It's not cool for the PS3 to suddenly get a bigger harddrive so close to launch. Or, to be fair, it's not cool that my Xbox 360 is suddenly massively out of date and there's no option for me to catch up. This isn't why I bought a console, and I'll be damned if I can't bitch about it.
In fairness, you could always upgrade the PS3 HDD before, so this really doesn't affect performance. The 360 is a different story.
I was under the impression that you had to open the PS3 to do so, however.
And besides, I don't want to have to go replace my harddrive. I want everything to be standardize. The day I get the error message that I can't play game X on my PS3 or 360 because my harddrive is not big enough is the day I stop gaming.
USB Hard Drives work. I'd also wager that you wouldn't receive either message for the PS3 or 360, as both companies have methods to prevent this for basic game performance, but if something is in 1080p and you have a premium, but your HDTV can't do 1080p over component (this is likely) and no VGA, then you may be a sad panda.
However, I'm willing to bet this won't be an actual problem, just more of "What If" thing.
Ownage Jones on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Currently playing: Infamous, Resident Evil 5
Need to play: Shadow Complex, Uncharted 2, Ratchet and Clank: ACIT, MW2, Alpha Protocol
It's not cool for the PS3 to suddenly get a bigger harddrive so close to launch. Or, to be fair, it's not cool that my Xbox 360 is suddenly massively out of date and there's no option for me to catch up. This isn't why I bought a console, and I'll be damned if I can't bitch about it.
In fairness, you could always upgrade the PS3 HDD before, so this really doesn't affect performance. The 360 is a different story.
I was under the impression that you had to open the PS3 to do so, however.
And besides, I don't want to have to go replace my harddrive. I want everything to be standardize. The day I get the error message that I can't play game X on my PS3 or 360 because my harddrive is not big enough is the day I stop gaming.
USB Hard Drives work. I'd also wager that you wouldn't receive either message for the PS3 or 360, as both companies have methods to prevent this for basic game performance, but if something is in 1080p and you have a premium, but your HDTV can't do 1080p over component (this is likely) and no VGA, then you may be a sad panda.
However, I'm willing to bet this won't be an actual problem, just more of "What If" thing.
My HDTV had VGA in, so I'm not really effected by HDMI (I don't think) but it's still an inconvenience.
Even more of an "inconvenience" is how I keep misspelling that word, and then how firefox keeps suggesting "Incontinent." Urgh.
If you check my post history, I don't sony snipe. In fact, I've expressed desire several times to get a PS3.
However, with the discontinuation of the 20 GB model 6 months after it was released, and now a newer "super" model allegedly appearing, again, only 6 months after launch, I'm wary. And I believe early adopters have a right to bitch when new hardware is released, again, only 6 months after purchasing.
People buy consoles because they're standardized. Early adopters didn't used to get screwed... if you look at the history of console revisions, it wasn't until nintendo added a light to the GBA that console revisions changed from iteration to iteration. It used to be that consoles would LOSE features in order to get cheaper, not gain them. The Turbo Duo 2 lost the headphone jack, as did the genesis 2. The SNES 2 lost it's auto-ejection mechanism, and the sega CD 2 lost it's on-console control panel.
It's not cool for the PS3 to suddenly get a bigger harddrive so close to launch. Or, to be fair, it's not cool that my Xbox 360 is suddenly massively out of date and there's no option for me to catch up. This isn't why I bought a console, and I'll be damned if I can't bitch about it.
Original article. It seems like the implication is that it's already been released. Now, just how in the hell would Sony have managed to do something like that so sneaky-sneaky?
The sega saturn was released with NO announcement. Just one day, retailers got a shipment, with games.
That's pretty sneaky.
Was it? I seem to recall all these ads in video game magazines for "saturnday." I swear to god they had the release date advertised.
If you check my post history, I don't sony snipe. In fact, I've expressed desire several times to get a PS3.
However, with the discontinuation of the 20 GB model 6 months after it was released, and now a newer "super" model allegedly appearing, again, only 6 months after launch, I'm wary. And I believe early adopters have a right to bitch when new hardware is released, again, only 6 months after purchasing.
People buy consoles because they're standardized. Early adopters didn't used to get screwed... if you look at the history of console revisions, it wasn't until nintendo added a light to the GBA that console revisions changed from iteration to iteration. It used to be that consoles would LOSE features in order to get cheaper, not gain them. The Turbo Duo 2 lost the headphone jack, as did the genesis 2. The SNES 2 lost it's auto-ejection mechanism, and the sega CD 2 lost it's on-console control panel.
It's not cool for the PS3 to suddenly get a bigger harddrive so close to launch. Or, to be fair, it's not cool that my Xbox 360 is suddenly massively out of date and there's no option for me to catch up. This isn't why I bought a console, and I'll be damned if I can't bitch about it.
Good post all around.
Even then, it didn't matter if your GBA did or didn't have a light, it could play all the games the same.
Same with DS Lite, it practically was just a change in plastic casing.
