So Blu Rays are fine and all, but I'm not ignorant of the PS3's raison d'être as a gaming system. I've got a 360 already and many of the great cross-platform games, so what I'm looking for is some suggestions for some "must have" PS3 exclusives. Already on my list are Little Big Planet, God of War Collection, and Uncharted 2, but what else should I be looking for?
I have little interest in sports games and fighters, and precisely zero interest in JRPGs, but I am willing to entertain suggestions for just about anything else, so throw 'em out there.
You could try Rampage, although that's probably a PS2 only... it contains the original Rampage World Tour which was imho more then worth the 10 bucks I payed for it, even though the new game is kinda crap.
Other then that... Guitar Hero is fun. Don't have much more to share.
So the wife and I finally joined the cutting-edge of five years ago and got an HD TV. Of course now we want a Blu Ray player as well and everyone seems to still be saying that, for the money, the PS3 is the best one you can get so we're picking one up tomorrow. (Payday! Yay tons of overtimes!)
So Blu Rays are fine and all, but I'm not ignorant of the PS3's raison d'être as a gaming system. I've got a 360 already and many of the great cross-platform games, so what I'm looking for is some suggestions for some "must have" PS3 exclusives. Already on my list are Little Big Planet, God of War Collection, and Uncharted 2, but what else should I be looking for?
I have little interest in sports games and fighters, and precisely zero interest in JRPGs, but I am willing to entertain suggestions for just about anything else, so throw 'em out there.
you HAVE to get medal of honor and black ops
you HAVE to get medal of honor and black ops
Neither are PS3 exclusives, though. I'm coming to the PS3 late, and haven't kep up on the exclusive offerings, so I'm looking for advice on those great games I can only get on the PS3.
you HAVE to get medal of honor and black ops
Neither are PS3 exclusives, though. I'm coming to the PS3 late, and haven't kep up on the exclusive offerings, so I'm looking for advice on those great games I can only get on the PS3.
oh right I didn't really think about it :/ but um theres assassin's creed, its not ps3 exclusive but theres stuff on the game that you can only get on ps3
I've never played, but... Killzone and Resistance series?
I was going to say MLB: The Show and God of War III, but you already mentioned one and excluded the other. Based on hearsay, inFamous is supposed to be good, I think.
inFamous if fairly good, but also incredibly stupid. You get powers based on How good or bad you are. If your not super goodie all the time, or deplorably evil all the time, you get nothing. And at one point, if you have a moment of weakness, it will throw your gage from one side of the spectrum all the way to the other, meaning all the powers you spent you XP buying are now useless, because you no longer the right alignment to use them.
So there is not really an alignment system, its basically a two class system, with the added benifit of the ability to make a wrong decision and completly and irrevocably screw yourself (not much of a feature really. Hope you saved.)
it's a bit more advanced than Xbox.
what...the....****. XBOX 360 is the best console ever end of story. (fanboy lol)
it's a bit more advanced than Xbox.
what...the....****. XBOX 360 is the best console ever end of story. (fanboy lol)
...which doesn't change the fact that it was released more than a year before PS3 and it objectively is slower and has less computing capability. Not to mention PS3 has bluray.
Of course those parameters matter truly to PC geeks, as the strength of the platform is in what can you play on it. You may look up Atari's input in the Bit Wars in the early 90s to see what I mean ;)
it's a bit more advanced than Xbox.
what...the....****. XBOX 360 is the best console ever end of story. (fanboy lol)
...which doesn't change the fact that it was released more than a year before PS3 and it objectively is slower and has less computing capability. Not to mention PS3 has bluray.
Of course those parameters matter truly to PC geeks, as the strength of the platform is in what can you play on it. You may look up Atari's input in the Bit Wars in the early 90s to see what I mean ;)
xbox sells more. has a better community (its actually moderated), has more features, isn't as hacker friendly as ps3, plays dvd's (cheaper than bluray), and if we're talking about capabilities, i can easily flash a bluray player into an xbox, my xbox has google chrome on it (ps3's browser is shoddy), better controllers (opinion), xbox has kinect (controller free video gaming [tracks skeleton]).
I'm a fanboy sir you will not win this arguement lmao I won't let you. I'll ignore whatever "truths" you throw at me haha
Well, certainly may not be your cup of tea..but the Katamari Damacy games are lovely for those I'm kind of drunk and don't want to think too hard evenings. Mock me if you will, but whiskey+Katamari Forever= ridiculous funtimes. I've sucked many naysayers into the vortex.
Why would it not be my cup of tea or mock-worthy? I adore the Katamari series. I spent ages tracking down a copy of the original even though I didn't even use my PS2 anymore, just so I could have it.
inFamous if fairly good, but also incredibly stupid. You get powers based on How good or bad you are. If your not super goodie all the time, or deplorably evil all the time, you get nothing. And at one point, if you have a moment of weakness, it will throw your gage from one side of the spectrum all the way to the other, meaning all the powers you spent you XP buying are now useless, because you no longer the right alignment to use them.
So there is not really an alignment system, its basically a two class system, with the added benifit of the ability to make a wrong decision and completly and irrevocably screw yourself (not much of a feature really. Hope you saved.)
That sounds really crappy. I hate when games require bad guys to be bad 100% of the time. Its like in games like Knights of the Old Republic, I can go around killing people for fun, but if I talk to people in a polite manner, I'm not that bad... Or I can go around saving the universe, but if I tell a jerk that he's a jerk, I'm kind of evil.
But console games really aren't good for developing your own characters so whatever. I guess I don't have to add inFamous to my list of games to get "someday".
That sounds really crappy. I hate when games require bad guys to be bad 100% of the time. Its like in games like Knights of the Old Republic, I can go around killing people for fun, but if I talk to people in a polite manner, I'm not that bad... Or I can go around saving the universe, but if I tell a jerk that he's a jerk, I'm kind of evil.
That's one thing I really liked about the Fable series, the moral an ethical choices were a lot harder to make and weren't simply whether or not to be a jerk and there were often no clear-cut "good" or "evil" options.
I found the whole syastem in KotOR kind of funny. I'm a real story-driven player so in these types of games I usually save right before a big choice needs to be made so I can play out both options to see how the story develops differently. When you get to the point late in KotOR where you have to choose whether or not to turn on your friends (sorry, I'm not going to sblock a 7 year old game) I saved and played out both options. When I turned on them I took a massive hit of dark side karma, but it still was only enough to drop me to precisely dead-neutral.
But what I liked in Fable, was that there were times where you actually were rewarded for being evil (other than for the love of evil). Like I remember an early mission, you had the choice between protecting a farm or robbing it. If you choose to rob it, you'd get a ton of money. If you protected it, you got fame, but little to no money. That seemed like a much better choice than "rob for money and jerkiness" or "save for less money, but we'll give you a magic item so it winds up being better anyway" that many games do. And that was like the first mission.
Maybe its just the way I see things, but games should work more to make evil seem better and have quicker gains. Because in my opinion, people try to be good and fight being evil.
Maybe its just the way I see things, but games should work more to make evil seem better and have quicker gains. Because in my opinion, people try to be good and fight being evil.
Then Fable 3 might be right up your alley.
I'm not giving anything away the say that half way through the game it changes, rather dramatically, and you end up king or queen of Albion.
Going in you know that there is a very, very bad event happening in 1 year's time and that many, if not most, people in Albion will be killed. You then set about having to make a number of difficult choices about whether to turn your back on the people who helped you gain the crown and oppress the living hell out of your own people in order to raise enough gold to fund the army required to keep everyone alive or to keep your promises to your allies and raise the status and living conditions of your people but have a helluva lot harder time getting that army together.
In this case being an evil prick really is the far easier path to victory
Going in you know that there is a very, very bad event happening in 1 year's time and that many, if not most, people in Albion will be killed. You then set about having to make a number of difficult choices about whether to turn your back on the people who helped you gain the crown and oppress the living hell out of your own people in order to raise enough gold to fund the army required to keep everyone alive or to keep your promises to your allies and raise the status and living conditions of your people but have a helluva lot harder time getting that army together.
In this case being an evil prick really is the far easier path to victory
Then Fable 3 might be right up your alley.I'm not giving anything away the say that half way through the game it changes, rather dramatically, and you end up king or queen of Albion.
Going in you know that there is a very, very bad event happening in 1 year's time and that many, if not most, people in Albion will be killed. You then set about having to make a number of difficult choices about whether to turn your back on the people who helped you gain the crown and oppress the living hell out of your own people in order to raise enough gold to fund the army required to keep everyone alive or to keep your promises to your allies and raise the status and living conditions of your people but have a helluva lot harder time getting that army together.
In this case being an evil prick really is the far easier path to victory
Then Fable 3 might be right up your alley.I'm not giving anything away the say that half way through the game it changes, rather dramatically, and you end up king or queen of Albion.
Going in you know that there is a very, very bad event happening in 1 year's time and that many, if not most, people in Albion will be killed. You then set about having to make a number of difficult choices about whether to turn your back on the people who helped you gain the crown and oppress the living hell out of your own people in order to raise enough gold to fund the army required to keep everyone alive or to keep your promises to your allies and raise the status and living conditions of your people but have a helluva lot harder time getting that army together.
In this case being an evil prick really is the far easier path to victory
Well, certainly may not be your cup of tea..but the Katamari Damacy games are lovely for those I'm kind of drunk and don't want to think too hard evenings. Mock me if you will, but whiskey+Katamari Forever= ridiculous funtimes. I've sucked many naysayers into the vortex.
Why would it not be my cup of tea or mock-worthy? I adore the Katamari series. I spent ages tracking down a copy of the original even though I didn't even use my PS2 anymore, just so I could have it.
Oh, glad to know you enjoy them! I've had several people laugh at my "chilidish" taste in video games when they saw it in my collection. But then when they tried it they shut right up!
Well, Katamari Forever is weird. Different game modes and such. But super fun! There's even an eternal mode with no time limit or objectives so you can just go explore the level and see whatever you might have missed.
first, the Xbox 360 was already obsolete in hardware terms when it was first put out, Microsoft rushing to be "first" with the next gen console. It is at it's peak right now, the developer's pushing to elk out every bit of programming for the thing as they keep releasing games for it. The PS3, however, still has a lot of potential and is able to do incredible AI behind the scenes with the silicon processers and has outshined the 360 graphically with the newer games.
Exclusives that are good games? GT5 is comming out this week. Exclusives, though, are not as promedent as they were durring the Nintendo days, most of the more "exclusive" games today being on the Wii, with Punch Out, Golden Eye, Metriod, Kirby and, of course, Mario.
If you already have the 360, I would suggest the Wii and forget the Kinnex.
couple things.
first, the Xbox 360 was already obsolete in hardware terms when it was first put out, Microsoft rushing to be "first" with the next gen console. It is at it's peak right now, the developer's pushing to elk out every bit of programming for the thing as they keep releasing games for it. The PS3, however, still has a lot of potential and is able to do incredible AI behind the scenes with the silicon processers and has outshined the 360 graphically with the newer games.
Exclusives that are good games? GT5 is comming out this week. Exclusives, though, are not as promedent as they were durring the Nintendo days, most of the more "exclusive" games today being on the Wii, with Punch Out, Golden Eye, Metriod, Kirby and, of course, Mario.
If you already have the 360, I would suggest the Wii and forget the Kinnex.
gasp!!! silicon processors? :O wow I'de love to see things from your point of view but I can't seem to get my head that far up my ass...you obviously havn't researched because even though with international hype you still managed to spell KINECT wrong. xbox has released new firmware frequently updating their systems to battle hackers (like apple but a little more successful) while ps3 is only now thinking of hackers. the wii has unbridled hackers running rampant through online play. and besides that there have been about 8 different xboxes released, each one frequently updated in terms of hardware. ps3's graphics are ok. bluray is ok.
couple things.
first, the Xbox 360 was already obsolete in hardware terms when it was first put out, Microsoft rushing to be "first" with the next gen console. It is at it's peak right now, the developer's pushing to elk out every bit of programming for the thing as they keep releasing games for it. The PS3, however, still has a lot of potential and is able to do incredible AI behind the scenes with the silicon processers and has outshined the 360 graphically with the newer games.
Exclusives that are good games? GT5 is comming out this week. Exclusives, though, are not as promedent as they were durring the Nintendo days, most of the more "exclusive" games today being on the Wii, with Punch Out, Golden Eye, Metriod, Kirby and, of course, Mario.
If you already have the 360, I would suggest the Wii and forget the Kinnex.
Thanks, that response was about as useful as a barbed wire canoe.
So I played InFamous for a few hours last night and I'm curious if I'm alone in thinking it bears a more than passing resemblence to Crackdown? Not in grpahics, of course, but in gameplay. I'm enjoying the game alright - though the two-button aim-and-shoot thing is annoying - but it feels very familiar. And what the hell is up with the way Zeke runs?couple things.
first, the Xbox 360 was already obsolete in hardware terms when it was first put out, Microsoft rushing to be "first" with the next gen console. It is at it's peak right now, the developer's pushing to elk out every bit of programming for the thing as they keep releasing games for it. The PS3, however, still has a lot of potential and is able to do incredible AI behind the scenes with the silicon processers and has outshined the 360 graphically with the newer games.
Exclusives that are good games? GT5 is comming out this week. Exclusives, though, are not as promedent as they were durring the Nintendo days, most of the more "exclusive" games today being on the Wii, with Punch Out, Golden Eye, Metriod, Kirby and, of course, Mario.
If you already have the 360, I would suggest the Wii and forget the Kinnex.
Thanks, that response was about as useful as a barbed wire canoe.
ur right about the similarity. lol and I'll go ahead and apologize for my fanboy rant :-p
couple things.
first, the Xbox 360 was already obsolete in hardware terms when it was first put out, Microsoft rushing to be "first" with the next gen console. It is at it's peak right now, the developer's pushing to elk out every bit of programming for the thing as they keep releasing games for it. The PS3, however, still has a lot of potential and is able to do incredible AI behind the scenes with the silicon processers and has outshined the 360 graphically with the newer games.
Exclusives that are good games? GT5 is comming out this week. Exclusives, though, are not as promedent as they were durring the Nintendo days, most of the more "exclusive" games today being on the Wii, with Punch Out, Golden Eye, Metriod, Kirby and, of course, Mario.
If you already have the 360, I would suggest the Wii and forget the Kinnex.
gasp!!! silicon processors? :O wow I'de love to see things from your point of view but I can't seem to get my head that far up my ass...you obviously havn't researched because even though with international hype you still managed to spell KINECT wrong. xbox has released new firmware frequently updating their systems to battle hackers (like apple but a little more successful) while ps3 is only now thinking of hackers. the wii has unbridled hackers running rampant through online play. and besides that there have been about 8 different xboxes released, each one frequently updated in terms of hardware. ps3's graphics are ok. bluray is ok.
X360 wasn't obsolete when it first came out (it certainly outclassed PCs of that time), firmware updates don't fix outdated hardware (now Kinect and Alan Wake prove it's outdated) and Sony is only now dealing with hackers because PS3 proved remarkably difficult to hack (seems like they've learned their lessons on the PSP).
Oh, and isn't GT5 that console DNF? ;)
...and I say go bugger yourselves, I've got myself a pad for my PC and none of those platforms have DoW anyway ;) Oh, and I use my machine to do art too.
couple things.
first, the Xbox 360 was already obsolete in hardware terms when it was first put out, Microsoft rushing to be "first" with the next gen console. It is at it's peak right now, the developer's pushing to elk out every bit of programming for the thing as they keep releasing games for it. The PS3, however, still has a lot of potential and is able to do incredible AI behind the scenes with the silicon processers and has outshined the 360 graphically with the newer games.
Exclusives that are good games? GT5 is comming out this week. Exclusives, though, are not as promedent as they were durring the Nintendo days, most of the more "exclusive" games today being on the Wii, with Punch Out, Golden Eye, Metriod, Kirby and, of course, Mario.
If you already have the 360, I would suggest the Wii and forget the Kinnex.
gasp!!! silicon processors? :O wow I'de love to see things from your point of view but I can't seem to get my head that far up my ass...you obviously havn't researched because even though with international hype you still managed to spell KINECT wrong. xbox has released new firmware frequently updating their systems to battle hackers (like apple but a little more successful) while ps3 is only now thinking of hackers. the wii has unbridled hackers running rampant through online play. and besides that there have been about 8 different xboxes released, each one frequently updated in terms of hardware. ps3's graphics are ok. bluray is ok.
X360 wasn't obsolete when it first came out (it certainly outclassed PCs of that time), firmware updates don't fix outdated hardware (now Kinect and Alan Wake prove it's outdated) and Sony is only now dealing with hackers because PS3 proved remarkably difficult to hack (seems like they've learned their lessons on the PSP).
Oh, and isn't GT5 that console DNF? ;)
...and I say go bugger yourselves, I've got myself a pad for my PC and none of those platforms have DoW anyway ;) Oh, and I use my machine to do art too.
you can hack a ps3 from the built in browser. xboxes you have to physically add and remove components to hack it. the hardware is fine. and yeah as big a fanboy as I am i'll admit that comps are better lol but xbox wins the console war.
you can hack a ps3 from the built in browser. xboxes you have to physically add and remove components to hack it. the hardware is fine. and yeah as big a fanboy as I am i'll admit that comps are better lol but xbox wins the console war.
I'm pretty sure the Wii does, actually... but it can only be decided after each one ends it's run.
And, as I noted, I play almost exclusively* on my PC, so I don't care ;)
*occasionally on my Nokia phone.
you can hack a ps3 from the built in browser. xboxes you have to physically add and remove components to hack it. the hardware is fine. and yeah as big a fanboy as I am i'll admit that comps are better lol but xbox wins the console war.
I'm pretty sure the Wii does, actually... but it can only be decided after each one ends it's run.
And, as I noted, I play almost exclusively* on my PC, so I don't care ;)
*occasionally on my Nokia phone.
nokia's...bleh lol
nokia's...bleh lol
It's 3 years old, but it still plays music and receives radio without a problem. I'd rather keep it than get an overpriced gizmo that can't even receive calls properly ;)
nokia's...bleh lol
It's 3 years old, but it still plays music and receives radio without a problem. I'd rather keep it than get an overpriced gizmo that can't even receive calls properly ;)
I see your point
couple things.
first, the Xbox 360 was already obsolete in hardware terms when it was first put out, Microsoft rushing to be "first" with the next gen console. It is at it's peak right now, the developer's pushing to elk out every bit of programming for the thing as they keep releasing games for it. The PS3, however, still has a lot of potential and is able to do incredible AI behind the scenes with the silicon processers and has outshined the 360 graphically with the newer games.
Exclusives that are good games? GT5 is comming out this week. Exclusives, though, are not as promedent as they were durring the Nintendo days, most of the more "exclusive" games today being on the Wii, with Punch Out, Golden Eye, Metriod, Kirby and, of course, Mario.
If you already have the 360, I would suggest the Wii and forget the Kinnex.
gasp!!! silicon processors? :O wow I'de love to see things from your point of view but I can't seem to get my head that far up my ass...you obviously havn't researched because even though with international hype you still managed to spell KINECT wrong. xbox has released new firmware frequently updating their systems to battle hackers (like apple but a little more successful) while ps3 is only now thinking of hackers. the wii has unbridled hackers running rampant through online play. and besides that there have been about 8 different xboxes released, each one frequently updated in terms of hardware. ps3's graphics are ok. bluray is ok.
Well, first thing is that the games made for the 360 still need to run on the original box, so whatever fictitious hardware upgrades you think they have done to the newer boxes are still limited by what was released in the beginning.
Everytime I hear or see stuff about the (looking at your post...) Kinect it reminds me of the double ended carts for the old 2600, made by Kennex. It seems interesting, but I would rather still have an actual controller, even the Move seems more apt, though I would mostly use the regular controller. I am not interested in gimmicks.
Hackers have owned the Xbox for years, hence the reason for the uptick in the anti-piracy measures. Whatever Hackers are doing in the ethersphere doesn't really concern me, as the Consoles don't really have an effect until one becomes a pirate themselves.
It is obvious you a Microsoft fan, I, however, am not. Vista was a disaster, Word is now a part of an office suite instead of a stand alone word processor, and the Xbox has tried to end the PC gaming market. I say bring back a SEGA console, or ATARI.
Yes, the 360 is showing it's age, while the PS3 is getting better and better.
Take a look at GT5. I doubt that the 360 will be able to match it.
Part of the problem is Sony's fault, I will give it that. Development in the beginning was trail and error as developers figured out the inner workings. That is all figured out now, and just as the PS2 later games looked as good as the first games for the 360, the PS3 games now are outshining the 360, and will continue to improve while the 360 languishes in the limited hardware they have/had.
couple things.
first, the Xbox 360 was already obsolete in hardware terms when it was first put out, Microsoft rushing to be "first" with the next gen console. It is at it's peak right now, the developer's pushing to elk out every bit of programming for the thing as they keep releasing games for it. The PS3, however, still has a lot of potential and is able to do incredible AI behind the scenes with the silicon processers and has outshined the 360 graphically with the newer games.
Exclusives that are good games? GT5 is comming out this week. Exclusives, though, are not as promedent as they were durring the Nintendo days, most of the more "exclusive" games today being on the Wii, with Punch Out, Golden Eye, Metriod, Kirby and, of course, Mario.
If you already have the 360, I would suggest the Wii and forget the Kinnex.
gasp!!! silicon processors? :O wow I'de love to see things from your point of view but I can't seem to get my head that far up my ass...you obviously havn't researched because even though with international hype you still managed to spell KINECT wrong. xbox has released new firmware frequently updating their systems to battle hackers (like apple but a little more successful) while ps3 is only now thinking of hackers. the wii has unbridled hackers running rampant through online play. and besides that there have been about 8 different xboxes released, each one frequently updated in terms of hardware. ps3's graphics are ok. bluray is ok.
1.Well, first thing is that the games made for the 360 still need to run on the original box, so whatever fictitious hardware upgrades you think they have done to the newer boxes are still limited by what was released in the beginning.
2.Everytime I hear or see stuff about the (looking at your post...) Kinect it reminds me of the double ended carts for the old 2600, made by Kennex. It seems interesting, but I would rather still have an actual controller, even the Move seems more apt, though I would mostly use the regular controller. I am not interested in gimmicks.
3.Hackers have owned the Xbox for years, hence the reason for the uptick in the anti-piracy measures. Whatever Hackers are doing in the ethersphere doesn't really concern me, as the Consoles don't really have an effect until one becomes a pirate themselves.
4.It is obvious you a Microsoft fan, I, however, am not. Vista was a disaster, Word is now a part of an office suite instead of a stand alone word processor, and the Xbox has tried to end the PC gaming market. I say bring back a SEGA console, or ATARI.
5.Yes, the 360 is showing it's age, while the PS3 is getting better and better.
6.Take a look at GT5. I doubt that the 360 will be able to match it.
7.Part of the problem is Sony's fault, I will give it that. Development in the beginning was trail and error as developers figured out the inner workings. That is all figured out now, and just as the PS2 later games looked as good as the first games for the 360, the PS3 games now are outshining the 360, and will continue to improve while the 360 languishes in the limited hardware they have/had.
1.uhh wtf? there is not a single xbox 360 game that will play on an xbox.
2. thats personal. opinions are like arseholes, everybody has one. have fun with your MOVE. while xboxes Kinect outsells it by a good few million units.
3.I'm not exactly sure what you're saying here as the grammar is off a bit.
4.where are you getting your info? xbox isn't trying to end the pc gaming market...and you're trying to counter my arguement about xbox by flaming the company that makes them? thats a horrible way to argue.
5. prove this? anything i'm saying can easily be looked up while you're just spewing opinions.
6.the market for racing games isn't very good actually so uhmmm yeah xbox outsells ps3 9/10. If you would like to compare exclusive games then compare halo:reach to gt5 when it comes out. they both have established franchises so its fair. its even a little in GT5's favor. Halo:Reach will win obviously.
7. the hardware updates that you can research are as follows; XENON, OPUS, ZEPHYR, FALCON, JASPER, and VALHALLA. ps3 has no hardware updates since release
Can you two loverbirds take the fanboy dick-measuring somewhere else, please? Thanks.
umm don't thank me yet lol cuz I ain't going nowhere :D
Just picked up my PS3 this morning. I'm told that FF13 is good, but Boraxe wasn't interested in RPGs.
BTW PS3 is better for one reason and one reason alone. Rechargeable out of the box controllers.
Just a word of warning, I've always loved the Final Fantasy series..to the extent that I have a Lulu tattoo. But I really didn't like 13. The story just grinds to a halt about halfway through, and the character development is blah. If you are wanting a good RPG on the PS3, I would recommend the Disgaea or Star Ocean series instead!
Just picked up my PS3 this morning. I'm told that FF13 is good, but Boraxe wasn't interested in RPGs.
Oh I like me some RPGs, just generally not JRPGs. That said, I played Beyond the Beyond (still have it, in fact). If I had a strong enough recommendation from someone whose advice I respected I'd give just about any game a try, at least a rental.
BTW PS3 is better for one reason and one reason alone. Rechargeable out of the box controllers.
They feel so light and flimsy, though. I miss the size and weight of the 360 controller (though not the poorly-situated battery pack).
Computers have had PC games that have higher grade graphics for the tweaked out box and a lower setting for the older computers that can't do the higher end stuff. Xbox 360 does not work like that.
Halo? It is a singlular game that Microsoft has had, a first person shooter. It has sold a fair amount of the systems with each release, but it is one game of many, and exclusives are beginning to shift to the PS3 side.
Concerning controllers, the one thing that was lost in the transition to the next gen of consoles (360/PS3/Wii) was the "rumble" feature for the PS3. I will not miss it, hated it ever since it was introduced. The 360 controlers are an improvement from the awful Xbox clunkers, but they still are not up to standard. The N64 controllers are better.
The PS3 will have games that take better advantage of the hardware while the games for 360 are already at their peak. The same thing happened with the Satarn.
Just a word of warning, I've always loved the Final Fantasy series..to the extent that I have a Lulu tattoo. But I really didn't like 13. The story just grinds to a halt about halfway through, and the character development is blah. If you are wanting a good RPG on the PS3, I would recommend the Disgaea or Star Ocean series instead!
