Xbox 360 with Blu-ray to spark price war with Sony PS3?
By Thomas Ricker 
posted Apr 2nd 2008 4:23AM
posted Apr 2nd 2008 4:23AM
DigiTimes is feeling pretty confident about the rumors they started yesterday regarding the Xbox 360 with integrated Blu-ray. They are so confident that they're predicting a price war as Microsoft takes on Sony's PS3 at its own game. Their sources claim that the Blu-ray Disc drive will cost Microsoft between $95 and $100 -- much higher than the $18 to $20 DVD drives already found in the Xbox 360. Microsoft is of course, expected to sell its new Blu-ray rig at a loss as is customary in the console market. Sony may then be forced to lower the cost of the PS3 and/or retaliate by increasing Lite-On's cost for the Blu-ray components (like the BD-ROM pick-up heads) purchased from Sony. Whatever the result, the competition would be nothing but good news for consumers of HD media... you know, if the rumor is true.
this rumor is just that a rumor, plus they should integrate it into the xbox. i just cant wait for sony to overcome the growing pains
I actually prefer an add on because I do not want to buy another xBox.
M
Even if there is a price war, SONY will come out the winner.
That isn't a fanboy statement - I've got both systems.
#1 SONY has already streamlined the PS3 line and its turning profits while MS is still repairing RROD 360's. The PS3 hasn't cost SONY massive losses in repairs.
#2 PS3 is the more powerful system - Metal Gear Solid 4 and CRYSIS are going to prove that. (Crysis won't be on 360).
I believe sooner than 2 or 3 years from now, MS is going to be forced to produce a new XBOX altogether while the PS3 can just sit back since its future proofed for the next 3 ~5 years at least.
#3 XBOX's exclusives are used up. There will be no more Halo games. There will be a Gears of War 2 but, thats pretty much it unless MS comes up with something big. PS3 has some good original PS3 exclusives coming sooner than the 3rd quarter of this year.
#4 its going to cost MS a lot to add BD-drives. They won't be able to keep their cost lower than PS3.
Flashpoint, your thinking is flawed.
#1 - MS is making a profit of the Xbox 360 business.
#2 - The PS3 is only theoreticly more powerful in some ways in the sense that the Cell is more powerful than the three cores of the 360. However, that's about it, and that's negated by the fact that programmers are learning to write code for symmetrical multi core systems, such as the 360, and not asymmetrical ones as the PS3. The PS3 also has a less powerful GPU (graphics card) and a significantly smaller system bus (how much data you can push around inside the box).
#3 Used up for now, probably, but apart from the fact that there is nothing saying that MS won't get new exclusives, using your logic the PS3 is in an equally bad position after this second quarter then?
#4 MS however has way more cash than Sony does, so there is nothing forcing them to go higher than the PS3, and will probably still keep their prices under it.
@ Flashpoint... "PS3 can just sit back since its future proofed" and you say you aren't a Sony Fanboy. Well, you've probably have had a sip of the koolaid. You don't know if the PS3 is "Future Proof", that's just marketing spin that you fell for.
I am not a fanboy... but I wanted to point out fallacies to your points.
Rebuttal on your 4 points.
1)"Streamlined" ?!?!? If it was streamlined they they wouldn't need to churn out some many SKUs (with another on the horzon.\ I wonder what feature they'll take out now, jk).
2)Reference Koolaid statement above.
3)The Halo 3 for the xbox this year will be GoW2 and the Halo 3 for 2k9 will be Bioshock 2... Hmmm that should keep the xbox around for the foreseeable future.
4)Technically, they can just eat the cost like. I think MS's ultimate goal is to just get in the living rooms.
Flashpoint, maybe you're forgetting the fact that Sony has sold at least half of their PS3s at a bigger loss than Microsoft has sold any Xbox 360 at, so they HAVE lost money on it- quite a bit.
Also, you seem to forget PSN- they have dedicated servers and bandwidth that costs them LOTS of money to maintain that they are offering for free, and no ammount of PS3s sold can cover those costs, let alone allow for profit after that.
I don't see MS selling the blu feature at a loss. Why? Because it doesn't get residual revenue off of movie title sales like Sony would, making up for the loss. For MS, it just keeps being a loss.
Plus we already know they aren't going to put games out on blu. This is a loser. MS will come out with an external solution.
Zeus, until you actually have COGS (cost of goods) and wholesale prices for every version of PS3 and 360 made in front of you, how about you lay off explaining in such detail which console sold for a bigger loss?
Not sure why people get into arguments over that stuff anyway. Who cares who made what loss, I care how much I paid.
"The PS3 is more powerful!"
Yeah, and the original Xbox was significantly more powerful than the PS2.
Guess which one sold more.
"Power" doesn't matter.
