Sign in to follow this  
Bigfoot

Sony PS3

Recommended Posts

Only chance of me buying a PS3 is if it drops down to $400 someday and even then I doubt it. Until then, I'm glad my housemate bought one so I could play Resistance. Ridge Racer sucks. Next game I'll play is Virtua Fighter 5 since it's on our Gamefly list. Next game after that is a long way off I think. Maybe GTA4?

Oh no, wait...next game after that will be God of War 2...even though it's a PS2 game. Any other good PS2 games coming out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wish I was in Japan right now though. The used PS3 there is like 250 dollars.

Yeah, I wish. They are still going full retail or slightly less for used systems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, I wish. They are still going full retail or slightly less for used systems.

Really?

I saw on some Japanese website/gamestore thingy the ps3 20 gig was like 27k yen or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Neo-Geo - $649.99

Of course, that came with a game (Magician Lord), two controllers and a memory card.

Which begs the question... what the hell is up with game companies no longer offering pack-in games with systems when they launch (save for the Wii)? $400-$600 is a lot to pay and not get a damn game (and no, demos don't count).

Hardware companies used to use killer aps as selling points, but they now have sufficient product differentiation to generally lean on their brand name.

aka

They're determined to suck more money from you right off the bat, and refuse to give you "something for nothing" as it were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Really?

I saw on some Japanese website/gamestore thingy the ps3 20 gig was like 27k yen or something.

If you had a link, please post it! Auction prices are still pretty high.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I won't get the PS3 because it's too expensive and there aren't any games that I want thus far. A cheap Blu-Ray player? Well it's competing with HD-DVD so who knows how long that war will last and how long Blu-Ray will be around. I don't want to make some sort of wasted investment. Sony has a bad habit of supporting the wrong technology, or being very strict about it.

So yeah when it's around $200 I might consider it. Otherwise I'd love to get a 360 because there are a lot of games out for it that I want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People say that the big thing about the PS3 is that it plays Blue-Ray disks.

Are they even that popular yet though? I mean, getting something that has great graphics, great power, AND can play Blue-Ray disks for only 600 bucks is pretty sweet but how many people do you know that actually has blue ray players? I don't know, maybe it's just around here but I don't know anyone that has one, nor have I seen anyone buy one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aka

consumer demand increased, and instead of increasing price in real dollars, they got rid of the extras

Which brings me back to the notion of "They're stiffing you".

Consumer demand for popular items is always high. The original GameBoy had nigh demand, as did the Genesis, the SNES, the NES, the PS1, the PS2, and other assorted systems. But somewhere along the way, game companies decided to stop including something for you to do. Instead, you're left having to shell out extra cash to actually be able to use your system as something beyond a paper weight.

Remember the 8bit and 16bit eras? Remember how people had a choice of either a system with a pack-in game, or just a core system? Usually the choice with the pack-in cost about $20 or so more, but even that price difference was still less than what you'd pay to get a game off the shelf (and the pack in was usually a good game). You were actually saving money buying the pack-in version. But right about the time the Saturn and PS1 hit, this option vanished, and all you had was the "core" system. Your choices were cut in half, and these days, a system is out for quite a while before it gets a pack-in to try and ramp up sales (and that's assuming it ever gets a pack-in).

All the financial models in the world can't hide the fact that this reads as simply a way for a given console manufacturer to get more cash out of consumer pockets. After all, why give someone a game for half the price that it would normally cost, when you can force them to pay full price? And why take a chance of loosing third party licensing income, when you could force people to buy a game that the console maker gets a sales percentage of?

But to address the consumer demand part again, that's always been a factor in the gaming world. A system maker relied on not just giving you a new system, but also giving you "more for your money" to make their system look more attractive. That usually meant extras in the form of a game, or even several games (anyone remember the 6-in-1 cart for the Genesis?). This went on from the 2600 right up the Neo-Geo and the Sega CD. After that, this sales model vanished, and only seems to resurface when sales have gone stagnant (or at least seem stagnant compared to a couple months earlier). And once the sales are up again, that pack-in or "buy this and get a free game" promotion is discontinued.

