Microsoft's Greenberg Slams Sony's Promises

T

Thomas96

CAGiversary!
http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/n...ays-xbox-360-will-extend-lead-over-ps3/?biz=1



Aaron Greenberg has come out fighting, practically creating a laundry list of Sony's failed promises for the PS3 business. He's confident 360 will extend its lead this year.
Posted by James Brightman on Friday, May 09, 2008
In an interview with the folks at Destructoid, Aaron Greenberg, Director of Product Management for Xbox 360 and Xbox Live, took off the gloves when asked about Sony and their upcoming lineup for the PS3. Ultimately, Greenberg thinks that Sony has simply failed to deliver on its promises.

"I know a lot of folks enjoy watching the console wars and we would never underestimate our competition. But answer to your question specifically, didn't Sony promise all of this last year including Home as well? We have been fighting Sony's promises from the day we entered the market and if you remember at that time it was all about PS2 being an online cybercity with partner announcements from the likes of RealNetworks and AOL. Then three years ago at E3 they showed what PS3 games would supposedly look like with the Killzone 2 video, that we are now learning will ship four years later. That means that we will have shipped Gears of War and Gears of War 2 before they can even get Killzone out the door," he said. "Think back to GDC 2007 when Sony promised to leap ahead in online with the Sony Home unveil. Here we are two years later and multiple delays for a product that appears to have little to no buzz. Where are the achievements? The friends list integration across all games? Where is the long-promised video store? Where are all the other products using and networking with their CELL chip? How come Blu-ray did not result in better games? What happened with Sixaxis and rumble? Where is the complete 1080p game library we were promised? If Blu-ray as they said would be such a catalyst to PS3 console sales, then why have PS3 sales over the past couple months not seen any lift since the format victory?"

Greenberg continued, "The reality is that Xbox 360 is leading this generation with a larger installed base, more than 2xs the games library, the most exclusives along with the leading online service and community. While we have not yet announced all of our plans for the full year, I am confident that we will extend our lead over the PS3 in 2008. Today Xbox 360 has a 5-million-unit console sales lead on a global basis based on most recently public reported data from both companies. This includes more than double the installed base in the U.S. according to actual NPD sell-through and over a 1-million-unit lead across Europe also based on reported sell-through from Chart Track and GfK. The days of Sony snowing the consumers and the press are over, I think the pressure is now really on them more than ever to deliver on all of these promises."





I like Sony, but he made a good point, about releasing Gears of war 1 and 2 before Killzone could be launched. On the other hand, I can't put a company down for delaying a game so that they can get it right. To me that's not a broken promise, its act of someone taking responsibility for their products.
 
Wow I am actually astonished someone came out and named specifically many broken promises.

I ahve the PS3/PSP and Wii/DS combo... would it not have been for the failure issue I would have jumped on the 360 instead of the PS3. With that being said I am now going to look for PS3 sales since Blu won the war, I thought for sure that and MGS4 would help boost it up quite a bit.

I see no mention of the Wii. From MS standpoint I cant imagine that a s a threat this cycle. It may win the war in terms of sales (hardware and maybe eventually software) but there are really two different beasts, that could easily work side by side.
 
I prefer the 360 to the ps3 for various reasons, but those that live in glass houses should not throw stones...

I am still waiting for the iptv set up they talked about over a year ago, that was supposed to roll out last fall...how about the user created content and the fact that you could make shirts/skateboards and sell them thru xbox live. They had a large part of one of there E3 press conferences attached to this. How about live anywhere, and being able to edit your car from forza on a cell phone? While that little push a couple months back about user created games was nice, the xna software has been out for a year or 2, and still not much to show for it.
 
As much as it's shit-talking, he does actually have some legitimate points.

(As a PS3 owner, I actually agree with a lot of what's been said).

That said, MS is certainly no innocent.

MS is sure as fuck "snowing" people regarding the 360 and its reliability.

Their disastrous manufacturing processes, turning what should be a console into a box of shit, is the main reason I haven't bought a 360 yet.

How about MS delivering a console that doesn't break?
 
while i think the 360 was made shitty, it isn't like the ps2 wasn't just as shitty. I went thru 6 or 7 units in a smoke free enviorment over the course of 4 years. I have only gone thru 2 360 units going into year 3. Neither of those numbers are great, but imo playstation fans don't have much of a leg to stand on when talking about 360 system reliability.
 
