What's everybody's gripe about the PS3?

I'm actually Steve McQueen, I'm not just using that screen name for shits and giggles. It's true. I'm not making it up. 'Cause I'm on a message board. Believe me.
 
[quote name='Puppy']:roll: Oh, you mean like all the links provided by the original poster? :roll: I actually know hardware, I'm not just making stuff up.
[/QUOTE]


Yet, you are just making stuff up. Clearly a TV that only shows channel 25 is still a TV. Your own analogies even prove you wrong.
 
[quote name='shrike4242']
Eh, why am I bothering to explain anything to you, you're obviously an anti-MS fanboy. :roll:[/quote]

And we got Doom5 in here, who's obviously an Anti-Sony fanboy. So, it's pointless to try and explain anything to anyone in this thread because they're either Sony or MS fanboys. You'd do better to close the thread otherwise this is going to go on forever.
 
[quote name='Puppy']No, it's not. If it doesn't have an ATSC tuner and support all four formats, it's a monitor, not a TV. An HDTV by definition supports 720p, 1080i, 480p, and 480i.



No, it's a monitor. HDTVs HAVE to support the entire spec or they're by definition not an HDTV. It's like claiming a TV is a TV that doesn't have speakers, or only shows channel 25-that's not a TV.[/QUOTE]
1. A it shouldn't matter if you have a "monitor" or a "TV" to use a device that has nothing to do with television. If we were talking about why you can't watch your local ABC station OTA in 1080i then this would be a problem.

2. By your definition a 1080P set wouldn't be a HDTV ;)

3. Even using your own definition you don't need a "TV" to play PS3 only a monitor. I'm not sure why you are so set on this not being a fuck-up from Sony. They are claiming the competition doesn't have "True HD" but they aren't supporting 1080i (a much higher resolution then 720p).
 
You know something I like about my PS3 that I don't like about my Xbox 360?

I went into Best Buy today for a few last minute christmas gifts (I get finished fast), and saw Capcom Classics Collection 2 for PS2/Xbox. Well, I don't know if it will work on my 360, though I generally prefer to have Xbox versions of titles over PS2 counterparts. I know, however, that the PS2 version will work on my PS3.

Which one will I buy?

The PS2, of course. If you look at the database of "200 titles" that don't work, you'll see criteria that Microsoft would kill for in their backwards compatibility. Screen flickers, an off color, framerate drops during FMV - they all are part of the mighty 200.

There's simply no comparison between the two consoles' backwards compatibility. "Now, myke, does that justify a $200 price difference!?!?!" No, of course not. However, it is a significant difference, IMO, that's often neglected. I have three consoles hooked up to my television. I don't want 5, or 7, or any other massive number. Three is pushing it, IMO. I also have a lot of classic titles I want to play. Microsoft's plan with the 360 has killed any incentive I have to buy a new Xbox game. I don't know if an Xbox game that comes out next week is compatible with the 360, yet I am assured that a decade-old PS1 title will work on my PS3. That's a big difference, IMO.

No console is the perfect one this generation. Each has its upsides and downsides. But the worst part about it, from my standpoint, is that so many fucking people just latch onto any evidence that Sony is the devil and write off anything positive they do, (and here's the part that really pisses me off), I find myself agreeing more than disagreeing with that schmuck 'whoknows.'

fuck you all very much for that. ;)
 
[quote name='mykevermin']You know something I like about my PS3 that I don't like about my Xbox 360?

I went into Best Buy today for a few last minute christmas gifts (I get finished fast), and saw Capcom Classics Collection 2 for PS2/Xbox. Well, I don't know if it will work on my 360, though I generally prefer to have Xbox versions of titles over PS2 counterparts. I know, however, that the PS2 version will work on my PS3.[/quote]

I was like that too until the middle of last year when I realized the X-Box was dead-Microsoft doesn't even care about it. All of a sudden, the Playstation 2 looked a lot more appealing to me. It's a cruddy situation for publishers too. It'll be profitable to make PS2 games for quite a while, just as it was for PS1 games.

If you look at the database of "200 titles" that don't work, you'll see criteria that Microsoft would kill for in their backwards compatibility. Screen flickers, an off color, framerate drops during FMV - they all are part of the mighty 200.
Click to expand...

