PDA

View Full Version : analysts, experts debate price of console



Slappy8800
05-10-2006, 11:23 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/cost_of_gaming



The $499 PlayStation 3 will have a 20-gigabyte hard drive but lacks a memory card slot, built-in wireless and HDMI, the favored connection for high-definition televisions. Those features come in the $599 model, which includes a 60-gigabyte drive.


i know its not new news but still...ouch

AquaInferno
05-11-2006, 11:59 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/cost_of_gaming



i know its not new news but still...ouch
Sony's ****in us just like MS ****ed you guys with the Core and Whatever the other version of 360 is called. This is a lame trend that needs to end in this gen of consoles it's RIDICULOUS. The extra $100 is for blu-ray, watch how much M$ charges for the add on player, that won't be utilizing it for games.

Edit: IF M$ decides to give you guys blu-ray as an option since they jumped on the HD-DVD bus they may be biased about it.

UltraDol-Fan
05-11-2006, 12:17 PM
yeah, the difference between this and the XBox is that you can upgrade the Core to be identical the the Premium, I don't think you can with the PS3

mor911
05-11-2006, 12:21 PM
yeah, the difference between this and the XBox is that you can upgrade the Core to be identical the the Premium, I don't think you can with the PS3
They'll (Sony) probly release pricey USB add-ons to make the cheap version function like the $600 version.

AquaInferno
05-11-2006, 12:34 PM
yeah, the difference between this and the XBox is that you can upgrade the Core to be identical the the Premium, I don't think you can with the PS3
At this point man, I don't even care. Both M$ and $ony are bending us over and givin it to us.. The add ons ruined Sega (32X to name the biggest flop) and I don't care if it ruins the both of them as well.. They shouldn't be bending us consumers over.. And for the record, I have almost no loyalty to $ony only Hideo Kojima and his masterpiece AKA Metal Gear... MGS 4 is why I am getting a PS3 so $ony can suck it. I'm not happy with video gaming these days because both companies are on top and taking advantage. If only the Big N wasn't for big kids... :mad: Sega, make a console, save the world!!! I am up in arms about this little 2 version thing $ony and M$ think is ****in funny, I'll show em funny. I'll get my money back, I'll get a mod and burn every SCEA game known to man for PS3, and buy only 3rd party titles. Rip me for my grip will ya, ha, I'll be laughin it up.

Agent51
05-11-2006, 12:55 PM
At this point man, I don't even care. Both M$ and $ony are bending us over and givin it to us.. The add ons ruined Sega (32X to name the biggest flop) and I don't care if it ruins the both of them as well.. They shouldn't be bending us consumers over.. And for the record, I have almost no loyalty to $ony only Hideo Kojima and his masterpiece AKA Metal Gear... MGS 4 is why I am getting a PS3 so $ony can suck it. I'm not happy with video gaming these days because both companies are on top and taking advantage. If only the Big N wasn't for big kids... :mad: Sega, make a console, save the world!!! I am up in arms about this little 2 version thing $ony and M$ think is ****in funny, I'll show em funny. I'll get my money back, I'll get a mod and burn every SCEA game known to man for PS3, and buy only 3rd party titles. Rip me for my grip will ya, ha, I'll be laughin it up.

That's clever, what you did there with the "$"s taking the place of the "S"s :rolleyes2

Here's my question, WHAT DOES IT MATTER? They sell a stripped down system for people who are just casual gamers and don't want to pay all that extra $ for sruff they don't need.

I think MS's stripped down 360 is pretty pointless, since after you buy a memory card ($30) to save the game, since there is no HD to do so, and you buy a game ($60) to even be able to USE your new 360 (since there is no HD to play XBox 1 games) you end up spendin $390, which is $10 shy of the premium system that lets you save and play old XBox games, meaning you don't NEED to buy one right away, especially sionce with the HD you can DL free games and demos. So THAT stripped down system is completely pointless in my opinion, since it's useless until you spend $90 more (game and memory card).

However, Sony's "stripped" down console DOES make sense. The system is already pricey due to the Blu-Ray player, so they need a way to appeal to more people. With their "stripped down" system you STILL get a HD (the same size as the premium 360's) and you still get wireless (according to the spec sheet BOTH have wireless controllers). With the HD it means you still get online and access to downloadable content and probably freebie games and demos. So really the only difference in the two is "true" HD with HDMI, and the extra 40GBs. Now, for someone who is just a casual gamer, they may not NEED 60GBs, and for someone who's TV doesn't support HDMI, why do they need it? In steps the "lower" PS3. Bam, they have all the features of the $600 one, sans 40GBs and HDMI, neither of which matters, so they pay $100 less. At least it isn't like the 360 where they THINK they are buying it cheaper but in the end it turns out to be the same price for less features :shakeno:

Plus, as I stated in another thread, if you buy a 360 premium pack, then you buy the HD DVD add on (which will be at LEAST $100, so we'll call it $100 for now) then you buy 2 extra hard drives (I know you can't use em, but we are talking hypothetically) to have 60GB, like the PS3, plus the $50 XBL subscription, you'd have just spent $750; $400 for the system, $100 for the HD-DVD player, $200 for 2 20GB HDs, and $50 for XBL. So that is $750 to make it equal what the PS3 has, which is built in "next gen" DVD technology in Blu-Ray, 60GB hard drive, and free online gaming. Except the PS3's is $600, so in the end all the MS fanboys (not saying you are Aqua, this is jst a general statement) that are saying Sony is priced too high and they will fail and are stupid etc etc, really have no clue what they are talking about, because, "pound-for-pound" so to speak, the PS3 is CHEAPER than the 360 :lol:

Medieval954
05-11-2006, 01:06 PM
Sony's arrogance might just bite them in the butt this time. They price the real PS3 at $599. Except, that is not a mass market price and is a whopping $200 more than Microsoft's real Xbox360 at $399, not to mention Nintendo is expected to come in at the $199-$299 range as well for the Wii. Sure, early adopters will pay $599 because those are hardcore gamers and hardcore gamers will pay ridiculous sums of money for new consoles, i.e. (Xbox360/PS2/DS on eBay). The thing is, after you've gone through them, the average Joe-sixpack isn't going to shell out $599 for a video game system. Sony didn't achieve sales dominance on the PS and PS2 until it got down to the mass market $199 price. They won't hit $199 on the PS3 for a long long time. Sony is really banking on the Playstation name to carry them through this and I'm not so sure it's going to work this time, not at that price point. You might say Sony can always cut the price, well so can Microsoft and Nintendo. Hell, Sony can drop the price by $100 next year and it'll still be $100 more expensive than an Xbox360 even if Microsoft stays put on their price. Also, North America's 3 biggest game franchises sales wise (Halo, Madden, Grand Theft Auto) will all appear on the Xbox360. The Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy, and Virtua Fighter franchises, while brilliant and exclusive to the PS3 (for now), didn't come close to the sales that Halo, Madden and GTA generated last gen in North America. And this is all not including what Nintendo is starting to do to Sony over in Japan. The DS has completely slaughtered the PSP over there and not even Playstation brand name has helped them. If the Wii takes off over there in similar fashion, this could very well be the Rome of video games collpasing. The Wii taking Japan and the Xbox360 taking North America will spell disaster for Sony, since their game division is the only thing making them a profit anymore. A lot of this speculative of course and anything can happen, but looking at it from an average consumer standpoint, not as a hardcore gamer like most in here, I think Sony really overplayed their hand here.

We'll see how this plays out.

AquaInferno
05-11-2006, 01:08 PM
That's clever, what you did there with the "$"s taking the place of the "S"s :rolleyes2

Here's my question, WHAT DOES IT MATTER? They sell a stripped down system for people who are just casual gamers and don't want to pay all that extra $ for sruff they don't need.

I think MS's stripped down 360 is pretty pointless, since after you buy a memory card ($30) to save the game, since there is no HD to do so, and you buy a game ($60) to even be able to USE your new 360 (since there is no HD to play XBox 1 games) you end up spendin $390, which is $10 shy of the premium system that lets you save and play old XBox games, meaning you don't NEED to buy one right away, especially sionce with the HD you can DL free games and demos. So THAT stripped down system is completely pointless in my opinion, since it's useless until you spend $90 more (game and memory card).

However, Sony's "stripped" down console DOES make sense. The system is already pricey due to the Blu-Ray player, so they need a way to appeal to more people. With their "stripped down" system you STILL get a HD (the same size as the premium 360's) and you still get wireless (according to the spec sheet BOTH have wireless controllers). With the HD it means you still get online and access to downloadable content and probably freebie games and demos. So really the only difference in the two is "true" HD with HDMI, and the extra 40GBs. Now, for someone who is just a casual gamer, they may not NEED 60GBs, and for someone who's TV doesn't support HDMI, why do they need it? In steps the "lower" PS3. Bam, they have all the features of the $600 one, sans 40GBs and HDMI, neither of which matters, so they pay $100 less. At least it isn't like the 360 where they THINK they are buying it cheaper but in the end it turns out to be the same price for less features :shakeno:

Plus, as I stated in another thread, if you buy a 360 premium pack, then you buy the HD DVD add on (which will be at LEAST $100, so we'll call it $100 for now) then you buy 2 extra hard drives (I know you can't use em, but we are talking hypothetically) to have 60GB, like the PS3, plus the $50 XBL subscription, you'd have just spent $750; $400 for the system, $100 for the HD-DVD player, $200 for 2 20GB HDs, and $50 for XBL. So that is $750 to make it equal what the PS3 has, which is built in "next gen" DVD technology in Blu-Ray, 60GB hard drive, and free online gaming. Except the PS3's is $600, so in the end all the MS fanboys (not saying you are Aqua, this is jst a general statement) that are saying Sony is priced too high and they will fail and are stupid etc etc, really have no clue what they are talking about, because, "pound-for-pound" so to speak, the PS3 is CHEAPER than the 360 :lol:

Well my point is this is going against the grain of gaming. I came out of the womb holding an Atari joystick and then went on to NES etc. Console gaming is about simplicity. It's about opening the box and having everything you'll ever need right there (Minus a memory card) With this add on BS that is going on it's obvious it's about the $$$. Because mommy will buy Johnny the wrong version of the PS3 or 360 and bam, mommy is now buying Johnny expensive little add ons. For example, no memory card slot in the "lite" PS3? Well isn't that gonna **** up Johnny from playing his PS2 games since mommy sold the PS2 to buy a PS3? In my opinion this is nothing but a cheap tactic by both companies to trick parents during the holidays. These parents still call PS2 just Playstation... I hear and see it all the time, they know NOTHING about the games and a ton will fall into the trap. Console gaming is about opening the box plugging it in and not needing to buy much else other than controllers, games and memory cards. They are making **** more complicated than it should be. For the record, I own 0 MS consoles. And I didn't think I was clever with M$ and $ony since that's all over the internet. (DCEmulation.com s where I saw $ony first) I did it because it's obvious what these guys are about the $$$$. I will calm down about this but as of right now I'm pissed :fire: They are goin against the fundamentals of console gaming. Change is good, but this isn't for the good of anyone other than these 2 corporations. Can you honestly say otherwise?

