PS3 costs Sony $800 ?

[SSgtSniper]

I have something to say about all this. Now keeping in mind folks I skipped through a lot of this because it's the same argument we've been having in The Maw vs. The Library Forum at Bungie, there are three things I seem to notice people missing.

 

1. Portability. This may sound crazy on it's surface, but Halo created a phenomenon in gaming caled a LAN party. Simply put, the xbox can be moved around much easier than a PC. Now, TV's aren't as portable, but that misses the point. The xbox was designed to better handle being moved frequently, something I dare say you wouldn't want to do with a PC. Also, if you tear the xbox up in transit, you lost 150 bucks. If you tear up your tower......

 

2. Ease of use. The xbox compacts all the functions spread haphazardly thoughout the keyboard based on some design I cannot find the logic of to save my life, into one small haldheld unit, with all keys (counting buttons, triggers and sticks as keys) positioned to be right at a finger/thumb. I cannot manage to get off the Ebon Hawk with my keyboard, but when I hooked up a controller, I was off it in a jiffy.

 

3. Multiplayer. Consoles are designed so that several people can participate on the same unit at once. That doesn't happen on a PC. PC gaming is one man at a time.

 

Pound for pound, dollar for dollar, the console has more potential packed into it for a large audience than a PC.

 

 

Something else worth mentioning is gameplay. I do not know how many times I have said this, as well as many console gamers everywhere, but enough with the flashy, give us good substance. Halo PC had plenty of added flash and more toys to play with, yet most Halo fans hate it. Why? Because all the flash and pizazz ruined the gameplay. They horribly unbalanced the game on the PC, just to add a few toys I didn't find interesting at all. I sold my copy of Halo PC days after I got it, and swore off PC gaming. I only got KOTOR II PC for the KSE editor, and once I am done fiddling with the extra flash and pizazz, I'll be back on my xbox again, because it's just clunky on PC.

 

Now, I hold LAN parties for Halo and Halo 2 frequently. It costs me far less to set up four TV's and Four xboxes, than sixteen PCs. Do the math on that one.

 

Now I'm not even going to lie: I won't get a 360 for a while yet. I'm picky that way. I'm waiting until Halo3 or KOTOR 3 forces me to, and hoping the price goes down. When either comes out, I will buy one regardless. But I have some bad news for you, BW, if the console cost 1,000, and a computer cost 1,000, I wouldn't have either. I cannot justify spending that much in one chunk for a toy. Which is all either of these are to me. I got all three of my xboxes, my PC, and my wife's PC for just under 1,200 dollars. Yes, they are generic computers. Yes I have upgraded them a little. But I still don't have 1,000 dollars in the both of them. And I damn sure won't put a thousand into a single unit. It's just too much. And I can tell you a LOT of people I know are the same way. Nick, (my fourth xbox at LAN) doesn't even own a PC at all. Because the cheapest thing he can get would cost him three xboxes, and he won't lay that down. Price matters to a lot of us, even if we have the money to spend. Could he afford a PC? Easily. Will he? No. That's just how it is. But he did lay down for a single xbox at 150. I think your argument of pricing them at what they cost for the unit would end BOTH console AND PC gaming, because a lot of the capital from console gaming profits goes to help fund new game development for both consoles and PCs. Capital they couldn't develop games without.

 

Bottom line is, a console has more draw for many than a PC ever could, but you kill them with price, you aren't helping the situation, because I can live without gaming if it gets too expensive. My wife would be happier anyhow if I did.

Edited February 21, 2006 by SSgtSniper

[BattleCookiee]

Sigh... talking about talking past people... <_<

 

Here

 

And because they are different is exactly the reason why I do compare the 2. Are we still talking about the same things here actually?

And why can't these 3 just all do +$500 for every of there console, and thus making additional profit? Because "Big Bad PC" is eager to steal away costumers of them then...

 

At which point I explained why the PC dosnt matter even though you continue to think it's somehow important to how the consoles companies are thinking...

 

LOOK! A plus sign!

