Sony PS3

[I-n-j-i-n]

Yeah, to be fair, the Wii doesn't exactly have their own killer ap just yet. They have a lot of decent/good short experiences and only Warioware comes close to that bill, but I mean it's Warioware. Something I breezed through in a day.

And DS had the same problem for one whole year when they had the most token, boring GBA sequel ideas with touchscreen features tacked on. It took them a while to get the truly unique and worthy games on it.

I don't think PS3's problem is getting the hardcore gamers. Why else then is it still selling so well even when it's so pricey and has such negative hype surrounding it? Look at the 360's launch and the buzz back then was how plain and not outstanding the console's features were. But that system was redeemed by the constant stream of games with occasionally great games in there with the Xbox Live aspect. The PS3 still has the inbuilt Bluray to bank on which would be a huge incentive to those who own HDTVs and see those new movies coming out in Bluray/HDDVD form.

[Bahamut]

Why are there 2 PS3 threads?

Well, this thread doesn't seem to be limited to the PS3, so I'm leaving it for now I guess.


Despite all the PS3 hate, I'm surprised at what games it does have for only 5 months into its lifespan. Virtua Fighter 5 is an amazing game by all counts, and certainly came much earlier than PS2's first great game. My only problems with the PS3 so far is that its graphics capabilities seem limited by the 256 MB of RAM compared to the 360's 512 MB, the controller lacks rumble & is piss poor for FPS again, and the price (but it's good for those who want a hi-def movie player). Having all 3 consoles is an interesting option this time around, since it seems this generation more than ever, good games are being distributed amongst all the consoles fairly evenly, at least for now.

[Antipode]

I'm not willing to say any console is bad if good games aren't out for it yet. So, to the PS3, I have absolutely no judgement until A) I play it and like/dislike it or B) A game that looks fun to me will come out for it.

I'm getting the Wii because I had a great (though sparse) time with Gamecube and I know many of the franchises will reappear. Since I like those franchises (more or less Prime 3, Brawl, Galaxy and Metal Slug Anthology will sell it for me), I know I'm going to like it. Plus, I played a couple games and it seemed like a fun concept. If, for free, I could choose a console I'd probably pick the 360. But since money enters into it (I need to work up cash myself) the Wii is for me, supposing I can find one.

Anyway, blah blah.

The PS3 looks amazing. People saying it's going to fail clearly WANT it to fail. Its online service is just being born and I believe some good games are on the horizon. I only pick the 360 over it because the good games are already a certainty.

[Ralphis]

Yeah, to be fair, the Wii doesn't exactly have their own killer ap just yet.

I spent a pretty good 33 hours on Zelda?

[atmuh]

I spent a pretty good 33 hours on Zelda?

you played a gamecube game

hope you liked it

[The Coop]

I spent a pretty good 33 hours on Zelda?

But that's on both the Wii and the Gamecube... and it was mostly made for the Gamecube. So really, the Wii has yet to get its first truly exclusive killer app. That's likely to change later this year though.

[Beatdown]

So I've been playing Resistance: Fall of Man recently...and the PS3 controller really shows its flaws with this game - the thumbstick locations are just terrible for FPS I think. Also, I've been spoiled with Gears of War, so Resistance really falls short graphics-wise in comparison and rubs off as rushed.

I find it increasingly hard to compare anything to Gears of War graphically. I have to keep reminding myself that the 360's been out for a while now and the PS3's got a ways to go. I've gotta give Resistance credit for entertainment value though, they do give you a lot of shit to shoot.

[Bahamut]

I find it increasingly hard to compare anything to Gears of War graphically. I have to keep reminding myself that the 360's been out for a while now and the PS3's got a ways to go. I've gotta give Resistance credit for entertainment value though, they do give you a lot of shit to shoot.

Yeah, I played some more Resistance earlier and I'm starting to like it some more, even though the thumbsticks still bother me somewhat.

One thing I'm looking forward to is hopefully more multiplayer games on the PS3 - there's no excuse now that it's very easy to hook up multiple controllers to it without the need of an additional peripheral.

[Beatdown]

Yeah, I played some more Resistance earlier and I'm starting to like it some more, even though the thumbsticks still bother me somewhat.

One thing I'm looking forward to is hopefully more multiplayer games on the PS3 - there's no excuse now that it's very easy to hook up multiple controllers to it without the need of an additional peripheral.

Do the thumbsticks feel...big (for lack of better term) to you? It's like they stick out more and have a larger range of motion.

[Bahamut]

Do the thumbsticks feel...big (for lack of better term) to you? It's like they stick out more and have a larger range of motion.

Nah, my hands are medium sized. It's just that it feels somewhat unnatural aiming with the right thumb pointing to the left, compared to aiming with the thumb pointing in the center and moving the thumb in the direction that's visually in agreement with what you're expect (as in the 360 controller).

[KakTheInfected]

Personally, I would consider Smooth Moves a killer app for the Wii. I understand why probably *everyone* in this thread will disagree, but I've played it more than any other game this year and the multiplayer never gets old.

Both the Wii and PS3 are too new to pass judgement on though, especially with stuff like Smash Bros. Brawl and MGS4 (provided it stays exclusive) on the horizon.

[suzumebachi]

Does anyone know anything about homebrew stuff for PS3 vs 360 yet? One of the things that made the last generation so cool was all the fun stuff you could do after you modded it (or disc swapped if you were a cheap bastard like me). You know, emulators, movie players, internet browsers... operating systems... etc. Others (*coughXerolcough*) say that the PS3 is likely to be the console of choice for homebrewers, but I find this EXTREMELY unlikely thanks to the ridiculous CPU architecture of the Cell, whereas, if I'm not mistaken, the 360 is still based on PC architecture, correct?

But then again I don't know shit.

[I-n-j-i-n]

Personally, I would consider Smooth Moves a killer app for the Wii. I understand why probably *everyone* in this thread will disagree, but I've played it more than any other game this year and the multiplayer never gets old.

Both the Wii and PS3 are too new to pass judgement on though, especially with stuff like Smash Bros. Brawl and MGS4 (provided it stays exclusive) on the horizon.

The reason why Smooth Moves is not "killer ap" is because the critical opinion and general attitude towards it is a bit ho hum and mixed in how the majority of gamers look at such a game. I mean, for a Warioware fan such as me, it's great. I think a lot of gamers could get taken in by the way it uses the Wiimote too. But it's definitely not for everyone and it just doesn't have the huge appeal that RPGs, Action, or Shooter games tends to have. Hell, minigame collections just in general don't have the visibility of even platformers or racers it seems.

Does anyone know anything about homebrew stuff for PS3 vs 360 yet? One of the things that made the last generation so cool was all the fun stuff you could do after you modded it (or disc swapped if you were a cheap bastard like me). You know, emulators, movie players, internet browsers... operating systems... etc. Others (*coughXerolcough*) say that the PS3 is likely to be the console of choice for homebrewers, but I find this EXTREMELY unlikely thanks to the ridiculous CPU architecture of the Cell, whereas, if I'm not mistaken, the 360 is still based on PC architecture, correct?

But then again I don't know shit.

Um, didn't they totally figure out how to homebrew it illegally a few months ago? Also, from the speculation alone, it sounds to me like legal homebrew options for the 360 is more open than the PS3's as well. It'd be perfectly even in terms of features if Microsoft decides to put in a browser in there.

[Evilhead]

The reason why Smooth Moves is not "killer ap" is because the critical opinion and general attitude towards it is a bit ho hum and mixed in how the majority of gamers look at such a game. I mean, for a Warioware fan such as me, it's great. I think a lot of gamers could get taken in by the way it uses the Wiimote too. But it's definitely not for everyone and it just doesn't have the huge appeal that RPGs, Action, or Shooter games tends to have. Hell, minigame collections just in general don't have the visibility of even platformers or racers it seems.

Yeah, I agree with you there. A "killer app" is a game that will move beyond a game that most people will want to pick up after they buy the system to a game that people will buy the system in order to play. Halo is a good example of this. Fortunately for the Wii, I don't think it really needs one yet. The system sells itself. Hell, even my mom wants one. By the time the initial impact of the controller wears off Nintendo will start releasing their big titles that will keep systems moving off shelves. The 360 already has a nice library, but the PS3 really needs that killer app fast. There really needs to be a PS3 game everyone is talking about to gather interest, and I think Sony is really dropping the ball on this one.



Um, didn't they totally figure out how to homebrew it illegally a few months ago? Also, from the speculation alone, it sounds to me like legal homebrew options for the 360 is more open than the PS3's as well. It'd be perfectly even in terms of features if Microsoft decides to put in a browser in there.

What was all the whispering of Linux on PS3? I guess you could get it to work for either system, but whichever one does will open will open the door to a huge homebrew world.

[Stargem]

I agree with the concept of pack-ins. While it does indeed make buying an system more expensive, it also gives customers something to look forward to when they get home and set it up. In my case, I got an SNES that also included Super Mario All-Stars + World, which is an pretty nice deal. Give a customer a good game experience for their first time playing, and you would probably have a customer come back for seconds.

I personally think that pack-in bundles should include an compilation game much like how my first game was, and perhaps another game that acts as the latest killer app. Future Wii packages could offer three or so Virtual Console titles that an customer could pick, and the killer app comes in the package. The former would allow customers to experience the Virtual Console system for free, making them more inclined to use it in the future since if they like it, then they would want more from it. In my opinion, while consoles can indeed be sold by name alone, it is the games that are offered and how you get customers interested in them is key to everything. It begins and ends with games, and deviating from this goal too much will result in ruin. Make good games, make people aware of them, and offer enough at an fair price so that you will have many good customers for the lifespan of your console.

In Sony's case though, they don't have enough games or consoles on the market to really convert anyone though. That is an problem for them, and the fact that people notice the Xbox 360 and Wii far more often because of the very fact that there are more of these systems in the common household is something to take note of.

[Dexie]

Wow. There's finally something on the PS3 that interests me. Amazing. O_o

http://kotaku.com/gaming/ps3/gdc-07-sony-reveals-littlebigplanet-242171.php
http://kotaku.com/gaming/littlebigplanet/clips-littlebigplanet-242305.php

This looks...really damn cool, doesn't it?

[G_D]

^ "Those creatures are cute - horrifyingly cute!" ~ Space Butler

It's definitely a fun-looking game.

I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned PlayStation Home (http://www.joystiq.com/2007/03/07/playstation-home-the-free-virtual-world-of-playstation-3/) yet. I will copy my own Joystiq post so as not to need to retype:

This is what the Mii concept should've been. Though what I was really hoping for Wii was that Animal Crossing would be the OS.

I'm sorry, this looks cool and all, but I *DO NOT* want to make a realistic human avatar. At the very least I want something fantastic like the Phantasy Star online games. Don't give me something I can already get in real life, give me something much cooler. Give me the Advent Children motorcycle, or some swords, or a sweet armored suit, or 6 feet of spiky hair...anything but *REAL LIFE*. That is the one thing that causes me to not like this. Cool concept - way better than the extremely limited Miis - but it is incredibly boring and mundane.

[Bahamut]

So it looks like the New York Times has confirmed Playstation Home's existence as being a rip off of Microsoft's and Nintendo's offerings. I say good, achievements need to be made universal.

[CE]

Holy fuck Playstation Home and LittleBigWorld.

gg sony

[RoeTaKa]

Just stick a load of Wii points in the Wii package, done, VC tour!

Each console is doing the same thing now, bloody copying each other all the time. Now they have to depend on killer apps and software, the Wii is the only console that can successfully dodge this by just imagining what else you can plug into the bottom of that Wiimote.

Still, 'Home' sounds like an intruiging idea for the PS3. The whole world can visit a virtual E3 or something like that, it's scary though, I wonder if the PS4 will want my mind, not just my body :S. Im still unconvinced, home seems like a suped up 3D internet and quite frankly what is the use of that besides just looking pretty, what a waste of development time. People will eat it up but its not impressive.

[Koelsch1]

I think Sony is really dropping the ball on this one.

Oh?????????

[Armoured Priest]

As I recall both Sega's Saturn and the N64 had pack-in games (or at least package versions, one core, the other with a game.) I know the Saturn originally came with Virtua Fighter and a game demo disc, then, later it came with 3 games: Vitua Fighter 2, Virtua Cop, and Daytona. Also, I believe the N64 came with Pokemon Stadium at one point. Don't recall if there were any other package deals for the N64.

I am all for pack in games. Sometimes (like when a kid is saving up using his allowance monies or a part-time job or something) and he has just enough to get the system, but not any games, it was kinda nice to buy the system and have something to do until you've saved up money for a game. Sure, he could wait until he has enough to buy the system and a game, but sometimes impulse takes over.

[Evilhead]

When I bought my Xbox it had a couple pack in games. PRG2 which I played for a little bit the afternoon I got it and some other game I never even took out of the case. I bought the system with the packins because it had an extra controller and was cheaper than the special edition Xboxs they had for sale at the store I was at.

Oh?????????


Awww.... And I thought you blocked me! I guess you couldn't live without your widdle Evilhead. How sweet.

And yeah, Sony is getting pwnd by Microsoft right now. 360>>>PS3. Maybe this will change when some games come out, but who knows? They are in danger of losing a lot of the market at this point, but even then the system won't be in danger of flopping completely. There's just too much money behind it.

[[]Diracy]

Many of you have maybe already seen this, some of you may have not. These are scans of the April issue of EGM, and feature the new Ratchet and Clank Future: Tools of Destruction. Looks like PS3 has its first killer app.

http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/7884/570514200703031149440biwk5.th.jpg (http://img219.imageshack.us/my.php?image=570514200703031149440biwk5.jpg)
http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/2729/570514200703031149451bimp1.th.jpg (http://img219.imageshack.us/my.php?image=570514200703031149451bimp1.jpg)
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/6969/570514200703062243390biep4.th.jpg (http://img217.imageshack.us/my.php?image=570514200703062243390biep4.jpg)
http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/6821/570514200703062243401bilt2.th.jpg (http://img221.imageshack.us/my.php?image=570514200703062243401bilt2.jpg)

And a video from the GDC conference....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5m6n1U-pTM

[Specter]

My only problems with the PS3 so far is that its graphics capabilities seem limited by the 256 MB of RAM compared to the 360's 512 MB, the controller lacks rumble & is piss poor for FPS again, and the price (but it's good for those who want a hi-def movie player).


Actually, the PS3 and 360 both have 512 MB (though that seems odd to me when the standard for PC's is 2 Gigs). Also, apparently Sony and Immersion (the rumble guys) are friends now, so there might be rumble in the controller now. Though that might mean that people would have to go out and buy all new controllers, and games would have to add it. And the controller will still suck for shooters, but that's what PCs are for.

[Gruntguy]

But that's on both the Wii and the Gamecube... and it was mostly made for the Gamecube. So really, the Wii has yet to get its first truly exclusive killer app. That's likely to change later this year though.

Please God, have Metroid Prime 3 and SSB. be good!

...and I don't mean The Coop being God unless I missed soemthing in the book of Revolation.

[The Coop]

But that's on both the Wii and the Gamecube... and it was mostly made for the Gamecube. So really, the Wii has yet to get its first truly exclusive killer app. That's likely to change later this year though.

Please God, have Metroid Prime 3 and SSB. be good!

...and I don't mean The Coop being God unless I missed soemthing in the book of Revolation.

:lol: http://www.geocities.com/arforfaborb/blank.gif

[I-n-j-i-n]

I agree with the concept of pack-ins. While it does indeed make buying an system more expensive, it also gives customers something to look forward to when they get home and set it up. In my case, I got an SNES that also included Super Mario All-Stars + World, which is an pretty nice deal. Give a customer a good game experience for their first time playing, and you would probably have a customer come back for seconds.

That is the precise reason why pack-ins shouldn't become mandatory like they tends to be. Also, a lot of 'pack-ins' nowadays can be relegated to online downloads of old or virtual games. Xbox 360 has a bit of that and they give you Uno and some market points for just subscribing to Xbox Live. The Wii could definitely pack in maybe 2000 VC points just for starters.

And considering how expensive these consoles are already, I think the days of Sega/Nintendo style pack ins are a thing of the past. Again, game consoles literally sell themselves. All three systems have enough great games to not have a single mascot stand over all of it like in the old days. Times simply have changed. And people are buying more and more game consoles even when they're priced at $600, $400 to the Wiimote/Chucks costing $60 to some games costing $60. And yet we're still seeing record game sales.

I personally think that pack-in bundles should include an compilation game much like how my first game was, and perhaps another game that acts as the latest killer app. Future Wii packages could offer three or so Virtual Console titles that an customer could pick, and the killer app comes in the package.

That kind of reasoning is a bit faulty as I would assume that Nintendo or any other company would rather flaunt the individual game sales and the individual marketing of the games rather than push them together with the console.

The former would allow customers to experience the Virtual Console system for free, making them more inclined to use it in the future since if they like it, then they would want more from it. In my opinion, while consoles can indeed be sold by name alone, it is the games that are offered and how you get customers interested in them is key to everything. It begins and ends with games, and deviating from this goal too much will result in ruin. Make good games, make people aware of them, and offer enough at an fair price so that you will have many good customers for the lifespan of your console.

People simply aren't dumb enough nowadays to rely on pack-ins as the only way we're going to be introduced to great games. We're not kids anymore. Also, back in the days of NES and Master System, we didn't have a very good gaming press, almost no TV coverage of games at all, and no internet to speak of. The entire dynamics of game sales do not hinge with pack-ins at all. It's a nostalgic idea that used to work. Though I agree with your idea in that maybe one or two VC or other virtual downloadable games would be a great idea not only for the Wii, but for the 360 and now PS3 having their online marketplace now.

In Sony's case though, they don't have enough games or consoles on the market to really convert anyone though. That is an problem for them, and the fact that people notice the Xbox 360 and Wii far more often because of the very fact that there are more of these systems in the common household is something to take note of.

I don't think that's entirely true. Sony has garnered a monstrous number of PS1 and PS2 libraries and if they can sell them all like they plan to, then that could help with their sales too. Sony has a history now and some people don't seem to realize it. And Sony needs to drive in home the idea that they have a Bluray packed in since that is a major reason to get one for high end buyers or anyone with HDTVs really.

[The Coop]

People simply aren't dumb enough nowadays to rely on pack-ins as the only way we're going to be introduced to great games. We're not kids anymore. Also, back in the days of NES and Master System, we didn't have a very good gaming press, almost no TV coverage of games at all, and no internet to speak of. The entire dynamics of game sales do not hinge with pack-ins at all. It's a nostalgic idea that used to work.

You obviously haven't hung around game stores much, have you? :wink:

Anyway, it has nothing to do with consumer intelligence, consumer age, gaming press levels, or game sales. It was simply a way of giving the consumer something to actually use with their new system, without charging them another sixty dollars. It was pure gravy, and the pack-in was usually chosen carefully to boot so that it would be seen as a perk. It put a game in peoples' hands (one that might not be available for sale right away, if at all, which made it look like even more of a perk), showing them what the system could do with a full fledged game instead of some crummy demo, and giving them a use for that nifty new system (remember, not everyone can buy a system and five games with it... or even one game these days).

