General Gaming News Thread

Post by **psi29a** » Thu May 11, 2006 5:29 pm

Moore wrote:"Tell me why you would buy a $600 PS3?" Peter Moore, a Microsoft vice president, said in an interview. "People are going to buy two (machines.) They're going to buy an Xbox and they're going to buy a Wii ... for the price of one PS3."

And discuss!

Post by **Finito** » Thu May 11, 2006 5:39 pm

I buy the 3 anyway, but I choose the ones I buy first by the games that are going to come out on it. I would buy a ps3 first because they just got the best games in my opinion.

Post by **newbified** » Thu May 11, 2006 5:44 pm

I think it's kind of pretentious to outright say that consumers will only buy a 360 and a Wii instead of saying something more along the lines of "Why purchase a $600 PS3 when you could buy an XBox360 and Wii for the same price?"

I somewhat have to agree on some aspects though (except for the 360 part since I don't see myself purchasing a 360). If the Playstation3 will really cost $600, I won't even consider buying it anytime near release. But at the same time Microsoft doesn't have much room to throw stones at Sony since their core system is $500. Only a $100 difference.

I think that Nintendo and the Wii will be a much more reasonably priced machine, and there's much more reason for me to buy one than to buy a 360. I grew up on the Genesis and Nintendo, and now that I can play all of these games again, I'll definately be enjoying myself doing so.

What would I get with a 360? Another Halo game? Whoopdee fuckin' doo.

Post by **Femto** » Thu May 11, 2006 5:49 pm

Moore wrote:"Tell me why you would buy a $600 PS3?"

Because it'll have good games?

Some people spend a lot more on gaming PCs.

Post by **Gaiseric** » Thu May 11, 2006 6:29 pm

newbified wrote:I think it's kind of pretentious to outright say that consumers will only buy a 360 and a Wii instead of saying something more along the lines of "Why purchase a $600 PS3 when you could buy an XBox360 and Wii for the same price?"

I somewhat have to agree on some aspects though (except for the 360 part since I don't see myself purchasing a 360). If the Playstation3 will really cost $600, I won't even consider buying it anytime near release. But at the same time Microsoft doesn't have much room to throw stones at Sony since their core system is $500. Only a $100 difference.

I think that Nintendo and the Wii will be a much more reasonably priced machine, and there's much more reason for me to buy one than to buy a 360. I grew up on the Genesis and Nintendo, and now that I can play all of these games again, I'll definately be enjoying myself doing so.

What would I get with a 360? Another Halo game? Whoopdee fuckin' doo.

Sorry, but the Xbox 360 core system is $299 and the premium is $399. Now the PS3 has a similar setup with their core system costing $499 and their premium system being $599. Now if I remember my elementary math correctly, thats a difference of $200. From the videos I have seen so far of the PS3 games, the graphical difference is minimal, definitely not worth $200. So they will have to have some amazing games if they want me to pay that much more. I am a fan of Halo and xbox live, and for the price, I think I will go for the 360. I am sure that if I had played the old MGS games, things might be different. Dont get me wrong, I will buy a PS3, but it will probably be a year or two down the line.

Post by **Daedelus** » Thu May 11, 2006 6:34 pm

Femto wrote:
Moore wrote:"Tell me why you would buy a $600 PS3?"
Because it'll have good games?

Some people spend a lot more on gaming PCs.

You aren't kidding. Before I lucked into a very sweet Dell offer, I was about to drop $1,500 this summer on a gaming rig. That's half of what the hardcore spend.

I can see myself buying both a PS3 and a Wii. I think, once announced, I'll pre-order a Wii. Damn thing is going to come out while I'm at school though, so I'll need to drive there to pre-order. Grr.

Post by **halfnhalf** » Thu May 11, 2006 7:40 pm

psi29a wrote:
Moore wrote:"Tell me why you would buy a $600 PS3?" Peter Moore, a Microsoft vice president, said in an interview. "People are going to buy two (machines.) They're going to buy an Xbox and they're going to buy a Wii ... for the price of one PS3."

