The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Hats off to Sony unlike MS and Ninty they are there to make gaming affordable unlike the others who are only interested in profit.
Sony scored a big hit with the PS1 and platinum games, which were affordable quality games that had to sell a certain amount to turn platinum, while N64 was still trying to sell cartridges for £64.99 Sony's platinum range came in at £19.99 and proved a big hit.
I am glad to see they are carryiing on the tradition with there PS2 platinum range. I mean lets face it GT3 is a far superior game to Project Gotham and yet it is have the price. They say you have to pay for quality but on this evidence you don't.
Sony scored a big hit with the PS1 and platinum games, which were affordable quality games that had to sell a certain amount to turn platinum, while N64 was still trying to sell cartridges for £64.99 Sony's platinum range came in at £19.99 and proved a big hit.
I am glad to see they are carryiing on the tradition with there PS2 platinum range. I mean lets face it GT3 is a far superior game to Project Gotham and yet it is have the price. They say you have to pay for quality but on this evidence you don't.
Page:
and as Vic Reeves famously said...'98.2% of statistics are made up on the spot'
Alright enough of this crap topic, let it drop and let the fanboys punch themselves in the face.
Dave RJR wrote:
> This also works when you compare the GameCube and PS2. The PS2 is still
> shifting in big numbers, yet you can buy a GameCube for less.
Not true the GameCube is already vastly outselling the PS2 (if you compare sales of the PS2 when it came out to sales of the GameCube now). Plus, Nintendo have got a great reputation for the best games in the world.
> This also works when you compare the GameCube and PS2. The PS2 is still
> shifting in big numbers, yet you can buy a GameCube for less.
Not true the GameCube is already vastly outselling the PS2 (if you compare sales of the PS2 when it came out to sales of the GameCube now). Plus, Nintendo have got a great reputation for the best games in the world.
Aah, but the Gamecube is still shifting. I was speaking to the store supervisor in Nottingham's vorgin megastore, who was telling me that they are re-arramging their console departmen to give more room to GC products at the expense of X-Box, which by their latest figures is being outsold 5 to 1 by the GC
Cyclone wrote:
> The fact being that the GC cost 130, and its games about 35 is
> ignored...?
Well personally, i kinda agree with u a bit on that. I thought the price of the console would have made a bigger impact than it has. However, in today’s world of image over content, people will pay more for a specific product so long as that product has the magic image factor. Another example of this is the SMART car. How do they get anyone to buy at all? I mean, it's well over £10,000 (you can buy lots of other small cars with a better spec for much less). And the SMART car only has a very lackluster 3 cylinder 600cc engine. You don’t even get 4 seats or a spare wheel! But people do pay the extra, because it has the image. There are different degrees to this of course. If the SMART car were to cost say £20,000, then the most people would not buy it - regardless of the image. Like the Sega Dreamcast. You can still buy one new for about £60 i think. Sega stopped production long ago - so it has taken a very long time to move the units that were already made. But at £60, why don't people snap them up - they don't because nobody wants it. Even if they brought the price down to £25, there still would be nobody running to the shops for them. Yet the PS2 at £200 will keep will keep moving units, because that's the most popular console (with the image), and the £200 price tag is within a lot of people's budget. Potential PS2 buyers would not stop and consider a Dreamcast at a lower cost, because it's not the machine to have. This also works when you compare the GameCube and PS2. The PS2 is still shifting in big numbers, yet you can buy a GameCube for less.
> The fact being that the GC cost 130, and its games about 35 is
> ignored...?
Well personally, i kinda agree with u a bit on that. I thought the price of the console would have made a bigger impact than it has. However, in today’s world of image over content, people will pay more for a specific product so long as that product has the magic image factor. Another example of this is the SMART car. How do they get anyone to buy at all? I mean, it's well over £10,000 (you can buy lots of other small cars with a better spec for much less). And the SMART car only has a very lackluster 3 cylinder 600cc engine. You don’t even get 4 seats or a spare wheel! But people do pay the extra, because it has the image. There are different degrees to this of course. If the SMART car were to cost say £20,000, then the most people would not buy it - regardless of the image. Like the Sega Dreamcast. You can still buy one new for about £60 i think. Sega stopped production long ago - so it has taken a very long time to move the units that were already made. But at £60, why don't people snap them up - they don't because nobody wants it. Even if they brought the price down to £25, there still would be nobody running to the shops for them. Yet the PS2 at £200 will keep will keep moving units, because that's the most popular console (with the image), and the £200 price tag is within a lot of people's budget. Potential PS2 buyers would not stop and consider a Dreamcast at a lower cost, because it's not the machine to have. This also works when you compare the GameCube and PS2. The PS2 is still shifting in big numbers, yet you can buy a GameCube for less.
The fact being that the GC cost 130, and its games about 35 is ignored...?
Dave RJR wrote:
> Sony must know what people want from games + games consoles more than
> Nintendo and Microsoft.
So being the greatest video gaming company (I am of course referring to Nintendo and it's official, so don't quote me saying *I'm* a fanboy) means nothing does it? They just completely have no idea what they're doing, do they? Also - Microsoft have a wealth of flight simulators and games like Halo and Age Of Empires under their belt.
> If Sony had it so wrong, they would not have sold 30m units.
Fair enough, but at the rate Nintendo are going they've also got it right. Very very right indeed.
> Even before GC and XBox, if Sony were so wrong, people could have
> switched to Sega's DC - but most didn’t.
It wasn't as much to do with that Sony were such a great company, it was more to do with the fact that more third party developers wished to make games for the PS2, therefore a wider range of games.
> Or with the knowledge that GC and later XBox were on the way, they could
> have switched from PS1 to GC or XBox. Regardless of the technology used
> all 3 machines produce similar results, close enough so that most people
> don’t care about it. So now that most people have got their PS2's and
> most are happy to stick with it, the GameCube and XBox can only pick up
> whats left over and a few users that want to jump ship.
Nintendo probably have the most loyal customers in the world, looking at the current GCube sales figures. At this rate, they'll catch up with the PS2 extremely quickly thanks to better specs, cheaper prices and better games.
> Sony must know what people want from games + games consoles more than
> Nintendo and Microsoft.
So being the greatest video gaming company (I am of course referring to Nintendo and it's official, so don't quote me saying *I'm* a fanboy) means nothing does it? They just completely have no idea what they're doing, do they? Also - Microsoft have a wealth of flight simulators and games like Halo and Age Of Empires under their belt.
> If Sony had it so wrong, they would not have sold 30m units.
Fair enough, but at the rate Nintendo are going they've also got it right. Very very right indeed.
> Even before GC and XBox, if Sony were so wrong, people could have
> switched to Sega's DC - but most didn’t.
It wasn't as much to do with that Sony were such a great company, it was more to do with the fact that more third party developers wished to make games for the PS2, therefore a wider range of games.
> Or with the knowledge that GC and later XBox were on the way, they could
> have switched from PS1 to GC or XBox. Regardless of the technology used
> all 3 machines produce similar results, close enough so that most people
> don’t care about it. So now that most people have got their PS2's and
> most are happy to stick with it, the GameCube and XBox can only pick up
> whats left over and a few users that want to jump ship.
Nintendo probably have the most loyal customers in the world, looking at the current GCube sales figures. At this rate, they'll catch up with the PS2 extremely quickly thanks to better specs, cheaper prices and better games.
I thought we agreed to let this topic die...
Ah well...
*points and laughs at iccle fanboy*
:D
Ah well...
*points and laughs at iccle fanboy*
:D
Awwwwww look at him.
Liccle fanbooooy
*points
Liccle fanbooooy
*points
Page: