Does Anyone Else Think The 360/PS3 Debate Gets Out Of Hand?

[second exodous]

'the cheap systems'

What? Is this a joke? The SNES launched at $199 in 1990, while the Genesis launched a year earlier at $190. That works out to around $325 each now after inflation. That's more expensive than a 360 Elite or a PS3 Slim. It's more than I paid for my 360 Pro back in 2007. The NES launched for $199 in 1985. That's close to $400 now, or more than what I paid for my 160GB PS3 with 3 games. And the Commodore 64, while reasonably priced compared to its contemporaries, was more expensive than a lot of mid-range gaming PCs are now. Honestly, these things were never "cheap". If anything, they're cheaper now than they've ever been and offer quite a bit more value for your dollar.

Oh, I just meant that they were half as much at launch as systems are now at launch but I didn't take inflation into account. NES got to under 100, I saw the second revision for I think 60 at places when it was new.

When you say that the current are 'more value for your dollar' you need to take into consideration that technology back then dictated that NES, SNES, Genesis, N64, ect, were state of the art.

I guess I'm wrong, I admit it. I didn't think of inflation. I guess I'm getting old 'back in my day consoles were half as much as they are today'. Wow, sucks to get old.

 

[Chip]

The SNES launched at $199 in 1990, while the Genesis launched a year earlier at $190. That works out to around $325 each now after inflation. That's more expensive than a 360 Elite or a PS3 Slim.

You can't compare launch prices of one system to prices of another system three years after launch. The Xbox 360 was $300/$400 and the PS3 was $500/$600 at launch. That is significantly more expensive than any other video game system has ever launched at, even acounting for inflation.

I take that back, the NeoGeo cost more. They were $400/$650 back in 1990, which is like $100,000 in today money.

 

[iprice]

The SNES launched at $199 in 1990, while the Genesis launched a year earlier at $190. That works out to around $325 each now after inflation. That's more expensive than a 360 Elite or a PS3 Slim.

You can't compare launch prices of one system to prices of another system three years after launch. The Xbox 360 was $300/$400 and the PS3 was $500/$600 at launch. That is significantly more expensive than any other video game system has ever launched at, even acounting for inflation.

I take that back, the NeoGeo cost more. They were $400/$650 back in 1990, which is like $100,000 in today money.

THe 3DO also cost more - $699.95 when first released in 1993.

 

[absolofdoom]

Honestly, who the hell still argues this?? I own all three systems. The Wii is a piece of shovelware shit and it obviously caters to the 10 years and under crowd. Plus it's STILL 100% gimmicky, even 3 years after release.

The PS3 sucks except for MGS4, maybe Uncharted and soon God of War 3. I love it for HD, though.

The only system with a plethora of great titles is the 360. Yes, it caters to the 17+ crowd, but at least the Kung Fu Panda-esque titles aren't half assed and don't require you to wave a controller around like a mongoloid.

Actually, this is why these arguments happen. One person says something like this and other people who disagree and can't keep their temper get enraged at the harsh wording. Boom, you get a heated argument.

I own a PS3 and a Wii. I don't play the Wii much, but not because it doesn't have good games, simply because I don't have enough money to buy games for both systems most of the time, and I personally prefer the PS3. I don't, however, run around telling people that the Wii is shit, or call the 360 names just because I don't have one. I'm aware that there are great games for all three consoles; I'm just not constructed of money.

 

[Exophase]

The SNES launched at $199 in 1990, while the Genesis launched a year earlier at $190. That works out to around $325 each now after inflation. That's more expensive than a 360 Elite or a PS3 Slim.

You can't compare launch prices of one system to prices of another system three years after launch. The Xbox 360 was $300/$400 and the PS3 was $500/$600 at launch. That is significantly more expensive than any other video game system has ever launched at, even acounting for inflation.

I take that back, the NeoGeo cost more. They were $400/$650 back in 1990, which is like $100,000 in today money.

Meh..

http://www.eurogamer...thread_id=65715

I don't see anything unreasonable about [size="+1"][/size]XBox 360 launching at $300-$400 when that's the range most things have launched at after inflation adjustment. But look at the adjusted prices of the late 70s consoles. Looks like inflation was really sharp then.

Nintendo consoles are always a little cheaper than the rest, although this generation they would have looked pretty bad if they weren't.

Anyway, why just talk about launch prices? More recent consoles are cut more aggressively over time than older ones were, especially Sony's. No fair calling today's consoles expensive based on their launch prices. Waiting a while until you buy a console is sensible for other reasons anyway.

On the other hand, with the average price of computers dropping like a stone instead of floating with inflation, it's somewhat natural to have expected the same thing to have happened to the much lower priced consoles.

By the way, daclassicgamingmaster, using "mongoloid" as a derisive term is highly racially insulting and I'd recommend dropping that habit lest someone gets the wrong idea.

 

[second exodous]

Are computer prices dropping like a stone when you consider the cost to play the latest games? Intel CPUs are way over priced, and I don't think their are any latest gen video cards that don't break the bank. On top of that AMD and nVidia want us to buy two, three, or four video cards now just so we can play that latest game at insane resolutions.

The first PC I built was when Quake II was brand new, I had a PC before but it was pre-built. Back in the day I spent less than half as much building my own PC as buying a pre-built, but today that margin is much closer. I think Dell, HP, Acer, ect, were just ripping us off royaly, after so many people starting building their own PC's they had to cut their prices to the bone.

Anyway, prices haven't gone down for me, they just stayed the same. It is less for people that were not smart enough to build their own PC.

 

[Exophase]

Are computer prices dropping like a stone when you consider the cost to play the latest games? Intel CPUs are way over priced, and I don't think their are any latest gen video cards that don't break the bank. On top of that AMD and nVidia want us to buy two, three, or four video cards now just so we can play that latest game at insane resolutions.

Yes, absolutely. Computer prices aren't strictly gaming prices. Have you thought about playing that latest game at less than insane resolutions? People buying multiple high end video cards are a niche that even game companies are (for the most part) not catering exclusively to.

Many people use computers without interest in gaming on them (myself included). Computers used to cost several thousand dollars. 15 years ago a standard OEM cost over $2000, now you can buy a pretty good computer for well under $500. The cost of building has similarly gone down a lot. Maybe Intel CPUs cost a lot in the high end, but I'm not talking about the high end. The same applies to video cards. I'm talking about mainstream, where you're not paying a premium for high end. It's true, a lot of this is OEM margin, but I've built way more than I would have cared to over the years and those prices have gone down a lot too. This is kind of moot, because I think there was a certain point several years ago where building a PC wasn't even an option.

 

[Polossatik]

Hum, for a bizarre reason i feel tempted now to handbuild myself a Spectrum...

 

[Orkie]

Does Anyone Else Think second exodous Just Likes to Start Inane Threads To Practice Typing?

 

[second exodous]

Does Anyone Else Think second exodous Just Likes to Start Inane Threads To Practice Typing?

That's a trollish thing to say. Is my thread clogging up the daily activity of the 'Other consoles' sub-forum? Look at the activity tell me that I'm harming anyone or anything.

If you don't like what is being discussed then just don't read it. You're like those people on youtube that post how much you hate the video when it's just someone daily vlog. Just don't watch the video, just don't read this thread if you don't like it. Honestly, who is wasting more time, me or you?

 

[lulzfish]

Does Anyone Else Think second exodous Just Likes to Start Inane Threads To Practice Typing?

That's a trollish thing to say. Is my thread clogging up the daily activity of the 'Other consoles' sub-forum? Look at the activity tell me that I'm harming anyone or anything.

If you don't like what is being discussed then just don't read it. You're like those people on youtube that post how much you hate the video when it's just someone daily vlog. Just don't watch the video, just don't read this thread if you don't like it. Honestly, who is wasting more time, me or you?

You, because you typed a longer response.
You're not supposed to reply to such comments, on gp32x or on YouTube.

 

[Nova]

Does Anyone Else Think second exodous Just Likes to Start Inane Threads To Practice Typing?

Irony.

 

[DaveC]

But the PS3 is so much better in most other respects that I personally use mine a lot more than my 360.

Plus, the GOTY for 2010 is pretty much undisputedly Uncharted 2, a PS3 exclusive .

For cross platform games this statement isn't true and most of the time it is the opposite. Look at reviews of games on both and almost always the 360 version has better framerates, sharper textures, and better shading/lighting due to a more flexible memory system (PS3 is separated into 256 MB parts) and GPU.

I have both and only buy exclusives for PS3, most everything else I go for the 360 version. Plus 360 has VGA out PS3 doesn't.

 

[Goity]

But the PS3 is so much better in most other respects that I personally use mine a lot more than my 360.

Plus, the GOTY for 2010 is pretty much undisputedly Uncharted 2, a PS3 exclusive .

For cross platform games this statement isn't true and most of the time it is the opposite. Look at reviews of games on both and almost always the 360 version has better framerates, sharper textures, and better shading/lighting due to a more flexible memory system (PS3 is separated into 256 MB parts) and GPU.

I have both and only buy exclusives for PS3, most everything else I go for the 360 version. Plus 360 has VGA out PS3 doesn't.

This is true to an extent, but you can't trust review sites for that information. It was IGN's XBox 360 Editor who said the AA in the PS3 version of GTA4 was leaps and bounds ahead of the 360's (PS3 640p no AA, 360 720p 2xAA ).
However, the differences are usually that minor they don't affect anyone's enjoyment of the title, and aren't usually noticeable (often half resolution particles in ps3 versions, and partially unresolved 2xMSAA in recent Unreal 3 games on 360). However, it isn't always the case that 360 versions are superior; A lot of 2009 games had triple buffering on PS3 but horrific screen tear on 360, and The Saboteur for example used a very nice custom AA filter on the PS3 SPUs for nicer image clarity.
The sharper texture factor has decreased now Sony have allowed more access to the PS3's Ram, and it's a game by game case as to which console has better texture filtering, and as for lighting that's not really the case; the PS3 is better equipped for HDR above the FP10 standard on most 360 games simply because of not needing to tile to fit into EDRAM.

I buy multiplatform games for both consoles and it generally comes down to conroller preferences most of the time, unless there's something seriously wrong with a particular version of a game (very, very rare... only Ghostbusters in recent memory, a game ironically published by SCEE).

 

[Jourdy288]

My father actually won a 360 and it's a great little machine. But, I'm quite impressed with the PS3 as well, I just think that the PS3 better games than the 360 graphically. The trouble is the cell processors and the SDK from SONY, etc.. Big mistake there.

 

[Username]

This topic is dumb, everyone knows which one is obviously better.

 

[danielliu88888]

This topic is dumb, everyone knows which one is obviously better.

the wii!


i mean gamecube

 

[Jourdy288]

This topic is dumb, everyone knows which one is obviously better.

The Wii!


I mean Gamecube.

WRONG, the DREAMCAST!
LOL, I've actually been looking for a Gamecube just to play Pikmin.
BTW, my gamertag is Jourdy288 if anybody cares to add me on XBL.

 

[aesir911]

videogame systems are like babies. and i love my babies. i will defend my xbox360 against ps3 any day. (same with my DSi, iPod touch, SEGA Genesis, and xbox). tempers will rise and flare!

 

[Jourdy288]

videogame systems are like babies. and i love my babies. i will defend my xbox360 against ps3 any day. (same with my DSi, iPod touch, SEGA Genesis, and xbox). tempers will rise and flare!

What's your gamertag?