I actually made a reference later about being AAA game specific. My fault for missing that part, thanks for the heads up.fornever1 said:
So why do people believe that the PS4 is just $50usd more expensive than Wii U?
- Thread starter Negatempest
- Start date
Recommended Videos
...I don't understand the point of this thread, people are already in agreement that the Wii U is cheaper then the PS4.
People don't want the Wii U because it's too expensive, it's because it has no games they want.
People don't want the Wii U because it's too expensive, it's because it has no games they want.
Holy Christ, I don't think I've ever seen someone post so much even in a thread they started.
On paper, it isn't. In terms of actual value, it is. Honestly, the Wii U uses old technology in every aspect. A tri-core processor, a heavily modified AMD 4600 series graphics card, and a scant 2 GB ram. It's significantly more powerful than the PS3 and the Xbox 360, but they aren't telling us those are next generation consoles. You could build a similar PC for about 200 bucks if you don't buy an OS. As a matter of fact, that 200 dollar PC could blow the Wii U out of the water in most aspects.
In other words, I don't see how the cost of the components could possibly justify the cost of the Wii U. The graphics card is damn near worthless, 3 generations behind the bend and was barely entry level for gaming back then. The processor is nearly as bad. An old tri-core running at 1.24 GHz. My old laptop ran at 2.0 GHz(admittedly a dual core machine). Just about the only thing good about it is the clockspeed of the RAM, 1600 MHz. Even then, it's 2 GB of DDR3 RAM.
Meanwhile, we know the PS4 will use an 8 core processor. With that many cores, clock speed is nearly irrelevant. It will be at least three times as powerful as the Wii U. I can't pick up much on the GPU, but it should be similar in performance to a Radeon 7800 series card, a fairly high end card in today's market. Finally, it uses 8 GB of GDDR5 RAM. There is no comparison. The PS4 is a hell of a lot stronger of a machine, easily worth the 100 dollar price difference.
Simply put, if I were looking to buy a PC to play games on and there was only a 100 dollar difference between these two, I'd pick up the second one in a heart beat.
Let it not be said that the Wii U is a bad machine. After all, you can run Skyrim on an Xbox 360. Devs can do a hell of a lot with what the Wii U has, but in terms of raw numbers, I don't see it as being good enough to justify it's price.
On paper, it isn't. In terms of actual value, it is. Honestly, the Wii U uses old technology in every aspect. A tri-core processor, a heavily modified AMD 4600 series graphics card, and a scant 2 GB ram. It's significantly more powerful than the PS3 and the Xbox 360, but they aren't telling us those are next generation consoles. You could build a similar PC for about 200 bucks if you don't buy an OS. As a matter of fact, that 200 dollar PC could blow the Wii U out of the water in most aspects.
In other words, I don't see how the cost of the components could possibly justify the cost of the Wii U. The graphics card is damn near worthless, 3 generations behind the bend and was barely entry level for gaming back then. The processor is nearly as bad. An old tri-core running at 1.24 GHz. My old laptop ran at 2.0 GHz(admittedly a dual core machine). Just about the only thing good about it is the clockspeed of the RAM, 1600 MHz. Even then, it's 2 GB of DDR3 RAM.
Meanwhile, we know the PS4 will use an 8 core processor. With that many cores, clock speed is nearly irrelevant. It will be at least three times as powerful as the Wii U. I can't pick up much on the GPU, but it should be similar in performance to a Radeon 7800 series card, a fairly high end card in today's market. Finally, it uses 8 GB of GDDR5 RAM. There is no comparison. The PS4 is a hell of a lot stronger of a machine, easily worth the 100 dollar price difference.
Simply put, if I were looking to buy a PC to play games on and there was only a 100 dollar difference between these two, I'd pick up the second one in a heart beat.
Let it not be said that the Wii U is a bad machine. After all, you can run Skyrim on an Xbox 360. Devs can do a hell of a lot with what the Wii U has, but in terms of raw numbers, I don't see it as being good enough to justify it's price.
It's not a sale price. It's the current standard price on Amazon. Now you might not remember this, but you did use Amazon as the example in your OP, but it's only valid when you use it?Negatempest said:Of course your getting crazy good sale prices on Amazon. That's like saying that Skyrim is worth the same amount that you find on steam sales.And it may look very biased, but it isn't.
Again, you're simply abandoning your reasoning when pressed. Please, stop doing this. As I said, I like the Wii U, I pre-ordered it. Stop acting like I am hating on the console. I'm not asking you for your reasons for liking the Wii U, I'm asking you for your reason behind this thread. I am simply annoyed with how your way of presenting this topic. Switching between facts and opinions, pointing out when people use either "incorrectly" by your standards while not caring one bit about how you yourself use it. When pressed on any issue, you abandon it and throw out accusations.
