Spankey said:
wow, so touchy! I gave my reasoning, read it. 16.71 million people seem to be interested in it to date which should answer your question. Or did I understand your post incorrectly? It's pretty difficult to decode. and as for "Is it so hard to believe that there are people out there not interested in buying Blu-Rays or DVDs?" no it's not. Worldwide there are billions of people obviously not interested in any gaming or home entertainment system. there are millions of people not interested in anything except trying to stay alive right now. so...what's your point? |
I already agreed that if you are a Blu-Ray/movie enthusiast (meaning you are planning to start a collection) and want a console then the PS3 is the choice. My question goes beyond that and I dont mean to be 'touchy' as you say.
You did some math adding the cost of an Arcade with a Blu-Ray player, where I think this is not valid because if they wanted a Blu-Ray collection, they would have obviously buy a PS3, its the only choice anyway. But Im just pointing out that there are a huge section of the consumers that would find no use at all with a Blu-Ray feature and therefore, it would by far be more economical to not pay for it in the first place.
If you were using the word economical in terms of a Blu-Ray collectors perspective then Im not disagreeing with you at all, but I took your post as from a general perspective, which would then be wrong to say PS3 is the more economical choice in general.
'16.71 million people seem to be interested in it to date which should answer your question'
No Im not asking how many people are interested, and Im sure for everyone that is interested there is a much bigger percentage who are not.
'... there are millions of people not interested in anything except trying to stay alive right now.'
Who's touchy now?
