Sony US slags off rival consoles Comments by Ellie Gibson

@ bad09

Is the movie service a rental service or to own? Who in their right mind would DL a movie to own onto a console?

If it's just a rental service, I don't really see the need for a huge storage device. You can fit thousands of songs in only a few gig as well, so I don't see music as being a need for a huge storage device either. Plus, doesn't everyone already DL all of their music onto their consoles these days? I know tons of people do it with the 360, but that's also because you can play the music through any game. Not sure if you can do that with the PS3?

@ ronuds

You will be able to own or rent apparently.

"Is the movie service a rental service or to own? Who in their right mind would DL a movie to own onto a console?"

Well that's it isn't it? The Wii is a games console but 360 and PS3 are multi-media devices. I used my 360 for media (ah, poor HD DVD) and I am loving the PS3 media aspect with all my TV shows on there and I only watch movies on Sky or digital/DVD/Blu on PS3/PSP now.

Of course the DRM will be there (I very much doubt the movie industry will ever go down the DRM free route, there is too much greed and stupidity in the industry) but at least you will be able to copy to your PSP for a movie on the go.

(I'm hoping you will be able to download movies on to other machines like you can with the games)

I'm against DRM but having a home version and portable is just enough to make me think about using it and I'm sure that will be the case for many.

The PS3 is the perfect example of a product featuring superior technology and a sophisticated design creating an ideal all-in-one entertainment product."

yeah if it had some decent games bar mgs4

Maybe it's the fact that there are far more better game available for the 360? That's the burden on your wallet!

@ bad09

If you could somehow transfer your purchased movies from the PS3 to somewhere else, then I could see a use for owning it. If you can only buy a movie and then play it on your PS3 forever, or keep it on your PS3's HDD, then it's a bit of a waste. I want to be able to burn any movie I buy to DVD or at least watch it whenever or wherever I want, which a console doesn't really provide (unless, of course, you want to carry it around all over the place).

Hard to say how popular the movie service will be. I don't think XBLM was doing all that hot until NetFlix became part of the service. Since so many had NetFlix, using it through the 360 became an obvious choice. I wonder how many people have signed up for NetFlix through the 360 though? I wouldn't suspect many...

PS3 games and Blu-rays have set me back alot of dosh too, so he's only partially right.

silkworms eat mulberry leaves

Might have a point if anyone wanted a blue ray player (beyond the hardcore must own every new piece of tech crowd). Or if anyone didn't have access to a PC.

I actually want to buy a PS3, but with this kind of marketing (?) it's hard to make Sony a likeable brand.

"/Owns Playstation 3. Is happy. Smug even. "

owns all of them and wonders why anyone would be smug about owning a games console?

@ ronuds

I used to burn to DVD to when I had no PS3 but now I see no point as I'd only stick in the DVD in the PS anyway! :)

You're right it is hard to judge but I do think the ability to both rent or own movies and buy music (and transfer to your PSP with ease) will be a big boost for the George Forman if the price (and content) is right.

The whole point of what the interview was that he was saying for what you get for the Playstation 3 you have to buy as extras for the Xbox 360, so even the the Xbox 360 console is cheap, all of the extras add up.

Xbox 360 Elite (120gb) - £169.99
Wireless Adapter - £60
Quick Charge Kit - £19.99 (+ £9.99 for additional battery packs depending on amount of controllers)
Xbox Live Gold - £40 (Annual)

Total = £289.98 (+ $40 per year)

Playstation 3 60gb - £300 (discontinued I know but for comparison purposes)
Everything else available for the Xbox 360 is included

Similar prices, saying how cheap the Xbox 360 console is.
You could also include the price of a Blu-ray player as well, if you wanted everything that the PS3 has available to it for the Xbox 360

Thank you Sony for clearing this up .... we (consumers/gamers) are a dumb constituency after all! Had Sony clearly made this statment at launch we would have not wasted cash on MS's and Nintendo's console.

Phew - that's settled then!

