Price vs Power

[dagamer]

Not a console expert by any stretch of the imagination but click (a bbc tech program) was talking consoles and they said price was one of the reasons the ps3 lost last time

The PS3 outsold the Xbox 360 in Europe, Japan, and the rest of Asia. And considering both consoles have sold the same amount (~76 million) while the PS3 has been on the market for a year less, that means it's, on average, sold more consoles per year than the 360 has. And that's with a $100+ larger price tag too. Even today, the cheapest 360 is $199 (though honestly, the $299 model is more desirable), but the cheapest PS3 is $269.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Nope, but when the price drops aren't they technically "current gen"

Technically, they are current gen the minute they are available, so technically no one will ever own a next gen console.

Now that we've reduced the argument to semantics someone needs to Godwin this thread.

The PS3 outsold the Xbox 360 in Europe, Japan, and the rest of Asia. And considering both consoles have sold the same amount (~76 million) while the PS3 has been on the market for a year less, that means it's, on average, sold more consoles per year than the 360 has. And that's with a $100+ larger price tag too. Even today, the cheapest 360 is $199 (though honestly, the $299 model is more desirable), but the cheapest PS3 is $269.

PS3 is $249.

 

[Brad Grenz]

The baseline model actually went up in price when the superslim was introduced. I think it's not hard to find the older slims for the $249 price, though.

 

[owen]

And then there is the problem that the more power in console has the longer it has to stay on the market before it gets replaced by a new version. You see this is how consoles remain fresh - they change every 5 or so years. This is why console people do no like PCs. PCs are shackled by their platform.

Being short sighted seems to be the problem with allot of you folks. You will NEVER have enough power. There is always a constraint. Working within a constraint not only shows skill but the ability to innovate. More power now and you will be playing the same shit fps shooters for the next 7 years until killzone 10. Yeah you will get a gem here and there but it won't be big enough to climb out of the crud.

 

[Nesh]

And then there is the problem that the more power in console has the longer it has to stay on the market before it gets replaced by a new version. You see this is how consoles remain fresh - they change every 5 or so years. This is why console people do no like PCs. PCs are shackled by their platform.

Being short sighted seems to be the problem with allot of you folks. You will NEVER have enough power. There is always a constraint. Working within a constraint not only shows skill but the ability to innovate. More power now and you will be playing the same shit fps shooters for the next 7 years until killzone 10. Yeah you will get a gem here and there but it won't be big enough to climb out of the crud.

I dont know whats your point?
Have a lower powered console that will be replaced in 5 years? Would that produce even better FPS than a more powerful console?
A PC gets better games because it gets updated more often? Because as far as I know, we play the same "shit" games on PCs that we play on consoles just with better performance.
Personally I always feel that developers innovate more often and faster with the introduction of new consoles

 

[owen]

My point is In the console world there is a balance between power and price which allows the platform to be stable but change at regular intervals. Some people don't want to be buying expensive video cards every six months.

 

[Nesh]

My point is In the console world there is a balance between power and price which allows the platform to be stable but change at regular intervals. Some people don't want to be buying expensive video cards every six months.

Well, I have never seen a console that was so overpowered that it interfered with the 5-7 year intervals or that its life expectancy became a problem because it was too long. There is a problem though when the console's life expectancy is diminished for whatever reason or content is affected by lack of support.

Wii became a massive success this gen but that meant nothing in terms of quality content. It missed most of this gens big games, despite hitting the sweet price spot.

A console that is very powerful will start showing results and evolving as fast as the less powerful console. In 5-7 years time technology will evolve anyways so it will be still expected to be replaced at that time frame

 

[AlphaWolf]

I thought wii fit and wii sports were this gens big games.

And the 360 is already past 7 years.

I'm still not convinced power has anything to do with results outside of forums and forums have never been a proven predictor of success (more the opposite really). The WiiU might be the forum debates biggest success story. And I still remember considerable resistance to the idea WiiU might not be successful.

 

[owen]

Mario Galaxy hit it out of the park. Wii Sports too. lol. The sweet was too cheap, it should have been $100 more expensive.

 

[Nesh]

I thought wii fit and wii sports were this gens big games.

And the 360 is already past 7 years.

I'm still not convinced power has anything to do with results outside of forums and forums have never been a proven predictor of success (more the opposite really). The WiiU might be the forum debates biggest success story. And I still remember considerable resistance to the idea WiiU might not be successful.

They are all important. Power means nothing by itself. But when power is combined with the ability to create new content and better experiences it becomes highly relevant.
Otherwise XBOX 360 would have still been relevant if it was just an XBOX1 with better live services and sold cheap.

The Wii replaced "improved experience from more power" with a controller that offered a different and more immersive experience in some genres that was easy to capture.

Wii would have been failure if it didnt find a substitute for improved performance even if it was sold cheaply.

The WiiU did not replicate that and hence why it is in deep trouble. The resistance is weakening

 

[MrFox]

Now that we've reduced the argument to semantics someone needs to Godwin this thread.

Okay. We all know what happened the last time someone wanted too much power. WWII.

