Top
280°

PS3 is the More Affordable Console

This ends Gaming Target's week long discussion of the successes and failures of Xbox 360 and PS3 as we see them in 2009. We've gotten a lot of responses; a lot of sites calling us biased against PS3 in the beginning of the week because we started with the success of Xbox 360 and the failures of PS3. The latter half of the week is proving to inspire the opposite reactions. I hope that our analysis, now that it can be seen in full, will show that Gaming Target has been fair, but I also hope this continues to spark the debate. This console generation is far from over.

Bernie Stolar, the former Sega of America COO, once promised that the Dreamcast would include a 56K modem "out of the box." Without it, would anyone have bought it separately just to try online gaming on the Dreamcast?

Read Full Story >>
gamingtarget.com
The story is too old to be commented.
Saint Sony2745d ago

I guess 360 feels cheaper because you don't have to buy everything at once if you don't like or need all of the given options.

Bubble Buddy2745d ago

Most of the gaming population aren't hardcore gamers. A lot of my friends who bought a console didn't know that Wi-Fi isn't it 360 or that they don't know how to setup Wi-Fi at all. Some were angered that they had to pay for online because they didn't know XBL wasn't free. Microsoft is sly but for me, I'd rather pay for all at once since I'll probably be using all the features :P

thats_just_prime2744d ago

WOW some failed math class with a big time F if they know that 199 is less then 399.

As for all the crap the sony fanboy like to try to add on to make it look like the ps3 is cheaper it just that crap. I got a 360 and the only thing I ever got for it was a recharger that cost me a whole extra 12 dollars. Thats less the the hd cable I had to buy to play my ps3.

iiraymoii2744d ago

MONOPRICE 3-6.00 dollar HDMI would like to have a word with you.

Agent VX2744d ago (Edited 2744d ago )

Oh, here we go again... The 17th zillion article on how the PS3 is soooooo much cheaper than the 360.

Yawnnnn.....

Jinxstar2744d ago (Edited 2744d ago )

@ Thats just prime

So you don't pay for XBL then? With no other added features at all like a hard drive, WiFi or anything if the 360 lasts you 4 years and all you have is XBL you equal the cost of a PS3. Anything extra is above the price...

Edit: I swear after I wrote my blog here about a million of these articles started poping up... Copy cats =P

Silellak2744d ago

As I said in a post earlier in the thread, some people would rather pay a premium now, others would rather pay a bit more over time but pay less upfront.

There's nothing inherently right or wrong about either approach, no matter what 360 and PS3 fanboys may want everyone to think. It's just a matter of how people want to manage their finances.

For me, the $4.16 a month for XBL is a drop in the bucket. And - as I've explained in previous posts - I believe that money goes towards more than just the ability to play online. It goes towards funding the underlying infrastructure of XBL that allows every game - from big-budget titles to intern-created XBLA titles to even the XNA community games - to have some online gaming component. Viewed in that way, I am more than happy to shell out a small premium.

Others may not be. And that's fine. There is nothing black and white about this discussion - it's all subjective to the gamer in question.

Sheddi2744d ago

You contributed this article, you should know?
I see where u stand.

JasonXE2744d ago (Edited 2744d ago )

then the wii probably cost the most out of the three? I hate how people spin stuff.

Jinxstar2744d ago (Edited 2744d ago )

@1.6

You been here a while now man and you know how it goes. I had a 360 and sold it cause all the games are on PC or coming to PC. I used the money to upgrade my PC and now I am happy playing for free online and buying all the games cheaper off steam. That right there is just being smart with money...

If I were say a mayor or something I would invest in quality built roads as opposed to paying people yearly to fix them because they were built poorly to begin with...

The principle goes in so far as that you get what you pay for.

Edit: Seriously saying something like "4.50$ a month is a drop in the bucket" That sounds like a smokers logic"5.00$ a day is nothing" Well over time it could buy a house... and the cost of XBL per year is close enough to the price of a full game that it's not worth it to me...

