Does the Playstation 3 appeal more to adults and the Xbox 360 more to children?

[QUOTE="pc-ps360"]

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

As people get older, they become smarter with their money. With age comes responsibility, and people that are older are less likely to buy things on impulse, and more likely to research the things they buy.

I don't think it's any secret to anyone that the PS3 is the better deal.

With the Xbox 360, you buy the cheapest console at $200, get a harddrive for $100, a Play N Charge kit for $20, Xbox Live for $60, and you're already at $380. With the PS3, you get all of that at $250, plus you get a blu ray disc drive that works for games and movies. With the 360, you only get a DVD drive, and the HD-DVD drive add-on only works for movies, not games.

That's also not taking into consideration build quality. The 360 Slim is a very light and cheap feeling console, and it's obvious that many cheap parts were used in it. The disc drive is extremely loud, uses a disc tray, and the console can get very hot. In contrast, the PS3 slim has very high build quality. It is very quiet, stays cool, and even has an internal power supply in comparison to the massive external power supply brick used by the 360. The build quality between the systems are like night and day.

Then you have the differences in the controller technology. The DualShock 3 has 10-bit sensitivity compared to the 360 controller 8-bit sensitivity used in last generation controllers. The 360 controller comes standard using AA batteries. The DS3 uses pressure sensitive/analog buttons and Sixaxis motion technology, both absent in the 360 controller. The 360 controller uses dated wireless 2.4GHz protocol technology compared to the superior Bluetooth alternative used in the DS3.

Even if the systems were the same price, the PS3 would have the advantage due to build quality and technological supremacy, but you have to take into account that not only is the 360 $50 dollars more by default, but you also need to buy batteries and chargers for the controller, along with Xbox Live, leaving you paying $130 dollars more for an inferior product.

Children don't really research the products they want, and when parents are buying products that their children want, they don't research those products either. I think that parents may see that the Xbox 360 may look cheaper at first glance (4gb SKU), but all of the hidden fees catch them by surprise due to lack of research.

I'm under the impression that the PS3 is automatically 100x more appealing to adults, because after research, something many adults partake in when buying products for themselves, the PS3 is the obvious choice.

Then you have the wide variety of genres that the PS3 exclusives cover, which also happen to be more adult oriented. With the new Kinect focus and games like Sesame Street Kinect: Once upon a Monster and Kinect Star Wars, the emphasis on children is even more pronounced.

arkephonic

:lol:

ur just a butthurt ps3 only owner that missed on all the wii, pc and 360 games this gen.

I don't know whether to post Eminem gifs or just feel sorry for you....ah f*** it.

They appeal to exactly the same audience and there is little to choose between them relatively. I'm glad they are both out there because competition is good for us gamers but let's not pretend they are worlds apart in any field at all. The exclusives for the systems are the only thing really setting them apart.

As people get older, they become smarter with their money. With age comes responsibility, and people that are older are less likely to buy things on impulse, and more likely to research the things they buy.

I don't think it's any secret to anyone that the PS3 is the better deal.

With the Xbox 360, you buy the cheapest console at $200, get a harddrive for $100, a Play N Charge kit for $20, Xbox Live for $60, and you're already at $380. With the PS3, you get all of that at $250, plus you get a blu ray disc drive that works for games and movies. With the 360, you only get a DVD drive, and the HD-DVD drive add-on only works for movies, not games.

That's also not taking into consideration build quality. The 360 Slim is a very light and cheap feeling console, and it's obvious that many cheap parts were used in it. The disc drive is extremely loud, uses a disc tray, and the console can get very hot. In contrast, the PS3 slim has very high build quality. It is very quiet, stays cool, and even has an internal power supply in comparison to the massive external power supply brick used by the 360. The build quality between the systems are like night and day.

Then you have the differences in the controller technology. The DualShock 3 has 10-bit sensitivity compared to the 360 controller 8-bit sensitivity used in last generation controllers. The 360 controller comes standard using AA batteries. The DS3 uses pressure sensitive/analog buttons and Sixaxis motion technology, both absent in the 360 controller. The 360 controller uses dated wireless 2.4GHz protocol technology compared to the superior Bluetooth alternative used in the DS3.

