You're an idiot for buying a PS3 at launch...

[Gradthrawn]

So says a very provocative article, particularly considering the intended audience. I don't necessarily disagree with his points about the launch line-up or that there will be better games out in the future, making the system more attractive. However, in my opinion, I think there are 3 elements that weaken his argument and dilutes, or degrades, his point. One, his judgment against the 7 titles he covers seems poorly put together, based on dated impressions. Two, he states that "if you're a multi-console gamer then pick up one of the others," yet gives no reason to pick up one of the others, doesn't discuss what about their library makes them more attractive, particularity the Wii, seeing as how its launching too. Maybe his whole argument for this was in regards to price. Three, he calls people an idiot for having an opinion different then his, based solely on his opinion. To me, that just doesn't make for good editorial journalism, and greatly weakens his position. Just thought I would share, as it was an... entertaining read to say the least. Though I doubt it, I'm hoping further discussion of this, if any, will stay civil. Despite the subject matter, there's no reason it can't.

 

[cthellis42]

Or you can use replace it with my own axioms:

You're an idiot for buying a console at launch...

Also feel free to replace it with "an OS" or "a DVD player" or "a car" or "anything you can easily afford to wait a minimum of six months for to evaluate." Which is, in reality, basically everything.

 

[Gradthrawn]

Or you can use replace it with my own axioms:

You're an idiot for buying a console at launch...

Also feel free to replace it with "an OS" or "a DVD player" or "a car" or "anything you can easily afford to wait a minimum of six months for to evaluate." Which is, in reality, basically everything.

Good points. But without earlier adopters, where would that leave everyone else? Can it be said that those that buy products early, are not a (non-trivial) part of making those products available to others down the line? Is there no value to the "idiot" that buys early? Are they truly idiots (or just eager)? I don't ask those questions rhetorically. I've always felt (or been under the impression) that those of us who buy products early, almost as pseudo-post-beta-testers (that make any sense?) are a rather important part of a product's life cycle (for future owners, not just for the company who made it). Don't know if thats true or not, never really took the time to research it.

EDIT

Wow, only 2 post in, not one bit of flaming, and already rated at 1 star. I wonder if they even read the post...

 

[NBK-Steve]

Buy and sell, EBAY is your friend.

 

[Oninotsume]

I've actually thought about the iffyness of first-generation consoles when considering my decision to purchase a PS3 at launch. The answer is a 5 year warranty purchased with points from Bic Camera

 

[groper]

I consider x360 launch as the most successful launch in history of consoles for two reasons. The first is that with games like KAMEO , COD2 , PDZ, CONDEMNED , PGR3 and NFS:UNDERGROUND it didnot make you feel like a fool for bying a console at launch.
The second reason has nothing to do with this thread :smile:

 

[Rangers]

If you can afford it and you want it, you're not an idiot.

That said, the PS3 purchase point for me is probably about $299.

The PS3 launch lineup is not great, but it's better than the 360 launch lineup, mainly because you're getting some nice 3rd party multi-platform games due to that extra year. The games like Rainbow Six Vegas. Those will be day one on PS3, so there's much more well rounded catalogue out there for launch buyers imo.

 

[g35er]

Well, this thread might get locked, if only for the title, but I'll state my piece. cthellis42 is right. If you wait about 1 year, you will get a far better deal than you get buying at launch. I've never bought a console at launch and I've never regreted it.

Waiting a year will net you:
1. A cheaper console. Both the 360 and the PS3 will likely drop their price by $100 by the end of 2007
2. You'll get a larger library of titles to chose from, including the big guns such as Final Fantasy, Gran Turisimo, Metal Gear, GTA, etc.
3. You'll get the "greatest hits", which means games at half price.
4. You'll pass the first batch manufacturing problems, which means you'll likely not have to deal with the likely hardware problems of the initial batch (see 360).
5. You won't have to endure the shopping frenzy (though that does excite some folks).

This is the same for any console or technology though, not specific to the PS3. There are reasons to get at launch, such as if there are games you actually want right away, or you want to be at the cutting edge of technology, but the cons outweigh the pros for me.

 

[groper]

mainly because you're getting some nice 3rd party multi-platform games due to that extra year. The games like Rainbow Six Vegas. Those will be day one on PS3, so there's much more well rounded catalogue out there for launch buyers imo.

Yes , the dream of every PS gamer is to play Rainbow 6

 

[Dot50Cal]

How dare someone like the PS3 and its launch lineup enough to preorder it! For shame!!11

A case of sour grapes if I ever heard one. Why on earth would someone even publish such an article? Sounds to me like the person is desperate to get more people in the same boat they are in, unable to preorder.

 

[inefficient]

The way I see it, $500 - $600 on a item that is going to entertain me for at least 5-6 years is very reasonable to me. Also the BD player factor weighs heavily in it's favor right now.

I techincally could wait for a few months for more games to come out. But do people really think the price of the unit will come down in 6months? It will be 12 month at a minimum and realistically more like 18months. When games like VF5 or HS come out I will have to buy one anyway, so there is no point waiting as the end result is going to be the same.