Xerx3s, napkins are unhygienic. i'll stick with tissues if it's all the same with you. ;o)

re sony and dreamcast. oh put a sock in it. you guys who can't let go of the "lies" that destroyed the dreamcast are an incredibly boring bunch. you'd think that if sega can move on with it then so can the rest of us, but no it's always with the lies that sony told. well you know what? dreamcast was a quality gaming console hampered by the lack of third party support and an indulgence in online few were ready for. and ultimately ps2 was soo much more capable than dreamcast. god of war pissed over anything thing dreamcast could muster. i love the dreamcast, i have two bloody versions and an extensive collection of games for it for gods sake but get over it. honestly you ex sega fans masquerading as 360 loyalists are like a broken record (and we all know there's more of you than you'll admit). learn to let it go.

Yeah, I know what you mean entirely, and probably a lot of people made that choice also, because of the Games Catalogue available.

All the prices were taken from Amazon before the price cuts, so it will vary.

I wonder why you never hear this kind of shit-talking from Sony's other hardware devisions. I mean, they never go on about how "Panasonic's HDTVs are a burden on your wallet." Or how "the Aiwa Stereo's lack of enhanced features comes at the expense of a comprehensive entertainment solution"

"I would argue that this enables the consumer to choose the quality of their cable, perhaps based on the quality of their TV."

More than likely based on how stupid they are. Monster cable with gold plated connectors and oxidised snake oil should suffice.

Great. Now I really can't decide which console to get!

*hugs PS2 tighter*

I really don't understand comments like "this sort of marketing talk makes me love my 360 even more" etc. Microsoft say the same sort of thing with even more regularity, surely. They're at least as bad as each other.

Some ones desprate

I don't even own a PS3 but Sony make valid points. I am even sold. This'll be joining me 360 and Wii soon enough.

It's all true, but the ps3 is just balls.

@Rash'

"re sony and dreamcast. oh put a sock in it. you guys who can't let go of the "lies" that destroyed the dreamcast are an incredibly boring bunch. you'd think that if sega can move on with it then so can the rest of us"

So essentially what you're saying is that people should pretend that Sony didn't/don't lie and become Sony apologists like yourself? Sounds like a plan... If you like being a blinkered fanboy, that is.

I don't mind some having some fun at Sony's expense. Most public relations releases deserve nothing less.

Fact is, though, Sony is right. At least in the U.S.

Comparing the lowest price points of the two consoles:

Xbox 360 Arcade $199
Wireless Network Adaptor $99
Hard Drive $100-150
Xbox Live subscription $50 (annual)
Total cost: $438 (plus $50 each additional year)

Sony PS3 60GB $399

Of course, not all who buy the Xbox 360 want or need wireless networking or a hard drive. Sony is correct in that they are comparing 'apples to apples'. Problem is that some would rather have an orange.

This also assumes that PS3's online has the same value as Xbox Live. I don't think it's too fanboy-ish to say that some might question this.

expect the competition to continue peddling add-ons in an effort to keep up with the Jones

I'm not going to make a comment about lack of rumble in controllers. That's just kicking the dog when it's already down.

Gradius, no i think my post is quite clear. it's boring and deluded to suggest sony are to blame for dreamcast's demise. it's a romantic notion it was sony's fault. truth is it was mismanagement that cost sega. so please let it go. and that's coming from an ex sega fan.

retibra, excellent post. it's the hypocrisy of "gamers". it never ceases to amaze me how many spout ms's propaganda without any thought of their own.

wireless is to expensive, but for the rest i think it's good value for the money the xbox costs.
would be funny if microsoft made gold free this Christmas and put a wireless adapter in the new revision.
but Sony does have a point with the add ons.
comparing the wii is just not fair... it's a totally different product.

While this level of jackassery is pretty irritating regardless of which of the companies it comes from, it's nothing compared to the days of the third/fourth generation consoles. At least they're not devoting multi-thousand-pound TV ads to slagging each other off yet. What is it that Nintendon't do again?

Incidentally, to get wireless on a 360 you don't have to invest in Microsoft's adaptor - there are plenty of other, non-Microsoft devices fit-for-purpose that cost less. As my 360 is a mere two feet away from my router though it's not much of an issue for me.

@retibra
"Look, let's be honest here. Regardless of whether you think the 360 is a better console than the PS3 or not, you absolutely cannot deny that MS are price-gouging bastards when it comes to the price of the add-ons! I mean come on, do you honestly think that the prices they charge for hard-drives and network adapters represent value for money?

