News Sony not cutting PS3 price in Europe

I presume that I am the only one here who's tired of this unwarranted hyperventilating every time someone at Sony breaks wind. Bit-Tech used to be a PC hardware enthusiast's site, not a grubby sub-Playstation-magazine bin o' hackery dedicated to nothing more than the near-verbatim regurgitation of Sony press-releases.

Of the twenty news stories currently on the home page, seven are about various Playstations or games exclusively for them, and several more are only of interest if you own an Xbox 360.

Please don't become so successful that you end up indistinguishable from the slippery junk I can pay £6 for in WH Smith.

Phil

 

If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.

On the front page, there is also a case review, how to etch, tons of PC related news ect.

 

You are reading the news section, not the main articles. They tend to be more in depth and less.... slippery.

 

As the writer of those stories, I should probably point out that they are time-dependant. It's E3, which means that a LOT of games news is coming out right now and I, as 'the games guy' (official title), have to cover them. Covering them all is impossible, so I choose the cream of the crop. These are, in my opinion, the stories which are of most interest to gamers right now. When 360 news comes along, I cover that. When Wii news comes along, I cover that. When PC news comes along, I cover that.

Unfortunately, theres been very little PC content shown at E3 which isn't swamped over by console releases. This obviously dictates what content I can find, which we compensate for with main features which are ussually exclusively focused at E3.

I agree Sony is massive in the news here right now, but the reason for that is simple: Its E3 and Sony is massively in the news everywhere.

Don't worry, I have no wish to end up like PS2 official or anything of the sort. If I had a dream for the game coverage of bit-tech it would simply be to give it an equal audience to the hardware side of things; an open, rational and knowedgeable crowd of readers who can reasonably discuss their passion and love of games. Everyday when I come to work my head is buzzing with ideas of how to make this happen and I can promise without exageration or lie that making bit-tech a hub of PC based games news, features and review is the single largest concern of mine on a daily basis.

Of course, to do this I need help from readers occasionally, so as always feel free to email me at joe.martin@bit-tech.net and give me your feedback, tips and ideas. Together we can make the games coverage here something to be even more proud of.

Rant over.

 

I still think it's underpriced for what it offers. If anyone wants to contest, then ask Sony to release a bare system to satisfy you with just the basic essentials to play games. Otherwise, it's perfectly priced.

 

It isn't perfectly priced. If it was perfectly priced then it would be selling by the bucket-load.

For the average gamer the PS3 costs too much.

For me as a tech enthusiast and who has the other two consoles, this is disappointing and will put me off buying one

 

Which is precisely what I said. If you guys want to buy it to only play games, then demand a version that does only that: 1 or 2 controller ports, game-only disc drive, no USB, no card reader, no storage, no optical out, bare power supply, no game or wiring bundle, no online Sony store or downloads, very basic online gaming support, cheap ABS plastic shell, etc.

What you guys are demanding from Sony is a PS3 that only plays games the way the Nintendo 64 did. Otherwise, (sorry I have to say this, mates) shut up and embrace the reality that game consoles no longer take only game discs up their slot. Alright, you guys have an authentic argument in that it is expensive for gamers, but you are not paying for gaming alone. Buy the crude equivalent of what the Playstation 3 offers and come back to me with a receipt.

 

It's over PS3 is finished

 

@Amon: I think you're totally missing the point. The point is Sony is alienating their customers by dropping the price in the US and Japan and not in Europe. As I said if the price dropped in Europe I would buy one (and tbh not for the cr@p games it has on it atm). I couldn't give a rats ass how much Sony pay for it hardware wise, if they want to sell the damned thing they have to drop the price and give Europe and the rest of the world equal billing. Let's face it: if you wanted just a games system you wouldn't bother buying the PS3 right now as there's basically nothing worth playing

 

No one here is arguing that the PS3 doesn't need those things... (I don't think anyway.. I'm not, and that's all that matters) We're just saying that the very very simple fact is that not many people are willing to or used to spending £400 for a games console. I know, its not just a games console any more. Its pretty much a media PC. But they still use the playstation name and they still market it primarily for games. So all people see is £400 games console. People that know different are people such as ourselves that hang around on the internets and the majority of us are clued up enough to know that a PC does most of those things, and we've already got one of those.

In all that I've failed to insert a sarky ultra obvious, panty bunching comment so I'll just call you a numpty instead.

 

Then they need to stop marketting it as a games console and more as a media center. They can start by changing the name and making the PLAYstation a system for gamers, which is what it originally was and was billed to be.

 

I think most people on the bottom line will agree that the PS3 (hardware wise) is good value for money - check the price of the 8800GTXs at the end of Tim's article today.

I also think that most people will agree that the current games console market has 3 pricing tiers and you pick the one you want (or can afford).

Wii on the lower end, based in game play.
360 in the middle for good graphics an a host of games at the moment.
The PS3 for the most power and a possible future of great games (I know, I know the 360 has a better GPU, but then there's the blueray... symantics really...)

The major point and what is ruffling the tails of people in Europe is that Sony are not treating each economic area fairly. The price to me is fine (although I'm personally not willing to spend that much on a console), but the price must be the same everywhere. The hardware is great, but again, this must be the same everywhere. Waiting awhile for a release is ok, but please make it the same everywhere. This way nobody feels as if they're being taken for a ride and judgements on whether the cost is worthwhile can be made later.



(and by the same everywhere... I understand the UK pays more and exchange rates etc. - I mean a reasonable difference. I also understand the difficulties in universal release dates - but make it weeks not months and all will be smiling)

 

We don't want it to just play games, we'd like to be able to download demos and stuff like the 360, but the BR player was unnecessary and doesn't improve it as a gaming console, all it does is make the console more expensive and gives Sony a way to use it's Playstation customers to push their BR format to victory.

 

Playstation 3 costs more money than a PC of equivalent performance. QED.

The only thing that's clever about it is the Blu-Ray drive, and you'd be insane to be suckered into buying before this preposterous HD video format squabble is over.

Oh, and the £45 games.

Phil

 

I think thats pushing it a little, but it's not too much more nowerdays to get a PC that's roughly the same power as a PS3. The only problem is a console can do a lot more with it's hardware than a PC can since a PS3 game is tailored for it's hardware, whereas a PC game has to to compatible with many different types. A console also doesn't have a massive OS running in the background.

 

In other news - Sony are scum.

 

Come on anyone who pays that much is a muppet but even so at least you can take it home and be sure it will run, not requires 3 patches, a new driver and what ever else it might take to get it running, most PS3 games are <£33 from a number of online stores.

I do agree that PC games are priced much better and over the course of ownership the PC could probably end up cheaper, if it wasn't for the fact you'd need an upgrade of some description in 12-18months just to support the latest game engines etc, it might just be true.

 

> A console also doesn't have a massive OS running in the background

I think you will find it most certainly does.

Phil

 

Double posted for some reason.

 

A friend of mine who I went to highschool with works for sony in their marketing department. anyone want me to kick him in the ass?