You told me that I missed your point. Why did you start by making a point of the price if this didn't matter? You claim that the games make the console (and I agree), not the price, why not focus on the games? Why do you claim to be unbiased when you assign value based on your own view of both the Wii U, its games and the PS4?
If you're simply going to ignore the things I am asking you then I can't see how you can tell me that I am missing your point. I am trying to understand it, but you won't explain it.
The U is a waste of money and effort, I know this for certain unfortunately. It's quite easily the worst console I have ever bought. PS4 (hell even the xbone most likely) is pretty much going to destroy what little the U actually does offer. Playing games on the U is like going to look for a pool party in the desert, it's just not happenin'.
When all is taken into consideration, you've pretty much gotten your '100'$ back on that beefy 500GB's and the added functions that Nintendo's console can't and won't deliver on.
Because your looking too deep into the OP. The OP is over analyzing the 'just the price' of deciding the console. When the point, as stated at the end of the post, is just look at the games or the brand. If the games on one console are more appealing than the other, than that is your cup of tea. But to over analyze the base price of the games is silly because smart shopping will find you great deals online.Yopaz said:It's not a sale price. It's the current standard price on Amazon. Now you might not remember this, but you did use Amazon as the example in your OP, but it's only valid when you use it?Negatempest said:Of course your getting crazy good sale prices on Amazon. That's like saying that Skyrim is worth the same amount that you find on steam sales.
Again, you're simply abandoning your reasoning when pressed. Please, stop doing this. As I said, I like the Wii U, I pre-ordered it. Stop acting like I am hating on the console. I'm not asking you for your reasons for liking the Wii U, I'm asking you for your reason behind this thread. I am simply annoyed with how your way of presenting this topic. Switching between facts and opinions, pointing out when people use either "incorrectly" by your standards while not caring one bit about how you yourself use it. When pressed on any issue, you abandon it and throw out accusations.
You told me that I missed your point. Why did you start by making a point of the price if this didn't matter? You claim that the games make the console (and I agree), not the price, why not focus on the games? Why do you claim to be unbiased when you assign value based on your own view of both the Wii U, its games and the PS4?
If you're simply going to ignore the things I am asking you then I can't see how you can tell me that I am missing your point. I am trying to understand it, but you won't explain it.
And yes I did use amazon, as an example of smart shopping. Mostly because amazon is the place to go to find some of the better deals, that are usually not MSRP. If you go to other sites the MSRP still holds. (Though the ZombiU bundle is the most expensive on Amazon oddly enough..)(And the MSRP of ZombiU bundle seems to be $399, surprised me)
Nor did I say you were favoring either system. I'm not even trying to direct any of this to you personally, I just don't like the way the gaming media only leads through MSRP or superior graphics instead of what you are getting from each console.
I wish that was true I will do, but I've been to Destructoid, Gametrailers, Screwattack, Giant Bomb, Kotaku, and even here on the Escapist and same lines I see all too frequently. "Wii U too expensive."Phrozenflame500 said:
Let me try again then. If price has nothing to do with your point, why did you make such a big deal of it when you made this thread? You have one sentence saying how the price doesn't matter. Why even mention price and value if you're going to ignore any point made from the point of price after you've spent so much time making your case.Negatempest said:
Also you used Amazon as "smart shopping" and ended up with the price of the Zombie U at $460 and the bundle at $409. Why is it invalid when I use Amazon the exact same way except using the actual prices and come up with slightly less than the cost of the bundle?
Just because the price is lower than MSRP it doesn't mean they're having a sale. It just means their asking price has been reduced since they first started selling it. I used Amazon, you used Amazon. Why am I wrong and you right?
Now for your final point. You never said I was favouring a console. True, but you went into a defensive line of arguing about the Wii U rather than why you chose to word your thread about the price.
Now you have thrown out some accusations at me when jammed, however in this point you did actually more ore less prove my accusation. I accused you of throwing out accusations when you didn't want to answer my question.
I asked you why you chose to focus your thread title on price, I asked why you chose to make your thread body about price, I asked why you'd even mention price if it had nothing to do with your point. You said I am over analysing things.
Now please answer me exactly that. Cut the bullshit. Why is 90% of your OP about price? Why bring up something and dismiss it as irrelevant when pressed? Also for the record, English is my second language, I know the difference between you're and your. Just saying.
I don't think Price is really a deciding factor for people weighing up between getting a WiiU or PS4.
I'm definitely considering price when I look at the Wii U.
As was pointed out earlier, the Wii U is using old technology. The Wii U is barely more powerful than the PS3/360 which are five year old systems, so why does it cost $150 more? If the Wii U launched in 2010 with its current specs and $350 price point, I may have considered it to be a good value then.
The current game bundled with the system does not add any value because the games are old and are no longer worth full $60 MSRP. Obviously that will change if the Wii U does get bundled with a new game.
