PlayStation CEO Hopes 2008 Was "As Bad As it Gets"

[Treblaine]

Oh, what's wrong? Did the fact that I streamed over all the good exclusives of your consoles somehow annoy you? Gee, sounds familiar, doesn't it? Like when you said the Ps3 doesn't have any good exclusives worth waiting for except one. Just shut up please. I really don't like looking at your poorly thought out posts.

You know, if I'm the one flaming here, why is it you want to continue the argument when I wanted to let it die out with both of us agreeing to disagree? I just want to put it behind us, and yet you don't want it to die. Just let it die already.

And for the record, I have a gamecube, and I despise Twilight Princess, if only because it pales in comparison to Wind Waker, a true refreshing sensation to the Zelda Franchise. How about you do a bit more research before insulting me, buddy? I loved my Gamecube and my N64, and my SNES, and my NES. So before you label me as a Sony fanboy, why don't you shut back the accusations of me being biased and try asking me what consoles I own?

I used to love my gamecube before the crappy memory cards killed all my data, and I lost all my pokemon from Ruby-Sapphire.

Now are you going to stop assuming? It only makes an ass out of u and me. Why do you want to keep arguing? Why?

Excellent! You bought the Gamecube and presumably you did not sell your PS2.

Now if you were open minded enough to buy the Gamecube and even enjoy Wind Waker (which I have also played and enjoy just as much) then why are you so inconsiderate of the DS or Xbox 360?

What is it - to you - that is so different from Gamecube last generation to Xbox360/Nintendo DS this generation?

"How about you do a bit more research before insulting me, buddy?"

Research? Was I supposed to Google you or something? How can you possibly expect me to know what consoles you do or do not have? And if you are insulted by the mere suggestion to play a game that you have in fact ALREADY PLAYED then I think anyone would agree with me that you are a bit paranoid, that was not an insult.

"why is it you want to continue the argument"

It takes two to tango. If you want this "argument" to end the power is all yours. Except I don't think you really want to end this little debate, the post before last was all fightin' words as well as making several big claims that I could hardly leave undisputed.

You may get the last word yet but you are going to have to work a lot harder for it than that.

 

[Pendragon9]

Excellent! You bought the Gamecube and presumably you did not sell your PS2.

Now if you were open minded enough to buy the Gamecube and even enjoy Wind Waker (which I have also played and enjoy just as much) then why are you so inconsiderate of the DS or Xbox 360?

Because none of the games I saw could ever compare to modern classics like Wind Waker or Super Smash Brothers Brawl, or even Timesplitters. I think that was on the XBOX, right? It was a classic shooter with a fun story and quirky paradoxical gameplay. I just don't see anything these days that innovates from it. These days they're doing nothing but spending most of their time revamping Halo and Mario games. What I loved about the companies last generation was how they innovated in at least ten franchises at a time. With Nintendo, for example, if I didn't see anything on the Gamecube at the time, I could pop in the GBA and try out Metroid Fusion, which by the way was a nice return to 2d gaming and I truly don't get why people didn't like it that much. If Halo2 was getting on my nerves, I could simply pop in.... well, another shooter at my pal's house. Not to mention the Gamecube didn't force a Wiimote down my throat, and the old XBOX didn't explode on us 33% of the time.

Research? Was I supposed to Google you or something? How can you possibly expect me to know what consoles you do or do not have?

You could have asked. I would've gladly told you. The consoles I've owned are: Nintendo, Super Nintendo, Nintendo 64, Gamecube, PLaystation1, Playstation2, Playstation3, Playstation Portable, Gameboy, Gameboy Color, Gameboy Advance, and I think an old Atari at one point, probably at my uncle's house.

If anything, I'm a Nintendo fanboy at heart simply because I own more of their consoles then Sony brand systems. Much like how Ps2 owners switched to the 360 after not enjoying the new changes, I switched to the Ps3 because I couldn't see myself getting into the Wii.

Why don't I have a DS? Because I don't see many games worth my time. It sells like hotcakes covered in drugs, I know. But because it's popular doesn't make it worthwhile to everyone.

Besides, I have a friend who has a DS, and I gladly gave it a shot. I wasn't interested in the new Pokemon or the revamped Mario or the yugioh. Also, I'm getting tired of using a stylus.

It takes two to tango. If you want this "argument" to end the power is all yours. Except I don't think you really want to end this little debate, the post before last was all fightin' words as well as making several big claims that I could hardly leave undisputed.

You may get the last word yet but you are going to have to work a lot harder for it than that.

What does it take to end this argument? I kindly asked for us to agree to disagree, but to no avail.

