Sony PS3 With No Blu-ray: Would you?
Filed under: Gaming, Sony Playstation 3 | By: Peter Chubb
Posted on: October 16, 2008 | 59 Comments
The Sony PS3 got off to a very slow start when it was first launched, a few price cuts later and things are looking better for the next-gen games console. Consumers have attacked Sony and asked that the price should be reduced even further: however Sony maintains that they already make a loss on the machine.
Gamers have argued that the price of the Sony PS3 should be more in line with the Xbox 360, but Sony have always said that they cannot do that as they make a loss on the PS3 as it is. The reason they say is because of the hardware inside, mainly the Blu-ray player.
So we have hit on a good point, if the PS3 did not have a Blu-ray player it would then be cheaper to purchase. Would having a PlayStation 3 with no Blu-ray player bother anyone. I have had a PS3 for 6 months now, and in that time i have only played a Blu-ray movie twice.
If you had the choice to have a cheaper PS3, and did not come with a Blu-ray player, would you buy that console?
CLICK HERE to keep updated with the latest news, share a comment or problems with products and services. Follow us on twitter or read more sony news.
GEeezzyyyyyy… You my friend are an idiot. First off you said, “Dont get me wrong, PS3 has more exclusives then on xbox 360, but PS3 exclusive are not as good as gears of war and halo 3.” The first half of your statement is flat out wrong. “Given these rules, here are the latest scores as of March 2007. In the lead is the Xbox 360, with 80 titles, 33 released and 47 unreleased. Following this is the Nintendo Wii of 53 titles, 13 released and 38 unreleased, and finally, the PS3 with 39 titles, 9 released and 30 unreleased.” (http://ps3.qj.net/Exclusive-titles-count-at-the-next-gen-console-wars/pg/49/aid/85380) This means that XBOX is making more games than Sony, and has an upper hand when attracting gamers. The second half of your statement is very true however, and I thank you for admitting this. XBOX has in fact out sold PS3 when considering exclusive titles, and the titles tend to be considered better games.
Secondly, you ask anyone in the gaming department at Wal-Mart, and guess what, if you have internet they’ll suggest a HDD. Not only that but for those people who don’t have HDD for their XBOX, Mircosoft
has launched a program so that you can get a 20GB HDD for only $20. (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2332515,00.asp) So that argument is invalid for the XBOX. You’re right though when you start to strip a console of backwards compatibility, you turn off customers. For example, I ‘was’ going to buy a PS3 very recently as I ran into some money, but then I discovered the PS3 no longer had B/C so I’m playing my XBOX again. XBOX clearly has way more features than the PS3 in every aspect.
Now no offense, but you really need to get out more. You “DON’T’ like to play with others? What’s wrong with you? Are some anti-social Emo kid or something? Grow a pair and stop worrying about what people think about your acne.
Now because you so kindly just ranted and raved, and never backed up any of your points, not to mention actually answered the writer’s question I will. Simply put, the only selling point the PS3 has is the Blu-Ray player. In fact, that’s the main thing my friends with do with their PS3. It’s the cheapest player, and that’s the only reason I wanted it other than to play ‘older’ PS games.
i personally would not care a bit because they cost too much money blue ray dics and i don’t have a hd tv but i don’t know about other people they should take a survey if they really want to take the blue ray out
That is a ridiculous question. The PS3 wouldn’t be the PS3 without the storage capacity offered by Blu-ray. I’ve had a PS3 since the start, and I use it equally for both games and Blu-ray movies. Being able to get a next gen disc player in my game console was a huge win / win for me.
I’m glad Sony stuck to their guns with this one. The PS3 is both a great gaming machine and a great HD movie machine. Beyond just the video improvements, the audio improvements offered by lossless audio tracks like Dolby True HD and DTS HD-MA are HUGE improvements over conventional lossy formats like Dolby Digital and regular DTS.
If you, the original writer, have only watched a couple of movies on Blu-ray, you either have a less than ideal setup or can’t see or appreciate the improvements offered by Blu-ray.
Xbox 360 60Gig $299.99
No wireless network +$ 82.99
1 Wireless controller +$ 0.00
Xbox Live +$ 38.99
= $419.97
PlayStation 3 80Gig $399.99
1 wireless network adapter $ 0.00
1 Wireless controller Dualshock3 $ 0.00
1 Playstation network $ 0.00
1 BluRay $ 0.00
= $399.99
Like for like PS3 in better value, what’s the problem.
