Originally Posted by UxiSXRD
They've already got the millions of homes part. The HD media-mass adoption cannot logically proceed faster than HDTV penetration at it's upper limit. Blu-ray adoption will follow on the heels of
PS3 sales haven't come remotely close to meeting expectations, despite the fact that there are more than enough installed HDTVs to drive demand. You're simply repeating the rationale that got them into this mess in the first place.
I definitely disagree with the latter because I don't believe they are mutually exclusive. I already have an incredible Blu-ray player in the PS3 and a standalone replacement would have to do a whole bunch more than that the PS3 can't (very unlikely) or better (even more unlikely). The only thing that could make me want a standalone is 24p and that's assuming that the PS3 won't/can't add such capability by firmware. I'll buy games that interest me as they come out.
IMO, BD hardware isn't quite there yet.......and it's slim pickins' on the gaming front given pricing constraints dictated by BD inclusion, and the resulting position of languishing in third place.
If I've been waiting for a PS3, and am a gamer that already owns an HDTV, then the PS3 is a logical choice to kill two birds with one stone.
If you're first-and-foremost a gamer who wants a good selection titles from which to choose, and play online, there's a better, less expensive choice.
If I'm not a gamer, I am already skeptical about a PS3 and the cheaper standalone is more attractive.
I agree that cheaper is always more attractive, both from the standpoint of fence-sitting consumers with reservations, and the potential for high volume sales; however, the question remains: can you accept the enormous cost of meeting a competitors price point, when your per-unit subsidy is already so substantial?
If I'm the strange gamer that isn't into movies, I still get the PS3 and may buy a movie or two ... even if I don't, I'm still then purchasing games.
If you're a gamer who isn't into movies, why on Earth would you choose the overpriced console with a smaller library?
The key here is that the PS3 has some price elasticity that won't be used until still currently strong PS2 sales dip below a threshold point.
By that time, the point might well be moot.
Only while PS2 sales remain strong.
Relative to the latest iteration, that's likely to be the case until the price of next-gen PS gaming is more in line with what the masses are actually willing to pay. Which comes first, the chicken, or the egg?
Nevertheless, Playstation 2 was the first DVD player for many a household. As the format gained traction (didn't pass VHS until June 2003!) and standalones became cheaper,the PS2 exploded as it's price cuts took effect.
Exactly. < $200.