This guy made some good points, but I'm wondering... IF, and when Sony makes improvements to PSN... specifically in game messaging and the Release of Home, what does MS do to counteract.... what are they doing to make live worth paying for?
 
[quote name='ryanbph']while i think the 360 was made shitty, it isn't like the ps2 wasn't just as shitty. I went thru 6 or 7 units in a smoke free enviorment over the course of 4 years. I have only gone thru 2 360 units going into year 3. Neither of those numbers are great, but imo playstation fans don't have much of a leg to stand on when talking about 360 system reliability.[/quote]

I don't buy that argument. I went through three original Xbox systems and my 360 is returning after a second time in the shop. While the early PS2's might have sucked, Sony has been on the ball with quality control for several years (my 5001 series PS2 was perfect and my PS3 has been flawless).
 
[quote name='Thomas96']This guy made some good points, but I'm wondering... IF, and when Sony makes improvements to PSN... specifically in game messaging and the Release of Home, what does MS do to counteract.... what are they doing to make live worth paying for?[/quote]


I guess it depends on a bunch of things...first off how well implemented is the in game messaging/friends list/accomplishments/group jumping into games running. Second of all, will sony still be offering all of this for free? When is it all coming out? If all those features aren't implemented and bug free for another year, then msft can suck it up for a year and launch the next system. They could add things. Granted I don't know what, but dedicated servers that go thru msft rather then 3rd party companies. They could implement clan support. It appears they are trying for more of a facebook like community setup. I am sure there are a bunch of idea's that they can offer that they can justify the roughly $4/month fee (and if you are a cheapass much less).

If msft doesn't have anything big up there sleaves, and start to see an exodus of players leaving the live network, they could always offer it for free.
 
That's MS for you. They love talking trash about the competition. I have a long list of 21 things they said, and I'll just add this to the list. I just learn to ignore it, but I think Sony is fine. PS3 is a great platform.

As for Killzone 2 being delay, Sony would be STUPID to release Resistance 2 and Killzone 2 in the same year, that's why there is a delay. Releasing two high profile first person shooters, by one publisher, in the same year in a short time, would either kill both, or really hurt one. It will divide the userbase. It's best to release the one further along, then wait a while, and then release the other.
[quote name='rodeojones903']He is 100% correct. Sony needs to get its shit together. I love the PS3, but we need these features quickly.[/QUOTE]
However, there is a problem. Sony could not actually implement certain features due to a lack of OS memory:
http://www.innerbits.com/blog/2007/05/09/ps3-memory-footprint/

It's like, MS is a software company and can implement many features easily by compressing software and simplying it, allowing many features to fit within 32MB. Sony has like 2-3X more memory reserved for their OS, and has difficulties with the features already being in using it up. Just the buddy list alone was said to use up 9MB while bringing up the keyboard was said to use up 20MB of memory. A lot of this is because Sony just isn't a software company and doesn't have the expertise MS has; however, Sony has the hardware advantage on MS because that's what they know while MS does not.

But that's what I keep trying to tell people over and over again, that's why certain features just aren't on the PS3 yet. It's like trying to pour more water into a full glass. If there isn't enough memory to implement certain features, they just cannot do it until they get the memory reduced enough. I once heard that the one thing they were able to get up and running on an in-game XMB was the web-browser at one point. They have reduced the memory much more and might finally be able to implement certain features, but let's just say a lack of memory wasn't really thought of in the design process. And it's not like Sony can reserve more memory because 3rd party developers who prefer more unified RAM (and not streaming RAM) already complain it's difficult porting to PS3 because of that.

As for the built quality of consoles, I will admit only MS consoles have broken on me (my Xbox twice and 360 twice). My PS2 never had an issue; however, I waited for over a year to get mine. My launch PSP, launch PS1, launch PS3, and so on have worked fine, but I can't explain whether I got lucky, whether I just take very good care of my platforms, or something.
 
