I agree. It's difficult to get 'stoked' about the PS3 when the Xbox's graphics look so much better (I'm not exagerating here, Gears of War looks way better than R:FOM). I'm sure the PS3 will eventually surpass the 360, but with Sony knowing what the Xbox already had, they must have known that a sub-par launch would hurt big time.
I agree 100% that we need to give PS3 a bit more time to produce some killer games. However, look at it from a developer standpoint: I can produce a game for Xbox 360 or Wii, both easy to code for (minus the motion controls of course!) and with large install bases. Or I could make a PS3 game which will take me longer to make (if I really want to take advantage of the Cell) and, if numbers are anything, won't sell more than 500,000 copies.
Sony needs to start throwing some serio...
I have to agree with Peter Moore that 'you get what you pay for.' If Sony pulls off a system that's as good as Xbox Live (for consoles) for free, then I'll stop payin'. But so far, the PlayStation Network is unfortunately quite sub par by any standards. I wish Sony had had a better plan at launch...
I don't want to rag on Sony too much, but I agree that Blu-ray is Sony's number one mistake. Unfortunately, their console is now totally tied to the success or failure of the media format. Thankfully, things are looking pretty good for Blu-ray now, but the format itself is still small potatoes. Very few people have the technology to actually enjoy Blu-ray discs, so to most consumers it's not a big selling point. It probably will become more important in the next few years, but the big 'S' has...
I actually bought a PS3 THEN traded it in for a 360... I'm a massive Sony fan (have ~40 PS2 games) but so far, the PS3 has been nothing but disappointments. It's not unlikely that Sony will ultimately take the lead (most analysts put it at like 2009 though) but right now there's absolutely no reason to buy their system (especially since there are still good PS2 RPGs coming out!).
If they'd waited a year later, they may as well have given up. The Wii and 360 would have enjoyed ...
I'd say that it's pretty darned glitchy in terms of pop-in and sound fuzzing (not bad but not great). I've also played through R:FOM and it doesn't look near as good as Gears of War. I'm sure the PS3 will have graphically amazing titles (Lair, MGSIV, etc.) but, having played several dozen hours on both systems in the last month (and being a big Sony fan!) I have to admit that there's nothing on PS3 yet that rivals the best of 360...
said that the PS3 version didn't look all that hot (in comparison to other next gen games). It's pretty much a last gen fighter (in terms of animation) with better graphics. So why would the 360 version look any different? It'll probably be no better, no worse.
And BTW, the blurb for this news article (as well as the title) are confusing/misleading. I don't want to have to go to the actual article to even understand what the heck the story is about.
Let's look at this rationally:
On the plus side, Folding @ Home is a good thing that's going to help some scientists in California improve the technology of 3D structural protein predictions. This may lead to all kinds good advances in the ability to predict disease states due to misfolded proteins (incidentally the people at PSM who claimed that this project is meant to cure cancer are idiots).
On the minus side, despite all the hype that F@H is getting, no ...
Having a bit of experience with scientific computing, I knew the F@H would be a massive system hog. Although I like the idea in principle, I wasn't willing to leave my PS3 on overnight, burning out the internal components. In my experience, computers tend to last longer when they're left on (not on and off all the time); but I can't say the same about consoles. We'll have to see in the future if PS3 'folders' experience greater than normal console failures - I certainly hope not, but I wasn't...
I used to name all my characters 'F$%ktard' and things like that in my GameBoy games. My parents never caught me but my uncle did once... I didn't get in trouble though, he laughed his ass off.
was predicting that Kojima would delay MGSIV to 2008. It's a bummer since releasing it during the holiday season would surely have sold consoles. I don't think that they delayed it for the install base... it seems like rather circular logic: Not buying consoles due to lack of games - Not releasing games due to lack of install base! MGSIV cannot afford to flop. They're probably just tweaking it unfortunately.
No console has ever won a console war due to superior graphics and technology (and higher price). I don't think that Sony's gonna capitulate or anything, and the PS3 and 360 will probably be neck-and-neck, but man, Sony's gotta give gamers a reason to buy their overpriced console. I'm not buying a PS3 for Blu-ray, the Cell processor or 'location free support'. I buy it for GAMES and Sony has yet to deliver anything exciting on that front. There are some interesting titles coming... but none o...
Umm, given that I've never actually played more than 25 mins of Halo (and never Halo 2) I wouldn't call myself a fanboy. I'm just calling them like I see them.
Honestly, Halo 3 looks great. However, if you look at a game like Resistance: Fall of Man, the graphics aren't amazing, but the game runs so smoothly that it more than makes up for it. There's more to games than graphics, and if Halo 3 is a low end PC game, than high-end PCs must be out of anyone's price range.
To realize that this article has nothing to do with gaming. If we just stick to the game news we'll have more than enough evidence that Nintendo and MS are currently trashing Sony.
Is because the PSM article appeared to imply that it was exclusive and the official Haze site:
http://hazegame.uk.ubi.com/...
doesn't mention the Xbox 360 anywhere. Gamespot however lists it as multi-platform.
I was under the impression that this was a PS3 only game. The official site only says PS3, why does it say 'multi' on N4G. Anyone know?
But none of those titles is really compelling. Lair and Heavenly Sword may, for lack of a better term, suck. They're new and we have no idea how they'll turn out. One big game (Metal Gear Solid 4) isn't going to make anyone (other than an idiot like myself) shell out 600 bones. We can keep repeating the few remaining PS3 exclusives like a mantra but sales numbers are telling: people aren't caring. Hey, I'm as sad about it as anyone else, but I see a 360 in my near future...
Even though I own a PS3, I'd have to agree with the Xboxers that Sony is partially to blame here. Their strategy behind the PS3 so far has been downright awful. Look at the next 8 months, there's no incentive to buy a PS3 over an Xbox 360. The 360 is cheaper, has more exclusives and, so far is getting a lot more positive press. Hey, I'd love to see Sony pull out of their rut, but for God's sake the company has to DO something (and that something involves more games).
But Kuest (24) is absolutely correct. What kind of marketing strategy is "Here's our expensive console, I know there's nothing great yet, but give us a chance and have patience"?!?!?! Ridiculous.
Fanboyism ruins everything and here's why:
If I go out and buy a Sony or Microsoft console JUST because I'm loyal to the brand, then what's their incentive to actually work for my money? You want Sony to shape up? Vote with your dollars. The big 'S' isn't going...