Even if the systems were the same price, the PS3 would have the advantage due to build quality and technological supremacy, but you have to take into account that not only is the 360 $50 dollars more by default, but you also need to buy batteries and chargers for the controller, along with Xbox Live, leaving you paying $130 dollars more for an inferior product.

Children don't really research the products they want, and when parents are buying products that their children want, they don't research those products either. I think that parents may see that the Xbox 360 may look cheaper at first glance (4gb SKU), but all of the hidden fees catch them by surprise due to lack of research.

I'm under the impression that the PS3 is automatically 100x more appealing to adults, because after research, something many adults partake in when buying products for themselves, the PS3 is the obvious choice.

Then you have the wide variety of genres that the PS3 exclusives cover, which also happen to be more adult oriented. With the new Kinect focus and games like Sesame Street Kinect: Once upon a Monster and Kinect Star Wars, the emphasis on children is even more pronounced.

arkephonic

it's true, i'm actually a fetus.

[QUOTE="WiiCubeM1"]

The PS3 is the more "hardcore" console of this gen. Sony really only greenlighted major, mature franchises hoping to draw in the hardcore market. That was their downfall this gen, in my opinion, as without casual titles to sell more consoles, they lost in the numbers race.

The Wii was the casual console this gen. Very few exclusive "hardcore" titles (except for the first-party titles) and a huge influx of casual titles sold the system, but, similarly, but opposite of, Sony, with too much focus on the casual side, they lost the interest of the self-conscious hardcore gamer.

The 360 was the middle ground console. Plenty of mature titles hardcore gamers would love, but a decent number of casual titles to appease little kids and casuals.

So, yes, the 360 does appeal to kids a bit more than the PS3, but that may have been more of a good thing.

arkephonic

It's no surprise to me that Sony is losing money, they're taking one for the team.

In an age where casual games dominate and children / soccer moms are the dominant consumers in sheer numbers, Sony looks in the other direction.

If I had a genie and could make a wish on how I wanted a major game company to perform, Sony would be the result. I'm an adult gamer that likes traditional "core" games, and that's Sony's focus, and that's where they excel.

It literally almost seems like Sony doesn't care about money, because all they want to do is please me. I'm in the minority, I'm an adult gamer that prefers traditional "core" games. I am far outnumbered by soccer moms and children, and they prefer casual games, and motion controlled casual games are what sell, because the target audience is the largest.

Sony is like a dream come true for me, because for whatever reason, they don't care about making money and just choose to please me as a gamer and continue making the games I want and the types of games that I like to play. I swear, I never had a genie and never made a wish for this to happen, but it is what it is, and Sony is the way that they are, and I love it!

You try too hard.

Keep your fanboy rants to a few sentences. Nobody is going to waste their time reading paragraphs full of nonsense. Keep it to a few sentences full of nonense.

Fizzman

[QUOTE="Fizzman"]

You try too hard.

Keep your fanboy rants to a few sentences. Nobody is going to waste their time reading paragraphs full of nonsense. Keep it to a few sentences full of nonense.

StrongDeadlift

Your sig seems to go hand in hand with every post you make. It's very appropriate.

I miss the McRibb sandwich.

Wii owners- Kids, Soccr moms, Nintendo drones, girls

360 owners- Teens, bro gamers, adults, party game fans, girls

PS3 gamers- teenagers and adults who act like children

True say.

Sony has taken one of the team and decided to make great games than finding ways to make the game sell.

I don't think many New Gamers this gen would see the sacrifice Sony has taken to at least deliver games.
That itself deserves an applause and they are Developers out there who also make and improve on the games rather than increasing figures.

g0ddyX

is

Wow, that is a new one :lol:

Sony loosing 7 billion or so dollars on the PS3 (with an increased projected loss up 3+ billon, double what it was before) was a sacrifice?

Sony cares that much about you that when its all said and done, the PS3 will lose them 10 billion dollars, because they wuv you so much?:lol:

cows gonna cow.

