Support NeoGAF

[Y2Kev]

Bold 1: You tied the console's value to how much loss the company takes on its manufacture. Like you point out above, from a consumer standpoint, it's meaningless. $250 is less than $300, thus the Wii is cheaper, meaning the differentiator here is entertainment value. Thus, if Wii is more fun, it's a better value. Corporate strategy is irrelevent. But since you felt compelled to use MS loss-leading as an argument for the console's value, I felt compelled to point out that MS isn't altruistic but is just looking for profit through a different strategy than it's smaller, more focused competitor.

No, false. I tied what the console's PRICE should be to how much it costs to manufacture, and that's basic economics. My statement about the 360's value being greater than the Wii's is unrelated to their manufacturing costs. I was simply remarking I am disappointed that Nintendo would charge (that is, price) so much for something they can mass produce cheaply. I am just assuming that the Wii isn't a huge investment financially like, say, the PS3 will be for Sony. I am not analyzing corporate strategy here, just talking very bluntly about cost opportunity.

Bold 2: I bought an ice cream cone this afternoon. It cost the vendor less than 25 cents to make. I paid $1.50 for it. I enjoyed it immensely. DId I get ripped off? Should the ice cream vendor have mortgaged his home to offer me the same cone for $0.50 less? Should this vendor just fold up when Dairy Queen moves into town, even if this store offers great-tasting ice cream for less and is more profitable but has fewer topping options? Is this getting convoluted? Are you seeing my point?

It depends. Is the vendor down the street selling bananas foster for 2 dollars? I understand your point in that as long as you are satisfied with your purchase, you feel sated when it comes to the value of the console. I just don't see how you can say that you wouldn't feel a little ripped off when you compare what you get with Nintendo compared to what you get with Microsoft simply as a matter of what PHYSICALLY, TECHNOLOGICALLY comes with the machine. Nintendo's console may wind up being better the better console and more fun in the long run, but I don't see tremendous value in investing in that level of technology.

Now, I know what you're arguing to counter this-- you've already mentioned I don't know the true value of the "unfinished" hardware. That is, I grant you, true. I think I have a general idea though.

Returning to your ice cream analogy, no matter how damn tasty that Toasted Almond bar is, for only marginally more, I'm buying the flambé. Sorry.

Alright ... I bought an ice cream cone this afternoon ... nevermind. You guys are never going to understand. Are benchmarks all you see when you look at a console? Why do even play games?

You would do better not to be so condescending when you are talking to people who take slight issue with buying Xbox Turbos for the same price they paid five years ago. Do YOU get it? Do you not understand that games are a visual media and graphics are important?

I can't stand it when someone tells me I only look at benchmarks. No, I look at performance and how that innovates in gameplay. Assassin's Creed, with its 30-some-odd characters on screen, amazing animation, and independent AI, could not be done on the Wii.

 

[DCharlie]

250 is still expensive for a shitty console...

but it's $499 at the very least... oh wait!

you fagwadcocklords wouldn't know a good idea unless it had sonys cock brand INFORMING you it was a good idea and a fuckmeuptheass price tag burning a cock hole in you face sphintered.

EVEN in a worse case scenario - somethng new is available for 1/2 price of the COCKSUCKERSTATATIONOFGENERICODOM.

Underneath the shade of the average tree /where they hand out mediocrary /i saw you with the PS3 under your arm/ standing in the middle of a long queue.

 

[ghostlyjoe]

This thread is jumping the gun in a couple issues:

1) We don't know the real Revolution pricepoint yet, or what that package includes

2) We don't know what the 360 will cost in November

The two sku strategy basically allows MS to attack two fronts at once if they choose to do so. The core pack can go for the cheap ass gamers who don't care about the extras of the premium pack (Nintendo's market), and if they price it competitively it could work out great. Then the premium package would be going after Sony's market, add in a HD DVD add on which costs less than the $499.99 PS3 package and MS may have just outsmarted both Nintendo and Sony in this upcoming race.




Err, didn't I say I would be getting one for Super Paper Mario and Twilight Princess.

We're all just defending our preferences at this point. I just don't understand why people gloss over the controller and attack the specs when teh controller is clearly the main focus of the Wii's appeal.

