What Is The PS3 Really Worth?

Shiftfallout said:
Folding@home has already proven that PS3s are able to process and contribute 10x more than the average computer.

Keeping in mind that "the average computer" is a $400 eMachine that Joe Public uses to browse the web and send emails, not a screaming fast $3000 Alienware gaming rig.

Okay, maybe not bad, but it doesn't surprise me at all that "the average computer" isn't as powerful as "the average PS3", when a PS3 is designed to be a graphics powerhouse. PCs aren't all used for gaming.
 
santo said:
Keeping in mind that "the average computer" is a $400 eMachine that Joe Public uses to browse the web and send emails, not a screaming fast $3000 Alienware gaming rig.

Okay, maybe not bad, but it doesn't surprise me at all that "the average computer" isn't as powerful as "the average PS3", when a PS3 is designed to be a graphics powerhouse. PCs aren't all used for gaming.

exactly, but considering the price of the PS3 and the average computer.. well as Borat would say:

Thatz NICE.

boratcannesyc2.jpg
 
Sure, the PS3 is cheap, considering its price and what's under the hood.

But think of it this way: it's like selling an Enzo Ferrari for $750,000... it's a great bargain, but there's still not going to be a lot of people willing to drop the cash on it.
 
santo said:
Sure, the PS3 is cheap, considering its price and what's under the hood.

But think of it this way: it's like selling an Enzo Ferrari for $750,000... it's a great bargain, but there's still not going to be a lot of people willing to drop the cash on it.

over 2.5 million people so far, and just a few months passed launch. I would say thats not bad at all. The PSP upwards of 25 million. Not bad at all....
 
i would probably buy one for $400 or $350.... Sony is very cheap for what potential it has but it's expensive to the average gamer... So therefore itt is both cheap and expensive. Cheap for what it is worth but expensive with the price.
 
For what you get the PS3 as a piece of hardware is worth what it costs, but it comes down to what the individual wants.
The blueray player as a movie disc player doesnt apeal to me at all becuase my interest in watching movie's isnt that high, at least from a quality point of view. For me to buy a ps3 at the current price it would need one or two really great games... i'm talking future classics.

what is ps3 worth to me.. well if i had the time to play another console id seriously consider buying one for £250 with a game (actual price is £400 without a game). £250 might seem low but thats honestly what its worth to me as an individual. Of course as more better games are released that figure will go up.
 
hotpotato78 said:
i would probably buy one for $400 or $350.... Sony is very cheap for what potential it has but it's expensive to the average gamer... So therefore itt is both cheap and expensive. Cheap for what it is worth but expensive with the price.

the average gamer? The average gamer is 30 years old. For a gamer with a background in PC gaming, sony's price is not a lot. Hell as a PC gamer i drop 300 -400 for a video card alone. A couple hundred for a RAM upgrade as well. Few years later, build a new computer. Its expensive but well worth it.

SO for me, I dont see the PS3 being that expensive at all. I think there are a lot of young people out there to want one but no one will buy it for them and thus they complain.
 
Shiftfallout said:
the average gamer? The average gamer is 30 years old. For a gamer with a background in PC gaming, sony's price is not a lot. Hell as a PC gamer i drop 300 -400 for a video card alone. A couple hundred for a RAM upgrade as well. Few years later, build a new computer. Its expensive but well worth it.

SO for me, I dont see the PS3 being that expensive at all. I think there are a lot of young people out there to want one but no one will buy it for them and thus they complain.

Oh my God. lol shift you are truely sad. When i say average gamer i am meaning someone(not 30 year olds) who constantly buys and plays games. Not because statistics says it that doesn't mean it is true shift.... I truely feel as if you don't understand what i am say at all. Shift are you rich or don't have responsiblities? because right now i am thinking both..... the ps3 is expensive for a game but it is not expensive for what potential it holds. So what am i saying. i am trying to say that it may be worth it and even though it is not being sold for how much it is worth. it still is high for many gamers. $600 is alot to spend on any game regardless of who makes it. This is why i say leave games to being games and stop making it a multi tasks thing. right now sony has to settle for selling it for $600 when it is probably worth $1000 or more. So what i am saying is the ps3 is cheap and handy for it's price but the price is still high, it's not too high but it is high. So in doing that the game is to high tech for a game. sony maybe jump the gun but who knows. But making a game a multi task console. Will make it more expensive than it needs to be. When you go in stores you usually find games in the toy section or electronics section some times. you don't think $600 is to much for a toy? Toys were really meant for kids. But they label video games as toys.

SO FOR THE LAST TIME SHIFT, I AM NOT SAYING THE PRICE IS TOO HIGH BUT I AM SAYING IT IS HIGH
 
Last edited:
The average gamer is not 30 years old. Another non factual statement brought to you by Shift. Next he'll say the PS3 will be #1 in sales by the end of this year.
 
sony actually pays like $1200 to make each ps3, but theyre sellin it for just $600, so i really wouldnt complain about the price. but i say if sony just dropped the blue ray and a little bit of other stuff, and made it like $450/$475 or somethin, it would sell way more. but my opinion; the ps3 sux as a game counsel, but is good as an electronic accessory. if i got one, i really wouldnt use it to game. id watch some dvds and download media and crap
 
hotpotato78 said:
When you go in stores you usually find games in the toy section or electronics section some times. you don't think $600 is to much for a toy? Toys were really meant for kids. But they label video games as toys.

Wait, werent you just complaining that people are saying Nintendo is a kiddie system and you are saying this?