For current gen systems, I actually have a 60 gig ps3, 160 gig ps3 slim, 250 gig Xbox 360 slim, 320 gig Xbox 360 slim, black Wii, white Wii, red 3ds, PC, iMac, iPhone, 64 gig iPad and a 64 gig iPod Touch 4g with a bunch of games for each. I don't believe in talking about every system unless you own and have played every system extensively, along with the vast majority of top games for each.

I miss the McRibb sandwich.

Wii owners- Kids, Soccr moms, Nintendo drones, girls

360 owners- Teens, bro gamers, adults, party game fans, girls

PS3 gamers- Some teens, people who bought it for blu ray, Man children who want to convince themselves Sony is the dominant force in gaming like the good ol' days (take a look at youtube)

WarTornRuston

Fixed ;)

[QUOTE="StrongDeadlift"][QUOTE="Fizzman"]

You try too hard.

Keep your fanboy rants to a few sentences. Nobody is going to waste their time reading paragraphs full of nonsense. Keep it to a few sentences full of nonense.

balfe1990

Your sig seems to go hand in hand with every post you make. It's very appropriate.

What on Earth? No, no.

They both appeal to multiple markets. That's the general idea. Certain games appeal to kids, whilst others don't. Furthermore, the apps/multimedia features of both tend to appeal to a more mature audience.

[QUOTE="balfe1990"]

[QUOTE="StrongDeadlift"] This lol. The funny part about it is...he isnt even trolling. You can tell by how much effort he puts into his posts, that heo believes every word he is saying. He is trying to convince HIMSELF that PS3 isnt last place, not us ;)StrongDeadlift

Your sig seems to go hand in hand with every post you make. It's very appropriate.

No, I'm saying the GIF just works with what you're writing.

PS2 dominated the Casual and Hardcore console market, guess which place they ended up in?

You would think that Sony would learn that you need BOTH markets to win.

Why do you think CoD sells more than truely great games like Witcher 2 as an example? The casuals.

This thing about Sony being more hardcore is lame and stupid, you want hardcore go PC.

For current gen systems, I actually have a 60 gig ps3, 160 gig ps3 slim, 250 gig Xbox 360 slim, 320 gig Xbox 360 slim, black Wii, white Wii, red 3ds, PC, iMac, iPhone, 64 gig iPad and a 64 gig iPod Touch 4g with a bunch of games for each. I don't believe in talking about every system unless you own and have played every system extensively, along with the vast majority of top games for each.arkephonic

I agree with OP but I just want to know.... Why do you own two of each console... an iPad AND an iPod Touch.....?

What a dumb thread.

lol god you're such a moron.


*used the correct you're just for ark since he really is a big moron*

by the way

WilliamRLBaker

The PS3 does appeal to adults more than the 360. The interface is more adult, and it was one of the more popular bluray players amongst audio enthusiasts, when the console arrived.

The PS3 does appeal to adults more than the 360. The interface is more adult, and it was one of the more popular bluray players amongst audio enthusiasts, when the console arrived.

Heirren

Yes.

The ps3 is the best bargin console but it also has the best selection of exclusives I can't get on pc. The ps3 isa great blu-ay player with 3d support as well. It is the best bang for the buck hands down.

noscope-ak47

pretty much. I don't have any problem with the Xbox, but at the moment Sony makes the more attractive offer.

no thats Nintendos group, PS3 is more teens same with 360

[QUOTE="FireSpirit117"]You're still pushing that "Xbox needs an HD-DVD player" nonsense? Oh Lord...arkephonic

This is the greatest peripheral add-on of all time. I wonder why it stopped selling.

I love arkephonic threads,they always leave a lot of butthurt and tears in their wake ;)

Rocker6

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="WiiCubeM1"]

The PS3 is the more "hardcore" console of this gen. Sony really only greenlighted major, mature franchises hoping to draw in the hardcore market. That was their downfall this gen, in my opinion, as without casual titles to sell more consoles, they lost in the numbers race.

The Wii was the casual console this gen. Very few exclusive "hardcore" titles (except for the first-party titles) and a huge influx of casual titles sold the system, but, similarly, but opposite of, Sony, with too much focus on the casual side, they lost the interest of the self-conscious hardcore gamer.

