• 68 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by Armoes (64 posts) -

In the past I've picked up new game consoles after their first price drop. But sometimes I've walked around Costco and seen great deals towards the end of a system's life. Then again, it can be fun to get them on or near day one.

What's your strategy / opinion?

#2 Posted by believer258 (11637 posts) -

I say give it two years. Enough time for good exclusives, a price drop, and bug fixes, but not so much that you miss it's heyday. In fact, I'd say that two years is just in time for a console's heyday.

#3 Posted by jeffrud (382 posts) -

I bought a Wii in Jaunary of this year, a DSi XL in May, a Gamecube in July, and will probably pick up a PS3 once its successor is announced. When Kissenger asked Zhou Enlai what he thought about the French Revolution, Zhou's response was, "It's too early to tell."

#4 Posted by Oscar__Explosion (2197 posts) -

If you don't want it right away 2 - 3 years.

#5 Posted by Klei (1768 posts) -

Day one. That's when it matters the most, at least to me. Afterwards, you pretty much won't care for the launch titles you might have missed, since their quality will be way below current standards. There's no buzz for a console two years later, and as a gamer, I just can't wait years to play my exclusives.

But hey, if you're patient, then wait. If you can, that is.

#6 Posted by phampire (281 posts) -

When it has games you want to play. I have never been an early adopter, all consoles will have price drops and revisions. But ultimately the availability of good games will determine when I buy one.

#7 Edited by EpicSteve (6471 posts) -

I always buy mine launch day because I'm crazy. But 1-2 years seems like the sweet spot, that isn't a blanket idea though. It depends on how into games you are. I'm sure there will be plenty of folks picking up 360s this year. Hell, when I worked at GameStop 2 years ago, people were still buying PS2s. Regardless, modern consoles show it takes about a year for the games to start taking advantage of the new tech and for the 1st parties to find their footing.

#8 Posted by McGhee (6094 posts) -

When there are games on it worth playing, obviously.

#9 Edited by Fredchuckdave (5339 posts) -

First price drop is fine as long as you've got a selection of games you want to buy, when you're buying a new console you generally want at least 10 games to look forward to that are objectively good. In the case of the PS2 this was sometime in 2002-2003, in the case of the PS3/360 it was around the end of 2009, then they proceeded to have the best two years of the generation and this mediocre year. For the original X Box there literally aren't 10 good enough games, for the Gamecube there were a lot of good first party exclusives and almost nothing else with the amazing exception of Resident Evil 4.

Never, ever buy a console at launch unless you've got money to burn but even then it'd be really depressing relative to just playing whatever excellent games you missed in the previous generation. Launch titles and near launch titles are almost universally dreadful though you do have the stellar exception of Mario 64 (Resistance: Fall of Man is also decent).

When I bought a PS3 mid 2010 I bought each of the following: Uncharted 2 (still by far the best game I've played this generation, though Dark Souls is a close second and The Witcher 2 is probably better but I played that on PC), Assassin's Creed 2, Resistance 1, MGS4, Bioshock, Final Fantasy XIII (I liked it because it was difficult), Arkham Asylum, DMC4, and God of War III. I also received a copy of Killzone 2 from my brother. I bought Demon's Souls a few months later but suffice to say I had 300+ hours of enjoyment from those games and this is how I was able to justify purchasing the new system; if you're buying a system on the prospect of eventually getting that enjoyment its quite a downer by comparison. Oh, maybe this new game that comes out won't suck this time! Hint: Chances are it will for the first 2-3 years of development, that's just how it goes.

Games that were released late in cycle: Final Fantasy 3, Super Metroid, Chrono Trigger, Vagrant Story, Valkyrie Profile 2, Rogue Galaxy, Resident Evil 4, God of War I and II, Uncharted 3, Dark Souls, Arkham City, the list goes on and on, if I were to make a top 10 list for any generation of consoles it would be difficult to find a list not almost entirely composed of latter half of the cycle games.

#10 Posted by RE_Player1 (7549 posts) -

Different factors for different folks. For me I usually wait for the first real price drop or revision of the hardware.

#11 Posted by ArbitraryWater (11477 posts) -

After the first price drop or hardware revision. By either of those times, there will usually be enough reason to buy the system without you having to make stupid justifications to yourself.

