Support NeoGAF

[rokkerkory]

I am saying more people should have bought the $450 game bundles. They had Forza, Titanfall bundles.

Now after buying the $399 xbox one what are they doing with it. Take it home, connect it to the TV and do what ?. Most of the folks land up picking up a game before leaving store. So they probably spent $460 on day 1.

For me, I wanted to wait until after E3 to make my decision on which to buy first X1 or PS4.

I am sure others wait for more games to come out, see the roadmap for the next year or two, or just didn't make sense financially at the time to buy.

Some of the bundles at $499 or even $450 wasn't really advertised widely and had limited stores participating. Sure on a forum like GAF, we are all in the know but the average consumer wouldn't have been.

 

[ryutaro's mama]

People seem to forget what a great deal the PS3 was. Blurays back then cost almost 1000 bucks or more so getting a PS3 for 600 was amazing.

Was it the right choice? No, but I'm sure as heck glad I didn't have to dish out 1000 bucks for bluray

Sony saving us from 1000 dollar Blu-Ray drives...you are delusional bro...I had no desire to buy a Blu-ray player in 2006, man. DVD format was good enough for me.

SONY FORCED BLU-RAY ON ITS CUSTOMERS TO WIN A FORMAT WAR.

That is anti-consumer and that shit happened.

And you say it was "amazing"...yeah, it was amazing if you wanted a fucking Blu-Ray player which I didn't and so Sony got to wait a long while for my sale.

 

[Iacobellis]

Sony saving us from 1000 dollar Blu-Ray drives...you are delusional bro...I had no desire to buy a Blu-ray player in 2006, man. DVD format was good enough for me.

SONY FORCED BLU-RAY ON ITS CUSTOMERS TO WIN A FORMAT WAR.

That is anti-consumer and that shit happened.

And you say it was "amazing"...yeah, it was amazing if you wanted a fucking Blu-Ray player which I didn't and so Sony got to wait a long while for my sale.

AND SONY FORCED THE CD AND DVD ON US, TOO, RIGHT?

 

[ryutaro's mama]

AND SONY FORCED THE CD AND DVD ON US, TOO, RIGHT?

Nice try.

How much was PS1?

PS2?

ANSWER: Not $599

 

[Head.spawn]

Maybe they didnt want Forza or Titanfall or Kinect.

Even if you didn't want those things, you could've sold Forza or Titanfall and Kinect.

People are selling Kinects on ebay/craigslist from $60-80. Those games could easily fetch $30-40.

 

[truth411]

Nice try.

How much was PS1?

PS2?

ANSWER: Not $599

There is a difference between flawed product and "anti consumer" when the PS3 first came out it had a bluray drive, 4 USB ports, a very strong but hard to code for Cell processor, multiple SD card slots and PS2/PS1 backward compatibility, Other OS and a Standard HDD. When you add it all up it was a great value at the time, BUT it was not price competitive with its main competitors. One can aurgue it was over engineered, but that's not anti consumer that's flawed, let's not forget they got the price down to 399 with the 40GB model a year later, but the damage was done.
What M.S. tried to do with its restrictions on used games, always online mandates or you can't play games period. Trying to treat physical media as if they were digital download WAS anti consumer. That's my 2¢.

 

[BigDug13]

Sony saving us from 1000 dollar Blu-Ray drives...you are delusional bro...I had no desire to buy a Blu-ray player in 2006, man. DVD format was good enough for me.

SONY FORCED BLU-RAY ON ITS CUSTOMERS TO WIN A FORMAT WAR.

That is anti-consumer and that shit happened.

And you say it was "amazing"...yeah, it was amazing if you wanted a fucking Blu-Ray player which I didn't and so Sony got to wait a long while for my sale.

Jesus you really have a lot of hatred towards that product. I didn't even game on my PS3 until 2013 and yet I still bought one at launch in order to do no gaming applications whatsoever. Because it was obvious HD-DVD was going to lose and I wanted a Blu-ray player and media player.

Yes they did spit in the face of their Playstation faithful with that product and they rightfully took their lumps for it when it came to sales and their financial losses. Just like MS is doing now.

They learned and changed. Therefore people are returning to their compelling product this time.

But let's not pretend that the original PS3 was a bad product just because it had Blu-ray inflating the price as if it was ONLY Blu-ray that inflated the price. It was also coming out with 3x the HDD space as 360. It also came with full 100% PS2 and PS1 BC. It was the only console with HDMI. It also offered wifi while 360 didn't.

There was more to the inflated price of the PS3 than simply Blu-ray. But it was too much for the Playstation faithful.

