PlayStation 3 costs $800, sez Merrill Lynch mob

[mugs]

Still won't be better than Super Nintendo

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: Koing

Originally posted by: destrekor
see the thing about the halo games is... they are good for consoles. Since consoles dont have anything compared to Goldeneye, the Halo series is the next best. but its horrible compared to computer games. for console gamers that don't play pc games, its great fun. i found halo2 multiplayer to be a rather boring attempt at great fun. it was fun... for a console. and fun when playing with a bunch of other xbox owners. but, i think i'd rather play the various half life 2 multiplayer mods, like HL2:CTF, HL2😀M, DoD:S, Gary's Mod for fun... and hell I think UT2004 has better multiplayer than the Halo games. Face up to it, PC multiplayer walks all over console multiplayer. Only Goldeneye has ever competed, and guess what, its an upcoming Source engine mod. 😀

Console games = you and your mates around on a big screen tv. Less of a problem with Xbox360 and PS3 running 720p and 1080p if Sony runs that for games.

PC online is great fun but you often don't have 3-4 pcs in the same room that are powerful enough to play games well. We've had lan parties but it is a hassle to move your pc to a friends house...

Koing

well see, owning a big screen tv is a problem for me, as i do not. so... multiple people playing on a 27" tv equals unfun. i prefer LAN parties though. will be heading to one tomorrow night. they are always fun. 😉
the one console game we do play, and is WAY better on console is DDR. Thats crazy fun at lan parties. 😀

Originally posted by: mugs
Still won't be better than Super Nintendo

clarify please. better than the system? phff
better than the games? probably right
games these days favor flashyness over content and story. but then again, play a shooting game on super nintendo. feels like a platformer, which equals unfun after millions of em. lol
development costs kind of rob most studios from putting time into story and the stories presentation. but a few gems are out there. 😉

 

[Blayze]

I still don't see it costing more than $400, maybe $500 when it comes out. I still want buy one for $400. Maybe in a year or so when there are a few price drops and more must have games.

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: HamburgerBoy

Originally posted by: Koing
DUDE don't dig yourself a deeper hole.

The only buttons you need to memorise are a few moves. There is no 'best' button combinations and 'mashing' them faster then your opponent. Those combinations are often then not completely crap (10 strings etc are easily broken)

You have to 'setup' the traps and position yourself properly. Fake this way, move back here, duck here etc. A lot of it is timing so you don't just bash the buttons about.

You clearly don't play any fighting games to any good degree.

It is like saying the driver who drives the best racing line wins the race! Duh! Yes but it takes A LOT of skill to do so.

Koing

But once you've discovered the best moves and perfect on them, there's nothing really new to the game. You just select your character, select your map (most of which are identical in all ways except cosmetics), and then fight.

Yes, chess is the same way. Just memorize some moves, get a strategy going and that's it. It's pretty easy. :roll:

Seriously, STFU before you make yourself look even more clueless.

 

[Koing]

Hey JB what beat'em ups do you play? I play SF games A2 and A3. Some CvS2 and Tekken of course. MK also but I've not really played a lot against others.

Koing

 

[Koing]

Originally posted by: destrekor

Originally posted by: Koing

Originally posted by: destrekor
see the thing about the halo games is... they are good for consoles. Since consoles dont have anything compared to Goldeneye, the Halo series is the next best. but its horrible compared to computer games. for console gamers that don't play pc games, its great fun. i found halo2 multiplayer to be a rather boring attempt at great fun. it was fun... for a console. and fun when playing with a bunch of other xbox owners. but, i think i'd rather play the various half life 2 multiplayer mods, like HL2:CTF, HL2😀M, DoD:S, Gary's Mod for fun... and hell I think UT2004 has better multiplayer than the Halo games. Face up to it, PC multiplayer walks all over console multiplayer. Only Goldeneye has ever competed, and guess what, its an upcoming Source engine mod. 😀

Console games = you and your mates around on a big screen tv. Less of a problem with Xbox360 and PS3 running 720p and 1080p if Sony runs that for games.

PC online is great fun but you often don't have 3-4 pcs in the same room that are powerful enough to play games well. We've had lan parties but it is a hassle to move your pc to a friends house...

Koing

well see, owning a big screen tv is a problem for me, as i do not. so... multiple people playing on a 27" tv equals unfun. i prefer LAN parties though. will be heading to one tomorrow night. they are always fun. 😉
the one console game we do play, and is WAY better on console is DDR. Thats crazy fun at lan parties. 😀

Lan parties are fun but it takes time to organise some mates to bring machines over. I REALLY don't want to take my 24" lcd in the car too often.

Laptops now a days are powerful enough to play most games though :thumbsup:

Koing

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: Koing

Originally posted by: destrekor

Originally posted by: Koing

Originally posted by: destrekor
see the thing about the halo games is... they are good for consoles. Since consoles dont have anything compared to Goldeneye, the Halo series is the next best. but its horrible compared to computer games. for console gamers that don't play pc games, its great fun. i found halo2 multiplayer to be a rather boring attempt at great fun. it was fun... for a console. and fun when playing with a bunch of other xbox owners. but, i think i'd rather play the various half life 2 multiplayer mods, like HL2:CTF, HL2😀M, DoD:S, Gary's Mod for fun... and hell I think UT2004 has better multiplayer than the Halo games. Face up to it, PC multiplayer walks all over console multiplayer. Only Goldeneye has ever competed, and guess what, its an upcoming Source engine mod. 😀

Console games = you and your mates around on a big screen tv. Less of a problem with Xbox360 and PS3 running 720p and 1080p if Sony runs that for games.

PC online is great fun but you often don't have 3-4 pcs in the same room that are powerful enough to play games well. We've had lan parties but it is a hassle to move your pc to a friends house...

Koing

well see, owning a big screen tv is a problem for me, as i do not. so... multiple people playing on a 27" tv equals unfun. i prefer LAN parties though. will be heading to one tomorrow night. they are always fun. 😉
the one console game we do play, and is WAY better on console is DDR. Thats crazy fun at lan parties. 😀

Lan parties are fun but it takes time to organise some mates to bring machines over. I REALLY don't want to take my 24" lcd in the car too often.

Laptops now a days are powerful enough to play most games though :thumbsup:

Koing

i had a laptop (dell inspiron 9100) that i would use to take over to friend's houses. but after awhile, they dont perform strong enough for recent games.

 

[thegimp03]

800-900 is ridiculous. Too bad people will shell out the money regardless.

 

[Koing]

Originally posted by: destrekor
i had a laptop (dell inspiron 9100) that i would use to take over to friend's houses. but after awhile, they dont perform strong enough for recent games.

Yeah that is the thing. You can't upgrade a laptop's graphics often (have heard of a few Dell ones which you can though DIY style).

At least with a console you know you will get 4-5yrs of a life span out of it.

Koing

 

[Red Dawn]

Meh, I'm sure my wife will win one just like she did the XBox 360, 8 MP3 Players along with a ton of other stuff.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: Koing

Originally posted by: destrekor

Originally posted by: Koing

Originally posted by: destrekor
see the thing about the halo games is... they are good for consoles. Since consoles dont have anything compared to Goldeneye, the Halo series is the next best. but its horrible compared to computer games. for console gamers that don't play pc games, its great fun. i found halo2 multiplayer to be a rather boring attempt at great fun. it was fun... for a console. and fun when playing with a bunch of other xbox owners. but, i think i'd rather play the various half life 2 multiplayer mods, like HL2:CTF, HL2😀M, DoD:S, Gary's Mod for fun... and hell I think UT2004 has better multiplayer than the Halo games. Face up to it, PC multiplayer walks all over console multiplayer. Only Goldeneye has ever competed, and guess what, its an upcoming Source engine mod. 😀

Console games = you and your mates around on a big screen tv. Less of a problem with Xbox360 and PS3 running 720p and 1080p if Sony runs that for games.

PC online is great fun but you often don't have 3-4 pcs in the same room that are powerful enough to play games well. We've had lan parties but it is a hassle to move your pc to a friends house...

Koing

well see, owning a big screen tv is a problem for me, as i do not. so... multiple people playing on a 27" tv equals unfun. i prefer LAN parties though. will be heading to one tomorrow night. they are always fun. 😉
the one console game we do play, and is WAY better on console is DDR. Thats crazy fun at lan parties. 😀

Lan parties are fun but it takes time to organise some mates to bring machines over. I REALLY don't want to take my 24" lcd in the car too often.

Laptops now a days are powerful enough to play most games though :thumbsup:

Koing

koing, did you ever player killer instinct or KI2 (KI gold for N64)?

supposedly there will be Killer Instinct 3 coming out for 360:Q:Q

i love the original KI, still the best fighting game ever, IMO

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: Koing

Originally posted by: destrekor
i had a laptop (dell inspiron 9100) that i would use to take over to friend's houses. but after awhile, they dont perform strong enough for recent games.

Yeah that is the thing. You can't upgrade a laptop's graphics often (have heard of a few Dell ones which you can though DIY style).

At least with a console you know you will get 4-5yrs of a life span out of it.

Koing

best thing about consoles, is even though the hardware doesn't change, the games get better and better looking over time as the developers learn the systems they are coding for. Black looks amazing, Killzone did too but it wasn't optimized too greatly. early games didn't look great at all compared to today's terms.

 

[Fox5]

No way PS3 would cost $800, it's not that much more of a system than Xbox 360 and it's being released a year later. A comparable gpu, the same amount of memory, and fabrication processes a year more advanced should ensure it doesn't cost more than the 360 did at launch.

 

[Cooler]

Originally posted by: Fox5
No way PS3 would cost $800, it's not that much more of a system than Xbox 360 and it's being released a year later. A comparable gpu, the same amount of memory, and fabrication processes a year more advanced should ensure it doesn't cost more than the 360 did at launch.

Its the celll chip thats hurting them if you ask me.