AquaInferno
05-11-2006, 01:10 PM
Sony's arrogance might just bite them in the butt this time. They price the real PS3 at $599. Except, that is not a mass market price and is a whopping $200 more than Microsoft's real Xbox360 at $399, not to mention Nintendo is expected to come in at the $199-$299 range as well for the Wii. Sure, early adopters will pay $599 because those are hardcore gamers and hardcore gamers will pay ridiculous sums of money for new consoles, i.e. (Xbox360/PS2/DS on eBay). The thing is, after you've gone through them, the average Joe-sixpack isn't going to shell out $599 for a video game system. Sony didn't achieve sales dominance on the PS and PS2 until it got down to the mass market $199 price. They won't hit $199 on the PS3 for a long long time. Sony is really banking on the Playstation name to carry them through this and I'm not so sure it's going to work this time, not at that price point. You might say Sony can always cut the price, well so can Microsoft and Nintendo. Hell, Sony can drop the price by $100 next year and it'll still be $100 more expensive than an Xbox360 even if Microsoft stays put on their price. Also, North America's 3 biggest game franchises sales wise (Halo, Madden, Grand Theft Auto) will all appear on the Xbox360. The Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy, and Virtua Fighter franchises, while brilliant and exclusive to the PS3 (for now), didn't come close to the sales that Halo, Madden and GTA generated last gen in North America. And this is all not including what Nintendo is starting to do to Sony over in Japan. The DS has completely slaughtered the PSP over there and not even Playstation brand name has helped them. If the Wii takes off over there in similar fashion, this could very well be the Rome of video games collpasing. The Wii taking Japan and the Xbox360 taking North America will spell disaster for Sony, since their game division is the only thing making them a profit anymore. A lot of this speculative of course and anything can happen, but looking at it from an average consumer standpoint, not as a hardcore gamer like most in here, I think Sony really overplayed their hand here.

We'll see how this plays out.

I love my PSP it kicks ***. Does as much as an Ipod nano and THEN some... Beats the carts the DS is STILL using. :tongue:

Deus Ex Dolphin
05-11-2006, 01:11 PM
Yeah, MS invented the "tard pack" and now Sony has PERFECTED it.

Interesting to see the reactions of people to the PS3 prices though:


http://ytmndps3.ytmnd.com/

Agent51
05-11-2006, 01:12 PM
Sony's arrogance might just bite them in the butt this time. They price the real PS3 at $599. Except, that is not a mass market price and is a whopping $200 more than Microsoft's real Xbox360 at $399, not to mention Nintendo is expected to come in at the $199-$299 range as well for the Wii. Sure, early adopters will pay $599 because those are hardcore gamers and hardcore gamers will pay ridiculous sums of money for new consoles, i.e. (Xbox360/PS2/DS on eBay). The thing is, after you've gone through them, the average Joe-sixpack isn't going to shell out $599 for a video game system. Sony didn't achieve sales dominance on the PS and PS2 until it got down to the mass market $199 price. They won't hit $199 on the PS3 for a long long time. Sony is really banking on the Playstation name to carry them through this and I'm not so sure it's going to work this time, not at that price point. You might say Sony can always cut the price, well so can Microsoft and Nintendo. Hell, Sony can drop the price by $100 next year and it'll still be $100 more expensive than an Xbox360 even if Microsoft stays put on their price. Also, North America's 3 biggest game franchises sales wise (Halo, Madden, Grand Theft Auto) will all appear on the Xbox360. The Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy, and Virtua Fighter franchises, while brilliant and exclusive to the PS3 (for now), didn't come close to the sales that Halo, Madden and GTA generated last gen in North America. And this is all not including what Nintendo is starting to do to Sony over in Japan. The DS has completely slaughtered the PSP over there and not even Playstation brand name has helped them. If the Wii takes off over there in similar fashion, this could very well be the Rome of video games collpasing. The Wii taking Japan and the Xbox360 taking North America will spell disaster for Sony, since their game division is the only thing making them a profit anymore. A lot of this speculative of course and anything can happen, but looking at it from an average consumer standpoint, not as a hardcore gamer like most in here, I think Sony really overplayed their hand here.

We'll see how this plays out.

Dude, again, you are completely forgetting about the Japanese market and just HOW big Sony will be over there for them. You are probably right in the fact that Sony may not dominate the US market, at least for some time, but MS doesn't stand a chance against Sony in the Japanese market, and over there they are WAY more technoligically obsessed, and there is a greater "gamer" population, so but Sony killing MS over there, it will mre than make up for any struggles the MAY have here.

Also, with regards to the pricing, see my post above yours, I already pointd out how, in the end, Sony's system is cheaper, so take that for what it's worth.

Medieval954
05-11-2006, 01:15 PM
I love my PSP it kicks ***. Does as much as an Ipod nano and THEN some... Beats the carts the DS is STILL using. :tongue:
Yeah, the PSP is a very nice piece of technology. I was just pointing out that in Japan, that has amounted to nothing as the DS is steamrolling them saleswise. The DS and PSP are neck and neck in North America, so no worries on this side of the pacific. :wink:

Dol-Fan Dupree
05-11-2006, 01:16 PM
Sony's arrogance might just bite them in the butt this time. They price the real PS3 at $599. Except, that is not a mass market price and is a whopping $200 more than Microsoft's real Xbox360 at $399, not to mention Nintendo is expected to come in at the $199-$299 range as well for the Wii. Sure, early adopters will pay $599 because those are hardcore gamers and hardcore gamers will pay ridiculous sums of money for new consoles, i.e. (Xbox360/PS2/DS on eBay). The thing is, after you've gone through them, the average Joe-sixpack isn't going to shell out $599 for a video game system. Sony didn't achieve sales dominance on the PS and PS2 until it got down to the mass market $199 price. They won't hit $199 on the PS3 for a long long time. Sony is really banking on the Playstation name to carry them through this and I'm not so sure it's going to work this time, not at that price point. You might say Sony can always cut the price, well so can Microsoft and Nintendo. Hell, Sony can drop the price by $100 next year and it'll still be $100 more expensive than an Xbox360 even if Microsoft stays put on their price. Also, North America's 3 biggest game franchises sales wise (Halo, Madden, Grand Theft Auto) will all appear on the Xbox360. The Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy, and Virtua Fighter franchises, while brilliant and exclusive to the PS3 (for now), didn't come close to the sales that Halo, Madden and GTA generated last gen in North America. And this is all not including what Nintendo is starting to do to Sony over in Japan. The DS has completely slaughtered the PSP over there and not even Playstation brand name has helped them. If the Wii takes off over there in similar fashion, this could very well be the Rome of video games collpasing. The Wii taking Japan and the Xbox360 taking North America will spell disaster for Sony, since their game division is the only thing making them a profit anymore. A lot of this speculative of course and anything can happen, but looking at it from an average consumer standpoint, not as a hardcore gamer like most in here, I think Sony really overplayed their hand here.

We'll see how this plays out.

From what I have read the biggest reason for the huge price is the Cell chip and the Blu-ray drive. In fact an article I read actually predicted this price and then said that in two years they could easily reduce the cost of the console by $250 by the mass manufacturing of those two components alone.

I think I agree with the guy at IGN who said that the big reason for the price is to not piss off blu-ray player manufacturers.

Agent51
05-11-2006, 01:17 PM
Well my point is this is going against the grain of gaming. I came out of the womb holding an Atari joystick and then went on to NES etc. Console gaming is about simplicity. It's about opening the box and having everything you'll ever need right there (Minus a memory card) With this add on BS that is going on it's obvious it's about the $$$. Because mommy will buy Johnny the wrong version of the PS3 or 360 and bam, mommy is now buying Johnny expensive little add ons. For example, no memory card slot in the "lite" PS3? Well isn't that gonna **** up Johnny from playing his PS2 games since mommy sold the PS2 to buy a PS3? In my opinion this is nothing but a cheap tactic by both companies to trick parents during the holidays. These parents still call PS2 just Playstation... I hear and see it all the time, they know NOTHING about the games and a ton will fall into the trap. Console gaming is about opening the box plugging it in and not needing to buy much else other than controllers, games and memory cards. They are making **** more complicated than it should be. For the record, I own 0 MS consoles. And I didn't think I was clever with M$ and $ony since that's all over the internet. (DCEmulation.com s where I saw $ony first) I did it because it's obvious what these guys are about the $$$$. I will calm down about this but as of right now I'm pissed :fire: They are goin against the fundamentals of console gaming. Change is good, but this isn't for the good of anyone other than these 2 corporations. Can you honestly say otherwise?

This I can semi agree with. While IDK if it is their plan persay, I do agree that a LOT of parents are clueless and will get the worng one and need to buy the expensive add-ons just to make it equal to the right one. Also, when the 360 came out and it was 2 different packs, I didn;t get it at all, I thought it was completely pointless (for the reason I named in my previous post). HOWEVER, seeing what Sony has done with their cheaper pack makes me see that there IS some use for it (again, as I described in my earlier post). It still isn't perfect (no memory card slots?) but it does make sense, as it has everything else, aside from HDMI, that the more expensive pack does. I still think they should be making just ONE system, with everything included, but if they MUST make two "packs" then I think Sony DEFINATELY did it "right", and MUCH better than MS, as Sony's is still a fully useable game system, just minus HDMI, and the 360 needs $100 in extras just to be playable.

