logo Sign In

The Non-Biased PS3 Thread — Page 5

Author
Time
Post link
Well I'll be getting the ps3, if only for a few reasons.
One, I'm fed up with having to upgrade my PC every few years. Two, by the time the ps3 reaches us in the UK all the problems should be sorted, and three, I don't own any other console - So it will make a pleasant change for me.
And also my little boy can play with me...He may only be two soon, but he's a smart bastard, and will probably whip my ass on the games anyhow!!

http://www.facebook.com/DirtyWookie

Author
Time
Post link
About the $70 price tag for the games and $600 for the console
I read that an atari 2600 game in 1982, adjusted for inflation, had a price tag of $73 in 2006 dollars
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Shark2k
First off I want to say that the GameCube was not shitty. The reason that the Cube seems shitty was because it had hardly any 3rd party supporters. The Cube would have done much better if it had more 3rd party support. About the 3rd party support for Cube: "Microsoft’s third party line-up is not exactly what it appears. I came across this from an anonymous developer:

"The Gamecube fell WAY behind in 3rd party support. They did great with first party- but a lot of big games ignored the 'Cube."

This may be how it appeared from the outside, but I can ensure you that this is not how it worked inside of the industry; there were lots of developers who wanted to bring games to the Gamecube but (as I will explain in a moment) were pressured by their publisher to put the games on other platforms.

When Microsoft entered the Console world they started spending insane amounts of money to buy exclusive support, ports or to simply prevent the Gamecube from getting ports; in Microsoft's world they believed that if they had enough third party exclusives (or at least the best looking version of a game) they would be as successful as the PS2. I know of several times when Microsoft paid publishers millions of dollars to ensure that the Gamecube would not get a port of a particular game." -TheWiikly.com (starts at Popular Excuse 3)

As to Nintendo not including DVD support in their system, answer this, how many DVD players do you have in your house? Okay so your answer is most likely more than one, especially if you include your computer. Nintendo did not include DVD support in their system because they want to make the system inexpensive and while DVD playback might not have really raised the price all that much, so be it, it's not a big loss. Besides, you can always buy a better stand alone DVD player for a better price then the DVD players that come in a system. Nintendo is going for the mass market and there goal is to get more people to start playing video games again. Certain things, IMHO, do not need to be in a video game console and a DVD player is one of those.

-Shark2k



Of course, this is the way it's always been. How do you think Sony so easily squashed the Dreamcast, which before the PS2, was not only enjoying a games line-up of phenomenal quality, but also broke console sales records at the time? At its height, the PS2 came along and developers simply walked away by virtue of a brand name.
MTFBWY. Always.

http://www.myspace.com/red_ajax
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: theredbaron
Originally posted by: Shark2k
First off I want to say that the GameCube was not shitty. The reason that the Cube seems shitty was because it had hardly any 3rd party supporters. The Cube would have done much better if it had more 3rd party support. About the 3rd party support for Cube: "Microsoft’s third party line-up is not exactly what it appears. I came across this from an anonymous developer:

"The Gamecube fell WAY behind in 3rd party support. They did great with first party- but a lot of big games ignored the 'Cube."

This may be how it appeared from the outside, but I can ensure you that this is not how it worked inside of the industry; there were lots of developers who wanted to bring games to the Gamecube but (as I will explain in a moment) were pressured by their publisher to put the games on other platforms.

When Microsoft entered the Console world they started spending insane amounts of money to buy exclusive support, ports or to simply prevent the Gamecube from getting ports; in Microsoft's world they believed that if they had enough third party exclusives (or at least the best looking version of a game) they would be as successful as the PS2. I know of several times when Microsoft paid publishers millions of dollars to ensure that the Gamecube would not get a port of a particular game." -TheWiikly.com (starts at Popular Excuse 3)

As to Nintendo not including DVD support in their system, answer this, how many DVD players do you have in your house? Okay so your answer is most likely more than one, especially if you include your computer. Nintendo did not include DVD support in their system because they want to make the system inexpensive and while DVD playback might not have really raised the price all that much, so be it, it's not a big loss. Besides, you can always buy a better stand alone DVD player for a better price then the DVD players that come in a system. Nintendo is going for the mass market and there goal is to get more people to start playing video games again. Certain things, IMHO, do not need to be in a video game console and a DVD player is one of those.

-Shark2k



Of course, this is the way it's always been. How do you think Sony so easily squashed the Dreamcast, which before the PS2, was not only enjoying a games line-up of phenomenal quality, but also broke console sales records at the time? At its height, the PS2 came along and developers simply walked away by virtue of a brand name.


If you're saying that developers just walked away from the Dreamcast after the PS2 came out that is different than what I quoted. Microsoft actually payed money to developers to not develope for the GameCube, so that's not the way it's always been.

-Shark2k

Author
Time
Post link
Gonna post a picture tomorrow, you guys are gonna love it.
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
Post link
What do you think the state of the PS3 will be in the next 6 months?
Author
Time
Post link
Pretty much the same as today's, a low selling console aimed at specific markets. It might have a boost at the end of the year with the new Metal Gear, but that's pretty much it. I wouldn't count on a PS4.
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
Post link
i wouldnt say that just yet.

in time the ps3 will drop in price and become more attractive to consumers. by the time that comes they will have time to have worked with the ps3 hardware and therefore pull out some pretty impressive games. not to mention already have a decent library of games to work with.

so in 6 months it may get better, but in a year it will be a much more popular console than some may think.

the wii on the other hand is very much limited in its capabilities. they will very much have to focus on gameplay for their audience. in a year or two the wii is going to look real bad. but that all depends on what your looking for when playing games.
"Never. I'll never turn to the darkside. You've failed your highness. I am a jedi, like my father before me."
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Luke Skywalker

the wii on the other hand is very much limited in its capabilities. they will very much have to focus on gameplay for their audience. in a year or two the wii is going to look real bad. but that all depends on what your looking for when playing games.


You do realize that is what Nintendo has always been about right? The Wii is about gameplay and a new innovative way to play video games. But of course, contrary to what many people think, the Wii will be able to have really nice graphics for enhanced definition gaming. Look at some of the games on the GameCube and then remember that the Wii has approximately 1.5 - 2 times more power than that. If developers stop being lazy, the Wii will have some really nice graphics. Look at Super Mario Galaxy for a good looking Wii game, and that isn't even out yet.

So I strongly disagree with your comment about the Wii going to look really bad. Right now the games, at least the ones that developers took a little time on the graphics, look really nice on HDTVs with component cables. If you were to compare PS3 and 360 games running in 480p to games on the Wii, of course running in 480p, then I think, with the exception of the PS3 and 360 games having more going on, they can look extremely nice compared to the 360 and PS3 graphics. Like you said with developers getting used to the PS3 hardware same thing applies with the Wii. Yes, the architecture is more or less a GameCube, but developers aren't taking advantage of their knowledge and once they get use to programming the Wii Remote, I'm sure you will see some pretty innovative and creative games coming out.

-Shark2k
Author
Time
Post link
Also they lose 200$ for every PS3 sold why would they want to lose more by lowering the price?
Author
Time
Post link
I heard rumors the Kingdom Hearts is coming to the Wii.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: sean wookie
Also they lose 200$ for every PS3 sold why would they want to lose more by lowering the price?


many consoles take a loss, and why they do that is because they know they can make the money back in accessories.
many people dont realize how much profit these companies actually make on their accessories. and considering that some people go through at least a couple controllers, not to mention batteries and memory cards, on top of the sale of games and other peripherals; i think they could care less.

on top of that i think many people are missing the point of the ps3. its not just a gaming console. Sony wants to push their Blu-ray disc, and if that means taking even more of a loss you think they're going to care if in the end it may make them billions upon billions more dollars. i think not.

all consoles will go down in price. i saw the xbox360 sell for 399 canadian a couple weeks ago.
and i dont even want to tell you how insane that is. these companies can afford to take a loss in console sales. if not then they wouldnt do it.
"Never. I'll never turn to the darkside. You've failed your highness. I am a jedi, like my father before me."
Author
Time
Post link
But will it sell? We want to play games not movies. And who really has a HDTV anyways? They are supposed to market for the masses.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Luke Skywalker

all consoles will go down in price. i saw the xbox360 sell for 399 canadian a couple weeks ago.
and i dont even want to tell you how insane that is. these companies can afford to take a loss in console sales. if not then they wouldnt do it.


You do realize that the 360 premium package is actually making money and has been for a while, right? PS3 is missing the point in my opinion. You can buy separate components that are better quality then having them all in one package. Look at the PS2 & Xbox DVD players, they were incompatible with a lot of movies. If I'm going to get a Blu-Ray player, I'll wait till the price drops and I can get a stand alone unit. Also, Sony is taking a huge risk in having the PS3 have a Blu-Ray player. Remember the Beta Vs. VHS era? Beta was a better format, yet VHS won. The same thing could happen with Blu-Ray. From what I know about it, Blu-Ray is in fact a better format, but HD-DVD might win out and then only Sony will be using Blu-Ray discs. Sony has a lot riding on their console this time around. This will definitely be an interesting console war.

