-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
(Reasonable folks please) Comparing the 360 Premium vs the PS3 core
- Thread starter sonycowboy
- Start date
$599 PS3 is not what I want.
My reasoning:
-I don't even have an HDTV. HDMI is irrelevant to me. If someday I DO get an HDTV, I'm sure component with 720p will be an acceptable leap for me personally. Hell, 480p would. I'm not that picky. Otherwise I would've ditched my flawed Wega years ago. The leap from good ol' composite to component has kept me satisfied. I don't really care about how great 1080p BluRay movies will look, either. I appreciate BluRay for its storage capacity, but I'm not going to be buying BluRay movies.
-No memory slots? I can live without them, thanks to the hard drive. I'll have a 20 gig hard drive for my saves, so... this isn't really a big deal. I hate memory cards for game saves, anyway. They're annoying. They were cool back in the days of the PSX and even earlier in the PS2 era, but it still got old a long time ago. And I'm not using my PS3 as a "media hub," so I could care less about transferring music, movies, pics, or whatever the hell Sony is intending for it to be otherwise.
-No WiFi. This is a problem, but it's the only problem and it alone will not push me to get a $600 PS3 instead. Later on, I'm sure third party WiFi adapters will come out that will work perfectly with the console; I will use one of those when the time is right.
The more I think about it, the more it doesn't seem like a "ripoff" to me. You can have just as much fun gaming on a $500 PS3 than you could a $600 PS3. If you play online a lot, the $500 PS3 will make you have to run another network cable through your house/apartment/dorm/whatever, but hey, it's still possible.
Would 360 Premium seem more "complete" from a marketing standpoint because it's not gimped? Maybe. But it doesn't bother me. I want my PS3 for games, first and foremost.
Now, I'm not saying I *like* the pricing scheme -- I hate it. The PS3 is too damn expensive to begin with. But I realize that if I want to get a PS3 before waiting who even knows how long for a pricedrop, then I have to make a decision, and those three extra things just aren't worth the $100 to me.
I find this unlikely as I would rather wait and see how well the console does as I said in my thread -- something that's easy to say right NOW, but one can only wait for so long. :\ Either that or Sony will just keep it at $500-600 for as long as possible (provided people still keep buying it).
So unless you're an HD addict, you should at least consider for a moment the things I mentioned before you say "all or nothing." It's not like the PS3 core console is gonna have 256MB of memory taken out, and the Cell CPU at a slower speed. It's just a couple misc. features that don't ruin gameplay (although it does make it more of a hassle to get online, it's STILL POSSIBLE).
Oh, and I've found wired PC gaming to be much more reliable than wireless PC gaming, btw. Wireless routers are known to do weird things like drop packets, randomly disconnect, etc. ESPECIALLY with new or touchy hardware. You might take your brand new $600 PS3 home and try to use it on a wireless network only to find that it keeps disconnecting or dropping packets.
My reasoning:
-I don't even have an HDTV. HDMI is irrelevant to me. If someday I DO get an HDTV, I'm sure component with 720p will be an acceptable leap for me personally. Hell, 480p would. I'm not that picky. Otherwise I would've ditched my flawed Wega years ago. The leap from good ol' composite to component has kept me satisfied. I don't really care about how great 1080p BluRay movies will look, either. I appreciate BluRay for its storage capacity, but I'm not going to be buying BluRay movies.
-No memory slots? I can live without them, thanks to the hard drive. I'll have a 20 gig hard drive for my saves, so... this isn't really a big deal. I hate memory cards for game saves, anyway. They're annoying. They were cool back in the days of the PSX and even earlier in the PS2 era, but it still got old a long time ago. And I'm not using my PS3 as a "media hub," so I could care less about transferring music, movies, pics, or whatever the hell Sony is intending for it to be otherwise.
-No WiFi. This is a problem, but it's the only problem and it alone will not push me to get a $600 PS3 instead. Later on, I'm sure third party WiFi adapters will come out that will work perfectly with the console; I will use one of those when the time is right.
The more I think about it, the more it doesn't seem like a "ripoff" to me. You can have just as much fun gaming on a $500 PS3 than you could a $600 PS3. If you play online a lot, the $500 PS3 will make you have to run another network cable through your house/apartment/dorm/whatever, but hey, it's still possible.