No offense to you I-n-j-i-n, or anyone else, but I'm not sure why the pack-in subject keeps bouncing around to things other than what it seems to be at its core... giving the consumer more for their money (something that hasn't been done in the game system world for a long time). If it helps, think of it along the same lines as a pre-order bonus. Is it needed for sales? Not really. Would it help sales? To at least some degree, yes. Would it be appreciated by the people buying the system? If it's chosen wisely, most likely (you can apply this to the "sales" part too).

It's an idea that used to work, and it worked on several levels. And frankly, as long as the pack-in wasn't something akin to Mortal Kombat Advance or Total Recall in quality, it would again.

I'll stop beating you guys over the head with my babbling now :lol:

[Tenucha]

I reserved the TMNT movie baised game ahead of time becasue you can get a reprint of the very first TMNT comic from GameStop. I think that was worth it.

I missed the days when you'd get a packed-in offer.
I didn't think that would ever happen again. N64 had a few going for it but it was much late rin its life.
I like more for my money rather then spending more so I can be attiquette. (sp?).

PS3 I think is trying that... however it's got FAR more then what I want.
There coping Nintendo and Microsofts achevements/Mii thing now and ripped off "Second Life" essentually and using it as there "Home" thats saposed to be a free program (however if you want to do more you gotta pay).

Now someone answer this... I havn't been keeping up to date on the specs and I dont own one.
Are the PS3 game discs blue-ray discs? Becasue I honestly dont care to own a Blue-Ray reader. I wanna buy a game console not a DVD player... I already have one of those. I THINK the PS3's games are Blue-Ray discs but I dont remember...

[I-n-j-i-n]

No offense to you I-n-j-i-n, or anyone else, but I'm not sure why the pack-in subject keeps bouncing around to things other than what it seems to be at its core... giving the consumer more for their money (something that hasn't been done in the game system world for a long time). If it helps, think of it along the same lines as a pre-order bonus. Is it needed for sales? Not really. Would it help sales? To at least some degree, yes. Would it be appreciated by the people buying the system? If it's chosen wisely, most likely (you can apply this to the "sales" part too).

It's an idea that used to work, and it worked on several levels. And frankly, as long as the pack-in wasn't something akin to Mortal Kombat Advance or Total Recall in quality, it would again.

If it's a preorder bonus, then it isn't much of a pack-in at all. Though I think the preorders are a great idea in the way the Japanese has done that even with their music CDs such as limited edition or limited print casing and small trite goodies that would be further the incentive to get it early while supplies last (as they don't last long. Music CD, DVD and Game editions sell out within days even if they're not that good).

And by the mentioning of the press in the way pack ins used to be received, I was talking more about the buzz factor back in the old days.

But ultimately, I don't think that game companies really are up to pandering to their audience like they used to. Because in the early days of gaming, people needed to have a stronger case to jump in and try out new systems. Because console gaming was new to most people, they needed to have a game in there or else it wouldn't create a good first impression. Nowadays, I just do not think there has to be that 'break in' game or an avatar of the system such as Mario or Sonic or Crash Bandicoot to put in as a service for the newcomers. Also, with most of the best games nowadays coming from the 3rd party, I don't think it makes sense for game console companies to offer excessive favoritism as they're always up to courting the 3rd parties.

I think pack ins could be a good service too, but I just don't think it's really worth much in terms of public image as a gaming company. Like with Wii Sports or Uno or some other well made but tech-demo-esque games, I think that'll further be the norm the more lucrative game business gets. Since the demand and the core knowledge of the games is so huge that they don't need to push that extra in there to 'service' the gaming customers. The only service the companies need to get is the sales. I just don't see what's in it for the game companies to go through with that.

[Evilhead]

Yes, they are blu-ray disks. People keep going on and on about how they don't need a blu-ray player, but forget that the 50+ gigs of game data these things can and do hold.

[The Coop]

Um, weren't we in another thread just a few minutes ago? :dstrbd:

No offense to you I-n-j-i-n, or anyone else, but I'm not sure why the pack-in subject keeps bouncing around to things other than what it seems to be at its core... giving the consumer more for their money (something that hasn't been done in the game system world for a long time). If it helps, think of it along the same lines as a pre-order bonus. Is it needed for sales? Not really. Would it help sales? To at least some degree, yes. Would it be appreciated by the people buying the system? If it's chosen wisely, most likely (you can apply this to the "sales" part too).

It's an idea that used to work, and it worked on several levels. And frankly, as long as the pack-in wasn't something akin to Mortal Kombat Advance or Total Recall in quality, it would again.

If it's a preorder bonus, then it isn't much of a pack-in at all. Though I think the preorders are a great idea in the way the Japanese has done that even with their music CDs such as limited edition or limited print casing and small trite goodies that would be further the incentive to get it early while supplies last (as they don't last long. Music CD, DVD and Game editions sell out within days even if they're not that good).

I think you took that a bit too literally :lol:

I didn't mean a direct comparison to a pre-order bonus, but rather the concept behind it... getting something extra that may not be needed, but it's nice to get and adds more value and entertainment (and usefulness?) to what you bought. System pack-ins and pre-order bonuses are different by nature and how you get them, but they're at least somewhat similar in purpose. That's what I was getting at.

[I-n-j-i-n]

I agree that the overall concept of at least portraying more value to the package is one of the reasons why pack-ins worked before.

Then again, look at the consoles themselves nowadays and PS3 can play Bluray (which is a substantial factor considering that just about all major movie releases nowadays have Bluray versions), the Wii has a bevy of channel options, Mii aspect and others beyond the pack-in of Wii Sports, and 360 has the whole customizable soundtracks and entertainment center value even without factoring in the Xbox Live service.

[The Coop]

I agree that the overall concept of at least portraying more value to the package is one of the reasons why pack-ins worked before.

Then again, look at the consoles themselves nowadays and PS3 can play Bluray (which is a substantial factor considering that just about all major movie releases nowadays have Bluray versions), the Wii has a bevy of channel options, Mii aspect and others beyond the pack-in of Wii Sports, and 360 has the whole customizable soundtracks and entertainment center value even without factoring in the Xbox Live service.

With the exception of the Wii, there's not a lot to do with the system you bought unless you fork out more dough (except browse, but your PC does that already). That's probably the biggest thing I miss about pack-in games. I mean sure, Altered Beast wasn't exactly ground breaking, and neither was Sol-Feace or even Super Mario World. But they were fun, "free", and made your new game system usable before you even got it out of the box with no extra cash having to be handed over. I miss that kind of thing.


...

I'm reiterating again, aren't I? Time for bed I think.

[Evilhead]

With the exception of the Wii, there's not a lot to do with the system you bought unless you fork out more dough (except browse, but your PC does that already). That's probably the biggest thing I miss about pack-in games. I mean sure, Altered Beast wasn't exactly ground breaking, and neither was Sol-Feace or even Super Mario World. But they were fun, "free", and made your new game system usable before you even got it out of the box with no extra cash having to be handed over. I miss that kind of thing.


...

I'm reiterating again, aren't I? Time for bed I think.

Well I think we all know what you're saying. Getting a free game or two with your system is never a bad thing, but from a business perspective I can see why the companies stopped doing it. Yes, it costs them a couple bucks to print up a game, and that little burst of joy the consumer gets might be beneficial somehow, but that's a lot of lost software revenue. Who's going to shell out $300 or whatever for a new game console and not buy at least ONE game to play right away? I usually buy at least two when I get a new system. Multiply that by 2 million or however many consoles sell at launch and that's a lot of money. Considering that both Microsoft and Sony are losing money on each system they sell they have to start making that up right away. And if you include a free game, especially if it's a good one, then that's a lot of lost potential sales.

[I-n-j-i-n]

^

Aside from lost revenue even, it's not like Sony or Microsoft to push pack-ins just for the sake of doing so. Nintendo also has become somewhat lax in that regard except for the way they completely ported over Twilight Princess with the controls. Stars have to align so that great games can be made just in time for the system launch too. I just don't think most game companies would risk putting out a game that won't be as easily received as it could have in the past. Also, games nowadays with the newer consoles can never really tap into the full power of the system at launch. Games in the 8 bit and 16 bit era were more easier to develop and utilize the systems' potential. It's much harder to untap the potential of the graphics and all the perks of a system right at launch.

Also note that this is why people pay more attention to launch titles now more than ever. I don't think the very term "launch title" was even used in the Playstation era. And the game companies themselves seems to perpetrate the line of 'launch titles' so that they don't have to worry about pack-ins and other heavy endorsement of a game

[Zutnunzor]

My cousin just recently put Linux on his PS3 and its pretty sweet. Don't know about other systems, but I'm having a blast with it.

[Bahamut]

Whoa big thread merge. So nobody has thoughts on Playstation Home?

[megadave]

Yeah, I do. The name. It should be called "Playstation Playland" or something like that. Seriously. Maybe "Playzone" or "Playground?"

[Baleshadow]

Playstation Home looks okay, but I am far more intrigued by LittleBigPlanet.

[Zutnunzor]

Playstation Home looks okay, but I am far more intrigued by LittleBigPlanet.


Game is cute. Movie and screenshots right here (http://www.joystiq.com/2007/03/07/sony-unveils-cooperative-platformer-littlebigplanet/)

[Blake]

Game is cute. Movie and screenshots right here (http://www.joystiq.com/2007/03/07/sony-unveils-cooperative-platformer-littlebigplanet/)

Wow. Awesome. Looks straight out of a disney/pixar movie. The music is great. And I love side scrolling platformers.

EDIT: I really wanna play this game. If the PS3 comes down in price in the future I might just buy one.

[sgx]

Little Big Planet. Holy shit that looks awesome. I want PS3 now.

[Soma]

I do want a ps3 now, I'm not sure why though. Home sounds like a good waste of time. It reminds me of the Clubs in Test Drive Unlimited (xbox360 though i think coming to ps3) where it's just you and your friends (or their avatars really) hanging out in a room, it was just glorified voice chat but it was amusing. Little Big Planet looks really impressive too. I want it for MGS4 and hopefully another Zone of the Enders also. But I'm still going to wait until the end of the year because i need to pay off my HDTV and some other things.

[The Unsung Plumber]

and hopefully another Zone of the Enders

I need another ZOE.

[The Damned]

So... why is it that people bitch and complain about how kiddy Nintendo games are, but fucking orgasm over LittleBigPlanet like it's some sort of lesbian orgy?:banghead:

Let's see...

1. It's a game where little dolls run around.

2. It's set in a world made up of toys, blocks and stylized cartoon drawings.

3. The music is whimsical and sounds like it would fit in perfectly on an episode of Azumanga Daioh or one of those short-lived Disney cartoons you see on Family Channel.

I'm not seeing how this is any different. Where's Evilhead? He should have some interesting reasons how this is completely different and better.

[SilverStar]

So... why is it that people bitch and complain about how kiddy Nintendo games are, but fucking orgasm over LittleBigPlanet like it's some sort of lesbian orgy?:banghead:

Let's see...

1. It's a game where little dolls run around.

2. It's set in a world made up of toys, blocks and stylized cartoon drawings.

3. The music is whimsical and sounds like it would fit in perfectly on an episode of Azumanga Daioh or one of those short-lived Disney cartoons you see on Family Channel.

I'm not seeing how this is any different. Where's Evilhead? He should have some interesting reasons how this is completely different and better.

Easy! Because it's high def! Everyone knows that! :P

And maybe because they give you a bit more control than one would expect from a game for a Nintendo system, currently. The whole loading images and data from the hard drive, and having everything look so smooth is part of the reason.

But, that's coming from someone who happens to like those kind of casual sandbox games.. though I do hate the whole Sims series, because they work too hard to force you to stick to a schedule, lest you up and die.

[sephfire]

Finally, the PS3 is starting to look appealing again.

The last time I thought "man, I must have a PS3" was back in 2005 after E3 where they first unveiled it. Ever since that gorgeous display, it's been almost nothing but disappoinment. In 2005, the PS3 had my interest over any other. But by release day, Sony had whittled my enthusiasm down to apathy.

But now, at last, the PS3 is starting to look appealing again. I think that might be some of the reason some people are fawning over Home and LittleBigPlanet. We've been wanting desperately to love the PS3, and now we might finally have a reason.

I'm loving my Wii and my Xbox360, but a small part of my heart has been aching to see the PS3 recover and bring some unique thrills of its own.

[SleazyC]

Does anyone know anything about homebrew stuff for PS3 vs 360 yet? One of the things that made the last generation so cool was all the fun stuff you could do after you modded it (or disc swapped if you were a cheap bastard like me). You know, emulators, movie players, internet browsers... operating systems... etc. Others (*coughXerolcough*) say that the PS3 is likely to be the console of choice for homebrewers, but I find this EXTREMELY unlikely thanks to the ridiculous CPU architecture of the Cell, whereas, if I'm not mistaken, the 360 is still based on PC architecture, correct?

But then again I don't know shit.
You can already run emulators, media players, web browsers, etc on a PS3 with the option to install one of the various flavors of Linux. The problem is that when running a separate OS you do not have access to the RSX so any type of video acceleration is a no go. When using a media player you have to use software-rendered full screen and playback suffers depending on your resolutions and bitrates. I was able to full screen SD Xvid encoded video files but trying to full screen h.264 or HD encoded video files resulted in choppy playback.

I was able to get Snes9x up and running with some minor sound problems as well as MAME up and running with the same sound problems. If anyone ever goes about optimizing software to use an SPE to handle things like video acceleration the PS3 could easily substitute as an HTPC. At the moment the lack of optimization and lack of access to RSX kills most of its value.

[SilverStar]

You can already run emulators, media players, web browsers, etc on a PS3 with the option to install one of the various flavors of Linux. The problem is that when running a separate OS you do not have access to the RSX so any type of video acceleration is a no go. When using a media player you have to use software-rendered full screen and playback suffers depending on your resolutions and bitrates. I was able to full screen SD Xvid encoded video files but trying to full screen h.264 or HD encoded video files resulted in choppy playback.

I was able to get Snes9x up and running with some minor sound problems as well as MAME up and running with the same sound problems. If anyone ever goes about optimizing software to use an SPE to handle things like video acceleration the PS3 could easily substitute as an HTPC. At the moment the lack of optimization and lack of access to RSX kills most of its value.

And for the MS side of the argument, MS has launched a competition for their XNA development environment, where they have something like 100 prizes of a grand or 10 for the top productions made with their tools.

[SleazyC]

And for the MS side of the argument, MS has launched a competition for their XNA development environment, where they have something like 100 prizes of a grand or 10 for the top productions made with their tools.
XNA is a pretty amazing push by MS to tap the Indie and Hobbyist sectors to bring out some fun and innovative games.

What Sony is doing on the other hand is allowing the end user to install another OS (at the time only Linux but I assume we might see something else later down the road) and then stopping there. Running Linux we could theoretically see a lot done with the PS3 but it's really a different direction then XNA. With XNA you can develop games that utilize the full hardware of the 360 but you won't see Media Players or emulators coming out. Now when we can finally inject some different OS into the flash of the 360 we might see an explosion of homebrew but at the moment most of it is restricted to flashing the firmware of the optical drive and thus is tied to piracy mainly.

[Evilhead]

So... why is it that people bitch and complain about how kiddy Nintendo games are, but fucking orgasm over LittleBigPlanet like it's some sort of lesbian orgy?:banghead:

Let's see...

1. It's a game where little dolls run around.

2. It's set in a world made up of toys, blocks and stylized cartoon drawings.

3. The music is whimsical and sounds like it would fit in perfectly on an episode of Azumanga Daioh or one of those short-lived Disney cartoons you see on Family Channel.

I'm not seeing how this is any different. Where's Evilhead? He should have some interesting reasons how this is completely different and better.

I've never complained about "kiddy" games. I hate dumbed down games in pretty much any form, but I'm open to all kinds of visual style. I loved the Katamari series, Loco Roco, Animal Crossing, etc.

LBP seems like a cool game, but it hasn't really changed my overall opinion on the PS3. I still plan to get one eventually, maybe after a price drop. Right now LBP ranks somewhere around 6 or 7 on my most wanted PS3 games. As of now I'd much rather have a 360. Plan on getting one once I'm back in the states.

[Merk]

As of now I'd much rather have a 360. Plan on getting one once I'm back in the states.

Why when you're back here, are they sold out in Japan?

[Evilhead]

Why when you're back here, are they sold out in Japan?

No, they are far from sold out here. In fact, I could get one cheaply since they are extremely unpopular but I'd like an American system because a lot of the best games don't come over here, whereas most good Japanese games make their way over to the states in the case of the 360.

[Specter]

So... why is it that people bitch and complain about how kiddy Nintendo games are, but fucking orgasm over LittleBigPlanet like it's some sort of lesbian orgy?:banghead:

Let's see...

1. It's a game where little dolls run around.

2. It's set in a world made up of toys, blocks and stylized cartoon drawings.

3. The music is whimsical and sounds like it would fit in perfectly on an episode of Azumanga Daioh or one of those short-lived Disney cartoons you see on Family Channel.

I'm not seeing how this is any different. Where's Evilhead? He should have some interesting reasons how this is completely different and better.

Um, because LBP is driven almost completely by user created content, and is more of a game-creation tool than a game itself. The whole thing is run by a physics engine so the player can theoretically make anything, not just a platformer. The fact that it's cutesy is just because it goes well with the accessibility of the whole thing.

[[]Diracy]

I'm gonna requote my post because i dont think anyone saw the the post since the threads merged.

Diracy;242852']Many of you have maybe already seen this, some of you may have not. These are scans of the April issue of EGM, and feature the new Ratchet and Clank Future: Tools of Destruction. Looks like PS3 has its first killer app.

http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/7884/570514200703031149440biwk5.th.jpg (http://img219.imageshack.us/my.php?image=570514200703031149440biwk5.jpg)
http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/2729/570514200703031149451bimp1.th.jpg (http://img219.imageshack.us/my.php?image=570514200703031149451bimp1.jpg)
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/6969/570514200703062243390biep4.th.jpg (http://img217.imageshack.us/my.php?image=570514200703062243390biep4.jpg)
http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/6821/570514200703062243401bilt2.th.jpg (http://img221.imageshack.us/my.php?image=570514200703062243401bilt2.jpg)

And a video from the GDC conference....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5m6n1U-pTM

[SleazyC]

So... why is it that people bitch and complain about how kiddy Nintendo games are, but fucking orgasm over LittleBigPlanet like it's some sort of lesbian orgy?:banghead:

Let's see...

1. It's a game where little dolls run around.

2. It's set in a world made up of toys, blocks and stylized cartoon drawings.

3. The music is whimsical and sounds like it would fit in perfectly on an episode of Azumanga Daioh or one of those short-lived Disney cartoons you see on Family Channel.