[quote name='CaseyRyback']I don't buy that argument. I went through three original Xbox systems and my 360 is returning after a second time in the shop. While the early PS2's might have sucked, Sony has been on the ball with quality control for several years (my 5001 series PS2 was perfect and my PS3 has been flawless).[/quote]


I haven't had an issue with the ps3 either, but going back 5 or so years ago, the ps2 had the big DRE issues with every series ps2 that came out. Was it as bad as msft, I doubt it but it was a horrible experiance for me and my ps2 playing days. The turnaround time was about 6wks...That drove me away from playing socom, without having a system for almost 2 months. My brother went thru 2 of them and then just played the xbox, my 2 groomsmen had issues with them as well. It wasn't like it was just me, and I remeber reading about it on blogs and the major sites talking about the DRE issue.
 
[quote name='ryanbph']

If msft doesn't have anything big up there sleaves, and start to see an exodus of players leaving the live network, they could always offer it for free.[/QUOTE]


That'll be the day when Microsoft makes Hell freeze over! lol
 
[quote name='ryanbph']I haven't had an issue with the ps3 either, but going back 5 or so years ago, the ps2 had the big DRE issues with every series ps2 that came out. Was it as bad as msft, I doubt it but it was a horrible experiance for me and my ps2 playing days. The turnaround time was about 6wks...That drove me away from playing socom, without having a system for almost 2 months. My brother went thru 2 of them and then just played the xbox, my 2 groomsmen had issues with them as well. It wasn't like it was just me, and I remeber reading about it on blogs and the major sites talking about the DRE issue.[/quote]

I am not saying that there were not issues in the past, merely pointing out that Sony solved their hardware problems and got quality under control. With the 50001 series of PS2 (the last fat one) and the slims there did not seem to be nearly as many hardware issues.

Also Mana Knight that is a bad argument. Killzone and Resistance could be spaced out far enough where they would not cut into each others market share. Look at CoD and Halo. There are no other premiere shooters coming out on that Triple this year. The real reason Killzone isn't coming out because Sony knows Gears will destroy it.
 
At least PS3's work. I'm on my third 360 and it's still acting up.
 
[quote name='CaseyRyback']Also Mana Knight that is a bad argument. Killzone and Resistance could be spaced out far enough where they would not cut into each others market share.[/quote]
Seriously. C'mon, TMK, have they got you convinced that you should only expect one top-notch FPS per year?

The real reason Killzone isn't coming out because Sony knows Gears will destroy it.
Click to expand...
Indeed. I also think that they're secretly worried about the game. There are rumors from some supposed insiders saying that Killzone 2 plays like crap (but is pretty; just like the first game), and that Sony is scrambling to get the gameplay up to snuff (by funneling tens of millions into Guerrilla, who have proven to be one of the most inefficient developers in the business). Launching it against a sure-fire critical hit like Gears 2 would be suicide.
 
[quote name='The Mana Knight']That's MS for you. They love talking trash about the competition. I have a long list of 21 things they said, and I'll just add this to the list. I just learn to ignore it, but I think Sony is fine. PS3 is a great platform.

As for Killzone 2 being delay, Sony would be STUPID to release Resistance 2 and Killzone 2 in the same year, that's why there is a delay. Releasing two high profile first person shooters, by one publisher, in the same year in a short time, would either kill both, or really hurt one. It will divide the userbase. It's best to release the one further along, then wait a while, and then release the other.

However, there is a problem. Sony could not actually implement certain features due to a lack of OS memory:
http://www.innerbits.com/blog/2007/05/09/ps3-memory-footprint/

It's like, MS is a software company and can implement many features easily by compressing software and simplying it, allowing many features to fit within 32MB. Sony has like 2-3X more memory reserved for their OS, and has difficulties with the features already being in using it up. Just the buddy list alone was said to use up 9MB while bringing up the keyboard was said to use up 20MB of memory. A lot of this is because Sony just isn't a software company and doesn't have the expertise MS has; however, Sony has the hardware advantage on MS because that's what they know while MS does not.

But that's what I keep trying to tell people over and over again, that's why certain features just aren't on the PS3 yet. It's like trying to pour more water into a full glass. If there isn't enough memory to implement certain features, they just cannot do it until they get the memory reduced enough. I once heard that the one thing they were able to get up and running on an in-game XMB was the web-browser at one point. They have reduced the memory much more and might finally be able to implement certain features, but let's just say a lack of memory wasn't really thought of in the design process. And it's not like Sony can reserve more memory because 3rd party developers who prefer more unified RAM (and not streaming RAM) already complain it's difficult porting to PS3 because of that.

As for the built quality of consoles, I will admit only MS consoles have broken on me (my Xbox twice and 360 twice). My PS2 never had an issue; however, I waited for over a year to get mine. My launch PSP, launch PS1, launch PS3, and so on have worked fine, but I can't explain whether I got lucky, whether I just take very good care of my platforms, or something.[/QUOTE]

I agree with you in regards to Killzone, they don't two big FPS games in one year, and Killzone would benefit most fom the delay especially since this is that dev team's first PS3 game.

Ever since the xbox was released, I know that Sony had to realize that their next console needed in game utlities. (at least custom soundtracks). Before the system launch Sony was supposed to have in game XMB features, and they showcased it. Its like they were showcasing system Possibilities, and not the actual system features. For instance, the PSP was supposed to be an extra rear view mirror screen for Gran Turismo. (or other games), however that's a possiblity no one remembers.

From the time they were showcasing the PS3, Sony should have been working on these system feature.
 
[quote name='CaseyRyback']
Also Mana Knight that is a bad argument. Killzone and Resistance could be spaced out far enough where they would not cut into each others market share. Look at CoD and Halo. There are no other premiere shooters coming out on that Triple this year. The real reason Killzone isn't coming out because Sony knows Gears will destroy it.[/QUOTE]Sony still plans to release Resistance 2 in November right up against Gears 2 anyway.

Here's how I'm trying to explain it (many others told me the same before I even thought about it):
-Socom Confrontation comes out in September, which is a shooter (although third person).
-Resistance 2 is already slated for November, which is a shooter (although an FPS).

I was figuring before Killzone 2 would be ready by October through December. So right there, Sony would have three shooters, two of them being first person, released around the same time. Sony themselves never released more than one multi-player shooter per year I believe (the one year their was no Socom, there was Killzone). Sony's platforms don't exactly have the largest online userbase, and when you are kind of asking them to play three games which are similar (all by the same publisher), that could lead to one game being severely hurt (or all hurting themselves). Now, if Killzone 2 was ready by this summer (like around June/July), I'd say it would be okay to release it because there's space between Resistance 2 at least (and some between Socom).

I mean, when CoD4 came around, the amount of people that played Resistance decreased significantly. There wasn't too many PS3 fans I hear who bought UT3 because they already had CoD4 as their FPS fix. If Killzone 2 came out first, there may be many (except the hardcore FPS fans or those who just buy a lot of games), who may pass up on Resistance 2 due to already owning Killzone 2, or those passing up on Killzone 2 due to already owning Resistance and wanting a sequel to that most. At least by pushing Killzone 2 to next year, that gives Sony a first a FPS for next year, while Resistance 2 will be the FPS for this year. It's like how MS is kind of alternating Halo and Gears. I remember when Square and Enix merged, they tried to think of a way to handle releasing DQVIII, KH2, and FFXII. I could have sworn I heard them say, since DQVIII was further along than FFXII, they were going to hold FFXII back a bit and release DQVIII first.

As Resistance 2 is out for a bit (a few months), people will start to want a new FPS, then that would be a good time to release.

If Sony were releasing high profile games in various genres online, then I wouldn't see it as an issue if a few were released close to one another.
[quote name='Thomas96']I agree with you in regards to Killzone, they don't two big FPS games in one year, and Killzone would benefit most fom the delay especially since this is that dev team's first PS3 game.

Ever since the xbox was released, I know that Sony had to realize that their next console needed in game utlities. (at least custom soundtracks). Before the system launch Sony was supposed to have in game XMB features, and they showcased it. Its like they were showcasing system Possibilities, and not the actual system features. For instance, the PSP was supposed to be an extra rear view mirror screen for Gran Turismo. (or other games), however that's a possiblity no one remembers.

From the time they were showcasing the PS3, Sony should have been working on these system feature.[/QUOTE]I thought I heard MS had some kind of patent on in-game music or something. Not the way where developers choose to implement it, but in a way it can be changed within any game (it was posted at a few forums). But at the same time, I have some question about it because it was indeed posted a day before April 1st.

