getting worried

hey whatever gots the games and is fun.... thats all i need.

and currently the xbox is doing that for me. but with mgs4 ... . ps3 will defintly get a boost.. but how much ?... im not sold on the ps3 just yet.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']
Don't be such a blind sony loyalist.[/quote]

Who ever said I was a sony loyalist? They have their own share of problems. I only stand up for them because it seems like everyone is down on them now just because the ps3 is taking its time. People dont realize that they have had the best console for the past two generations.

Also Ima PC snob.
 
[quote name='InuFaye']People dont realize that they have had the best console for the past two generations.
[/quote]

I think people are fully aware of this. However, they seem to be also aware that it has very little effect on the current situation (See: NES->SNES->N64).

Hell, if SONY realized that fact even, they mightve made the PS3 more like the 1 and 2
 
[quote name='InuFaye'] People dont realize that they have had the best console for the past two generations.
[/QUOTE]

I definitely played the PS1 and PS2 the most the past two gens. But I don't give a shit that people are down to them.

I have zero loyalty to any of these overpriced hunks of plastic or the greedy companies that make them.

Sony brought all this on themselves, they could have stayed on top and again had the best console in terms of game support if they'd stuck with what got them on top--reasonably priced gaming machines that most anyone could afford to buy (or be willing to buy) right from day 1.
 
[quote name='InuFaye']Did I say Xbox 360? NO. I said XBOX. Which refers to the first one.
[/QUOTE]

We know. And that has not bearing on the PS3 or 360, which is the topic of this thread. So we're telling you to pull your head out of your ass, and talk about stuff relative to the PS3s chances of competing with the 360 and Wii.

The fact that Halo made the original X-box has no bearing on this gens race. All that matters now is that the PS3 has been too expensive, came out a year too late, and has had to few games to make a strong challenge to the 360 or Wii yet.

Oh, and for good measure--PC GAMING SUCKS. That's the only platform I have any bias against. Hate keyboard part of controls, hate playing on a monitor (not dorky enough to put a PC in the living room and hook up to the TV) and most of all I can't stand sitting at a PC at home for hours to play a game after sitting at one all day at work. :p
 
[quote name='InuFaye']Who ever said I was a sony loyalist? They have their own share of problems. I only stand up for them because it seems like everyone is down on them now just because the ps3 is taking its time. People dont realize that they have had the best console for the past two generations.

Also Ima PC snob.[/QUOTE]



I'm really wondering if it's just taking its time or if it really isn't going to take off. It's no doubt that they had the best console of the last two gens, but the problems at Sony are very obvious-- the whole shake up in management, passing of PS3 debt to the Insurance division, and the demotion (i.e. fired in Japan) of Kutaragi all reveal that.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']I definitely played the PS1 and PS2 the most the past two gens. But I don't give a shit that people are down to them.

I have zero loyalty to any of these overpriced hunks of plastic or the greedy companies that make them.

Sony brought all this on themselves, they could have stayed on top and again had the best console in terms of game support if they'd stuck with what got them on top--reasonably priced gaming machines that most anyone could afford to buy (or be willing to buy) right from day 1.[/quote]


Because Companies want to make money on products they instantly become greedy. :roll:

Since you wanted to call them over priced hunks of plastic you obviously dont have any loyalty to gaming.
 
[quote name='InuFaye']
Since you wanted to call them over priced hunks of plastic you obviously dont have any loyalty to gaming.[/QUOTE]

Not really. I like to play games. But I was much happier when Consoles were all $199-299 at launch, and all $199 or less 12-18 months in, vs this generation with $250-$600 launch prices, and price drops being small and slow to come thus far (at least with 360 which has been out almost 2 years and only dropped $50).

That's getting pricey for me, given that games are not my top hobby anymore.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']We know. And that has not bearing on the PS3 or 360, which is the topic of this thread. So we're telling you to pull your head out of your ass, and talk about stuff relative to the PS3s chances of competing with the 360 and Wii.

The fact that Halo made the original X-box has no bearing on this gens race. All that matters now is that the PS3 has been too expensive, came out a year too late, and has had to few games to make a strong challenge to the 360 or Wii yet.

Oh, and for good measure--PC GAMING SUCKS. That's the only platform I have any bias against. Hate keyboard part of controls, hate playing on a monitor (not dorky enough to put a PC in the living room and hook up to the TV) and most of all I can't stand sitting at a PC at home for hours to play a game after sitting at one all day at work. :p[/quote]

PC gaming is better then console gaming in every way shape and form. Its a fact. Keyboard and Mouse give you more precise controls then what you could ever get on a console. Monitors also have much higher refresh rates and resolutions then what your TV does. PC is just better in every way. And because you cant stand to look at a monitor because you looked at one at work all day is not a fair knock against PC gaming.
 
