PS3: Lowering price, removing all backwards compatibility

[TBag]

[ QUOTE ]
Man, if you don't cover 100% of all possible bases with a post, you people will rip someone a new A hole, won't you?

I wonder how many pages each post would be in a thread if everyone constantly felt the need to view and express every view of every possible angle for any post they make.

[/ QUOTE ]

In my personal opinion, everyone in America should stop playing video games and take up soccer. Instead of becoming fit and healthy, you're all becoming fat pieces of [censored].

<font color="white"> But on a serious note the tone of your original post ("Any sport &lt; PS3 costs") implies that the PS3 is ridiculously expensive. You say "100% of your bases", but in this argument there is clearly only 2 bases and you neglected to mention the other one. So I ask you, what is your justification for leaving out the other? HMMMMMM? IS IT BECAUSE I SMELL FANBOY?</font>

[Low Key]

No arguments there. Well, aside from that Beckham fellow that just moved here.

[AceLuby]

What a suprise this thread turned into a 360 costs a ton less than a PS3 ZOMG!!! You want equivalent systems you will spend about the same. The thing w/ the 360 though is that you can buy each part separately or upgrade later for those that can't save for a system. It's really the only valid argument, but no one really uses it.

Lets try to get back on topic here, what does this do to the avg buyer? How many people really play backwards campatible games after the first couple years a system comes out anyway? I got a launch day PS2 (well near-launch) and I only used that backwards compatibility for about a year and then once more about 6 mos after that when I got into FF7 again. By then the PS2 had a bunch of great games. Personally, I think this was poor timing as the PS3 is in it's infancy and to take away the library of PS2 games really sucks for gamers. But, as others have pointed out, many people already own a PS2 and if not could get one online for $50-$100, which would be similar to how you would have to pay $100 to get wi-fi for the 360. It's not for everyone, but if you want to have it you can.

[daaaaahawkz]

[ QUOTE ]
What a suprise this thread turned into a 360 costs a ton less than a PS3 ZOMG!!! You want equivalent systems you will spend about the same. The thing w/ the 360 though is that you can buy each part separately or upgrade later for those that can't save for a system. It's really the only valid argument, but no one really uses it.



Lets try to get back on topic here, what does this do to the avg buyer? How many people really play backwards campatible games after the first couple years a system comes out anyway? I got a launch day PS2 (well near-launch) and I only used that backwards compatibility for about a year and then once more about 6 mos after that when I got into FF7 again. By then the PS2 had a bunch of great games. Personally, I think this was poor timing as the PS3 is in it's infancy and to take away the library of PS2 games really sucks for gamers. But, as others have pointed out, many people already own a PS2 and if not could get one online for $50-$100, which would be similar to how you would have to pay $100 to get wi-fi for the 360. It's not for everyone, but if you want to have it you can.

[/ QUOTE ]

the ps3 is definitely cheaper than the xbox 360... if the 360 had everything the ps3 has in it the 360 would retail for 700 bucks. id list the many advantages but its been covered in past threads

[wonderwes]

Hey look, it is a Dire, lets make some bad remark about Sony thread. Ok, I think we all get it. 360 is better than PS3. Your point is clear. Do you go to things like E3 or Tokyo Gamer Show? No. Ok well unless you have somethine new and informative, or maybe actually interesting, none of us care.

It is called options people. If you buy a car, do you get the basic package, or do you get the alarm, touch screen navigation and expensive stereo system? Some people want backwards compatbility and flash card readers. Some people don't want any. The power of choice. Look into it.

Oh btw, just for Dire:

[AceLuby]

[ QUOTE ]
Hey look, it is a Dire, lets make some bad remark about Sony thread. Ok, I think we all get it. 360 is better than PS3. Your point is clear. Do you go to things like E3 or Tokyo Gamer Show? No. Ok well unless you have somethine new and informative, or maybe actually interesting, none of us care.

It is called options people. If you buy a car, do you get the basic package, or do you get the alarm, touch screen navigation and expensive stereo system? Some people want backwards compatbility and flash card readers. Some people don't want any. The power of choice. Look into it.

Oh btw, just for Dire:

[/ QUOTE ]

If (when?) I ever see this IRL I'm gonna be so pissed...

[Dire]

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=29509

Interesting article on this topic. The author's perspective is that Sony is doing 40GB / no BC model to effectively create a distinction between the 'low-end' and 'high-end' PS3s, possibly to even create artificial demand for the 'high-ends' this holiday season as Sony announced they will be cancelling the 60GBs in Europe.

[wonderwes]

PS3 Price drop official

This should not be a surprised to most people, but they finally flipped the switch today. No PS2 chip, no SD card slots, and 2 less USBs. It was smart for Sony to keep lowering the price.

[Dudd]

Sony better hope this works, because September sales numbers have them getting crushed. They need something like Halo 3 to boost their numbers, even if it's only temporarily.

360: 528,000
Wii: 501,000
PS3: 119,000