AquaInferno
05-11-2006, 01:19 PM
This I can semi agree with. While IDK if it is their plan persay, I do agree that a LOT of parents are clueless and will get the worng one and need to buy the expensive add-ons just to make it equal to the right one. Also, when the 360 came out and it was 2 different packs, I didn;t get it at all, I thought it was completely pointless (for the reason I named in my previous post). HOWEVER, seeing what Sony has done with their cheaper pack makes me see that there IS some use for it (again, as I described in my earlier post). It still isn't perfect (no memory card slots?) but it does make sense, as it has everything else, aside from HDMI, that the more expensive pack does. I still think they should be making just ONE system, with everything included, but if they MUST make two "packs" then I think Sony DEFINATELY did it "right", and MUCH better than MS, as Sony's is still a fully useable game system, just minus HDMI, and the 360 needs $100 in extras just to be playable.

Ok I agree, there agreed on something. And I still like sayin Sony can suck it, hell so can MS and Nintendo, but I dunno I got nothin against the Big N.. They're always the cheapest and well who knows I might go PS3/Wii this generation I always liked some of Big N's franchises.

Medieval954
05-11-2006, 01:32 PM
Dude, again, you are completely forgetting about the Japanese market and just HOW big Sony will be over there for them. You are probably right in the fact that Sony may not dominate the US market, at least for some time, but MS doesn't stand a chance against Sony in the Japanese market, and over there they are WAY more technoligically obsessed, and there is a greater "gamer" population, so but Sony killing MS over there, it will mre than make up for any struggles the MAY have here.

Also, with regards to the pricing, see my post above yours, I already pointd out how, in the end, Sony's system is cheaper, so take that for what it's worth.
Yes, I know how big Sony is in Japan right now. They own the video games market, like they do worldwide. My point was, everyone thought with the PSP, they'd take out Nintendo's bread and butter (their handheld division). But instead, the DS has managed not only to outsell the PSP, but by a wide margin. That has to be of some concern since people thought, including Sony themselves, that the Playstation brand was invincible. Now, this does not mean the Wii will do the same thing to the PS3 in Japan, but it is a realistic outcome now based on the DS/PSP race. Also, yes, the XBox360 is pretty much dead on arrival in Japan. They don't seem to like American products over there. :lol:

As for pricing, the problem is not that the PS3 isn't a good value, because with all the stuff they crammed into it, it is. The problem is the price point is too high for the average consumer. Yes, the Xbox360 with the HD-DVD attachment is the same price as the PS3. But what if you don't want to watch HD-DVD's? What if you only want to play games? I don't think the average comsumer wants high-def movies since HDTV penetration is still at roughly 25%. What about the other 75% who don't have a high-def TV? Is it right Sony forces a Blu-Ray player on them they won't probably ever use? I may be wrong and the PS3 might be the thing that makes people run out and want to upgrade their TV and I'm sure that is what Sony is gambling on, but that is a huge gamble and I personally am not sure if it'll pay off.

Just to be clear, I'm not trying to say the PS3 is totally going to collapse. That is just silly and many people will still buy the thing, myself included (after some price drops). I just don't think they will dominate the market anymore, not at that price.

Dol-Fan Dupree
05-11-2006, 01:34 PM
This I can semi agree with. While IDK if it is their plan persay, I do agree that a LOT of parents are clueless and will get the worng one and need to buy the expensive add-ons just to make it equal to the right one. Also, when the 360 came out and it was 2 different packs, I didn;t get it at all, I thought it was completely pointless (for the reason I named in my previous post). HOWEVER, seeing what Sony has done with their cheaper pack makes me see that there IS some use for it (again, as I described in my earlier post). It still isn't perfect (no memory card slots?) but it does make sense, as it has everything else, aside from HDMI, that the more expensive pack does. I still think they should be making just ONE system, with everything included, but if they MUST make two "packs" then I think Sony DEFINATELY did it "right", and MUCH better than MS, as Sony's is still a fully useable game system, just minus HDMI, and the 360 needs $100 in extras just to be playable.

I thought the cheaper Sony still had memory card slots, just not memory stick slots

Dol-Fan Dupree
05-11-2006, 01:40 PM
Yes, I know how big Sony is in Japan right now. They own the video games market, like they do worldwide. My point was, everyone thought with the PSP, they'd take out Nintendo's bread and butter (their handheld division). But instead, the DS has managed not only to outsell the PSP, but by a wide margin. That has to be of some concern since people thought, including Sony themselves, that the Playstation brand was invincible. Now, this does not mean the Wii will do the same thing to the PS3 in Japan, but it is a realistic outcome now based on the DS/PSP race. Also, yes, the XBox360 is pretty much dead on arrival in Japan. They don't seem to like American products over there. :lol:

As for pricing, the problem is not that the PS3 isn't a good value, because with all the stuff they crammed into it, it is. The problem is the price point is too high for the average consumer. Yes, the Xbox360 with the HD-DVD attachment is the same price as the PS3. But what if you don't want to watch HD-DVD's? What if you only want to play games? I don't think the average comsumer wants high-def movies since HDTV penetration is still at roughly 25%. What about the other 75% who don't have a high-def TV? Is it right Sony forces a Blu-Ray player on them they won't probably ever use? I may be wrong and the PS3 might be the thing that makes people run out and want to upgrade their TV and I'm sure that is what Sony is gambling on, but that is a huge gamble and I personally am not sure if it'll pay off.

Just to be clear, I'm not trying to say the PS3 is totally going to collapse. That is just silly and many people will still buy the thing, myself included (after some price drops). I just don't think they will dominate the market anymore, not at that price.

Wow a lot of entitlism in that statement. It is right for Sony to put anything they want in their product. It is your right to choose if you want to buy it or not.

I like Blu-Ray because of the size. Heck because of the size of Blu-Ray now game makers can release their games world wide at the same time, allowing all versions on one disk. Sometime soon 4 to 9 gigs is just not going to be enough data

Medieval954
05-11-2006, 01:42 PM
From what I have read the biggest reason for the huge price is the Cell chip and the Blu-ray drive. In fact an article I read actually predicted this price and then said that in two years they could easily reduce the cost of the console by $250 by the mass manufacturing of those two components alone.

I think I agree with the guy at IGN who said that the big reason for the price is to not piss off blu-ray player manufacturers.

Well, yeah, since Sony basically owns the Cell chip (along with IBM) and the Blu-ray format is 100% Sony technology, they could conceivably drop it $250 in 2 years. But that still makes it $349. Hardly a consumer friendly price. Also, in 2 years, Microsoft and Nintendo will have had price cuts by then as well. Can they afford to shut out the mass market for 2 years? That's a gamble.

Medieval954
05-11-2006, 01:45 PM
Wow a lot of entitlism in that statement. It is right for Sony to put anything they want in their product. It is your right to choose if you want to buy it or not.

I like Blu-Ray because of the size. Heck because of the size of Blu-Ray now game makers can release their games world wide at the same time, allowing all versions on one disk. Sometime soon 4 to 9 gigs is just not going to be enough data

Like I said, I'm trying to view this as an average consumer, not a hardcore gamer. :wink:

Dol-Fan Dupree
05-11-2006, 01:50 PM
Well, yeah, since Sony basically owns the Cell chip (along with IBM) and the Blu-ray format is 100% Sony technology, they could conceivably drop it $250 in 2 years. But that still makes it $349. Hardly a consumer friendly price. Also, in 2 years, Microsoft and Nintendo will have had price cuts by then as well. Can they afford to shut out the mass market for 2 years? That's a gamble.

Well there are other compenents in the PS3 other than the Cell Chip and the blu-Ray player. There is also the RSX chip and a lot of other fun memory's and all the other things that will get cheaper. Just look at video cars, right now that video card with the chip in the PS3 would cost $500, in two years that would go down to at least $150. I am just talking about cell chip and blu-ray player alone.

I think it will take a good two years if not three for the PS2 to stop outselling the PS3 and Xbox360 combined.

Dol-Fan Dupree
05-11-2006, 01:51 PM
Like I said, I'm trying to view this as an average consumer, not a hardcore gamer. :wink:

average consumer is going to buy a PS2 or an Xbox.

Medieval954
05-11-2006, 01:56 PM
average consumer is going to buy a PS2 or an Xbox.

Right, but topic was a debate of console prices on next-gen systems, not last gen. People buying PS2's, Xbox's and Gamecube's does not help their install base on of next-gen systems. At least not directly.

Agent51
05-11-2006, 01:57 PM
Ok I agree, there agreed on something. And I still like sayin Sony can suck it, hell so can MS and Nintendo, but I dunno I got nothin against the Big N.. They're always the cheapest and well who knows I might go PS3/Wii this generation I always liked some of Big N's franchises.

I don't have anything against any of them. Actually, I will say I can't stand nintendo, they have failed me ever since SNES. I quite them after the orignal NES, I never like super, 64 was horrible, and GC doesn't even deserve words, and let's just say I can't POSSIBLY roll my eyes enough to express my feelings for the "Wii".

I do PREFER Sony, but that's because I like their games better, and I always like the controller better than the XBox's (finally the 360 got the cotnroller right though). Not to mention I play MOSTLY sports games, and I just like the feel and control of them more on PS than on XBox.

However, I don't HATE MS, nor am I a "fanboy" of either. My arguements may sound like I'm a Sony fanboy, but I'm not, I'm just trying to legitimately defend it since nobody else seems to be doing so (defending it with FACTS anyone).

It also gets me that EVERY SINGLE TIME a new system is coming out stuff like this happens. Half the people bash it's technology, and price and it's E3 showing, etc, and the other half praise it to high hell by just saying "it's gonna be awesome" and such, while neither side provides and FACTS for their claims (I know some pro and con peopel provide facts, but the majority just go on opinions and heresay). In the end the system always turns out great and those same bashers end up owning one and praising it, so the whole pre-launch arguements tend to get REALLY old (again, nothing directed at you Aqua, this is just a generalization). Everyone bitched about the 360's price when it came out, but it turned out to be worth the money. People questioned it's technology, and it turns out to be pretty good, etc etc. I'm just waiting for the day when all these pre-lanch *****-fests stop. When was the last time a BAD system was launched? Let's see:

360 - Doin' pretty good so far, WAY to early to call it a success or failure, but I HIGHLY doubt it crashes and burns.