I'm not seeing how this is any different. Where's Evilhead? He should have some interesting reasons how this is completely different and better.
Maybe because Sony has offered a diverse lineup with a pretty large selection of mature games (not just M rated games) while Nintendo systems have always been stigmatized as having a much more family oriented approach and much less mature games in comparison.

I think the whole kiddy argument is pretty stupid but when it comes down to image you can hardly argue that Sony has held a much more mature one when compared to Nintendo if we just look at all the M rated games published by Nintendo versus Sony (not talking about third party here but first or second party games).

My two cents anyways...

[SilverStar]

Maybe because Sony has offered a diverse lineup with a pretty large selection of mature games (not just M rated games) while Nintendo systems have always been stigmatized as having a much more family oriented approach and much less mature games in comparison.

I think the whole kiddy argument is pretty stupid but when it comes down to image you can hardly argue that Sony has held a much more mature one when compared to Nintendo if we just look at all the M rated games published by Nintendo versus Sony (not talking about third party here but first or second party games).

My two cents anyways...

And if you want to look at only first party games, Nintendo has done far better than Sony, all around. Nintendo games are, sadly, usually the best of their peers. And are usually among the first to try it, too. The results, are that everything else, be it on their system or otherwise, tends to fall vastly short with far more flaws.

Maybe one day Nintendo will go the way of Sega and go strictly software, with no hardware allegiance? If so, then you'll start seeing the real effects of Nintendo, spread across all fields. Sony and Microsoft would both start to be labeled as being "too kiddy" because of how incredibly well the Nintendo games would do, causing other developers to try to emulate the successes.

One thing you have to consider, is that Nintendo sells more software than pretty much any other company, regardless of having such a small installed userbase. And by Nintendo, I mean internal and 2nd party developers(since I don't think Sony themselves have actually MADE any games, they've had to rely on second party dev studios to do all the software work for them, while they just handle the licensing).

[Specter]

(since I don't think Sony themselves have actually MADE any games, they've had to rely on second party dev studios to do all the software work for them, while they just handle the licensing).

Uh, SCE? They did a little title called God of War. Also, Shadow of the Colossus, but I don't know if you've heard of those since they're such small titles, and not really all that remarkable.

[SleazyC]

And if you want to look at only first party games, Nintendo has done far better than Sony, all around. Nintendo games are, sadly, usually the best of their peers. And are usually among the first to try it, too. The results, are that everything else, be it on their system or otherwise, tends to fall vastly short with far more flaws.
Can't argue against this one really as Nintendo is the king of software but if we look at the crux of why fanboys call Nintendo "kiddy" it is due to the fact that they really lack the diverse lineup that has allowed Sony to introduce Little Big Planet without the cries off "kiddy game."

Maybe one day Nintendo will go the way of Sega and go strictly software, with no hardware allegiance? If so, then you'll start seeing the real effects of Nintendo, spread across all fields. Sony and Microsoft would both start to be labeled as being "too kiddy" because of how incredibly well the Nintendo games would do, causing other developers to try to emulate the successes.
If Nintendo were to go third party I still don't think you would see Microsoft of Sony being labeled kiddy due to my previous point that at the moment their current and previous consoles had much more diverse lineups to the point that fanboys couldn't point out and say that all Nintendo made were kiddy games.

One thing you have to consider, is that Nintendo sells more software than pretty much any other company, regardless of having such a small installed userbase. And by Nintendo, I mean internal and 2nd party developers(since I don't think Sony themselves have actually MADE any games, they've had to rely on second party dev studios to do all the software work for them, while they just handle the licensing).
Currently Nintendo has a pretty damn huge market share not only in the handheld market (which they have owned for years and years) but they are picking up incredible steam in the console market as well. Even then they had incredibly good tie-ratios with the Gamecube. One thing that is pretty consistent with Nintendo and any hardware they bring out is that they can also bring the software sales.

In the end I think the true fault lies with third parties letting this stigma of Nintendo having a "kiddy" image get to them. They could always weasel their way out of it with the Gamecube saying that sales were too low but given the Wii's current sales and its projected sales that isn't an excuse for developers anymore. I look forward to seeing some more mature games released on the Wii (not only talking about only blood, guts, and sex here) but I really don't see how people argue that some type of double standard is being pulled because LBP looks to be something that Nintendo would have brought out and people aren't calling them out for releasing a "kiddy" game.

[SilverStar]

Uh, SCE? They did a little title called God of War. Also, Shadow of the Colossus, but I don't know if you've heard of those since they're such small titles, and not really all that remarkable.

Haven't played either, so to me they aren't very remarkable. ;)

Typically, Sony doesn't do a lot internally. They just grab second parties to do their stuff for them. You know, like the Gran Turismo series(done by Polyphony Digital, which is owned by Sony).

[Bigfoot]

If people are crying over Devil May Cry 4 not being a PS3 exclusive, what are they going to do if Final Fantasy XIII rumor is true about it not being an exclusive as well?

http://www.joystiq.com/2007/03/22/loyalists-cry-over-devil-may-cry-on-xbox-360/

[wormguy]

Haven't played either, so to me they aren't very remarkable. ;)

Are you retarded?

Are you retarded?

I'm not a Sony fan at all, but damn if those aren't fantastic games.

[I-n-j-i-n]

Haven't played either, so to me they aren't very remarkable. ;)

Typically, Sony doesn't do a lot internally. They just grab second parties to do their stuff for them. You know, like the Gran Turismo series(done by Polyphony Digital, which is owned by Sony).

Wow, were you high while making that comment? So I guess stuff like Eternal Darkness and all those great Rareware games in Nintendo's past were not credible Nintendo games at all then?

And no matter how you can spin it, God of War, Sly, Ratchet & Clank , Shadow of the Colossus and a lot of Sony 1st party games have been almost flawless examples of pure gaming in recent memory. Just because Nintendo has the more marketable names doesn't necessarily make them the only 1st parties around. But I would have to agree with the notion that Sony 1st parties tends to be ignored because they don't strut around their big buttocks of it being a Sony property unlike how Nintendo does it, shoving their franchise names up everyones' throats.

[Bahamut]

Damn...why couldn't I have gotten one for free? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6482789.stm

[Malaki-LEGEND.sys]

If people are crying over Devil May Cry 4 not being a PS3 exclusive, what are they going to do if Final Fantasy XIII rumor is true about it not being an exclusive as well?

http://www.joystiq.com/2007/03/22/loyalists-cry-over-devil-may-cry-on-xbox-360/

What about the supposed "White Engine" that SE has designed specifically for the development of PS3 games?

I mean, unless they scale it or toss it out all together to design for the 360, which would be easier to develop for anyway.

[Vivi22]

Wow, were you high while making that comment? So I guess stuff like Eternal Darkness and all those great Rareware games in Nintendo's past were not credible Nintendo games at all then?

And no matter how you can spin it, God of War, Sly, Ratchet & Clank , Shadow of the Colossus and a lot of Sony 1st party games have been almost flawless examples of pure gaming in recent memory. Just because Nintendo has the more marketable names doesn't necessarily make them the only 1st parties around. But I would have to agree with the notion that Sony 1st parties tends to be ignored because they don't strut around their big buttocks of it being a Sony property unlike how Nintendo does it, shoving their franchise names up everyones' throats.

Agreed. Frankly, I haven't seen Nintendo make anything that tops Sony titles for creativity/fun factor in years. Sony is the best first party developer as far as I'm concerned, and one of the best developers overall, but no one really realizes it since it's usually their second parties with their names slapped on the titles.

And anyone who claims that God of War 1 or 2 aren't remarkable either hasn't played them, is high/brain damaged, or both (I suppose they could just be crazy too).

[Bahamut]

Agreed. Frankly, I haven't seen Nintendo make anything that tops Sony titles for creativity/fun factor in years. Sony is the best first party developer as far as I'm concerned, and one of the best developers overall, but no one really realizes it since it's usually their second parties with their names slapped on the titles.

And anyone who claims that God of War 1 or 2 aren't remarkable either hasn't played them, is high/brain damaged, or both (I suppose they could just be crazy too).

Wario Ware?

[G_D]

Agreed. Frankly, I haven't seen Nintendo make anything that tops Sony titles for creativity/fun factor in years. Sony is the best first party developer as far as I'm concerned, and one of the best developers overall, but no one really realizes it since it's usually their second parties with their names slapped on the titles.

And anyone who claims that God of War 1 or 2 aren't remarkable either hasn't played them, is high/brain damaged, or both (I suppose they could just be crazy too).

STOP. BEING. DUMB. Sony HAS NEVER and WILL NEVER develop a 1st party title. SONY IS NOT A DEVELOPER. They are a publisher. The only exclusives they have are at best 2nd party titles (i.e. GT4, God of War, Ico/SotC, etc.) and at worst 3rd party exclusives (i.e. Virtua Fighter, Final Fantasy, etc. which are getting more and more rare).

Sadly enough, if we were to get into a "best developer" debate, I'd probably be tempted to go with Namco/Bandai. Nintendo is the best 1st-party developer, since I believe it is also the ONLY 1st-party developer now that Sega is software-only.

EDIT: Forgive me, I lied. Apparently SCE developed Ape Escape and LocoRoco. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Computer_Entertainment#Internal_division)

EDIT 2: It seems the only difference between Sony and Nintendo is that Sony incorporates their 2nd-party devs to make them look like 1st-party. Nintendo keeps themselves separate as a developer from their 2nd-party devs.

EDIT 3: What the heck. Apparently I don't know anything, and you should ignore this whole post. Somehow Intelligent Design and Retro Studios are 1st-party... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divisions_of_Nintendo)

[Bahamut]

STOP. BEING. DUMB. Sony HAS NEVER and WILL NEVER develop a 1st party title. SONY IS NOT A DEVELOPER. They are a publisher. The only exclusives they have are at best 2nd party titles (i.e. GT4, God of War, Ico/SotC, etc.) and at worst 3rd party exclusives (i.e. Virtua Fighter, Final Fantasy, etc. which are getting more and more rare).

Sadly enough, if we were to get into a "best developer" debate, I'd probably be tempted to go with Namco/Bandai. Nintendo is the best 1st-party developer, since I believe it is also the ONLY 1st-party developer now that Sega is software-only.

Microsoft has been making games for over a decade IIRC - they just didn't expand as much until they started their XBox initiative.

[PriZm]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-party_developer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-party_developer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_developer

Just to make it absolutely clear, Sony IS a developer.

[RealFolkBlues]

Wario Ware? Weird. Quoting someone doesn't include their quotes anymore. Hmmm.

As for fun factor, I can't think of too many Nintendo first- or second-party titles that really made me grind my teeth to play them. This is the company that gave us Wii Sports for God's sake.

Obviously, when it comes to creativity, there are points both for and against the Big N. Fanboy though I am, I will admit that yes, they do whore out their franchises a little, especially Mario. Can you really blame them, though? Mario is amongst the most, if not THE most recognizable of company mascots in the world. Also, many of these titles are innovative ideas with familiar characters strapped to them, such as the aforementioned Wario Ware. Every once in a while, though Ninty will stray far from a formula, often for awesome results, such as the freakin' brilliant Pikmin series or Animal Crac...err...Crossing.

The principle difference I see between Sony and Nintendo in terms of internal development is that Sony is rarely focusing as much of their resources on the matter, or at least, not producing as much in the end. What they have made is usually pretty excellent, but, fairly understandably, Nintendo has in the past and continues to push this side of their software with force, outstripping them at least in terms of quantity, if not quality as well.

BTW, propers to G_D for admitting your mistakes with those edits.

[Ero Elohim]

The only issue I have with Sony as a developer is their tendencies to milk a franchise more than even Nintendo. See: Ratchet and Clank.

First game comes out, does well. Every year afterward there is a sequel. Every. Year. Finally, the main PS2 franchise sputters out at the 4th game. The worst part is that the sequels weren't really any different from their predecessors. A few improvements made in Going Commando, but that was about it.

Jak was almost the same way, only it suffered a bit from "Xtreme Syndrome." Started as a mildly cutesy platformer and morphed into some wierd Mad Max shit.

And God of War, while a good game in my opinion, isn't really all it's cracked up to be. It's well-polished in some respects, but the combat system is still a bit sloppy. I played both games on their hardest modes, which only serves to highlight how cheap the game can be at times. **SPOILER**(Case in point: The Barbarian King in the swamp swings his hammer around when he's in big mode. From visual indication, you should be able to roll backwards and avoid it, but the hitbox still tags you and knocks you around. It makes the attack god-awfully difficult to dodge and I had to resort to a very cheap tactic to beat him.)**END SPOILER**

Don't get me wrong, though, Nintendo has been slacking a bit lately, too. They really needed to inject something new into the Zelda series, rather than relying on "OMG ZELDA: TP LOOKS LIKE OOT!!" As it is, Twilight Princess was a good game, but nothing great and new. I'm really hoping Metroid Prime 3 and Mario Galaxy can come up with some wicked new ideas.

[Koelsch1]

They really needed to inject something new into the Zelda series, rather than relying on "OMG ZELDA: TP LOOKS LIKE OOT!!" As it is, Twilight Princess was a good game, but nothing great and new. I'm really hoping Metroid Prime 3 and Mario Galaxy can come up with some wicked new ideas.


New ideas like what?

[Penfold]

Agreed. Frankly, I haven't seen Nintendo make anything that tops Sony titles for creativity/fun factor in years. Sony is the best first party developer as far as I'm concerned...

I think you may be in the minority on this one. I, for one, don't doubt the creativity of the Nintendo staff, nor their ability to make fun games. RealFolkBlues cited Pikmin, and I agree. Many of the first-party titles coming from Nintendo are looking pretty fun and rather innovative to me, such as Super Paper Mario and Mario Galaxy. Anyway, to each his own eh?

EDIT: That's interesting that Retro Studios is technically first-party for Nintendo, since I always thought they were 2nd party. You learn something new every day, I guess.

[Beatdown]

Def Jam: Icon is depressingly average, and not the brutal fun the previous games were. Where did my ridiculously painful, over the top "why is he bending that way WHAT WAS THAT SOUND?!" moves go? Why am I spending half the fight spinning my track over that guy's? Why did that helicopter just swing down and smack me? I do not understand. :puppyeyes:

[SleazyC]

I think you may be in the minority on this one. I, for one, don't doubt the creativity of the Nintendo staff, nor their ability to make fun games. RealFolkBlues cited Pikmin, and I agree. Many of the first-party titles coming from Nintendo are looking pretty fun and rather innovative to me, such as Super Paper Mario and Mario Galaxy. Anyway, to each his own eh?
Sony has the biggest conglomeration of developers both first and second party under its wings and although it usually isn't recognized for its games I would say that Sony does have the best first/second party developments houses. Nintendo has the nostalgia factor which will probably always get it more recognition but the developers that work under Sony are all very talented, moreso talented then Nintendo's in my opinion.

[G_D]

BTW, propers to G_D for admitting your mistakes with those edits.

I hate misinformation, even when it's coming from me.

[SilverStar]

Sony has the biggest conglomeration of developers both first and second party under its wings and although it usually isn't recognized for its games I would say that Sony does have the best first/second party developments houses. Nintendo has the nostalgia factor which will probably always get it more recognition but the developers that work under Sony are all very talented, moreso talented then Nintendo's in my opinion.

If Nintendo were working solely on the nostalgia factor, then they wouldn't be too likely to be the top software house. Even in October '06, before the Wii was even launched, Nintendo was #2 for publishers for the month, in the US. Second to EA.

When you consider, that's Nintnedo, with 2-3 systems that they're releasing for exclusively(Wii, DS, GBA), compared to EA which releases 2-3 games per month, across every system, that shows they're a lot more powerful than simple nostalgia.

And as for the complaint about Zelda just being Zelda with nothing new.. that's the problem with making sequels. Either they deviate far too much from the original formula and get panned as being "Not (series) Enough!", or they stay true to the formula and get ripped on for being "Too much of the same!" It's a series. Do you really want them to make as much of a wild departure as they made, by turning Dinosaur Island into a Star Fox game? Because that's the only real alternative.

The other option there, is to just keep the wildly new ideas, to their own franchises. Dinosaur Island should have been its own series, unrelated to Star Fox.

So, would you rather a sequel be a lot like the previous game, but with some evolutionary/incremental improvements, or take off in a whole new direction and be something completely unlike what you were expecting from the previous titles?

[I-n-j-i-n]

That's the thing. In terms of pure creativity and totally new brands, Sony actually has bested Nintendo in the last several game generations. It doesn't mean Nintendo is a bad company for it, but Sony was the one pumping out the new and innovative and possibly risky projects left and right and they're STILL doing that (Resistance, anyone? God of War? Shadow of the Colossus?).

Not to forget that they created or at least funded and published a lot of under appreciated gems as well.

In the end, it's usually about Sony not being respected as a game DEVELOPER it is. I love Nintendo as a historical, nostalgic and continued sequel-makers all the same, but Sony has been the new face for gaming for YEARS now. This is not even a new revelation anymore.

[Bahamut]

Nintendo has done a lot in the past decade or so as well, such as the Wario Ware series, Nintendogs, and Pikmin for some examples. I think Nintendo still holds the innovation crown simply because they can use those innovations to appeal to a vast audience, while most of Sony's own gaming innovations are focused almost exclusively to the hardcore crowd.

[I-n-j-i-n]

Nintendo has done a lot in the past decade or so as well, such as the Wario Ware series, Nintendogs, and Pikmin for some examples. I think Nintendo still holds the innovation crown simply because they can use those innovations to appeal to a vast audience, while most of Sony's own gaming innovations are focused almost exclusively to the hardcore crowd.

The thing with those examples is that they were the rarity and not the norm. With Sony, most of their titles were innovative and in sheer number of new franchises and ideas in gameplay alone, again, people tend to overlook them simply because they may not be as visible as the usual Nintendo franchise fare.

And I disagree that a lot of Sony's games necessarily fall into the hardcore crowd. A lot of games they pushed for, published for since the PSX era and has actually developed in-house were critical and popular successes.

Also, whether a game is hardcore or not is NO indication to how innovative something is. That point is absolutely moot.

Though in terms of how it may look on paper, I would have to agree that Nintendo does the better job of selling their games. But then again, that is exactly in line with my point that Sony's development efforts tends to be overlooked. There is really nothing wrong with the way Nintendo makes sequels, but in terms of unique gaming content, Sony really has them beat by a long shot. Again, that doesn't discredit Nintendo all by itself. But Sony definitely is a contender in terms of unique games.

[KakTheInfected]

How exactly was Resistance innovative? Or God of War for that matter?

They may be newer, original IPs, but I really see nothing innovative about them.

[SilverStar]

Sometimes, taking something that's been proven to work well, slapping a fresh coat of paint on it and putting it in a whole new environment is all that something needs.

At the core, most 3D platformers are just, even still, close clones of Mario64(though, most suffer from far worse camera issues).

