TIME magazine deems PS3 a bust.

[quote name='jer7583']

Blu-Ray is UNNESSECARY.[/quote]
If you want to get like that, why use DVDs? They aren't necessary. We can use 6 CDs. Everything about videogames is superfluous.

As for that list of games, 3 of them were PS2, 1 was Xbox and one was (at best) Wii. That means 480p AT MOST.

Halo 2 is 5GB ->http://btjunkie.org/torrent?do=stat&id=56316efbe354eeb92ed8b0c2173d79d578d68d1bb318
Okami is 3.2GB
-> http://btjunkie.org/torrent?do=stat&id=626070a6e306d2404c50d840ea6ef1cf512cbd2d585b

FFXII is 3.4GB
-> http://btjunkie.org/torrent?do=stat&id=4161f4de1a0c0dbc7e17e1f9224b03a7ade85e77453e

MGS3 is by far the largest, clocking in at 5879MB
-> http://btjunkie.org/torrent?do=stat&id=4409ef30558b8957cd668bdbef61758ddecbdeb46b88

Put into 720P, those games would be about 2.6666 times the size. At 1080i/p, which is undoubtedly where the industry is headed, they'd be 6 times the size.

At 720P, Okami would fit on a single dual layer DVD. However, thats the only game. FFXII would come in at 9GB which is 500MB over the capacity of DVDs.

MGS3 at 1080P would weigh in at a massive 35GB. How the hell are you going to say with a strait face that DVDs will be just fine and dandy?

Argue the numbers. I dare you.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']There is no point in debating with him....he just doesnt get it...only time he says anything close to logical is when he gets too many people saying fanboy. Yes its common sense to most people that DVD didnt jack the price of the PS2 up $100s...but nope not to some.[/quote]

I'm debating the issues. You're making character attacks. Theres no point in debating with you as once your views are challenged you start calling names.

Now take your ball and go home.
 
[quote name='jer7583']Kayden, DVD didn't add $200 to the cost of the PS2. And it was an established format at the time. And it didn't have a competing format war to worry about. AND the jump from VHS to DVD was instantly recognizable, and didn't require a $1000 Television purchase, on top of the player, and new discs.

This next generation disc format thing is just too much too soon. Instead of raising the celing for developers to shove even more pretty garbage on a disc, how about they make the best use of what they have first. There's no reason you can't design a AAA title with excellent graphics and unique gameplay on a single dual layer DVD. Look at gears of war, zelda, final fantasy XII, Halo 2, MGS3, Okami, etc. etc. etc.

Blu-Ray is UNNESSECARY.[/QUOTE]

And given the hardware architecture of the PS3, it's hard to say that BR alone jacked up the price $200. It has wireless capability, which MS did not include, and charges $100 for an optional adapter for. It has the PS2 and PS1 chipset on board, something MS clearly did not include in the 360. Care to guess what a 360 would cost you if they had an Xbox on board as well?

Let's give MS and Sony the benefit of the doubt, and oversimplify this: let's just say the difference between the $500 and $600 PS3 is the wi-fi (and ignore card readers and the other addons). So Sony and MS value wireless access at $100; they're equal on that regard. If you think that, well, then it's absurd to claim that the BR add-on is "$200 more" than anything, especially when the 20GB PS3, which is $100 more than the Premium 360, features the following in common with, or superior to, the MS console:

no wireless
20GB drive
online play (though free for Sony)
95-98% backwards compatible with all those PS1 and PS2 games you own
downloadable content
Games for purchase for your PSP
and Blu-ray playback.

So, for $100, and NOT $200, more than the cost of the 360, you get BR playback capability. So let's not play this hypothetical game where we all think the PS3 would launch at $400 if it featured a DVD drive, because we don't know. We can guess that it sure wouldn't be $500/600. But to say that PS3 buyers are being forced to pay $200 more for Blu-Ray is an absurdity, when there are only marginal differences between the $500 and $600 PS3, absolutely ZERO of which have anything to do with the Blu-Ray drive.
 
[quote name='Kayden']I'm debating the issues. You're making character attacks. Theres no point in debating with you as once your views are challenged you start calling names.

Now take your ball and go home.[/QUOTE]

IIm sorry if it seems im making cheap shots or personal attacks but its what your doing. You debate the issue but into a circle. You sound like a fanboy and say alot of stuff thats just off and biased....then when called on it by multiple people say something a bit more fair and balanced.

It seems like your trying to play both sides. Your saying stuff thats just wrong about the PS3 by arguing the price tag and blu ray...but then turn around and say the opposite.
 
[quote name='jer7583']
This next generation disc format thing is just too much too soon. Instead of raising the celing for developers to shove even more pretty garbage on a disc, how about they make the best use of what they have first. There's no reason you can't design a AAA title with excellent graphics and unique gameplay on a single dual layer DVD. Look at gears of war, zelda, final fantasy XII, Halo 2, MGS3, Okami, etc. etc. etc.

Blu-Ray is UNNESSECARY.[/QUOTE]
If DVD games have topped out, meaning some games need more than a single dvd. Would that not be making the best of what they had. You really cannot throw FF 12 on that pile, the game has lag problems because there is so much stuff on screen at one time.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']IIm sorry if it seems im making cheap shots or personal attacks but its what your doing. You debate the issue but into a circle. You sound like a fanboy and say alot of stuff thats just off and biased....then when called on it by multiple people say something a bit more fair and balanced.

It seems like your trying to play both sides. Your saying stuff thats just wrong about the PS3 by arguing the price tag and blu ray...but then turn around and say the opposite.[/quote]

So, I'm arguing both sides of the issue, but still a fan boy?

Yes, I can criticize the PS3 and Sony without raving about how much they deserve to fail or how much better the Wii is. Criticism and respect are not mutually exclusive. The sooner you realize this, the sooner you too can join bigboy conversations.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Stop arguing in circles, prick. We're all about name-calling here. ;)[/quote]

Its not so much arguing in circles as it is bringing up the same point they keep avoiding. :p
 
[quote name='Kayden']So, I'm arguing both sides of the issue, but still a fan boy?

Yes, I can criticize the PS3 and Sony without raving about how much they deserve to fail or how much better the Wii is. Criticism and respect are not mutually exclusive. The sooner you realize this, the sooner you too can join bigboy conversations.[/QUOTE]

Not what im saying. First let me say you tell me not to use personal attacks but you have done it multiple times to me through multiple topics. Just like myvmikdjfa or whatever his illogical name is you just come into topics and act like a jackass. You have been this way since before you even changed your avatar and again you started acting like him around the same time. I almost wonder if you guys arnt the same acount. You post in most of the same topics and act the same way. You also were both cool and atleast somewhat polit efor awhile then bam you went off the deep end.

Anyways when the odds are against you you act a little polite for awhile...and then flip flop. Kinda like you do with your arguments. Its not that you say something mean then something nice. Its that you say some really really idiotic stuff....then something logical...but it actually relates which makes it seem like your flip flopping.

For instance you say something about Blu Ray and how great it is and its not jacking up the price. Then turn and make comments which almost imply otherwise and dont go along with it.

Anyways. Telling you the same I told the other grumpy guy with the funny name. Act like an adult(or as you would say, talk like a big boy)or ill just block your ass too. I dont have time for children.
 
[quote name='Kayden']Its not so much arguing in circles as it is bringing up the same point they keep avoiding. :p[/quote]
Your math is arbitrary, and you're not factoring in the research being put into methods of compression.

Gears of War clocks in at around 6gig. You should be using that as a more accurate measuring stick.
 
[quote name='Kayden']DELTED[/QUOTE]

To go back and give you one last chance at having an adult conversation. Its not that we are avoiding the issues, its that your posts are logical from the sense of someone who appreciates these things. But MANY people do not feel the same way as you. The lagging PS3 sales which YOU choose to ignore show this.

DVDs were neccesary. maybe we could have kept on with carts but it wasnt logical at the time. From a logistical stand point it was time to move on. Developers wanted it and educated gamers did too. Now though DVDs hold ALOT of information, especially the newer ones. Blu Ray is a good medium, it could even be considered a neccesary one....JUST NOT YET. Sony pushed it too soon and as a result it upped the price of the console which pissed off gamers and is making the system not sell.

Multiple CDs were used in the PSX era and even a few games this gen used multiple disks. With new disks holding more and more data and the option to use multiple cheaper disks we didnt need to upgrade, or atleast not to Blu Ray which is far too costly.

You can argue whatever you want, but as we are seeing with the PSP vs the DS and now the 360 vs the PS3 Sony has a habit of pushing shit others dont want. You can defend them all you want but its a simple fact. Blue ray was not NEEDED, it was an option and a dumb one. Added to the fact that sony has acted arrogant, abused power etc etc etc people have a right to say fuck Sony and the PS3 is a bad console. It can and WILL be a good console, but its a few years ahead of its time....and a few hundred ahead as a result.

Multiple people have choosen to say this kind of stuff to you which to 80% of gamers seems to be the feeling....but you choose to ignore it and just keep focusing on YOUR opinion and why it must be right. If the PS3 seems to not be tech to far ahead of its time to you and a quality system....great.But the rest of us disagree. The whole flippin industry seems to disagree.
 
When I made this thread, I wanted it to be about casual fans, not technical issues an everyday joe would not understand.

I wanted us to talk about how this article, and other similar articles/news reports, would have an impact on the casual community. I really wish it had not turned into this.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']To go back and give you one last chance at having an adult conversation. Its not that we are avoiding the issues, its that your posts are logical from the sense of someone who appreciates these things. But MANY people do not feel the same way as you. The lagging PS3 sales which YOU choose to ignore show this.

[/QUOTE]
But Sony has sold over 1 million units.
 
Why didn't you say so!? Please, just ignore me now.

PS- If you thought myke was an asshole before, wait until he finds out you incinuated we're the same person. :hot:

[quote name='MSI Magus']Not what im saying. First let me say you tell me not to use personal attacks but you have done it multiple times to me through multiple topics. Just like myvmikdjfa or whatever his illogical name is you just come into topics and act like a jackass. You have been this way since before you even changed your avatar and again you started acting like him around the same time. I almost wonder if you guys arnt the same acount. You post in most of the same topics and act the same way. You also were both cool and atleast somewhat polit efor awhile then bam you went off the deep end.

Anyways when the odds are against you you act a little polite for awhile...and then flip flop. Kinda like you do with your arguments. Its not that you say something mean then something nice. Its that you say some really really idiotic stuff....then something logical...but it actually relates which makes it seem like your flip flopping.

For instance you say something about Blu Ray and how great it is and its not jacking up the price. Then turn and make comments which almost imply otherwise and dont go along with it.

Anyways. Telling you the same I told the other grumpy guy with the funny name. Act like an adult(or as you would say, talk like a big boy)or ill just block your ass too. I dont have time for children.[/quote]
 
[quote name='evilmax17']Your math is arbitrary, and you're not factoring in the research being put into methods of compression.

Gears of War clocks in at around 6gig. You should be using that as a more accurate measuring stick.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. And again why cant we use multiple disks, we have done it before. Plus the less space a developer seems to have the better they seem to get at compressing. People did alot of stuff towards the end of every gen with limited amounts of spaces people thought not possible. Blu Ray is just sooooo much space that it allows developers to be lazy and just slop data on.
 
[quote name='Kayden']Why didn't you say so!? Please, just ignore me now.