Nintendo did that back with the NES and top-loading. But they didn't go and add anything crazy.
Though, perhaps Nintendo IS to blame, considering they started the whole "Expansion Pack" requirement thing. I always hated that, but I got the expansion pack with whatever game included it, so I was fine.
(Was that PD?)
Original article. It seems like the implication is that it's already been released. Now, just how in the hell would Sony have managed to do something like that so sneaky-sneaky?
The sega saturn was released with NO announcement. Just one day, retailers got a shipment, with games.
That's pretty sneaky.
Was it? I seem to recall all these ads in video game magazines for "saturnday." I swear to god they had the release date advertised.
I demand a response to my question!
"Saturnday" was supposed to be September 2nd, 1995. However, the saturn launched May 11th, 1995, with no warning. The excuse was that saturnday was a ruse used to lure sony into launching later.
EDIT: I should expand a bit, because this sounds a bit confusing.
E3 is held in May, and in 1995, Sega announced, during E3, their plans for launch of the sega saturn. THey announced the official launch day as Saturnday, September 2nd, 1995. Sony, hours later, announced the PSX would launch September 9th, 1995.
Sega then, the same day, announced that the Saturnday launch was still ago, but that the launch day was not the north american launch day. Rather, in select spots around the country, the saturn would be sold THAT VERY DAY. May 2nd, 1995, sega surprised everyone by launching the saturn at E3.
It was a BOLD move, and one that would have really paid off if it would have been a north american launch. Sega could have very easily pulled away, but by launching only at select retailers (I believe it was Funcoland, EB, and maybe KBToys), they neglected several huge retail stores like Walmart, Best Buy, Toys-R-Us, etc. And those retailers were PISSED that, for 3 months, they couldn't sell saturns.
If you check my post history, I don't sony snipe. In fact, I've expressed desire several times to get a PS3.
However, with the discontinuation of the 20 GB model 6 months after it was released, and now a newer "super" model allegedly appearing, again, only 6 months after launch, I'm wary. And I believe early adopters have a right to bitch when new hardware is released, again, only 6 months after purchasing.
People buy consoles because they're standardized. Early adopters didn't used to get screwed... if you look at the history of console revisions, it wasn't until nintendo added a light to the GBA that console revisions changed from iteration to iteration. It used to be that consoles would LOSE features in order to get cheaper, not gain them. The Turbo Duo 2 lost the headphone jack, as did the genesis 2. The SNES 2 lost it's auto-ejection mechanism, and the sega CD 2 lost it's on-console control panel.
It's not cool for the PS3 to suddenly get a bigger harddrive so close to launch. Or, to be fair, it's not cool that my Xbox 360 is suddenly massively out of date and there's no option for me to catch up. This isn't why I bought a console, and I'll be damned if I can't bitch about it.
Good post all around.
Even then, it didn't matter if your GBA did or didn't have a light, it could play all the games the same.
Same with DS Lite, it practically was just a change in plastic casing.
Nintendo did that back with the NES and top-loading. But they didn't go and add anything crazy.
Though, perhaps Nintendo IS to blame, considering they started the whole "Expansion Pack" requirement thing. I always hated that, but I got the expansion pack with whatever game included it, so I was fine.
(Was that PD?)
If you check my post history, I don't sony snipe. In fact, I've expressed desire several times to get a PS3.
However, with the discontinuation of the 20 GB model 6 months after it was released, and now a newer "super" model allegedly appearing, again, only 6 months after launch, I'm wary. And I believe early adopters have a right to bitch when new hardware is released, again, only 6 months after purchasing.
People buy consoles because they're standardized. Early adopters didn't used to get screwed... if you look at the history of console revisions, it wasn't until nintendo added a light to the GBA that console revisions changed from iteration to iteration. It used to be that consoles would LOSE features in order to get cheaper, not gain them. The Turbo Duo 2 lost the headphone jack, as did the genesis 2. The SNES 2 lost it's auto-ejection mechanism, and the sega CD 2 lost it's on-console control panel.
It's not cool for the PS3 to suddenly get a bigger harddrive so close to launch. Or, to be fair, it's not cool that my Xbox 360 is suddenly massively out of date and there's no option for me to catch up. This isn't why I bought a console, and I'll be damned if I can't bitch about it.
Good post all around.
Even then, it didn't matter if your GBA did or didn't have a light, it could play all the games the same.
Same with DS Lite, it practically was just a change in plastic casing.
Nintendo did that back with the NES and top-loading. But they didn't go and add anything crazy.
Though, perhaps Nintendo IS to blame, considering they started the whole "Expansion Pack" requirement thing. I always hated that, but I got the expansion pack with whatever game included it, so I was fine.
(Was that PD?)
I think it was a Star Wars game...
Rogue Squad? Dang, I can't remember and I'm too lazy to look it up.
yeah me too, except I had already bought one for the graphical enhancements it gave some games. I remember being pissed, but hey at least I got to enjoy the improvements more than most people.
Which is how I feel about console upgrades/price drops.
Though I do certainly see the problem with a lack of console streamlining. Too close to the problems with PC gaming (inherent in the system, I don't have a problem with PC games specifically)
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
edited April 2007
Oh ye of short memories.
The memory pak launched, BY ITSELF, in conjunction with the first Rogue Squadron game and Turok 2. DK64 was the first game to require it, and included it as a pack-in. Majora's Mask required it, PD required it for single-player IIRC.
the only way i can see this being true, is if they're doing a price drop, and just because there is little cost difference for hd's just decided to up it to 80gb, making it an even better deal
the only way i can see this being true, is if they're doing a price drop, and just because there is little cost difference for hd's just decided to up it to 80gb, making it an even better deal
That would piss off fans even more than just a price drop.
Original article. It seems like the implication is that it's already been released. Now, just how in the hell would Sony have managed to do something like that so sneaky-sneaky?
The sega saturn was released with NO announcement. Just one day, retailers got a shipment, with games.
That's pretty sneaky.
Was it? I seem to recall all these ads in video game magazines for "saturnday." I swear to god they had the release date advertised.
I demand a response to my question!
"Saturnday" was supposed to be September 2nd, 1995. However, the saturn launched May 11th, 1995, with no warning. The excuse was that saturnday was a ruse used to lure sony into launching later.
EDIT: I should expand a bit, because this sounds a bit confusing.
E3 is held in May, and in 1995, Sega announced, during E3, their plans for launch of the sega saturn. THey announced the official launch day as Saturnday, September 2nd, 1995. Sony, hours later, announced the PSX would launch September 9th, 1995.
Sega then, the same day, announced that the Saturnday launch was still ago, but that the launch day was not the north american launch day. Rather, in select spots around the country, the saturn would be sold THAT VERY DAY. May 2nd, 1995, sega surprised everyone by launching the saturn at E3.
It was a BOLD move, and one that would have really paid off if it would have been a north american launch. Sega could have very easily pulled away, but by launching only at select retailers (I believe it was Funcoland, EB, and maybe KBToys), they neglected several huge retail stores like Walmart, Best Buy, Toys-R-Us, etc. And those retailers were PISSED that, for 3 months, they couldn't sell saturns.
The memory pak launched, BY ITSELF, in conjunction with the first Rogue Squadron game and Turok 2. DK64 was the first game to require it, and included it as a pack-in. Majora's Mask required it, PD required it for single-player IIRC.
Nah, PD didn't require it for single player, but it did require it for co-op and adversarial story mode (which I think was like, op agent, or something). The REAL benefit of it was in multiplayer, I think it enabled bot support either from 0-8, or from 4-8. As well as the graphical benefits of it. It really might be the best system upgrade ever, incredibly cheap for what it did for PD alone.
The memory pak launched, BY ITSELF, in conjunction with the first Rogue Squadron game and Turok 2. DK64 was the first game to require it, and included it as a pack-in. Majora's Mask required it, PD required it for single-player IIRC.
Nah, PD didn't require it for single player, but it did require it for co-op and adversarial story mode (which I think was like, op agent, or something). The REAL benefit of it was in multiplayer, I think it enabled bot support either from 0-8, or from 4-8. As well as the graphical benefits of it. It really might be the best system upgrade ever, incredibly cheap for what it did for PD alone.
The N64 Expansion Pak is needed to access the solo player levels and most of the multiplayer features, although a limited subset of the Combat Simulator options are available without the device.
Original article. It seems like the implication is that it's already been released. Now, just how in the hell would Sony have managed to do something like that so sneaky-sneaky?
The sega saturn was released with NO announcement. Just one day, retailers got a shipment, with games.
That's pretty sneaky.
Was it? I seem to recall all these ads in video game magazines for "saturnday." I swear to god they had the release date advertised.
I demand a response to my question!
"Saturnday" was supposed to be September 2nd, 1995. However, the saturn launched May 11th, 1995, with no warning. The excuse was that saturnday was a ruse used to lure sony into launching later.
EDIT: I should expand a bit, because this sounds a bit confusing.
E3 is held in May, and in 1995, Sega announced, during E3, their plans for launch of the sega saturn. THey announced the official launch day as Saturnday, September 2nd, 1995. Sony, hours later, announced the PSX would launch September 9th, 1995.
Sega then, the same day, announced that the Saturnday launch was still ago, but that the launch day was not the north american launch day. Rather, in select spots around the country, the saturn would be sold THAT VERY DAY. May 2nd, 1995, sega surprised everyone by launching the saturn at E3.
It was a BOLD move, and one that would have really paid off if it would have been a north american launch. Sega could have very easily pulled away, but by launching only at select retailers (I believe it was Funcoland, EB, and maybe KBToys), they neglected several huge retail stores like Walmart, Best Buy, Toys-R-Us, etc. And those retailers were PISSED that, for 3 months, they couldn't sell saturns.
And thus began the Saturn's downfall.
Now THAT, I didn't know. Thanks!