AAACE52744d ago (Edited 2744d ago )

All I know is my 360 just died on me last night! Good thing it was still under factory warranty.

R-rod in not finished yet! I bought this one in may of 2008 I think, and it gave out at about 6 pm last night. Hopefully they give me a new one with the new chipset. Now I gotta wait a month.

I think i'll check out Circuit city and see if I can get a Ps3 for cheap. That way, i'll have something to play now, and i'll have both when I get my repair back.

Anon19742744d ago

But I just thought I'd share. Personally, I'm over $900 now into my Xbox. $450 for the console at launch, $100 for the Wi-Fi when I bought a new house and needed for my setup, 2 years of XBL at $8.99 a month. Microsoft didn't exactly advertise the $50 a month fee at the beginning. When my free months were up it defaulted to monthly and I didn't know it was cheaper until someone on these forums mentioned $50. I was like, no...wait..that's not right. Extra controller and charge and play kit. Extra re-chargeable battery kits (I didn't play my 360 for a few months and when I came back not a damn one of them would hold a charge).

Finally $75 for the extended warranty from Microsoft I got after my second RROD. Saved me from a disk gouging console they sent me as a replacement then refused to take back because "Disk scratching isn't covered under the warranty."

So yeah, if you don't need a harddrive, don't download anything, don't play with others and don't need extra controllers, don't need wi-fi, have a ready stockpile of batteries, don't intend to play online, don't want to use any of the video download services...The 360 is priced great at $199!

Shadow Flare2744d ago (Edited 2744d ago )

If xbox guys or anyone else finds the ps3 expensive, then use a page out of your own book. Apparently anyone who can't afford xbox live is a cheap loser because its only like $4 a month. With that logic, you only need to pay $33 a month to purchase a ps3. And what's more, you won't have to buy any add-on's with ps3 unlike the 360; you'll have bluray as standerd unlike the 360; and it won't break on you, unlike the 360. Are YOU a cheap loser?

IdleLeeSiuLung2744d ago

It is ridicoulus to make all these console X is cheaper than console y because it is all relative to your needs.

Let's say I just wanted to play x game and I don't care to play online, then perhaps a PS2 or an Xbox 360 is the better choice. If I need wifi or if there are games on the console I want to play that isn't on the other then perhaps a Wii or PS3 might be a better choice. I really think the Xbox Arcade really competes with the PS2 and Wii, not the PS3, but gives you an upgrade path. In that respect it is a great value.

You can argue one way or the other, but consumers are fairly intelligent and will pick a console that fits their needs. Also in the US, most retailers have 30-day return policy. Unhappy? Take it back. So what is up with all the complaints, because the consumers aren't since 360's are selling.

@darkride66:
It seems to me like you didn't put much thought into your purchase as evident in the fact that you bought the rechargeable battery packs from MS and paid $8.99 a month for 2 years before even noticing! The 360 controllers (like the Wii controller) have the benefit of using regular batteries in which you can get regular rechargeable batteries for it. When the batteries goes bad, you don't have to take the controller apart to replace it and you can just pop in new charged batteries in the middle of a game. No need to charge with a long cord.

heroicjanitor2744d ago

The arcade doesn't have a hdmi cable included either.

Oner2744d ago (Edited 2744d ago )

The honest and fairest comparison to use for BOTH sides is

$300 360 60gb model + 1 year of LIVE! $50 + 1 controller $50 + 2 play & charge kits $40 = $440
vs
$400 PS3 80gb model + 1 controller $50 + HDMI cable $5 = $455

That is the LEAST amount you will spend for the AVERAGE gamer up to the HARDCORE, and maybe even including the CASUAL one as well as too. I added charge & play kits because if you factor in throw away non rechargeable batteries (which IS needed) it will cost EVEN more money in the long run. So this is a totally fair comparison. No WiFi added, No HD-DVD, No additional extras etc. to "pad" one side or the other. BUT let it be known that they do have to be noted as possibly costing CERTAIN users extra money (well not HD-DVD but you get the point).

