Xbox One Why 100 dollars over PS4 means little to me.

SiNAR 212 said:
I agree with Knight. But no offense, you are crazy lol if you think that PS3 users thought PSN (Multiplayer Part) was not free your wrong. EVERY PS3 user knew it was free and used that argument the most on why the PS3 was better than 360. Now to conteract that argument, Yes Comcast in my area DOES offer the same speed at a lower cost (I think 15 bucks) But here is the thing that service DOES NOT stay at a steady 50 MB speed. I had them before and it fluxuates. I have had WOW! for 5 years and I am ALWAYS at a locked 50 MB. So a loosly based logic, here we go PS4 is cheaper yes, says it is a console for the gamers..where are the 20 or so games they said were being made during E3. This is like comcast being cheaper, but not keeping up with their promise on the speed. Now X1, there is NO arguing that the games are not there, because they are, and a camera we ALL know developers WILL use in some way big or small. Thats WOW! keeping my speed at a locked 50 MB . Hopefully i didnt confuse anyone lol
Click to expand...

Sure PS3 owners know that PSN is free, because they have a PS3. I said BEFORE i had a PS3, I had no idea PSN was free.

Also youre missing my point with your internet analogy. I think its awesome that you get the CHOICE to pay extra to have reliable locked in internet speeds. You probably use the internet alot for various things and want it to be stable. Its cool that you have that option.

I dont use my internet quite as much, and when i do use it, i dont really care if my speeds fluctuate to an extent. With that said, i would take the lower plan, and be glad i had the option.

See what I'm getting at there. You obviously BELIEVE in the kinect and think its an excellent device. I'm of the opinion that yes, it MAY be an excellent device, but i just dont care because i wont use it no matter how good it is.

Microsoft is basically saying "you WILL pay for it and if you dont use it, tough...but you WILL pay for it if you buy an xbox one" its 100% their right to do so, im just saying, "I just wont buy an xbox one then, at least until the price drops"

all this kids and moms etc isnt of concern to me, im giving MY reasoning and logic for not wanting to pay more for a kinect, and it has nothing to do with what i can and cant afford.
 
SiNAR 212 said:
Correct. As an average consumer is looking around the shelves they will see both boxes on the shelf...maybe lol, and see hey, for an extra $100 bucks the camera will go with this. Trust me, during the holidays its go big or go home. And I am not even going to agree with the "struggling family" excuse because not to get all political on here but every year they say familys arent going to buy as much and then store sales in store or online are higher and higher every year.
Click to expand...

the "struggling families" are the biggest spenders lol, bottom line.

I know a family who lives in a single wide trailer (no shame in that, do what you have to do) with a rotting floor. you have to jump from the kitchen to the hallway or the floor might break. They are constantly crying broke and how noone will help them etc.

They have a 55 inch tv, a new mac, an xbox 360 with kinect and multiple games.

One of their kids was at our house recently and started playing my xbox (original release, white). She then said, man your xbox is old, and you dont even have a kinect! I always joke around saying im a poor mexican. I also try to teach these kids what it means to truly "afford" something. So i replied,"shoot, im a poor mexican, i cant afford a kinect" She then said, "whatever you guys are rich! besides WE can afford a kinect so you can too!"

I wanted so badly to say, welllll, you really CANT afford a kinect but i restrained myself and instead explained what it truly meant to afford something.

Anyway, i also heard on the radio that families that identify as poor spend the most money on prom. So theres further support for that claim
 
TheMartinG said:
Sure PS3 owners know that PSN is free, because they have a PS3. I said BEFORE i had a PS3, I had no idea PSN was free.

Also youre missing my point with your internet analogy. I think its awesome that you get the CHOICE to pay extra to have reliable locked in internet speeds. You probably use the internet alot for various things and want it to be stable. Its cool that you have that option.

I dont use my internet quite as much, and when i do use it, i dont really care if my speeds fluctuate to an extent. With that said, i would take the lower plan, and be glad i had the option.

See what I'm getting at there. You obviously BELIEVE in the kinect and think its an excellent device. I'm of the opinion that yes, it MAY be an excellent device, but i just dont care because i wont use it no matter how good it is.

Microsoft is basically saying "you WILL pay for it and if you dont use it, tough...but you WILL pay for it if you buy an xbox one" its 100% their right to do so, im just saying, "I just wont buy an xbox one then, at least until the price drops"

all this kids and moms etc isnt of concern to me, im giving MY reasoning and logic for not wanting to pay more for a kinect, and it has nothing to do with what i can and cant afford.
Click to expand...

I understand your point but I feel MSFt is being ostracized for doing what most companies do. How many features came with your phone, PC, or TV that you don't use? Still paid for them.
 
TheMartinG said:
Sure PS3 owners know that PSN is free, because they have a PS3. I said BEFORE i had a PS3, I had no idea PSN was free.

Also youre missing my point with your internet analogy. I think its awesome that you get the CHOICE to pay extra to have reliable locked in internet speeds. You probably use the internet alot for various things and want it to be stable. Its cool that you have that option.