Plus I can afford it. And it's going to be fun to have the bragging rights of owning a launch model.

Of course, if you buying a PS3 results in me not being able to pick one up at launch... THEN YOU ARE AN IDIOT FOR BUYING A PS3 AT LAUNCH!!!111

 

[DuckThor Evil]

If one has the desire to get a console, the only valid reason I can think of not buying the console at launch is the possible defects in the hardware on the first batch of units (X360). Even then I woulnd't call people idiots for doing it. Why on earth is an article like this published on psi-next?
The fact that the better games are coming later doesn't mean you loose by being early adopter.

So in essence if you wait a year. You possibly gain 100$, more mature unit. You lose one year of gaming moments on that particular console (of course you can play those games after the year you definately loose some expreriences) I don't think that justifies calling people idiots in an editorial.

 

[patsu]

Of course, if you buying a PS3 results in me not being able to pick one up at launch... THEN YOU ARE AN IDIOT FOR BUYING A PS3 AT LAUNCH!!!111

I was out of US when Sony started the pre-order. My friends were too late to the rescue. So I can sympathize with your statement above. If you can derive value from your favorite launch-day consoles and are willing to pay for the high price, there is nothing wrong in buying them. Those early boxes have PS2 emulation hardware, so BC may be better (Just my guess !).

As for robustness, it depends on the vendor's brand and your luck. My imported PS2 still work today, and my launch period PSP has better Sharp display than subsequent Samsung ones. Zero dead pixels too.

 

[Carl B]

I feel pretty uncomfortable with that editorial, seeing as I volunteer for the same site...

I don't think it should have gone up personally; it's not in the spirit of what I believe PS3Insider is about. And... well it comes off as harsh. Real harsh! I'm getting one at launch, y'know? Am I an idiot too? Or do I simply need to have access to Cell ASAP?

I'm not saying the author didn't make valid points, but the phrasing and approach are just too strong - they reflect the personality of the writer, for what that's worth. I'm formally disowning any association to it, and I only wish that the 'powers that be' running the umbrella E-mpire organization would get a clue in terms of a cohesive news strategy, rather than embracing this total 'free speech' approach with essentially zero vetting of those that wish to write.

 

[Tagrineth]

My personal thoughts on the matter revolve more around the fact that all the launch PS1s ans PS2s wound up failing. Sony has very poor first revision hardware quality.

 

[borntosoul]

well this last phrase from the editorial said it all,

"For all of the idiots who are buying one at launch, don’t feel too bad,
if I had the excess money lying around, I’d probably be one of you. I’m a notorious early adopter. But logically, there’s no good reason to do so".

basicaly if he had spare cash he would be an idiot too.

saving a few hundred dollars isnt gonna make up for a years full of lost gaming to serious gamer, any top end gpu/cpu loses that amount in a year anyway. one point that i think is a biggie is the 65nm versions should be cheaper and bit cooler and maybe more quiet - i dont mind waiting, so thats what id be getting. but if gt5, gta4 and resident evil were launch games i would buy it at launch regardless


i have bought most of the consols (from snes to ps2) at or close to launch and in the end regreted buying them all. not because there were issues with them or they were expensive or that i didnt have fun - i had lots of fun with them, but i felt they had no lasting appeal. i found myself always going back to the pc. it was moslty a resulotion thing because every time id upgrade my pc i couldnt stand to look at the lo res consol graphics on my 68cm t.v. this time around i will be buying the ps3- we(australia) get it around march 2007, no biggie for me because winter will hit shortly after - perfect timing. hopefully this time around i will own it and enjoy it for much longer.

 

[cthellis42]

Good points. But without earlier adopters, where would that leave everyone else? Can it be said that those that buy products early, are not a (non-trivial) part of making those products available to others down the line? Is there no value to the "idiot" that buys early? Are they truly idiots (or just eager)? I don't ask those questions rhetorically. I've always felt (or been under the impression) that those of us who buy products early, almost as pseudo-post-beta-testers (that make any sense?) are a rather important part of a product's life cycle (for future owners, not just for the company who made it). Don't know if thats true or not, never really took the time to research it.

EDIT

Wow, only 2 post in, not one bit of flaming, and already rated at 1 star. I wonder if they even read the post...

What? We ALWAYS should take advantage of idiots. It's not like my comments will stop anybody. We just get to ride on their backs. Hehe...

 

[patsu]

My personal thoughts on the matter revolve more around the fact that all the launch PS1s ans PS2s wound up failing.

Just a side note... My launch PS2 (imported from Japan) is still going.
And of course, eventually anything has to give.

 

[Tagrineth]

Just a side note... My launch PS2 (imported from Japan) is still going.
And of course, eventually anything has to give.

A statistical anomaly, I can assure you. 8)

 

[Bad_Boy]

My launch day ps1, ps2, psp, all work fine as the day I got them.
A statistical anomaly I must be.