Indigo_Dingo:

joystickjunki3:

Indigo_Dingo:

PedroSteckecilo:
Value = Very Yes
Desired Titles = Very No

Whats it like living in mid 2007? I bet you're really anxious to know who will be the next American president.

Come on, he's right. He said "desired," and that word can mean different things to different people. All of the titles on the PS3 I'd want to play are rentals. Good rentals, but that's it.

EDIT: But that doesn't mean that the PS3 is a bad choice for everyone.

How can you rent LittleBigPlanet?

by going to your local blockbuster and picking it up for 9.99 and keeping it for a month, leaving you with a 1.99 restocking fee. By that time I would assume the novelty to have worn off, and new games entering your "want to play" list.

Baby Tea:
, it also comes with something a PS3 does not: HD cables. Last I checked, and I could be wrong, PS3s do NOT come with HD cables, and you have to buy them separately.

They do only cost £5 max.

Malygris:

As the most expensive of the three major gaming consoles on the market, the PlayStation 3 has lagged behind the Xbox 360 in worldwide sales and been absolutely demolished by the Wii.

actually it's not, xbox just announced 28 million in sales and the ps3 is at 20 million, which means the ps3 is selling more than the 360, an article from earlier in the week on this site

tho what they are saying is true, the 360 they say is lower priced would cost a lot more if you had to upgrade everything to match what the ps3 can do out of the box, the same was true since both consoles were released

Baby Tea:

y8c616:
it is merely advertising showing that the ps3 has way more features out of the box, and that its a better quality product. it shows all essential features, not, as you suggested, missing anything out. Its up to the consumer whether they want to pay the price of quality, or buy the second rate crap, and in the xbox's case, buy all the features separately (costing more in the long run, as demonstrated here)

Better quality product?
I'm all for console equality, but this statement reeks of fan-boyism.

A $299 360 comes with everything a PS3 does, minus Blue-Ray and Wi-Fi. But, it also comes with something a PS3 does not: HD cables. Last I checked, and I could be wrong, PS3s do NOT come with HD cables, and you have to buy them separately.

As for Blue-ray? Who cares? Unless you have a 1080p TV, it's wasted. And even though I DO have a 1080p TV, my 360 up-converts so I don't need Blue-ray. No big issue.

Wi-Fi? Well, if you are actually going to use it (Since a bunch of friend of mine who have PS3s say the Wi-Fi sucks), an extra $100 puts the price point at the same ($399)...not including the extra for HD cables.

And the online? Again, all my friends who have used both have said that the 360 online is preferable. I'm willing to pay my $50 for 13 months for online play. It's worth it to me! And, apparently, thousands and thousands of other people feel the same.

Look, I think both consoles are good in their own right. I, personally, prefer the 360. That doesn't mean the PS3 is crappy. It's a good system! It's just not the system I want. And a lot of people feel that way (And vice versa).
So let's keep the flaming to a minimum (That goes for BOTH sides!)

I too think both consoles are good, though i prefer the ps3 myself, and im no fanboy, Il admit the ps3 has faults; biggest of all is the rice- no matter how much more functionality it has, it wont sway an on-the-fence consumer. The ps3 upscales dvds and ps2 games as well; while better than standard, it still isnt quite as high quality as blu ray. The difference is visible on any HDTV 1080i or above i think.
The wifi works fine; i think ive lost connection once or twice, when i was having issues with my ISP, so not really the ps3's fault. Also, everyone says that live is better than psn, but ive seen no proof. From what ive seen, live is slightly more polished, but for all the money it makes, it should be. Psn has plenty of exclusive dlc, and you can browse the web on it.
The extra £10 i spent on my Gold plated sony HDMI lead is'nt much of an issue really, seeing as i have a comparable online service free, saving me £50 a year.
All that is just extras though; most people buy consoles for exclusives, and i got my ps3 for MGS4, in the same way that im sure many people got their 360's for halo3

gdnvs:
lame...
The table isn't fair, it only contains things that
the ps3 features it doesn't show the services that
that microsoft or Nintendo provide for their consoles.

such as???????????????????????

klc0100:

Baby Tea:
, it also comes with something a PS3 does not: HD cables. Last I checked, and I could be wrong, PS3s do NOT come with HD cables, and you have to buy them separately.

They do only cost £5 max.

I know they aren't expensive (Unless you're buying an HDMI cable), but that's not the point! They say you get more for a PS3 out of the box, but you don't even get HD! Out of the box, the blue-Ray player is useless/pointless. They Slam the 360 for not having 'features' out of the box, when they are guilty of the same thing.
That's my point.

Release more exclusives that aren't a pile of meh and people might sit up and take notice.

Baby Tea:

klc0100:

Baby Tea:
, it also comes with something a PS3 does not: HD cables. Last I checked, and I could be wrong, PS3s do NOT come with HD cables, and you have to buy them separately.

They do only cost £5 max.

I know they aren't expensive (Unless you're buying an HDMI cable), but that's not the point! They say you get more for a PS3 out of the box, but you don't even get HD! Out of the box, the blue-Ray player is useless/pointless. They Slam the 360 for not having 'features' out of the box, when they are guilty of the same thing.
That's my point.

But HD cables really are just an accessory you can still play fine without them you cant really compare not having HD cables to not having WI-FI or free online play.
and the Blu-Ray player is hardly useless.

Indigo_Dingo:

super_smash_jesus:

Indigo_Dingo:

joystickjunki3:

Indigo_Dingo:

PedroSteckecilo:
Value = Very Yes
Desired Titles = Very No

Whats it like living in mid 2007? I bet you're really anxious to know who will be the next American president.

Come on, he's right. He said "desired," and that word can mean different things to different people. All of the titles on the PS3 I'd want to play are rentals. Good rentals, but that's it.

EDIT: But that doesn't mean that the PS3 is a bad choice for everyone.

How can you rent LittleBigPlanet?

by going to your local blockbuster and picking it up for 9.99 and keeping it for a month, leaving you with a 1.99 restocking fee. By that time I would assume the novelty to have worn off, and new games entering your "want to play" list.

You could say the exact same thing about any game in the history of man.

I think that was the whole point, though. We all have the games that we prefer to others and would rather own than rent. One yours obviously seems to be Little Big Planet.

klc0100:

Baby Tea:

klc0100:

Baby Tea:
, it also comes with something a PS3 does not: HD cables. Last I checked, and I could be wrong, PS3s do NOT come with HD cables, and you have to buy them separately.

They do only cost £5 max.

I know they aren't expensive (Unless you're buying an HDMI cable), but that's not the point! They say you get more for a PS3 out of the box, but you don't even get HD! Out of the box, the blue-Ray player is useless/pointless. They Slam the 360 for not having 'features' out of the box, when they are guilty of the same thing.
That's my point.

But HD cables really are just an accessory you can still play fine without them you cant really compare not having HD cables to not having WI-FI or free online play.
and the Blu-Ray player is hardly useless.

He said "out-of-the-box" and he's right. W/o HD cables, the HiDef experience that is supposed to be BluRay is pretty much useless. Sure you get more space on the discs for games, but the 360 seems to be doing just fine w/ the dual-layer DVDs.

Baby Tea:

klc0100:

Baby Tea:
, it also comes with something a PS3 does not: HD cables. Last I checked, and I could be wrong, PS3s do NOT come with HD cables, and you have to buy them separately.

They do only cost £5 max.

I know they aren't expensive (Unless you're buying an HDMI cable), but that's not the point! They say you get more for a PS3 out of the box, but you don't even get HD! Out of the box, the blue-Ray player is useless/pointless. They Slam the 360 for not having 'features' out of the box, when they are guilty of the same thing.
That's my point.

well if you have a hdtv you will have at least 1 HDMI cable at least 1, and if you buy a ps3 well i dont know!! you can use it! well at least i dont have to worry about having gremlins in my console, good afternoon

" Not avalible in earlier models "?

If Sony wants to pull that trick then I get to ignore this year and say sony has zero worthy games next to Wii/360, plus they run at a loss for sony.

But I wouldn't say that because it's stupid, like saying you are better when sales show we don't care.

Vlane:
Blu-Ray and HDMI isn't everything Sony.

Blu-ray isn't anything. Sony must be getting desperate to consider that sad format something to brag about.

*sigh*

Oh Sony, you poor clueless bastards.

I play the Wii, I don't play the 360, and I sure as hell do not plan on ever buying a PS3. Not only do you not have a single title that interests me in the slightest bit. You cost more than the other two systems! I don't have an HDTV, so BluRay looks exactly the same as DVD to me. My TV isn't High def, so it doesn't matter what I hook up to it, that won't be high def either.

All this shit you are trying to tell me makes you the better value is all shit I DON'T WANT.

It's completely reasonable - if Sony is NOT OFFERING WHAT I WANT, who cares if their product is technically superior? Hell, I'll be the first to state their product is technically superior. BUT IT IS NOT WHAT I WANT.