 

[Ristamar]

This thread is jumping the gun in a couple issues:

1) We don't know the real Revolution pricepoint yet, or what that package includes

2) We don't know what the 360 will cost in November

Indeed. This thread would be at least be slightly amusing if we at least knew the official finalized Wii specs and what as being packaged with the console. Slightly.

but it's $499 at the very least... oh wait!

you fagwadcocklords wouldn't know a good idea unless it had sonys cock brand INFORMING you it was a good idea and a fuckmeuptheass price tag burning a cock hole in you face sphintered.

EVEN in a worse case scenario - somethng new is available for 1/2 price of the COCKSUCKERSTATATIONOFGENERICODOM.

Underneath the shade of the average tree /where they hand out mediocrary /i saw you with the PS3 under your arm/ standing in the middle of a long queue.

I said, "Wow." :lol

 

[Archie]

but it's $499 at the very least... oh wait!

you fagwadcocklords wouldn't know a good idea unless it had sonys cock brand INFORMING you it was a good idea and a fuckmeuptheass price tag burning a cock hole in you face sphintered.

EVEN in a worse case scenario - somethng new is available for 1/2 price of the COCKSUCKERSTATATIONOFGENERICODOM.

Underneath the shade of the average tree /where they hand out mediocrary /i saw you with the PS3 under your arm/ standing in the middle of a long queue.

dcharlie has lost it

 

[Magicpaint]

No, false. I tied what the console's PRICE should be to how much it costs to manufacture, and that's basic economics. My statement about the 360's value being greater than the Wii's is unrelated to their manufacturing costs. I was simply remarking I am disappointed that Nintendo would charge (that is, price) so much for something they can mass produce cheaply.

How do you know this? Have we seen the actual price of the system, what's packed in? Oh wait, this is GAF, we love to jump to conclusions without actual concrete information.

I can't stand it when someone tells me I only look at benchmarks. No, I look at performance and how that innovates in gameplay. Assassin's Creed, with its 30-some-odd characters on screen, amazing animation, and independent AI, could not be done on the Wii.

Likewise, there should be plenty of Wii games that wouldn't be achievable on the PS3/Xbox360.

 

[ghostlyjoe]

No, false. I tied what the console's PRICE should be to how much it costs to manufacture, and that's basic economics. My statement about the 360's value being greater than the Wii's is unrelated to their manufacturing costs. I was simply remarking I am disappointed that Nintendo would charge (that is, price) so much for something they can mass produce cheaply. I am just assuming that the Wii isn't a huge investment financially like, say, the PS3 will be for Sony. I am not analyzing corporate strategy here, just talking very bluntly about cost opportunity.



It depends. Is the vendor down the street selling bananas foster for 2 dollars? I understand your point in that as long as you are satisfied with your purchase, you feel sated when it comes to the value of the console. I just don't see how you can say that you wouldn't feel a little ripped off when you compare what you get with Nintendo compared to what you get with Microsoft simply as a matter of what PHYSICALLY, TECHNOLOGICALLY comes with the machine. Nintendo's console may wind up being better the better console and more fun in the long run, but I don't see tremendous value in investing in that level of technology.

Now, I know what you're arguing to counter this-- you've already mentioned I don't know the true value of the "unfinished" hardware. That is, I grant you, true. I think I have a general idea though.

Returning to your ice cream analogy, no matter how damn tasty that Toasted Almond bar is, for only marginally more, I'm buying the flambé. Sorry.

I'm enjoying this debate, but I'm running out of time. I see where you're coming from, but I disagree, and it seems you feel the same way. So be it. I respect your point of view.

 

[fartblast]

its going to be 199.99

 

[Y2Kev]

How do you know this? Have we seen the actual price of the system, what's packed in? Oh wait, this is GAF, we love to jump to conclusions without actual concrete information.

You honestly can't be serious. Do you think Nintendo will sell their console at a loss? Do you think they are suddenly going to swap out what they have planned and put in a 3 ghz G5? I don't understand this.

I'm not jumping to conclusions. I'm using logic and analyzing what Nintendo has done in the past to try and find a proper pricepoint for the Wii.

Likewise, there will be plenty of Wii games that wouldn't be achievable on the PS3/Xbox360.

Being that we were discussing benchmarks and graphics in games, this is completely irrelevant. True, but not relevant.

 

[Illuminati]

Lol @ Azazela. Let's all stop to point at laugh at his stupidity and misfortune.

its going to be 199.99

IAWTP. I don't think the conversion rate will be 1:1.

 

[thefro]

Considering X-Box 1 is still $150, $199 is a sensible price for Wii

 

[Matlock]

but it's $499 at the very least... oh wait!

you fagwadcocklords wouldn't know a good idea unless it had sonys cock brand INFORMING you it was a good idea and a fuckmeuptheass price tag burning a cock hole in you face sphintered.