Well, Sony designed the Cell and its specifications right around the time PS2 came out. Their plan was have a CPU, with multiple CPUs within, thinking everything was going multi-core or whatever. Regardless to what the competition may have had, Sony had this plan all along with how the cell was going to be designed. However, there was kind of a design flaw with the cell where it doesn't provide much main memory (at 256MB compared to 512MB). Sony may have thought the cell would be able to do what they played, but when running the PS3 OS in the end with it, let's just say it used up more memory than they planned. I almost guarantee they had a plan with the XMB running all these features, but when they compiled the code or whatever, took up much more space than anticipated and had to cut back. Stuff like that happens in software (I've written software myself for microcontrollers since I'm a EE, and ran into an issue of not enough memory for a microcontroller I was using. In my case, I could just buy a bigger one, but Sony could not easily do it due to already spending lots of money on R&D on the cell).
 
I agree with all of those points. I plan to buy a ps3 eventually, but theres still no real reason for me to. MGS4 is not a system seller for me.

Sony's rebuttal should be one sentence. "65% Console Failure rate." I'd die laughing if they did that.
 
[quote name='Puffa469']I agree with all of those points. I plan to buy a ps3 eventually, but theres still no real reason for me to. MGS4 is not a system seller for me.

Sony's rebuttal should be one sentence. "65% Console Failure rate." I'd die laughing if they did that.[/QUOTE]



They should do it in a commercial.
 
^ that would be QUITE entertaining.

Sony has a lot of issues they didn't fufill, M$ on the other hand has a system that just blows. I think they are both FAILing. : shrugs :
 
I have both the PS3 and 360. I have not had any problems with the PS3, but I NEVER play it - seriously, if I want to play a game I always turn on my 360, so this made me wonder if the reliability issue has not cropped up on the PS3 (I have gone through 3 360s) as a result of the fact that they are not played as much.
 
These are indeed good points. For anyone who says Microsoft is talking shit, it should be very much noted that Sony had quite a legacy of talking out of their asses during the PSP and PS3 eras.
 
My cousins PS3 just broke, and I was in utter shock. First I heard of one breaking besides that one weird code problem from a few weeks ago.

Other than that, by the time Killzone 2 comes out, the Xbox 720 will be beginning its hype IMO.
 
[quote name='megma42']I have both the PS3 and 360. I have not had any problems with the PS3, but I NEVER play it - seriously, if I want to play a game I always turn on my 360, so this made me wonder if the reliability issue has not cropped up on the PS3 (I have gone through 3 360s) as a result of the fact that they are not played as much.[/QUOTE]

I agree with this 110 percent. Just yesterday I was wiping the dust off my ps3 and controller. My ps3 is only turned on for warhawk, that is really about it. These constant arguments about the xbox 360 failure rate don't mean squat to me with the ps3 library still so weak. I've already been through the red ring process and it was pretty painless, got a box, sent it off, got the system back, wasn't nearly enough for me to go gee I will start buying multi platform games on the ps3 from now on.

I think Sony is in trouble, not enough to sink them but some issues do need to be addressed, it seems like they're falling into that old Nintendo strategy of waiting for one game to sell systems versus having the system sell systems.

edit: Also of note, ps3's do break, ebay search last week brought up a ton with no video problems, I was pretty surprised since it isn't mentioned much.
 
Although, I still question this guy because he tries to claim how MS releases Gears 1 and 2 (which they are actually only publishing in the first place by a more experienced developer) and Killzone 2 isn't out, when Resistance came out around the same time as Gears 1 and R2 will be out around the same time as Gears 2. Also, why has Too Human been taking so long and why did it take 5 years to develop Kameo?? Some developers are just better at releasing stuff on time while some developers, it takes a bit longer to get started (although Guerrilla was initially focused on getting Killzone Liberation out, and now they are more devoted to Killzone 2. Also, Guerrilla has been greatly expanding bringing in new talent, along with a new lead producer).
[quote name='megma42']I have both the PS3 and 360. I have not had any problems with the PS3, but I NEVER play it - seriously, if I want to play a game I always turn on my 360, so this made me wonder if the reliability issue has not cropped up on the PS3 (I have gone through 3 360s) as a result of the fact that they are not played as much.[/QUOTE]
I play my PS3 almost every single day and it works.
 
