European Xbox 360 Price Cut Confirmed, Detailed; Arcade Unit Now Cheaper Than Wii
Effective this Friday, March 14, the cut drops the estimated retail price of the hard disc drive-lacking Arcade unit to 199.99 euros/£159.99, with the 20GB HDD-equipped Xbox 360 priced at 269.99 euros/£199.99. The Elite Xbox 360, which includes a 120GB HDD, will sell at 369.99 euros/£259.99.
Under the new prices, the Arcade unit is cheaper than a Nintendo Wii, which carries an ERP of 249.99 euros/£179.99.
Though the slash brings the prices of European Xbox 360 hardware much closer to those of the United States, the difference between the two, in the words of Shacknews editor Maarten Goldstein, "is still grossly unfair with the current euro/USD rate."
Going by today's euro/USD exchange rate, the new price of the Arcade unit, which has an MSRP of $279.99 in the United States, translates to $307.11. Compared to US MSRP of $349.99, the price of a European Premium unit will be $414.58, with the $449.99 Elite going for $568.14 in Euroland.
-
MrGrindy
replyMeh. I always think of the 360 as last-gen and my updated PC has most of the same games. 360 exclusives don't interest me at all.
But a PS3 price cut would be cool.-
-
-
Ken Katarugi? is that you?
-
-
I consider them all "current gen"
-
here we go.... *zips of flame suit*
the 360 and ps3 share far more games than the 360 and PC do, at very similar visual fidelity, so by my count that puts them at pretty much the same generation in my book -
Your updated PC cost a lot more than $280 to play those same games.
But nice troll.-
-
-
-
But it is true, is it not, that a developer makes less per game sold on a console game than a PC game due to licensing fees, is it not? (seriously, I know you work for 3DR, you can set me straight on this).
It's basically true that the console makers take a hit on the hardware in order to sell software. This is why an NVidia card can cost more than your entire console - it's not because NVidia are being a bunch of dicks, it's because that's what they have to charge in order to make a profit on the card. Microsoft isn't making a profit on the 360 itself, it's taking a loss on the gamble that collectively people will buy enough games to make it profitable. Note how the Xbox division wasn't profitable until last year.
-
-
-
But you only have to buy a handful of games, like maybe seven, to offset the cost of manufacturing the console itself. Everything above that is profit and collectively, the number of games purchased per console user is above that number (it probably helps that the video rental places of the world also buy a good number of titles). Console makers take a loss on the hardware to sell more software (except Nintendo, which seems to create their own gravity it seems). When something comes along like the RROD problem, there goes that profit (see MS and their $1B hit on fixing that).
Anyway yeah the point is MrGrindy threw out a little flamebait and people took it in this thread. But it's not like consoles are cheaper than PC's because they're better, they're cheaper because the console maker is taking a loss on the hardware in order to sell software and make money. If one player in the console space takes over they get cocky - see Sony and their $600 PS3 entry. Nintendo lost their cocky years ago so they come out with moderately powerful hardware which is innovative in some respect and sell shit tons. Microsoft isn't cocky (just trigger happy apparently), which is why their console experience is second to none. Sony got cocky and decided to have PS3 be their delivery channel into the HD space and it nearly killed them this round. -
not really, everyone (almost) has a computer already. The price difference between a new ordinary computer and a decent gaming rig is only the price of a good video card ($200) and maybe some more memory. Even starting with no computer at all you can build a decent game PC for $700 easily.
-
-
-
To Shredomatic: Incorrect, good sir. If you factor in the $50 per year over the 3-4 years that you'll have a 360, that's $200 right there, then factor in the extra $10 per game (at $60 a game vs $30-50 per PC game) at about 3-6 games a year over 3-4 years, that equals about another $150-240, then factor in extra controllers, at another $40-80, you'll find that this magical $280 game machine now costs around $600-800....and that's not even counting the cost of an HDTV to really make the 360 "Next-Gen", graphically speaking. Considering that you can build a more powerful system than either the PS2 or the 360 via PC for about $700-800, tops, I'd say that you're the one who's wrong here. No offense intended, just clarifying. I see no reason not to own both platforms (or all of them), though... :)
-
He's not wrong though. For the vast majority of people, a 360 is and always will be cheaper than building and maintaining a decent gaming PC. Especially if you count the time required to set up a computer and fix the various problems that come up with buggy games and hardware issues. Also, consoles deliver a more gamer-centric experience (play on the couch in front of a big screen, multiple players can play together on one machine), so this is not an apples to apples comparison.
I love my PC, but there is really no comparison cost-wise, in my opinion.-
"For the vast majority of people, a 360 is and always will be cheaper than building and maintaining a decent gaming PC."
How so? I just proved that remark to be total and utter BS. Do the math, be honest with yourself and add it up. It's simply untrue. Also with all the magazines and websites that have Build-your-own-PC walk-throughs these days it takes literally 2-3 hours, tops, to build your brand-new system, so that's hardly a huge time-sink/hassle. Furthermore, the comments about buggy games and hardware issues are hardly accurate anymore, either. Most games come with auto-updaters and with great software out there like Gameshadow, that does all your patches for both hardware and software, PC gaming is easier than it's ever been, if anything.
Ironically it's console gaming that has been stealing the limelight for buggy games as of late - with games like the Wii version of GH not providing Stereo sound (and gamers having to MAIL IN their game discs to get a replacement) or the recent Bully SE fiasco, or now the Super Smash Bros. Brawl problem - it's hardly a PC-only issue anymore.
So I'd say there's by FAR a definitive cost-comparison that could be made between (at least) those 2 platforms.
-
-
-
-
While I can appreciate your opinion, I can't help but think that it is severely flawed. As others have stated, when it comes down to it, the PS3 and 360 are equal and neither one really has a major advantage over the other. (No, regardless of what some might say, the PS3 having BR does not make it a superior GAMING machine.) Add to that, the rather tiring reference about 360 games coming to the PC is a very weak argument that just comes off sounding like a lame fan-boy comment. People buy consoles because of the benefits/strengths of consoles. They don't buy consoles to have them compared/compete with PCs. I have all three consoles and several PCs. I also have some of the same games on PC that I do for the consoles, the fact is that the majority of the titles that come to the PC differ from their console counterparts in their feel/look. Bottom line, if you are a true gamer and have the means, all systems have their strengths/weaknesses and should all be enjoyed.
-
Back under your bridge troll.
-
front page commenters are the worst
-
Shouldn't your name be McTrolly?
-
I always think of the PS3 as RETRO
take that bitch.
-
