News MS: "Sony is out of touch"

Basically, I was just trying to cost justify that extra $100 that the guy was making into $1000.

You can use non-MS HDD's on 360, but it's not supported and you are taking a risk that the HDD will crap out on you and all of your downloads/game saves/music/movies/photos/etc. are all are gone, and how much of that you can get back you will have to find out the hard way.

There is an advantage to being able to buy charge kits: they are independent of the controller you buy, meaning if you only have one controller and you forget to charge it the night before, if you have another charge kit sitting in the charger you can just pop it in the pop the dead one in the charger, but again how often are you really going to need that (I always plug my controller(s) back in when I'm finished)?

What's funny is most Arcade owners (the ones trying to spend the least amount of money) who have to have Live and renew it automatically (for $50/yr) via credit card will spend the same amount of money overall than an 80GB PS3 owner in 4 years time. Of course, you can purchase a Live card yourself on newegg for ~$40, but still. I will throw this out there though (and to be fair I will use retail pricing), to truly get the most out of the PS3, average consumers must purchase a HDMI cable ($30 Dynex brand at BestBuy) as well. Either way, I hope I made my point.

 

The Live cost working out to be more than the PS3 in the long term has always tickled me. People say it as if you are throwing money down the drain every year.

Personally, I don't care how much more expensive my 360 ends up being; it cost less to buy initially and has a superior online component that is well worth the cost of a game.

 

You have a debug PS3? As in one that can play dev code? If so...PM me.

 

Skiddy, I respect your appreciation for 360's cheaper initial cost and your enthusiasm for its Live service, but your statement about 'throwing money away' does have merit for users based on whether they use the extra features of Live or not.

I hate to keep beating a dead horse, but please explain to me how XBL is "superior" (meaning worth the extra $50 a year) to PSN? The only thing that I can think of off of the top of my head (and I use both services btw) is the ability to talk to friends outside of the game (up to 8 people). Does this truly make it that much better? Also, the PSN isn't a P2P based network (XBL is) currently allowing it to support up to 60 players (Resistance 2) and up to 256 players (once MAG debuts sometime this year). From what I have researched, the maximum players XBL supports currently is 18 (COD4&5).

IMO, both services are great. PSN is free and offers more players to be online at once. Live is a cost, but it allows up to 24 players (COD4&5) and the social experience is more seamless (though not by much).

 

PS3 is... weird. Powerful CPU coupled with crappy GPU.

But that aside, remember that most people are idiots and ignorants, they want "this funny gaming thingy", go to their nearest shop, see the funny and "nice" looking Wii aside "uber powerful", "serious" and "impressive" 360 and PS3 and choose... guess what. Most people just want exactly this - a "nice gaming thingy" to play with their friends. Just look at the street - majority of cars are cheap, mainstream crap. Look at the PCs - 95% of world's sales are cheap, generic "everyday usage" or office machines. Look at your friends - most of them are complete or nearly complete ignorants when it comes to something more than "cheapest pub in town". That's how it was, is and will always be.

And that is why Nokia makes 80% of their profit from their cheapest, most mainstream phones, the cheapest and "nicest" console will always win, mp3 is "suitable for most listeners" and why people say "I tried this Linux thing but there was some problem with my wifi card so I just use Vista". Sony underestimated the power of dark, underachieving, ignorant masses and made something for more serious players - forgetting that serious players are just a small percentage of all gamers.

 

I agree pretty much with you but this is rubbish, how the risk with a Samsung (etc) hard disk any greater than with a MS branded one, the HD in your pc goes you better hope you have a good back up routine same goes for you console and your server etc.

 

agree totally

Yes. PS3 has weird but powerful hardware. And most games to this day fails to take full advantage of this. The SPEs can also be used to help with the graphics, not just physics stuff.
But with multi-platform releases and generic game engines this will not happen.

And I adore Sony for making such a beast of a console. The Blu-ray addition was great. the PS3 really is an entertainment machine, not just a console. Too bad this only appeals to the techno-lust in us and hardcore gamers. The PS3 was not such a hit because of the steep price, but a lot of people are grateful Sony made this machine (it didn't have ZERO sales).
If Sony had made a console that appealed to the masses (read: cheap) it would have been mediocre.

I myself don't care about consoles at all. I'm an oddball. I'm a PC gamer. That means I spend even more money than what a PS3 costs in order to play games and have my fun.
So if you're going to talk about stuff that doesn't count (like Wii), I'm a great example.

 

done!!

