PSN Down

[Ayepecks]

@ rajputwarrior: Not really surprising -- they had to expect that would happen. I'm sure it's not really an exceptionally large amount, though.

[FiB3R]

@ rajputwarrior: Not really surprising -- they had to expect that would happen. I'm sure it's not really an exceptionally large amount, though.

They're saying it's doubled, I would call that an exceptionally large amount.

[Ayepecks]

They're saying it's doubled, I would call that an exceptionally large amount.

I'm willing to bet the average number of trade-ins isn't high to begin with, though. So I'm sure it's still not an exceptional amount.

[Exhaale]

This is so frustrating for people who rely on PSN to play with other people, not everyone has gamer buddies with similar skill levels to play with... :whistle:

[Miuku.]

They're saying it's doubled, I would call that an exceptionally large amount.

Double from what?

"Introducing new shampoo, it's now four times as effective".

[jerzdawg]

Double from what?

"Introducing new shampoo, it's now four times as effective".

4x's!! that is a shampoo breakthrough!! please.. I must have the name of this cleansing giant!!

OT - I will be checking out gamestop to see if any cheap PS3s can be purchased do to this huge increase in trade-ins..

[shakey]

Double from what?

"Introducing new shampoo, it's now four times as effective".

Double from the 1 person who traded it in last week :p

[FiB3R]

Double from what?"Introducing new shampoo, it's now four times as effective".

Double from the 1 person who traded it in last week :p

haw haw :rolleyes:

The fact that it has doubled is exceptional, regardless of the base amount.

[Ayepecks]

The fact that it has doubled is exceptional, regardless of the base amount.

No, it's really not.

If you open up a store and are doing so poorly that you only sell $400 worth of merchandise a day, when you need to be selling at least $5,000, is it going to be exceptional if you sell $800 worth? Like I already said, Most stores don't get many trade-ins anyway. So if it goes from 2 or 3 trade-ins in one day to 4 to 6 trade-ins in one day, is that exceptional to you? Because I don't see what's exceptional about that.

How many trade-ins of console hardware a day do you think a place like GameStop (just for instance) averages? Because it's not a lot. I doubt it's any different in the UK, either.

[x9248]

Doesn't matter what the base value is, a 100% increase is still drastic. Maybe not newsworthy but increase is still increase when it comes to economics.

[shakey]

Doesn't matter what the base value is, a 100% increase is still drastic. Maybe not newsworthy but increase is still increase when it comes to economics.

No it's not. just because you use value 100% doesn't instantly make it drastic. If games were 5$ each, and they went up 100% to 10$ each, that isn't drastic. Percents don't equate to too much depending on the initial value you start at. If PS3's where be traded in at like 100 a week, and then it went to 200, that would be drastic. Because it is a significant actual number, not percent. While it is still 100%, it was a lot larger base than if it was from 1 console a week to 2.

Or another analogy. A game had originally 1 enemy on the screen for you to fight. The next game, they say, We drastically increased the enemies on screen by 100%, to 2. Would you view that as drastic?

[soniqstylz]

4x's!! that is a shampoo breakthrough!! please.. I must have the name of this cleansing giant!!

OT - I will be checking out gamestop to see if any cheap PS3s can be purchased do to this huge increase in trade-ins..

Saw somewhere that GS was offering $200 if you trade in a phatty for a slim.

[x9248]

No it's not. just because you use value 100% doesn't instantly make it drastic. If games were 5$ each, and they went up 100% to 10$ each, that isn't drastic. Percents don't equate to too much depending on the initial value you start at. If PS3's where be traded in at like 100 a week, and then it went to 200, that would be drastic. Because it is a significant actual number, not percent. While it is still 100%, it was a lot larger base than if it was from 1 console a week to 2.

You're too intent on the actual numbers... you need to look at it from a business point of view.

If you owned a restaurant, would you rather have 1 family dine-in or 2? Yes both numbers are low and quite sucky if you want to actually make money, but one of them is clearly better...

[shakey]

You're too intent on the actual numbers... you need to look at it from a business point of view.

If you owned a restaurant, would you rather have 1 family dine-in or 2? Yes both numbers are low and quite sucky if you want to actually make money, but one of them is clearly better...