You seem to think im dissagreeing with everything you said. You generalized the average gamer, and i cleared up some things. Why are you so defensive?

I have to say after listening to you though, you definately are a bit jumpy. Jumping to conclusions, and your logic is a bit off. Try not to take offense but you really are speaking from your personal feelings rather than factual knowlege. It happens to a lot of people. They think they know something then use their own personal feelings or perspective to debate rather than just toss out some facts.

I dont care if you get more angry, but read some of the stuff you post sometimes. Its completely off the wall.

SO FOR THE LAST TIME SHIFT, I AM NOT SAYING THE PRICE IS TOO HIGH BUT I AM SAYING IT IS HIGH

Jumping to conclusions. You put meaning where there was none, im not saying the system is cheap and for everyone. My post was merely talking about the average gamer you mentioned. You are over reacting.

Please tell me which part of this is saying what you claim?
"the average gamer? The average gamer is 30 years old. For a gamer with a background in PC gaming, sony's price is not a lot. Hell as a PC gamer i drop 300 -400 for a video card alone. A couple hundred for a RAM upgrade as well. Few years later, build a new computer. Its expensive but well worth it.
SO for me, I dont see the PS3 being that expensive at all. I think there are a lot of young people out there to want one but no one will buy it for them and thus they complain."

I dont see me mention anything about it being to high. You are over reacting to my clairification on the "average" gamer.
Jumping the gun, putting intent where there was none, thats a bad habbit you need to break. Comprende?
 
Shoko said:
sony actually pays like $1200 to make each ps3, but theyre sellin it for just $600, so i really wouldnt complain about the price. but i say if sony just dropped the blue ray and a little bit of other stuff, and made it like $450/$475 or somethin, it would sell way more. but my opinion; the ps3 sux as a game counsel, but is good as an electronic accessory. if i got one, i really wouldnt use it to game. id watch some dvds and download media and crap

My point exactly. I'm not paying for a media entertainment machine. I'm paying to play high quality games. Something that sony is lacking when compared to the other two companies. If we're talking aobut it just in terms of actually "goodies" then of course its worth over $1,000. People can complain because its sony who made the product and priced it. Too bad thats not what the average consumer or the average gamer needs or is willing to spend. Maybe further down the line it will change but right now I don't think its reasonable to say its worth $600. For me I'd pay $400 for it if I was in a neutral mood.
 
sagema said:
The average gamer is not 30 years old. Another non factual statement brought to you by Shift. Next he'll say the PS3 will be #1 in sales by the end of this year.

OK, I dont usually do this much.. but you are a child. A kid. And not a smart one at that.

Yes, the average gamer is 30 years old. Before you commented like an angry teen being dumped at a jr-high dance, did you bother to do some research? Did you say "hey that sounds like crap, i better check before i call him out"? Oh but you didnt do that did you? No. You didnt. And this is why no one takes you seriously.

Untill you learn to grow up and act like a logical person, dont bother posting at all.

Feel humbled.
ESA
TOP 10 INDUSTRY FACTS

1. US computer and video game software sales grew six percent in 2006 to $7.4 billion – almost tripling industry software sales since 1996.

2. Sixty-nine percent of American heads of households play computer and video games.

3. The average game player is 33 years old and has been playing games for 12 years.

4. The average age of the most frequent game buyer is 40 years old. In 2006, 93 percent of computer game buyers and 83 percent of console game buyers were over the age of 18.



5. Eighty-five percent of all games sold in 2005 were rated "E" for Everyone, "T" for Teen, or "E10+" for Everyone 10+. For more information on ratings, please see www.esrb.org.


6. Eighty-seven percent of game players under the age of 18 report that they get their parents’ permission when renting or buying games, and 89 percent say their parents are present when they buy games.

7. Thirty-five percent of American parents say they play computer and video games. Further, 80 percent of gamer parents say they play video games with their kids. Sixty-six percent feel that playing games has brought their families closer together.


8. Thirty-eight percent of all game players are women. In fact, women over the age of 18 represent a significantly greater portion of the game-playing population (30%) than boys age 17 or younger (23%).


9. In 2005, 25 percent of Americans over the age of 50 played video games, an increase from nine percent in 1999.

10. Forty-four percent of game players say they play games online one or more hours per week. In addition, 32 percent of heads of households play games on a wireless device, such as a cell phone or PDA, up from 20 percent in 2002.
http://www.theesa.com/facts/top_10_facts.php
http://reviews.cnet.com/4531-10921_7-6528572.html?subj=blog&part=rss&tag=Gamers growing up
 
OMG i am not saying you said it is to high. I am saying it isn't too high. But it is expensive. you turn around and said well i don't think it is expensive. From right there it is like your disagreeing with me. you keep saying the average gamer is 30 and i don't think so no matter what statistics say. Dude you got problems i am just talking you know. sorry if it might come off different but i am just talking.......My hold point is, the game is expensive anyway whether they cut down the price or not.

Lmao you make me laugh mann. yeah people are saying that nintendo is kiddie. But often times games and toys are together. So then that would make the ps3 kiddie huh? I feel like a game should be to everyones grasps not the people who are working and can afford to spend $600

When i talked about it being in the toy section i was trying to say if people walked in the toy section and saw a ps3 for $600, they would think they are in the wrong section because that is an expensive game. That's all i was trying to say. regardless of what technology it is, it stil is costly.... But i'm just saying shift. on walmart website they have games under toys. But usually toys are for kids but with all the technology in video games, they are becoming more and more for everyone than before. Which is good. But dude i said the electronic and toy section. why did you only pick on the toy section part huh.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top