“PS3 in Danger of Dying” Crowd Debunked

I see those differences in the shots, it's just not something that warrants using it to bash the PS3 (not that you have, but I'm sure others have) or to feel like your missing out if you only have a PS3 etc.

Personally, I just don't care. As long as it's not a gameplay effecting difference like slow down or pop up, I don't care about these kind of graphical differences. Just like for the vast majority of movies I don't care enough about pic quality to upgrade to blu ray. Just because their is a difference doesn't mean it's worth caring about.
 
[quote name='dallow']You care a lot too Zewone.
You posted it didn't you?[/QUOTE]
No, I don't. I posted it in jest, to myke's post. Shit like that and the shit that goes on NeoGAF is really annoying.
[quote name='mykevermin']Well, that settles it. I'm getting the 360 version. If I'm paying $60 for something, I better get 60 goddamned dollars worth of dust particles.

Is the rest of that website like that?[/QUOTE]

I'm not sure, I just read that one article.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']I see those differences in the shots, it's just not something that warrants using it to bash the PS3 (not that you have, but I'm sure others have) or to feel like your missing out if you only have a PS3 etc.

Personally, I just don't care. As long as it's not a gameplay effecting difference like slow down or pop up, I don't care about these kind of graphical differences. Just like for the vast majority of movies I don't care enough about pic quality to upgrade to blu ray. Just because their is a difference doesn't mean it's worth caring about.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, gameplay differences is what matters most, as far as PS3/360 is concerned.

After playing COD:WAW on 360 and than playing my dad's copy he got for the Wii...

That's a different story. it wasn't just the graphics, but the controls, man. That's a terrible game.
 
Yeah, it reminds me of all the videophile nerd bitching on sites like AVS Forum. I read a few threads there after getting my blu ray player and quickly stopped. No interest in discussion movies when most people are just nit picking transfer quality to death, griping about edge enhancement etc.

To each their own. I just like playing games and watching movies. I like them to look good, but I see no need in becoming that anal and picky about technical issues that you can't enjoy the content.
 
You care enough to always mention the slight downgrade the PS3 version has of some multiplatform title or other. Be it some off textures, or a lower res, or a lack of AA.

---

I think that site is just a Resident Evil fansite.
 
[quote name='dallow']You care enough to always mention the slight downgrade the PS3 version has of some multiplatform title or other. Be it some off textures, or a lower res, or a lack of AA.
[/QUOTE]

I do that to piss people off who would actually care (you).
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Yeah, it reminds me of all the videophile nerd bitching on sites like AVS Forum. I read a few threads there after getting my blu ray player and quickly stopped. No interest in discussion movies when most people are just nit picking transfer quality to death, griping about edge enhancement etc.

To each their own. I just like playing games and watching movies. I like them to look good, but I see no need in becoming that anal and picky about technical issues that you can't enjoy the content.[/quote]
Yeah, but that's what that site is all about.
It's very specific.

When people pay $10,000 for a CD player, they bitch about every little thing about it for a reason.

[quote name='zewone']I do that to piss people off who would actually care (you).
[/quote]Not always, but I know that's part of it.

I'm an A/V nerd, and yes, I like to nitpick. I'm fascinated by the technical aspects of these machines. But it was more fun last gen.
That's why I'm jealous of PC games, but would rather spend money on monitor speakers than a new rig.
 
Yep. I mainly wandered over to read up on the player I ordered before buying it. But the rest of the site is definitely not for me. Need find another good movie forum. Since I stopped posting on DVD Talk a few years ago I've not bothered finding another forum yet. Then again, really don't need another place to waste time online!

As an example of the analness over there, here's a thread nit picking the hell out of The Dark Knight blu ray--which I though looked incredible.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1089714
 
[quote name='Tsukento']Woah woah, hold on now.

SEGA didn't just decide to call it quits out of the blue. SEGA had to stop making consoles. It was leading them close to bankruptcy as not only were their past mistakes catching up to them, but it also ended up causing a huge loss in sales for the Dreamcast.

Dreamcast was meant to destroy the N64 and PlayStation to make up for the failure of the Saturn outside of Japan. Because of the failure of the Saturn, people aren't sure they want to invest in the Dreamcast after they've been burned by the company who told them CDs were the next thing (SEGA CD) and then released another add-on that went right back to cartridges (32X) and then abandoned that as soon as their next big console came out, which supported CDs (Saturn). Then comes the PS2 and SEGA's losing even more sales.

It got to a point where they were so back up on unsold consoles, they had to stop at some point because their warehouses were practically filled. SEGA ended up losing to the PS2 and all of their past mistakes catching up to them. They originally planned to file for bankruptcy but in turn then decided to become a third party company.

Prior to their merge with Sammy, they were actually making more money as a third party developer than they were as a hardware company.

While many people say the same could happen to Sony the same way things happened with SEGA, it could never actually happen for one reason alone: Sony doesn't soley make video game hardware. They have enough money from other things to keep them afloat. SEGA didn't.[/quote]

So you agree with me? I never said Sega had lots of options.
 
