The new PlayStation 3 Slim is a good gamble

Rm_headshot
Thursday, September 20, 2012

PlayStation 3 Slim 250GB

Oh, Sony. Must you?

Here we all are, excitement building around the incoming 8th generation video-game consoles -- the PlayStation 4, the Xbox 720 (and that will never be its official name) -- possibly unveiling as soon as next summer. So you introduce a new version of the PlayStation 3 right at the eleventh hour. Why, Sony?

It already took three years and six different SKUs to nail a commercially competitive PS3. I'd written it off as the distant third, the "me-too" console, but you did it, Sony, you really did. The PS3 "Slim" dropped with the right form factor at the right price, and it took a while, but that Hail Mary pass narrowed a huge gap to come within a few million units of the Xbox 360's sales numbers. That's astounding...and now you're messing with success. You're throwing down an all-new SKU that's half the size and $20 more expensive. Why, Sony? Why?

Well, I have a theory about the why. Several, in fact. And they're all really bad news for Sony's competition.

 


Keep in mind that the original PS3 Slim isn't officially called the "Slim" and never was. That's just the tag us journalists hung on it. To Sony, it's always simply been the PlayStation 3 160GB...a revised, smaller SKU that immediately replaced the bigger, bulkier, far more expensive boxes that floundered so badly in the marketplace. This new "Slim," which is miniscule compared to the elder "Slim," follows that same lead. It's the PlayStation 3 250GB, and it's here to phase out the old hardware, not join it on store shelves.

Simple reason for that. It costs less to make.

Sony's first attempt to shave dollars off the PS3's product BOM (the complete cost of manufacturing) cut the chip that allowed backwards compatibility with PlayStation 2 games. By the time the first 160GB "Slim" released, hardware costs nose-dived...same performance, less expensive guts, higher profit margin. The new 250GB "Slim" chops that overhead even further. Hell, they're even saving real money on material costs and shipping freight now.

So you might think it's a little brassy to raise the price. True, the 250GB bumps up the storage capacity and includes two games -- Uncharted 3 and Dust 514 -- but we're seven years into the PS3's life cycle. Most people might think a price cut would be in order.

I wonder if they'd also think it's a coincidence that Sony announced a 250GB console releasing on September 25 for $270 just one week after Nintendo announced a November 18 release for its 8GB Wii U...priced at $300. Nintendo undercut the competition last time around to great effect. Sony's playing that card back on them with a lower price and a stronger machine..



Of course, the new PS3 bundles don't include Move, its motion controller, but Move isn't really doing PlayStation too many favors, anyway; Like the PS Vita, it's a good device without the software to support it. Sony's gambling that the numbers -- 8GB vs. 250GB, $300 vs. $270 -- will work in their favor and that motion control won't be the factor it was back in 2006. I wouldn't bet against them on either front.

Sony definitely wants to kick the legs out from under the Wii U with this new, tempting PS3, but that's not the whole picture. The 250GB stands as the mid-level PlayStation. Europe will get a cheapie 12GB flash memory version, but the day before Halloween (three weeks earlier and right at the Wii U's price point), a 500GB PlayStation 3 comes to town.

I find that very interesting. We're at the end of the PS3's life cycle. What are we supposed to fill that gigantic hard drive up with, exactly?

The PlayStation Store's made great strides, but it still hangs well behind Xbox Live and its Summer of Arcade when it comes to exclusive downloadable games. They're absolutely reaching for greatness, even if they arguably haven't hit the bullseye quite yet (see Papo & Yo). On the other hand, you can also download the complete Infamous, Little Big Planet, and other top-tier retail releases of years past. Not enough to take up 500GB, maybe that's about to change. Maybe recycling PlayStation hits of yesteryear is just the begining.

Here's where I bring Dust 514 back into the conversation.



I've had my eye on Dust 514 for a while now. It's the first-person-shooter component to developer CCP Games' Eve Online, a ship-bound, PC-based massively-multiplayer-online game, but both games operate concurrently across platforms. Bombard a planet from orbit in Eve, see the bombs falling on your position in Dust. And the Dust 514 bundled with the 250GB SKU falls right in line with that plan. The PS3 is a cross-platform console right out of the box.

This isn't the first time PlayStation's stepped over that divide, either. They did it with Portal 2, Valve's popular sequel, on Steam, Valve's popular download service. You could sync the two games on those two platforms and jump between them without losing progress...just pick up right where you left off. Nothing's really come of that functionality since, possibly because Valve's rumored to be working on their own proprietary game console.

