be split up over several discs. The PS1 has done this with the mega seller FF7, and I think the 360 game Blue Dragon is doing it already.

Also MS has repeatedly stated that it will not release the 360 with an HD drive, nor will it ever make games using HD-DVD.

Plus, some PS3 games are using the full 25GB of BD because they include pre-rendered video in the game, and 360 games are pretty amazing just on DVD-9s rendering the video on the console. But I do think that later on when programmers get better at unleashing the power of both consoles, this could lead to a problem on the 360.

Another thing to throw in about what the 360 has that the PS3 doesn't that I don't think anyone else mentioned is that is that the 360 controllers have force feedback and the PS3 controllers don't.

Just my two cents.

You guys are crazy. They are both too expensive. Thats why the Nintendo DS and EVEN THE OUTDATED PS2 sold significantly more units over the holidays than either the PS3 or 360. The truth is the format war is killing both of them. If I knew that BR was going to be here to stay I would have already bought a PS3, and likewise with the 360 and HD-DVD and I'm not really even a gamer. But PS3 has to come out with atleast one good game to catch up. I mean its absurd to have a launch and no games to play. The list of upcoming games for the 360 is much more impressive and PS3 is starting to lose exclusivity on some of their key titles. In the end its all about content. You can talk about media servers and internet all you want but people buy gaming consoles to play games and whoever ends up with the better games is going to win the war.

As a gaming console the PS3 is way over priced and even though it's a little better so is the Premium X360. I will be paying $400 for a Premium X360 soon though because it's where the next gen games are right now and it has a great list of games on the way. I won't buy the Core because I need the HDD and it would be the same price anyways. I'm right now just waiting to see if the rumors of the new SKU are true and if so when it will be available.

When the games come out and the price comes down I will own a PS3 for gaming. But it is going to have to be at most $400, probably less because I will already own a gaming console and can't justify spending $400 on another one. Any movie player I own, Blu-Ray or HD-DVD, will be a dedicated player. Far to many of the consoles I've seen used as the main DVD player have crapped out and had drive related errors. Neither my Xbox or PS2 (wich died to unrelated circumstances) had any drive problems and I never used them as a DVD player.

And I don't plan on upgrading to an HD movie player anytime soon. They are to expensive to justify it over regular DVD. Every movie is coming out on DVD so I don't have to worry about wich on I own so I can watch my favorite movies and there is a much larger back catalog then either have at this time and won't have for many years to come.

For what it is worth, a recent Home Theater Magazine review of the PS3 rated it a "good value".