It is shit like this that boggles my mind about the PS3. Released a year later and yet the 360 version of multiplatform games looks better. It shouldn't even be really close.
 
Not really, no.

The difference is so insignificant it's not something really worth bringing up.

Except in threads like this.
 
But you can't say "there's no difference" and be correct.

There's a difference.
 
Holy shit I hadn't seen those from the horror yet.

The difference isn't huge, but it's pretty noticeable. Bad aliasing and things look dull on PS3..

I even showed my sister and she picked number 1 over number 2 specifically because of the lighting.

Mistakes continue to be made.
 
No I wrote that because the pictures finally loaded.

They were filled with LOL. Have fun with the inferior version.
 
I kno, cuz that's what I said.

I give you a D in reading comprehension :(
 
I hate how fanboys are like "but it plays the same!!!" when the system they are currently blowing shows off worse visuals than the competition.
 
Come on. It is a significant difference. Lower quality textures, missing effects, lower quality lighting..

Not saying it's the end of the world, but would it hurt you to accept that the PS3 version has a lower visual quality in those shots from that demo? It wouldn't kill you to admit that, would it? Because it's the truth.

The final may be different, but as for that demo, the PS3 version does not look as good as the 360 one.
 
It now recognizes when you type ICUP and explodes on naughty children who get that idea.
 
Whoknows,

If you threw a party
and invited everyone you knew
you would see
the biggest gift would be from me
and the card attached would say
"thank you for being a friend"
 
[quote name='whoknows']I like how it bothers you enough to hate it.[/quote]

Good stuff. If anything, fanboys shouldn't bloat about system specs - my psssss3 pwns yur treesity which doesn't prove whose the better gamer or anything. Critics critique, but fanboys make asses of themselves.
 
[quote name='dallow']Yeah, but that's what that site is all about.
It's very specific.

When people pay $10,000 for a CD player, they bitch about every little thing about it for a reason.

Not always, but I know that's part of it.

I'm an A/V nerd, and yes, I like to nitpick. I'm fascinated by the technical aspects of these machines. But it was more fun last gen.
That's why I'm jealous of PC games, but would rather spend money on monitor speakers than a new rig.[/quote]

QFT. These people don't just have a $1200 HDTV and a PS3. The problems they talk about probably aren't going to be a big deal to people with a typical HD set up, but it's going to be an issue for them because these guys have great TVs/projectors and BR/DVD players that are likely very well configured. I mean, I'm not much of a videophile, but I am a bit of an audiophile, so I know exactly where they come from. When I buy an CDs that has multiple versions, I try to find the best mastered one.

Also, TDK didn't exactly get the best reviews when it came to its picutre, which I thought was warranted. I thought the extended edition of ROTK looked better, honestly.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']What ever the case, they're nerd losers who care more about A/V quality vs. just enjoying films.[/quote]

Yes dmaul, that's exactly what they are. Because they care so much about video quality, they don't care about enjoying films. Yes, you are exactly right. Your logic is impeccable as picture quality has absolutely no bearing on enjoyment. At all. I watched TDK on a 13 inch B&W Zenith and it was great. Really.
 
[quote name='jer7583']Whoknows,

If you threw a party
and invited everyone you knew
you would see
the biggest gift would be from me
and the card attached would say
"thank you for being a friend"[/QUOTE]

Love you too
 
[quote name='dbrev42']Maybe when the price drops lower than $399.99 I'll get one. But most people in todays economy cannot afford to spend this on a gaming system. Come on Sony, don't you see a price drop is necessary![/QUOTE]

This is why the thread is wrong.

No matter what you say about games, Blu-Ray, or anything else, the fact remains that the PS3 is the console with the highest entry cost. In a lousy economy, that extra $100-$200 you could save by getting a Wii or 360 is going to matter to a lot of people. The lousy economy also negates Blu-Ray as a selling point; why spend $30-$40 on a movie when you can get the standard def version for half the price and it'll still look just fine on your old TV sets you can't afford to replace?

That doesn't mean that the PS3 is going to vanish...but it does mean that it's an awful year to be selling luxury items like game consoles. Since virtually everything Sony sells is consumer electronics - electronics that aren't necessary for daily life - I would imagine the company as a whole is going to take a pretty significant hit in the upcoming year. How the PS3 will fare is still to be seen. There's a market for it, sure, but it's also a market that's getting smaller with each passing day.
 
[quote name='Gothic Walrus']This is why the thread is wrong.

No matter what you say about games, Blu-Ray, or anything else, the fact remains that the PS3 is the console with the highest entry cost. In a lousy economy, that extra $100-$200 you could save by getting a Wii or 360 is going to matter to a lot of people. The lousy economy also negates Blu-Ray as a selling point; why spend $30-$40 on a movie when you can get the standard def version for half the price and it'll still look just fine on your old TV sets you can't afford to replace?

