Wii's Momentum To Last Until Ps3 is Under $300?

[sremick]

funnt those links you posted are not the same CELL that is in the ps3

Actually, it is. Both use a Cell Broadband Engine (aka "Cell BE" aka "CBE") CPU. Both happen to run at 3.2GHz even. Maybe there's a slight iteration difference, but that's not what you claimed. You claimed: "the cell is only in the ps3 so its not massed produced". That's akin to claiming the Celeron M is only used in the Asus EEE PC... when actually many other things use the Celeron M. Even if they are different GHz (the one in the EEE is 900MHz) or editions, they are all "Celeron M" CPUs. Likewise, the Cell BE CPU is used in many things other than the PS3.

At the moment, there only seems to be a single 3.2GHz CBE in production, although implementors (like Sony) are free to program the 8 SPEs on the die as they see fit.

If you are so convinced that the PS3 has some other processor other than the 3.2GHz CBE, please show us evidence.

OWNEd!! FAILZ!!

Umm, ok.

 

[ls1foxbody]

if you think the cell in the ps3 is the same that is in those blades you must be crazzy.and how come your not refuting the other things i said i.e. 90 to 65nm = smaller = less power = cheaper...not because OMG IBM has put the cell in there server blades so all the sudden ps3 costs are cut in half..lmao thats a joke.

 

[sremick]

if you think the cell in the ps3 is the same that is in those blades you must be crazzy.

Yes, that's what I'm saying. I've shown evidence to prove it. What exactly do you have that suggests otherwise, besides your feelings?

and how come your not refuting the other things i said i.e. 90 to 65nm = smaller = less power = cheaper

Because I don't disagree with that. But that had nothing to do with what I was specifically talking about. You claimed nothing used a Cell CPU but the PS3 and that they weren't being "mass-produced". I showed you that other things have been using it since at least 2006. Besides going off on an immature emotional tirade, you have neither shown contrary evidence nor simply admitted your mistake.

not because OMG IBM has put the cell in there server blades so all the sudden ps3 costs are cut in half..lmao thats a joke.

Well, when did I say that? I wasn't referring to the cost-impact on the PS3 at all. Sony has their own special issues in that regard. Again, I was taking issue strictly with your incorrect statement that nothing used the Cell CPU except the PS3 and that they aren't being "mass produced". If you want to continue to argue other points with other people, fine... but you'd do well to accept you're wrong on this specific point and move on.

 

[ls1foxbody]

ok im not gonna type all night but basically r&d covers testing process before production to catch any flaws,so as they wont have to change **** around and spend more money,second the plastic injection tools along with the robots,machines whatever else you want to call them are the same as the 1's from ps2 and other ce devices.they dont buy new **** every couple years they be stupid.only thing new is the molds for the plastic.i dont get how you think for every ce device they create they have to buy all new stuff,that would be a waste and insane .sorry

 

[masterjedi]

Here's what it boils down to for me.

The PS3 is simply too expensive. i understand that it's really a good deal for a Blu-ray player, and I understand that the graphics are amazing, and that the amount of information you can put into games is astounding, but none of that matters because the system costs too much. As soon as I heard that the PS3 was going to cost $600, I scratched it from my list. Add the fact that there haven't been a lot of games that I consider "must-haves" and there was no way I was buying a PS3.

The 360 is a nice machine, but was also a little pricey when it launched. Then came the "red ring of death" syndrome and the 360 became an even more unpopular choice. I have three different friends who each had to replace their 360s at least once. One guy had to replace his twice. When Microsoft had to allocate over a billion dollars to fund replacement 360s, that was a huge red flag for me. And again, there weren't enough "must have" games on the system for me to justify taking the risk of buying it and then having it break.

The Wii was perfectly priced. At $250 and a packed in game, it gave me the best bang for my buck when it launched. The control scheme wasn't really a selling point for me. I was curious to see if it worked, but at the time I didn't really have any ideas about how motion control would immerse me in my games more than standard controllers would. None of the launch games were "must haves" for me, but at $250, it didn't really matter. I figured I could find something in there that I liked. It all came down to price.

Now that we're a full year into the "war" things have taken a definite shape. I think the Wii's momentum lasts until early next year. You only need 4-5 good/great games to get you through a year. For the consumer, that's a new game every 2-3 months which is plenty if you're an average gamer. Even your "hardcore" gamer isn't going to go buy two or three games in the same week that Halo 3 comes out because they're going to want to devote all their game time to Halo 3. Now if you look at the game lineup for the Wii this year, they've almost got those 4-5 games ready to go:

Mario Kart Wii
Wii Fit
Super Smash Brothers Brawl

All they need is for one or two more games that get released on their system this year to get good reviews or word of mouth, and their momentum for the duration of the year is saved. It won't matter if the PS3 and the 360 get their 4-5 titles as well, because they're still going to be playing catch-up. I believe the only way the Wii loses momentum is if they fail to produce 4-5 good/great titles per year or both the PS3 and the 360 lower their prices to either match or beat the price of the Wii.

 

[wezeles]

ok im not gonna type all night but basically r&d covers testing process before production to catch any flaws,so as they wont have to change **** around and spend more money,second the plastic injection tools along with the robots,machines whatever else you want to call them are the same as the 1's from ps2 and other ce devices.they dont buy new **** every couple years they be stupid.only thing new is the molds for the plastic.i dont get how you think for every ce device they create they have to buy all new stuff,that would be a waste and insane .sorry

i metioned machines... not that they went buying all new machines but as part of the cost. even if they didnt purchase any new machines to make this Gen, which i doubt they atleast have one or 2 new machines leased or purchased... they probably are paying someone else to acctually make the plastic parts anyways,and with that they have to lease the time on the machines plus the cost of parts alone... When it comes to the plastic end you charge not only what it cost to make the part but the time it takes to make it... sure they could be using the same injection machines as before, but then again they are still making ps2's so obviously they didnt just pull out the ps2 molds and toss in the ps3 molds... Thats just the plastic end, in that alont they still had to toss up millions of dollars just for plastic tool design,blueprint,prototype, and finnal build...

Then they had to do the same thing on the elctronics end to design build and assemble boards... This is all intial cost

one chip costing 35 bucks instead of 55 bucks isn't going to save them enough money to make a dent... its just a small boost outta the deep red they are in.. obviously with the close to 10 million units sold they are now getting into the area where they are paying off the initial cost, finding cheeper manufacturing methods... still selling them at the current price and making 0-100 dollar profit without a price drop to 300 dollars would let them break even at the end of 2009 keeping with current trends...

Sony has to decide weather doing a price drop, and again taking a loss on consoles in the hope of increased future game sales is the right move... honestly at a buisness standpoint i dont see eaither move to be "great one", your still loosing money to try to risk make future money...

Back on topic though Will the price drop help them?

 

[masterjedi]

I think the price drop helps the PS3 move more consoles, but it doesn't help them move more games because the games are still going to cost $60-$70 and that has proven to be a show stopper for consumers.

 

[Caliko]

I believe the only way the Wii loses momentum is if they fail to produce 4-5 good/great titles per year or both the PS3 and the 360 lower their prices to either match or beat the price of the Wii.

By the time this happens, Nintendo will be able to play the same card and possibly lower the price of the Wii to $159.99... or even as low as $129.99. So Nintendo will always have a price advantage.

 

[romj]

The more I look at the thread title the more crappy it sounds. It implies that the wii is a cheap, inferior product and the ONLY reason people bought it is cuz of the PRICE and that the PS3, which is a superior systen, was lower in price, than people woulda bought that instead, and if the price is lowered enough, people will just suddenly drop the wii and flock out to buy a PS3, because everyone and their relatives know it's a superior system.

What I wonder is, why? Why can't they BOTH be succesfull? Why does one have to beat out the other?

A lot of gamers are multiconsole owners. I think this number will rise, once the PS3 drops lower in price more. And also, many people will be able to get one, who couldn't before, which can only be a good thing for us all.

 

[masterjedi]

We're not saying the Wii has only enjoyed success because of it's price. We're saying that price has been a big factor in that success. Typically for people like me. When I first heard about the new new systems, I was equally excited for all three. However, I assumed I would definately be purchasing a PS3 because I had a PS2 and was very satisfied it. Common sense would dictate that the PS3 would have to be better than it's predecessor so it was on my "buy" list before I even know what capabitlities it had. However, as soon as I learned about the $600 price tag, I removed it from my "buy" list without a second thought. That left me with the Wii and the 360 and I ultimately chose the Wii because it was the cheapest. As the year has gone on, I've found that I really do enjoy the Wii and a lot of the games it has to offer so it turned out to be a good investment for me. I'm sure there are many other buyers out there who used the same decision making process when deciding which new game console they were going to buy as well.

And as for those who keep wondering "why can't they both be successful," that's like asking a Star Wars fan why they don't like both trilogies equally. Everyone has their own preference. Even though I love all 6 Star Wars movies, nothing is going to make me like Episode IV better than Episode III. It's the same with game consoles.

 

[romj]

We're not saying the Wii has only enjoyed success because of it's price. We're saying that price has been a big factor in that success. Typically for people like me. When I first heard about the new new systems, I was equally excited for all three. However, I assumed I would definately be purchasing a PS3 because I had a PS2 and was very satisfied it. Common sense would dictate that the PS3 would have to be better than it's predecessor so it was on my "buy" list before I even know what capabitlities it had. However, as soon as I learned about the $600 price tag, I removed it from my "buy" list without a second thought. That left me with the Wii and the 360 and I ultimately chose the Wii because it was the cheapest. As the year has gone on, I've found that I really do enjoy the Wii and a lot of the games it has to offer so it turned out to be a good investment for me. I'm sure there are many other buyers out there who used the same decision making process when deciding which new game console they were going to buy as well.

And as for those who keep wondering "why can't they both be successful," that's like asking a Star Wars fan why they don't like both trilogies equally. Everyone has their own preference. Even though I love all 6 Star Wars movies, nothing is going to make me like Episode IV better than Episode III. It's the same with game consoles.

Understood. What I'm addressing here is not just personal preferences but the virulent hostility towards the wii and its owners. Those who actualy want and wish it to fail.

Of course Price is a factor in many buying descisions and people prefer one thing over another. Yes I have preferences, but I do not want the less prefered thing to crash and burn. And yes, price was a facter in my deciding to get a wii, but I also got it because I was fascinated by the new way to play game it represents and I enjoy Nintendo games, and I'm sure that there are many others that did the same.

 

[wezeles]

To the casual gamer price is very important... and people arnt just buying the Wii because its one of the cheepest, its also because of the new gameplay associated with it.And if they liked graphics more most have gone with a 360 because of price and it being pretty much equal to a PS3 graphically.

The fact is no matter how much Sony drops MS and Nintendo could match it and still not run into the red like Sony.

I think the 300-400 price range would scoop them up some sales but they would still have to show the people what they get for the money.

Yesterday i saw a glimps of Home included into a PS3 add without mention of what it acctually was. Home is awsome! They need to show it off alot more. Just the Sims fanatics alone would love the idea of there online console revolving around a Sim like atmosphere.

And i dont want them to rush it or anything but this is whats holding me off to buying the PS3, is the NEW eye toy
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwwbkzEACws[/media]
once this finnaly comes out they will have a reason to ask for the spare cash.



right now you pay 250 for the Wii because of new style gameplay,VC library,Mii's.

you pay 275-400 for a 360 because of superior graphics and the best online capabilities.

the PS3 you pay 400-500 and so far the graphics are the same level as 360 "they arn't filling up Blu-ray disk to make games" So the only differance is they offer an unneeded Blu-ray player and Home.

Maybe once they toss in the eye toy, depending how many "good games" they offer for it, it will be like haveing a bit of both worlds for acctually less compared to buying a Wii-360.

untill then i personally dont think any price drop,exclusive game "unless its a crazy Sony sponsored blu-ray packed game lol" or all around "old gen" way of getting better sales is gonna help them. The hardcore already have chosen and purchased,now its the casual gamers they all have to fight for... It takes more than a list of technical data to get that sale!

 

[wezeles]

please dont post links to the plain old play station 3 webcam eaither..... thats not the HD eye toy The new Eye toy is supose to hit the USA and Europe this summer.