Yet you question all of those people without knowing anything about them, or even more questionably, if they still exist.
Without no way of measuring their income you question what they do with it and accuse those people of basically doing it to support Sony or PD? Have you ever thought that, like most of the human race, they may well do this for their own motives and benefits?
It's still irrational if you earn a trillion dollars a year, it's just a trivial drop in the Scrooge McDuck pool of money that you own.
With my questioning of your rational, at least I have measurable data and the fact that you exist to back up my opinion of what I think you are doing with your time, you have neither of these things when you painted them all as "paying fan service" and question what they do with their money.
You didn't bother reading the thread where a person had described doing this exact thing shortly before I posted, did you?
These people exist.
On the other hand, you do have measurable data about me that you have massively overexaggerated. My post history is public. Try actually looking at it.
Well lets look at the odds from those users points of view then. They obviously enjoyed the last game enough to go out and buy the system for the next. Regardless of what you and I think about the rational in doing so, I would have to say the odds are looking in their favour, would you not agree?
You can question the rational of this, sure, but you cannot and should not label them as some sort of blind loyalists who are pissing their money away when you clearly have no clue or no way to measure their motives and income.
You seem to misunderstand this whole thing. Income doesn't change whether it's irrational. Motives don't change whether it's irrational. How much they would enjoy it doesn't change whether it's irrational.
You can get the same outcome by purchasing a console the day before GTS releases, with significantly less risk. That's why it's irrational.
Speaking of rolling the dice, remember PCars? Did you not roll the dice as I did myself on a company with no experience in the simulation market? Do you not see the hypocrisy in what you are saying now? You need to detach yourself from your own views and experiences on a product when talking about people who clearly had different ones than yourself.
Yes, I did. But SMS didn't have no experience in the simulation market. They were fundamentally Blimey through a few name changes, and had GTR 2 under their belt.
Although even if they had no experience, there are a couple of differences. One is that if people had not supported pCARS, the final game wouldn't have existed. That's not the case with GTS.
The second is that the moment I paid money, I got a product that was playable. It was largely a janky hot lap simulator when I got into it, but I did have a product. Like when I got into the AC early access, I decided that I was happy spending that amount of money for the product that was on offer at the time, regardless of whether future development happened.
That's not the case here. People are paying money to set up for a product that doesn't yet exist. It is a gamble in a way that early access is not.
Like I said above, who is to say these people would care what Sony or PD think either? Once again, Without knowing these peoples disposable income and motives for it, you certainly cannot paint them all with the same brush because you know absolutely jack about them.
As I said above, income and motives don't change how irrational the purchase is.
I think it's important for me to highlight the hypocrisy of this statement with two words.
Project Cars
As above. I spent money, I got a product that actually functioned. Not the same situation at all.
I'm a little puzzled why you would think that is was similar at all. Early access is by definition receiving a functional product, albeit one still under development. Buying a box that is no use to you without a game with no release date is not.
I questioned your rational and gave a statement of what I think of it and asked you to explain your thinking and what you get out if it. It's exactly what you have done but to a lesser degree of what you wrote about these people you speak of that may or may not exist anymore. I did not give a blanket statement to cover a lot of people I know absolutely nothing about either.
You seem to think that there's something worse about analysing something that many people are doing rather than one. Why is that?
Your analysis of me is wrong, as I pointed out. You are yet to point out why my assessment that it is irrational to buy a console specifically for GTS at this point in time is wrong. Keep trying though.
Like I've said several times, I'm not attacking these people. It's their money and they can do what they want. It is irrational though, with the exception of the case that
@FPV MIC stated where the deal on the console is so good that your risk is substantially or entirely mitigated.
What is it that is wrong with pointing that out? It seems like an extension of the special snowflake mentality to me. Everyone is not a winner, and people should have it pointed out to them when what they're doing is sub-optimal or flat out wrong. Politely, but I think I've been reasonably polite about it.
People are welcome to keep doing it afterwards if they so wish, but if we don't share knowledge then nobody gets any smarter. We get people who think that dropping $400 on a box that does nothing is actually a good idea, instead of doing so because they know it's technically a bad idea but they really wanted to anyway. I've made purchases that were irrational, but the difference is that I don't try to justify them afterwards like they're objectively a good idea.