The point I'm making is that not everyone will agree that the Ps3 has failed this generation, and despite the market not in favor of the Ps3, I don't see dark clouds in the future. Well, I do see one Dark Cloud in the future, if you get my drift.

 

[WraithGadra]

Its been said before that in a public forum, responses are more for the benefit of others than the one being responded to. If you wish to ignore facts you dislike, you're more than welcome to. I raise them so that others may see the discussion, learn and join in.

The Sega Saturn and Dreamcast are often regarded as good consoles, yet both did poorly when they were on the market. I suspect the PS3 will be similarly regarded.

If you're done, stop responding.

Well said.

I knew it was someone in this thread, I just couldn't remember who.

snip

...

You know, if I'm the one flaming here, why is it you want to continue the argument when I wanted to let it die out with both of us agreeing to disagree? I just want to put it behind us, and yet you don't want it to die. Just let it die already.

And for the record, I have a gamecube, and I despise Twilight Princess, if only because it pales in comparison to Wind Waker, a true refreshing sensation to the Zelda Franchise. How about you do a bit more research before insulting me, buddy? I loved my Gamecube and my N64, and my SNES, and my NES. So before you label me as a Sony fanboy, why don't you shut back the accusations of me being biased and try asking me what consoles I own?

I used to love my gamecube before the crappy memory cards killed all my data, and I lost all my pokemon from Ruby-Sapphire.

Now are you going to stop assuming? It only makes an ass out of u and me. Why do you want to keep arguing? Why?

Emphasis mine.

That didn't seem to stop you from labeling me a 360 fanboy when I pointed out the PS3's install base and library issues, which is just silly considering that the 360 has just five million over half of the Wii's install base and a smaller library by 200+ games. Like I said, all three console makers have made mistakes this cycle.

 

[Pendragon9]

Like I said, all three console makers have made mistakes this cycle.

Thank you for saying this. I think it's clear all of them have made mistakes. It's not just Sony making the mistakes. And I'm saddened when people think they're the only ones making mistakes.

Particularly the motion control bit. Every company made a mistake with that gambit. I didn't like the Wiimote, I don't look forward to Project Natal, and I'm not gonna even bother trying out Sony's magic wand of whatever-dom. If anything, the PC gets my respect for not trying to get in on this motion control crap. I'm hoping I'm not wrong.

I know the Ps3 has a smaller library and a smaller install base, but I don't think that really matters. The Gamecube and XBOX had tiny amounts of games last generation compared to the Ps2, and that didn't stop me from enjoying them. It shouldn't stop anyone else either.

 

[Jumplion]

I have to focus in on this as you need to consider the monitor factor. One thing that hugely increases the REAL-OVERALL cost of the PS3 is how it can only play the games in native resolution via a HDTV which to get decent quality can easily top $1000. Even shopping around for best prices the total cost of PS3 + HDTV is about $800-1000. So considering you can get a good quality 1440x900 monitor for under $100: dollar-for-dollar you should compare a PS3 with a $700-$900 PC.

I'm sure you can find a decent deal here [http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?id=pcat17080&type=page&qp=cabcat0101000~~nf397||546f7368696261&list=y&nrp=15&sc=TVVideoSP&sp=-bestsellingsort+skuid&usc=abcat0100000&DCMP=KNC-TLC&ref=30&loc=KW-0954&gclid=CKXa_6aB1JsCFSXyDAod_kdJMQ].

You're right here, an $800 PS3 is worth $800 of a PC. What's the problem here? A PS3 can last as much as the PC you buy, what's the problem here? What are you trying to say, that the PS3 can be as expensive as a PC? Of course it can, why would I debate that?

My argument is not that a PS3 appears to be cheaper than a PC, nor is it that PCs are apparently expensive, both of those are bullshit. My argument is that PCs and Consoles are two completely different things that should never be compared in the first place. So what if a PS3 is weaker, hardware-wise, than a PC? The PS2 and Wii are both laments that it does not matter how powerful a PC is, it's what you can do with it that matters.

Now a PC will play games really well but also do all the necessary functions of a computer like internet, word processing, and even more advanced programs like photo/video/music editing. PS3 cannot adequately replace a PC though Linux is useful.

Nor has the PS3 ever tried to replace a PC. Why are you thinking that a console needs to do all that stuff? Why does a console need to do all that stuff to be considered "above" a PC? As I said, a PC is always first and foremost a business machine. A console does not need photo/video/music editing, and while it may include it, the primary purpose of a console is to provide an entertainment hub for the user. Whether this means being completely multimedia, or just doing one simple thing, it depends on the system in question.

