If PS3' price is a big issue for you than this might help!!!

[pnjabimunda8]

http://img81.imageshack.us/img81/6661/comparingid9.jpg

[GizmoGC]

Wow! Sums it up pretty clearly now! 360 is crap! Sony rules!

What about the people that have no interest in going online? Or watching HD movies? That shaves off like $300!!! Guess the PS3 really isn't a great value, eh?

I also have to say that is one AWESOME MS Paint job! Way to go! I hope you pass you're 8th grade final!

[Vinny]

Too bad they forgot to mention that... with the PS3, you're being forced to buy a currently inferior and potentially dead movie format. Also, we have yet to see if Sony's online interface will actually be able to compete with LIVE.

But in the end... it's all about the games baby.:)

[DesertEagleXIX]

PSP Compatible? Where the fuck do I fit the UMD's in?

All games compatible? Twenty bucks says the PS3 won't reach 100% compatibility!

"Witch one gives you..." Dude, Halloween is over!

[White-Wolf]

the wii will still be 250.... but i do see your point ;) I am more worried i havent seen any previews of the ps3, like from ign and stuff. It lets me beleave that the ps3 is going to be really last minit and may be really bad with more bugs then the 360 on the 17th. BTW the 360's ring of death is still a major problem to this day, and untill thats fixed i wont even consider getting one.

[daphatty]

Welcome to last month...

[Scorch]

I'm still loving how people think they'll be able to play every PS3 game online for free. Access is free much like the silver live account.. individual developers, due to rising costs of production (thanks to blu ray) WILL charge.

Of coure, that's me talking out of my ass.. but watch, it will happen

[furyk]

I love that people are still saying you need to buy an official 360 wireless adapter for wi-fi when you can snag a 3rd party one for $20 and tax. It also doesn't address the idea that $400 is still too fucking much for a video game console for quite a few people let alone $600.

Edit: And it's which not witch, dumb ass. We're not using a fucking gaming console to create a magical brew.

[gofishn]

But guys, the PS3 features different memory slots!!! How could you not buy one?!?

[Weedy649]

You cant really compare as mentioned, AND this is CAG.

I got my year of xbox live at target for $17(was found for 35 by many), linksys wireless adapter that works fine can be had for $20 and if you have your battery situation straight you dont need play and charge

In the end not being forced to get something just makes it cheaper for those...well the type of people who visit this site.

[Quackzilla]

Playstation and Xbox have different fucking games, I mean seriously, they are totally different.

If someone want's to play Xbox games they will buy a fucking Xbox, and if they want to play Playstation games they will buy a fucking Playstation.

[Spades22]

Glad someone said you can get a wireless adapter for 20 bucks...scared me when I thought I'd have to pay 100 bucks yet to play online.,..

[hiccupleftovers]

OP go back to gamefaqs and return with a better degree in MS Paint. Secondly, this is CAG for g-d's sake. you should know that if there is a will, there is a way and there is always the CAG way to get things cheap.

As others have mentioned you can get the wireless adapter through any 3rd party, though certain linksys adapters can be a bitch to get to work, there is always some way around to get a discounted live card if not free.

What the fuck is the play and charge kit? Is that basically just some rechargeable battery pack or something? Shit I just use .99 cent batteries and it works fine. That or my rechargeable batteries when they're not in something else or charging.

And possibly the best thing about the 360 is that it gives you the option to buy those other products. It doesn't force it onto the consumer for an exorbitant price tag that no console should cost no matter the hardware. Unless you're rich, there's is no way that you logically justify to pay for $600 when you might as well just put that money into a higher pc rig.

[mofo1115]

Which witch is which?

[hiccupleftovers]

Which witch is which?

The Foreman grill of course.

[chakan]

Witch one indeed.

[captainfrizo]

A few things I noticed:

1. It's $579.96, not $579,96. Unless you're from Europe.

2. Everything mentioned with regards to the 360 (outside the console itself) is optional, giving the end buyer more choices and therefore the ability to have a much lower final cost. The $600 PS3 is $600 no matter how you cut it.

3. What about the headset for the PS3? There's an additional cost right there that the OP somehow managed to forget. Oh, and the PSP compatibility doesn't work if you don't own a PSP. Since you included all the optional accessories for the 360 in its cost you should to do the same for the PS3. There's another $200 or so for the complete PS3 experience.

4. The OP's Microsoft Paint skills need fine tuning.

5. You'd be better off posting this type of thing here (http://www.gamefaqs.com). Actually, you can stay over there once you're finished re-posting this comparision. There's no need for you to return to CAG. Ever.

So, there you have it. A few things I noticed while taking a look at this price comparison.

[DarkNessBear]

Oh god they are going to eat you the fuck up for this one.

Im not even going to look at the posts on this thread. RIP OP. =(


p.s you forgot to include that they would have to purchase 2 more Harddrives.

[thingsfallnapart]

Op doesn't mention either that an average Blu Ray disc is about 7 dollars more then an HD-DVD disc.

[Zoglog]

apples and oranges as far as i'm conerned.

But on the other hand i've always said the PS3 is a bargain for what it is, but that's only because I can use all of the features. To normal gamers without a 1080p TV, maybe not.

[gofishn]

Darknessbear and Zoglog, two voices of impartiality.

[Thomas96]

Good job; I didn't even realize people have to pay for the charge and play mod, and the wireless internet mod, if you were to compre their cheaper model vs the ps3 500 model the descrepancy between value would be even more evident.

[shipwreck]

I can't decide whether to front page this or not. Truly a masterful argument for Sony's camp.

Dynomite work OP. Your research skills, MS Paint mastery, and logical impartiality are rarely seen around these parts.

[Tromack]

I'm still loving how people think they'll be able to play every PS3 game online for free. Access is free much like the silver live account.. individual developers, due to rising costs of production (thanks to blu ray) WILL charge.

Of coure, that's me talking out of my ass.. but watch, it will happen

Exactly. People seem to believe there is a free lunch thing going on. Someone will have to pay for the servers you are playing on. Either the developers eat it and spend less money on the game or they pass it along to you in some form or another. The money will come from somewhere.

Oh, and OP, you entirely ignore that it's easy to get deals on most of those 360 things, such as the wireless adapter or live cards.

[Daddy]

Edit: And it's which not witch, dumb ass. We're not using a fucking gaming console to create a magical brew.


Hahhaa that witch crap was the first thing i noticed, I was like maybe its for halloween

[MadFlava]

apples and oranges as far as i'm conerned.


Completely agree. I really don't see the sense of comparing platforms because they are so different. In fact I hope to own all three because each one offers something I want.

[Quackzilla]

Op doesn't mention either that an average Blu Ray disc is about 7 dollars more then an HD-DVD disc.
Um, I don't think either disc is over a dollar, so uh... you fail.

[pinoy530]

You know these stupid price comparisons never show the +$30 for component cables on the ps3 side or the +$25 for the remote(since they insist on including the hd-dvd player).

[Wolfpup]

IMO what's silly about people blasting that original Sony comparison, is the real comparison is simple. If you want to play online at ALL, then

Playstation 3 = $500
X-Box 360 = $400 + 50 x 5 = $650 (or $700 with a 6 year lifespan...heck, PS2 is at six full years, and will probably have at least one more solid year left)

These comparisons that only add one year of Live are silly. Are they expecting the 360 to be replaced after a year?