Indigo_Dingo:
Once again, we have this curious affliction that seems to keep people trapped in a time period a year and a half ago. Perhaps the most fascinating part is these people seem to be able to communicate with modern humans.

Fine then, fancy pants. Once Sony manage to release a number of exclusives that actually pique the interest of the average Wii/360 player, then maybe, just maybe, they'll see an uptake in console purchases.

At least they can always sit back and say, "We're big in Japan".

For all the add ons I would have needed to connect an xbox360 to my hdtv, use a hard drive and connect to my wireless network, It probably would have come to about the same price as my ps3. Aside from the hdmi cable, I got everything I needed for my ps3 in the box(LBP!!!). Not to say however, that there aren't people with no interest in a hard drive, 1080p graphics, blu ray or wifi. And of course for them, large parts of the Ps3 would have been no more than expensive, useless, plastic clutter. But you can't fault it for it's simplicity. I took out my ps3 and thanks to the built in wifi and free psn, I jumped straight into online gaming within a few minutes of connecting to my network. When I have enough money I will probably buy an Xbox too. But for now, this is much better suited to my interests.

First thing is look at the sales numbers. There was a good article yesterday with some discussion about it too. Basically the PS3 has sold more units than the Xbox 360 did when it was as old as the PS3. The Wii is a run away success but anyone I talk to that does not have younger kids says that the lack of quality content makes it strictly a bowling machine for when company is over.

The next hammer to fall will be that Sony's cost to produce the PS3 will come down. When that happens the price will come down for consumers. There is a very substantial base of PS2 users waiting for this. The PS3 also has a great 2009 line up of exclusive games plus prior system selling exclusives are coming down in price.

The question mark is this: Will the PS3 really be able to produce games that can not be duplicated on other systems? If the exclusives being released can demonstrate that the PS3 is the most powerful console, the price gets dropped, and PS2 owners jump in, developers will swing back to concentrating on maximizing the power of the PS3. At that point what does MS do? If they release a new system to match the PS3, it will cost the same or more. Why not just get the PS3. It will have an established selection of games and it is a complete entertainment device. Plus with MS's track record of systems that fail, confidence will be low in the beginning.

I see why Sony is saying what it is saying and I also can see a strategy for the future. It all hinges on the first party games demonstrating the power of the PS3.

Limos:
*sigh*

Oh Sony, you poor clueless bastards.

I play the Wii, I don't play the 360, and I sure as hell do not plan on ever buying a PS3. Not only do you not have a single title that interests me in the slightest bit. You cost more than the other two systems! I don't have an HDTV, so BluRay looks exactly the same as DVD to me. My TV isn't High def, so it doesn't matter what I hook up to it, that won't be high def either.

All this shit you are trying to tell me makes you the better value is all shit I DON'T WANT.

so just be clear to me pleaseeee! who is the clueless? you whit your regular(old)tv and your wii? or my self whit my ps3 and my hdtv? i guess sony because if you make a good product and if you are charging only production cost for the console you made making barely no money but being good to me "the costumer" i guess they deserve to die, unlike Microsoft and nintendo the ones who charge twice for a piece of half as graphic card and 1 gaming central processor put in some plastic that melt after a while... and besides making you pay to play online... well i feel sorry for me.

Also, Jesus Christ look at all the fanboys.

Would you all go back to the IGN forums pls.

Xbox360's come with headsets, thats an additional purchase for the ps3, controllers with vibration, thats an additional purchase for the ps3.

If you want a keyboard you can now buy that small bluetooth keyboard for the ps3, thats an accessory that adds clutter. You can't say that your console produces less clutter due to less accessories, when clutter is directly proportionate to how many accessories the user wants, and in the case of the 360 and Wii, they have alot of choice.

But thats all side babble, the key differences between the ps3 and the 360 are their games, 80% are on both so that doesn't matter too much, the ps3 has exclusives like Resident ev...no, um, Tekke... oh dear, its ok though they might still have Virtua.... nevermind.

Ace Comba... this isn't working, yes i'm a fan of Metal Gear Solid but i'm not buying a ps3 for one game, Killzone's shaping up to be a good first person shooter, like Perfect Dark Zero, which has been available on the 360 for years.

I'm not the head of a successful international company so i'm not even going to pretend i know what sony should be doing differently, i think its past it now, developers will keep making games for the 360 till Microsoft brings a new one out, and if sony are still playing the "ps3 has more lasting value" card when that happens, then Xbox won't only have the biggest most exclusive back catalog of games but it will also be more powerful than the PS3, then they can rule the galaxy in a tortoise shaped spaceship with a big golden smiley on it.