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: Fox5
No way PS3 would cost $800, it's not that much more of a system than Xbox 360 and it's being released a year later. A comparable gpu, the same amount of memory, and fabrication processes a year more advanced should ensure it doesn't cost more than the 360 did at launch.

lack of ownership (IP) of the components, is my guess. not sure if sony has the IP for the Cell, and sony might not have the IP for the nvidia gpu. BD-ROM, they might
but do understand, the cell is much more costlier a chip than the three-core powerpc chip in the x360, and it's only a dvd-rom drive in it. those kind of things could add a cost.

btw, the x360 reportidly costs between $500-600 to manufacture. following what i just said, the cost difference is realistic considering microsoft owns the IP for all components in the x360.

 

[0roo0roo]

yup, ms owns its ip this time. so they can start cutting costs like sony did with the ps2 with its 12 hardware revisions😛

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: Koing
Hey JB what beat'em ups do you play? I play SF games A2 and A3. Some CvS2 and Tekken of course. MK also but I've not really played a lot against others.

Koing

SF series, MK 1, 2, 3 (4 sucked), and the MK series on the XBox. Marvel vs Capcom, MvC 2, XMen vs Street Fighter, Virtual Fighter, Virtual Fighter 2, Tekken 1, 2, 3, Killer Instinct, Killer Instinct 2 (I've got the arcade game in my computer room) and some others I'm sure I've forgotten. The main fighting game I play now is Capcom vs SNK 2:EO. Fighting games + XBox Live = AWESOME! It's funny because I've played just about every popular FPS game on the PC with all their state of the art graphics, but what I spend most of my time playing is some 2D fighting game that the graphics could probably be reproduced by the original Playstation. I can play CvSNK 2 for hours upon hours. Talk about replay value! 🙂

 

[spamsk8r]

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: HamburgerBoy

Originally posted by: Inspector Jihad
for people who have friends, consoles provide more fun that pcs...like super mario strikers...that game is amazing.

but ofcouse, your buddies can always drag their sweet pcs to your house to have a bitchen lan party.

Never played it. If it's anything like Super Mario Party then yeah, those types of games can be pretty fun with a group of friends. So can Monopoly or Go Fish.

Stop lying to yourself. Monopoly is not a fun game.

Even if you think you liked the game, you didn't. And it's simple why. Ready? Cause this is anybody here 2 1/2 hours into a game of monopoly.

Fvck this game! It's four in the morning grandma! You win! I'm sittin' on Baltic with crap. I'm paying luxury tax out the arse! And I hate when you're the banker, where'd you get the pink 50s you cheating whore!?!? Don't fvcking touch me grandpa, Nana is a cheating whore! And I should cut your head off with this little doggy!

Dane Cook FTW!

 

[SpeedZealot369]

I'm guessing it will cost us $400-500 when ps3 comes out. Even microsoft took a huge hit on every system sold(or at least they said they did)

 

[Wingznut]

Originally posted by: SpeedZealot369
I'm guessing it will cost us $400-500 when ps3 comes out. Even microsoft took a huge hit on every system sold(or at least they said they did)

Yeah, but not THAT huge... If the $800-$900 figure is accurate.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: Wingznut

Originally posted by: SpeedZealot369
I'm guessing it will cost us $400-500 when ps3 comes out. Even microsoft took a huge hit on every system sold(or at least they said they did)

Yeah, but not THAT huge... If the $800-$900 figure is accurate.

Yeah, I think they are saying that MS is only taking a hit at around $126 right now for every 360.

 

[Syrch]

anyone say neogeo? Man i wanted that system way back when but it was like $800 or more. Even though I am much older and have a job now i still will not pay that for a console. Im VERY hesitant to spend $500

 

[herkulease]

no way will sony take a 400 to 500 dollar lost per system sold. assuming they sell at 400.

they have been losing money and have some 1 billion in cash on hand as an entire corporation. take microsoft's current 360 sold of about 1 million and figure in a 400 dollar lost each, its 400 million dollars in losts. Not going to happen.

Seriously the inclusion of blu ray hurts sony. they can't go back on it now. they've hyped it so much that they have to deliver or risk losing buyers.

I think the cost would be much less if they only included a dvd drive. why jump ahead when there hasn't been any standard specs for blu ray let alone one for next gen dvds.

 

[SpeedZealot369]

800 dollers is alot for anyone, even 500-600 is. Also, its not worth much without an hdtv is it?

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: herkulease
no way will sony take a 400 to 500 dollar lost per system sold.

they have been losing money and have some 1 billion in cash on hand as an entire corporation. take microsoft's current 360 sold of about 1 million and figure in a 400 dollar lost each, its 400 million dollars.

Seriously the inclusion of blu ray hurts sony. they can't go back on it now. they've hyped it so much that they have to deliver or risk losing buyers.

I think the cost would be much less if they only included a dvd drive. why jump ahead when there hasn't been any standard specs for blu ray let alone one for next gen dvds.

Because Sony has a financial interest in Blu-Ray becoming the next standard for optical media. If Blu-Ray wins out over HD-DVD then Sony will be raking in the royalty money that will more than make up for the loss they take on the PS3.

Essentially, part of the function of the PS3 is to be a trojan horse to get a Blu-Ray player into the hands of as many consumers as possible.