 

[ryutaro's mama]

There is a difference between flawed product and "anti consumer" when the PS3 first came out it had a bluray drive, 4 USB ports, a very strong but hard to code for Cell processor, multiple SD card slots and PS2/PS1 backward compatibility, Other OS and a Standard HDD. When you add it all up it was a great value at the time, BUT it was not price competitive with its main competitors. One can aurgue it was over engineered, but that's not anti consumer that's flawed, let's not forget they got the price down to 399 with the 40GB model a year later, but the damage was done.
What M.S. tried to do with its restrictions on used games, always online mandates or you can't play games period. Trying to treat physical media as if they were digital download WAS anti consumer. That's my 2¢.

But the thing you are trying to compare it to, didn't actually happen. I'll describe it like this, had Ken Kutaragi said, "You'll get a second job to afford this" (the biggest fuck you can say to a consumer) and then there was backlash and he then walked it back, I wouldn't be talking about what he MIGHT have done.

Problem is, Sony didn't walk it back. They stuck to their guns and as a result, I didn't buy their platform until years later.

I just played my PS2 and 360 until they came around.

 

[ryutaro's mama]

Jesus you really have a lot of hatred towards that product. I didn't even game on my PS3 until 2013 and yet I still bought one at launch in order to do no gaming applications whatsoever. Because it was obvious HD-DVD was going to lose and I wanted a Blu-ray player and media player.

Yes they did spit in the face of their Playstation faithful with that product and they rightfully took their lumps for it when it came to sales and their financial losses. Just like MS is doing now.

They learned and changed. Therefore people are returning to their compelling product this time.

I don't hate the PS3 at all. I have one and have a ton of 1st party stuff. I just know back in 2006, when the price was announced and Ken Kutaragi had that smug quote, I was pissed.

And so I voted with my wallet and didn't support them out the gate like I did with PS1 and PS2.

 

[whateverblah]

Sony saving us from 1000 dollar Blu-Ray drives...you are delusional bro...I had no desire to buy a Blu-ray player in 2006, man. DVD format was good enough for me.

SONY FORCED BLU-RAY ON ITS CUSTOMERS TO WIN A FORMAT WAR.

That is anti-consumer and that shit happened.

And you say it was "amazing"...yeah, it was amazing if you wanted a fucking Blu-Ray player which I didn't and so Sony got to wait a long while for my sale.

They didn't force anyone to do anything. No one had to buy it. Many people didn't.

 

[HawksWinStanley]

I didn't even game on my PS3 until 2013 and yet I still bought one at launch in order to do no gaming applications whatsoever.

You didn't play any games on your console for 7 years? That's weird. Did nothing seriously come out that you wanted to play?

Even if you didn't want those things, you could've sold Forza or Titanfall and Kinect.

People are selling Kinects on ebay/craigslist from $60-80. Those games could easily fetch $30-40.

Is there a big enough market for XB1 Kinects that people can sell them for $80? The only way to get one up til recently was to buy the XB1 which comes with it. So who is buying those Kinects that could use it and not already have one?

 

[ryutaro's mama]

They didn't force anyone to do anything. No one had to buy it. Many people didn't.

Of course they didn't actually force you to do anything. That isn't my point. If you wanted a PS3 at launch you were screwed because they were passing the then high costs of the new BRD on to the consumer.

 

[k3rn3ll]

A 6 percent sample size is a large sample size by all scientific standards

The only problem with this is they are two completely different markets. Internet and retail are vastly different. They are getting closer to each other as years go past but still. The one guy mentioned presidential polls. This would be like comparing Under 30 voters to over 30. Your gonna get vastly different results everytime

 

[bishoptl]

Nice try.

How much was PS1?

PS2?

ANSWER: Not $599

Sorry, you can't have it both ways. The PS2 provided a huge leg up for the DVD format and was a great value - many consumers purchased a PS2 solely as a DVD player with no intention of gaming. The PS3 did the same thing for the Blu-Ray format, with - again - many consumers purchasing it as a value Blu-Ray player with no intention of playing games.

Kinect provides no such value.

Of course they didn't actually force you to do anything. That isn't my point. If you wanted a PS3 at launch you were screwed because they were passing the then high costs of the new BRD on to the consumer.

Sony was eating a significant cost on each PS3 thanks to Blu-Ray. Purchasing an equivalent stand-alone would have cost you at or near $1000 USD at the time. This is known.

 

[BigDug13]

You didn't play any games on your console for 7 years? That's weird. Did nothing seriously come out that you wanted to play?



Is there a big enough market for XB1 Kinects that people can sell them for $80? The only way to get one up til recently was to buy the XB1 which comes with it. So who is buying those Kinects that could use it and not already have one?

I gamed on my 360. Didn't even look at PS3 games. Multiplats were covered. I missed out on some exclusives that I have since started catching up on.

 

[Kerm 1]

I am not mad.. just surprised how idiotic consumers are. I really want to hear from folks who bought these $399 console, what games do they play.

$399 + Game = $460
Kinect + Game + Xbox = $450 << no one bought it. it was sitting on store shelf

What is the reason they are buying now and not before ?.

JFC. I picked one up today. I have three in my home already. I own 2 or 3 copies of most games, I travel and disconnecting and packing that shit up is a pain in the ass. Not much need to pack around, let alone; have Kinect in most hotel rooms. Perfect setup. BTW, I have three PS4's as well... I chose a 4th Xbone to travel with. OMFG, the humanity.

 

[Magwik]

What's going on in here ...

 

[ryutaro's mama]

Sorry, you can't have it both ways. The PS2 provided a huge leg up for the DVD format and was a great value - many consumers purchased a PS2 solely as a DVD player with no intention of gaming. The PS3 did the same thing for the Blu-Ray format, with - again - many consumers purchasing it as a value Blu-Ray player with no intention of playing games.

Kinect provides no such value.

Bish, I didn't even mention the Kinect and/or MS. I was responding to the guy that said getting a $600 Blu-Ray player was "amazing".

For me, in 2006, it wasn't amazing. It was a fuck you to me, especially when coupled with KK's quote.

This coming from someone that supported both previous PS systems from the start.

 

[BladeoftheImmortal]

Because as it stands, PS4 is #9 and Xbox One is #42 on Amazon...

is it the white sku that's number 9 because those sales won't be seen till September.

 

[Dragonborn]

Bish, I didn't even mention the Kinect and/or MS. I was responding to the guy that said getting a $600 Blu-Ray player was "amazing".

For me, in 2006, it wasn't amazing. It was a fuck you to me, especially when coupled with KK's quote.

This coming from someone that supported both previous PS systems from the start.

But again, that's because you didn't want a bluray. I said that for me and others looking to jump into bluray, it really was amazing value.

 

[LOLCats]

Well at least the $499 model is still vibrant.

Not mine, its kinda dull and lonely atm.

 

[mhayze]

People forget there was also a $499 20GB PS3 at launch. 20GB was fine for a while, and once the HD filled up, that extra $100 eventually bought a 1TB drive. You even got GT prologue for free (still have it installed).. good times.

 

[eddfromtheriver]

is it the white sku that's number 9 because those sales won't be seen till September.

Doesn't really matter as the regular one is just beside it.

 

[blackflag]

Compared to Sony and MS... I think the guys who are buying the $399 Xbone are the biggest idiots in the world. They were selling Xbox + Kinect + Titanfall for $450. It was amazing value

Even if you buy a $399 Xbox one now.. what are they going to do with it ?. Pay an extra $60 to buy Titanfall or just play peggle 2. What are these idots doing with their consoles any way ?

I will never touch kinect and I played titanfall on 360 and got rid of it. So why would I spend more just because?

Anyway my daughter works at target I can get 15% off the 400 but I'm still waiting until the Platinum game comes out to get one so it'll probably be even cheaper. I barely play my PS4 or my other consoles as it is.

 

[bishoptl]

Bish, I didn't even mention the Kinect and/or MS. I was responding to the guy that said getting a $600 Blu-Ray player was "amazing".

For me, in 2006, it wasn't amazing. It was a fuck you to me, especially when coupled with KK's quote.

Getting a Blu-Ray player at $600 at that time was an incredible value, compared to what it would cost you otherwise. KK's incendiary commentary was a PR debacle, but the numbers didn't lie.

 

[ryutaro's mama]

But again, that's because you didn't want a bluray. I said that for me and others looking to jump into bluray, it really was amazing value.

I was looking to jump into the new Playstation, not the new Playstation (plus BRD). It doesn't matter now but then it sucked.

So for the record, you are cool with Sony initially pricing me out of their platform and the hardware designer telling me "get a second job to afford it"?

 

[truth411]

Of course they didn't actually force you to do anything. That isn't my point. If you wanted a PS3 at launch you were screwed because they were passing the then high costs of the new BRD on to the consumer.