Plus, when the brand new generation of games come out... console means starting over with a whole new system..... With PC it can just mean incremental upgrades, perfect example is DX11 coming along soon with Dirt 2 as well as a new operating system.

In 5+ years. The need to upgrade a PC is near the same as the need to upgrade a console.

Blu-ray is irrelevant with PC. Did Crysis need blu-ray? No. Do any of the best looking PC games that easily beat any console game need blu-ray? No. Blu-ray is only for if you want 1080p movies, I'll settle for streaming/downloading 720p movies for now. The cost of the disks, players and screens/monitors of resolution/size to play them is not worth the 2x increase in detail... not yet.

Blu-ray can be quite relevant for consoles however. Again, MGS4 took up an entire blu-ray disk (allegedly). I'm curious though, how big is it to install Crysis? And even as I say this, it's not just about the disks or the hardware, it's what you can do with them.

PS: Both Nintendo Wii and Xbox 360 have VGA output so monitors are also options for them but if we are going to consider total costs then both Wii and 360 have to have $$$ added to overall cost due to - respectively - their expensive peripherals and annual subscription fee. But this is a hard one to quantify for obvious reasons.

Yes, I feel that this is especially true with the Wii and all of the peripherals and attachments. Paying $80 just to have 4 people have the equal amount of motion control, while only certain games support it? What the hell? Stupid Nintendo and their peripherals that sell millions regardless, [small]and that I will probably buy regardless[/small]

PPS: Also, if you live in the UK, it is worth your while to be free of HDTV as TV = TV licence = £142 per year = $230 per year. Yanks don't understand but with the amount of free and legal streaming of content via the internet, I am one of millions of young adults who don't have a TV and don't ever want one.

Heh, though I'm a Yank, there's some truth to that. Sometimes I find myself on the computer all day and I forget about TV.

PPPS: just noticed this is a bit PC fanboyish... to balance everything; gaming IS harder on PC especially in terms of management and DRM plus you constantly have to monitor your PC's health. Just don't consider PC that bad an option, though it takes more effort, it doesn't take much more money in many circumstances while the payoffs can be much greater than for consoles.

This is the crowning moment of awesome for you, in these past "PS"'s. I will not deny, PC gaming is "superior" than Consoles (depending on how you define "superior"), but the amount of work it takes just to get into PC gaming is enough to put off many people from being true PC Nerds and to makes consoles a better option for those. Personally, eventually I do believe I'll become a PC gamer, but I don't think that will be for a while and I know I'm going to be gaming on my consoles for many years to come.

 

[WraithGadra]

Like I said, all three console makers have made mistakes this cycle.

Thank you for saying this. I think it's clear all of them have made mistakes. It's not just Sony making the mistakes. And I'm saddened when people think they're the only ones making mistakes.

Particularly the motion control bit. Every company made a mistake with that gambit. I didn't like the Wiimote, I don't look forward to Project Natal, and I'm not gonna even bother trying out Sony's magic wand of whatever-dom. If anything, the PC gets my respect for not trying to get in on this motion control crap. I'm hoping I'm not wrong.

I know the Ps3 has a smaller library and a smaller install base, but I don't think that really matters. The Gamecube and XBOX had tiny amounts of games last generation compared to the Ps2, and that didn't stop me from enjoying them. It shouldn't stop anyone else either.

Never heard of Surface, I presume? Don't worry, it's not going anywhere.

Given that the Wiimote is the only motion control scheme that is an actual (and successful) product as of now, that's not one of the mistakes I was referring to. Wii Music and showing the Vitality Sensor without any software were what I was thinking of.

A low install base isn't going to affect anyone's enjoyment of any console. What it will affect are the number and quality of games available on that console. I'm not talking opinions here, I'm talking business.

 

[Pendragon9]

A low install base isn't going to affect anyone's enjoyment of any console. What it will affect are the number and quality of games available on that console. I'm not talking opinions here, I'm talking business.

Well, the way I see it, Sony will be working round the clock to get some more 1st party games out, if only to keep up with the others. Either way, that works for the gamer.

Let's not count them out yet, because I highly doubt people will just cut support to Sony like that. Activision is only really talking smack when they pressured Sony, and they know they'd crash and burn if they pulled such a move.

So I'm assured the developers won't cut off support to 23 million people. It's a stupid gambit. The only reason some developers are doing it is because of a certain someone throwing money around. *coughMScough*

Also, as I feel I should say this, when it comes to digital distribution, I think blu ray is more than just DVD +. It holds alot of space, and will probably have applications outside of gaming and movies.

Not to mention I'd rather have hard copies of games than have them solely online. I believe this is what the gripe was about the PSP Go, not being UMD compatible.