 

[DrJay24]

If you want price, buy the previous gen when the new stuff comes out. Bigger library, more dependable, lower power, etc.

 

[Wynix]

"cheaper price" or "more power" are way too vague of choices.

I think what Sony is offering is very good in terms of power and features, all indications are pointing to a $399 price point which is great, i think there may even be a small chance for a $349 price point.

If Sony release @ 399 = Excellent.
If Sony release @ 349 = Fucking outstanding.

 

[liolio]

I choose price, though I don't buy crap because it is cheap.
Though if system 1 offer overall a good value and comes at 300$ and system 2 offers significantly more but comes at 400$, I would tend to favor system 1 even if system 2 offers more bang for bucks.

I'm quiet price sensitive though I've to vouch system 1 worth it, so it has to be a really neat package.
I would do the same for most products. Usually in the price curve for a class of product you have a sweet spot where no that much of a jump in price makes a nice difference in what you get (bangs for bucks) but usually I spot before and settle on "good enough for my needs" as I put price and budget before what I really want. Though it is also because I'm not rich at all but I noticed that evven when I've the money I end up being pretty much conservative in my choices (happens with guitars for example and sometime I know that I should I paid the tiny premium instead of ranting about those damned tuners... ).

I would think a lot of consumers are like me, but I don't think it is the majority. I would also guess there could be difference in culture (/or even within generations), with some countries more prone to saving (the countries linked to the Roman church tend to favor security to more wealth and often the associated risks to get there, French, Italians for example have overall more saving than what you would think for their level of revenues /had as the crisis goes and cultural traits are diluted for the sake of the cult of progress...).

I've also a tough time with the subscription model, for example may not have much money when I head back to France, buying a system a 199$ with a 2 years subscription at say 10$ a month, could be more doable to me than spending 300$ or more. 10$ should not be an issue for my budget on a monthly basis, further more you actually pay less than what you think thanks to inflation.
The TCO after 2 years is 439$, and if subscription is pretty mandatory to enjoy most of what the system has to offer we speak of 799$ after 5 years.
That the price not corrected by inflation and to make a proper comparison one has to know exactly what system 2 does wrt subscription services.

I wonder if they could convince me, services have to be really amazing for me to pay when I can access them for free on my PC.

I'm not an impulse buyer, actually I don't understand impulse buyers, I don't enjoy shopping, it doesn't make me happy (overall). To consider system 1 I think I would need a really low price ala 99$ even though on the long run I know that the TCO is consistent.
I realize that I mostly don't need smartphone, they are fine but overall I don't care for most of what they offer.
May be as I'm likely to cut my expanses wrt to phone (and subscriptions are cheaper in France to begin with, both ISP and phone operators), I may fit a subscription for games into my budget but for now it is a stretch.

If I were a parent, having already to pay a subscription for the kids phones, clearly the subscription model would be a no. 10$ here, 30 else where, if you do a minimal amount of accountability (which lot of broken people seem not able to do... and are left wondering where their money goes...) you know it adds up fast, and even on the span of a couple of years we speak significant amount of money.

 

[owen]

"cheaper price" or "more power" are way too vague of choices.

I think what Sony is offering is very good in terms of power and features, all indications are pointing to a $399 price point which is great, i think there may even be a small chance for a $349 price point.

If Sony release @ 399 = Excellent.
If Sony release @ 349 = Fucking outstanding.

Lol, the Vita Costs $300 and it has no internal storage. Where are you people getting your price indications from? The current PS3 which is a 6 YEAR OLD PIECE OF hardware costs 279 with a 250 gig harddrive.

how do you expect Sony to sell a new piece of hardware for 399? much less 350. lol

 

[DrJay24]

Lol, the Vita Costs $300 and it has no internal storage. Where are you people getting your price indications from? The current PS3 which is a 6 YEAR OLD PIECE OF hardware costs 279 with a 250 gig harddrive.

how do you expect Sony to sell a new piece of hardware for 399? much less 350. lol

Vita is $249 in the US. The PS3 is $269, but it is sold for a profit most likely. A new console would be a loss, like it has been historically. The PS3 original BOM was estimated at $800-$900 and sold for $600. If the PS4 BOM is $450 it could be sold for $399, a few games or controller would pay for the loss.

 

[LuckyGuess]

I'm all about... embedded or graphics cards that do 1920x1200 and look good. WUXGA

BullSh*t Explanation: I'll trade all the features in the world for a pc that runs in a straight line like it's processing fiber optic math. No clue what power is supposed to mean... Just respond instantly when I type or click!!

My Next PC on a Lacquer Plaque:
(((My idea of Power = A computer that never asks, did you mean to do that? Cause I'm busy right now.)))
= 4x Core PC [1MB L2 per 64bit core] w/ 8MB of L3
= 8GB of DDR4 (Perhaps it has multi-color LED. Enjoy the nigh-time fireplace effect.)
= 2GB (shared or separate) Graphics Solution that supports 3D @ 1920x1200 at 60fps.
Some really good audio processing to make it worth buying an update to my Grado Headphones.
~ Or finally buying a 7.1 Onkyo system. (I'm a 4.1 channel person who covets MUCH more.)

