130°

Will people see a PS4/ PS Vita combination as too expensive?

The current rumor floating around the internet is that there is a new Playstation bundle coming. This bundle will combine the new Playstation 4 with the Playstation Vita at a price of $500. For people that want/need both, this would be an instant kill two birds with one stone scenario. However, as good as that scenario is, there is one ever constant hinderance that people like to bring up, price.

Read Full Story >>
playstationgamerleague.com
LOGICWINS3908d ago

Of course there will. Those people don't understand what value is.

Canary3908d ago

Well, the thing is... would they be wrong to think that?

If Sony decides to market the Vita as a PS4 peripheral rather than an independent gaming platform, they'd be right to think of it as too expensive IMHO. The Vita needs to be able to stand on its own--to form its own, individual identity--to anchor the Vita to the PS4 would be a mistake.

As for why it would be a mistake... well, I'm too tired to get into details, but essentially Sony seems to want the Vita to be usable in a similar manner to the WiiU gamepad... and just look at how many (foolish) gamers persist in advocating a future iteration of the WiiU sans the gamepad. It's not really a functionality many gamers see the appeal of (especially without experiencing it firsthand).

....

And, personally, too, I think it's a bad idea. I already own a Vita, so I don't need any incentive/deal to buy one. What I do need is software, and I don't see bundling the Vita with a PS4 encouraging further software development or international localization efforts.

LOGICWINS3908d ago

The software is there...and more will come. Gamescom and TGS will undoubtedly give us a multitude of Vita titles.

At $100, anyone getting a PS4 thats even remotely curious about Vita will spring for the bundle. More people will have a Vita, the install base will grow, and publishers will start becoming interested in it.

rainslacker3908d ago (Edited 3908d ago )

It'd be no more expensive than the Xbox One at $500. If people don't understand what they're getting for an extra $100 in that bundle as opposed to the Xbox One, then it's likely they don't care either way.

So to speak of value.

Xbox One. You get the system. You can argue you get Kinect, but Kinect is a controller for the system. So in this regard it's part of the system and not really an added bonus.

Not trying to start a fan boy thing here, just stating this for simplicity in the comparison...not dissing the Kinect or what kind of effect it will have on the desirability for the console...and it's a shame I have to qualify that so this thread doesn't devolve.

PS4+Vita Bundle for $500. You get the system along with another handheld system you can take anywhere to keep playing your console no matter where you are(assuming a Wi-Fi connection is available). In addition you can play Vita specific titles(even if you don't know if there are any you want), or give it to your kid or friend or whatever.

Consumers aren't always idiots. PS4+Vita bundle is a perceivable value over the other no matter what, even if you don't know what the Vita is. The dumbest of consumers can equate 2 systems > One. The only thing that might happen among these types of consumers is that they may equate it to the Wii U gamepad...but again, that would mean they likely don't know enough to care either way. They're more likely to buy based on brand loyalty or a system having a particular game they really want.

Otherwise, this bundle is highly unlikely at this price. This discussion would be more interesting if the bundle was $550-600 vs. $500 for X1.

Mr-Dude3908d ago

If those people excist then those people should take a bat and hit themself against the head for being stupid...

kornbeaner3908d ago

Let's see, PS4 + Vita for $500 or a Xbox one for $500. 1 box would contain two systems while the other would contain just 1. How would people see this as too expensive?

Mookie3908d ago

If they can get that $500 price it's a wrap on the Xbox one.

Belking3908d ago

Nah, no one is gonna but that combo because of Vita.

rainslacker3908d ago (Edited 3908d ago )

I'd probably get it at that price...and I already own a Vita. That price is a steal.

Bowzabub3908d ago

Ignorance IS one of mankind's many fallacies unfortunately.

Show all comments (20)
220°

Tomb Raider Remastered just quietly censored one in-game detail

Tomb Raider 1-3 Remastered players are ticked off by the game’s most recent patch, which censors in-game pin-up posters of Lara Croft.

Read Full Story >>
gamingbible.com
rlow15h ago

This is why gaming is screwed. When people change things to fit someone’s agenda, it’s a slippery slope downhill.

Christopher5h ago(Edited 5h ago)

Even if that agenda is of the developer? Way to remove developer rights.