 

[Haydyn]

This is basically efficient but costly vs cheap and good enough. If the Xbox360 didn't exist, then yes, I would have a PS3. But the fact of the matter is I do have a 360, and can get 90% of the current releases (not counting all of the Wii gimmick games.) Yes, I want FF13 and Infamous (never played God of War, and stopped caring about Heavenly Sword when my puberty started wearing off), but I'm not going to get another system just to play two games I want. Yes, I have bought systems just for one specific game, but I could always get more games after that. In this case, I can already get all the other games I want, so why get a PS3?

From what I've read, it seems like a lot of people will buy a PS3 when God of War comes out. It seems like that's its only chance. I don't think 2009 and 2010 could get any worse.

PS: I'm not trying to bash Sony, or the PS3. I'm saying what most people alreayd know, it was in the wrong place at the wrong time (which doesn't make sence, because it's two negatives. Wouldn't it be worse to be in the right place at the wrong time, or the wrong place at the right time?" Hopefully the Wii will start losing sales when the 360 and PS3 get motion sensors.

 

[shaltir]

oh sony, you guys are so cute

i'm really starting to dislike that guy though...

oh, and for whoever was saying they wouldn't buy a PS3 to play FF13...i do believe it is coming out for 360 too. infamous on the other hand, may force me to spend money and that beast.

 

[Treblaine]

Excellent! You bought the Gamecube and presumably you did not sell your PS2.

Now if you were open minded enough to buy the Gamecube and even enjoy Wind Waker (which I have also played and enjoy just as much) then why are you so inconsiderate of the DS or Xbox 360?

Because none of the games I saw could ever compare to modern classics like Wind Waker or Super Smash Brothers Brawl, or even Timesplitters. I think that was on the XBOX, right? It was a classic shooter with a fun story and quirky paradoxical gameplay. I just don't see anything these days that innovates from it. These days they're doing nothing but spending most of their time revamping Halo and Mario games. What I loved about the companies last generation was how they innovated in at least ten franchises at a time. With Nintendo, for example, if I didn't see anything on the Gamecube at the time, I could pop in the GBA and try out Metroid Fusion, which by the way was a nice return to 2d gaming and I truly don't get why people didn't like it that much. If Halo2 was getting on my nerves, I could simply pop in.... well, another shooter at my pal's house. Not to mention the Gamecube didn't force a Wiimote down my throat, and the old XBOX didn't explode on us 33% of the time.

Well for your consideration:
-Portal: Still Alive (extra content exclusive to 360 that even the PC doesn't get)
-Halo 3 (You apparently played Halo 2, the replay feature in this injects a new level of competition to online multiplayer)
-Condemned: Criminal Origins (new twist on first person survival horror)
-Gears of War 1 & 2: This is NOT a Halo revamp
-GTA4's DLC
-Dead Rising
-Mass Effect, Fable 2, Lost Odyssey

And for Wii:
-The ENTIRE of Virtual Console with scores of classic retro games, many from the most obscure platforms perfectly emulated.
-Metroid Prime 3 + Metroid prime 2 "Wii-release"
-No More Heroes (this is NOT Mario)
-Super Mario Galaxy (OK this IS Mario but just read the reviews, it is the Best Mario in over a decade)
-Super Smash Bros Brawl
-House of the Dead 2/3 (this is a big one for me, love Arcade shooters but hate feeding coins)
-House of the Dead Overkill
PS: you can plug in a regular Gamecube controller for most of these games if that suits you but the aiming advantage is often worth it.

Coming Soon: Monster Hunter 3, Red Steel 2, Fragile.

Research? Was I supposed to Google you or something? How can you possibly expect me to know what consoles you do or do not have?

You could have asked. I would've gladly told you. The consoles I've owned are: Nintendo, Super Nintendo, Nintendo 64, Gamecube, PLaystation1, Playstation2, Playstation3, Playstation Portable, Gameboy, Gameboy Color, Gameboy Advance, and I think an old Atari at one point, probably at my uncle's house.

If anything, I'm a Nintendo fanboy at heart simply because I own more of their consoles then Sony brand systems. Much like how Ps2 owners switched to the 360 after not enjoying the new changes, I switched to the Ps3 because I couldn't see myself getting into the Wii.

Why don't I have a DS? Because I don't see many games worth my time. It sells like hotcakes covered in drugs, I know. But because it's popular doesn't make it worthwhile to everyone.

Besides, I have a friend who has a DS, and I gladly gave it a shot. I wasn't interested in the new Pokemon or the revamped Mario or the yugioh. Also, I'm getting tired of using a stylus.

