Oh, so if software upgrades = new version, we must be on the 50th Xbox and PS100 by now.
assclown, that is quite typical of a post someone with a name like yours would make.
First of all, PS3 did launch with a XMB. From day one. PSP even had one. Xbox never had a XMB, ever. And they never will, it's a sony owned IP. Also, PS3 has 512 MB's of RAM, not 512KB. Guess what? So does Xbox 360. Cross game chat is also featured on Vita, which... You guessed it! ... has 512MB of RAM.
Also folks, to clarify since I've gotten messages about the issue, if you like to record your games with a HD PVR , you will not be affected by this.
Again, THIS IS NOT PS3 HAVING ANY HARDWARE/FEATURE REMOVED. The only change takes place on the actual Blu-Ray disc and ONLY FOR MOVIES. Component cables will still work just fine, however if you play one of the newer discs that has the mandatory analog copy protection (after 2013), it will be downgraded to just above standar...
Read my post above. This affects gaming in no way, shape, or form.
This article fails to point out that there are passive 3DTVs that use the same cheap glasses you get from the movie theater, that not everyone gets a headache from 3D, and that Sony isn't requiring anyone to make the switch to 3D, it is entirely optional.
The author should just go buy a 2DTV and quit bitching and moaning while the rest of us enjoy our 3D. To many of us, 3D actually adds a strategic advantage to gameplay. Especially considering it's kinda how we see r...
Guys, here's a little information from someone who authors Blu-Ray discs for a living.
Sony is NOT removing the ability to output via component from PS3. PERIOD. Gaming and even most movies will still output in HD via component. When you author a Blu-Ray disc, you have the option to set a flag that disables the video to be output in HD via an analog source such as component. If this flag is enabled, the output will still work, but the quality of the video will be downgrad...
Vita can be used as a phone, so that renders that argument a moot point. And why would people want to pay money for a handheld game that looks like a console game? Maybe because they can take their console game on the road with them and resume right where they left off on the console? You cannot get trophies on your phone for a PS3 game, so that also is a stupid argument. Phones have shitty games and they are nowhere near the quality of games you will find on a PSP, PS3, Vita, DS, 3DS, etc......
I like em', gives me a moment to hit the bowl before the action starts.
This is just stupid, they don't even know the exact specs of the CPU, GPU, memory, or anything and they're trying to make comparison articles? Hold on, let me try...
"How many Wii U's will it take to make one PS4? You'll need to duct tape 500 of them together and then throw a PS3 on top of that pile to make one PS4, because Sony said it will contain tech that is at least slightly more powerful than PS3. At least slightly more powerful means 5000 more core...
It'll come in the form of a price increase later this year. :P
It would reduce resolution in order to achieve the effect, but on a screen that small, who cares? PS Vita's screen has more than enough pixels to half the resolution and still have a good image.
Sounds like we did with the PS3 when it launched. "Just wait for Lair."... "Just wait for heavenly sword"... "Just wait for price cut"...
In reality, no one game makes a system. 3DS suffers because it's too similar to the DS, and the casual gamer isn't as amazed by 3D as Nintendo hoped they would be. They just see it as an expensive DS. One that has a 3D screen that you can only see at certain angles. One that makes using the built in mo...
A way to make 3D cheap... For instance, you could apply this tech to Vita and make it have a 3D screen that was actually better than 3DS', as it has a 120 degree field of view instead of having to sit dead center to the screen.
Oh yeah, 3DS' sales are definitely indicative of the fact that it's gonna give Vita a hell of a run for it's money. That thing is flying off the shelves! /s
Microsoft can keep it's pay to play online tactics, as well as it's proprietary hardware the hell away from my console, thank you.
Not to mention, competition fuels innovation. We actually gain more from having more choices, as they have to work harder to impress us and to keep their products affordable.
Going multiplat won't magically make GG's games any better, so I do not see your point.
Gears of War and Halo 3/ODST/Reach/4 dominate the space marine market... My point is that KZ didn't bring enough to the table to really compete against these games (not saying they're in direct competition being that they're console exclusives, but that is the standard that the killzone games will be measured against anyway).
And since when does expressing a valid opinion = trolling? Go back to your corner and cry you butthurt fanboy. I'm one of Sony's str...
Because it's a space marine FPS released into a market flooded with space marine FPS's, which had a story that was generic at best, acting that was generic at best, and gameplay that was repetitive just like the last one. Don't get me wrong, KZ3 has points where it shines, such as multiplayer, but other than that it's just another run of the mill space marine shooter. When it's going up against the likes of Gears and Halo, it just didn't bring enough to the table to co...
They understand that, which is why they know not to put all their eggs in the motion control basket and keep on releasing quality exclusive core content for those of us who do not do the waggle... unlike some companies.
Only lagging behind kinect by a couple million in sales (with a MUCH smaller advertising budget) is getting bitch slapped? Also, using cameras alone to control a video game is tech from the 90's, it's been around since the dawn of the PC webcam. PS2 brought it to consoles. All kinect did was upgrade that concept with depth sensing, just like Move upgraded Wii's "last gen tech" with a camera, augmented reality, video/voice chat, head/body tracking, etc.
S...