-Shark2k

Author
Time
Post link
I have read some articles about Sony's other aces, including the first Blu-Ray consumer DVD burner. With the capacity to read "virtualy every disc format" along with burning on all disc formats, the burner can write to Blu-Ray discs, with the capacity of I believe 16.x gigs.
Author
Time
Post link
A lot of developers are jumping ship at this early stage (Konami may follow suit with Metal Gear, according to rumour). We all know that Sony is not profiting from its console sales, and yes, this is more often the case than not these days. This is always practiced with the expectation that profits will be made from software sales. It does defeat the purpose, however, when you only have 400, 000 units ready for a worldwide launch. How is an installed user-base of 400, 000 an incentive to develop games for said platform?
MTFBWY. Always.

http://www.myspace.com/red_ajax
Author
Time
Post link
I've come to find that Sony is great at alienating their customers (maybe George Lucas is a stockholder!) by making Sony brand specific items which tries to make the whole industry accomodate them, examples include memory sticks, UMD format, and now Blu-Ray. Although Blu-ray is the better format, I think HD-DVD will win based on it's name. Even the least tech savvy person knows HD means High Definition, whereas they'll see Blu-ray and go Huh?. Just my opinion though.
Author
Time
Post link
HD-DVD is a more stable format, cheaper to produce, with a on going market and more easily to reach the popular market, although it will take a couple of years. If I had to bet on a single format, HD-DVD would be it. Sony has a history of trying to impose a closed standart and failing miserably (Betamax, Memory Stick, UMD), I strongly belive Blu-Ray will continue this trend.
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: ferris209
Although Blu-ray is the better format, I think HD-DVD will win based on it's name. Even the least tech savvy person knows HD means High Definition, whereas they'll see Blu-ray and go Huh?


That's exactly what my dad did. He was talking about HD-DVDs, and I mentioned Blu-Ray to him, and he said "What the hell is Blu-Ray?" If my dad represents the average consumer, then Blu-Ray discs are gonna flop, whether they're superior or not.

http://i.imgur.com/7N84TM8.jpg

Author
Time
Post link
Apart from that, I've read a review fror the first Blu-Ray burner device for the PC. It works (albeit slowly) for CDs and DVDs, but it does not burn Blu-Ray disks at all (either it dosen't work at the end, or the computer crashes).
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
Post link
i agree the HD DVD does have a more widely accepted name. but this is assuming that the average consumer does absolutly no research on a High Definition setup when purchasing and therefore is not told about Blu Ray.

anyone planning to upgrading to HD is going to talk to sales associates and sooner or later will come into the Blu Ray name. it seems that many people here think that if someone is going to go high definition all they have to do is buy an HD DVD player and they're there. and if anyone has talked to sales associates or is one, we all know that we don't let customers leave without selling them more than they came for.

and Sony is putting a lot of risk into a decision like this, that much is true. however i dont think a company such as Sony hasnt already done the math on a matter such as this. companies never just walk blindly into a decision that may cost them billions of dollars.

i suggest we all give Sony the benefit of the doubt before making assumptions. if they end up failing, then its obvious they deserve it for not looking into what their consumers actually want. but if they do end up succeeding i dont see why there is any reason to hate on them?

after all they did ship their 1 million consoles like they said they would by the end of decemeber. this is almost twice the amount that xbox360 had shipped by the end of 2005. and i never recall people badmouthing Microsoft this much.

for some reason it just seems to be "cool" these days to hate Sony.
i dunno why.
"Never. I'll never turn to the darkside. You've failed your highness. I am a jedi, like my father before me."
Author
Time
Post link
"for some reason it just seems to be "cool" these days to hate Sony."

Screw that I DONT hate Sony,I friggin LOVE my PS3,and the Blu-ray looks fantastic,the comments made here just totally crack me up,there probably all made by people that dont have and cant afford one.

I also have the Wii,and totally love that too,I have the original Xbox,and believe it or not,I like that system as well,but I have NO interest at this point in the Xbox 360.

DJ
Author
Time
Post link
There isn't a damn thing to play on the PS3 right now.

Put some fucking good games on it and maybe I'll buy one. That's how I do things, because I'm not a jackass.

Harrison Ford Has Pretty Much Given Up on His Son. Here's Why