Would 360 Premium seem more "complete" from a marketing standpoint because it's not gimped? Maybe. But it doesn't bother me. I want my PS3 for games, first and foremost.
Now, I'm not saying I *like* the pricing scheme -- I hate it. The PS3 is too damn expensive to begin with. But I realize that if I want to get a PS3 before waiting who even knows how long for a pricedrop, then I have to make a decision, and those three extra things just aren't worth the $100 to me.
I find this unlikely as I would rather wait and see how well the console does as I said in my thread -- something that's easy to say right NOW, but one can only wait for so long. :\ Either that or Sony will just keep it at $500-600 for as long as possible (provided people still keep buying it).
So unless you're an HD addict, you should at least consider for a moment the things I mentioned before you say "all or nothing." It's not like the PS3 core console is gonna have 256MB of memory taken out, and the Cell CPU at a slower speed. It's just a couple misc. features that don't ruin gameplay (although it does make it more of a hassle to get online, it's STILL POSSIBLE).
Oh, and I've found wired PC gaming to be much more reliable than wireless PC gaming, btw. Wireless routers are known to do weird things like drop packets, randomly disconnect, etc. ESPECIALLY with new or touchy hardware. You might take your brand new $600 PS3 home and try to use it on a wireless network only to find that it keeps disconnecting or dropping packets.
Damn thing(ps3) will get all the games, i don't see MS having vastly improved dev support yet. Nintendo is going to have to prove the thing is fun before devs jump on. Sony gets the best and most variety. So dammit they can throw in some new technology you don't really need (blue ray) and charge you a little more for it. They might as well charge more, no matter what the price, with the whole world lanuching together it'll be hard getting one.
I believe so. Also, someone on IRC was telling me transferring PS2 saves to PS3 can be done via USB as well. So you'd have to have both consoles on to do it of course, but once it's done, it's on your hard drive forever unless you delete what I assume would be "virtual memory cards".
gamergirly
Member
What spin? You either can afford it or you cant. We can say as much against or for a console as we want to say. Rant. Scream. Laugh. Mock. But the only difference at the end of the day is what is coming out of your wallet. If anything at all. That's how decisions will be made. Love or hate Sony.
I want HDMI even if my set is only 720p.
analog SUCKS. Component video while a huge step up from composite or s-video is still analog. That means the PS3s D/A converter (of unknown quality) is gonna mess with the signal, then you got the TVs A/D converter doing lord knows what.
Its a kick in the teeth on top of the already high price that you have to pay an extra $100 for digital video output. A decent D/A converter should cost more than the HDMI port for christs sake. Of course the premium probably has to have both... but FUCK!.
The WiFi and MS readers can GTFO for all I care, I have shitloads of USB MS readers and WiFi dongles sitting around. All I want is a all digital path for my video and sound.
analog SUCKS. Component video while a huge step up from composite or s-video is still analog. That means the PS3s D/A converter (of unknown quality) is gonna mess with the signal, then you got the TVs A/D converter doing lord knows what.
Its a kick in the teeth on top of the already high price that you have to pay an extra $100 for digital video output. A decent D/A converter should cost more than the HDMI port for christs sake. Of course the premium probably has to have both... but FUCK!.
The WiFi and MS readers can GTFO for all I care, I have shitloads of USB MS readers and WiFi dongles sitting around. All I want is a all digital path for my video and sound.
Wait, what's analog going to do to mess up my picture if I want to use, say, 720p with component?
I'm asking because I don't know. I realize it's not digital so it probably won't be as good as HDMI, but seriously, how much worse is it? I doubt it's THAT big of a deal. Component for 720p on an HDTV will be more than enough for me. It'll be better than what I have now, which I still have no problem with, so...
I'm asking because I don't know. I realize it's not digital so it probably won't be as good as HDMI, but seriously, how much worse is it? I doubt it's THAT big of a deal. Component for 720p on an HDTV will be more than enough for me. It'll be better than what I have now, which I still have no problem with, so...
MetalAlien
Banned
Diablos said:
videophiles like to keep the signal digital as long as possible. Doesn't mean you really see the difference.
I would be completelty Ok with no HDMI if the BR movies will at least let me do 720p over component.. but I don't think it works like that.
There's a lot of drama queens and chicken littles when it comes to this pricing issue. When you look at it from a gamer and consumer point of view there is some very good points being made.
The PS3 core is indeed very similar to the 360 premium. In fact I would consider the PS3 core not only comparable but maybe the better deal.