Yes I agree Sony need to drop the price because they need to look at the WII and not the Xbox360.
People are way too cheap now. Back in the 80’s game consoles weren’t cheap and they weren’t anywhere near the quality and power of the PS3. If $400 is too much for you go buy a SNES or something, you can’t afford gaming as a hobby.
If there were no blu ray player, almost no game would be for the ps3. MGS4 can barely fit on a blu-ray disc. It is so compact. You would need around 10 dvd’s. Other games are like this too. Also, the blu-ray player in the ps3 is the cheapest around. So what your paying a little more money. You get HD graphics, a basically $200 blu-ray player because you get it with a massive harddrive and anything an xbox360 can do and all around better quality. It has such a better value. The 360 also doesn’t have as man exclusive titles. Ps3 has resistance 2, LittleBig Planet, MGS4, God of War and so many more. They need blu- ray to survive. Blu- ray provides what all of these games and so many more need. If you compare 360, wii and ps3 raphics together and most other components together, you’ll find the ps3 is better. It needs blu-ray. Sony wouldn’t bring blu-ray if theyy didn’t want the ultimate gaming system, the ps3!
this is to interactive…u do know that if ur lookin to play ps one games that EVERY ps3 will play them its just only the 20 gig, 60 gig, and older model 80 play ps2 games so if all ur lookin to play r old ps one games then ur in luck
Well what about if Sony makes a PS3 with like a terabyte of space and allows us to download the games to the hard drive.
Interactive, I am no idiot. If anything, you are. You are basing your information of results in march 2007. Its almost two years passed. ITs october 16 2008. (I live in America SO time zone is different.) According to http://boardsus.playstation.com/playstation/board/message?board.id=pslounge&thread.id=267865 PS3 has 65 titles released and 134 titles still to come.Dont forget about the new titles and the 30 games that arent confirmed for development but is expected to come. Theses results are still in working progress and has been last updated Aug 26 2008. Its pretty accurate but now more games on PS3 and xbox 360 has been released. According to -en.wikipedia.org/wiki/category:xbox_360-only_games - only 177 games are exclusive( most recent list i could find and it does tell what is released and wha coming soon.)EVEn so xbox 360 has been out longer the PS3 and PS3 has caught up very fast and should even beat the xbox 360 with even more exclusives. By the way i was talking about exclusive that are even worth be noted. for example, the games that make people buy xbox over PS3 would be HALO, Gears of war, fable and maybe they like PGR, forza and saints row, bioshock and lost planet when those games where exclusives. PS3 has Ratchet, heavenly sword, warhawk, resistance 1 and 2(HALO KILLERS), KILLZONE(ALSO WILL HELP KILL HALO), Uncharted drakes fortune, MGS4, Motorstorm,littlebigplanet, finalfantasy verses, a future rockstar game, SOME game named quantim (something like that) A game that looks similar to gears of war, Gran torismo , infamous, MAG, socom, even god of war and i can go on. PS3 will have more exclusive games then xbox 360 and it will have exclusives that have high expectations and with theses games there is more varity in games being made on PS3. WHat i meant buy the statment ,”Dont get me wrong, PS3 has more exclusives then on xbox 360, but PS3 exclusive are not as good as gears of war and halo 3.” was that PS3 has more exclusive that are good and not just games you will never hear, for example, Who care about that VIVA pianata game or whatever its called. Xbox has more of those exclusive you dont know or care about. It will only get attetion because of the fact it has the name exclusive. Meaning ps3 games are games people will play and it will move ps3s but non of those games made a huge impact as of how HALO 3 and gears of war did. MGS4 came close, but didnt do as much as halo 3. Hope you understand what im trying to say. PS3 does have the most exclusive but just non of them can stand up to halo or gears of war. Probably, the new PS3 titles like RESISTANCE and killzone, and littlebigplanet will do what halo did for the xbox and it should because they have allot of hype and resistance is know as the game that cant go wrong.
yes good idea make to ps3 one with and one with out a blue ray player i know i don’t care but one thing games use it like well all of them in fact it’s probly the main reasion why the ps3 graphics look a litlle bit better