Also, since every third party developer thought that the system was launching in September, there were literally no third-party games for five months.
the only way i can see this being true, is if they're doing a price drop, and just because there is little cost difference for hd's just decided to up it to 80gb, making it an even better deal
That would piss off fans even more than just a price drop.
Eh, not really. 20 extra gigs isn't going to cause that much of a fuss. If it was 100+price drop, then :x
But 20? Not so much. Besides, when have early adopters not been shafted? Only system I can think of would be the Gamecube (or did that have revisions?).
Ownage Jones on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Currently playing: Infamous, Resident Evil 5
Need to play: Shadow Complex, Uncharted 2, Ratchet and Clank: ACIT, MW2, Alpha Protocol
Only system I can think of would be the Gamecube (or did that have revisions?).
It did. I don't know about any specific internal changes but Gamecubes made in the first 3 or so years had an extra port on the back. This was for use with special component cables.
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
edited April 2007
*grins*
Come on, guys. I'm one of the heavier Nintendo fanboys around here. Trust me -- if I quote something about these systems, chances are better than good that I'm right. =P
Come on, guys. I'm one of the heavier Nintendo fanboys around here. Trust me -- if I quote something about these systems, chances are better than good that I'm right. =P
Listen to this guy for christ's sake. PD required the expansion pak for single player.
The memory pak launched, BY ITSELF, in conjunction with the first Rogue Squadron game and Turok 2. DK64 was the first game to require it, and included it as a pack-in. Majora's Mask required it, PD required it for single-player IIRC.
Nah, PD didn't require it for single player, but it did require it for co-op and adversarial story mode (which I think was like, op agent, or something). The REAL benefit of it was in multiplayer, I think it enabled bot support either from 0-8, or from 4-8. As well as the graphical benefits of it. It really might be the best system upgrade ever, incredibly cheap for what it did for PD alone.
The N64 Expansion Pak is needed to access the solo player levels and most of the multiplayer features, although a limited subset of the Combat Simulator options are available without the device.
Yeah, I guess I'm mistaken, couldn't wait to get home from work and check the box, so I found a photo of it here.
Edit: MobyGames removed the image, I'll repost the box art as soon as I find it again.
chomamadog on
0
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
edited April 2007
Erm.. hotlinking Mobygames is a no-no. Thank goodness they don't use shock images.
IIRC, the box is misleading. The game doesn't technically require the expansion pak, so they explain that stuff on the back.
^Well, get used to it. Life isn't fair. "You take the good, you take the bad, you take em both, and there you have, the facts of life...the facts of life."
BladeofTheImmortal on
0
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
edited April 2007
Blade, if I may make an observation?
Every system has its fans. For financial reasons, for quality reasons, for marketing reasons... Brand loyalty exists as a concept in America, and across the globe. It's part of capitalism -- get 'em hooked, and keep 'em hooked.
With that said, these multinational mega-million dollar companies don't need some guy to defend them on the internet. We are, after all, just speculating and discussing the things at hand. We are part of a fraternity, in a way, a common bond of brothers and sisters out to enjoy a good time in a visual medium.
No matter what you feel against people who have opposing brand loyalties to your own, calling them delusional is very unproductive to healthy discussion. And no matter WHAT your personal beliefs, calling Christians delusional will generally ruffle feathers pretty bad.
To link both together? That's suicide, man.
I wish Sony the best of luck. I don't understand what is going on in their heads, but I will never wish them ill will. I plan to own a PS3 someday. I feel personally offended, as a Nintendo fan and a fan of gaming, that you just attacked the 360 fans and the Christians on this board.
Please. Can we get this back on topic, namely that of the rumored (RUMORED) 80GB version of the PS3?
If you check my post history, I don't sony snipe. In fact, I've expressed desire several times to get a PS3.
However, with the discontinuation of the 20 GB model 6 months after it was released, and now a newer "super" model allegedly appearing, again, only 6 months after launch, I'm wary. And I believe early adopters have a right to bitch when new hardware is released, again, only 6 months after purchasing.
People buy consoles because they're standardized. Early adopters didn't used to get screwed... if you look at the history of console revisions, it wasn't until nintendo added a light to the GBA that console revisions changed from iteration to iteration. It used to be that consoles would LOSE features in order to get cheaper, not gain them. The Turbo Duo 2 lost the headphone jack, as did the genesis 2. The SNES 2 lost it's auto-ejection mechanism, and the sega CD 2 lost it's on-console control panel.
It's not cool for the PS3 to suddenly get a bigger harddrive so close to launch. Or, to be fair, it's not cool that my Xbox 360 is suddenly massively out of date and there's no option for me to catch up. This isn't why I bought a console, and I'll be damned if I can't bitch about it.
Define "console revisions". The NES had several configurations that shipped with varying combinations of two gamepads, a lightgun, two games, and a retarded robot thing. By the third iteration, the system shipped with two controllers, a lightgun, a trackpad, and three games.