The guy does make some good points and it's good to see someone calling Sony on their lies, they promise big a don't always deliver.

However it's not like MS are squeeky clean either, I just hope this guy remembers that if you dish it out you'd better be ready to take it as well.
 
Overall IMO, MS and Sony should not be taking shots at each other. Nintendo has both of them beat right now and they should be trying to top them, not going after each other.

I could bring up about a promise MS made about Halo 3 launching with PS3:
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6124592.html

However, I do not care because it's old news. When Killzone 2 comes out, the longer than expected time it took to make it will be old news. I have way too many games to look forward to on all platforms anyway. :D
 
I like how microsoft seems to ignore there own flaws. They claimed they was going to fix the rrod problem. There bragging about how many games they have? Well duh the 360 has been out a year longer than the ps3, and wii. If the 360 came out the same time as the ps3, and wii I think things would be way different. Some of the major games may not have been out yet. I would say ps3, and 360 would be about even in sales. I own all 3 consoles there is something I hate about each,but I think most people know what I prefer.
 
Guess what... all the fucking features in the world don't mean a damn thing if the hardware running them breaks down constantly.

I will never buy another Microsoft product. Six 360s is enough for me.
 
[quote name='The Mana Knight']Overall IMO, MS and Sony should not be taking shots at each other. Nintendo has both of them beat right now and they should be trying to top them, not going after each other.

I could bring up about a promise MS made about Halo 3 launching with PS3:
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6124592.html

However, I do not care because it's old news. When Killzone 2 comes out, the longer than expected time it took to make it will be old news. I have way too many games to look forward to on all platforms anyway. :D[/QUOTE]

LOL we can close the thread now. You had to dig Deeeeep you find that article. You got a good memory.
 
[quote name='megma42']I have both the PS3 and 360. I have not had any problems with the PS3, but I NEVER play it - seriously, if I want to play a game I always turn on my 360, so this made me wonder if the reliability issue has not cropped up on the PS3 (I have gone through 3 360s) as a result of the fact that they are not played as much.[/QUOTE]

Exact opposite for me which is probably why my 360 still works.
 
[quote name='The Mana Knight']Overall IMO, MS and Sony should not be taking shots at each other. Nintendo has both of them beat right now and they should be trying to top them, not going after each other.

I could bring up about a promise MS made about Halo 3 launching with PS3:
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6124592.html

However, I do not care because it's old news. When Killzone 2 comes out, the longer than expected time it took to make it will be old news. I have way too many games to look forward to on all platforms anyway. :D[/quote]

Yet you care enough to bring it up as a promise, when it was an off the cuff remark by someone who has had zero involvement in either the creation of Halo 3 or 360 (Which, if you believe Bill Gates is involved in anything other than signing the checks for the Games division employees, you're insane).

Why not list some of the off the cuff "promises" by Sony's staff?

Or is this another double standard situation like the Haze demo?
 
[quote name='terribledeli']Yet you care enough to bring it up as a promise, when it was an off the cuff remark by someone who has had zero involvement in either the creation of Halo 3 or 360 (Which, if you believe Bill Gates is involved in anything other than signing the checks for the Games division employees, you're insane).

Why not list some of the off the cuff "promises" by Sony's staff?

Or is this another double standard situation like the Haze demo?[/QUOTE]Oh, so you want me to bring up more then:
The first I found runs all the way back to 12th july 2006.

Microsoft: PlayStation 3 is New Betamax
http://news.spong.com/article/10219?cb=712

Microsoft: 1080p Doesn't Matter
http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/features/microsoft-1080p-doesnt-matter/69309/?biz=1

PS3 "too expensive", says Microsoft Japan bod
http://computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=143586

Microsoft prepping 'surprises' for PS3, Wii launch
http://computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=143628

No 1080p games for PS3 this year, predicts Microsoft exec
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=18975

Microsoft ‘guarantees’ that Xbox 360 games will look better than PS3 games
http://www.xboxic.com/news/1728

