After all, everyone needs a cell phone, not everyone needs a portable.
Not true. Not everyone needs a cell phone. And especially not everyone needs the kind of cell phone that could play stuff like Infinity Blade.
I can very much agree with this when it comes to smart phones. Right now there is absolutely no reason for me to have a smart phone, not that I could afford it at the moment anyway. Most people who have smart phones do not need smart phones. But for some its a significant convenience for managing business and their personal lives, while others just own one because its cooler than a regular phone and they want the nice expensive new toy. Nothing wrong with that, but it certainly isn't a necessity either.
More game companies will start branching out to mobile software, or continue to expand their mobile development. There's more money to be made.
Is there really, though? (Honestly asking, I don't really know the answer) Everyone I know plays the same 4 or 5 smart phone games, and those are ones they can get for free. Is the market dominated so much by the Angry Birds and Words With Friends of the world that new players are going to have a prohibitive barrier to entry?
EDIT: Players as in companies making games, not as in people playing games.
pirateluigi on
http://www.danreviewstheworld.com
Nintendo Network ID - PirateLuigi 3DS: 3136-6586-7691
G&T Grass Type Pokemon Gym Leader, In-Game Name: Dan
Nintendo/Sony combined mobile revenue:
2009: 2.2 billion
2010: 1.6 billion
2011: 1.4 billion(estimate made in November)
Their revenues are most definitely shrinking... maybe they will go up in 2012 with the vita coming out, but Sony represents such a tiny slice of the pie that I seriously doubt it will make much of a difference.
Is that gross or net, given that a lot has gone into R&D for the new systems in recent years?
Regardless if those numbers are correct then that's easy to concede, but you can't attribute it all to the cell market. PSP's been dead in all regions but Japan for a long time, DS was in its twilight and the 3DS had a rough start that has improved since.
Fortunes will probably improve, but perhaps not to the heights of...actually what were the absolute best years again?
i wonder who is making more, though? the cell phone games sell well, but at a $1-5 price point usually. major console games are much more expensive, and cost more to make. at the price range most games are for iOS and android, it's almost always in the 'impulse buy' range. you see it, want it, and it's cheap. i know people who have every version of angry birds despite them being the same exact game. i also know that $60 is nowhere near the 'impulse buy' area so the major game companies have to push harder with advertising to sell their games.
i used to think a big marketing budget was a bad idea but seeing how well it paid of for titles like BF3, it seems like you have no chance in hell of making a 'blockbuster' title without a sizeable ad campaign too.
People who want to play casual, easy to pick up games like angry birds typically don't go for games like Game Dev Story or tower defense games. Most of the money made on the mobile market is made off of games that appeal to the masses.
People who want to play casual, easy to pick up games like angry birds typically don't go for games like Game Dev Story or tower defense games. Most of the money made on the mobile market is made off of games that appeal to the masses.
And yet, Gameloft, EA, iD, interplay, square, and a bunch of other companies see the mobile platform as profitable enough for them to continue releasing deep titles on them.
You can't pigeonhole the cellphone gaming market as angry birds and bejeweled any more. There is a great deal of innovation and some amazing titles happening there right now, and it's only going to get better.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
With mobile games, you have smaller price points, but also smaller budgets.
Infinity blade has one of the largest budgets for a mobile game -- $1.9 Million.
It raked in $11+ million.
Revenue is also jammed up in the top sellers, and the rest spread out over thousands of other games and apps.
It's a much different market.
Handheld and mobile game budgets are almost always far less than their console counterpart.
I really doubt that Professor Layton or Trauma Center had a budget past 1 million. Uncharted on the PSP Vita will be what, 4-5 million, if I had to guess.
It would be silly to spend blockbuster movie budgets on portable games for any device. The nature of the platform means you aren't spending money on a 5.1 / 7.1 mix, 1080p graphics, 25-50GB of content, etc.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
0
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
I think one of the things which is keeping large devs from trying for the mobile market is that they've still got this "every game must be a high-budget blockbuster" mentality. Throwing wads of cash at a project has largely replaced the concept of implementing good ideas on the bigger end of the company scale, which is pretty much anathema to designing a profitable mobile game.
