By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
psychoBrew on 07 October 2009
Edit Thread
angrypoolman said:
psychoBrew said:
Carl2291 said:
Sony launched the PS3 at $600.

PS3 at the time took ~$800 to make.

Losing $200 per console is a pretty big risk...

That wasn't a risk.  That was arrogance in an attempt to corner the next gen DVD market.

There was no reason their console had to cost $800 anyway -- Microsoft made a better console for much less money.

Microsoft made a better console? Are you shitting me? Give me five reasons how Microsoft made a better console.


LOL.  How did you come up with that number?  Not that it needs 5 reasons to be better, but comming up with them is not that hard.

Multiplats are better on the 360.

The controller is better on the 360.

The Price WAS better on the 360 (during the time period we're talking about).

Natal will be better than Sony's motion control rip-off.

The online community is better on the 360.

It's pretty sad that some people think ripping off the customer is a risk.  Sure, it's risky, but it's not a good risk for the consumer and certainly isn't something to brag about.  If you must call it risk, they took it for all the wrong reasons.  The reality is Sony did nothing new with the PS3.  They made it more powerful, but that's to be expected.  They included Blue Ray, but similar things have been done before.  They simply followed the same tried and true direction they've been following for over a decade, and there's not much risk in that.