Microsoft Says Sony's Online Network Is 'Busted'
http://www.gwn.com/news/story.php/id/10657/Microsoft_Says_Sonys_Online_Network_Is_Busted.html

Microsoft: PS3 Linux Not 'Competitive' Compared To XNA
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=12107

Microsoft Engineer about PS3 Horizontal Scaling in SDK
http://www.ps3scene.com/news/static/MicrosoftEngineeraboutPS3HorizontalScalinginSDK-1170202587.php

Microsoft continues to support DS, but not PSP
http://www.pspfanboy.com/2007/02/17/microsoft-continues-to-support-ds-but-not-psp/

‘Market doesn’t need Blu-ray’, says UK Xbox boss
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=23761

Microsoft: Plenty of PS3 stock due to both high supply & low demand
http://www.maxconsole.net/?mode=news&newsid=15363

Microsoft secret agents resort to subterfuge at PS3 Euro-launches
http://www.joystiq.com/2007/03/23/microsoft-secret-agents-resort-to-subterfuge-at-ps3-euro-launche/

"PS3 no better than the Xbox", says Microsoft boss
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/gadgets_and_gaming/article1553699.ece

Microsoft's Kim: Sony 'Helped Us With Their Own Missteps'
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=13209

PlayStation Home: Microsoft Fires Back
http://computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=159636

Toshiba and Microsoft remind us of what HD DVD can do (and what Blu-Ray cant)
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/field-no...d-dvd-can-do-and-what-blu+ray-cant-273454.php

Microsoft says it will take PS3 sales away at Christmas
http://www.gamernode.com/News/3878-...l-take-PS3-sales-away-at-Christmas/index.html

Microsoft: Xbox 360 Will Beat PS3 Because Of Stronger Position
http://www.portableplanet.co.uk/200...0-will-beat-ps3-because-of-stronger-position/

Microsoft on PS3 Home: "Sony will struggle"
http://www.pocket-lint.co.uk/news/news.phtml/10280/11304/Microsoft-comments-Sony-Home-Delay.phtml

Xbox 360 is the "better option" for gamers
http://www.videogamer.com/news/05-11-2007-6823.html
Click to expand...

So, you know plan to attack every single one of my post like you have in the OTT.:roll: Just lay off, please.:roll:

The Haze demo isn't what this topic is about.

Anyway, people bring up various things Sony execs say, so I don't see any difference.
 
[quote name='rodeojones903']He is 100% correct. Sony needs to get its shit together. I love the PS3, but we need these features quickly.[/QUOTE]

No joke. I'm starting to think in-game XMB will never happen, achievements will be a flop and/or poorly implemented, and they're always going to be playing a game of 'catch-up' in some of these domains.

[quote name='CoffeeEdge']Indeed. I also think that they're secretly worried about the game. There are rumors from some supposed insiders saying that Killzone 2 plays like crap (but is pretty; just like the first game), and that Sony is scrambling to get the gameplay up to snuff (by funneling tens of millions into Guerrilla, who have proven to be one of the most inefficient developers in the business). Launching it against a sure-fire critical hit like Gears 2 would be suicide.[/QUOTE]

Don't get me wrong: what I've seen of Killzone 2 thus far is very impressive looking.

But I'm not an easy mark; I don't get why people clamor for Killzone 2 like it's the greatest game of the century. Killzone was totally forgettable: boring gameplay, bland environments, I don't remember fuck-all of the story.

So as far as Killzone 2 is concerned, I'm taking a "fool me once, shame on you..." approach to the game. If it turns out that it sucks, and I buy it on launch day thinking it's a "Halo killer" or somesuch nonsense, that's MY fault for not paying attention. Not Sony's or whoever the developer is.

EDIT: Greenberg makes some fine comments, but he overlooks how consistent Sony is in putting out relatively good platforming titles across their three consoles - especially established IP like Jak & Dexter, Ratchet and Clank, SOCOM. It's his job to focus on why MS is better, so of course he's leaving that out, and focuses on a few long developmental time frames (and forgetting GT5, or GTPSP as well).