I do not have a 1080p TV and probably won't ever. I really have no interest in the PS3 premium. The PS3 core would do just fine for what I want it to do and I will seriously consider it, and I already have a 360 premium. The PS3 premium will attract the high end videophiles, but I think the PS3 core will attract a lot of gamers and might even sell better.
Of course Sony could have done much better. I'm not exactly thrilled with the pricing either, but there's no point crying about what should have or could have been. As consumers all we can do is choose from what is available, and I would say the PS3 core and 360 premium are definately comparable. The PS3 core isn't at all "crippled" when you compare it to a 360. If you think so, then the 360 is just as crippled.
I don't consider this damage control. It's a realistic comparison of available products by consumers considering a next gen gaming console. For anybody that is considering a 360, I see no reason why they shouldn't also consider a PS3 core. The differences are not that drastic. You can stick your head in the sand and get all mad at Sony for not providing a lower price, but in the end it is a competative product for the available competition.
The PS3 core is indeed very similar to the 360 premium. In fact I would consider the PS3 core not only comparable but maybe the better deal.
I do not have a 1080p TV and probably won't ever. I really have no interest in the PS3 premium. The PS3 core would do just fine for what I want it to do and I will seriously consider it, and I already have a 360 premium. The PS3 premium will attract the high end videophiles, but I think the PS3 core will attract a lot of gamers and might even sell better.
Of course Sony could have done much better. I'm not exactly thrilled with the pricing either, but there's no point crying about what should have or could have been. As consumers all we can do is choose from what is available, and I would say the PS3 core and 360 premium are definately comparable. The PS3 core isn't at all "crippled" when you compare it to a 360. If you think so, then the 360 is just as crippled.
I don't consider this damage control. It's a realistic comparison of available products by consumers considering a next gen gaming console. For anybody that is considering a 360, I see no reason why they shouldn't also consider a PS3 core. The differences are not that drastic. You can stick your head in the sand and get all mad at Sony for not providing a lower price, but in the end it is a competative product for the available competition.
I dunno I can see a night and day diffrence between running my flat panel LCD in D-Sub vs. DVI-D. The amount you notice it will come down to the quality of the D/A converter in the PS3 and the A/D converter in your TV. Digital to analog conversion always introduces blur, color loss, and noise though. I would rather go without it.
MetalAlien
Banned
Flo_Evans said:
Yea but he doesn't even have a HDTV. I guess it depends on how picky you are.. I use cheap cables some people like the super expensive cables. I can't see the difference... but I guess others can....
I would bet money that I couldn't see the difference between 1080i component and HDMI on a normal sized HDTV... now on my projo (92") maybe.
I have no problems with the premise of this thread, but lets get one thing straight.
The $499 PS3 is not a Blu Ray player. Any legitimate Blu Ray player must have an HDCP compatible output. This means HDMI or DVI+HDCP.
With the PS3 tard pack you are getting a game machine only.
Now that we are comparing the $399 360 Premium to the $599 PS3, you are talking about a $200 difference. With initial Blu Ray players going for $1000, only paying $200 for an "ok" (I assume) Blu Ray player sounds like a damn good deal if you ask me.
Now this doesn't take into account a possible price drop for the 360 by the time November rolls around. A $349 or even $299 360 Premium will make the PS3 price hard to swallow.
The $499 PS3 is not a Blu Ray player. Any legitimate Blu Ray player must have an HDCP compatible output. This means HDMI or DVI+HDCP.
With the PS3 tard pack you are getting a game machine only.
Now that we are comparing the $399 360 Premium to the $599 PS3, you are talking about a $200 difference. With initial Blu Ray players going for $1000, only paying $200 for an "ok" (I assume) Blu Ray player sounds like a damn good deal if you ask me.
Now this doesn't take into account a possible price drop for the 360 by the time November rolls around. A $349 or even $299 360 Premium will make the PS3 price hard to swallow.
firefoxsux
Banned
a = 500 = retail suicide
b = 600 = retail suicide
c = no hdmi = all suicide
as a=b >>>> c, make 1 ps3 stupid ken 20gb + no CF/SD. 1 tard pack = 1 less ps3 created
ps3 already downgraded, stop become a tard! tard must die. email sony do your part all fanboys report in.