Isnt MS gonna charge 100 bucks for an HD-dvd drive too? and if later games force gamers to buy a hd-dvd drive wouldnt that make the x360 500 bucks for the core and 600 for the hd?

600 for an entertainment system to me doesnt seem like much, thinking how most gaming computers are in the 3k range.

As for me, the only thing that i got at a lanuch was a PSP, but that was a gift. i dont plan on getting anything for awhile, too many current games i need to play.

Post by **Daedelus** » Thu May 11, 2006 11:07 pm

halfnhalf wrote:Isnt MS gonna charge 100 bucks for an HD-dvd drive too?

Something around those lines. They're segmenting their own market again. This was the sort of thing I feel should have told MS "Hey, maybe we should wait a bit and not jump the gun so fast."

Post by **Gaiseric** » Fri May 12, 2006 12:15 am

They will have a hd-dvd drive later, but they said that games will not use it, its just for movies. If it is $100, thats still only $500 for a HD-dvd player and videogame system. You guys were using the same justification for paying $600 for the PS3, well this is still $100 cheaper.

Post by **Femto** » Fri May 12, 2006 1:12 am

Gaiseric wrote:They will have a hd-dvd drive later, but they said that games will not use it, its just for movies. If it is $100, thats still only $500 for a HD-dvd player and videogame system. You guys were using the same justification for paying $600 for the PS3, well this is still $100 cheaper.

That's true.

The HD-DVD add-on will only be $100 and that'll probably be a whole lot cheaper than an actual HD-DVD player.

Still, you need a 360 for it to even work.

Post by **Daedelus** » Fri May 12, 2006 4:54 am

Gaiseric wrote:They will have a hd-dvd drive later, but they said that games will not use it, its just for movies. If it is $100, thats still only $500 for a HD-dvd player and videogame system. You guys were using the same justification for paying $600 for the PS3, well this is still $100 cheaper.

Like Femto said, I need a 360 first to even have the drive.

When did MS say it was for movies only? This is going to severely limit them toward the middle and/or end of the generation. It's a limit the GC put on itself off the bat. Or the N64. You can't limit yourself so quickly with what is now an old format (DVD).

Post by **Gaiseric** » Fri May 12, 2006 6:10 am

Oh god, you mean I just might have to get off my ass to put a second disc in? I might look into some extension cables so my console can be right next to the couch, but it still wastes a whole minute of my time.

Post by **Daedelus** » Fri May 12, 2006 9:27 pm

Gaiseric wrote:Oh god, you mean I just might have to get off my ass to put a second disc in? I might look into some extension cables so my console can be right next to the couch, but it still wastes a whole minute of my time.

No, smartass. That's not what I'm getting at whatsoever.

Second disc means a lot more than you think. Where do you split the game? What is contained on the second disc? How much is it going to cost for me to produce, label, press and distribute said second disc? How much more is a 2-disc case going to cost?

It's limiting. Wii is guilty of it, however their audience and target consumer is a bit different. 360 is trying to hit the "NEED BTR GRAPHICS PLZ" crowd (aka Damien) and limiting yourself out of the gate with your format is a bad idea.

Post by **Gaiseric** » Fri May 12, 2006 9:56 pm

Daedelus wrote:Where do you split the game?

In the middle.

What is contained on the second disc?

The second half.

How much is it going to cost for me to produce, label, press and distribute said second disc? How much more is a 2-disc case going to cost?

Not much at all. Were any of the PSX games like Final Fantasy which had 3-4 discs and different cases much more than regular single disc games? The Gamecube was not limited by their tiny dvds, ie Resident Evil 4 is one of the best looking games on the system and it has two discs.

New technology, same process. Its not a problem. Quit your bitching.