But that's all beside the point. The point is this: People have, for six months, been bitching because Sony is stupid and their console is overpriced and if they didn't do something fast, they were ZOMG DOOMED. Now Sony appears to be trying to do something to ameliorate these concerns, and the reaction is almost universally "ARRRGH, SONY IS SCREWING US, FUCK THOSE FUCKING FUCKERS." I'm not singling anyone out for criticism, because I'm not about to cross reference this thread with every other Sony bitch fest to see which people are being fickly assrags. But taken as a whole, the reaction here is dumb and inconsistent. If we take as a given that the PS3 is over-priced - and I think a lot of people are willing to concede that - and if we take as a corollary that this price is depressing sales figures, what should Sony do? Should they commit suicide by maintaining a ridiculous price point so that a subset of gamers who willingly bend over by purchasing launch systems don't get their feelings hurt?
Let me put it this way: Given the choice between the PS3 being a comparative flop and receiving a lot less developer support, and having them drop the price (or add a pretty minor feature) by $100 a little early in the console's life, which would you prefer? (I'm asking this of a hypothetical bitchy PS3 owner.)
ElJeffe on
Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."
Eh, I don't see what the big deal is. It's just a larger HDD with no other changes. Remember, you can put your own HDD into the system. I can go and get a 120GB or bigger for cheap and just toss it in there. If it was an actual hardware revision, I might get a bit miffed, but I don't see a need for commotion if it's just a HDD.
Dashui on
Xbox Live, PSN & Origin: Vacorsis 3DS: 2638-0037-166
Im just sayin, if you are gonna drop the price of a console you absolutely have to drop it down to the level of the competition otherwise there is no point. If someone didnt buy it at 599 they wont buy it at 499 when the competition is still selling at 250 and 299.
Sony cant use a price drop as a strategic measure, because the amount they would need to drop for this tactic to be viable is far too much, like 200 dollars on a console 6 months after launch = death knell.
Im just sayin, if you are gonna drop the price of a console you absolutely have to drop it down to the level of the competition otherwise there is no point. If someone didnt buy it at 599 they wont buy it at 499 when the competition is still selling at 250 and 299.
Not true, because the systems aren't perfectly interchangeable. The PS3 offers a high-def DVD player in the package. Even then, the two systems have different exclusive games, and different loyal fan-bases. You assume that the cheaper console will always win, and this has not been born out. The PSX was pricier than the N64, and it kicked ass. The PS2 was pricier than the Dreamcast, and it kicked ass. People are willing to pay a premium to play the system they want. They don't just buy whatever system is lowest in cost.
ElJeffe on
Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."
Im just sayin, if you are gonna drop the price of a console you absolutely have to drop it down to the level of the competition otherwise there is no point. If someone didnt buy it at 599 they wont buy it at 499 when the competition is still selling at 250 and 299.
Not true, because the systems aren't perfectly interchangeable. The PS3 offers a high-def DVD player in the package. Even then, the two systems have different exclusive games, and different loyal fan-bases. You assume that the cheaper console will always win, and this has not been born out. The PSX was pricier than the N64, and it kicked ass. The PS2 was pricier than the Dreamcast, and it kicked ass. People are willing to pay a premium to play the system they want. They don't just buy whatever system is lowest in cost.
I'm still sticking with when the games (exclusives, big name, at the very least) come out and enough of them, the system will sell. And that applies to any system. You can't tell me that when Final Fantasy 13/Versus, Metal Gear Solid 4, etc, comes out, that people won't be tempted to buy one then and beyond.
Dashui on
Xbox Live, PSN & Origin: Vacorsis 3DS: 2638-0037-166
If you check my post history, I don't sony snipe. In fact, I've expressed desire several times to get a PS3.
However, with the discontinuation of the 20 GB model 6 months after it was released, and now a newer "super" model allegedly appearing, again, only 6 months after launch, I'm wary. And I believe early adopters have a right to bitch when new hardware is released, again, only 6 months after purchasing.
People buy consoles because they're standardized. Early adopters didn't used to get screwed... if you look at the history of console revisions, it wasn't until nintendo added a light to the GBA that console revisions changed from iteration to iteration. It used to be that consoles would LOSE features in order to get cheaper, not gain them. The Turbo Duo 2 lost the headphone jack, as did the genesis 2. The SNES 2 lost it's auto-ejection mechanism, and the sega CD 2 lost it's on-console control panel.
It's not cool for the PS3 to suddenly get a bigger harddrive so close to launch. Or, to be fair, it's not cool that my Xbox 360 is suddenly massively out of date and there's no option for me to catch up. This isn't why I bought a console, and I'll be damned if I can't bitch about it.
Define "console revisions". The NES had several configurations that shipped with varying combinations of two gamepads, a lightgun, two games, and a retarded robot thing. By the third iteration, the system shipped with two controllers, a lightgun, a trackpad, and three games.