But wouldn't it be interesting if that alleged Valve console was, in fact, a collaboration with Sony on the PlayStation 4? Valve's hiring notices suggest otherwise, but I do have to note that they're also one of Eve's publishers.

Synching up to Steam and it's huge catalog of games -- not to mention a wealth of indies coming up through Steam Greenlight -- can put that 500GB hard drive right to work in ways the PlayStation Store alone never could. Release every game simultaneously as discs and as downloads, maybe with a slight discount for those who get their games digitally. That puts every other game console on the defensive. To say nothing if Sony releases a 1TB PlayStation 4 in 2013.

Even if Steam isn't involved, Sony still has several thousand PlayStation 2 games they can likely tap into. That'll keep a 500GB hard drive busy for a while.

Either way, I doubt Sony would've taken this bold a step at this point if Nintendo hadn't tipped its hand by showing the Wii U more than a year before its release; hardware developers usually keep a tighter lid on these things for good reason. As-is, the new "Slims" constitute a serious shot across Nintendo and Microsoft's bow. Expect Sony to start aiming full salvos dead-center by summer.

 
Problem? Report this post
RUS MCLAUGHLIN'S SPONSOR
Comments (5)
Default_picture
September 20, 2012

Preorders of the Wii U show that hard drive space is little to no concern to consumers.If the new slim benefits PS3 in any way, it will be the alternative purchase when parents have given up looking for the Wii U during Christmas season.   

100media_imag0065
September 21, 2012

I completely disagree that Xbox Live's games are better than PSN's, or that Xbox Live has more exclusives. It is the exact opposite. Xbox Live games simply can not compete with Sony's awesome lineup.

-All the awesome Pixel Junk games like Shooter, Eden and Side Scroller

-Super Stardust HD (The best downloadable game ever made)

-Dead Nation

-Flower

-Journey

-Ratchet & Clank: Quest for Booty

-Echochrome

-Papa & Yo (I don't know what you're talking about, this game was incredible)

-Infamous Festival of Blood

-Wipeout HD

-Wipeout Fury

-Dyad

-Sideway: New York

-Sound Shapes

-Fat Princess

-Datura

-Closure

-Shatter

-The Last Guy

I could go on and on and on and on and on. Plus it has al the multi-platform greats like Braid, Limbo, Cast Crashers, etc. And the crap ton of PSN games Sony has announced to be coming soon like Rain, Dust 514, The Unfinished Swan, etc. And lets not forget the Vita exclusives like Escape Plan, Super Stardust Delta, Lumines, Mutant Blob Attack, etc. PSN has a ton more awesome exclusives than Xbox Live has for sure, with a ton more on the way.

Default_picture
September 21, 2012

I think it further shows that Sony still doesn't get how to offer a product to its consumer base in this generation. Sure these new systems offer more, but they're either the same price, or more expensive. How does that make sense? The mixed messages sent from their team here and with the Vita have only outlined that there is something wrong over there.  They constantly break even the most simple rules of business and promoting products to market.

 

I know why they did it, they want to create a little more buzz with the Wii U coming out, but the way to do that is get cheaper!!! You don't offer 3-5 different SKU's all at relatively the same price as your current ones.  

100media_imag0065
September 21, 2012

Well, Microsoft does the same exact thing. Look at how many SKU's they have out there, and all of them are just expensive, and more often than not more expensive, than Sony's. Microsoft has one model less expensive, and that specific model doesn't come with a hard drive, so if you planned on downloading lots of games or movies, you'd have to go out and buy one, which bumps the cost up significantly.

Right now on Best Buy's website a standard 250Gig Xbox 360 costs $300. Also on Best Buy's wesbite, 3 different bundles of 320GB PS3 models for the same price. And all of the PS3 ones come with a free game. Of course, each one has a lot of different models for a lot of different prices, but more often than not, Sony has the better deal with more hard drive space, a pack in game, and a cheaper price.

Microsot has so many different SKU's, for more money.

Default_picture
September 21, 2012

The difference is, Microsoft's price stays consistant. Plus, there is still the 4G model that is still price under $200. Considering Xbox usually comes out with a hoiday bundle offering games included at no extra cost, the new PS3 should've stayed at $249.99 with the games included

.

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.