We're paying $200 extra dollars for what again?

[rudyjuly2]

Re: We're paying $200 extra dollars for what again?

Still, many people want the PS3 simply for gaming, not high-def movie watching, so in that regard, I can see why some might be upset that they have to pay $500 - $600, when if Bluray was not included, it could have been alot cheaper.

That's my big beef. The 360 was already out of my price range. The PS3's extra costs put it way out of my price range. I don't see the systems being different at all personally. I see them doing the same things with the PS3 also being an HD player. However, you can buy the add on for the 360 at essentially the same total cost if you want. The fact the HD player is also a separate stand alone feature will also help preserve the 360. When you combine the fact that Blue Ray might not even be the successful format, it makes it scary to pay that much for a PS3 right now. I would prefer to buy the PS3 just because of the Show but will wait for the first price drop and pick up a 360 next year most likely (and pray 2K makes a decent baseball game in the future).

For those that don't think price is a big factor, there was a study that showed that over 50% (I think) of video game players surveyed wanted a 360. However, only 3% were planning on buying it soon. People are waiting on next-gen. Dropping the prices will be the necessary push to get them in and MS has a huge advantage in the price point department.

You're paying extra money for a forced feature you don't need and could eaasily game without

That's my beef as well. The only thing I've heard is that the extra storage capacity might be needed for future games but I don't know if that's true or not.

[ThaGenecyst]

Re: We're paying $200 extra dollars for what again?

Holy thread ressurection Batman!!

Bacardi, I thought the Blue Ray disc also allowed for more space for developers to use to create games. Or is that just some marketing ploy?Excuse my late ignorance, I haven't really been following the discussions lately.

they can if devs feel the need to. I wouldn't really expect 3rd party devs making multiplatform games to take FULL advantage of blu ray's storage space... i'd expect it from say.. Square with FFXIII (uncompressed 1080p cgi vids) and maybe even Konami with MGS4, or even SCE with Gran Turismo (super high res bg's, cars, vids, etc)

[Sully]

Re: We're paying $200 extra dollars for what again?

Holy thread ressurection Batman!!

Bacardi, I thought the Blue Ray disc also allowed for more space for developers to use to create games. Or is that just some marketing ploy?Excuse my late ignorance, I haven't really been following the discussions lately.

That is true, graphik, but if a developer is planning a multi-platform release, they're likely to develop for the 360 first, then port the same game over to the PS3...rather than developing a title that utilizes all of the disc space on blu-ray, then chopping it up for the 360. It still boils down to money.

Now, the games that are PS3 exclusives are a different story...

[caseyd]

Re: We're paying $200 extra dollars for what again?

And even better example, Ipod. There are many other MP3 players that are just as good and more affordable, but because it's an "Ipod" that's what they want.

That may have been a valid argument at one point, but when looking at $ per gb now, the 80gb is a better deal than anything out there (assuming you need that much space). The 30gb units are also the same price as Zune and Creative VisionM now, so you still can't say that others are more affordable anymore. Just thought I'd throw that out there. I think Ipods get a lot of "reverse negativity" because they are Ipods.

[Pete1210]

Re: We're paying $200 extra dollars for what again?

After reading articles on the hardware specs of the two systems, I am not at all surprised that graphically they are about the same.
If I didn't have a 360 already and wasn't hooked on xbox live, I'd pay the extra $100 for the Blu-ray player.

[Sully]

Re: We're paying $200 extra dollars for what again?

After reading articles on the hardware specs of the two systems, I am not at all surprised that graphically they are about the same.
If I didn't have a 360 already and wasn't hooked on xbox live, I'd pay the extra $100 for the Blu-ray player.

As would I, Pete. I'm thinking about picking the PS3 up in the Spring, likely the 20GB version. There aren't many exclusives for the PS3 that interest me, but I wouldn't mind the blu-ray player, and a little baseball game called The Show.

[ExtremeGamer]

Re: We're paying $200 extra dollars for what again?

After reading articles on the hardware specs of the two systems, I am not at all surprised that graphically they are about the same.
If I didn't have a 360 already and wasn't hooked on xbox live, I'd pay the extra $100 for the Blu-ray player.

That's the big thing. I love my 360. But when you break down the price, IF you want High Defition for DVD, and you want WiFi, the 60GB PS3 is the better deal. It's just out a year later, and doesn't have the quality of titles that the 360 does at this point.