But, I have to agree, I would love to see Nintendo come out with a few dozen new IPs, instead of just putting a new spin on classic games. Pikmin was a great example of this.. so, how about another pikmin sequel, then something similar, but completely different? The whole swarm tactic, I'm sure, could be used in a bunch of different games.

[I-n-j-i-n]

How exactly was Resistance innovative? Or God of War for that matter?

They may be newer, original IPs, but I really see nothing innovative about them.

You really have to be pretty biased to say that. The innovation in question doesn't have to be flat out apparent as they can be either. The whole usage of the dual shock for the swords, the crafty difficulty level and all can be small additions that adds up to the whole experience. Just because any other game had swords and monsters doesn't make them equivalent to God of War in terms of experience.

Also, when did I say that innovation in itself is the focal point of the whole argument for Sony's games? It's rather that they have a lot of UNIQUE games and with many other brands and identities as actual separate games from one another.

It doesn't necessarily amount to saying that each and individual Sony franchise holds as much weight as a Mario or Zelda game. That is not the point.

Sometimes, taking something that's been proven to work well, slapping a fresh coat of paint on it and putting it in a whole new environment is all that something needs.

Not really. Sony developers did a lot to add a ton of unique gameplay points. Super Mario Sunshine arguably copied some aspects of other platformers with the entire gadget mechanic as well. But nobody gave a hoot about that.

At the core, most 3D platformers are just, even still, close clones of Mario64(though, most suffer from far worse camera issues).

You're simply wrong there. You apparently have never played a Sly Cooper game or Ratchet & Clank. And those games simply DO NOT have camera issues at all.

But, I have to agree, I would love to see Nintendo come out with a few dozen new IPs, instead of just putting a new spin on classic games. Pikmin was a great example of this.. so, how about another pikmin sequel, then something similar, but completely different? The whole swarm tactic, I'm sure, could be used in a bunch of different games.

Just constant condescensions, huh? I keep getting the typical "only Nintendo makes innovative games" idea here. Also, if you're talking about Pikmin, it's almost the same overall gameplay idea of the Misadventures of Tron Bonne game. But nobody dares accuse Nintendo of copying others of course. Because they're the only ones capable of innovation? Doesn't that strike some people as awfully shallow minded, incredibly biased, and condescending of other great game developers out there who has furthered videogames as a whole even if not under some unifying corporate banner? A lot of Sony's properties seems to go that route as they simply have more numerous development teams and they're more apt to doing their own things compared to the tightly run ship of Nintendo's. I do not see why one has to see this one way or the other. The fact remains that Sony's development efforts keeps getting undue condescension. And you guys are PROVING it.

[KakTheInfected]

I really don't consider "small additions" innovative. Those games are still largely played like and reminiscent of games on the market already. Unless the gameplay is drastically different, or a whole new idea altogether, it's not innovative. God of War is good, I'd be insane to argue that, but that doesn't mean it's innovative. (Resistance is neither, dual analog FPS ftl).

And you did call those games innovative, so don't get all pissy when someone asks you why you think so.

[I-n-j-i-n]

I really don't consider "small additions" innovative. Those games are still largely played like and reminiscent of games on the market already. Unless the gameplay is drastically different, or a whole new idea altogether, it's not innovative. God of War is good, I'd be insane to argue that, but that doesn't mean it's innovative. (Resistance is neither, dual analog FPS ftl).

And you did call those games innovative, so don't get all pissy when someone asks you why you think so.

Did you not read the rest of my point? Obviously not because I was talking more in terms of their unique qualities as games and not because of some one-upping of innovation in games.

And by "innovative", it's not entirely in the realm of apparent innovation I have pointed out either. It's in the way of new experiences and unique games with their own development aesthetics just the same. Me getting pissy? But you're simply proving my point over and over again how people like you are condescending everything and anything about Sony simply because you do not like the name itself.

Also, "dual shock FTL" isn't any technical grounds for why the game is or is not innovative. Again, the entire gaming aesthetic of Naughty Dog making such a game after creating a lot of platformers is a unique twist for the development team and the game has got solid reviews all around. Again, the innovation in question is not necessarily some obvious quality like Mario 'creating' platformers, but in the figurative way of it being a unique gaming experience. You can say that Mario and Sonic are both platfomers but they both have unique qualities.

[KakTheInfected]

No, I didn't read the rest of your point. I got pretty bored after the "you don't agree with me so you're biased" part and was already a little put off by seeing someone actually call Resistance innovative.

I'm not being condescending by saying those games aren't innovative. I'm saying it because they're not. Maybe I should take a few lessons from you and go spam why everyone who doesn't think Twilight Princess is innovative is a fanboy.

[linkspast]

Who made Katamari? Id say its pretty innovative

[I-n-j-i-n]

No, I didn't read the rest of your point. I got pretty bored after the "you don't agree with me so you're biased" part and was already a little put off by seeing someone actually call Resistance innovative.

I'm not being condescending by saying those games aren't innovative. I'm saying it because they're not. Maybe I should take a few lessons from you and go spam why everyone who doesn't think Twilight Princess is innovative is a fanboy.

Okay, care to go past being offended and actually arguing logically instead of jumping to conclusions? I did just that. TWICE. Why couldn't you?

Did you not hear me say that it's a matter of me using the very word 'figurative' in the context of the whole thing? Also, why are you stuck on some semantics of a single word instead of reading what I have to say?

If you're going to troll me on a stupid technicality, then why is anything you say ever relevant about this specific discussion?

I'm only getting the vibe from you in this issue as it being a matter of being a standoff between two companies. If you are saying otherwise, why don't you make the discussion instead of going by some ridiculous "because I don't like you" route?

If you can't even elaborate, not read any of my posts, keep up the condescension, don't bother to make this into a credible discussion, WHY bother?

[KakTheInfected]

I haven't seen you elaborate. My inital question still hasn't been answered with anything except a bunch of backtracking.

I'm not offended. I just know that when someone gives a response like "lol u think differently wut a n00b" to a legitimate question that they're just going to repeat it again...like you did. So it's not worth it. Sorry if you want a discussion.

[I-n-j-i-n]

I haven't seen you elaborate. My inital question still hasn't been answered with anything except a bunch of backtracking.

I'm not offended. I just know that when someone gives a response like "lol u think differently wut a n00b" to a legitimate question that they're just going to repeat it again...like you did. So it's not worth it. Sorry if you want a discussion.

I only elaborated it roughly three times now. And you say you're not offended? But you said in the previous post that you're stuck on my wording of the whole "bias" word. Because I said "you have to be pretty biased", that doesn't imply that I'm saying you're completely and utterly biased. That was a figurative way of speech in that it sounded biased to me. Also, all I hear from you is the constant praise of anything Nintendo and condescension of anything Sony. That SOUNDS to me like it's biased. I'm not implying with absolute certainty that you are either.

And you keep on with the whole "i see no innovation whatsoever" and etc etc, and yet I'm providing a counterpoint. Then you come on at me with personal attacks.


To get back on track here, my entire point is that there simply are a lot more unique and potentially risky intellectual properties in the way of different franchises and different games with Sony and that it's being overlooked. Again, that has no relevance to the quality of other companies or Nintendo as it's been called upon by other posters countless times before. My post is about Sony and Sony's games itself. As per this thread's title and subject matter. If you're going on saying "no innovation whatsoever", I simply think it's a matter of perspective and figurative meaning of what that wording even is.

[Bahamut]

The thing with those examples is that they were the rarity and not the norm. With Sony, most of their titles were innovative and in sheer number of new franchises and ideas in gameplay alone, again, people tend to overlook them simply because they may not be as visible as the usual Nintendo franchise fare.

Sony's innovations are just as "rare", if not rarer than that. The only thing remotely as innovative is Loco Roco, but as a game they made it somewhat bland. Sony does make good games, but I wouldn't make the mistake of calling many of them innovative.

[Ero Elohim]

I would think that, just by looking at older interviews before the first God of War came out, you could deduce that the game wasn't innovative. I remember reading one such interview where David Jaffe specifically says that God of War wasn't anything new; He states that they're simply trying to combine everything great about other action games and polish the whole experience. Most reviews of the game echoed that sentiment as well. The whole "No, it's not new, but it's a damn good game." angle was repeated time and time again.

As far as Resistance goes, I haven't played it. I've seen videos and interviews with Insomniac, though, and it doesn't look like they've done anything terribly new there. A few mildly interesting weapons, nothing like the Ratchet and Clank series, and a really pretty engine are what I see in Resistance.

[G_D]

Who made Katamari? Id say its pretty innovative

Namco. They're a pretty good dev, IMO.

[I-n-j-i-n]

Sony's innovations are just as "rare", if not rarer than that. The only thing remotely as innovative is Loco Roco, but as a game they made it somewhat bland. Sony does make good games, but I wouldn't make the mistake of calling many of them innovative.

Again, a lot of the smaller elements of those games definitely are innovative. Ape Escape used the dual shock to its full effect and it was almost like a precursor to the Wiimote in how the each analog sticks worked like the extension of the character and his arm. Parappa the Rapper may have spurred on the wave of musical rhythm games and Sony continued that with a lot of games even if they weren't commercial successes such as Frequency. Ratchet & Clank pretty much took the idea of the platformer and an action shooter and went with it further than any games of its type had so far. Sly Cooper added stealth into the platforming mix where no other game really tried to combine the two. Eyetoy may not have caught fire, but it's essentially the same overall idea as the Wii's own mini-game, body-moving gameplay.

Again, by the idea of 'innovation', I don't just mean in ways that change entire genres necessarily. It's the whole aesthetic of unique games and franchises that can stand on their own and Sony simply has its lion's share of that. Sony has a lot of first party games and yet people are looking at Sony as if they have NOTHING. But that is simply and utterly not true. That's all I'm getting at.

I'm not trying to knock Nintendo down or anything, but again, I simply feel that there's a disconnect with all the harsh criticism Sony gets over others. Since people keep comparing Nintendo, Warioware was not Nintendo's original idea either. Other developers in the past have made games with the 5 second mini-game motif in the past, even if they weren't commercial successes. Mario using the jetpack in Sunshine was reminiscent of other platformers experimenting with the idea before as well. If you are the most cynical and jaded of gamer, Pikmin was a yet another console stab at an RTS/Lemmings game (but of course, I'd disagree that is the case since it has its own unique qualities to stand out). I STAND BY Nintendo for these smaller innovations just the same. The smaller improvements Nintendo makes for each of their sequels are innovations just the same in my eyes. Even if they add elements that has been done in other games and match it in there, I don't fault Nintendo for some lack of innovation for it. I am NOT in that token mindset of choosing one or the other here. And of course, people only bash Sony due to one reason or the other and I simply don't see why that has to be the case. I like both companies and though I may sound the more pompous for it, I feel I have a good understanding of the workings of both companies. Because I follow them through their games and not their marketing or sales or public persona in this whole 'console war' BS.

[PriZm]

Who gives a fuck about whether a game is innovative or not anyways ? As long as its fun to play.

[Petara]

Who gives a fuck about whether a game is innovative or not anyways ? AS LONG AS IT'S FUN TO PLAY.

QFE

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[SilverStar]

Who gives a fuck about whether a game is innovative or not anyways ? As long as its fun to play.

QFT

Take what works and just try to keep it fun. That's all that sequels are about. And I must say, in recent years games have been getting better by their sequels. Something which movies need to take a hint on.

[SleazyC]

If Nintendo were working solely on the nostalgia factor, then they wouldn't be too likely to be the top software house. Even in October '06, before the Wii was even launched, Nintendo was #2 for publishers for the month, in the US. Second to EA.
Creativeness/Innovation!= Sales.

I know Nintendo demolishes every other developer with its sales but innovativeness and creativity do not equal sales. Nor does great art direction (Okami much?). If Nintendo slaps their name on something you can expect that it will be quality 90% of the time and this is the recognition that will they will always get over Sony since Nintendo has been around longer and is a much more storied game developer.

When you consider, that's Nintnedo, with 2-3 systems that they're releasing for exclusively(Wii, DS, GBA), compared to EA which releases 2-3 games per month, across every system, that shows they're a lot more powerful than simple nostalgia.
EA isn't exactly the best company to compare them to as EA's ports are a joke. Probably 70% of their revenue is from rehashes of their sports games. E

ither way I never said that having unique games will equal sales and it definitely has hurt sales just as many times as it may have helped and broken out new genres, ideas, or directions for games to go in.

[I-n-j-i-n]

Creativeness/Innovation!= Sales.

I know Nintendo demolishes every other developer with its sales but innovativeness and creativity do not equal sales. Nor does great art direction (Okami much?). If Nintendo slaps their name on something you can expect that it will be quality 90% of the time and this is the recognition that will they will always get over Sony since Nintendo has been around longer and is a much more storied game developer.

Agreed. As much as Nintendo is apt to a few truly great advances in gaming every year, they do a lot of boneheaded/genius stuff such as making franchise spinoffs with no real newness except for newness's sakes and $$$ (read: Mario Party, Pokemon Colosseum games, Mario Sports titles especially the ones not made by Camelot). To be fair, Sony and Microsoft and just about any other given companies (except maybe Bioware and Blizzard..) have the habit of sticking to the status quo in terms of the creative use of their licenses.

Either way I never said that having unique games will equal sales and it definitely has hurt sales just as many times as it may have helped and broken out new genres, ideas, or directions for games to go in.

I don't think I could have said it any better. The thing is, a lot of great Sony titles and Sony developed/published games that were very innovative didn't sell well. But of course, that is not a direct indication of their quality as unique games with innovative features.

Even look at games like Shenmue and other low key, not-as-well selling games of the past, like even the first few Grand Theft Auto games, and come into the future with something like GTA3, which blew away the gaming market in terms of popularity and critical appeal, and all these little obscure games have paved the way for them, no matter how little they may have sold in the past.

[Bigfoot]

Just watched a gameplay video of Enchanted Arms. Looks pretty boring, or just your typical RPG with next gen graphics. The battle system looks interesting though. It uses a grid system where you can move your party around(I guess moving yourself in front of someone protects them from melee attacks?).

I never did care for the sound of your feet stepping as you're running in any RPG since you do so much running around. The sound just gets to you sometimes :P

They could really do away with each character saying something before they attack. Especially when a guy playing his saxophone plays and speaks at the same time. Or when this guy with a spear is going to attack, he yells "I see you!" as if the monster was hiding or something.


edit: I forgot this was on the 360 too, *shrug*.

[Power Surge]

20 GB PS3 has been discontinued.

http://gamesarefun.com/news.php?newsid=7672

EDIT: ...except in Japan.

http://www.joystiq.com/2007/04/12/20-gb-ps3-is-still-alive-in-japan/

[Hector]

Ahh yes, paving the way for GTA3. That's a rather sad pinacle, don't you think? The only prop I'll give the game is that they took the go-anywhere do-anything style of open-ended RPGs, and combined it with an easy pick-up-and-play feel. GTA is not a game I'd look at for depth, enduring plot or lasting satisfaction--it is an instant gratification game that's only lasting appeal comes from a few jokes made about the title.

[Bigfoot]

Lair looked pretty cool, but then everything in the gameplay movie I saw was very repetitive.

Fly around, shoot fireballs from a dragon's mouth that sounds like a cannon(even seems like it's autoaim, not sure), land on the ground and kill a bunch of NPC soldiers that look like they probably don't even harm you, and fly back up in the air. Rinse, repeat.

There's a ton of action happening at once though. That was cool. FPS gets pretty bad at times though when you're on the ground and the dragon is breathing fire everywhere.

[KakTheInfected]

It's going to be Rogue Squadron 2/3 in high def. Nothing but another Factor 5 tech demo...but without Star Wars.

[KakTheInfected]

I am just going to toot my own horn after reading the latest impressions of Lair from various websites. God I rule.

The last good Factor 5 game was the original Rogue Squadron and at this pace, it's going to stay that way...

[dsx100]

Does anyone here know when or if Sony is ever going to stop putting the Emotion engine in their PS3's, and yes I did read but I couldn't find an answer through the whole 322 pages. Maybe I missed it ? I heard they were dropping support after April but I see no evidence that they actually have yet.

Anyway I ask because I want to buy a PS3 but I care alot about backwards compatiblity. I know the new PS3's are going to use software emulation but there list is really small and I doubt some of my favorite rare and not-so-popular games will ever make the list. So if the PS3 already has or is going to drop the emotion chip before the fall, then I am thinking of buying a an older model which brings me to my next question.

What is the SCPH for the PS3s with the emotion egine? Basically any launch window PS3.

An answer, if possible, is much appreciated.

[Ero Elohim]

The last good Factor 5 game was the original Rogue Squadron and at this pace, it's going to stay that way...

I thought Rogue Leader was pretty good.

That's... really all I had to say. Toodles.

[Bigfoot]

The newest video of Lair looks really good.

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/21218.html

[dsx100]

Can't anyone answer or try to answer my question? Please?

[SilverStar]

Can't anyone answer or try to answer my question? Please?

I say you just try to get an early NA launch unit. I think they've already taken the Emotion Engine out of the design for current and future hardware units, though nothing has been really stated so far, for the NA region about it.

[dsx100]

I say you just try to get an early NA launch unit. I think they've already taken the Emotion Engine out of the design for current and future hardware units, though nothing has been really stated so far, for the NA region about it.

Thanks man. Thats all I needed to hear

[Bigfoot]

Looks like a $100 price cut is coming to the PS3. There's an ad for Circuit City for the week after E3 that shows a $100 price drop, so you'll probably be hearing about that during Sony's press conference.

http://kotaku.com/gaming/rumor/playstation-3-100-price-cut-hits-july-15-275391.php

[KWarp]

FOUR HUNDRED AND NINETY NINE US DOLLARS

Has a console's price ever been cut this early before? The Nintendo DS was cut $20 about 11 months after launch. Should this PS3 rumor be true, that's 8 months...

[AarowSwift]

FOUR HUNDRED AND NINETY NINE US DOLLARS



Hmm, that's just one hundred ninety-nine dollars too much. $300 is pretty much the maximum I'm willing to pay for a video game system. I don't care how cutting edge the tech is; I'm buying the thing to play games on, not to mount on my wall like some tech trophy.

[SilverStar]

Hmm, that's just one hundred ninety-nine dollars too much. $300 is pretty much the maximum I'm willing to pay for a video game system. I don't care how cutting edge the tech is; I'm buying the thing to play games on, not to mount on my wall like some tech trophy.

Don't you mean 200 bucks too much? $500 is nothing to sneeze at, for a game system. But it's certainly something to shy away from.

Maybe in 6 months we'll see it down to $299 to match the X360. The rate things are going, it'll be interesting at that point.

[AarowSwift]

Don't you mean 200 bucks too much?

499 - 199 = 300 I'm pretty sure I meant what I said.

[Evilhead]

Hmm, that's just one hundred ninety-nine dollars too much. $300 is pretty much the maximum I'm willing to pay for a video game system. I don't care how cutting edge the tech is; I'm buying the thing to play games on, not to mount on my wall like some tech trophy.

