Its sales are still doing good because the PlayStation brand won't be forgotten.. PlayStation is known for its quality ;)

a year behind microsoft. the price cutting is on track.. microsoft is slashing prices fast to catch up in 2008 sales...

last year sony did the same...

sony is still ranked #5 in amazon best sellers

a price cut is always welcomed so it's a silly question to ask if it needs a price cut.. of course it does.. everything does.. but i dont think sony is as desperate as microsoft is.

microsoft is price cutting like penny pincher, $20 here, $30 there, $50 over there..

sony just dropped it's price once by $100 and has kept it steady since.. a price drop is on the way and it will be welcomed but i don't think they have to.. they should, but they dont have to...

plus its more to make a ps3 than a 360.. you cant expect them to play price wars with a cheaper machine.. as is the 360 is trying to appeal to the wii and ps2 market... something the ps3 is not trying to do.. or needs to do...

tell you the truth microsoft cutting prices, emphasizing the arcade model, only makes the ps3 look more valuable and high tech

I mean they could do it and give the price a slashing or two. This would work twofold the system would sell a lot better cause 1) people on the fence most likely pick it up 2) as of right now it is the best blu-ray player out on the market and the cheapest.

This leads me to my second point which is people buying it just as a blu-ray player Sony would be making money off every blu-ray sold. This is a good thing but it would also make it the cheapest blu-ray as I mentioned before but that would do nothing for all the other companies making blu-ray players. They would lower there's down to follow suit.

Now sony made some good relations with other companies with blu-ray and the question would they be willing to sacrifice that trust and goodwill to slash the ps3. I think its more along the lines that the BDA is a cartel and they would have to put it to some vote or make concessions here and there. Of course I could also be waaaaaaay off and just be the thoughts and a meandering fool. Lord only knows

Of course they need one, its just isnt going to happen anytime soon. They've already lost ALL the profit they made in the PS2 generation with the PS3 and they are still making a loss with the hardware

If they want to make a profit in their gaming division they not going to drop the price unless their sales drop drastically

What they need to do is come out with more AAA exculsives so they can make money on software

I don't think that they need to drop the price, before i bought a PS3 i thought it was far too expensive but since purchasing one back in January of this year i believe that it represents excellent value for money.

It does, but the fact that it's still managed to sell more in its first two years than the 360 did in its first two years, and at a HIGHER price point no less, says something.

600 dollars a bargain? i and a majority of gamers want a GAMES console to play games, i couldnt care less if it came with a nuclear powered hover board, six hundred dollars for a console is not a bargain period

F*ck yeah, it does.

Hmmm... that's irrelevant.

Sony can't afford a price cut anyway!

I think it depends on how people respond to the 360 price cuts.

Right now... No. It's selling very well, and is pretty much the #1 reason Microsoft cut their prices. PS3 has been outselling 360 DESPITE its price advantage.

Later on though, it won't have a choice but to drop prices.

keep it expensive. a lot of people are going to want to go for the most expensive option to get the most bang for their buck.

Of course it does...everything does. Gas, food, clothes, PS3's, 360's.

Not because it's not a great value, but because its price makes it something beyond a luxury for most people. The PS3 is doing o.k. right now in sales. But if Sony wants it to be significantly better, they have to find a way to lower costs enough for the value to start speaking to the people who are content with their DVD collection and would settle for a $199 Xbox 360 for Multiplatform games since it is so extremely affordable. Someone once said that $199 is the console price sweet spot. If PS3 gets down to $250, it'll start selling like hot cakes.

It'd be nice, but no. They don't need it. They're outselling their direct competition (xbox 360) week in and month out. That's apparently even after their price cut.

No I don't think the PS3 needs a price cut because it's already been selling strong against the 360 this entire year in the U.S. and Worldwide with the higher price point.

If PS3 sales were not increasing compared to last year then yes, a price drop would be needed but not now because the sales have been doing well.

The Xbox 360 was the console that actually needed a price cut because the sales had started to slack off despite having the $279 price point and a larger game library.

By having a higher price, people see it as a more worthwhile, long-term purchase. A 360 arcade might be bought on a whim, sure, but at that price you don't _expect_ it to be reliable, and you sure aren't going to invest a lot on games and peripherals. I've spent more on games/controllers/downloads for my PS3 than the original price of the console. And that's really saying something considering I bought it at UK launch (£425 I think, or $850). I also can't stand americans complaining about the price, I mean it _launched_ at $600, £300. That's what it costs now in the UK. I know it's got tax added on in the UK already (and it's a lot), but there is a significant price difference even still.

QUestion is very stupid. Simple answer would be YES it does need but than it should be explained why?
It is logical that price cut is ALWAYS good for consumers, that means more people can buy it. Sure PS3 is selling well as it is now but with price cut even more people would be buying it.
There are different kind of price cuts. Ones that MS is doing, which means "to cut price since product is not selling" or one that Sony could possibly do and that is "my product has solid sales but if i cut price even more it might explode in sales."

but if they were to announce a price cut, even if it was $50 along side the release of oh lets say LittleBigPlanet, then I can assure Sony that along with a crap load of positive press, they will also sell a poop load of consoles. and then keep charging through on to the holiday buying season (november - december).

can this guy spell or what?
I've seen better grammar from an 8 year old

why does the PS3 cost more?
because you get more

For xmas 2009 expect Sony to make the same move MS is doing now: 199$ consoles, hopefully, by then, the PS3 will have a handful of decent exclusives.

Sony should keep the 40 gig coming out into the market sell it for 299.99 and keep the 80 gig at 399.99. The thing they should have done at first was release the Metal gear solid bundle with the 160 gig instead of an 80 gig. With that set for sure make the new 80 gig backwards compatible with ps2 and ps1 games. Or for anybody who is computer smart go and pick up a 500 gig sata drive and upgrade the 80 or 40 gig ps3 wich ever they own. There is were a person can save money is by upgrading the hard drive them selves.

just a gud bundle will do but either way it got the games so socom here i come.

hell yes it does

in a way yes, but in other ways no.

blu ray cost money yeah but those will be dropping in prices.
http://www.blu-ray.com/news...

if the link above is to be believe than i would believe sony needs to give the ps3 at least a 50 drop on each sku. this will make it more attractive along with this below.

http://www.n4g.com/NewsCom-...

i think a 350 8ogb or a 450 160 gb is a more attractive bargain if you ask me. yeah i know everything you get in the box deal, i know first hand as i own a 60gb still, i think at least a 50 dollar price cut here could be useful. in many ways.

Despite the $200 difference. They should keep their price points firm until next year. $100 price cuts are much more dramatic (and draw more publicity) than $50 price cuts.

where the call Blu-Ray, Blue-Ray.

....I paid $750....when I bought My launch day PS3..And people are complaining about $399.00( I understand some cannot afford) but 399.00 is a great price for what you get.

At $399.00 you get the best HD Audio device, one of the best Blu-ray players on the market, you get the BEST upconverting DVD player on the market, and for a bonus you can play.....MGS4, Uncharted, KillZone2......and the rest of great a$$ games that are coming out....

is a bargain to hardcore sony fans and hardcore gamers alike, because yes you get a lot of bang for a reasonable buck out of it. But to the everyday average consumer, this is why the wii has been whooping PS3 and 360 was cause of price. Cause those average consumers are easily influenced by a cheaper price tag rather than features. To lots of people cheaper/free is better than paying more/too much for something, especially if you can get the same/similar product for less. I mean this can also be said about PSN compared to LIVE. I feel you get what you pay for though. I personally like LIVE over PSN and Im glad I pay for it cause it gets content quicker at times and at times even exclusive, also PSN obviously is lacking in the online department with features compared to LIVE. But I paid more for my 60 gig PS3 than my XBOX 360, for blu-ray/built in wi-fi, etc.. Which are features you obviously pay for to get more in your PS3 system that you can't with 360! all in all I think my thoughts have been explained enough

But it's just normal for hardware to drop in price the longer they are on the market, so it will eventually happen, but the question is when. Sony is already losing so much money on the PS3 they can't afford to drop the price anytime soon if they wanna keep their loses to a number that makes sense for them. So, it will happen just not anytime soon.

doesn't NEED one, but it's always nice eh?

The PS3 doesn't need a pricecut if the sales are going very strong but I think they could use a pricecut around next year.

The PS3 just moved into #5 at Amazon so it's one of the top five (80gb).

http://www.amazon.com/gp/be...

But Sony needs to do more advertising for heaven's sake. They need to get out there and let people know what the PS3 is about.

MOVE IT SONY!

CHOP, CHOP!

Aaaah, the smell of disagrees in the afternoon.

Don't hate ya'll!

"People are in business to make money, However if you are in a non profit organization I think that you need to go back to business school and retake some courses. Companies release products to make a profit so that they can pay their employees and manufacturing costs and this of course will create more jobs which in terms means people will have more money to spend which in turn will create more jobs. That is how the economy works everywhere."

He must not know that some people in non profit organization are well paid......and grants, donors, and sponsors can put you in a great place....while there are some risk, the rewards can be even greater.

Your getting the most complete technological experience out there bar NONE(Fanbois man your disagree button). I would go ahead and list all of the high quality functions of the PS3 but we are all Gamers here so we know what it intels, its up to you to accept or reject the truth but it still doesnt change anything. The PS3 is pretty much a bargain at $399.00

Sony should wait until after the 2008 Holiday Season and wait until KZ2 is released and THEN drop the price. MS's price drops hasnt been too much of a thorn in their side thus far but a $199.00 price tag for the 360 sounds quite attractive. A price drop is coming for sure, I just dont think its necessary right now because of how well the PS3 is selling despite the other 2 consoles being cheaper.

The PS3 doesn't need a price cut....No, no, no Sony, the PS3 needs games.

Sony still has to watch the price on the ps3. it's still the top bluray player on the market and they can't lower price and upset their other business partners who have more expensive bd players out there

for xmas bring back the old mgs 80gig with a lbp or motorstorm 2 pack in a extra ds3 controller and a eye toy camera for $499, flood the big box guys like costco and sams with them for the holidays. add value don't cut price.

I refuse to buy one till they drop the price. I own an X360 at the moment and it is perfect for my wants - playing games and watching films. The PS3, however, demands that I surrender £300 to do the same thing, and Sony justifies this by telling me that not only am I getting a console, I'm getting a whole load of junk that I'll never use - USBs, wifis, etc. There's even a blu-ray player that I absolutely have to pay for, when I can just download the films for less money and more convenience. But it's essential, by Sony's judgment, unlike backwards-compatibility - which no longer exists on UK consoles.

all balances out(Kind OF!). If you buy a PS3 for 399.00 You will have paid more than what you could purchase a 360 for. If you buy a 360 for 199.00 and up and pay 50$ a year for a gold account, after four years you will have paid just as much as you would for PS3 and a free lifelong online service.

So even with the 360 being 199.00 and an annual $50.00 membership for Live would still make the 360 more expensive than a PS3 if you plan on keeping it for 4 or 5 years. This is a just an example of the Arcade(No HDD) SKU that MS is offering. You can factor in the over all cost for the Premium and Elite SKU's with a Gold account for 4, 5, 6 years. The 360 is still gonna be more expensive in the end despite its initial cheaper price tag. The only way that this could be avoided is to not have a Gold account. This is a factor thats easy for us consumers to overlook because we only have to worry about the here and now but its something that Sony as a business has to take into account and is why I'm sure their not so gong ho on a price cut.

No.

yes

I think the author hides his autism well. Really, 'thousands' to separate PS3 components? I'd love to sell stuff to this guy. Anyway, as a happy owner myself, I still think it needs a price cut. No one asked Sony to put all this nice stuff in a black box, but thank you anyway. Oh, and if you payed way too much for a launch console that's your issue, not de facto for the rest of us.

However, I think I can kinda understand from the perspective of keeping great support and features. I just don't like/understand the removal of PS2 compatibility. IMHO a $50 price cut would seem some nice fan service.

but so could everything else I wouldn't mind a price cute on houses so that I could go out and buy a home for cheaper!!Get what I am trying to say!

but even at the price it's at now it is worth every penny!!

The only reason I'd say No is because of the Blu-ray Player.. If Sony drops the PS3 Price then all the bluray players out have to drop there price to stay in the now.... this is a bad thing for sony..... Maybe if they put back in the ps 1-2 support then it would help the price...

heck the 80gb or 60gb need to come down as well f-k that hollow 40gb is not a damn ps3 its a empty ps2 console with no wifi, no backward capabilities not even a emulator better off buy a real ps3 on craigslist 60gb 80gb for 350- 450

I already own one...so it would do me no good. Besides like stating many times in the past and in this article...the ps3 is a steal.

No, not really. It is selling well at the price it stands at but do we WANT a price cut? Sure we do. Who wouldn't?

BASICALLY YES!!!

A: Unless They have the best AAA games coming out this year and next year+and beyond, meaning if they had the top games and exclusives that get scores of 9 and 10 they'll be ok for the long run as this will guarantee the 100 million base might eventually wait for the PS3 price to drop later on.MIGHT!

B:They made a big mistake by pricing and engineering an overly expensive system at a bad time when the Economy has taken a crap and they have to deal with this big flop they made, with making the PS3 so expensive to produce.Now the ball is in their court PS2 fans are waiting for PS3 but can't afford it and Sony can't afford to lose so many Billions in investment.They screwed up.The pressure is on this Gen may have been lost! so they might as well cut their losses...
or do they go out with a bang and drop the price????And roll the dice??