And I still don't agree the PC does not matter when the console manufactors have their prices low...

 

No thats a rumour of the PS3 production cost and it's based on a read/write blu ray which the PS3 dosnt need to have since you dont save games to blu ray and the PS3 isnt intended as a blu ray recorder only a blu ray player although $800 for a blu ray recorder is a bargain even if you never played a game on it.

 

And you know that exactly because you already saw a PS3?

 

So what the console manufacturers are smart. I really dont care that you think its unfair because you think it's killing the PC. The PC has done more than enough to kill itself with the low quality crap and patch it later attitude.

 

I think it is unfair? . Odd, I was under the impression I stayed objective during this entire discussion. I could throw in Pro-PC stuff but that doesn't change the console manufacturers have done it better on the market!

 

As the consumer why wouldnt I ? I mean it dosnt matter to me if it  costs SONY $3000 it's what It costs me that is important. A machine that plays games as well as

[SSgtSniper]

And also still have a desire to play these games..., and you would be prepared to pay for it too... and then you would have to pay more than $60

 

I wouldn't. It's a hobby, and a fairly cheap one. Price anything much higher than that threshold, and I will decide to just go fishing. Or something. I'm not laying down much more than I currently do. I'm going to get squeezed out of gaming altogether in the next few years, I am well aware. So will many others. Then it'll get cheaper again, as companies struggle,and I will return. How it's always been.

Edited February 21, 2006 by SSgtSniper

[BattleCookiee]

I wouldn't. It's a hobby, and a fairly cheap one. Price anything much higher than that threshold, and I will decide to just go fishing. Or something. I'm not laying down much more than I absolutely have to.

 

Not that a company like MS would care. For you 100 others!

[SSgtSniper]

Sorry, I just edited on the fly. Reread.

[alanschu]

But the perfect price for profit would be higher than now... I can bet on that. And as I already said before; the games tax. is only more profitable now because the consoles make loss when sold. If there is no competition in the form of the PC there would be nothing to stop them from actually selling them for more cash...

 

This assumes the demand for video game consoles is inelastic. I doubt it is.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

LOOK! A plus sign! 

And I still don't agree the PC does not matter when the console manufactors have their prices low...

 

And you know that exactly because you already saw a PS3?

 

I think it is unfair?  . Odd, I was under the impression I stayed objective during this entire discussion. I could throw in Pro-PC stuff but that doesn't change the console manufacturers have done it better on the market!

 

Now you again go looking at it from your own point  <_< . I (all along) look at it from the point of a producer. If you would do the same it would seem logical that you try for "max. profit" instead of "max. amount of people reached". This kind of stuff like "As costumer I would prefer..." doesn't help the argument... especially if it is as hight of a D

[BattleCookiee]

I'm going to get squeezed out of gaming altogether in the next few years, I am well aware. So will many others. Then it'll get cheaper again, as companies struggle,and I will return. How it's always been.

 

But, if due to that struggle there is no longer a PC to counter the consoles, such a reduce would never come. And that is what I am talking about all along; the doom-scenario when the consoles have no compitition and thus can freely decide their prices to fit maximum profit...

[SSgtSniper]

I know it is. Xboxes sold measely until the price dropped to 180. Then it took off. Ask yourself why?

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

I wouldn't. It's a hobby, and a fairly cheap one. Price anything much higher than that threshold, and I will decide to just go fishing. Or something. I'm not laying down much more than I currently do. I'm going to get squeezed out of gaming altogether in the next few years, I am well aware. So will many others. Then it'll get cheaper again, as companies struggle,and I will return. How it's always been.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Thats true PC software used to cost a fortune.

 

I think the average was

[SSgtSniper]

The PC wouldnt be a dead platform in the console sense which is another thing you cant seem to grasp. Even if they stopped making PC games tommorow they would continue to make PCs. It's not like if you were trying to remake a Dreamcast game and would have to remanufacture the unit.

 

He has a point there. My wife's PC has never played a game since it was purchased. Never. Not once.

 

 

Any questions?

[alanschu]

Oh, Windows is most definitely not packaged "free" with current systems. That price is included in the total retail package, but it's not free. Otherwise, you might as well say the video card is free, or the computer is free, with a donation of X dolalrs.

 

Even the big boys like Dell pay Microsoft money to "bundle" Windows with their computers.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

But, if due to that struggle there is no longer a PC to counter the consoles, such a reduce would never come. And that is what I am talking about all along; the doom-scenario when the consoles have no compitition and thus can freely decide their prices to fit maximum profit...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Look the consoles are countering each other. Thats why the prices drop when a new console comes along and not when a new video card of PC chip is released.

 

The PC isnt some sort of last bastion of price protection

[SSgtSniper]

Oh, Windows is most definitely not packaged "free" with current systems.  That price is included in the total retail package, but it's not free.  Otherwise, you might as well say the video card is free, or the computer is free, with a donation of X dolalrs.

 

Even the big boys like Dell pay Microsoft money to "bundle" Windows with their computers.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Yup, but PC companies also sell at a loss on low end units, because MS pays them to. I know they lost money on mine, and my wife's. It is what it is.

[BattleCookiee]

3/4 pages of argument and people STILL do not get it...

 

*Sigh* It is the Military thread reborn... now just in game form

 

I give up... good night... please come back after you read my posts...

[alanschu]

Oh, Windows is most definitely not packaged "free" with current systems.  That price is included in the total retail package, but it's not free.  Otherwise, you might as well say the video card is free, or the computer is free, with a donation of X dolalrs.

 

Even the big boys like Dell pay Microsoft money to "bundle" Windows with their computers.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Yup, but PC companies also sell at a loss on low end units, because MS pays them to. I know they lost money on mine, and my wife's. It is what it is.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

How do you know this? What type of computer do you have?

[SSgtSniper]

3/4 pages of argument and people STILL do not get it...

 

*Sigh* It is the Military thread reborn... now just in game form

 

I give up... good night... please come back after you read my posts...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Oh I get it, but you are wrong. It's apples to oranges. PCs will exist whether there are PC games or not. The world is driven on the damned things anymore.

 

Consoles do not even try to compete with PCs. They can't. Because when it comes down to it, if you really want to spend enough money, you can build a PC that will have the capability of every console ever combined. Consoles compete with other consoles. At least xbox and playstation do. Nintendo is just 'there'.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Oh, Windows is most definitely not packaged "free" with current systems.  That price is included in the total retail package, but it's not free.  Otherwise, you might as well say the video card is free, or the computer is free, with a donation of X dolalrs.

 

Even the big boys like Dell pay Microsoft money to "bundle" Windows with their computers.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Maybe it's different in Canada but in PC world here there are lots of signs with FREE Windows XXX and a bunch of other stuff like office etc.

 

Sure it gets paid for somewhere but to the consumer if they think they are getting the hardware plus some free software they are all the happier.

[SSgtSniper]

Oh, Windows is most definitely not packaged "free" with current systems.  That price is included in the total retail package, but it's not free.  Otherwise, you might as well say the video card is free, or the computer is free, with a donation of X dolalrs.

 

Even the big boys like Dell pay Microsoft money to "bundle" Windows with their computers.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Yup, but PC companies also sell at a loss on low end units, because MS pays them to. I know they lost money on mine, and my wife's. It is what it is.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

How do you know this? What type of computer do you have?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Pair of cheap Compaq units. I have about 400 in one, and 450 in the other. With a recent RAM upgrade in both, and one add on HDD.

 

I eidt to add the initial cost for each was around 350.

Edited February 21, 2006 by SSgtSniper

[alanschu]

Yeah, well, I can put a sign saying "free" anything I want on computers I sell too.

 

 

Doesn't mean the customer doesn't pay for it. It's marketing.

Edited February 21, 2006 by alanschu

[alanschu]

Pair of cheap Compaq units. I have about 400 in one, and 450 in the other. With a recent RAM upgrade in both, and one add on HDD.

 

What makes you think no profits were made though? Keep in mind that companies like Dell and Compaq can acquire parts for mere fractions of the prices that we can get from an OEM reseller (for building our own computers).

[BattleCookiee]

Oh I get it, but you are wrong. It's apples to oranges. PCs will exist whether there are PC games or not. The world is driven on the damned things anymore.

 

:'(

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Ah man... am I really THAT bad in explaining what I mean with the dead of "PC as GAMING PLATFORM" :'(

 

And now we start PC Vs. Console wars I really should leave this topic

Edited February 21, 2006 by BattleCookiee

[astr0creep]

I have something to say about all this. Now keeping in mind folks I skipped through a lot of this because it's the same argument we've been having in The Maw vs. The Library Forum at Bungie, there are three things I seem to notice people missing.

 

1. Portability. This may sound crazy on it's surface, but Halo created a phenomenon in gaming caled a LAN party. Simply put, the xbox can be moved around much easier than a PC. Now, TV's aren't as portable, but that misses the point. The xbox was designed to better handle being moved frequently, something I dare say you wouldn't want to do with a PC. Also, if you tear the xbox up in transit, you lost 150 bucks. If you tear up your tower......

 

2. Ease of use. The xbox compacts all the functions spread haphazardly thoughout the keyboard based on some design I cannot find the logic of to save my life, into one small haldheld unit, with all keys (counting buttons, triggers and sticks as keys) positioned to be right at a finger/thumb. I cannot manage to get off the Ebon Hawk with my keyboard, but when I hooked up a controller, I was off it in a jiffy.

 

3. Multiplayer. Consoles are designed so that several people can participate on the same unit at once. That doesn't happen on a PC. PC gaming is one man at a time.

 

Pound for pound, dollar for dollar, the console has more potential packed into it for a large audience than a PC.

 

 

Something else worth mentioning is gameplay. I do not know how many times I have said this, as well as many console gamers everywhere, but enough with the flashy, give us good substance. Halo PC had plenty of added flash and more toys to play with, yet most Halo fans hate it. Why? Because all the flash and pizazz ruined the gameplay. They horribly unbalanced the game on the PC, just to add a few toys I didn't find interesting at all. I sold my copy of Halo PC days after I got it, and swore off PC gaming. I only got KOTOR II PC for the KSE editor, and once I am done fiddling with the extra flash and pizazz, I'll be back on my xbox again, because it's just clunky on PC.

 

Now, I hold LAN parties for Halo and Halo 2 frequently. It costs me far less to set up four TV's and Four xboxes, than sixteen PCs. Do the math on that one.

 

Now I'm not even going to lie: I won't get a 360 for a while yet. I'm picky that way. I'm waiting until Halo3 or KOTOR 3 forces me to, and hoping the price goes down. When either comes out, I will buy one regardless. But I have some bad news for you, BW, if the console cost 1,000, and a computer cost 1,000, I wouldn't have either. I cannot justify spending that much in one chunk for a toy. Which is all either of these are to me. I got all three of my xboxes, my PC, and my wife's PC for just under 1,200 dollars. Yes, they are generic computers. Yes I have upgraded them a little. But I still don't have 1,000 dollars in the both of them. And I damn sure won't put a thousand into a single unit. It's just too much. And I can tell you a LOT of people I know are the same way. Nick, (my fourth xbox at LAN) doesn't even own a PC at all. Because the cheapest thing he can get would cost him three xboxes, and he won't lay that down. Price matters to a lot of us, even if we have the money to spend. Could he afford a PC? Easily. Will he? No. That's just how it is. But he did lay down for a single xbox at 150. I think your argument of pricing them at what they cost for the unit would end BOTH console AND PC gaming, because a lot of the capital from console gaming profits goes to help fund new game development for both consoles and PCs. Capital they couldn't develop games without.

