PlayStation 3 Year One

[j_garcia]

Anyone who still says the PS3 doesn't have games at this point has no idea what they are talking about. There are quite a few now and there are plenty of good ones. The Wii doesn't have that many titles either, but that doesn't seem to get mentioned a lot. No, there aren't any HUGE titles that are true console sellers for the PS3, and there are fewer than the other consoles, but that is the way it always is. And that will be the same story when the next Xbox comes out too...

 

[abboudc]

So the Console that breaks down 45% of the time is a better console because you can play games on it more?

I have both. I play my 360 probably 5x as much. It's not that i don't like the PS3, it's a quality piece of hardware. There just hasnt been a reason for me to play it. Every multiplatform game review that i've seen said to get the 360 version because it's better. Plus there's Halo3, BioShock, Gears of War...

PS3 has games, just not great games. Folklore...eh. Ratchet and Clank was good. Heavenly Sword? Great production values, average game at best. Motorstorm was cool for the short time it lasted. Resistance was pretty good.

The PS3 has games, from PS2. You can play those. It ALSO has PS3 games! REALLY?! WOW! I just read a bunch of fanboism bullsh*t from the interweb and figured it didn't have ANY games, because that's what they said.

Some models play PS2 games via hardware, some software, and some not at all. But most people that have PS2 games already have a PS2...
I'd stop reading fanboy sites if i were you, you're never going to reason with them. Fanboys are the minority though...PS2 outsold Xbox over 2:1. 360 is outselling PS3 over 2:1. That means PS2 owners are buying the 360 even with the well-publicized reliability issues...

You have to have a working console, before you can play a game. Period.

Let me ask you this. If they had the same reliability (which they admittedly do not), which would you consider the better game machine?

Why does every PS3 or Xbox 360 thread degenerate? Gosh, you'd think this was the sub forum and somebody didn't recommend an SVS sub...

 

[gus6464]

I have both. I play my 360 probably 5x as much. It's not that i don't like the PS3, it's a quality piece of hardware. There just hasnt been a reason for me to play it. Every multiplatform game review that i've seen said to get the 360 version because it's better. Plus there's Halo3, BioShock, Gears of War...

PS3 has games, just not great games. Folklore...eh. Ratchet and Clank was good. Heavenly Sword? Great production values, average game at best. Motorstorm was cool for the short time it lasted. Resistance was pretty good.



Some models play PS2 games via hardware, some software, and some not at all. But most people that have PS2 games already have a PS2...
I'd stop reading fanboy sites if i were you, you're never going to reason with them. Fanboys are the minority though...PS2 outsold Xbox over 2:1. 360 is outselling PS3 over 2:1. That means PS2 owners are buying the 360 even with the well-publicized reliability issues...




Let me ask you this. If they had the same reliability (which they admittedly do not), which would you consider the better game machine?

Why does every PS3 or Xbox 360 thread degenerate? Gosh, you'd think this was the sub forum and somebody didn't recommend an SVS sub...

Yes but you are missing one vital fact about all of this:

The Xbox 360 has been out for a year longer than the PS3!!!!! The 360 didn't get it's real first great game until GOW. And that was 1 year later!!!

 

[abboudc]

Yes but you are missing one vital fact about all of this:

The Xbox 360 has been out for a year longer than the PS3!!!!! The 360 didn't get it's real first great game until GOW. And that was 1 year later!!!

This is very true. The first year for the 360 was very lean as well. Ugly PS2 ports dominated. There were a few "good" games like GRAW, but it was a really weak year.

I'm guessing the first great PS3 game will be MGS4 in the spring, followed by God of War 3 in the fall. Here's to hoping the PS3 breaks out in its sophomore year. I can't wait for God of War personally, it was my favorite PS2 game by far.

At least Sony's execs seem to have gotten their heads out of their butts.
Ken Kutaragi (before PS3 was released): "I think it's too cheap. I want people to have to save up for it."

One thing they need to do and right away, is give EA money or prod them to fix their game engines on PS3.

 

[Profcrab]

I wouldn't be so sure about the PS3 ending up in third. Earlier this week, Reuter's reported that the PS3 outsold the Wii in Japan in November. Now that may not seem like a big deal, but the Wii was dominating sales in Japan even worse than it was here in the states. I would like to see what the sales figures look like for November and December here in the states once the Christmas dust settles.

Don't get me wrong. I agree with just about everything you said on how Sony came to market with the PS3 with all the crap they were talking. They really
ALMOST blew it, but in their own not so quiet way, they are making up for it, and I agree with what Wayde said earlier in this thread:

"Call that a failure on Sony's part - so far. But what Jack says is that he's in it for the long haul seeing PS3 as a 10 year console. High price tag and weak early sales are the price you pay. When you're a tank you move slowly but nobody can stop you when you get rolling."

"I don't mean to slam PS3, give it time to build momentum. I think we haven't seen what it's capable of yet"

The 360 also outsold the PS3 for one week in Japan. Put certain events together and you get a momentary jump in sales. Whether or not it is a trend is another story. I doubt that the one month that the PS3 outsold the Wii is going to be a lasting trend. The PS3's sales may go up there, but aside from some momentary jumps caused by price drops or an anticipated title release, I don't see it continuing. As for the PS3 and 360, the PS3 will always have Japan, but not outside of it.

Jack says it's a 10 year console, but that is pure marketing BS. The same marketing BS that Kutaragi said about it when it launched. Today's HD consoles are barely able to do 720p natively with most games. Generally, they are upscaling from a lower resolution. The graphics hardware in both consoles is close to 2 year old PC graphics technology. Especially with all the competition now, there is no way the PS3 will hold its own for 10 years.