[furyk]

IMO what's silly about people blasting that original Sony comparison, is the real comparison is simple. If you want to play online at ALL, then

Playstation 3 = $500
X-Box 360 = $400 + 50 x 5 = $650 (or $700 with a 6 year lifespan...heck, PS2 is at six full years, and will probably have at least one more solid year left)

These comparisons that only add one year of Live are silly. Are they expecting the 360 to be replaced after a year?

No, they're expecting Live to go free after another year (assuming Sony's online service isn't complete crap which is still a very real possibility).

[Spades22]

You know... I recently bought a PS2(I got 45 days to return it so I was still deciding whether or not to) and when you look at it... I love my online, so the prices really ARE the same! (I could care less bout HDTV though and stuff). At least for me it is... I mean 400 + 60 for the live card, + probably 30 or 40 for the networking adapter... so thats about 500$ just to get online going for 1 year. Then for the 100$ I spent on the PS2, you can tack that on, considering if I bought the PS3, I'd put the 100 in there since its backward compatible. So... 600$. Not to mention that you'll have to pay each year for live. Hmm I think I might just wait till all the prices drop cause its all too expensive lol. MAybe I'll buy a Wii... only ... 250$...

And I kind of doubt live will go free, and right now PS3 online is free, so you can't argue that it will suddenly cost money...thats a sad argument.

[icruise]

I'm still loving how people think they'll be able to play every PS3 game online for free. Access is free much like the silver live account.. individual developers, due to rising costs of production (thanks to blu ray) WILL charge.

I really don't see this happening. The individual game companies aren't the ones providing online service are they? Why would they need to charge?

[Mookyjooky]

I usually go with whatever brand has fucked me less in the past.

Nintendo:
everything 64
Cel-shaded fiasco
SP/LITE/Micro - Why not make it good the 1st time?
Virtual Console Prices with no upgrades
E-reader
Lack of headphone jack in SP???

Sony:
low 1st shipments of PS2
the constant conceptual bullshit of capabilities of PS2 and now PS3
I hate the 2 analog sticks right next to each other.
killed the Dreamcast
Releases any shitty game (But wont release good 2d games)

Xbox:
I hated the duke controller?

[Spades22]

Note Microsoft has been around a lot less as well haha

[daroga]

When did the IQ level of CAG completely bottom out? Between this and people arguing that downloadable games via the VC and XBLA are too expensive because you can just steal them and play for free, it seems like I missed a memo or something.

[Spades22]

Nah its just we got smarter, you guys are falling behind :lol:

[mmercer13]

What an idiot.

[Spades22]

Well ya he kind of exaggerates the prices a bit... but in all honesty there really isn't much of a difference...but that is only IF!!!!! IF YOU WILL BE PLAYING ONLINE! If you play online, there really isn't much of a diff. However, we haven't seen how good PS3's online is yet, so the 360 might still be cheaper. However if PS3's is good online, and you play online a lot, it won't make much of a difference in price. Simple as that!

I mean...it doesn't take a rocket scientist to add up a few numbers and see that for yourself.

[furyk]

And I kind of doubt live will go free, and right now PS3 online is free, so you can't argue that it will suddenly cost money...thats a sad argument.

Again, it's a matter of how well the PS3's online service actually ends up being. If it is great or even good, Microsoft will have to do something or otherwise it'll squander their only real advantage. As it stands now, online with the PS2 sucked and people were more then happy to pay for Live because of that.

Also, mooky, you're really being blind to some of the horrible things that Microsoft has done so far whether it be setting the trend for exhorbitant downloads, lag on games that are 20 years old, or broken consoles. They may not have personally effected you, but they're enough of an issue that to ignore them as issues is doing a disservice to trying to pull a coherent case for and against each of these systems (which can certainly be said about the original post).

[Giygas]

http://$$$$$$$$$$$$/uo9e3 + http://$$$$$$$$$$$$/vvdcp = $29.98 before shipping

[Z-Saber]

Man, screw the 360. This MS Paint job has won me over!

I'm so sorry for all the bad things I said about you, Sony. :cry:

[chosen1s]

Man,

The OP got hit pretty hard on this one, at least on the first page. As someone who recently purchased a 360, I would say that once again it comes down to games. If you're not a fan of sports games or FPS, I don't see that the 360 has really done anything to make a person excited in the year since it's been out. Oh well, just my opinion.

The OP sales pitch was a little silly because that's the whole point - people don't like being "forced" to buy all those extras if they don't want them.

[captainfrizo]

However if PS3's is good online, and you play online a lot, it won't make much of a difference in price. Simple as that!

I mean...it doesn't take a rocket scientist to add up a few numbers and see that for yourself.

You're right! All this time I've been wrong! I admit it. Here, I'll even show you.

Note: These prices are assuming the consumer will not want to get the item in question for a cheaper price, and don't include taxes.

Xbox 360 - $400
1 Year of Live - $50*
(optional wireless adapter) - $100
Total cost - $550

PS3 - $600
Online play - Free*
Not included to make Sony's price look better: a headset
Total cost - $600

* - for now. Microsoft's cost could drop or Sony may have to charge for online play. The costs for each console will change as a result. For now, I'm sticking to what Microsoft does and what Sony claims will do.

. . .oh, shit. The 360 is still $50 cheaper, even if you pay full retail price for everything, go with the wireless adapter (when you could just use the networking cable, something Sony fanboys seem to forget), and don't buy a headset for the PS3.

"I mean...it doesn't take a rocket scientist to add up a few numbers and see that for yourself."

Maybe you should take your own advice into consideration before posting. You can easily trim $100 off the cost of the 360 and you can easily add about another $30 for the cost of a headset for the PS3.

Here, I'll even go through this again since you insisted that there isn't "much of a difference in price:"

If you don't go wireless, the cost of a 360 and online play is about $450.

The cost of the PS3? $600 (and that's assuming you don't buy a headset).

$150 difference. So, either way, the 360 is anywhere from $50-150 cheaper. I'm sure somewhere in there you can find the point where the difference is substantial enough, but that will very from person to person.

Please, next time try to think before you post mindless bullshit.

[Maynard]

while you should have figured you were gonna get flamed, the only validity of your argument really is the HD-DVD vs. Blu Ray part. Even then though NO ONE knows which way that format war will be going.

[Wolfpup]

You're right! All this time I've been wrong! I admit it. Here, I'll even show you.

Note: These prices are assuming the consumer will not want to get the item in question for a cheaper price, and don't include taxes.

Xbox 360 - $400
1 Year of Live - $50*
(optional wireless adapter) - $100
Total cost - $550

PS3 - $600
Online play - Free*
Not included to make Sony's price look better: a headset
Total cost - $600


Wrong, and several people on this thread have already explained why.

Quoting myself:

Playstation 3 = $500
X-Box 360 = $400 + 50 x 5 = $650

The wireless headset is a red hearing, as we can just as easily say the 360 is missing a play and charge kit. (Not to mention the 360's voicechat sound quality is atrocious, though I don't know if that's because of the system/software or the headset).

[CocheseUGA]

I don't know who is more stupid, the OP or the morons in this thread that incessantly rip the PS3 sight unseen.

[Mookyjooky]

When did the IQ level of CAG completely bottom out? Between this and people arguing that downloadable games via the VC and XBLA are too expensive because you can just steal them and play for free, it seems like I missed a memo or something.

Wierd, I didnt hear anyone say that in this thread... maybe I missed it.

I said that VC games were too expensive, with no changes like online multiplayer, 720/1080 upgrades and whatnot.

8 bucks a Genesis game is retarded anyway you slice it. (Maaaaaaybe Gunstar Heroes...)

I dont believe in playing games on a PC, my Mac is for work only... but the VC prices are higher than XBLA and with 1/2 the upgrades. Added in the lack of a hard drive, and it just gets worse and worse.

[Spades22]

ya duh "captainfrizo" so you plan on playing live with your 360 for one year? guhhhh wow honestly think before you post that crap and learn to add. I said it didn't take a rocket scientist, but it does take someone who passed addition in elementary school. Headset I don't need anyway, I don't use it. So... once again you have:

400$ for the Xbox360, 60$ for the Xbox live card FOR ONE YEAR, then you can probably get a cheaper than 100$, maybe around 40 or so, so 500$. Thats already some type of PS3, the cheaper one I thought. Then 1-2 more years of live, depending on how much you spend for some of the stuff stated above, and you're over the cost of the PS3. Sure... if you plan on throwing out the console after a year and sticking to no online, 360=cheaper. I believe i stated all this before though.

[Daddy]

Sweet we are price comparing products we dont even own yet or havent even tried out? Awesome because Ive really wanted to price compare my car to a flying bus from the future ;)

[Mookyjooky]

Sweet we are price comparing products we dont even own yet or havent even tried out? Awesome because Ive really wanted to price compare my car to a flying bus from the future ;)

Extremely lame response.

We DONT know how much a flying car from the future is.

We DO know how much a PS3 will be.

The companies set the price, not you... so it doesnt matter if you've tried it or not... its still gonna be $599.99.

I've just flipped you over and hit your weak spot for massive damage, bitch.

[Z-Saber]

More like you sucked down his flamebait... bitch.

[Mookyjooky]

More like you sucked down his flamebait... bitch.

Better than what you suck. :D

[dastly75]

Witch! Witch! Burn Her!!!

[racthamp]

what really sad to me.. is that I remember vaguely on Xbox 360 pricing before it came out. I thought many people couldn't believe they were charging $400 for a game system and now all the sudden, alot of people seem to accept that $400 is such a bargain to another $600 machine.. oh mine! I suspect if those two systems weren't this high price, the wii could have come out $199 .. oh well... hopefully, i'll be able to wait until these machine drop in prices first.. anyway.... self-restriant!!! ;)

[CocheseUGA]

Once again a PS3 thread devolves into a third grade lunchroom discussion.

[Mookyjooky]

Once again a PS3 thread devolves into a third grade lunchroom discussion.

Your Mom :D

[HumanSnatcher]

I smell fanboyism coming from the OP...and boy does it fucking reak!

[Spades22]

lol thing is though I still think the 360 is crazy too high lol, lol which is why I never bought one or will lol. lol When I was a kid it would have seemed like nothing lol, but now its a lot more lol, even 250 american seems pricey for a console lol.

[Michaellvortega]

When did Gamefaqs buy out Cheapassgamer?

[alongx]

You should have posted this in the Xbox 360 board, cause it pushes me to buy a 360 more.

[Jewelz23]

people are bitching about the wrong issue here. Do you guys even pay attention to what's going on in the video game world overall or just look at the set price of a video game system?

A Video Game here in NYC is retailing for $65 after tax, that by far is more of an issue than the $599 price tag that many feel is not warranted.

$59.99 is not the end either, almost every game has a "special" edition or whatever retailing anywhere from $69.99 to $99.99! that's the big issue here fellas, stop crying about how much the console costs...that's eventually a non-issue...now buying games at $65 a piece...that's where it hurts.

[captainfrizo]

Wrong, and several people on this thread have already explained why.

Quoting myself:

Playstation 3 = $500
X-Box 360 = $400 + 50 x 5 = $650


That's all fine and dandy, but you are making two major assumptions:

1. That XBox Live will continue to be $50 a year after the PS3 launch.
2. That the PS3 online service will be free forever.

And, if you read my post carefully enough, you would have seen that I said that the prices I used are based on current pricing. Oddly enough, you didn't include that in your quoting of my post. Here, I'll post that part again so you don't miss it a second time:

"* - for now. Microsoft's cost could drop or Sony may have to charge for online play. The costs for each console will change as a result. For now, I'm sticking to what Microsoft does and what Sony claims will do."

I guess you missed that part.

I believe the intent was this thread was to originally discuss the launch pricing and why it's not that big of a deal, not something 5 years from now when the cost of online gaming could be dramatically changed for Microsoft and/or Sony.

Oh, and it's also funny how you chose to use the $500 PS3 and the $400 Xbox 360 in your example in an attempt to make the PS3 sound cheaper.

[elsnow77]

well for one, i got my 360 for 350 + no tax. Plus, i don't have a play charge kit, or the official ms brand wireless adapter, plus i have no interest in the HD player

[Spades22]

Ya 65 bucks for a game is nuts... but games go down in price easy, so I never spend that. I usually get games when they're players choice or whatever unless its a really good game. And we're not making assumptions stating that the Xbox360 will be 60 dollars for however many years and PS3 will be free... you guys are making the assumptions by stating the Xbox360 WONT be 60 dollars a year and the PS3 WONT be free. Right now the correct information is that Xboxlive is 60 bucks a year and PS3 online is free.

[kennistond]

The only thing this thread is good for is finding out who else to put on my ignore list.

*Cough*Spades22 and pnjabimunda8*Cough*

[DarkNessBear]

The only thing this thread is good for is finding out who else to put on my ignore list.

*Cough*Spades22 and pnjabimunda8*Cough*

Why are Xbox Fanboys so scared of other people that dont conform to their ideas/opinions?

I never understood that.

[kennistond]

Why are Xbox Fanboys so scared of other people that dont conform to their ideas/opinions?

I never understood that.

I'm not a fanboy.
These guys are just idiots.

lol thing is though I still think the 360 is crazy too high lol, lol which is why I never bought one or will lol. lol When I was a kid it would have seemed like nothing lol, but now its a lot more lol, even 250 american seems pricey for a console lol.

Point Proven.

[DarkNessBear]

http://www.ps3land.com/images/concepts/small/controller2.jpg

I wish the new controller would be atleast like that.

But I guess fanboys would say they are copying 360.

I also like this one:
http://img332.imageshack.us/img332/3346/ps3cathodeconcept3hb.jpg

What you guys think?
"lol thing is though I still think the 360 is crazy too high lol, lol which is why I never bought one or will lol. lol When I was a kid it would have seemed like nothing lol, but now its a lot more lol, even 250 american seems pricey for a console lol. "
Point Proven.
Lol.

Agreed.

[horrido]

It has yet to be determined if PS3 online is P2P. If it is, then it will never live up to Live. I know there has been indication that some games will be server based. I imagine it will be a mix.

[Spades22]

haha I was hoping someone would comment on that "lol" post, I posted like that a lot before and people would always make fun of it :P, although I was hoping it wouldn't be a rude comment. Anyway, all I see you doing is name calling...your not making very valid arguments, I'm just stating the true prices as they stand now. Sure they could change, but for now the info. I stated is the best info. there is out there. I'd sooner state facts than something that MIGHT happen. If you're gunna call anyone an idiot, mumble it to the correct person. (aka you :lol:)

[argyle]

Oh, and it's also funny how you chose to use the $500 PS3 and the $400 Xbox 360 in your example in an attempt to make the PS3 sound cheaper.

Well honestly, the $500 PS3 has everything feature-wise that the $400 360 has, and then some. Same size hdd, neither have wireless, neither have card slots, $500 PS3 has hdmi, blu-ray, charger for controller, etc.

Now I understand some people's argument that not everyone wants all that stuff, and that's fine, but the base argument that was made (very, very poorly) by the OP is that the price is justified by what you get - and that's true.

Bear in mind I think the price was justified with my 360 purchase as well. But I ran up against another sad roadblock tonight, that the 360 doesn't have any form of digital video output. I'd love to be able to connect my 360 to my tv via the dvi port, so I could take advantage of the dvd upscaling - but no such luck. Hopefully MS will correct this soon & release some hdmi cables for the system to complement that new 1080p feature they added - we'll see.

Finally, let me say I for one am glad that Sony isn't making some of these features optional. I'm one of those that thinks the extra space a blu-ray disk provides will prove beneficial for game developers, but they couldn't utilize it if it were an optional add-on. Ditto for the hdd. I'll gladly pay the extra $$ for these features to be standard and therefore used to their full potential.

[Strell]

How is this fucking topic still open?

[Zen Davis]

people are bitching about the wrong issue here. Do you guys even pay attention to what's going on in the video game world overall or just look at the set price of a video game system?

A Video Game here in NYC is retailing for $65 after tax, that by far is more of an issue than the $599 price tag that many feel is not warranted.

$59.99 is not the end either, almost every game has a "special" edition or whatever retailing anywhere from $69.99 to $99.99! that's the big issue here fellas, stop crying about how much the console costs...that's eventually a non-issue...now buying games at $65 a piece...that's where it hurts.

Where the hell in NYC are you shopping? You don't go to one of those hackneyed electronics stores do you where they give you no return policy whatsoever?

[sonicbooom]

I saw this posted at PS2NFO almost two months ago (not the diagram, the argument).

http://www.ps2nfo.com/forums/ps3-chat/ps3-definitely-worth-600-a-24993.html

It's a good argument if you ask me. If you want to play online or want HD-DVD, or even just want the highest quality 360, you've got a whole lot to buy.

[Spades22]

Thats how this discussion should have gone, but for some reason people think consoles are their children and if you say one has better features than the other they freak out.

[TimPV3]

I posted this in August. Since then, Kotaku has done it, Sony has done it, and now you've done it.

To be honest, I've been sick of seeing this since I posted it myself.

[gofishn]

Everyone wonders why there's so much PS3 bashing here at CAG. Want to know the reason why? Because it's 600 freaking dollars! This web site is called Cheap Ass Gamer for a reason folks. Yes, I do own a 360 and I stretched my cheap ass budget to the limit to get one, but I did wait until I could get a good deal ($342 shipped from Overstock). Simply put, I can in no way afford to pay $599 for a video game console. Don't give me the "it's a bargain because it plays BluRay" bs argument. I like video games, and I would like to own a PS3 someday because just like in the last generation, Sony gets great 3rd party support. The more third party developers on board, the better chance we have of seeing better, more innovative, and more diverse games. Unfortunately, it's going to be some time before I own one because of the insane price.

[Zoglog]

I don't even see how this topic is open for debate anymore.............

figures, internets

http://www.jaylittle.com/jaylittle/downloads/epenis.jpg

[Jewelz23]

Where the hell in NYC are you shopping? You don't go to one of those hackneyed electronics stores do you where they give you no return policy whatsoever?
what the fuck are you talking about?

[CocheseUGA]

Everyone wonders why there's so much PS3 bashing here at CAG. Want to know the reason why? Because it's 600 freaking dollars! This web site is called Cheap Ass Gamer for a reason folks. Yes, I do own a 360 and I stretched my cheap ass budget to the limit to get one, but I did wait until I could get a good deal ($342 shipped from Overstock). Simply put, I can in no way afford to pay $599 for a video game console. Don't give me the "it's a bargain because it plays BluRay" bs argument. I like video games, and I would like to own a PS3 someday because just like in the last generation, Sony gets great 3rd party support. The more third party developers on board, the better chance we have of seeing better, more innovative, and more diverse games. Unfortunately, it's going to be some time before I own one because of the insane price.

You, I, and everyone else knows there will be a price drop on it within a year. Sony will get a nice sales bump at first, but that will be a lot of people reselling them on eBay. After that, sales of the Wii will consistantly be more. And you know that will just eat at Sony's ass.

[Daddy]

Extremely lame response.

We DONT know how much a flying car from the future is.

We DO know how much a PS3 will be.

The companies set the price, not you... so it doesnt matter if you've tried it or not... its still gonna be $599.99.

I've just flipped you over and hit your weak spot for massive damage, bitch.


Lets see ,so youve played PS3 then? Youve gone on its network when the general public has? Youve seen any hardware issues? youve seen its second wave of games for 2007? Yeah the only massive damage done here is to your brain, plus you need to work on your trash talking skills b/c they are pretty weak too. Again hard to compare something when there are so many factors plus like i said you dont even have the product in hand yet. What good is knowing the price of something if you havent even experienced the product

[sonicbooom]

Lets see ,so youve played PS3 then? Youve gone on its network when the general public has? Youve seen any hardware issues? youve seen its second wave of games for 2007? Yeah the only massive damage done here is to your brain, plus you need to work on your trash talking skills b/c they are pretty weak too. Again hard to compare something when there are so many factors plus like i said you dont even have the product in hand yet. What good is knowing the price of something if you havent even experienced the product If there's one thing I wouldn't doubt for the PS3, it would be the games. Unless the launch games had glitches.

[Daddy]

If there's one thing I wouldn't doubt for the PS3, it would be the games. Unless the launch games had glitches.

Okay and why would you say that? Again have you played them?

[Spades22]

...lol...still a difference in that comparison... at least we know features of the ps3... where as with a flying car you don't know anything other than it will "fly" haha

[sonicbooom]

Okay and why would you say that? Again have you played them? lol, maybe because I've seen the list of games coming out and because I've liked games from those series'? And maybe because I like the company that's making the games?

That has to be one of the dumbest arguments I've ever heard, ever.

