That is distorting the truth. LBP portable is not the same as the console version, and nothing precludes a person from buying both if they have both PS3 and PSP.
So yeah, "exclusivity" should mean what it means, and not be modified for your own purposes.
Thankfully my sarcasm meter isn't completely broken. Thanks for the laugh.
Indeed, very hard not to take a peek at the trailers.
But, congratulations to ND yet again.
That does make me wonder - do all games support platinum trophies?
I suspect not. There must be a quality assurance process that stops a cheap game from giving out easy platinums as its selling point.
So why do it? Why "focus on these rumors" as you say?
Why does it need to generate 10 billion dollars in *profits*? Try again.
After all the installs on an 80GB PS3, it will still have more usable space than a 20GB 360, and infinitely more space than a 0GB 360. There's no need to exaggerate.
As you've pointed out yourself, it just makes it easier for the developer to know that a HDD is mandatory in each unit. If it should come down to the availability of free space, it is certainly much easier for a PS3 user to free up some on their unit, than for a developer to program around the possibility of even o...
You mean the Wii? obviously price is not the only determining factor. While you choose to ignore the advantages that PS3 has, they readily explain why people are still buying PS3s, and why the overall sales rate of the PS3 exceeds that of the 360, despite the pricing difference.
There is no reason to believe, other than spite, that PS3 won't meet the target that they've set out, again.
It is not surprising that certain camps of the gaming community would want to propagate the "belief" that Sony will cut PS3's price soon.
Apart from the relentless insistence from certain segments of the media, has there been any solid evidence that it will happen soon?
What fuels these rumours then? I'm sure some have genuine interest in seeing a cheaper PS3, but more likely, the intent proves to be a malicious one.
Which is how it was meant to be played anyway.
I agree. I do not subscribe to the notion of having to pay for the ability to play my own games, on my own connection.
As has been pointed out before, if online gaming was available for free, few people would care to pay for those extra features on Live. Really, Microsoft chose to hold online gaming to ransom this way.
Good points there, all summed up in a concise paragraph (unlike the article that whores for hits with its one-point-per-page antic).
why is 2009 the year of the xbox and PC? Did you miss all the games that have been released for the PS3 this year, with more to come?
Hmmm, it seems Sony can never do right in the eyes of the media. Oh well, it's business as usual :).
That is interesting to know about the timelines.
I don't think examples from Netflix proves anything about blu-ray's durability. It is sad that people are able to come to a conclusion with such little thought process.
Surviving Netflix calls for something beyond any physical media could offer. If anything, blu-ray fairs the best.
Don't think he can provide any source for his claim. Don't hold your breath.
Ironically, blu-ray's data being closer to the surface and more vulnerable, has necessitated a protective coating that beats HD-DVD by miles.
The old proponents of HD-DVD (such as the sample above) had always used blu-ray's physical structure as its negative point, but were never able to account for the protective coating that made blu-ray even more durable than the old DVDs.
thank you family guy
It is sad, isn't it?
As far along as Sony has come (despite the perverse onslaught of media hostilities and their double standards through the years), for an article like this to appear now just smacks of bitterness and contempt.
I just hope that the majority of people can see the reason behind their madness (as most of the posters here do). Can I be optimistic about this?
Indeed, getting a PS3 owner's admission is the only ploy they can use to prove a point. Fortunately, the truth is obvious.