The PS3 has Arrived

[Marquoz]

Originally Posted by jeabombers

I love that Sony is finally stepping up to the plate can getting aggressive with their numbers. The latest PtoM has a table that compares the prices of the PS3 with those of the Wii and 360 at their basest of forms. It then details what you have to spend with each system to get the same features that the PS3 has. One of the price points that is often forgotten is that you have to pay $50 per year for Xbox Live, so you immediately have all that money to spend not once, but every year that you own the system if you desire to play online. Not to mention wireless, etc. Even the 360 arcade version ends up being $50 more than the $400 PS3. That then doesn't even mention that the PS3 has blu-ray, and the 360 MAY eventually get another add-on for it (and another $200 peripheral.) Yes, the Wii stays $250.
The question is, do you want a TOY that "everyone" can have fun playing, or do you want a well-oiled machine that makes everyone that ever sees it in action drop their jaws, and not utter another word?

Ugh, I hate how people trot out the price difference thing. I've got a PS3 so there's 0$ for a blu-ray add on. I have this great thing called an ethernet cable, so there's 0$ for wireless. I don't play online so there's 0$ a year for Xbox Live. So it's $199 to $399. Voila. I don't see why people feel this need to price match the Xbox to the PS3. It's comparing apples and oranges. I got a PS3 for it's capabilities, and I'm getting an Xbox for it's capabilities. I can't play Disgaea 3 on the Xbox, but I also can't play some of the Xbox games on the PS3, so there's a good reason to own both of them.

[br715mech]

Originally Posted by Marquoz

Ugh, I hate how people trot out the price difference thing. I've got a PS3 so there's 0$ for a blu-ray add on. I have this great thing called an ethernet cable, so there's 0$ for wireless. I don't play online so there's 0$ a year for Xbox Live. So it's $199 to $399. Voila. I don't see why people feel this need to price match the Xbox to the PS3. It's comparing apples and oranges. I got a PS3 for it's capabilities, and I'm getting an Xbox for it's capabilities. I can't play Disgaea 3 on the Xbox, but I also can't play some of the Xbox games on the PS3, so there's a good reason to own both of them.

X2 Could not have said it better myself. I own both and dont regret it at all.

[FendersRule]

I on the other hand, own both, and havn't turned on my 360 in weeks...heh.

The exclusives on the 360 just tend to suck atm.

[Stephie_is_a_dork]

The only people that don't LOVE the PS3 are the people that don't have a PS3.

I hope that doesn't come off too snobbish, it's hard to convey over the internet. I just mean that the PS3 is such an amazing machine, and I don't know any PS3 owners who don't absolutely love it. Any critics, bloggers, media, casual gamers or 360 "fanboys"(I hate that term) that say anything less clearly haven't had the opportunity to REALLY experience it. I'm not talking about seeing your friend play Guitar Hero, COD or some other multi-platform game for a half hour and saying "Hmmm...doesn't look that much better than a 360." If these naysayers had ONE DAY alone with a PS3, a few PSN games (perhaps Wipeout HD, Flower and Pixeljunk Monsters?) on the hard drive, a quality Blu-ray or two and a few choice exclusives (LBP, Uncharted, MGS, Resistance, whatever type of games they're into) I guarantee they'll be hooked in one day. Give them another day to explore the PSN content available, find out what Life with Playstation/Folding @ Home is about, view photo slideshows on their HDTVs, listen to a SACD, and video chat with far away friends and family, and there will probably be tears when the PS3 goes buh-bye. I wouldn't be surprised if offers to trade their first-born child tumbled out of their mouths as they desperately clung to the PS3 as if it were the source of all life itself.

Really, the only reasons the PS3 isn't #1 in sales are price an misinformation. If Chuck Norris sold PS3s on a 30-minute infomercial with a free 30-day in-home trial and 3 easy payments of $99.95, evvvvvvvveryone would buy it!

Make it happen, Max!

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by Marquoz

Ugh, I hate how people trot out the price difference thing. I've got a PS3 so there's 0$ for a blu-ray add on. I have this great thing called an ethernet cable, so there's 0$ for wireless. I don't play online so there's 0$ a year for Xbox Live. So it's $199 to $399. Voila. I don't see why people feel this need to price match the Xbox to the PS3. It's comparing apples and oranges. I got a PS3 for it's capabilities, and I'm getting an Xbox for it's capabilities. I can't play Disgaea 3 on the Xbox, but I also can't play some of the Xbox games on the PS3, so there's a good reason to own both of them.

