http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35059

I kid you not. Can the resident Sony fans come here and explain what the hell this bullshit is?

Mr Pot, there is a Mr Kettle on line one

That says it all.

Wow. Just wow. Nothing more need be said, for it would be lost within the raucous laughter.

Ri-fucking-diculous.

i agree with him

man but really the wii should be like 23 dollars xbox 34 and sony ps3 maybe like 36 that would be good pricing i would get 2 of each then

Hahaha. I'd like to see where this progresses.

Something tells me that "The Inquirer" isn't exactly the most reputable of sources.

Unless I'm confusing this with another "news" publication of a similar name.

Also: This references a blog that rants about how the PS2 will still be able to compete with the next-gen consoles in a rather limited market, yet again, another less-than-reputable source.

Shenanigans.

Hypocrite!

Something tells me that "The Inquirer" isn't exactly the most reputable of sources.

Unless I'm confusing this with another "news" publication of a similar name.

Also: This references a blog that rants about how the PS2 will still be able to compete with the next-gen consoles in a rather limited market, yet again, another less-than-reputable source.

Shenanigans.

I love how you are not willing to trust this source because it's negative towards the PS3, and yet you are willing to blindly assume your vague, theoretical sources that say Sony spends $3000 on every PS3 are infallible.

You are so full of shit it hurts sometimes.

oh dear me. sony really lost the plot. oh, and odin.

I dont trust the source because its too stubit by Sony, If they think they can affect the gamers by this!!!

Something tells me that "The Inquirer" isn't exactly the most reputable of sources.

Unless I'm confusing this with another "news" publication of a similar name.


You're thinking of the National Enquirer.

Something tells me that "The Inquirer" isn't exactly the most reputable of sources.

Unless I'm confusing this with another "news" publication of a similar name.

Also: This references a blog that rants about how the PS2 will still be able to compete with the next-gen consoles in a rather limited market, yet again, another less-than-reputable source.

Shenanigans.

Either you trust them all, or you don't trust any at all because no source can claim to be 100% reliable. Besides, picking and choosing who to trust based solely on what news tickles your limp dick the most is a really retarded criteria.

It wouldn't be complete bullshit, because the PS3 already comes with a pre inbuilt Blu Ray DVD player.... so.... :)

Its incredible. Absolutely incredible. Like a captain rushing around insisting that everything is fine; whilst the ship continues to edge slowly into the ocean and water gushes and spills relentlessly onto the deck. At first I thought it might of been a case of putting paper over the cracks for Sony, but as the days go by its looking more and more like blatant arrogance and outright stupidity.


Ephraim said that to have a good Wii you need shedloads of accessories and this makes it cost about $372. He said that $372 was a bit too much for your average Aussie family to fork out for a console, so he expects his PS2 machine to compete well against both it and the more expensive Xbox 360.

Idiot. The PS2 still has a few years in it sure (God of War 2 anyone?), but it is NOT competition for a next-generation console for god's sake. By his logic, the PS3 isn't going anywhere in favor of the PS2 either, because its twice as bad price-wise as the other entries.


He also doubted that Australian Playstation fans would feel snubbed after being told that they will have to wait until March to buy the console.

Well, as one of them, you can bet your bottom dollar that I fell snubbed. Sony has lot touch with the gamers, and seems to think the rest of the world is a collection of narrow-minded fan-boys that will follow their pide-piper through the woods like morons.

It is really starting to annoy me.

Ephraim said that to have a good Wii you need shedloads of accessories and this makes it cost about $372. He said that $372 was a bit too much for your average Aussie family to fork out for a console, so he expects his PS2 machine to compete well against both it and the more expensive Xbox 360.

PS2 is the worst console (tehnicallly) in development!

I love how you are not willing to trust this source because it's negative towards the PS3, and yet you are willing to blindly assume your vague, theoretical sources that say Sony spends $3000 on every PS3 are infallible.

You are so full of shit it hurts sometimes.

The story isn't about the PS3, it's about an idiot blogger posting an "interview" asking whether the Wii or Xbox360 can cause the current PS2 user base in Australia to ditch the PS2 they already have in favor of those consoles.

How can you read the actual blog interview and not understand that as the point of the discussion? The man being interviewed said that the PS2 would be quite capable of keeping current owners happy with it's upcoming game release schedule until the launch of the PS3.

It wasn't about early adopters not being willing to spend money on the Wii or Xbox360 in favor of a currently available system, it was about people being attracted to those newer systems enough to shell out the additional money for that system versus buying a new game for their current one during the few months until the PS3 comes out (the far and above vast majority of the gaming market) in a market where the PS2 pretty much dominates things already.

In short, fuck you and your high horse for your lack of reading comprehension.

EDIT:

Here's the link to the OP linked article's "source": http://blogs.theage.com.au/screenplay/archives/gaming_trends/003390.html

yah but....until?