But that's all beside the point. The point is this: People have, for six months, been bitching because Sony is stupid and their console is overpriced and if they didn't do something fast, they were ZOMG DOOMED. Now Sony appears to be trying to do something to ameliorate these concerns, and the reaction is almost universally "ARRRGH, SONY IS SCREWING US, FUCK THOSE FUCKING FUCKERS." I'm not singling anyone out for criticism, because I'm not about to cross reference this thread with every other Sony bitch fest to see which people are being fickly assrags. But taken as a whole, the reaction here is dumb and inconsistent. If we take as a given that the PS3 is over-priced - and I think a lot of people are willing to concede that - and if we take as a corollary that this price is depressing sales figures, what should Sony do? Should they commit suicide by maintaining a ridiculous price point so that a subset of gamers who willingly bend over by purchasing launch systems don't get their feelings hurt?
Let me put it this way: Given the choice between the PS3 being a comparative flop and receiving a lot less developer support, and having them drop the price (or add a pretty minor feature) by $100 a little early in the console's life, which would you prefer? (I'm asking this of a hypothetical bitchy PS3 owner.)
For the first part of your comment, those are ACCESSORIES, not console components. Yes, the NES had different hardware configurations. However, it only went through one, in-the-box change through out the course of it's history, and even that didn't change it's innards in a way that made either superior, outside of price.
And that revision came somewhere between 6 and 7 years later.
What would I have sony do? Fuck if I know. All I know is that, if I was an early adopter, I'd be pissed. And as someone who is looking to buy a PS3, I'm reluctant because they keep doing shit like this. And beyond that, I really don't think including a bigger harddrive was a good fix.
Personally, I'd rather they discontinued the 60 gb version, and made the 20 gb version the "real" one. Everyone who got the 60 gb version got a little extra treat for buying earlier, and everyone can still play every game released. And the price goes down.
Everyone wins.
TheSonicRetard on
0
AbsoluteZeroThe new film by Quentin KoopantinoRegistered Userregular
edited April 2007
I wonder when the Premium Wii with a third Gamecube duct-taped to it comes out...
Im just sayin, if you are gonna drop the price of a console you absolutely have to drop it down to the level of the competition otherwise there is no point. If someone didnt buy it at 599 they wont buy it at 499 when the competition is still selling at 250 and 299.
Not true, because the systems aren't perfectly interchangeable. The PS3 offers a high-def DVD player in the package. Even then, the two systems have different exclusive games, and different loyal fan-bases. You assume that the cheaper console will always win, and this has not been born out. The PSX was pricier than the N64, and it kicked ass. The PS2 was pricier than the Dreamcast, and it kicked ass. People are willing to pay a premium to play the system they want. They don't just buy whatever system is lowest in cost.
Except this generation is breaking all those conventions.
The expensive console is tanking.
The cheap one from Nintendo is destroying the rest of the competition.
Apparently people aren't prepared to pay for a premium.
Im not saying thats true, but surely from the face of it it looks like it could be the case
The other issue regarding a price drop; the PS3 was only just released in Europe. Like, it has been on sale for just one month.
Now when talking about hardware revisions / price cuts, Sony will either have to go worldwide with this, or really shouldn't move at all for some time yet.
Europe has been screwed hard enough with the delay / price increase / dropped EE & castrated BC at this point, seeing the US get even better hardware / lower prices, the (800k or something?) early adopters who have bought a Euro PS3 in the last month would have been essentially shit all over. Maybe they wouldn't care.
Now, 599 olol aside, right now, with the pound strong against the dollar, $599 = £300.
The PS3 here is £425.
Is importing the console an option? I mean, I know Sony was hitting the grey market hard, and killed Lik-Sang or something a while back, but can you import an American unit? What sort of extra costs might you incur? Tax and shipping? How would the games and online component work?
best way to import one is if you/someone you know is going on a trip. Open the box to avoid import tax.
Shipping would cost a lot, and anyone selling them online would charge a premium for the risk of sony shutting them down.
edit: you would be able to play most games on it, but region protection is determined on a title to title basis, so you might need to end up importing games.
Europe has been screwed hard enough with the delay / price increase / dropped EE & castrated BC at this point, seeing the US get even better hardware / lower prices, the (800k or something?) early adopters who have bought a Euro PS3 in the last month would have been essentially shit all over. Maybe they wouldn't care.
From my observation of video game history it seems that Video Game makers don't believe it's possible to screw Europe hard enough.
Though it becomes a question of screwing the early adopters versus screwing up your console's long term viabilty, which do you believe is the right option?
Inflammatory humor:
Those early adopters have already shown a disconnect from reality so....
Posts
USB Hard Drives work. I'd also wager that you wouldn't receive either message for the PS3 or 360, as both companies have methods to prevent this for basic game performance, but if something is in 1080p and you have a premium, but your HDTV can't do 1080p over component (this is likely) and no VGA, then you may be a sad panda.
However, I'm willing to bet this won't be an actual problem, just more of "What If" thing.