Call Sony cheap cunts for pointing out the ridiculous RRP's that MS set, but they aren't making this shit up.

Same deal with the price of Live subscriptions. Noone's arguing that it offers a better service than PSN, but quite honestly what do you expect when its been running since 2002. PSN's only been around since November 2006 and unsuprisingly its nowhere near as mature a service. Point is, MS are asking £50 a year - that isn't cheap.

And let's be honest, you don't pay for a Gold sub the actual value of Live as a service is severely reduced.

The 360 does have a lot of additional costs - albeit optionally- on top of the basic hardware price. It's a fact.

What never ceases to amaze me is that so many people are apparently so hyper aware of every shortcoming and fuckup Sony commits yet they seem unwilling to recognize MS many dubious decisions.

If you hate Sony and the PS3, fine. But would someone please explain to me why you are letting MS off scot-free with what they are doing? Wouldn't it be more productive to give the people who's services you are (apparently) most likely to be using a bit of a kicking every now and then to stop them taking the piss?"

Personally, I think all these "my dad is bigger than yours, so there" stories are a bit pathetic regardless of where they come from, but I am hugely amused at the eternal vigilance of the various faction fanboys, so swift to point shaking fingers at these articles and excitedly shout "A-HA!" whenever they think they're getting some piss-poor ammunition for their misguided causes. (Not talking about you there, BTW). Neither MS, Nintendo nor Sony have any real interest in anything but our money and people should remember that.

There are a lot of costly optional add-ons as you rightly said however I think that they are very optional, the only add-on I've bought for my 360 (Elite, mind you so I got better peripherals/cables out-of-box) is a play and charge cable/battery for about €15. And Live Gold, which I've since cancelled: I can only assume some sort of oxygen deprivation in my brain caused me to even momentarily be willing to pay to play games online when I have a perfectly good PC for such things.

But yes, things like MS expecting people to pay to play games online (which I imagine hurts their service and game sales more than they would be willing to admit) or not including a wireless internet adapter as standard are stupid and greedy: it would have cost a few extra quid to install one in each console and the price of their external adapters is ridiculous. But we all know that the 360 is cheaply manufactured and breaks if you use harsh language in the same room and I believe the vast majority of 360 owners more tolerate those faults because it has good games than they celebrate it as a great deal from a sturdy, complete hardware point of view.

I'm still kicking myself for missing the start of the half-price sale in the nearest toy-store to me. A half price PS3 would be damn good value. The PS3 does offer good value in terms of "completeness" if you're looking for a "total entertainment solution" or whatever but is still seriously overpriced when all you want is a games console.

I like playing games, doesn't matter which machine they're on. I don't care if they're black or white, or if they're pink (actually that might bother me a bit).

I bought an Xbox 360 for a couple of reasons; it came out when I wanted a new system, and it's as cheap as chips. I'd go as far to say that 80% of people buy an Arcade unit and DON'T go on to buy further peripherals. I buy a games machine to play games on, not watch movies, or listen to music (I only did it once to see the visualiser).

I WILL also be buying a PS3, but NOT while it costs £300, because I'll only use it for games and I can’t justify spending that kind of money on a games machine.

The question I have for Sony is: why makes consumers pay for technology that the consumers themselves don't want bundled with their system and costs everyone (including Sony) more money to manufacture and then buy??

Why buy a bus when you only need a taxi?

"As PS3 continues to evolve without the need for additional parts or expenses, expect the competition to continue peddling add-ons in an effort to keep up with the Jones' This is so stupid, the kind of thing only the brainless insecure fanboys lap up. Anybody with an once of intelligence behind them knows that the 360 doesnt "need" any additional addons in order to play... its a CHOICE offered..if you want blueray, wifi, anyway then yes the ps3 is better value for money...but the majority of people want a games consoles for games..and you dont need anything extra in order to do that other than the TV you hook the thing up to. Which is why the 360 can be sold at a price lower than the wii and make a profit, and the ps3 is still over twice the cost and losing money with each console sale. its twice the cost because you ARE actually paying for these "additional addons" in the box .

I also like the fact that in their report they were comparing the launch core systems..and stating a lack of HDMI port because of that.. yet they failed to make any mention of the ps3's £600 introductory price..remember that? or fail to mention the optional extra's you then "need" in order to play a ps3..such as lead to allow HD gaming, mic, rumble equiped control pad..all things inside a current £99 arcade system (£99 at sainsburys btw).

