Poll: What are you willing to pay for a modern, up to date console?
- Thread starter InsanityRequiem
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Ezekiel said:
Continuing the sentiment, I'm not sure what you mean there...4K support is pretty much the whole point of the Pro. Myself I just went and got the Slim UC4 bundle over the holidays. Good enough for me since I won't be bothering with 4K, at least until I need a new projector.
*edit*. Damn, just got caught up on that... weird how they chose to skimp on a feature that was supposed to define the upgrade in the first place. Maybe they are being overly cautious after the original PS3 Bluray sticker shock, figuring the adoption rate is still too low to matter much and they'd rather not take the added risk of driving it up themselves again. Also, streaming 4K is pointless when almost no one has the bandwidth to support it. Plus steaming quality is never as good as what's on a disc.
I dunno. It's a case by case sort of thing, also dependent on what spare currencies I have, how suspicious I am of the retailer selling it, how I feel on the day including level of sobriety, whether it has Bloodborne on it, whether that day becomes the day I decide to quit gaming to go live in the forest for a couple of years feeding off various fungi and backpackers, and whether social obligations and/or romantic obligations are prioritised over personal entertainment desires.
But for now, I'll probably be willing to trade this weird polished rock I found in my garden the other day. Or gem. Or...I don't know. It's probably shiny and cool enough.
But for now, I'll probably be willing to trade this weird polished rock I found in my garden the other day. Or gem. Or...I don't know. It's probably shiny and cool enough.
- Feb 7, 2011
- 8,802
- 3,383
- 118
- Country
- 'Merica
- Gender
- 3 children in a trench coat
But would ANYONE actually play in a position like that?Yoshi178 said:
Hell, I can't even play video games leaning back, much less in repose. 90% of the time I play games I'm leaning forward attentively. I've tried playing laying down a couple of times and it made me play MUCH worse.
- Feb 7, 2011
- 8,802
- 3,383
- 118
- Country
- 'Merica
- Gender
- 3 children in a trench coat
As a PC gamer, I'm kind of spoiled for performance. So if I bought a console, it would need to (at the very minimum) be able to keep up with a mid range current PC ($700+). Anything less and you are wasting your time.
Considering I have a Gaming PC I've put about $1,700 into I'd say pretty high, but that cost is also including things like dual monitors, gaming keyboard and mouse, operating system, extra hard drives, and other such things not really needed for a plug n play console. I certainly don't regret that since the cost of games on PC is dirt cheap, so it evens out if you play a lot of games (which I do).
To be honest, if we're talking about a home console, the next XBOX or Playstation, then really it has nothing to do with how up to date it is, I value consoles at the worth of their library, and only the parts of the library that interest me. I've not bought a PS4, an XBOX One, or a Nintendo console, not because I don't like those systems, but because they failed to have a library of games of equal value to the system's cost that interested me, and more importantly are exclusive. While I dislike console exclusive games, it's pretty much the ONLY reason to even invest in a console once you have a Gaming PC, and the offerings have been lacking in the last few generations due to 90% of games releasing cross platform, or being timed exclusives. At one time I had 12 games for my PS3, and now I have about 4 after selling off games that I was able to get on PC instead, it got to the point where I never played my PS3 so now it's at my dad's house so he can play it.
Long story short, if a console has $700+ worth of games to play, I'll pay for that console, just as I have with my PC. The worth of the library I want on the console has to equal the value of the console for me.
To be honest, if we're talking about a home console, the next XBOX or Playstation, then really it has nothing to do with how up to date it is, I value consoles at the worth of their library, and only the parts of the library that interest me. I've not bought a PS4, an XBOX One, or a Nintendo console, not because I don't like those systems, but because they failed to have a library of games of equal value to the system's cost that interested me, and more importantly are exclusive. While I dislike console exclusive games, it's pretty much the ONLY reason to even invest in a console once you have a Gaming PC, and the offerings have been lacking in the last few generations due to 90% of games releasing cross platform, or being timed exclusives. At one time I had 12 games for my PS3, and now I have about 4 after selling off games that I was able to get on PC instead, it got to the point where I never played my PS3 so now it's at my dad's house so he can play it.
Long story short, if a console has $700+ worth of games to play, I'll pay for that console, just as I have with my PC. The worth of the library I want on the console has to equal the value of the console for me.
I wouldn't, unless it has a large selection of platform-exclusives. And even then, they'd have to be something special.
Because considering the price of console games these days, I'd rather stick to Steam sales. It's not as if I don't already have hundreds of games on my to-play list..
Because considering the price of console games these days, I'd rather stick to Steam sales. It's not as if I don't already have hundreds of games on my to-play list..
They already confirmed the Switch will not be sold at a loss. Why do you think it costs 300USD?Yoshi178 said:
OT: $301-$400, assuming three things:
1. That our corporate overlords abandon the Australia tax (the Xbox One cost $600 at launch, The Switch is going for $470)
2. That this magical system actually has more than two good exclusives (the last instances of this were the GameCube and PS2)
3. That the system is a dedicated games machine first and foremost. Not an "entertainment centre". My PC, phone and Blu-Ray player can do already get me onto Netflix, Microsoft. I don't need the Xbox One for that, nor do I want it to do that.
So if this hypothetical machine worked like this, that would be nice. It would also be nice if The White Stripes were still making music and if Duke Nukem Forever hadn't been a pile of arse biscuts.
- Feb 7, 2011
- 8,802
- 3,383
- 118
- Country
- 'Merica
- Gender
- 3 children in a trench coat
They did, the PS3 controller was a complete piece of shit, and the PS4 control was an improvement in every way.Yoshi178 said:
Well...except battery life. For the life of me I have no idea why they decided it needed that stupid light in the front but man the battery life on that controller is dismal because of it.
Honestly, at this point "I'm not" is most accurate for me. I got turned off of the console market back in high school simply because the individual lineups for each console made me consider them a poor investment. Long story short is that I'd end up shoving a bunch of money at something I'd only get 2-3 games for before they started cycling it out again. With that in mind, I'll stick to PC (which has a longer shelf-life, better backwards and forwards compatibility, and is useful for more things than just gaming)
It's a simple LED, it doesn't use more battery than the LEDs in any other controller.Dirty Hipsters said:
Bigger battery drains are rumble engines and the touch pad.
Please do elaborate on how the design is not very good and could you provide an example of a better design? I mean, I would say that all consoles emulate this design for a reason?Ezekiel said:
One hand can comfortably reach 8 buttons and an analogue stick to control, that seems fairly enough for gaming from a couch seated position.