Different strokes for different folks man. I hate the keyboard, will take my 50" HDTV over my 17" monitor (again, not dorky enough to every put a PC in the living room), etc. etc.

Not to mention that I don't care much for FPS, RTS, Sim games, or point and click adventure and pretty much every other genre the consoles do as well or better than PCs.

So it just has no appeal to me, combined with the fact that I just hate sitting at a computer period.

And plus, if I liked PC games I'd have something in common with losers like you, and I just can't have that can I? ;)
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']PC gaming?...Alright. I'll bite.

4 player IN PERSON multiplayer games.[/quote]

LAN parties.
 
[quote name='InuFaye']LAN parties.[/QUOTE]

Too much hassle, and requires running in a big enough circle of dorks who are willing to drag their computers around.
 
So you think you are so cool calling us dorks? You are just as big a dork as we are. Your username is for darth maul from star wars. You are arguing on a site for cheap video games and you know about them. You my friend are also that much of a dork. Plus Lan Parties arent as hard as you think they are. Plus I guess you guys never heard of controllers that you "could" plug into the computer and get multiplayer.
 
[quote name='InuFaye']PC gaming is better then console gaming in every way shape and form. Its a fact. Keyboard and Mouse give you more precise controls then what you could ever get on a console. Monitors also have much higher refresh rates and resolutions then what your TV does. PC is just better in every way. And because you cant stand to look at a monitor because you looked at one at work all day is not a fair knock against PC gaming.[/QUOTE]

Where are the fighting games on PC?

Where are the Gran Turismo-esque racing games on PC?

How can I play Ninja Gaiden Sigma and/or 2 on PC?

How can I play Marvel Ultimate Alliance on PC?

Where's the unified multiplayer that allows me to know what friends of mine are online and what they're doing?

Where are the platform games on PC?

Where are the JRPGs on PC?

Will I be able to play GTA4 on PC?

...anyhow, your facts leave much to be desired.
 
[quote name='InuFaye']So you think you are so cool calling us dorks? You are just as big a dork as we are. Your username is for darth maul from star wars. You are arguing on a site for cheap video games and you know about them. You my friend are also that much of a dork.[/QUOTE]

Oh, I never deny my dorkiness. :D I just still toss it out there as losers like you actually CARE what some other random loser, asshole on the internet has to stay about you and it's fun to watch the lame retorts start flying. :D

Ok, Ok. It was fun while it lasted. But enough riling up the PC gamer trolling on a console forum area.

Lets get back to the PS3 discussion...
 
[quote name='InuFaye']I never onced compared Live to PSN in this discussion. Live is and will be for along time light years behind pc online games. PC gamers have had online for the better part of 15 years. You console gamers finally get a good taste of it and now you act like microsoft invented online play! Please I remeber back in the day on my 486 windows 3.1 machine using my modem to call my friends house and play doom connected to each other.[/QUOTE]

:wall: Who's talking about PC gaming? You said outside of Halo MS was pretty much worthless last gen and would have folded. I brought up Live as a counterpoint. Online gaming with a console was archaic up until Live and I firmly believe without MS it still would be.

As for the million sellers, I'd pull up some stats but for some reason going to VGChartz games page is getting flagged for malware on my system. Not worth taking a risk of that for some silly internet debate. :) Maybe later when I can get on my Mac.
 
[quote name='Halo05']Where are the fighting games on PC?
MUGEN anyone?
Where are the Gran Turismo-esque racing games on PC?
GTR2. Better then GT. CONFIRMED.
How can I play Ninja Gaiden Sigma and/or 2 on PC?
DMC4 is coming to PC. It looks leagues better then where ng2 is now.
How can I play Marvel Ultimate Alliance on PC?
Its on PC.
Where's the unified multiplayer that allows me to know what friends of mine are online and what they're doing?
Steam
Where are the platform games on PC?
There are ports.
Where are the JRPGs on PC?
The Japanese dont buy pcs for gaming.
Will I be able to play GTA4 on PC?
All the others have been on PC its just a matter of time.

...anyhow, your facts leave much to be desired.[/quote]

Edited your post with my input.
 
I'm not gonna bash pc gaming or pc gamers but I also don't play pc games. Just not for me. I do however occasionally play PC games that get ported to consoles. I've just always been a console gamer and I'm satisfied with that. Each to his own.
 