You may be using the DS to less than it's full potential, many consider the "thimble Stylus" a cheap but vital accessory for the DS. It fits over the thumb or index like a thimble yet has a hard low friction point like a stylus that means it is as comfortable to use as a PC's trackpad as yet with the precision of the stylus.

I mean if you apparently liked Wind Waker on GC so much why are you not interested in Phantom Hourglass?

It takes two to tango. If you want this "argument" to end the power is all yours. Except I don't think you really want to end this little debate, the post before last was all fightin' words as well as making several big claims that I could hardly leave undisputed.

You may get the last word yet but you are going to have to work a lot harder for it than that.

What does it take to end this argument? I kindly asked for us to agree to disagree, but to no avail.

The point I'm making is that not everyone will agree that the Ps3 has failed this generation, and despite the market not in favor of the Ps3, I don't see dark clouds in the future. Well, I do see one Dark Cloud in the future, if you get my drift.

[/quote]

Well, we may agree to disagree on the point of PS3's relative success or failure, but at the same time you make many other claims such as that Wii/360/DS are not worth it and the heavy implication that they have failed more than PS3. We have not settled that argument yet as you have still not properly explained your reasoning for why you were so open to GBA, Gamecube and XBox Original yet that same open-ness does not exist now for the Xbox 360 or Nintendo Wii/DS.


We can only agree to disagree when we have nothing left to debate but principal when there are still many claims to be scrutinised. If you are deliberately ignoring other consoles of this generation out of some misguided sense of loyalty then I would like to get to the bottom of that. If not ignoring, you could at least be holding a prejudice against them that prevents you enjoying them. I say that as I used to feel the same way back when I first got my PSP and PS3 but the feeling is transient, you grow out of it eventually.

I also won't 'agree to disagree' over facts. PS2 had 70% of the market in the last generation, now it barely has 20%. In market terms at least that is a failure. And as Wraithgadra said:

A low install base isn't going to affect anyone's enjoyment of any console. What it will affect are the number and quality of games available on that console. I'm not talking opinions here, I'm talking business.

This is born out in 3rd party titles like Splinter Cell Conviction, Section 8, Raven Squad, Huxley as well as third party developers like Valve flat refusing to develop anything for PS3. Partly this is due to the difficulty of developing for PS3 another is how with only 20% of the console market and an even smaller part of the overall market (including PS2 and PC), there is not much incentive to develop for PS3.

Monster Hunter 3 for example was going to be a PS3 exclusive but switched to Wii instead.

 

[Bat Vader]

There. Technically, I didn't respond.

Technically, you did respond. You addressed the above fact and even said you did not respond so technically you did.

In all honesty I feel people should be mature and talk things over like civil adults. When people argue it makes them seem childish, no matter what they are arguing about.

My opinion on the matter is I really don't care what happens t Sony. I want a PS3 and Heavy Rain before anything happens to them. After that it doesn't matter. To me anyway. I don't know about others.

 

[Treblaine]

*snipped down to key quotes*
My argument is not that a PS3 appears to be cheaper than a PC, nor is it that PCs are apparently expensive, both of those are bullshit. My argument is that PCs and Consoles are two completely different things that should never be compared in the first place. So what if a PS3 is weaker, hardware-wise, than a PC? The PS2 and Wii are both laments that it does not matter how powerful a PC is, it's what you can do with it that matters.

I wouldn't say that PC and consoles are completely mutually exclusive.

the primary purpose of a console is to provide an entertainment hub for the user. Whether this means being completely multimedia, or just doing one simple thing, it depends on the system in question.

Let me throw out the question to you and everyone, how much time do you spend on your PC consuming media and using it for entertainment? The claim that PCs are primarily business machines is a myth perpetuated by those silly Mac vs PC adverts. Considering both the capability and ACTUAL use of PC I believe it should not be considered separate from consoles.

The need to upgrade a PC is near the same as the need to upgrade a console.

Yes, but it is much cheaper to buy a replacement graphics card (the latest mid range is about $200) when new consoles début at $400 to $600. Sure consoles will go down in price but there is so much competition in the graphics card market their prices fall even quicker, new GPUs are released virtually every month. But the caveat of competence or at least confidence to replace a PC component is a huge barrier but there are still millions of people who do it as you can tell from the numbers of powerful graphics cards sold, who's main application is for rendering PC games. It is a factor and (crap, better get back on topic) it will be competing with PS3 this year. (phew)

Blu-ray can be quite relevant for consoles however. Again, MGS4 took up an entire blu-ray disk (allegedly). I'm curious though, how big is it to install Crysis? And even as I say this, it's not just about the disks or the hardware, it's what you can do with them.