That doesn't mean that the PS3 is going to vanish...but it does mean that it's an awful year to be selling luxury items like game consoles. Since virtually everything Sony sells is consumer electronics - electronics that aren't necessary for daily life - I would imagine the company as a whole is going to take a pretty significant hit in the upcoming year. How the PS3 will fare is still to be seen. There's a market for it, sure, but it's also a market that's getting smaller with each passing day.[/QUOTE]

Word. My wife and I are really restricting our budget for the year. The only time I'm buying games is from money I have set aside from selling other games on eBay. Not a penny of my income is going to buying games for the foreseeable future. If I didn't own any of the three consoles right now, the least likely purchase would be the PS3 simply due to the cost.
 
Do you use Goozex myke? I've bee getting most of my games off of there for the past year. You get pretty good value for most games (especially new games)--much better than gamestop etc.

Just pay to ship the game out, and pay them $1 per game you receive--so it's a great way to get rid of old games and get new ones for about $3.50 out of pocket with shipping and the $1 fee.

Selling games on eBay some times gets more money than you get in Goozex points, but not super often, and Goozes is less hassle than listing, getting paypal etc.
 
There's always flipping to spend a good afternoon turning $20 into $100!

that's how I buy my games!
 
[quote name='evanft']Yes dmaul, that's exactly what they are. Because they care so much about video quality, they don't care about enjoying films. Yes, you are exactly right. Your logic is impeccable as picture quality has absolutely no bearing on enjoyment. At all. I watched TDK on a 13 inch B&W Zenith and it was great. Really.[/QUOTE]

There's a big difference between caring about picture quality, and being so anal that minor flaws keep you from enjoying a film.

I enjoy a nice looking Blu Ray, have a decent 50" HDTv and calibrated it with Digital Video Essentials, so I do care, but I'm not going to nitpick things as I just like watching movies not analyzing picture quality.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']There's a big difference between caring about picture quality, and being so anal that minor flaws keep you from enjoying a film.

I enjoy a nice looking Blu Ray, have a decent 50" HDTv and calibrated it with Digital Video Essentials, so I do care, but I'm not going to nitpick things as I just like watching movies not analyzing picture quality.[/quote]

What do you mean dmaul? Our posts are in complete agreement. When someone invests thousands into their HT set up, why would they overanalyze anything? I mean, if they're making posts about picture quality on the AVS Forum, they're clearly not spending any time actually watching their movies.
 
I didn't say they don't spend time watching movies. I'm saying I've never understood people who are more into the technical aspects of their expensive home theater set ups than enjoying movies for plot, acting, direction etc.

You see people over their always posting screen comparisons, bitching about EE, DNR etc. etc. and NEVER posting in threads discussion opinions on the films.

Doesn't seem like a good use expensive home theaters to me, but if people get off more on stroking their cocks over how good things look on their set up and bitching about minor flaws them more power to them I guess.

I'll keep enjoying movies and remaining willfully ignorant to what shit like EE and DNR really is and how to look for it. I just need to stay away from AVS as I'm not an A/V guy and the hardware threads I went there for are useless to me as well as those people are way to picky and spend way more on HT equipment than I ever would consider.
 
It's people like them that get studios to remaster their work, and keep improving standards in our AV products.

AV is their hobby. Doesn't mean they don't/can't enjoy a film.
 
[quote name='Gothic Walrus']This is why the thread is wrong.

No matter what you say about games, Blu-Ray, or anything else, the fact remains that the PS3 is the console with the highest entry cost. In a lousy economy, that extra $100-$200 you could save by getting a Wii or 360 is going to matter to a lot of people. The lousy economy also negates Blu-Ray as a selling point; why spend $30-$40 on a movie when you can get the standard def version for half the price and it'll still look just fine on your old TV sets you can't afford to replace?

That doesn't mean that the PS3 is going to vanish...but it does mean that it's an awful year to be selling luxury items like game consoles. Since virtually everything Sony sells is consumer electronics - electronics that aren't necessary for daily life - I would imagine the company as a whole is going to take a pretty significant hit in the upcoming year. How the PS3 will fare is still to be seen. There's a market for it, sure, but it's also a market that's getting smaller with each passing day.
[/quote]

I understand where you are coming from, but consumers need to think about what they are getting for the money. A 360 with w/ 60GB HDD is $300 retail. Add in $50/year to play online (I think this is correct, but I don't play M$ consoles) and you are at $350. The closest PS3 in cost is $400 and comes with 20GB more of space as well as a HD-DVD player (mind you the ONLY HD format) for an extra $50. The digital switch is going through in Feb and there will be a large increase in sales of HDTVs which will also benefit SONY as a company. Whether those sales also increase PS3 sales is yet to be seen, factor in the PS3's cost of production that is dropping dramatically and it lookes like 2009 will be a decent year for SONY.
 
Yes everyone in February is going to be running out and buying up hdtvs coupled with a ps3s. Sorry but in this economic climate people are more conscious on how they spend their money
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top