I'm not going to weigh in on PC vs. Consoles, they both have strengths and weaknesses, but I thought I would take a stab at this any way while I'm sitting here eating. I also like a good questionnaire :lol:


[quote name='Halo05']Where are the fighting games on PC?

Where are the Gran Turismo-esque racing games on PC?

How can I play Ninja Gaiden Sigma and/or 2 on PC?

How can I play Marvel Ultimate Alliance on PC?

Where's the unified multiplayer that allows me to know what friends of mine are online and what they're doing?

Where are the platform games on PC?

Where are the JRPGs on PC?

Will I be able to play GTA4 on PC?

...anyhow, your facts leave much to be desired.[/QUOTE]

1. Everything but Tekken 4, 5, DR, DoA 3+4, and SC 2+3. Maybe I'm missing a few...little known fact-- you can play all the DC games on PC as well. They aren't 100% perfect yet though they are close.

2. I dunno

3. if you find a way, pm me

4. http://www.gamefaqs.com/computer/doswin/data/932592.html

5. Steam and I think Xfire has something like that. Steam is great!

6. Psychonauts is there, and emulators

7. Emulators

8. Yeah. and if not, emulators (in the year 20XX)
 
[quote name='Halo05']Where are the fighting games on PC?

Where are the Gran Turismo-esque racing games on PC?

How can I play Ninja Gaiden Sigma and/or 2 on PC?

How can I play Marvel Ultimate Alliance on PC?

Where's the unified multiplayer that allows me to know what friends of mine are online and what they're doing?

Where are the platform games on PC?

Where are the JRPGs on PC?

Will I be able to play GTA4 on PC?

...anyhow, your facts leave much to be desired.[/QUOTE]

I'll answer these questions too, despite that I'm very well aware that there's strengths and weaknesses for consoles and PCs.

1) They aren't there... cept for Melty Blood Rev. B.

2) GTR 2 for sims, a buncha other stuff for non-sims.

3) :(

4) Buy it, play it.

5) It's coming... says MS. But then, they did make XBL what it is today, so hopefully they're really going to deliver.

6) I can't imagine wanting platform games on PC...

7) Given the state of JRPGs today, I can't imagine wanting many of these either. And this is coming from somebody who fucking loves RPGs. Though I'd like Persona 3 on PC...

8) Prolly. Since you could play literally every other GTA on the PC prior to 4.

So yeah, there's a lotta stuff that's only on consoles... but at the same time, it works both ways... there's a lot of PC games that aren't on consoles, and not just MMOs (which are boring.) Lots of the stuff on the PC is multiplatform fare, and it's 99% of the time much better looking than any console counterpart could hope to be. The PC really feels like a 360 with far more good games and better graphics. And if you really need a gamepad for stuff, then you can just hook one up or use the 360 controller.
 
[quote name='InuFaye']Edited your post with my input.[/QUOTE]

Interesting you bring up the whole Japanese don't develop for PCs thing. Actually, that's the one issue with PC games... US devs typically can't design a game worth shit, so it'd be nice if we got more Jap games where design was actually a factor. Though we are getting DMC 4 on the PC and Lost Planet came out in June, so perhaps we'll see something of a turning point. Mebbe.
 
I never took issue with the fact that PCs have advantages, I took issue with InuFaye (complete with NG II signature thing) claiming that PCs can do everything that consoles do better than consoles.

It's not that way, it's really never been that way. The entire matter comes down to what you enjoy playing. I had no idea that MUA came out on PC, it simply popped into my head because I finally got it for 360 today but I think my other points stand pretty well on their own.

I've been using emulators for over ten years now and in the same way that you can't knock PCs for people spending all day on them at work and thus, not wanting to play games on them at home, you can't blame the Sega Genesis for eventually being emulated. Plus emulation is a legally grey area that many people are perfectly reasonable to want to avoid.

GTR2 looks incredible but it's all touring/race cars. If you want to race around in a stock 1989 Skyline GT-R, it's not the game for you. Like JRPGs? (I don't really but there are some who live and breathe them), PCs won't help you.

Anyhow, I hope my point is made.
 
[quote name='InuFaye']Because Companies want to make money on products they instantly become greedy. :roll:

Since you wanted to call them over priced hunks of plastic you obviously dont have any loyalty to gaming.[/quote]

No, but because companies have DOUBLED the price of their crap from last gen to current, while adding in alot of extra bullshit many don't want. And as far as loyalty to gaming is concerned, I typically wait till the systems are $150 or less anyway, so I WILL own a 360 and PS3, but probably not till the PS4 and Xbox720 are out for a while already.

Maybe by then MS will have fixed their hardware issues and Sony will have finally realized that they charged too much this gen for too many added functions that I'm sure they'll take out one by one in an in vain attempt to reduce price and sway consumers to grab a PS3.

Not everyone wants all the bells and whistles of the PS3, I just wish Sony would've taken that into consideration before releasing the PS3.

Oh and as far as loyalty does go, I go for the system with the best value and PRICE for my liking. I started gaming on the Atari 2600, moved to the Sega Genesis and didn't buy another console till the Playstation was $149, so I'm not loyal to any company, since all they want is my money in the first place.
 
[quote name='Halo05']
Anyhow, I hope my point is made.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, it is. I was just answering to be contrary. Because I'm a dick :lol:
 
[quote name='Chacrana']Interesting you bring up the whole Japanese don't develop for PCs thing. Actually, that's the one issue with PC games... US devs typically can't design a game worth shit, so it'd be nice if we got more Jap games where design was actually a factor. Though we are getting DMC 4 on the PC and Lost Planet came out in June, so perhaps we'll see something of a turning point. Mebbe.[/QUOTE]

Yep, that's big for me. A console without strong japanese developer support is useless to me--and that's a big part of why I haven't got into PC gaming as well.

Western developers have gotten better in recent years, but still, if I put together a list of my 20 all time favorite games, probably 18 would be Japanese developed.
 
[quote name='Halo05']I never took issue with the fact that PCs have advantages, I took issue with InuFaye (complete with NG II signature thing) claiming that PCs can do everything that consoles do better than consoles.

[/QUOTE]


He is technically correct, performance wise. All the current gen games that have PC counterparts that I have played are all much better, imo. but consoles have those pesky exclusives, a better, more varied base of developers, and a lot more current releases in a wider amount of genres (barring the emulators.)
 
[quote name='Apossum']He is technically correct, performance wise. All the current gen games that have PC counterparts that I have played are all much better, imo. but consoles have those pesky exclusives, a better, more varied base of developers, and a lot more current releases in a wider amount of genres (barring the emulators.)[/QUOTE]

Consoles also have that pesky ability to play any damn game from that system you put into them without worrying about specs(ram, video card, computer chips, drivers, security measures, etc). You pop a game into a console and in 15 seconds you are gaming. That is a luxury that the PC can never attain.
 
I wish more PC developers would develop for consoles... heck, it'd be nice to see some games port to the PS3.. and you can still use [edit] mouse and keyboard.
 
[quote name='Corvin']Consoles also have that pesky ability to play any damn game from that system you put into them without worrying about specs(ram, video card, computer chips, drivers, security measures, etc). You pop a game into a console and in 15 seconds you are gaming. That is a luxury that the PC can never attain.[/QUOTE]


damn, didn't want to get sucked into this, but you make it sound like gaming on a PC is rocket science. I'll take the ability to customize the hell out of the way the game looks over the "luxury" of having Halo 3 stuck at 25-30fps with a crap load of lighting effects and shadows I don't care for. Or to fix up whatever aspect of the game is bothering my eyes. Just look at Bioshock-- people went crazy for the "unlock framerate" feature.

It takes a little set up, but it looks and runs the way you want to run it. Just pop in the disc and play.
 
[quote name='Corvin']Consoles also have that pesky ability to play any damn game from that system you put into them without worrying about specs(ram, video card, computer chips, drivers, security measures, etc). You pop a game into a console and in 15 seconds you are gaming. That is a luxury that the PC can never attain.[/QUOTE]

As of late, it seems that a game running at a decent frame rate is a luxury that consoles can't attain. I'd much rather take my pesky process of putting in a disc and clicking "yes" a few times to install the game if it means I can enjoy the thing.
 
[quote name='Apossum']damn, didn't want to get sucked into this, but you make it sound like gaming on a PC is rocket science. I'll take the ability to customize the hell out of the way the game looks over the "luxury" of having Halo 3 stuck at 25-30fps with a crap load of lighting effects and shadows I don't care for. Or to fix up whatever aspect of the game is bothering my eyes. Just look at Bioshock-- people went crazy for the "unlock framerate" feature.

It takes a little set up, but it looks and runs the way you want to run it. Just pop in the disc and play.[/QUOTE]
I agree it isn't hard, but most people just want the ability to play, they don't care too much about setting things up. My only issue with pc gaming is that it can get really expensive really quickly if you want a pretty decent rig. I have to say though, for fps's, the keyboard/mouse combo is tough to beat.
 
ps3 lost all its exclusives. thats why i went with a 360. they lost the svr series, gta, devil may cry, assasians creed, and some others. why would anyone pay $200 extra when you can play all these same games for a cheaper price? the only real exclusive that the ps3 is left with is mgs (or the only real exclusive worth playing). 360 is gonna win this console war becuase of all its exclusives such as halo, bioshock, gears of war, and some others.
 
Spoken like a true fanboy, saying that something will always be that way just because it happens to be that way now.

Not to mention you're going to lose out on great games for both platforms.

The reality is, the 360 wins this year, hands down, and no argument from me, a rather avid Sony gamer who owns a 360 because I enjoy playing games on both systems.

However, it's only been a year since the PS3 released and it's only now getting some bigger exclusives out the door. In 2008 when both Sony and MS both are pumping out games to try to one up each other, you're just going to miss out on some good gaming.

Meanwhile, I'll get to take my pick of both 360 and PS3 games next year.

Having an irrational loyalty to one corporate entity, or console is just plain immature in light of the fact that those corporations don't care about you. If they did, they wouldn't have sold you faulty hardware, instead they just want your money. When you give up foolish loyalty you can pick and choose good games from both sides, and enjoy them as independant gamers.

For example, I enjoyed Halo 3, but that's not going to stop me from enjoying Uncharted, Killzone 2, MGS4, and FF13 when they come out.
 
[quote name='Vanigan']Spoken like a true fanboy, saying that something will always be that way just because it happens to be that way now.

Not to mention you're going to lose out on great games for both platforms.

The reality is, the 360 wins this year, hands down, and no argument from me, a rather avid Sony gamer who owns a 360 because I enjoy playing games on both systems.

However, it's only been a year since the PS3 released and it's only now getting some bigger exclusives out the door. In 2008 when both Sony and MS both are pumping out games to try to one up each other, you're just going to miss out on some good gaming.

Meanwhile, I'll get to take my pick of both 360 and PS3 games next year.

Having an irrational loyalty to one corporate entity, or console is just plain immature in light of the fact that those corporations don't care about you. If they did, they wouldn't have sold you faulty hardware, instead they just want your money. When you give up foolish loyalty you can pick and choose good games from both sides, and enjoy them as independant gamers.

For example, I enjoyed Halo 3, but that's not going to stop me from enjoying Uncharted, Killzone 2, MGS4, and FF13 when they come out.[/quote]

someone tell me why sony is trying to hype up kilzone so much? the first one tottally sucked. and do all of those games that you mentioned have a solid release date? for all we know this games could take another 2 years to come out....
 
Uncharted releases November 20th. No solid dates on MGS4, but it's a 2008 title. FF13 is either Q4 2008, or even into 2009. There's also Haze this year too, which despite looking okay at first, the gameplay videos look really good and should hold over FPS fans on the PS3 for a while. Then there's also unnannounced titles, or ones that are laying low. I know of a few such as Heavy Rain. No doubt MS has many games lined up for 2008 too, and I'm glad for it because that just means even more games for me to play alongside my growing PS3 library.

But I can pretty much assume there were plenty of games you factored into buying your 360 that weren't out yet. For example, you probably bought yours about a year ago when Halo 3 still had no release date. In fact, many of the games you mention also had no release date around the time you bought your 360.

The first Killzone was decent, mainly held back by the old PS2 hardware. Killzone Liberation established Guerilla as a company that knows how to make action shooters, even when on a handheld it a very good game.

And, as you can see from the Killzone 2 footage, just watching it and the gameplay footage should tell you why they're hyping Killzone 2, and why Killzone 2 stands on its own pretty well.

So frankly you did nothing to address my counter argument. I'm glad you enjoy playing nothing but games on the 360, but for those who are smart enough to realize that there's good games to be had on both systems we'll be having more fun.
 
[quote name='InuFaye']There is no way that Lost Planet and Dead Rising sold a million copies. Crackdown only sold because of the halo 3 beta. Bioshock is getting close to a milllion copies. Madden? Are you serious? Its available on every system under the sun. Oblivion ,Gears , and lost planet are superior on the PC. The 360 will remain the box for the western games. [/QUOTE]
Alright, finally had time to look them up. Courtesy of vgchartz:

Xbox 360 titles:
Lost Planet: 1.4 million
Dead Rising: 1.36 million
Oblivion: 1.99 million
Gears of War: 4.56 million
Bioshock: .75 million

Madden 08: 1 million - this was a huge deal that made headlines. outsold the PS2 & 3 combined. You can't sweep that under the rug when comparing consoles.