Yeah, exactly. There are games on there that have an occasionally weird looking save screen, or a green dot appears once in a while, or stuff like that. Meanwhile stuff that's supposedly compatible with the 360 is sometimes unbeatable, has vehicles falling through the level, has slowdown, etc.

No console is the perfect one this generation. Each has its upsides and downsides. But the worst part about it, from my standpoint, is that so many fucking people just latch onto any evidence that Sony is the devil and write off anything positive they do, (and here's the part that really pisses me off), I find myself agreeing more than disagreeing with that schmuck 'whoknows.'
Click to expand...

What I don't get about the Sony bashing is that Microsoft is a far worse corporation than Sony ever has been-even when Sony's had control of the game market. I mean if you're going to avoid Sony, you'd better also avoid Microsoft or you're a gigantic hypocrite.
 
[quote name='Puppy']What I don't get about the Sony bashing is that Microsoft is a far worse corporation than Sony ever has been-even when Sony's had control of the game market. I mean if you're going to avoid Sony, you'd better also avoid Microsoft or you're a gigantic hypocrite.[/quote]

:applause:

My thoughts exactly.
 
I as well. I dont want to be a nintendo fan. In fact i really wanted the ps3 to be 400 without blue ray, but it wasent. I think micro$oft as a corperation is about as evil as you can get. I also think sony needs to be knocked off its high horse for its fucked price tag. So that leves me with the wii i guess. I dident start on their side, but its more like i got forced into a conner. I just want something that plays good games dammit. I dont want a entertainment system.... bla....
 
Just play the games you enjoy and STFU already. Bitches that think company A: is evil, or company B: Is stuck up, need to realize MS/Nintendo/Sony are NOT non-profit organizations and they don't personally care about you. They want your business.
 
[quote name='Puppy']What I don't get about the Sony bashing is that Microsoft is a far worse corporation than Sony ever has been-even when Sony's had control of the game market. I mean if you're going to avoid Sony, you'd better also avoid Microsoft or you're a gigantic hypocrite.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. I can't figure out the "only one company can be inherently bad" kind of fanaticism we see here. I was just reading about the history of the Turbo-Grafx 16 on wiki (not a great source, I know...). It briefly discussed the kinds of anti-competitive practices that Nintendo engaged in to try and kill the market from within during the 16-bit wars.

Initially, the TurboGrafx-16 sold well in North America, but it generally suffered from a lack of support from third-party software developers and publishers. One reason for this was that many larger software companies such as Konami supported the PC Engine in Japan, but also produced games for Nintendo. Nintendo at the time had engaged in anti-competitive practices that were later ruled illegal, such as enforcing exclusive contracts and punishing developers who developed for more than one system with "chip shortages" around the holiday seasons. As a result of this practice, many developers were compelled to pick the immensely popular NES over the upstart NEC console, resulting in a catch-22 for the TurboGrafx-16 — most developers would only consider taking a risk on the TG-16 if it were more popular, and yet it could not become more popular because only a handful of North American publishers would support it. Accordingly, most of the games published for the TG-16 were produced by NEC and Hudson Soft.
Click to expand...

I recall Nintendo getting in trouble for these kinds of business practices. They aren't alone in that regard, but it's funny how history rewrites itself. Now that TG16 is part of the virtual console, and given wider public perception of Microsoft and the general disgust towards Sony's arrogance, somehow people think that Nintendo is the one "pure" company. Clearly that is not true.

I don't dislike Nintendo, to be fair. I just don't like bullshitting myself into believing one system or one company is factually better than the other. I'll save that shit for when I watch sports (though it's wrongly attributed then, too).
 
Didn't Nintendo also demand prominent and majority shelfspace from it's retailers? I seem to remember stories of Nintendo threatening to withold product if they didn't get their desired footprint in certain retailers.

Regardless, this generation isn't really about games anyway. It's about entertainment dollars and delivery systems. It's about getting that foothold in your livingroom and getting your monthly fee or microtransaction on a regular basis. I'm sure we will all be victims as the cable companies will be the next ally in this war as MS and Sony create allegiences with more and more media conglomerates. The war is just beginning, and the ammo isn't in those silly little DVD cases, it's movies, music, TV, and games on the side.
 