I'm not sure how big it was to install Crysis on Steam which I used but I do know Install took about the same amount of time as MGS4 took to install to the PS3's HDD for all of its acts :S
MGS4 was not a triumph of Blu-ray as with the multiple installs it would be cheaper, quicker and easier to have MGS4 come on 5 DVD disk and just have a 15 second disk change as you progress through the game. This is also great if you return to the game and want to play a particular level, you don't have to go through an install each time, if you want to play act 3, just put in Disk #3. Shouldn't be a problem as MGS1 came on several disks with no issues. Hell, Final Fantasy 9 came on 4 Disks, and MGS games have always been quite linear.
It seems that MGS4 uses only about 32GB from people who look at the size on disk when running Linux on PS3. But if you consider all the audio is uncompressed, think about the hours of music and endless plot exposition for all the cutscenes and codec chats. Uncompressed is the same as on a traditional Music CD, so about .58GB per hour and considering there are 20 hours of cutscenes alone... move to compressed audio (you can only tell the difference from uncompressed with a $10,000 speaker system) and the game will fit onto about 2 DVDs.

FYI, Crysis can be downloaded by Direct2Drive in a 5.8GB packet though it asks for 12GB on disk, PC developers don't try particularly hard to reduce their game's footprint on the HDD and size on HDD is not relevant to size streamed from DVD.
Crytek is developing the Cryengine for consoles but have yet to have a game to go with it.

 

[Zersy]

60% of this thread says that they need to cut the price
10% make smart comments to how the PS3 will do good because of the large amount of exclusives heading for it

the rest will just make some argument with prices in them.

i shall be different and just say that i don't care because i'm a happy gamer

 

[Bat Vader]

60% of this thread says that they need to cut the price
10% make smart comments to how the PS3 will do good because of the large amount of exclusives heading for it

the rest will just make some argument with prices in them.

i shall be different and just say that i don't care because i'm a happy gamer

I must agree. It is pointless and childish to fight over consoles. We should all be sensible, civil, and mature.

 

[Jumplion]

Hokay actually I can build a decent sli for £260 which is what $380 so the BLu ray takes it to 530 ? The 600 had alot of stuff it doesnt need for the average user . Actually at this exchange rate I could make a really nice machine for £310. BR is only £50.

That actually kind of proves my point that Blu-ray is a leap in technology. That, and you can easily get a $400 PS3 (286 Euros) for a measly extra $20. Though I just forgot what an SLI system is >_< What an average punter I am, eh?

The install sizes are based on PC installs part of the console 'wall' for me is the need to have a disc in the drive. CD's & DVD's are extremely vulnerable to scratches Id hate to lose a game because of a scratch & sod sending it back itd be easier to buy a new one.

While Blu-ray isn't resistant to scratches, it is much more resilient to damage as someone previously mentioned.

Again reading, Fallout 3 is pretty huge, Cod is not. They are practically the same size installation (ON A PC). One of these titles has not been streamlined. Now your making stuff up clearly channeling Indigo, I didnt say the PS3 scratched discs I said discs can get scratched. Im afraid your talking crap as well, I know 2 PS3 owners & both have scratched discs. Its no better or worse than a XBox as far as Im concerned. There both piss poor but at least the XBox has an excuse.

Eh? I thought we were still talking about the PS3 in that paragraph? Sorry for misunderstanding, but I thought you were talking about the PS3 versions of Fallout 3 and CoD4. But I'm curious, were the scratched disks from the PS3 itself or from mishandling? I'm not saying that the PS3 doesn't scratch disks, but on a much lesser scale than that of the 360, and there is absolutely no excuse for that piss poor hardware to ever be in use of any electronic. I could go on a rant on that, but I'll spare you.

Sony started in 94-95, Microsoft started 6 years later. A 6 year head start & the George Foreman Grill is the best they can do ? Surely even the blindest of fan bois would agree Sonys business decisions have not been smart in the last 2 years ? I mean the Wii a 'casual gamers/for kids/blah blah blah' is outselling by a factor of metric fuckloads (50M vs 23M). How do they explain that ? If multifunctionality is such a big deal the Wii is pretty limited. If gaming is the key factor .....

Oh shut up with the "George Foreman Grill" it's getting old. Sure, some of Sony's decisions have been stupid in the past couple of years, I'm not denying that and neither should anyone else. But sometimes their decisions are blown WAY out of proportion out of something as small as a molehill and even when there's no problem at all. On the Wii thing, it's good that they're selling so well, more power to them, but Pet Rocks sold millions as well, eh? From what I've heard though, Wii sales are slowing down considerably if not going down, but that's just from what I've heard.

If you wish to continue this discussion, please do so through PM. Thank you.

~Jumplion

 

[Pendragon9]

snip

I've already gone through all those titles. They don't innovate at all on the original concepts. It's just more running and gunning. i mean, face it. Nothing this generation has can compare to last generation.

I couldn't compare to the overly hyped Portal DLC, I hate what the Halo series has become, Gears of War is okay, but not great, Condemned doesn't look that great, I don't even play GTA4, so i could care less what crappy DLC the 360 has exclusives to, I'll wait for Dead Rising 2 because I played and wasn't interested in the first, and the last three are all bland RPG style games that I feel don't even live up to Final Fantasy 7, which was in itself a crapfest compared to Final Fantasy 6.

And yes, I can foresee every fanboy on this site ready to lynch me for not hailing Mass Effect as God's gift to gaming, but I really couldn't care less. Unless it lets me pilot a giant mecha capable of blowing up planets everywhich way, it's not gonna garner my attention.

The VC is kinda crap when you've already played 90% of the titles beforehand. It's only for people who weren't born in the N64 generation. The Metroid Prime series got stale around Echos, No More Heroes just honestly seems like another generic "trying to be hardcore" Wii title, I've seen enough of Mario Galaxy for one lifetime (doesn't have the Mario 64 magic) Smash Brothers is just too different from Melee, not to mention the whoring out they did, and everything else is just shovelware. Oh, and do you really think Phantom Hourglass is so innovative? Because I don't recall it ever giving you the power to freely sail across the ocean. All I saw was a small lake and you having to plot a whole course through it using the stylus. It never gave you the freedom to just go with the tide. It didn't push the concept to it's limit, like Wind Waker did. As much as I don't believe it, I don't even know if the Ps2 could handle a game as unique as Wind Waker. Shadow of the Colossus came close, but the depth and massive scale of the ocean was just incredible. When Phantom Hourglass took that away, it took away the one part I loved the most. And now the next DS Zelda will have trains. They might as well take away all the open endedness of the old Zelda games while they're at it.

And to be honest, I don't even care for Monster Hunter. It's a funny thing actually. Any franchise that goes multiplat or moves to another console is a franchise I never really cared about. If you'll notice, I never once liked the Metal Gear series (too much hype around MGS4, ech), I never liked the Monster Hunter series (too serious for a game if you ask me) and I just couldn't care for any series that keep continuing past their prime, save for a few that are actually good.

In essence, the two consoles, though having some good games, don't warrant a purchase from me. What I keep seeing is Nintendo constantly trying to be hardcore and failing while the 360 spits out bland RPGs and shooters by the dozen.

Look, I know the Ps3 has it's own problems, but I'll take them in stride. It has proven to me that it has the best choice of games to me. Maybe not to everyone, but it has to me. If Sony has truly messed up this generation, then I'll gladly stick by and see what comes of it. And to me, the Wii has failed in the eyes of the Gamecube. I will never come to appreciate that stupid Wiimote. And I'm happy to pay a hundred extra dollars upfront if it means my Ps3 won't have a 33% chance to die on me, or a 100% chance to have online that is technically superior, but has nothing but mic spamming jerkbags on it.

Overall, I feel I've chosen the console right for me.

If the Wii wants my sale, it's gonna have to stop using the Wiimote as a crutch and actually try, instead of declaring graphics as the devil. If I'm gonna buy a 360, it's gotta drop it's error rate to 0.2%, or to zero, not to mention getting better online or enforcing better ettiquette.

 

[Soxafloppin]

The only bad thing about the ps3 is the price, its still an amazing console.

 

[Treblaine]

I've already gone through all those titles. They don't innovate at all on the original concepts. It's just more running and gunning. i mean, face it. Nothing this generation has can compare to last generation.

Wait.. "nothing this generation can compare to last generation" that is a testament to our times but why would that make you choose PS3 over Xbox 360 or why should anybody else prefer PS3? I don't think anyone could call Killzone 2 particularly innovative or most of the PS3's flagship games.

I couldn't compare to the overly hyped Portal DLC, I hate what the Halo series has become, Gears of War is okay, but not great, Condemned doesn't look that great, I don't even play GTA4, so i could care less what crappy DLC the 360 has exclusives to, I'll wait for Dead Rising 2 because I played and wasn't interested in the first, and the last three are all bland RPG style games that I feel don't even live up to Final Fantasy 7, which was in itself a crapfest compared to Final Fantasy 6.

And yes, I can foresee every fanboy on this site ready to lynch me for not hailing Mass Effect as God's gift to gaming, but I really couldn't care less. Unless it lets me pilot a giant mecha capable of blowing up planets everywhich way, it's not gonna garner my attention.

