PS3 Under $400 in Japan?

[Kb-smoker]

In the past months, the Japanese blog CoolGamer has been a dependable source of early information regarding the Japanese game market. Not once has their news turned out to be a false lead, so that's why it was pretty important today when the site updated with a small notice saying "PS3 price set below 40000 Yen," which is about $400 at current exchange rates.

In the update, the blogger writes, "In the latest Famitsu, a very important person mentioned that the PS3 price would not be over 40000yen". This information correlates to a previous comment from a Sony rep a few months back, who mentioned the same price. With any luck this will turn out to be the case, and Japan will see the PS3 in the spring of 2006 for slightly under $400.

One thing to note though is that the PS2 was also released in Japan for a bit under 40000 yen, but when it came to the U.S. it was sold for a hundred dollars less at $299. It's not out of the question that same sort of pricing scheme will be employed this time as well.

Sound like good news to me...

link (http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3145024)

[WolfWooD]

Thats great news. Great find.

[xbdestroya]

Well, as gets mentioned every now and then, there has been that 40,000 yen quote out for a while now - given by an *official* at one of Sony's investor meetings. Of course that doesn't mean it's a number they will/would stick by.

Now, CoolGamer (the blog) is there quoting Famitsu. So what we need to know is who the important person Famitsu is quoting is. If it's just a rehash of the investors meeting quote (afterall that was one of the SCE crew - thus important), that doesn't help us, but if it's a new quote reaffirming that price, that could be some good confirmation!

[Handycrap101]

Seems legit to me...It was stated that the source was NEVER wrong and everything that has been said and speculated is becoming true.

On a side note...Kb-smoker is becomeing one of the better users on this board... great stuff man, keep it up!

[Black Dragon37]

This isn't surprising.

And I second the Kb-smoker comment. :)

[cpiasminc]

At the same time, what does that mean outside Japan? Microsoft, for instance, has pretty well said that they're selling the 360 for ~$50 less in Japan than they are in the US.

[xbdestroya]

Seems legit to me...It was stated that the source was NEVER wrong and everything that has been said and speculated is becoming true.

On a side note...Kb-smoker is becomeing one of the better users on this board... great stuff man, keep it up!


Yeah but you have to read - and analyse - the whole thing. The blogger is 'never wrong,' but all the blogger is doing in this instance is quoting Famitsu. So, now we need to know whether Famitsu is right or wrong. I swear some of you people are too easy to please! http://community.the-underdogs.org/smiley/happy/icon_razz.gif

[Saibo]

PS3 price = 299 USD, i been saying that for awhile now. I'll stick to it :)

[tazz3]

I also agrre with saibo it will be PS3 WILL BE 299.

[xbdestroya]

Well that undercuts my $349 theory there Saibo, so I certainly hope you're the one that's right! http://community.the-underdogs.org/smiley/happy/cool4.gif

Though honestly I'd be happy with either. In fact, I'm mentally ready now to pay up to $400 or thereabouts, I guess thanks to MS' 'full' 360 launch price.

[Sendok]

i've been expecting $349.99 ever since MS went at the $399.99 price (US).

[Handycrap101]

Yeah but you have to read - and analyse - the whole thing. The blogger is 'never wrong,' but all the blogger is doing in this instance is quoting Famitsu. So, now we need to know whether Famitsu is right or wrong. I swear some of you people are too easy to please! http://community.the-underdogs.org/smiley/happy/icon_razz.gif

HEY HEY HEY!! I'm just taking exciting news and taking anyting I can and hoping for the best...

[Domination]

PS3 price = 299 USD, i been saying that for awhile now. I'll stick to it :)


I see a $350 retail tag before a $300 tag. For one, Sony is packing more into the console this time. Therefore, it may not be safe for them to launch all the major territories at such a small cost and expect to establish profits on time like this gen due to them having much more to work with this time around. I may have to elaborate on that. I am expecting a strategy that will get them as close to profitability, or rather in a safer zone, as possible but without completely alieanating the consumer while still remaining competitive with everyone else.