Tell that to PC gamers! Some people pay that much for their video card.

As for me, I just spend three grand on a biwa, plus I have to pay more than that to move into my new place, so I won't be buying ANY game systems for a while. Looking to sell some in fact. Anyone need a Japanese Xbox and a library of games?

[The Damned]

Tell that to PC gamers! Some people pay that much for their video card.

Except that you can use your PC for more than playing games. Yeah, I know, not the greatest comparison, but when you think about it, PCs aren't really the same as a console. The PC, even when it's geared towards gaming, is still a device that is intended for general, multipurpose stuff, whereas consoles (even with their increase in multimedia functions) are intended for playing games.

Having to pay more for a new component to increase performance isn't the same as buying a pre-set, non-upgradeable system.

[Bahamut]

Except that you can use your PC for more than playing games. Yeah, I know, not the greatest comparison, but when you think about it, PCs aren't really the same as a console. The PC, even when it's geared towards gaming, is still a device that is intended for general, multipurpose stuff, whereas consoles (even with their increase in multimedia functions) are intended for playing games.

Having to pay more for a new component to increase performance isn't the same as buying a pre-set, non-upgradeable system.


But most people have no use for a super expensive video card for non-gaming purposes. Hell, one of my best friends does computer graphics and he says that having the latest and greatest is bullshit even for those purposes.

[dsx100]

But most people have no use for a super expensive video card for non-gaming purposes. Hell, one of my best friends does computer graphics and he says that having the latest and greatest is bullshit even for those purposes.

Its not required that have something powerful but it certianly helps out a lot. Maya works much better on high-end video card than it does on a low end or intergrated one. Plus intergrated cards rob your system of ram, which is often very much needing when running programs even as simple as photoshop.

[Bahamut]

Its not required that have something powerful but it certianly helps out a lot. Maya works much better on high-end video card than it does on a low end or intergrated one. Plus intergrated cards rob your system of ram, which is often very much needing when running programs even as simple as photoshop.

This is someone who has done a bunch of freelancing, including doing computer animated commercials. He has gotten by with his work with not nearly as recent computers as you'd expect (at least parts considered 2-3 years old). I still don't buy that argument.

Edit: As I thought, CAG broke the news on this pricing of the PS3 as usual. Also, you can get 5 free bluray DVDs with the purchase of the PS3.

[KWarp]

Except that you can use your PC for more than playing games. Yeah, I know, not the greatest comparison, but when you think about it, PCs aren't really the same as a console. The PC, even when it's geared towards gaming, is still a device that is intended for general, multipurpose stuff, whereas consoles (even with their increase in multimedia functions) are intended for playing games.

Having to pay more for a new component to increase performance isn't the same as buying a pre-set, non-upgradeable system.
A vast majority of PC users don't need the latest tech to do their job. The only exceptions lie in the area of top tier film editing, top tier sound composition, a tiny portion of game development, and a few insane photoshop artists. That can't amount to more than a million people.

[dsx100]

This is someone who has done a bunch of freelancing, including doing computer animated commercials. He has gotten by with his work with not nearly as recent computers as you'd expect (at least parts considered 2-3 years old). I still don't buy that argument.

Edit: As I thought, CAG broke the news on this pricing of the PS3 as usual. Also, you can get 5 free bluray DVDs with the purchase of the PS3.

You can definately get the job done using pretty much anything, I'm not trying to argue that point, your friend is right. However, I am just trying to get the point across that it does help. Those cards do free up a lot of ram and offer things like texture and shader renderings that can help out the finished product. On older systems, doing stuff like that could take a little more work and little more time to complete, but it is still very possible. In fact the same goes for gaming. You can get good games to run good off older or lower end systems. Believe me, for at least 4 years, I got games like Unreal 2004, Doom 3, Warcraft 3, Age of Mythology, and Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic to run off an Nvidia Geforce MX4000 and 512 system RAM. For me, these games ran and looked great but where still weren't that great compared to what higher end systems could do. It all just depends on what you want out of your games, 3d applications, and etc. If you want higher performance, even if they work fine now, you should upgrade your card.

By the way, that sounds like an excellent deal. Hopefully it will last till the holiday season.

[BardicKnowledge]

Other PS3 news: NG Sigma is awesome. My fraternity is renting it this week (started last night, have it until Tuesday) -- we finished the first 5 chapters (4 Ryu + 1 Rachel).

Having the Rachel chapters integrated into the storyline makes her feel like she belongs as part of the game instead of just a DOA style model to stare at every couple of chapters.

In any case, as someone who played Black, this is still worth it. And dual-wielding rocks -- it's a risky way of fighting, but fun as hell (flying swallow + bounce-off? yes)

[Groovemaster303]

Ninja gaiden is the only decent game on the PS3...
i would have bought it but i was so fed up waiting for some games to come out that last week i sold it to Game who gave me an mental £275 cash.

I took the money and ran.... to Currys and bought myself a decent laptop which is perfect for sketching ideas on for some new tracks.

[The Pezman]

bluray DVDs
OMG CONTRADICTION IN TERMS

It's pretty obvious the deck seemed stacked against the PS3 right now, but I'm not ready to count it out. White Knight, MGS4 and (eventually) Final Fantasy XIII will, I imagine, help turn the tide. I don't need a 360 because, as I mentioned in the Gears of War thread, I prefer to play games on a device which allows me to upgrade my graphics card, and there are next to no exclusives for either the 360 or its little brother. I'll probably get a Wii eventually as well... eventually. Do you think they'll start shipping units with HD graphics cards? I can't imagine it can be that expensive...

[SilverStar]

OMG CONTRADICTION IN TERMS

It's pretty obvious the deck seemed stacked against the PS3 right now, but I'm not ready to count it out. White Knight, MGS4 and (eventually) Final Fantasy XIII will, I imagine, help turn the tide. I don't need a 360 because, as I mentioned in the Gears of War thread, I prefer to play games on a device which allows me to upgrade my graphics card, and there are next to no exclusives for either the 360 or its little brother. I'll probably get a Wii eventually as well... eventually. Do you think they'll start shipping units with HD graphics cards? I can't imagine it can be that expensive...

Er.. PS3 doesn't have upgradeable video, either. In fact, the only console that did, was the N64, with the help of the 4mb expansion card.

You don't seem to realize just how much trouble upgrading the video chip in a console would be, to actually make it more powerful. That means that any games developed for the new chip, won't function on the old one.

The thing about game consoles, is they're more or less a fixed device. Fixed specs, so there's no compatibility issues, or screwed up drivers. It looks just as good on everyone's machine as it does on yours.

[The Pezman]

I prefer to play games on a device which allows me to upgrade my graphics card
This was in reference to a PC.

[The Coop]

Er.. PS3 doesn't have upgradeable video, either. In fact, the only console that did, was the N64, with the help of the 4mb expansion card.

Actually, as far as I know, that wasn't a "video" upgrade at all perse. It was just an extra 4MB of memory that allowed the system to run in a higher resolution (640x480), use a better color depth, or use larger/improved textures (all of which required more memory to be used, which made implementing them without the expansion pack tricky due to the N64's rather low RAM count). It didn't do anything but provide more storage space for data, which enabled the game makers to use more of the N64's already existing features (bad planning on Nintendo's part there). It didn't add new abilities, it just made it so the pre-existing ones could be used more easily. So really, it was basically the same thing the Saturn used with it's 1MB/4MB memory expansion carts, or that the TurboGrafx-16 used with its various memory upgrade cards.

[The Damned]

So, remember last week, when everyone was talking about a price drop for the PS3, and all those stores had ads published for this price drop, and then there were insider reports from all over the place saying that there was going to be a price drop? And remember how Sony said there wasn't going to be one, and then they had PR people and marketing guys swear on bibles that there wasn't going to be a price drop, and then they had the big hunchos in Japan and the US saying that a price drop was out of the question?

Yeah (http://kotaku.com/gaming/we.re-slashing-prices/sony-confirms-ps3-price+cut-80gb-bundle-276091.php).

Sony either is full of liars, or no one knows what the hell they are doing. :banghead:

Price cut-wise, this changes very little. You still pay $500 or more for a slight increase in hard drive capacity. Oh, and a game that's glitchy and doesn't sell well on its own.

Honestly, I'd be interested in a PS3, if the price was a hell of a lot lower, if they had any games I was interested in, and they stopped this constant bullshit. Hell, even Microsoft is more direct and straightforward than this, and they were masters of FUDD for years.

Sony, please... you did so well with the PS1 and PS2. What's making you do this crap?

[SilverStar]

So, remember last week, when everyone was talking about a price drop for the PS3, and all those stores had ads published for this price drop, and then there were insider reports from all over the place saying that there was going to be a price drop? And remember how Sony said there wasn't going to be one, and then they had PR people and marketing guys swear on bibles that there wasn't going to be a price drop, and then they had the big hunchos in Japan and the US saying that a price drop was out of the question?

Yeah (http://kotaku.com/gaming/we.re-slashing-prices/sony-confirms-ps3-price+cut-80gb-bundle-276091.php).

Sony either is full of liars, or no one knows what the hell they are doing. :banghead:

Price cut-wise, this changes very little. You still pay $500 or more for a slight increase in hard drive capacity. Oh, and a game that's glitchy and doesn't sell well on its own.

Honestly, I'd be interested in a PS3, if the price was a hell of a lot lower, if they had any games I was interested in, and they stopped this constant bullshit. Hell, even Microsoft is more direct and straightforward than this, and they were masters of FUDD for years.

Sony, please... you did so well with the PS1 and PS2. What's making you do this crap?

There's only 2 possibilities: Either everyone in Sony is as on the ball as Perrin was for Nintendo.. or they're just outright lying.

Way to go, Sony!

Edit:

Oh, and didn't Sony mock MS, when they started doing in-store price cuts, saying something along the lines of, "If sales were going as you expected, you wouldn't have to cut prices so soon after launch"?

Now here Sony is, 8 months in, cutting the price by a full 100 bucks. After killing the entire lower-end model. Poor bastards. PS3 may wind up as Sony's Saturn. Their big stumbling block, with a few good games.. and then the PS4 might be something worth owning, but be hit with such bad press from the PS3 that it gets killed off quickly.

[The Damned]

Let's see... they took the system with the 60 gig hard drive that sold for $599, and dropped it to $499.

Then they took the 80 gig system that they said was not going to be sold in North America, and priced it for North America at $599.

Now, since they discontinued the 20 gig model, which had certain features left out to make it cheaper. The 60 gig system used to be the high-end version, but now the high-end version is the low-end version. This means that you get all those left-out things plus another 40 gigs.

For the same price as the old low-end system. When you look at it that way, it seems like a good deal.

Except for a few things:

1. Only the people that bought the 20 gig system are going to see it that way. And guess what? They already spent $499 on a PS3. Unless one of them can find someone to buy their lower-end 20 gig model for the full $499, they aren't likely to see the point in buying an upgraded version for something they just bought a few months ago at the same price. No one is going to do that. Not even the fanboys!

2. People that haven't bought a PS3 yet are still going to see $499 and $599 price tags. They aren't going to look at what it has that the old model didn't, and think "what a deal". They are going to look at that price tag, and they are going to think it's too expensive. Then they will see the Wiis and 360s, and think how much cheaper they are.

3. When someone sees the two models and the price difference, they are going to buy the $499 one. Why make an 80 gig model to begin with? Why split your customer base? Well, I guess with those prices, splitting isn't very likely. I guess it would be more like, "why drive your customer base away from one product and towards another?" Why not just sell the cheaper system and make money period?

The only answer I can think of is that that is exactly what they want to do: make people think the $499 model is cheaper. Not the greatest plan, but considering Sony's track record these last two years...

[Bahamut]

What Sony is doing is making Microsoft's XBox 360 Elite look that much better..and that's a bit pricey for a game system as it is.

[SilverStar]

What Sony is doing is making Microsoft's XBox 360 Elite look that much better..and that's a bit pricey for a game system as it is.

What Sony is doing, is trying to make sure they have the cheapest Bluray player on the market with the PS3, since the cheapest standalone was also cut in price.

I don't think Sony really gives a damn about the games at this point, they're just trying to cut HD-DVD completely out of the market. Even if they have to side with as many sinking ships as possible(see: Blockbuster).

I think Sony is trying to do too many things at once, and they've totally lost focus. Then again.. should PS3 actually survive to the point where it gets down to 299-399 for the 60GB(hell.. I wouldn't have minded a $399 20GB model, if it at least had the other features. Be a good comparison, to a 360 Premium), that's when the sales will really start picking up. But, I think Sony's shown their hand, here.. they don't want to make it too cheap. They want to keep adding more and more, keeping it at the same relative point. So, in 3 years we might be seeing a PS3 with full PS1/PS2 software emulation(with upscaling and refining features), more internal memory(but not for playing games), plus all the bells and whistles(rumble, motion sensitive controllers, etc..), for $599. They'll just keep trying to raise the bar, to make their system look better, yet making the people who already bought one feel left out when new hardware is introduced(maybe some sort of internalized wireless PS1/PS2 controller receiver and adapter).

What I'd actually love to see, is for the "master key" in the PS3's BD-ROM drive to be cracked and released, causing Sony and the rest of the BD Conglomerate have to brick the hardware, because the key was decrypted and chipless piracy becomes readily available.

[Ero Elohim]

Sony, please... you did so well with the PS1 and PS2. What's making you do this crap?

Whoa, leave the PS2 out of a post that comes dangerously close to claiming that Sony hasn't always spewed bullshit. I'll admit that they were decent in the PS1 days. The PS2 however, was so much false information and hype that you can't possibly be forgetting it:

Remember the "Emotion Engine" that would allow for individual emotional responses crafted for AI characters on the fly? Smells like "Blast Processing" to me.
Remember the FF8 ballroom CGI in real time? Yeah, took Sony 2 years to fess up to that one.
Remember "the PS2 will be powerful enough to render 'Toy Story' in real time"? Not even close, Sony.
Remember when they threw up charts that compared the PS2's wireframe, no-effects full poly count to the Gamecube's all-effects on full poly count, attempting to make the Gamecube look like a far inferior technical machine?

For my purposes, at least, the PS2 was the beginning of the bullshit era and one of the reasons I strongly dislike the company. That they continue it long into the failings of the PS3 is a bad sign and projects an image of a poorly run business.

[The Damned]

Actually, I was talking about market success, but you make a good point.

I find it interesting how Nintendo went from new guy to champ to second place to last place and then first place (NES to Wii) in 23 or so years, but Sony went from new guy to champ to industry pariah in only twelve years.

That's just amazing. To see any company go downhill so fast after such success is just fascinating.

And don't just start thinking "uh oh, Nintendo fanboy", because I'm not. I loved the PS1 for it's huge library of RPGs, and I've played my share of X-Box titles. I actually think Sony spurred the current success of Nintendo by beating them down enough to force Nintendo to start acting smarter. Competition, in this case, really did make things better for us customers. We got two new systems (Wii and DS) that work out great, and we see the revitalization of an old company that most of us grew up on.

[Ero Elohim]

Actually, I was talking about market success, but you make a good point.

I find it interesting how Nintendo went from new guy to champ to second place to last place and then first place (NES to Wii) in 23 or so years, but Sony went from new guy to champ to industry pariah in only twelve years.

That's just amazing. To see any company go downhill so fast after such success is just fascinating.

And don't just start thinking "uh oh, Nintendo fanboy", because I'm not. I loved the PS1 for it's huge library of RPGs, and I've played my share of X-Box titles. I actually think Sony spurred the current success of Nintendo by beating them down enough to force Nintendo to start acting smarter. Competition, in this case, really did make things better for us customers. We got two new systems (Wii and DS) that work out great, and we see the revitalization of an old company that most of us grew up on.

I used to be a Nintendo fanboy, but lately I've been pretty ho-hum on all three next-gen offerings.

The PS3 is the "god in a box" without a parish to preach to. Hell, it doesn't even have a bible to work with. I.E. It has no games and no coherent following. Sony expected to throw it out and be praised for allowing us to buy their product.

The Wii is a conceptually brilliant idea, one that I can come up with a dozen or so ideas that would be amazing games in their own right.** However, it seems like all the industry wants to do with it is make it into a collection of bad PS2 ports and minigames.

(**Aside: As an example, one idea I had was getting Capcom to revitalize the Megaman series into a high-speed, action side-scroller, using the Wii-mote's pointing features to control an on screen crosshair allowing Megaman to shoot in full 360 while remaining completely mobile. The game would mostly center around high-energy stages, involving deft platforming and frequent hazards like spike pits and lava, combined with large amounts of mobile, hunter-killer-like enemies who would pursue you around the screen, requiring fast reflexes and good aim to shoot down timely enough that you won't be hampered in your platforming. The thought of something like this being possible while games like Bionicle Heroes are created instead make me loathe developers.)

The 360 is the only one I currently own and, honestly, I rarely play it. Most of the games feel like they would've worked better as PC titles, I have no use for the multimedia features, and the game selection itself is far to reliant on the Church of the Shooter. Microsoft hasn't proven itself quite as dirty as Sony, yet, but they're also beginning to slide that way.

All in all, I'm starting to agree with the people who said this console generation feels rushed. I'm still playing older PC titles and PS2 games.

[dsx100]

I find it interesting how Nintendo went from new guy to champ to second place to last place and then first place (NES to Wii) in 23 or so years, but Sony went from new guy to champ to industry pariah in only twelve years.


Actually, the SNES came in first place overall (Thanks to continued support similar to what sony did with psone and is doing with PS2) and the Dreamcast actually came in last place last gen. So Nintendo actually hasn't been ever been last place. Also the Gamecube is actually considered a pretty big sucess for Nintendo because they made a lot profit of it, more than the Xbox, and a little less than the PS2.

Sony might be the first company to come in first 3 years straight if they keep this stuff up. 499.99 for a Blu-ray player that doubles as a console isn't bad at all. This news of an 80GB system is also pretty interesting considering they are bundling a game with the console, and considering sony once mocked MS for releasing the elite claiming they "cheating out their loyal fanbase by releasing a superior system so long after launch".

[Neo Samus]

Actually, the SNES came in first place overall (Thanks to continued support similar to what sony did with psone and is doing with PS2) and the Dreamcast actually came in last place last gen. So Nintendo actually hasn't been ever been last place. Also the Gamecube is actually considered a pretty big sucess for Nintendo because they made a lot profit of it, more than the Xbox, and a little less than the PS2.

Sony might be the first company to come in first 3 years straight if they keep this stuff up. 499.99 for a Blu-ray player that doubles as a console isn't bad at all. This news of an 80GB system is also pretty interesting considering they are bundling a game with the console, and considering sony once mocked MS for releasing the elite claiming they "cheating out their loyal fanbase by releasing a superior system so long after launch".


The thing is, most consumers either a) don't konw what Blu-ray is or b)don't give a damn about blu-ray. I'm not really impressed with either format to be honest. Persoanlly it seems like Sony is trying to shove Blu-ray down everyone's throats.

[SilverStar]

All in all, I'm starting to agree with the people who said this console generation feels rushed. I'm still playing older PC titles and PS2 games.

I think about the same way, now. PS3 was developed without a lot of really compelling content. It was meant to be -the- powerhouse, to destroy everyone else.. instead, a lot of side-by-side comparisons are giving the nod to Microsoft.

X360 was rushed. The hardware wasn't fully tested, and the return rate of up to 30% reflects this. Microsoft has taken huge losses just in the first year, because as many as a third of their total units shipped, have been used as replacements. They have a bunch of games that look interesting.. but only until you get sick of the genre.

Which is a lot like Nintendo. The Wii? Sure, it's revolutionary. It reinvisions the entire way games are played. In theory. Instead, all we've been treated to are PS2 ports, minigames, and games that were retooled from Gamecube. I've spent more time playing old Gamecube games I've been able to buy cheap, than playing the near unending stream of Wii rentals I've been getting from my Canflix account.

At the rate things are going, with overpowered, cost-heavy hardware being relatively slow to get its legs, and the 20M+ investment required to make games for the hardware, we might see a shift toward the more older styles of games, where it isn't all about super high production values.

But at the same time, Nintendo may be selling like crazy.. but for established base, the people who have been around actually buying the hardware, the people who waited in line to get the system on launch.. there's just not a lot there to chew on. It's all potato chips and bubble gum, with the first real steak dinner being Metroid Prime 3.

Even the one thing that has been a definite in the game industry for so long, being that Nintendo software would outsell everything else because it's just -fun- to play.. is falling apart. A lot of the games that I've tried, haven't been able to hold my attention past what would be a demo phase, because they're just too damn boring.

I hope we're not looking at another crash.. as much as it would do the industry good, able to bring it back to the roots where there's actual, real competition in the hardware sector, instead of 3 giants fighting for control. But in the mean time, I have PC games to enjoy. Overlord is pretty cool. :)

[Hector]

Wasn't the original crash caused by too much hardware competition? Pure competetion via a plethora of businesses would ruin the console+media genre and herald a depressing age of plug&play dominance.

The simple fact of the gaming business is that the more competition there is in the hardware sector, the less competition there is in the software sector and vice-versa. To give an example using some hyperbole, an inferior platformer can compete with mario by staying off a Nintendo console; a Japanese RPG may compete with Square by avoiding the Playstation; and an FPS may compete with Halo by avoiding the X-Box.

What we have now for hardware is perhaps the ideal situation (sorry sega-fans). There is enough hardware competition to avoid the sort of complacent behavior we once saw from Atari, Nintendo and Sony each in turn, but not so much as to severely limit software competition.

In the end, choosing between hardware and software competetion, I'd have to choose software in most cases. The exception being there should always be 3 competitors (though who they may be is welcome to change).

[eternal Zero]

Blu-ray is ahead of its time if it'll ever have a time. I'm not completely sold on the idea, and I think that Sony was too hasty to force it upon their consumers. There just isn't enough of a wow factor tog et people to buy PS3s. The Wii has the Wiimote and the current easy-access games along with the impending powerhouses of full-blown games designed specifically for the Wii. The 360 has got games backing it even though recently it hasn't been doing so well. I don't think that the PS3 will recover much except for the few exclusives that it will have that will force loyal fans of those series to play the game no matter what. Nintendo is just waiting on the big players to enter the arena: SSBB and MP3. The 360 surely has something going on soon...what was it called? Oh yea: Halo 3.

[Bigfoot]

Wow, so with the new model you'll only get a 20gig upgrade, an ok game, and a new PS3 model that will be even less compatible with your PS1/PS2 games(basically, like the Euro version).

http://www.joystiq.com/2007/07/09/80gb-ps3-has-limited-backwards-compatibility/

[The Coop]

Wasn't the original crash caused by too much hardware competition? Pure competetion via a plethora of businesses would ruin the console+media genre and herald a depressing age of plug&play dominance.

That was only part of it. There were quite a few systems around in the early 80s, but the crash also came about from an extreme lack of software quality control on the part of the console makers. Piss poor games, and horrid games that got way over-hyped, just turned people off... as did the supposedly "superior" consoles people bought into that got no real backing (thus very small game libraries... like Vectrex and the 5200). So, the crash came about.

[dsx100]

Wow, so with the new model you'll only get a 20gig upgrade, an ok game, and a new PS3 model that will be even less compatible with your PS1/PS2 games(basically, like the Euro version).

http://www.joystiq.com/2007/07/09/80gb-ps3-has-limited-backwards-compatibility/

Does this mean that the 60 GB models still have the emotion engine and may possibly continue to have it? I never planed on getting the 80GB one anyway so I really hope the 60 GB models still have that backwards compatibility.

[Drack]

Does this mean that the 60 GB models still have the emotion engine and may possibly continue to have it? I never planed on getting the 80GB one anyway so I really hope the 60 GB models still have that backwards compatibility.

Probably not. I'm guessing you'll have to turn to eBay to get PS3s that aren't emotionless.

However, check this out: Even lighter PS2 in the works:

http://www.destructoid.com/the-mighty-ps2-continues-to-trim-down-after-all-this-time-34616.phtml
http://www.destructoid.com/elephant//ul/34616-PS2New_l.jpg

[Blake]

Oh boy. I just don't understand what's going on. Does the emotion engine substantially affect backwards compatibility like people are cracking it up to?

Oh lawd:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFIDsTsWJHw

[The Coop]

Oh boy. I just don't understand what's going on. Does the emotion engine substantially affect backwards compatibility like people are cracking it up to?

Oh lawd:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFIDsTsWJHw

I like how he pimped the number of PS2s they've sold, but (as per the norm) didn't mention that a decent percentage of those sold units were replacements of ones that broke due to faulty hardware. Do they really think they're still fooling anyone with those numbers?

[Neo Samus]

Apparently since they still use them. Personally I think it BS that they count the units that were faulty.

[Groovemaster303]

Does this mean that the 60 GB models still have the emotion engine and may possibly continue to have it? I never planed on getting the 80GB one anyway so I really hope the 60 GB models still have that backwards compatibility.

BC without the emotion engine is not really that bad at all, especially since the 1.80 firmware update, which upscales and smooths the image it's not brilliant by any means but the sheer number of compatible games on the ps3 is pretty good even without the emo.

Who wants to wear out their Blu-ray drive by playing old crappy ps2 games on Ps3 anyway.
pick up a second hand ps2 for £20 and bob's your father's brother

[Bahamut]

Apparently since they still use them. Personally I think it BS that they count the units that were faulty.

Did you expect anything less from Sony?

[SilverStar]

Did you expect anything less from Sony?

Don't forget, MS does the same thing. With the.. probably close to 2 million returned systems, so far.

Also, funny thing about the sales numbers. They're MONTHS out of date. Wii at less than 3 million, PS3 at less than 1.5, and X360 at only 5.8? 360 has hit official numbers of around 10 million already. You'd think they would try to get the official numbers before trying to post that.

[Neo Samus]

Don't forget, MS does the same thing. With the.. probably close to 2 million returned systems, so far.

Also, funny thing about the sales numbers. They're MONTHS out of date. Wii at less than 3 million, PS3 at less than 1.5, and X360 at only 5.8? 360 has hit official numbers of around 10 million already. You'd think they would try to get the official numbers before trying to post that.

So...is that 1.5 Million units of the PS3 shipped or sold? :<

[SilverStar]

So...is that 1.5 Million units of the PS3 shipped or sold? :<

I'd say.. probably 1.5 million sold by retailers. Globally. In 8 months.

Except that then, the numbers would still be FAR too low, because Nintendo has easily sold over 7 million(being heavily conservative here) of the Wii. So.. double those numbers, for both Sony and Nintendo, and you probably have a lot closer to the truth.

[The Coop]

Don't forget, MS does the same thing. With the.. probably close to 2 million returned systems, so far.

True, but at least Microsoft acknowledged that there is/was a problem. Sony's just comes across as playing dumb regarding the rather substantial rate of PS2 returns since the system's debut. I mean, where was the increased warranty length when scores of PS2s were being returned burned out and unable to read discs at EB and Gamestop stores all over the US? Instead of helping the customers, Sony left them to fend for themselves (i.e. having to buy a second, third, etc. system), and stuck their fingers in their ears while screaming "LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU WE'RE #1!"... and they're still doing it today.

I realize it's hard to expect much more from a company that made the arrogant remarks they did concerning the PSP design flaw, but you'd think they'd catch on. I mean, even Microsoft, with all their cockiness, have learned how to better handle customer complaints surrounding hardware issues.

[The Author]

http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?p=123215

...


How do idiots get enough money to purchase a PS3 anyway?

[dsx100]

BC without the emotion engine is not really that bad at all, especially since the 1.80 firmware update, which upscales and smooths the image it's not brilliant by any means but the sheer number of compatible games on the ps3 is pretty good even without the emo.

Who wants to wear out their Blu-ray drive by playing old crappy ps2 games on Ps3 anyway.
pick up a second hand ps2 for £20 and bob's your father's brother

If you had read what I said earlier you would know why I care that the PS3 has the emotion engine.



Anyway I ask because I want to buy a PS3 but I care alot about backwards compatiblity. I know the new PS3's are going to use software emulation but there list is really small and I doubt some of my favorite rare and not-so-popular games will ever make the list. So if the PS3 already has or is going to drop the emotion chip before the fall, then I am thinking of buying a an older model which brings me to my next question.



Excuse me for playing a lot of great games that didn't sell millions and millions of copies. Also Sony has already stated they weren't focusing on updating the backwards compatible list because they wanted to focus on new games.

Also PS2 has one of the best libaries of games out right now and it most definately has games that are much better than anything the PS3 has out right now.

[Groovemaster303]

So your happy playing obsolete games on a £425 console.
There may be some classics on PS2 but nevertheless don't you think it's a waste of money to spend that much on a new console just to play your old games.

[eternal Zero]

[url]How do idiots get enough money to purchase a PS3 anyway?

I dunno, ask dsx.

At this point of the "console wars" I'm sticking to an interesting bit I heard from someone. It stated: "It isn't really a war anymore. Nintendo didn't try to prove itself to the competition because it didn't view them as competition. They let the Wii speak for itself and as such aren't in competition with the other two. As far as they're concerned, it's a one-horse race. The 360 has a year of games behind it and is doing strongly because of it. The PS3 is currently a glorified George Foreman grill. This E3 is their last chance of proving themselves or they just might have to drop out."

That's definitely paraphrased and mixed and matched, but that's my general view of things now.

[Bahamut]

Sony is mainly pushing bluray here...and what's with the console war perception?

[Drack]

Well, a $500 blu-ray player AND game console, which you can get 5 free blu-ray movies with as a promotion, really isn't that bad a deal nowadays. (Just eBay the movies to folks who don't know about the promo if you don't like them).

Especially a good deal if the buyer skipped PS2.

The main problem with PS3 right now is a lack of a good library of quality games (and the flood of crappy movies nowadays), excluding backwards compatibility.

Big stuff is promised, and E3 can only bring more promises, but the same goes for Sony's competitors.

[eternal Zero]

and what's with the console war perception?

I blame E3 for that outburst.

[The Damned]

I blame half the people on the internet for that outburst.1234567890

[Ero Elohim]

Especially a good deal if the buyer skipped PS2.

So, like, four people?

Edit: More seriously, if someone skipped PS2, it wasn't because of a lack of games or money. It was likely because they either don't care at all about video games or they're hardcore anti-Sony. Both reasons why they wouldn't be potential customers for the PS3.

I think both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD need to be set on fire and have their ashes dumped into the oceans, so they'll be further mangled by deep sea pressure. I watch regular DVDs on a 50" plasma TV and I don't see any problems that would warrant purchasing a $500+ piece of equipment and all my movies over again.

[megadave]

So, like, four people?

Edit: More seriously, if someone skipped PS2, it wasn't because of a lack of games or money. It was likely because they either don't care at all about video games or they're hardcore anti-Sony. Both reasons why they wouldn't be potential customers for the PS3.

I think both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD need to be set on fire and have their ashes dumped into the oceans, so they'll be further mangled by deep sea pressure. I watch regular DVDs on a 50" plasma TV and I don't see any problems that would warrant purchasing a $500+ piece of equipment and all my movies over again.

I agree, although they will play standard DVDs, so you don't have to re-purchase them.

But, I've never cared. For now, Blu-Ray and HDDVD are a rich man's commodities.

[Drack]

So, like, four people?

Edit: More seriously, if someone skipped PS2, it wasn't because of a lack of games or money. It was likely because they either don't care at all about video games or they're hardcore anti-Sony. Both reasons why they wouldn't be potential customers for the PS3.

I think both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD need to be set on fire and have their ashes dumped into the oceans, so they'll be further mangled by deep sea pressure. I watch regular DVDs on a 50" plasma TV and I don't see any problems that would warrant purchasing a $500+ piece of equipment and all my movies over again.I skipped PS2. Anyone around these forums knows I'm a pretty hardcore gamer. Anti-sony? Think my post you quoted proves I'm not.

So why did I skip PS2? I had a gamecube and a kickass PC during the PS2 era. Had lots of games for both. All of my close friends during that time had PS2s so I had no problem bumming a play if I wanted to. Some of my friends' PS2s broke, one friend had his break multiple times. I want technology I can trust won't break - and from what I've seen and played, the PS3 is very well built.

Also I'm not much of a movie watcher. I didn't buy DVDs (just rented a few) or just watched movies on the big screen, so no loss of investment. But my latest computer monitor works as a 1080p display so why not?

Is this kind of story THAT uncommon?

UNRELATED EDIT: I'm reading a lot of FUD about HDMI. My monitor's HD inputs are 15-pin analog, DVI (compliant with HDCP), and component. Would the PS3 disallow anything due to lack of an HDMI connection?

[Bahamut]

So, like, four people?

Edit: More seriously, if someone skipped PS2, it wasn't because of a lack of games or money. It was likely because they either don't care at all about video games or they're hardcore anti-Sony. Both reasons why they wouldn't be potential customers for the PS3.

I think both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD need to be set on fire and have their ashes dumped into the oceans, so they'll be further mangled by deep sea pressure. I watch regular DVDs on a 50" plasma TV and I don't see any problems that would warrant purchasing a $500+ piece of equipment and all my movies over again.


Nah, I just leeched the PS2 off of various friends...although I did pick one up ~1 1/2 years ago (and just before the price drop, go figure).

[dsx100]

I dunno, ask dsx.


That was uncalled for man. I am sick of your shit. I haven't said anything about you for close to a month now and all you do is continue to hold on to this. Just shut the hell up already. I can't even afford a PS3 for your information.

About the whole PS2 thing, there is more than just a "few" classics on that system ok. I mostly just want a PS3 with the emotion chip just for convenience. Just so I won't have to be carrying around 2 systems, or have two systems hooked up at once. Convenience! I will probably and up getting a PS3 anyway but I simply would just prefer one with an emotion chip. Is that so wrong. Shit, people just can't seem to have their opinions respected around here.

[eternal Zero]

I had no need for a PS2 until I decided to buy my own DDR pads and go that route. I did have a PS1, but like Drack, I had a sweet PC and with that felt that I only needed one console. Most of my faith was with Nintendo at the time so I invested in a GCN instead of a PS2. This isn't to say I never played it. Also, I do happen to own one now for the above reason I stated and while it still doesn't get as much attention, I agree that nobody would've skipped the PS2 on games or content.

[Hy Bound]

So what's the deal with the circuit city discount, there has got to be a catch. Is it that you get 100 off of it after you buy a bunch of cheaper stuff, or what? THERE'S GOTTA BE A CATCH I TELL YA!

[Bigfoot]

It's a price cut. There's no catch.

[Neo Samus]

The catch is you must give up your first born.

[Petara]

Hooray price cut! Too bad I was on the ball and bought a 20 gig 7 months ago for the same damn price. Fuckin Sony. :banghead:

[Airwalker]

The catch? Since there is no longer a 20 gig model, you can't find a PS3 for $399. They had a $499 PS3 on launch, even though the new $499 model is all the sweeter with Wifi and other things.

Though, if you were only interested in the 60 gig model, it is $100 cheaper for you.

[NeoForte]

Sorry to break this news for ya but Ps3 is still $599. The 60GB model is not being produced anymore after July and any supplies in stores will be phazed out for the new 80GB SKU as it nets them more of a profit than making the 60GB one.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=7033077&postcount=684

Link to Video of Kaz confirming it.

Soooooo.....everyone that wants a cheap Ps3 go buy one before they sell out (and before Sept ends to get the 5 free Blu-Ray movie giveaway)

[The Author]

Oh

My


God...


I think Sony just committed corporate suicide.

[Bahamut]

No wonder Microsoft isn't going to do a price cut on the 360.

Good job Sony, not only do you screw the early adopters in under an year, you screw over people who don't jump on it now once the 80 GB one comes out.

[Arek the Absolute]

Son of a fucking bitch.

[The Damned]

Fuck.

In other news, Sony expects people to now rush out and get the cheaper version while they still can.

Hey, here's an idea: why not just keep the 60 gig systems, and sell those at the price you said? That way, you have people buying them all the time instead of just in the next couple of weeks! Yeah, people buying your product all year round! Crazy, huh?

[Drack]

Not only that, but with the end of the 60GB model, ALL PS3s in production from August onwards will have the Emotion Engine removed.

It's as if they're giving you a deadline to buy a PS3.

[Dunnowhathuh]

Forgive my blatent ignorance and lack of research on the subject but this (http://au.gamespot.com/news/6173987.html?action=convert&om_clk=latestnews&tag=latestnews;title;1) says that PAL nations aren't getting the 80gig variants or a price drop for that matter. So that means we don't get PS3's at all haha? Or does that just mean they're gonna keep making the 60 gig variants for us and make us pay the same price for it as the Americans do for their 80 gig version (and by saying "same price" I mean up to 300 bucks $A more then the US). I'm probably missing something here cuz I haven't been giving much of a rat's ass about the PS3 lately. Either way, PAL nations get bad end of the stick again.

[Majin GeoDooD]

I have a feeling that if Sony had waited for a couple weeks to announce this news it would've been better for them. I wonder how many people that were planning to go buy a 60gig model now will end up not buying one after hearing this.

[SilverStar]

...Kaz, time for you to be shot out of the volcano and for someone else to come in.

Seriously, maybe the reason why people didn't want the 20GB model, is because it was so heavily crippled? You know, not having half the external functionality of the 60GB model.

And now to kill off the 60GB model, completely? Oh shit, congratulations to Sega territory!

[Nec5]

I'll wait for the 100GB model. Then I'll wait for it to drop in price for the newer 120GB model.

[The Damned]

I think the Kotaku headline (http://kotaku.com/gaming/durr/the-great-60gb-phase-out-clusterfuck-278256.php) says it all, so...

Considering the last dozen times they did this exact same crap, it turned out to be true. So I'm still going to stick with "fucking fuckity fuck fuck".