Well that just sucks. I've bought every console release of FF. Come to think of it 12 had re-playability issues as well.
Related note; my bundle pack was supposed to have a copy of Force Unleashed 2. It actually had two copies, and I'm at a loss as what to do with the seond.
Throw it away. Actually, do that with the other one as well ;)
1. First, I was not saying the original Xbox, I am saying the original set up for the 360 when it was first released. A real hardware update would be a new console (720?). My point is that the games made for the 360 now need to still be able to play on the original release 360 box.
2. Computers have had PC games that have higher grade graphics for the tweaked out box and a lower setting for the older computers that can't do the higher end stuff. Xbox 360 does not work like that.
3. Halo? It is a singlular game that Microsoft has had, a first person shooter. It has sold a fair amount of the systems with each release, but it is one game of many, and exclusives are beginning to shift to the PS3 side.
4. Concerning controllers, the one thing that was lost in the transition to the next gen of consoles (360/PS3/Wii) was the "rumble" feature for the PS3. I will not miss it, hated it ever since it was introduced. The 360 controlers are an improvement from the awful Xbox clunkers, but they still are not up to standard. The N64 controllers are better.
5. The PS3 will have games that take better advantage of the hardware while the games for 360 are already at their peak. The same thing happened with the Satarn.
1. So a hardware update has to have a new name? you're just being silly and grasping at this point.
2. I've already said before that pc is better than console. Once again you're grasping for a valid arguement. you're arguing the ps3 can you stick with it?
3. Way to back down from my challenge. Halo reach's first day sales will be roughly double those of GT5.
4. I wasn't aware that there was a standard for game controllers, oh yeah...there isn't. xbox 360 controllers are comfortable and ergonomic...unless you have baby hands lol
5. I'm sorry a what?
They feel so light and flimsy, though. I miss the size and weight of the 360 controller (though not the poorly-situated battery pack).
I've got big hands. Most controllers are small to me.
Ditto. My problem with the 360 controller is I find the tips of my middle fingers get jammed into the "crevice" at the sides of the battery pack. I know it's cos I'm holding it wrong, but it's still a drag.
They feel so light and flimsy, though. I miss the size and weight of the 360 controller (though not the poorly-situated battery pack).
I've got big hands. Most controllers are small to me.
Ditto. My problem with the 360 controller is I find the tips of my middle fingers get jammed into the "crevice" at the sides of the battery pack. I know it's cos I'm holding it wrong, but it's still a drag.
I play legacy southpaw boraxe so the way i hold it is; two fingers holding it up on the right side and three on the left while i make a "claw" with my right hand, I operate both triggers, both sticks, buttons, and d-pad, as well as bumpers.
I play legacy southpaw boraxe so the way i hold it is; two fingers holding it up on the right side and three on the left while i make a "claw" with my right hand, I operate both triggers, both sticks, buttons, and d-pad, as well as bumpers.
Thanks for that visual.
my hands dude wtf? it's a more comfortable way to play with an xbox 360 controller
1. So a hardware update has to have a new name? you're just being silly and grasping at this point.
2. I've already said before that pc is better than console. Once again you're grasping for a valid arguement. you're arguing the ps3 can you stick with it?
3. Way to back down from my challenge. Halo reach's first day sales will be roughly double those of GT5.
4. I wasn't aware that there was a standard for game controllers, oh yeah...there isn't. xbox 360 controllers are comfortable and ergonomic...unless you have baby hands lol
5. I'm sorry a what?
1. Yup, the most hardware change would be the drive size and cooling system. New games still have to run on the first batch of X360s, and they have a few years.
2. I do not understand what either of you is trying to say here.
3. Sales numbers or GTFO.
4. Personal preference - de gustibus and all that.
5. I'm pretty sure thaX meant a SEGA Saturn.
1. So a hardware update has to have a new name? you're just being silly and grasping at this point.
2. I've already said before that pc is better than console. Once again you're grasping for a valid arguement. you're arguing the ps3 can you stick with it?
3. Way to back down from my challenge. Halo reach's first day sales will be roughly double those of GT5.
4. I wasn't aware that there was a standard for game controllers, oh yeah...there isn't. xbox 360 controllers are comfortable and ergonomic...unless you have baby hands lol
5. I'm sorry a what?
1. Yup, the most hardware change would be the drive size and cooling system. New games still have to run on the first batch of X360s, and they have a few years.
2. I do not understand what either of you is trying to say here.
3. Sales numbers or GTFO.
4. Personal preference - de gustibus and all that.
5. I'm pretty sure thaX meant a SEGA Saturn.
thank you for numbering :] and
1. the cpu's are changed in every model, as well as a TON of other things.
3. Halo reach in its first week of sale had exactly 4,049,971 units sold. and hit over $200million on the first day.
5. a sega saturn? he/she can stick that saturn right up his/her.....
1. the cpu's are changed in every model, as well as a TON of other things.
BACKWARDS. COMPATIBILITY.
As much as newer X-box 360s might be better, any new game for it must be able to run on an original release X-Box 360.
Because of this limitation, there's only so much they can do. Because if a new game relies on something that's in a newer X-Box that isn't in an original release X-Box, then they have to downgrade the game for everyone.
It's like this... if I make a game, but require that it can run on hardware from 2000, then there's only so much I can do with it. Even if it also runs on the top-of-the-line stuff today, because it's also running on 2000 hardware, it is limited.
1. the cpu's are changed in every model, as well as a TON of other things.
BACKWARDS. COMPATIBILITY.
As much as newer X-box 360s might be better, any new game for it must be able to run on an original release X-Box 360.
Because of this limitation, there's only so much they can do. Because if a new game relies on something that's in a newer X-Box that isn't in an original release X-Box, then they have to downgrade the game for everyone.
It's like this... if I make a game, but require that it can run on hardware from 2000, then there's only so much I can do with it. Even if it also runs on the top-of-the-line stuff today, because it's also running on 2000 hardware, it is limited.
Or, in this case, 2005 hardware.
1. the cpu's are changed in every model, as well as a TON of other things.
BACKWARDS. COMPATIBILITY.
As much as newer X-box 360s might be better, any new game for it must be able to run on an original release X-Box 360.
Because of this limitation, there's only so much they can do. Because if a new game relies on something that's in a newer X-Box that isn't in an original release X-Box, then they have to downgrade the game for everyone.
It's like this... if I make a game, but require that it can run on hardware from 2000, then there's only so much I can do with it. Even if it also runs on the top-of-the-line stuff today, because it's also running on 2000 hardware, it is limited.
right thats not really an issue though. a ps3 is just as limited that the only thing it can do is blu ray while the only thing you can do with xbox is dvd. the only advantage is graphics. which I will admit, the ps3 has better graphics but thats the only "flaw" in the xbox apparently. while you say backwards compatibility what you're really saying is that the xbox can only use dvd. they CAN'T use blu ray because its proprietary so its a non issue. since those are the only two possible options then personally for me, I play in 1080p so I don't notice. but someone on a lower resolution tv might get a little boost from blu ray. thats the only downfall of the xbox 360. it is forced to rely on dvd. theres no revolutionary technology that you can add to a dvd so it doesn't matter.
Frankly, I don't care which is better1, but if you can't give a coherent answer, don't just fill the space with noise instead. I mean really, when someone says "backwards compatibility means that new games can't be much "better' then old games" and you respond with "chair!" it just makes you sound like a drooling fan boy, rather then someone who's actually informed about what the **** he's talking about.
If someone asks about X, don't rant about Φ!
________
1The console I buy next will be determined mostly by what console other members of my family have, as that'll determine what games I can play co-op with them.
No, what I'm saying is that instead of responding to the point you were saying "hey look, a distraction!" If you're not going to address a point, don't address it, but don't sit there and pretend a duck is a chair.
Frankly, I don't care which is better1, but if you can't give a coherent answer, don't just fill the space with noise instead. I mean really, when someone says "backwards compatibility means that new games can't be much "better' then old games" and you respond with "chair!" it just makes you sound like a drooling fan boy, rather then someone who's actually informed about what the **** he's talking about.
If someone asks about X, don't rant about Φ!
________
1The console I buy next will be determined mostly by what console other members of my family have, as that'll determine what games I can play co-op with them.
um please read what I wrote instead of spewing hot air k? I didn't rant. I approached your arguement in a cool and calm manner. and just because you're better at arguing than me DOES NOT mean you can dismiss my point, and it DOES NOT mean that you are always correct.
I said (this will be a watered down version) the xbox is limited to dvd's thereby restricting what they can do graphics wise. The ps3 has blu ray thereby better graphics. The xbox can ONLY play dvd games. which isn't a problem because so does the wii and pc. The arguement that the xbox 360 is that it HAS to play older games which are still just dvd's so it's ok.