LS2/LS7, its common knowledge among techies/nerds/people in the know (me) which had cost more to produce and which sold at more of a loss. Considering the PS3 cost more than 800 bucks to produce up until recent months, and that the Xbox 360 cost roughly 450-500 near launch, its pretty obvious.
Until you can put up a decent argument or say something relevant to the discussion, don't post.
oh yea first post
Oh damn. I think you FAIL!
Epic early bird fail...
'=======SOLUTION TO "FIRST POST" PROBLEM===========
If InStr(userpost, "first post") 0 Then
userrank(userpost.author,"Lowest Ranked")
ipban(userpost.author)
userban(userpost.author)
End If
Engadget got rid of my < > before the 0
He DID get first post, as silly as it may be. You guys fail by saying he failed.
Uh, no. He was beaten by 2 minutes.
Fail fail fail
Damn. I hope they release an external one.
Yeah, can't wait to plug it into an Eee and watch Spiderman 3 on that not-so-lovely 7 inch screen.
Same, I'm not buying a second Xbox. Besides the 360 has already flooded the market to a large extent, not many people left to buy a 360 who don't have one and were planning on purchasing one!
This is just a rumour, and the whole price war is just those who wrote the rumour speculating. It actually means nothing.
Hahaha, have fun with 3 fps on the eee.
I will buy the external if its like $50, but I already have hd movies, so there is really no need.
yea totally f'ed up but thanx for being so observant
the low rank is haunting you dude
Needless to say, you are a douche...
Haha. I mean't external one for the 360. Good luck with the Eee.
what do yu think the price point would be if it were true?
You should consider changing your name or get used to that pretty red text.
:)
These industry's are just made up of sheep.
well yea if the almighty dollar is at stake
this is stupid. 360 core, premium , elite, arcade, bluray , and sony has 20gb , 60gb , wifi , no wifi, 80gb, backawards compatability, no bc, wtf wtf wtf. its like ordering a meal.
exactly, its stupid!
In MS's defense, there's only 3 versions. Arcade, Pro, Elite. Pretty much = 0gb, 20gb, 120gb.
Sony has only 1 version
The first 60GB version was a limited version (Because of the BC), now the standard is the 40GB.
They all contain Wifi, they only difference is Flash-memory cards, a larger HDD and BC.
But the Hardware is the same in ALL PS3.
Unlike the Xbox360; it has wireless/wired controller, optional wifi, optional HDDVD, with(out) HDD, with(out) monthly internet, and many more options (to come)
That's how Microsoft makes money: overloading them with options, choices and extra's that confuse people and make them buy more -> spend more
Not what Sony is doing: 1 PS3 to rule them all.
- Free to comment on this :)
@Aythamie
You know there are four of them, right? And none of them were "limited editions" (the MGS4 PS3 isn't here yet, so I'm not including it). Just earlier models.
20, 40, 60, and 80. Just Wikipedia them, I'm sure most people here already know everything about them.
Wrong- the 40GB and 80GB don't have the emotion engine chips; the 80GB has software emulation, and the 40GB doesn't have any backwards compatibility at all. The 60GB and 20GB had hardware backwards compatibility with the emotion engine chips.
Also, yes, there were 4 different versions. The 20GB which had all black trim (no chrome) and no WiFi or card reader, with BC; the 60GB had all the features- WiFi, BC, card reader, chrome trim; the 80GB which had software BC, chrome trim, card reader, and WiFi, and the 40GB which has no BC, chrome trim, WiFi, and I believe no card reader.
true, but that's only changing the HDD and you can change it yourself.
The hardware is the same overall
they all have:
- Wifi
- HDMI
- Free Internet
- Blu-ray
- HDD (swappable)
- Wireless controllers
more
- MMS/CF/SD-card slots (optional)
Luckly Sony didn't release the 20GB version
my point: the different PS3 versions are all the "same"
Xbox360 OPTIONAL hardware:
- Wifi
- HDMI
- LIVE Gold (monthly payment)
- HD-DVD (movies only)
- HDD (none, 20GB or 120GB)
- Wireless Controllers
these cannot be taken for granted when developing a game
-> No HDD installs, no 1080p, no HDDVD, XBL
"Luckly Sony didn't release the 20GB version"
Who are you and why are you insane?
@Athyamie
Seriously, wtf internet are you looking at for your information? I think even the Best Buy internal website has more accurate information then the crap you are spewing.
Aythamie, that would explain why my friend has a 20GB model? No, he doesn't- it was never released!
I don't know why you chose to ignore my entire post- each different one had separate little hardware differences. The 80 and 40 giggers don't have the emotion engine chip as the 20 and 60 giggers do...
HDMI isn't "optional" and the HD-DVD movies and Xbox LIVE have absolutely nothing to do with hardware.
