This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="Zero5000X"][QUOTE="BumFluff122"]Do you think it would be more damage on your finances to pay 600 dollars in one lump sum or 400 in one lump sum and 50 dollars per year from then on out?BumFluff122i would rather pay the $600. think about it. if u had the money would u rather pay ur house off as soon as u get it or have a mortgage u pay interest on? the first way has u paying more at one time, but in the long run u pay less.Interest? Since when do you pay interest on XBL accounts? Interest has nothing to do with this argument. Actually, based upon interest your arguement is completely flawed and backwards. If you actually consider prevailing interest/inflation rates to compute the present value of the money you will pay for each of the next 5 years, it ends up costing $608.15 for Xbox360 and 5 years of XBL in terms of 2007 US dollars. Considering the advantages Xbox Live still holds over PSN, and the higher quality of content and online titles for X360, I think the an extra $8.15 is more than justified over a five year period. As a member of XBL essentially since its inception, I can honestly say that I believe the price is more than justified for the service provided. Until PSN improves to the level of XBL I believe the price is more than reasonable.
when you think about it the Xbox 360 is more expensive then the PS3 in the long run. Sure the 360 is $400 and the PS3 is $600, but you have to pay for Xbox Live which builds up over time. After a while you are paying more to have the 360 since PS's online is free. Most people just think of the right now costs. not trying to bash the 360 just pointing something out people might not consider.Zero5000XEveryone and their mother has considered this in SW..... According to your logic it would take 4 years for the 360 to become more expensive then the PS3. Less then $5 a month is nothing for what you get with XBL. Excluding games I have spent $760 on my PS3 and $700 on my 360 which includes 2 payments toward XBL that I would have paid to continue playing my original Xbox anyways.
The 360 is not just MORE expensive but it is WAY MORE expensive. Sure Xbox Live is $50 a year but that's just a drop in the bucket when you consider all the great games you have to buy. You'll probably be spending like $500 a year just to buy the games! With the PS3 you don't have any of those costs associated with owning the machine.Bleach_is_basic
So your still going to be spending like $500 a year just to buy PS3 games too, so what's your point. Also $50 a year is cheap for what you get. You get exactly what you pay for.
when you think about it the Xbox 360 is more expensive then the PS3 in the long run. Sure the 360 is $400 and the PS3 is $600, but you have to pay for Xbox Live which builds up over time. After a while you are paying more to have the 360 since PS's online is free. Most people just think of the right now costs. not trying to bash the 360 just pointing something out people might not consider.Zero5000X
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Are you sure about that? I don't have Xbox live and at this point I don't need it I'm kind of a solitary player I like playing alone so that I can focus better , I paid $400 for my 360 and thats all I paid for besides games, Xbox live is optional by the way it aint like they pulled a Sony and threw a blu-ray in the system, if someone feels like they want to shell out an extra $50 then so be it but people need to stop trying to defend the PS3's price thats pretty much what this topic comes down to, the PS3 is expensive either way you slice the cake, $600 in 1 shot is alot of money for most people, at least with the Xbox if you play live for 4 years then it will be like $600 total , so this topic is pointless bottom line IS PS3 IS EXPENSIVE FOR A "GAMING" MACHINE!!!!!!!
PS3 IS EXPENSIVE FOR A "GAMING" MACHINE!KingOfJerseyIt's more than a gaming machine. It's why I can live with the price I paid.
[QUOTE="Zero5000X"]when you think about it the Xbox 360 is more expensive then the PS3 in the long run. Sure the 360 is $400 and the PS3 is $600, but you have to pay for Xbox Live which builds up over time. After a while you are paying more to have the 360 since PS's online is free. Most people just think of the right now costs. not trying to bash the 360 just pointing something out people might not consider.Danm_999From the perspective of an online user, yes. But most console owners don't use online, so while the argument may be applicable to us, it isn't to most others. Interesting, I've never considered that before. With more and more RPGs coming to the 360, perhaps more 360 users won't feel the need to go with XBL.
when you think about it the Xbox 360 is more expensive then the PS3 in the long run. Sure the 360 is $400 and the PS3 is $600, but you have to pay for Xbox Live which builds up over time. After a while you are paying more to have the 360 since PS's online is free. Most people just think of the right now costs. not trying to bash the 360 just pointing something out people might not consider.Zero5000XI don't pay for Live. So tell me again, how is $600 cheaper than $400?
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment