Back from "vacation", what's missing after all E3-talk?

MS was showing a wireless headset at E3.

 

Well, if we are going to talk about common uses what "most cases" then I rather suspect that in most cases PS2 users with the cameras leave usually them unplugged and unused, except in rare cases where they might play a game that incorporates one.

But to answer your question, there are more webcam games for the PC than there are for the PS2. I rather suspect the ratio of actual users is pretty similar on both systems.

 

I would, cause I'm not short on cash, but I'm not going to assume everyone would.

As for batteries, presumably a wired headset uses alot less juice since it doesn't have to transmit anything, I'd highly doubt that the headset has any meaningful impact on the controllers battery life.

Anyways, I don't think we need to go on and on, obviously there are cases where a wired headset would be preferred and vice versa.

 

Well you're wrong. I know a couple friends who don't have a ton of cash and have impulse purchased a 360 on payday.

I agree the MS headset is crap, but it does the trick.

 

Oh, I know a bunch of those people. And the difference between spending $350-$450 on a console and a game and spending $550-$650 on a console and a game is huge for those people.

The difference is blowing a single paycheck on a system and having to actually save up money to blow on the system.

For me, most of the people that I know that fall into that category, simply can't save.. well, for anything.

So the PS3 has effectively priced itself out of the range of 'impulse buy' and while the 360 is damn close, it isn't quite there.

 

Since this thread appears to be more about the xbox gesture cam then the thread I opened:

Here's some more brief impressions of it controlling a game with "tank-like" hand controls.

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/708/708327p1.html

 

Not as big a difference as you'd like to imply. The premium pack is $400, and the competing $500 PS3 SKU is only $100 more. Feature wise, it is at least matched.

Unless of course, your paycheck is worth $100

 

We keep hearing this $100 dollar difference, as if the Xbox 360 core edition doesn't exist. It smacks a bit of intellectual dishonesty. Everyone agrees that the features of the Xbox 360 match up with the cheaper PS3. But the bottom line is the cheapest Xbox 360 is $300. The cheapest PS3 is $500. There is no rationalizing this fact away...

 

Intellectual dishonesty is believing that anyone would buy a core pack and consider it good value, given that it is missing a few functionalities. Intellectual dishonesty is believing that despite the $500 SKU matching the 360 premium pack in every way, should still be compared with the core 360 pack, when discussing value.

 

So because you don't consider it a good value, it doesn't exist?

The question is simple: What is the cheapest I can buy into the Xbox 360? And what is the cheapest I can buy into the PS3?

 

So what if it exists? Please, price the core pack with the minimum addons to match that of the $500 PS3, or even the xbox 360. Tell me how much it costs then.

 

The issue is not about whether Sony or Microsoft offer better or equal value on a per feature basis. It's about cost of entry. Trying to minimize the PS3 cost of entry at $500 by saying it's really only $100 dollars more than the Xbox 360 is wrong. This is not a complex or subtle point.

 

Sony could probably have minimised the cost of entry by simply offering the PS3 without any included peripherals at some random price. Would anyone want it? The situation is similar with the core 360 pack.

Sony's idea of entry is to compete with the less laughable 360 premium pack. This is perhaps a little too subtle.

 

Oh man you missed it. First of all all scehduled showcasings of the popular games you and I both look foward were all cancelled and the only game under the spotlight was an ATARI port of pong that will come to pc's in late 2007. Also in the parking lot there was talk of "Half Life 3" but the conflict of interests amongst the group led to a surge of violence that left 13 dead and 52 wounded.

 

The Core package in Nov may be much more desireable than it is now. Strategically pricing the HDD, 256MB memory card, or console itself could do do this.

I don't understand how you can say that no-one would want to buy a core package with a memory card. Isn't that what people have been doing with Playstation for 10 years?? It all depends on the pricing structure.

Granted, right now the core is setup as a very poor value, but that is due to very minor things that can easily change, namely lack of wireless controller, tiny 64mb memory card, and an overpriced 20gb hdd.

 

onanie, what sis is trying to say is that when an average consumer considers buying something, they don't think about the add-ons. Like if a customer asks a clerk how much is the cheapest 360 or the ps3 is. The answer would be $300 and $500. The question wasn't "How much will I end up spending all together?" , So the difference is $200. I do realize what you mean. You are refering to the "value of purchase" versus "cost of entry".

 

Which one did you buy? Microsoft has the answer for you, and if not, then the popularity of the core pack would tell you something about the average consumer.

P.S. looks like the voting brigade has arrived

 

I think people are underrating the consumer's ability to find value, and if they're ignorant of this field they ask a friend and that friend will say "get the premium over the core". They're not mindless zombies that just look at price lol.