Even after months of forewarning from Sony about the cost of the PS3, news of its $600 price sticker seemed to drop like a nuclear bomb among gamers, fanboys and journalists alike. The shockwaves ran rampant through the media like wildfire, immediately labelled as ridiculously high and extremely unwise on Sony's behalf. Many even stated, "It's time to buy a 360 then".
I was initially taken back by the announcement myself - and who wouldn't be - but while contemplating buying a 360, I decided to sit down and do some proper price comparisons between the two machines. The results were surprising;
*Prices taken from BestBuy.com
Essentially, if I were to buy a 360 and its various add-ons, it would actually cost 120USD more than the PS3 at launch. Even opting for a cheaper non-Microsoft Wi-Fi adapter, along with the (still rumoured but ultimately destined to happen) 360 price drop, the price gap between the two still ain't that great.
The debatable point here is of course the 360's HD-DVD add-on, and whether or not it's relevant in a price comparison, but as an owner of an HDTV, HD video playback is something I couldn't possibly miss out on...whether that be via Blu-ray or HD-DVD. Even those who currently claim not to want a 360 HD-DVD drive, will need to buy a separate HD-DVD or Blu-ray player further down the line at some point. With HD-DVD players launching at $500, and Blu-ray at $1000, the small price of $150 for an HD-DVD add-on is even quite attractive (if not cosmetically).
But which is here to stay? At the risk of getting into the never ending HD-DVD vs Blu-ray debate, I just can't see Microsoft fully supporting HD-DVD as a standard down the line (and subsequently their add-on), as they aren't a media content provider. As a format, Blu-ray has a far higher capacity (6 layered Blu-ray discs will hold 200gb storage) and is also being supported by many giant media companies. The only reason Microsoft wants you to believe the Blu-ray format is unimportant is because that's the only way for them to get the 360 standing on equal technical ground with the PS3.
It would be a disaster for consumers to suffer another format war in 10 years time, which is exactly where the HD-DVD format would take us. The argument of additional manufacturing costs against Blu-ray is also a non issue, due to the combined demand of the technology through both movies and PS3, making it more cost efficient long term. If you look on Amazon.com right now, you can even see that Blu-ray movies are priced similarly to regular DVDs.
Going back to the PS3 as a machine, there also seems to be an awful lot of confusion regarding the capabilities of the cheaper $500 model due to its lack of HDMI connectivity. While HDMI is an integral part of Blu-ray's video playback copy protection - downgrading its output to standard definition when absent - this doesn't affect gaming at all. It essentially means those who don't foresee themselves watching Blu-ray movies on their PS3 for whatever reason, have a cheaper option to pick from (although personally, I think that additional $100 is money well spent).
Finally, there's the recently unveiled PS3 motion sensitive controller. Even if Bill Gates thinks otherwise, it's a step in the right direction if you ask me. If PS3 developers can pioneer new gameplay as we're seeing with the Nintendo Wii, along with PS3 next-gen graphics, it could surprise a lot of people. I am quietly optimistic.
I'm no Sony fanboy - I don't even own the previous Playstations - and I'm certainly no Microsoft hater either. I'm just a price conscious consumer who wants to play next generation games in HD and simultaneously enjoy HD movies at home, and from what's been laid out before me, I sincerely believe that the $600 price tag of the PS3 isn't actually that expensive. Certainly not when stacked up against the various add-ons required for the 360.
So do yourself a favour. Be a smart shopper. And don't take that $200 price difference at face value.
This review/report was created by the great team at TPSreport.co.uk:
More info >
