[QUOTE="ParadiddleFill"][QUOTE="chaos-SD"][QUOTE="ParadiddleFill"][QUOTE="chaos-SD"][QUOTE="ParadiddleFill"] you still dont get what im trying to say who would pay an extra 600 dollars when they already have a pc that can play better virtual chatrooms like There and Second Life and yes these worlds are better due to the fact that you can create your own lands and iteams without paying for premade iteams. Not to mention Second Life has its own economy and real estate and actual virtual colleges where you can go te hear lectures.
chaos-SD
Your logic is flawed. One is not paying an EXTRA six hundred dollars for anything, they are paying $600 for a PS3. It DOES NOT matter if most people already own a PC. That PC had to be purchased at some point. PC's don't just come with houses, and they certainly don't appear out of thin air. Maybe your parents own one and you use it, but they had to pay for it, and at some point you will have to purchase one.
Â
the point is why pay extra money for a feature thats on the pc which everyone already owns. Its like whats the point of buying a jaguar for the the FM player when your Rolls Royce already come with XM
I don't think you know what the original arguement even is...it's Second life and There is better than Home. When one compares things like theseone must take into account that everyone has access to these 2 things or has experienced them enough to compare them. that alone can make the arguement flawed since very few people have experienced home, and the fact that most are approaching this topic with a facist opinion. Now when comparing these 2 things the fact that one is on PS3 and the others are on PC can be brought up. However, since the original arguement stems from comparing Home and Second Life one must compare these two units equally as well. So one must know that each of these units have to be purchased. It does not matter if more people already own one, because that will lead to a flawed arguement as well. So you must take into consideration that everyone either has to purchase both a PC and PS3 or that everyone already owns both. So IT DOES NOT MATTER THAT MOST PEOPLE ALREADY OWN A PC!
Also, you still have not proven that There or Second Life is better than Home, because at this point it is Impossible.Â
youre right i cant prove home is better then second life because home isnt out. But you cant remove the fact that most people own pcs and use a hypothetically situation to prove a point. Because the fact of the matter is that there are a hell of alot more people who own pcs and there are very few people who own a ps3 in comparaison. You cant excuse that fact so the the question remains why spend an extra 600 dollars on a feature you already can get for free
Yes, it's not hypathetical, everyone had to purchase a PC at some point. That's all there is to it, so stop trying to excuse the fact that everyone, HAD TO purchase a PC to own a PC. Peace out, I'm done here because your arguement is flawed and your trying to run it in circles just so you can win. I urge other users not to argue with this one.Â
Â
haha yes eveyone had to purchase a pc whats the point, that doesnt mean they should spend another 600 dollars for something they can get on there pcs.Â
This is a virtual chatroom called There Its like home only not as graphically superior. But its alot better because it lets you create your own clothes,homes, businesses everything. Home is just a rippoff of these kind of virtual chatrooms like There and Second life. I dont see how sony fanboys think this can even compete with xbox live
Log in to comment