But yes, i agree £299 for those "free" additional extra's is a better deal

"so being critical of MS pricing for these "optional" extras is I think completely fair."

I think it’s wrong to suggest that the competitions’ methods of selling more consoles is flawed when it’s one of the very reasons the competition has managed to sell more machines.

Sony is looking at the errors they have made - added blu-ray with every machine, adding the PS2 chip (which they have since changed), both which must add to a fairly substantial amount of $s to the manufacturing price – and are trying to say that it’s the competition that’s made the mistake by not adding them (even though MS and N are making more $s as a result). Frankly I find it a little absurd.

Oh and I want a PS3, just when it comes down in price.

exactly.. you might as well say you've got to pay £90 extra for a ps2 to get backwards compatability on their "introduction" 40gig system.

You can get the 60gig 360 for £160 with 2 new releases for the past 4months at Game. The 40gig ps3 is still atleast £100 up on that standalone. For that extra £100 you get a blueray player, and wifi.. which is little help if you dont want a blue ray player, or dont want to pay the then additional price of a router to make use of the wifi.

Don't get me wrong I love my PS3 ...

... but ...

... he's blowing his own trumpet a bit there considering Sony removed the 2 USB ports, Cut the HDD to 40GB and ripped out the memory card reader, packed it without a HDMI cable oh and yeah thanks for making the Dualshock pad the standard, oh no you didn't did you I forgot I had to buy one (along with a HDMI cable, bigger hard drive, USB exstension, eye camera, extra fans, stand, another vibraty-shaky gamepad, beanbag with speaker in, headphones (live with bird), Full HD 40" TV so it looks better etc.)!

Okay so I got a bit carried away but you see my point!

It's hardly unfair to criticise the cost of the extras you'd need to get the best out of the 360 Arcade when Microsoft are telling consumers that you don't need them.

Don't get why people are still going on about the lack of rumble in the Sixaxis pad and having to replace it with a Dualshock 3. So what? How can that possibly be as bad as Microsoft releasing the Xbox 360 to the public while it was riddled with flaws? The lack of rumble was a stupid decision on Sony's part, but releasing a machine as badly broken as the 360 was borders on contempt for your customers.

people are going on about the lack of rumble pad because its a ludicous as saying you NEED that optional extra, as it is saying you NEED wifi as an optional extra.

"However, when you take a look at the feature offerings side by side, there is only one true winner in delivering total value and price."

This quote is awesome. PS3 does indeed win in delivering total "price".

@evilfoxhound hang on I see your point about the cost of buying a 120GB HDD(this is a laptop style HDD though and proprietary; its always more expensive that way unless you can give me examples from Sony or Nintendo to the contrary?) and an a official HDMI(the cheapest Ive seen it going for is about 30 quid, its about 40-50 in other places cant see how they justify that either)...

But if you could be bothered finding decent prices on the extras you bought(really who else pays £45 for a gold membership on Eurogamer?) then you would have been better off getting an Elite which still looks good value next to the PS3.

Thats just leaves the wireless arguement which is how much? Another £40-50?
I dont need Wi-Fi for gaming but recently since Ive learned how to install XBMC on my classic Xbox; I bought a second one for downstairs... my router was already ready for wireless so I just got a refurbished wireless bridge for about £8+delivery(about £15 all together), which means now I can stream my media wirelessly(wired would have been even better but takes more effort and its not my house). As a bonus when I do get a 360 I can connect to live downstairs too.

SCHLAAAAGZ!

"buy toilet roll made from the silk of worms fed on liquid gold and unicorn meat. "

Wow, what do you think sony is smoking?

But I don't wan't a blu ray player, sony. I dont' want an "entertainment centre". I want a games console. Don't try and make it sound like you're the better deal because you included crap that I didn't want.

"And, presumably, expect the competition to continue making enough money from those add-ons to buy toilet roll made from the silk of worms fed on liquid gold and unicorn meat. " - lol! :D

"Sony have admitted in the past they didnt include a HD cable because other companies can produce them far cheaper with the exact same quality."

Kinda like Blu-ray players?