You don't own a PS3. Why?

[2real4tv]

Lets say for the sake of argument that the difference was tiny, like 1%. The basic premise still stands, why spend more? What makes it a no brainer in this case is that the difference is sometimes small, sometimes large, so it's a much easier choice. But even if multi plats were identical, why spend more? I guess I just don't get why someone should spend more for less, when none of your value propositions apply to them. I really don't get it. I used that friend example because he didn't take advantage of anything on his PS3 that you guys deem as "value". He didn't go online, didn't watch blu-rays, didn't upgrade his hdd, didn't have a controller preference, none of that. All he does on it is play what happened in his case to be three multi platform games. I'm sure there are tons of other people in the exact same situation.

So I had to ask him, why in heck did you spend more to play worse versions? In his case he really just didn't know, he thought we was playing the best versions so he spent more, and I suspect there are thousands of others like him that just don't know. For people in that situation, that have no interest in installing Linux on their console or in getting achievements, I still stand by my original point of they are wasting their money going PS3. But if you see a value advantage somewhere then by all means go for it.

Fair enough but your being very specific in your case comparing specific features in the 360 to prove your point. Start adding accessories to the 360 and it starts to get pricey.

One of the things I considered when buying the two systems was value so when comparing the feature set(online, wireless, Harddrive and HD media) of both I realized at least in my case the 360 was costing more. The only reason I purchase the 360 first is because I could not find a ps3 and GeOW.

I purchased the system in 06 when it was $399 then got the E74 which Microsoft did not honor at the time. I then purchased an Arcade system and now its starting to damage my games with circular scratches. My RB2, COD4 and CODWaW are not working. Luckily for RB2 I was able to borrow my friends copy and install to the harddrive. So far I've spent $399(20gig) + $199(Arcade) + 3*$50(Live) + 3*$59(3 scratched games) = $$.

I do understand your point because you can't beat $199 and at the end of the day Sony needs to lower the price of their system. A friend of mine inquired about the two systems and I recommended the 360. He ended up buying one for his kid but still wants to buy a ps3 for himself. I also did the same for my cousin but he ended up buying a ps3 anyway.

 

[obonicus]

I realize that things have value, and if you see more value in one than the other then by all means buy it. I was focusing on those that don't really know or don't care about all the features one or the other offers and just want a game box. I could tell them "yeah but bluray...Live....change the hdd" etc and they don't care, they simply want a game box and that's it. It might sound like a small subset of the buying populace, but it's actually quite massive. For those people they will be buying mostly multi plat games and that's it. They won't watch movies, use online, none of that. They power it on, play a bit, turn it off, that's it. When you are dealing with that, there is no reason to pay more for less. That's all I'm saying. If someone really wants a certain controller then fine, make the trade off. But for those that don't care either way, then it's a no brainer.

Fine. I'm not arguing this. What I'm saying is that none of it is objective truth -- you're choosing to focus on certain aspects as positives and certain as negatives. That's based on subjectivity. You don't think the PS3 is the best value for games if that's all they want. I actually agree. People here are giving you counter-examples, and for them, their value judgment is every bit as good as yours. Remember, this isn't the 'why doesn't the PS3 sell as well as the 360' thread.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Fair enough but your being very specific in your case comparing specific features in the 360 to prove your point. Start adding accessories to the 360 and it starts to get pricey.

That's the thing though. For the vast majority of people out there, they don't need and will never buy anything to add to their X360, other than possibly an additional controller.

And for those that do, they can pick and choose what they wish to add. And if the price comes out to more than the PS3 for what they feel they need, then the PS3 obviously becomes a better choice when considering price only.

Prior to the X360 getting HDMI as standard that could have been a major sticking point (and was) for some people. But now?

Hell, if I had to get a PS3 I'm FORCED to get an Infrared receiver for it just to be able for it to be used as part of my home entertainment system which is all run off a universal remote.

But again, that's just me, and whatever the arguments on price it's still optional, if people don't need it they don't get it.

However, I'd argue that Infrared receiver on a machine meant to be the centerpiece of a home entertainment gateway is FAR more required than say wireless networking.

Regards,
SB

 

[2real4tv]

That's the thing though. For the vast majority of people out there, they don't need and will never buy anything to add to their X360, other than possibly an additional controller.

And for those that do, they can pick and choose what they wish to add. And if the price comes out to more than the PS3 for what they feel they need, then the PS3 obviously becomes a better choice when considering price only.

Prior to the X360 getting HDMI as standard that could have been a major sticking point (and was) for some people. But now?

Hell, if I had to get a PS3 I'm FORCED to get an Infrared receiver for it just to be able for it to be used as part of my home entertainment system which is all run off a universal remote.

But again, that's just me, and whatever the arguments on price it's still optional, if people don't need it they don't get it.

However, I'd argue that Infrared receiver on a machine meant to be the centerpiece of a home entertainment gateway is FAR more required than say wireless networking.

Regards,
SB

I disagree by a mile being tied down to your router or a port vs having two remotes. I prefer having the flexibility of moving my system to any room without any problems vs a 2nd remote any day.

Before the new house I bought it was not a problem because we all gamed on the same tv in the livingroom. Now Iam more spread out where the 360 is in my son's room and the ps3 is in my room. Which means I would have to put the access point in his room which Iam against.

 

[DrJay24]

The infrared thing is cheap and easy to fix, but you are complaining about a problem you don't actually have, so it's kind of FUD. BTW the "center piece" is the TV, a console is just one component.

 

[MrFloopy]

Remember, this isn't the 'why doesn't the PS3 sell as well as the 360' thread.

That's right, it's the "You don't own a PS3, why?" thread. Which it seems people have forgotten.

Like I said, when you define the criteria solely to the 360's strengths the decision looks easy.

Fair enough but your being very specific in your case comparing specific features in the 360 to prove your point

No it's defining the criteria to the reasons why we didn't buy (or recommend) a PS3.

Sounds like you are saying that we are justifying why we did something by only giving the reasons for why we did it. What were you expecting?

oh and this:

Of course that just shows your bias.

Do you mean my bias to a brand or my bias toward the reasons for making a decision?
Mate, I couldn't give a flying monkeys toss about console brands etc, but people do believe it or not ask me for advice, and I have an opinion as to what they should buy. I don't care if they follow my advice or not.

Most people who ask don't care about:

HD movies
Online
or platform exclusives. They don't have an allegiance otherwise they wouldn't ask my advice.

And reliability? Losing the use of you console for a week for free repairs is simply not an issue. (does this even happen in current models? we have a tally in our offices of over 400 employees and the tally hasn't moved for a while.)

 

[2real4tv]

That's right, it's the "You don't own a PS3, why?" thread. Which it seems people have forgotten.





No it's defining the criteria to the reasons why we didn't buy (or recommend) a PS3.Sounds like you are saying that we are justifying why we did something by only giving the reasons for why we did it. What were you expecting?

oh and this:



Do you mean my bias to a brand or my bias toward the reasons for making a decision?
Mate, I couldn't give a flying monkeys toss about console brands etc, but people do believe it or not ask me for advice, and I have an opinion as to what they should buy. I don't care if they follow my advice or not.

Most people who ask don't care about:

HD movies
Online
or platform exclusives. They don't have an allegiance otherwise they wouldn't ask my advice.

And reliability? Losing the use of you console for a week for free repairs is simply not an issue. (does this even happen in current models? we have a tally in our offices of over 400 employees and the tally hasn't moved for a while.)

My understanding is that joker has a ps3 and he was talking in terms of why someone would not buy a ps3.

I'll give you HD movies and thats it. IMO my allegiance is not to the hardware but to the software which could also include exclusives. But I have both so it is not an issue for me.

edit: nvm just seen the recommend

 

[MrFloopy]

I'll give you HD movies and thats it. IMO my allegiance is not to the hardware but to the software which could also include exclusives.

Sorry, my point was probably not clear:

I meant that the people who are likely to ask my opinion have no favourite franchises (most of them have never had a console before) so exclusives are not an issue for them.

But I have both so it is not an issue for me.

I have PS3, PSP, PS2, Wii and 360 devkits sitting on my desk and a work software library that's quite good so it's not for me either, but I only play games on it if it's relevant to what I'm doing. Since I work exclusively with physics these days that can be quite a varied selection.

 

[Phil]

So I had to ask him, why in heck did you spend more to play worse versions? In his case he really just didn't know, he thought we was playing the best versions so he spent more, and I suspect there are thousands of others like him that just don't know. For people in that situation, that have no interest in installing Linux on their console or in getting achievements, I still stand by my original point of they are wasting their money going PS3. But if you see a value advantage somewhere then by all means go for it.

Instead of pointing out how much money he's wasted, why not better inform him about all those tripple A+ titles that not only look and run better than all of those multiplatform titles, but also happen to be exclusive to the game console he bought?

I think the point everyone is trying to make - the difference in multiplatform games might be there and evident, but it's probably not that evident to those people playing it. From that, you can assume, the difference to be at best marginable and not a huge difference. The difference between consoles becomes larger once you include the strengths and weaknesses of a console over another.

When I recommend consoles - I don't assume that all they want to play are multi platform titles. I ask them, what they want to play and look at the variety of library that is offered on each console. For the best part, multiplatform games are IMO close enough for those people to not really care about which one runs a tiny little bit better or not. They'd be far better of receiving advice based on games that are exclusive to the one or the other. You like first person shooters? Ah, you have Halo on the X360 or KillZone2 on the PS3. Based on this and that, what would you prefer? Or do you want family games? etc. Also, what do any of your friends own a console? Do you want to play with them? etc

It's never about "two identical cars with different fuel consumption", unless the buyer in question only intends to buy the console for specific multi-platform game A, B and C only and they all happen to run better on the cheaper console. How likely is that? And if that's the case - why not point him to the exclusive games which tend to use his console of choice better anyway?

The "illinformed people" you know who bought a PS3 under the impression that [their] multiplatform games run best on that console, should be playing some of the exclusive titles if they are so concerned about what uses their console to its fullest...

 

[-tkf-]

It might sound like a small subset of the buying populace, but it's actually quite massive. For those people they will be buying mostly multi plat games and that's it. They won't watch movies, use online, none of that. They power it on, play a bit, turn it off, that's it.

Unless Sony and Microsoft is lying through their teeth (which wouldnt be a surprise) the "massive" part of PS3 and 360 owners go online with their console. I don´t recall ever having met a type of gamer that only plays multiplatform titles and thats it.

 

[-tkf-]

I think the point everyone is trying to make - the difference in multiplatform games might be there and evident, but it's probably not that evident to those people playing it. From that, you can assume, the difference to be at best marginable and not a huge difference. The difference between consoles becomes larger once you include the strengths and weaknesses of a console over another.

And the difference is shrinking to the point where it takes an actual effort to notice it, so much that those playing on SD or smaller HD screens most likely cant tell.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

How come people can rationalize this kind of math but not the console price difference (when it exists) when averaged over a few years?

Are you rolling those eyes at me, when my post clearly stated that the entry price difference divided over the years amounts to insignificant amount in the end?!

Would you seriously let your niece buy a less reliable system, because it's got more anti-aliasing than the other system?

The biggest reason I don't recommand the 360 to anyone close to me, is because I don't want them to suffer with the RROD.

In Finland the manufacturer warranty for the PS3 is one year, for Xbox 360 it's two years in general and three years for RROD issues. Yes the EU law says this and that, but if your PS3 breaks after the one year mark, you'll have a fight in your hands and while you still have a decent chance to win, it's way more trouble than I feel comfortable. My 360 broke a while back about 20 months from the purchase and It was picked up from my apartment and delivered back in 10 days, which was not that bad. I guarantee you that if my PS3 breaks now after about 20 months of purchase it will take wayy longer to get it fixed for free. Basically the official importer offers to fix it for 260€ and then the fighting begins.

Point being that despite the RROD (which is not that big of an issue for the new Jasper machines anyway) the 360 is in my opinion the more safer purchase, because of the superior warranty policy. My PS3 has been working great and is still as silent as when I bought it, but if it breaks I'm in trouble and imo it's far more annoying to fight against mega corporations than just fill an online form and wait for the UPS to pick the package up and wait about two weeks to get it back, especially if you have the other console keep you busy while waiting :smile:

 

[Arwin]

My niece will not go online, won't use it to watch movies, won't upgrade the hdd, won't do anything really other than sometimes power it on, giggle and play a bit, then turn it off. Would you or anyone else have suggested for this type of 'client' that then spend an extra $200 on a PS3?

In this case I would recommend your niece not to get a console at all, but stick to a DS. You're defining types of users that I simply don't know any of.

