Putting Xbox 360's Price in Context

[Phades]

IGN posted this article (http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/643/643170p1.html) showing different console costs adjusted for inflation. They also share this little nugget of 'wisdom' to add a little more perspective."...computer technology doesn't exactly follow the same rules of inflation as other products. This is due to the decreasing cost and increased capabilities of the guts of a machine. So while the value of the $650 smackers paid for a Neo Geo is an exorbitant amount of cash by today's standards, the actual hardware could now be produced for a tiny fraction of that cost."In other words, just because technology is better today doesn't mean it should cost more.

[RvltnEvolved]

$500 bucks for a 360 with a hard drive and 2nd controller is not bad especially if the specs are right, and from the screen shots I've seen it is lookin' damn sexy

[Liquidize105]

Wow.

3 numbers - 399, elicited so much blabbering from the press it's unbelievable.

Excuse me, I have to duck the verablized razorwind coming at me from all 360 degrees now. If I do survive, kill me, because it'd be a sin to let me go on living.

[Chandler]

Oh how the US dollar has dropped :/

[Jaded Fool]

The article reads like the writer is trying to justify buying an xbox 360.

"I can't afford $399! But if it was an Atari it'd be $811... so it's actually really cheap!"

For the purpose of this article we'll be looking at the price of a video game console statiscally and comparing its cost to today's dollar value.

Great, so by ignoring the fact that Atari had a very different system in terms of features and ignoring the fact that supply and demand at the time was considerably different, IGN have served their 'purpose'.

'statiscally' ... wow, just noticed that ;)

[Adam Blue]

So microsoft is trying their best to tell people that the console is gonna be $400 this generation...so? Shit, that stuff happens. Prices go up, I got a raise, it all works together.

[Bushido]

$500 bucks for a 360 with a hard drive and 2nd controller is not bad especially if the specs are right, and from the screen shots I've seen it is lookin' damn sexy


The Xbox is begining to look more like the common computer without the 'fringe' benifits. No porn No DvD burner No VoiP No web browser. I think PC gaming is about to experience a renaissance with prices that make Xbox and Sony look like snake oil salesmen.

[Evil Avatar]

I think PC gaming is about to experience a renaissance with prices that make Xbox and Sony look like snake oil salesmen.

Kind of hard for PC gaming to experience a renaissance when hardly anyone is making PC games.

[Deathbane27]

Also, try playing anything on a $500 PC. That's early Xbox/PS2-quality graphics, if that. And for some reason, people don't like making new PC games that don't tax the latest hardware.

No porn No DvD burner No VoiP No web browser.

No DVD burner, but for the rest, there's always hacking. I'm not certain about web browsing and VoIP, but I've seen mpeg movies being played on my friend's modded Xbox. There's your porn right there.

[MrMeatshake]

No porn No DvD burner No VoiP No web browser.

No DVD burner, but for the rest, there's always hacking. I'm not certain about web browsing and VoIP, but I've seen mpeg movies being played on my friend's modded Xbox. There's your porn right there.

yeah, the XBMC (http://www.xboxmediacenter.com/) software is amazing. i can't wait until i get my 360 so i can mod my old xbox into a media storage and playback MONSTER ;)

[H.Bogard]

Also, try playing anything on a $500 PC. That's early Xbox/PS2-quality graphics, if that. And for some reason, people don't like making new PC games that don't tax the latest hardware.


I challenge you to spend those $500 (wisely) on your pc and you WILL get x360 like graphics....the first generation of them AT THE LEAST!

Ive heard enough blabbering about pc gaming being to expensive...every dime you shell out isnt SOLELY for gaming you know...the pc is a multipurpose machine so count your money for everything that you use it for

[Deathbane27]

Ive heard enough blabbering about pc gaming being to expensive...every dime you shell out isnt SOLELY for gaming you know...the pc is a multipurpose machine so count your money for everything that you use it for

No, I don't know. Considering I already own a pc, yes, any further money I put into it would be solely for gaming. If I hadn't bought Morrowind and then EQ2, I'd still be running on a 900Mhz Duron with 64MB of RAM and no 3D-accelerator card on Windows 98SE and be perfectly happy with it. And I STILL don't have a DVD drive. :p

[Bushido]

I challenge you to spend those $500 (wisely) on your pc and you WILL get x360 like graphics....the first generation of them AT THE LEAST!