Game Cube - Many people (myself included) don't like it, mainly becase of it's "kiddie" games (also the controller for me, I hate that thing), but the fact remains that is still selling, and it's holding it's own in the company of the giants of MS and Sony, which is pretty impressive, IMO, for a company who shuns online play and who is "geared towards kids".

XBox - I'd call this a GREAT success. Powerful (for it's time) graphics, the hard drive, everything, huge success.

Playstation 2 - Again, great success

Playstation 1 - Big success

OK, after this the order gets hazy, and I don't feel like looking up the timeline, lol, but to me, aside from Sega Saturn/CD, the Jaguar, and the 3DO, all of which were like DECADES ago, lol, we have never really had a FAILURE of a system. Sure, there have been many people didn't like, or in the case of the dreamcast, a great system that just folded, but in terms of just a crap system in general that was a complete failure, those three are the only ones that come to mind, and they were all a LONG time ago, no RECENT system has failed, and thy just keep getting better, yet everyone STILL has the tired arguments before a launch. Be it about the specs or the price or the lack of E3 content or the lack of launch lineup etc. Now the whole "2 versions" arguement comes in. Well yes, they should stick to just one build, but I see their reasoning in two different versions, and when it all comes down to it, DON'T BUY THE CRAPPY PACKAGE! Lol, it's that simple. It's not like the premium 360 or the HDMI PS3 would be $300 or $500 respectively if the lower package DIDN'T exist, they'd still be $400 and $600, but then people wouldn't have the OPTION to buy a cheaper package that lacked the stuff they may not NEED, or want, anyway. It's a smart idea IMO, it just needs to be done better. Sony ALMOST had it, they just should have had memory card slots in the cheaper one too.

Agent51
05-11-2006, 01:59 PM
I thought the cheaper Sony still had memory card slots, just not memory stick slots

So did I, but some people are making it out to be that is has no memory card slots, so I was just disputing it

Dol-Fan Dupree
05-11-2006, 02:01 PM
Right, but topic was a debate of console prices on next-gen systems, not last gen. People buying PS2's, Xbox's and Gamecube's does not help their install base on of next-gen systems. At least not directly.

Well that doesn't really happen until two years down the road. It took till year 3 for the ps2 to come close to the ps1. Ps2 is still selling really freaking well. It is going to dominate this christmas just like it dominated last christmas. It won't be till 2 or 3 years till the ps2 isn't the highest selling console.

Dol-Fan Dupree
05-11-2006, 02:01 PM
So did I, but some people are making it out to be that is has no memory card slots, so I was just disputing it

my understanding was no HDMI, no wifi, 40 less gigs of hard drive space and no memory stick

Dol-Fan Dupree
05-11-2006, 02:10 PM
Game Cube - Many people (myself included) don't like it, mainly becase of it's "kiddie" games (also the controller for me, I hate that thing), but the fact remains that is still selling, and it's holding it's own in the company of the giants of MS and Sony, which is pretty impressive, IMO, for a company who shuns online play and who is "geared towards kids".


The thing about the Game cube is that it is the only system that actually made a profit to the company since launch. If you look at the profibility of the three gaming departments, Nintendo is dominating.

Medieval954
05-11-2006, 02:11 PM
Well that doesn't really happen until two years down the road. It took till year 3 for the ps2 to come close to the ps1. Ps2 is still selling really freaking well. It is going to dominate this christmas just like it dominated last christmas. It won't be till 2 or 3 years till the ps2 isn't the highest selling console.
Well, that's the point I've been trying to hammer through this entire thread. Price and value are two different things. While next-gen systems may be a value for hardcore gamers, the price is what separates it from selling well to the average consumer. It's why DS outsells PSP and why PS2 outsells Xbox360.

Agent51
05-11-2006, 02:12 PM
Yes, I know how big Sony is in Japan right now. They own the video games market, like they do worldwide. My point was, everyone thought with the PSP, they'd take out Nintendo's bread and butter (their handheld division). But instead, the DS has managed not only to outsell the PSP, but by a wide margin. That has to be of some concern since people thought, including Sony themselves, that the Playstation brand was invincible. Now, this does not mean the Wii will do the same thing to the PS3 in Japan, but it is a realistic outcome now based on the DS/PSP race. Also, yes, the XBox360 is pretty much dead on arrival in Japan. They don't seem to like American products over there. :lol:

As for pricing, the problem is not that the PS3 isn't a good value, because with all the stuff they crammed into it, it is. The problem is the price point is too high for the average consumer. Yes, the Xbox360 with the HD-DVD attachment is the same price as the PS3. But what if you don't want to watch HD-DVD's? What if you only want to play games? I don't think the average comsumer wants high-def movies since HDTV penetration is still at roughly 25%. What about the other 75% who don't have a high-def TV? Is it right Sony forces a Blu-Ray player on them they won't probably ever use? I may be wrong and the PS3 might be the thing that makes people run out and want to upgrade their TV and I'm sure that is what Sony is gambling on, but that is a huge gamble and I personally am not sure if it'll pay off.

Just to be clear, I'm not trying to say the PS3 is totally going to collapse. That is just silly and many people will still buy the thing, myself included (after some price drops). I just don't think they will dominate the market anymore, not at that price.

But DS killed the market as NINTENDO's product, which is still a Japanese company. I was arguing that PS3 will destroy the 360 in Japan, which will even out to MS dominating the US market for the time being. Plus, those Japanese are crazy tech heads, and they ALL have tons of money (I know, because THOUSANDS of Japanese people visit Hawai'i everyday, and they are ALL tossing money around left and right) so they will prolly buy a PS3 AND Wii, my point was that PS3 will destroy the 360 there and even out in th wordlwide market.

If you don't want to watch HD-DVDs then you don't buy the attatchment, so you have your game system for $400, plus an extra $50 a year for XBL. So in 2 (or 4, depending on which you buy) the price equals out with paying $50 each year for XBL. As far as people not having HDTVs, the argument goes both ways, BOTH systems were made for HDTVs. Both systems still look better than current-gen on normal TVs, but they looks WORLDS better in HDTV, so anyone with a normal TV who buys either system will most likely be upgrading to an HDTV soon anyway. It may be a gamble for Sony adding the Blur-Ray trying to make it the future, but BOTH systems base their graphics around HDTV, so in that argument, BOTH systems took a huge gamble on their futre period, gaming or not, by making their systems HD. They were basically banking on the majority of gamers either owning a HDTV or buying one soon after. This is obvious since most of the best graphical features don't show up when played on normal TVs. For example, Fight Night's blood and sweat and facial expressions aren't NREALY as clear on a normal TV compared to HD, and you NEED to see those features to know how you are doing in the game, and a lot of future sports games are using, or going to use, the "facial features tell how the game is going" concept. So basically, anyone who doesn't own HDTV will be at a disadvantage by not knowing since they can't see it without HD. So you see, they both already took a gamble by assuming everyone will get an HDTV to use these systems on, so Sony's B;u-Ray ISN'T a gamble, because it's not like you can play the game in a normal TV with the super graphics it boasts, but you need a HDTV for the Blu-Ray DVDs, you need HDTV for both, so it's really just a bonus.

ChrisKo
05-11-2006, 02:13 PM
my understanding was no HDMI, no wifi, 40 less gigs of hard drive space and no memory stick

You are correct sir!

Agent51
05-11-2006, 02:14 PM
my understanding was no HDMI, no wifi, 40 less gigs of hard drive space and no memory stick

That was mine too, except if you look at the specs sheet, the official one released by Sony (posted SOMEWHERE on these pages, has Japanese and american writing) that compares the specs of the two, it says they BOTH have wireless. That would make the only difference HDMI and 40GBs

Dol-Fan Dupree
05-11-2006, 02:15 PM
Well, that's the point I've been trying to hammer through this entire thread. Price and value are two different things. While next-gen systems may be a value for hardcore gamers, the price is what separates it from selling well to the average consumer. It's why DS outsells PSP and why PS2 outsells Xbox360.

My point is that in two years is when things will actually matter in the next gen arm race. It will be when both systems are pricy enough for the more average gamer to buy one and when each system will have enough games where people will make the choice by the one with the most games

ChrisKo
05-11-2006, 02:15 PM
That was mine too, except if you look at the specs sheet, the official one released by Sony (posted SOMEWHERE on these pages, has Japanese and american writing) that compares the specs of the two, it says they BOTH have wireless. That would make the only difference HDMI and 40GBs

Wireless controllers, yes, but not WiFi network support.


EDIT - Adding image to show difference (notice no IEEE 802.11 b/g for the lower price)
http://www.finheaven.com/clear.gif

Medieval954
05-11-2006, 02:16 PM
But DS killed the market as NINTENDO's product, which is still a Japanese company. I was arguing that PS3 will destroy the 360 in Japan, which will even out to MS dominating the US market for the time being. Plus, those Japanese are crazy tech heads, and they ALL have tons of money (I know, because THOUSANDS of Japanese people visit Hawai'i everyday, and they are ALL tossing money around left and right) so they will prolly buy a PS3 AND Wii, my point was that PS3 will destroy the 360 there and even out in th wordlwide market.

If you don't want to watch HD-DVDs then you don't buy the attatchment, so you have your game system for $400, plus an extra $50 a year for XBL. So in 2 (or 4, depending on which you buy) the price equals out with paying $50 each year for XBL. As far as people not having HDTVs, the argument goes both ways, BOTH systems were made for HDTVs. Both systems still look better than current-gen on normal TVs, but they looks WORLDS better in HDTV, so anyone with a normal TV who buys either system will most likely be upgrading to an HDTV soon anyway. It may be a gamble for Sony adding the Blur-Ray trying to make it the future, but BOTH systems base their graphics around HDTV, so in that argument, BOTH systems took a huge gamble on their futre period, gaming or not, by making their systems HD. They were basically banking on the majority of gamers either owning a HDTV or buying one soon after. This is obvious since most of the best graphical features don't show up when played on normal TVs. For example, Fight Night's blood and sweat and facial expressions aren't NREALY as clear on a normal TV compared to HD, and you NEED to see those features to know how you are doing in the game, and a lot of future sports games are using, or going to use, the "facial features tell how the game is going" concept. So basically, anyone who doesn't own HDTV will be at a disadvantage by not knowing since they can't see it without HD. So you see, they both already took a gamble by assuming everyone will get an HDTV to use these systems on, so Sony's B;u-Ray ISN'T a gamble, because it's not like you can play the game in a normal TV with the super graphics it boasts, but you need a HDTV for the Blu-Ray DVDs, you need HDTV for both, so it's really just a bonus.

I get we're you're coming from. Like I said, we'll see if these two consoles actually drive people out to get HDTV's or not, because like you said, you do need one to take full advantage of them.

Medieval954
05-11-2006, 02:18 PM
My point is that in two years is when things will actually matter in the next gen arm race. It will be when both systems are pricy enough for the more average gamer to buy one and when each system will have enough games where people will make the choice by the one with the most games
Gotcha. I agree. None of this will truly matter until about 2-3 years when all 3 consoles are entrenched into the market. But it is fun to speculate. :goof:

dQbell
05-11-2006, 02:34 PM
My point is that in two years is when things will actually matter in the next gen arm race. It will be when both systems are pricy enough for the more average gamer to buy one and when each system will have enough games where people will make the choice by the one with the most games

Good Point. And that's most likely why MS so needed to come out early. Sony has 66% of the market. That's huge. For MS to come out along side Sony would be total failure. In 2-3 years will be a major challenge for the 360.

Dol-Fan Dupree
05-11-2006, 02:35 PM
I get we're you're coming from. Like I said, we'll see if these two consoles actually drive people out to get HDTV's or not, because like you said, you do need one to take full advantage of them.

i think in 2008 when all broadcasts are in HD, that will actually pump up hd at home

Agent51
05-11-2006, 02:39 PM
Wireless controllers, yes, but not WiFi network support.


EDIT - Adding image to show difference (notice no IEEE 802.11 b/g for the lower price)
http://ps3.qj.net/uploads/articles_module/36205_PS3_difference.jpg

THAT makes more sense, a lot of people were arguing no wireless/bluetooth, and that chart clearly shows it has bluetooth AND wireless controllers for both. The Wi-Fi I DID know though, but, in theory, can't you just hook it into a wireless router?

ChrisKo
05-11-2006, 02:58 PM
THAT makes more sense, a lot of people were arguing no wireless/bluetooth, and that chart clearly shows it has bluetooth AND wireless controllers for both. The Wi-Fi I DID know though, but, in theory, can't you just hook it into a wireless router?

Yes, that means the wireless access point and your internet connection need to be near your console. Most people have their internet connection enter the home in their office and they put a wireless access point there. Then they use wireless connections to their gaming devices to avoid any further wires.

You could put a wireless access point next to the game console and have that act as a bridge to the original access point.

Since the PS3 will have USB, it will be only a matter of time before a USB wireless adapter is created anyway.

There's a lot of different options when it comes to achieving your network goals. It all depends on how much money you're willing to spend. I have no problems running a 100ft patch cable from my office to the living room. Makes it easier if your single and don't have a wife to complain about some cable laying on the floor. :evil:

Deus Ex Dolphin
05-11-2006, 03:32 PM
I'm looking at that 2X speed for the Blu-ray drive and wondering how bad load times will be on the PS3, unless developers learn to stream off the disk and cache in the hard drive to reduce load times. A lot depends on the developer, but 2X is gonna be slow.

Uh, I still get from that chart that the $500 system has no memory slots, period.

The Blu-ray movie function is still broken in the $500 unit WITHOUT a HDMI output, which destroys the value of the "bargain" PS3. I can accept the "value for the price" argument for the $600 PS3, but $500 buyers will get bent over.

Price is a huge factor for casual gamers, with game selection being a close second. You can talk about the PS3 being down to $400 in two years time, but by then I bet you can get a Wii for $129 or even $99, and a 360 for $199 or $299 for a HD-DVD bundle package.

At $149 the systems really start to fly off the shelves, if the games are there, which is why the Gamecube has suffered in sales even at $99, and MS will have a 360 at that price point at least a year, maybe TWO years before Sony can match it. Sony simply can't afford to bleed money like MS can and has done with the original Xbox.

Game selection will be much closer this gen too. There is much more Japanese support (RPGs) for the 360, and GTA4 is a big plus. The 360 will have more games to choose from this year, and quite possibly throughout the whole next-gen. Better price and matching game selection? Tough battle for Sony.

Of course each system will have exclusive games, but aside from those, the selection should be very similar for the PS3 and 360. That takes us back to price.

BTW, worst case scenario for Sony? Blu-ray fails to catch on as the standard and kills the value of the PS3 for high-def movies, along with the royalties from Blu-ray movie players. For Sony, this generation is a life-or-death struggle.

MS? They could lose billions of dollars on the 360, and bring out an Xbox 720 in 2010 if they want. No company WANTS to lose money, but all it means to MS is LESS profit.

I bring this subject up to help us understand what is at stake here for these companies.

Dol-Fan Dupree
05-11-2006, 03:38 PM
I'm looking at that 2X speed for the Blu-ray drive and wondering how bad load times will be on the PS3, unless developers learn to stream off the disk and cache in the hard drive to reduce load times. A lot depends on the developer, but 2X is gonna be slow.

Uh, I still get from that chart that the $500 system has no memory slots, period.

The Blu-ray movie function is still broken in the $500 unit WITHOUT a HDMI output, which destroys the value of the "bargain" PS3. I can accept the "value for the price" argument for the $600 PS3, but $500 buyers will get bent over.

Price is a huge factor for casual gamers, with game selection being a close second. You can talk about the PS3 being down to $400 in two years time, but by then I bet you can get a Wii for $129 or even $99, and a 360 for $199 or $299 for a HD-DVD bundle package.

At $149 the systems really start to fly off the shelves, if the games are there, which is why the Gamecube has suffered in sales even at $99, and MS will have a 360 at that price point at least a year, maybe TWO years before Sony can match it. Sony simply can't afford to bleed money like MS can and has done with the original Xbox.

Game selection will be much closer this gen too. There is much more Japanese support (RPGs) for the 360, and GTA4 is a big plus. The 360 will have more games to choose from this year, and quite possibly throughout the whole next-gen. Better price and matching game selection? Tough battle for Sony.

Of course each system will have exclusive games, but aside from those, the selection should be very similar for the PS3 and 360. That takes us back to price.

BTW, worst case scenario for Sony? Blu-ray fails to catch on as the standard and kills the value of the PS3 for high-def movies, along with the royalties from Blu-ray movie players. For Sony, this generation is a life-or-death struggle.

MS? They could lose billions of dollars on the 360, and bring out an Xbox 720 in 2010 if they want. No company WANTS to lose money, but all it means to MS is LESS profit.

I bring this subject up to help us understand what is at stake here for these companies.

I don't agree. I don't think Microsoft will continue with the Xbox if it doesn't become profitable this generation.

I think people are playing up the Blu-Ray movie function. It is more of the Blu-Ray storage function. More room = bigger games. Plus region free is freaking amazing for gameplay.

Also 2x blu-ray speed means 2 times faster than 1x blu-ray speed. Which is meaningless to say it is fast or slow unless you know the 1x blu-ray speed.

Agent51
05-11-2006, 04:05 PM
Deus Ex, the chart says no memory STICK, SD, or compact flash for the $500 version, meaning it doesn't support the mimi memory cards that digital camera and some cellphone use. As far as memory CARDS, like actual video game ones, the chart makes no mention of them period, since one can only assume they are standard for every system. No actual video game memory card support on a system would be SUICIDE for said system. Even WITH a HD, you wouldn't be able to transfer data without the memory card or the memory stick/SD/compact flash support.

UltraDol-Fan
05-11-2006, 04:38 PM
I agree with Agent, there HAS to be a way for people to take games over to their friends house. No way Sony doesn't put a memory card slot on there.

ChrisKo
05-11-2006, 05:38 PM
I'm looking at that 2X speed for the Blu-ray drive and wondering how bad load times will be on the PS3, unless developers learn to stream off the disk and cache in the hard drive to reduce load times. A lot depends on the developer, but 2X is gonna be slow.

Yeah, looks like it's going to be SLOW


1x BluRay read rate = 36 Mbps
1x DVD read rate = 11.08 Mbps
1x CD read rate = 1.2 Mbps



The Blu-ray movie function is still broken in the $500 unit WITHOUT a HDMI output, which destroys the value of the "bargain" PS3. I can accept the "value for the price" argument for the $600 PS3, but $500 buyers will get bent over.

Please quit saying this incorrectly. It's not broken. You can say there's a POSSIBILITY of lower quality (still better than DVD) if the content owner so chooses. Please read my response to your previous statement regarding the same topic. http://www.finheaven.com/boardvb2/showpost.php?p=2400918&postcount=270


Game selection will be much closer this gen too. There is much more Japanese support (RPGs) for the 360, and GTA4 is a big plus. The 360 will have more games to choose from this year, and quite possibly throughout the whole next-gen. Better price and matching game selection? Tough battle for Sony.

Having a head start witha next-gen game library didn't help Sega out much with the Dreamcast. How can you even claim there is more JRPG support for the 360? GTA4 is a simultaneous launch for both systems, so how is it an advantage to either?

I don't care to really get involved in big console wars because I will buy and play them all as I'm a tech geek. But I don't like people posting incorrect information when it's easily available.

Happy Gaming!

Medieval954
05-11-2006, 05:46 PM
Yeah, looks like it's going to be SLOW


1x BluRay read rate = 36 Mbps
1x DVD read rate = 11.08 Mbps
1x CD read rate = 1.2 Mbps



Please quit saying this incorrectly. It's not broken. You can say there's a POSSIBILITY of lower quality (still better than DVD) if the content owner so chooses. Please read my response to your previous statement regarding the same topic. http://www.finheaven.com/boardvb2/showpost.php?p=2400918&postcount=270



Having a head start witha next-gen game library didn't help Sega out much with the Dreamcast. How can you even claim there is more JRPG support for the 360? GTA4 is a simultaneous launch for both systems, so how is it an advantage to either?