Crackdown: 1.36 million - you realize only about 300k were in on the beta right? that means 1 million bought the game just for the game. I'm sure you are just pulling out your own anecdotal numbers out of your ass. It was a solid title that sold really well. There's no denying that. Were there people that bought just for the beta? Sure, but even if all 300k of those did, those that didn't buy for the beta far outnumber those that did.

compared to the top PS3 titles:
Resistance: 1.66 million
Motorstorm: 1.16 million
Lair: .12 million
Heavenly Sword: .08 million
Ninja Gaiden Sigma: .23 million
Madden 08: .4 million
Oblivion: .23 million

You can argue about Gears & Lost Planet being superior on the PC until you are blue in the face. That is a personal preference. Console gamers are a different beast, which is what we are discussing. All these numbers are console sales only. You can go back to pretending all those sales didn't occur. :)
 
[quote name='Corvin']Alright, finally had time to look them up. Courtesy of vgchartz:

Xbox 360 titles:
Lost Planet: 1.4 million
Dead Rising: 1.36 million
Oblivion: 1.99 million
Gears of War: 4.56 million
Bioshock: .75 million

Madden 08: 1 million - this was a huge deal that made headlines. outsold the PS2 & 3 combined. You can't sweep that under the rug when comparing consoles.

Crackdown: 1.36 million - you realize only about 300k were in on the beta right? that means 1 million bought the game just for the game. I'm sure you are just pulling out your own anecdotal numbers out of your ass. It was a solid title that sold really well. There's no denying that. Were there people that bought just for the beta? Sure, but even if all 300k of those did, those that didn't buy for the beta far outnumber those that did.

compared to the top PS3 titles:
Resistance: 1.66 million
Motorstorm: 1.16 million
Lair: .12 million
Heavenly Sword: .08 million
Ninja Gaiden Sigma: .23 million
Madden 08: .4 million
Oblivion: .23 million

You can argue about Gears & Lost Planet being superior on the PC until you are blue in the face. That is a personal preference. Console gamers are a different beast, which is what we are discussing. All these numbers are console sales only. You can go back to pretending all those sales didn't occur. :)[/QUOTE]



PS3 games are selling pretty good. As long as the game is good, then it'll sell. Lair, definitely not going to make a millon with its problems [they should add that patch, HS considered too short, Madden broken game, and Oblivion was already released on 360 - whoever wanted it, already bought and played it.

After this price drop[not price drop, cheaper model, and holiday sales] some ps3 games on that list may get a boost, like HS.. and if Factor 5 were smart, they'd release that patch and have the game re reviewed with a more appropriate control scheme. - controller.
 
[quote name='Vanigan']Uncharted releases November 20th. No solid dates on MGS4, but it's a 2008 title. FF13 is either Q4 2008, or even into 2009. There's also Haze this year too, which despite looking okay at first, the gameplay videos look really good and should hold over FPS fans on the PS3 for a while. Then there's also unnannounced titles, or ones that are laying low. I know of a few such as Heavy Rain. No doubt MS has many games lined up for 2008 too, and I'm glad for it because that just means even more games for me to play alongside my growing PS3 library.

But I can pretty much assume there were plenty of games you factored into buying your 360 that weren't out yet. For example, you probably bought yours about a year ago when Halo 3 still had no release date. In fact, many of the games you mention also had no release date around the time you bought your 360.

The first Killzone was decent, mainly held back by the old PS2 hardware. Killzone Liberation established Guerilla as a company that knows how to make action shooters, even when on a handheld it a very good game.

And, as you can see from the Killzone 2 footage, just watching it and the gameplay footage should tell you why they're hyping Killzone 2, and why Killzone 2 stands on its own pretty well.

So frankly you did nothing to address my counter argument. I'm glad you enjoy playing nothing but games on the 360, but for those who are smart enough to realize that there's good games to be had on both systems we'll be having more fun.[/quote]

since you own a ps3 now of course your going to try and make it sound so good and great. but everyone knows the truth about it...... i would rather buy a 2nd 360 instead of a ps3. so have fun play lair...
 
[quote name='docvinh']I agree it isn't hard, but most people just want the ability to play, they don't care too much about setting things up. [/quote]

I think this is because they haven't really had a chance to do this at all. but when little things come along-- like upscaling and smoothing on the PS3, or that "unlock framerate" (i.e. disable v-sync) feature in Bioshock, they get a lot of attention.


My only issue with pc gaming is that it can get really expensive really quickly if you want a pretty decent rig. I have to say though, for fps's, the keyboard/mouse combo is tough to beat.
Click to expand...

qft. the only way to justify it is to make it your main PC for everything, imo.
 
[quote name='Apossum']damn, didn't want to get sucked into this, but you make it sound like gaming on a PC is rocket science. I'll take the ability to customize the hell out of the way the game looks over the "luxury" of having Halo 3 stuck at 25-30fps with a crap load of lighting effects and shadows I don't care for. Or to fix up whatever aspect of the game is bothering my eyes. Just look at Bioshock-- people went crazy for the "unlock framerate" feature.