[quote name='furyk']And is graphical power that important? Squenix is famous for pushing any machine to the limit. They'll be able to milk any system for what it's worth (look at FFXII which was on the "weakest" system of last gen).[/QUOTE]

I guess graphical power is important to a point. The PS2 wasn't too much weaker than the other two consoles, and the amount of PS2s sold compared to the amount of GCN/XBoxs sold was so large that it was pretty much a no brainer. It's a bit different this time. The "weakest" is no longer 'slightly weaker', and it also offers a different style of play.
 
[quote name='dpatel']It's a bit different this time. The "weakest" is no longer 'slightly weaker', and it also offers a different style of play.[/QUOTE]

I'll be honest, I can't look at the Wii in the same fashion as the PS3 and 360. Sure, it's from Nintendo and it plays video games, but it's so radically different (from the graphical capabilities to the controller to the features or lack thereof) I can't seriously compare it to the other two consoles.
 
[quote name='White-Wolf']enix and square are having doubts about the ps3. They are holding off anounceing games. and its no longer a given that it will be on the ps3. sorry. I think ign had an article saying that they wanted to be more fair to other consoles with thier game releases and someplace kingdom hearts came up as one that may not be on the ps3. I will post it if i find it again.

remember square started on the nintendo.[/QUOTE]
You're wrong about the Square-Enix thing. All they said is that they dont want the PS3 to win by too much. I'm trying to find the exact quote, but as of now it does not mean FFXIII or any other games by Square-Enix will be cancelled on the PS3 and moved to another console.

EDIT: Here is the exact quote:

"We don't want the Playstation 3 to be the overwhelming loser, so we want to support them. But we don't want them to be the overwhelming winner either, so we can't support them too much."
 
[quote name='Doom5'] No hardware scaling. BIG MISTAKE for such a high-end and expensive gaming console. All CRT HDTV's are 1080i native, some upscale 720p nicely, some do a terrible job, some won't even accept a 720p signal. Why should I ditch my ISF calibrated tube that looks far superior to any LCD/DLP on the market so I'm not stuck playing in a downgraded 480p mode? I'll take my 1080i on my 360 via it's internal scaler.
[/QUOTE]

Bingo... This is my main reason. I was all set to sell my first one (preordered at EB) to cover the cost of getting one at Costco when they become plentiful (March, April?). Now I'm not so sure (well, I've done the selling part - I guess I can consider it as having paid for the Wii + accessories). Unless more games start coming out with the native 1080i available, the PS3 is useless for my HDTV setup. I don't have a 360 and was really craving an HD gaming setup. In general I'm much more interested in Sony's franchises - there's only a handful of games I'd want on the 360, and with Oblivion being one of those I was psyched when they announced it for PS3. I'd want a PS3 for HD FF, KH, RPG's in general, and games like Jak. (I have less than zero interest in Halo, GTA, or MGS so how those shakeout multi-console or not doesn't concern me).

I've had my TV for 3 years now and have never had an HD signal on it ;). To top it all off, it is a Sony model :rofl:. My TV, in particular, downscales 720p to 480p. So all those purty PS3 games will look plain on my TV. I have a Wii and am extremely pleased with that (though I'm waiting till mid-Dec on the component cables before playing Zelda - I've cursed out Nintendo plenty on CAG for not having these available at launch). I just can't see paying $600 for 480p gaming - sure, the Blu-Ray should look nice, and some games might start supporting 1080i/p. For now I've decided not to get one - IF they come out with a new version (or revision) with an upscaling chip I will probably give Sony my money. Or, possibly, if it looks like most future games will start supporting 1080i (I can live without any of the current games).
 
[quote name='dpatel']I guess graphical power is important to a point. The PS2 wasn't too much weaker than the other two consoles, and the amount of PS2s sold compared to the amount of GCN/XBoxs sold was so large that it was pretty much a no brainer. It's a bit different this time. The "weakest" is no longer 'slightly weaker', and it also offers a different style of play.[/QUOTE]

Well again, Final Fantasy XII-2 isn't a PSP game, it's a DS game (and the DS sure as heck isn't as powerful as the PSP/PS2). Square-Enix's loyalties will fall to whoever sells the most systems. Furthermore, while Final Fantasy is an RPG where graphics are key, the biggest RPG the company has in Japan is still Dragon Quest (which has never been seen as a graphics powerhouse). I doubt Square will outright support one company over another again, but I don't think it's above them to completely shift their loyalties based on what sells the most.
 