It's limiting. Wii is guilty of it, however their audience and target consumer is a bit different. 360 is trying to hit the "NEED BTR GRAPHICS PLZ" crowd (aka Damien) and limiting yourself out of the gate with your format is a bad idea.

360 is not about that like the original xbox was. Its more about the PC to 360 functionality and the online community aspect. Graphic whores will buy a PS3 this time around. But are they aware of the costs to produce blu-ray discs, especially if the whole thing flops?

Post by **Daedelus** » Sat May 13, 2006 12:30 am

Gaiseric wrote:Not much at all. Were any of the PSX games like Final Fantasy which had 3-4 discs and different cases much more than regular single disc games? The Gamecube was not limited by their tiny dvds, ie Resident Evil 4 is one of the best looking games on the system and it has two discs.

Then you're someone who has zero clue as to how a business runs. Everything is a cost. Aside from your (yet again) smartass answers, these are real questions. I feel a couple games at the very least were limited by the small size of the GC media. Yes, RE4 is a great looking game. It's on two discs. Why not cut some future costs (gasp, horror, remorse) and start off with a format that you will be able to expand into, not force out of? It's not bitching, by the way - it's a debate. You're the one turning it into bitching with your snide replies.

Post by **Femto** » Sat May 13, 2006 1:11 am

The cost of pressing a second or third disc is absolutely negligible.

Everybody knows that you're not paying for the disc itself but for what's in it.

Pressing a single Blu-Ray disc will probably cost more than pressing 10 DVDs or GC discs anyway.

For the nth time, Daedelus should chill the fuck out.

Post by **Gaiseric** » Sat May 13, 2006 1:15 am

Daedelus wrote: You're the one turning it into bitching with your snide replies.

Jon Lovitz makes me do it.

Post by **Daedelus** » Sat May 13, 2006 1:28 am

Femto wrote:For the nth time, Daedelus should chill the fuck out.

That's only the second time I've seen it. I'm sorry I challenge what people think.

Post by **Femto** » Sat May 13, 2006 1:30 am

Daedelus wrote:That's only the second time I've seen it. I'm sorry I challenge what people think.

You must be very smart.

Post by **Daedelus** » Sat May 13, 2006 1:34 am

If there's a problem, out and say it. Either here or in PM, I don't really care which.

Post by **Femto** » Sat May 13, 2006 1:38 am

Daedelus wrote:If there's a problem, out and say it. Either here or in PM, I don't really care which.

lol

The problem is that you need to chill the fuck out, I've said it a few times already.

You're coming across as a rambling lunatic that takes every single insignificant comment far too personally.

Website · Post by **BasouKazuma** » Sat May 13, 2006 2:02 am

Daedelus man, you're just flat out wrong.

How many games are gonna need to use up 25 gig or 50 gig discs?

It really is a bad arguement. It is a lot easier for the developer to just fit everything on one disc with a huge data capacity (and slightly more convient for a gamer), but I'm sure they could take a little extra time to split the game up if needed. Even then they could just opt to use a dual layer DVD which would hold about 9 gigs. Now, how many games are gonna use more than 9 gigs?

This really is just an arguement over relatively few future titles.

Post by **Daedelus** » Sat May 13, 2006 2:22 am

BasouKazuma wrote:This really is just an arguement over relatively few future titles.

Yes, I've been insistent on that since the beginning. They are limiting themselves for the future.

Post by **Femto** » Sat May 13, 2006 3:56 am

Daedelus wrote:Yes, I've been insistent on that since the beginning. They are limiting themselves for the future.

BasouKazuma is a dumbass, I wouldn't take him seriously if I were you.

Just a heads-up.

Post by **Daedelus** » Sat May 13, 2006 4:09 am

Femto wrote:
Daedelus wrote:Yes, I've been insistent on that since the beginning. They are limiting themselves for the future.
BasouKazuma is a dumbass, I wouldn't take him seriously if I were you.

Just a heads-up.

It's more of a defense just in case someone actually takes him seriously