[Jam Stunna]

You know, I kept my mouth shut about the PS3's price, thinking that maybe they had some master pricing plan that actually made sense in the long run. Apparently, that is not the case.

[atmuh]

i really thought they were starting to get it together
but they did in fact lose their minds completely

[Petara]

I think the Kotaku headline (http://kotaku.com/gaming/durr/the-great-60gb-phase-out-clusterfuck-278256.php) says it all, so...

Considering the last dozen times they did this exact same crap, it turned out to be true. So I'm still going to stick with "fucking fuckity fuck fuck".

Emphasis on the FUCK!

[Effef]

ROFL Sony!?!?!??

[DJ Skratch 'n' Sniff]

This all reminds me of one time someone said something and everyone believed it and started bitching about it when, in reality, it turned out to not be true.

I can't argue with people about the PS3's price because they're usually too young or don't have a job/don't have much income or would rather buy a console with a 33% failure rate.

[SlightlyOddGuy]

This is Sony following the iPod business model. Kutaragi talked about it a year ago, and everyone shrugged it off as more Krazy Ken madness. Apparently, it's turned out to be corporate policy.

[Groovemaster303]

I'm glad i got rid of mine when i did.

Sony are a bunch of muppets.

[Bahamut]

This all reminds me of one time someone said something and everyone believed it and started bitching about it when, in reality, it turned out to not be true.

I can't argue with people about the PS3's price because they're usually too young or don't have a job/don't have much income or would rather buy a console with a 33% failure rate.

...What? The PS3 IS expensive, unless you have some sort of $100k+ income to throw around. And at least Microsoft has a 3 year warranty now, rather than screwing people over like Sony did over the PS2 era.

And for the record, yes, I do own a PS3, and had it for 3-4 months.

[DJ Skratch 'n' Sniff]

...What? The PS3 IS expensive, unless you have some sort of $100k+ income to throw around. And at least Microsoft has a 3 year warranty now, rather than screwing people over like Sony did over the PS2 era.

And for the record, yes, I do own a PS3, and had it for 3-4 months.

Sure the 360 is 200 bucks cheaper (now only $100 though), but you have to buy accessories up the ass. A charger? $25. Wireless adapter? $100. HD-DVD player? $200. New 20 gig HDD? Another $100. Xbox Live? $50 a year. Plus the HDD is 40 gigs smaller and the PS3 frickin' utilizes Blu-Ray. So, assuming you want your Premium 360 to be up to par with Sony's 60 gig console, it'll set you back $975, and that's just for one year of online play. 360 sounds twice as expensive to me. Did I mention the 360 has a 33% failure rate? Has anyone heard of a PS3 Red Ring of Death? PS3's also support SD cards! They're up to 4 gig sticks now, ain't they?

Now, with such an awesome E3 line-up, I think it's pretty clear who's winning this console war.

Also, I only have a $20K income, thank you very much :)

[Spidey]

And at least Microsoft has a 3 year warranty now, rather than screwing people over like Sony did over the PS2 era.

I stood in line opening day to buy a PS2(ended up on the evening news and got my fifteen seconds of fame), and enjoyed the heck out of it. A couple of years later, the laser mis-aligned and it wouldn't read DVD games. It gathered dust for a while; then in the summer of 2004, I called Sony to ask them about it, since no electronics store would fix it for less than $70. They told me that it was not an uncommon problem, that I should ship it to them and they would fix it for me. Two weeks later, they shipped me a new system for free, which I still have. ~shrug~ I didn't really feel screwed by Sony.

[The Damned]

Now, with such an awesome E3 line-up, I think it's pretty clear who's winning this console war.

Nintendo? Because they are outselling everyone combined? Because they can't produce enough to meet demand (and not an artificial shortage, either; they're pumping out hundreds of thousands a week in multiple factories)? Because the games they offer are popular and fun? Because They have the best price? Because they have the best customer service off all three companies? Because they have incredibly popular first-party titles? Because a lot of the developers that used to be pro-PS2 have switched over to the Wii?

[SilverStar]

Sure the 360 is 200 bucks cheaper (now only $100 though), but you have to buy accessories up the ass. A charger? $25. Wireless adapter? $100. HD-DVD player? $200. New 20 gig HDD? Another $100. Xbox Live? $50 a year. Plus the HDD is 40 gigs smaller and the PS3 frickin' utilizes Blu-Ray. So, assuming you want your Premium 360 to be up to par with Sony's 60 gig console, it'll set you back $975, and that's just for one year of online play. 360 sounds twice as expensive to me. Did I mention the 360 has a 33% failure rate? Has anyone heard of a PS3 Red Ring of Death? PS3's also support SD cards! They're up to 4 gig sticks now, ain't they?

Now, with such an awesome E3 line-up, I think it's pretty clear who's winning this console war.

Also, I only have a $20K income, thank you very much :)

Like most people who don't seem to get it, you're comparing a media center PC, to a game console. And don't forget, the "price drop" is only while supplies last.

X360 Premium lets you play all the games, no worries. Toss in a Gold membership(which you get the first month free with the system anyway, to see if you actually like it), and the.. oh, what was it? 20 A+ titles coming out in the second half of this year?

Compared to a BluRay player that has some game functionality added onto it.

[dsx100]

Man this news sucks. I was really hoping I could get a new 60GB model in Novemeber. Looks like I am just going to have to buy an old 20GB model off ebay or something.

[Bahamut]

Like most people who don't seem to get it, you're comparing a media center PC, to a game console. And don't forget, the "price drop" is only while supplies last.

X360 Premium lets you play all the games, no worries. Toss in a Gold membership(which you get the first month free with the system anyway, to see if you actually like it), and the.. oh, what was it? 20 A+ titles coming out in the second half of this year?

Compared to a BluRay player that has some game functionality added onto it.

Well, the PS3 will be a multimedia center too, so I'd say that's besides the point.

Sure the 360 is 200 bucks cheaper (now only $100 though), but you have to buy accessories up the ass. A charger? $25. Wireless adapter? $100. HD-DVD player? $200. New 20 gig HDD? Another $100. Xbox Live? $50 a year. Plus the HDD is 40 gigs smaller and the PS3 frickin' utilizes Blu-Ray. So, assuming you want your Premium 360 to be up to par with Sony's 60 gig console, it'll set you back $975, and that's just for one year of online play. 360 sounds twice as expensive to me. Did I mention the 360 has a 33% failure rate? Has anyone heard of a PS3 Red Ring of Death? PS3's also support SD cards! They're up to 4 gig sticks now, ain't they?

Now, with such an awesome E3 line-up, I think it's pretty clear who's winning this console war.

Also, I only have a $20K income, thank you very much :)

Most people don't buy the wireless adapter or HD-DVD player. Plus I got my 360 Premium for $300 with a $100 gift card back around Christmas, so I spent even less.

While the PS3 isn't as faulty as the 360 (and please do not cite percentages without any source to back it up), again, at least Microsoft extended the warranty to 3 years.

Your post here is like standard fanboy fare - much of your claims are exaggerated or lacking fair consideration. I really don't care about console war bullshit that idiots concoct to make their purchase look better, but there's little need to slam another console just because you prefer a particular one.

[The Coop]

While the PS3 isn't as faulty as the 360 (and please do not cite percentages without any source to back it up), again, at least Microsoft extended the warranty to 3 years.

Indeed. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, where was Sony when their PS2s were being returned regularly, burned out and unable to read discs? Microsoft had the balls to own up to the fact that their original batches of systems had a problem, and took steps to try and help those who bought those units, and future customers. Sony just looked the other way and spouted how many units they'd sold.



Oh, and...

TEH PoS3 HAS A ONE HUNDERED PERCANT FALE RATE BECAUSE IT HAS NO GUD GAMEZ!! AMI RITE??!!!shift+one

:wink:

[DJ SymBiotiX]

Nintendo? Because they are outselling everyone combined? Because they can't produce enough to meet demand (and not an artificial shortage, either; they're pumping out hundreds of thousands a week in multiple factories)? Because the games they offer are popular and fun? Because They have the best price? Because they have the best customer service off all three companies? Because they have incredibly popular first-party titles? Because a lot of the developers that used to be pro-PS2 have switched over to the Wii?

omg I love you.. :P

I hate it when people say the wii is nintendo's worst idea, and its gonna die... I really dont understand those kind of ideas, when you still cant find a fucking wii in any store :P

[atmuh]

i used to be a nintendo fanboy but when i came to this place and realized how retarded fanboys sound i slowly drifted into the neutral zone so i can objectively say that this ps3 price thing is gay as balls

[DJ Skratch 'n' Sniff]

There are a zillion things I want to say here.

First off: the Wii is only selling because it's cheaper than the other two and it's more family oriented. There aren't that many good games on it. Let's be honest here; most are games with the whole motion sensitivity gimmick just tacked on. I'm digging the Virtual Console more than the actual games myself.



While the PS3 isn't as faulty as the 360 (and please do not cite percentages without any source to back it up), again, at least Microsoft extended the warranty to 3 years.


Source:

"In the quest for supremacy in next-generation gaming consoles, Microsoft (MSFT) had a big advantage by releasing the Xbox 360 a full year ahead of competing devices from Sony (SNE) and Nintendo (NTDOY). But hardware failures on the device are forcing Microsoft to cede some of its hard-won ground.

After months of reports about unusually high hardware failures for the Xbox 360, the Redmond (Wash.) software giant on July 5 said it will take a $1.05 billion to $1.15 billion charge to extend warranty coverage on repairs and replacements. The company said a months-long investigation into an "unacceptable number of repairs" to Xbox 360 consoles has helped it identify several flaws that caused the system to crash—indicated by three flashing red lights on the front dubbed the "Red Ring of Death" by gamers.

Robbie Bach, president of Microsoft's entertainment and devices division, declined in an interview to say what specifically caused the failures or how high the failure rate has been.

But the disclosure follows weeks of online chatter about a high retail return rate for the console. While the normal console return rate is between 3% and 5%, online news site DailyTech on July 2 said it surveyed retailers and found that the Xbox 360 had a staggeringly high return rate of 33%."

Found it on Digg.

It's easy for me to rip on the 360 for this simple reason: of the 5 people I know that bought a 360 (including myself), 4 got the Red Ring of Death. One of us even got it a second time after it had been "refurbished".

I'm not a Sony fanboy. I just think they made a better console and people are getting a hell of a deal for all the crap they're getting with it. Yet they still bitch about the price.



X360 Premium lets you play all the games, no worries. Toss in a Gold membership(which you get the first month free with the system anyway, to see if you actually like it), and the.. oh, what was it? 20 A+ titles coming out in the second half of this year?


Free for the first month? I didn't get that.

And what A+ titles? You mean the ones that are also available for the PS3? Cause it seems the only good 360 exclusives coming out the rest of this year are Bioshock and Halo 3.

Wow. Huge post.

[atmuh]

First off: the Wii is only selling because it's cheaper than the other two and it's more family oriented. There aren't that many good games on it. Let's be honest here; most are games with the whole motion sensitivity gimmick just tacked on. I'm digging the Virtual Console more than the actual games myself.

i actually agree
i personally think the wii sucks balls
all i have played on it for the past three months is smash bros melee

I'm not a Sony fanboy. I just think they made a better console and people are getting a hell of a deal for all the crap they're getting with it. Yet they still bitch about the price.

youre a tad confused
ya see people care about choice
most people dont care about all the crap you get in a ps3
i worked in a game store and when i explained what extra crap you get 95% of the people said so what

And what A+ titles? You mean the ones that are also available for the PS3? Cause it seems the only good 360 exclusives coming out the rest of this year are Bioshock and Halo 3.

which is good enough for most people

[Bahamut]

Ho boy, now we have the other consoles being brought in to a PS3 thread :???: .

The 360 has plenty of fun exclusives out there, and some upcoming ones like Mass Effect, and Blue Dragon. But more importantly, when given a choice between a PS3 version and a 360 version of the game, so far the PS3 just doesn't have something as good as achievements, which push you to go that extra step to doing something more in a game, or even finishing it. In addition, the 360 is cheaper than the PS3 for what appears to be generally a similar lineup. For what it's worth, so far the PS3 just has the weakest set of exclusives coming up, even when compared to the Wii. What's coming out in '07 for the PS3 that'll be on par with Metroid Prime 3, Super Mario Galaxy, or Smash Bros. Brawl for fun? Or even for the 360's offerings? It's looking rather bleak this holiday, and this is coming from a PS3 owner.

The only thing that seems worth buying a PS3 for is its own exclusives, and it is sorely lacking in that department now and for the near future.

Also about the return rate, a survey is a poor substitute for actual data. It said up to 33%, not mostly.

[SilverStar]

Ho boy, now we have the other consoles being brought in to a PS3 thread :???: .

The 360 has plenty of fun exclusives out there, and some upcoming ones like Mass Effect, and Blue Dragon. But more importantly, when given a choice between a PS3 version and a 360 version of the game, so far the PS3 just doesn't have something as good as achievements, which push you to go that extra step to doing something more in a game, or even finishing it. In addition, the 360 is cheaper than the PS3 for what appears to be generally a similar lineup. For what it's worth, so far the PS3 just has the weakest set of exclusives coming up, even when compared to the Wii. What's coming out in '07 for the PS3 that'll be on par with Metroid Prime 3, Super Mario Galaxy, or Smash Bros. Brawl for fun? Or even for the 360's offerings? It's looking rather bleak this holiday, and this is coming from a PS3 owner.

The only thing that seems worth buying a PS3 for is its own exclusives, and it is sorely lacking in that department now and for the near future.

Also about the return rate, a survey is a poor substitute for actual data. It said up to 33%, not mostly.

As a long-time Nintendo fan(but not a fanboy), I have to say that, more than anything, Sony is looking just like this generation's Nintendo.. only without the profit.

They're already releasing an "updated" PS3, not a year out of the gates, and for the most part, their only really interesting games.. are first/second party titles. The difference between them and Nintendo the past 2 generations, is that Nintendo was actually turning a profit, constantly. Sony's taking huge hits for every system sold, because they are trying to force blu-ray.

Like I said, though.. PS3 is just a multimedia PC. Built for the multimedia, but with some gaming capability added in. X360 was more built for gaming, and had the multimedia added on to that.

And even if every game between PS3 and X360 between now and the end of the year were coming out on both systems.. that would still make X360 a superior choice for a gaming perspective, since it's cheaper for what it would be used for: playing games. And so far, in side-by-side comparisons, the X360 games have been coming out stronger in a lot more areas than the PS3 versions.

So, unless you actually have a true 1080p HDMI/HDCP HDTV and have a hard-on for buying all the movies you already own, on another format(and in turn, more money than sense for that reason), 360 is actually the better choice.

But, if what you REALLY want is a HD DVD player to watch movies on.. well, that's when PS3 shines. It's a high end BluRay player, with Linux capabilities, and even has the ability to play games as a bonus.. which is actually how Sony has been marketing it since they announced it. They have not once called it a gaming machine or game console(at least, not as far as I recall), and have actually gone on record as saying that's exactly what their system is NOT.

So, you could spend $600 for a gaming PC that is supposed to last you for 10 years(and by then, you could build a better one for less, and actually have superior PS2 emulation by then), or spend $400 to get a game machine that has some bonuses and, largely, plays the same games, at the same quality.

[Jam Stunna]

I just noticed something in today's Best Buy circular. They listed the 60 gig version of the PS3 as $499, without mentioning the 80 gig at $599. If they continue advertising like that, when the 60 gig version runs out, it's going to seem like a price increase to the average consumer. Not a good thing for Sony.

[DJ Skratch 'n' Sniff]

After this I'm done arguing:

E3 '07 showcased almost nothing for the Wii. The Zapper? Useless. That balance board thingie? Who cares? Super Mario Galaxy and Metroid Prime 3 are the only awesome things coming out for the Wii this year.

The 360 has Bioshock, Halo 3 and Blue Dragon. Let's be honest here, Blue Dragon doesn't feel right for the 360. It's never been the expansive role-playing game console but, who knows, maybe this'll make way for other cool RPGs to come. I'd also like to point out that Blue Dragon alone is selling 360's in Japan; about 380,000 consoles sold versus 200,000 copies of the game.

The PS3 totally won E3 (not that it's a competition, but you know what I mean). With such awesome looking games as Heavenly Sword, Killzone 2, Uncharted, MGS4, Tools of Destruction, FFXIII, FF Versus XIII, Folklore, God of War 3, Infamous, White Knight Story, Heavy Rain, Lair, Warhawk and Little Big Planet. I know quite a few of these won't even be coming out until '08 but, holy shit, what a line-up.

Ho boy, now we have the other consoles being brought in to a PS3 thread :???: .

Being pro PS3 sounds worthy enough for the PS3 thread.

[PriZm]

Srsly.

This 'console war' fanboyism never fucking ends. People only talk about price and potential and future exclusives blah blah fucking blah because all three consoles currently suck goat balls.

[Jam Stunna]

Srsly.

This 'console war' fanboyism never fucking ends. People only talk about price and potential and future exclusives blah blah fucking blah because all three consoles currently suck goat balls.

Aren't those the only things to talk about?

[atmuh]

all three consoles currently suck goat balls.

amen brotha

[DJ Skratch 'n' Sniff]

Well, if we can't talk about the console's price or games on said console's thread, than where the hell do we talk about them?

[SilverStar]

Srsly.

This 'console war' fanboyism never fucking ends. People only talk about price and potential and future exclusives blah blah fucking blah because all three consoles currently suck goat balls.

Well, if you look at what's currently available.. PS2. Or X360. Everything else is future(next few months, out to a year or so).

[Nec5]

Srsly.

This 'console war' fanboyism never fucking ends. People only talk about price and potential and future exclusives blah blah fucking blah because all three consoles currently suck goat balls.That's why I am nowhere close to buying one of them.

[I-n-j-i-n]

E3 '07 showcased almost nothing for the Wii. The Zapper? Useless. That balance board thingie? Who cares? Super Mario Galaxy and Metroid Prime 3 are the only awesome things coming out for the Wii this year.

I actually agree except I'm not exactly blown away by the Metroid Prime 3 hands-on videos. It looks like the aiming system seems clunky, and though the developers are aiming for 'mouse and keyboard style accuracy', it's still not quite there. And platformers really have been taken down a notch in the last few years. I'll still buy Mario Galaxies, but it's just not the blowout event it used to be IMO.

The 360 has Bioshock, Halo 3 and Blue Dragon. Let's be honest here, Blue Dragon doesn't feel right for the 360. It's never been the expansive role-playing game console but, who knows, maybe this'll make way for other cool RPGs to come. I'd also like to point out that Blue Dragon alone is selling 360's in Japan; about 380,000 consoles sold versus 200,000 copies of the game.