But really, the discussion in this thread is becoming pathetic.

 

[specwarGP2]

But even if multi plats were identical, why spend more? I guess I just don't get why someone should spend more for less, when none of your value propositions apply to them.

You make it seem as if the exclusive games on each platform cancel each other out. The reality is that PS3 has a larger, much more compelling catalog of exclusives (IMO), and those exclusives when released, actually stay exclusive to the platform.

Let's be real here, the BD player, free PSN, hard drive, etc.. that's fine and all and those things do have value and help justify the extra cost, but the pedigree of the exclusives is what's keeping PS3 in the game.

 

[MazingerDUDE]

Point being that despite the RROD (which is not that big of an issue for the new Jasper machines anyway) the 360 is in my opinion the more safer purchase, because of the superior warranty policy. My PS3 has been working great and is still as silent as when I bought it, but if it breaks I'm in trouble and imo it's far more annoying to fight against mega corporations than just fill an online form and wait for the UPS to pick the package up and wait about two weeks to get it back, especially if you have the other console keep you busy while waiting :smile:

But, what are the chances? The defect ratio of PS3 is probably on par with any other consumer electronics out there. Do I ever care about extended warranty when I am to purchase a consumer electonics? No I don't. Sure there were times when some electronic gadgets broke down on me much earlier than I anticipated, but I take the chance because it rarely happens. Cerainly never in a video game hardware that I started using since the old school Nintendo era. How about the 360? it's certainly far more prone to break down than any other major console existed in history. I'd much rather get a hardware that can last 10 years with zero warranty, then get a hardware that will surely fail even if it comes with 10 year warranty. Hell, they should not sell such faulty hardware to begin with. If I look around myself, I have many buddies that own PS3. I've yet seen anyone with hardware issue, while almost everyone except me, got their 360 RRODed. (even Grandmaster's got both of his 360s RRODed recently ) I even know a guy who repaired his 360 9 times! (This guy's even got second 360 for a back up) Maybe some diehard 360 fans like him would happily accept burden like that, but it certainly is not something that average consumer could get accustomed to. In fear of RROD, I keep usage of my 360 to minimum. I play all the multi-platform games on PS3 unless it's Ghosterbusters shitty, and thankfully there're few of such examples these days. (well, in fact, I did get the Prototype for 360 as well, since I absolutely hate screen tearng )

I still bought the 360, because I love Halo and Gears, and other MS exclusives such as Fable2 and PGR4. After all, it's the games that sell system. And that's what PS3 is weak about at this point along with its not so competitive price tag, and that's why it's selling worse IMO.

 

[SonComet]

I actually have a friend that bought a 360 in 05 for 399.99, and then bought a blu-ray player in 07 for the same price as a new PS3 just because he doesn't like Sony, but claims to love video games. Maybe there are more like him?

 

[DrJay24]

Are you rolling those eyes at me, when my post clearly stated that the entry price difference divided over the years amounts to insignificant amount in the end?!

Sorry, my bad. I was responding to the rationale in general. You are correct sir

 

[Cornsnake]

Why is it still being argued what console anyone is most likely to buy? These things have sold for years now with the Wii at around 50 million consoles, the Xbox 360 at around 30 million consoles, and the PS3 at around 22 million. It seems to me people have found ample reason to buy any of these 3 consoles, and it doesn't look like that's going to change anytime soon.

And OMFG @ what this thread has become.

 

[SG79]

Would you or anyone else have suggested for this type of 'client' that then spend an extra $200 on a PS3?

You're generally doing anyone a disservice by even suggesting the arcade 360, but sure. Reliability and general multimedia capabilities (let's say the client will get an HDTV down the road), the PS3 is the better bet.

 

[dobwal]

I thought this post was about people explaining their decision not to purchase a PS3, so that we could have a discussion on what less obvious aspects that may be affecting PS3 sales, not a bunch of propaganda on what console is a better buy, which we have been doing since late 2006.

How cares about what you as an individual recommend to friends and your reasons for doing so. I recommended the PS3 to a friend because the blue LED matched the color of her eyes. Also I recommended a Wii to my nephew because the controller could serve as substitute nunchunks in cases of emergencies. I then recomended 360 to my uncle because he was a Michigan State Spartan fan. None of this explains why individuals here on B3D passed on a PS3.