gamer2010

Member
CRank: 5Score: 9890

Oh come on, Sony say the same kind of stuff. It just gets ignored, because the whiny PS3 fan base are the only ones that make a big deal about this kind of stuff. You can get easy hits if you put up an article about some comment Microsoft made, because the rabid PS3 fan base just works itself into a frenzy over it.

5881d ago 8 agree10 disagreeView comment

Sure, so you can get disconnected every few games on Uncharted 2. That's what happens to me.
And there are a lot of features that make Live work better. I can tell a lot better what my friends are doing exactly on the 360 than on the PS3 and I can communicate with them better.

5881d ago 2 agree3 disagreeView comment

Damn I never have seen those screen shots before. You guys are right that it doesn't look all that amazing.
But of course PS3 loyalist will hype it to the moon and back.

5881d ago 3 agree5 disagreeView comment

What a tool.
Show me any screen shot with blocky shadows. Try it, I know you can't. The shadows are excellent and are certainly better than the pixelated and jagged shadows found in Killzone 2. And it does have dynamic lighting you moron. Read the damn article in GameInformer.

5881d ago 3 agree6 disagreeView comment

I'm not conservative or liberal, but why do you guys always act like it is the conservatives that are in favor of censoring and controlling game content? Liberals are just as much behind it. Jack Thompson and Hillary Clinton are liberals after all.
Like I said, I don't agree with either party, I'm just pointing out an error in some people's thinking.

5881d ago 6 agree2 disagreeView comment

Meh, ps3 has no games. :(

Which is actually closer to the truth seeing as how the 360 has nearly twice as many games as the PS3.

5881d ago 4 agree6 disagreeView comment

I agree, the PS3 lineup looks boring as hell. But I don't know why you brought that up in an article about the awesome looking 360 lineup.

5881d ago 6 agree4 disagreeView comment

Give me a break. The PS3's lineup is comprised of mostly mediocre, boring crap.

Halo Reach and Mass Effect 2 alone destroy the entire weak PS3 lineup.

5881d ago 4 agree5 disagreeView comment

"Meh" is the only way to describe the mind of a PS3 fanboy.
Not much there.

5881d ago 5 agree9 disagreeView comment

True, but those games sucked on the PS2 compared to the Xbox. For that reason I always thought of them as Xbox games.

5881d ago 3 agree1 disagreeView comment

A console's lineup is not only made up of exclusives, all games that come out on a console are part of its lineup.

5881d ago 3 agree2 disagreeView comment

Are you dumb, nix? We know Natal is coming out later this year and they are obviously going to have quite a few games to launch it with. That right there is going be quite a few games shown at E3.

It doesn't matter though. The 360's lineup is already amazingly strong even without the games that will be announced at E3. I honestly can't think of another year this generation in which I wanted to get so many exclusives on one console.

5881d ago 4 agree2 disagreeView comment

I agree with you, Solidus. That Immortal321 guy is off in la la land.
The PS3 had a good year last year, but like many things PS3-related things become exaggerated and distorted the more times the story is told. It didn't blow the 360 away last year. If you took away even one game from the PS3's lineup last year there wouldn't have been much difference between the lineups.
This year though the 360 has a killer lineup and the PS3's is the one falling behind.

5881d ago 8 agree19 disagreeView comment

Don't worry, mcnablejr, people exaggerate the difference. My roommate has decent PC rig and I have seen him play Mass Effect, Fallout 3, Dragon's Age and a whole bunch of other games and the difference is pretty negligible.
Honestly, the difference between those games on the PC and on the 360 really aren't a big deal.
Better resolution is not nearly as noticeable as some people make it out to be. Better textures? Eh, it depends. Usually the difference is still fairly mild. ...

5882d ago 0 agree3 disagreeView comment

Put the crack pipe down. Halo Reach looks better than God of War 3. Those last GOW3 screenshots looked meh.

5882d ago 2 agree9 disagreeView comment

Ok sure, that's why Mass Effect 2 looks lots better than Mass Effect 1 and Halo Reach looks so much better than Halo 3 and Gears 3 will look better than Gears 2.
Epic has already been talking about some of the improvements they have made to their engine, like better lighting, and you can bet that Gears 3 will look noticeably better than Gears 2.
In 2010 with all the games I have seen the 360 is passing the PS3 by.

5882d ago 2 agree7 disagreeView comment

Get your eyes checked Chubear.
Or better yet pull your head out of Sony's @ss and maybe then you will be able to see better.

5882d ago 3 agree5 disagreeView comment

What, he is right.
Killzone 2 has a few good textures, but most of them were kind of flat and lacking in detail. Halo 3 has consistently good textures for the most part.
Don't tell me though, you are one of those ps3 fanboys that only plays the ps3 and doesn't have a clue what 360 games really look like.

5882d ago 4 agree7 disagreeView comment

You think this http://www.indianvideogamer... looks amazing?

Ha! It looks good, but I think many of you are letting your nostalgia and love of the series get in the way of your objectivity. Try to imagine it from the perspective of someone that has never played the previous God of War games. Good, no do...

5882d ago 0 agree0 disagreeView comment

It is hilarious that that guy gets mad at Arnon for showing a screenshot comparison and then posts a video. What does it matter? We are judging Halo Reach on some crappy quality scans and we don't have video, so we are comparing screenshot to screenshot, which clearly shows Halo Reach looks better.

5882d ago 2 agree1 disagreeView comment