PS- If you thought myke was an asshole before, wait until he finds out you incinuated we're the same person. :hot:[/QUOTE]

Wont matter to me, hes on ignore. I had him on it before but someone quoted a few of his posts in a different topic...it seemed he had matured and I unblocked him. Apparently he is still the same childish jackass though and he keeps tossing out really hurtfull personal attacks so back to ignore. Should be ammusing for the rest of you atleast watching him rant and rave like he always seems to...but this time at a person that cant even see what he types. Kinda like watching a crazy person talk to a wall ;)
 
[quote name='evilmax17']Your math is arbitrary, and you're not factoring in the research being put into methods of compression.

Gears of War clocks in at around 6gig. You should be using that as a more accurate measuring stick.[/quote]

I don't have gears, so I really don't know much about it. Is it in 720p? I would assume...

Maybe I'm norribly wrong. Maybe BluRay disks will never come close to filling to completion. Or maybe games will become so big that they'll span 5 DVDs. Or maybe the quality of games will be reduced so they fit on 1 DVD.

Time will tell, I'm just going off of what I've seen in the past and what I see now.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']To go back and give you one last chance at having an adult conversation. Its not that we are avoiding the issues, its that your posts are logical from the sense of someone who appreciates these things. But MANY people do not feel the same way as you. The lagging PS3 sales which YOU choose to ignore show this.

DVDs were neccesary. maybe we could have kept on with carts but it wasnt logical at the time. From a logistical stand point it was time to move on. Developers wanted it and educated gamers did too. Now though DVDs hold ALOT of information, especially the newer ones. Blu Ray is a good medium, it could even be considered a neccesary one....JUST NOT YET. Sony pushed it too soon and as a result it upped the price of the console which pissed off gamers and is making the system not sell.

Multiple CDs were used in the PSX era and even a few games this gen used multiple disks. With new disks holding more and more data and the option to use multiple cheaper disks we didnt need to upgrade, or atleast not to Blu Ray which is far too costly.

You can argue whatever you want, but as we are seeing with the PSP vs the DS and now the 360 vs the PS3 Sony has a habit of pushing shit others dont want. You can defend them all you want but its a simple fact. Blue ray was not NEEDED, it was an option and a dumb one. Added to the fact that sony has acted arrogant, abused power etc etc etc people have a right to say fuck Sony and the PS3 is a bad console. It can and WILL be a good console, but its a few years ahead of its time....and a few hundred ahead as a result.

Multiple people have choosen to say this kind of stuff to you which to 80% of gamers seems to be the feeling....but you choose to ignore it and just keep focusing on YOUR opinion and why it must be right. If the PS3 seems to not be tech to far ahead of its time to you and a quality system....great.But the rest of us disagree. The whole flippin industry seems to disagree.[/QUOTE]

I like the high and mighty tone of this post, as I think MSI really believes that he's putting forth facts. Undeniable, objective, empirically varifiable FACTS. Of course, I recognize that "saying it does not make it so." I only wish that others could. I've taken the liberty of bolding each thing he says which he seems to claim as fact, but is not only NOT factual, but lacks supporting evidence. This is just fundamental "logical" argument; a word he likes to use quite often, ironically. To paraphrase a quote from Mandy Patinkin, I do not think that word means what you think it means.

So, we can all agree that DVD, as a format, has a limited shelf life, just like those that followed it. The argument, then, is when will it be obsolete on the console end? Sony predicts sooner than MS and Nintendo think,but ultimately nobody, least of all someone who has brought nary a goddamned fact into this thread, can predict when it will find itself being outdated.

Now, MSI, you may "ignore" me, but you still read my posts: since you've resisted the challenge to bring genuine data-based fact into this debate, I will take the high-and-mighty approach (and I'm VASTLY more qualified for that throne, darlin'), and ask you this: what data do you have, what proof do you have, to support your claim that the PS3 is not selling? I'll be waiting with bated breath.

[quote name='MSI Magus']Wont matter to me, hes on ignore. I had him on it before but someone quoted a few of his posts in a different topic...it seemed he had matured and I unblocked him. Apparently he is still the same childish jackass though and he keeps tossing out really hurtfull personal attacks so back to ignore. Should be ammusing for the rest of you atleast watching him rant and rave like he always seems to...but this time at a person that cant even see what he types. Kinda like watching a crazy person talk to a wall ;)[/QUOTE]

Such a flirt. I like that I matter to someone whose ignore list I'm on. It's funny, Kayden...I forgot that I had at one time dubbed you my least favorite CAG. Now I need a composition book to create that list.
 
[quote name='Kayden']DELETED[/QUOTE]

You made these calculations under the assumption that sound, menu, and model data will incrase by the same amount that resolution increases by. How much of that MGS3 data is pure audio and music? How much of Halo 2's data is for the tons of audio(spoken and sound effects) recorded for that game?

A game with comparable graphics/length but far less recorded audio (but much more pre-rendered movies, something that's becoming far less common in next gen games), FFXII weighs in at a much smaller size.

You can't simply multiply the total by a single number and expect that to be the size of a 720p/1080p game. Texture data is really the only thing that increases with higher resolutions. Model data is marginal, as it's simply vertexes and points in 3d space. AI programming, again, doesn't really add to the size of the game. Also factor in that pre-rendered videos which eat up space like crazy aren't going to be needed as much. Texture and Audio data are the two biggest parts of a game. Texture data is going to increase with next gen games. Audio.. not so much.

I'd like to see kayden argue that having a game on 1 disc instead of two in the case of something like MGS4 or even FFXIII would justify the purchase of a system costing just $100 more, for the purpose of keeping it on one disc, alone.
 
[quote name='Kayden']I don't have gears, so I really don't know much about it. Is it in 720p? I would assume...

Maybe I'm norribly wrong. Maybe BluRay disks will never come close to filling to completion. Or maybe games will become so big that they'll span 5 DVDs. Or maybe the quality of games will be reduced so they fit on 1 DVD.

