Leaderboard

For monumental things, like the gold spike at Promontory Point, I think it's perfectly fine to do something like this. But unless Sony planned the PS5 to be their last ever system, I think it's completely ridiculous to do something like this. Sure, everyone would like to have a gold system. It's human nature to want the most valuable items. But what purpose does it actually serve? All I see it doing is being a status symbol for someone to say "I have more money than you so I'm better than you." It's like this Hermès bag. I guarantee I can get some just as good at Walmart for $20. Why the hell would I spend $107,800 for a fucking purse? Status symbol. But a bag like that is just ASKING to be robbed. And would anyone even hook up a gold PlayStation? It seems to me that no one would. It would just sit in that wooden box, and collect dust. But maybe there are collectors of oddball gold items, so I could be talking nonsense. But these are just my views on a gold console.

Well, @DC, I guess I'll start the bidding at 1 billion points. I know I don't have that many points, but I promise I'll spend the next couple of decades working it off on here. To the topic at had, I actually like it when companies do this sort of thing. Obviously, this is a luxury beyond the reach of most people and it's a complexly vain, self-centred indulgence for those that can, but anyone can admire this sort of thing the same way we admire supercars. Yes, the vast majority will never be able to afford one, but that doesn't mean we can't enjoy them. It's not practical, it's not necessary, but we create them anyway because it's cool and a statement of human spirit, doing it because we can. Still, there are people berate companies who create these rare, luxurious collectibles (I'm just ready to see an XBox fanboys do so with regard to this, for example). I remember a couple of years ago Ubisoft partnered with electronics manufacturer Focal and the very exclusive and prestigious Parisian jeweller Tournaire to come up with this; Hand crafted, 18-karat gold headphones with a designed themed around Assassin's Creed Origins. Only 10 were ever made with watering price tag of 50,000 euro (around $60,000) and could only be so much as viewed but booking an appointment directly with Tournaire's boutique in Paris. I was on a Discord channel when some crusader was trying to call-out Ubisoft on their greed in reference to this, but he got upset when nobody was buying what he was saying. Most of us saw this for what it was, a luxury indulgence for the very rich, not an attempt by Ubisoft to be anti-consumer. If anyone with any sense wanted to call Ubisoft out, they would lead with the microtransactions, not an ultra rare, ultra expensive collectible that would make Ubisoft a few tens-of-thousands of dollars at most. He kept referencing to some rant fuelled, obscure article that pointed out "You could have a Porche for that price". True, you could, a Porsche Boxter, the bottom rung Porsche sports car, and the basic Boxter at that. I remember saying that would rather have the headphones because that's at least a statement of wealth, driving a Boxter tells the world you wanted a 911, but life hadn't worked out the way you hoped, and you couldn't afford one. Even The Last of Us Part II couldn't escape a scathing from idiot haters over this limited edition Talor Guitar with the same design as the Ellie's Guitar in the game, a price that was just $300 more than the $2000 guitar it was based on. Any excuse and people will use it. The point I'm trying to make it is, wether one is able to afford them or not, people should just be allowed to enjoy these things, whatever that means.