PS3 Images on Amazon

[one.123]

I don't know if this has been mentioned before, but i was checking out the ps3 on amazon and found....

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/cu...8?ie=UTF8&sort=quality&index=0&page=1#gallery

haha, theres a couple more there too (also the one that compares the prices between the xbox360 and ps3(20gb) is very intresting)

 

[Sazar]

Or you can buy the premium package, get pretty much everything there and save a bundle on a ps3.

Interesting indeed.

Alternatively, you can buy a Wii and get rumble AND motion.

 

[Grandmaster]

I think Sony had published a similar image a couple months back.

Certainly quite persuasive for those who are uninformed.

Alternatively, you can buy a Wii and get rumble AND motion.

Haha 😛

 

[one.123]

gm, what do you mean by that?

 

[Grandmaster]

I mean that chart is misleading for people that don't know how much the premium 360 is.

 

[Vanquished]

I mean that chart is misleading for people that don't know how much the premium 360 is.

Um,
I still think the ps3 is a better deal.

 

[Grandmaster]

Um,
I still think the ps3 is a better deal.

That's a subjective opinion.

From a factual point of view, the Premium 360 costs no where near the premium PS3. You are paying an extra $200 for that bluray drive.

Also, you do have to pay for Live, but Sony or Nintendo's online services come no where near the quality of Live. And Live is not a required purchase.

 

[ElementalDragon]

is it just me or is the person who created that little price comparison pic a complete idiot? if he's adding the wireless controller and hard drive anyway..... why the hell use the core system? the core system also comes with a wired controller, so that's basically saying you're buying a second controller, while the PS3 is sticking with just one controller. something ELSE you have to buy with PS3 is a game.... seeing as it doesn't come with one. neither does the 360 as far as i know... but that's still something to consider in the price.

And isn't the standard Live service that comes with the 360 free, only having to pay for the better version?

He seriously didn't think about ANY part of that pic. Judging by the other prices he has....

Xbox 360 Premium:
Base Cost: $400
High Definition Movie: $200 (though i don't see a NEED for it.....)
Online Service: $0 (since they're going by base units... why go with more expensive service... if it's actually free...)
20G HD Drive: $0
Wireless Controller: $0 (since PS3 comes with one)
HD Cable: $40 (probably can find one cheaper.... but that's the price he showed)
Quick Charge Kit: $30 (another ridiculous idea to use in price comparisons... buying a Wireless controller alongside the wired that comes with it then adding the quick charger. isn't there another way 360's controllers can be charged?)
Wireless Headset: $60 (again... can probably find cheaper)

Total Cost: $730

Yes.... it's still over the dude's $540 estimate for the PS3.... which i find completely ridiculous, since you'd also have to buy extra controllers if you want to play with your friends. and you also have the option on the 360 to buy wired controllers, with no need for the quick charger, and would be cheaper than PS3's wireless controllers. Basically the overall price you pay depends on how much you expect to use your console. Not everybody sees the need for the HD DVD attachment.... and might never actually need it. Main reason i bought a Wii. if i wanted to play DVD's..... that's what we have a DVD player hooked up to our 50" widescreen plasma display for. if i wanted games in uber-high resolution...... i'd probably wait till the price is NOT insane.

guess he also didn't add in the fact that you can get a 360 Core and a Wii for about the price of the PS3. i'd be MUCH happier with that purchase than just getting a PS3. wooo... bluray.... big freakin whoop.

 

[Vanquished]

Having the PS3 as a 600 dollar blu-ray player is a great deal.

 

[Sazar]

$200 for the Xbox360 HD-dvd player is a fabulous deal since you can connect it to your pc or xbox.

If you REALLY need a high def player.

Much cheaper than $600

 

[Vanquished]

But...
You already paid 400 for the xbox.
so its 600 either way...
Plus a blu-ray player is 1000, so....

 

[Sazar]

I don't have to buy an xbox for the hd-dvd player.

It's only $200, so....

 

[Shamus MacNoob]

Sony or Nintendo's online services come no where near the quality of Live.

And what can you tell us about the services offered by both sony and nintendo / Do you own either ? Have you ever used either?

Maybe some links to show us uninformed masses the truth about the online gaming experiences on the PS3 and Wii ...

 

[Vanquished]

I don't have to buy an xbox for the hd-dvd player.

It's only $200, so....

Confused I am
Are you talking about an addition onto the XBOX or a seperate player?

 

[Grandmaster]

I have no experience with any of the current gen online stuff, I'm making my assumption on three things:

1) My experiences with Live on the Xbox.
2) My experiences with playing online on the PS2.
3) No online play with the Gamecube (since there wasn't really any).

Live is something MS has been working on for years. They've spent lots of money on building the proper hardware infrastructure, building the software right. It's a system that is incredibly convenient and easy to use. For example, lets take something simple like a Friends list.

On Live, you have a central Friends list that you can take with you across all the games you own. You can also have a universal "recent players list", so you can easily send friend invites to someone you just played with but forget to send a friend invite from within a game. In addition, they have features that will take Sony and Nintendo months/years to add.

Sony have learned from their mistakes on the PS2 and they've taken most of what makes Live great and incorporated it into the PlayStation Network. They still have some remnants of the PS2 online stuff like per game friends lists. It also makes sense to me that the stability of their servers and things like that will not be as good as a service that is paid and has been refined over the years.

Nintendo had no online presence with the Gamecube, and on the Wii it's quite a cumbersome service, with people having to go through with the whole Friend Code stuff that is also per game and complicated to setup.

Again I'm basing all of this on my experiences with last gen online services and from what I've read online about the various current gen services.

 

[Shamus MacNoob]

The whole Wii friend thing is a way to control who can send email to your console , its far from complicated took me 3.5 seconds to figure out how to send email to my gmail account, the amount of Wii channels I see inside the Wii looks like to me its going to be game channels preset you wanna play that game click on that channel dont see where the so called game by game setup is, PS3 online we will see how that goes, I wont make assumptions I will wait and see .

 

[Vanquished]

I have no experience with any of the current gen online stuff, I'm making my assumption on three things:

1) My experiences with Live on the Xbox.
2) My experiences with playing online on the PS2.
3) No online play with the Gamecube (since there wasn't really any).

Live is something MS has been working on for years. They've spent lots of money on building the proper hardware infrastructure, building the software right. It's a system that is incredibly convenient and easy to use. For example, lets take something simple like a Friends list.

On Live, you have a central Friends list that you can take with you across all the games you own. You can also have a universal "recent players list", so you can easily send friend invites to someone you just played with but forget to send a friend invite from within a game. In addition, they have features that will take Sony and Nintendo months/years to add.

Sony have learned from their mistakes on the PS2 and they've taken most of what makes Live great and incorporated it into the PlayStation Network. They still have some remnants of the PS2 online stuff like per game friends lists. It also makes sense to me that the stability of their servers and things like that will not be as good as a service that is paid and has been refined over the years.

Nintendo had no online presence with the Gamecube, and on the Wii it's quite a cumbersome service, with people having to go through with the whole Friend Code stuff that is also per game and complicated to setup.

Again I'm basing all of this on my experiences with last gen online services and from what I've read online about the various current gen services.

Ya cant make assumptions.
Especially since Nintendo didnt have 1 before.

 

[one.123]

what i don't get is that everyone was complaining that the ps3 was way overpriced. "a 600 hd player". like thats all the ps3 does? the ps3 can play hd movies out of the box, the xbox would need a 200$ add-on (correct me if i get any of this wrong) which would mean the ps3 at 600$ is the same cost as a xbox360 with a hd player add on (600$) ...right?

 

[Grandmaster]

Yes, but you have a choice with the 360. With the PS3 you are essentially forced to pay for the bluray drive.

The PS2 was $299 when it came out.

 

[ElementalDragon]

exactly what GM said. probably the main reason the one dude from Atari said Sony shot themselves in the foot. what if someone wanted PS3.... but didn't want to use BluRay as their next HD movie format? last i checked, HD DVD players are quite a bit cheaper to buy than BluRay players.

Looking at the graphics on the PS3 compared to the 360.... it basically IS just a cheaper bluray player. i know the 360's been out for a year.... but it doesn't have THAT many games.