[quote name='Kaijufan']He is also wrong about the PS3's GPU being better then the 360's and the PS3 having a better CPU architecture. [/quote]

Those links are a good read. I actually went back to and read from page 1. Yes, truly an amazing attention to detail and full of knowledge. Like the classic analogy they use: a beastly high-powered car versus a nimble modest car.
 
End of story is PS3 turned out to be junk, plain and simple and if you were stupid enough to pay $800 to play resistance (which you can beat on HARD in 3 1/2 hrs!!!) then you should probably go on QVC and start getting suckered into buying more crap
 
[quote name='bmulligan']Didn't Nintendo also demand prominent and majority shelfspace from it's retailers? I seem to remember stories of Nintendo threatening to withold product if they didn't get their desired footprint in certain retailers.

Regardless, this generation isn't really about games anyway. It's about entertainment dollars and delivery systems. It's about getting that foothold in your livingroom and getting your monthly fee or microtransaction on a regular basis. I'm sure we will all be victims as the cable companies will be the next ally in this war as MS and Sony create allegiences with more and more media conglomerates. The war is just beginning, and the ammo isn't in those silly little DVD cases, it's movies, music, TV, and games on the side.[/QUOTE]

I don't recall the shelfspace situation. Doesn't mean it never happened, however. Nintendo's innocence the past few generations may not be from a change of heart, but, rather, the lack of leverage that it once had.

I'm genuinely happy with all three consoles so far. The true test will be what they look like in a year. What will my Wii/PS3 library (counting 1 each ATM) look like relative to my 360 library (12-13 games) by next Christmas? When offered a game for all three systems, which will I buy? Things like that.
 
[quote name='furyk']Well again, Final Fantasy XII-2 isn't a PSP game, it's a DS game (and the DS sure as heck isn't as powerful as the PSP/PS2). Square-Enix's loyalties will fall to whoever sells the most systems. Furthermore, while Final Fantasy is an RPG where graphics are key, the biggest RPG the company has in Japan is still Dragon Quest (which has never been seen as a graphics powerhouse). I doubt Square will outright support one company over another again, but I don't think it's above them to completely shift their loyalties based on what sells the most.[/QUOTE]

Good point. I didn't know there was going to be a XII-2. I guess, if Wii does garner a significant amount of the market, they would most likely shift loyalties to them. Although, in my opinion, the market is going to be pretty evenly split this time around. I still see the Final Fantasy series staying, for the most part, on the Playstation, but I can see Squares' games spread pretty evenly among the systems (unlike the last gen). I just hope PS3 gets Kingdom Hearts.


[quote name='Daddy']End of story is PS3 turned out to be junk, plain and simple and if you were stupid enough to pay $800 to play resistance (which you can beat on HARD in 3 1/2 hrs!!!) then you should probably go on QVC and start getting suckered into buying more crap[/QUOTE]

Yep, you are completely right. By that same token, pretty much every game system was "junk", since we are solely judging them from their launch titles.
 
[quote name='Daddy']End of story is PS3 turned out to be junk, plain and simple and if you were stupid enough to pay $800 to play resistance (which you can beat on HARD in 3 1/2 hrs!!!) then you should probably go on QVC and start getting suckered into buying more crap[/quote]

can a person be banned based on stupidity?
 
[quote name='dpatel']Yep, you are completely right. By that same token, pretty much every game system was "junk", since we are solely judging them from their launch titles.[/QUOTE]

Not the Dreamcast! Oh.....

:(

It's rotting.
 
[quote name='Daddy']End of story is PS3 turned out to be junk, plain and simple and if you were stupid enough to pay $800 to play resistance (which you can beat on HARD in 3 1/2 hrs!!!) then you should probably go on QVC and start getting suckered into buying more crap[/quote]

Last time I checked Gears of War was the exact same thing and thats one of Xbox's biggest titles that has come out a year after the console itself. 95% of FPS can be beaten in one sitting the fact that a PS3 shooter is the samy way makes it no worse then that of the 360's games.
 
