Rumor:Wii U to be priced at $299

[mr deez]

Way too expensive in the uk. nigh on 300 quid at a time when the next xbox and play station will likely have had their first teasers really won't work..

 

[Deleted User]

Still a home console will be behind a pc for years, there's just no way they can budget them to be cheap.

Not like home consoles NEED to keep up.
The PS3 runs some pretty gorgeous games (FF13?) with its "outdated hardware".
Consoles are more for simplicity sake than anything. In all my years using a console, not once have I gotten weird annoying errors that prevent me from playing a game. I don't need to update drivers, install random fixes, do workarounds, solve compatibility issues, etc. Plus they're cheap for what they offer.

I still prefer my PC since it's better overall and I can deal with the problems, but yeah. I do get the appeal of a console, since I used to be a console gamer till I got a good PC.

Even if consoles use "outdated" hardware, as long as they're more powerful then they are now, they'll do just fine next gen.

Console games get covered up by blur effects

FF 13 looks alright from far away, but horrible at up close

Console games run at 30 FPS 95% of the time, and barely break the 600P Barrier

I'm tired of people saying that end game computers cost 600+, when a TV+ console is more expensive...


For about 600 dollars you can build yourself a gaming computer that can run games @ TRUE 1080p + 60 fps

 

[BORTZ]

I wonder of the $300 price tag coupled with relatively unimpressive hardware is enough to fool grandparents and fat Americans with dreams of loosing weight in front of their tv to get them to buy this new Nintendo nonsense.

 

[KingVamp]

That said this rumour is still bullshit.

I probably know the reason,but why?

Let say this is true. For some reason, they think if Sony/Microsoft release it 2012-2013 there hardware will completely
beat out the wii u. I wonder what the price will be for their next console?

I also want to point out, they could be selling at a loss.

 

[Hells Malice]

Still a home console will be behind a pc for years, there's just no way they can budget them to be cheap.

Not like home consoles NEED to keep up.
The PS3 runs some pretty gorgeous games (FF13?) with its "outdated hardware".
Consoles are more for simplicity sake than anything. In all my years using a console, not once have I gotten weird annoying errors that prevent me from playing a game. I don't need to update drivers, install random fixes, do workarounds, solve compatibility issues, etc. Plus they're cheap for what they offer.

I still prefer my PC since it's better overall and I can deal with the problems, but yeah. I do get the appeal of a console, since I used to be a console gamer till I got a good PC.

Even if consoles use "outdated" hardware, as long as they're more powerful then they are now, they'll do just fine next gen.

Console games get covered up by blur effects

FF 13 looks alright from far away, but horrible at up close

Console games run at 30 FPS 95% of the time, and barely break the 600P Barrier

I'm tired of people saying that end game computers cost 600+, when a TV+ console is more expensive...


For about 600 dollars you can build yourself a gaming computer that can run games @ TRUE 1080p + 60 fps

You don't factor in the cost of a TV with a console, derpfactory. Chances are you'll already have one for, y'know, tv and shit. Not a lot of people go out of their way to buy a TV with their console unless they really have excess funds.

A good PC monitor costs around $200. My 24" monitor is gorgeous and cost $220. I guarantee you wont get a GOOD HD monitor when spending about $600 for a high-end PC. Thing about PC monitors however is that you likely WILL buy one with a PC since you...well, wont have any use for a monitor without a PC. Unlike a TV without a console.

Hell you can pretend all you want that a PC is cheaper, but they aren't. At all. They're an investment, and you keep paying into that investment as the years go by. With a console you buy it once (bar unexpected failures that any electronics are capable of) and then buy the next one 7 years from then. Unless you want to commit to a not-necessary upgrade like a slim model or a bigger HDD.

Oh and you aren't supposed to sit 5 inches from a big screen TV. If you sit at a realistic distance, yeah, games look gorgeous on a console if done right. FF13 looks fantastic. Could it look even better on a PC assuming you hooked it up to a huge TV? Of course, but that's because you pay more for it to do so.

By the way you really don't need to hump PC leg to my posts. I'm a PC gamer, i'm just not a blind idiot who dismisses consoles as obsolete.

EDIT: typo fixes

 

[Wizerzak]

Way too expensive in the uk. nigh on 300 quid at a time when the next xbox and play station will likely have had their first teasers really won't work..

£187, about the same as the Wii.

That's actually quite cheap IMO, just a bit more than the Wii (at launch) which is understandable taking into account the better technology and inflation.

 

[Wizerzak]

Still a home console will be behind a pc for years, there's just no way they can budget them to be cheap.

Not like home consoles NEED to keep up.
The PS3 runs some pretty gorgeous games (FF13?) with its "outdated hardware".
Consoles are more for simplicity sake than anything. In all my years using a console, not once have I gotten weird annoying errors that prevent me from playing a game. I don't need to update drivers, install random fixes, do workarounds, solve compatibility issues, etc. Plus they're cheap for what they offer.

I still prefer my PC since it's better overall and I can deal with the problems, but yeah. I do get the appeal of a console, since I used to be a console gamer till I got a good PC.

Even if consoles use "outdated" hardware, as long as they're more powerful then they are now, they'll do just fine next gen.

Console games get covered up by blur effects

FF 13 looks alright from far away, but horrible at up close

Console games run at 30 FPS 95% of the time, and barely break the 600P Barrier

I'm tired of people saying that end game computers cost 600+, when a TV+ console is more expensive...


For about 600 dollars you can build yourself a gaming computer that can run games @ TRUE 1080p + 60 fps

You don't factor in the cost of a TV with a console, derpfactory. Chances are you'll already have one for, y'know, tv and shit. Not a lot of people go out of their way to buy a TV with their console unless they really have excess funds.

A good PC monitor costs around $200 for a good one. My 24" monitor is gorgeous and cost $220. I guarantee you wont get a GOOD HD monitor when spending about $600 for a high-end PC. Thing about PC monitors however is that you likely WILL buy one with a PC since you...well, wont have any use for a monitor without a PC. Unlike a TV without a console.

Hell you can pretend all you want that a PC is cheaper, but they aren't. At all. They're an investment, and you keep paying into that investment as the years go by. With a console you buy it once (bar unexpected failures that any electronics are capable of) and then buy the next one 7 years from then. Unless you want to commit to a not-necessary upgrade like a slim model or a bigger HDD.

And people buy PCs solely for gaming? No. Nearly everyone owns a PC nowadays, almost as many as own a TV, it's become another standard thing in a home. If you spend $400 (probably more) on a standard PC (that everyone would have, just for work, school, internet etc.) then the extra $200 to make it up to $600 is less than buying a console. And even if a PC does cost more in upgrades etc. then it's not by much and I'd much rather pay that little bit extra for a much better experience.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

And people buy PCs solely for gaming? No. Nearly everyone owns a PC nowadays, almost as many as own a TV, it's become another standard thing in a home. If you spend $400 (probably more) on a standard PC (that everyone would have, just for work, school, internet etc.) then the extra $200 to make it up to $600 is less than buying a console. And even if a PC does cost more in upgrades etc. then it's not by much and I'd much rather pay that little bit extra for a much better experience.

A $600 PC is still not top of the line. Top of the line PCs are at least over $1000 if you want godlike specs. Plus most any $600 PC (that you built, mind you, not a prebuilt one) will probably become outdated a lot faster than a console or expensive PC.

Also, consoles are for more than just gaming nowadays. Not as much as PCs, but I spend as much time watching Netflix on my Xbox as I do playing games.

 

[Hells Malice]

How did we go from the cost of a gaming PC to the cost of a standard home computer?
Of course a standard home computer is going to be cheap. You can go buy a notebook for like $150, but you're not going to be playing much on it.

We're discussing gaming PCs not media streaming and browsing.

A $400 can, what, play minecraft and runescape?
EDIT: actually wait I forgot Minecraft is (or was?) pretty intense on a PC.

 

[Deleted User]

How did we go from the cost of a gaming PC to the cost of a standard home computer?
Of course a standard home computer is going to be cheap. You can go buy a notebook for like $150, but you're not going to be playing much on it.

We're discussing gaming PCs not media streaming and browsing.

A $400 can, what, play minecraft and runescape?

My sister has a 500 dollar pc, and can play just about any current gen game on medium settings.

 

[Wizerzak]

And people buy PCs solely for gaming? No. Nearly everyone owns a PC nowadays, almost as many as own a TV, it's become another standard thing in a home. If you spend $400 (probably more) on a standard PC (that everyone would have, just for work, school, internet etc.) then the extra $200 to make it up to $600 is less than buying a console. And even if a PC does cost more in upgrades etc. then it's not by much and I'd much rather pay that little bit extra for a much better experience.

A $600 PC is still not top of the line. Top of the line PCs are at least over $1000 if you want godlike specs. Plus most any $600 PC (that you built, mind you, not a prebuilt one) will probably become outdated a lot faster than a console or expensive PC.

Oh yeah... I'm getting the conversion rates confused.

Still, my point is that gaming PCs don't cost as much as people think if you look at it as a 'value-added on top of a normal home PC' point of view.

On topic: What was the original price of a Wii in the US? It can't be that different to $299.

 

[Qtis]

£187, about the same as the Wii.

Just like the 3DS was $249 and 249€ and about 219£? :I

 

[Hells Malice]

How did we go from the cost of a gaming PC to the cost of a standard home computer?
Of course a standard home computer is going to be cheap. You can go buy a notebook for like $150, but you're not going to be playing much on it.

We're discussing gaming PCs not media streaming and browsing.

A $400 can, what, play minecraft and runescape?

My sister has a 500 dollar pc, and can play just about any current gen game on medium settings.

A console plays PC games on around low settings in 95% of cases, and cost around $250 to do so. From a strictly gaming perspective, you can double that to play on medium settings according to you.


PCs are more expensive. This is a FACT. They CAN run things better, and that's because of the price difference, and like I said, we also throw out a ton of convenience. Consoles are just plain convenient. Anyone can use a console. You can teach grandma to use a console in 10 seconds. "Turn it on, insert game, play game."

Consoles have their merits. Just like PCs do. Also i'm not saying PCs cost THAT MUCH. I mean I could afford a solid new PC within a month working minimum wage. But in general, yeah, they're a lot more expensive than a console.

 

[Wizerzak]

£187, about the same as the Wii.

Just like the 3DS was $249 and 249€ and about 219£? :I

OK, it's not gonna be much more than £200 which is still pretty close to the Wii.

Launch price for the Wii was $250
Apparent price for the Wii U $300
That's only a $50 (£30) difference, that's not that bad.

 

[muckers]

I wouldn't pay more than £250 to be an early adopter.

If it launches with an original Zelda game and a couple of decent 3rd party titles, I'd probably go up to £300. But I love me some Zelda and would jump at the chance to play it in true 1080p as soon as humanly possible.

 

[DiscostewSM]

Oh and you aren't supposed to sit 5 inches from a big screen TV. If you sit at a realistic distance, yeah, games look gorgeous on a console if done right. FF13 looks fantastic. Could it look even better on a PC assuming you hooked it up to a huge TV? Of course, but that's because you pay more for it to do so.

But that's why people think 4k resolutions are needed. They've got to have that detail at 5 inches from the screen.

 

[Qtis]

But that's why people think 4k resolutions are needed. They've got to have that detail at 5 inches from the screen.

Actually 4K = bigger screen possibilities with the same resolution per cm/inch. Technically people don't play close to a screen, but you have to admit that a HD game looks better on a 32" instead of a 55" if you happen to be even a bit closer to the TV. After the screen size is about the size of a normal wall, lets say 200cm x 300cm, with about the same pixel per inch ratio as with a 32" 1080p TV, making the resolution bigger wouldn't matter. Before that happens, making better TVs will be an option for all console makers and the likes

 

[tbgtbg]

$299 isn't pricing it "aggressively". Pricing at at $199 would be pricing it "aggressively". Not that I'm saying I expect they would price it that low, but there's nothing aggressive about pricing it at the same price that 360 (core) launched at and $50 more than Wii itself launched at. If anything a $299 price is utterly mundane.

 

[Hells Malice]

$299 isn't pricing it "aggressively". Pricing at at $199 would be pricing it "aggressively". Not that I'm saying I expect they would price it that low, but there's nothing aggressive about pricing it at the same price that 360 (core) launched at and $50 more than Wii itself launched at. If anything a $299 price is utterly mundane.

Gamers sure are cheap these days.
A new PS3/360 still costs around $250. The Wii U will have similar hardware, and not to mention will be brand new. Considering the name alone could sell a million units, it'd be a good price if it was $300.
Though I still doubt this rumor. I'm expecting it it to be more.

 

[fishykipper]

Like £189.99 here in the UK. Id say thats very cheap for a new Gen console. Was expecting the price reveal to be over £250, which is still reasonable.