Time will tell, I'm just going off of what I've seen in the past and what I see now.[/QUOTE]

Well another thing to think about is do we really want games that fill Blu Ray disks? Frat boy and tech whores love this new stuff. But ALOT of gamers are saying why am I paying $10 extra for games and why does every game have to be a blockbuster epic? Even developers like Cliffy B are saying they want game prices to come down and a return of simpler games. I dont think anyone is saying lets go back to pong.....but if people focused a little on older tech at a lower cost we could see games like Okami coming out more often and for HALF the price.

Blu Ray and Sony are just encouraging the inflation of the industry and it becoming epics only with no room for small fun stuff.
 
Your right. The entire game isn't textures and Halo 2 and MGS3 are very audio intensive. However, even half of 35GB is 16.5gb or 2 DVDs. As a computer gamer, I find even putting in 1 disk a rediculous task as all of the data is already on the harddrive. :lol:

But seriously... So the 20GB costs $100 more than the Premium 360. If you assume all things are equal (even though they arent) and that you are paying $100 for BluRay playing, you're still ahead. With the 360 the HDDVD addon is $200 and doesn't support BR games. Tired example, I know. But you prefer that arangement as it means MS is giving you a choice. HDDVD is option. Well, guess what? BluRay playback is optional too. Sony isn't twisting your arm off making you buy it. If they're such a horrible fucking company just leave them to the fuckin crows. If Sony is doomed to failure they'll go tits up with out you prophesizing their down fall on messageboards.

This thread is about as productive as every other thread involving the mention of Sony, BluRay or the PS3.

[quote name='jer7583']You made these calculations under the assumption that sound, menu, and model data will incrase by the same amount that resolution increases by. How much of that MGS3 data is pure audio and music? How much of Halo 2's data is for the tons of audio(spoken and sound effects) recorded for that game?

A game with comparable graphics/length but far less recorded audio (but much more pre-rendered movies, something that's becoming far less common in next gen games), FFXII weighs in at a much smaller size.

You can't simply multiply the total by a single number and expect that to be the size of a 720p/1080p game. Texture data is really the only thing that increases with higher resolutions. Model data is marginal, as it's simply vertexes and points in 3d space. AI programming, again, doesn't really add to the size of the game. Also factor in that pre-rendered videos which eat up space like crazy aren't going to be needed as much. Texture and Audio data are the two biggest parts of a game. Texture data is going to increase with next gen games. Audio.. not so much.

I'd like to see kayden argue that having a game on 1 disc instead of two in the case of something like MGS4 or even FFXIII would justify the purchase of a system costing just $100 more, for the purpose of keeping it on one disc, alone.[/quote]
 
[quote name='Kayden']Your right. The entire game isn't textures and Halo 2 and MGS3 are very audio intensive. However, even half of 35GB is 16.5gb or 2 DVDs. As a computer gamer, I find even putting in 1 disk a rediculous task as all of the data is already on the harddrive. :lol:

But seriously... So the 20GB costs $100 more than the Premium 360. If you assume all things are equal (even though they arent) and that you are paying $100 for BluRay playing, you're still ahead. With the 360 the HDDVD addon is $200 and doesn't support BR games. Tired example, I know. But you prefer that arangement as it means MS is giving you a choice. HDDVD is option. Well, guess what? BluRay playback is optional too. Sony isn't twisting your arm off making you buy it. If they're such a horrible fucking company just leave them to the fuckin crows. If Sony is doomed to failure they'll go tits up with out you prophesizing their down fall on messageboards.

This thread is about as productive as every other thread involving the mention of Sony, BluRay or the PS3.[/QUOTE]

Amazing! I think we have a forfeiture of the arguement! Kayden sees why it's a good idea for some (imo: most) people to have a choice for a next gen disc drive!

I'd say that's productive.
 
[quote name='jer7583']Amazing! I think we have a forfeiture of the arguement! Kayden sees why it's a good idea for some (imo: most) people to have a choice for a next gen disc drive!

I'd say that's productive.[/quote]

:sigh:

Leaving you to measure eachother's dicks isn't forfeiting.
 
[quote name='jer7583']Amazing! I think we have a forfeiture of the arguement! Kayden sees why it's a good idea for some (imo: most) people to have a choice for a next gen disc drive!

I'd say that's productive.[/QUOTE]

Now, if we can work on getting some people out of the mindset that BR/HDDVD are completely and absolutely unnecessary attractions that have zero upside to them whatsoever.

And I'm glad to see that you're now talking about the BR drive as a $100 upgrade over the price of a 360 Premium. Now, how can we whittle that down as a result of the cost difference between a system that includes the hardware from its previous itertation (PS3) and that which does not (360)?

:lol:
 
My point is that for people who don't want a Blu-Ray player, the PS3 becomes worthless and overpriced next to the 360, talking completely outside of the two systems' other relative merits/faults.

Now, how many people want a blu-ray player? that's the real question.
 
I disagree that each system's relative merits/faults should be omitted from the equation, because not mentioning them leads to the very incorrect assumption that they are actually rather similar under the hood, save for the DVD/BR controversy.

Knowing that they are different becomes quite crucial when trying to assert whether or not the BR drive is the sole contributing factor to how "overpriced" the PS3 is.
 
[quote name='jer7583']

Now, how many people want a blu-ray player? that's the real question.[/QUOTE]

Lets take it a step further, how many people even know anything about HD, HDdvd or Blu-ray?

Besides my brother, no one else that I know personally knows what 720p, 180i/p, hdmi, etc etc etc even are.

The only people in my family who watch high def shows are the ones who had comcast come in and set up their cable for them.

Now I know that this is only a small sample size and really doesn't mean anything, but I find it interesting no less.

I think some people here lose sight that the casual fan of games knows next to nothing about the techincal side of things.
 
