Max King of the Wild said:
|
No, it's not. Without the Blu-Ray drive, the PS3 would have had a DVD drive and it would have worked just fine. The consummer paid extra for a feature that wasn't 100% required.
Signature goes here!
| crissindahouse said: i believe blu-ray was the most expensive part of the whole ps3. like 300 bucks production costs or something like that. |
I believe it was that expensive. But they could have still included it and had launched a ps3 sub 500 dollar still. Thats the point that phinch made. There were many contributing factors that increased price. If they went wirh a better cpu/gpu combo they could have even kept those extra bells and whistles and had sub 500 dollar price.
| RolStoppable said: My thoughts on this are that Gera made an admission that the Vita is not a consumer-friendly product, because Sony forced a proprietary storage format on the market instead of giving consumers the choice to buy common SD cards from any company they want to. PR is a double-edged sword. |
Not to mention the pseye and move, which are options and will be left like that, for a richer experience almost nobody wants.
Proud to be the first cool Nintendo fan ever
Number ONE Zelda fan in the Universe
Prediction: No Zelda HD for Wii U, quietly moved to the succesor
Predictions for Nintendo NX and Mobile
| TruckOSaurus said: No, it's not. Without the Blu-Ray drive, the PS3 would have had a DVD drive and it would have worked just fine. The consummer paid extra for a feature that wasn't 100% required. |
Wow, just wow... did i say bluray drive? No i was very careful what word i used. Please stop responding to me
Max King of the Wild said:
|
Sorry about that but I guess that means we agree on the fact that Sony chose to include an unnecessary feature which drove up the cost of their machine like Microsoft is doing with the XBO.
Signature goes here!
Max King of the Wild said:
I believe it was that expensive. But they could have still included it and had launched a ps3 sub 500 dollar still. Thats the point that phinch made. There were many contributing factors that increased price. If they went wirh a better cpu/gpu combo they could have even kept those extra bells and whistles and had sub 500 dollar price. |
well, one thing is for sure, if sony would have sold the same console just with dvd instead of blu-ray, they would have had some hundred bucks less costs per console and could have sold the console for less. and i'm sure many consumers (if not most) would have liked the idea to get almost the same console just with a dvd drive.
i would never say that sony did something consumer unfriendly but if sony really wants to tell us that a forced cam for everyone (it's not as if people have to buy an xbox one) is anti-consumer they should call themselves out for it as well with their ps3 they sell right now to us.
| Darth Tigris said: No more so than forcing Blu Ray last gen. Gotta love hypocrisy. |
And sony paid their price for doing so.
Seriously, you guys arguing about blueray is like if someone said, "ps4/360 dont need 4gb of RAM because the Wii U shows you can only use 1gb." Its a natural progression and ram and disc drives are a required component unlike kinect. It really is that easy
Talal said:
I don't like Kinect at all and I'd rather have my console without it, but this stuff happens all the time there's no reason to pick on MS only. |
Because you have a choice. Like 100 different car manufacturers. In gaming consoles world there are only 3 companies left
Seriously, you guys arguing about blueray is like if someone said, "ps4/360 dont need 4gb of RAM because the Wii U shows you can only use 1gb." Its a natural progression and ram and disc drives are a required component unlike kinect. It really is that easy
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
