<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Justice @ Jun 13 2007, 09:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>It's not free, you're paying at least $120 more for a PS3. "Free" is just a term that means hidden costs.</div> Exactly... Sony includes the cost of running their online service in the price of the PS3. They would be stupid not to take into into consideration during product costing... so it might appear to be "free," but it really isn't. Microsoft doesn't charge that $50 in the price of the 360... so Xbox would be the better deal in terms of that aspect, because they give you the option of paying that $50 and getting online play, whereas you're pretty much "forced" to pay for it with the PS3 whether you use it or not.
I would get a PS3, but Halo 3 is only for 360 (right?), and that is the only reason I'm even getting a 360, for Halo 3.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pronk48 @ Jun 14 2007, 10:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I would get a PS3, but Halo 3 is only for 360 (right?), and that is the only reason I'm even getting a 360, for Halo 3.</div>Yes.I have yet to be informed of a PS3 only game that actually MATTERS.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BigMo763 @ Jun 14 2007, 01:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Exactly... Sony includes the cost of running their online service in the price of the PS3. They would be stupid not to take into into consideration during product costing... so it might appear to be "free," but it really isn't. Microsoft doesn't charge that $50 in the price of the 360... so Xbox would be the better deal in terms of that aspect, because they give you the option of paying that $50 and getting online play, whereas you're pretty much "forced" to pay for it with the PS3 whether you use it or not.</div>Show me a link or a terms of use page where this can be confirmed.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (noballer07 @ Jun 14 2007, 11:54 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Show me a link or a terms of use page where this can be confirmed.</div> It wouldn't be on their terms of use page. Are you really stupid enough to believe that PS3 just gives online play out of the kindness of their hearts? (hint: they're a business, meaning the answer is no) They have to give free online play to sell their system, but it is a part of the system. There is no reason to consider it free. That's about as asinine as saying that bluray is free for the PS3. (another hint: it's not, you pay for it in the cost of the system)
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>That's about as asinine as saying that bluray is free for the PS3. (another hint: it's not, you pay for it in the cost of the system)</div><span style="font-family:Arial">A Blue Ray player costs around $1,000. The PS3 is a $600 system, you're not paying for it...</span>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BALLAHOLLIC? @ Jun 14 2007, 12:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><span style="font-family:Arial">A Blue Ray player costs around $1,000. The PS3 is a $600 system, you're not paying for it...</span></div> The Blue Ray is figured into the cost of the system.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Justice @ Jun 14 2007, 12:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'> It wouldn't be on their terms of use page. Are you really stupid enough to believe that PS3 just gives online play out of the kindness of their hearts? (hint: they're a business, meaning the answer is no) They have to give free online play to sell their system, but it is a part of the system. There is no reason to consider it free. That's about as asinine as saying that bluray is free for the PS3. (another hint: it's not, you pay for it in the cost of the system)</div>Justice, I don't give a feezy. When you put it that way, Microsoft might have put an extra few hunned dollars to go towards internet even when people would pay to subscribe anyway. I paid for the system, but I'm not going to pay more just to play it; that's the issue. The PS3 costs so f*cking much because of the Bluray and all that good ish.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BALLAHOLLIC? @ Jun 14 2007, 12:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><span style="font-family:Arial">A Blue Ray player costs around $1,000. The PS3 is a $600 system, you're not paying for it...</span></div>They were $1,000 when they first came out. The Sony blu-ray player is $500 now. The prices of blu-ray/hd-dvd players are dropping steadily. To the average person, a blu-ray player isn't even worth it because they don't have 1080p HD tvs. Besides, now you can buy up-converting DVD players which play 1080p so you don't have to buy new DVDs, so blu-ray and hd-dvd players are pretty useless. Also, I bet more than half of the people that own a PS3 haven't even used the blu-ray player, or used it fully.
I was about to say what Tony said. The price of blu ray may have dropped, but you still have that + a gaming system. PS3 online is free because it's no where near as good as Xbox Live...good enough for me though.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I was about to say what Tony said. The price of blu ray may have dropped, but you still have that + a gaming system.</div>Well it's a good thing you didn't say what Tony said because he acts like the blu ray was a free add on. PS3 alone is not a 600 dollar gaming system. Blu ray and online are accounted into the price of the system. Now, altogether, it's not a bad price. Moreso if you want or need those features. With the 360, you don't have to pay for those features, it's your choice if you want them. But Yeah, if you want them, I'd say go for the PS3. Especially online, because it beats a yearly payment.
I find it funny that some people don't understand the basic idea of a company including the costs of producing their product, running their service, and providing customer service into the price of a system before marking that price up to make a profit.Just because they say it's "free," doesn't mean it's free at all. Why would PS3 give "free" online play? They would be losing money off of PS3 sales if it was really "free." It's just included in the price of the PS3. Same with the BluRay player. Obviously they aren't going to mark up the price of the PS3 to include the entire $1000 cost of the Bluray when it first came out, but that isn't how product costing works anyway. It depends on what product costing system they use, but for the most part they'd take the total cost of purchasing and installing/implementing the BluRay player and average it out over the entire production batch. Also, I doubt that Sony paid $1000 each for each BluRay player... they probably got a very good deal on them in order to include them in the PS3...