All I want to know are the following:
1) Where the fuck is my "Alan Wake"?
2) How is this man single? I mean, come on...
ai_132.jpg
 
I have no allegiance since I buy and sell systems as they get games I want (I only own a PS3 right now and a gaming PC), but the guy is right on all fronts (except that whole "thinking it's 2009" thing.) Sony has been continuously making and dropping promises since the day the PS3 was announced. The promises keep getting smaller, the games keep getting delayed, the system got trimmed of full BC, and while the system isn't bad, it looks much worse because they over hyped and under delivered on it. On top of that, they've also been backpedaling and doing damage control since release day.

All I can say is MS got the jump on them this gen. Sony got complacent, Kutaragi got overconfident, and now they're paying by dropping to 3rd place.
 
[quote name='Apossum']
All I can say is MS got the jump on them this gen. Sony got complacent, Kutaragi got overconfident, and now they're paying by dropping to 3rd place.[/quote]

Well I just hope MS make the best of their headstart, I do think the PS3 is getting stronger, it's certainly not getting weaker.

Third place may be, but Sony still won the Hi-Def format war, and sometimes I think that was the one they were really interested in.
 
[quote name='benjamouth']Well I just hope MS make the best of their headstart, I do think the PS3 is getting stronger, it's certainly not getting weaker.

Third place may be, but Sony still won the Hi-Def format war, and sometimes I think that was the one they were really interested in.[/QUOTE]



That's a big win and I should qualify my shit by saying "in the U.S." because it's much closer in Europe (from what I hear) and MS probably won't catch up in Japan.

Still, all the things I side about features and promises hold true--Sony hasn't really lived up to it.
 
[quote name='Puffa469']I agree with all of those points. I plan to buy a ps3 eventually, but theres still no real reason for me to. MGS4 is not a system seller for me.


You're an idiot.
 
[quote name='DAWG26']You're an idiot.[/quote]
Someone's an idiot for not paying either $400+ or $500+ for ONE video game?


Dunno where you get your logic from, but paying out the ass just to play one game is rather ridiculous.

[quote name='The Mana Knight']Overall IMO, MS and Sony should not be taking shots at each other. Nintendo has both of them beat right now and they should be trying to top them, not going after each other.[/quote]
Nintendo has them beat in hardware sales numbers, not quality games.
 
[quote name='DAWG26'][quote name='Puffa469']I agree with all of those points. I plan to buy a ps3 eventually, but theres still no real reason for me to. MGS4 is not a system seller for me.


You're an idiot.[/quote]

You don't even know if MGS4 is a good game yet, and you're calling him an idiot? Geez. :roll:
 
His complaints are the exact reasons why I have yet to even consider a PS3 purchase this generation. As far as I'm concerned, it doesn't even exist as a possibility for me until they get up to par with the standards set by 360.

It's just a shame about the poor build quality on 360. If not for that point, i'd have zero complaints with the system. Fortunately I've only had one system go bad, and it was repaired promptly and free of charge.

It would take Mana Knight levels of fanboyism in order to deny the claims made in the OP.
 
[quote name='megma42']I have both the PS3 and 360. I have not had any problems with the PS3, but I NEVER play it - seriously, if I want to play a game I always turn on my 360, so this made me wonder if the reliability issue has not cropped up on the PS3 (I have gone through 3 360s) as a result of the fact that they are not played as much.[/quote]

I really don't think that's it. I have 3 PS3s, and while I almost never play them either (I only own one game, which I didn't pay for), they're running balls-out 24/7, contributing to Folding@Home (probably around 1500 work units between the 3 of them). I haven't had the slightest problem with any of them, and the oldest one has been running nonstop for about 8 months now. There's no question in my mind that the PS3 hardware is solid.

To be fair, however, my 360 is in a rather enclosed space and is still working after 18 months.
 
[quote name='VipFREAK']lol, I don't think it will be necessary since the 360 will break itself...[/quote]


i think this is funny cause the only real complaint against the 360 is hardware failure (dont get me wrong, thats big) but MS has addressed it with a 3 year warranty and different boards/chips and eventually they *should* get it right.....

while Sony is rock solid in the hardware dept there are complaints about everything else....

I'd rather have the system with all the bells and whistles that might fail but be covered under warranty than the system that will last forever and has nothing much else that I'm interested in to offer

P.S. i only own a 360 right now but am praying to God SOCOM will be the best thing ever so I have a reason to buy a PS3
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top