I said (this will be a watered down version) the xbox is limited to dvd's thereby restricting what they can do graphics wise. The ps3 has blu ray thereby better graphics. The xbox can ONLY play dvd games. which isn't a problem because so does the wii and pc. The arguement that the xbox 360 is that it HAS to play older games which are still just dvd's so it's ok.
*headdesk*
You really think the optical drive type is what determines graphics?
That's just unbelievable.
If you're really so uninformed: graphics are rendered by the GPU and the CPU. Those are the chocking points for Xbox, as newer games need to run on the older 360s as well. Sure, you can add some RAM or put in a bit faster CPU, but that will only make your game load faster than on an older machine, which makes it a bit pointless in business sense.
And since there isn't much point in upgrading those components, they aren't updated. That's why Xbox chokes on Alan Wake and Kinect - it's starting to show it's age. Now, when the run is turning into a "late" phase, and all platforms have robust game libraries, PS3 has a technical advantage.
The difference between a blu-ray and a dvd is that one can store more. Something that comes out on a single disk for the PS3 may need to be on several on the X360.
People need to stop talking about hardware specifications/limitations like they matter. If you know anything about consoles, you should know that the power of the hardware is trivial in determining the sucess of the system. It almost always comes down to exclusives and game popularity. I'd say right now 360 is probably doing better, but the PS3 is closing the gap decently. But none of that is based on actual data, just perception of what people like.
No, what I'm saying is that instead of responding to the point you were saying "hey look, a distraction!" If you're not going to address a point, don't address it, but don't sit there and pretend a duck is a chair.
Frankly, I don't care which is better1, but if you can't give a coherent answer, don't just fill the space with noise instead. I mean really, when someone says "backwards compatibility means that new games can't be much "better' then old games" and you respond with "chair!" it just makes you sound like a drooling fan boy, rather then someone who's actually informed about what the **** he's talking about.
If someone asks about X, don't rant about Φ!
________
1The console I buy next will be determined mostly by what console other members of my family have, as that'll determine what games I can play co-op with them.
um please read what I wrote instead of spewing hot air k? I didn't rant. I approached your arguement in a cool and calm manner. and just because you're better at arguing than me DOES NOT mean you can dismiss my point, and it DOES NOT mean that you are always correct.
I said (this will be a watered down version) the xbox is limited to dvd's thereby restricting what they can do graphics wise. The ps3 has blu ray thereby better graphics. The xbox can ONLY play dvd games. which isn't a problem because so does the wii and pc. The arguement that the xbox 360 is that it HAS to play older games which are still just dvd's so it's ok.
Oh for ****s sake, QQ nub. If you don't want to be accused of spewing crap instead of adressing points, don't type **** like "satrm what?" Making fun of a typo is not the same as making a sound argument, something that someone with your habitual lack of attention to detail in writting should be intimatley aware of.
Look, new CPU has no effect on what games that come out can do, because they must work on thed old one as well. That was the point from the get go which you have still failed to adress. PS3 starting hardware (which determines what games can be made to do on it) is better than XBOX360 starting hardware (which determines what games can be made to do on it). Saying 6 million timeshow new XBOX360s have better hardware is not adressing that point, it is completly missing that point.
Talking about DVD vs BluRay is also not adressing the point, that is a new point, and deserves a new number.
Uncharted is fun. A lot of fun. Very, very cinematic in style, basically what all those sh*tty Indiana Jones games SHOULD have been. But there's really one game you SHOULD try.
Demon's Souls.
Edit: Oh, and the self-admitted fanboy. If you're not going to actually ENGAGE in debate, STFU and get off the goddamned thread.
The real advantage for the consoles in the future is not going to be who is first with the next gen console, but who sets up the support best to take advantage of the new specs. Microsoft was the king in this respect in the past. (It is a set PC, basically) My belief is that Sony has learned from the PS2 mess, along with the overall misque for the PS3, and will design the PS4 around the ease of development.
Nintendo can never be counted out either, and I think that the new net play thing I seen the commercial for is gonna be competition.
Microsoft is beginning to show it's age, and the next gen is gonna be more of a challenge than simply doing up an upper tier PC knockoff.
Blu Ray does have a small bit here. FF13 is (one? or two?) disks while it is (5? 6?) disks for the 360. It is a distinct advantage.
Yeah, I have heard good things for both Uncharted games, defenatly getting them when I finally buy my PS3.
We may have helped you, sure, but I wouldn't call us 'support' any more than I would call crocs eating enemy soldiers allies. Step wrong and we will get you too just as fast; its how we roll here.
Anyone know if there will be another offering of Fall of Resistance?
We may have helped you, sure, but I wouldn't call us 'support' any more than I would call crocs eating enemy soldiers allies. Step wrong and we will get you too just as fast; its how we roll here.
This is sig worthy.
Aside from that, Valkyria Chronicles and Naruto Shippuden: Ultimate Ninja Storm are two of the most fun games I've ever played, and they're PS3 exclusives, so there's that, too.
I said (this will be a watered down version) the xbox is limited to dvd's thereby restricting what they can do graphics wise. The ps3 has blu ray thereby better graphics. The xbox can ONLY play dvd games. which isn't a problem because so does the wii and pc. The arguement that the xbox 360 is that it HAS to play older games which are still just dvd's so it's ok.
*headdesk*
You really think the optical drive type is what determines graphics?
That's just unbelievable.
If you're really so uninformed: graphics are rendered by the GPU and the CPU. Those are the chocking points for Xbox, as newer games need to run on the older 360s as well. Sure, you can add some RAM or put in a bit faster CPU, but that will only make your game load faster than on an older machine, which makes it a bit pointless in business sense.
And since there isn't much point in upgrading those components, they aren't updated. That's why Xbox chokes on Alan Wake and Kinect - it's starting to show it's age. Now, when the run is turning into a "late" phase, and all platforms have robust game libraries, PS3 has a technical advantage.
The difference between a blu-ray and a dvd is that one can store more. Something that comes out on a single disk for the PS3 may need to be on several on the X360.
the cpu and gpu in an xbox 360 are better than the ps3's. please research. kinect and alan wake work fine. and thats why xbox has ton's of dlc and ps3 doesn't.
No, what I'm saying is that instead of responding to the point you were saying "hey look, a distraction!" If you're not going to address a point, don't address it, but don't sit there and pretend a duck is a chair.
Frankly, I don't care which is better1, but if you can't give a coherent answer, don't just fill the space with noise instead. I mean really, when someone says "backwards compatibility means that new games can't be much "better' then old games" and you respond with "chair!" it just makes you sound like a drooling fan boy, rather then someone who's actually informed about what the **** he's talking about.
If someone asks about X, don't rant about Φ!
________
1The console I buy next will be determined mostly by what console other members of my family have, as that'll determine what games I can play co-op with them.
um please read what I wrote instead of spewing hot air k? I didn't rant. I approached your arguement in a cool and calm manner. and just because you're better at arguing than me DOES NOT mean you can dismiss my point, and it DOES NOT mean that you are always correct.
I said (this will be a watered down version) the xbox is limited to dvd's thereby restricting what they can do graphics wise. The ps3 has blu ray thereby better graphics. The xbox can ONLY play dvd games. which isn't a problem because so does the wii and pc. The arguement that the xbox 360 is that it HAS to play older games which are still just dvd's so it's ok.
Oh for ****s sake, QQ nub. If you don't want to be accused of spewing crap instead of adressing points, don't type **** like "satrm what?" Making fun of a typo is not the same as making a sound argument, something that someone with your habitual lack of attention to detail in writting should be intimatley aware of.
Look, new CPU has no effect on what games that come out can do, because they must work on thed old one as well. That was the point from the get go which you have still failed to adress. PS3 starting hardware (which determines what games can be made to do on it) is better than XBOX360 starting hardware (which determines what games can be made to do on it). Saying 6 million timeshow new XBOX360s have better hardware is not adressing that point, it is completly missing that point.
Talking about DVD vs BluRay is also not adressing the point, that is a new point, and deserves a new number.
no the ps3 came out with worse hardware than an xbox 360 and the 360 came out first. whats your excuse now? so making fun of typos isn't ok but name calling is? GTFO you act like a kid. xbox 360 also has EIGHT SEPERATE CORES THAT PROCESS WHILE PS3 HAS ONE, and that ONE is worse than any of the xbox 360's
Demons Souls is one of the top action/RPGs I have played. Its slowly working its way to my favorite. There is great depth in the character optimization and replayability. On the down side it is very dark and sometimes depresses me-no woodlands or journeys to the elves.
I have found the game to be so good I would repurchase a PS3 just to play Demons Souls.
Its $20 on Amazon normally but they have been having Christmas sales (on their deals page) with it at $15. It always sells out as well, which is good news.
Its got a great online component and I was worried lack of interest would bring the servers down.
So yeah Demons Souls, amazing.
Metal Gear Solid 4 is the only other title I think is a must have. You can pick that one up for $10 and occasionally less.
I have heard (haven't played yet) many good things about Heavy Rain, a story-driven RPG that might interest you.
I have God of War 3 and God of War collection (sometimes on amazon for $10 in the holiday deals). I like them both but I don't consider them the same level as Demons Souls(DS) or MGS4.
I think some of the other exclusive titles-such as Uncharted 1 and 2, both Ratchet and Clanks, Killzones, Little Big Planet are all fine games but I feel I can get a similar experience and enjoyment on other consoles as well. Gran Turismo 5 is nice but its another game I feel I can get a similar experience many places for example with Forza.
I actually played some of the PS3 3-D titles recently and they are all impressive, but then you will need a 3-D ready tv (or computer monitor). So if your looking towards the future that could be a big plus for your choice of a PS3. Gran Turismo 5 in 3D was pretty amazing.
The Wii was a steaming pile of crap hardware when it came out (and still is), and it sold best of all. So yeah, I don't think hardware is the most important part of a console.
haha I didn't think about that
btw can flamers stop flaming? Its a friendly arguement not some knock down drag out fight to the death. we should all calm down some.Since the release of the current generation of consoles, the debate has raged, not persisted, but raged about which company has the better console. However, even this question has been answered, time and time again, Sony, it's developers, and it's fans still proclaim that it is the better console. This is false.
Hardware is the weapon that Sony and company touts more often than anything else. They constantly state how the PS3 is the more powerful system, because of the Cell Processor, and Blu-Ray. However, the PS3 is not the more powerful system. There is just one, Cell Proecssor, and the Blu-Ray has painful load times, while it has more space on the disk, it still loads slower than regular DLDVD format discs. This is one of the reasons a game must install to the hard drive. Sony likes to state that most of it's games wouldn't run on the Xbox 360 due to limitations of the disc. This is incorrect.
[It's] great for watching movies, but not so great for games. Getting data off the Blu-ray drive takes about twice as long as it does to get the same data off the 360's DVD drive. That translates into longer load times, or god forbid if you're streaming from disk, tighter constraints on the amount of data you can stream
For instance, in Resistance: Fall of Man, every art asset is stored on disk once for every level that uses it. So rather than storing one copy of a texture, you're storing it 12 times. If you took that entire game and removed all the duplicate data, it would likely fit on a DVD without any problem
- Jason Booth, Turbine and Harmonix Developer who produced titles such as Rock Band, and Guitar Hero.
There you have it from a developer who's made some of the most popular games today, Rock Band and Guitar Hero. So what is Blu-Ray really good for then? Watching movies? This isn't a score for Sony, because the 360 already lets you watch high definition movies in 1080p if you'd like. You can rent them from the market place, stream them from Netflix, or straight from your computer or mac. Blu-Ray may be able to hold a huge amount of data now, but is Blu-Ray really the future? No. Blu-Ray has arrived at the end of the disc era. Flash cards may very well be the next format, but digital downloads are storming consoles, especially with the 360's new ability to download full games, right onto the hard drive through Games on Demand.
Next up is graphics processing capabilities. Sony touts that it's Cell processor is more capable of providing better graphics than the Xbox's powerhouse tri-core processor. Jason booth says:
The fill rate on the PS3 is significantly slower than on the 360, meaning that games either have to run at lower resolution or use simpler shader effects to achieve the same performance, Additionally, the shader processing on the PS3 is significantly slower than on the 360, which means that a normal map takes more fill rate to draw on the PS3 than it does on the 360. And I'm not talking about small differences here, we're talking roughly half the pixel pushing power
Half of the pixel pushing power he says. Amazing. Here's a graph from an IGN and Gamespy Comparative analysis that shows the processing power of both the Xbox 360, and the PS3:
Here's a graph that shows the shader operations per second, also courtesy of IGN:
The last graph we'll look at, is for system bandwidth, which is necessary for running more complex graphics.
The Cell processor is supposed to make up for this issue, however, given the history of games that have appeared on both systems, such as every game that has been made for 360 and ported to PS3, we've seen that games look significantly better on 360. Take a look at this article from The Sixth Axis, a predominately PS3 website, which showed that the PS3 couldn't support high resolution for the game Ghostbusters, without a patch, and after the patch, still called sub-hd by Gamezine.
Id Software (creators of Doom, Quake, and anticipated game Rage) director John Carmack said this:
What you can say really quite clearly and not get into too much argument about it is that the 360 is much easier to develop for, it's easier to get the performance out of it that it can deliver, and the rasterizer, the GPU side is generally faster than what the PS3 has.
And from a developer's standpoint, Gabe Newell from Valve, developer of Left 4 Dead, and Half Life 2, says,
I think [PS3 is] a waste of everybody’s time. Investing in the Cell, investing in the SPE gives you no long-term benefits. There’s nothing there that you’re going to apply to anything else. You’re not going to gain anything except a hatred of the architecture they’ve created. I don’t think they’re going to make money off their box.
So here we have multiple game developers stating what the hardware specifications reinforce. The Xbox 360 is the better system where hardware is concerned.
Some credit goes to dannny :] my fellow xboxer
Online is always the last weapon that Sony and it's fans use to determine which console is better. They maintain that the PS3 has better online support than the Xbox 360, due to the fact that it is free. But is $40.00 a year really too expensive for people?
Sony's servers aren't maintained by a customer base who pays for them. They're maintained by money that Sony keeps pouring into them. It's another way that they're losing money. In the future, you can be that Sony will make it's online service subscription based, in order to keep costs down, and maybe, one day, turn a profit.
So what do you get for $40.00 a year through Xbox Live? You get exclusive content, a chance to "Game with Fame",exclusive demos, insider news and tips, Games on Demand, and of course it's selection of Video Content. From television shows to new releases, there's something for everybody. You can purchase shows and rent movies through the marketplace, or stream them live from Netflix. Not only that, but the $40.00 a year helps fund updates. Microsoft also offers family plans which feature 4 one year subscriptions for half the price of one.
Thank you for the support, guys.
I think I'll just quote TA for this one: Look gazelle, just 'cause the lion ate the hypotenuse in your love triangle does not mean he is on your side.
Arguing against someone with you are arguing is not the same thing as arguing for you.
Personally I would've gone with the Wii. But hey.
I wasn't aware the Wii could play BluRays, the prime motivation for us buying the PS3.
Its a friendly arguement not some knock down drag out fight to the death. we should all calm down some.
Actually it was me asking for some friendly advice that you and another poster turned into an argument.
People need to stop talking about hardware specifications/limitations like they matter. If you know anything about consoles, you should know that the power of the hardware is trivial in determining the sucess of the system. It almost always comes down to exclusives and game popularity. I'd say right now 360 is probably doing better, but the PS3 is closing the gap decently. But none of that is based on actual data, just perception of what people like.
I'm pretty sure that was the first thing I've said about console wars, pointing out Atari's systems demise
Oh, web services were mentioned; consider this: Sony's web service was available here from day one. Xbox Live is legally available only since November.
And they started their anti-piracy information caimpaign long before anything concrete about Live in Poland was announced. **** you for that one, Microsoft.
Thanks for the graphs though, Jesse.
I wasn't aware the Wii could play BluRays, the prime motivation for us buying the PS3.
Yar. We have a Wii and it cannot play BluRay.
Really, though, the fact that the PS3 can was the deciding factor when we chose it over the 360. I mean, why not add that to your entertainment center?People need to stop talking about hardware specifications/limitations like they matter. If you know anything about consoles, you should know that the power of the hardware is trivial in determining the sucess of the system. It almost always comes down to exclusives and game popularity. I'd say right now 360 is probably doing better, but the PS3 is closing the gap decently. But none of that is based on actual data, just perception of what people like.
I'm pretty sure that was the first thing I've said about console wars, pointing out Atari's systems demise
Oh, web services were mentioned; consider this: Sony's web service was available here from day one. Xbox Live is legally available only since November.
And they started their anti-piracy information caimpaign long before anything concrete about Live in Poland was announced. **** you for that one, Microsoft.
Thanks for the graphs though, Jesse.
I'm sorry I have to admit to being unaware of Poland's problems with xbox live but I played with tons of people from germany and holland so I didn't think there was a problem.
And no problem adh
And boraxe I'm sorry for turning your thread into this. I'll stop if you like.
I wasn't aware the Wii could play BluRays, the prime motivation for us buying the PS3.
Yar. We have a Wii and it cannot play BluRay.
ya know what you're right :] as an entertainment (gaming is entertainment but to me its alot more so I'm not including that) system the ps3 is clearly better by far.
I'm biased as I am a professional gamer and I strive for excellence in gaming, but I'll be honest, if I wanted to really destroy people (skill level on ps3 is low), or have a system purely for enjoyment, I would get a ps3 (and I plan on getting one) but it won't replace my bawks.
ya know what you're right :] as an entertainment (gaming is entertainment but to me its alot more so I'm not including that) system the ps3 is clearly better by far.