$600 is good value but Xbox360 will win in USA because of cheapness.
b = 600 = retail suicide
c = no hdmi = all suicide
as a=b >>>> c, make 1 ps3 stupid ken 20gb + no CF/SD. 1 tard pack = 1 less ps3 created
ps3 already downgraded, stop become a tard! tard must die. email sony do your part all fanboys report in.
$600 is good value but Xbox360 will win in USA because of cheapness.
dirtmonkey37
flinging feces ---->
BlueTsunami said:
Yeah, your comparison (the original thread poster) was fine but like this guy says, don't forget that the core can't do 1080p (which is made possible by HDMI), it doesn't have Wifi, and it doesn't have memory card slots.
But it's not like the 360 has any of those so why is the PS3 100 dollars more?
well there is the slight chance that the multi-out could support a DVI-D cable that has HDCP protection on it. (only problem would be finding a TV that has that) There is also the slightpossibility of the multi-out supporting a proprietary HDMI solution. But I would image if it where to even be possible then sony would probably charge you $100 for the cable and you might as well get the 'good' PS3 in the 1st place.
I think there is a small chance Sony was just testing the waters with the price and SKU announcements.
Dropping the tard pack or not might not be an option, but the question of HDMI on tard pack or not might be.
An uproar like here an the boards will sure be noticed as probably will a flood of emails.
Especially here in europe HDTV is very delicate, most people still fear being fucked up with new standards and hold back purchasing. Sony could for once not fuck their european fanbase and just sell the premium pack at $499 (60,000 Yen + 18% VAT = 500 Euro).
The us$ is unfortuantely a lot weaker, so this wouldnt be an option. But do they really want to explain their customers the real advantage of PS3 (being a bluray player too) will only be tru for one SKU? Really stupid, as long as they cant drop the bluray drive too and offer it for $399.
Or they announce that no bluray movies needs HDCP and all will run on the tard pack too. That would be a nice idea, I think those who need to care about $100 neither need 1080p nor the perfect digital quality, we all know from 360 that component is perfectly fine for 720p.
Dropping the tard pack or not might not be an option, but the question of HDMI on tard pack or not might be.
An uproar like here an the boards will sure be noticed as probably will a flood of emails.
Especially here in europe HDTV is very delicate, most people still fear being fucked up with new standards and hold back purchasing. Sony could for once not fuck their european fanbase and just sell the premium pack at $499 (60,000 Yen + 18% VAT = 500 Euro).
The us$ is unfortuantely a lot weaker, so this wouldnt be an option. But do they really want to explain their customers the real advantage of PS3 (being a bluray player too) will only be tru for one SKU? Really stupid, as long as they cant drop the bluray drive too and offer it for $399.
Or they announce that no bluray movies needs HDCP and all will run on the tard pack too. That would be a nice idea, I think those who need to care about $100 neither need 1080p nor the perfect digital quality, we all know from 360 that component is perfectly fine for 720p.
Because of a bluray drive that alone retails at some $500-$700 probably. You guys should say good bye to the believe that a HD-DVD addon will come at some $100 (or if so MS probably loses as much on that drive as on the 360)dirtmonkey37 said:
inpHilltr8r
Member
HDCP encoder may be an issue. There's a shortage of PC parts, but dunno if that affects Sony somehow. Wasn't HDCP only finalised recently? Maybe this is fallout from that.Kiriku said:
In reality, Sony is really between a rock and a hardplace with regards to pricing. I highly doubt the price comes from greed, as it would make more sense financially to release it at a more attractive price if they could afford to do so, but rather the features overload they promised.
Considering the backlash between dropping primary features (BRD) and the high prices, I think they chose correctly, given that this will be a long term decision... and when console prices are considerably lower after 2-5 years, people will be looking at the features list and the games that exploited those extra features and make a pretty quick and certain decision on their choice of machines.
The price shock is temporary. The feature cut is permanent.
They cut the right features, made the right decisions, it's just a matter of reality that things didn't turn out as ideally as we'd had hoped.
Considering the backlash between dropping primary features (BRD) and the high prices, I think they chose correctly, given that this will be a long term decision... and when console prices are considerably lower after 2-5 years, people will be looking at the features list and the games that exploited those extra features and make a pretty quick and certain decision on their choice of machines.
The price shock is temporary. The feature cut is permanent.
They cut the right features, made the right decisions, it's just a matter of reality that things didn't turn out as ideally as we'd had hoped.
MidgarBlowedUp
Member
I'm planning on getting the KD-34XS955N and I would hate to waste that HDMI input on the back of it.
Also for the cut memory card ports... the solution is a USB thumb drive. I'd imagine Sony realised these devices were cheap and plentiful enough for everyone that for anyone at all intrested in actually using transportable storage for their PS3, rather than bitching about been fucked over would be using these instead.
firefoxsux
Banned
cut hdmi of br is right decison? ken cut features and tard pack is okay now?
5 days ago $600 with cut features is not a possibility for jesus cutaragi of scei in accordance with gaffers sony praises.
thread over. all please stop damage control.
5 days ago $600 with cut features is not a possibility for jesus cutaragi of scei in accordance with gaffers sony praises.
thread over. all please stop damage control.
MidgarBlowedUp
Member
Yeah, I think Sony dropped the correct parts. The 360 core pack,(not the topic I know) which I have, is slightly limited in terms of a full gaming experience. There is no HDD, so I can't play FFXI on it and I can't download stuff off live with it, and I can't save my games without a mem card, I can't even play many of the LIVE arcade games, I can't play any Xbox games on it, and if you want any form of HD you must by a component or VGA cable.
With the PS3 core you can do all the things you need to get a full gaming experience out of the box. The only thing missing, I assume, would be a component cable. But, if the inputs are backwards compatible I'm covered. And(on topic) you're getting more functionality with the PS3 Premium vs the Xbox360 Premium with the exception of maybe Windows connectivity, which is still a moot point since you can't really do anything, except look at pictures, unless you have XP Media Center. Thanks for screwing the XP Pro users MS.
With the PS3 core you can do all the things you need to get a full gaming experience out of the box. The only thing missing, I assume, would be a component cable. But, if the inputs are backwards compatible I'm covered. And(on topic) you're getting more functionality with the PS3 Premium vs the Xbox360 Premium with the exception of maybe Windows connectivity, which is still a moot point since you can't really do anything, except look at pictures, unless you have XP Media Center. Thanks for screwing the XP Pro users MS.
firefoxsux said:
I haven't been angry about the price announcements at all. Maybe suprised, but not angry. Do I seem like I'm grieving over the price? Or just trying to say my own stuff in a sea of fucking price shock monkeys?
They cut the right features; they didn't remove the HDD, they didn't remove the BRD. Wifi, HDMI, memory cards, they're not something everyone will have. If you have the gear to use all that stuff, you're probably a rich bastard as well, or at the least able to afford it.
In otherwords, Sony made the cuts that wouldn't negatively affect the games and the software that would be available for the machine, and by extension the premium version of the console. They made the right choices.
MidgarBlowedUp
Member
firefoxsux said:
It's just that GAF is faster than Judge Judy and sentencing. Now everyone is starting to actually learn about what the PS3 offers and seeing that $600 isn't so crazy considering what you are getting. I still think $600 is insane for a console, but I really don't have a choice, I want FFXIII and HDMI.
Many of you seem to be under the impression that you need HDMI for 1080p, this isn't the case. Component can handle a 1080p/30 signal, but not a 1080p/60 one. So if you have a 1080p set you'll still be able to watch BR movies in all their glory so long as the disc isn't locked, in which case you'll be stuck with 540p.
The decision to remove HDMI is still retarded, but if you can afford a 1080p set another $100 shouldn't phase you.
The decision to remove HDMI is still retarded, but if you can afford a 1080p set another $100 shouldn't phase you.
Pope Benedict XVI
Member
The psychological effect of the PS3 core's missing features is crucial I think. You're slapping down $499 and yet getting the inferior version of the PS3. Even if you don't particularly want HDMI, it just ruins the feel-good factor and desirability.
MidgarBlowedUp
Member
Pope Benedict XVI said:
But saves the gameplay-ability.
If I own both tard packs and I want to play something that requires the HDD like FFXI Online I'm screwed with the 360 tard pack, but I'm in business with the PS3 tard pack.
I must be slow. Assuming this isn't another load of BS, this is some consolation:
http://www.scei.co.jp/corporate/release/pdf/060509ae.pdf
http://www.scei.co.jp/corporate/release/pdf/060509ae.pdf
Pope Benedict XVI
Member
MidgarBlowedUp said:
But we're comparing the 360 premium with the PS3 core. I'm just saying that while neither has HDMI, the lack of it in the 360 premium doesn't have the same negative psychological impact as the lack of it in the PS3 core. Humans aren't entirely rational beings.
Pedigree Chum
Banned
Pope Benedict XVI said:
Lack of HDMI on PS3 is more fucked up cause its essential to a key feature on PS3, the blu-ray movie playback.
the biggest problem isnt the initial price, it will (probably) sell out regardless. try comparing the price of a core xbox (if it still exists) vs the core ps3 in a few years however. how long will sony take to reach a mass market price (say, $200) vs microsoft? also not being able to upgrade the spec of the core to the premium ps3 is just plain wrong.
firefoxsux
Banned
ken: xbox 1.5!
fanboys: WOW JUST WOW! Features Total! Sony make inhouse! 1 ps3 $399 FTW! Peter Moore dog face own! dc260!
ken: tard $499 ps3 downgrade $599
fanboys: features creatures! $499 good cuts! $599 FTW!
$599 downgrade still value for the money. i think tard pack must die. sony world placings is weakened. i am buying ps3 one day.
i call for all is stop damage control. thats all.
cutaragi was not my jesus after project cell downgrades every new year.
gaffer fanboys see it now. pride for ken promises was very high sobots post like elitist trolls!
thats all.
fanboys: WOW JUST WOW! Features Total! Sony make inhouse! 1 ps3 $399 FTW! Peter Moore dog face own! dc260!
ken: tard $499 ps3 downgrade $599
fanboys: features creatures! $499 good cuts! $599 FTW!
$599 downgrade still value for the money. i think tard pack must die. sony world placings is weakened. i am buying ps3 one day.
i call for all is stop damage control. thats all.
cutaragi was not my jesus after project cell downgrades every new year.
gaffer fanboys see it now. pride for ken promises was very high sobots post like elitist trolls!
thats all.
Pedigree Chum
Banned
golem said:
MS holds all the cards as far as pricing goes next-gen. They're either going to make Sony bleed to death trying to match X360 pricing or just watch as Sony's western userbase contines to erode. Sony is banking on people looking at PS3 and thinking "this is a premium product worth the premium price", its not going to work against MS. Wake the fuck up Sony.
gollumsluvslave
Member
Some observations, consider I already have a premium 360.
My 360 already occupies my sole component input on my HDTV, and I was stoked that PS3 would have HDMI, as I have a free HDMI input.
With the PS3 2Sku situation, the Gimp Pack is not an option to me unless I buy a component switch box. In which case i may as well just pony up and get the non-gimp pack.
Which I doubt I'll be able to justify.
Bottom line is when it comes to November, it's going to be about the games that are available - *if* Sony's launch has some must haves, that can compete with the likes of Gears of War, Too Human, Lost Planet and Mass Effect, then I'll probably have to take some serious stock.
But that is another point - everyone has finit disposable income - those 4 360 games (Too Human i'm still on the fence with) will come to £200, and will fully occupy my gaming hours over the holidays. At which point PS3 becomes a real hard sell, something I'd not really be considering if it was priced similar to 360 - something has to give with my finances, and at the likely £400-450 price point with an unproven launch line-up versus a great looking fall 360 line-up it's just too much.
My 360 already occupies my sole component input on my HDTV, and I was stoked that PS3 would have HDMI, as I have a free HDMI input.
With the PS3 2Sku situation, the Gimp Pack is not an option to me unless I buy a component switch box. In which case i may as well just pony up and get the non-gimp pack.
Which I doubt I'll be able to justify.
Bottom line is when it comes to November, it's going to be about the games that are available - *if* Sony's launch has some must haves, that can compete with the likes of Gears of War, Too Human, Lost Planet and Mass Effect, then I'll probably have to take some serious stock.
But that is another point - everyone has finit disposable income - those 4 360 games (Too Human i'm still on the fence with) will come to £200, and will fully occupy my gaming hours over the holidays. At which point PS3 becomes a real hard sell, something I'd not really be considering if it was priced similar to 360 - something has to give with my finances, and at the likely £400-450 price point with an unproven launch line-up versus a great looking fall 360 line-up it's just too much.
gollumsluvslave
Member
Not only that, but as I said in the above post, I have a FREE HDMI input, but not a free component input, which makes a component switch box an additional purchase for me with the Gimp Pack.
