By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - PS3 Slim and 360 Elite at same $299 price makes 360 look primitive.

The on 21 August 2009

^And still can't play blu-ray and have to pay $50 for XLive Gold....



Around the Network
Euphoria14 on 21 August 2009
durtysouthhustlah said:
Euphoria14 said:
@dougsdad0629

Thanks.

Someone here thought it was little ioi at first.

Talk about an insult.

Your baby is too cute and precious

Fucking right!



iPhone = Great gaming device. Don't agree? Who cares, because you're wrong.

Currently playing:

Final Fantasy VI (iOS), Final Fantasy: Record Keeper (iOS) & Dragon Quest V (iOS)     

    

Got a retro room? Post it here!

eliasg on 21 August 2009

the 360 is the better as a gaming console, blah, blah, blah...



 XBOX360

Official member of the Xbox 360 Squad

FilaBrasileiro on 21 August 2009

The 360 is still 34% cheaper than the PS3.



wenlan on 21 August 2009
leo-j said:
The ps3 is still the most expensive console belive it or not, so yea

agree.

being able to afford a console that is (or used to be) THE most expensive does make people feel good, doesn't it?

that's the momentum microsoft won't get at this round of price war because they play the $199 card too soon.



It (PS3's market share) might hit 30%, but definently not more. ~ Neo

Flaming (Calling another user (any user) a fanboy is flaming.) ~ Machina-AX

Around the Network
dsister44 on 21 August 2009
Euphoria14 said:
dsister44 said:

But... but that would mean the only reason that the Xbox was outselling the PS3 because it was better. Thats just not possible O_o

I never said which was better though.

I absolutely love both of them if you want me to be completely honest. I was just stating a sudden change in argument lately.

I am still waiting for you to accept my friend request.



Onyxmeth on 21 August 2009
dougsdad0629 said:
Onyxmeth said:
dougsdad0629 said:

Microsoft should be extremely worried that their system is the same price now as the PS3.  Now that the price is a non-factor (who actually buys the 360 arcade unit?) for each company's fully featured console, the 360 looks absolutely primitive by comparison.  The PS3 plays Blu-ray...the 360 DVD.  PS3 has built in Wi-Fi...the 360 not.  The PS3 has free online...the 360 makes you pay.  The PS3 has a slot loading disc drive...the 360 an antiquated tray.  The PS3 is reliable...the 360 not so much.  I'm sure other people can think of more examples.  The point is that MS should not be looking to match the PS3's price.  They should be looking to beat it considering what each console offers.  The Elite 360 should sell at $249 or even $199.

Notice I'm not talking about the games here.  "Good" or "bad" games are a purely subjective matter.

If I combine a microwave oven and a 360 into one package and keep the price at $300, the 360 will essentially be saving you $30-50 on a microwave. That's value. Unfortunately, not everyone gives a shit about having a microwave and a game console all in one, and that's what you don't seem to comprehend. Value only has value so long as it adds a feature the prospective buyer cares about. What you don't seem to understand is that the value of the 360 is in that final sentence you can't seem to wrap your head around, the games. Quality is subjective, but general appeal is not and appeal comes from sales.

What I'd like you to do is this. Do this exact same scenario with the Wii. Take games out of the equation (since it's all subjective) and just judge "value". You'll see even more value on the PS3's end, and yet none of that will propel it past the Wii outside of a possible initial spike over the next few weeks. Sometimes you have to understand that what people see appealing in a console cannot always be presented in a feature comparison chart. If you make all your purchases off of value charts then congrats. Most people don't.

The Wii offers a unique interface which partially justifies its price.  The PS3 and 360 have the same standard controller interface.

So what you're saying is, something that cannot be directly compared as objective value is somehow affecting the sales of a particular console over another. Jeez, I kinda think that was the point I was making. The 360 and the PS3 are not the same console. They do not do 100% of the same things. They have subjective criteria that go into why people purchase each, the same as the Wii. This is why you can't feature compare them and then come up with an answer. These are not DVD players. These are not computers. These are individual consoles that play different games and offer different features. If somebody wants to play Halo 3 with their friends, the value comparison to have that on a PS3 is a few billion dollars so Sony can buy it off of Microsoft. We each had our individual reasons to buy our consoles, but I'll be damned if mine was based on some side-by-side features chart.