I'm biased as I am a professional gamer and I strive for excellence in gaming, but I'll be honest, if I wanted to really destroy people (skill level on ps3 is low), or have a system purely for enjoyment, I would get a ps3 (and I plan on getting one) but it won't replace my bawks.
Well that's why we got it. I do have one question, though: if you don't have a 360 purely for enjoyment, what the hell else do you have it for? I mean, that's kinda what these things are for, no?
I honestly think as solely a gaming console, in the current state, the 360 is a better system. Their online network is much better and they have more games that I play. But I do think the PS3's blu-ray is a huge plus and their games are starting to be better. Honestly, if I had to give away one of my current systems, it'd definately by my Wii, but I'd have a hard decision if I had to choose between the 360 (here and now) and PS3 (potential).
ya know what you're right :] as an entertainment (gaming is entertainment but to me its alot more so I'm not including that) system the ps3 is clearly better by far.
I'm biased as I am a professional gamer and I strive for excellence in gaming, but I'll be honest, if I wanted to really destroy people (skill level on ps3 is low), or have a system purely for enjoyment, I would get a ps3 (and I plan on getting one) but it won't replace my bawks.
Well that's why we got it. I do have one question, though: if you don't have a 360 purely for enjoyment, what the hell else do you have it for? I mean, that's kinda what these things are for, no?
It started as that but I became engrossed and now I'm paid to play. You'll probably think this is dumb or something but I play because I'm competitive, theres something about it that makes me so that I do it to feel like I'm better than others.
To save someone the trouble of asking I get paid $10 per 20 minute game battles match. There are about ten of these matches a week. And I do single player tournaments about once a week for a random amount of money anywhere between $10-$300. I win about 9-10 times. my team for game battles always wins. Undefeated.
I think his argument is the blu-ray capacity isn't worth the difference in gaming quality. I can see where he's going with it if he's really into online gaming and the current libraries available and doesn't care about blu-rays.
I honestly think as solely a gaming console, in the current state, the 360 is a better system. Their online network is much better and they have more games that I play. But I do think the PS3's blu-ray is a huge plus and their games are starting to be better. Honestly, if I had to give away one of my current systems, it'd definately by my Wii, but I'd have a hard decision if I had to choose between the 360 (here and now) and PS3 (potential).
correct :] I'm coming purely from a gaming point of view
Ah, I see. As I don't play vidya games often and the only 'modern' system I have to compare the experiece to now is a Wii, I think I'll be perfectly amazed by the PS3. ;)
Yeah man I hope you enjoy it and maybe consider getting a cheap xbox to go with it :] the $200 new xbox would do just fine if you ever wanted one.
I'm biased as I am a professional gamer and I strive for excellence in gaming, but I'll be honest, if I wanted to really destroy people (skill level on ps3 is low), or have a system purely for enjoyment, I would get a ps3 (and I plan on getting one) but it won't replace my bawks.
..and if you played on a PC, you'd be the one being destroyed. That's why Microsoft scrapped the idea of linking Windows and Xbox Lives - no matter how many gimmicks the Xbox players had, they were still smeared by the PC guys. (I'm talking shooters of course)
Viva Keyboard + Mouse!
...and I think all the best known PS3 exclusives were mentioned already. There isn't much in the exclusive field on either part these days.
Yeah man I hope you enjoy it and maybe consider getting a cheap xbox to go with it :] the $200 new xbox would do just fine if you ever wanted one.
It's certainly a possibility. The kid does have an annual celebration of the day of his birth, too. And he does like him some vidya games. And Halo.
I'm biased as I am a professional gamer and I strive for excellence in gaming, but I'll be honest, if I wanted to really destroy people (skill level on ps3 is low), or have a system purely for enjoyment, I would get a ps3 (and I plan on getting one) but it won't replace my bawks.
..and if you played on a PC, you'd be the one being destroyed. That's why Microsoft scrapped the idea of linking Windows and Xbox Lives - no matter how many gimmicks the Xbox players had, they were still smeared by the PC guys. (I'm talking shooters of course)
Viva Keyboard + Mouse!
...and I think all the best known PS3 exclusives were mentioned already. There isn't much in the exclusive field on either part these days.
well heres something neat about that. I DO actually play cross console sometimes with xlink kai (a hacker's alternative to xbox live) and I do ok :] but the germans....the germans
they are literally god like when they play shooters. I try to not play against them.Yeah man I hope you enjoy it and maybe consider getting a cheap xbox to go with it :] the $200 new xbox would do just fine if you ever wanted one.
It's certainly a possibility. The kid does have an annual celebration of the day of his birth, too. And he does like him some vidya games. And Halo.
haha you and your kid are always welcome in my xbl matches zombie
Just picked up my PS3 this morning. I'm told that FF13 is good, but Boraxe wasn't interested in RPGs.
BTW PS3 is better for one reason and one reason alone. Rechargeable out of the box controllers.
To reference back to this, I believe what you heard was, "it gets good after the first 20 hours."
There's a reason that there are posters of the FF10 troupe cheering, "We're not the worst FF anymore!"
no the ps3 came out with worse hardware than an xbox 360 and the 360 came out first. whats your excuse now? so making fun of typos isn't ok but name calling is? GTFO you act like a kid. xbox 360 also has EIGHT SEPERATE CORES THAT PROCESS WHILE PS3 HAS ONE, and that ONE is worse than any of the xbox 360's
Yeah see, this is what I'm talking about. Tottally missing the point. I do not know nor care about the hardware of consoles. If your going to respond to me in an argument, please relate it to my point, not spout a bunch of fan boy crap that does nothing to address me. And if you choose to not do that, then don't get all whiney when someone calls you out on it.
Personally I would've gone with the Wii. But hey.
I wasn't aware the Wii could play BluRays, the prime motivation for us buying the PS3.
Same. It's shiney, looks nice on my 50 inch, is asthetically pleasing, and lets me stream movies over netflicks without having to pay money to microsoft. I can play worms on it. And I don't have to buy batteries for the remotes, I just hook them back onto the cord.
Xboxes look like crap, I would feel compeled to hide the ugly ass thing If I had one.
Xboxes look like crap, I would feel compeled to hide the ugly ass thing If I had one.
Even the new one?
Xboxes look like crap, I would feel compeled to hide the ugly ass thing If I had one.
Even the new one?
Much better.
Keep in mind that direct ports from the PC/360 to the PS3 have always been worse for ware. The best games that the PS3 have had, present and future, are those that are made with the PS3 hardware in mind from the beginning, not the ports that try to get a quick fix to jam a 360 title into the PS3 box.
Take a good look at Dragon Age. The best version is, of course, in the PC, but the PS3 version outshines the 360, mainly because Bioware did it right, and delayed the PS3 to tweak it, and worked it for the hardware instead of making a "port."
There are load cycles that a few developers use to regulate the load times, this has been done since launch.
The main reason there are few exclusives (other than the fact that Nintendo is the only one with a current house to make them) is that it is better to make games for both systems instead of going with one and losing potential sales.
360 is easier to develop on, this is something that isn't news. It is a set PC box, basically. I am hoping that Sony has learned from the past and has more Developer friendly set up for the PS4 in the future.
I hope all of you get YLOD.
I don't even know what that is. But I know what RROD are
And I don't have any console actually.
I hope all of you get YLOD.
I don't even know what that is. But I know what RROD are
And I don't have any console actually.
Yellow Light Of Death lol its a complete meltdown, you sometimes can't even fix it. Its not as simple as re-flowing it. Alot of the parts are done forever :]
Personally I would've gone with the Wii. But hey.
I wasn't aware the Wii could play BluRays, the prime motivation for us buying the PS3.
I was more or less talking about the best console out of the three. If "must play blue-ray" is a motivation, then yeah the others auto-fail. But as for as consoles go, the Wii is awesome. There's a reason they've sold so many of them; they're great entertainment.
I've played on the PS3 and I seriously can't find a good reason to put one in my livingroom. If I want to game on my own, I have my pc, and if I want to have fun with friends I'd rather use the Wii for that.
Personally I found the Wii to be ok fun. Not great, but fun enough. The only reason we got the PS3 version is cuz the kid loves the Wii and so does the gal. Me? I don't care a bit and the deal we got was actually pretty good.
Of course I don't know the real specifics since I'm not a console person, but it all just sounds like imitation again... and the reason the Wii did so well was because it was new. I'm betting that Nintendo is laughing at Sony and Microsoft and their attempts to copy the Wii while they're working on the next innovative system that's once again going blow both of their competitors out of the water.
And, of course, the 360 and PS3 have a massive advantage in the graphics department. Oh, and Nintendo stuff feels kiddy to me. I know they've got adult titles, but I just can't shake that feeling for some reason.
