The design of the 360 was fine, it was just rushed out the door before it was properly tested. It's not so much the designer's fault (How do you test for a RROD before the console has had one?), but rather the fault of whoever demanded it be out a year before the PS3. If there's any "fat" to be trimmed, that's where I'd trim it.
"this is true. All PS3's that are currently bc locked will eventually be unlocked through and official Sony fw update once the PS2 is eventually laid to rest :( in 2010.
There is a lot of FUD in this particular thread. A lot of this should already be known by now to PlayStation fans for instance PS3 games look fine on the PS3 unless you are a n00b and have no idea how to set up one's sytem.."
Dude, the reason there's so much FUD around is because people lik...
"Well they might have sold [6 million in 3 months], but how much is Microsoft losing on each console, due to the low selling price?
They did two price cuts two months in a row [sic, probably meant 2 years in a row] so although they may be selling lots of PS3's [I think he means 360's], how much money are they really making?
Also, some of those must still be in stores [sitting on shelves] and how many of those count towards replacement 360's for those that have broken?" ...
You guys sound like a broken record. The 360 has/had RROD issues, we get it! You can stop harping on about it now.
Probably because Microsoft would rather buy an exclusive than have a first party developer make one. Sony takes the opposite approach and seems to get better results. I honestly don't think the hardware is the only factor here.
And for the record, I think this article is either BS or incredibly misleading, just in case anyone thinks I'm having a go at the PS3.
Hey two games that aren't released yet REALLY prove your point!
Even when KZ2 is released, how do you know a future 360 game isn't going to "look better" than it? Seriously, saying KZ2 is the one proof that the PS3 is the "superior" console is dumb, there's always going to be a better looking game down the line, on both fronts.
Why is it so hard for PS3 fanboys to believe that their console isn't the holy grail? The 360 is a powerful console, it's also e...
Unlike on N4G, developers tend to be very diplomatic about what they say and how they say it, they don't want Sony or Microsoft getting annoyed with them (there are exceptions to this rule, of course, such as Gabe Newell, who loves to moan about the PS3).
On the one hand, he's saying "We want the technology to do the game Justice and the PS3 certainly has that", but on the other he's saying "The PS3 is more technically demanding to develop for".
In other words,...
And by "blend", I mean "sell". The total market for this game is only the people who own GTAIV on the 360 and have an internet connection. DLC isn't THAT popular, I'll be very surprised if this makes the $50million Microsoft paid for it (Was it just this episode or was it 2 or 3?).
You just need to make sure you have a PC powerful enough to play it. That's kinda the point of console games, so you don't have to.
Apparently Blademask doesn't know the difference between Xbox Live, the Xbox Marketplace and Xbox Live Arcade.
To bash the Xbox for having expensive DLC is stupid, Sony is just as guilty of this as anyone else.
I personally believe that 99% of DLC is vastly overpriced, especially map packs, they are the worst offenders for this (They're like what, $10-15 for about 4 maps, when the main game that cost you $50 came with like 15 maps, a single player game, multiplayer, ...
I like the ranking system, whereby using one "perk" unlocks another, I think that's a great idea (similar to how COD4/5 lets you unlock silencers, scopes, etc. for each gun by using that gun a lot), but I dunno, there doesn't seem to be as many "perks" as COD4/5 has. I suppose they can always add new ones through patches, though.
I am jack's complete lack of surprise.
Holy sh*t, the title is "The Most Anticipated 360 ARCADE Titles for 2009", so it's no surprise that there's actually mention of...get this...XBLA titles!
I'm sure there'll be a list of the most anticipated PSN titles for 2009 soon enough.
What the hell are you even talking about? One game runs badly on the 360, so the whole console must be rubbish, right? What about Haze? Didn't that have a plethora of technical issues on the PS3? Must mean the PS3 is rubbish as well, right?
Is it not just possible that Bioware made a poor effort at writing the game in the first place? It wasn't technically challenging or anything, it didn't do anything particularly special that other Unreal Engine games didn't do, it was just bad...
This isn't good for anyone. Even if you're a diehard 360 fan, you need Sony to give Microsoft the competition that will force them to improve the console. And if you're a PS3 fan, obviously you want Sony to be doing well.
I hope the economy gets better, I'd hate for the next generation to be just Nintendo and Microsoft.
Ray tracing is far from "new", it's one of the oldest methods of rendering there is, it's just bloody time consuming.
Oh but here's the cool thing - you don't NEED a second video card for this stuff, when you're not rendering the screen the video card is pretty much sitting idle, so it doesn't matter if you're using it to process physics, AI, etc. before drawing with it. And the thing about games is that it's very difficult NOT to do those in a specific order, so it makes sens...
Does anyone else see the Irony in stating that the 360's longevity is a problem, then immediately stating how Sony's support of the PS2 is a great thing?
The PS2 had no more longevity than the 360, there's nothing stopping Microsoft supporting the 360 for years to come and unlike the Original Xbox, a new generation isn't likely to happen any time soon so Microsoft has every reason to support it.
Didn't Sony sell the CELL to Toshiba?
Graphical comparisons are pointless.
PS3 and 360 are almost technically equal in terms of GRAPHICAL ability.
CELL is better suited to things like Physics and other PROCESSOR intensive tasks (Advantage PS3).
360's GPU is slightly faster at graphics than PS3's and has a better scaler so there's less FPS drops (Advantage 360).
People will disagree with this statement and start bringing console exclusives into it without knowing what fair testin...
If that was the case here, it would put the PS3 on par with the 360 in terms of what multiple-sign-in accounts do. For example, EDF doesn't support multiple achievements per account, there are a few games like that on the 360.
Thankfully, most developers make the effort to account for it, so I don't see why the PS3 would be any different.