Call it whatever financial model you like, but at its core, it's still a cheap way to get more money from the consumer by giving them less, while still charging them a lot of cash. Console makers these days just come off as wanting to suck every last dime form you that they can, without giving you anything extra. Sure, they had the same outlook then too, but they hid it a lot better :wink:

I mean, the Nintendo Wii is the first mainstream system in a long time to actually go back to that old pack-in model, and look how well that concept was received. That says something pretty important to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I had to choose between pack in games and a core system I would always pick the core system. Why should I have to shell out extra money, even if it's half the price of a retail game, for something I probably don't even want anyway? I like to choose what game(s) I buy with my new console, rather than being stuck with some game I may or may not want. What if instead of getting a core PS3 for $599 I have to pay $629 for a PS3 with Madden 2007 or Sonic or some other game I don't want? Sure it's cheaper than buying the game by itself, but It's a waste of money to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one said you'd have to buy the pack-in version, Evilhead, and that's the beauty of it. You had a choice in the 80's and the first half of the 90's whether you just wanted the system, or the system and a game. You don't have that now, and that's been my point.

If I recall, some systems used to debut with a game, and then the core system came later. Now it's reversed, except the pack-in version rarely comes along later... and if it does, it's very short lived.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Either way, I don't see how it would impact my choice in buying the system. If they happened to offer a pack-in game I wanted I would buy it, otherwise you could use the same money they are charging you to buy a used game of your choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I've been playing Resistance: Fall of Man recently...and the PS3 controller really shows its flaws with this game - the thumbstick locations are just terrible for FPS I think. Also, I've been spoiled with Gears of War, so Resistance really falls short graphics-wise in comparison and rubs off as rushed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Either way, I don't see how it would impact my choice in buying the system. If they happened to offer a pack-in game I wanted I would buy it, otherwise you could use the same money they are charging you to buy a used game of your choice.

It's not about you, my friend. Nor is it about me. It's about the general populous as a whole, and giving them more than just the bare bones minimum for their money... like they used to do. Sweetening the deal for a little more money is always a good second option to give people, and a game is a great way to do it. It may not be a selling point to you or possibly me, but it'll be one to a lot of folks if the game isn't a polished turd.

Sega, Nintendo, SNK and others did it before with success, so there's no reason for Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo to not do it now. And while I know this is the age of charging people for every last little thing a game/system maker can think of, that doesn't change how bogus the current setup comes across as being when you look back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think pack-ins are an antique idea though. Just because it used to work in the past doesn't mean it'll work now. That used to work because game systems typically had an iconic mascot. Even the Playstation adopted Lara Croft and Crash Bandicoot but then they realized that systems basically sell themselves nowadays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think pack-ins are an antique idea though. Just because it used to work in the past doesn't mean it'll work now. That used to work because game systems typically had an iconic mascot. Even the Playstation adopted Lara Croft and Crash Bandicoot but then they realized that systems basically sell themselves nowadays.

Wouldn't it be nice to at least see them try the idea though? Can't say it won't work if no one even tries it out.

And remember, the GameBoy, Genesis, Master System, NES, Atari 2600/7800/XE/Jaguar, 3DO and Sega CD had no real iconic mascot when they launched, but they all had games with them. You don't need a mascot really. All you need is a good (hear that 3DO?) game :grin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it ridiculous that people are claiming Sony and the PS3 are on life support or some crap like that. Oh no, the system doesn't have many games! Just ... like ... ANY brand new system in its first 6-9 months! Gasp! The 360 had that problem ... The PS2 had that problem ... The Xbox had that problem ... the DC had that problem ... Oh no! Those systems were all doomed! DOOOOOOOOOOOMED! (well okay, so the DC was, but the rest weren't) Were those companies or systems on "life support" because good titles didn't start rolling in until about 9 months after the system had been released? Idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this