Posted November 27, 2011 (edited) Does it? Apparently not. Otherwise I imagine there would hardly be any lamenting. Edited November 27, 2011 by Burny Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 27, 2011 So... wait, the memory cards aren't in an already used format, they're unique and expensive?? Seriously, Sony, fuck you. Fuck you up the fucking ass! For the first time I actually thought you priced a product decently, you had to go and fuck things up, didn't you?? Fuck you! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 27, 2011 Seriously, Sony, fuck you. Fuck you up the fucking ass! For the first time I actually thought you priced a product decently, you had to go and fuck things up, didn't you?? Fuck you! If by "priced decently" you mean they're not going to earn all too much by selling Vitas, then they seemingly have. Otherwise they wouldn't expect it to take up to three years until the system is profitable. Obviously there is no official information on it, but I wouldn't be surprised if memory was the corner they had to cut in order to achieve that price. The low blow is just that they're making their memory quasi-mandatory which puts the effective minimal price at 280$. Which is still rather cheap for what the Vita offers for a mobile system, if expensive by console standards. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 27, 2011 If by "priced decently" you mean they're not going to earn all too much by selling Vitas, then they seemingly have. Otherwise they wouldn't expect it to take up to three years until the system is profitable. Obviously there is no official information on it, but I wouldn't be surprised if memory was the corner they had to cut in order to achieve that price. The low blow is just that they're making their memory quasi-mandatory which puts the effective minimal price at 280$. Which is still rather cheap for what the Vita offers for a mobile system, if expensive by console standards. By priced decently I mean actually pricing a console accordingly, for once. Every single playstation line product launch price has been ridiculously high, up till now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 27, 2011 PS3 launch price was fair I think. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 27, 2011 Yeah, 600€ is a fucking fair price. oO Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 27, 2011 (edited) By priced decently I mean actually pricing a console accordingly, for once. Every single playstation line product launch price has been ridiculously high, up till now. Haven't they been selling practically all their Playstations at a loss when they launched? If so, what are they to do? Just sell at a competitive mass-market price at launch and hope that it will just take a year or two more to be profitable? You can't ask for a high-end gaming machine and expect that you won't have to pay the price. You could ask for more moderately powered or more focused consoles (e.g. just gaming, not trying to win the format war for Blu-Ray while at it) which are priced accordingly. That doesn't seem to be what the Playstation crowd is after though. Yeah, 600€ is a fucking fair price. oO Oh come on. What more can they do than lose money on each console sold? You want a Blu-Ray player/console before they are ready for mass market with all kinds of bells and whistles? You pay the price. Your other option is buying a XBox 360. Edited November 27, 2011 by Burny Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 27, 2011 It cost like €900 to make, and a couple of billion in development. No idea who's idea that was, but they could hardly price it lower. Also I think Rez was joking :p Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 27, 2011 PS3 launch price was fair I think. I might have agreed (No, I lie t'was lol-tastic) had the PAL console not had less functionality than the NTSC version...which was much cheaper. Still, the Vita's launch line up is already better than the first two years of PS3 titles. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 27, 2011 I have just been looking at Golden Abyss. Want. So much. God. Vita looks so godly. It is pronounced "Veeta" right and not "Vyta" ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 28, 2011 Haven't they been selling practically all their Playstations at a loss when they launched? If so, what are they to do? Just sell at a competitive mass-market price at launch and hope that it will just take a year or two more to be profitable? You can't ask for a high-end gaming machine and expect that you won't have to pay the price. You could ask for more moderately powered or more focused consoles (e.g. just gaming, not trying to win the format war for Blu-Ray while at it) which are priced accordingly. That doesn't seem to be what the Playstation crowd is after though. Oh come on. What more can they do than lose money on each console sold? You want a Blu-Ray player/console before they are ready for mass market with all kinds of bells and whistles? You pay the price. Your other option is buying a XBox 360. I did pay the price. I paid 250€ for my 60GB backwards compatible launch PS3. 3 years after it came out. And it still sucked when I bought it. You do realize that what I'm essentially saying is proven... the thing only started selling and becoming something to take seriously after the price drop. The PS3's dawn years were a giant flop. And everyone knew it. I'm a business student, and pretty much the basis for market rules is that what makes the world spin is price... You have to take losses in order to make profit. Sony's PS division took some years to realize this... the Vita is the first PS launch that makes sense... but they were still sneaky enough to corrupt it. Bottom line is, price is justifiable if you're offering a unique product... it's the reason Apple is a success, or Bentleys. The Playstation 3 had no advantage whatsoever over the 360 when it came out, as Blur Ray vs HDDVD war was still going on... and yet it still dared to overprice itself... if you ask me, they deserved all the hate and initial failure they got. It's a matter of knowing how the world works... I have just been looking at Golden Abyss. Want. So much. God. Vita looks so godly. It is pronounced "Veeta" right and not "Vyta" ? Veeta. Isn't it obvious? oO Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 28, 2011 I thought so, but heard it pronounced "Vyta" is two Youtube videos. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 28, 2011 It's a matter of knowing how the world works... Sure. If you limit your view of the world to that of a spoiled, bitching consumer, who stamps his feet and swears a lot. After all, a company being arrogant and doing a bad job of a system's design, therefore having to sell technology at a massive loss that is still extremely expensive to the point, where it completely misses their target audience's comfort zone, isn't part of the world. It's all just a matter of unfair pricing. Just don't go about spouting that a 280$/€ entry price for a mobile gaming platform, that's one or two generations ahead of all competitors in technological terms is not fair. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 28, 2011 Oh, no, nothing of the sort. I think it's a good price... Hell, I've been sayin It's their first launch with a price that makes sense all along, haven't I? I just think the whole memory card shenanigan is a completely unnecessary jerk move. As for the rest, every consumer is a spoiled jerk... But he's the one paying, and he's the one that determines a success. It's not unfair pricing, it's just a bad business plan. Worst launch ever, to be fair.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 28, 2011 The PS3's dawn years were a giant flop. And everyone knew it. Well I didn't.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 28, 2011 It is pronounced "Veeta" right and not "Vyta" ? Vyta. Like "Vital" without the "l". Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 28, 2011 Vyta. Like "Vital" without the "l". It's obviously veeeeeetah! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 28, 2011 It's Vita as in Ryvita, no? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 28, 2011 It's Vita as in Ryvita, no? Perfect! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 28, 2011 I did pay the price. I paid 250€ for my 60GB backwards compatible launch PS3. 3 years after it came out. And it still sucked when I bought it. You do realize that what I'm essentially saying is proven... the thing only started selling and becoming something to take seriously after the price drop. The PS3's dawn years were a giant flop. And everyone knew it. I'm a business student, and pretty much the basis for market rules is that what makes the world spin is price... You have to take losses in order to make profit. Sony's PS division took some years to realize this... the Vita is the first PS launch that makes sense... but they were still sneaky enough to corrupt it. Bottom line is, price is justifiable if you're offering a unique product... it's the reason Apple is a success, or Bentleys. The Playstation 3 had no advantage whatsoever over the 360 when it came out, as Blur Ray vs HDDVD war was still going on... and yet it still dared to overprice itself... if you ask me, they deserved all the hate and initial failure they got. It's a matter of knowing how the world works... Veeta. Isn't it obvious? oO Of course it had an advantage, only idiots thought HD-DVD would ever win. It was the most one sided battle in technology in a long time. Factoring in the £60 it costed to make the 360 WiFi capable out of the box with the adaptor, it was hardly over priced. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 28, 2011 Vyta. Like "Vital" without the "l". No, the name is latin based. Which means it's read Veeta, not Vyta. Of course it had an advantage, only idiots thought HD-DVD would ever win. It was the most one sided battle in technology in a long time. Factoring in the £60 it costed to make the 360 WiFi capable out of the box with the adaptor, it was hardly over priced. Factoring in the 200€ or 300€ (if you went for the arcade xbox) price difference, that is completely irrelevant, isn't it? Plus the fact that Blu-Ray was completely irrelevant at the time... and pretty much still is, compared to the power of DVD. (although the last 2 years have finally been making a change) Look, it's not rocket science... just check the numbers... the whole reason it initially flopped was the price. There's no other way around it, it is what it is. "The high launch price of the PS3 has been subjected to criticism from analysts, developers and consumers. Sony executive Phil Harrison has defended the price by citing its Blu-ray Disc support and overall value." Overall value? Lol... it too the damn thing 4 years to become good! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 28, 2011 If you can price an iPad at £400 the PS3 was the bargain of the century. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 29, 2011 If you can price an iPad at £400 the PS3 was the bargain of the century. That's not really fair, especially when you consider other tablets made by other companies (Samsung, Acer, etc etc) are all priced at around the same level. The Kindle Fire is the first (actually good) tablet to come in at a significantly lower price than it's competition, and that is both thanks to the fact that it misses out some features other tablets have, and the fact that it has been in development for a good few years until the cost of components dropped. I really don't think that at launch the PS3 could be considered good value because it was SO expensive. Still, the price did fall relatively quickly, and it soon became a good value product. At the time it launched, though, it really wasn't. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 29, 2011 That's kind of assuming I don't really want an iPad. I do. When the iPad 3 is out, one will be mine. In terms of not only what the PS3 could do, but more importantly what it became (and is), I'd say its price was easily justifiable. My PS3 gets so much use. Most of the time it is streaming movies and TV shows off my computer/HDD/LoveFilm or playing BluRays. The rest of the time I'm playing games. If I buy an iPad it slowly becomes obsolete. Had I bought a PS3 at launch, 5 or 6 years later it's functionality would be the same as any 'newer' model. To be honest, that's why I find it kind of weird people hold off say a £50 price drop that'll take over a year to come. My time is more valuable than money. But yeah, that's what I think and obviously it's different for everyone. I understand why people think the PS3 was overpriced, it makes sense. I didn't buy one at launch, I think I bought mine for like £360 with three games about coming up to three years ago now (I can't remember exactly). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted November 29, 2011 Huh, ipads don't become obsolete when new one's come out. Granted newer models have more functionality added then a new console but barely! The thing is, they're just completely different tech, I don't understand how you can properly compare them! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