I would think JRPGs will do way better in America/Europe than otherwise. The fanbase reception is huge and 11+ million owners have been waiting for an RPG experience for a long time. I'm a bit burnt out on RPGs of the last year, but I'm itching for an RPG on the 360 too. Also, Blue Dragon isn't the JRPG highlight of E3. Eternal Sonata was. And Lost Odyssey sounds pretty original for a JRPG. I just wish they announce more games beyond those three from Mistwalker. As for shooters and action games, 360 will have more than enough to satisfy. PS3 too actually.

The PS3 totally won E3 (not that it's a competition, but you know what I mean). With such awesome looking games as Heavenly Sword, Killzone 2, Uncharted, MGS4, Tools of Destruction, FFXIII, FF Versus XIII, Folklore, God of War 3, Infamous, White Knight Story, Heavy Rain, Lair, Warhawk and Little Big Planet. I know quite a few of these won't even be coming out until '08 but, holy shit, what a line-up.

The thing is, most of those games are purely tentative and most probably will be 2008/2009 titles.

PS3 did pretty well, but I just think the 360 had more games that will actually come out in 2007. But as for tentative, future projects go, PS3 really does look promising even if the fanbase might not be there yet, if it ever catches up to the 360 at this point.

[PriZm]

Aren't those the only things to talk about?

Yes. That's why it's pointless. If we could discuss the games currently available and draw our conclusions from these, it would make sense. But now all the talks I see on the tubes is about: "My Wii kicks ass, I'll be able to play Smash Bros Brawl/Mario Galaxy/Metroid Prime when it comes out. My X360 kicks ass, I'll be able to play Mass Effect/Halo 3 when it comes out. My PS3 kicks ass, it can process 5000000GFlops/s and I'll be able to play Final Fantasy 13 when it comes out.

The price difference isn't so big. Let's say a Wii is 250$ and a PS3 is 600$. That's 350$. At 70$ a game that's like 5 games. And if you buy games that last 4-5 hours like Wario Ware that's like 25 hours worth of gameplay. Whatever, this is not in defense of Sony or whoever, but that's just to make a point that the best console will not be determined by price or potential, but by the games avaiable. And since the library is so small for all consoles we don't know yet.

The novelty of the Wii controller could end up being not much more than a gimmick. Or it could be awesome. Same goes for X360 and PS3.

The fact of the matter is we don't know yet. I see the different threads about the consoles as a discussion about what's new and what's good/bad regarding the console, not about why it could eventually potentially possibly in the future if everything goes well if we kneel down and pray/suck their corporate cocks be better than X other console.

[Jam Stunna]

Yes. That's why it's pointless. If we could discuss the games currently available and draw our conclusions from these, it would make sense. But now all the talks I see on the tubes is about: "My Wii kicks ass, I'll be able to play Smash Bros Brawl/Mario Galaxy/Metroid Prime when it comes out. My X360 kicks ass, I'll be able to play Mass Effect/Halo 3 when it comes out. My PS3 kicks ass, it can process 5000000GFlops/s and I'll be able to play Final Fantasy 13 when it comes out.

The price difference isn't so big. Let's say a Wii is 250$ and a PS3 is 600$. That's 350$. At 70$ a game that's like 5 games. And if you buy games that last 4-5 hours like Wario Ware that's like 25 hours worth of gameplay. Whatever, this is not in defense of Sony or whoever, but that's just to make a point that the best console will not be determined by price or potential, but by the games avaiable. And since the library is so small for all consoles we don't know yet.

The novelty of the Wii controller could end up being not much more than a gimmick. Or it could be awesome. Same goes for X360 and PS3.

The fact of the matter is we don't know yet. I see the different threads about the consoles as a discussion about what's new and what's good/bad regarding the console, not about why it could eventually potentially possibly in the future if everything goes well if we kneel down and pray/suck their corporate cocks be better than X other console.

What? How can you limit discussion about videogames (or anything for that matter) to only what you can see here and now? Half of any interesting conversation is discussing what is possible, and determining if it's likely or not. You'd run out of things to talk about pretty fast if you didn't have a healthy amount of speculation thrown in.

[DJ Skratch 'n' Sniff]

Woot! PS3 thread craziness!

[atmuh]

I actually agree except I'm not exactly blown away by the Metroid Prime 3 hands-on videos. It looks like the aiming system seems clunky, and though the developers are aiming for 'mouse and keyboard style accuracy', it's still not quite there.

not to sway talk from ps3 but i just wanna say that i played that about a year ago and back then it was CLOSE to being dead on. id say that if it was as accurate as it was back then (i nailed pretty much everything on the first shot with little difficulty) itll be fine for release


and basically after sorta following most of everything with e3 i am in the same boat as where i started
i have no desire whatsoever to purchase any new console at all
really the only thing that was mildly interesting to me there was smash bros but its not like that is new stuff or anything

[DJ Skratch 'n' Sniff]

and basically after sorta following most of everything with e3 i am in the same boat as where i started
i have no desire whatsoever to purchase any new console at all
really the only thing that was mildly interesting to me there was smash bros but its not like that is new stuff or anything

Only Smash Bros? How can that be? I thought it was full of neato stuff. Like inFamous! That game came out of nowhere and looks awesome.

[The Coop]

WHEEEEEEEEEEE DOWGY!

Looks like we done got ourselves a good ol' fashioned console war! This makes me happier than a fella at a Hooters wet t-shirt contest with a bucket of ice water!

[PriZm]

What? How can you limit discussion about videogames (or anything for that matter) to only what you can see here and now? Half of any interesting conversation is discussing what is possible, and determining if it's likely or not. You'd run out of things to talk about pretty fast if you didn't have a healthy amount of speculation thrown in.

I'm not saying we shouldn't discuss about future games. I'm saying it is impossible to gauge the consoles current quality by only speculating about future games.

[I-n-j-i-n]

I think it's understandable if someone doesn't want to buy any new consoles. By all standards, this year's E3 is good grounds for there to be no more E3 since most companies' own press events revealed a lot more than E3 did this time around.

Also, beyond a few exclusives for PS3 and 360 and a few little known stuff for the Wii, all the blowout news happened outside of E3 this time around.

No more Peter Moore tattoos... (or Ridge Racer)

[Bahamut]

Also, beyond a few exclusives for PS3 and 360 and a few little known stuff for the Wii


Funny how you hold to this view, but I felt like Nintendo revealed more interesting new stuff than Sony or Microsoft...which says a lot about how poor the offerings all 3 companies made. A lot of articles I've read in the mainstream press are of a similar view as well.

[dsx100]

Sometimes it seems like I am the only one excited about this generation.

There are a ton of games I can't wait to play on both PS3 and Wii many coming out this year. Sure some aren't all that new, but that doesn't mean they'll be bad or not fun. But it's understandable why many wouldn't see much in these consoles, especially when there are so many great games avialable for the last gen systems.

[DJ Skratch 'n' Sniff]

Sometimes it seems like I am the only one excited about this generation.


You're not the only one. People just like to bitch.

[Trenthian]

people still talking about the PoS 3?

[Jam Stunna]

You're not the only one. People just like to bitch.

I guess people are becoming disillusioned with the industry. Alot of people on these boards have been playing videogames for around twenty years, so there's really not that much they haven't seen already.

[The Damned]

I guess people are becoming disillusioned with the industry. Alot of people on these boards have been playing videogames for around twenty years, so there's really not that much they haven't seen already.
QFT and QFE.

[The Coop]

You're not the only one. People just like to bitch.

More like, "Some people don't like to base the worth of a game system on what they themselves can't yet form an experienced opinion on" :-P


Scores of people on these boards have been excited about the latest big game coming out, only to be stung hard for $50-$60 because the game didn't live up to what it was supposed to be. Busted controls, iffy frame rates, bugs in the code, questionable gameplay, things that were supposed to be in the game that got left out... it gets to the point where people prefer to take a "wait and see" attitude. The same thing goes for consoles. Promises get made about how many third parties are on board, what the system can do, how committed the company is to that system... and then suddenly, no one's making games for that system any longer, and games that are nearly done get canceled. It doesn't take long in the gaming world to have an eye opening experience that makes you stop and think about diving in head first again. You learn to be patient until the game/system can prove itself, eventually showing you how much of the hype turned out to be true. So when folks come in and start preaching about what's yet to be like it's the greatest thing ever, and start claiming that system X is the one to get because of games no one's played yet (or will play for a good while)... well, you get what we have here.

For systems, I personally only go by what's able to be bought, not what's coming down the pipe. If there's nothing that interests me now, I'm not buying the system. It's as simple as that. No amount of "LOOK WHAT WE'VE GOT COMING UP!" hype is going to make me buy it. Some might call this jaded, but I call it being smart. $250-$600 is a lot of cash to spend on "what's coming", and I'm not into throwing cash away on promises for the future that could very easily not be kept. When there are enough games that interest me actually in the stores, then I'll get a given system if I have the cash. Otherwise, all I see is hype... not reasons why system X is better than system Y.

For games, I prefer to wait until reviews have started pouring in. I like to see what reviewers have to say, and find out how much of the promised gaming experience is actually there. Very few games make me want to get them on day one. And unless it's a situation where a lot of game magazines and websites get to review it before it hits store shelves, 90% of those don't come home with me on release day. I don't want hype and franchise pedigrees to be the deciding factor on whether to buy a game or not. I want how the game actually turned out, to be that factor.


Edit: Expanded on a few thoughts.

[The Damned]

Awesome post +1 for The Coop. Well said.

[Bahamut]

Yeah, Coop makes an excellent point here. I try to ignore hype and stay disinterested towards games until I actually play them and am able to judge them for myself. I think the whole hype for future games viewpoint goes too far and does a disservice for many fine games in the industry that the developer doesn't unload the hype wagon for, as well as doing a disservice for the gamers who may miss out on gems.

[Jam Stunna]

Yeah, Coop makes an excellent point here. I try to ignore hype and stay disinterested towards games until I actually play them and am able to judge them for myself. I think the whole hype for future games viewpoint goes too far and does a disservice for many fine games in the industry that the developer doesn't unload the hype wagon for, as well as doing a disservice for the gamers who may miss out on gems.

I think the hype comes from the videogame industry, as a whole, becoming increasingly more hit-driven. Take Two is the perfect example of that. They seem to lose money every year, except for the ones where a GTA game is released. Developers are having a hard time pushing these next-gen systems to the limit, and still turning a profit, so they need that one huge game that everyone's been talking about.

[PriZm]

Thank you, that was what I was trying to say, only much more concise and eloquent.

[The Damned]

Yeah, and most of those games end up being another Dai Katana. Hyped all the time, and the result is a feeling not unlike a girl's disappointment when her boyfriend jizzes all over her panties their first time.

... OK, that was a terrible comparison, but you get my point. I actually staying away from most big budget/hype games, simply because, like Coop said, I've been burned too many times by shitty titles that promised a lot.

In fact, I think this explains why there are a lot of series that have repeat customers. But that's getting into the whole "new ideas versus old gameplay" argument...

[Atomicfog]

Same old gendisc :). It's great, thinking back to all of the older arguments made, and what ended up happening regarding future predictions.

[Bahamut]

Same old gendisc :). It's great, thinking back to all of the older arguments made, and what ended up happening regarding future predictions.

So how's your PS3 doing?

[I-n-j-i-n]

Funny how you hold to this view, but I felt like Nintendo revealed more interesting new stuff than Sony or Microsoft...which says a lot about how poor the offerings all 3 companies made. A lot of articles I've read in the mainstream press are of a similar view as well.

For one, the biggest thing Nintendo has unveiled is with hardware. Namely the controllers. Also, I would not trust my gaming knowledge from the mainstream press which most of them aren't even true gamers but more like the casual types Nintendo is aiming for.

Also, this is not bias talking since I OWN a Wii and not even a PS3, but PS3 had way more things happening this year. 360 was actually pretty consistent with the games. I don't know about you, but I care MUCH more about games than hardware news at this point.

The PS3 Playstation Network actually showed a lot of original content and Naughty Dog is a constant surprise with their new brands and mixes of genres. Uncharted looks like the spiritual successor to Tomb Raider 2 that adventure gamers have been looking for almost 10 years now. Heavenly Sword looks like another solid action/platformer effort, possibly even more solid than God of War. Haze could be a potential sleeper hit considering it's from the team that did Time Splitters. And Everyday Fighter seems to be one of the most original game ideas I've heard in this E3 (http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/action/everydayshooter/news.html?sid=6174559&om_act=convert&om_clk=newlyadded&tag=newlyadded;title;1)

Also, what is so surprising about Mario Kart or Brain Academy/Age 2? We all saw them coming YEARS ago. Not that they're bad games. Hell, I'm a FAN of them, but it's not exactly news other than the controller for Mario Kart. What I'm not a fan of is something like Wii Fit which I don't see the point of, since good old exercise is way more fun to me. The best games Nintendo had were the little known 3rd parties especally. Jenga actually looks good and De Blob is probably the best Wii news I've heard that could potentially be really good. As for NiGHTs, I'll hold reservations until they finally do an old Sega franchise justice. The only game that did that was Out Run 2..

And 360 had its share of unique gaming property. Namely Mass Effect, Blue Dragon, Eternal Sonata, Lost Odyssey, and PC/360 exclusive Bioshock and otherse. And though totally out of my price range (probably), there's Rock Star and other little known titles too.

Wii didn't do bad, but as far as the actual games and epic-titles go, 360 and PS3 were far from disappointments. If the mainstream media can't pick apart the game nuances from all those new crop of games, it's their loss.

[Bahamut]

Well, I wasn't expecting Mario Kart to come out so soon, or SSBB AND SMG either. I didn't see anything for the PS3 that would be that compelling for that time period. In the top notch software department, PS3 is on uncertain grounds for the holidays, compared to the heavy hitters that Nintendo and Microsoft are unrolling.

[I-n-j-i-n]

As for the foreseeable future, I'm probably going to buy around 10 360 games (some being PC versions I'd rather play on a console or Virtua Fighter 5 and other PS3/360 titles) before the end of the year compared to around 5 Wii games.

I agree that PS3 this year is a bit anemic. I'm not going to buy one until another $100 price drop anyway.

But as far as title announcements and tentative 2008 titles go, I think PS3 has been pretty exciting this E3. But Wii probably will get a new Zelda, Animal Crossing and other Wii titles and 360 already has a stock of titles for 2008 too, including other exclusives from PS3 that converted for 360.

PS- All this could mean moot if Heavenly Sword and MGS4 live up to the hype and become the greatest pair of games ever released before holidays. You never know.

[Atomicfog]

So how's your PS3 doing?

The real irony is that I never got one. I did wait in line when it came out but barely missed getting one. Really, I don't really care for the PS3 right now, but when it starts getting all of the amazing games that have been shown at this and last years E3 I will most definitely get one. Right now I really think that the Xbox 360 is way better then I would have ever expected, and I want to get one of those as well. I have played all of the systems quite alot though because all of my friends have one or two next-gen consoles. Sadly, even the best next-gen console games just don't feel "next-gen" enough for me. This generation of consoles is really exciting graphics wise, but, for me, extremely disappointing game play wise. Regarding game play, I feel like we have been doing the same thing for years, and even the Wii-mote doesn't seem like much innovation to me. There are so many awesome games out there, but I just don't feel like the controllers match the graphics.

It is also pretty annoying that almost all games still have doors that just don't open, scenery that you can't explore, and there doesn't really seem to be that many new ways to interact with your environment... With all of the insane amounts of details in these new games it still feels like your limited to the same amount of environmental interactions as most original Playstation games. Just because those trees look really beautiful doesn't mean you can climb them, or even move the branches (It takes a game as next-gen as Crysis to just scratch the surface of this issue for some reason). On the other hand the best of the games for the systems are extremely fun , and even if they aren't as next-gen as I'd like they are still very fun, just not enough to warrant me buying a next-gen console right away.

I'll probably buy a PS3, Xbox 360 between next month and early next year, but I don't feel any rush since the majority of the games I care about for all of them still aren't out yet. I might get a Wii as well, but only if SSBB is everything I think it will be, since I really don't care for much else on the Wii. For now I am still getting tons of enjoyment out of my PSP, and my new high-end gaming laptop dishes out great fun as well.

[Bahamut]

Well, why not get a PS3 from Amazon now, while the 60 GB one is still in stock and while there's still such a deal for it? Even if you don't necessarily want one so quick, it has the Emotion Engine still in it, and it's doubtful that the 80 GB one will be cheap anytime soon.

[Atomicfog]

Well, why not get a PS3 from Amazon now, while the 60 GB one is still in stock and while there's still such a deal for it? Even if you don't necessarily want one so quick, it has the Emotion Engine still in it, and it's doubtful that the 80 GB one will be cheap anytime soon.

Yeah, I'm going to try to get a PS3 as soon as possible because of that, but I don't mind too much if I miss the opportunity. I'm about to start college and move out of my house, so my money has to spent wisely, but even if I miss the opportunity to get the cheap 60 Gb model. The new PS3 will still play the old games, and it doesn't matter if for some reason it sucks at doing so since I still have a PS2, a PS1, and the ability to play any PS1 game on my PSP. Besides that, Motorstorm is more fun than one might think, and the extra 20 Gbs would be nice. I definitely want the cheaper 60 Gb version more, but it won't be a horrible loss if I miss it.

[Bahamut]

Oh, I didn't say Motorstorm is bad (I actually have been a bit lazy in snatching it up), but the price upgrade from the 60 GB PS3 seems even worse than the jump between the 360 Premium and 360 Elite, considering that Sony actually lets you swap in your own hard drive into the PS3.

[Atomicfog]

Oh, I didn't say Motorstorm is bad (I actually have been a bit lazy in snatching it up), but the price upgrade from the 60 GB PS3 seems even worse than the jump between the 360 Premium and 360 Elite, considering that Sony actually lets you swap in your own hard drive into the PS3.

Yeah, it's not exactly worth the money when compared to the cheaper 60 Gb, but it won't be too bad if that is the option I'm stuck with.

Also one other thing that plays a factor in all this is the fact that I don't have an HD T.V. After always playing the PS3 on a my friends huge DLP television, I don't know how well I could deal with my PS3 on a regular T.V. I've seen it it 480i, and it just seems so much worse. I was thinking of getting a T.V tuner card for my laptop since it has a 1080P LCD, but I heard there is a pretty decent chance I might end up with frame lag if I go with that option, so I probably won't. I'm definitely considering getting a PS3 soon, but I'll have to face the fact that it will probably be on a regular television for a while if I do.

[Groovemaster303]

For the PS3 i have to agree, you really do need to use a HDTV.
Everything looks dreadful on 480i just look at the XMB the text is blurry and lacks clarity.
With the 360 it's not too bad, but the fact for a few quid you can grab the official VGA lead and use any old pc monitor for some high definition gaming is a big plus in my book.
It might not be as cool as your mates 40inch HD telly but it saves spending big bucks on one for the time being.
Does the PS3 have support for VGA yet?

[Necrotic]

Does the PS3 have support for VGA yet?

Wondering the same thing myself. Also what about DVI? Me and my bro are thinking of investing in one of these while the opportunity's here.