And slash, speaking of making a profit off of good ideas rather than using boatloads of cash, are you guys developing for the mobile markets at all?
Nintendo/Sony combined mobile revenue:
2009: 2.2 billion
2010: 1.6 billion
2011: 1.4 billion(estimate made in November)
Their revenues are most definitely shrinking... maybe they will go up in 2012 with the vita coming out, but Sony represents such a tiny slice of the pie that I seriously doubt it will make much of a difference.
Flurry's data (The only citeable data) is actually not really accurate in this context. Its cited method for gathering mobile data is nebulous and pretty much boils down to 'Trust us', and its handheld sales data relies primarily on NPD (Which doesn't count bundled software or anything similar.)
Which is an issue since buying the handheld is a decent chunk of revenue for companies (Usually.) so it plays into their mobile revenue as well.
PSP also hasn't had a really good title since 2008, unfortunately. Most of its big hitters fell within that timeframe due to the way Sony (and nintendo, I discovered.) do their fiscal year ending March 31st.
Then you look at the 'estimate' for 2011 and realize for them, the fiscal year is only 2/3rds through. (MH3g selling 470k units in two days is a clear indicator of data that wasn't put into this consideration.)
tl:dr: All these numbers are completely pointless til we see how things go in proper 2012. Or, more precisely, Apr.1-2012/mar.31-2013. With two actual live current gen handhelds with active release schedules. (Instead of twilight handhelds with semi-comatose release schedules.)
Also those numbers completely ignore any revenue from the eshop or PSN. I couldn't say how profitable those are, but its another point of data missing from this.
Actually Infinity Blade II is currently the highest-grossing app in the app store, and that's not exactly casual-bait.
Edit: The Arkham City iOS game is number three.
Yeah, of this week, right?
Right.
And while the big name development teams might shy away from smartphone games, pretty much every publisher is releasing games for them except Nintendo.
Oh, the US pricing for those nigh-manditory Vita memory cards has been revealed:
The 4GB card will be available for $24.99, followed by the 8GB card at $39.99 and the 16GB card at $69.99. A 32GB card will also be available for $119.99, nearly half of the system's $250 price.
Actually Infinity Blade II is currently the highest-grossing app in the app store, and that's not exactly casual-bait.
Edit: The Arkham City iOS game is number three.
Yeah, of this week, right?
Right.
And while the big name development teams might shy away from smartphone games, pretty much every publisher is releasing games for them except Nintendo.
What I meant to say was, most of the overall grossing apps, as displayed by like the itunes app store and the android market, are casual.
Nintendo has resisted bringing its franchises to smart phones and tablets, where games sell for a fraction of the $40 the company charges for 3DS titles. But people are increasingly playing games on those mobile devices. Market research firm Flurry reported that this year, sales of games for iOS and Android devices will exceed sales of games for handheld consoles for the first time.
But Miyamoto said he doesn't see smart phones as ideal gaming platforms, and that the best opportunities for game development still lie in Nintendo's own hardware.
"What we really have to do is try to be different," he said. "We are trying to create something that can never be reproduced on the smart phone."
But seriously, I agree with Shiggy. There are game experiences I can have on my 3DS that I can't have on my Android phone. I'm not saying one is better than the other, but for me I'm not ready to make a phone my primary game playing device.
http://www.danreviewstheworld.com
Nintendo Network ID - PirateLuigi 3DS: 3136-6586-7691
G&T Grass Type Pokemon Gym Leader, In-Game Name: Dan
0
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
Nintendo has resisted bringing its franchises to smart phones and tablets, where games sell for a fraction of the $40 the company charges for 3DS titles. But people are increasingly playing games on those mobile devices. Market research firm Flurry reported that this year, sales of games for iOS and Android devices will exceed sales of games for handheld consoles for the first time.
But Miyamoto said he doesn't see smart phones as ideal gaming platforms, and that the best opportunities for game development still lie in Nintendo's own hardware.
"What we really have to do is try to be different," he said. "We are trying to create something that can never be reproduced on the smart phone."
Nintendo to create the God particle confirmed.
Nintendo is the Apple of gaming.
Since when is Nintendo a self-preening company which sells products through massive marketing campaigns rather than quality?
Because I've got my gripes about Nintendo, but it's pretty insulting to put them in an Apple analogy.
Actually Infinity Blade II is currently the highest-grossing app in the app store, and that's not exactly casual-bait.
Edit: The Arkham City iOS game is number three.
Yeah, of this week, right?
Right.
And while the big name development teams might shy away from smartphone games, pretty much every publisher is releasing games for them except Nintendo.
What I meant to say was, most of the overall grossing apps, as displayed by like the itunes app store and the android market, are casual.
Nintendo has resisted bringing its franchises to smart phones and tablets, where games sell for a fraction of the $40 the company charges for 3DS titles. But people are increasingly playing games on those mobile devices. Market research firm Flurry reported that this year, sales of games for iOS and Android devices will exceed sales of games for handheld consoles for the first time.
But Miyamoto said he doesn't see smart phones as ideal gaming platforms, and that the best opportunities for game development still lie in Nintendo's own hardware.
"What we really have to do is try to be different," he said. "We are trying to create something that can never be reproduced on the smart phone."
Nintendo to create the God particle confirmed.
Nintendo is the Apple of gaming.
Since when is Nintendo a self-preening company which sells products through massive marketing campaigns rather than quality?
Because I've got my gripes about Nintendo, but it's pretty insulting to put them in an Apple analogy.
Actually, it is a really sound analogy.
Nintendo is a company that doesn't care if it sells more consoles than anyone else so long as they are a super profitable venture.
Nintendo takes ideas others have attempted before (touchscreen gaming, motion control) and "revolutionizes" the features in such a way that they are called revolutionary by their fans, are scorned as copycats by those opposed to them, and eventually see these features show up on their competitor's devices.
Nintendo has an iconic frontman (well, two) that serves as a focal point of the company. People question the continued success of the company in their absence.
Nintendo fetishizes making further iterations of their devices smaller, lighter... Or they make versions with huge screens.
Nintendo press events are filled to bursting with loyal fans who cheer and applaud at shiggy with a sword, or the reveal of the next Zelda.
I mean, there are tons of similarities.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Nintendo has resisted bringing its franchises to smart phones and tablets, where games sell for a fraction of the $40 the company charges for 3DS titles. But people are increasingly playing games on those mobile devices. Market research firm Flurry reported that this year, sales of games for iOS and Android devices will exceed sales of games for handheld consoles for the first time.
But Miyamoto said he doesn't see smart phones as ideal gaming platforms, and that the best opportunities for game development still lie in Nintendo's own hardware.
"What we really have to do is try to be different," he said. "We are trying to create something that can never be reproduced on the smart phone."
Nintendo to create the God particle confirmed.
Nintendo is the Apple of gaming.
Since when is Nintendo a self-preening company which sells products through massive marketing campaigns rather than quality?
Because I've got my gripes about Nintendo, but it's pretty insulting to put them in an Apple analogy.
As a former owner of 3 Apple laptops, 2 iPods and an iPhone, your claim that their products aren't "quality" is a little baffling to me. My experience has certainly been different. They are marketing geniuses, sure, but they still sell quality products.
XBL: Flex MythoMass
0
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
I should amend that to quality vs. price. I cannot fathom paying what Apple asks for their products.
Important to not leave out the bit about ridiculous prices, which, if we go with the Nintendo analogy, Nintendo doesn't roll with.
Nintendo has resisted bringing its franchises to smart phones and tablets, where games sell for a fraction of the $40 the company charges for 3DS titles. But people are increasingly playing games on those mobile devices. Market research firm Flurry reported that this year, sales of games for iOS and Android devices will exceed sales of games for handheld consoles for the first time.
But Miyamoto said he doesn't see smart phones as ideal gaming platforms, and that the best opportunities for game development still lie in Nintendo's own hardware.
"What we really have to do is try to be different," he said. "We are trying to create something that can never be reproduced on the smart phone."
Nintendo to create the God particle confirmed.
Nintendo is the Apple of gaming.
Since when is Nintendo a self-preening company which sells products through massive marketing campaigns rather than quality?
Because I've got my gripes about Nintendo, but it's pretty insulting to put them in an Apple analogy.
As a former owner of 3 Apple laptops, 2 iPods and an iPhone, your claim that their products aren't "quality" is a little baffling to me. My experience has certainly been different. They are marketing geniuses, sure, but they still sell quality products.
I ponder how anyone can call Apple laptops quality. At that price you should be able to double the internals of those things without any kind of issue. I guess build quality is what you're talking about here? Actual cost:performance ratio is really fucked up as far as mac books go.
Yeah, I understand the price argument. I think they're a bit high as well. But Apple appeals to a group of people who highly value aesthetic and design, and a well polished, controlled end to end experience.
I mean, my gaming PC is way more powerful than any current iMac, and cost a lot less, but it's . . . well, it's ugly, and I had to build it myself, and I'm my own support guy.
Since when is Nintendo a self-preening company which sells products through massive marketing campaigns rather than quality?
Because I've got my gripes about Nintendo, but it's pretty insulting to put them in an Apple analogy.
Quality aside, Nintendo's marketing budget is enormous. They spent over $200 million dollars marketing for the Wii's launch for example.
This. The reason everyone wanted a wii, or even knew what it was is because Nintendo lit money on fire for months leading up to its launch. Everything from Regis playing Wii sports, to it being product-placed in shows, to the incessant, never ending stream of "wii would like to play" commercials...
It was a marketing Goliath.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
They're also pretty darn expensive (their computers in particular), with one exception: the iPhone. The 16GB and 32GB model prices ($199 and $299) are right in line with what most new Android/Windows/BlackBerry devices charge, and yes, all of them are taking the two-year contracts into account.
Granted, the 64GB version at $399 is more expensive than most things out there.
cloudeagle on
Switch: 3947-4890-9293
0
L Ron HowardThe duckMinnesotaRegistered Userregular
I liked it when everyone was arguing over mobile apps being real games or difficulty of games, instead of Apple vs PC.
0
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
Yeah, I feel bad about that. We should go back to the mobile thing; it's actually a relevant issue with a lot of unknowns I'd like to see worked out.
Since when is Nintendo a self-preening company which sells products through massive marketing campaigns rather than quality?
Because I've got my gripes about Nintendo, but it's pretty insulting to put them in an Apple analogy.
Quality aside, Nintendo's marketing budget is enormous. They spent over $200 million dollars marketing for the Wii's launch for example.
Yeah, but the Wii was at least cheap and they made good games for it. What Apple product has ever been reasonably priced?
The second version of the Apple TV is pretty fairly priced. Ultimately though, if their products sell then they are not overpriced to those who are buying.
Build quality and reliability of Apple products is part of what you are paying the premium for.
While the Cost:Performance ratio the major downside for Apple historically I think they are even making inroads on that front. I read an article talking about the new Sandy Bridge MacBook Air's that was talking about how other manufacturers were having problems matching the price point of the Air's for similarly spec'ed ultrathin laptops.
Nintendo ID: Incindium
PSN: IncindiumX
0
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
I think Mac laptops are of the same basic quality of their Windows counterparts.
Then I suspect you have not owned one.
I would concede that a high end Lenovo or Vaio would be of a similar level of quality, but your 599 dollar similar-specced dell system will have a shittier display, a flimsy case, piss poor battery life, and a non-existent resale value a couple years down the road...
But, errr.... Tangent? Anyways, I think the mobile market is going to be one of radical change in the coming years, and it will be fun to watch.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
But my 800$ custom BlackWidow laptop will have twice the MacBook specs with a biometric lock, better display, weight maybe a couple ounces more and have an awesome giant spider logo on it.
Oh, also, it'll last just as long if not longer, as they make fantastic laptops.
Still be 1000$ less than the low tier mac book though! (Yes, comparing a Dell to a mac book is silly. At least aim for something a bit higher class. Thats like comparing a DS to a gameboy color.)
Posts
I can very much agree with this when it comes to smart phones. Right now there is absolutely no reason for me to have a smart phone, not that I could afford it at the moment anyway. Most people who have smart phones do not need smart phones. But for some its a significant convenience for managing business and their personal lives, while others just own one because its cooler than a regular phone and they want the nice expensive new toy. Nothing wrong with that, but it certainly isn't a necessity either.
