BC cost Sony about $27 per machine, so this move cannot truly be a bid to bring the price of the PS3 down. I think the drop in price was merely an attempt to make the loss of BC palpable. I very much doubt they are really trying to please consumers by cutting their game selection from 4,000+ to 65.
Therefore, it seems to me that this move is not meant to appease consumers at all, but to appease developers.
I believe they feel that with the PS3 supporting BC, that many gamers are taking a "wait and see" approach to actual PS3 games choosing instead to use their purchase strictly as a Blu-ray player.
I suspect this move is probably their way of upping PS3 game sales to keep any more developers and/or exclusive titles from jumping ship. With only 65 games on the market to date (only 30 of which being even worth glancing at), I can't say I'd blame them.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
BC cost Sony about $27 per machine, so this move cannot truly be a bid to bring the price of the PS3 down. I think the drop in price was merely an attempt to make the loss of BC palpable. I very much doubt they are really trying to please consumers by cutting their game selection from 4,000+ to 65.
Therefore, it seems to me that this move is not meant to appease consumers at all, but to appease developers.
I believe they feel that with the PS3 supporting BC, that many gamers are taking a "wait and see" approach to actual PS3 games choosing instead to use their purchase strictly as a Blu-ray player.
I suspect this move is probably their way of upping PS3 game sales to keep any more developers and/or exclusive titles from jumping ship. With only 65 games on the market to date (only 30 of which being even worth glancing at), I can't say I'd blame them.
I'm "waiting to see" if Sony gets their head out of there ass -- before I buy one.