Well, in honesty, we are just being anal of the use of the words "huge" and "drastic". Yes, it is important to have more, but lets not go over emphasizing the importance.

[x9248]

Well, in honesty, we are just being anal of the use of the words "huge" and "drastic". Yes, it is important to have more, but lets not go over emphasizing the importance.

Considering we are talking PS3's, a very expensive technological device, the economy is affected even if it went from 5 traded in a week to 10. We're talking 100's of dollars that a business is dishing out. Of course they then take them and resale them at a huge profit, but then that begs the question of who is going to buy them?

Is it drastic in the sense that it will affect the PS community of over 70 million (or whatever)? Absolutely not lol.

[shakey]

I think that the gamers who traded in their systems made a more drastic decision. But to each their own. PSN will be up soon, and in the mean time, it makes for a great streaming device and bluray player. And single player games have been getting much love lately, which is a good thing since I had been neglecting many of mine. lol.

[Amarok]

All that really tells me is that the severely impatient people are no longer going to be my problem in multiplayer games. :D

[Ayepecks]

You're too intent on the actual numbers... you need to look at it from a business point of view.

If you owned a restaurant, would you rather have 1 family dine-in or 2? Yes both numbers are low and quite sucky if you want to actually make money, but one of them is clearly better...

Look at it from a business point of view? You've been doing anything but. You said that it "[d]oesn't matter what the base value is, a 100% increase is still drastic." Finance and accounting would disagree with you on that -- the base number is probably the most important aspect of the scenario we're discussing.

[x9248]

Look at it from a business point of view? You've been doing anything but. You said that it "[d]oesn't matter what the base value is, a 100% increase is still drastic." Finance and accounting would disagree with you on that -- the base number is probably the most important aspect of the scenario we're discussing.

What is your point? You quote something I said to try to prove something and yet you've made no counter argument whatsoever.

In terms of PROFIT, yes base numbers matter. However you can't even reach profit without sales. 2 sales is better than 1, period.

I understand maybe "drastic" was a bit embellished, semantics really. 100% (ie double) is nothing to pout about.

[FiB3R]

No, it's really not.

If you open up a store and are doing so poorly that you only sell $400 worth of merchandise a day, when you need to be selling at least $5,000, is it going to be exceptional if you sell $800 worth? Like I already said, Most stores don't get many trade-ins anyway. So if it goes from 2 or 3 trade-ins in one day to 4 to 6 trade-ins in one day, is that exceptional to you? Because I don't see what's exceptional about that.

How many trade-ins of console hardware a day do you think a place like GameStop (just for instance) averages? Because it's not a lot. I doubt it's any different in the UK, either.

You're just pulling those numbers out of your arse, but even so, 4 to 6 trade-ins per day, per store, up and down the country, that would be thousands, right? GAME has over 600 stores in the UK alone, not to mention all the other retailers.

So yes, over all, it would be a massive increase.

[Ayepecks]

What is your point? You quote something I said to try to prove something and yet you've made no counter argument whatsoever.

In terms of PROFIT, yes base numbers matter. However you can't even reach profit without sales. 2 sales is better than 1, period.

I understand maybe "drastic" was a bit embellished, semantics really. 100% (ie double) is nothing to pout about.

My preceding posts already addressed your point, so why do I need to make yet another counter argument? All you're trying to do is change the discussion into something it's not by distracting away from the issue of the overall amount of trade-ins. If two sales still aren't a lot, then that disproves your point, does it not? Because no one's arguing that two isn't more than one, but good straw man.

You're just pulling those numbers out of your arse, but even so, 4 to 6 trade-ins per day, per store, up and down the country, that would be thousands, right? GAME has over 600 stores in the UK alone, not to mention all the other retailers.

So yes, over all, it would be a massive increase.

One of my brothers works at GameStop. I'm pulling no numbers out of my ass, just giving an estimate that's on the high-end of the spectrum (which I had obviously erroneously assumed would satisfy you). Like I already stated, I can't speak for the entire industry (or even all GameStops across the country), but I can tell you that -- on a great day -- his particular store is lucky to get two of the same console traded in. It's not hard to make an educated guess that other stores aren't going to be much different. Furthermore, you're blatantly disregarding the context of the article. They use no empirical data -- they simply asked random store clerks what the impact had been. What do you think would be easier for them to say -- "yeah, we're getting twice as many" or "yeah, we've seen an increase of 23.74%, going from an average of 1.35 trade-ins per day to 1.67 trade-ins per day"? Let me paint the picture for you: the journalist was told to make a story on the topic, and that's what (s)he is doing by framing the article in the best possible manner to create a story. I had to do the exact same thing when I wrote for a newspaper.

And even if they were using empirical data, the double of one is two. If you go from one dollar to two dollars, it's still not a lot of money, now is it? Until you show me that they surveyed the 600 stores -- and not three or four -- I'm going to continue to state that this is not a drastic increase, as I stated before. Prove to me that there is a "massive increase" in the number of trade-ins of PS3s.

[FiB3R]

Is GameStop in the UK? No. Is the article about the UK? Yes. Your brother may as well work in McDonald's.

?We?re just ten days into the month and already we have an increase of 200 per cent in PS3s coming into the store compared to all of March."

Do you really think there would be a story if it went from 1 console to 2? Really?

Paint as many pictures as you like, condensing ****. I don't have to prove **** to you.

[Nick H. Supervisor]

Ignoring such terms as "huge" and "drastic" when it comes to the idea that the number of people handing in PS3's has doubled since the PSN outage, does no one else think those people people are idiots? I mean really, this isn't the end of PSN or online play. Not to mention the fact that just because there is no online gaming doesn't mean that the PS3 is then useless.

Eh, it doesn't affect me. I'll laugh at them later.

[Anarki]

My preceding posts already addressed your point, so why do I need to make yet another counter argument? All you're trying to do is change the discussion into something it's not by distracting away from the issue of the overall amount of trade-ins. If two sales still aren't a lot, then that disproves your point, does it not? Because no one's arguing that two isn't more than one, but good straw man.

One of my brothers works at GameStop. I'm pulling no numbers out of my ass, just giving an estimate that's on the high-end of the spectrum (which I had obviously erroneously assumed would satisfy you). Like I already stated, I can't speak for the entire industry (or even all GameStops across the country), but I can tell you that -- on a great day -- his particular store is lucky to get two of the same console traded in. It's not hard to make an educated guess that other stores aren't going to be much different. Furthermore, you're blatantly disregarding the context of the article. They use no empirical data -- they simply asked random store clerks what the impact had been. What do you think would be easier for them to say -- "yeah, we're getting twice as many" or "yeah, we've seen an increase of 23.74%, going from an average of 1.35 trade-ins per day to 1.67 trade-ins per day"? Let me paint the picture for you: the journalist was told to make a story on the topic, and that's what (s)he is doing by framing the article in the best possible manner to create a story. I had to do the exact same thing when I wrote for a newspaper.

And even if they were using empirical data, the double of one is two. If you go from one dollar to two dollars, it's still not a lot of money, now is it? Until you show me that they surveyed the 600 stores -- and not three or four -- I'm going to continue to state that this is not a drastic increase, as I stated before. Prove to me that there is a "massive increase" in the number of trade-ins of PS3s.

Yet, I bet you would be the first to moan if "gas" prices doubled...

[D. S. Veteran]

Ignoring such terms as "huge" and "drastic" when it comes to the idea that the number of people handing in PS3's has doubled since the PSN outage, does no one else think those people people are idiots? I mean really, this isn't the end of PSN or online play. Not to mention the fact that just because there is no online gaming doesn't mean that the PS3 is then useless.

Eh, it doesn't affect me. I'll laugh at them later.

In the Techspot piece, they say they mostly look, and I quote directly, "A retail employee at another store reported a similar trend of PS3 trade-ins, with many disgruntled Sony customers returning their console for an Xbox 360 -- especially the "hardcore online shooter crowd."" and "He also noted that those customers tend to be Black Ops or Modern Warfare 2 players."

Not really concerned about having less of those around the PSN spouting dumb crap through their mics.