OmegaRed said:And in the end, I'm still forced to get a PS3 for Metal Gear Solid 4. Damn you Kojima...:lol
QFT
OmegaRed said:And in the end, I'm still forced to get a PS3 for Metal Gear Solid 4. Damn you Kojima...:lol
GashPrex said:anybody think that sony might change their minds on the price point after hearing how bent a lot of people are?
on the 1up podcast they were saying that sony people were concerened they had alienated some fans with the pricepoint, so obviously they are aware.
genjiZERO said:Fixed
like I keep saying, Sony can near charge whatever they want. FF and MGS fans are rabid
HomerSimpson-Man said:Seriously, at the end of the day Sony still has the games I want most of all with games like MGS, FF, DMC.
But, yeah that price hurts so bad.
HomerSimpson-Man said:Seriously, at the end of the day Sony still has the games I want most of all with games like MGS, FF, DMC.
But, yeah that price hurts so bad.
genjiZERO said:What the price ultimately means is that I won't be able to get all the systems I want early on. So I have to make the decision, do I want a PS3 at launch or a Wii? This scenario sux, but maybe its a business strategy on Sony's part; by having these exclusives Sony will certainly be getting my money, the question now is when. If the Wii comes out at 200US and the games are cheaper and not gimicky then I very well may get that and patiently wait for Final Fantasy 13 before I pick up a PS3 (probably a year or two down the line). But still I'll be getting a PS3.
But you know, thinking about it 600US really isn't that bad of a price for what you get out of the thing. Sony is still losing money at that price. Plus if you compare a $600 PS3 to a $400 iPod and what you get with all that, well, I think anyway, the PS3 looks the better deal.
Snaku said:
RaijinFY said:For MGS4, FFXIII games and others... Ugh, I will get a PS3 possibly, but first I'll wait a price drop. THERES NO WAY SONY YOU WILL GET 600 FROM ME!!! NOT EVEN WITHOUT BUYING A SINGLE GAME!!!!
RaijinFY said:I dont think Sony will have the balls to keep these prices more than one year. Once they will switch to 65nm for CELL and RSX, cost production will go down and then I expect a $100 price cut for each SKU. Otherwise, this is insane... and certainly not good for the industry.
RaijinFY said:The funny thing is if Sony had announced a $100 cheaper SKU, I would have been sold. :/
RaijinFY said:The funny thing is if Sony had announced a $100 cheaper SKU, I would have been sold. :/
Ponn01 said:This is what i'm not understanding and someone mentioned it earlier and I think I agree its a psychological thing. People are crying bloody murder on this price and convincing themselves the Basic package is crippled when actually it's priced pretty damn reasonably next to it's competitior sitting on the shelf. You're getting everything the competitor offers on the shelf and for a hundred bucks more you are getting a next gen disc format STANDARD for future proof gaming and Blu-ray movie playback. For a hundred bucks more. And you have 6 months to save up that hundred bucks but look at the return on investment. I'm really just talking about the bitching on GAF here. Your average consumer I wouldn't expect this kind of reasoning from and I don't expect them out there on launch day either.
I'm basically looking at it like building a PC. I try to have a good mix of what's in my budget and what I can throw in to future proof it as much as possible. And that's just hardware though. The bigger picture is hardware, longevity and games. Games being the biggest push for me along with Blu-ray. The machine is an investment, regardless what you think you may or may not want you have to take into consideration whats in it and everything its about. I'd rather have the stuff in there with seamless integration and standard then have to monkey around with add ons and accessories and upgrades. Save that shit and headache for the PC and in the long run I always end up paying more for it and getting less.
Panajev2001a said:I think Sony corp's new policy is to massively increase profit margins and reduce by a great amount the number of years it takes any product they sell to recoup their losses.
jacomar said:Someone on a spanish forum did a hell of a job putting up pics of what was shown this year, and what was shown laste year. He called it PS3 vs PS2.5
Sorry if yall consider it offtopic
http://elotrolado.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=549631&perpage=10&pagenumber=1
HomerSimpson-Man said:I got say though, since select games didn't match their own CG(duh), it still a stretch to call something like Resistence PS2.5 since it's not up to Killzone CG. Has he seen the game compared to PS2 games? That .5 is one generaltional leap then.
jacomar said:Someone on a spanish forum did a hell of a job putting up pics of what was shown this year, and what was shown laste year. He called it PS3 vs PS2.5
Sorry if yall consider it offtopic
http://elotrolado.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=549631&perpage=10&pagenumber=1
nataku said:Those comparsions are terrible...
RaijinFY said:The funny thing is if Sony had announced a $100 cheaper SKU, I would have been sold. :/
jacomar said:Why?
beermonkey@tehbias said:Does anyone have HDTV penetration statistics for Japan?
Doube D said:bull fuckin shit. There is NO WAY sony is losing 100-200 bucks on the 600 dinero version. Are these idiots saying it costs sony 800 dollars to mass produce the ps3 (something it does practically all internally)? Cause if so, either MS is losing 400 bucks per x360 or ps3 tech really is a gpu generation ahead. Otherwise, it doesn't make any sense, blu ray drive and all taken into account.
I HIGHLY doubt sony would be losing any money on the 600 buck piece. MAYBE 50ish at best.
MrSardonic said:where does this bullshit come from? Reports of the videogames industry are so fucking inaccurate it borders on propaganda
_leech_ said:Don't have any numbers, but i do know they've had a form of HDTV (known as Hi-Vision) since the early 90s.
It is full-on propaganda. I am amazed at how much the media fuels the fanboyism in this industry.
So you are saying that an industry analyst who says that 360 has 'PS2 graphics' is credible.The Take Out Bandit said:Yeah, Bloomberg am fuckin' biased total! :lol
The problem is this isn't a gaming site, and these are industry analysts.
people who cite analysts are morons :lolbeermonkey@tehbias said:So you are saying that an industry analyst who says that 360 has 'PS2 graphics' is credible.
Willy Wanka said:Supposedly MS lose $126 on every 360 sold so $100-$200 doesn't seem that far off base.
http://uk.gamespot.com/news/6140383.html?sid=6140383
Not until I walk into Costco and see PS3s on the shelf!Snaku said:So uh, yeah. Do I have to wait until the PS3 actually launches later this year, or is Sony's word enough to have my tag removed? :lol
Doube D said:bull fuckin shit. There is NO WAY sony is losing 100-200 bucks on the 600 dinero version. Are these idiots saying it costs sony 800 dollars to mass produce the ps3 (something it does practically all internally)? Cause if so, either MS is losing 400 bucks per x360 or ps3 tech really is a gpu generation ahead. Otherwise, it doesn't make any sense, blu ray drive and all taken into account.
I HIGHLY doubt sony would be losing any money on the 600 buck piece. MAYBE 50ish at best.
bishoptl said:Not until I walk into Costco and see PS3s on the shelf!
Ninja Scooter said:they have Coscto's in canada?