I personally would add the the Live Vision Camera $40 & PSEye $40 (because it IS a "wash" being equally priced) and the $5 HDMI cable for the 360 Pro Model since it doesn't come with one (only the Elite does) BUT since it does come with HD component cables I feel that would be unfair to add a price when it can "out of the box" do HD whereas the PS3 does not. PLUS I don't want people complaining about these items (as well for some reason) because I am trying to keep it FAIR for BOTH sides unlike past comparisons, this article included.

So "out the door" the 360 is $15 cheaper I will agree...but after the 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc. year, it is not at all.

Oner2744d ago (Edited 2744d ago )

@darkride66 ~ Wow! I can truly understand the sentiment.

@IdleLeeSiuLung ~

"It seems to me like you didn't put much thought into your purchase as evident in the fact that you bought the rechargeable battery packs from MS and paid $8.99 a month for 2 years before even noticing! The 360 controllers (like the Wii controller) have the benefit of using regular batteries in which you can get regular rechargeable batteries for it. When the batteries goes bad, you don't have to take the controller apart to replace it and you can just pop in new charged batteries in the middle of a game. No need to charge with a long cord."

You say all this yet fail to realize & never once even factor in having to BUY these rechargeable batteries OR the charger itself. They are still an ADDITIONAL COST of which adds to the bottom line of the 360! No matter which way you look at it period!...although you did fail to mention that for some reason as to make it "seem" cheaper which is EXTREMELY odd & misinformed I might add.

ButterToast2744d ago

@1.13

Consumers for the most part are stupid. they look at what is going to cost them the least now and not what it is going to cost them in the long run. Now you and I might be informed consumers when it comes to deciding which console will best fit our needs, but most aren't.

IdleLeeSiuLung2744d ago

You are right that it is an additional cost, but call it future proofing if you would (the same argument PS3 fanboys use). Instead of having to buy a new controller when your battery goes bad or having to do a complicated electronic surgery process to replace battery as in the dual-shock, you can simply replace the battery at will. Most people will probably buy a new controller due to the difficulty of replacement as well as finding the battery. Now what cost you more?

I never once mentioned that it is cheaper. I was simply saying that comparison like this is invalid because people's needs are different. With MS you pay for it over time, but more and Sony you pay more upfront, but less over time depending on your needs.

The Lazy One2744d ago

that is, what we in the world of business, call the retard tax.

Here's the plain and simple.

Cost to play 1 game on the 360 (not including bundles): $259

Cost to play 1 game on the PS3 (not including bundles): $459

uxo222744d ago

This article made a lot of good points about the PS3. However the title is all wrong. "More affordable" means less expensive.

Perhaps it should be titled "PS3 is the Better Valued Console."

Either way, we've heard it all before. But it's not the gamers on N4G that you need to convince.

Mini Mario2744d ago (Edited 2744d ago )

The only gripe i have with the ps3 is all the installing and updating. And with alot of casual gamers that dont know alot they wouldnt even know why its doing it...its not the "put disc in and play" i guess like sonys previous machines.

GarandShooter2744d ago

'having to do a complicated electronic surgery process to replace battery as in the dual-shock'

This is either a very weak attempt at spin, or a telling self-revelation about your manual dexterity and prowess with a screwdriver.

+ Show (19) more repliesLast reply 2744d ago
pav23232745d ago

usual Xbox 360 owner replies. "We don't need all of those features". Although, if they had the features and PS3 did not, it would be used as ammo, just like the 'feature ammo' they use now. Such as, "we have cross game invites", "Netflix", etc... I am not a Xbox hater, just a PS3 supporter. In fact, my son is playing the Skate 2 demo as I type on the 360. He enjoys the 360 more than I, and I enjoy the PS3 more than him.

Silellak2744d ago (Edited 2744d ago )

It's not just a "usual reply" - for many people, it's true.

Some people will want everything the PS3 does, and for them, the PS3 is the best choice price-wise.

