Koei Tecmo Joins Calls for PS3 Price Cut

Kenji Matsubara, CEO of Koei Tecmo, has added his voice to those calling for a price cut for the PS3.

Apparently taking cues from Activision's Bobby Kotick, Koei Tecmo CEO Kenji Matsubara has made it known that he has asked Sony to drop the price of the PlayStation 3.

In an interview with CVG, he said: "Whenever I discuss this with Sony reps I always ask them: 'Please cut the price', but I don't have a clear view on Sony's situation."

"It's definitely a way of boosting the PS3 market, but it's Sony's strategy and I don't know their cost structure. Sony introduced cutting-edge technology in the PS3, that's why people in the industry accept that the PS3 cost is so high, but we'd welcome a price cut."

"Yes, from a publisher's point of view we would welcome a price cut for PS3, and we are waiting, definitely," he added.

Source: via 1up

Permalink

Forgive my ignorance but are PS3 games actually on Blu-Ray discs?
If not, couldn't they make a second more affordable model PS3 without the Blu-Ray player?

It just seems that whether or not Blu-Ray is the way of the future, people aren't all that interested in switching to it yet. I for one still don't have a Hi-Def compatible television (its still the old bulky model) and as such Blu-Ray would be redundant for me.

fletch_talon:
Forgive my ignorance but are PS3 games actually on Blu-Ray discs?
If not, couldn't they make a second more affordable model PS3 without the Blu-Ray player?

It just seems that whether or not Blu-Ray is the way of the future, people aren't all that interested in switching to it yet. I for one still don't have a Hi-Def compatible television (its still the old bulky model) and as such Blu-Ray would be redundant for me.

its part of their marketing stratigery, yeah stratigery, blu ray will make us all go out and buy the same movies that Sony Pictures made before.

Its the whole DVD thing again, but with DVD Sony got pissy that they didn't think of it, they helped out with Philips in making the Compact Disc and made everyone buy the same albums they had on vinyl all over again, they wanna do the same with Blu-ray, get you to buy more Sony stuff all over again.

This thread has been done 3 times in one day. It seems that mods can easily overlook their own rules.

ColdStorage:

fletch_talon:
Forgive my ignorance but are PS3 games actually on Blu-Ray discs?
If not, couldn't they make a second more affordable model PS3 without the Blu-Ray player?

It just seems that whether or not Blu-Ray is the way of the future, people aren't all that interested in switching to it yet. I for one still don't have a Hi-Def compatible television (its still the old bulky model) and as such Blu-Ray would be redundant for me.

its part of their marketing stratigery, yeah stratigery, blu ray will make us all go out and buy the same movies that Sony Pictures made before.

Its the whole DVD thing again, but with DVD Sony got pissy that they didn't think of it, they helped out with Philips in making the Compact Disc and made everyone buy the same albums they had on vinyl all over again, they wanna do the same with Blu-ray, get you to buy more Sony stuff all over again.

Fair enough. However could they not just run out both versions of the console at the same time. If making money is their objective (which of course it is), then I would suggest they make a compromise of sorts, some people (like myself)wouldn't mind buying a PS3, but considering I'd only use it for gaming, the excessive price puts me off (and in my case the non PS2 compatability is a turn off too, I have a PS1 but not a PS2).

If they really are losing money on PS3 units (which seems to be popular belief) then why not try to recuperate loss by bringing out a "lite" version of the console, one that they might be able to realistically sell at a profit.

Hoxton:
This thread has been done 3 times in one day. It seems that mods can easily overlook their own rules.

Or perhaps since this is a thread made to discuss an official article/content your point is null and void. Escapist content to my knowledge is not really comparable to random people making threads about it.

fletch_talon:
Forgive my ignorance but are PS3 games actually on Blu-Ray discs?
If not, couldn't they make a second more affordable model PS3 without the Blu-Ray player?

It just seems that whether or not Blu-Ray is the way of the future, people aren't all that interested in switching to it yet. I for one still don't have a Hi-Def compatible television (its still the old bulky model) and as such Blu-Ray would be redundant for me.

Yeah, that's not really the case at all. People >are< interested in switching to it. The problem is that people can't afford it, not because of the price, but because it's a commodity for a commodity. When people can't afford commodities why would they get a commodity for a commodity?

It's really no different than DVD's or VC's.

What people don't realize is that while Sony loses money on the PS3, they gain nothing but money from all Bluray related sales. Phillips Bluray players? They get money from each sale. Warner Bros. puts a movie on Bluray? Same thing. Games on Bluray? Again, same thing.

So, it doesn't really matter if they lose some money on it nor does it really matter if you buy one or not. They did exactly what they wanted to do with the PS3 and everything else is really just a bonus to them.

Despite what people think, Sony knows what they are doing. Just because it doesn't all revolve around the world you live in doesn't mean anything.

And yes, all PS3 games are on Bluray. Most PS3 exclusives would not fit on a DVD.

Credge:
Despite what people think, Sony knows what they are doing. Just because it doesn't all revolve around the world you live in doesn't mean anything.

I hope this isn't directed at me. Considering I didn't once criticise what Sony does with the PS3, I was just asking why they havn't followed a particular path. Yes I think its silly to market the PS3 as a gaming console when they apparently are relying on its Blu-Ray player to make money, but if its working for them, fine.

Yes I would like the PS3 to be more affordable and backwards compatible with the PS2, but I'm not about to come and whine about it. Considering how much I hate it when others do the same about my console of choice. Honestly, if you don't like it, don't buy it, if you honestly can't find any redeeming features for it, then you won't be missing out on much will you?

fletch_talon:

Fair enough. However could they not just run out both versions of the console at the same time. If making money is their objective (which of course it is), then I would suggest they make a compromise of sorts, some people (like myself)wouldn't mind buying a PS3, but considering I'd only use it for gaming, the excessive price puts me off (and in my case the non PS2 compatability is a turn off too, I have a PS1 but not a PS2).

If they really are losing money on PS3 units (which seems to be popular belief) then why not try to recuperate loss by bringing out a "lite" version of the console, one that they might be able to realistically sell at a profit.

The Blu Ray games are a great addition in my opinion, I've never had disc read errors because they are almost impossible to scratch and the extra size allows the games to be quite a bit bigger (like MGS4). The uncompressed sound really does sound good with all the SFX in games. You can really notice the difference with a good TV, but I wouldn't call it necessary.

Anyway, I don't think they should drop the format, especially for future potential.

The PS3 might get an emulator technology of sorts that would allow every model to play PS2 games and if rumors are to be believed they are dropping the price soon along with a Slim model, so your problems might be fixed then.

Hoxton:
This thread has been done 3 times in one day. It seems that mods can easily overlook their own rules.

And what rule would that be?

nilcypher:

Hoxton:
This thread has been done 3 times in one day. It seems that mods can easily overlook their own rules.

And what rule would that be?

Not to make same posts? Everyone around escapist is rattling about the search button. So i came to understand that it's essential to check if there have been same topics (at least recently) before posting one? Correct me if I'm wrong.

Hoxton:

nilcypher:

Hoxton:
This thread has been done 3 times in one day. It seems that mods can easily overlook their own rules.

And what rule would that be?

Not to make same posts? Everyone around escapist is rattling about the search button. So i came to understand that it's essential to check if there have been same topics (at least recently) before posting one? Correct me if I'm wrong.

It's a slightly different matter if you're talking about a news post though isn't it?

nilcypher:

Hoxton:

nilcypher:

Hoxton:
This thread has been done 3 times in one day. It seems that mods can easily overlook their own rules.

And what rule would that be?

Not to make same posts? Everyone around escapist is rattling about the search button. So i came to understand that it's essential to check if there have been same topics (at least recently) before posting one? Correct me if I'm wrong.

It's a slightly different matter if you're talking about a news post though isn't it?

How come?

I have to confess that I'm starting to think that Sony don't care about the sales of this console. It has already served its purpose in winning for them a format war between their Blu-Ray and HD-DVD. They still own Columbia pictures, right? So they have a content-pipeline. They are keen on getting everyone to upgrade their widescreen TVs to HD Bravias, obviously they need an HD disc player of some sort. Hence the PS3.

So long as third party developers keep working on the 2nd wave of its games (and, frankly, how many AAA titles can gamers afford to buy?), they will in a couple of years have a smallish, high-quality, catalogue of exclusives whereupon the drop in the price of its components will give them the latitude for a dramatic price cut.

There isn't any reason for them to sell more subsidized consoles when there is so little software for them and so few people can afford it.