With your logic, I should never in my life have anticipated any game, EVER. I mean, I never would have had a chance to play those games until they were actually released, right? So I guess that means all those people that thought Final Fantasy XII, Guitar Hero 2, Metal Gear Solid 3, and all those other shitty games were going to be good--all of those people were just dumb in the head. Fuck previews, fuck media, fuck news. All those things are stupid. I mean, logically, those three things are worthless and don't mean a damn thing because we haven't played the game, right?

Yeah, ok. :roll:

[DJSteel]

Okay and why would you say that? Again have you played them?

Have you played GOW, COD 3, or Halo 3.. why would you think that they would be any good?? you, my friend, are an idiot.

[White-Wolf]

If there's one thing I wouldn't doubt for the PS3, it would be the games. Unless the launch games had glitches.
This is a funny, sure the ps2 had awesome games, but it seems Sony has done everything possible to disenfranchise 3rd party games.

1 because of price, their wont be alot of ps3's sold, and so game devs will be worried about how many units their game would sell on a ps3.

2 games require the highest rez textures, and is the most expensive system to make games for because of that.

3 No ps3 has been previewed, and it may be delayed. This affects the confidence in the market.

4 if blue ray fails, ps3 games fail.

5 Most game devs in japan (sonys base) are more interested in the wii (through some survey, i will get link later) this means many people want to make games for the wii rather then a ps3. Xbox is still dead last though, as Japan really doesn’t like it.

All my data mining and research shows that the ps3 wont have the best games, They may have a few awesome games but it wont be like the days of the ps3. They wont have the most amount of awesome games, unless something changes. And I’m thinking that’s the price.

hell on gamespot i think.... i read square-enix is holding out on kingdom hearts 3 because they are loosing confidence in ps3 and want to see who will win the console war. Well we all know the wii will sell more consoles so is that what determines the winner?

dont worry though, i could be wrong.

[sonicbooom]

1 because of price, their wont be alot of ps3's sold, and so game devs will be worried about how many units their game would sell on a ps3.That is something you do not know. You're assuming. So far, the PS3 is selling out of preorders everywhere, so you're wrong until after the first run is released.

I'm sure that the PS3 is going to sell out of their second run also since it's going to be another limited run, unless the first run is so faulty that people don't want to buy it. But when things are limited, they sell.

Somebody close this thread..

[DJSteel]

i also don't get how games fail if blu ray isn't accepted or fails??

[Daddy]

lol, maybe because I've seen the list of games coming out and because I've liked games from those series'? And maybe because I like the company that's making the games?

That has to be one of the dumbest arguments I've ever heard, ever.

With your logic, I should never in my life have anticipated any game, EVER. I mean, I never would have had a chance to play those games until they were actually released, right? So I guess that means all those people that thought Final Fantasy XII, Guitar Hero 2, Metal Gear Solid 3, and all those other shitty games were going to be good--all of those people were just dumb in the head. Fuck previews, fuck media, fuck news. All those things are stupid. I mean, logically, those three things are worthless and don't mean a damn thing because we haven't played the game, right?

Yeah, ok. :roll:


Actually yes it is worthless b/c its someone elses opinion in a review and the video is there to sell you....how many games have been changed so you no longer like them? I mean lets say Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter on 360, its nothing like the first game in the series sure i watched vids of it and it looked great, it got stellar reviews, UBISOFT made the games i liked BUT did i know the lobby would take 20 min to get a game or that nobody wants to join a 1st person only game? NOPE, so again my friend senario is until youve tried it..... even caring about the price is pointless. Nothing is set in stone till YOU YOURSELF have tried it and justified the price whatever it might be or dismissed it based on your experience, either that or your a helpless sheep in a world of marketing if so i have a great deal on a flying bus from the future ;)
dont worry ill post some vids and a review of it to hype you up

[Daddy]

Have you played GOW, COD 3, or Halo 3.. why would you think that they would be any good?? you, my friend, are an idiot.


Thinking something looks cool is one thing it actually being good is another, opinion is opinion sorry you follow the crowd.

[sonicbooom]

Actually yes it is worthless b/c its someone elses opinion in a review and the video is there to sell you....how many games have been changed so you no longer like them? I mean lets say Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter on 360, its nothing like the first game in the series sure i watched vids of it and it looked great, it got stellar reviews, UBISOFT made the games i liked BUT did i know the lobby would take 20 min to get a game or that nobody wants to join a 1st person only game? NOPE, so again my friend senario is until youve tried it..... even caring about the price is pointless. Nothing is set in stone till YOU YOURSELF have tried it and justified the price whatever it might be or dismissed it based on your experience, either that or your a helpless sheep in a world of marketing if so i have a great deal on a flying bus from the future ;)
dont worry ill post some vids and a review of it to hype you up I guess I can throw away all my opinions about Final Fantasy XIII, Metal Gear Solid 4, Resident Evil 5, Devil May Cry 4, Halo 3, and all those other games. I'm not allowed to think those games will be good because you said so.

You fucking genius, you. God damn, why couldn't you have been born in Einstein's place. Instead of giving references to Einstein, we could just talk about how much of a brain Daddy is.

Oh, wait a minute.. that sounds kind of stupid. Just like your stupid opinion about how I'm not allowed to think a game is going to be good because it isn't released yet.

Thinking something looks cool is one thing it actually being good is another, opinion is opinion sorry you follow the crowd.lol, and what if you aren't following the crowd, genius?

[Wolfpup]

That's all fine and dandy, but you are making two major assumptions:

1. That XBox Live will continue to be $50 a year after the PS3 launch.
2. That the PS3 online service will be free forever.

And, if you read my post carefully enough, you would have seen that I said that the prices I used are based on current pricing. Oddly enough, you didn't include that in your quoting of my post. Here, I'll post that part again so you don't miss it a second time:

"* - for now. Microsoft's cost could drop or Sony may have to charge for online play. The costs for each console will change as a result. For now, I'm sticking to what Microsoft does and what Sony claims will do."

I guess you missed that part.

I believe the intent was this thread was to originally discuss the launch pricing and why it's not that big of a deal, not something 5 years from now when the cost of online gaming could be dramatically changed for Microsoft and/or Sony.

Oh, and it's also funny how you chose to use the $500 PS3 and the $400 Xbox 360 in your example in an attempt to make the PS3 sound cheaper.


Of COURSE I'm assuming Live will continue to be 50/year, and of COURSE I'm assuming the Playstation Network will be free, because neither company has ever given any indication to the contrary, nor have any legit media given any serious weight to it. The only reason anyone would assume otherwise is if they're trying to make the Playstation 3 sound more expensive than it is.

And of COURSE I'm comparing the most expensive 360 to the cheaper Playstation 3, because (as another poster mentions) those two are the closest in features. The $500 Playstation 3 already includes what the 360 includes (plus you're getting a more powerful piece of hardware). Even playing the game that "Live might be free after 1 year!!!", that's still just a $50 price difference for more powerful hardware. I for one am not going to get worked up over an extra $50 on a $450 piece of hardware-especially not when that extra money buys you better hardware (not to mention you can make up the difference just by trading in a PS2).

Bottom line-at full retail the 360 is NOT cheaper unless you'll NEVER go online-and even then the price difference is pretty minuscule for how much they cost.

Wierd, I didnt hear anyone say that in this thread... maybe I missed it.