The 360 was the middle ground console. Plenty of mature titles hardcore gamers would love, but a decent number of casual titles to appease little kids and casuals.

So, yes, the 360 does appeal to kids a bit more than the PS3, but that may have been more of a good thing.

g0ddyX

It's no surprise to me that Sony is losing money, they're taking one for the team.

In an age where casual games dominate and children / soccer moms are the dominant consumers in sheer numbers, Sony looks in the other direction.

If I had a genie and could make a wish on how I wanted a major game company to perform, Sony would be the result. I'm an adult gamer that likes traditional "core" games, and that's Sony's focus, and that's where they excel.

It literally almost seems like Sony doesn't care about money, because all they want to do is please me. I'm in the minority, I'm an adult gamer that prefers traditional "core" games. I am far outnumbered by soccer moms and children, and they prefer casual games, and motion controlled casual games are what sell, because the target audience is the largest.

Sony is like a dream come true for me, because for whatever reason, they don't care about making money and just choose to please me as a gamer and continue making the games I want and the types of games that I like to play. I swear, I never had a genie and never made a wish for this to happen, but it is what it is, and Sony is the way that they are, and I love it!

Yep. I'm not sure for the exact reason as to why Sony does this, but I'm happy that they do. It's possible that maybe Sony attempted to go after the children market and failed, so instead they just stuck with traditional mature oriented games. I'm not so sure that's a good thing for them as a company, but for me as an adult gamer, it's the best thing that could have ever happened. The worst thing that could have ever happened to the Xbox 360 for me as a gamer is them having success with children Kinect focus, and that's exactly what is happening. It shifts their entire focus onto something I'm not even interested in. Sony attempted to try something that I'm not interested in, and failed, so now they focus on things that I am interested in.

As an adult gamer who is primarily interested in traditional "core" video games, I am in the minority when compared to children and soccer moms who prefer casual motion controlled games. Why any company would primarily focus on me and making what I like is beyond me, but I love it. Some of my favorite games this generation are Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots, God of War 3, Demon's Souls, Uncharted series, Killzone series and Resistance series. I like a bunch of 360 exclusives as well, but that is no longer Microsoft's focus. Microsoft tested the waters with the children audience using Kinect, and it blew up in their face and now they're behind it 100%. Whether you like it or not, this means more children Kinect games, and much less traditional "core" games. Potential traditional "core" games for the Xbox 360 are now not being made in favor of children Kinect focused games. Yes, there are still some traditional "core" games being released for the Xbox 360, but not nearly as many. If the Kinect children focus had failed for Microsoft, they too would be like Sony and focusing on me and the kind of games I like, but that's not the way the cards fell. The way the cards fell for Sony was in my favor, and business and money aside, Sony is the best for me.

It's no mystery as to why Sony struggles with business and money, because the kinds of games I like are in the minority. Like I said earlier, gamers like me who prefer traditional "core" video games pale in comparison to the children and soccer moms, and the games aimed towards children and soccer moms are what sell, it's where the money is at.

Regardless of Sony's intentions and motivations, regardless of why they do the things they do, they are entirely focused on making traditional "core" games, and making the people who got them to where they are today happy. Microsoft doesn't care about the people who stood in line for Halo 3, the people who got the Xbox brand to where it is today, because they're now in the minority compared to children and soccer moms, and Microsoft follows the money. Sony's entire focus is making games for the people who have been playing since Playstation 1, played the Playstation 2, and went on to the Playstation 3, people who like traditional "core" video games, the games that got the industry where it is today. Their focus isn't on a flawed new way of gaming, who's target audience is children and soccer moms.

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]For current gen systems, I actually have a 60 gig ps3, 160 gig ps3 slim, 250 gig Xbox 360 slim, 320 gig Xbox 360 slim, black Wii, white Wii, red 3ds, PC, iMac, iPhone, 64 gig iPad and a 64 gig iPod Touch 4g with a bunch of games for each. I don't believe in talking about every system unless you own and have played every system extensively, along with the vast majority of top games for each.DeadMan1290

I agree with OP but I just want to know.... Why do you own two of each console... an iPad AND an iPod Touch.....?