You can use numbers to prove anything that is remotely true. I just know that my PS3 is little more than a dvd player to me.

For all of you catastrophizing and saying the PS3 is going to kill Sony, I say BS. This company is a Goliath and will not go down with one turn of a market cycle. They're still selling consoles and games so its not like they're totally sunk. I predict a flip next gen in Sony's favor.

The media format is Blu-Ray and it'll be more accepted over time as the general consuming populace start going bat shit crazy for Hi-Def. Right now, of course, its not happening in no small part to the economic downturn.. However on the end of every recession there is a spike upwards and when people start riding that they'll see disposable cash as a godsend and something that should be burnt at every corner. Hi-Def will be everywhere and the top line, biggest muscle, console will be out the doors at top speed.

Sony produces quality hardware, this is a fact. Just look at brick rates of the two. (I'm leaving Wii out of this as its a totally different demographic) Most of the consumers I know and have worked with like to do research before purchasing a product, when they find out M$ has a history of bricking consoles and Sony has a history of solid machines (this is ignoring titles, as of now..I'll get to it) they will see an obvious bonus. Sony will also have been involved with Blu-Ray development longer (they created it) and it will no longer be a "whats that?" concept to most people.

As for titles, thats what Sony needs to work on. They, in their quest for uber hardware greatness, neglected one of the most important things for game consoles... the games. As long as they can get back in the game, pardon the pun, they'll be a big contender.

This is an awkward cycle for game consoles, its the first HD generation and there are some big growing pains that have been associated with it. It'll be interesting to see what happens in the coming years.

milomalo:

Limos:
*sigh*

Oh Sony, you poor clueless bastards.

I play the Wii, I don't play the 360, and I sure as hell do not plan on ever buying a PS3. Not only do you not have a single title that interests me in the slightest bit. You cost more than the other two systems! I don't have an HDTV, so BluRay looks exactly the same as DVD to me. My TV isn't High def, so it doesn't matter what I hook up to it, that won't be high def either.

All this shit you are trying to tell me makes you the better value is all shit I DON'T WANT.

so just be clear to me pleaseeee! who is the clueless? you whit your regular(old)tv and your wii? or my self whit my ps3 and my hdtv? i guess sony because if you make a good product and if you are charging only production cost for the console you made making barely no money but being good to me "the costumer" i guess they deserve to die, unlike Microsoft and nintendo the ones who charge twice for a piece of half as graphic card and 1 gaming central processor put in some plastic that melt after a while... and besides making you pay to play online... well i feel sorry for me.

Sony is clueless for putting so much stress on High Definition. Most people don't have HighDef TVs. Personally I can't see the difference between my normal TV and my friends HDTV. It looks basically the same.

I don't own any BluRay movies, and I don't plan on buying any bluray movies. So why the hell would I need or want a BluRay player?

The Wii has already CURBSTOMPED the 360 and PS3. The 360 has managed to get back on it's feet and is recovering. The PS3 is just sitting on the ground and whining at us about how much better it is (despite having been throughouly curbstomped) and hemmoraging customers like it's going out of style.

milomalo:

Limos:
*sigh*

Oh Sony, you poor clueless bastards.

I play the Wii, I don't play the 360, and I sure as hell do not plan on ever buying a PS3. Not only do you not have a single title that interests me in the slightest bit. You cost more than the other two systems! I don't have an HDTV, so BluRay looks exactly the same as DVD to me. My TV isn't High def, so it doesn't matter what I hook up to it, that won't be high def either.

All this shit you are trying to tell me makes you the better value is all shit I DON'T WANT.

so just be clear to me pleaseeee! who is the clueless? you whit your regular(old)tv and your wii? or my self whit my ps3 and my hdtv? i guess sony because if you make a good product and if you are charging only production cost for the console you made making barely no money but being good to me "the costumer" i guess they deserve to die, unlike Microsoft and nintendo the ones who charge twice for a piece of half as graphic card and 1 gaming central processor put in some plastic that melt after a while... and besides making you pay to play online... well i feel sorry for me.

What?
What are you even talking about? The person above merely stated how the PS3 doesn't interest them in the slightest, and it's 'features' aren't features at all to them.

Look man, fanboyism isn't overly welcome. Especially ignorant, uneducated fanboyism. On either side (Right, Indigo?). You like the PS3? Great. Enjoy it. Not everyone will! The PS3 might be the whole package for you! It isn't for me! And it isn't for all people! Get over it.

jdnoth:
Also, Jesus Christ look at all the fanboys.