False, bluray players were $1,000 and up!!! for all that the PS3 did and features, it was a savings!!! It was the same thing Sony has been doing since PlayStation 1, build the strongest console they can and add a new medium for more space for games and added value beyond just gaming. PS1 = CD, PS 2 =DVD, PS3 = bluray+hdd. again remember they got the price down to 399 in a year, but with HD gameing came higher development cost, and the 360 had a year head start and easier to code for since its similar to a PC, and was the lead platform for multiplats. So the only developers who really maxed out the PS3 were Sony 1st party team. As I see it Sony mistakes were 2 fold, 1. They were to high off there success from the PS1/PS2 era. 2. They stuck to the same model / thinking it would guarantee them victory the 3rd time under estimating M.S. but there product was not "anti consumer" it was arguably over engineered for the price point the market would accept vs it's competitors and thus flawed.

 

[Blackstarhat]

Nice try.

How much was PS1?

PS2?

ANSWER: Not $599

they had a $500 ps3 at launch

 

[Winterfang]

Getting a Blu-Ray player at $600 at that time was an incredible value, compared to what it would cost you otherwise. KK's incendiary commentary was a PR debacle, but the numbers didn't lie.

What of you wanted a PS3, didn't cared for the bluray and couldn't afford it? Where was the PS3 without a bluray (I know it's impossible because the games where made with the big GB size on the disk)

I think that was the point he was trying to make, there was no other option. Either get a PS3 with blueray or don't get the PS3. If he meant something else then disregard this post.

 

[teiresias]

is it the white sku that's number 9 because those sales won't be seen till September.

White Destiny Bundle is #8, regular non-bundle black is #9, this is the hourly chart which granted mean little, but there you are.

 

[New002]

Getting a Blu-Ray player at $600 at that time was an incredible value, compared to what it would cost you otherwise. KK's incendiary commentary was a PR debacle, but the numbers didn't lie.

Pretty much. If you wanted a Blu-Ray player back then it didn't maken sense to get anything BUT a PS3. It was several hundred dollars cheaper than a stand alone Blu-Ray player with the added bonus of being a PS3. I almost bought one myself at one point to use primarily as a Blu-Ray player.

 

[ryutaro's mama]

I have no desire for this derail. I was asking a question of that poster. The thread isn't about this.

I have made it clear how I felt in 2006 in regards to PS3 and the implied "amazing" price.

Moving on.

 

[MilesTeg]

they had a $500 ps3 at launch

In extremely limited quantities that was basically an excuse to not be seen as $599 only.

 

[Dragonborn]

I was looking to jump into the new Playstation, not the new Playstation (plus BRD). It doesn't matter now but then it sucked.

So for the record, you are cool with Sony initially pricing me out of their platform and the hardware designer telling me "get a second job to afford it"?

Nope, I stated before that their arrogance was their downfall.

I understand what you're saying, and they are completely legitimate complaints. It's just different for me since I was actually looking for bluray at the time.

Different views depending on what you were looking for and I feel both are equally valid

 

[blame space]

 

[slapnuts]

Might be because everyone has been holding off for last 3 weeks. Its like making a dam, breaking it and saying wow so much water!

I believe this is playing a HUGE part into this....loaded up 3 weeks worth of buyers waiting for the initial price drop and bam! There you go..you got 3 weeks worth of buyers all coming at the same time. Like someone else said, lets see if it's got legs because i believe it wont but i am damn happy to see MS sell X1 without kinect...was a huge mistake from the get go. Rebounded, MS has.

 

[neotokyo360]

XboxOne Day one Edition.

Can boot XBO without Kinect ?

 

[slapnuts]

Sorry, you can't have it both ways. The PS2 provided a huge leg up for the DVD format and was a great value - many consumers purchased a PS2 solely as a DVD player with no intention of gaming. The PS3 did the same thing for the Blu-Ray format, with - again - many consumers purchasing it as a value Blu-Ray player with no intention of playing games.

Kinect provides no such value.


Sony was eating a significant cost on each PS3 thanks to Blu-Ray. Purchasing an equivalent stand-alone would have cost you at or near $1000 USD at the time. This is known.

Yeah i know three family members who bought a PS3 solely for the blu-ray player, these people were older folks, relatives of mine in their later 40's and 50's that are into home theater equipment. At the time the bluray player was pretty nice when compared to dedicated blu-ray players...there were various comparisons done at home theater websites.

 

[BladeoftheImmortal]

I have no desire for this derail. I was asking a question of that poster. The thread isn't about this.

I have made it clear how I felt in 2006 in regards to PS3 and the implied "amazing" price.

Moving on.

the problem is you were stating that as a matter of fact when it is an opinion. The price was good if you wanted a bluray player at the time. if you didn't, then yea it was expensive for a game console but for a game console and bluray player it was the cheapest you could find.

 

[TheBanditKing]

"Puzon pointed out that the $499 standard Xbox One is still "very vibrant" for GameStop."