 

Bottom line is, a console has more draw for many than a PC ever could, but you kill them with price, you aren't helping the situation, because I can live without gaming if it gets too expensive. My wife would be happier anyhow if I did.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I know I was supposed to have left but this struck a cord.

 

1- Portability : LANs on PC have been around since before DOOM, it's nothing new. People have been lugging around towers and monitors since way before Halo came out. If I would drop my XBox in the middle of the street, I would be just as heartbroken as if I dropped my PC. Gamers have a tangible emotional attachment to their gaming rig, console or PC. Its monetary value is secondary

 

2- Ease of use : I can play most games, including those complex RTS games you can't find on consoles, with 10 keyboard keys. How many buttons on the XBox controller? 17 counting 2 sticks. Also, comparing a first-person shooter played on console and on the PC is well... I won't say. Needless to say, NOTHING compares to aiming and shooting with a mouse while running, jumping, crouching, climbing with a keyboard. Key placement is also FULLY configurable which is rarely the case with a controller.

 

3- Multiplayer : On PC, you can play with hundreds of people online at the same time, on your own screen(no splitscreen crap). And most of the time, it's completely free. Something you can't have on XBox. Comparing PC multiplayer gaming with console multiplayer gaming is, well... I won't say.

 

Price is a good reason not to get a gaming PC. But it's the only reason. Unless you're a MAC user, in which case see my Nutjob thread.

[SSgtSniper]

Pair of cheap Compaq units. I have about 400 in one, and 450 in the other. With a recent RAM upgrade in both, and one add on HDD.

 

What makes you think no profits were made though? Keep in mind that companies like Dell and Compaq can acquire parts for mere fractions of the prices that we can get from an OEM reseller (for building our own computers).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Because to put it bluntly, it's well known that the xbox cost literally TWICE what it sold for at the end. which is half the strengeth of these units when I bought them.

 

Now, quick math: xbox sold for 150 at end run. Twice that is three hundred.

 

300 for half of the unit I have sitting here, minus my upgrades. Take ad double that, you get six hundred. Subtract a quarter for volume discount, you get 450. And it still doesn't have software. I paid less than that for this thing before I put in my upgrades.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

1- Portability : LANs on PC have been around since before DOOM, it's nothing new.  People have been lugging around towers and monitors since way before Halo came out. If I would drop my XBox in the middle of the street, I would be just as heartbroken as if I dropped my PC. Gamers have a tangible emotional attachment to their gaming rig, console or PC. Its monetary value is secondary

 

2- Ease of use :  I can play most games, including those complex RTS games you can't find on consoles, with 10 keyboard keys. How many buttons on the XBox controller? 17 counting 2 sticks. Also, comparing a first-person shooter played on console and on the PC is well... I won't say. Needless to say, NOTHING compares to aiming and shooting with a mouse while running, jumping, crouching, climbing with a keyboard. Key placement is also FULLY configurable which is rarely the case with a controller.

 

3- Multiplayer : On PC, you can play with hundreds of people online at the same time, on your own screen(no splitscreen crap). And most of the time, it's completely free. Something you can't have on XBox. Comparing PC multiplayer gaming with console multiplayer gaming is, well... I won't say.

 

Price is a good reason not to get a gaming PC. But it's the only reason. Unless you're a MAC user, in which case see my Nutjob thread. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think Quake was my first exposure to LAN gaming. Huge hassle though sticking everything in the car all the time.

 

I'm not attached to my machines. I'd be upset if one broke but if there was a replacement on hand I wouldnt be.

 

It really depends what you are used to I was a long time PC gamer before switching and it took me a while to relearn everything for years I couldnt even touch a console FPS because mouse/aswd was so ingrained in me.

 

It's so much more fun playing with people in the living room than some faceless people online though. Especially in competative games. Nintendo's WI FI was fun with Mario Kart although too many people quit races which is a problem with online gaming across the board. At least you dont have to listen to people whine though which is plus.

 

Actually I'd save money being a PC gamer because there have been like 5 games released I actually want in the last couple of years and thats it.

Edited February 21, 2006 by ShadowPaladin V1.0