This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="clyde46"] It is expensive. You also have to consider the fact that PS3 came out almost 6 months after the US release and it was about $800 when you apply the exchange rates. In comparison, the 360 was £280, it had games and it was already available. tormentosReally what was the price of a premium 360 + a blu-ray player on UK when the PS3 came out,since you say it was expensive,you have to compare it against similar tech to be able to get to that conclusion,and is not a matter if you want it or not,is a matter of what the PS3 had inside... Lets do some math. £900 Blu-ray player £280 Xbox 360. Total = £1,180 Price of the PS3 £425.. I don't even wan to think what was the exchange rate on those days for that incredible high price,because if you claim that £425 translate back then into 800 dollars that mean that the currency exchange was very close to 2 to 1 2 dollars for each pound or close. Which mean that would translate into like $2,250 for a 360 and Blu-ray player,when sony for $800 less than half gave you both systems.. Expensive is a stupid term to describe the PS3 price,considering what it had inside,it was like buying a Ferrari for $70K sure still expensive but is a Ferrari man the real thing cost way more. Oh and the PS3 release 4 months after US launch not 6. See even other Cows laugh at you and your stupidity.
Really what was the price of a premium 360 + a blu-ray player on UK when the PS3 came out,since you say it was expensive,you have to compare it against similar tech to be able to get to that conclusion,and is not a matter if you want it or not,is a matter of what the PS3 had inside... Lets do some math. £900 Blu-ray player £280 Xbox 360. Total = £1,180 Price of the PS3 £425.. I don't even wan to think what was the exchange rate on those days for that incredible high price,because if you claim that £425 translate back then into 800 dollars that mean that the currency exchange was very close to 2 to 1 2 dollars for each pound or close. Which mean that would translate into like $2,250 for a 360 and Blu-ray player,when sony for $800 less than half gave you both systems.. Expensive is a stupid term to describe the PS3 price,considering what it had inside,it was like buying a Ferrari for $70K sure still expensive but is a Ferrari man the real thing cost way more. Oh and the PS3 release 4 months after US launch not 6. See even other Cows laugh at you and your stupidity.[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="clyde46"] It is expensive. You also have to consider the fact that PS3 came out almost 6 months after the US release and it was about $800 when you apply the exchange rates. In comparison, the 360 was £280, it had games and it was already available. Bruce_Benzing
[QUOTE="Bruce_Benzing"]See even other Cows laugh at you and your stupidity.[QUOTE="tormentos"] Really what was the price of a premium 360 + a blu-ray player on UK when the PS3 came out,since you say it was expensive,you have to compare it against similar tech to be able to get to that conclusion,and is not a matter if you want it or not,is a matter of what the PS3 had inside... Lets do some math. £900 Blu-ray player £280 Xbox 360. Total = £1,180 Price of the PS3 £425.. I don't even wan to think what was the exchange rate on those days for that incredible high price,because if you claim that £425 translate back then into 800 dollars that mean that the currency exchange was very close to 2 to 1 2 dollars for each pound or close. Which mean that would translate into like $2,250 for a 360 and Blu-ray player,when sony for $800 less than half gave you both systems.. Expensive is a stupid term to describe the PS3 price,considering what it had inside,it was like buying a Ferrari for $70K sure still expensive but is a Ferrari man the real thing cost way more. Oh and the PS3 release 4 months after US launch not 6.clyde46
See even other Cows laugh at you and your stupidity.When people resort to attack you personally rather than your argument,is because is impossible for them to actually attack your points... Regardless of what you say blind biased lemming my argument is spot on,and unless MS reveal a 7950 or 670 GTX console that has GDDR5,that rumor price even with Kinect is a down right robbery... But you people are use to be sucker punch by MS so what the hell.Bruce_Benzing
[QUOTE="Bruce_Benzing"] See even other Cows laugh at you and your stupidity.When people resort to attack you personally rather than your argument,is because is impossible for them to actually attack your points... Regardless of what you say blind biased lemming my argument is spot on,and unless MS reveal a 7950 or 670 GTX console that has GDDR5,that rumor price even with Kinect is a down right robbery... But you people are use to be sucker punch by MS so what the hell. You have to make a valid point before someone can attack it.....
tormentos
[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="clone01"] Cat paint you no think fence car alarm lol internetz I can't taste ceiling el tormo!!!!!!! sony.clone01High troll01 still chasing gamercards.? I know goat eat foam for microwave news for Pokemon. El tormooooooo! Sony.
Â
Â
Â
Classic
I know goat eat foam for microwave news for Pokemon. El tormooooooo! Sony.[QUOTE="clone01"][QUOTE="tormentos"] High troll01 still chasing gamercards.?tormentos
Â
Â
Â
Classic
es my moped toast bicycle. el tormooooooo!!!! sony.
[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]
[QUOTE="Michael0134567"]
Straight to the point. I like it.
Michael0134567
It's important to be succinct. To ramble, would be to become tormentos.
That's what I like about you.
[QUOTE="Michael0134567"]
[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]
It's important to be succinct. To ramble, would be to become tormentos.
lundy86_4
That's what I like about you.
Â
.
:P
BULLSHIT. The common sense approach would be that the next MS system if weaker from a technological standpoint it wouldnt cost as much as a technologically superior thing. Based upon pure speculation if the next MS system comes with basically the same cpu and gpu but ddr3 even 8 gigs of it it will cost less cause 8 gigs of gddr5 is more expensive. Thats not the argument being presented what is being presented is that the next MS system is weak will be nothing but kinect and MS is evil so they will artificially increase its cost. Even though history shows otherwise the original xbox always sold at a loss because nvidia refused any sort of R&D or fabrication using newer techniques and smaller nm processes and the 360 sold at a loss for the first 2 years. WilliamRLBaker
Â
I think you are confuse.
The 360 was sold at a loss for 1 year,the next one thy were breaking even on hardware,but loosing in marketing,shipping and all that crap,fast forward 8 years,and the 360 still is been sold for $300 with HDD,$100 dollars difference from launch price,compare that to the original xbox that with less room to play slashed $170 of its original retail price in just 4 short years.
It shows what MS is doing,everything is over priced,HDD network adapters,$60 for online play,andeven hiding free apps under a pay wall to get more people in,fact is if you want to watch netflix on xbox 360 you need xbox live gold mandatory even if you are not interested in online play,that doesn't happen on any other device on this planet.
You just don't want to admit it,Kinect was MS last rip off it cost $56 dollars to make the crappy thing and they sold it for $150,and some how you still doubt it.
The fun thing is that with those specs is the rumors are true,that console is hugely over price period,$540 for xbox live 2 years and a 720,not even the 360 was taht expensive,it was $500 with 2 years of xbox live.
You are just reading between the lines like you always do.
Â
Â
Â
Log in to comment