I dont use my internet quite as much, and when i do use it, i dont really care if my speeds fluctuate to an extent. With that said, i would take the lower plan, and be glad i had the option.

See what I'm getting at there. You obviously BELIEVE in the kinect and think its an excellent device. I'm of the opinion that yes, it MAY be an excellent device, but i just dont care because i wont use it no matter how good it is.

Microsoft is basically saying "you WILL pay for it and if you dont use it, tough...but you WILL pay for it if you buy an xbox one" its 100% their right to do so, im just saying, "I just wont buy an xbox one then, at least until the price drops"

all this kids and moms etc isnt of concern to me, im giving MY reasoning and logic for not wanting to pay more for a kinect, and it has nothing to do with what i can and cant afford.
Click to expand...

So you just played online and...thought.....you payed for it? Im lost, how do you play something you think is not free...with no money being handed over?

For this comment you have to read my analogy closer. Since im getting an X1 i am FOR SURE getting a crap load of games that they have showed or talked about. Why settle for a cheaper console that only talks about how many games they have in development and shows nothing. So in a way you are buying a console off of hopes (anyone remember FF Versus and The Last Gaurdian?) Know what I mean?

As for the KiNECT yes its alot on my belifs but ALSO what has been shown. Here is the thing about a compnay making you buy something. PS4 comes with a free PS4 game called...party something cant remember and they showed it being balls to the walls fun and everything and its free...oh yeah...you need the camera to play it. Thanks for the "option" and the "free game" i cant even play.

You just have to look at it another way. If the KiNECT was so doom and gloom, why are SO many developers going to use it? These are things that will add a new level of gameplay. Its an added benefit. And thats just for games.
 
KN1GHTMARE said:
I understand your point but I feel MSFt is being ostracized for doing what most companies do. How many features came with your phone, PC, or TV that you don't use? Still paid for them.
Click to expand...

BAM!!!! THIS!!!! I know NO ONE watches every single channel, yet you still have to pay for them.
 
SiNAR 212 said:
So you just played online and...thought.....you payed for it? Im lost, how do you play something you think is not free...with no money being handed over?

For this comment you have to read my analogy closer. Since im getting an X1 i am FOR SURE getting a crap load of games that they have showed or talked about. Why settle for a cheaper console that only talks about how many games they have in development and shows nothing. So in a way you are buying a console off of hopes (anyone remember FF Versus and The Last Gaurdian?) Know what I mean?

As for the KiNECT yes its alot on my belifs but ALSO what has been shown. Here is the thing about a compnay making you buy something. PS4 comes with a free PS4 game called...party something cant remember and they showed it being balls to the walls fun and everything and its free...oh yeah...you need the camera to play it. Thanks for the "option" and the "free game" i cant even play.

You just have to look at it another way. If the KiNECT was so doom and gloom, why are SO many developers going to use it? These are things that will add a new level of gameplay. Its an added benefit. And thats just for games.
Click to expand...

You're misunderstanding him. He said that before he didn't know it was free until after he owned it and went to play. Meaning g he had no idea prior to his purchase.
 
KN1GHTMARE said:
You're misunderstanding him. He said that before he didn't know it was free until after he owned it and went to play. Meaning g he had no idea prior to his purchase.
Click to expand...

Your right I mis-read it, my bad.
 
Swanlee said:
For me that extra 100$ is giving me a voice controlled universal remote. I paid more than $100 for my normal logitech universal remote, you can't even buy a stand alone voice controlled universal remote so just that one feature pays for the difference.
Click to expand...

Actually, that is a good point. My last fancy remote cost me upwards of 200.00, and that was from Sony! Again, not everyone can put that extra amount of money out for a game system, however, if you can afford it, it is well worth the price!

J
 
Jedioutcast said:
Actually, that is a good point. My last fancy remote cost me upwards of 200.00, and that was from Sony! Again, not everyone can put that extra amount of money out for a game system, however, if you can afford it, it is well worth the price!

J
Click to expand...

It is a very good point. SHoot, this remote alone - http://www.bestbuy.com/site/universal-remote/1780476.p?id=1219063711274&skuId=1780476&st=categoryid$abcat0107039&cp=1&lp=1

Is 450 big ones...thats for a remote...a remote...and people say 500 bucks for a multi tasking machine is too much lol...
 
And this alone at Best Buy.com...shows that $500 is nothing to people...just look at this bundle...GONE
1.jpg
 
As I mentioned in an earlier post, it may hurt putting that type of money out for a game system, but it only (hopefully) happens once.

J
 
SiNAR 212 said:
So you just played online and...thought.....you payed for it? Im lost, how do you play something you think is not free...with no money being handed over?

For this comment you have to read my analogy closer. Since im getting an X1 i am FOR SURE getting a crap load of games that they have showed or talked about. Why settle for a cheaper console that only talks about how many games they have in development and shows nothing. So in a way you are buying a console off of hopes (anyone remember FF Versus and The Last Gaurdian?) Know what I mean?

As for the KiNECT yes its alot on my belifs but ALSO what has been shown. Here is the thing about a compnay making you buy something. PS4 comes with a free PS4 game called...party something cant remember and they showed it being balls to the walls fun and everything and its free...oh yeah...you need the camera to play it. Thanks for the "option" and the "free game" i cant even play.

You just have to look at it another way. If the KiNECT was so doom and gloom, why are SO many developers going to use it? These are things that will add a new level of gameplay. Its an added benefit. And thats just for games.
Click to expand...

Im editing my post cause i jumped the gun. You mentioned in another post that you misread so thats cleared up.
The free game is free. I lose nothing if i dont play, if i choose to buy the camera i get full access to the free game. Microsoft isnt giving you a free camera. Microsoft isnt giving you kinect features free but saying you have to buy the camera. They're FORCING you to buy the camera.

Computers and cellphones come in all shapes, sizes and price brackets. They come with various levels of features, including many you will not use. If i was someone who only texted and called, i wouldnt get an iphone, because i dont use those features. However, if an iphone and a galaxy 4 cost the SAME EXACT THING WITH A CONTRACT, and one has features i wont use, I'm not losing anything by buying the one with extra features. It would be like if the galaxy 4 charged an extra 100 dollars for an eye tracking feature I didnt want, and didnt make a non-eye-tracking version. I wouldnt get it, instead I'd get the iphone.

SiNAR 212 said:
And this alone at Best Buy.com...shows that $500 is nothing to people...just look at this bundle...GONE
View attachment 2405
Click to expand...

And here i thought i had established that it wasnt about affording or not affording it

Ill try to simplify my side of the argument for you. I think everything I've said so far can boil down to this one statement. "Why not pay $100 more for an xbox with kinect?"

Because I don't WANT to!
 
TheMartinG said:
Im editing my post cause i jumped the gun. You mentioned in another post that you misread so thats cleared up.
The free game is free. I lose nothing if i dont play, if i choose to buy the camera i get full access to the free game. Microsoft isnt giving you a free camera. Microsoft isnt giving you kinect features free but saying you have to buy the camera. They're FORCING you to buy the camera.

Computers and cellphones come in all shapes, sizes and price brackets. They come with various levels of features, including many you will not use. If i was someone who only texted and called, i wouldnt get an iphone, because i dont use those features. However, if an iphone and a galaxy 4 cost the SAME EXACT THING WITH A CONTRACT, and one has features i wont use, I'm not losing anything by buying the one with extra features. It would be like if the galaxy 4 charged an extra 100 dollars for an eye tracking feature I didnt want, and didnt make a non-eye-tracking version. I wouldnt get it, instead I'd get the iphone.



And here i thought i had established that it wasnt about affording or not affording it

Ill try to simplify my side of the argument for you. I think everything I've said so far can boil down to this one statement. "Why not pay $100 more for an xbox with kinect?"

Because I don't WANT to!
Click to expand...

Sorry to hear that
 
Hey, to each is own... *** Warming up hands and clearing throat for Kinect***

J
 
Definitely. I know you all will enjoy your kinects. I think its a cool little piece of tech. Its just not cool enough (to me) to warrant paying an additional 100 dollars, when i liked my gaming just fine the way it was.
 
Segm3nt said:
Umm, I will address this aspect you bring up as devils advocate. I know a lot of parents who see 100 dollars more must mean its better and I only buy the best for my child.
Click to expand...

I'm not doubting the realism of this claim but there are way, way more parents who will come to the opposite conclusion. They will look at both price tags and say, "well, they both play videogames, so why buy one that's 100 dollars more?". That's why you are seeing such heavy marketing from Microsoft, because they want parents to trust and recognize their brand. Microsoft knows that if they just left parents to decide between the two, the overwhelming majority will go with the cheaper one.
 
TheMartinG said:
Definitely. I know you all will enjoy your kinects. I think its a cool little piece of tech. Its just not cool enough (to me) to warrant paying an additional 100 dollars, when i liked my gaming just fine the way it was.
Click to expand...

Totally understand. Well, who knows, maybe there will be a game that will really WOO you soon. XB1 isn't going anywhere.

J
 
bifftape said:
I'm not doubting the realism of this claim but there are way, way more parents who will come to the opposite conclusion. They will look at both price tags and say, "well, they both play videogames, so why buy one that's 100 dollars more?". That's why you are seeing such heavy marketing from Microsoft, because they want parents to trust and recognize their brand. Microsoft knows that if they just left parents to decide between the two, the overwhelming majority will go with the cheaper one.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with that one. Years ago, when the Sega Dreamcast hit the market and the older Nintendo was already around, I went into a game store and overheard an exchange between a parent (had no clue) and the employee (ditto). The parent wondered why the Dreamcast was MUCH more expensive than the Nintendo system and the employee said, it's probably because it's new. She even commented on the graphics looking better than Nintendo and he said, "It's probably on a better TV than the Nintendo system." Needless to say, she went with the Nintendo system.

J
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Latest threads

Back
Top