The biggest issue with the Wii U is the tablet controller. I'm aware that off-tv play has use to many people, but it does not have any use to many others. Doing some research the tablet controller costs about $80 to make. If it wasn't required and included then the Wii U would sell for $40 less if it only included the Pro controller.
As was pointed out earlier, the Wii U is using old technology. The Wii U is barely more powerful than the PS3/360 which are five year old systems, so why does it cost $150 more? If the Wii U launched in 2010 with its current specs and $350 price point, I may have considered it to be a good value then.
The current game bundled with the system does not add any value because the games are old and are no longer worth full $60 MSRP. Obviously that will change if the Wii U does get bundled with a new game.
The biggest issue with the Wii U is the tablet controller. I'm aware that off-tv play has use to many people, but it does not have any use to many others. Doing some research the tablet controller costs about $80 to make. If it wasn't required and included then the Wii U would sell for $40 less if it only included the Pro controller.
I'm not sure that the addons are relevant to the cost. If you want a 32GB WiiU you HAVE to buy the bundle. Would you buy Nintendo Lands without it if it cost $60? Probably not. It isn't a $60 game. I mean, the ps4 doubles as a bluray player, has a 500GB hdd, your psn profile is user and not machined defined (so you can easily install your games on another machine and play them) and it is significantly more powerful that the WiiU. Are we including those "additions" in the price comparison?
In any event, Nintendo Land came out in November of 2012. Almost a year old. Are you going to sit there and tell us that being able to buy it new for under $20 isn't realistic? Why not? The stands and everything else that comes with it are around $10. The additional storage space? They're almost criminal prices in a world where $80-90 can get you 2TBs of storage. The standard 8GB space? I can find you a USB drive literally shaped like a thumb for less than $10 with that much space on it. 16GB? Still less than $10. 32GB? $20 or less, easy. Maybe not in the shape of a fancy thumb though... haha.
To put this in perspective, the WiiU is supposed to be a next gen console. And yet, the WiiU cannot play current gen digitual downloads like Uncharted 3 just because of a limited space.
So yes, The ps4 is only $50 more than the WiiU's premium bundle and less than $100 more than the standard.
In any event, Nintendo Land came out in November of 2012. Almost a year old. Are you going to sit there and tell us that being able to buy it new for under $20 isn't realistic? Why not? The stands and everything else that comes with it are around $10. The additional storage space? They're almost criminal prices in a world where $80-90 can get you 2TBs of storage. The standard 8GB space? I can find you a USB drive literally shaped like a thumb for less than $10 with that much space on it. 16GB? Still less than $10. 32GB? $20 or less, easy. Maybe not in the shape of a fancy thumb though... haha.
To put this in perspective, the WiiU is supposed to be a next gen console. And yet, the WiiU cannot play current gen digitual downloads like Uncharted 3 just because of a limited space.
So yes, The ps4 is only $50 more than the WiiU's premium bundle and less than $100 more than the standard.
War Thunder, Warframe, Blacklight, and Planetside are easily AAA games, they just happen to also be free.Negatempest said:
Really, they're actually better than many of the games you'll be asked to pay for on any platform.
That OP is meant to be confusing.Yopaz said:
When it gets down and dirty, without creating a second paragraph going into super details on why the price has no real influence, (If you would like me too, I will. ) the games or the brand is what is going to sell you the console, not the price. All that OP mumbo jumbo is completely unnecessary bullshit that is one of the last things to consider when you decide on the console you want.
To help emphasize that games or brand is what is going to sell a console. Price is one of the last subjects to think about. Unless it is stupidly over-priced like $700usd more or less.PoolCleaningRobot said:Not until I figure out what this thread is even forNegatempest said:Give a bro a hug than.
(like the Neo-Geo going for $649, like really? )
And I agree. They are great AAA games. Just remind the gaming media about that.GloatingSwine said:
Ah, graphics. One of the last things you should think about honestly. You really can't bring in superior graphics to support a console because any well built gaming PC will blow any console out of the water with a similar price. No competition there. Now if you mention games that are specific for said consoles than that is when you get into the meat and potatoes of the discussion. Which leads to my end clause. The games or brand is what will sell you the console, not the price.WouldYouKindly said:
OK, fair enough for the OP I guess.Negatempest said:That OP is meant to be confusing.
Except... You intentionally made it confusing and then you make fun of me for missing the point. Where does that make sense?
I have asked you several times why you made the thread the way you did, why you focused more on price than anything else. Why you would rather throw out accusations and avoid the issue when asked than actually explain it.
After all the accusations you have come up with about me missing the point, about me using Amazon incorrectly, me over analysing things and all that you go with the path that you always intended to confuse... it seems like I won't ever get a real answer out of you. You are avoiding answering again I see. You recognize that you have lost this argument, but rather than admitting it you avoid it. I can't say I am surprised.