I don't care to really get involved in big console wars because I will buy and play them all as I'm a tech geek. But I don't like people posting incorrect information when it's easily available.

Happy Gaming!
Good stuff with the info up there.

As for as why Grand Theft Auto 4 being launched on the PS3 and Xbox360 simultaneously is a big deal is because the GTA series was by far the biggest selling franchise in North America last gen. It is, in the biggest sense of the phrase, a "system seller". Sony got a timed exclusive window for the series last gen, which meant a majority of the sales came on the PS2 due to Xbox owners having wait 6-12 months for the port to come over. Now, with the series coming out on the same day, Sony stands not only lose a chunk of sales for the next game in the series, but it also discourages people from buying a PS3 to get their hands on the game first.

Pretty big deal. :D

Edit - Just to clarify, it's a big deal here in North America as the GTA series is nowhere near the sales juggernaut in Japan as it is here.

Agent51
05-11-2006, 05:52 PM
Yes, that means the wireless access point and your internet connection need to be near your console. Most people have their internet connection enter the home in their office and they put a wireless access point there. Then they use wireless connections to their gaming devices to avoid any further wires.

You could put a wireless access point next to the game console and have that act as a bridge to the original access point.

Since the PS3 will have USB, it will be only a matter of time before a USB wireless adapter is created anyway.

There's a lot of different options when it comes to achieving your network goals. It all depends on how much money you're willing to spend. I have no problems running a 100ft patch cable from my office to the living room. Makes it easier if your single and don't have a wife to complain about some cable laying on the floor. :evil:

OK, so here's my question. Say you have a wirless network in your house, as I do. Assuming the come out with a wireless adapter for the PS3, like they have for the other systems, that means you can buy the adaptor and connect it to yuor wireless network right? I mean, if so, what is the point of the Wi-Fi built in? Actually, let me rephrase that. I know what the point s, so you don't have to buy the adaptor, but what is the point of people complaining about the Wi-Fi not being included in the $500 version? It's not like it matters one way or the other if you don't have a wireless network in your house, and it's not like you CAN'T make it wireless, so what's the big deal?

And I hear ya with the cord across the floor thing. I personally don't like wires running everywhere so when I did up my surround sound I ran all the wires through the walls and stuff, and back before I went wireless with my network I ran all the wires under the floors and across the ceiling in the basement. However, back when I lived at home in RI I used to just have a 50 foot ethernet cable that I would connect my laptop to and I could sit ANYWHERE in my room with it. I had a basement room and my mom would copmplain about the cord being all over the floor everytime she went down to do laundry, lol.

ChrisKo
05-11-2006, 05:54 PM
Good stuff with the info up there.

As for as why Grand Theft Auto 4 being launched on the PS3 and Xbox360 simultaneously is a big deal is because the GTA series was by far the biggest selling franchise in North America last gen. It is, in the biggest sense of the phrase, a "system seller". Sony got a timed exclusive window for the series last gen, which meant a majority of the sales came on the PS2 due to Xbox owners having wait 6-12 months for the port to come over. Now, with the series coming out on the same day, Sony stands not only lose a chunk of sales for the next game in the series, but it also discourages people from buying a PS3 to get their hands on the game first.

Pretty big deal. :D

Edit - Just to clarify, it's a big deal here in North America as the GTA series is nowhere near the sales juggernaut in Japan as it is here.

I agree that it hurts Sony a bit, but with the current pricing structure of both next-gens (not including Nintendo, because they won't get GTA) I don't see 1 title being a system mover. I could be wrong, but I just feel that once we got ~$400 range, it makes it harder for people to justify purchasing a system for 1 game exclusively. I think with that type of investment, a buyer will be looking at the library available and then if it's still a tie, the deciding factor will be the exclusives.

Agent51
05-11-2006, 05:55 PM
Good stuff with the info up there.

As for as why Grand Theft Auto 4 being launched on the PS3 and Xbox360 simultaneously is a big deal is because the GTA series was by far the biggest selling franchise in North America last gen. It is, in the biggest sense of the phrase, a "system seller". Sony got a timed exclusive window for the series last gen, which meant a majority of the sales came on the PS2 due to Xbox owners having wait 6-12 months for the port to come over. Now, with the series coming out on the same day, Sony stands not only lose a chunk of sales for the next game in the series, but it also discourages people from buying a PS3 to get their hands on the game first.

Pretty big deal. :D

Edit - Just to clarify, it's a big deal here in North America as the GTA series is nowhere near the sales juggernaut in Japan as it is here.

Isn't GTA coming to PS3 AND 360 at the same time though, like october 2007? So it's not like the 360 will get a jump n the sales in terms of it coming out months in advance for the 360. it will be out at the same time, in a YEAR from this october, meaning the PS3 will have been out for 11 months already.

Medieval954
05-11-2006, 06:02 PM
Well, my point was, before, if you wanted to play a GTA title first, you had no choice but to have a PS2. Now that you have 2 choices on where to play GTA title first, it could potentially be harming to Sony for fans of the series. But as ChrisKo said, in a perfect world, when you plunk down $399+ on a system, you should judge the entire library. But you'd be amazed on how many people will only buy a system for one game, especially later on in the console generation.

AquaInferno
05-11-2006, 06:11 PM
Well, my point was, before, if you wanted to play a GTA title first, you had no choice but to have a PS2. Now that you have 2 choices on where to play GTA title first, it could potentially be harming to Sony for fans of the series. But as ChrisKo said, in a perfect world, when you plunk down $399+ on a system, you should judge the entire library. But you'd be amazed on how many people will only buy a system for one game, especially later on in the console generation.

MGS 4 convinced me to get a PS3.. I'm diehard for MGS. I GOTTA see how it ends you just don't understand :lol: But then again I owned a PS1, PS2, and PSP so I seem destined for PS3 anyway, but MGS 4 exclusive on PS3 did help a bit.

Agent51
05-11-2006, 06:13 PM
Well, my point was, before, if you wanted to play a GTA title first, you had no choice but to have a PS2. Now that you have 2 choices on where to play GTA title first, it could potentially be harming to Sony for fans of the series. But as ChrisKo said, in a perfect world, when you plunk down $399+ on a system, you should judge the entire library. But you'd be amazed on how many people will only buy a system for one game, especially later on in the console genration.

I kind of did the "buying a system for one game" thing with XBox. BOTH XBox systems actually, the original and the 360, lol. See, I bought an XBox at launch for the Transworld Surf game. I played the crap out of it for liek a month, but no other games interested me, I hated all the games I played. I never tried Halo because I HATED FPS games. Anyway, so I sold my XBox, thn I played Halo with a friend, and was hooked. We beat it though and I'm like, "eh, ok, I can go without it", there still wasn't any XBox-only title I liked enough to buy one. Then Halo 2 came out, and I was like, screw it, so I reserved it, and bought an XBox again, lol. To this day I only own Halo 2, Fight Night Round 2, and Midnight Club 3 on XBox, the last two for the sole fact that I didn't feel like buying a 3rd memory card to save the games on PS2, as my other 2 were filled and had no room for more stuff, lol.

Then with 360 I knew I'd get one, but I planned on waiting til after the PS3 to pick one up, since none of the games appealed to me enough to keep one at launch (I got ahold of one and sold it for major money though). Then I started seeing the Test Drive Unlimted information, and the instant I read that it was satellite-mapped to my island in Hawai'i I knew I HAD to get it. It WAS listed as being released in January (way back around launch time) so I was starting to go frantic trying to find a system. Then it got bumped back to June 20th, and now systems are widely available, and I grabbed one, JUST for this game. I own Fight Night Round 3 and Condemned, but I would have never bought the system JUST for these two games (haven't picked up Oblivion yet because I ave ZERO time, sorry Mor, lol).

The difference though is I was definately planning on buying a 360 all along, just not this soon, whereas with the XBox I never really wanted it, I just bought it to have it, then re-bought it for Halo 2

Agent51
05-11-2006, 06:15 PM
MGS 4 convinced me to get a PS3.. I'm diehard for MGS. I GOTTA see how it ends you just don't understand :lol: But then again I owned a PS1, PS2, and PSP so I seem destined for PS3 anyway, but MGS 4 exclusive on PS3 did help a bit.

Dude, Snake is SO old in this one, lol. I will confess, I loved the first one, the good ol' double-disc PS1 one. Then I bought the second one but never really played it, so I traded it in and have pretty much completely forgotten about the series. This game looks GREAT though, I might have to go back and play through all th eones I ever did just to catch up on the story.

Medieval954
05-11-2006, 06:16 PM
MGS 4 convinced me to get a PS3.. I'm diehard for MGS. I GOTTA see how it ends you just don't understand :lol: But then again I owned a PS1, PS2, and PSP so I seem destined for PS3 anyway, but MGS 4 exclusive on PS3 did help a bit.
Exactly. I said in another post, whatever system gives me Zelda, I get. I've seen similar posts in various forums referring to Metal Gear, Halo, Final Fantasy, etc, in the same way. So now that the biggest and best selling series of last gen, GTA, is available on 2 systems day 1, it'll probably split their fanbase and that is not a good thing for Sony.

Of course, towards the end of next generation, everything will have dropped in price enough for everyone to afford each console. But until that day comes, fanbases will be split among consoles depending on game franchise exclusivity.

AquaInferno
05-11-2006, 06:18 PM
Exactly. I said in another post, whatever system gives me Zelda, I get. I've seen similar posts in various forums referring to Metal Gear, Halo, Final Fantasy, etc, in the same way. So now that the biggest and best selling series of last gen, GTA, is available on 2 systems day 1, it'll probably split their fanbase and that is not a good thing for Sony.

No but if Sony can keep the REAL Final fantasy games, not Crystal chronicles or Online, but the good ol' turn based RPG FF, they'll keep a ton of people. I think the FF fanboys overrule all fanboys combined, seriously. At gamefaqs.com when they do the yearly character battles some FF character almost always wins it.

ChrisKo
05-11-2006, 06:32 PM
No but if Sony can keep the REAL Final fantasy games, not Crystal chronicles or Online, but the good ol' turn based RPG FF, they'll keep a ton of people. I think the FF fanboys overrule all fanboys combined, seriously. At gamefaqs.com when they do the yearly character battles some FF character almost always wins it.