Other people only want to play single player games or local multiplayer with friends, and may not care about Blu-Ray right now. For them, all they really need is what the basic 360 offers.

I don't think either approach is right or wrong. I do think Microsoft overcharges for a lot of their accessories, no question. I imagine they do so so that the non-Arcade SKUs seem like a better deal.

I still say not having a hard drive standard was a huge mistake for them. I know why they did it, but I still disagree, if only because it limits developers too much. The lack of built-in Wi Fi in the 360 is the other thing that always made no sense to me. I mean, come on MS, even Nintendo got their right, and their online system for the Wii is a joke. Actually - it's not even a joke, because it's too depressing to be funny.

@Below:

You basically said a lot of what I said, but shorter ;)

I guess it comes down to: Are you willing to pay a premium in advance, or pay a bit more if you decide you want those features later? No matter what the fanboys on this site may try to convince you, there's no "correct choice" there. In some ways, paying everything upfront is good. In others, it's nice to not have to spend a HUGE chunk of money up front, and instead spread it out and just spend when you decide you want/need a certain feature.

ultimolu2744d ago

Or they'll say that potential owners wouldn't need that stuff. All they want to do is play games. But I guarantee that sooner or later they may want that stuff.

El Padre2744d ago

I'm buying a PS3 when Killzone 2 lands (waiting for the reviews) and I would easily take a lower price over built-in Wi-Fi. A cable is cheap, reliable and my router is on the same floor as my consoles. There's a ton of cables behind my TV set - one more won't hurt.

Sibs2744d ago

Well for me I would have had to bought a wifi adapter, and that was one of the major points for me not going through the hassle of getting ripped off by microsoft to buy it and attach it myself, so I got a ps3

For some reason I have a phone jack right near my tv, but no ethernet cable...

Shadow Flare2744d ago (Edited 2744d ago )

...the words of an idiot.

Microsoft started this generation with a phrase they LOVED to use, "It's all about choice".

"Mr. Moore, why bring out a HD-DVD add-on?"
-"Well it's about giving our consumers the choice..."

"Mr. Moore, why are there 3 SKU's for the 360?"
-"It gives consumers the choice"

"Why do some consumers have to buy add-ons for their 360 models?"
-"Because it gives consumers the choice if they want to buy it"

"Why aren't you making a bluray add-on for 360?"
-"Consumer demand isn't there"

FAIL

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2744d ago
Trollimite2744d ago

when ps3 owners call websites on there BS! they had no plans of doing a second part. but when they saw all the negative replies they made one. good job ps3 owners.

KingJFS2744d ago

That's ridiculous. The announcement for the second part of the series (pro-PS3/anti-Xbox360) was included at the top of anti-PS3/pro-Xbox 360 articles of the first part.

Drealmcc0y2744d ago

If thats true, then why did it get 2-1 by 360 in december

dukadork22744d ago

you mean you can't run a simple addition for yourself?
you mean you'd jump off a cliff to follow the herd?

xbot: follower, conformist idiot, fashion victim, easy marketing pray
M$ marketing team knew who they were dealing with

Voiceofreason2744d ago

Ps3 isnt cheaper.. It burns hundreds of dollars of electricity a year. More so than any other console. The 50.00 cost of Live is more than made up for by the savings on your electric bill. There ar more examples of why it costs more but it is pointless. Anyone with an IQ over 50 can see it isnt cheaper, The only people foolish enough to believe this already bought a PS3 so it will not change anything.

iiraymoii2744d ago

wow...lol 360 is balls deep in you aint it lol.

Chug2744d ago (Edited 2744d ago )

Digging hard for reasons to justify your purchase, eh?
You're seriously talking about electricity bills?? Wow, just wow.
So either you're desperate to debunk this article or I guess my IQ level is less than 50...

omodis4202744d ago

@ Voiceofreason

"Boo this man"

Silellak2744d ago (Edited 2744d ago )

You might want to consider moving your posts to the Open Zone, if you're going to insult every PS3 owner in existence.

