That's some reasonable price range, assuming the BR player still there

...considering that PS3 games come on Blu-Ray disks, they can't exactly axe the drive in favor of a traditional red-laser DVD.

Is this 40 GB going to be like the 20 GB and lack the Wi-Fi and Card Reader, as well as the PS2 hardware?

An HD game console with the BD drive built in for $400? I would have to say that should make it the best value of the three.

Sony and MS are both under pressure from Nintendo, but Sony is in the worst position at this time. A $400 price point for a Bluray drive is good, but for one that plays games...it GREAT! Now, lets see how MS will counter...umm I would like to see the 360 Pro system at the $250-280 range and them pulling downt he Elite to $350-399 and totally gettign ride of the core system. Now that's competitive pricing. God, I love console wars. (I have my three consoles already, but I like the drama).
Peace!

Sony might be finally making the first good move of this round of console wars. Not to mention it could help cool HD-DVDs holiday run.

For the DVD and console fanboys I have no allegiance to any console of Hi-Def movie format. Consoles I own all 3 and I really don't care about Hi-Def movies at the moment.

Somebody over there is wising up.

How can there be any negligable manufacturing cost difference between a 40 gig HDD and an 80 gig HDD? Can't be more than 3 dollars. What else would this thing be missing? What they need to do is release a PS3 without a blu-ray for $299. What good is the HDD NIC, if not for downloading and storing extra content? You know what the PS3 is like? It's like a car with both a gasoline and a diesel engine. But you cant run them both at the same time. It's got the NIC HDD for downloading content (the gasoline engine) and it's got blu-ray (the diesel) which more or less serves the same purpose. You have to get rid of one, Sony! (Watch, they'll get rid of the HDD and the network card lol)

I wonder how much it REALLY costs to make a PS3 or a Blu-Ray player? I'd like to see a breakdown of each model's component/labor costs (launch, March, June, now, Christmas).

I figure M$ will counter, as the latest price drop was a real joke. The HDDs need a SERIOUS price drop, too (I'm running out of space). PS3 has a much better HDD situation, while M$ is "APPLE-ING" the hell out of us. M$ may resist a price drop, however, considering the $1 billion heatsink miscalculation fiasco. (Of all the design flaws to have...) Heads must have rolled oveer that one.

Wow Shadowmaster625... The main selling point of PS3 is the Blue-Ray player! That is what sets it apart from Xbox and Wii. Without that built in there would be very little point to owning a PS3. Come on who wants to buy an upgraded PS2 with a basic disc that cant play or produce HD content? And the HDD is also needed since people will want to store music and videos (like the Xbox) on it or other files, maybe even games?

It wouldn't be right if this thread wasn't turned into a Bluray vs HD-DVD debate.

It's what everyone is really thinking about isn't it?

Shadowmaster625

Ummmm.... both other consoles have a HDD (Wii has the 512mb internal) and downloading service. If they get rid of the HDD NIC then they wont be competitive and will surely lose. Their problem is also their biggest strength... the Blu-Ray player. That is what is driving up the costs. Taking out the emotion engine is also saving them about what... $30 a console. They save now but have to spend how much trying to emulate the stuff. They are actually going to spend more this way, but it makes the stock holders happy that they are saving money now.

"What they need to do is release a PS3 without a blu-ray for $299." WTF? what would that accomplish? PS3 games are blu-ray disks only. go buy a PS2 then.

the way i see it, as long as the hdmi doesn't get the boot, then it's worth it to me. i barely use 2 gigs on my 360, and that's downloading a demo, try it, delete, and download another. and so to that, 40 would be plenty, regarless of the minimal price difference between a 80 and 40 gig hard drive.

2.5" are just to expensive

with 3.5" they could swap the 80GB down to the $400 range and do 250-320 GB for the $500

of course I'm waiting for more "ONLY FOR PS3" games fanboys aside the PS3 isn't a stellar success, but it is not the Dreamcast {Why Sega: Why did you stop production?} I don't see SONY hanging in the towel when they can make their money back from software sales {just not with LAIR - oh the humanity}. Thankfully the do have a battery in this thing.

Nintendo is going to be the lead through their innovation of controls and solid first party games like Zelda and Metroid {I guess the developers forget how the overlord treated them back in the day}, Nintendo is selling the Wii like hotcakes and are making money off of it, once sales drop off they'll have just price drop and everyone will go Wii crazy again.

as for the XBOX360: work on improving production quality {make it cooler sans ring-o-fire, and MAKE IT QUIET so you don't mind using it as a media center extender}, but hey it's Microsoft: I don't expect quality. {My favorite quote from a guy who sent his X360 in 3 times to M$ and each time they gave him a new one, and he looked at this a a good thing}

I'm sure those Broken X360s replacements/repeat customers inflated the actual user base for the XBOX360 {not to mention all the people who have one modded to play offline games and another for online gaming}

Sony is in a BAD position...they can't cut prices much more, as they are taking a terrible beating on EACH console sold, and with the diminished capability of backwards compatibility with PS2 (Cost cutting move there), it's kinda hard to convince old buyers to switch. If Wii and 360 prices drop again, PS3 is toast, since Sony has shot it's wad here!!!

Shadowmaster, Why would anyone want a PS3 without the BD drive? All PS3 games come on BD. You basically would just have a DVD player that can go online and play a few downloadable games.

the BD and HDMI are my main reason to jump onto PS3.

As for HDD space, I actually don't mind if they don't ship a HDD w/ it. I can always use an external one. They are dirt cheap nowadays.

With potential PVR ability, that puny 80 gig just won't be up to the job

Though, I think, most people buying PS3 early would have own a PS2 already. So, it won't be that great a problem if you really want to play those old games.

Because of the similar design concept between PS2 and PS3, the software emulation should be perfected to an acceptable level within a year? Hope so. Then, you can pack your PS2 into the basement.

Though, with the original hardware, you can really up scale the PS2 games to look much better on HDTV.

If Sony finally does a $400 PS3, it will still fail because the system * HAS NO GAMES * !!!! Until the game system has, you know, games.. and Sony can decide on a configuration, its only gonna get worse.

I'd be surprised if the only difference is the 40GB, you'd be nutz to buy the more expensive one if it is.

But if that is the only diff, I think at $400 this would go nicely with my Epson EMP-TW1000 ;)

i dont believe it.
the 40gb HDD are gone. nobody is making them anymore, just see how many laptops come with 40gb HDD today...zero.
60gb HDD are these days chaper than 40gb HDD.
so if sony drop the 60gb, i dont think they go back for 40gb.
where they can find millions of 40gb HDD ???

First they took away some of the cores in the chips, then they took away the PS2 compatibility, what's next? Sony is really hurting on the PS3. I was going to buy in, now they can forget it. Why would I want a compromised console? We're supposed to be moving forward, not backward Sony! Sony, the backwards company. As soon as Blu-Ray looses the format war, the PS3 will become a relic. No thanks.

Do you guys remember the flak MS got over the size of the original Xbox? Why? It's the small size issue for the reason why they can only use 2.5" drives. Vanity. Period. If console gamers were not so vain, then we'd have consoles that were cheaper and probably more powerfull, so what if they were 20% bigger in size. Humans make me sick at times.

Sony's cost for a PS-3 is dropping faster than Britney Spears dancing ability. The reason they are tying the price drop to a new model with a smaller hard drive is to prevent canabilization of top end sales.

Expect a few more new models/price drops before Christmas. Sony's cost will continue to drop. Sony will continue to pass the savings on (They will have no choice).

Also expect lots of people getting angry about price fluctuations and too many models. :)

Every time I read some ridiculous comment about Sony on a THG page, it always seems to be posted by RalfTheFanboy.

Sony passing along savings to customers??? Are you kidding me??? When's the last time anyone paid LESS for a Sony memory stick than for ANY other format flash memory.

Or how about a Sony HDTV? EVER seen one go on sale???

Please... Sony is desperate to prop up Bluray this Christmas. They are not trying to save customers any money. They are trying to save a crappy DRM-ridden standard.

That Ralf comment almost qualified as humor. Keep trying you will get it. :)

First off, Sony has a set amount they are willing to loose per unit, just like Microsoft. They know as well as anyone there product is expensive. Yes, they know they must bring the price per unit down if they are to win the long term console or HD media war.

To drop the price per unit, they must drop the cost per unit. If Sony can get the amount it costs them to build a PS-3 to half what it was at launch, they can charge half what they charged at launch. This will give Sony a better position in the market (What everyone is playing for at this point in the game).

As for Sony's "crappy DRM-ridden standard", Quality wise No one, not even Toshiba or Microsoft is claiming that HD-DVD is a higher quality standard. From an engineering standpoint Blue-ray is superior or equal in every measurable way. DRM-ridden? HD-DVD and Blue-ray use exactly the same DRM. They license the technology from the same companies.

Once again Ralf you waste everyone's time with incorrect information.

Not only are your posts based primarily on conjecture, when you do mention something you purport to be fact, you are wrong.

While both Bluray and HD-DVD use copy AACS copy protection, Sony added additional layers of DRM on top that HD-DVD declined to add.

This article is old but the facts have not changed and gives a detailed description of the issue. And before you make the comment that only pirates should care, I want control over how I use my copy of a movie. If I want to copy it to my laptop or my media server for viewing I want that option. With HD-DVD I have a better chance of being able to decide how I use my purchase.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1846092,00.asp

[Both the competing Blu-Ray and HD-DVD formats will use the Advanced Access Content System... However, the Blu-Ray group will also secure its discs with ROM Mark, a method to identify authentic Blu-Ray discs, as well as "BD ", which will serve to dynamically update the rights-management schemes in case workarounds or other cracks are discovered and exploited.

The additional protection schemes proved to be the tipping point for Fox, a company executive said.

"We made no secret when we approached both formats that we'd make a decision primarily on content protection,"

A statement attributed to the coalition of companies jointly backing the rival HD DVD spec, and led by Toshiba, called Fox's assessment of the Blu-Ray rights-management technology "surprising and misleading".

"The content protection system of HD DVD provides an equivalent level of security as the system advocated by Fox for Blu-ray," the statement said, released last Friday in response to the Fox announcement.

"We also believe the Blu-ray disc format and proposed copy protection system may result in playability and reliability issues for the consumer." ]

If you want to know why I hate Sony and their push for DRM... read this. They burned me once: NEVER AGAIN!!!

http://www.cnet.com/4520-6033_1-6376177-1.html

SpaceMonkey,

No, they are saving money by taking the Emotion Engine out. Let's say the $30 figure is correct. That's $30 per console, say 1 million consoles (likely they will sell many more), that's $30 million. Let's go overboard a little and say they are paying 30 guys $100,000 per year each _just_ to work on the PS2 emulation. So, over the entire 10 year lifespan of the console they will spend $30 million. As far as rolling out the updates, those should be included in the BIOS updates that Sony is going to roll out anyway, so it costs them nothing extra. I think I have been _way_ more than fair in comparing emulation vs. real hardware, and even in this scenario they would _still_ break even.

that crazy y would u do that!!!waste of time

Who would be chump enough to kick down 400 or 500 or 600 for a video game machine. Why not just hand over your wheels.

What about Europe, especially the UK? It's about time Sony dropped prices over there..instead of forcing people to give rip-off merchants the right to rip them off even more.

If they indeed do that I'd be in line for one!