[quote name='seanr1221']Lets take it a step further, how many people even know anything about HD, HDdvd or Blu-ray?

Besides my brother, no one else that I know personally knows what 720p, 180i/p, hdmi, etc etc etc even are.

The only people in my family who watch high def shows are the ones who had comcast come in and set up their cable for them.

Now I know that this is only a small sample size and really doesn't mean anything, but I find it interesting no less.

I think some people here lose sight that the casual fan of games knows next to nothing about the techincal side of things.[/QUOTE]

Thats what I was mentioning but Kayden and others simply did not want to hear. A tech wont do well untill the people understand what exactly it is and feel its price is justified. The PS2 came at a time whenever people other then tech buffs were getting intreasted in owning a DVD player so it was an awsome addition and the system didnt cost that much over what people felt was a standard at that time. People were upset with spending extra on an Xbox 360 but even if it was an increase it was a reasonable one. The PS3 on the other hand is DOUBLE the price of its predecsor and the addition in the system is not only a tech that people have never heard of....but one that renders all those DVDs they bought useless. The upgrade from CD to DVD was understood and went hand in hand with the upgrade from VHS to DVD. But DVD to blu ray makes no sense. Most people feel like hey I just bought this damn thing 3-6 years ago(depdning on when you got it)why the hell should I spend twice as much for something that renders what I just bought useless.

You can say we are measuring our dicks all you want. And you can say Blu Ray this and 720p that....but when it comes down to it the masses neither understand nor are ready to understand what this stuff is. An upgrade was fine...but the difference between Blu Ray to most people doesnt feel like a large jump like it was from CD to DVD - VHS to DVD. Argue all you want but it is just a fact. The difference doesnt appear as large and thus the price feels(and is)unjustified and pisses people off.

Quick question for you Kayden. Are you a bit of a tech nut? Iv got no clue about how much DVDs hold exactly nor do I own a HD TV yet. But you seem to know about this stuff and have an intreast in it. If this is the case have you stopped and thought that because this is an intreast of yours it seems awsome and worthwhile....but the rest of us are about video games and price, or in the American publics case, simplicity and price....and thus why you feel soooo differently then everyone else and must argue this?
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']You can say we are measuring our dicks all you want. And you can say Blu Ray this and 720p that....but when it comes down to it the masses neither understand nor are ready to understand what this stuff is. An upgrade was fine...but the difference between Blu Ray to most people doesnt feel like a large jump like it was from CD to DVD - VHS to DVD. Argue all you want but it is just a fact. The difference doesnt appear as large and thus the price feels(and is)unjustified and pisses people off.[/QUOTE]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/12/25/eveningnews/main2295198.shtml

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/IndustryInfo/story?id=2722762

Sorry to report that your concept of "fact," which is yet again lacking any support whatsoever (there are few things that are "just a fact," hombre, and your analogy, which is highly debatable, is yet another example of something that is not "just a fact"), is refuted by holiday sales. If "the masses" aren't ready for HDTV or PS3, then perhaps you can explain to me why the sales of HDTVs spiked during this holiday?

Then again, perhaps I'm setting myself up for disappointment; I already asked you once to backup your claim that PS3 systems weren't selling, and that Kayden was living in la-la land since he thought they were selling out everywhere. You failed to show you have anything at all, except the nonsense in your head, to backup your claims then, so I'm not sure why I think you'll do it now.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']
Quick question for you Kayden. Are you a bit of a tech nut? Iv got no clue about how much DVDs hold exactly nor do I own a HD TV yet. But you seem to know about this stuff and have an intreast in it. If this is the case have you stopped and thought that because this is an intreast of yours it seems awsome and worthwhile....but the rest of us are about video games and price, or in the American publics case, simplicity and price....and thus why you feel soooo differently then everyone else and must argue this?[/quote]

If building PCs for a living is any answer to your question...

I think one of the biggest problems in this "discussion" is that, while there are people on the same side, there aren't people talking about the same ideas. Some people are talking about the PS3 itself is a failure, others say Sony is going under and then some are just talking about the benefits of the inclusion of BluRay. Its hard to have a civil discussion when no one is even on the same terms.

I don't give a shit about the average mass market. I'm not here to debate the worth of a BluRay player to Grandma Kettle. I don't care if Johnboy understands the pros and cons of intergrated wifi connectivity.

My point (if I even have one) is that right or wrong, Sony has a BluRay player in the PS3. Arguing over Sony's decision to include it now is a bit like deciding whether or not we should have crucified Jesus. In otherwords, a bit late. If you don't agree with their decision, ok. We're all entitled to our own opinions, I just don't get what you guys feel you achive by making "facts" up and wishing for the death of Sony. Thats a little generalized as there are about a half dozen people all with different points and I'm trying to address you all at once.

PS3s on store shelves? I don't doubt it. However, that only equates "massive failure" only if some large volume were going unsold. Time says the PS3 is a failure? Going to Time for videogame advice is like consulting the pope on moves from the Kama Sutra. Unless you (you being anyone) can provide a source beyond your cousin in Tulsa who saw'd a PeeEshTree on one o dem Wallyworld shelfs, your argument is nothing more than smoke.

Then on to the people saying its only selling as well as it is because of scalpers. Well, whos buying from them? No one? Wouldn't they then return it to a store? No news of lacking sales OR massive returns? Imagine that...

I know my fair share of Joe Stupids. Two of them own PS3 and know dick about tech. They think they're the best thing ever. Better than the Wii, better than the 360.

Just because you think Sony made a bad move doesn't mean "80% of the world thinks Sony sucks".

If there are any more "facts" put into this thread without even the slightest bit of supporting evidence, I'm going to come to your house and skull fuck you.
 