[quote name='Brian9824']Last time I checked Gears of War was the exact same thing and thats one of Xbox's biggest titles that has come out a year after the console itself. 95% of FPS can be beaten in one sitting the fact that a PS3 shooter is the samy way makes it no worse then that of the 360's games.[/quote]He uses it as an example as it's the only launch game that's both exclusive to PS3 and can be deemed as its marquee title. All the others can either be had on 360 or aren't quite up to spec.
 
I guess my gripe is that it really didn't deliver on some of the things that I thought it was going to have. Like, graphically improving PS2 games and upconverting DVD playback. Also, I really hate this two SKU trend. They should just have one model, didn't they learn anything from the 360 launch? The launch lineup is also weaker than the PS2 launch. Anyway, I look forward to seeing how it all plays out.
 
The 360 launch games were okay.. but like you state with most of the ps3 launch titles are on the 360, a lot of the 360 titles were on other systems.. and what made it even worse was that most of the 360 launch titles, and some still to this day are missing content from the Ps2, Xbox, GCN release of the same title.
 
Instead of bitching on the systems lets just bitch on the launch titles. We can all agree that for the most part launch titles on all systems suck. The only reason Wii has Twilight Princess is because they pushed it back on gamecube for 2 years and then tacked on some controls and called it a Wii game.

Heck Sony should have paid Square-Enix to do that with Final Fantasy XII. Imagine FFXII as a PS3 launch title :whistle2:o
 
Eh, there have always been launch titles I've enjoyed. In retrospect the Playstation 2 launch titles weren't good, but I did enjoy stuff at the time. I guess the Playstation 1 had a weak launch, but I didn't own it until the RPGs started coming out for it.

The Playstation Portable, Playstation 3, 360, Gamecube, and Wii launches are all pretty strong.

Sometimes you get a launch title that's really special, and there's never anything like it even years later. Stuff like Actraiser and Luigi's Mansion are great examples of that.
 
[quote name='DJSteel']can a person be banned based on stupidity?[/quote]

I'm wondering this too because he definitely qualifies.
 
[quote name='Brian9824']
Heck Sony should have paid Square-Enix to do that with Final Fantasy XII. Imagine FFXII as a PS3 launch title :whistle2:o[/quote]

Yeah the dropped the ball there. there didn't even have to be a major graphics upgrade as long as it played at 720p resolution. The PS2 realease of FFXII doesn't even support progressive scan :cry:
 
[quote name='Brian9824']Instead of bitching on the systems lets just bitch on the launch titles. We can all agree that for the most part launch titles on all systems suck. The only reason Wii has Twilight Princess is because they pushed it back on gamecube for 2 years and then tacked on some controls and called it a Wii game.

Heck Sony should have paid Square-Enix to do that with Final Fantasy XII. Imagine FFXII as a PS3 launch title :whistle2:o[/QUOTE]

I'm glad they didn't. To be honest, I am surprised they didn't do this though. Sure it pissed off a lot of GCN owners, but they will buy the game regardless. Sony could've easily have done this with God of War 2, as well, since it is a First Party title. Oh well, I'm not complaining. I am glad they are supporting the PS2 still, I am just surprised they didn't do this.
 
Umm the system didnt deliver as well, not just the launch titles so there goes your theory....no games and a bunk overpriced system, so if you bought it yeah your not too bright. To argue about launch titles I liked mario 64 (yes easy to beat) on N64.... splatterhouse and Bonk or keith courage in alpha zone on Turbo graphix, halo on xbox,condemed on 360,mario on nintendo, battle arena toshinden on PS1, and Zelda on Wii, so i guess for me I had no problem justifying any of those consoles (yes one is even a Sony Playstation) I can honestly say by the time of launch for PS3 i had not one shred of excitement to pick it up
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Splatterhouse wasn't a launch title by any stretch of the imagination.[/QUOTE]


I know but hey I had to throw that in their that game is priceless....best part was "help me" then she turns into something Maynard would date...lol


Speaking of badass games remember Temco World Wrestling on nintendo....loved the "special move" animations
 
[quote name='Daddy']Umm the system didnt deliver as well, not just the launch titles so there goes your theory....no games and a bunk overpriced system, so if you bought it yeah your not too bright. To argue about launch titles I liked mario 64 (yes easy to beat) on N64.... splatterhouse and Bonk or keith courage in alpha zone on Turbo graphix, halo on xbox,condemed on 360,mario on nintendo, battle arena toshinden on PS1, and Zelda on Wii, so i guess for me I had no problem justifying any of those consoles (yes one is even a Sony Playstation) I can honestly say by the time of launch for PS3 i had not one shred of excitement to pick it up[/QUOTE]