Why not all PS3s have WiFi or card readers and the hard drive size is the main difference between all of them. Wireless controllers aren't an issue because all Xbox 360s and PS3s have them in the box (unless I'm mistaken about the Arcade).
The hardware is different from each PS3 model- the Xbox has had more consistency in the physical hardware of each console, the only real difference being the different construction process between the different chipsets (Falcon, etc).
Hard drive installs? You mean the caching the PS3 does with each new game inserted into the console- thats not a feature, thats more of a drawback and a stop gap solution to the insanely slow disc drive. It provides nothing more than a solution for quicker load times (which are still pretty dismal).
Also, all Xbox 360s support 1080p and have done so since before the PS3 was even released.
The PS3 doesn't have free internet- it has free online play that Sony offers at a huge loss.
Game developers don't have any problems working with DVD-9, and Xbox LIVE isn't a hinderence as you inderectly apply- PSN is more so considering its not finished and fairly rough around the edges.
Whatever... You're ignorant with no real knowledge on the situation. I suggest you be quiet now.
"Who are you, and why are you dumb?!"
- Earl, Tremors 2
@Zeus.:God
We know, dude. Chill.
Zeus:God
The BluRay drive in the PS3 varies in transfer rate from just over half the speed of the 360's peak to actually faster than the 360's 12x transfer rate. This cannot qualify as "insanely slow". Yeah, it's slower overally, and so you could call it "slow", but "insanely slow" is misleading at best.
You're right that 360 varies less in the actual construction than the PS3. But in the end-state configuration, it varies about as much as PS3 does. This is because the 360 is modular. Some 360s have HDMI and some don't (I don't know how you state it isn't "optional"). Some 360s have WiFi and some don't. Most critically, some 360s have hard drives and some don't.
Yeah, the PS3 varies in ways too. Some have WiFi and some don't. Some have card readers and some don't. The BC changes are large change, although note that PS3 developers don't have access to the EE or GS anyway, so as a developer for the platform, this change doesn't affect you at all.
So the PS3 actually presents a more consistent "platform" to the developer than the 360. Does this matter? Well, yeah, it does, as developers have to take into account attach rates for anything that is optional. But in the end, I think it actually affects developers less than how PS3 is relatively more difficult to develop for given it has an inferior SDK and a more complex system architecture that requires use of assembly language to get maximum results from the hardware.
phew, too much text too read.
btw did you got my point?
Regardless of this, Microsoft still won't be able to release blu-ray games. They have to maintain compatibility with all 360s
AND THAT IS THE MAIN REASON IT WON'T HAPPEN !
Microsoft choose wrong when they didn't put an HDDVD drive in the 360's Elite/Premium revision. I believe to this day that this move would have saved HDDVD and because it didn't happen, PS3's Blu Ray killed HDDVD on arrival.
If Microsoft puts a BD drive in, they'd only be able to do it for movies and not for games. It would cost game developers way to much to develop a BD version of a game on 360, a BD version for PS3 and a regular version for 360.
More likely, a new XBOX will debut in 2 years with the drive in it. By that time, BD Drive costs should be lower than $50
AND THAT IS THE MAIN REASON IT WON'T HAPPEN !
Microsoft choose wrong when they didn't put an HDDVD drive in the 360's Elite/Premium revision. I believe to this day that this move would have saved HDDVD and because it didn't happen, PS3's Blu Ray killed HDDVD on arrival.
If Microsoft puts a BD drive in, they'd only be able to do it for movies and not for games. It would cost game developers way to much to develop a BD version of a game on 360, a BD version for PS3 and a regular version for 360.
More likely, a new XBOX will debut in 2 years with the drive in it. By that time, BD Drive costs should be lower than $50
TALKING IN CAPS IS FUN!
Still not sure why you guys tend to vote up good replies and then vote down the accidental downpost.
Downrank it all you want, its not going away.
If anything you should downrank Engadgets reply system; double postings can't be regarding as spam, only faulty coding.
You know..I would give a shit about 360, but mine is in the repair shop for the second time now in 2 months and my PS3 is doing a great job as a spaceheater.. /wrists
should be integrated shudn't it..
nothing will change.
We all know the PS3 has completly turned around and has been outselling the Xbox360 worldwide for 19 weeks straight... This is without Home, without GTA4, without MGS4, without another pricedrop... I don't see a 360 with BluRay having any dramatic effect on things.
Both the 360 & PS3 are both looking really good right now, a simple BluRay add-on won't effect the PS3's side. Sure it'll do good things to the 360 side, but nothing on the PS3
Personally, and this is just my opinion...I think its more a slap in the face to Microsoft to include a BluRay drive in their 360...Thats just me though so dont attack me