EVEN in a worse case scenario - somethng new is available for 1/2 price of the COCKSUCKERSTATATIONOFGENERICODOM.

Underneath the shade of the average tree /where they hand out mediocrary /i saw you with the PS3 under your arm/ standing in the middle of a long queue.

you sir, are the greatest cusser I've ever seen

 

[Magicpaint]

You honestly can't be serious. Do you think Nintendo will sell their console at a loss? Do you think they are suddenly going to swap out what they have planned and put in a 3 ghz G5? I don't understand this.

I'm not jumping to conclusions. I'm using logic and analyzing what Nintendo has done in the past to try and find a proper pricepoint for the Wii.

Which is a problem as far as I'm concerned.

What they've done in the past is quite different from their approach for the Wii. When was the last time so much R&D went into a controller? What if two of them are going to be packed in? Because they backed out in the horsepower race doesn't mean that they aren't spending and placing priority on other equally demanding aspects of technology (3D controller, small size, connect 24, low power consumption, heat etc)

Being that we were discussing benchmarks and graphics in games, this is completely irrelevant. True, but not relevant.

I thought the underlying dicussion was about the value of the console here?

 

[SuperPac]

Considering X-Box 1 is still $150, $199 is a sensible price for Wii

Yeah, but most stores do not offer the $150 version new anymore. The only one in stock most places is still the $179 Forza pack. So Wii would only be $20 more than XB1 if it ends up being $199.

I think they should do two SKUs (since everyone else is doing it).

$199 Tard Pack - Wii, one Wiimote.

$249 Premium - Wii, two Wiimotes, plus Wii Sports. And in an Apple-like twist, make the Premium version available in black.

 

[Sallokin]

249.99 or 199.00. Either way I'll have enough to pick up a system an extra controller and a game or two for less than the price I paid for a premium 360. Great news indeed.

 

[Y2Kev]

Which is a problem as far as I'm concerned.

What they've done in the past is quite different from their approach for the Wii. When was the last time so much R&D went into a controller? What if two of them are going to be packed in? Because they backed out in the horsepower race doesn't mean that they aren't spending and placing priority on other equally demanding aspects of technology (3D controller, small size, connect 24, low power consumption, heat etc)

Okay, so instead of just arguing about these nebulous, intangible concepts, what do you think the price will be and how much do you think each unit is costing Nintendo? Go ahead and "jump to conclusions," I promise I won't get angry.

I thought the underlying dicussion was about the value of the console here?

The discussion is shifting pretty rapidly. The only reason I even brought up AC is because ghostlyjoe asked if all Mrbob does is look at benchmarks. AC is a game literally teeming with impressive benchmarks. Discussing how games on the Wii will be unique because of the controller is a non sequitur.

 

[jarosh]

but it's $499 at the very least... oh wait!

you fagwadcocklords wouldn't know a good idea unless it had sonys cock brand INFORMING you it was a good idea and a fuckmeuptheass price tag burning a cock hole in you face sphintered.

EVEN in a worse case scenario - somethng new is available for 1/2 price of the COCKSUCKERSTATATIONOFGENERICODOM.

Underneath the shade of the average tree /where they hand out mediocrary /i saw you with the PS3 under your arm/ standing in the middle of a long queue.

mom, i've learned many new words today

 

[Magicpaint]

Okay, so instead of just arguing about these nebulous, intangible concepts, what do you think the price will be and how much do you think each unit is costing Nintendo? Go ahead and "jump to conclusions," I promise I won't get angry.

Not more than $250.
I honestly have no idea about the latter. I know Nintendo's policy is normally about making profit with the hardware, but I can't say for sure if they're applying that practice with the Wii. Mainly because of that controller.

The discussion is shifting pretty rapidly. The only reason I even brought up AC is because ghostlyjoe asked if all Mrbob does is look at benchmarks. AC is a game literally teeming with impressive benchmarks. Discussing how games on the Wii will be unique because of the controller is a non sequitur.

I must have missed that then, my bad.

 

[BuzzJive]

The core pack can go for the cheap ass gamers who don't care about the extras of the premium pack (Nintendo's market), and if they price it competitively it could work out great.

You talk about not "jumping the gun", but then you do it yourself.

Also - with the MS tard pack, you're not getting a wireless controller, a place to save games or Wi-Fi. There's plenty of value in those things - which is why it costs another $200 or so to get that stuff from MS.

 

[Y2Kev]

Not more than $250.
I honestly have no idea about the latter. I know Nintendo's policy is normally about making profit with the hardware, but I can't say for sure if they're applying that practice with the Wii. Mainly because of that controller.

Well, yeah.

That's really the only thing I'm going on. If this costs Nintendo $300 to make and they sell it at $250, I'm just saying I'd be surprised. But more power to them if they do that.

 

[Jeff-DSA]

$199-$250 is an excellent value for a new console considering that I'll get TONS of use out of it, especially since my wife is pretty interested in it. She won't touch my PS2 or 360...

 

[Battersea Power Station]

I tied what the console's PRICE should be to how much it costs to manufacture, and that's basic economics.

That's just a totally incorrect statement. Basic economics is supply and demand. Manufacture cost is a secondary consideration.

Let's say it costs me 10 bucks to make a product and I make 10 of them. I charge 12 for each, but at 12 I can only sell 5 of them.

So far, my production costs are 100 (10 times 10) and my gross income is 60 (12 times 5). I'm at a loss of 40, which sucks.

If I charge 9, though, I can sell all 10 of them, which makes my gross income 90 (9 times 10) and my loss equal to 10. That still sucks but it's better than the 40 dollar loss.

Supply and demand is the main and often sole determinant of price, and that is basic economics.

Similarly, if Nintendo can sell the product at 200, and you can bet that people will gobble it up at that price, they're not going to market it at 150.

I just don't see how you can say that you wouldn't feel a little ripped off when you compare what you get with Nintendo compared to what you get with Microsoft simply as a matter of what PHYSICALLY, TECHNOLOGICALLY comes with the machine. Nintendo's console may wind up being better the better console and more fun in the long run, but I don't see tremendous value in investing in that level of technology.

Lol, investing in a level of technology? The only way you can "invest" in a piece of electronics is if you count your level of enjoyment as worth more than the price. You're never going to get a monetary return on your "investment" because the price and worth of the piece of electronics is only going to go DOWN. So, since level of enjoyment is the only "payout" on your "investment" it's the only thing that should determine whether or not the Wii is worth the price -- THE ONLY THING.

If you can't find it in you to enjoy games with GC Turbo graphics no matter how fun the controls and gameplay are, then, yes, your "investment" in a Wii probably won't be worthwhile. Personally, I wouldn't mind playing GC/XBOX level-graphics for another 5 years, but that's another story.

By the way, I appreciate you writing out your post intelligently and patiently and not submitting to Azelazalalaz's style.

 

[DCharlie]

mom, i've learned many new words today

just to avoid copyright infringement, that last line regarding the "average tree" is a line from a Half Man Half biscuit song - for the original replace PS3 with "alchemy" (the Dire Straights album)

 

[Y2Kev]

That's just a totally incorrect statement. Basic economics is supply and demand. Manufacture cost is a secondary consideration.

Let's say it costs me 10 bucks to make a product and I make 10 of them. I charge 12 for each, but at 12 I can only sell 5 of them.

So far, my production costs are 100 (10 times 10) and my gross income is 60 (12 times 5). I'm at a loss of 40, which sucks.

If I charge 9, though, I can sell all 10 of them, which makes my gross income 90 (9 times 10) and my loss equal to 10. That still sucks but it's better than the 40 dollar loss.

Supply and demand is the main and often sole determinant of price, and that is basic economics.

Similarly, if Nintendo can sell the product at 200, and you can bet that people will gobble it up at that price, they're not going to market it at 150.

Fine, it's a secondary consideration, but you do understand what I meant to convey, no? The price of the item is at least largely determined by how easy and cheap to manufacture it is. That, to me, is inherently tied to supply and demand. I didn't use the proper terminology like you did, but I do mean essentially the same. Don't you think the demand would even be greater at a cheaper price point, anyway?

If the Wii is easy to manufacture because the components are cheap, then consequently won't the supply be pretty available (unless Nintendo gimps something or intentionally starves the market)? If the components are expensive and rare, the demand would probably outstrip supply.

Lol, investing in a level of technology? The only way you can "invest" in a piece of electronics is if you count your level of enjoyment as worth more than the price. You're never going to get a monetary return on your "investment" because the price and worth of the piece of electronics is only going to go DOWN. So, since level of enjoyment is the only "payout" on your "investment" it's the only thing that should determine whether or not the Wii is worth the price -- THE ONLY THING.

If you can't find it in you to enjoy games with GC Turbo graphics no matter how fun the controls and gameplay are, then, yes, your "investment" in a Wii probably won't be worthwhile. Personally, I wouldn't mind playing GC/XBOX level-graphics for another 5 years, but that's another story.

By the way, I appreciate you writing out your post intelligently and patiently and not submitting to Azelazalalaz's style.

Now I think you are being a little anal here. I am not literally investing in the technology, but I was using the term loosely how you defined it (jokingly or not). I never get monetary returns on most of the things I buy...but I still invest in them. I think you are nitpicking at my post here with the proper terminology and it doesn't really do anything to me other than impress me.

But I do disagree with you. I can get returns on my investment to varying degrees. I don't really understand how it becomes difficult to see what I mean when I talk about perceived value here. If the 360 can offer what it offers at a slightly higher price, I find it strange that so many people are offended by the suggestion that maybe the Wii is priced highly considering what it literally is.

Enjoyment is not the only thing you consider, at least for me, when buying a console. I'm considering many other things-- like what I can do with it other than simply play games, how long it will last me, and then other small considerations like does it support Dolby Digital.

Thank you for your kind words, and, for the record, I will be buying a Wii at launch. I just am not sure I think it's the best possible price for the device considering what you are getting in terms of sheer horsepower. I am interested in new gameplay experiences so I will shell out more for what I consider perceived value.

My only question is....what is the perceived value of the new gameplay experiences? I'm sure I'll be satisfied, but I don't know if I'm that into Elebits.

 

[DCharlie]

Nintendo already own the next gen so much in japan that they've started installing leather pimp seats in Nintendo colours right by where the PS3 displays are going to be... AND they have hydrolic pump action too....

 

[Mark Gonzales]

I found this picture interesting. Is Wii really revolutionary or did they just take an idea from Dreamcast and run with it?

 

[TheKingsCrown]

No, false. I tied what the console's PRICE should be to how much it costs to manufacture, and that's basic economics.

Not really. Most products price and cost to manufacture are quite a bit different. Its called profit, and its required for capitalism to work.

 

[Y2Kev]

Not really. Most products price and cost to manufacture are quite a bit different. Its called profit, and its required for capitalism to work.

What the....

I never said they were the same thing. I just said they were inherently related.

 

[BorkBork]

I found this picture interesting. Is Wii really revolutionary or did they just take an idea from Dreamcast and run with it?

There is nothing similar about that and the wiimote in design and purpose.

 

[Nightbringer]

I see a lot of hipocresy here.

See your beautiful iPod or other similar MP3. You have paid 3 times the manufacturation cost.

See your HDTV, the same.

See your Cell Phone, the same ten times more worse.

And now are you blaming Nintendo because Wii is going to have a cost under 250$?

Pure hipocresy and damage control.

 

[mrklaw]

DCharlie, you know the PS3 might have some good games too? just checking.

I'll buy a Wii just for Mario+Zelda plus a couple of other first party games that'll be worth getting.

I actually wonder what the 'per game' cost is of the different consoles?

Take this generation as an example. Divide the cost of the console by how many games you have for it.

If you buy twice as many games for PS3 compared to Wii, then its the same equivalent premium per game

 

[Y2Kev]

I see a lot of hipocresy here.

See your beautiful iPod or other similar MP3. You have paid 3 times the manufacturation cost.

See your HDTV, the same.

See your Cell Phone, the same ten times more worse.

And now are you blaming Nintendo because Wii is going to have a cost under 250$?

Pure hipocresy and damage control.

Well, they are different industries. Generally, game hardware is sold at cost or at a loss and the money is made up in software. The price isn't usually inflated because it could be prohibitively expensive otherwise (omg ps3). The same is generally true with TVs (which are probably more on the cutting edge as well) and cell phones. But I have had the same cell phone for like nine hundred years.

 

[CajoleJuice]

199.99 or bust.

 

[Error]

what this thread about again? I'm fucking lost.

 

[Mark Gonzales]

There is nothing similar about that and the wiimote in design and purpose.

My bad. I was unaware you could read foreign languages.

 

[Y2Kev]

what this thread about again? I'm fucking lost.

ICE CREAM!!!

 

[CajoleJuice]

ICE CREAM!!!

 

[Error]

ICE CREAM!!!

thought it was about cellphones

 

[Y2Kev]

That looks delicious.

*tom cruise picture here*

thought it was about cellphones

*rolleyes* It's about iPods *rolleyes* Keep up.

 

[Nightbringer]

Well, they are different industries. Generally, game hardware is sold at cost or at a loss and the money is made up in software. The price isn't usually inflated because it could be prohibitively expensive otherwise (omg ps3). The same is generally true with TVs (which are probably more on the cutting edge as well) and cell phones. But I have had the same cell phone for like nine hundred years.

¿Game Hardware is sold with loses?

This is the marketing stupidity created by Sony and Microsoft, companies that enter in the business with a lot of loses and infraestructure enough to support them.

What value has the technology?

This is for me the real question, understanding value as the effort to put the technology to the people and giving new posibilities.

 

[Y2Kev]

¿Game Hardware is sold with loses?

This is the marketing stupidity created by Sony and Microsoft, companies that enter in the business with a lot of loses and infraestructure enough to support them.

I thought even the GameCube was sold at a slight loss. Either slight or they were breaking even. Nintendo doesn't jack the price up either. It's just how it works.

The other industries you mentioned do because they don't have other revenue sources post-purchase. Apple kinda does, I guess.

 

[BorkBork]

My bad. I was unaware you could read foreign languages.

It's ok. Just be more careful about your assumptions next time.

 

[Magicpaint]

I thought even the GameCube was sold at a slight loss. Either slight or they were breaking even. Nintendo doesn't jack the price up either. It's just how it works.

The other industries you mentioned do because they don't have other revenue sources post-purchase. Apple kinda does, I guess.

GC sold at a 'slight' loss only when it hit $99.99 iirc.

 

[DCharlie]

DCharlie, you know the PS3 might have some good games too? just checking.

i'm sure it will - and so will the Wii - the preconception is that a low spec machine with limited media capacity will suck from the off - and of course the controller is a gimmick etc etc usual bollock shite from know nothing cock lords etc etc...

but yes, the PS3 -WILL- have some great games, i'm just wondering how that'll affect the great games on a system at 1/3 of the price in japan.

 

[Mrbob]

You talk about not "jumping the gun", but then you do it yourself.

That was my point. There are a number of unkown factors heading into November.

 

[Kobun Heat]

So... what are you guys arguing about? I can't even follow this.

 

[Y2Kev]

I think everyone agrees it's gonna be between 200 and 250. Lol.

 

[Amir0x]

i'm sure it will - and so will the Wii - the preconception is that a low spec machine with limited media capacity will suck from the off - and of course the controller is a gimmick etc etc usual bollock shite from know nothing cock lords etc etc...

but yes, the PS3 -WILL- have some great games, i'm just wondering how that'll affect the great games on a system at 1/3 of the price in japan.

PS3 has so many potentially great games it's ridiculous, the Wii third party list looks positively barren by comparrison (also compared to 360). Is it worth triple the price or double the price? Fuck no.

But nonetheless, it's triple to price with BRD, infinitely superior graphics AND confirmed superior surround sound, built in HDD with every system, exclusive games like MGS4, FFXIII, DMC4, GT5, etc. So yeah, it's not worth 500 dollars or 600 dollars in my view (299 for me!), but Nintendo Wii is not on par yet. Not even close.

with Wii, you get your Nintendo games... and then you get Red Steel and Elebits.

Which is fine, Wii is about Nintendo. Nintendo games. And they will be awesome, and it will be worth the price of admission. But nothing has been proven yet about superiority, either quality wise or game wise. Nintendo has a looooooooooooooooooooooooong way to go.

 

[ronito]

hmmm.....ice cream.....

 

[Magicpaint]

PS3 has so many potentially great games it's ridiculous, the Wii third party list looks positively barren by comparrison (also compared to 360). Is it worth triple the price or double the price? Fuck no.

But nonetheless, it's triple to price with BRD, infinitely superior graphics AND confirmed superior surround sound, built in HDD with every system, exclusive games like MGS4, FFXIII, DMC4, GT5, etc. So yeah, it's not worth 500 dollars or 600 dollars in my view (299 for me!), but Nintendo Wii is not on par yet. Not even close.

with Wii, you get your Nintendo games... and then you get Red Steel and Elebits.

Which is fine, Wii is about Nintendo. Nintendo games. And they will be awesome, and it will be worth the price of admission. But nothing has been proven yet about superiority, either quality wise or game wise. Nintendo has a looooooooooooooooooooooooong way to go.

So basically you're agreeing with Dcharlie. Both systems will have great games.