
In their review of the PS3, Next Generation concludes that "the PS3 is a must-buy – eventually. But is it worth $600 and a night in a parking lot? Not a chance."
"So what are we left with? In 2006, PlayStation 3 isn't about what the system can do. It's about what the system will do. Yes, if you spend $600 you deserve to get $600 worth of entertainment. But it's a (minimum) six-year promise that Sony's making, and it'll take a while for the games to ramp up, as it always does. Is it worth it right now? No. Even the Blu-ray movie selection kind of sucks.
But will the PS3 be worth it in the end? There can't be a doubt. At a base level, Sony has achieved every function essential for this system to compete with the 360. You can argue the finer points, but if you suggest that the PS3 isn't exactly what it needs to be, you're simply wrong. It's the inheritor of the PlayStation legacy, and it's also a system that is a technical powerhouse and an attractive one, too. The PS3 is a must-buy – eventually. But is it worth $600 and a night in a parking lot? Not a chance."

Discover how Sony Interactive Entertainment, Nintendo, and Microsoft continue to collaborate to improve player safety across our platforms.

Ex-Tripwire CEO John Gibson shares his 'Entertainment First' vision to capture the agenda-free magic of classics like Star Wars, Zelda, and Metroid.
Yes. Just make a good game instead of worrying it should make some kind of stupid social/political differences in the world... we've got enough of that in the real world. Games are places we can escape to and just have fun.
I fail to see how representing actual underrepresented or making them feel included is an “agenda”. This is an extremely self centered selfish viewpoint. Those actual underrepresented people just want to be recognized as valid. The privileged majority who are always represented take that for granted and can’t deal with the fact that “other” types of people or views exist. Inclusion or awareness isn’t an agenda. It’s representing reality and making those “other” people or stories be seen and align with actual reality.
There are literally thousands and thousands of games to choose from, and if you are annoyed that some have cultural or topical relevance, that’s your problem and you don’t have to buy them. Meanwhile other people who want that actually have games that speak to them. So sick of this “my way or the highway” attitude.
And there are plenty of games out there, if that privileged majority have an issue or don’t want a game based on cultural relevance. Pick up a Switch. Most games are g-rated, noncontroversial cartoons with stories fit for tweens. No reality to get mad at.
Y'all could also, ya know, just not buy games you feel have an agenda? This constant bitching coming from all these whiney men every time they see a game that isn't catering to them specifically is tiring. They latch themselves onto these games and throw endless amounts of harassment as if there aren't another thousand games releasing before/around/after. I'm usually outspoken when it comes to forced diversity in games, but the issue here is you're all bigoted as hell and need to learn to be a little less offended. Y'all become the snowflakes you mocked so much lol.
As ever, this is a misguided expression of the speaker's issue. While of course there are some games (pure puzzle games, etc) that have no agenda, any game with a narrative is conveying some type of message. What people who say they don't like "woke" or "politics in games" actually mean is that they don't like hamfisted, poorly written narratives/characters that are thin veneers for modern political messages that feel out of place in the game's universe. It's why all these people complain about the Veilguard and not Baldur's Gate 3. They both have "woke" characters but in BG3 they feel like they belong in the universe, while in the Veilguard they just feel like generic fantasy skins for modern American 20-somethings.

Mega Mixtape has some good grooves coming in, and Gamerhub UK talks more with them.
That it isn't worth 499-599, maybe 299-399. I still wouldn't take it if it were given to me with all the games and accessories. They are doing nothing to make the gaming community better, just making themselves look bad.
get a 360 or a wii now, and then get a ps3 when the price drops if the games interest you.
Have always said that the ps3 will take time. The golden games that playstation is know for won't be coming out for a year or two. So yeah the system is worth 600 bones easy. Just not at launch more of an investment really
When it comes to gaming consoles, Sony just can't sit back and wait for people to buy the PS3. They are already a full year behind and the production numbers are WAY BELOW what they promised! Even after a delayed launch!
This is what Sony gets for being too greedy! They could have left Blu-Ray out and sold the PS3 at the same cost of the 360.
They already had the majority of studio support for Blu-Ray, so why did they have to mess up the Playstation line by trying to force Blu-Ray into the home? In turn, screwing up the greatest thing that Sony had going for them!
The hype will eventually die down, just like it did with the 360.
When there are 3 systems to choose from with readily available inventory, that is when the real race will begin!
But as of right now, Sony is playing catch-up!
The PS3 is ESPECIALLY not worth it if you don't have a tv that natively accepts a 720p signal! *NONE* of the PS3's games that are 720p will upscale to 1080i! Therefore, if you have a CRT HDTV (only about 2% of them accept a 720p signal, natively) then your PS3 will be downscaling all games to 480p! SONY SUCKS! How is this acceptable?! Yet so many sheep are going to go out there and buy a PS3 without even knowing the facts first! Complete and utter crap! 480p?!?! WTF?!
http://www.joystiq.com/2006...