And get in touch with the child in you dude
Kids have the most fun anyway.I dunno, it just feels juvenile to me. Like it's not meant for me to play. I have a tough time getting past that part of it. The look - graphics - is a large part of that.
As far as touchin' the kid in me, I don't think that'd be a good idea. Seriously, though, I'm plenty kiddy. I just explore it in a more adult fashion. I know, it makes no sense. Oh well.
You are refering to the second one regarding the Wii and the first one regarding the PS3 being better I think?
I do agree that games need to display the proper feeling/mood at all times, I just don't think that making the image a higher resolution with more polygons is the right way to do it in many cases
Meh, it's like the Wii graphics - in a lot of cases - take me out of the game mindset. Really it's not a huge deal cuz I don't play much anyway and, like I said, I did find some of the stuff pretty fun. Thing is, I'm also wowed by shiny stuff.
Much better.
The PS3 looks like a George Forman grill raped a fax machine.
I was more or less talking about the best console out of the three.
Sorry, I thought you were talking about the Wii.
If "must play blue-ray" is a motivation, then yeah the others auto-fail.
Well, I said in the first post that the reason we were getting a PS3 is cos we wanted a BluRay player and it is, by all accounts, the best one you can get for the money.
But as for as consoles go, the Wii is awesome. There's a reason they've sold so many of them; they're great entertainment.
Those are not the same thing. As a console the Wii is garbage, as a family entertainment option it is great. The same holds true for a deck of cards and a copy Monopoly.
I've played on the PS3 and I seriously can't find a good reason to put one in my livingroom. If I want to game on my own, I have my pc, and if I want to have fun with friends I'd rather use the Wii for that.
And which one do you use for playing BluRays?
You know I've never understood why people keep falling for pretty pictures. I'll take solid gameplay over graphics anyday.
I'll take solid gameplay and pretty pictures, thanks.
As a console the Wii is garbage
This, imho, depends on whether you look at a console as being a piece of hardware (I said it myself; as far as hardware is concerned the Wii is a pile of crap) or a source of entertainment (which the Wii in my opinion provides much more of then a PS3)
If you want to go hardware, yeah the Wii is a massive failure. If you want a device that allows you to have fun, it's probably your best option.
And which one do you use for playing BluRays?
None of them, I don't have a TV.
EDIT: Well technically I do have on, it's just not plugged in to the cable, never really used, and way to old to do any kind of service to a blue-ray player.
If you want to go hardware, yeah the Wii is a massive failure. If you want a device that allows you to have fun, it's probably your best option.
I do, which is why I drew the distinction. The Wii isn't so much a video game console as a family video entertainment interface. It is more akin to a digital board game then a real console, something that the seemingly endless glut of minigame shovelware does little to contradict.
What it comes down to personally is that Nintendo just doesn't "do it" for me, or at least it hasn't done for close to 20 years. I enjoyed the hell out of my NES, but the SNES and all subsequent efforts have just left me cold. I don't dig the "feel" of their games ("juvenile", as ZB put it, though that is not necessarily a bad thing), and the endless recycling of the same characters (who don't interest me at all) over and over and over again.
I'm not against childlike naivety, nor am I a graphics whore (I love the Katamari series, for example), I just don't enjoy the Nintendo interpretation of either.
Why do you care about hardware? It does nothing without games. I mean I can understand if you don't like Wii games, and I don't doubt that many of them are crap (as they are for all gaming devices) but I don't see that as a reason to dismiss it as a console.
Much better.
The PS3 looks like a George Forman grill raped a fax machine.
mmm all the flavor without the fat
But why do you consider the Wii to be a family entertainment system and the PS3 and the Xbox to be actual consoles? All of them to essentially the same thing; they provide you with the option to play video games for entertainment (although one of them also plays blu-ray)
The do essentially the same thing in very different ways to appeal to very different audiences. The Brave Little Toaster and Debbie Does Dallas do essentially the same thing - show a series of progressively changing still images at a rate of 24 per second to create the illusion of movement - yet aim to achieve very different results for very different audiences.
Why do you care about hardware?
I don't. I needn't "care" about something to recognize to objectively recognize one representative article of a type is technically superior to another. I don't need to "care" about cars to recognize that a Rolls Royce is a superior piece of technology to a Kia.
It does nothing without games. I mean I can understand if you don't like Wii games, and I don't doubt that many of them are crap (as they are for all gaming devices) but I don't see that as a reason to dismiss it as a console.
It is no less that Nintendo itself has done. They knew competing with the 360 and PS3 was going to be a tough slog, and considering how badly they had their **** handed to them in the preceding two hardware generations they were more than a little gun shy about entering such a showdown, so they consciously chose not to focus on producing a powerhouse machine and instead focused on broad appeal to family/casual gamers. Given the massive success of the console this approach has clearly worked.
Ultimately, for the most part the games I most enjoy playing simply cannot function on a Wii so in that regard hardware most certainly does matter.
Fair arguments. For the same reasons here I'd also consider the Kia to be a much better car then the Rolls Royce; simply because it does a great job for many more people, even though the Rolls Royce clearly has the better hardware.
Whereas I consider it a much worse car but a much better transportation option for many.
Much better.
The PS3 looks like a George Forman grill raped a fax machine.
AKA sweet
I hope all of you get YLOD.
I don't even know what that is. But I know what RROD are
And I don't have any console actually.
Yellow Light Of Death lol its a complete meltdown, you sometimes can't even fix it. Its not as simple as re-flowing it. Alot of the parts are done forever :]
Well, first off, the YLOD is fixable, in theory, but you void the warranty. Just like the RROD.
Second, the YLOD is reported in less than .5% of all the PS3's sold. That's LESS than a precent, in an industry where a 5% fail rate is seen as acceptable. And this actually went down with the slim model.
Meanwhile, I just bought an Xbox 360 Slim because my last two 360's RROD'd within 6 months.
If I can leave my PS3 on for hours at a time, but my 360 starts to fry after about 2, there's a problem.
Its available for $7-15.
Although its a little old, Warhawk is not a bad game as well.
Its available for $7-15.
Warhawk was a lot of fun. I didn't know they still had a strong online community.
I think that Nintendo went with the right concept from the beginning. Look for the Wii to be into the 100 dollar range next year. Parents looking at the consoles will get the Wii more often than the other two, and the 360 got a bad rap in the beginning because of the red light of death. (Nephew had one that did this, not good)
PS3 advantage. Blu Ray. Games on Blu Ray have three things going for it. Uncondensed music/sound, high res skins and it has more storage capacity. This comes with an inherent higher cost, and the PS2 backward compatibility was axed after the first machines to make it more affordable.
Xbox advantage. Ease of development. It is a mid ranged (Higher end when first released) PC, basically. Not really a factor for the average consumer, but it got the games (as did the original Xbox) because of this and a lot of games that were gonna be PC games got turned into inferior Console games for this instead. (Just look at Bioware)
Nintendo really came out as the real winner in this round of consoles. The Sony sold at a loss at the beginning, and the Xbox 360 got a Lion's share simply because of the glut of games it began to get... oh, and that Halo thing. (Wonder what will happen next now that Bungie is no longer a part of Microsoft)
(Wonder what will happen next now that Bungie is no longer a part of Microsoft)
If I had to guess; nothing. Bungie will continue churning out the same game year after year for whatever console microsoft is selling games for. The Xbox 360 is known, among the general populace, for 2 things; Xbox fanboys and Halo fanboys. I suppose its possible that there is little overlap between the two, but I strongly doubt that.
I doubt that Halo will stay a 360 exclusive when the next game comes out.
I don't think the exclusivity will have too much to do with it at this point. People who want to play halo will also want an XBox. People who have other systems may pick up Halo, but probably not in anywhere near the numbers that will grab it for the Xbox.
But I really don't follow this stuff, and you clearly do, so I will defer to your knowledge and judgment on the issue.
I doubt that Halo will stay a 360 exclusive when the next game comes out.
It's not really an exlcusive - there are PC ports for Halo 1-3. It's just not very popular on that platform.
I hope that there is a drastic change for FFXV. Really, I do.
I got enough credit that FF13 used cost me 5 bucks. I'm enjoying it but the characters are whiny bitches.
It's a Final Fantasy game. WTF did you expect?
That is to say... the FF games are better if you don't think of the main character as the protagonist, but as the viewpoint character.
I haven't played any of the FF games since ten, but whiney main characters have been a staple since 7. I've enjoyed the side characters more then the main ones in each game I've played since then (and based on the art, that trend would continue if I played 12 or whichever ones are interesting after that).
That is to say... the FF games are better if you don't think of the main character as the protagonist, but as the viewpoint character.
Ohhh thanks EE I didn't really get it until now.
Incredible graphics and a great story...?
Well there's your problem.
Seperith was the great villian, though. There really hasn't been that great of villians since then.
Incredible graphics and a great story...?
..............
..............
..............
.....BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!