I said that VC games were too expensive, with no changes like online multiplayer, 720/1080 upgrades and whatnot.

8 bucks a Genesis game is retarded anyway you slice it. (Maaaaaaybe Gunstar Heroes...)

I dont believe in playing games on a PC, my Mac is for work only... but the VC prices are higher than XBLA and with 1/2 the upgrades. Added in the lack of a hard drive, and it just gets worse and worse.

Another thread in another forum. Basically some fanbois were trying to claim Nintendo's games are too expensive because you should just go steal them-which is the stupidest argument I've ever heard.
And I'm not seeing how Nintendo's games are "more expensive" than X-Box Live stuff. The prices seem pretty comparable, but already there's better stuff (IMO) for Wii. Plus a lot of content on Live is unplayable because of the 360's terrible d-pad.

[Spades22]

Wow a big debate over how a flying bus is similar to a PS3...brilliant :roll:

[neudog]

First off most those items can be found on sale now or can be obtained for $5 cheaper using the GGC at BB. Also this is CAG and alot of us have been able to score LIVE subscriptions for $20 or less. Also you are not required to have wireless network adapter to go online this is a conveniance purchase. So let's do the new math before taxes:

Premium System: $399
Play & Charge: $14.99
LIVE 12 month: $17-60
HD-DVD: $129.99

Total = $560.98 (low end) or $603.98 (high end)

So they're pretty much equal aside from the wireless capability.

[auralia]

I am 90% certain you have to buy a add on to make your games compatable unless they changed it i remember reading about it in game informer and another magazine as well.

[getmyrunon]

Why are people saying the HD-DVD addon is 129? It's 199?

[Maynard]

Daddy, the offer is still up 20 bucks.



20 + your death = 20 for you

[Wolfpup]

I am 90% certain you have to buy a add on to make your games compatable unless they changed it i remember reading about it in game informer and another magazine as well.

An add on to what? What are you talking about?

[White-Wolf]

That is something you do not know. You're assuming. So far, the PS3 is selling out of preorders everywhere, so you're wrong until after the first run is released.

I'm sure that the PS3 is going to sell out of their second run also since it's going to be another limited run, unless the first run is so faulty that people don't want to buy it. But when things are limited, they sell.

Somebody close this thread..
Your right, i dont know per say, its just my opinion. I dont think it will sell as many as the wii though, becuse of the price. and becuse of this, i dont think that it will have the best games, becuse the titles on the ps2 that were taken for granted to be on the ps3 may not be on the ps3 if the wii sells more then the ps3.

i also don't get how games fail if blu ray isn't accepted or fails??
Its becuse its a combo thing. the market of the ps3 is assumeing that both succed or the investment in the ps3 isent worth it. Right now sony is avoiding taxes in japan becuse all thier money has been droped into cell and blue ray. If blue ray fails it could take more then just the ps3 down with it. The ps3 is loosing money on every console it sells, the wii is makeing money on every console it sells. This is becuse the price of the ps3 to make is more then 600 while the price of the wii is under 200. sony invested a ton of money on the ps3's blue ray, if it flops, it will be just like universal media discs. Those flopped and becuse of that, thier are not many psp games. Thats the problem i think with the ps3, its too connected to too many things that really have the potential to kill the system.

again, my opinion, but i dont think the market is ready for blue ray. The ps2 sold as it did becuse it was a bargen. people wanted dvds at the time and i know many famelies that got a ps2 just becuse of the dvd player, and becuse they could also give thier kids a video game system. Two birds with one stone. Blue ray now is forceing itself into the maket with the games. They hope to make up the money the loose on the ps3 with rights to blue ray makeing it the standard for hd content. it is is a very diffrent situation then the ps2. The problem is, sony dosent know the diffrence between the two. they think the ps3 will be just like the ps2. It wont happen like the ps2, trust me. I dont know what i will happen, but i do know that if the blue ray fails, the ps3 will tank, and it will fail.

this console war wont be wone with 2 million units, or 4 million or even 8 million. Those could all sell out. Its who sells 30 million or 70 million. That will be the winner. Is the market ready for the ps3 and blue ray? no i dont think so. In 3 or 4 years i think it will be, but by then, the next console war will be around the conner. The ps3 just wont have mass market appeal like the ps2. Its too expensive and blue ray is just to risky. If blue ray succeeds and beats hd dvd, then the ps3 has a chance, and may be like the ps2, but right now, its just too soon to say for sure. Give it 1 or 2 years. The price of hd tv's also will effect the market of the ps3 almost directly. I wouldent be supprized if sony drops the prices of thier hd tv's to sell blue ray.

[elwood731]

An add on to what? What are you talking about?
I think he means for PS1/2 games, maybe? Of course, that's wrong. You only need an add-on to transfer old PS1/2 saved games.

As I've said before, there is a great deal of misinformation out there on the PS3 and Wii still. Things will be much clearer in a few short weeks, and then better comparisons can be drawn between the value of the three. Still, at the end of the day, you get value out of what you enjoy. There are people who will tell you the Neo-Geo was a bargain at the time, and it was compared to purchasing full cabinets.

[CocheseUGA]

Daddy, the offer is still up 20 bucks.



20 + your death = 20 for you

Who the fuck are you?

[Maynard]

You, I, and everyone else knows there will be a price drop on it within a year. Sony will get a nice sales bump at first, but that will be a lot of people reselling them on eBay. After that, sales of the Wii will consistantly be more. And you know that will just eat at Sony's ass.

Hmm, your IQ level is almost the same as Daddy's.....Dont worry you'll get there soon! Dont give up chubbs!

[Wolfpup]

Its becuse its a combo thing. the market of the ps3 is assumeing that both succed or its price is not worth it. The ps3 is loosing money on every console it sells...

So is the 360. The PS3 probably includes a Blu Ray drive to trojan horse that format into living rooms, but it is an advantage for games, and long term won't cost much different from a DVD drive. In fact long term Sony may be able to build a Blu Ray drive cheaper than Microsoft can buy a DVD drive.

...if it flops, it will be just like universal media discs. Those flopped and becuse of that, thier are not many psp games.

Huh? That's a complete non sequitur. In the first place, there are tons of PSP games. And UMD movies selling or not has nothing to do with the PSP's success as a GAME system. Ditto for the Playstation 3. I have no plans to buy any Blu Ray or HD-DVD discs until the format war is over (if then). But that in no way makes me want a Playstation 3 less.

...I dont know what i will happen, but i do know that if the blue ray fails, the ps3 will tank, and it will fail.

And again...why? What do the two have to do with each other? That's like arguing the Gameboy Advance was a failure because not many people bought videos for it.

Regarding the pricing...I think that's up in the air too. It's roughly the same price as the 360 (more or less depending on how you look at it), and the 360 seems to be selling pretty well. Only about half as well as Microsoft predicted, but still quite well. The market seems to be able to bear expensive consoles now. Remember that the 360 and PS3 won't always cost this much.

Sony has one HUGE advantage over Microsoft (and even Nintendo to an extent). They still have the Playstation 2 as a healthy market. They can still grab people that are cost sensitive. The PS2 should have at least one more solid year, plus years of bargin crap, so Sony has a lot more wiggle room in that sense than Microsoft.