It takes a little set up, but it looks and runs the way you want to run it. Just pop in the disc and play.[/QUOTE]

But again, that's just opinion.

I'd take the former as I have little patience for screwing around with settings, needing patches, worrying about upgrades ore often than every 4-6 years if I want to play the latest games at best settings etc. etc.

PC gaming offers a lot, it's just not for me. I have a hard time finding any positives to it, other than the mouse being superior for aiming in FPS--and that's washed out by me absolutly sucking with the keyboard portion of the controls.

Different strokes for different folks.
 
[quote name='Vanigan']
So frankly you did nothing to address my counter argument. I'm glad you enjoy playing nothing but games on the 360, but for those who are smart enough to realize that there's good games to be had on both systems we'll be having more fun.[/QUOTE]

Also worth noting that not everyone has the time to keep up with all the good games on more than one console.

So for many, it's just a matter of going with which console has the most exclusives that interest them, and accepting that they'll miss out on some. But of course, that doesn't cover the blind fanboys who argue that one system has nothing worth playing.

For me, I can do Wii and either PS3/360, mainly because I'm pretty confident the Wii will just be used for 2 or 3 first party titles a year, as that looks to be all I'll be interested on it.

There will be games I'll want on both the PS3/360, but no way I'd ever have time to keep up with both anyway, so I'll just have to decide which looks to have the most exclusives I want to play along with which one hits the magic $300 price first. Looking to be 360 now, but I'm a still hesitant as there's not much on the 2008 slate yet for it, and the stupid failure rates.
 
[quote name='Apossum']
qft. the only way to justify it is to make it your main PC for everything, imo.[/QUOTE]

That justification doesn't work for me. My PC just gets used for simple task. E-mail, internet, word processing, ripping mp3s, unloading digital pictures from my camera etc.

Need really no power for that, so no need for an expensive computer with a top notch processor, a ton of ram, nor a good 3D card.

So any added cost for that stuff is all for games--and games I don't enjoy playing as much as I do my consoles.

Just not my cup of tea I guess.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Also worth noting that not everyone has the time to keep up with all the good games on more than one console.[/QUOTE]

Oh, bullshit.

EMG ain't exactly "War & Peace," puddin' pop. It's a magazine that's 100 pages, roughly (let's be kind and have a somewhat conservative estimate) 1/3 ads, bringing the readable material down to 67 pages (we'll even take that extra .4 page :lol:). Consider the frequency and size of pictures, and you're down even more.

Seriously. You can read an entire EGM, cover to cover, in under an hour.

"Don't have time." If you want to talk websites, certainly. There are people out there who can't post 50 75-word diatribes discussing how expensive the PS3 is while on the clock each and every day. There are those with priorities, interests, and other things to do.

To say "there's not enough time" is absurd beyond belief. If, OTOH, you want to claim that folks would rather not use the time they have to read about a console they don't own/don't want to own, then I'm prone to agreeing with you. I couldn't tell you a fuckin' thing about the "Phantom," for instance.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: those who claim "PS3 has no games" are those who (1) aren't paying attention to the PS3 in the slightest, and are thus wholly unqualified to speak on whether or not the PS3, in fact, has games, or those (2) who seem to have a vested interest (mostly emotional, in gamers' cases, and occasionally financial) in believing that the PS3 will never have good games, so they feel compelled to lie to themselves and others about the PS3's games.

The #1 point above is like asking people about things they don't know about, and then failing to regard them as an expert on the matter.

"Who is the Prime Minister of the Ukraine?"

"Uhh...I don't know."

...would you regard that person as an expert on Ukrainian politics? Of course not. So why would you believe anyone when they try to claim the PS3 has no games coming out for it, and then can't give you a list of games that are coming out for it (under the impression that the "no games" claim is absurd, and that something at some point will come out for it, no matter how mundane or uninteresting).

It's plain silliness, I tellya.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Oh, bullshit.
[/QUOTE]


Why so hostile?

Games aren't my number 1 hobby, so no, I don't have time to play all the games I'd be interested in on multiple consoles anymore.

Factor that in with working full time, and going to grad school, and my free time is already limited. And even more so for games since social stuff takes precedence, adn then other hobbies like movies, music, learning guitar, hiking etc. are all prioritized above gaming.

As far as having time to post on message boards--sure. I post most of the time for work (yes,unfortunately stuck working on a saturday)--can't play any console games at my desk.