Elite Game Computer Deisgn:
8x 64bit CPU cores (1MB L2 per core) w/16MB of L3 (Basically a server CPU)
AMD graphics card. The best you can find for for $400-300. (Yes, there are $1,000 cards out there.)


With either system...work towards this:
PC Power and Cooling PSU (= Japanese Solid State Capacitor power supply)
OCZ solid state drive ('Synapse' Caching Drive or Two Solid State Drives in Raid 0)
2~6 - 5400 RPM Drives. (With Caching or Multi-boot /// 5400rpm drives last for Decades!!!)
= Perhaps a TerByte Magnetic Tape Backup Device. =
Two MDISC drives; Definitely, yeah Definitely. http://www.mdisc.com/what-is-mdisc/
Tape is better for TeraBytes. But MDISC.. like magic.. (tried buying them last upgrade, was out of stock. :,[ )
HDTV (I like company) LED or Laser DLP (TV have started offering contrast levels at PC)
2x Wireless Weatherproof Speaks
Open Air Headphones. (Grado connects to an MP3 player and like a live symphony (WTF?$1,600..)-:

Dream: Someone Upholster a Couch with a concealed 1 or 2 sub woofers, then setup 5.3 audio.
Force Feedback... couches? Think about it Sony. Rumble Chairs~!!!
Finally buy one of those sound bars that can do SRS 5.1 or some such to save electricity.

What POWER list could motivate you to part with your MONEY?

 

[Wynix]

Lol, the Vita Costs $300 and it has no internal storage. Where are you people getting your price indications from? The current PS3 which is a 6 YEAR OLD PIECE OF hardware costs 279 with a 250 gig harddrive.

how do you expect Sony to sell a new piece of hardware for 399? much less 350. lol

The Vita does not cost 300, it's pretty easy to find one between 200-250, and that may even include a game and memory card, also the Vita comes with an expensive OLED screen, the PS4 will not.
The PS3 too can easily be found between 200-250.

The PS4 is using a dirt cheap cpu and a middle range gpu, both come from AMD who designed them and since sony will be ordering in such large amounts they will be given a very nice discount.

The Blu-ray drive will be significantly cheaper than in the launch ps3.

The only thing that can be considered expensive is the 8Gb of ram, but again because of the enormous amounts Sony will be ordering they will get a large discount(will still be the most expensive part).

The PS3 is Sonys only game system that has been sold above 299, to claim that they are unable to release a product at a decent price would be very short sighted.

$399 for the base model is almost written in stone, the only reason why i think there is an outside chance of $349 is because Sony has a tonne of momentum right now and they might just surprise us all.

 

[AlphaWolf]

The Vita does not cost 300, it's pretty easy to find one between 200-250, and that may even include a game and memory card, also the Vita comes with an expensive OLED screen, the PS4 will not.
The PS3 too can easily be found between 200-250.

The PS4 is using a dirt cheap cpu and a middle range gpu, both come from AMD who designed them and since sony will be ordering in such large amounts they will be given a very nice discount.

The Blu-ray drive will be significantly cheaper than in the launch ps3.

The only thing that can be considered expensive is the 8Gb of ram, but again because of the enormous amounts Sony will be ordering they will get a large discount(will still be the most expensive part).

The PS3 is Sonys only game system that has been sold above 299, to claim that they are unable to release a product at a decent price would be very short sighted.

$399 for the base model is almost written in stone, the only reason why i think there is an outside chance of $349 is because Sony has a tonne of momentum right now and they might just surprise us all.

PS3 is the only other home console Sony has launched in the last decade. It's price point might be more relevant than the PS1 or PS2.

Their launch price is going to depend on how big a loss they want to eat. I bet their premium model (the one people will want) will be $499, because all the people that voted power are willing to pay that. Next year they can drop the price for the holiday when supply is solid.

 

[Lucid_Dreamer]

PS2 games looked nowhere near Halo:CE and Riddick Escape from Butcher Bay. Those games were in another league entirely.

Also, is there some magic curse or natural law of the universe that negates a console from being eligible to win a generation just because it IS the most powerful AND that such hasn't happened historically?

So because the weakest console won this gen that automatically grants the weakest console next-gen the console sales crown?

It's a terribly weak and tired argument, especially as it completely ignores the plethora of factors that contributed to why the consoles of the past that won did in fact win in their respective generations.

The only reasonable connection with the most powerful of the past console not winning, and any kind of precedent for the future I can see, is that if any of the three major console vendor was to chase the bleeding edge this round, although they would be satisfying the whims of the super hardcore, they would risk pricing themselves out of the market (like the PS3 very nearly did).

It's abundantly clear from the leaked and revealed specs of these next two consoles, that neither is chasing the bleeding edge, and so any relationship between power vs relative sales performance of this coming gen and any that has gone before it is in fact pretty moot.

This gen is over already? I thought we couldn't even pretend that the current gen was over until the next-gen consoles launch. Or, are you just talking about North America? I ask because worldwide they are even at the moment.