The only snag in having a 10-year plan is that it spans the normal 5-year console lifespan. One could reasonably expect them to find strong competition from the next Xbox in another 18 months. I'd expect Microsoft to launch a 1080 around November 2010, forcing a PS3 price cut.

fletch_talon:
I hope this isn't directed at me. Considering I didn't once criticise what Sony does with the PS3, I was just asking why they havn't followed a particular path.

Oh no, I didn't aim it at you. It was intended to be one of those "Everyone says this, and it's not really true" sort of deals not directed at anyone.

Yes I think its silly to market the PS3 as a gaming console when they apparently are relying on its Blu-Ray player to make money, but if its working for them, fine.

It's not marketed as a gaming console. It's marketed as a home media platform.

Gamers think it's marketed as a gaming console. Asking random people about it, they generally say "Media" or "Games and movies".

Yes I would like the PS3 to be more affordable and backwards compatible with the PS2, but I'm not about to come and whine about it. Considering how much I hate it when others do the same about my console of choice. Honestly, if you don't like it, don't buy it, if you honestly can't find any redeeming features for it, then you won't be missing out on much will you?

There's a PS3 that is backwards compatible with PS2 and all PS3's are backwards compatible with PS1 games. They removed it because it "costs too much money" and gets in the way of the PS2, which still sells well and is nothing but huge profit for them.

Everyone would like the PS3 to be more affordable, but you're looking at a lot of tech that needs to go down in price. It's not just Bluray, Cell Processors, and other required bits. It's just technology as a whole. The list of features the PS3 has goes through the roof, and it all supports each other.

Here's sort of a break down of logic for just 7.1 surround sound.

Bluray allows for 7.1 surround sound in games and movies.

Not including 7.1 surround sound on the PS3 would save money, but then what is the real point of the Bluray?

So, in order to make the Bluray worth while, you need to include 7.1 surround sound.

And you could sort of do this with every tiny little thing that is included. Wi-fi, 1080p, Bluetooth, a decently sized hard drive... all of it sort of revolves around the Bluray or something linked to the Bluray.

So, as much as everyone would like to see a price cut, you're looking at cutting features out that negates a big part of what makes the PS3 a really good deal despite the cost. That is, unless all technology advances enough to warrant a cheaper price on some of the basic things I listed above.

If they're able to make a PS3-Slim then the normal PS3's should be cheaper as well UNLESS the PS3-Slim has a lot of those features removed and it's made specifically for games. Which is cool for those who don't want a media system and just want a gaming console... but then... don't the 360 and Wii cover that area pretty well?

Credge:

fletch_talon:
I hope this isn't directed at me. Considering I didn't once criticise what Sony does with the PS3, I was just asking why they havn't followed a particular path.

Oh no, I didn't aim it at you. It was intended to be one of those "Everyone says this, and it's not really true" sort of deals not directed at anyone.

Yes I think its silly to market the PS3 as a gaming console when they apparently are relying on its Blu-Ray player to make money, but if its working for them, fine.

It's not marketed as a gaming console. It's marketed as a home media platform.

Gamers think it's marketed as a gaming console. Asking random people about it, they generally say "Media" or "Games and movies".

Yes I would like the PS3 to be more affordable and backwards compatible with the PS2, but I'm not about to come and whine about it. Considering how much I hate it when others do the same about my console of choice. Honestly, if you don't like it, don't buy it, if you honestly can't find any redeeming features for it, then you won't be missing out on much will you?

There's a PS3 that is backwards compatible with PS2 and all PS3's are backwards compatible with PS1 games. They removed it because it "costs too much money" and gets in the way of the PS2, which still sells well and is nothing but huge profit for them.

Everyone would like the PS3 to be more affordable, but you're looking at a lot of tech that needs to go down in price. It's not just Bluray, Cell Processors, and other required bits. It's just technology as a whole. The list of features the PS3 has goes through the roof, and it all supports each other.

Here's sort of a break down of logic for just 7.1 surround sound.

Bluray allows for 7.1 surround sound in games and movies.

Not including 7.1 surround sound on the PS3 would save money, but then what is the real point of the Bluray?

So, in order to make the Bluray worth while, you need to include 7.1 surround sound.

And you could sort of do this with every tiny little thing that is included. Wi-fi, 1080p, Bluetooth, a decently sized hard drive... all of it sort of revolves around the Bluray or something linked to the Bluray.

