Sony on PS3: You're "paying for potential"

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

"The price of the PS3 is high, but you're paying for potential," says marketing man

The PS3 may still be the most expensive console on the market by quite a margin, but you are "paying for potential", says Sony marketing boss Scott Steinberg.

Microsoft earlier this week replaced the 20GB Xbox 360 with a new 60GB SKU, now on sale for the same ?199 asking price, while the 40GB PS3 costs ?299 with Sony showing no signs of slashing it.

It's worth the extra investment though, says Steinberg. "The price of the PS3 is high but you're paying for potential," he said, touting Sony's ten-year lifecycle plan for the shiny box.

"The ten-year strategy is ingrained in all of us. [sCEA president and CEO] Jack [Tretton] has brought that to all levels of the organization," he told Gamasutra.

As well as games, Sony has periodic firmware updates and added functionality - such as PlayTV, a digital TV receiver - planned for the "future-proofing" of PS3.

Mike Jackson

Source: CVGb>

[Scirwode]

He's got a point, but it's still too expensive for me.

Scirwode

[Coldgunner]

I see it equally as a games machine and a BD player, so the cost was reasonable to me and I get what I wanted out of it. The inclusion of streaming and Divx support was just topping.

[popisdead uk]

I agree. The technology inside the PS3 isn't cheap, and it's (mostly) cutting edge. (Y)

[HilariousNinja]

Well I haven't got worth my 400 quid yet. But certainly when Blu-Ray becomes close to how DVD is now, it will be surely worth it, considering how the first few player were near the thousands. And the potential could be great, and games such as MGS have proved that.

One major part in seeing the potential in the graphics department is GT 5. Guess that can be the real judge of showing how far the PS3 has and can go in the future. Can't wait!

[popisdead uk]

Well I haven't got worth my 400 quid yet. But certainly when Blu-Ray becomes close to how DVD is now, it will be surely worth it, considering how the first few player were near the thousands. And the potential could be great, and games such as MGS have proved that.

One major part in seeing the potential in the graphics department is GT 5. Guess that can be the real judge of showing how far the PS3 has and can go in the future. Can't wait!

that ?400 will pay for itself over the PS3's 10 year lifespan though, surely?

[HilariousNinja]

Yeh I suppose, but like I said, it hasn't given me much more than a 360 or Wii yet. But with Home and lots of more exciting prospects, I'm sure it will pay for itself and a couple more :)

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

I know I am.

I wouldn't buy into a console if it had no potential to last on the hardware or software front.

If I couldn't of afforded it I'd just of waited till it came down in price. It'll be around for a long time.

The price is high, but the potential IMO is good (Y)

As time goes on, that should shift to lower price, and less potential, however more ability.

Meaning potential turns into ability, until you hit your limit (aka see the PS2 now, it's passed its potential limit, but still sells on it's ability merit).

[Guest]

How long will people continue to pay for potential though?

[popisdead uk]

How long will people continue to pay for potential though?

The PS3 isn't just potential, it's already producing some great games and is high up the list of better BD players.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

How long will people continue to pay for potential though?

People will continue buying things as their views on what is an acceptable "ability" differ.

Some people might want to wait till Home is out, LBP/KZ2/R2 are out, heck some people might just want to wait 5 years till the PS3 is really cheap. Or some people as we know bought really early as they just wanted a BR player, they were happy with that ability enough to purchase.

Therefore some people just don't mind joining earlier when the potential is highest, and the ability lowest.

PS3 started with potential really high, and ability pretty damn low (all the mistakes at launch), but that has definitely changed a fair bit over the past 6 months, and will only continue to shift in favour of ability as time passes.

[spenser.d]

that ?400 will pay for itself over the PS3's 10 year lifespan though, surely?

First off, a 10 year lifespan is unrealistic. It'll be about 7, 8 tops given the state of the industry.

Second, concerning the article... /facepalm

They shouldn't be making you pay for potential, and you all shouldn't be suckered in to pay for potential. That's just stupid spending. If the PS3 is worth the money you paid for it at the moment in your mind, then that's awesome and you've made a good purchase. If you've spent that kind of money hoping that it'll be worth it sometime down the road, that's just stupid, especially given Sony's track record so far concerning a few things with the PS3.