Jesus was killed how long ago? The PS3 is still active. Yes Sony has included it so its said and done, but the system JUST came out and its GOING to be a current debate if you like it or not. This is a video game message board and the industry giant has just dropped a $600 gauntlet down in alot of peoples opinions. Maybe you dont take gaming seriously at all, but as I and others have said while its not our lives, its a fair portion of it. Sony doing what they have done is horrid for the industry in alot of peoples opinions and this means we will continue to be vocal about it.

You also cant simply say that the cats out of the bag stop talking about it given that Sony themselves are still pushing this issue. It seems almost every week Sony is making some kind of arrogant quote about the PS3. This keeps this an issue in many peoples minds. And that they are making those comments in and of itself is an issue. Sony is a giant corporation that not only released a system at double the standard cost....but they did so with the attitude of fuck you peasents you will buy this if it was an old genesis with a Playstation name on it.

Much like how you seem to stereotype anyone saying anything negative about the PS3 as an idiot crying for the downfall of the company, Sony themselves has stereotyped all of us gamers as idiots and that pisses me off.

Maybe these are not mathamatical facts that you can sit and digest and say ill be damned about.....but whenever most gamers are up in arms, Sonys stock is down, Sony is making these arrogant quotes, sales are down, sales dont meet Xbox 360 launch sales, etc etc etc etc etc then its easy to say its a fact that Sony is having a very hard time, made some very wrong moves and needs to act like adults and say we fucked up vs saying if you dont like us shitting on you how about a golden shower bitchs. And things like 80% is just an exagerated quote. I dont honestly think 80% of people feel that way, not that id be suprised. I just see that ALOT if not most of gamers and the industry(just read any game news site)are pissed at Sony and feel they fucked up. Thats what this whole thread is about. Time said they fucked up, IGN did, 1up did.....at this point again im sorry but it seems 80% of people are saying its messed up.

Seriously, im not calling for the downfall of Sony. Im not hoping they go the way of the dodo. And I dont really think your a fanboy(that was a missunderstanding). I just think Sony has made some mistakes and they are ones that are very very bad for the industry. Instead of admitting said mistakes Sony continues down this path AND insults us. Again bad for the industry. If you disagree thats fine. But whenever most people seem to feel this way you cant expect to come in here and act like you have(essentially calling us idiots and making fun of what we believe)and not expect people to be upset.....hehe no offense your kinda acting like Sony. Making mistakes then instead of just saying welp I fucked up(and dont even fire back saying for me to do it because I already said I was wrong calling you a fanboy, I fucked up)and then just firing off insults and further pissing people off.
 
As jer7583 pointed out, having a DVD drive in the PS2 is totally different from having a BR drive in the PS3. If you're not a fanboy Kayden you shouldn't have any problem seeing that.
 
I read the first few lines and saw you missed my point entirely. I'm not even going to respond to the rest of that.

[quote name='MSI Magus']Jesus was killed how long ago? The PS3 is still active. Yes Sony has included it so its said and done, but the system JUST came out and its GOING to be a current debate if you like it or not. This is a video game message board and the industry giant has just dropped a $600 gauntlet down in alot of peoples opinions. Maybe you dont take gaming seriously at all, but as I and others have said while its not our lives, its a fair portion of it. Sony doing what they have done is horrid for the industry in alot of peoples opinions and this means we will continue to be vocal about it.

You also cant simply say that the cats out of the bag stop talking about it given that Sony themselves are still pushing this issue. It seems almost every week Sony is making some kind of arrogant quote about the PS3. This keeps this an issue in many peoples minds. And that they are making those comments in and of itself is an issue. Sony is a giant corporation that not only released a system at double the standard cost....but they did so with the attitude of fuck you peasents you will buy this if it was an old genesis with a Playstation name on it.

Much like how you seem to stereotype anyone saying anything negative about the PS3 as an idiot crying for the downfall of the company, Sony themselves has stereotyped all of us gamers as idiots and that pisses me off.

Maybe these are not mathamatical facts that you can sit and digest and say ill be damned about.....but whenever most gamers are up in arms, Sonys stock is down, Sony is making these arrogant quotes, sales are down, sales dont meet Xbox 360 launch sales, etc etc etc etc etc then its easy to say its a fact that Sony is having a very hard time, made some very wrong moves and needs to act like adults and say we fucked up vs saying if you dont like us shitting on you how about a golden shower bitchs. And things like 80% is just an exagerated quote. I dont honestly think 80% of people feel that way, not that id be suprised. I just see that ALOT if not most of gamers and the industry(just read any game news site)are pissed at Sony and feel they fucked up. Thats what this whole thread is about. Time said they fucked up, IGN did, 1up did.....at this point again im sorry but it seems 80% of people are saying its messed up.

Seriously, im not calling for the downfall of Sony. Im not hoping they go the way of the dodo. And I dont really think your a fanboy(that was a missunderstanding). I just think Sony has made some mistakes and they are ones that are very very bad for the industry. Instead of admitting said mistakes Sony continues down this path AND insults us. Again bad for the industry. If you disagree thats fine. But whenever most people seem to feel this way you cant expect to come in here and act like you have(essentially calling us idiots and making fun of what we believe)and not expect people to be upset.....hehe no offense your kinda acting like Sony. Making mistakes then instead of just saying welp I fucked up(and dont even fire back saying for me to do it because I already said I was wrong calling you a fanboy, I fucked up)and then just firing off insults and further pissing people off.[/quote]
 
[quote name='Kayden']I read the first few lines and saw you missed my point entirely. I'm not even going to respond to the rest of that.[/QUOTE]

I love that most of this topic is people arguing against you....yet you claim YOUR missunderstood.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']I love that most of this topic is people arguing against you....yet you claim YOUR missunderstood.[/quote]

You're right. Why don't you go get another videogame tattoo'd on your flabby ass to celebrate?
 