***One player called it a “huge problem with modern games,” saying they can now be “ruined AFTER people buy them”.***

The level of drama. Yes, I recall sitting there for more hours than I did anything else in the game. These two pinups are the core of the game, after all!

coolbeans3h ago(Edited 3h ago)

rlow1's cringe catastrophizing aside, I do think developers *ought* to strive to maintain an original work to the best of their ability. The language of a "remaster" tacitly implies that - for good or ill - what's being resold is what fans remember but better.

Profchaos3h ago

Games can be ruined after purchasing them yeah we know this not from this but from GTA IV which had half it's radio content patched out due to licensing expirations and to me that was a huge deal.

This pin up poster is a bit of nonsense but the whole argument of modern games can be ruined post launch is Absol true.

DedicatedDark2h ago(Edited 2h ago)

It's not their work to censor. They are incharge of restoration & remastering the work, not overwriting it.

Barlos1h ago

It's not the agenda of the developer though, they're pandering and trying to increase their ESG score.

Way to support censorship...

victorMaje1h ago

It’s not the end of the world for sure, but I understand the hate towards this kind of change. I believe it’s also a matter of principle.

Imagine a Picasso painting being restored & the restorer deciding there aren’t enough strokes, or some lines aren’t straight enough or curved enough…not sure it would/should sit well with people.

Have all original devs signed off on this change? Even if it’s the case, are we saying older gamers are better mentally equipped to process what was there than current gamers, hence the change?

Enough time ago the case was made that games are an art form. We’re supposed to have won that case.
So which is it? Are games art or not?

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1h ago
Eidolon1h ago

Hasn't this been happened for over a decade since remasters? I can't see that it's any worse now. Maybe if Sweet Baby starts getting their hands on remasters we will definitely have a problem.

Rebel_Scum4h ago

tbh I dont see something like this as censorship. Does anyone else not find it strange for someone to stick pin ups of themsleves in a locker room?

Now of it was a pin up of some half naked firefighters it might make sense as Lara might like that, and if they removed that I would cry censorship. But removing pin ups of the main character, yeah I get it.

Barlos1h ago(Edited 1h ago)

It's a game, and they were placed there for the audience. It's not real life. If it was, she wouldn't have fought a T-Rex now would she?

Yes, it's censorship but it's a bit less in your face. If they were in the original game, then they should have been in the remasters. It's bad enough that they have that ridiculous unnecessary warning at the start, but then they start removing things post launch. I don't care how small the change, they shouldn't be doing it. It's nothing but ESG pandering but in a subtle way.

Rebel_Scum1m ago

Look bro, if you have pictures of yourself naked on a bear skin rug up in your house let me tell you, its not normal.

SimpleDad54m ago

By the year 2030, this remaster collection will totally be changed and censored. Probably will remove Lara as a playable character. It's ridiculous. Glad that my family didn't buy this.
I still have Tomb Raider 2 PS1 as a memory.

CobraKai24m ago

It’s mentioned in the article, and it’s a point i 100% agree with, it’s the fact that they can censor a game after you buy it. That’s total bullshit.

Killer2020UK6m ago

Whilst it's an overreaction to say this has "ruined" the game, it's still problematic that this has happened post launch and for many, post-purchase.

I don't want someone to change a product for the worse after I've bought it. The same goes for implementing micro transactions after reviews.

I wonder why they did this? Nobody was kicking up a fuss as far as I'm aware.

100°

Final Fantasy III Pixel Remaster Review – You Are Your Job, Apparently

Gary Green said: In a time where an enhanced, 3D remake of Final Fantasy III already exists, it’s hard to argue that Final Fantasy III Pixel Remaster is the definitive version we were expecting. With Final Fantasy III already being the last in the series to be translated and make its way west, this is something of a slap in the face for the fans. Still, let’s not be disheartened. There may be many shortfalls in this edition of Final Fantasy III, however there’s no denying that this classic JRPG still holds some nostalgic value, even if it struggles to break away from its original hardware limitations.

Read Full Story >>
pslegends.com
FACTUAL evidence5h ago(Edited 5h ago)

It’s funny I’m seeing these articles about pixel remaster, and I just platinumed 1-4 within 8 days lol. I’ve been on FF5 for about a week now. Let’s just say 5 was the start of FF having content like crazy. I should have the plat within 2-3 days.

70°

Warframe's Protea Prime Access launches on all platforms on May 1st, 2024

"Digital Extremes are today very happy and proud to announce that Warframe’s next highlightly anticipated Prime form launches soon with Protea Prime Access arriving on all platforms on May 1st, 2024." - Digital Extremes.