The electronics expo is over. The expo, E3, is an annual event that debuts many of the newest videogames and videogame consoles. This year, the Playstation 3 and new Nintendo Wii console were top draws. However, the even bigger draw is the price of the new systems that we all want.
When the new Xbox 360 came out, everyone was taken aback by the price. A hefty $400+ for the “good” version of the system that included all the bells and whistles everyone wants. Despite that, they flew off shelves. Apparently, the hardcore gamers make more money than I expected. Of course, you must also factor in the Stupid Parent factor - those parents that will shell out insane amounts of cash to get anything for their kid.
The 360 has been on its own in the “next generation” category for quite a while. At E3, however, the new Playstation and Nintendo was shown and talked about.
Much to my dismay, the Playstation 3 has a reported starting price of $500!!! And that’s for the low-end version. Want the goods, you’ll be dropping $600.
If there’s a way to lose a large part of your base, and audience in general, it’s price. Playstation is not BMW. You can’t rely on your name and history to sell your product at any price.
I have been a Playstation loyalist since the time I was able to mod my PS1. It was great. I remember I paid $125 for my PS1. Then when the PS2 came out, I waited until its first drop to $200. And I was happy. Happy to enjoy my (then) next-generation games.
As a long time gamer and eternal videogame fan, it is truly saddening to find that videogame system are costing so much. Apparently neither Sony nor Microsoft are interested in entry-level gamers.
There are always new gamers out there and they are not going to pay $600 for a system on which they will probably only play 2 or 3 games - which alone will cost them $70 each.
I’m not an entry-level gamer. But I am a gamer that has lost all optimism in videogaming and am looking for something to revive my passion in gaming. A $600 system is not a way to get me back into gaming.
Enter Nintendo, who has hinted that their new console will start at less that $250. Which means its first price drop (when I always buy a system) it will probably be close to $200.
The current state of videogames is sad. We’re getting better looks, faster speeds, and higher prices, but we’re not getting better games.
Regardless of hype, price is the ultimate decider. I know what console will end up in my living room.
The priceing of the new systems is exactly why I wait until the systems show up on the used market. That way the cost is easier to handle and you have a selection of games for $5-20. The new systems are just PC’s with propritary games. They run internet, games, and chats and half of them run some form of windows. The day of the game console is gone. The newest platforms are multimedia boxes. Case in point is the PSP. No good games that I know of but it can play every newly released movie in the palm of your hand. I have heard someone say the PSP is only worth anything when you load a NES emulator on it. My advice is to go out and pick up an older console and play thru the 300+ game cataloge that most have. Which console? Try the Deamcast.
I’m looking forward to the Wii, and playing the old school 8-bit nintendo games, and the old TurboGrafx games.
G+
I agree with Lorkin. Unfortunately the game console is dead, which is sad. I mean, everyone that will buy a PS3 or Xbox already has a DVD player and a computer - why do we need another one?
I’d rather have a system that focuses on games and does that really well, rather than have (another) PC that can do “it all” but none of it too terribly well.
The Dreamcast was a very underrated system in terms of game library. Sure, it didn’t boast uber-top end hardware, but a lot of the games were fun. But, I guess that’s why Sega gave up on consoles and went to games.
~~~
All that aside, I was wondering last night why we always put the console by the television. Shouldn’t we have the console by the couch where it is closer to switch games and hook-up controllers?
I’d rather have long AV cords that I never touch come from my couch to the TV, than have to get up and mess with switching games and tangled controller cords. Anyway…
One word. Wireless. But that is a very good question. I think it stems from the fact that the atari had a short cord with the prong ends that has to be screwed on to the back of the TV. Or it could just be the fact that as kids we sit close to the TV.
You can put long AV cords on your console, but you’re going to spend some money to do it. The longer the cords get, the more signal loss you end up with, so you’re going to have to spend more money on heavier weight cables.
In audio, it’s not such a big deal. For some reason, our ears tend to be more forgiving about that sort of thing.
For the video though, the longer the cables get, the more loss you get, which means ghosting and lower clarity on the screen.
Ever notice how longer cables from your PC to your monitor result in headache causing ghosting on your display? This is getting better with digital (DVI, etc…) displays, but even they have their limits (16 feet I think) before signal loss makes problems again.
I think it’s just always been easier to make longer controller cables, and keep the AV cables as short as possible for the best picture quality.
G+
It seems the analysts have it right, as per a recent post at GameSpot:
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6154256.html
“PS3 is more like a computer than just a gaming console” - This is not what gamers want to hear. They want to game, not dick around with worrying about computer problems. Turning console gamers into PC gamers doesn’t sound like a smart thing.
However, someone (Nintendo?) will pull a Coke Classic and bring to market some simple console that just plays games and it will be cheap and good and everyone, young and old, will eat it up.
…I’m hungry…