VGKing said:
sales2099 said:
Damnyouall said:
If they use it for entertainment, wouldn't it make much more sense to get Playstation next where online is FREE?
~$350 USD of online fees in 7 years is not insignificant.
|
sigh...Free doesn't mean better, I think people like yourself cant be reminded of that enough.
But $350 over 7 years really is pocket change. You make minimum wage thats still $20 000 per year (at least it is in Canada). $140 000 in 7 years. Again, minimum wage. Never mind if your a kid your parents buy it and if your older your probably making at least double with your career.
Sometimes, people dont mind paying a little more to get the best.
|
No, free does not always equal best.
But paid doesn't always equal best either.
$350 isn't pocket change though...that's a lot of money for the middle class(the 99%) That money could be spend paying off bills.
If you're a kid then the parents will be less likely to pay a yearly Live fee.
A smart parent would get a PS3(talking 2011/12 here) since its cheaper in the long run.
|
Don't want this to be another Live vs PSN debate.
As a father of three kids I don't mind paying for something if my kids will enjoy it with their friends. For example both of my boys have a PSN account but they don't use it rarely because none of their friends have it. A smart parent will get their kids something that all the their friends have so they don't feel left out of game time which my kids only get during the weekend.