So, as much as everyone would like to see a price cut, you're looking at cutting features out that negates a big part of what makes the PS3 a really good deal despite the cost. That is, unless all technology advances enough to warrant a cheaper price on some of the basic things I listed above.

If they're able to make a PS3-Slim then the normal PS3's should be cheaper as well UNLESS the PS3-Slim has a lot of those features removed and it's made specifically for games. Which is cool for those who don't want a media system and just want a gaming console... but then... don't the 360 and Wii cover that area pretty well?

Bluray is not directly required for HD or surround sound. It's just a very large disk at an even more disproportionate price. It fits alot of data, and those things are data intensive. It's possible to put HD footage with 7.1 surround sound on a DVD, CD or if it's short enough, a floppy or NES cartridge. I'll stick with my extrenal HD that fits the content of 30 blu ray disks at about the price of 10 of them.

Hoxton:

nilcypher:

Hoxton:

nilcypher:

Hoxton:
This thread has been done 3 times in one day. It seems that mods can easily overlook their own rules.

And what rule would that be?

Not to make same posts? Everyone around escapist is rattling about the search button. So i came to understand that it's essential to check if there have been same topics (at least recently) before posting one? Correct me if I'm wrong.

It's a slightly different matter if you're talking about a news post though isn't it?

How come?

The mods spend time researching the facts and writing a quality article, much different than a random person posting a link and a sentence. And the news stays on the front page of the site, unlike user posts which can fall behind and never been seen by everyone.

*Sniff* I liked this thread the first time, when I made it yesterday morning =

(

Rednog:

Hoxton:

nilcypher:

Hoxton:

nilcypher:

Hoxton:
This thread has been done 3 times in one day. It seems that mods can easily overlook their own rules.

And what rule would that be?

Not to make same posts? Everyone around escapist is rattling about the search button. So i came to understand that it's essential to check if there have been same topics (at least recently) before posting one? Correct me if I'm wrong.

It's a slightly different matter if you're talking about a news post though isn't it?

How come?

The mods spend time researching the facts and writing a quality article, much different than a random person posting a link and a sentence. And the news stays on the front page of the site, unlike user posts which can fall behind and never been seen by everyone.

I receive multiple RSS and Google news Alert feeds on the hour, every hour, for PS3, and PC gaming updates. In fact, I also posted the GTbyCitroen post before anyone else.

Mornelithe:
*Sniff* I liked this thread the first time, when I made it yesterday morning =

(

Rednog:

Hoxton:

nilcypher:

Hoxton:

nilcypher:

Hoxton:
This thread has been done 3 times in one day. It seems that mods can easily overlook their own rules.

And what rule would that be?

Not to make same posts? Everyone around escapist is rattling about the search button. So i came to understand that it's essential to check if there have been same topics (at least recently) before posting one? Correct me if I'm wrong.

It's a slightly different matter if you're talking about a news post though isn't it?

How come?

The mods spend time researching the facts and writing a quality article, much different than a random person posting a link and a sentence. And the news stays on the front page of the site, unlike user posts which can fall behind and never been seen by everyone.

I receive multiple RSS and Google news Alert feeds on the hour, every hour, for PS3, and PC gaming updates. In fact, I also posted the GTbyCitroen post before anyone else.

That's great, but it is escapist magazine not escapist forum. Thus the staff has every right to post their own news articles. The rules exist to help stop multiple user threads for popping up, ie look at when Jackson died, a ton of posts were generated across the forums. And like I mentioned user news can be looked over easily, but having something written on the front page at least gives a better chance for the news to be seen. And we don't all subscribe to various news alerts.

Tecmo? Meh, they're nothing to bother with anyways. I can't remember the last time I played a game worthwhile from them.

Rednog:

Mornelithe:
*Sniff* I liked this thread the first time, when I made it yesterday morning =

(

Rednog:

Hoxton:

nilcypher:

Hoxton:

nilcypher:

Hoxton:
This thread has been done 3 times in one day. It seems that mods can easily overlook their own rules.

And what rule would that be?

Not to make same posts? Everyone around escapist is rattling about the search button. So i came to understand that it's essential to check if there have been same topics (at least recently) before posting one? Correct me if I'm wrong.

It's a slightly different matter if you're talking about a news post though isn't it?

How come?

The mods spend time researching the facts and writing a quality article, much different than a random person posting a link and a sentence. And the news stays on the front page of the site, unlike user posts which can fall behind and never been seen by everyone.

