back to article Sony sticks it to Xbox 360 and Wii

In a move likely to enrage Xbox 360 and Wii owners alike, Sony Computer Entertainment of America (SCEA) has released a cost versus benefits assessment of all three consoles. And guess which machine won? On top of Blu-ray support, integrated Wi-Fi and “huge hard drives,” Sony claimed the PS3 offers “ten years of value with a …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Anonymous Coward

    And guess which machine won?

    The best value one...

    PS3 is clearly the best value (and arguably the best full stop).

    I don't think Sony are being dishonest here at all. BD is essential, and Wifi is nice to have, the ample HDD space in very PS3 also has it's advantages from both a developers point, and the consumers point.

    You can buy a wii, it's cheap and crap, you can also buy a 360, it's can also be cheap and crap, but it will end up being expensive and crap (and still no Blu-ray), or you can just buy a PS3. That's how I see it.

  2. David Gosnell

    It's true, but irrelevant

    Who cares about "evolving"? It's this kind of evolution and divergence that's been the ruin of PCs and allowed consoles to get into the running. Why throw all that away?

    Consoles are primarily for playing games, and so long as they continue to do so in a cost effective manner, the public will be happy - and they are proving to be happiest with the Wii by all accounts, providing as it does a complete and user-friendly turnkey solution for next to nothing, that is appealing to a huge new demographic Sony and MS only dream of.

    >>>> IMHO <<<<

  3. Bassey

    Seems reasonable

    It's kind of like making the argument that a shit-hot laptop is cheaper than an Eee PC because, in order to get an Eee PC up to the spec of a shit-hot laptop, you'd need to buy a better screen, keyboard, more memory, bigger hard drive, graphics etc. etc.

    It's a valid argument, but only for people who want or need a shit-hot laptop, If all you need is the functionality offered by an Eee PC, it's cheaper. The same goes for the consoles. If all you want to do is play games, get the cheapest one that has the games you want to play. If you want to surf the web, play HD video, stream music, toast bread, spy on your neighbours etc then the whole cost thing gets rather more muddied.

    However, Microsoft's recent sales figures suggest their £129 headline price is working rather well at persuading people to make an impulse purchase!

  4. B Weeks
    Paris Hilton


    I wonder how many people who purchased an X360 arcade model actually WANT Blu-ray, Wi-fi and a large hdd? Surely a better comparison would have been using the Elite?

    But then ofc the competition would have had a better online service AND a bigger HDD by default....

    I'm not a 360 fanboy, I own both consoles. My 360 Elite sees alot of use. My PS3 gets the odd exclusive game but is generally a DVD Upscaler and Blu-ray player (incidentally, it is very good at both of these things).

    It really depends what you are looking for, but shifty comparisons with low spec competitor SKU's instead of the comparative model really just makes you look bad to anyone who pays attention...


    Paris, because she is the best way I can sum up a PS3 - Looks like she should be full of potential entertainment, but rarely delivers unless used in a manner in which she was not originally intended!

    /end joke

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Jobs Horns

    I dont wont a all in one device

    I dont care about Blue Ray, I dont buy DVD's, so I am not going to buy BR disks, so the Xbox is way more value for me.

    Why can't everyone just accept that everyone's needs are different and they make their choice based on their needs. Why does everyone have to argue about who's console is the best? Its all a bit of Pen*s measuring exercise.

  6. Anonymous Coward

    re: It's true, but irrelevant

    "and they are proving to be happiest with the Wii by all accounts"

    Based on what? Sales figures? come on, that's not a true indication. Most people I know that have a Wii, have it gathering dust in the cupboard, and it comes out at Xmas with the monopoly board.

    It's a fad, a long lasting, and well milked fad, but stil a fad. Consumers are idiots, tell them something is in short supply, and they will kill other shoppers to get one ( Wii, Wiifit, Professor Layton, DSlite and so on..)

  7. Eric Juillerat
    Black Helicopters

    It's all about the games

    Show me the games and I'll listen. The 360 has more, and most are better. If I wanted a Blue Ray player, I'd a bought one. I wanted a gaming I bought one. I don't buy BD disks; why would I want to spend more on BD, and get fewer gaming titles; options? This math doesn't work for me.