If you had the X360 first, that kind of means the price of the PS3 was necessary for you to play BDs. It suggests that if the X360 had an add-on, you might not have purchased the PS3 right away.

As far as the wireless thing goes, YOU don't need wireless. I needed wireless when I had my X360. I had to build a PC out of spare parts and buy a $30 wireless card to have access! Most don't have that know-how. They would buy the $100 wireless adapter. WiFi was and is quite common in people's homes. Stringing 50ft+ worth of cable across the floor isn't convenient at all.

In other words, most American homes, with broadband in it, have a wireless router. Your personal experience of being in the same room with your internet access is not typical.

[KilloWertz]

I actually bought the PS3 because of Metal Gear Solid 4, but I've been pretty much using it as a BD player for the last couple of months. That's not to say I don't like the system. I do, but the main people I play with are on Xbox Live. I still like the system though and think there's a lot of good exclusives coming. Killzone 2 FTW!

[Marquoz]

Originally Posted by Ascended_Saiyan

As far as the wireless thing goes, YOU don't need wireless. I needed wireless when I had my X360. I had to build a PC out of spare parts and buy a $30 wireless card to have access! Most don't have that know-how. They would buy the $100 wireless adapter. WiFi was and is quite common in people's homes. Stringing 50ft+ worth of cable across the floor isn't convenient at all.

I just honestly loathe the "add this, add that, add XYZ and it costs this much" argument. It reeks of a desperation move, because it really doesn't take much of anything into consideration. There are so much better arguments to use to convince people to purchase a PS3 like highlighting what it can do without having to resort to trying to bash the competition.

[jeabombers]

Originally Posted by Marquoz

I just honestly loathe the "add this, add that, add XYZ and it costs this much" argument. It reeks of a desperation move, because it really doesn't take much of anything into consideration. There are so much better arguments to use to convince people to purchase a PS3 like highlighting what it can do without having to resort to trying to bash the competition.

I wouldn't call it "competition bashing". It's a statement of fact in this down-turned economy. The #1 excuse I hear from people that prefer the "other system" is that the PS3 is "too expensive", yet they are the same people that had to pay the extra $200 to get their systems running up to their personal specs. Yes, people like you and I don't play games online. I'm even too cheap to pay for $400/year hi-speed, plain and simple. But the fact of the matter is, games like Call of Duty: World at War have a combined (PS3/360) online user base up in the millions. People want to argue the validity of how important online gaming is. I personally LOVE to play single player, no matter how "atrocious" people claim it is. I personally HATE games that would be great, but actually DITCH their single-player component (I'm looking at you, Warhawk!)

Unfortunately, Sony has a bunch of brainless monkeys running around in their advertising department. They HAVE NO CLUE as to *how* to have "much better arguments to use to convince people to purchase a PS3 like highlighting what it can do without having to resort to trying to bash the competition." Have you seen PSP and PS3 commercials on TV? They *MAY* appeal to pot-heads, but I seriously even doubt that. Show us what the PS3 can do! Like the videos that we all see on the monitors at Wal-Mart! Yes, ONE commercial like that managed to leak through here in the U.S. Still doesn't do enough on TV to justify the PS3. I like the Sony Japan marketing strategy. Ever hear of their PSP ads? Hot chicks, wearing practically nothing, playing their PSP. When 80% of our general marketing resorts to sex here in the U.S., why not use it to attract the desired demographic of sex-starved video gamers. Not that I *want* to see them resort to "sex sells", it's just one of those things that they've already done in another country, with huge success, and dropped the ball when it came to ours....

I like the idea of having an infomercial on the PS3. I mean, seriously: There is way too much awesomeness in a PS3 that can be summed up in a 30 second spot on TV. Gamers ALWAYS stay up late at night and play games, watch TV, etc. Throw your infomercial on then, and sometimes in those mid-day weekend slots, and BOOM! Sales a-plenty. Even my grandma acknowledges how crazy it is that the PS3 can do so many things, in just one box.

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by Marquoz

I just honestly loathe the "add this, add that, add XYZ and it costs this much" argument. It reeks of a desperation move, because it really doesn't take much of anything into consideration. There are so much better arguments to use to convince people to purchase a PS3 like highlighting what it can do without having to resort to trying to bash the competition.

Nah, it reeks of the truth. There are tons of people buying MS accessories, right? Popular accessory purchases for the X360 is the WiFi dongle and the controller charge kits. Plus, people buy the XBL yearly service EVERY year. Therefore, how can that information reek of anything but truth for a HUGE amount of would be X360 owners?

MS's main argument is price. However, their argument doesn't cover the price of accessories that they may want to purchase for it. Those things aren't free ya know.

[Marquoz]

Originally Posted by Ascended_Saiyan

Nah, it reeks of the truth. There are tons of people buying MS accessories, right? Popular accessory purchases for the X360 is the WiFi dongle and the controller charge kits. Plus, people buy the XBL yearly service EVERY year. Therefore, how can that information reek of anything but truth for a HUGE amount of would be X360 owners?

MS's main argument is price. However, their argument doesn't cover the price of accessories that they may want to purchase for it. Those things aren't free ya know.

Well, I bought a controller charge kit, remote, USB hub for my PS3, and an HDMI cable. There's add ons for both of them. I required those things to play my system the way I wanted to. Should I add those prices to the system? No, those were choices I made because I chose the cheaper system for PS3 and I had various different ways I chose to handle what I needed.

Yes, I could use the USB hookups to charge my controllers, but it's nice having them back where I play to store. Yes, I could use my controller to control my movies, but the remote is nice. Yes, I can keep switching things around to charge on my PS3, but it's nice having everything plugged in at once. I charge my phone, iPod, and headset off my system at once. That's not including a controller if I so need to charge one while playing.

I don't berate Sony for not including those things with the system. As I said, it was my choice based upon preferences. Well, actually, the lack of an HDMI cable does kind of suck, they should get with monoprice and include one for free as well as the composite cables. This way people with HDTVs would already have it there and they could say they are a complete HD system out of the box.

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by Marquoz

Well, I bought a controller charge kit, remote, USB hub for my PS3, and an HDMI cable. There's add ons for both of them. I required those things to play my system the way I wanted to. Should I add those prices to the system? No, those were choices I made because I chose the cheaper system for PS3 and I had various different ways I chose to handle what I needed.

Yes, I could use the USB hookups to charge my controllers, but it's nice having them back where I play to store. Yes, I could use my controller to control my movies, but the remote is nice. Yes, I can keep switching things around to charge on my PS3, but it's nice having everything plugged in at once. I charge my phone, iPod, and headset off my system at once. That's not including a controller if I so need to charge one while playing.

I don't berate Sony for not including those things with the system. As I said, it was my choice based upon preferences. Well, actually, the lack of an HDMI cable does kind of suck, they should get with monoprice and include one for free as well as the composite cables. This way people with HDTVs would already have it there and they could say they are a complete HD system out of the box.

PS3 controllers don't charge money just for the ability to recharge your controller. If you bought a docking station, that's something altogether different. You're REALLY reaching on that one.

You could add the price of an HDMI cable to the PS3 pricing. That would be totally accurate, IF HDMI cables came with the Arcade and Pro (which it doesn't). The remote, however, would not be added because the X360 doesn't come with one. Again, you're REALLY reaching. USB outlets are provided. The X360 does have 1 more outlet on the back, so it COULD be argued about the cost of a hub (IF a LARGE group of people were buying/using that).

If a LARGE amount of people use/buy a particular feature, it's fair game. When one console provides that feature/accessories at no additional cost, it's a VERY valid talking point. More money spent for something you didn't have to pay for on the other system directly translates into cost. Cost is a VERY big talking point...period.

[SkantDragon]

I don't agree that the discussion about pricing is desperation or misleading on Sony's part. Indeed, if there's anyone who's being misleading, it's Microsoft. They tout the price of their 360 arcade model compared to the PS3... when the arcade model is stripped down well below the requirements of the vast majority of gamers. It's like comparing a bare bones car that doesn't even have hub caps to a fully loaded car from another manafacturer with power steering, power windows, etc.

So it's quite reasonable, I think, for Sony to point out that the comparison of price of a stripped down 360 to a fully loaded PS3 isn't exactly fair.

As mentioned, people do often cite the reason they have a 360 rather than PS3 is that the latter is 'too expensive' without realizing that they have actually spent more on the 360 in total for required accessories.

Depending on your requirements, the 360 can, in fact, be less expensive. And so can the PS3. It depends on what you need really. The 360 is generally the cheaper option if your needs are few. And the PS3 is generally the cheaper option if you need more.

In short, there's more to the whole equation than a simple comparsion of base prices. And it's in Sony's best interest to help their potential customers understand that. (And in Microsoft's best interest to help their potential customers stay ignorant)

[blitz6speed]

As much of a PS3 fanboy as i am, when you need such convincing to let people know you have the superior product, you know you arent doing your job right.