Poll: Are console re-releases bothering anyone else?

[Unrulyhandbag]

I don't care for them. It's to make improvements that the first ones don't have, but really you don't have to have these special features.

What special features? A bigger hard drive is an accessory and should be sold separately, or better yet with an industry standard connection so that ANY hard drive will fit.

And the PS3 has actively been dropping features

Backwards compatibility? gone
Other OS? gone (although now they've robbed it from the original consoles too)
Memory card slots? gone
useful number of USB sockets? only 2 left.


The whole point of consoles was having a baseline (preferably a cheap one) that everyone works from, if the new version of a console has more RAM what happens to the million units already out there when games start using that extra memory? they may as well have brought out a new console instead because all existing customers have been left behind. If a newer version is less capable then the newer customers may find themselves unable to play some games or have less reason to buy the console in the first place.
When PS2 game sales were still higher than all current consoles sales, Sony's dropping of backwards compatibility from the PS3 was the most retarded move they could have made. (I could understand it from the slim model to save space but can you even get a fat ps3 anymore?)

The only re-releases I approve of is either drastic visual redesigns (ala ps slim) or new bundles (say an xbox with kinect)

 

[Meggiepants]

Not really. Each new system hopefully fixes the screw ups of the last. And I don't buy them just to buy them, I only get them if I have to replace an older system.

Finally replaced my first gen PS3 when it died, and the newer one is smaller quieter and cooler - as in less heat. All good things for my replacement to have.

The new 360 I got to replace my old 360 supposedly solves a lot of the problems of the old ones. We shall see.

If I were just getting into the console market, I would surely hope they would come out with an updated version of these systems, since the originals had so many issues.

 

[BlumiereBleck]

Gotta do what they gotta do

 

[octafish]

Not me, but I'm a nerdy guy with glasses in a suit. (PC)

 

[ultrachicken]

I think they're just giving more options for potential buyers.

 

[DustyDrB]

Obvious answer is: Bob Dole approves, so it's ok.

 

[Unrulyhandbag]

Not really. Each new system hopefully fixes the screw ups of the last.
The new 360 I got to replace my old 360 supposedly solves a lot of the problems of the old ones. We shall see.

The Xbox was inexcusably badly tested console on release and is still barely passable. My new one last month died just as quickly as my release day piece of junk, thank the gods for warranties. I only bought that after my second one died outside of warranty and was too burned out for a spot of thermal paste to solve, and thanks to the dogs tail and a blundering toddler it chewed up some disks in it's lifespan.

The PS3 was pretty well done really; solidly built, fairly well designed, reasonable ventilation and not as noisy as a Dreamcast.
My original PS3 has been switched on constantly for over a year now that it's a media server without any issue whatsoever, I doubt there's many consoles of any generation could make that claim.

 

[Dr. Octogonopus]

Sony seems to have this obsession with taking good hard ware (PSX, 2 and 3) and trying to shrink it down. Most of the consoles in the slim series have less reliable hardware. And of course the fact that the newer PS3s dont have backwards compatibility. Sonys main selling point should be their huge back catalog of games. Sure I can by the same sized HDD but in a smaller console thats also cheaper but that means the only FF game I can play is 13. How does that make sense?

 

[Dexiro]

It doesn't really bother me as much as I'd thought. I mean it's not like I'm being forced to trade in for newer models all the time.

I could quite happily be playing away on a launch-model ps3 while all the better models whiz by, at worst I'll be able to get a better ps3 for fairly cheap if this one breaks down.

 

[ReaperzXIII]

My only problem is when the new consoles are released that do what the old one was supposed to be able to do and if I want to use that feature then I have to pay to get it whilst they get it with their console already for the same price I paid.

 

[suhlEap]

doesn't bother me, you just get whichever one you want...

 

[Chimpzy_v1legacy]

Why should they bother me? It's not like they are forcing me to buy the newer models. None of the newer models of any system has features that I consider absolutely essential anyway.

 

[rockyoumonkeys]

Doesn't bother me, if all we're really talking about is hard drive space or a superficial redesign.

I always go through a couple consoles in each generation, so I guess it's nice that when the time comes to replace a broken one, there's a slightly improved version out.

 

[sketchesformysweet]

They do and they don't.

With the DS I was annoyed when the DSi was released as it was less than a year previous to that that I had purchased my DS lite and now a new one was out with so many new features and I felt like I would be being ripped off if I had to go and spend the full amount on the new model.

As for the Xbox360 and PS3, I think that the upgrades have been fine, though I would have been annoyed if I did buy an xbox over a PS3 some months ago as just after I purchased it they announced the new xbox model. So bearing that in mind, maybe its always good to wait a little before making a purchase.

I think that its fine to upgrade consoles, but let there be time in between. If they're upgraded too quickly then it becomes annoying as you end up spending lots of money on whats supposed to be the superior model only to have it outdated within months.