#12 Posted by Mesklinite (804 posts) -

Wii I had gotten day 1. It was great, worth it in the sense that it was sold out for over a year. Games were meh but a cool party tool. Xbox I got 3-4 years after launch. It was cool. This time around I'll get the next xbox on launch day and I'll wait for deals on the Wii-U so probably 2-3 years since the Wii didn't really impress me.

#13 Posted by mikeeegeee (1552 posts) -

Once it produces something I have to play. N64 was Goldeneye, Xbox was an instant buy because of Halo, 360 I waited until Gears 1.

#14 Posted by Strife777 (1503 posts) -

For me day 1 or as soon as I can when it comes to ''main'' consoles. With handhelds I tend to wait a little bit, until enough interesting games are out and the price drops a little.

#15 Posted by frankfartmouth (1016 posts) -

I usually wait about a year or two. I bought the Atari Jaguar at launch. That pretty much taught me my lesson. There are so many more practical reasons to hold out a little while. However, I do sometimes miss that electric feeling of having a brand new rig on day one, even if the launch games are shit and the thing is buggy as hell.

#16 Posted by crithon (3081 posts) -

I know this sounds odd, but 3 years in is usually my ideal time to come in. Prices are reasonable, a large enough library so there isn't a dry season waiting for something and you can always barrow a game from a friend he's bored with.

#17 Posted by iam3green (14390 posts) -

1 or 2 years. whenever the price drops. i kind of feel like it's a good spot. it fixes the console bugs and such.

#18 Posted by joshthebear (2700 posts) -

I'd say 1 - 2 years. Give developers time to get an understanding of the system and start producing quality stuff.

#19 Posted by RedCream (704 posts) -

Give it 3 years so that you can dig deep to the massive library and all the kinks are already ironed out.

#20 Edited by TyCobb (1945 posts) -

If you have the money, then as close to the launch day as possible will net you the most fun. Like mentioned -- you may miss some fun launch day titles that were super fun when they launched, but are no longer even worth the time of day because they just aren't up to par of the current standards (*cough* Perfect Dark Zero) or the online portion is now dead even though you could have potentially spent hours upon hours playing it. But, I guess ignorance really is bliss if you don't know what you are missing.

It is kind of a double edged sword though when it comes picking up a system at launch -- you get to have the system right then and there with some potentially amazing games, but it is also possible that there aren't any real interesting games for a year or so. N64 launched with only 2 titles and took a while to start getting new games, but I had so much fun with Mario 64 and dumped so many hours into that I didn't care. 360 had something like 15 launch titles and even though I got mine 6 months after launch, there was a period where there wasn't a single game I was really interested in. When it had its RROD, I kind of didn't care except that I wasn't able to stream music from my computer through my receiver with the 360. It was right after the warranty expired and right before Microsoft extended it so I figured I was S.O.L. and just took it apart to disconnect the DVD drive in order to at least get into the dashboard. It wasn't until the Elite version came out and Forza 2 (think it was 2, maybe it was 1) was packaged with it that I finally bought it again. At that time it had finally accrued enough games in its library that I could justify actually owning a 360.

So like I said, it seems to be that if you have the money, there isn't really any harm in just grabbing the system at launch. Especially when there's a chance that they will take features out of it later on (PS3's PS2 backwards compatibility).

#21 Posted by StingerMK2 (386 posts) -

for the Dreamcast, Gamecube, Wii and Xbox 360, i got them at launch, next console, probably Xbox, im gonna hold off for a while, maybe a year or 2, depends on the games really, im gonna stick to PC gaming for that time period, and if no games impress me on the Xbox, i might stick to PC indefinitely

#22 Posted by corruptsaves (214 posts) -

Like other people have said I would go for 2 years as well. Enough time for the games to get better and sort out some of the jank. I don't think I would want to wait longer than that. But if you can maybe until the next hardware version comes out. You can bet that there is going to be something wrong with the first version of a console to temp all existing owners to want to upgrade.

Also only take the plunge when there is enough already out that you want to play. But it will be temping...

#23 Posted by adam1808 (1373 posts) -

How long did it take the PS3 to have good games? 2 years? That.

#24 Posted by JoeyRavn (4949 posts) -

I usually wait a couple of years before buying a game consoles, and sometimes even after it's been replaced by a new one. I bought my 360 about two years ago, which meant that I had a great catalog of games at very low prices.

Nintendo handhelds are an exception, though. I tend to buy them pretty early in their life cycle.

#25 Posted by Mcfart (1549 posts) -

Yup, although everyone wants to see new consoles, most of us won't be getting them for a year or 2. Instead we'll be looking at the cool new stuff they have and wishing we had them as the Bombcast guys gush over them.

Still though, there's like a bagillion games to keep one occupied this gen, and the graphics quality of the 360/PS3 haven't aged nearly as badly as the PS2 did, so games aren't an eyesore to look at.

#26 Edited by John1912 (1830 posts) -

Personally I usually cant hold off buying the main 2 long as there are a couple of good launch titles worth having. Ive always been a avid gamer. I feel that large part of a games appeal and experience is playing it when it first comes out. If you wait the game loses its shine as the graphics and mechanics age, its just not the same experience a year or more down the road.

If that doesnt matter to you, then a year, or first price drop are prob good options. I say just get one when you want one, and if fits into your budget.

#27 Edited by TorMasturba (1095 posts) -

For the most up-to-date and continual fun? Right as soon as the console releases.

For saving cash? Right at the end of the current gen.

For middle of the boat? 2 years in when there's several great games out at a great lower/low price and the developers have then got a good grasp on the new current tech and it's capabilities.

For me I got an Xbox 360 straight away, because that was where all the games were at. I got a second hand PS3 three years after it's release that wouldn't go online because the asshole that sold it to me on Amazon had got the console banned from PSN usage(fortunate because I mostly got it to play games I couldn't get access to on the 360). Then last of all I got the two handhelds as the new generation of handhelds has just come out(This being a case in point of my above answers) and the Wii was last on my list for super cheap purchase just to play those games like legend of Zelda and Mario galaxy 1+2, the last story etc.

It's like will from tested always used to say about your own tech purchases, adapted in this case for the context of games; "Don't get the console that makes lots of promises about what it can do and what games are possibly going to be on it, get what looks great for you personally and what will definitely be on it."

Just to make some of you laugh, I made a total wrong turn where my phone is concerned, as I got a windows phone 7, which is abound with heavenly promises that it never fully delivers on.

The next phone I get will be one of the other two, depending on factors of the current marketplace at that time. Lesson learned.

I'm now 24 and my current games interests is solely pc based, rpg's mixed with really weird obscure games like the ones drew and dave like.

I feel like maybe I'm not as obsessed to get the latest games "right here, right now!", and would possibly be totally okay with waiting a year or two before I got a console, depending on which console games also come out on PC being a big factor on how early I get a new console.

Do what's right for you duder!

#28 Posted by juice8367 (439 posts) -

6 months to a year for me. Thats when most games start to take advantage of the hardware.

#29 Posted by TorMasturba (1095 posts) -

@Mcfart said:

Yup, although everyone wants to see new consoles, most of us won't be getting them for a year or 2. Instead we'll be looking at the cool new stuff they have and wishing we had them as the Bombcast guys gush over them.

Still though, there's like a bagillion games to keep one occupied this gen, and the graphics quality of the 360/PS3 haven't aged nearly as badly as the PS2 did, so games aren't an eyesore to look at.

Wait until the next gen comes out and 360/PS3 graphics will start to look terrible ha ha... Wii U is excluded from this comment until otherwise proved it us worth our time.

#30 Posted by SomeJerk (3144 posts) -

When it has at least one game you really really want on it,  or immediately if you're really bored and can spare the money. Those are two reasons to buy consoles, and Tokyo Jungle was responsible for a load of PS3 sales!

#31 Posted by GunstarRed (5030 posts) -

A year usually, that's usually when you start seeing what the system can produce.

#32 Posted by Hippie_Genocide (537 posts) -

I jump in day 1 as long as I'm even vaguely interested in what the console is providing. So much fun at the Dreamcast launch (9.9.99 Never Forget), and the PS2 launch...the anticipation of new consoles was great. The leap in technology is less now so I don't get the same level of excitement.

#33 Edited by Pr1mus (3811 posts) -

When the first games you really want to play start coming out.

In the PS3's case that was April 08 for GTA IV and MGS4 a few weeks later.

Also hardware reliability. That wasn't really a concern before this gen. It is one now.

Online
#34 Posted by Aetheldod (3511 posts) -

2 years ... by then games begin to be awesome

#35 Posted by crusader8463 (14412 posts) -

Unless I fall into some money to burn or hear about them removing some vital feature going forward, like PS3 backwards compatibility in early versions, then I wait a year or two or until there are at least 4-5 games I can only play on that platform and no where else.

Ideally the best time to buy one is once it's over and the next iteration has come out as by that point it's all super cheap. For example; I got a Wii and like 20 games for around $400 last year. If I had of bought all that stuff new it would have easily been well over $1500-$2000

#36 Posted by AlexW00d (6185 posts) -

@phampire said:

When it has games you want to play. I have never been an early adopter, all consoles will have price drops and revisions. But ultimately the availability of good games will determine when I buy one.

#37 Posted by Rays_Gaming_Rants (64 posts) -

I would say right when the system gets a good library, if you have the money for full price. Launches are typically lackluster, but if you give a system a good 4-8 months, the selection available becomes infinitely better.

#38 Posted by crusader8463 (14412 posts) -

Another factor for me is my backlog. As someone who has a huge god dam back log if the new consoles are not backwards compatible then I probably won't have the space for a new one let alone a free port to plug into the TV. Ideally the new ones will be 100% backwards compatible so I can just sell the current one and replace it with the new one and keep playing the old games on that. Other wise I will probably put off buying the new ones until I can burn through that back log.

#39 Posted by kgb0515 (411 posts) -

After being burned by the RROD a few times with the 360, I feel like I should hold off for a while. The problem is that I have no spending filter in my brain when it comes to games, and I will probably waste a bunch of money at launch for the next Microsoft and Sony systems. Although I didn't buy a PS3 until about a year or more after launch because they were really overpriced with the whole bluray thing. Still....I'm a damn sucker.

#40 Posted by Demoskinos (14562 posts) -

I'd say a year. Although I'm dumb and I'll dive in right away. And that is how I'm on my 6th 360....

#41 Edited by AndrewB (7492 posts) -

When a game hits that I need to have. I bought a 360 almost exactly a year after launch when Gears of War hit (and it came with Burnout: Revenge for free). I bought a Gamecube for Wind Waker. I asked for a Gameboy for Christmas when Mario Land hit. You get the idea.

I feel like if you're going to be one of those people who waits years for a price drop, though, you're wasting time. Suck up that cost and have the system years before you otherwise would. If playing games is your hobby, it's worth it.

I mean, there are people just now buying a current-gen console for the first time, just on the cusp of the next hardware. I guess I'm just too much of a cutting-edge type of person, because that seems insane to me. I buy older consoles for the best titles in their libraries, but I also want to play topical games living up to the full potential that modern technology allows for. There's a reason that my 360 has only been turned on to check out the last couple of rounds of updates, but not really to actually play a game (besides Mass Effect 3 this year).

#42 Edited by billyhoush (1192 posts) -

The first hardware revision and/or price drop. You get superior hardware that will last until the end of the gen at a lower price plus a backlog of cheap AAA titles plus some soon to be released games that are mid gen and properly developed.

#43 Posted by Village_Guy (2495 posts) -

After the first or second price drop in my opinion.

#44 Posted by robcat09 (48 posts) -

Day 1,baby! Gotta be a part of the culture.

#45 Posted by fisk0 (3849 posts) -

Tail end I think, means it has a large selection of titles at reasonable prices, and generally hardware and design revisions will have made the machines both cheaper and more stable by then (with exceptions for PS2 and PS3 that lost hard drive support and PS2 backwards compatibility with later revisions respectively).

#46 Posted by ShaggE (6333 posts) -

Me, it'll be as soon as I can afford it. I like to switch every generation, so Sony's got me when the Orbis comes around, unless MS *really* blows my mind with the Durango.

#47 Posted by The_Nubster (2047 posts) -

@believer258 said:

I say give it two years. Enough time for good exclusives, a price drop, and bug fixes, but not so much that you miss it's heyday. In fact, I'd say that two years is just in time for a console's heyday.

This is exactly my thought process. I like to get them early, just so I can form an opinion on them and rub my obvious superiority in others faces, but two years is a good point to jump in.

#48 Posted by TheMasterDS (2015 posts) -

As soon as its worth buying.

#49 Posted by evanbower (1210 posts) -

The beginning.

#50 Posted by Fattony12000 (7053 posts) -

I still want a PSX and a Panasonic Q. So, about a decade after they come out?