Yep, FF has big following in US, Japan, and Europe....so if FF XIII stays PS3 only, Sony should do just fine. If MS could only get the other countries hyped about Halo.

Dol-Fan Dupree
05-11-2006, 06:35 PM
No but if Sony can keep the REAL Final fantasy games, not Crystal chronicles or Online, but the good ol' turn based RPG FF, they'll keep a ton of people. I think the FF fanboys overrule all fanboys combined, seriously. At gamefaqs.com when they do the yearly character battles some FF character almost always wins it.

I bet other than Madden, FF is the highest selling console game. Especially after FF VII came out. FF VII sold a lot of freaking copies.

Dol-Fan Dupree
05-11-2006, 06:36 PM
Yep, FF has big following in US, Japan, and Europe....so if FF XIII stays PS3 only, Sony should do just fine. If MS could only get the other countries hyped about Halo.

Even though Halo is a great game, there is still a bunch of FPS games that are really good as well.

With FF there aren't as many RPGs that are really good.

ChrisKo
05-11-2006, 06:42 PM
My favorite RPG (yes, i like it better than FF - my second favorite) is Suikoden and it's going strong with Suikoden V just being released. In fact, I had to buy a new PS2 (old drive crapped out on me) so I can play this one. I wonder how long before Konami says anything about the series on the PS3.

I really wished they would bring the Suikoden I and II remakes to the US PSP.

Dol-Fan Dupree
05-11-2006, 06:50 PM
My favorite RPG (yes, i like it better than FF - my second favorite) is Suikoden and it's going strong with Suikoden V just being released. In fact, I had to buy a new PS2 (old drive crapped out on me) so I can play this one. I wonder how long before Konami says anything about the series on the PS3.

I really wished they would bring the Suikoden I and II remakes to the US PSP.

I just got that as well, however I am going to beat Dragon Quest VIII first.

My old PS2 drive crapped on on me. I bought a new PS2 to play Kingdom Hearts II.

Pennington's Rocket Arm
05-11-2006, 07:16 PM
remember when the 3DO first came out? i think it was $799. yeah, that worked out.

Agent51
05-11-2006, 07:21 PM
remember when the 3DO first came out? i think it was $799. yeah, that worked out.

I was JUST reading that earlier today when I wa looking up old systems. It was $700 and some places where selling for $800. Eventually Goldstar started making the systems (instead of Panasonic) and dropped the price to $400, but it was way too late for the system.

$800 for a system WAY back then is INSANE, lol, the systems we have coming out NOW aren't even that much. I'm sure this had smething to do with the technology and manufaturing of it back in the day, but still, $800 for a 16-bit system is crazy.

Medieval954
05-11-2006, 07:25 PM
remember when the 3DO first came out? i think it was $799. yeah, that worked out.

http://www.finheaven.com/clear.gif

Yeah, back then, it was all the rage with games on a CD instead of a cartridge. :eek:

Then it launched at an unthinkable $699 and proceeded to bomb quickly.



Don't forget the Neo Geo with it's $649 price and obscene $199 cartridges.

http://www.finheaven.com/clear.gif

Majpain
05-11-2006, 09:59 PM
Should I get the 499 or 599?

Agent51
05-11-2006, 11:00 PM
Should I get the 499 or 599?

Depends on what you want. Do you want 60GB of memory and the ability to use media cards and an HDMT connection? If that doesn't metter too much to you, the save yourself $100 and got with the cheaper pack

Deus Ex Dolphin
05-12-2006, 12:14 AM
Well, let's run the numbers then.

1x BluRay read rate = 36 Mbps
1x DVD read rate = 11.08 Mbps
1x CD read rate = 1.2 Mbps


So a 2X Blu-ray would be 72 Mbps, right? Granted under peak performance. Compared to the Xbox 360 12X DVD drive, which would give us (12 x 11) 132 Mbps, again at peak performance.

I can tell you right now that load times have not improved on the 360 compared to the old Xbox, if anything some games take a bit longer than before (Project Gotham Racing 2 versus PGR3 for example).

So, the PS3, with half the read speed of the 360, will be faster to load? Or would it be slower? It may be simplistic to just crunch the numbers like that, but it seems a valid concern to me.

As for the Japanese RPG support? I was talking about 360 support compared to the old Xbox, not compared to what the PS3 will have. Clearly Japan will be behind Sony and Nintendo over MS. The 360 does have a handful of Japanese RPGs on the way (Enchant Arm, Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey, etc) so thing have improved, but sales are pathetic for MS in Japan and that may never change.

BTW, checked with my local EBgames this evening. They will not take preorders yet, but will want $200 down, and expect there might only be 10 systems per store. Someone please tell me this guy is sniffing glue.

Medieval954
05-12-2006, 12:18 AM
Well, let's run the numbers then.

1x BluRay read rate = 36 Mbps
1x DVD read rate = 11.08 Mbps
1x CD read rate = 1.2 Mbps


So a 2X Blu-ray would be 72 Mbps, right? Granted under peak performance. Compared to the Xbox 360 12X DVD drive, which would give us (12 x 11) 132 Mbps, again at peak performance.

I can tell you right now that load times have not improved on the 360 compared to the old Xbox, if anything some games take a bit longer than before (Project Gotham Racing 2 versus PGR3 for example).

So, the PS3, with half the read speed of the 360, will be faster to load? Or would it be slower? It may be simplistic to just crunch the numbers like that, but it seems a valid concern to me.

As for the Japanese RPG support? I was talking about 360 support compared to the old Xbox, not compared to what the PS3 will have. Clearly Japan will be behind Sony and Nintendo over MS. The 360 does have a handful of Japanese RPGs on the way (Enchant Arm, Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey, etc) so thing have improved, but sales are pathetic for MS in Japan and that may never change.

BTW, checked with my local EBgames this evening. They will not take preorders yet, but will want $200 down, and expect there might only be 10 systems per store. Someone please tell me this guy is sniffing glue.

:sidelol:

I detest EB/Gamestop like a disease. This just adds to the dozens of reasons why.

unifiedtheory
05-12-2006, 01:03 AM
Well, let's run the numbers then.

1x BluRay read rate = 36 Mbps
1x DVD read rate = 11.08 Mbps
1x CD read rate = 1.2 Mbps


So a 2X Blu-ray would be 72 Mbps, right? Granted under peak performance. Compared to the Xbox 360 12X DVD drive, which would give us (12 x 11) 132 Mbps, again at peak performance.

I can tell you right now that load times have not improved on the 360 compared to the old Xbox, if anything some games take a bit longer than before (Project Gotham Racing 2 versus PGR3 for example).

So, the PS3, with half the read speed of the 360, will be faster to load? Or would it be slower? It may be simplistic to just crunch the numbers like that, but it seems a valid concern to me.

As for the Japanese RPG support? I was talking about 360 support compared to the old Xbox, not compared to what the PS3 will have. Clearly Japan will be behind Sony and Nintendo over MS. The 360 does have a handful of Japanese RPGs on the way (Enchant Arm, Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey, etc) so thing have improved, but sales are pathetic for MS in Japan and that may never change.

BTW, checked with my local EBgames this evening. They will not take preorders yet, but will want $200 down, and expect there might only be 10 systems per store. Someone please tell me this guy is sniffing glue.

Stop going to EB...I DETEST stores that act like they are the end all be all of anything.

God I hate that store.

Dol-Fan Dupree
05-12-2006, 01:21 AM
Well, let's run the numbers then.

1x BluRay read rate = 36 Mbps
1x DVD read rate = 11.08 Mbps
1x CD read rate = 1.2 Mbps


So a 2X Blu-ray would be 72 Mbps, right? Granted under peak performance. Compared to the Xbox 360 12X DVD drive, which would give us (12 x 11) 132 Mbps, again at peak performance.

I can tell you right now that load times have not improved on the 360 compared to the old Xbox, if anything some games take a bit longer than before (Project Gotham Racing 2 versus PGR3 for example).

So, the PS3, with half the read speed of the 360, will be faster to load? Or would it be slower? It may be simplistic to just crunch the numbers like that, but it seems a valid concern to me.

As for the Japanese RPG support? I was talking about 360 support compared to the old Xbox, not compared to what the PS3 will have. Clearly Japan will be behind Sony and Nintendo over MS. The 360 does have a handful of Japanese RPGs on the way (Enchant Arm, Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey, etc) so thing have improved, but sales are pathetic for MS in Japan and that may never change.

BTW, checked with my local EBgames this evening. They will not take preorders yet, but will want $200 down, and expect there might only be 10 systems per store. Someone please tell me this guy is sniffing glue.

One of the reasons for that is lack of hard drive.

Motion
05-12-2006, 08:43 AM
Deus do you work for MS?

Dol-Fan Dupree
05-12-2006, 09:10 AM
Deus do you work for MS?

I do

Motion
05-12-2006, 09:36 AM
I do

For real? Thats interesting, because I've noticed your one of the more objective posters in the whole debate, where as certain people show extreme bias. What exactly do you do for MS?

mor911
05-12-2006, 09:46 AM
Question, do I ever come off as biased or one-sided?

Motion
05-12-2006, 09:50 AM
Question, do I ever come off as biased or one-sided?

Biased against fanboys :lol: Otherwise no. :wink:

dQbell
05-12-2006, 09:54 AM
Question, do I ever come off as biased or one-sided?

I think you do...something about not wanting to hook up with a fat chic comes to mind. :lol:

Motion
05-12-2006, 09:58 AM
I think you do...something about not wanting to hook up with a fat chic comes to mind. :lol:

:sidelol: Good call, I forgot about that!

Agent51
05-12-2006, 10:03 AM
Question, do I ever come off as biased or one-sided?

Outside of Oblivion? LOL, nah man, you're pretty objective, I've seen you argue BOTH sides for all of the systems, which is cool, and shows knowledge.

I'm sure I come off as a Sony fanboy lately, which is not the case, I just happen to be defending them right now because everyone else seems to be bashing them.

mor911
05-12-2006, 10:05 AM
HEY! The Mor loves the big women too....

:barf:

OK fine, so I'm a shallow prick. Sue me.

mor911
05-12-2006, 10:06 AM
We should make a group called G.A.F.