Yea, pretty clearly PR, but they of course wouldn't say otherwise. Amazon tells a very different tale and while that's certainly not a perfect gauge it has been rather accurate all year long (as in, every time the PS4 is on top on Amazon, it tops NPD as well).

I'm more surprised by the PS4 Destiny bundled jumping to #3 on the Amazon vs. the X1 Kinect less bundle still way, way below (I think it just barely cracked the top 50?). Heck, outside of the Halo collection, the next X1 game is Destiny, at #29. Seems Sony got most of the boost from E3.

came in to say this, honestly this seems like a PR stunt.

 

[ryutaro's mama]

the problem is you were stating that as a matter of fact when it is an opinion. The price was good if you wanted a bluray player at the time. if you didn't, then yea it was expensive for a gake console but for a game console and bluray player it was the cheapest you could find.

I never said it was a fact. Since I am saying it, it is implied to be my opinion.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

I am not mad.. just surprised how idiotic consumers are. I really want to hear from folks who bought these $399 console, what games do they play.

$399 + Game = $460
Kinect + Game + Xbox = $450 << no one bought it. it was sitting on store shelf

What is the reason they are buying now and not before ?.

I don't think the new xbox one is selling any better than the bundles according to the online reports we have, so I don't really trust that gamestop says they're selling well. I don't predict that May sales are going to be awful and June sales will be great. I suspect they'll be pretty close to eachother.

 

[GoofsterStud]

Compared to Sony and MS... I think the guys who are buying the $399 Xbone are the biggest idiots in the world. They were selling Xbox + Kinect + Titanfall for $450. It was amazing value

Even if you buy a $399 Xbox one now.. what are they going to do with it ?. Pay an extra $60 to buy Titanfall or just play peggle 2. What are these idots doing with their consoles any way ?

While I think calling them idiots is a bit much, we had the $399 Xbox One with Kinect and Forza for a week around here. So I am really at a loss.

 

[BladeoftheImmortal]

I never said it was a fact. Since I am saying it, it is implied to be my opinion.

You said sony forced it on their consumers. the thing is, it wasn't forced because a lot of people wanted it for a bluray player. that was stated as a fact not as your opinion.

 

[ryutaro's mama]

You said sony forced it on their consumers. the thing is, it wasn't forced because a lot of people wanted it for a bluray player. that was stated as a fact not as your opinion.

I was a potential launch customer. If I wanted a PS3 at launch, I had to pay $500 or $600 to get one. The price was not consumer friendly so it was being forced me. KK said as much.

From my perspective, it was being forced.

I am reeeaally trying to not further this derail.

 

[BladeoftheImmortal]

I was a potential launch customer. If I wanted a PS3 at launch, I had to pay $500 or $600 to get one. The price was not consumer friendly so it was being forced me. KK said as much.

From my perspective, it was being forced.

I am reeeaally trying to not further this derail.

you had a choice not to buy it. you weren't forced to buy it. it's not a matter of perspective here. It wasn't forced on you, it was a terrible choice for you.

 

[ryutaro's mama]

you had a choice not to buy it. you weren't forced to buy it. it's not a matter of perspective here. It wasn't forced on you, it was a terrible choice for you.

Yep. You are right. My perspective is wrong.

Derail OVAH.

 

[Vyer]

Ryu is right. Bluray was far from a guaranteed winner at PS3 launch. Sony used the PS3 to try and win a format war and gave a big fuck you to people who were just looking for a game system at the time thanks to the result in pricing. It's revisionist history to pretend that Sony did some sort of favor to gamers at the time.

Of course, much like the xbone launch, the ps3 numbers at the time accurately reflected exactly that.

 

[ZehDon]

Nice try.

How much was PS1?

PS2?

ANSWER: Not $599

You've never been to Australia, have you?

...Despressingly, even after being adjusted for inflation, many of these consoles are still less expensive than they originally cost in Australia. Yay, Australia tax!...

 

[truth411]

Ryu is right. Bluray was far from a guaranteed winner at PS3 launch. Sony used the PS3 to try and win a format war and gave a big fuck you to people who were just looking for a game system at the time thanks to the result in pricing. It's revisionist history to pretend that Sony did some sort of favor to gamers at the time.

Of course, much like the xbone launch, the ps3 numbers at the time accurately reflected exactly that.

No, it was not an F you to anybody. Yes they were trying to knock down 2 birds with one stone , exactly like the PS2 (DVD) and PS1 (CD). Again people conveniently forget they got the price down 399 in 2007 a year after launch. Not to mention a 499 version at launch with the ability to upgrade your own HDD. Anywho different strokes for different folks I suppose.