Tag: Became a freaking mod and a complete douche, coincidentally, at the same time.



Euphoria14 on 21 August 2009
dsister44 said:
Euphoria14 said:
dsister44 said:
 

But... but that would mean the only reason that the Xbox was outselling the PS3 because it was better. Thats just not possible O_o

I never said which was better though.

I absolutely love both of them if you want me to be completely honest. I was just stating a sudden change in argument lately.

I am still waiting for you to accept my friend request.

On 360?

I haven't been on LIVE since Molly was born.

Upstairs of the house is where we stay while Samantha is going to school and the ethernet line hasn't been run up here yet.

This bugs me too because I want to download some 360 demos.

I am going to eventually try to use my laptop as an internet connection though, someone said it works.



iPhone = Great gaming device. Don't agree? Who cares, because you're wrong.

Currently playing:

Final Fantasy VI (iOS), Final Fantasy: Record Keeper (iOS) & Dragon Quest V (iOS)     

    

Got a retro room? Post it here!

psrock on 21 August 2009

The $199 PS3 is coming, probably 2011., then the 360 will be 99 dollars, so MS will alwayshave an advantage price wise.



 Next Gen 

11/20/09 04:25 makingmusic476 Warning Other (Your avatar is borderline NSFW. Please keep it for as long as possible.)
dougsdad0629 on 21 August 2009
Onyxmeth said:
dougsdad0629 said:
Onyxmeth said:
dougsdad0629 said:

Microsoft should be extremely worried that their system is the same price now as the PS3.  Now that the price is a non-factor (who actually buys the 360 arcade unit?) for each company's fully featured console, the 360 looks absolutely primitive by comparison.  The PS3 plays Blu-ray...the 360 DVD.  PS3 has built in Wi-Fi...the 360 not.  The PS3 has free online...the 360 makes you pay.  The PS3 has a slot loading disc drive...the 360 an antiquated tray.  The PS3 is reliable...the 360 not so much.  I'm sure other people can think of more examples.  The point is that MS should not be looking to match the PS3's price.  They should be looking to beat it considering what each console offers.  The Elite 360 should sell at $249 or even $199.

Notice I'm not talking about the games here.  "Good" or "bad" games are a purely subjective matter.

If I combine a microwave oven and a 360 into one package and keep the price at $300, the 360 will essentially be saving you $30-50 on a microwave. That's value. Unfortunately, not everyone gives a shit about having a microwave and a game console all in one, and that's what you don't seem to comprehend. Value only has value so long as it adds a feature the prospective buyer cares about. What you don't seem to understand is that the value of the 360 is in that final sentence you can't seem to wrap your head around, the games. Quality is subjective, but general appeal is not and appeal comes from sales.

What I'd like you to do is this. Do this exact same scenario with the Wii. Take games out of the equation (since it's all subjective) and just judge "value". You'll see even more value on the PS3's end, and yet none of that will propel it past the Wii outside of a possible initial spike over the next few weeks. Sometimes you have to understand that what people see appealing in a console cannot always be presented in a feature comparison chart. If you make all your purchases off of value charts then congrats. Most people don't.

The Wii offers a unique interface which partially justifies its price.  The PS3 and 360 have the same standard controller interface.

So what you're saying is, something that cannot be directly compared as objective value is somehow affecting the sales of a particular console over another. Jeez, I kinda think that was the point I was making. The 360 and the PS3 are not the same console. They do not do 100% of the same things. They have subjective criteria that go into why people purchase each, the same as the Wii. This is why you can't feature compare them and then come up with an answer. These are not DVD players. These are not computers. These are individual consoles that play different games and offer different features. If somebody wants to play Halo 3 with their friends, the value comparison to have that on a PS3 is a few billion dollars so Sony can buy it off of Microsoft. We each had our individual reasons to buy our consoles, but I'll be damned if mine was based on some side-by-side features chart.

Mine was purely based on features.  I gladly paid $500 for my launch 20 gig PS3.  I wanted hi-def games and hi-def movies.  There was/is only one place to get both, the PS3.  Buying a 360 for $300-$400 at the time plus a $1000 Blu-ray player just sounded stupid.



Keep this in mind when reading what I type...

I've been gaming longer than many of you have been alive.