I have 2 of each console, even my retro consoles, just for collecting purposes. Sure, they hold no value now, but they might in the future. All of my 2nd consoles are new in box and haven't been opened yet. A couple of my retro consoles are boxed in a box different from the original, but they are mint condition consoles.

As for the Apple stuff, I got the 64gb Touch 4g first, and the iPad 2 2nd because it is way better with a bigger screen. I never use my Touch, I have probably used it a total of 2 hours. The iPhone 4 does everything the Touch 4g can do and more, so there's really no reason for me to ever use the Touch unless I am saving my phone battery for something important.

[QUOTE="DeadMan1290"]

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]For current gen systems, I actually have a 60 gig ps3, 160 gig ps3 slim, 250 gig Xbox 360 slim, 320 gig Xbox 360 slim, black Wii, white Wii, red 3ds, PC, iMac, iPhone, 64 gig iPad and a 64 gig iPod Touch 4g with a bunch of games for each. I don't believe in talking about every system unless you own and have played every system extensively, along with the vast majority of top games for each.arkephonic

I agree with OP but I just want to know.... Why do you own two of each console... an iPad AND an iPod Touch.....?

I have 2 of each console, even my retro consoles, just for collecting purposes. Sure, they hold no value now, but they might in the future. All of my 2nd consoles are new in box and haven't been opened yet. A couple of my retro consoles are boxed in a box different from the original, but they are mint condition consoles.

As for the Apple stuff, I got the 64gb Touch 4g first, and the iPad 2 2nd because it is way better with a bigger screen. I never use my Touch, I have probably used it a total of 2 hours. The iPhone 4 does everything the Touch 4g can do and more, so there's really no reason for me to ever use the Touch unless I am saving my phone battery for something important.

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="DeadMan1290"]

I agree with OP but I just want to know.... Why do you own two of each console... an iPad AND an iPod Touch.....?

jonleeprice

I have 2 of each console, even my retro consoles, just for collecting purposes. Sure, they hold no value now, but they might in the future. All of my 2nd consoles are new in box and haven't been opened yet. A couple of my retro consoles are boxed in a box different from the original, but they are mint condition consoles.

As for the Apple stuff, I got the 64gb Touch 4g first, and the iPad 2 2nd because it is way better with a bigger screen. I never use my Touch, I have probably used it a total of 2 hours. The iPhone 4 does everything the Touch 4g can do and more, so there's really no reason for me to ever use the Touch unless I am saving my phone battery for something important.

The thing is, I don't even care if any of them appreciate in value. I'm not the type who plans on selling down the line. I plan on holding onto everything I get, so the value is really meaningless for anything other than a topic for discussion sometime in the future.

do not know

Second thread in a row that I didn't read.

As people get older, they become smarter with their money. With age comes responsibility, and people that are older are less likely to buy things on impulse, and more likely to research the things they buy.

I don't think it's any secret to anyone that the PS3 is the better deal.

With the Xbox 360, you buy the cheapest console at $200, get a harddrive for $100, a Play N Charge kit for $20, Xbox Live for $60, and you're already at $380. With the PS3, you get all of that at $250, plus you get a blu ray disc drive that works for games and movies. With the 360, you only get a DVD drive, and the HD-DVD drive add-on only works for movies, not games.

That's also not taking into consideration build quality. The 360 Slim is a very light and cheap feeling console, and it's obvious that many cheap parts were used in it. The disc drive is extremely loud, uses a disc tray, and the console can get very hot. In contrast, the PS3 slim has very high build quality. It is very quiet, stays cool, and even has an internal power supply in comparison to the massive external power supply brick used by the 360. The build quality between the systems are like night and day.

Then you have the differences in the controller technology. The DualShock 3 has 10-bit sensitivity compared to the 360 controller 8-bit sensitivity used in last generation controllers. The 360 controller comes standard using AA batteries. The DS3 uses pressure sensitive/analog buttons and Sixaxis motion technology, both absent in the 360 controller. The 360 controller uses dated wireless 2.4GHz protocol technology compared to the superior Bluetooth alternative used in the DS3.

