Ray007 said:
Could you please stop saying that. How many times does the man have to say that he played and actually enjoyed games on other consoles for you to acknowledge it? As for the question of discussion. I agree with you. I can understand the concept of going ALL the way with the PS3 - a consol that does it all at a premium price. But as you pointed out, there would be no point, since the PC is much better suited to the task and will out do any consol due to its upgrade path. I agree with the general consensus here, that it would have been better to drop some of the high-tech gadgetry (ie. BR |
) and sell it at a price point closer to $300.Ok, I'll change it to "I couldn't have standed owning only nintendo consoles." Btw, he called into question Sony's business practices, but it was Nintendo's business practices (and bad ones) that led to Sony leading. Nintendo charged a high premium for catridges, censored 3rd party games (Mortal Kombat sweat, anyone?), and generally didn't seem to care about 3rd parties for the N64. Now, they won't let 3rd parties handle Wii's online code until they release their own online game (finally).
I agree that blu-ray was the riskest move of this generation. We'll see if it pays off for Sony in the long run, because even if the PS3 fails blu-ray could succeed because of the move. Had they released a more expensive console, even fewer blu-ray drives would be out there.