Ive heard enough blabbering about pc gaming being to expensive...every dime you shell out isnt SOLELY for gaming you know...the pc is a multipurpose machine so count your money for everything that you use it for


My point exactly, consoles attempt to imitate PC's. As for games have you tried World of Warcraft or Guild Wars or the BattleField or the Half-Life. Lets not be silly Evil.

[Evil Avatar]

In other words, just because technology is better today doesn't mean it should cost more.

It shouldn't cost more when it has a better video card, a hard drive, a network card, wireless support and more RAM than earlier systems? You might want to re-think that statement.

[Evil Avatar]

As for games have you tried World of Warcraft or Guild Wars or the BattleField or the Half-Life. Lets not be silly Evil.

I take it you haven't seen my collection of Xbox games. :) I think the one being silly is anyone who doesn't realize that console gaming is where gaming is at right now. PC's are great, but for how long? Mostly, the advantage PC's have over console systems is RTS titles and MMORPG's and there is no reason that they can't put MMORPG's on the 360 or PS3.

PC gaming is in a slump and the ability to name the top 5 titles of last year in one breath isn't going to change that.

How many copies of Half-Life 2 do you think Valve would have sold if it had come out on the Xbox first instead of the PC? A ton more than I'll bet they sold on the PC.

And who isn't tired of upgrading every year? Do you think Call of Duty 2, Prey, Quake 4, Unreal Tournament 2007 and Spore are going to run well on current systems? Probably not.

[bapenguin]

Yeah...it's a sad state PC gaming...for every top title on PC you have 5 on the consoles. There's just much more variety and quantity on the consoles. Are the games better on PC? In some respects....yes.

If you think 500 bucks is going to buy you a PC with XBox 360 quality graphics.... it's going to be tough...lets put something together that will hardly going to get you above XBox quality graphics. Don't forget...include the case, powersupply, cables, etc in your pricing.

And if you want 360 quality graphics you are going to need at least a 6600GT or X800...so you are down 150 bucks right there.

Low end Athlon 64....150 bucks....uh oh we are at 300 already.

PCI Express Motherboard....65 bucks

1 Gig of ram (512 just doesn't cut it) - 80 bucks

445.....

80 gig HD.....50 bucks....

12x DVD.....12 bucks...

507....still need the case...etc etc....

And the best thing about this system...in 1 year....you won't be able to play any of the new shit at any decent resolution and graphical quality.

[BigJonno]

For the first time that I can remember, the UK is getting a console priced in line with the US and it's cheaper than the PS, PS2, Saturn and Xbox launch prices while including more stuff. I couldn't be happier.

[Kamalot]

Even taking into account inflation, the big moovers and shakers on that list are STILL under $400!

NES
Genesis
Super Nintendo
N64
Dreamcast
PS1
PS2

Whereas some of the biggest flops were super expensive!

Sony won't be stupid enough to launch the PS3 at over $299.

[bapenguin]

Sony won't be stupid enough to launch the PS3 at over $299.

You are kidding yourself. They can't afford to launch it at $299. Losing over 200 a system just isn't an option. I'm betting $399 launch price of the PS3. Microsoft set the bar.

[morose]

You are kidding yourself. They can't afford to launch it at $299. Losing over 200 a system just isn't an option. I'm betting $399 launch price of the PS3. Microsoft set the bar.
Exactly right. Depending on the sales numbers they see from the 360, they might even take up the multi-tiered aspect that MS is now pioneering. Just depends if it's sucessful. My gut tells me it's not going to be, but since to the best of my knowledge you can upgrade the gimped Xbox to match all the features of the full version after the fact, it's not a complete hose for folks who opt for the cheapy to start.

Plus... hmm... incremental upgrades... where have I seen that before? Oh yeah! The PC market! :) And anyone who says PC gaming is dead or dying needs to look at the sales numbers for the top tier titles (like World of Warcraft) and compare them to consoles... then come back here and try to make a point. So a PC-like hardware strategy isn't just a given for complete failure.

Sony would be crazy to take any more of a loss than they'll have to already to put the PS3 out at a price point lower than $299, and from the statements that have been floating around the Sony channels, I'm guessing $399 is closer.

[Kamalot]

Sega set the bar as well. They launched early with the Saturn at the reasonable price of $399. Sony came around a little while later with the PS1 at the cool, cool rice of $299.

That $100 made all the difference in the world.

Now, I'm not a Sony fan, but those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. Looking at history, no console over the $299 launch price has ever turned out to be a substantial force in the market. That's probably why Microsoft wants to come in at and above the magic $299 number by dividing their console market.

Also, history teaches us that it is extremely difficult for peripherals to be widely accepted unless they are cheap. Rumble packs come to mind. Expensive add-ons; Sega CD, 32X, Multitap, additional hard drives, etc, never amount to a significant penetration in the market to make developers widely adopt their use. By dividing their consoles upon launch, Microsoft is making the Hard Drive an add-on that will make it shunned by the majority of developers.

This seems a treacherous road to walk between add-ons and the magic price and may incur the evils of both.

[Zeal]

Sega set the bar as well. They launched early with the Saturn at the reasonable price of $399. Sony came around a little while later with the PS1 at the cool, cool rice of $299.

That $100 made all the difference in the world.

Now, I'm not a Sony fan, but those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. Looking at history, no console over the $299 launch price has ever turned out to be a substantial force in the market. That's probably why Microsoft wants to come in at and above the magic $299 number by dividing their console market.

Also, history teaches us that it is extremely difficult for peripherals to be widely accepted unless they are cheap. Rumble packs come to mind. Expensive add-ons; Sega CD, 32X, Multitap, additional hard drives, etc, never amount to a significant penetration in the market to make developers widely adopt their use. By dividing their consoles upon launch, Microsoft is making the Hard Drive an add-on that will make it shunned by the majority of developers.

This seems a treacherous road to walk between add-ons and the magic price and may incur the evils of both.


That is exactly what's gonna happen. That's also why Microsoft has hinted that the harddrive won't even be there in the future. I hate this.

[trip1eX]

console gaming is where the mainstream is at not where gaming is at. Gaming is anywhere there are killer games. And right now that's the pc.

[Phades]

It shouldn't cost more when it has a better video card, a hard drive, a network card, wireless support and more RAM than earlier systems? You might want to re-think that statement.

I was actually just trying to summarize the point IGN was making, not make one of my own.

But no, as the point was, it shouldn't necessarily cost more relative to the launch of earlier consoles. Computers are known for their "smaller, faster, cheaper" cycle. The Xbox360 is better than the Xbox. If it wasn't, it wouldn't be coming out. Being better doesn't mean it should have a higher launch price and the Xbox360 doesn't.

I'll no doubt get the $399 bundle deal, but the price to buy the console as consoles have traditionally launched since the first Playstation (ie. System, controller, cables, nothing more) is $299. I find that completely acceptable. If anything, IGNs's charts show that to be relatively cheaper than the Xbox 1 at launch. Since the Xbox was the only system to ever have a hard drive as standard, I'm over the fact that it's successor will not. I've completely enjoyed each console I've owned. I've never thought to myself, "damn, I wish my Gamecube had a hard disk!"

[Phades]

console gaming is where the mainstream is at not where gaming is at. Gaming is anywhere there are killer games. And right now that's the pc.

And right now that is also on consoles. The existence of great games on the PC does not somehow negate their existence (in greater numbers) on consoles.

[Phades]

Yeah...it's a sad state PC gaming...for every top title on PC you have 5 on the consoles. There's just much more variety and quantity on the consoles. Are the games better on PC? In some respects....yes.

If you think 500 bucks is going to buy you a PC with XBox 360 quality graphics.... it's going to be tough...lets put something together that will hardly going to get you above XBox quality graphics. Don't forget...include the case, powersupply, cables, etc in your pricing.

And if you want 360 quality graphics you are going to need at least a 6600GT or X800...so you are down 150 bucks right there.

Low end Athlon 64....150 bucks....uh oh we are at 300 already.

PCI Express Motherboard....65 bucks

1 Gig of ram (512 just doesn't cut it) - 80 bucks

445.....

80 gig HD.....50 bucks....

12x DVD.....12 bucks...

507....still need the case...etc etc....

And the best thing about this system...in 1 year....you won't be able to play any of the new shit at any decent resolution and graphical quality.

Where can I get an X800 for $150? I need a new video card (my 9800 pro is starting to feel its age).

[TheKeck]

Yeah...it's a sad state PC gaming...for every top title on PC you have 5 on the consoles. There's just much more variety and quantity on the consoles. Are the games better on PC? In some respects....yes.

If you think 500 bucks is going to buy you a PC with XBox 360 quality graphics.... it's going to be tough...lets put something together that will hardly going to get you above XBox quality graphics. Don't forget...include the case, powersupply, cables, etc in your pricing.

And if you want 360 quality graphics you are going to need at least a 6600GT or X800...so you are down 150 bucks right there.

Low end Athlon 64....150 bucks....uh oh we are at 300 already.

PCI Express Motherboard....65 bucks

1 Gig of ram (512 just doesn't cut it) - 80 bucks

445.....

80 gig HD.....50 bucks....

12x DVD.....12 bucks...

507....still need the case...etc etc....

And the best thing about this system...in 1 year....you won't be able to play any of the new shit at any decent resolution and graphical quality.

This is kind of a side note, but if you're diligent you can sometimes get great deals on PCs. Last month, two of my co-workers bought systems from CompUSA for $183. Athlon 64 3500+, hard drive, DVD-rom, some ram, and all the case and cables and everything, of course. Starting with that, you can get an X-box 360 killer for $500 pretty easy I'd say.

I realize this is obviously the exception to the rule, but it is possible. Mostly I just wanted to share the deal. (This, however, was all to my chagrin, as I had just dropped $1100 on a system of my own. :( )

[TheKeck]

It shouldn't cost more when it has a better video card, a hard drive, a network card, wireless support and more RAM than earlier systems? You might want to re-think that statement.

I'm going to have to agree with Phades here. Of course, a 360 NOW should cost more than an X-Box NOW. But, why shouldn't it cost more than $600 like the Neo Geo? It's certainly orders of magnitude more powerful than that. Did you totally miss the point of this argument?

[rein]

This whole pc vs the 360 debate is false.

Who the hell has to update their pc every year? That is just false. I am running the same pc I built 2 years ago and even back then it wasn't the top of the line. I have yet to run into a problem playing a game.

If you are going to make the argument in order to have all of the bells a whistles then you will have to upgrade it fine. In that argument though, you need to say the Xbox 360 will cost close to $2000 or more because to get the highest graphic capability you will need an HD tv.

I have been a console gamer since the olden days of sears telegames. It wasn't my fault, my mother sat me down at a table top pong arcade game when I was young and that was it. However, over the last 4 - 5 years I have spent my share of time on pc games. I could don't give a flying flip about which console/pc/any combination wins out next generation. But come on, nobody I know has to upgrade their pc every year.

edited because I didn't intend to use the word stupid.

[H.Bogard]

If you think 500 bucks is going to buy you a PC with XBox 360 quality graphics.... it's going to be tough...lets put something together that will hardly going to get you above XBox quality graphics. Don't forget...include the case, powersupply, cables, etc in your pricing.

Dude where the hell did i mention that you need to spend 500 bucks to build a pc from SCRATCH? Let me quote myself : Spend $500 ON YOUR PC

that means not buying a monitor etc, just a new cpu ,video card and ram ....for 500 bucks...i can help you with a deal if you feel youre getting mugged.

How many copies of Half-Life 2 do you think Valve would have sold if it had come out on the Xbox first instead of the PC? A ton more than I'll bet they sold on the PC.


bbb....bbb but....hl2 sold well cuz of all the boxes you could tumble! and those are missing on teh xb0xx!

what do i mean to say? half life 2 might have sold twice as well...but it also would have been 5 times less outstanding that it is

you want to count pc money? lets talk guild wars, or world of warcraft...MMOs are cash cows on the pc , you have 2 million xbox live subscribers right now and single pc game alone , one such as WoW , has equavilent subscribers...plus battlefield 2 peeps...plus counterstrike freaks...

also i disagree with pc being only for mmo`s and rts titles...i say shooters are best played on pc and they also sell more than consoles...
name one console shooter that doesnt rhyme with HALO that sold better than a pc game.

[bapenguin]

Where can I get an X800 for $150? I need a new video card (my 9800 pro is starting to feel its age).

They are 175 at newegg. I just kinda threw that number out based on a 6600GT price...since they are similar in performance.

[motor]

The Xbox is begining to look more like the common computer without the 'fringe' benifits. No porn No DvD burner No VoiP No web browser. I think PC gaming is about to experience a renaissance with prices that make Xbox and Sony look like snake oil salesmen.

Let's see...Xbox 360 promises to create a way to do micro-transactions between users and there is also private high-quality video chat with the camera accessory.

Xbox 360 is a porn machine!

I can't wait until I start getting spam friend request in the middle of a game by "meloveyoulongtime$4.99perminute"!

[Phades]

Let's see...Xbox 360 promises to create a way to do micro-transactions between users and there is also private high-quality video chat with the camera accessory.

Xbox 360 is a porn machine!

I can't wait until I start getting spam friend request in the middle of a game by "meloveyoulongtime$4.99perminute"!

Of course that would mean you've added them to your friends list.... ;)

[motor]

Of course that would mean you've added them to your friends list.... ;)

Wouldn't you ;)

[Cyrano]

The reason we don't notice inflation very much is because it happens gradually. When you look at Xbox with HDD launching for $300 and Xbox 360 with HDD launching for $400, that doesn't seem very gradual.

[Tyrant]

Dude where the hell did i mention that you need to spend 500 bucks to build a pc from SCRATCH? Let me quote myself : Spend $500 ON YOUR PC

that means not buying a monitor etc, just a new cpu ,video card and ram ....for 500 bucks...i can help you with a deal if you feel youre getting mugged.


Considering the likely cost of an a video card that would be somewhat equivalent to the Xbox360's GPU, combined with the cost of a new CPU, along with the cost of some extra RAM...I'd say you're already really close to pushing the $500 mark, and unless all the developers decide to port their games to the PC, you're out of luck if you want to play something like Project Gotham 3 on your computer.



you want to count pc money? lets talk guild wars, or world of warcraft...MMOs are cash cows on the pc , you have 2 million xbox live subscribers right now and single pc game alone , one such as WoW , has equavilent subscribers...plus battlefield 2 peeps...plus counterstrike freaks...


As far as I know, Battlefield 2 and Counter-strike players don't subscribe to anything to play their games.

[Tyrant]

The reason we don't notice inflation very much is because it happens gradually. When you look at Xbox with HDD launching for $300 and Xbox 360 with HDD launching for $400, that doesn't seem very gradual.

The original Xbox didn't come with a wireless controller, headset, and remote control though.

To compare the prices of previous consoles and upcoming ones is rather trivial, considering how utterly different they are with respect to specifications and what accessories they come with.

[Heretic Machine]

Considering the likely cost of an a video card that would be somewhat equivalent to the Xbox360's GPU, combined with the cost of a new CPU, along with the cost of some extra RAM...I'd say you're already really close to pushing the $500 mark, and unless all the developers decide to port their games to the PC, you're out of luck if you want to play something like Project Gotham 3 on your computer.


And you'll be out of luck when it comes to playing the real version of TES: Oblivion, and Unreal Tournament 2k6.

The original Xbox didn't come with a wireless controller, headset, and remote control though.

So, let's take a look at the core system vs the original XBOX. Comparable hardware improvments over the other consoles out at the time, but one has a HD and one doesn't.

[H.Bogard]

Considering the likely cost of an a video card that would be somewhat equivalent to the Xbox360's GPU, combined with the cost of a new CPU, along with the cost of some extra RAM...I'd say you're already really close to pushing the $500 mark, and unless all the developers decide to port their games to the PC, you're out of luck if you want to play something like Project Gotham 3 on your computer.




As far as I know, Battlefield 2 and Counter-strike players don't subscribe to anything to play their games.

I think perigon already said what i wanted to say ... and about battlefield 2 and cs...those games dont require any subscribtion , HENCE THEY SELL MORE!

[Tyrant]

And you'll be out of luck when it comes to playing the real version of TES: Oblivion, and Unreal Tournament 2k6.


Ah yes, it must be the real version because you can use 3rd party modifications! It's not as though the actual game is on the 360 versions or anything...

Then there's the likely console gamer's preference to just pop in the game and play as opposed to going through the installation process, downloading and installing patches, updating DirectX, along with various drivers due to graphical or sound related issues that may crop up. Then you have the multiplayer setting. Now in the case of PC games, I'm not aware of many that support multiplayer on the same computer, where as console versions of multiplayer games tend to have splitscreen play.


So, let's take a look at the core system vs the original XBOX. Comparable hardware improvments over the other consoles out at the time, but one has a HD and one doesn't.

One also lost a good deal of money over the years partly due to the presence of said HD, where as the other is obviously trying to reverse the trend. When you consider the cost of a 20gig 2.5" laptop HD with an enclosure($50+), it definitely adds a strain with regards to the amount of money lost per console sold had they decided to make it standard. I'd imagine this is where the $100 price comes in, but considering that we had to buy memory cards for $20-$30 each on other consoles that launched for $299, it really isn't that different from previous generations. Now as for backwards compatibility being lost without the HD, I know the PS2 didn't charge extra for backwards compatibility...wait, no, it probably did with respect to developing the emulation software to do so....but I preferred playing Playstation games on a regular Playstation anyway, as I didn't have to put up with longer initial load times and potential emulation issues.

On another note, I thought I was on your ignore list or something, because I pointed out that various major PS2 games in Japan had HD support, despite the small userbase a few days ago in another topic, yet I never saw a reply from you.

[mister_slim]

You are kidding yourself. They can't afford to launch it at $299. Losing over 200 a system just isn't an option. I'm betting $399 launch price of the PS3. Microsoft set the bar.
I doubt it. Those PS3 numbers are pointless, at this point in time. For one thing, Sony has a completely different manufacturing chain. Also, they've already put a billion dollars into IBM's fab, which will probably help as well.
Who the hell has to update their pc every year? That is just false. I am running the same pc I built 2 years ago and even back then it wasn't the top of the line. I have yet to run into a problem playing a game.
I haven't upgraded my computer since buying a cheap iBook three years ago.

[Dracula-X]

I'd wager Sony launches at $399 as well (where's the Evil Avatar bookie!?)

Although, I was wrong about the 360 launch price, I called it at $349, but the thought never occurred to me they might actually split the market... :)

[H.Bogard]

Ah yes, it must be the real version because you can use 3rd party modifications! It's not as though the actual game is on the 360 versions or anything...

Then there's the likely console gamer's preference to just pop in the game and play as opposed to going through the installation process, downloading and installing patches, updating DirectX, along with various drivers due to graphical or sound related issues that may crop up. Then you have the multiplayer setting. Now in the case of PC games, I'm not aware of many that support multiplayer on the same computer, where as console versions of multiplayer games tend to have splitscreen play.

One also lost a good deal of money over the years partly due to the presence of said HD, where as the other is obviously trying to reverse the trend. When you consider the cost of a 20gig 2.5" laptop HD with an enclosure($50+), it definitely adds a strain with regards to the amount of money lost per console sold had they decided to make it standard. I'd imagine this is where the $100 price comes in, but considering that we had to buy memory cards for $20-$30 each on other consoles that launched for $299, it really isn't that different from previous generations. Now as for backwards compatibility being lost without the HD,


Firstly....are you saying that being able to play a game with mods is a BAD thing?

and about having issues playing a game on the pc, seriously if you have a gaming pc that can handle oblivion...there really shouldnt be any issues at all.
I know the PS2 didn't charge extra for backwards compatibility...wait, no, it probably did with respect to developing the emulation software to do so....but I preferred playing Playstation games on a regular Playstation anyway, as I didn't have to put up with longer initial load times and potential emulation issues.

Get out from beneath the damn rock! the ps2 didnt use emulation to run ps1 games!!! there was an entire fucking ps1 chipset inside the ps2 that ran those games from HARDWARE.

[Tyrant]

Firstly....are you saying that being able to play a game with mods is a BAD thing?


No, I'm not saying being able to play mods is a bad thing, I'm saying it doesn't make up the actual core of the game. Modifications either serve as slight changes to the game in a generally aesthetic manner, or they become total modifications that are practically an entirely different game in and of itself. Certainly, it adds extra value to the title that you purchase, but I'd imagine a 3rd party modification isn't going to be the primary selling point for most consumers. Now before you throw CS at me, as far as I know, a phenomenon of that magnitude has only happened once in all the years that I've been playing PC games.


and about having issues playing a game on the pc, seriously if you have a gaming pc that can handle oblivion...there really shouldnt be any issues at all.


Considering that newer video cards like Radeon X800s have had driver related issues with recent games like Battlefield 2(check out the latest Catalyst release notes), your statement falls through. Since the PC platform is far from a fixed one when it comes to the plethora of possible hardware configurations, bugs, whether directly from the game itself, or from the hardware in one's computer, are bound to crop up.



Get out from beneath the damn rock! the ps2 didnt use emulation to run ps1 games!!! there was an entire fucking ps1 chipset inside the ps2 that ran those games from HARDWARE.

DAMN IT! MY SUPREME PS2 HARDWARE KNOWLEDGE HAS FAILED ME. LOOKS LIKE IT'S WRIST SLITTING TIME!!!

Anyway, I stand corrected, but that still doesn't negate the likelihood that the cost of the system was increased due to the added backwards compatbility. Nothing truly comes for free when it comes to console features.

[H.Bogard]

. Now before you throw CS at me, as far as I know, a phenomenon of that magnitude has only happened once in all the years that I've been playing PC games.


HL2 deathmatch
garry`s mod
tonnes of farcry multiplayer mods
i cant say all these are as huge as cs but then again cs is too big to beat.


Considering that newer video cards like Radeon X800s have had driver related issues with recent games like Battlefield 2

BF2 Is sponsored by Nvidia.......are you really surprised?


DAMN IT! MY SUPREME PS2 HARDWARE KNOWLEDGE HAS FAILED ME. LOOKS LIKE IT'S WRIST SLITTING TIME!!!

Why would you put in perspective, the cost of something which you wouldnt know much about inside-out ?

[Tyrant]

HL2 deathmatch
garry`s mod
tonnes of farcry multiplayer mods
i cant say all these are as huge as cs but then again cs is too big to beat.


I've never heard of anyone rushing out to buy HL2 because they can make Dr. Breen get flattened by door dominoes or to play rather bland DM. According to the All Seeing Eye server browser, there's only 1300 HLDM servers out there and even fewer Garry's mod servers, where as there's tens of thousands of CS servers. I'd imagine the same could of Farcry, as I've never heard anything about "must buy then try" mods for it.



BF2 Is sponsored by Nvidia.......are you really surprised?


The display corruption issue was an ATI driver issue, which means that it was a bug on ATI's part, not some Nvidia conspiracy.


Why would you put in perspective, the cost of something which you wouldnt know much about inside-out ?

Considering that very few people know the exact costs of manufacturing various consoles, I'm working purely on logic, which unfortunately doesn't seem to click with some people. Besides, why don't you ask the same question to rest of this site?

[Ninja 20XX]

Sega set the bar as well. They launched early with the Saturn at the reasonable price of $399. Sony came around a little while later with the PS1 at the cool, cool rice of $299.

That $100 made all the difference in the world.


Yeah, but the Saturn had so many birth defects right from the start it might as well had 'doomed' printed on the case.

Sega launched the console without support, had 30,000 units on their way to retailers before they even officially announced the console at the very first E3. They only sent those 30K to four retail chains, and some of the retailers who got left out ended up spurning Sega from that point on, which hobbled the official wide release launch that followed.

Gamers were still feeling the burn from the 32X / Sega CD fiasco, expensive hardware add-ons with little in the way of games, let alone quality games, so consumer confidence was pretty low.

Sega sent development kits to Western third-party developers that had elements, both software and documentation, that were in Japanese, and it was their responsibility to translate the materials, and on top of that, Sega's internal teams got better tools, so the development community wasn't happy with them.

Sony certainly didn't hurt from the price, but the games were a big factor - they went out and secured a huge number of commitments from publishers, including a few who rarely dealt with anyone outside of Nintendo when it came to consoles, like Namco and Squaresoft. It was a snowball effect - the more they made the rounds of publishers and started rattling off the list of pubs making PS games, the more publishers didn't want to be left out, and this was before the hardware really caught on in a big way with the public.

Price is very important, but it's not everything - the Gamecube has almost always been cheaper than the PS2 and had much better capabilities with graphics, but it also lacked the variety and volume of the PS2 in terms of software.

Hardware will always come down in price, but if the games aren't there, it's a moot point.

One thing you'll note about expensive, failed consoles is that none of them have really had an outstanding number of good games, either. It's a chicken and egg thing - without the potential of a large installed base, publishers don't want to get involved to provide content, but if they don't get involved, that doesn't make the hardware sell any better. Which is most responsible - unsavory pricing or lack of games?

Maybe if the 3DO had the equivalent of Halo, Zelda, or GTA, it would've been more successful. I never had one myself, but I've never really heard about any truly outstanding games, either.

The Neo-Geo has to be excluded from any sort of comparisons, because it was built and marketed specifically for the ultra-hardcore. They never intended to compete directly with anyone, that was never really meant to be a consumer-level product with widespread appeal.

PC gaming just doesn't have the mindshare consoles do. There's a lot of quality games, but it does have a bit of a hardcore stigma attached to it. Consoles have always pushed the social end of the experience with multiplayer - maybe if PC developers did find a way to allow for multiple players on the same unit, that would be a big kickstart, although being huddled around the PC isn't the same as lounging on the couch.

I doubt more expensive consoles are going to drive gamers to PC gaming, it's not the same thing to them. They'll just try to hang with what they have until the prices come down and the publishers will be watching the transition rate like hawks, a lot of them believed they bailed too early on the PlayStation in favor of the PS2 and it cost them considerable profits.

Publishers could play a big role in how quickly things heat up depending on how they divide their resources and transition themselves - that may be why Sony seems to really have stepped up internal first-party game development for the PS3, because they may feel that publishers may be too reluctant to give up the PS2 business they already have to really focus on console-selling killer apps, so they might have shoulder that burden themselves early on.