With a $400 tag as final, Microsoft or Nintendo could easily drive a better bargain since they have platforms at a much more affortable price ($300 or less) for the average consumer.

[Danji]

I think we can all agree that $400 won't be happening over here due to them wanting to underprice the 360. If they were to do this the result would be immense. More powerful hardware, Blu-ray playability, plus a lower price? I think that'd turn heads.

[Helios]

At the same time, what does that mean outside Japan? Microsoft, for instance, has pretty well said that they're selling the 360 for ~$50 less in Japan than they are in the US.

That comparison doesnt realy work. I could be wrong but the way I see it Microsoft is selling the 360 for less in Japan to get people to buy it, lets not forget Japan is basically in Sony's back pocket. So while even though its releasing first and a reduced price point they're still going to have to work pretty hard to steer sales their way.

What that means outside Japan is kind of how they've always done it which is similar to the way MS operates inside Japan. Reduced prices and the such, just not to the same degree because Sony carriers quite a bit more weight in the gaming world than MS does. Point being they dont really have to "win over" customers.

[Saibo]

I see a $350 retail tag before a $300 tag. For one, Sony is packing more into the console this time. Therefore, it may not be safe for them to launch all the major territories at such a small cost and expect to establish profits on time like this gen due to them having much more to work with this time around. I may have to elaborate on that. I am expecting a strategy that will get them as close to profitability, or rather in a safer zone, as possible but without completely alieanating the consumer while still remaining competitive with everyone else.

With a $400 tag as final, Microsoft or Nintendo could easily drive a better bargain since they have platforms at a much more affortable price ($300 or less) for the average consumer.

They arent really packing more into the PS3, say compared to the PS2 for its time. DVD was expensive when the PS2 was introduce also, now we have the trend continueing with Blu-Ray. We still have a GPU and a CPU. the only thing, that might increase the cost of the PS3, might be the introduction of a harddrive as standard(no one knows if it well be standardized or not, but it seem it well become a standard(40 GB HDD)). But for now, and until officail price are announce, i'll stick with my crazy 299 theory.

Ken, mention something along the lines, of having new technology doesnt always mean, more expensive with regards to each generation of a console(in a old PS3 inteview). After that he mentions, that the PS3 will be expensive and does into detail about working for a PS3,etc. Its good salesmen tactic. tell the consumer its expensive and shock them with a lower price. Hence why im sprung on the 299 USD price tag theory.

Mark my words, PS3 will be 299 USD + sale tax in the USA.

[rpgamer_2k5]

As I said before, it's going to be $299. The difference between Blu-Ray and DVD (2000) is that the latter has underwent some huge price cuts to compete with HD-DVD. We should expect the unit price of the Blu-Ray drive to be even lower than the DVD counterpart on the launch PS2s.

The Cell is certainly not going to be more pricey than the Emotion Engine, if anything, it's going to be cheaper. The PPEs should not be a problem to manufacture and the SPEs are designed to be very affordable to manufacture. Sony's Nagasaki Fab2, Oita fab (JV), and Fishkill are going to manufacture Cells for a vast market, hence cutting the rate significantly.

Last but not least, the RSX is a mass produced GPU--it's jointly developed between Sony and Nvidia and will be manufactured by Sony. Nvidia isn't going to get much royalties from the RSX and this will allow Sony to sell the RSX at a lower rate.

$299.99 US :)

I wouldn't be surprised if the PS3 is much more cheaper to manufacture than the Xbox 360. Like what the hell, Microsoft is not manufacturing any of the significant components in house; they have purchased the full IP for XeCPU and Xenos. In other words, they are being charged big money to be recieve the design. Those non-MS fabs are certainly not going to manufacture the components at a cost lower than the Sony counterpart. It's just impossible!

$299.99 :)

[CrumCon]

There are so many aspect Sony is going to make PS3 cheaper then we though it would be.

1 - To battle the early Xbox which already has plenty of userbase when PS3 arrives
2 - To make Blu-Ray format to be the winner as DVD successor, AND PS3 as the cheapest blu-ray player out there.. or better says it would be the cheapest DVD successor player out there

and 3rd.. to kick some ass and to be the successor of console king like its ancestors

[Black Dragon37]

The PS3 isn't about holding #1 in videogames, at least I don't think so anymore. It's about Sony making a comback. Blu-ray is thier coveted ticket back into the living rooms of Japan and America, and that's all their betting on right now. I wouldn't be surprised to see them take one final hit, as a PS3 for anywhere between $299 and $399 is going to take the market by storm and solidify the success of Blu-ray.

[Domination]

They arent really packing more into the PS3, say compared to the PS2 for its time. DVD was expensive when the PS2 was introduce also, now we have the trend continueing with Blu-Ray. We still have a GPU and a CPU. the only thing, that might increase the cost of the PS3, might be the introduction of a harddrive as standard(no one knows if it well be standardized or not, but it seem it well become a standard(40 GB HDD)). But for now, and until officail price are announce, i'll stick with my crazy 299 theory.

Ken, mention something along the lines, of having new technology doesnt always mean, more expensive with regards to each generation of a console(in a old PS3 inteview). After that he mentions, that the PS3 will be expensive and does into detail about working for a PS3,etc. Its good salesmen tactic. tell the consumer its expensive and shock them with a lower price. Hence why im sprung on the 299 USD price tag theory.

Mark my words, PS3 will be 299 USD + sale tax in the USA.

Things like Cell, RSX, online, Blu Ray, backwards compatibility, etc. are things we saw in the first console. But an added number of controller ports or possible Tivo capability, which Ken is thinking about adding, meaning not for certain yet, are things that the last consoles didn't have. As I said before, even if it didn't add too much extra cost to the console, we are still talking about remaining in a safe position. Think of it in terms of Sony bundling a stand with every PS2 console.

If you are correct, however, that will only exceed my expectations. ;-]

[xbdestroya]

HEY HEY HEY!! I'm just taking exciting news and taking anyting I can and hoping for the best...

I know Handycrap - I was just kidding around. http://community.the-underdogs.org/smiley/happy/smile2.gif

I don't think the console will be over $400 either, as I've mentioned. In fact except for the blu-ray drive, I imagine Sony has the other costs fairly under control.

Some points of reference with PS3's costs overall:

Back in PS2 launch days, the EE was 240MM^2 and the GS was 279mm^2. Plus, those were both on an immature cutting-edge process with terrible yields.

In contrast, Sony will be launching Cell and RSX on a very mature 90nm process, with a Cell chip that not only is the same die-size as the old EE, but will be on 300mm wafers and able to withstand some level of on-die defects.

RSX, though we don't have an exact die-size, is on the same mature 90nm process. If we scale from the GTX's 334mm^2 die size down to 90nm, RSX should actually be smaller than the original GS (assuming again a straight 'port'). Not only smaller, but perhaps also with some 'redundancy' a la Cell - per Kutaragi.

So right now RSX and Cell are looking to me a fair deal cheaper for Sony to produce than their EE and GS analogues were back in the day.

[Darkon]

I doubt cell will be 90nm Sony already should have 65nm process ready heck even Intel already has it ready and last time i checked Sony and Toshiba were far ahead of Intel

Speaking of Intel I got a Celeron M running @ 2,3 Ghz on just a heatsink :)

[xbdestroya]

Well, Sony announced they would launch Cell at 90nm to avoid the yield problems that plaued hem back in the day, so I have no reason not to take them at their word. They could possibly surprise us all and go 65nm, but the truth is if they want to produce enough chips to launch in Spring of 2006, they'd have to have that process ready to go basically now. I wouldn't be surprised if they got to 65nm by the end of 2006, but I just don't think they're going to be launching there.

Congratulations on the 'M' though. http://community.the-underdogs.org/smiley/happy/smile2.gif

[Z]

they will, as officially stated, go with 90nm to avoid delays. but that doesn't mean they can't use 45nm as soon as possible. they can use it without changing much of PS3's internal design. the outer design will be left intact. they don't have to re-design or shrink it just because they are using a smaller die. if you remember, PS2 used a smaller die without changing the original design much. they will leave a new smaller desing for a future marketing boost.