C:MS has deep pockets they can afford to lose money they do it all the time !!The list of crap failures goes on and on :look at Zune,HD-DVD investment,Vista,old Xbox,Xbox 360 RROD,
It's their brand name and their Monopoly on the OS market that allows them this freedom!!Sony is in Danger of losing this war because simply PS2 fans can't afford to wait and pay for that PS3!! somethings gotta give..!

Sony should learn from Sega! remember Genesis then Saturn???

nah it still have more options than the 360.

free online

free HDMI

WiFi

free Blu-Ray Player so my answer is no it's good where it's at.

yip cut the price, more sold the better.Sony will lose money but will make it up with a bigger user base ,not think so?.Few of my friends bought a 360 because it was cheaper and more games (cheaper)than the PS3 and for the Blue-ray only watched 2 films lol

I would prefer another price cut but not if they are going to strip down more features like how they took out the backwards compatiblity and flash card readers on certain models seems just retarded to remove functionality :S

If its all about price than tell me why the 360 is not whooping nintendo's ass? Its cheaper. But cheaper does not equal value to the consumer. I'm am a proud PS3 and 360 owner. I find no value in the Wii because the software does not appeal to me. The PS3 must appeal to people all around the world right now. I will say that the PS3 is my system of choice for the forseeable future I like the exclusives for the system in WO HD, Flower, LBP, R2, K2, GoW3 etc...... and most of the multiplats that I want to play run reasonably well on the system too. The PS3 with all the normal inputs and available upgrades is by far the better deal. I like the fact that you can exchange the HD, Bluray ready, rechargeable controllers out the box, wireless out the box, wifi out the box need I go on....... Ok I must, Free ONLINE! GeeEEEEEEz!!!!

Now that Jim Ryan is gone just need to remove Herman Hulst from his position! And maybe give Shuhei the position he deserved.

This gen hasn't been the best for games, last gen consoles are still out there and now there's been talk of the PS6 and Xbox Two for a year or so. Many games this gen will be ported to next gen and the cycle will continue. The re-release of the Neo Geo AES+, games on cartridge for £70 ($95), gaming is going back in time. Gaming has gone pricing mad with the high cost of games, consoles and controllers. The men and women at the top are clueless.

It’s always interesting to hear behind-the-scenes stories like this, especially involving veterans like Shuhei Yoshida and leadership figures like Jim Ryan. That said, there are usually multiple sides to decisions at that level. It could be less about not “listening” and more about differences in long-term vision for PlayStation. Yoshida played a huge role in shaping the brand, so whatever the reason, his impact is undeniable.

If true, and I'm inclined to believe it is, it goes to show that Sony lost their way when they became more western/didn't respect the PlayStation origin story. Andrew House and Jack Tretton did great work, but they also didn't try to fundamentally change the PlayStation DNA. Ryan oversaw the death of Japan Studio and a live service direction.

I already figured this, good lord imagine if Shuhei took over instead, would've been a platinum era 😩

I miss the first three generations of PlayStation. The way they turned PS3 around, we knew they meant business. We were all worried for a bit there around launch. Eventually from 2008 they started shifting slowly. But since Yoshida was fired, it's never been the same. Still enjoy my PS5 daily. I got a backlog dating back to PS2 lol So I'm fine but new games aren't as appealing anymore.

It seems like we were thrown on to the worst timeline possible where everything is too expensive and the wrong people were put in positions that makes the world a shitty place. We could have had Shu as the head of PS but we got the shitty alternative. Same goes for everyone in power around the world. Doesn’t matter the company or country the majority of us got the shitty picks and the world is declining like never before. I do think PS can come out of this because of their studios, talent and IP but they need someone more in touch with gamers leading things like Shu was. They’re still the best place for console gaming imo but it could be much better than it is especially without the massive live service failures. The rest of the world I have a lot less hope for right now. Hopefully the pendulum swings back towards the good ole days but I’m preparing for the worst.

There goes illuminati distraction story

So now there's certifiable proof that Ryan was in fact "fired", as opposed to when it was first announced that he "retired", in order to save face.

There's another guy who recently "retired" as CEO of another large gaming company, after doing a dismantling job as lead for well over a decade.

seems legit, the business man, fires the one who has ideas to move the business forward.

Jim Ryan is the reason why we are entering year 6 since the PS5 launch and many of us don't feel like the PS5 has gotten started as yet.

I hope going forward, we will see a return to form.