It doesn't help that your post is a load of crap with no basis in reality. Look, there are definitely reasons to choose a 360 over a PS3. But yours? Not even close to one of them.

P4KY B2744d ago (Edited 2744d ago )

I don't know if what you said about using extra power is correct or not.
But if it is correct then you do have a very valid point and vica versa.

jro2112744d ago (Edited 2744d ago )

You went there (electricity)? This argument carries about as much weight as an ant could carry. Who gives a #^@# about electricity. The Xbox isn't too far behind if I may add. What makes it worse is that it consumes less electricity and still craps out like the POS it is. Let's add the cost and inconvenience of replacement. Add the cost of those who had to replace their RRoD Xbox prior to the extended warranty and those who have after the warranty was extended. Anyone with an IQ above 50 (I doubt this includes you)and an un-bias opinion can see the value in the Playstation and its reliability. Oh, I own both systems and I prefer my PS3 over my Xbox. It's sad that I did have to buy a battery charger, and skip out on Wi-Fi because I didn't want to make such a stupid purchase for the price. Before you start to insult people, try growing a brain first.

Sarcasm2744d ago

oh my god... now it's

bu bu bu bu bu teh electric bill!

lordgodalming2744d ago (Edited 2744d ago )

Okay okay. The PS3 does use a butt-ton of electricity. However, that's why God created power strips you can switch off and cords you can simply unplug. Good grief, the only appliance in my whole house that I always leave plugged in is my refrigerator. No food will spoil if you unplug the PS3 when you're not playing it. Same's true for the 360 or Wii as well. Next argument, please.

@thewhoopimen below: I need to quit being so surprised when someone on here actually posts a relevant link. Bubs for you.

thegood332744d ago

Well, let's keep it simple. No one cares about a wireless headset. Many people don't care about a wireless connection. The 360 controller is so overly superior to the PS3 controller in every way imaginable. Xbox live is superior to ps3's home in every way.

And the 360's game library absolutely smokes the ps3.
going once.
going twice.
sold.

Voiceofreason2744d ago (Edited 2744d ago )

Hey kids, I dont own nor will I ever own a MS console. I however am I real gamer so I read the news. Maybe you missed it or just will not admit it but a company released results a few months back showing PS3 ate up a lot more electricity than the 360 or Wii.
BTW saying anyone with an IQ over 50 can see the PS3 isnt cheaper is not insulting the entire PS3 fanbase.. You are under the false assumption that EVERY PS3 owner is the same. No not all are dumb enough to believe its cheaper, regardless of how much value they know it has. Is it cheaper? Of course not that does not mean it isnt worth the price. Many people will admit PS3 is worth the money. Few would actually be foolish enough to try to say it was cheaper. Maybe you should stick to the open zone since you take the honest truth as some negative..

lordgodalming2744d ago (Edited 2744d ago )

Tell you what: the 360 has a hell of a good controller. I like the spring in the analog sticks and the general shape of it. Dislike the hard buttons, but that's my personal preference. The Dualshock line of controllers (of which the Dualshock 3 is, to me, the best yet) is also great. I've been playing on them for close to ten years now and have yet to develop arthritis.

Games are an even bag. I'd love a 360 for Gears, Viva Pinata, NGII, and one or two of the exclusive JRPGs. But, again, I made my choice (can't afford both consoles), and I've had a great time with the exclusives and multiplats on PS3 as well. I won't list them here for the sake of space.

The PSN is fantastic. I honestly don't understand how people crap on it anymore. In my opinion, Home is lame and I never use it, but I'm also not paying to use it.

All that to say, when I said "Next argument" in my last post, I wasn't saying the 360 bites it hard, I was saying that the PS3 doesn't. Your arguments above were defensive and more than a little weak. This article says the PS3 is a great value, and for me, a person who saved up for 10 months to buy one, it IS a great value. Just like your 360 is for you. Game on.

GarandShooter2744d ago

The PS3 is heavier too, so it costs more in fuel to transport it home from the store in my car. CURSE YOU SONY!

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 2744d ago