The man being interviewed said that the PS2 would be quite capable of keeping current owners happy with it's upcoming game release schedule until the launch of the PS3.


so.... "until" is long enough to afford a ps3 but not long enough to afford the wii or 360?

this seems like an issue of holding out. and it is assumed poeple will hold out for the ps3 because they own a ps2.

so this automatically means that unless the 360 and wii DON'T eat out of what is already being saved for the ps3, it's simply too expensive.

yah that makes sense since everyone is totally saving the ps3 without a doubt, right?


clever marketing if the goal is to have the ps3 raise itself above the competition by making people think that the other systems are "optional systems to own if any money from the ps3 is leftover if any". that's REAL balsy if you ask me. lol

It wasn't about early adopters not being willing to spend money on the Wii or Xbox360 in favor of a currently available system, it was about people being attracted to those newer systems enough to shell out the additional money for that system versus buying a new game for their current one during the few months until the PS3 comes out (the far and above vast majority of the gaming market) in a market where the PS2 pretty much dominates things already.

Wait so suddenly the reliability of the article isn't in question anymore because now you found a way to say it isn't saying that anymore

Wait so suddenly the reliability of the article isn't in question anymore because now you found a way to say it isn't saying that anymore

The reliability of the article that was linked in the OP is still shit, TK.

The article that was linked misrepresents the content of the actual blog that they link to as their source (I still call bullshit on the blog, because it doesn't provide any proof that the interview actually occured, but as long as people are pulling strawmen out of their ass it doesn't hurt to burn them).

They're apparently not that expensive, considering the sells. Who does Sony think it's fooling?

Nintendo is a great company as far as games development goes, they have been around for
a long time, they know how to deliver an entertaining product. My only question for this Christmas on Wii is the price point. Even though it's affordable, at $400 plus whatever you need to buy accessories-wise, I'm guessing you need to spend about $500 to take home a Wii and enjoy it. I can't judge the product because I haven't played it but I've heard good things about it. For this Christmas, I think that price point is still not family entertainment because $500 is a lot to fork out, but we welcome the Nintendo heritage of gaming where they can appeal to a broader audience because long-term that is critical for the industry. What we've done on PlayStation 2 with social gaming has broadened the audience and we're glad that they are attempting to do similar things to open up the market to families and never-before gamers. Time will tell. For this Christmas I think the price for what it specifically does as a video games machine is a bit pricey, but I think that their strategy long term we have great respect for.

Sorry Odin, but I really think you are full of effing ess on this one. If you seriously try to tell me he did not just condemn the PS3 in those words, you're out of your mind. He says that $500 is "not family entertainment." So his far more expensive PS3 console clearly is even less so. End of story.

Real price comparisons: Based on Console + 1 game + 2 Wireless Controls

X360 Premium Pack (Includes game + 2 wireless controls) = $650
Wii (Wii-sports and 1 game bundled) + extra controller = $460
PS3 + Extra Controller + Game = at least $1200

I think it's funny that he's bagging the Wii out for 'whatever you need to buy accessories wise', when the PS3 has even less pack-ins than the Wii does.

Also: the PS3 isn't that expensive when you consider what it takes to get a X360 up to its level. In order for the 360 to play back HD DVD movies, you need to buy the extra driver, and in order to access wireless broadband, you need to buy an adapter. That shoots the price of the 360 up to approx $1000.

Also: the PS3 isn't that expensive when you consider what it takes to get a X360 up to its level. In order for the 360 to play back HD DVD movies, you need to buy the extra driver, and in order to access wireless broadband, you need to buy an adapter. That shoots the price of the 360 up to approx $1000.

Very true. For the 360 to be used to it's fullest it will cost you about 1000bucks, just like you said.

So the PS3 is fairly reasonable seeing that you get it all in the one package plus a controller. It does come with controller right?

As for the comments on the Wii about costing to much for families.....well that just dont make sense. Wii is the cheapest and is intended more for the fun game side of things. I think. I don't own a Nintendo console but I think their goal is to be more of a gaming console, rather than an entertainment console like Sony is aiming for. I think the Wii is a reasonable price for people who just wanna have a good time with their games, especially multiplayer.

So the PS3 is fairly reasonable seeing that you get it all in the one package plus a controller. It does come with controller right?

I actually regard Microsoft's approach as the more sensible one. After all, not everyone is going to want an HD DVD player on their Xbox 360. Some people won't care as much about online play either. For those types, they wind up not having to shell out any more than necessary, whereas people may well wind up paying out the nose for features in the PS3 that they'll never use.

Right, giving people the option is what makes sense. As has been said many times here before, nobody is going to claim that the PS3 isn't worth its price point... there's a lot of holy-effing-expensive shit packed in there. That still doesn't make it affordable, though.