With all that in mind, I probably buy 8-10 games a year tops these days.

So sure, someone can keep up on all the big games if they have a lot of free time and gaming is there number 1 hobby to do in that free time.

But it's a different story for more casual gamers who have very busy lives.
 
People generally dont throw down the "no games" bit without a qualifer, whether it be "for me" or "worth the entry price".

Usually they dont even do "no games" anyway. I'd like to think "enough games" is more common.

And thats aside from complaints that dont have anything to do with the system in particular, like "I've got my hands full with just the one or two systems that I happened to buy first, for whatever reason or another".

I imagine people who buy EVERY system during a generation are absolutely the smallest possible subset of gamers.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Why so hostile?[/quote]

That's just how I talk. No harm meant.

Games aren't my number 1 hobby, so no, I don't have time to play all the games I'd be interested in on multiple consoles anymore.
Click to expand...

You're talking about people in general, not people in your specific predicament. Or, you were talking about that. Please keep your argument consistent; when I claim that people in general do have time to be informed about upcoming games, please don't counter with "well, I don't." That's not gonna fly in grad school, either.

Factor that in with working full time, and going to grad school, and my free time is already limited.
Click to expand...

Aww, someone didn't qualify for an assistantship, did they?

That's hostility (an example, at any rate). Not me simply saying "bullshit."

And even more so for games since social stuff takes precedence, adn then other hobbies like movies, music, learning guitar, hiking etc. are all prioritized above gaming.
Click to expand...

Good for you. Seriously. But that wasn't your argument. You said "Also worth noting that not everyone has the time to keep up with all the good games on more than one console." Semantically, you could argue that you were correct, but if you decide to go there, you render your original argument moot, since any "not everyone" argument could be refuted with but a single counter example.

As far as having time to post on message boards--sure. I post most of the time for work (yes,unfortunately stuck working on a saturday)--can't play any console games at my desk.

So sure, someone can keep up on all the big games if they have a lot of free time and gaming is there number 1 hobby to do in that free time.

But it's a different story for more casual gamers who have very busy lives.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. As I said, reading through an issue of EGM is pretty quick and comprehensive. Now, it may be redundant that EGM is not read by casual gamers? Possibly. But that, again, is not the argument you're making (what you're saying is that it's not possible, whereas that's different from saying it's not likely).
 
Dmaul likes to take his situation, and apply it to everyone.
Then when you call him out on generalizing, he says he meant just himself.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']
You're talking about people in general, not people in your specific predicament. Or, you were talking about that. Please keep your argument consistent; when I claim that people in general do have time to be informed about upcoming games, please don't counter with "well, I don't." That's not gonna fly in grad school, either.
[/quote]

My point was that not everyone is a nerdy hardcore gamer. Some just play games 5 hours or less a week--be it by physically not having time, or by just not liking games enough to devote more time to this.

I'm not sure where all this "not being informed" about games and saying there are "no games" crap came from as I didn't address those. I was just responding to the post I quoted saying how people are missing out so much if they don't own multiple consoles. Of course people are missing good games, but not everyone has the time (or is willing to devote the time) to play all the good games across more than one platform anyway.

As for not flying in gradschool, I was top of the class for the master's, and doing about the same in the Ph D in the number 1 ranked program in my field. So I'm flying just fine thank you.


Aww, someone didn't qualify for an assistantship, did they?
Click to expand...

Actually, I've been fully funded every year. Now I'm working full time on a grant that I'm a co-PI on that will provide the data for my dissertation as I'm all done with classes and comp exams.


Good for you. Seriously. But that wasn't your argument. You said "Also worth noting that not everyone has the time to keep up with all the good games on more than one console." Semantically, you could argue that you were correct, but if you decide to go there, you render your original argument moot, since any "not everyone" argument could be refuted with but a single counter example.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. I clarified my original argument above, read that again. It can't be refuted by a single example. "Not everyone" just means that some people don't have the time or interest to keep up with games on multiple systems.

And by "keep up" I mean play all of the good ones. Maybe this is where the confusion set in--I didn't mean keep informed, I meant keep up in playing through all the games that interest them. Not just reading about them in EGM.

Not necessarily. As I said, reading through an issue of EGM is pretty quick and comprehensive. Now, it may be redundant that EGM is not read by casual gamers? Possibly. But that, again, is not the argument you're making (what you're saying is that it's not possible, whereas that's different from saying it's not likely).
Click to expand...

And that shows that this was the mistakes. I didn't mean keep up in that manner, genius. It clearly meant keep up in terms of playing through them and not having a hopeless backlog. Maybe you shoud go to grad school and study reading comprehension.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top