Is there really, though? (Honestly asking, I don't really know the answer) Everyone I know plays the same 4 or 5 smart phone games, and those are ones they can get for free. Is the market dominated so much by the Angry Birds and Words With Friends of the world that new players are going to have a prohibitive barrier to entry?
EDIT: Players as in companies making games, not as in people playing games.
Nintendo Network ID - PirateLuigi 3DS: 3136-6586-7691
G&T Grass Type Pokemon Gym Leader, In-Game Name: Dan
Is that gross or net, given that a lot has gone into R&D for the new systems in recent years?
Regardless if those numbers are correct then that's easy to concede, but you can't attribute it all to the cell market. PSP's been dead in all regions but Japan for a long time, DS was in its twilight and the 3DS had a rough start that has improved since.
Fortunes will probably improve, but perhaps not to the heights of...actually what were the absolute best years again?
This seems logical. I guess we don't know that for sure.
i used to think a big marketing budget was a bad idea but seeing how well it paid of for titles like BF3, it seems like you have no chance in hell of making a 'blockbuster' title without a sizeable ad campaign too.
PS - Local_H_Jay
Sub me on Youtube
And Twitch
I suspect the PSP was not profitable during 2010 or 2011.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Edit: The Arkham City iOS game is number three.
And yet, Gameloft, EA, iD, interplay, square, and a bunch of other companies see the mobile platform as profitable enough for them to continue releasing deep titles on them.
You can't pigeonhole the cellphone gaming market as angry birds and bejeweled any more. There is a great deal of innovation and some amazing titles happening there right now, and it's only going to get better.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Infinity blade has one of the largest budgets for a mobile game -- $1.9 Million.
It raked in $11+ million.
Revenue is also jammed up in the top sellers, and the rest spread out over thousands of other games and apps.
It's a much different market.
Steam ID: slashx000______Twitter: @bill_at_zeboyd______ Facebook: Zeboyd Games
Handheld and mobile game budgets are almost always far less than their console counterpart.
I really doubt that Professor Layton or Trauma Center had a budget past 1 million. Uncharted on the PSP Vita will be what, 4-5 million, if I had to guess.
It would be silly to spend blockbuster movie budgets on portable games for any device. The nature of the platform means you aren't spending money on a 5.1 / 7.1 mix, 1080p graphics, 25-50GB of content, etc.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
And slash, speaking of making a profit off of good ideas rather than using boatloads of cash, are you guys developing for the mobile markets at all?
Yeah, of this week, right?
Flurry's data (The only citeable data) is actually not really accurate in this context. Its cited method for gathering mobile data is nebulous and pretty much boils down to 'Trust us', and its handheld sales data relies primarily on NPD (Which doesn't count bundled software or anything similar.)
Which is an issue since buying the handheld is a decent chunk of revenue for companies (Usually.) so it plays into their mobile revenue as well.
PSP also hasn't had a really good title since 2008, unfortunately. Most of its big hitters fell within that timeframe due to the way Sony (and nintendo, I discovered.) do their fiscal year ending March 31st.
Then you look at the 'estimate' for 2011 and realize for them, the fiscal year is only 2/3rds through. (MH3g selling 470k units in two days is a clear indicator of data that wasn't put into this consideration.)
tl:dr: All these numbers are completely pointless til we see how things go in proper 2012. Or, more precisely, Apr.1-2012/mar.31-2013. With two actual live current gen handhelds with active release schedules. (Instead of twilight handhelds with semi-comatose release schedules.)
Also those numbers completely ignore any revenue from the eshop or PSN. I couldn't say how profitable those are, but its another point of data missing from this.
Right.
And while the big name development teams might shy away from smartphone games, pretty much every publisher is releasing games for them except Nintendo.
Less stupid but still steep.
What I meant to say was, most of the overall grossing apps, as displayed by like the itunes app store and the android market, are casual.
http://www.apple.com/itunes/charts/paid-apps/
Nintendo is the Apple of gaming.
Apple is the Nintendo of computing.
But seriously, I agree with Shiggy. There are game experiences I can have on my 3DS that I can't have on my Android phone. I'm not saying one is better than the other, but for me I'm not ready to make a phone my primary game playing device.
Nintendo Network ID - PirateLuigi 3DS: 3136-6586-7691
G&T Grass Type Pokemon Gym Leader, In-Game Name: Dan
Since when is Nintendo a self-preening company which sells products through massive marketing campaigns rather than quality?
Because I've got my gripes about Nintendo, but it's pretty insulting to put them in an Apple analogy.
But not all. Non-casual titles can both exist and do well, even if they aren't the majority.
What are you talking about? Apple is all about high quality... At a nice high cost to go along with.
Nintendo ID: Incindium
PSN: IncindiumX
Actually, it is a really sound analogy.
Nintendo is a company that doesn't care if it sells more consoles than anyone else so long as they are a super profitable venture.
Nintendo takes ideas others have attempted before (touchscreen gaming, motion control) and "revolutionizes" the features in such a way that they are called revolutionary by their fans, are scorned as copycats by those opposed to them, and eventually see these features show up on their competitor's devices.
Nintendo has an iconic frontman (well, two) that serves as a focal point of the company. People question the continued success of the company in their absence.
Nintendo fetishizes making further iterations of their devices smaller, lighter... Or they make versions with huge screens.
Nintendo press events are filled to bursting with loyal fans who cheer and applaud at shiggy with a sword, or the reveal of the next Zelda.
I mean, there are tons of similarities.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
As a former owner of 3 Apple laptops, 2 iPods and an iPhone, your claim that their products aren't "quality" is a little baffling to me. My experience has certainly been different. They are marketing geniuses, sure, but they still sell quality products.
Important to not leave out the bit about ridiculous prices, which, if we go with the Nintendo analogy, Nintendo doesn't roll with.
I ponder how anyone can call Apple laptops quality. At that price you should be able to double the internals of those things without any kind of issue. I guess build quality is what you're talking about here? Actual cost:performance ratio is really fucked up as far as mac books go.
Quality aside, Nintendo's marketing budget is enormous. They spent over $200 million dollars marketing for the Wii's launch for example.
Zeboyd Games Development Blog
Steam ID : rwb36, Twitter : Werezompire, Facebook : Zeboyd Games
I mean, my gaming PC is way more powerful than any current iMac, and cost a lot less, but it's . . . well, it's ugly, and I had to build it myself, and I'm my own support guy.
I miss having a Mac
Yeah, but the Wii was at least cheap and they made good games for it. What Apple product has ever been reasonably priced?
This. The reason everyone wanted a wii, or even knew what it was is because Nintendo lit money on fire for months leading up to its launch. Everything from Regis playing Wii sports, to it being product-placed in shows, to the incessant, never ending stream of "wii would like to play" commercials...
It was a marketing Goliath.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
They're also pretty darn expensive (their computers in particular), with one exception: the iPhone. The 16GB and 32GB model prices ($199 and $299) are right in line with what most new Android/Windows/BlackBerry devices charge, and yes, all of them are taking the two-year contracts into account.
Granted, the 64GB version at $399 is more expensive than most things out there.
The second version of the Apple TV is pretty fairly priced. Ultimately though, if their products sell then they are not overpriced to those who are buying.
edit: expanded a bit...
Build quality and reliability of Apple products is part of what you are paying the premium for.
While the Cost:Performance ratio the major downside for Apple historically I think they are even making inroads on that front. I read an article talking about the new Sandy Bridge MacBook Air's that was talking about how other manufacturers were having problems matching the price point of the Air's for similarly spec'ed ultrathin laptops.
Nintendo ID: Incindium
PSN: IncindiumX
Then I suspect you have not owned one.
I would concede that a high end Lenovo or Vaio would be of a similar level of quality, but your 599 dollar similar-specced dell system will have a shittier display, a flimsy case, piss poor battery life, and a non-existent resale value a couple years down the road...
But, errr.... Tangent? Anyways, I think the mobile market is going to be one of radical change in the coming years, and it will be fun to watch.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Oh, also, it'll last just as long if not longer, as they make fantastic laptops.
Still be 1000$ less than the low tier mac book though! (Yes, comparing a Dell to a mac book is silly. At least aim for something a bit higher class. Thats like comparing a DS to a gameboy color.)