Of course I think there's a huge chance the Wii could be incredibly successful, partially just going by the DS success. Partially because of good will. Partially because of the cheaper price. And partially because the control scheme might really be a revolution.

Going by projected numbers, I think Wii will have surpassed the 360, if not by December 31, then by the first months of 2007. At that point development may start shifting to Wii (there were hints if it does well Dragon Quest 9 might be a Wii game instead of PS3).

And remember that Wii and Playstation 3 will DESTROY 360 in Japan. Wii will probably exceed 360 in it's first day. So I think long term both Wii and PS3 will continue having better Japanese support than 360.

[Apossum]

this didn't help. this didn't help at all!

$500 PS3 ft-non-1080p-w

[gofishn]

Is there a "Worst Thread of the Year" award?

[DJSteel]

Thinking something looks cool is one thing it actually being good is another, opinion is opinion sorry you follow the crowd.

more people I know are acting like you, minus the ingnorant BS that you are shovelling, I cannot disagree more with your mindless trolling based on no facts or stats

[CocheseUGA]

Hmm, your IQ level is almost the same as Daddy's.....Dont worry you'll get there soon! Dont give up chubbs!

Don't make me quote myself.

[White-Wolf]

I agree Puppy, with alot of what you said, But i think that thier is a connection to umd and the success of the psp. I dont think the psp has very many good games, and they are not makeing money with movies on umd. I agree that comparieing umd to blue ray wasent a good example on my part.

I still dont think that what made the ps2 awsome, will work with the ps3. Its too soon.

I do think that the ps3 is more of a deal then the 360 though, if blue ray wins the hd tv war. Right now its to hard to tell.

Personaly i think that games on the ps2 are better then the games on the xbox, and i dont care for the games on the 360. I will be getting a wii as my first console, becuse i know it wont have bugs ect. I may get a ps3 later, if blue ray does well. I dont dislike the ps3 or anything, i just think sony is being a bastard with how they are presenting themselves with all the mud slinging. I also dont think its right to use gamers to launch blue ray. Seems way too greedy. I wish they would focuse just on makeing a game system, not a media system. I think the wii has it right though. I buy a video game system, and i get exactly that. You dont need a hardrive to play video games, or a dvd or blue ray player ect. I have a computer for that.

[zerolens]

Everyone wonders why there's so much PS3 bashing here at CAG. Want to know the reason why? Because it's 600 freaking dollars! This web site is called Cheap Ass Gamer for a reason folks. Yes, I do own a 360 and I stretched my cheap ass budget to the limit to get one, but I did wait until I could get a good deal ($342 shipped from Overstock). Simply put, I can in no way afford to pay $599 for a video game console. Don't give me the "it's a bargain because it plays BluRay" bs argument. I like video games, and I would like to own a PS3 someday because just like in the last generation, Sony gets great 3rd party support. The more third party developers on board, the better chance we have of seeing better, more innovative, and more diverse games. Unfortunately, it's going to be some time before I own one because of the insane price.

If you were a true cheap ass you wouldn't be so stuck up in having to have the fully loaded version. It's no one's fault but your own you're not willing to buy the cheaper versions of either consoles.

You sound like the guy on the first page ranting about Sony forcing options on people and how MS lets you pick and choose, then next sentence complains about having to pay $600 for a PS3. Maybe if you guys weren't such hypocrites people might take you seriously.

[captainfrizo]

You sound like the guy on the first page ranting about Sony forcing options on people and how MS lets you pick and choose, then next sentence complains about having to pay $600 for a PS3. Maybe if you guys weren't such hypocrites people might take you seriously.

Maybe if you examined the first post more clearly you'd see the OP used the $600 model in his example/explanation. That's why the $600 was used in the responses on the first page. The $500 model wasn't even in the conversation at the time of those first responses.

[gofishn]

If you were a true cheap ass you wouldn't be so stuck up in having to have the fully loaded version. It's no one's fault but your own you're not willing to buy the cheaper versions of either consoles.

You sound like the guy on the first page ranting about Sony forcing options on people and how MS lets you pick and choose, then next sentence complains about having to pay $600 for a PS3. Maybe if you guys weren't such hypocrites people might take you seriously.

Hypocrite? I fail to see anything hypocritical about my statement. If you want me to use the el cheapo PS3, fine, $500 is still too much to pay for a console. Happy now? Like I said, I got my premium 360 brand new for $342 shipped, no tax. So, I'm already starting out $158 cheaper than the bare bones PS3, with my loaded 360, and I'm not even counting the taxes I'd have to pay on that $500 (7.5% in my county). I'm not trying to play favorites with huge international corporations. MS and Sony are not the Yankees and the Red Sox. I have absolutely no stake in who "wins" the "console war". I'm not a Microsoft or Sony shareholder, I'm just a guy who likes to unwind by playing video games. I'm only loyal to whoever brings me the best games (that I can afford).

[zerolens]

Maybe if you examined the first post more clearly you'd see the OP used the $600 model in his example/explanation. That's why the $600 was used in the responses on the first page. The $500 model wasn't even in the conversation at the time of those first responses.

Does the topic creator need to bring up the $500 version for you or anyone else to know it exists? Ranting about wanting options in what you want to buy then turning around and comparing it to the $600 version is being a hypocrite. The topic creator compared the $600 version because he added wifi to the 360. He could have easily dropped wifi and used the $500 version, it's the same difference regardless which example he uses.

He could have been much more bias by adding in multiple years of xbox live at $60 X 5 years if he wanted. He didn't factor in additional hard drive space either. Instead you want to nickel and dime about a headset, if you guys like using official MS and Sony branded products and configurations to make comparisons then it would be in your best interest to stop using the $600 version. To make an apple to apple comparison you would have to add in 2 additional 20GB hard drives ($200 more added) and $100 wifi.

Bottomline you're paying $100 more for blu-ray, it's that simple. We all know if it was using DVD like the 360 it would be $400, not $500. If they stripped out the hard drive and other things they could make it $300 like the core I'm sure. Yes blu-ray is being forced on you, no one is going to argue that. But once you and the others start comparing the $600 version then don't be surprised when the $100 wifi and additional money for hard drive space enter the argument.

[Strell]

How is this fucking topic still open?

Gosh, mysterious Internet person who is dashing and wanted by all the ladies, I just don't know!

[Genocidal]

Needs more wangs.

[zerolens]

Hypocrite? I fail to see anything hypocritical about my statement. If you want me to use the el cheapo PS3, fine, $500 is still too much to pay for a console. Happy now? Like I said, I got my premium 360 brand new for $342 shipped, no tax. So, I'm already starting out $158 cheaper than the bare bones PS3, with my loaded 360, and I'm not even counting the taxes I'd have to pay on that $500 (7.5% in my county). I'm not trying to play favorites with huge international corporations. MS and Sony are not the Yankees and the Red Sox. I have absolutely no stake in who "wins" the "console war". I'm not a Microsoft or Sony shareholder, I'm just a guy who likes to unwind by playing video games. I'm only loyal to whoever brings me the best games (that I can afford).