Would you all go back to the IGN forums pls.

Are you trying to say "I'm not a fanboy" (yes you are!)?

PS3's biggest mistake was their treatment of backward compatibility. The PS2 was the most played console in 2008 and having a machine that would have upgraded the picture, improved anti-aliasing, and decreased loading times for PS2 games in the same way the PS2 did for Playstation games. People still have and play their old games. For the First year of the XBox 360's life, Halo 2 was their number 1 online game. A console that allows transition instead of just new products is simply more attractive. This is why Blu-Ray players play regular DVDs and have features to upgrade the picture. It was essential with the movie player but was unimportant for games on the PS3.

By Sony's own logic, Nintendo could make a table that shows only the Wii has Mario, Link, and Samus, while the competitors don't even offer that.

Sorry, but while I'm a happy PS3 owner, that's some weak sauce they're using for definition of "value."

But to be honest, I'm also part of the few who LOVE the PS3's online service. Never had any problems. Oh, well.

Jarrid:

jdnoth:
Also, Jesus Christ look at all the fanboys.

Would you all go back to the IGN forums pls.

Are you trying to say "I'm not a fanboy" (yes you are!)?

I think he's saying how all the posts have been some kind of defence for there consle.

My N64, has finally died, after ten years. I wouldn't pay $50 a year, for ten years, for XBL. I have to side with the PS3. If I hadn't already quit console gaming, I'd definitely get one. $100 for Wi-fi is ridiculous. You pay for the PS3 now, but you'll never lose out for not having that feature. PS3 also has wireless controllers as standard, something I MUCH prefer over wired.

PS3 never appealed to me for the reasons it doesn't appeal to alot of people:

1. I don't own an HDTV.
2. I don't own any Blu-ray movies.
3. Aside from MGS4 no other game exclusive for the PS3 interests me.

But thats just me, there are obviously alot of people (hence the sales) who want a PS3, I'm just not one of them. You can have your PS3, I'll stick with my 360 thank you very much, to each his own.

Baby Tea:

milomalo:

Limos:
*sigh*

Oh Sony, you poor clueless bastards.

I play the Wii, I don't play the 360, and I sure as hell do not plan on ever buying a PS3. Not only do you not have a single title that interests me in the slightest bit. You cost more than the other two systems! I don't have an HDTV, so BluRay looks exactly the same as DVD to me. My TV isn't High def, so it doesn't matter what I hook up to it, that won't be high def either.

All this shit you are trying to tell me makes you the better value is all shit I DON'T WANT.

so just be clear to me pleaseeee! who is the clueless? you whit your regular(old)tv and your wii? or my self whit my ps3 and my hdtv? i guess sony because if you make a good product and if you are charging only production cost for the console you made making barely no money but being good to me "the costumer" i guess they deserve to die, unlike Microsoft and nintendo the ones who charge twice for a piece of half as graphic card and 1 gaming central processor put in some plastic that melt after a while... and besides making you pay to play online... well i feel sorry for me.

What?
What are you even talking about? The person above merely stated how the PS3 doesn't interest them in the slightest, and it's 'features' aren't features at all to them.

Look man, fanboyism isn't overly welcome. Especially ignorant, uneducated fanboyism. On either side (Right, Indigo?). You like the PS3? Great. Enjoy it. Not everyone will! The PS3 might be the whole package for you! It isn't for me! And it isn't for all people! Get over it.

well sorry for acting like a baby (wink) and im sorry i didnt know you were the ambassador for the community, I've been here long enough to know the rules, cool of man! if you dont like it at least don't call it dumb.

BlueMage:
It's completely reasonable - if Sony is NOT OFFERING WHAT I WANT, who cares if their product is technically superior? Hell, I'll be the first to state their product is technically superior. BUT IT IS NOT WHAT I WANT.

he at least knows how to make a point, and don't go here and there calling names on things.

I like my Xbox. Once you get it 1 mandotry RR OH D it a nice little thing to have.

Meh, a friend tells me that that his wii operates better online than his PS3, though that could be our area as were out of the way a bit. I rarely play online games myself, preferring to play with mates, so Mario Kart is good enough for me.

As for the PS3, what exclusives does it have already/are in development? I don't say this to flame or troll (or whatever new name people come up with next), I'm genuinely interested.

The only ones I'm aware of at the moment are Final Fantasy 13, Killzone, MGS4 and Ratchet and Clank. None of them interest me, and I couldn't care less for HD as I've a small telly, so no PS3 for me.