I'm sorry.Quote:
FFTA
Printable View
I'm sorry.Quote:
FFTA
It's telling when a company's ideal (in their own eyes) move is not to make better software to compete, but release much cheaper hardware. Oh, and that they are going after the "non-gamer" crowd. Why should we, as gamers, be excited?
Do you drive a Ferrarri? If not, you support this ideal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joust Williams
Worst analogy ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
If games cost 10 times the average person's yearly salary it wouldn't be, though.
If every car out there but one was a Ferrari, then yes, I would probably go for the Ferrari.
The hardware isn't cheaper when compared to previous generations. Everyone else is just getting more expensive, and they're still selling at a loss.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joust Williams
And it's a totally reasonable move. Not everyone wants to pay $400+ just for a system, and $60+ for games. Some do, and that's fine, they've already got two companies catering directly to them. Why do they need a third?
I understand...it's just like, I dunno, conceding defeat. Many years ago you wouldn't think Nintendo was going to have the cheapest system on the market. You'd say, "Nintendo is the heavy hitter, WTF is this junk". It's not like Nintendo is doing this because they want to be nice.
Yes. It's weird seeing Nintendo do this. In the 1990s they were the most original AND the most technologically advanced. StarFox with its 200 polygons per second was mind-blowing. They always tried to be ahead of the tech curve. Even the GameCube, while not as powerful as Xbox, was a very impressive and powerful piece of hardware for the price.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joust Williams
The Wii... they could probably sell it for $100, and that is taking the remotei nto account. The hardware is just nothing.
A car is at least a necessity. We've seen the ridiculous outrage on this board over the $600 PS3. Is it really that different? Granted, a smaller percentage can afford a Ferrarri than a PS3, but it still forces some people to find a cheaper alternative with less performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
I know, they're doing it because they can't compete with Sony and Microsoft on an equal playing field. Which is why I'm glad they're not trying to, because they did that with the Gamecube and we all saw how that turned out. And the whole "cheap hardware + controller gimmick" thing is working out amazingly well with the DS, so who knows? At the very least there's some actual diversity between the systems this generation, so owning all three won't seem horribly redundant.