To TC, what you're saying is absolutely true. However, the fact is, which is pretty sad, most people don't go into that much detail to buy something. Heck, I don't think most of them can do the math without a calculator. People just look at the base cost and assume that one is cheaper.

I laughed.

Please, please justify a HDD for the 40-50% of consoles which will never be taken online.

Heres a 20GB HDD for $55

Heres a 120GB HDD for $140 *But note it comes with the massive time saver which is a transfer cable*

Heres a 12m Live card for $40 *Note can be had for as cheap as $30 on special.

Your friends still covered for RROD from the date of purchase. Did he retain his reciept? The manufacturing date is only used when you don't have one.

I

If you are putting warranty-less 360 then I can put 599 dollars ps3

"The reason the repair cost is on the 360 is because millions upon millions have failed, whereas out of the 23 million PS3 that are in consumer homes right now...only like 15 failed (exaggeration, I know, but you get the gist). If every other PS3 failed on someone, I'm sure Sony would make a "PS3 failure warranty program" It's not fanboyism to know that there is such a high certainty that a product will fail and that another is 99.5% of the time NOT going to fail"

Thats NOT what we're debating. God have you completely ignored everything.

Simply putting nothing in the PS3 repair box (when it DOES cost something) when it needs to be repaired is just rubbish.

It doesn't matter about rates ect, what matters is that chart, and the chart is wrong.

First off, I stated it was an exaggeration, and secondly, you cut off the sentence. "It's not fanboyism to know that there is such a high certainty that a product will fail and that another is 99.5% of the time NOT going to fail"

You can pay $199.99 to start gaming on a 360.

That's $200.00 less than the basic Playstation 3.

End of thread. If you want to drag it out and say 'oh, but this system would cost less if you bought 5 accessories for the other' is a bad, bad, argument.

Ok, factor out money then. Yes, a PS3 repair (if it happens for a few people) costs something. What about time though? That too is valuable. If I spend $300, bare minimum on a console, I don't want to have to wait 6 weeks to play it.

Even still though, you're only using the lack of PS3 repair in the chart as a talking point. When PS3s start failing left and right, and the cost is still 0 in that box, I'll call it rubbish. When less than 1% of them fail, which, in all the physical science classes that I've taken is damn near negligible lol, I won't call it rubbish

I am pretty confident that you edited in the part about it being an exaggeration, since I C&P'd. And yes, I cut off your sentence for effect. Sue me.

By the way, the PS1 had problems. The PS2 had problems. The 60GB PS3 has problems. You don't have to assume that Sony would handle hardware issues the same way Microsoft has handled theirs, since they have a lengthy track record which speaks for itself.

No I'm not, I already mentioned them not using the most basic 360 and Live,& WA being found much cheaper.