  8. Anonymous Coward

    Companies are so out of touch with customers

    I don't understand companies, they are way off, some people want the whole package, blue ray ext. other are happy with just having a Wii, maybe it's just about being simple and playing games. Most companies are so out of touch with the customer it's insane. The bottom line is that the Wii and Xbox are doing better than Sony, maybe Sony should look at why is Wii doing so good. Maybe because it's about kids playing video games only and not about other gagets.

  9. David Gosnell

    @AC re re: It's true, but irrelevant

    Most people you know are probably hardcore gamers, who are not in the demographic that the Wii has most impacted upon. It's hardly a secret that Wii games rarely cross over with those of the other consoles, and that's because they realise the market is different. Idiots we may all be, but we're still having fun, and don't stress over the kind of nonsense reported here. Ah sweet bliss!

  10. Alastair

    Re: And guess which machine won?

    "BD is essential,"

    What? Is it? Pray tell, why?

    "You can buy a wii, it's cheap and crap"

    Sorry, let me correct that for you: "You can buy a wii, it's cheap and fun"

    Not everyone *wants* a hardcore gaming console, so who can say what is "best"?

  11. Allan Rutland

    Just a shame that...

    Blu-Ray is still nothing but an over priced, attempted cash farm for Sony which is sadly failing dismally. Heck, just need to look at the figures from Japan last month which showed Blu-Ray hadn't even manged to get to 10% of the installed VHS userbase in Japan....and that included PS3's.

    Screaming about features isn't the PS3's problem. The lack of games is, and until Sony do something about that, a game console without games is of very little use. And no matter what they may try and push the PS3 as, it is still a games console.

  12. Scott
    Thumb Down

    PS3: Not for me

    I don't have an HD telly, rendering a Blu-Ray player next to useless.

    I don't want to spend around £400 on a games console. I just upgraded my computer for about that and I'd use that a lot more.

    I have an Xbox 360. Have done for years. The one drawback for me is that size of the hard drive. I don't want to spend £80 on a new one so I'll make do. It still works, still plays all the same games that it did so no real cause for concern.

    I got a Wii just before Christmas. It allows me and my friends to play a load of fun, easy to pick up games and appeals to not only my friends but parents too. I can't see my parents sitting there with a PS3 controller in their hands and having the same amount of fun (especially with my father only having 1 arm!).

    The PS3 is very good if you're willing to outlay the cash on it and an HD telly (which judging by what Sony are saying, an HD telly is necessary). I'm not so it's not for me.

  13. Mark

    re: It's all about the games

    "Show me the games and I'll listen. The 360 has more, and most are better."

    Sorry, but the only people saying that anymore, is Microsoft and their army of drones ("Allan Rutland" being one I assume).

    PS3 has plenty of games, and they are of higher quality than all the other consoles. Don't take my word for it, take metacritics..

  14. Robert de Ridder

    PS3 Plenty games?

    Actually all the article mentions is that percentage wise the PS3 has better games. Which makes sense as PS3 games are a lot more expensive to produce, so you'd expect the companies who do, make it worth the effort.

    In hard actual numbers the 360 not only has more games than the PS3, but also more good games.

  15. Victor Hugo Gil A.

    The only really good game I miss from the 360

    I used to have both a Xbox 360 and a PS3 and I can tell you that the PS3 have better games and better quality image in both, playing games and playing movies. The only game I'm missing from the 360 is GOW 2 but I know anything is perfect.

    The Wii is good to play with friends in a party 'cause it has some funny games but if Sony can deliver some games of this kind it will beat the wii.

  16. Silvergunner

    This reminds me of...


    People who weren't around at the time may want to read as well, as it details the interview and gives an in-depth view of the CEO of Atari. I feel Sony's announcement here really does reflect the insane advertising stance of Jaguar - better value, despite the system been weaker. PS3 been better value? Sony has forgotten people want to play Video Games, just like Atari did. But saying that, Atari preferred to pump up the price of the system with a complicated architecture that didn't work.

    Umm... Sony...

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022