Wow. The Playstation 3 hardware is bad and you like Keith Courage and Battle Arena Toshinden over PS3 launch games? Oooookay then :D
 
[quote name='Puppy']Wow. The Playstation 3 hardware is bad and you like Keith Courage and Battle Arena Toshinden over PS3 launch games? Oooookay then :D[/QUOTE]


Umm interpretation must be off for you, back then that shizzle was hot just like donkey kong throwing barrels was amazing over PONG, different times my friend but yeah on a side note I would play battle arena toshiden with friends instead of a PS3 game right now
 
[quote name='Puppy']Wow. The Playstation 3 hardware is bad and you like Keith Courage and Battle Arena Toshinden over PS3 launch games? Oooookay then :D[/quote]

I have to admit that I loved Battle Arean Toshinden. For the time, seeing a 3-D fighting game like Toshinden made my jaw drop. It didn't stand the test of time like Soul Calibur did on Dreamcast but considering gaming was mainly 2-D before Saturn and PS3, Toshinden was a huge graphical leap.
 
My biggest complaint has to be the launch titles. So far I have gotten Genji and Resistance. I want to pick up more games, but there isn't much else besides a few racing games and a bunch of sports games. At lest there are few games next month that I have some interest in, but 2007 looks to be a badass year for the PS3.
 
[quote name='Daddy']End of story is PS3 turned out to be junk, plain and simple and if you were stupid enough to pay $800 to play resistance (which you can beat on HARD in 3 1/2 hrs!!!) then you should probably go on QVC and start getting suckered into buying more crap[/quote]

Im not even done with Resistance. AND its already longer then Gears of War. So what the hell are you saying?

I think I figured out what the ignore list is for.
 
I get every major system that comes out, usually on launch day. I have did so as far back as the Genesis / SNES days. Hell, I even usually get all the minor systems soon after (looks over at his Vitural Boy on a shelf), but that streak ended with the PS3. Its not that I dont WANT one...I'll get one someday soon, but with Christmas so close and having scrapped up enough extra cash to get a Wii on launch day I didnt want to fight with my wife on spending so much cash on it right now.
I have a 360 and absolutely love it. The Wii is interesting (But I only have Zelda with it and refuse to play anymore of it until I get some composite cables cause, What the HELL, it looks blurry without them). Having said this, I think I can usually give a fair opinion comparing systems. I haven't gotten to play much of PS3 yet, but it looks solid.
I am really annoyed with Sony right now though. Back when they were readying the PS1 launch, they really laid into Nintendo for being "Over arrogant" and "Complacent." I remember Sony saying that was the reason Nintendo had lost touch with its base customers. They complained about Nintendo depending too much on their past sucessses and how the big N didnt do enough to innovate. In my opinion, Sony has now switched places with Nintendo in those regards.
Sony just seems to tailor the facts to fit their needs. In the Xbox/PS2 wars when the Xbox was clearly more powerful, Sony preached over and over on how Processing power doesnt matter...its the games. Now its Cell processer this and that...The PS3 is 40x more powerful than the PS2. And as for innovation, you have to admit that Sony stole the motion sensing features of the Wii controller at the last minute. That's why many PS3 games were delayed to rework the control schemes.
As for the game lineup now and in the near future. I really do want to play Resistance. Im a big FPS fan, but I am sure getting sick of seeing and hearing about MGS4. I still haven't seen any footage that looked like game footage to me. Maybe thats a big advantage of having Bluray...your cut scenes look sharper. All the stupid statements coming out of Sony leadership didn't help either. Saying that the PS3 wasnt a game system? Saying that they could sell 5 million units without having ANY games at launch? That just shows the arrogance they have from being the leader for the last few years....it shows the same arrogance that Sony complained that Nintendo had back in the N64/PS1 days.
To each their own. All three systems will have great games and some stinkers. I just hope that people can focus on the real gems that come out and not buy into the hype. Thats how wonderful games (Okami) get overlooked and how pathetically terrible games (50 Cent, Manhunt) sell millions. Game on, folks! This will be a great era to be a gamer.
 
