Quote:
|
Originally Posted by 3Z3VH
So, with game consoles now approaching $600... why would someone not just bite the bullet and go with an ACTUAL computer ?
$600 could buy you one heck of a nice gaming system sans-monitor. If you really care about losing your HDMI support on the PS3, then that means you already have a DVI monitor to use for said computer.
The reason the NES was so successful despite it's cost ? It really was the only game in town. The Genesis was more expensive, and had less games, the atari had nowhere near the same graphics, and computers were still very antiquated to use. Nowadays, a PC can do EVERYTHING these consoles do, they can do it better, faster, they can be upgraded, they can do things that have nothing to do with games even, and you don't have to entirely replace it when the next generation comes out (and apparently now the price isn't even an object anymore).
If Sony really is setting the mark for the evolution of the game console, you will see the game console's demise sooner rather than later, as people will come to realise a PC is a BETTER value.
|
Ummmmm, with the NICE video cards running at like $400 a pop, you could not really buy a great system that will last a long time for $600 at this point. No way. Not to mention, if you wanted to stay top of the line running all the new games at full speeds with everything turned up, you would have to upgrade probably every year, not every 5 or 6 years like you would a console. A better value? no way.
And while I love my computer, there are some games that I could never see coming out on a computer and actually being good. Just like there are games I could never see coming out on a console and being good.
And the release price for the PSX in 1995 was $300. I don't see much of a big deal in the price difference over 11 years.