[quote name='Kayden']I read the first few lines and saw you missed my point entirely. I'm not even going to respond to the rest of that.[/QUOTE]

You're just robbing yourself of the thrilling conclusion, you know. Because it's a fact that everybody on earth hates the blu-ray except for you. And perhaps maybe three other people. Just face the facts, that the PS3 is like a $7 trillion dollar turd pie with carmelizing pecans crust, because they are so much more expensive than the 360. We all know the PS3 is really $600 because nobody on earth can live without wi-fi or a card reader or chrome trim, which makes it totally wrong. It is not a fact, then, that the PS3 only costs $500, which is $100 more than the Premium 360. That's just wrong.

Sony is so arrogant. They make games and want us to buy them. 74% of people I just made up don't want games on the PS3. Ever. They just want to polish the PS3, have their fat girlfriend grind on it so they can sell it for a million dollars on eBay (praise the lord and pass the butter). Moreover, Sony's stock is down after hitting its highest point ever in April 2006. This is because nobody wants the Playstation 3. There is nothing Sony makes that is reflected in its stock price except for the Playstation. Face the facts. It's not like Sony makes movies; or televisions; or cameras. They are arrogant and just make Resistance and Playstations. So arrogant.

I read it in the internet forums and even that one guy at 1up said the PS3 is a failure, so it must be true. Gamers like me hate the Sony oppression and must stand up to the facist machine, or else we'll end up under their oppressive regime, forced to upgrade our video players to watch "Dunston Checks In" in 1080p. We must stand up, throw off our yokes of oppression, and fight the machine. And, by that, I mean, bitch on an internet message board and buy a Wii.

That really hurt to type, BTW. On a serious note, don't make fun of him for having tattoos, kurisu. Make fun of him for somehow affording next-gen games while being on SSI.
 
I know a TON of people who have HDTV's and they buy them for the sake of HAVING them. They dont actually use the HDTV parts of them.
 
All 3 console companies would do equally "bad" things if they had the chance. This is something all fanboys don't understand. Nintendo tried to control the entire industry, we all know what MS has done with Windows, and Sony has put spyware on its CDs. If you're actually a fan of any of these companies then you're an idiot.

For the current gen though, the Wii and PS3 are both ripoffs.
 
[quote name='rickonker']All 3 console companies would do equally "bad" things if they had the chance. This is something all fanboys don't understand. Nintendo tried to control the entire industry, we all know what MS has done with Windows, and Sony has put spyware on its CDs. If you're actually a fan of any of these companies then you're an idiot.

For the current gen though, the Wii and PS3 are both ripoffs.[/QUOTE]

Just because they would do it doesnt mean we should allow it while its happaning. When Nintendo was fucking up I complained and didnt support them. Now Sony is while Nintendos has changed and is doing cool and origional stuff thats cost effective. Thus Sony has my annoyance and Nintendo my support.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']Just because they would do it doesnt mean we should allow it while its happaning. When Nintendo was fucking up I complained and didnt support them. Now Sony is while Nintendos has changed and is doing cool and origional stuff thats cost effective. Thus Sony has my annoyance and Nintendo my support.[/QUOTE]
I agree with your strategy, but IMO Nintendo is not doing stuff that's cost effective. The Wii is not even close to being worth $250. It should be $150 or less, maybe $199 since it comes with Wii Sports.
 
[quote name='rickonker']I agree with your strategy, but IMO Nintendo is not doing stuff that's cost effective. The Wii is not even close to being worth $250. It should be $150 or less, maybe $199 since it comes with Wii Sports.[/QUOTE]

I think $200 with or without wii sports should have been the system price, and if they had launched at $200 id have camped out and got one. However it was a bit pricey for me. That doesnt mean though that Nintendo shouldnt be applauded for releasing a much cheaper and cool alternative. Beats $600 for a PS3, hell even beats $400 for a 360.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']I think $200 with or without wii sports should have been the system price, and if they had launched at $200 id have camped out and got one. However it was a bit pricey for me. That doesnt mean though that Nintendo shouldnt be applauded for releasing a much cheaper and cool alternative. Beats $600 for a PS3, hell even beats $400 for a 360.[/QUOTE]
I don't think it beats $299 for a 360. The 360 is a better value. And even if it's not, if you compare the Wii to the GameCube no way it's worth more than $149.
 
[quote name='rickonker']I don't think it beats $299 for a 360. The 360 is a better value. And even if it's not, if you compare the Wii to the GameCube no way it's worth more than $149.[/QUOTE]

See your just going from a graphics stand point. Nintendo still put alot of time, effort and money into the controller as well as onlline and other componets. They wanted the system to only cost $100 at first but it just kept adding up. It costs a little more then it should but not alot. And again when you think about the 360 and where its library is lacking, then that live is an extra $50, plus other expenses....ya id rather have a Wii. The 360 is a great system too dont get me wrong, and its going to get better. But it still has those costs and it still needs some more exclusives(and trust that hit games stay exclusive)with Nintendo games we know they stay exclusive.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']See your just going from a graphics stand point. Nintendo still put alot of time, effort and money into the controller as well as onlline and other componets. They wanted the system to only cost $100 at first but it just kept adding up. It costs a little more then it should but not alot. And again when you think about the 360 and where its library is lacking, then that live is an extra $50, plus other expenses....ya id rather have a Wii. The 360 is a great system too dont get me wrong, and its going to get better. But it still has those costs and it still needs some more exclusives(and trust that hit games stay exclusive)with Nintendo games we know they stay exclusive.[/QUOTE]
No, I'm going by all features, not just graphics. And are you seriously taking Nintendo's word that they "wanted the system to only cost $100"? They are making a huge profit on each Wii sold.
 
[quote name='rickonker']No, I'm going by all features, not just graphics. And are you seriously taking Nintendo's word that they "wanted the system to only cost $100"? They are making a huge profit on each Wii sold.[/quote]Perhaps on hardware, but not when you factor in the R&D. Nintendo easily invested more in the R&D of the Wii than Microsoft for Sony did in their respective systems (assuming, of course, that you separate the Cell processor and BluRay apart from the PS3 R&D, as it's for a broader range of products, not just the game consoles).