It's hypocritical because you claim to be a cheap ass but then use a $600 price for the PS3 when in your situation you could easily consider the $500 version. Are you adding 40GB more to that $350 360 you bought? So why rant about the $600 price?

And you know how I can tell you're biased? Not only do you not see the problem in comparing the $600 version to any version of the 360, but you refer to the $500 version as "bare bones" and the 360 as "loaded". Who cares how they are marketed, the premium 360 and "bare bones" PS3 have almost identical equipment.

And even worse you bring into the argument the taxes you would pay on the $500 version, but make sure to tell everyone you got your 360 tax free. Gee I guess it's impossible for you to get a PS3 online like your 360 and avoid taxes but the 360 is so special you can order online and not have to pay taxes! We definetly need to factor that in, 360 is tax free but with the PS3 we have to factor in taxes!

[CappyCobra]

I don't know who is more stupid, the OP or the morons in this thread that incessantly rip the PS3 sight unseen.
...Or the people who are on Sony's tip before even playing the damn thing.

People want to pay $600 for a PS3? Sure! Go ahead! Knock yourself out! All the quicker it will drop in price when it becomes cheaper to produce. :bouncy: I can wait... <eyes backlog>

[millrat1030]

Reading through this thread one thing has become abundantly clear, you have fanboys for both systems. No matter what is said about either system someone will try and tell you why your wrong. I have only one thing to say as a cheap ass gamer, gofishn you got a good deal on a system that has been out for a year and hopefully we'll see deals like that on a ps3 in a year.

[Genocidal]

www.woot.com There's your $15 adapter for the 360, so knock $80 off the price (after shipping, in case anyone wants to be anal)

[gofishn]

Reading through this thread one thing has become abundantly clear, you have fanboys for both systems. No matter what is said about either system someone will try and tell you why your wrong. I have only one thing to say as a cheap ass gamer, gofishn you got a good deal on a system that has been out for a year and hopefully we'll see deals like that on a ps3 in a year.

I actually got it in like May, but the deal comes along all the time on Overstock and always gets posted in the deals section here.

[gofishn]

It's hypocritical because you claim to be a cheap ass but then use a $600 price for the PS3 when in your situation you could easily consider the $500 version. Are you adding 40GB more to that $350 360 you bought? So why rant about the $600 price?

And you know how I can tell you're biased? Not only do you not see the problem in comparing the $600 version to any version of the 360, but you refer to the $500 version as "bare bones" and the 360 as "loaded". Who cares how they are marketed, the premium 360 and "bare bones" PS3 have almost identical equipment.

And even worse you bring into the argument the taxes you would pay on the $500 version, but make sure to tell everyone you got your 360 tax free. Gee I guess it's impossible for you to get a PS3 online like your 360 and avoid taxes but the 360 is so special you can order online and not have to pay taxes! We definetly need to factor that in, 360 is tax free but with the PS3 we have to factor in taxes!

I don't usually get personal in threads like this, but you sir, are an idiot. How many times must I say this? For me, $500 is far too much to spend on a console. Where is the bias in that? Being cheap? Knowing the constraints of my budget and refusing to go beyond them?

[captainfrizo]

Does the topic creator need to bring up the $500 version for you or anyone else to know it exists? Ranting about wanting options in what you want to buy then turning around and comparing it to the $600 version is being a hypocrite.

Let's try this one more time - my response was in response to the OP's post. He used the $600 version and I responded as so. If he had used the $500 version I would have been more than happy to respond to that as well. However, he didn't, so I didn't. Your comments were directed to my response and I was explaining to you what I said and why.

Secondly, I don't see how wanting the option to buy something instead of forced with the option is hypocritical at all. The $300 or $400 360 can ultimately be as expensive as the buyer chooses with regards to adding what what he/she wants. The final cost may be over $500 for everything or just the $400 for the premium console (hell, even $300 for the core). The $500 or $600 for the PS3 console will be the same $500 or $600 no matter what.

What if you don't care about wi-fi or HD-DVD? In my opinion its much better for the consumer that he/she can choose what he/she wants with regards to their console (and thus having more control over the price) than being forced with pre-installed features that they may not want/need that only increases the price. The automobile industry has been doing this for years, I don't think this should be a new concept.

[zerolens]

I don't usually get personal in threads like this, but you sir, are an idiot. How many times must I say this? For me, $500 is far too much to spend on a console. Where is the bias in that? Being cheap? Knowing the constraints of my budget and refusing to go beyond them?

$500 is too much for me too, I mentioned that in another topic on here. And to go ahead and say it, I'm clearly biased, anybody here can see that. The reason I responded to your post to begin with is you were ranting about what being a cheap ass gamer is all about but were quoting the $600 price. You compared it to a tax free overstock price, comparing any xbox (unless you add options) to the $600 version is not an apple to apple comparison.

Your follow-up post showed you still didn't see the point I made, which is comparing the $600 version to an overstock price is silly. The PS3 is $100 more expensive, no if's and's or but's. If someone wants to nickel and dime about cables, batteries for a controller, a headset that's a personal decision each person makes about what they need.

I'm a supporter of the $300 360, I've said that in previous threads as well. I have no problem someone comparing that either, which now makes the PS3 $160 more expensive. Most people don't see any value in it when the premium version is only $60 more, but it goes to show that $60 is a small price to pay to step up to the next version for people in here, so $100 more for the PS3 will be a small price to pay as well for some of these same people. It's not about being a cheap ass, it's about what an individual person thinks a product is worth. But if you can't get past buying a "lesser" version of a console that's no one's fault but your own.

For people comparing $400 360 to $500 PS3 and prefer PS3 games believe me $100 is a small price to pay for getting the kind of games you want. Saving $50 on a 360 and buying a next-gen console early in its life where games haven't hit rock bottom yet doesn't scream "cheap ass" to me. $500 is too expensive for you and $350 for a 360 is ok for you, nothing wrong with that. But someone who buys a next-gen console that early and wants to compare to the $600 version (and I get the feeling that's actually the version of the PS3 you would buy ultimately because you still see the other version as "bare bones") isn't much of a cheap ass.

I'll be waiting for 65nm PS3, a $100 price drop, and games like Oblivion and Untold Legends to hit $30 or cheaper. I don't consider that being a cheap ass because it's still a $400 console and $30 games, the same as buying a year old $350 console isn't much of a cheap ass either.

[sincere7576]

u compared the prices good but dont forget that at first xbox was free online for about a yr or so. i think playstation is going do the same thing eventually

[anomynous]

http://img81.imageshack.us/img81/6661/comparingid9.jpg
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b284/cool1337/suicidesigjt0.gif

[naes]

PS3 is also a powerhog. I read somewhere on Digg that it will put your electricity bill up about 40 bucks a year. Not a lot, but it adds up.

[RAMSTORIA]

god i hate everyone

[DJSteel]

PS3 is also a powerhog. I read somewhere on Digg that it will put your electricity bill up about 40 bucks a year. Not a lot, but it adds up.

Xbox Live price > PS3 power bill price... i love how people are pulling electricity bills as a negative for a system... meanwhile who has tested this?

[furyk]

I love how some one quoted the original post to fuck up this page of the thread too. It's a good thing I'm a slut for pain.