[quote name='jousley']I get every major system that comes out, usually on launch day. I have did so as far back as the Genesis / SNES days. Hell, I even usually get all the minor systems soon after (looks over at his Vitural Boy on a shelf), but that streak ended with the PS3. Its not that I dont WANT one...I'll get one someday soon, but with Christmas so close and having scrapped up enough extra cash to get a Wii on launch day I didnt want to fight with my wife on spending so much cash on it right now. I have a 360 and absolutely love it. The Wii is interesting (But I only have Zelda with it and refuse to play anymore of it until I get some composite cables cause, What the HELL, it looks blurry without them). Having said this, I think I can usually give a fair opinion comparing systems. I haven't gotten to play much of PS3 yet, but it looks solid. I am really annoyed with Sony right now though. Back when they were readying the PS1 launch, they really laid into Nintendo for being "Over arrogant" and "Complacent." I remember Sony saying that was the reason Nintendo had lost touch with its base customers. They complained about Nintendo depending too much on their past sucessses and how the big N didnt do enough to innovate. In my opinion, Sony has now switched places with Nintendo in those regards. Sony just seems to tailor the facts to fit their needs. In the Xbox/PS2 wars when the Xbox was clearly more powerful, Sony preached over and over on how Processing power doesnt matter...its the games. Now its Cell processer this and that...The PS3 is 40x more powerful than the PS2. And as for innovation, you have to admit that Sony stole the motion sensing features of the Wii controller at the last minute. That's why many PS3 games were delayed to rework the control schemes. As for the game lineup now and in the near future. I really do want to play Resistance. Im a big FPS fan, but I am sure getting sick of seeing and hearing about MGS4. I still haven't seen any footage that looked like game footage to me. Maybe thats a big advantage of having Bluray...your cut scenes look sharper. All the stupid statements coming out of Sony leadership didn't help either. Saying that the PS3 wasnt a game system? Saying that they could sell 5 million units without having ANY games at launch? That just shows the arrogance they have from being the leader for the last few years....it shows the same arrogance that Sony complained that Nintendo had back in the N64/PS1 days. To each their own. All three systems will have great games and some stinkers. I just hope that people can focus on the real gems that come out and not buy into the hype. Thats how wonderful games (Okami) get overlooked and how pathetically terrible games (50 Cent, Manhunt) sell millions. Game on, folks! This will be a great era to be a gamer.[/QUOTE]


PARAGRAPHS

that is all.
 
I have a lot of gripes with the PS3. One of the most important is that they've already released two separate versions of it with different features, which is something that should not happen in the console world. The only difference between the two "versions" of the Xbox 360 console is the chrome finish, which is about as important as the N64 coming in different colors.
 
[quote name='rickonker']I have a lot of gripes with the PS3. One of the most important is that they've already released two separate versions of it with different features, which is something that should not happen in the console world. The only difference between the two "versions" of the Xbox 360 console is the chrome finish, which is about as important as the N64 coming in different colors.[/QUOTE]
Actually the $300 version is missing more things than just the chrome finish, namely the HDD. At least with the PS3 its playable out of the box no need to buy a memory card since the HDD does come with it. With the $300 360 you are forced to go buy a memory card to be able to save your games. The only major things missing from the cheaper PS3 are Wi-Fi, card readers (not required to play any games) and the shiny finish.
 
[quote name='whoknows']Actually the $300 version is missing more things than just the chrome finish, namely the HDD. At least with the PS3 its playable out of the box no need to buy a memory card since the HDD does come with it. With the $300 360 you are forced to go buy a memory card to be able to save your games. The only major things missing from the cheaper PS3 are Wi-Fi, card readers (not required to play any games) and the shiny finish.[/QUOTE]

I was talking about the base console hardware. The HDD is a detachable accessory. I agree that it's better to include the HDD, but there is a huge benefit in having only one version of your console.
 
[quote name='rickonker']I was talking about the base console hardware. The HDD is a detachable accessory. I agree that it's better to include the HDD, but there is a huge benefit in having only one version of your console.[/QUOTE]
I'm just trying to make the point that the $300 360 is a crippled system and a lot different than the analogy you made of it being as important as coming in different colors. The cheaper PS3 can play games as well as the Premium one, the stuff it's missing is what you are paying if you want to use the PS3 for more than just games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top