That Wii Remote isn't just a mew controller hastily tacked on to a gamecube. That thing is refined.

The current guess is that Nintendo is making about $40 on each system sold. I guess that's a "huge" profit in the the long run. I just have to ask, "So?" That means Nintendo is in no danger of going belly-up as they're not losing a darn thing on their systems. Both Sony and Microsoft have broader plans for their system lines than just games, and they're willing to spend some money to get that to happen, but even long-range plans can't be a money-pit forever.

If the Wii isn't worth it to you for the money, wait. It'll have price drops in the not-so-distant future. That's the strategy I've got with the 360 at the moment. :)
 
[quote name='daroga']Perhaps on hardware, but not when you factor in the R&D. Nintendo easily invested more in the R&D of the Wii than Microsoft for Sony did in their respective systems (assuming, of course, that you separate the Cell processor and BluRay apart from the PS3 R&D, as it's for a broader range of products, not just the game consoles).

That Wii Remote isn't just a mew controller hastily tacked on to a gamecube. That thing is refined.

The current guess is that Nintendo is making about $40 on each system sold. I guess that's a "huge" profit in the the long run. I just have to ask, "So?" That means Nintendo is in no danger of going belly-up as they're not losing a darn thing on their systems. Both Sony and Microsoft have broader plans for their system lines than just games, and they're willing to spend some money to get that to happen, but even long-range plans can't be a money-pit forever.

If the Wii isn't worth it to you for the money, wait. It'll have price drops in the not-so-distant future. That's the strategy I've got with the 360 at the moment. :)[/QUOTE]

Exactly. Nintendo always makes profit so yes they could have lowered the price. But they are not making as much as ricker makes it out to be R&D is a HUGE expense and even if their online plan isnt as amazing as live its free which again means a big expense. When you buy a console you buy potential unless you wait till the middle of the gen. Each console will just take different amounts of time to reach its potential and be worth the cost of admission. I feel Nintendo will live up to its potential, especially given its low cost shortly because Nintendo alone releases so many good games which are exclusive. MS on the other hand while they do get some great exclusives now(Viva pinata!, Blue Dragon etc etc)far too many games will also be hitting PS3 and PC as well as costing $10 more, the system costing $200 more(come on if you get the core system your going to spend more buying the extras anyways)xbox live fees etc etc. Sony is just lagging far behind this gen where potential is concernced. They have ALOT but its going to take a LONG time for Blu Ray to truely show why its superior and that disk space really be taped into. The extra power of the system right now certainly isnt showing, and like Nintendo Sonys online aint impressive.

Again I feel the Wii being $150 less with a free game, free online, having Nintendo exclusives to back it and having a cool origional controller makes it the system most likly to reach its potential and my acceptable price point first.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']

I can't believe I'm having a conversation with someone who seriously used the phrase "just to pwn ya again bro." Not that I'm appalled at the grammatical use of "again," which would erroneously suggest that I was somehow put in my place to begin with (let alone once more)...I just can't read that and not feel like I'm debating Aristotlean philosophy with Pauly Shore.
[/QUOTE]

:rofl:

You sir, are a winrar!!! *

* Spelled badly on purpose, just for you
 
[quote name='daroga']Perhaps on hardware, but not when you factor in the R&D. Nintendo easily invested more in the R&D of the Wii than Microsoft for Sony did in their respective systems (assuming, of course, that you separate the Cell processor and BluRay apart from the PS3 R&D, as it's for a broader range of products, not just the game consoles).[/QUOTE]

:lol: Yes, if you take out the processor and the drive, the R&D costs do tend to dwindle, but that's a foolish thing to try to assert when making a comparison. Because other products are using it is no excuse; where would you apply the R&D costs, then? Moreover, I don't know of any Cell-based products on the horizon that aren't PS3. Have any been announced? If not, then I think that's something to keep in mind when making such comparisons.
 
[quote name='daroga']Perhaps on hardware, but not when you factor in the R&D. Nintendo easily invested more in the R&D of the Wii than Microsoft for Sony did in their respective systems (assuming, of course, that you separate the Cell processor and BluRay apart from the PS3 R&D, as it's for a broader range of products, not just the game consoles).

That Wii Remote isn't just a mew controller hastily tacked on to a gamecube. That thing is refined.

The current guess is that Nintendo is making about $40 on each system sold. I guess that's a "huge" profit in the the long run. I just have to ask, "So?" That means Nintendo is in no danger of going belly-up as they're not losing a darn thing on their systems. Both Sony and Microsoft have broader plans for their system lines than just games, and they're willing to spend some money to get that to happen, but even long-range plans can't be a money-pit forever.

If the Wii isn't worth it to you for the money, wait. It'll have price drops in the not-so-distant future. That's the strategy I've got with the 360 at the moment. :)[/QUOTE]
Do you have a link for the R&D costs? I'm not saying you're wrong but I would be seriously surprised if Nintendo spent more on R&D than even MS. My guess is that R&D costs for the 360 were much more than the Wii's, because of the CPU and GPU. And even for Sony, you'd have to count at least a part of the Cell development costs towards the PS3.

Did the Wii Remote really cost more to develop than the 360's brand new CPU and GPU? I know Nintendo didn't invent the motion sensing technology.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']:lol: Yes, if you take out the processor and the drive, the R&D costs do tend to dwindle, but that's a foolish thing to try to assert when making a comparison. Because other products are using it is no excuse; where would you apply the R&D costs, then? Moreover, I don't know of any Cell-based products on the horizon that aren't PS3. Have any been announced? If not, then I think that's something to keep in mind when making such comparisons.[/QUOTE]
There are a few but the market is very small for them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top