I receive multiple RSS and Google news Alert feeds on the hour, every hour, for PS3, and PC gaming updates. In fact, I also posted the GTbyCitroen post before anyone else.

That's great, but it is escapist magazine not escapist forum. Thus the staff has every right to post their own news articles. The rules exist to help stop multiple user threads for popping up, ie look at when Jackson died, a ton of posts were generated across the forums. And like I mentioned user news can be looked over easily, but having something written on the front page at least gives a better chance for the news to be seen. And we don't all subscribe to various news alerts.

So.....those of us who are more in the know than others should refrain from posting breaking news? Is that what I'm getting from this? LoL. Not gonna happen.

Mornelithe:

SNIP

So.....those of us who are more in the know than others should refrain from posting breaking news? Is that what I'm getting from this? LoL. Not gonna happen.

I never said that, the original question brought forth was why are the mods not bound by the same rules of use the search button first in terms of new articles. The response is that news posted by the mods is the "official" news of the site while user news is not because mod news is on the front page. Also I never said people should refrain from posting breaking news, more power to you if you make a breaking news report (which technically isn't your breaking news anyways since you already admit to getting the information from a feed). The point is that you are free to make as many news reports as you want, but as soon as a mod posts an article on the same topic, new user ones on the same content should not be created because they are just more clutter. The goal is to condense users interested in commenting on a topic into 1 thread and not have it spread across multiple ones.

Rednog:

Mornelithe:

SNIP

So.....those of us who are more in the know than others should refrain from posting breaking news? Is that what I'm getting from this? LoL. Not gonna happen.

I never said that, the original question brought forth was why are the mods not bound by the same rules of use the search button first in terms of new articles. The response is that news posted by the mods is the "official" news of the site while user news is not because mod news is on the front page. Also I never said people should refrain from posting breaking news, more power to you if you make a breaking news report (which technically isn't your breaking news anyways since you already admit to getting the information from a feed). The point is that you are free to make as many news reports as you want, but as soon as a mod posts an article on the same topic, new user ones on the same content should not be created because they are just more clutter. The goal is to condense users interested in commenting on a topic into 1 thread and not have it spread across multiple ones.

Just an FYI before this goes any further, I love starting arguments for the simple pleasure of having something to do while I'm working and waiting for things to finish. I don't honestly care ;)

FIVE HUNDRED AND NINETY NINE YOU ESS DOLLARS

I loved E3 2006.

nilcypher:
Koei Tecmo Joins Calls for PS3 Price Cut

Kenji Matsubara, CEO of Koei Tecmo, has added his voice to those calling for a price cut for the PS3.

Apparently taking cues from Activision's Bobby Kotick, Koei Tecmo CEO Kenji Matsubara has made it known that he has asked Sony to drop the price of the PlayStation 3.

In an interview with CVG, he said: "Whenever I discuss this with Sony reps I always ask them: 'Please cut the price', but I don't have a clear view on Sony's situation."

"It's definitely a way of boosting the PS3 market, but it's Sony's strategy and I don't know their cost structure. Sony introduced cutting-edge technology in the PS3, that's why people in the industry accept that the PS3 cost is so high, but we'd welcome a price cut."

"Yes, from a publisher's point of view we would welcome a price cut for PS3, and we are waiting, definitely," he added.

Source: via 1up

Permalink

Has anyone noticed something? Notice how patient and calm his words are. He isn't mouthing off like Bobby Kottick was doing. But he does have a point. It's been what? Almost three years since the console released? I'm sure developers would be willing to stand by the PS3 if its development costs didn't cost two arms and two legs.

buy teh haloz:

Has anyone noticed something? Notice how patient and calm his words are. He isn't mouthing off like Bobby Kottick was doing. But he does have a point. It's been what? Almost three years since the console released? I'm sure developers would be willing to stand by the PS3 if its development costs didn't cost two arms and two legs.

That's exactly what I noticed about the release from Tecmo. You get more flies with honey, is how the saying goes.

I don't understand though Buy teh haloz heh, it has been three years, and the PS3's dropped from $700, to $400. $100/year, isn't THAT bad, is it? Especially when it was originally being sold at a $250 loss. And, while Sony's probably breaking even by now, they were still losing $48/unit, up until the past couple months (Can't really be confirmed if they're breaking even or not yet, simply because noone's done another evaluation of the manufacturing costs).

It will help with hardware sales, but, as Tecmo said, we don't know Sony's strategy at the moment, however, a cut is almost unanimously expected world-wide, before Christmas.

I reckon they will have a price cut when they release the PS3 slim.

If they don't i will be very disappointed with sony.

Sony's going to have to unplug their fingers from their ears and stop singing "LALALALALALA" and start listening.

Agent-Sliper:
I reckon they will have a price cut when they release the PS3 slim.

If they don't i will be very disappointed with sony.

They're really gambling their future on that.

buy teh haloz:

nilcypher:
Koei Tecmo Joins Calls for PS3 Price Cut

Kenji Matsubara, CEO of Koei Tecmo, has added his voice to those calling for a price cut for the PS3.

Apparently taking cues from Activision's Bobby Kotick, Koei Tecmo CEO Kenji Matsubara has made it known that he has asked Sony to drop the price of the PlayStation 3.

In an interview with CVG, he said: "Whenever I discuss this with Sony reps I always ask them: 'Please cut the price', but I don't have a clear view on Sony's situation."

"It's definitely a way of boosting the PS3 market, but it's Sony's strategy and I don't know their cost structure. Sony introduced cutting-edge technology in the PS3, that's why people in the industry accept that the PS3 cost is so high, but we'd welcome a price cut."

"Yes, from a publisher's point of view we would welcome a price cut for PS3, and we are waiting, definitely," he added.

Source: via 1up

Permalink

Has anyone noticed something? Notice how patient and calm his words are. He isn't mouthing off like Bobby Kottick was doing. But he does have a point. It's been what? Almost three years since the console released? I'm sure developers would be willing to stand by the PS3 if its development costs didn't cost two arms and two legs.

This is the major difference he is saying "Yeah I would like it and I welcome it and I ask for it, but I don't know there situation so I'm not going to demand anything"

I feel the title is a little misleading to, it makes it sound like Koei made a press release instead of being asked a question in an interview. Wouldn't a better title be "Koei Tecmo CEO believes the PS3 should cut its price" I mean it's longer but less misleading.

It would be great for the PS3 to get a price cut. That way I could buy one.

buy teh haloz:
Has anyone noticed something? Notice how patient and calm his words are. He isn't mouthing off like Bobby Kottick was doing. But he does have a point. It's been what? Almost three years since the console released? I'm sure developers would be willing to stand by the PS3 if its development costs didn't cost two arms and two legs.

So far, I think sony has cut their development kit by down to I think $2,000 which is over 90% less than what it used to be. Could be wrong, but I know they cut down the dev kit, though that might not be what you were talking about.

Personally, a price cut will eventually come, that's about that.

Right now I have a choice between a new mobile phone or a PS3, I doubt I'd get the PS3 unless the price falls.

I am absolutely NOT making a 360/ps3, mine is better post here, but...

When you consider that a fair number of consoles end up being xmas / birthday gifts, and bought by parents not so knowledgable of the console market, when they see the entry level 360 at around £130-160, and the Wii at about £150-180, then the PS3 lurking around £300, they're probably not going to be swayed by a blu ray player. Also in the current financial climate, saving half the money is going to swing things too.

I certainly am not a rich person, and when I choose to enter the current gen of consoles, I am sensing I'll be going 360, just because I can join in cheaply. If PS3 was the only option I wouldn't be getting one until PS4 was released, and considering PS2s are still selling for £100, maybe not even then.

I still stand by my belief that for the average gamer, the main two differences between PS3 and 360 are the flagship games, which would be a big selling point, and the blu ray player, which is a big selling point to some. IF neither affects your decision, then finding an extra £150 or so is probably not a priority. Also it just makes good business sense if at all possible to release games as multiformat, making console choice even less important.

Again, I'm not a 360 fanboy, but short of the blu ray, if £300 falls into my lap, its gonna be a 360 and games, not a PS3 without. I have played a fair bit on both consoles also.

The problem with sony is they are marketing the PS3 as a Bluray player with games available as a bonus feature. Completely marginalizing the gamer crowd that should be their primary focus. I can get a stand-alone Blueray player for 150-200 bucks, why would I pay twice as much for the PS3 if all I want to get is the Bluray? Meanwhile MS is doing well with a focus on gaming/online capabilities, oh and some media capabilities on the side as a bonus. And the Wii is focusing on the family/party group crowd with its system and lineup.