Gamers Agaist Fanboyism

mor911
05-12-2006, 10:08 AM
Outside of Oblivion? LOL, nah man, you're pretty objective, I've seen you argue BOTH sides for all of the systems, which is cool, and shows knowledge.

I'm sure I come off as a Sony fanboy lately, which is not the case, I just happen to be defending them right now because everyone else seems to be bashing them.
It's not my fault Oblivion is the sigle greatest gaming experience ever... Go buy Oblivion today!



<Walks to desk>


<Collects sponsorship check from Bethesda>


:mor911:

mor911
05-12-2006, 10:15 AM
Biased against fanboys :lol: Otherwise no. :wink: The real reason I ask is because I do tend to defend Microsoft. My company is a big time parter with Microsoft (big in the web hosting world, we're backing ASP.NET and the MSSQL with our new hosting brand) and Microsoft sends my company a lot of free cool stuff (from USB jump drives to wireless mice, to t-shirts, fleeces, jackets, 360s, games, controllers... They take care of their partners). My company usually has raffles and competitions to give the stuff out (raises moral). Plus, call me old fashioned but "Made in America" still kinda means something to The Mor. The 360 is american designed and engineered, and I support that 100%. That's NOT a knock against japanese consoles or gaming because we all use japanese consoles and gaming units. I just like to see an american made console do well.... Pride I guess. :wink:

Motion
05-12-2006, 10:25 AM
The real reason I ask is because I do tend to defend Microsoft. My company is a big time parter with Microsoft (big in the web hosting world, we're backing ASP.NET and the MSSQL with our new hosting brand) and Microsoft sends my company a lot of free cool stuff (from USB jump drives to wireless mice, to t-shirts, fleeces, jackets, 360s, games, controllers... They take care of their partners). My company usually has raffles and competitions to give the stuff out (raises moral). Plus, call me old fashioned but "Made in America" still kinda means something to The Mor. The 360 is american designed and engineered, and I support that 100%. That's NOT a knock against japanese consoles or gaming because we all use japanese consoles and gaming units. I just like to see an american made console do well.... Pride I guess. :wink:

I can totally understand and respect that. And at the same time you usually always come across very objective. I know I personally defend Sony more than any other, guess its just a brand loyalty thing. I have nothing against MS or Nintendo at all, its the people that blindly bash other companies/systems no matter what they do with ridiculous reasoning that annoys me. Competition is a good thing for us gamers.

Dol-Fan Dupree
05-12-2006, 11:01 AM
For real? Thats interesting, because I've noticed your one of the more objective posters in the whole debate, where as certain people show extreme bias. What exactly do you do for MS?

I am a software tester there. Well I contract there.

Agent51
05-12-2006, 11:11 AM
We should make a group called G.A.F.

Gamers Agaist Fanboyism

How about G.A.F.F.?

Gamers Against Fanboyism & Fatties

Might as well sue me too, cuz I'm not "down with OPP" (Obese Pudgy P***y)

mor911
05-12-2006, 11:13 AM
G.A.F.F.


I like it!

Agent51
05-12-2006, 11:19 AM
G.A.F.F.


I like it!

Sweet, we can be the co-founders then, because you came up with the main part, and I added the second "F", which MAY be the most important one :lol:

Medieval954
05-12-2006, 12:02 PM
Ah, so some of you have ties to Microsoft. That explains a lot. :goof:

Motion
05-12-2006, 12:22 PM
How about G.A.F.F.?

Gamers Against Fanboyism & Fatties

Might as well sue me too, cuz I'm not "down with OPP" (Obese Pudgy P***y)

I want in too!

Agent51
05-12-2006, 01:46 PM
I want in too!

Done, you can be the executive-vice-chariman-chief-director-assitant-head manager of the anti-fat girls subsidiary division of no fanboying

Motion
05-12-2006, 01:49 PM
Done, you can be the executive-vice-chariman-chief-director-assitant-head manager of the anti-fat girls subsidiary division of no fanboying

I like it

dQbell
05-12-2006, 03:28 PM
How about G.A.F.F.?

Gamers Against Fanboyism & Fatties

Might as well sue me too, cuz I'm not "down with OPP" (Obese Pudgy P***y)

Umm..I googled GAFF and got this:

http://teddygirl.com/gaff.html

It's a garment designed to hide "the buldge" for men. Might wanna converse on the name. :tongue:

Agent51
05-12-2006, 03:40 PM
Umm..I googled GAFF and got this:

http://teddygirl.com/gaff.html

It's a garment designed to hide "the buldge" for men. Might wanna converse on the name. :tongue:

PARTY POOPER :fire: :D

Fine, G.A.F.F.C.

Gamers Against Fanboyism & Fat Chicks

Deus Ex Dolphin
05-12-2006, 10:42 PM
Deus do you work for MS?


I should be getting paid from them, yeah... :D

Hey, I know I come across as a "raving Xbox fanboy" at times, but I'm working for the common good of mankind, okay? :wink:

I really loved my old PSX, the one system where Sony, IMHO, got it right and moved gaming forward. I then jumped to the Sega Dreamcast then an Xbox.

MS has been flat stupid at times, like that original Xbox controller. Or the Core 360 which created the term "****** pack", and deserves the label. I laughed at Nintendo and the Wiimote controller, but now I'm thinking it could be pretty fun for certain types of games.

Anyway, Sony has made lots of promises about the PS3, and if they fail to fulfill them? I gotta call them on it. I admit the approach can be mild, or it can be abrasive. For example, in talking about the Blu-ray drive and load times? I could say:

"Guys, I'm worried the PS3 load times will be too long, due to the the low Mbps of the Blu-ray drive. What do you think?"

Or, I could say:

"Guys, Sony is sticking the cheapest, slowest piece of crap Blu-ray drive in the PS3... and load times will suck!!"

Quite a difference in appoach, huh? I'll try to be mild in the future. Though the irony of throwing around the label "fanboy" on a Dolphin website... :D

nevadadolfan
05-13-2006, 01:16 AM
I should be getting paid from them, yeah... :D

Hey, I know I come across as a "raving Xbox fanboy" at times, but I'm working for the common good of mankind, okay? :wink:

I really loved my old PSX, the one system where Sony, IMHO, got it right and moved gaming forward. I then jumped to the Sega Dreamcast then an Xbox.

MS has been flat stupid at times, like that original Xbox controller. Or the Core 360 which created the term "****** pack", and deserves the label. I laughed at Nintendo and the Wiimote controller, but now I'm thinking it could be pretty fun for certain types of games.

Anyway, Sony has made lots of promises about the PS3, and if they fail to fulfill them? I gotta call them on it. I admit the approach can be mild, or it can be abrasive. For example, in talking about the Blu-ray drive and load times? I could say:

"Guys, I'm worried the PS3 load times will be too long, due to the the low Mbps of the Blu-ray drive. What do you think?"

Or, I could say:

"Guys, Sony is sticking the cheapest, slowest piece of crap Blu-ray drive in the PS3... and load times will suck!!"

Quite a difference in appoach, huh? I'll try to be mild in the future. Though the irony of throwing around the label "fanboy" on a Dolphin website... :D

Now thats FUNNY!!!!

Deus Ex Dolphin
05-14-2006, 02:49 AM
According to Games Radar, it appears the lower end PS3 won't include support for the wireless controllers, and the 20 GB hard drive won't be upgradable.

http://www.gamesradar.com/gb/ps3/game/news/article.jsp?articleId=20060513133719562032&sectionId=1006

If you must get a PS3, the $600 one is the way to go, especially if this info holds true.

Agent51
05-14-2006, 08:54 AM
According to Games Radar, it appears the lower end PS3 won't include support for the wireless controllers, and the 20 GB hard drive won't be upgradable.

http://www.gamesradar.com/gb/ps3/game/news/article.jsp?articleId=20060513133719562032&sectionId=1006

If you must get a PS3, the $600 one is the way to go, especially if this info holds true.

Hmmm........It's odd that now they say wireless controllers/bluetooth WON'T be on it, since the official spec sheet that is going around (don't have a link, but it's posted in this thread and the E3 thread a bunch) CLEARLY says that BOTH systems have bluetooth and wireless controls.

Doesn't really effect me because I would never even think of buying the cheaper versions of systems anyway, but that sucks for people who will buy it. I just don't get the point of the cheaper systems, to me, 100 extra bucks at laucnh is MUCH better than over $100 down theline to upgrade your "core" system, but oh well, I have the premium 360 and will get the $600 PS3 at launch, so no biggie, lol.

SKing29
05-14-2006, 06:29 PM
Well, I want to put my two cents into this debate. I consider myself a pretty hardcore gamer, I have 25 games for my PS2, but I haven't bought a game since Need For Speed Underground in 2003 (see that makes my addiction worse seeing as how I bought 25 in about 2 years). Now I have calmed down about video games, but I still love them and I play Madden everyday. I also had planned to buy a PS3, but the price is just outlandish. Microsoft well they have only one gaming series being Halo, so I choose not to waste my money there, plus its overpriced too. As for Nintendo's Wii, it will be cheap and innovative, but will probably be to kid oriented and won't have much 3rd party support. So if I had to choose I would get the Wii just based on price, and thats how I think a lot of casual gamers will go. It hurts me being a Sony fan and missing out on GTA, MGS, Gran Turismo, and so on, but honestly even I won't shell out $500 or $600 bucks for a gaming console. I would like to know how Sony and Microsoft expect college students (like me) and other people with little money to shell out what would be a month's rent or for me a whole year of book money. I think Sony and Microsoft won't get the results they're hoping for, and I want to give Nintendo props for keeping what console gaming is all about and that is fun. Too me if you need HD, Hard drives, Blu-Ray, etc. then go get a computer, but I guess that's what consoles are becoming nowadays (yes, I know all technically are, but they were gaming exclusive). I feel that consoles are losing their heart and what made me a console gamer rather than a PC gamer, its disappointing because I don't think kids can have the same experience with these consoles as I did with the Sega Genesis and Super Nintendo that were geared towards gamers and not the masses as a whole.

Medieval954
05-19-2006, 01:51 AM
http://www.finheaven.com/clear.gif

:D