Currently playing: Infamous, Resident Evil 5
Need to play: Shadow Complex, Uncharted 2, Ratchet and Clank: ACIT, MW2, Alpha Protocol
My HDTV had VGA in, so I'm not really effected by HDMI (I don't think) but it's still an inconvenience.
Even more of an "inconvenience" is how I keep misspelling that word, and then how firefox keeps suggesting "Incontinent." Urgh.
Good post all around.
I demand a response to my question!
Even then, it didn't matter if your GBA did or didn't have a light, it could play all the games the same.
Same with DS Lite, it practically was just a change in plastic casing.
Nintendo did that back with the NES and top-loading. But they didn't go and add anything crazy.
Though, perhaps Nintendo IS to blame, considering they started the whole "Expansion Pack" requirement thing. I always hated that, but I got the expansion pack with whatever game included it, so I was fine.
(Was that PD?)
"Saturnday" was supposed to be September 2nd, 1995. However, the saturn launched May 11th, 1995, with no warning. The excuse was that saturnday was a ruse used to lure sony into launching later.
EDIT: I should expand a bit, because this sounds a bit confusing.
E3 is held in May, and in 1995, Sega announced, during E3, their plans for launch of the sega saturn. THey announced the official launch day as Saturnday, September 2nd, 1995. Sony, hours later, announced the PSX would launch September 9th, 1995.
Sega then, the same day, announced that the Saturnday launch was still ago, but that the launch day was not the north american launch day. Rather, in select spots around the country, the saturn would be sold THAT VERY DAY. May 2nd, 1995, sega surprised everyone by launching the saturn at E3.
It was a BOLD move, and one that would have really paid off if it would have been a north american launch. Sega could have very easily pulled away, but by launching only at select retailers (I believe it was Funcoland, EB, and maybe KBToys), they neglected several huge retail stores like Walmart, Best Buy, Toys-R-Us, etc. And those retailers were PISSED that, for 3 months, they couldn't sell saturns.
And thus began the Saturn's downfall.
I think it was a Star Wars game...
Rogue Squad? Dang, I can't remember and I'm too lazy to look it up.
I got my copy with DK64.
yeah me too, except I had already bought one for the graphical enhancements it gave some games. I remember being pissed, but hey at least I got to enjoy the improvements more than most people.
Which is how I feel about console upgrades/price drops.
Though I do certainly see the problem with a lack of console streamlining. Too close to the problems with PC gaming (inherent in the system, I don't have a problem with PC games specifically)
The memory pak launched, BY ITSELF, in conjunction with the first Rogue Squadron game and Turok 2. DK64 was the first game to require it, and included it as a pack-in. Majora's Mask required it, PD required it for single-player IIRC.
That would piss off fans even more than just a price drop.
Now THAT, I didn't know. Thanks!
Nah, PD didn't require it for single player, but it did require it for co-op and adversarial story mode (which I think was like, op agent, or something). The REAL benefit of it was in multiplayer, I think it enabled bot support either from 0-8, or from 4-8. As well as the graphical benefits of it. It really might be the best system upgrade ever, incredibly cheap for what it did for PD alone.
No I'm pretty sure single player required it....
Edit:
Also, since every third party developer thought that the system was launching in September, there were literally no third-party games for five months.
Eh, not really. 20 extra gigs isn't going to cause that much of a fuss. If it was 100+price drop, then :x
But 20? Not so much. Besides, when have early adopters not been shafted? Only system I can think of would be the Gamecube (or did that have revisions?).
Currently playing: Infamous, Resident Evil 5
Need to play: Shadow Complex, Uncharted 2, Ratchet and Clank: ACIT, MW2, Alpha Protocol
It did. I don't know about any specific internal changes but Gamecubes made in the first 3 or so years had an extra port on the back. This was for use with special component cables.
Come on, guys. I'm one of the heavier Nintendo fanboys around here. Trust me -- if I quote something about these systems, chances are better than good that I'm right. =P
Listen to this guy for christ's sake. PD required the expansion pak for single player.
Yeah, I guess I'm mistaken, couldn't wait to get home from work and check the box, so I found a photo of it here.
Edit: MobyGames removed the image, I'll repost the box art as soon as I find it again.
IIRC, the box is misleading. The game doesn't technically require the expansion pak, so they explain that stuff on the back.
You managed to insult me twice in one post when I wasn't even involved in that quote tree.
That should be an immediate warning sign that such posts are retarded, and not really acceptable.
Every system has its fans. For financial reasons, for quality reasons, for marketing reasons... Brand loyalty exists as a concept in America, and across the globe. It's part of capitalism -- get 'em hooked, and keep 'em hooked.
With that said, these multinational mega-million dollar companies don't need some guy to defend them on the internet. We are, after all, just speculating and discussing the things at hand. We are part of a fraternity, in a way, a common bond of brothers and sisters out to enjoy a good time in a visual medium.
No matter what you feel against people who have opposing brand loyalties to your own, calling them delusional is very unproductive to healthy discussion. And no matter WHAT your personal beliefs, calling Christians delusional will generally ruffle feathers pretty bad.
To link both together? That's suicide, man.
I wish Sony the best of luck. I don't understand what is going on in their heads, but I will never wish them ill will. I plan to own a PS3 someday. I feel personally offended, as a Nintendo fan and a fan of gaming, that you just attacked the 360 fans and the Christians on this board.
Please. Can we get this back on topic, namely that of the rumored (RUMORED) 80GB version of the PS3?
Define "console revisions". The NES had several configurations that shipped with varying combinations of two gamepads, a lightgun, two games, and a retarded robot thing. By the third iteration, the system shipped with two controllers, a lightgun, a trackpad, and three games.
But that's all beside the point. The point is this: People have, for six months, been bitching because Sony is stupid and their console is overpriced and if they didn't do something fast, they were ZOMG DOOMED. Now Sony appears to be trying to do something to ameliorate these concerns, and the reaction is almost universally "ARRRGH, SONY IS SCREWING US, FUCK THOSE FUCKING FUCKERS." I'm not singling anyone out for criticism, because I'm not about to cross reference this thread with every other Sony bitch fest to see which people are being fickly assrags. But taken as a whole, the reaction here is dumb and inconsistent. If we take as a given that the PS3 is over-priced - and I think a lot of people are willing to concede that - and if we take as a corollary that this price is depressing sales figures, what should Sony do? Should they commit suicide by maintaining a ridiculous price point so that a subset of gamers who willingly bend over by purchasing launch systems don't get their feelings hurt?
Let me put it this way: Given the choice between the PS3 being a comparative flop and receiving a lot less developer support, and having them drop the price (or add a pretty minor feature) by $100 a little early in the console's life, which would you prefer? (I'm asking this of a hypothetical bitchy PS3 owner.)
Im just sayin, if you are gonna drop the price of a console you absolutely have to drop it down to the level of the competition otherwise there is no point. If someone didnt buy it at 599 they wont buy it at 499 when the competition is still selling at 250 and 299.
Sony cant use a price drop as a strategic measure, because the amount they would need to drop for this tactic to be viable is far too much, like 200 dollars on a console 6 months after launch = death knell.
Not true, because the systems aren't perfectly interchangeable. The PS3 offers a high-def DVD player in the package. Even then, the two systems have different exclusive games, and different loyal fan-bases. You assume that the cheaper console will always win, and this has not been born out. The PSX was pricier than the N64, and it kicked ass. The PS2 was pricier than the Dreamcast, and it kicked ass. People are willing to pay a premium to play the system they want. They don't just buy whatever system is lowest in cost.
I'm still sticking with when the games (exclusives, big name, at the very least) come out and enough of them, the system will sell. And that applies to any system. You can't tell me that when Final Fantasy 13/Versus, Metal Gear Solid 4, etc, comes out, that people won't be tempted to buy one then and beyond.
For the first part of your comment, those are ACCESSORIES, not console components. Yes, the NES had different hardware configurations. However, it only went through one, in-the-box change through out the course of it's history, and even that didn't change it's innards in a way that made either superior, outside of price.
And that revision came somewhere between 6 and 7 years later.
What would I have sony do? Fuck if I know. All I know is that, if I was an early adopter, I'd be pissed. And as someone who is looking to buy a PS3, I'm reluctant because they keep doing shit like this. And beyond that, I really don't think including a bigger harddrive was a good fix.
Personally, I'd rather they discontinued the 60 gb version, and made the 20 gb version the "real" one. Everyone who got the 60 gb version got a little extra treat for buying earlier, and everyone can still play every game released. And the price goes down.
Everyone wins.
Except this generation is breaking all those conventions.
The expensive console is tanking.
The cheap one from Nintendo is destroying the rest of the competition.
Apparently people aren't prepared to pay for a premium.
Im not saying thats true, but surely from the face of it it looks like it could be the case
Now when talking about hardware revisions / price cuts, Sony will either have to go worldwide with this, or really shouldn't move at all for some time yet.
Europe has been screwed hard enough with the delay / price increase / dropped EE & castrated BC at this point, seeing the US get even better hardware / lower prices, the (800k or something?) early adopters who have bought a Euro PS3 in the last month would have been essentially shit all over. Maybe they wouldn't care.
Now, 599 olol aside, right now, with the pound strong against the dollar, $599 = £300.
The PS3 here is £425.
Is importing the console an option? I mean, I know Sony was hitting the grey market hard, and killed Lik-Sang or something a while back, but can you import an American unit? What sort of extra costs might you incur? Tax and shipping? How would the games and online component work?
Shipping would cost a lot, and anyone selling them online would charge a premium for the risk of sony shutting them down.
edit: you would be able to play most games on it, but region protection is determined on a title to title basis, so you might need to end up importing games.
From my observation of video game history it seems that Video Game makers don't believe it's possible to screw Europe hard enough.
Though it becomes a question of screwing the early adopters versus screwing up your console's long term viabilty, which do you believe is the right option?
Inflammatory humor: