Wtf was Sony thinking releasing the PS3 at $600 in 2006?

Giving you a great value

>backwards compatibility with two generations (thousands of games each)
>supports an insane amount of formats including the new blu ray and super audio CD
>everything in one box with wifi support
>architecture that forced developers to actually read a manual for once
the estimated price was like $800+
not only did they sell it at loss but the also made it $299 barely two years after launch
fast forward 15+ years later and gamers are still crying at the lack of hardware backwards compatibility

>>712438408
>>backwards compatibility with two generations (thousands of games each)
>>supports an insane amount of formats including the new blu ray and super audio CD
>>everything in one box with wifi support
>>architecture that forced developers to actually read a manual for once
>the estimated price was like $800+
>not only did they sell it at loss but the also made it $299 barely two years after launch
>fast forward 15+ years later and gamers are still crying at the lack of hardware backwards compatibility
what did we learn?

>>712438663
that most normie ""gamers"" are whiny broke bitches that want the cheapest plastic box to play their coda and fifa with zero foresight of the consequences of their actions and demands
which is also partially the reason why live service slop will never die

>>712438408
>Supports formats
Liar.
PS4 &5 only supports MP4 aac and Webm vp9 video, and MP3, wav audio.

PS is shit for formats now. I doubt it was different then.

The PS3 was a POS that caused downgrades. 7th Gen resolution increase fucked the future.

>>712438898
That's what I wa saying about the Switch 2. Treating games as low-budget consumer products definitely limits their potential.

>>712438068 (OP)
600 dollaz ain't shit
I'll give you 600 dollaz just to shut the hell up nigga

>>712439419
$600 in 2006 is equivalent to about $951.78 today

>>712439507
Anon wipes his ASS with $951.78.

Why wouldn't they? The massive success of the PS2 and zero competition would make anybody up the price. They obviously did not know that the 360 was going to be a viable competitor.

>>712438068 (OP)
FIVE HUNDRED AND NINETY NINE US DOLLARS

>>712438068 (OP)
Meanwhile bluray players around that time.

>>712438068 (OP)
thinking?

>>712439870
Yeah people just stuck with DVD. Even today lots of normies don't even care

>>712438068 (OP)
They got too fucking cocky after two generations of domination and assumed everybody would jump on the bandwagon on brand and hype just like the ps2 but forgot what made them the success they were with the ps1.

>>712439870
and the reason they were so expensive? the sony licensing fee, because they had always intended to sell the PS3 as a "budget" blu-ray player, so they needed competing players to be too pricey for the average consumer

what they didn't bother dedicating brain cells to was the fact that no one had asked for blu-ray and the interest remained non-existent for many years

>>712438068 (OP)
Xbox360 cost $100 less, but:
>Unreliable console (3rl)
>no HDMI output
>no Wi-Fi (they dared to sell the adapter ''for only'' $99 later on)
>no Blu-ray (they dared to sell the HD DVD addon later ''for only'' $199)
>pay to play online service ($70 a year lol)
>no native backwards compatibility
>controller that uses double aa batteries (they dared to sell the Xbox 360 Rechargeable Controller Battery Pack addon later ''for only'' $30)
The majority of people (idiots) who bought the first Xbox 360 models (Xenon, Elpis, Zephyr) at some point had to buy another console.
"Imagine paying $399 for a console without hdmi output..." people were that retarded back then.
Xbox360 is by far the most scummy console ever released.

PS3 at $499 is a bargain price compared to the 399$ Xbox360 package. Only a retard would think that the $100 difference is not a 100% worth it.

>>712439507
>>712439507
Retard

>>712438068 (OP)
Back then, if I had known that the new models would not have backwards compatibility, I would have bought it.

>>712440693
No, the xbox 360 had two options at release and one was 200 dollars cheaper than the ps3.
It's even right there at the bottom of the 399 version, the core version.

>>712440693
You forgot
>Actually had games
And the PS3 YLOD was just as bad as the RROD but only retards bought PS3s so there were just less people owning it

>>712438068 (OP)
Money went further total back then so it scales to be cheaper no matter what inflation charts you post.

>>712442864
>>712441436
The low sales and price drop 2 years later show that the public consensus was $600 was too expensive, no matter how nitpicky you want to be

>>712438068 (OP)
it was the cheapest blu-ray player you could get

>>712438068 (OP)
It's five hundred and ninety nine US dollars, dumb nigger. Get it right.

>>712438068 (OP)
They teamed up with some other company for the CPU that was gonna use it for other applications. That was their first mistake.
Sony was also betting on bluray becoming the dominant disc platform and it did but internet and streaming took over so they won the battle but lost the war. Nobody could have predicted Netflix becoming megahuge back then.

>>712441924
Core $299 package has no HDD. You can't save games withoud it and most of the games released later requires it to be playable. Also came with a shitty AV cable.

>>712442063
False and false
PS3 fat backwards compatible models are still around and easy to find
Xbox360 models, before the Jasper revision in late 2008, are all mostly junk rn.

>>712440693
It was easier to make games for it and that's all that mattered, xbox and playstation were always third party machines, not first party.

>>712443294
No hdd but they did support flash drives, most people had some of those around by then and it was not priority usb so any cheap usb was usable.
Sometimes the cheaper one just wins. For most of the 360/ps3 lifespan the 360 outsold the ps3 by a huge margin, not until the later years after the steam had run out did the ps3 start catching up in sales.

>>712443524
>For most of the 360/ps3 lifespan the 360 outsold the ps3 by a huge margin
This is true because of the "no games" meme that is actually true.
Back then, I myself was confused thinking: "where the fuck is the next medal of honor, the next final fantasy, grand theft auto 4, metal gear solid 4, tekken, soul calibur, god of war 3, resident evil 5, ace combat, tomb raider, burnout, need for speed (NFS Shift sucked so fucking much), midnight club, gran turismo 5, killzone..."
People were waiting for these games, but they all took 2, 3 and some even 4 years to arrive. This is what hurt the sentiment, hurt the sales and also generated the "no games" meme back then.
It's crazy how quickly the PS3 catch up once all the major games came out.

FIVE HUNDRED AND NINETY-NINE U.S. DOLLARS

GIANT ENEMY CRAB

ATTACK ITS WEAK POINT

FOR MASSIVE DAMAGE

RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIDGE RAAACEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEER

>>712438068 (OP)
Ps1/2 libraries were built on $20-30 games, even lower once the green label stuff got going. Once they got their foot in the door, they jacked up their prices to Nintendo level but without the quality. Happens all the time in business

because it had the ps2 chip in it for 100% backwards compatibility you fucking incel

>>712439870
blu ray wasn't revolutionary like DVD was. The PS3's launch was a disaster and only managed to come back in the last 3 years of it's life span. If you were an early adopter like me, you got shit.

>>712438068 (OP)
That is the powar of the cerru processur.

>>712439075
You are incorrect.

>>712438068 (OP)
That's $950 USD in today's money

>>712448454
Blu-ray had a storage size of 25gb which allowed games to fit in more data and movies to finally reach 1080p where as DVD only allowed 4gb of memory and 480p res for films. BluRay definitely was revolutionary and is why it's still around and DVD isn't.

>>712450923
I meant more that consoomers weren't flocking to it like they did DVD. Sony were always on top of the storage wars

>>712443281
It’s wild how much Sony hedged their bets on that Cell processor. They were so convinced it’d be the future of computing that they even had scientists running Linux on PS3s for research. Reality was, that architecture was an absolute nightmare for devs — nobody wanted to optimize for 7 SPUs when 6 of them were basically locked unless you hand-coded stuff. Meanwhile, Xbox devs were chillin' with a friendly PowerPC setup and tools that didn’t want to strangle you.

And yeah, Blu-ray won the format war, but like you said, streaming bodied physical media not long after. Whole gen was Sony flexing too hard on tech and forgetting that people just want to play games without needing a degree in computer science.

>>712443281
>: Nobody could have predicted Netflix becoming megahuge back then.
The fuck do you mean? Just because Blokebuster went full fucking retarded doesn't mean Netflix becoming megahuge was unpredictable. Everybody on the up n up back then loved the idea of a streaming service.

Shit was going to redefine everything

>>712438068 (OP)
Economy was pretty good back then, it made sense

>>712438068 (OP)

Bump