 

Right all these comments about PS3 has better hardware etc fair enough but from people I know doing computer games at uni and lecturers its just a complete ball ache to program for compared to the xbox.

Now honestly looking at PS3 games what would you buy? I cant think of one game I'd want on a PS3 if I had one. There the issues sony has imo.

(Im an Xbox 360 owner btw but havent turned it on since last April when I played GTA3)

 

end of the day they are consoles. game consoles. games sell consoles and the 360 has more. talk all you want about blu ray and the ps3 being an entertainment centre but its supposed to be a games console.

and look at the fact that its harder to program for and arguably will look better if you do it right, but what 3rd party developer is going to bother putting so much extra time into a console that is losing ever single week on the games charts(every multiformat game sells less on PS3 than 360 im sure there are a few exclusives that have out sold 360 games at the time im just using multi as an example)

point out the rrod all you want but it shows a faulty console is still out selling the ps3 and by a wide margin

 

Greetings!

A way for console makers to keep in the news after the initial "next-gen console" hype has passed.

 

own all 3 consoles and pc

all 3 consoles ar ecurrently collecting dust

if the game is out on pc ill buy it for pc before any other console.

i use my ps3 as a media center for playing hd content. Havent turned on my 360 since gear of war 2 ( which was crap)

 

^^ dont say that i bought it yesterday lol

 

Sony over-egged the pudding hopelessly with PS3 - tried to buy their way to success with a hardware spec so huge it became genuinely difficult to work with. Possibly this means we'll see the games getting better and better with time, but that's speculation.

Nintendo decided to compete with good ideas - and a workable implementation of gesture-based control which had been tried before (by Nintendo, no less) but never really worked as well as it does on the Wii.

Sony tried to be flash, Nintendo tried to be clever. Advantage Mario.

 

Here, let me help you along: http://ps3.ign.com/articles/937/937162p4.html

Phil, how long do you think the Wii will continue to sell? 10 years? I severely doubt that. Sony decided to (just like with PS1 & PS2 ) pack the most advanced HW into their console so that it will last that long. It's not a sprint, it's a marathon. Based on the history of PS1/PS2 titles, IMO PS3's will only continue to get better like you said....

rollo, considering you own a PC (probably with great specs) I can see why your 360 hasn't been turned on. If history repeats itself, then most of its must-have exclusives will be coming to PC soon enough (except GOW2 if Mr. Cliff is to be trusted). As for the PS3, have you ever tried Motorstorm 1/2, Uncharted, GT5, LittleBigPlanet, Folklore, Heavenly Sword, Pixeljunk Monsters/Eden, Echochrome, MGS4 or Valkyria Chronicles? These are great titles that I have played that you won't find on PC. Just trying to help you out.

 

You're missing the point. The Wii audience isn't that bothered about graphics, which is, let's face it, what "hardware" comes down to. Nintendo has been clever twice, really - first by creating a device that's a well-executed example of a moderately novel idea, and also by pitching it to people who would moan like crazy if you tried to make them rebuy it every eighteen months.

I'm not a console guy either way, I have no axe to grind, but the Wii strikes me as a smart move and PS3 strikes me as wa-aayy too expensive. You need to be a console afficionado, which isn't a market anything like the size of the Wii. Ten years? I dunno. How long have they been selling Monopoly?

 

Phil, I totally agree that the Wii was a smart move by Nintendo. In regards to the "wa-aayy too expensive" statement, if you read my first post you would see that the 80GB PS3 is only $100 more than the 60GB 360, and you get built-in wifi and Blu-Ray capabilities (which I think is cost-justified). Of course Sony is targeting a different audience than the Wii (we can all agree on that), and in order for them to target that audience they felt it was best to implement a long-term strategy by going for a more "return on investment / pay more up-front, but get more in the long-run" type of approach which has not suited them well considering the recession and because most people don't really care about the extra features (i.e. Blu-ray) which is why 360 is doing so well). I think that it will take some time (meaning a couple price drops) before anyone can truly say PS3 was either a success or a failure again considering Sony is in this for the long-term (meaning not dropping price 2 times a year).

 

Ye like I said I havent seen one PS3 game that I want to play. Pretty flawed though using an argument for a PS3 from a PS3 site though aint it?

 

Are you kidding me? How is IGN a "PS3 site"? I just so happened to find the article under ps3.ign.com. So, to make you happy here it is on their 360 page: http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/937/937518p4.html. It was a universal article, not one created by a specific group handling a specific console (i.e. PS3). What more do you want?

 

But it does have a YLOD.
At least you can usually fix an RROD.