F
fhqwhgads
Lurker
And still no price drop planned. Blu-Ray though, is still $1000 on its own, so I don't see how much lower they can go anyways.
The PS3 has been robbed!!!
- Thread starter Homicidal Cherry53
- Start date
fhqwhgads said:
According to FrakAttack, we'll have one soon, and the PS3 costs $800 to make apparently. The manufacturing price is going down though so I would expect a price drop soon. Greedy old Nintedo is making $40 per console and yet they still can't make a Wii $200.
F
fhqwhgads
Lurker
Well, yeah, 'cause then they'd lose $10. But of course, Nintendo's the greedy one with their damn multiple editions, and the Elite versions, not to mention the absurdly high price tag on everything of theirs. They're so greedy, they only think about money.
fhqwhgads said:
I'm not trying to get in an argument here. Nintendo could lose a few bucks on the Wii and it wouldn't hurt them. Sony is losing $200 per console and Nintendo can't lose an insignificant $10? I just think its kind of ridiculous. Microsoft is pretty greedy, but I was surprised because Nintendo usually isn't.
F
fhqwhgads
Lurker
I wasn't trying to get in an arguement either, I was pointing out you're calling Nintendo greedy when they refuse to have $60 first party games, have the cheapest console, and have finally gotten rid of all the extra costing hookups you need. Greedy is charging for XBL.
All the companies are equally greedy the only difference is Nintendo was smart enough to make a console that they both can turn a profit on and sell for subsantialy less than there competiors and is more line price wise with what many consumers are willing to pay.Homicidal Cherry53 said:
Mai Valentine
Moderator
Even if the PS3 drops in price, there's still the problem of it has very few games worth buying, IMO. Honestly if someone gave me a PS3 for free I'd probably still trade it in and pay off all the 360 games I have reserved.
Mai Valentine said:
Well it would appear that the PS3's game problems may be changing. With Lair, Ratchet and Clank, and Heavenly Sword coming out real soon, and the big system sellers MGS 4 and FF 13 right on the horizon, we may start seeing the PS3 becoming a serious competitor to the 360 and Wii (let's be honest. It really isn't right now. The 360 is doubling its sales, and the Wii, quintupling them).
F
fhqwhgads
Lurker
Umm, no. 360 has what, 11 million? Wii, eight? PS3, threeish?
fhqwhgads said:
Okay, do you read these posts before you respond. I'll quote myself:
Homicidal Cherry53 said:
In case you still can't figure it out, I'm talking about in the future so it has very little to do with current sales figures. Just because the PS3 is losing now doesn't mean it always will be. Its like your saying a baseball game is over in the first inning.
F
fhqwhgads
Lurker
You can't talk about the future when you say 'right now', because right now isn't the future. The 360 is more than tripling PS3 sales, the Wii, over double. That's generally what 'right now' means is...right now.
fhqwhgads said:
Actually the 360 is only doubling, on a monthly basis (both aren't selling that well right now) and the Wii, on a monthly basis, is quintupling.
I still don't think you read my entire post (I quoted out of context last time). What I quoted was something saying, yes the PS3 is sucking now. The rest of my post was talking about the next year or so (if you read the post carefully, I have a feeling you would know this):
Homicidal Cherry53 said:
F
fhqwhgads
Lurker
I did read your post. I wasn't anywhere near talking about that part. I was just pointing out the sales thing, which I realize was how much they're selling, not have sold.
fhqwhgads said:
True, the PS3 isn't selling well, but my point was this may not continue. How many good games were there when the PS2 first launched? It took a year or so to get the really great games to the system ( this was of course right when the Gamecube and Xbox came out so Sony had a pretty big edge)
F
fhqwhgads
Lurker
Xbox had a lot of PC ports, and GCN had lack of third party, so that really wasn't helping either. The PS3 thing is that still, not a lot of people want to spend some much when most people just want it for games, not movies and all that.
fhqwhgads said:
Well I don't know how true it is. When/if Blu-Ray becomes the main medium for movies, it will become a pretty compelling reason to buy a PS3 (although it probably isn't doing much good now). If the 360 and PS3 both end up with great games, Blu-Ray might end up being a tie-breaker for many.
F
fhqwhgads
Lurker
See, there's till the if floating around. They should have waited until next gen just to see if it would work. No reason they couldn't have gone with HD this gen.
fhqwhgads said:
Well, there's kind of a catch 22 there. Without Blu-Ray on the PS3, Blu-Ray wouldn't be in the lead against HD-DVD, so if you wait until the next generation to put it in...well in all likelihood, Blu-Ray's already lost, but putting it in the PS3 may be what Blu-Ray needs to win because the PS3 has put 3 million Blu-Ray players in people's homes (way more than the crappy HD-DVD attachment for the 360) which is more than the total HD-DVD players out there. So if you wait to put in Blu-Ray, you don't get the possible benefits of being able to play Blu-Ray and Blu-Ray will likely fail.
F
fhqwhgads
Lurker
But if you removed Blu-Ray, odds are six million people would have a PS3 in their home. What exactly do you have to have Blu-Ray for? Most stuff is still in standard.
fhqwhgads said:
Well, Blu-Ray is there, first off to play Blu-Ray, and second to expand the PS3 disc memory and make it better hardware. Plus, Blu-Ray may actually end up being very beneficial for the PS3, especially towards the end of this generation when consoles are being stretched to the limit in terms of what they can do. Blu-Ray may give the PS3 that little extra push in terms of hardware, necessary to make more demanding games run well. Plus, Blu-Ray may still yet be a selling point for the PS3. Its just too early to judge, but either way, Blu-Ray will be a deciding factor in the PS3's success.