But you probably won't even use the blu-ray player unless you have an HDTV where the PS3 is. Why pay for something you won't use?
That's the way I look at it... although it is all personal preference. But to sit there and say the PS3 gives you things for "free" that you have to pay for with the 360 is retarded. You're paying for it no matter what... it's just included in the price with the PS3, but it's an add-on on the 360.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>But you probably won't even use the blu-ray player unless you have an HDTV where the PS3 is. Why pay for something you won't use?</div>True for now, but I think later on, HD's will be common, along with the DVD becoming obsolete to blu rays and HDDVDs just like VHS did to DVDs. But agree, right now, it's not worth having.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rok @ Jun 14 2007, 11:25 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Well it's a good thing you didn't say what Tony said because he acts like the blu ray was a free add on. PS3 alone is not a 600 dollar gaming system. Blu ray and online are accounted into the price of the system. Now, altogether, it's not a bad price. Moreso if you want or need those features. With the 360, you don't have to pay for those features, it's your choice if you want them. But Yeah, if you want them, I'd say go for the PS3. Especially online, because it beats a yearly payment.</div>Well most blu ray players are worth more than the PS3 and that's a big reason why people are buying it, not because it's better than the Xbox, because it's not, at least not yet. Online gaming is free because it sucks compared to Live. You actually do get what you pay for with that. I didn't have Xbox live for my first system though so getting anything is a plus for me and I don't have to spend any extra money for that thing so I can play Xbox Live wirelessly. So I save 50 bucks the first year while getting online gaming and a blu ray player and save 50 more bucks each year while playing the same games. The $250 saved before the next systems come out is enough for me to get the worse system. Now hopefully it doesn't come to me screwed up because I ordered it online. Sony does lose some money, but then they don't add on the online gaming headset and the games and controllers are really expensive...maybe I should've went with the 360 after all. Eh, no big deal as long as it works because I'll be getter the same games pretty much.But yeah Primetime, go with the 360.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BALLAHOLLIC? @ Jun 14 2007, 12:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><span style="font-family:Arial">A Blue Ray player costs around $1,000. The PS3 is a $600 system, you're not paying for it...</span></div>I'm sure since you're 17, you don't understand how technology works, but I can tell you for a fact that it doesn't cost Sony $1,000 or anything close to that to make a bluray player. In fact, it's more like double digit cost, and it goes down everytime they make another one. You are paying for the bluray, just not nearly as much as retail like if you got a straight up bluray player.On another note, I don't know why you call it Blue Ray.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (noballer07 @ Jun 14 2007, 12:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Justice, I don't give a feezy. When you put it that way, Microsoft might have put an extra few hunned dollars to go towards internet even when people would pay to subscribe anyway. I paid for the system, but I'm not going to pay more just to play it; that's the issue. The PS3 costs so f*cking much because of the Bluray and all that good ish.</div>Microsoft doesn't give away free xbox live (not for the life of the system, anyway), because people love xbox live. They have established it as something worth paying for. Sony gives theirs away, because otherwise tardos wouldn't buy their system. If Microsoft needed to make it free, they would. They don't. More people will buy their system without xbox live anyway (counterintuitive, I know).
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rok @ Jun 14 2007, 01:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>True for now, but I think later on, HD's will be common, along with the DVD becoming obsolete to blu rays and HDDVDs just like VHS did to DVDs. But agree, right now, it's not worth having.</div>Like I said, with up-converting DVD players, it converts a regular DVD to full HD. No need to buy a $30 Blu-ray DVD, or HD-DVD.DVDs will not become obsolete in the next twenty years, I assure you. Blu-ray and HD-DVD hasn't taken off and it has been out pretty much a year. DVDs will probably outdue both, just watch.It doesn't compare to VHS and DVD. They are two TOTALLY different types of technology.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Justice @ Jun 14 2007, 03:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Microsoft doesn't give away free xbox live (not for the life of the system, anyway), because people love xbox live. They have established it as something worth paying for. Sony gives theirs away, because otherwise tardos wouldn't buy their system. If Microsoft needed to make it free, they would. They don't. More people will buy their system without xbox live anyway (counterintuitive, I know).</div> Agreed. Xbox Live is 100x better than whatever online crap Sony puts out. The 360 is being pushed into becoming more of a total media center instead of just a gaming console... something that I don't think the PS3 will be able to compete with down the line.And noballer, sure, Microsoft may have included more cost in running their online service in the price, but whose to say Sony's cost of running their online service is not higher than Microsoft's? It can go both ways... the difference is that with the 360 you're getting a better overall product for your money because of how versatile it is and how versatile Microsoft is pushing it to become. You can download movies and TV shows with the 360, download games and demos, as well as connect every PC and TV in your household to it and stream music, pictures, videos, etc., not to mention the connectivity with the Zune (or whatever it's called). Bundle that up with all the games that are out for the 360 and the games that are coming out... and the 360 just blows PS3 out of the water, in my opinion.I've paid less for the 360 (including the $50 for Xbox Live) than people will pay for the PS3, and I'm getting a hell of a lot better product. That's the way I see it.