Even if the systems were the same price, the PS3 would have the advantage due to build quality and technological supremacy, but you have to take into account that not only is the 360 $50 dollars more by default, but you also need to buy batteries and chargers for the controller, along with Xbox Live, leaving you paying $130 dollars more for an inferior product.

Children don't really research the products they want, and when parents are buying products that their children want, they don't research those products either. I think that parents may see that the Xbox 360 may look cheaper at first glance (4gb SKU), but all of the hidden fees catch them by surprise due to lack of research.

I'm under the impression that the PS3 is automatically 100x more appealing to adults, because after research, something many adults partake in when buying products for themselves, the PS3 is the obvious choice.

Then you have the wide variety of genres that the PS3 exclusives cover, which also happen to be more adult oriented. With the new Kinect focus and games like Sesame Street Kinect: Once upon a Monster and Kinect Star Wars, the emphasis on children is even more pronounced.

arkephonic

As people get older, they become smarter with their money. With age comes responsibility, and people that are older are less likely to buy things on impulse, and more likely to research the things they buy.

I don't think it's any secret to anyone that the PS3 is the better deal.

With the Xbox 360, you buy the cheapest console at $200, get a harddrive for $100, a Play N Charge kit for $20, Xbox Live for $60, and you're already at $380. With the PS3, you get all of that at $250, plus you get a blu ray disc drive that works for games and movies. With the 360, you only get a DVD drive, and the HD-DVD drive add-on only works for movies, not games.

That's also not taking into consideration build quality. The 360 Slim is a very light and cheap feeling console, and it's obvious that many cheap parts were used in it. The disc drive is extremely loud, uses a disc tray, and the console can get very hot. In contrast, the PS3 slim has very high build quality. It is very quiet, stays cool, and even has an internal power supply in comparison to the massive external power supply brick used by the 360. The build quality between the systems are like night and day.

Then you have the differences in the controller technology. The DualShock 3 has 10-bit sensitivity compared to the 360 controller 8-bit sensitivity used in last generation controllers. The 360 controller comes standard using AA batteries. The DS3 uses pressure sensitive/analog buttons and Sixaxis motion technology, both absent in the 360 controller. The 360 controller uses dated wireless 2.4GHz protocol technology compared to the superior Bluetooth alternative used in the DS3.

Even if the systems were the same price, the PS3 would have the advantage due to build quality and technological supremacy, but you have to take into account that not only is the 360 $50 dollars more by default, but you also need to buy batteries and chargers for the controller, along with Xbox Live, leaving you paying $130 dollars more for an inferior product.

Children don't really research the products they want, and when parents are buying products that their children want, they don't research those products either. I think that parents may see that the Xbox 360 may look cheaper at first glance (4gb SKU), but all of the hidden fees catch them by surprise due to lack of research.

I'm under the impression that the PS3 is automatically 100x more appealing to adults, because after research, something many adults partake in when buying products for themselves, the PS3 is the obvious choice.

Then you have the wide variety of genres that the PS3 exclusives cover, which also happen to be more adult oriented. With the new Kinect focus and games like Sesame Street Kinect: Once upon a Monster and Kinect Star Wars, the emphasis on children is even more pronounced.

arkephonic

Last time I checked, PS3 didn't have the ultimate racing console game of the generation: Forza 4.

And how the **** is Gears of War 3 a children's game? :?

.

I think the 360 and Twilight share basically the same audience.kuraimen

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="FireSpirit117"]You're still pushing that "Xbox needs an HD-DVD player" nonsense? Oh Lord...DarkLink77

This is the greatest peripheral add-on of all time. I wonder why it stopped selling.

Absolutely. What with the initial price launch, mostly adults purchased the PS3 for themselves, as most parents wouldn't drop that kind of money for a console for the kids. The 360 was cheaper, and thus, more moms and dads dropped for that for the kiddies. So, more kids on 360. More adults on PS3. Actually, the 360 and the Wii have about the same demographic when it comes to age bracket.ispeakfact

I am sorry you can't afford an xbox 360