The PS2 is still being sold now because it dominated its generation and there are just a crapton of games out for it. If someone doesn't have an HDTV and wants a system with enough games to keep you busy for several years and all available cheap, the PS2 is the way to go. That isn't going to be the case this generation. Many former exclusives are now multiplatform and no console is completely destroying the others. People may be buying PS3s and Xbox360s 10 years from their launch, but they will be archaic alternatives to newly releasing PS5s and XBox(3x360). I do expect though that the next generation of systems will not push the price boundry like these did. Especially after Nintendo just blew everyone's doors off with that price. The next consoles will probably come in at $300-$350 and not be rediculous improvements over the PS3 and 360.

 

[Profcrab]

So the Console that breaks down 45% of the time is a better console because you can play games on it more?

The PS3 has games, from PS2. You can play those. It ALSO has PS3 games! REALLY?! WOW! I just read a bunch of fanboism bullsh*t from the interweb and figured it didn't have ANY games, because that's what they said.

You have to have a working console, before you can play a game. Period.

SheepStar

I have a 1st generation 360 and it hasn't died yet. That isn't to say that there wasn't a problem with that generation. While people have made a big deal about finding a defective newer console, there is have been very few complaints about the current versions and for those that have a console die to the RRoD, it has a 3 year warranty for it. It does suck that it had that problem, but at least Microsoft did the right thing and extended the warranties for them.

I have both consoles and I play the 360 way more. The PS3 does have some decent games out now, but I enjoy the multiplatform games more on the 360, mainly because of the better connection to my friends list and cross game invites, so the PS3 spends alot of time waiting for the next PS3 game from gamefly that I'll beat in under 10 hours (their big games have been pretty short) and then turn the thing back off again. The PS3 isn't a bad console, but don't get carried away with yourself.

 

[Sheep]

Let me ask you this. If they had the same reliability (which they admittedly do not), which would you consider the better game machine?

Why does every PS3 or Xbox 360 thread degenerate? Gosh, you'd think this was the sub forum and somebody didn't recommend an SVS sub...

You know that I recommend SVS subs.

I think the PS3 is better.

-Built in WiFi
-Built in Blu-ray
-BC (not on the 40gig, but it's cheaper)
-A better console power wise, that is taking technology a step farther. The Xbox is a glorified PC, that doesn't run.

I have played the 360 and Wii, and still would rather have the PS3.

SheepStar

 

[NeverSeen]

You know that I recommend SVS subs.

I think the PS3 is better.

-Built in WiFi
-Built in Blu-ray
-BC (not on the 40gig, but it's cheaper)
-A better console power wise, that is taking technology a step farther. The Xbox is a glorified PC, that doesn't run.

I have played the 360 and Wii, and still would rather have the PS3.

SheepStar

I've owned all 3.

I find the Wii is a great console for all but the hardcore gamers. You can download all the games you grew up with for cheap, anyone from 2-100 can play, and its good fun with any amount of people and at any level of intoxication.

I perfer the home screen of the 360, but that is only because i'm still getting used to the PS3.

I like being able to connect to all differant countries on the PS3 store and download the asian content. Its also a great all in 1 machine. I play my SD DVDs, Blu Rays, and some games on it. I bought it mostly because it was a blu ray player, and I could play games. I like the fact that you can also download old school PS1/2 games for it on the cheap as well. I'm not concerned about the BC. Cost wise, you can't get anything near it in the 360 now.

Compair only the features of the $400 360 and the $400 PS3, and you really can't justify buying the 360. More games (older console) and better online play (you get what you pay for...) is all the 360 really has going for it.

Ramble ramble ramble /end.

 

[abboudc]

Compair only the features of the $400 360 and the $400 PS3, and you really can't justify buying the 360. More games (older console) and better online play (you get what you pay for...) is all the 360 really has going for it.

I think you hit the nail on the head here.

Sony overinvested in the hardware, and neglected software/services. Awesome hardware and a clunky interface and online.

Microsoft overinvested on the software/services side, and neglected the hardware. XBL is great, and the hardware dies randomly.

Nintendo, well, they did what Nintendo always does -- whatever they want The Wii came out around a year ago too, and there are 3 awesome first party games -- Zelda, Metroid, and now Mario Galaxy. The third party support was really weak, but with it still sold out everywhere, third parties are coming around.

I think the PS3 is better.

-Built in WiFi
-Built in Blu-ray
-BC (not on the 40gig, but it's cheaper)
-A better console power wise, that is taking technology a step farther. The Xbox is a glorified PC, that doesn't run.

The lack of wifi definitely disappoints, it should at least be on the Elite. Blu-ray is a plus too. BC was really important to me, so i picked up a 60g before they went out of stock. I don't think anyone is arguing the PS3 is much better hardware. What people seem to forget sometimes though is a game console is an ecosystem...hardware+software+services.

 

[j_garcia]

What people seem to forget sometimes though is a game console is an ecosystem...hardware+software+services.

That is it in a nutshell right there...great hardware with lousy or no games is useless. Great games with average, unstable or simply poor quality hardware is also a waste of time. Services is something a bit new for all of them and while PSN isn't perfect (not as nice as XBL), it isn't too bad either.

 

[Sheep]

The lack of wifi definitely disappoints, it should at least be on the Elite. Blu-ray is a plus too. BC was really important to me, so i picked up a 60g before they went out of stock. I don't think anyone is arguing the PS3 is much better hardware. What people seem to forget sometimes though is a game console is an ecosystem...hardware+software+services.

I agree. But when you look at PS3 services, they're free. If I was paying $30 a month for online, I would expect it to be hassle free. I think the PS3 network just has bugs. If they iron those out and have it work well, it will really hurt the Xbox.

SheepStar