These aren't genuine reasons for disliking these games... these are simply lame excuses for a blanket dismissal.

The fact that you weren't interested in Dead Rising 1 yet you look forward to Dead Rising 2 coming to PS3 is a pretty good indication you don't like Dead Rising 1 simply because it is on the 360.

Dismissing an RPG game like Mass Effect because you can't "pilot a giant mecha capable of blowing up planets" is the saddest excuse. It's an RPG for Christ sake not a shooter. Resistance 1 & 2 don't even have mecha... so... no buy? You don't need to be a fanboy to see you are being completely unreasonable.

The VC is kinda crap when you've already played 90% of the titles beforehand. It's only for people who weren't born in the N64 generation.

OK, N64 games make up a minority on VCon, most are from the NES/SNES era. Considering the minimum age to play these games if only in pure reading age the cutoff is about 7 years old so by 2009 anybody under 25 have likely not played these games as they were not old enough when they came out. These 13-18 and 18-25 year old age groups is hugely lucrative and considering the popular acceptance of retro gaming (I mean Mega Man 9 got made) how can you ignore this? To have played most of the top SNES, NES, Genesis, Turbografix, etc games you'd have to be almost in your thirties by now. Factor in how these games are quality, proven titles, suited to SDTVs and give hours of gameplay for a low price... these are perfect recession fodder.

The Metroid Prime series got stale around Echos, No More Heroes just honestly seems like another generic "trying to be hardcore" Wii title, I've seen enough of Mario Galaxy for one lifetime (doesn't have the Mario 64 magic) Smash Brothers is just too different from Melee, not to mention the whoring out they did, and everything else is just shovelware. Oh, and do you really think Phantom Hourglass is so innovative? Because I don't recall it ever giving you the power to freely sail across the ocean. All I saw was a small lake and you having to plot a whole course through it using the stylus. It never gave you the freedom to just go with the tide. It didn't push the concept to it's limit, like Wind Waker did. As much as I don't believe it, I don't even know if the Ps2 could handle a game as unique as Wind Waker. Shadow of the Colossus came close, but the depth and massive scale of the ocean was just incredible. When Phantom Hourglass took that away, it took away the one part I loved the most. And now the next DS Zelda will have trains. They might as well take away all the open endedness of the old Zelda games while they're at it.

I don't think anyone is impressed by your logic here. You simultaneously say Metroid Prime got stale yet Super Smash Bros Melee was too different!!!?! Then you say you have seen enough Mario Galaxy for a lifetime yet apparently you don't even own a Nintendo Wii. Lacking magic? Exactly how much of Galaxy have you played?
You then complain Zelda is not innovative enough... excuse me... Zelda has never been innovative. Enter dungeon, get keys, find sacred talisman... its not Metal Gear Solid and never has been. I can't believe you are complaining that the sailing isn't exactly the same as Gamecube, portable consoles - even the PSP - sacrifice performance for portability. You are not being at all fair here.

In essence, the two consoles, though having some good games, don't warrant a purchase from me.

Well if you feel that way, why would people buy the PS3 in 2009 "though it has some good games"? You can't dismiss Xbox 360 and Wii with one reasoning then not apply that same reasoning to PS3, in the end if you make all things equal the lower entry cost will win.

If I'm gonna buy a 360, it's gotta drop it's error rate to 0.2%, or to zero, not to mention getting better online or enforcing better ettiquette.

I assume you are referring to the RROD and failure rate but that would be silly, even cars that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars don't have a 0% failure rate, nothing has a 0% failure rate. Not even a PS3 has a 0% failure rate, I know people who have had their PS3 spontaneously break. I have asked in video stores in half a dozen towns from big name stores to un-associated stores and they have all said since the recent hardware revision of the 360 (identifiable by the HDMI output) they have had a very low reported failure rate - on par with PS2 or PS3. In fact the PS2 had terrible reliability in the beginning... mine broke even... but back then I was forced to just buy the PS2 Slimline, Microsoft has offered unconditional warranty extended to three years now. The reliability issue is a dead issue. I think you are just bringing it up as an excuse.

Also, better online etiquette? You have heard of the "mute player" feature that almost every game supports to block out individual players voice? I have had to use it on both PC and PS3 online games but to be honest I hardly hear any chat in any online multiplayer PS3 games. Perhaps because the headset is bundled with Xbox 360 yet you have to buy an expensive bluetooth headset for PS3. I tried to link my dad's bluetooth headset with PS3... it just kept demanding a code and there was no code in the headset's manual or anywhere. I predict the only reason etiquette is better on PS3 is because hardly anyone can get their voice heard but any gamer worth his salt knows just to mute immature players.

I was really expecting more from you than this.