-Spenser

[popisdead uk]

First off, a 10 year lifespan is unrealistic. It'll be about 7, 8 tops given the state of the industry.

Second, concerning the article... /facepalm

They shouldn't be making you pay for potential, and you all shouldn't be suckered in to pay for potential. That's just stupid spending. If the PS3 is worth the money you paid for it at the moment in your mind, then that's awesome and you've made a good purchase. If you've spent that kind of money hoping that it'll be worth it sometime down the road, that's just stupid, especially given Sony's track record so far concerning a few things with the PS3.

-Spenser

The article just re-affirms that Sony will continue to push the PS3 to the developers and get as much out of it as possible. That's how I see it.

[Dick Montage]

Potential is not a tangeable asset - you don't pay for potential. What marketing bollocks!

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

First off, a 10 year lifespan is unrealistic. It'll be about 7, 8 tops given the state of the industry.

Second, concerning the article... /facepalm

They shouldn't be making you pay for potential, and you all shouldn't be suckered in to pay for potential. That's just stupid spending. If the PS3 is worth the money you paid for it at the moment in your mind, then that's awesome and you've made a good purchase. If you've spent that kind of money hoping that it'll be worth it sometime down the road, that's just stupid, especially given Sony's track record so far concerning a few things with the PS3.

-Spenser

How so?

If you buy something you DON'T think is going to increase in ability as time passes (especially a console, which is proven DOES get better over time), THAT is stupid.

I bought my PS3 at a time I was content with it's abilities, but far from believing it was anywhere near it's potential, hence I knew or "hoped" it would get better down the road.

I would happily of bought later if cash flow was lower than it was at the time, but I had the luxury of being able to afford.

[popisdead uk]

Potential is not a tangeable asset - you don't pay for potential. What marketing bollocks!

Of course you pay for potential! Everybody that purchases a console knows that the potential of the hardware is nowhere near it's full potential and we all love watching the games get bigger and better each and every year.

We all buy into potential.

[spenser.d]

How so?

If you buy something you DON'T think is going to increase in ability as time passes (especially a console, which is proven DOES get better over time), THAT is stupid.

I bought my PS3 at a time I was content with it's abilities, but far from believing it was anywhere near it's potential, hence I knew or "hoped" it would get better down the road.

That's not what I said though, was it.

A product like a console should get better over time, but it should also be good, at least for the person who purchases it, at the time they purchase it. They shouldn't buy it if all they're betting on is some 'potential' and it's not worth it to them now.

-Spenser

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

That's not what I said though, was it.

A product like a console should get better over time, but it should also be good, at least for the person who purchases it, at the time they purchase it. They shouldn't buy it if all they're betting on is some 'potential' and it's not worth it to them now.

-Spenser

No one should buy anything if it's not worth it to them either now or in the future, that's just spending money unwisely.

However I don't think that's what the article is talking about.

They're trying to say, what you pay now, will be rewarded with potential and the length of the lifespan. In other words an attempt at reassuring people buying a PS3 when costs are as high as they are - It is the most expensive console on the market.

So basically saying, if you're happy/content or maybe even a little disgruntled with what you've got now, you'll be even happier as time passes as it will get better.

[The Gunslinger]

This doesn't make any sense at all!

Technology is not an investment (monetary investment), as the product prices depreciate rapidly once the product is mainstream. So why would I pay more now, and wait till it reaches full potential rather than wait till it does reach full potential and get it cheaper? ( I understand the concept of early adopters, but I dont see the general public "paying for potential")

Btw, remember that the prices of dvd players fell significantly once it was mainstream. The price of stand alone bluray players will drop as well, making it even harder to justify the "paying for potential" line.

Not knocking the PS3, just saying, "paying for potential" is no excuse to not drop prices...

[Malechai1]

i'm happy with my PS3. I've felt it was totally worth the money.

[spenser.d]

No one should buy anything if it's not worth it to them either now or in the future, that's just spending money unwisely.

However I don't think that's what the article is talking about.

They're trying to say, what you pay now, will be rewarded with potential and the length of the lifespan. In other words an attempt at reassuring people buying a PS3 when costs are as high as they are - It is the most expensive console on the market.

So basically saying, if you're happy/content or maybe even a little disgruntled with what you've got now, you'll be even happier as time passes as it will get better.

