Thursday, July 16, 2009

Why does the ps3 cost more than Xbox360?

May be...
  • First great answer, 10 pts. Ready?

    Type...
  • Because Sony said so.



    Sony won't give you the option of a cheaper console. Or more accurate, Sony can't let the PS3 cost less than the 360. If they did, then they would go out of business. They put so much tech into the PS3 that they HAVE to sell it for a higher price. With Sony it's either expensive or really expensive.





    Someone mentioned Ferrari vs Ford. The problem with that analogy is that Ferrari's are priced so that don't sell in high volumes, but it doesn't need to sell in high volumes to be profitable. The market that Ferarri is in is a low volume market that makes money making low volume products.



    The PS3 is priced so that it doesn't sell in high volumes too, however, it doesn't make a profit. The market that the PS3 is in one that requires very high sales volumes to even break even, let alone make a profit.



    The PS3 tries to be like a Ferrari Enzo but it ends up being a VW Phaeton (only lasted 2 years in North America).





    Other than the Blu-Ray drive and Hard Drive, everything else on the PS3 could and should be optional. And if Sony had done a better job of building its CPU, the Hard Drive could have been optional too.



    For instance, not everyone needs Wi-Fi, some prefer wired connections, especially when your wired router is right next to your console.



    Also, sometimes it's just nice to have a wired controller. Sure, you can plug in your PS3's wireless controller via USB. But I would gladly pay $10-$15 less for a PS3 controller that didn't have a bluetooth module built in.
  • the ps3 comes with built in wi-fi, and internet browser. it is a much more reliable system with less than a 1% failure rate, and unlike the 360, it won't scratch the disks beond all repair (I miss gears of war 2).



    the wireless connection alone amounts to the cost difference.
  • Well the PS3 isn't a brick in disguise (XBOX 360) it wasn't rushed and they are well made. It has a built in blu-ray player which is like $250, free wifi ($100) and 80gb or 160 hardrive right now ($50-$80), usb ports and you can play PS1 games. if you think about it the 360 is $249 but you have to add a bigger hardrive ($50-$100), pay for live ($50), wi-fi apdaptor ($100) and after using live for 2-3 years you will you as much money the PS3 is worth..
  • The PS3 has a blu-ray player not a dvd player but it can play DVDs and it will upgrade them to full 1080p. It has free wireless and free online where the 360s wireless costs $100 and the online costs $60 a year in canada. The PS3 also has a better processor. 1 7 core 3.2ghz and another 1 core 3.2ghz vs the 360s 1 core 3.2ghz processor
  • well look at it this way you buy a PS3 $400 +tax right a 360 arcarde $200 +tat now lets wanna play wireless $100, wanna watch movies about $120 for an HD DVD player, wanna buy wireless controllers $50 for each + batteries or how bout chargable batteries $20 for a pack wanna play online $60 a year you would be spending about $500-$550 if you it with all these accessories while the PS3 for $400 you get built in Wifi, Blue Ray (can watch movies too) web browser, chargable controller with USB, and PSN is free so you would be spending less when buying a PS3
  • Prolly because of the parts put into the ps3(blue-ray), and the fact that is weighs like 15 lbs. The 360 is made cheaper.



    If your gonna buy a ps3 wait a bit, I heard there is going to be a price drop soon.
  • Don't need to type. Just do some really basic math...if you have the mental capacity.



    http://www.mikegotgame.com/xbox-360-vs-p…
  • IT DOESN'T, if you buy the wireless adapter for your xbox its the same price!!!! (wireless adapter = 100$$$)
  • Blu ray, powerful supercomputer-like engine, slot loading drive, wifi, well built
  • Less than a 1% failure rate.... well that means nothing if you have one of the 1% of ps3s that failed like me..... :(
  • blu ray(ps3) vs. hd dvd (xbox). hd dvd died, bluray owns
  • Why Ferrari costs more than Ford Focus?
  • No comments: