Slashdot Mirror
PlayStation 3 Available For PreOrder in U.K.
motorheadabega writes "BBC is carrying the story that as of today the PS3 is available for preorder for only £550 ($1,020). All that and they can't even guarantee delivery before Christmas." From the article: "The electronics giant had originally planned to launch the new console in the spring, but was forced to delay because of technical problems with its high-definition Blu-ray DVD drive. The PS3 comes in two different models. The basic model has a 20GB hard drive, while the more expensive model comes with a 60GB one. The lower end model also lacks wi-fi, a slot for memory cards and a HDMI port for high-definition programmes. "
Before you think "Jesus Christ! £550 for a PS3!!!", bear in mind that this is a bundle of the high spec PS3 (with 60GB HDD) and 3 games, AND free shipping.
If you work that back, based on £40 a game, the console cost is £430... which is right on the money for the £425 previously reported. The real newsworthy part of this story is the fact they're taking pre-orders so soon. Do I smell a publicity stunt on the part of play.com?
Note: I still think that the supposed price (£425) is ridiculously expensive, and I'm not trying to argue that this is in any way "cheap".
That price does include shipping and three games.
There is nothing we don't already know in TFA other than that it's available for pre-order. Also note that the pre-order package includes three games. There has to be something more (can't look at the actual offer as I'm at work) to justify the £125($235) difference. Unless of course the games are £42($79) each. Of course, they're probably counting the VAT in there, so maybe it is just the three games. Still... damn expensive.
Everything I say is a lie. Except that... and that... and that, and that, and that, and that... and that.
I could spend $1000 on a computer that would be four times more powerful, and I would be able to buy video games for it at a fraction of the price. There's nothing coming out for PS3 that really excites me, so why would I waste that much money on it? Personally, I thought that Xbox 360 was too much money, but compared to the PS3, I think I know what will be bought for Christmas.
Gamestation in the UK have been taking PS3 pre-orders for weeks. We've been taking them at £425 for whatever the basic 60Gb package is (i.e. presumably a box with the console and one controller - similar to the PS2). The store I work in has actually stopped taking pre-orders because we've already taken more than we're likely to get come November 17th.
For £550 with 3 games looks like the £425 price is correct, and that's a pretty decent saving on the game prices since we're expecting new PS3 games to cost above £50 new (Xbox 360 games are generally £49.99 new here in the UK). Also notice that Play.com are saying the games included may change due to availability - or more likely they may put more desirable games into the package if better launch titles are announced. There's really nothing next-gen about a Singstar game from what I saw of E3 footage.
What's funny is that, by now, probably more people have preordered the PS3 than are likely to receive them at launch. Looks like the $600 price tag may not hurt Sony too much, after all. I'm interested to see how this will all turn out.
"This thing does science so hard, you say, 'I've never seen that much science.'" -Sam
1. Order PS3 for Sony fanboys from UK.
2. Sell it on eBay after launch while artificial shortage exists.
3. Use profits to buy Wii.
4. Put rest into Nintendo shares.
5. Retire to sunny Bermuda.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Play.com wasn't the first site to offer the PS3 for pre-order, Gamestation (http://www.gamestation.co.uk/product.asp?id=ps3h0 02) had it on their site the day after the press conference, there may have been others too.
People that believe in their opinions don't post AC.
In local non-chain game store the other week trading in ancient PS1 and games - female assistant rather disinterestedly asked me if I wanted to pre-order a PS3. No thanks, I say, I'm getting a Wii. You'd have thought I'd plugged her into the mains! Wasn't it cool, had I seen the E3 videos, wouldn't a lightsaber game totally rock, didn't the new Zelda look amazing? Chatted for a while, then went downstairs and browsed the pre-owned Xbox titles. G.b.t.c asked me if I was interested in upgrading to a 360. No thanks, nothing there I want, I'm waiting for the Wii. Bzzzt! Had I seen the E3 videos, had I seen Miyamoto conducting the orchestra, had I seen the drumming game? The staff in there are gamer geeks one and all, and none of them give two hoots about the PS3.
In GAME today, chatting to the manager - he says that he's starting to get lists of pre-orders for software for PS3, and he thinks he's going to get stuck with a lot of unsold stock, especially among the many, many sequelae. As in Ridge Racer 6, Tekken 5 and Tony Hawk's 8. He said he thought they'd end up having to do bundles very early on just to shift some of these games. Apparently most of the pre-orders are from parents whose kids want the PS3 for Xmas. People who are buying their own machines are mostly going for the 360 now, or waiting for the Wii.
Good point. But I think a lot of us actually looked at the gaming lists for the different consoles. I did. What I saw was that the Wii has a lot of really fun games, in multiple areas of gaming, that I want to play, and that it was kind of spare for the PS3 and 360, unless I was a sports geek (hint - get a 360) or needed Blu-Ray (hint - get a PS3).
So, I'm down for a Wii right now. In fact, I like it so much, I bought the company! - literally, today I bought 500 shares of NTDOY.PK (Nintendo ADR shares), after having sold off 400 Microsoft shares at the market peak (before the crash).
Call me a fool if you will, but my guts rarely wrong about these things. And over the years I've learned to listen to my gut.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Over the years, I have seen the Super Nintendo Entertainment System, Nintendo 64, Nintendo Gamecube. Everytime I got a chance (rarely happened, and console gaming isn't really a interest to me) to play on one of these machines, I remember it being fun. Unlike my experiences with things like Final Fantasy Seven on the PlayStation, which I did try after I was begged into doing it.
I'm probably going to get a Wii, but I'm not going to get it without demoing it at the store first. I've never bought a console before, this would be the first time.
I see the X-box 360 as a rip off with the additional fees you would need to pay to actually use what I consider should be a free feature.. X-box live.
Why you might ask?
Paying to support a instant messaging service, a indexing server and something that provides my machine with URLs for updates that have been known to be a bit messy. Paying just so I can use a built in feature of games to play with others on-line.
PC games have been providing this for free for years. If expenses are really a issue, they could easily allow people to run their own services. Some of which no doubt will provide it for free. I'm all for supporting a company, but I don't want to support a company by paying for something I shouldn't have to.
There is the PS3, well, over the years. I've bought mp3 players from Sony that couldn't play MP3s. My parents have bought me various Sony products which have been total crap. I have heard so many issues about Sony hardware. Not to mention it's going to be the second most expensive console in history. Err, no thanks.
The quality of graphics I've seen so far for games (pictures I've seen in articles) I'm interested in being released for the Wii vs the x-box 360 I can't really tell the difference in graphics quality, probably because the game manufacturers aren't really taking advantage of all that extra power which I keep hearing about.
Why the hell do you use faith for making purchasing decisions? That's terrible logic.
Don't get a Wii this November. You don't have to. You can just wait for the PS3 to come out and compare.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
Even if you like every game Nintendo puts out, that's hardly a decently-sized library.
I do like Nintendo titles, they tend to be excellent examples of their respective genres. I have 30 games for the cube I spent an average of $15 apiece on, and about 45 for the PS2, which I've spent about $18 apiece on. I'm happier with my Cube because it was cheaper, we play it at just about every get together I've had, and it hasn't broke on me yet(I'm on my third PS2, just picked another one up after determining I wasn't going to get a PS3 at launch).
Both of which are spin-offs from the main sequence of games. The games could end up being decent, but given how hard Crystal Chronicles sucked, and how poorly spin-offs in general do, I don't have much hope. In any case, who would want to play offshoots when the real Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest sequels will appear on PS3?
So was Seiken Densetsu AKA Secret of Mana(which was Seiken Densetsu 2). It started as FF: Adventure. FF:CC really wasn't a bad game either, you just had to play it with 2-3 other people for it to shine as anything other than a generic real-time dungeon crawl(the bucket was freakin' like Eris's apple, we almost got into fist-fights playing that game)*. The only thing I know about the new FF:CC is that it looks classic FF in styling, which is a good thing imo, and even if it goes along the same formula as the last one, that's no bigger of a departure than XI or XII. I've played every FF since 1(missing 3, which I'll probably play on the DS when it comes out) and the main series has been disappointing to me of late, so...
As to Dragon Quest, the only Dragon Quest title I know of for next gen systems *is* Swords. The prequel to swords was a game called Dragon Quest Kenshin, a stand-alone unit with SNES-style graphics, a friend of mine has it, it's actually quite a bit of fun. As to the main series - I found VIII to be incredibly easy, and short. I played it like the a DQ and just tore through it. It also had little annoyances like lens flare(in a cartoon!?) and inconsistant rendering(non cell-shaded environments). I'm not a graphics whore, at all, but I am a style whore. One of the things I loved about the original metroid prime was the little details they put in. Water flowing off the visor, mist, heat off the power beam, Samus's face lighting up. Or Windwaker, where the whole thing had a very consistant and imo excellent style to it.
Which will be a second-rate port of the "real" 360 and P3 versions.
Maybe, maybe not. You could argue that the 360/PS3 versions will be second-rate versions of the PC version, they won't look better, and they won't have the control.
The Wii version could end up having the control of the PC version, while lacking the graphics, and vice-versa for the PS3/X360.
The N64's TBA lineup was also quite promising as well. However, once the PSX picked up steam, a lot of those games vaporized.
Most famously FFVII. The SNES/Genesis->N64/PS/Saturn transition is why I don't buy consoles based upon the future. I've been burnt on that before. It is completely possible the same thing could happen to the PS3. I'm not counting on it, but it's possible.
The games I listed(that you quoted) are all Nintendo first/second party though, so it's unlikely they'll vaporize.
It's premature in both cases, but not equally so. On the PS3's side, it's just an assertion that the status quo will be maintained. On the Wii's side, it's an assertion that a dramatic turnaround will happen. Maintainence of the status quo is generally the more likely outcome. That is not to say that the Wii will fail, but rather that the odds are against it succeeding.
History within the console realm maintains that no company has yet to keep dominance for more than 2 generations. The status quo argument is the same one that was used for the N64, and we all saw how that worked out. If Sony pulls it off, it'll be the first time it's ever been done. And th
The key to the enjoyment of pop music is to replace any instance of "love" with "C.H.U.D."
Hi,
Yes, I am enjoying the latest N64 games, in my computer with 1964. I usually play Mario Tennis, Mario Kart 64 and Mario Golf, all of them with my girlfriend and sometimes a flatmate.
Oh, and I sometimes also play Army Men (both of them). They are very cool!
So what? anything wrong with that? I do not have to spend hundreds of £££ to compensate a lack of appropiate cock size with uber-expensive boring-as-hell console games.
Yeah, I am waiting for the Wii, and I just bought Worms 1 and 2 from Ebay for £5 (incl shipping) to play in epsxe.
So what? you surely are one of those jerks taht buy EA sport games each year just because to have the sports teams "up to date", when the gameplay has been the same for the last 10 years (yeah, I also love International Super Star Soccer for the N64) oh, and we also play Dr. Mario for the NES.
So suck it loser
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'