That seems like a stupid thing to say though, as it's pointing out the obvious. To me, he seems to be marketing the console on potential, as if that's a selling point on it's own. He's also half-admitting that the PS3 isn't the machine it should be right now, which is poor marketing. To me, he's saying "the PS3 is will be worth the high price down the road, even though it's not really worth it now," which is a stupid thing to say. Then again, we all knew already that Sony's never been good at PR.

This also doesn't bode well for those hoping for a price cut, if this guy is trying to justify it's current pricing.

-Spenser

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

This doesn't make any sense at all!

Technology is not an investment (monetary investment), as the product prices depreciate rapidly once the product is mainstream. So why would I pay more now, and wait till it reaches full potential rather than wait till it does reach full potential and get it cheaper? ( I understand the concept of early adopters, but I dont see the general public "paying for potential")

Btw, remember that the prices of dvd players fell significantly once it was mainstream. The price of stand alone bluray players will drop as well, making it even harder to justify the "paying for potential" line.

Not knocking the PS3, just saying, "paying for potential" is no excuse to not drop prices...

You answered your own "question" in there :p

Early adopters and people who have the cash to make investments in devices when they are higher priced will always do so.

Probably partly due to their interest in bleeding edge technology.

The general public doesn't really enter this equation on potential - Most of them will buy a PS3 when it's ?199, or once it's been out a few years.

The PS2 or PS1 was not sitting at 30/40/50million after 1 year 8/9 months.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

This doesn't make any sense at all!

Technology is not an investment (monetary investment), as the product prices depreciate rapidly once the product is mainstream. So why would I pay more now, and wait till it reaches full potential rather than wait till it does reach full potential and get it cheaper? ( I understand the concept of early adopters, but I dont see the general public "paying for potential")

Btw, remember that the prices of dvd players fell significantly once it was mainstream. The price of stand alone bluray players will drop as well, making it even harder to justify the "paying for potential" line.

Not knocking the PS3, just saying, "paying for potential" is no excuse to not drop prices...

Couldn't agree more

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

That seems like a stupid thing to say though, as it's pointing out the obvious. To me, he seems to be marketing the console on potential, as if that's a selling point on it's own. He's also half-admitting that the PS3 isn't the machine it should be right now, which is poor marketing. To me, he's saying "the PS3 is will be worth the high price down the road, even though it's not really worth it now," which is a stupid thing to say. Then again, we all knew already that Sony's never been good at PR.

This also doesn't bode well for those hoping for a price cut, if this guy is trying to justify it's current pricing.

-Spenser

He's just reassuring of the future, and making the PS3 sound like it's going to hit the 10 year cycle Sony always tout.

If you want to start reading between the lines and bringing out conclusions of it's been said cause it's underperforming or whatever, that's fine. People see comments in different lights.

You could see it as bad PR in one sense, but it's just really Sony going on about the 10 year life cycle as I said above. Quite welcoming they do do that, I certainly don't want my PS3 locked up and non-existent after 5/6 years.

"the PS3 is will be worth the high price down the road, even though it's not really worth it now,"

He's definitely NOT saying that :laugh:

Of course Sony will think the PS3 is worth it right now, it's their console. They'd tell you it's the best to buy, like MS/Nintendo would say as well.

Some gamers think it's worth it as well obviously, those that are happy with their purchase.

You can't really define "not worth it right now" globally, personally, yes.

[obsolete_power]

Weeeeeeell, you're paying for potential and a damn good BD player. To be honest with you, I do fine with the games already out on it. I am not the type of person that keeps buying a games. I have a few that I play and that's it. Plus I use it for DVD watching as well as Blu Ray. I don't get what is the deal with people complaining about the games out for it.....

How many games can you own and play because remember, each game is like $50 and I don't have to tell you that the money can add up VERY quickly if you get lost in this world where you MUST continuously increase your game library. I think people should stop complaining about this and look at the issue REALISTICALLY. The PS3 of course can be better and could definitely be improved but I really don't see how the 360 library is considered BETTER.

Sure it has a bunch of exclusive titles such as Halo and Gears of War and Bioshock (which is coming for PS3 in the fall) but so what? I like the PS3 the way it is right now and am looking forward to updates and improvements.