[Graphik]

Re: We're paying $200 extra dollars for what again?

they can if devs feel the need to. I wouldn't really expect 3rd party devs making multiplatform games to take FULL advantage of blu ray's storage space... i'd expect it from say.. Square with FFXIII (uncompressed 1080p cgi vids) and maybe even Konami with MGS4, or even SCE with Gran Turismo (super high res bg's, cars, vids, etc)

Those games you mentioned can definitely be a selling point for some. Its just a shame that none are ready yet. It would of actually made the debate of which console is better much more easy. For now, since the debut games look the same or in some cases, no better than what the 360 is offering, its making it alot harder to justify dropping 200 extra on the PS3. Also, lets not forget that 1st party games are becoming more and more scarce as the years past.

[Sully]

Re: We're paying $200 extra dollars for what again?

Those games you mentioned can definitely be a selling point for some. Its just a shame that none are ready yet. It would of actually made the debate of which console is better much more easy. For now, since the debut games look the same or in some cases, no better than what the 360 is offering, its making it alot harder to justify dropping 200 extra on the PS3. Also, lets not forget that 1st party games are becoming more and more scarce as the years past.

The launch titles are disappointing. Then again, look at the launch list for the 360 last year. While it may have been slightly better than what we're seeing for the PS3, it was hardly impressive, and surely didn't justify a $300/$400 leap to the next-gen.

Give Sony a year, as it now seems the 360 is finally picking up steam with some quality titles.

[DaveDQ]

Re: We're paying $200 extra dollars for what again?

Now, the games that are PS3 exclusives are a different story...

That sums it up. Both systems are going to shine with exclusive titles.

However, I don't think we're going to see a 200.00 difference in any title, and like TJ pointed out earlier, the average Joe is thinking that 600.00 is all about gaming.

[tanis38]

Re: We're paying $200 extra dollars for what again?

As would I, Pete. I'm thinking about picking the PS3 up in the Spring, likely the 20GB version. There aren't many exclusives for the PS3 that interest me, but I wouldn't mind the blu-ray player, and a little baseball game called The Show.

Same here, although I will probably need to wait until Fall 2007 (what are the chances of a price drop by then? Please!)

I would LOVE to try out that Bluray player on my tv (especially through an HDMI connection), becaused I am obsessed with watching HD shows, they just look so damn gorgeous (CSI, The Tonight Show, Late Show, Football, etc.). But there really are not any games coming out on the PS3 (other than The Show) that interest me at the moment.

On the other hand, there are a TON of games coming out for the 360 early next year that I want. So that should hold me over. And if I absolutely NEED to watch HD movies, I can either DL them from the Marketplace or pony up for the HD-DVD Drive (which I am not too interested in at this point)

[CaptainZombie]

Re: We're paying $200 extra dollars for what again?

As would I, Pete. I'm thinking about picking the PS3 up in the Spring, likely the 20GB version. There aren't many exclusives for the PS3 that interest me, but I wouldn't mind the blu-ray player, and a little baseball game called The Show.

When I get the PS3 possibly Feb/March, I'm going with the 20GB version. I really don't need WiFi, the extra 40GB, and the memory card reader is $15 which will do fine. I want the PS3 to game on and don't care for the extra multimedia crap. ****, if they can take out the BluRay for me also to make it cheaper, then were game (only in my dreams).

[bigfnjoe96]

Re: We're paying $200 extra dollars for what again?

I firmly believe SONY is banking that people will buy the PS3 for the same reason many people brought the PS2. For both GAMING & MOVIE Playing purposes. The addition off a DVD Player with the PS2 was a BIG selling point & actually helped move the DVD Format in the right direction.

SONY is hoping this also hold's true for BLU-RAY as this format is used for both. I think this might back-fire. Simply because the Gaming & Movie Industry are not what they use to be 5 years ago.

[Skyboxer]

Re: We're paying $200 extra dollars for what again?

As would I, Pete. I'm thinking about picking the PS3 up in the Spring, likely the 20GB version. There aren't many exclusives for the PS3 that interest me, but I wouldn't mind the blu-ray player, and a little baseball game called The Show.

Same here. I'll go with the 20GB version. Anyways I'll wait for reviews of The Show before I do anything as that's the only game I have interest in.

[Jistic]

Re: We're paying $200 extra dollars for what again?

Sony's trying to win a format war. That's where the real money's at. It's the Betamax all over again.