Which Console is most prepared for the long term?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="Javy03"][QUOTE="musicalmac"][QUOTE="Javy03"]The "blinking" problem is a not a big problem. Very few PS3s have that. Nothing like the ring of death but I digress. My point is having a new HD movie format to take advantage of the growing number of HDTVs as well as having a new larger format for gaming is beneficial. I cant see what other system is more future proof then the PS3? THe 360 depends on add ons, batteries for controllers, paying to play online, and VGA movie output. I hardly would consider that furture proff as well as the Wii and its weaker hardware and focus on two genres of games, Mini games and Party games.musicalmacYes, I do know the 360 isn't known for it's longevity in more cases than M$ would like to admit (I'm guessing). I'm on my second. Depending on add-ons is hardly a problem. Look at the iPod. The rampant success that little thing has had is based a lot on all the 3rd party support. Hardly anyone makes 3rd party products for the Zune, but there are walls of iPod accessories. What it does is allow for personalization, and more importantly, versitility. Anyone who can afford a 360 can also afford $5 for online. You aren't going to miss it. That's a dollar menu lunch at McDonalds. After all I have read and seen, the 360 seems more versitile and more usefull as a multimedia box. I still have yet to be shown otherwise, but if you have more information that I don't have, I'm more than willing to hear you out. Yes but the ipods accessories to pretty up your ipod or custimize it or the 200 dollar add on to play HD movies without HDMI is not in the same category. The ipod is successful because its an MP3 player that offers style and multimedia functions like downloading music and movies. The add ons for that is merely cosmetic but the add ons for the 360 are more serious. They are expensive and for the purpose of getting the system to do things its competition does right out of the box. Pretty ipod skins and 100 dollar 20gb HDD, 200 dollar movie player, 20 dollar controller charger are not on the same level and do not help you custimize your 360. Thats what the face plate is for, the add ons allow the 360 to run at the capability of its competition or optimum potential. You shouldnt have to build a transformer to get that. As for online the truth of the matter is most of the gamers last gen did not play games online. Paying 50 dollars a year just didnt appeal to them. But guess what will appeal to the nononline gamer of last gen. Free online gaming. You can justify the price of online just like you can justify the 100 dollar difference between 360 and PS3, but the point is it will be a huge perk for some who like me did not online game until it was free. Exactly how is the 360 more versitile?? My Mac is connected to my 360, and it allows me to play all the music in my iTunes library, all the photos in my iPhoto library, and all the movies in my movies folder easily. I can download a demo, play a game, and listen to music from my computer at the same time. I don't know if the PS3 is capable of doing this. They're also implimenting additional techonlogy in the future (IPTV I think?...). I'm not sure on all the details, so I'm going to refrain from commenting on it too much. If someone wants to fill that gap, be my guest. Connecting media players to a 360 (such as an iPod or other device) is very simple, and your music, photos, and movies show up appropriately. On the PS3, you have to go rooting through catagorized folders on the iPod, which give you no indication of what song, artist, genre, etc. you may be looking for. The 360 has a universal menu that you can always access to see a wealth of information regardless of what I may be doing. I do not know if the PS3 offers this freedom. I believe the majority of 360 owners use XBOX Live in one fashion or another, be it the Silver or Gold memberships. I don't have stats to back up my claim, but I did read that a large percentage were gaming online. Based on what I've written here, what can the PS3 do? I'm very curious, because I don't know as much about it. This is why I ask. The PS3 can play movies and music straight from an mp3 player just like the 360. The PS3 can also take many other USB using devices. THe PS3 will also be getting downloadable movies via PSN. BUt here are some key differences. The PS3 allows the use of any Blutooth device so if you want to use a headset and dont wanna be restricted to a Sony brand you can use any Blu ray headset for your games. You can also use Blutooth Keyboards and Mouse. The 360 cant do that. You also can roam the internet if you so chose for free. You can also upgrade your HDD without being forced to pay for an overpriced Sony brand like Microsoft does with their 20gb 100 dollar HDD. So as downloading demos and movies start taxing on my HDD I can either back them up on my computer or buy any brand I want to get a bargin 80gb or 100gb HDD and install it. The 360 doesnt permit that. Your defense for the 360s being future proof is that you can play videos, music and photos via your ipod. THats what I would hardly consider future proof. The PS3 can do it similiarly but why would I want to watch a downgraded movie on my HDTV that came from my ipod when I can watch it at 1080p via blu ray. And why would I want to listen to music via my console when I can do it just fine from a boombox or computer. THe future is not pluggin in your ipod to your console its having multimedia functions like HD movies, motion sensing, free online, HDMI inputs, freedom to upgrade without overpaying, and a larger format for devs to make amazing games. DVD and ipod functionality hardly cut it IMO.
360 and Wii, the PS3 is too damn hard to develope for, if it took the devs 6 years to use the PS2 to the fullest,(Just look at GoW2, best looking game on the PS2) it will take devs longer to use the PS3, the fact the PS3 is harder to make games for, means the Wii and 360 will have games out on time/early while the PS3's will be delayed.NagidarWhy would it take longer. Devs already have said its easier to dev for then the PS2, and Sony have been making better tools to make it easier to make games for the PS3. Yes the PS2 aged well over time but games like MGS2, and SOTC that are hardly knew are still very beautiful. The PS3 is gonna improve overtime just fine. As for delayed games, thats a little silly. The PS2 and Xbox shared ports and they came out at the same time and the Xbox was alot easier to dev for then the PS2. Games are only delayed now because the PS3 is new and the devs had less time with a final PS3 dev kit. By summer or a little later you will see games released at the same time like GTA and others.
[QUOTE="musicalmac"][QUOTE="Javy03"][QUOTE="musicalmac"][QUOTE="Javy03"]The "blinking" problem is a not a big problem. Very few PS3s have that. Nothing like the ring of death but I digress. My point is having a new HD movie format to take advantage of the growing number of HDTVs as well as having a new larger format for gaming is beneficial. I cant see what other system is more future proof then the PS3? THe 360 depends on add ons, batteries for controllers, paying to play online, and VGA movie output. I hardly would consider that furture proff as well as the Wii and its weaker hardware and focus on two genres of games, Mini games and Party games.Javy03Yes, I do know the 360 isn't known for it's longevity in more cases than M$ would like to admit (I'm guessing). I'm on my second. Depending on add-ons is hardly a problem. Look at the iPod. The rampant success that little thing has had is based a lot on all the 3rd party support. Hardly anyone makes 3rd party products for the Zune, but there are walls of iPod accessories. What it does is allow for personalization, and more importantly, versitility. Anyone who can afford a 360 can also afford $5 for online. You aren't going to miss it. That's a dollar menu lunch at McDonalds. After all I have read and seen, the 360 seems more versitile and more usefull as a multimedia box. I still have yet to be shown otherwise, but if you have more information that I don't have, I'm more than willing to hear you out. Yes but the ipods accessories to pretty up your ipod or custimize it or the 200 dollar add on to play HD movies without HDMI is not in the same category. The ipod is successful because its an MP3 player that offers style and multimedia functions like downloading music and movies. The add ons for that is merely cosmetic but the add ons for the 360 are more serious. They are expensive and for the purpose of getting the system to do things its competition does right out of the box. Pretty ipod skins and 100 dollar 20gb HDD, 200 dollar movie player, 20 dollar controller charger are not on the same level and do not help you custimize your 360. Thats what the face plate is for, the add ons allow the 360 to run at the capability of its competition or optimum potential. You shouldnt have to build a transformer to get that. As for online the truth of the matter is most of the gamers last gen did not play games online. Paying 50 dollars a year just didnt appeal to them. But guess what will appeal to the nononline gamer of last gen. Free online gaming. You can justify the price of online just like you can justify the 100 dollar difference between 360 and PS3, but the point is it will be a huge perk for some who like me did not online game until it was free. Exactly how is the 360 more versitile?? My Mac is connected to my 360, and it allows me to play all the music in my iTunes library, all the photos in my iPhoto library, and all the movies in my movies folder easily. I can download a demo, play a game, and listen to music from my computer at the same time. I don't know if the PS3 is capable of doing this. They're also implimenting additional techonlogy in the future (IPTV I think?...). I'm not sure on all the details, so I'm going to refrain from commenting on it too much. If someone wants to fill that gap, be my guest. Connecting media players to a 360 (such as an iPod or other device) is very simple, and your music, photos, and movies show up appropriately. On the PS3, you have to go rooting through catagorized folders on the iPod, which give you no indication of what song, artist, genre, etc. you may be looking for. The 360 has a universal menu that you can always access to see a wealth of information regardless of what I may be doing. I do not know if the PS3 offers this freedom. I believe the majority of 360 owners use XBOX Live in one fashion or another, be it the Silver or Gold memberships. I don't have stats to back up my claim, but I did read that a large percentage were gaming online. Based on what I've written here, what can the PS3 do? I'm very curious, because I don't know as much about it. This is why I ask. The PS3 can play movies and music straight from an mp3 player just like the 360. The PS3 can also take many other USB using devices. THe PS3 will also be getting downloadable movies via PSN. BUt here are some key differences. The PS3 allows the use of any Blutooth device so if you want to use a headset and dont wanna be restricted to a Sony brand you can use any Blu ray headset for your games. You can also use Blutooth Keyboards and Mouse. The 360 cant do that. You also can roam the internet if you so chose for free. You can also upgrade your HDD without being forced to pay for an overpriced Sony brand like Microsoft does with their 20gb 100 dollar HDD. So as downloading demos and movies start taxing on my HDD I can either back them up on my computer or buy any brand I want to get a bargin 80gb or 100gb HDD and install it. The 360 doesnt permit that. Your defense for the 360s being future proof is that you can play videos, music and photos via your ipod. THats what I would hardly consider future proof. The PS3 can do it similiarly but why would I want to watch a downgraded movie on my HDTV that came from my ipod when I can watch it at 1080p via blu ray. And why would I want to listen to music via my console when I can do it just fine from a boombox or computer. THe future is not pluggin in your ipod to your console its having multimedia functions like HD movies, motion sensing, free online, HDMI inputs, freedom to upgrade without overpaying, and a larger format for devs to make amazing games. DVD and ipod functionality hardly cut it IMO. Hmm... I'm confident you either read my post and didn't get it, or chose not to answer some tougher questions. I also have the feeling you're missing the point. Who wants to browse the internet on their PS3 when they could do so better on a computer? It's much more practical. Who wants to store everything on their console when they could store it on their computer, and stream it to the console? That way you can play it on the computer, media device, and TV. The HD on a PS3 is larger yes, but so are Blu-Ray movies. I don't know the size, but being an editor, I have the feeling they're quite bulky. Regardless of what kind of HD you end up putting in your PS3, HD movies are going to fill it up quickly, I'd think. Can the PS3 download, game, and stream at the same time? Is there a universal menu which allows instant access to anything related to the system, friends, or live, streaming media? This is yes or no. I didn't say the iPod was the reason for the 360's future success, and saying so is simply a reflection of your understanding. I have a feeling you're running out of good reasons, and are now resorting to such things as posted above.
[QUOTE="Javy03"]The "blinking" problem is a not a big problem. Very few PS3s have that. Nothing like the ring of death but I digress. My point is having a new HD movie format to take advantage of the growing number of HDTVs as well as having a new larger format for gaming is beneficial. I cant see what other system is more future proof then the PS3? THe 360 depends on add ons, batteries for controllers, paying to play online, and VGA movie output. I hardly would consider that furture proff as well as the Wii and its weaker hardware and focus on two genres of games, Mini games and Party games.musicalmacYes, I do know the 360 isn't known for it's longevity in more cases than M$ would like to admit (I'm guessing). I'm on my second. Depending on add-ons is hardly a problem. Look at the iPod. The rampant success that little thing has had is based a lot on all the 3rd party support. Hardly anyone makes 3rd party products for the Zune, but there are walls of iPod accessories. What it does is allow for personalization, and more importantly, versitility. Anyone who can afford a 360 can also afford $5 for online. You aren't going to miss it. That's a dollar menu lunch at McDonalds. After all I have read and seen, the 360 seems more versitile and more usefull as a multimedia box. I still have yet to be shown otherwise, but if you have more information that I don't have, I'm more than willing to hear you out.
If u are really asking all these questions why not go buy a ps3 and find out for yourself? Yes maybe it doesnt have all the games the xbox 360 has in itz wall of games but I can promise u one thing, give sony a year and u will see more games on the ps3 then a years time u have seen with the xbox 360.
As for the long term issue, sony has already proven this to there user base that each of there systems last 10 years, as for MS they already shown me what they are capable if success doesnt come to there console, they will abandon it and make a new one and force users to buy there next system, which is why alot of sony die hards stick by sony because no matter what ppl say, sony has alwayz kept der word and made each of there consoles last 10 years, and not only that, but with the ps3 its a no brainer to say what system is here for the long term, because as years pass u will see everything move to hi definition and while sony will have already have all this in its system making it easy for developers to addopt to the system with bluray and all, microsoft will have to do sum catching up to do because they will be stuck using dvd's for there games. Lookin forward to the future and why am I so excited about my ps3 more then I am with my xbox 360?
Because as time passes and developers learn how to bring the best out of the ps3 hardware and use bluray capacity and all to there advantage, u will see the difference between what the ps3 is capable of doing vs the competition and is why I am in rush to see metal gear solid 4 and all the other awsome games coming later in 2008, because ill be enjoying all the games like god of war 2 and mass effect and halo 3 and motorstorm and heavenly sword for this year and more. So I am ready for whatever my ps3 has to offer for us in the future and it is going to be an amazing ride. :)
[QUOTE="Nagidar"]360 and Wii, the PS3 is too damn hard to develope for, if it took the devs 6 years to use the PS2 to the fullest,(Just look at GoW2, best looking game on the PS2) it will take devs longer to use the PS3, the fact the PS3 is harder to make games for, means the Wii and 360 will have games out on time/early while the PS3's will be delayed.Javy03Why would it take longer. Devs already have said its easier to dev for then the PS2, and Sony have been making better tools to make it easier to make games for the PS3. Yes the PS2 aged well over time but games like MGS2, and SOTC that are hardly knew are still very beautiful. The PS3 is gonna improve overtime just fine. As for delayed games, thats a little silly. The PS2 and Xbox shared ports and they came out at the same time and the Xbox was alot easier to dev for then the PS2. Games are only delayed now because the PS3 is new and the devs had less time with a final PS3 dev kit. By summer or a little later you will see games released at the same time like GTA and others.
 WTH are you talking about, the Cell is kicking devs asses, the Cell is a pain in the arse to develope for, thats going to cause problems in the long run this gen.
Yes, I do know the 360 isn't known for it's longevity in more cases than M$ would like to admit (I'm guessing). I'm on my second. Depending on add-ons is hardly a problem. Look at the iPod. The rampant success that little thing has had is based a lot on all the 3rd party support. Hardly anyone makes 3rd party products for the Zune, but there are walls of iPod accessories. What it does is allow for personalization, and more importantly, versitility. Anyone who can afford a 360 can also afford $5 for online. You aren't going to miss it. That's a dollar menu lunch at McDonalds. After all I have read and seen, the 360 seems more versitile and more usefull as a multimedia box. I still have yet to be shown otherwise, but if you have more information that I don't have, I'm more than willing to hear you out.[QUOTE="musicalmac"][QUOTE="Javy03"]The "blinking" problem is a not a big problem. Very few PS3s have that. Nothing like the ring of death but I digress. My point is having a new HD movie format to take advantage of the growing number of HDTVs as well as having a new larger format for gaming is beneficial. I cant see what other system is more future proof then the PS3? THe 360 depends on add ons, batteries for controllers, paying to play online, and VGA movie output. I hardly would consider that furture proff as well as the Wii and its weaker hardware and focus on two genres of games, Mini games and Party games.squallff8_fan
If u are really asking all these questions why not go buy a ps3 and find out for yourself? Yes maybe it doesnt have all the games the xbox 360 has in itz wall of games but I can promise u one thing, give sony a year and u will see more games on the ps3 then a years time u have seen with the xbox 360.
As for the long term issue, sony has already proven this to there user base that each of there systems last 10 years, as for MS they already shown me what they are capable if success doesnt come to there console, they will abandon it and make a new one and force users to buy there next system, which is why alot of sony die hards stick by sony because no matter what ppl say, sony has alwayz kept der word and made each of there consoles last 10 years, and not only that, but with the ps3 its a no brainer to say what system is here for the long term, because as years pass u will see everything move to hi definition and while sony will have already have all this in its system making it easy for developers to addopt to the system with bluray and all, microsoft will have to do sum catching up to do because they will be stuck using dvd's for there games. Lookin forward to the future and why am I so excited about my ps3 more then I am with my xbox 360?
Because as time passes and developers learn how to bring the best out of the ps3 hardware and use bluray capacity and all to there advantage, u will see the difference between what the ps3 is capable of doing vs the competition and is why I am in rush to see metal gear solid 4 and all the other awsome games coming later in 2008, because ill be enjoying all the games like god of war 2 and mass effect and halo 3 and motorstorm and heavenly sword for this year and more. So I am ready for whatever my ps3 has to offer for us in the future and it is going to be an amazing ride. :)
Saying I should buy a PS3 because I have questions about it is quite possibly the silliest thing I've read today. No offense, but I don't have 650 dollars lying around getting bored. I appreciate the post, but you've only stated a lot of unknowns. If anything, you're helping affirm my belief that the 360 is the superior multimedia machine.But as long as this remains a problem, I won't step foot near it:
[QUOTE="Javy03"][QUOTE="musicalmac"][QUOTE="Javy03"][QUOTE="musicalmac"][QUOTE="Javy03"]The "blinking" problem is a not a big problem. Very few PS3s have that. Nothing like the ring of death but I digress. My point is having a new HD movie format to take advantage of the growing number of HDTVs as well as having a new larger format for gaming is beneficial. I cant see what other system is more future proof then the PS3? THe 360 depends on add ons, batteries for controllers, paying to play online, and VGA movie output. I hardly would consider that furture proff as well as the Wii and its weaker hardware and focus on two genres of games, Mini games and Party games.musicalmacYes, I do know the 360 isn't known for it's longevity in more cases than M$ would like to admit (I'm guessing). I'm on my second. Depending on add-ons is hardly a problem. Look at the iPod. The rampant success that little thing has had is based a lot on all the 3rd party support. Hardly anyone makes 3rd party products for the Zune, but there are walls of iPod accessories. What it does is allow for personalization, and more importantly, versitility. Anyone who can afford a 360 can also afford $5 for online. You aren't going to miss it. That's a dollar menu lunch at McDonalds. After all I have read and seen, the 360 seems more versitile and more usefull as a multimedia box. I still have yet to be shown otherwise, but if you have more information that I don't have, I'm more than willing to hear you out. Yes but the ipods accessories to pretty up your ipod or custimize it or the 200 dollar add on to play HD movies without HDMI is not in the same category. The ipod is successful because its an MP3 player that offers style and multimedia functions like downloading music and movies. The add ons for that is merely cosmetic but the add ons for the 360 are more serious. They are expensive and for the purpose of getting the system to do things its competition does right out of the box. Pretty ipod skins and 100 dollar 20gb HDD, 200 dollar movie player, 20 dollar controller charger are not on the same level and do not help you custimize your 360. Thats what the face plate is for, the add ons allow the 360 to run at the capability of its competition or optimum potential. You shouldnt have to build a transformer to get that. As for online the truth of the matter is most of the gamers last gen did not play games online. Paying 50 dollars a year just didnt appeal to them. But guess what will appeal to the nononline gamer of last gen. Free online gaming. You can justify the price of online just like you can justify the 100 dollar difference between 360 and PS3, but the point is it will be a huge perk for some who like me did not online game until it was free. Exactly how is the 360 more versitile?? My Mac is connected to my 360, and it allows me to play all the music in my iTunes library, all the photos in my iPhoto library, and all the movies in my movies folder easily. I can download a demo, play a game, and listen to music from my computer at the same time. I don't know if the PS3 is capable of doing this. They're also implimenting additional techonlogy in the future (IPTV I think?...). I'm not sure on all the details, so I'm going to refrain from commenting on it too much. If someone wants to fill that gap, be my guest. Connecting media players to a 360 (such as an iPod or other device) is very simple, and your music, photos, and movies show up appropriately. On the PS3, you have to go rooting through catagorized folders on the iPod, which give you no indication of what song, artist, genre, etc. you may be looking for. The 360 has a universal menu that you can always access to see a wealth of information regardless of what I may be doing. I do not know if the PS3 offers this freedom. I believe the majority of 360 owners use XBOX Live in one fashion or another, be it the Silver or Gold memberships. I don't have stats to back up my claim, but I did read that a large percentage were gaming online. Based on what I've written here, what can the PS3 do? I'm very curious, because I don't know as much about it. This is why I ask. The PS3 can play movies and music straight from an mp3 player just like the 360. The PS3 can also take many other USB using devices. THe PS3 will also be getting downloadable movies via PSN. BUt here are some key differences. The PS3 allows the use of any Blutooth device so if you want to use a headset and dont wanna be restricted to a Sony brand you can use any Blu ray headset for your games. You can also use Blutooth Keyboards and Mouse. The 360 cant do that. You also can roam the internet if you so chose for free. You can also upgrade your HDD without being forced to pay for an overpriced Sony brand like Microsoft does with their 20gb 100 dollar HDD. So as downloading demos and movies start taxing on my HDD I can either back them up on my computer or buy any brand I want to get a bargin 80gb or 100gb HDD and install it. The 360 doesnt permit that. Your defense for the 360s being future proof is that you can play videos, music and photos via your ipod. THats what I would hardly consider future proof. The PS3 can do it similiarly but why would I want to watch a downgraded movie on my HDTV that came from my ipod when I can watch it at 1080p via blu ray. And why would I want to listen to music via my console when I can do it just fine from a boombox or computer. THe future is not pluggin in your ipod to your console its having multimedia functions like HD movies, motion sensing, free online, HDMI inputs, freedom to upgrade without overpaying, and a larger format for devs to make amazing games. DVD and ipod functionality hardly cut it IMO. Hmm... I'm confident you either read my post and didn't get it, or chose not to answer some tougher questions. I also have the feeling you're missing the point. Who wants to browse the internet on their PS3 when they could do so better on a computer? It's much more practical. Who wants to store everything on their console when they could store it on their computer, and stream it to the console? That way you can play it on the computer, media device, and TV. The HD on a PS3 is larger yes, but so are Blu-Ray movies. I don't know the size, but being an editor, I have the feeling they're quite bulky. Regardless of what kind of HD you end up putting in your PS3, HD movies are going to fill it up quickly, I'd think. Can the PS3 download, game, and stream at the same time? Is there a universal menu which allows instant access to anything related to the system, friends, or live, streaming media? This is yes or no. I didn't say the iPod was the reason for the 360's future success, and saying so is simply a reflection of your understanding. I have a feeling you're running out of good reasons, and are now resorting to such things as posted above. A reflection of my understanding??? If I recall you were bragging about how your mac can hook up to your 360 and stream movies, music and photos for about two paragraphs?? As for a universal menu yes there is one for the PS3 were you can choose from talking to your buddies, see what game they are on, go to the online store, watch movies, play music, view photos, etc... As for browsing the internet there is a reason that people have wireless keyboards. Its because there are people who would like to browse the internet on the couch and those people can now enjoy that while on their big screen TV. What you fail to understand and wont comment on is that the PS3 has alot of things standard that the 360 struggles to do with add ons. The PS3 can also upgrade the HDD so as for downloading HD movies, if your HDD gets slim you can upgrade to a larger one on your own and save money instead of waiting for MS to come out with one that is overpriced. The 360 cant do much out of the box and takes alot of money to invest in it to get it to run where the PS3 runs standard. People wanna customize its appearance not have to pay extra to add on features that are standard in another console. Oh and as for the PS3 download and game at the same time, a firmware in march is gonna fix that. The 360 had the same situation when it launched, it couldnt multitask as well and took six months I believe before the firmware came out. SO again tell me what the 360 has over the PS3 that insures its future proof??
Why would it take longer. Devs already have said its easier to dev for then the PS2, and Sony have been making better tools to make it easier to make games for the PS3. Yes the PS2 aged well over time but games like MGS2, and SOTC that are hardly knew are still very beautiful. The PS3 is gonna improve overtime just fine. As for delayed games, thats a little silly. The PS2 and Xbox shared ports and they came out at the same time and the Xbox was alot easier to dev for then the PS2. Games are only delayed now because the PS3 is new and the devs had less time with a final PS3 dev kit. By summer or a little later you will see games released at the same time like GTA and others.[QUOTE="Javy03"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]360 and Wii, the PS3 is too damn hard to develope for, if it took the devs 6 years to use the PS2 to the fullest,(Just look at GoW2, best looking game on the PS2) it will take devs longer to use the PS3, the fact the PS3 is harder to make games for, means the Wii and 360 will have games out on time/early while the PS3's will be delayed.Nagidar
 WTH are you talking about, the Cell is kicking devs asses, the Cell is a pain in the arse to develope for, thats going to cause problems in the long run this gen.
Says who??? So far Oblivion is coming out just fine for the PS3 with plenty of perks and runs better. The Cell takes some learning but I have yet to see devs say they cant make a game for the PS3 because of the Cell.[QUOTE="Nagidar"]Why would it take longer. Devs already have said its easier to dev for then the PS2, and Sony have been making better tools to make it easier to make games for the PS3. Yes the PS2 aged well over time but games like MGS2, and SOTC that are hardly knew are still very beautiful. The PS3 is gonna improve overtime just fine. As for delayed games, thats a little silly. The PS2 and Xbox shared ports and they came out at the same time and the Xbox was alot easier to dev for then the PS2. Games are only delayed now because the PS3 is new and the devs had less time with a final PS3 dev kit. By summer or a little later you will see games released at the same time like GTA and others.[QUOTE="Javy03"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]360 and Wii, the PS3 is too damn hard to develope for, if it took the devs 6 years to use the PS2 to the fullest,(Just look at GoW2, best looking game on the PS2) it will take devs longer to use the PS3, the fact the PS3 is harder to make games for, means the Wii and 360 will have games out on time/early while the PS3's will be delayed.Javy03
 WTH are you talking about, the Cell is kicking devs asses, the Cell is a pain in the arse to develope for, thats going to cause problems in the long run this gen.
Says who??? So far Oblivion is coming out just fine for the PS3 with plenty of perks and runs better. The Cell takes some learning but I have yet to see devs say they cant make a game for the PS3 because of the Cell.That is a horrible example cnsidering everything in Oblivion was already in place, all they had to do was tweak it.
Look at games like FFXIII, MGS4, they were all delayed.
[QUOTE="Javy03"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]Why would it take longer. Devs already have said its easier to dev for then the PS2, and Sony have been making better tools to make it easier to make games for the PS3. Yes the PS2 aged well over time but games like MGS2, and SOTC that are hardly knew are still very beautiful. The PS3 is gonna improve overtime just fine. As for delayed games, thats a little silly. The PS2 and Xbox shared ports and they came out at the same time and the Xbox was alot easier to dev for then the PS2. Games are only delayed now because the PS3 is new and the devs had less time with a final PS3 dev kit. By summer or a little later you will see games released at the same time like GTA and others.[QUOTE="Javy03"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]360 and Wii, the PS3 is too damn hard to develope for, if it took the devs 6 years to use the PS2 to the fullest,(Just look at GoW2, best looking game on the PS2) it will take devs longer to use the PS3, the fact the PS3 is harder to make games for, means the Wii and 360 will have games out on time/early while the PS3's will be delayed.Nagidar
 WTH are you talking about, the Cell is kicking devs asses, the Cell is a pain in the arse to develope for, thats going to cause problems in the long run this gen.
Says who??? So far Oblivion is coming out just fine for the PS3 with plenty of perks and runs better. The Cell takes some learning but I have yet to see devs say they cant make a game for the PS3 because of the Cell.That is a horrible example cnsidering everything in Oblivion was already in place, all they had to do was tweak it.
Look at games like FFXIII, MGS4, they were all delayed.
So was Halo 3. Delays happen every gen. for every game. Zelda was delayed for the gamecube when the Wii one was ready was that because the Gamecube is too difficult to work with. Delays happen for various reasons, devs wanna add more, devs want a larger fanbase, devs wanna launch in a strategic day. Its not all because of the hardware. Those are poor examples.A reflection of my understanding??? If I recall you were bragging about how your mac can hook up to your 360 and stream movies, music and photos for about two paragraphs?? As for a universal menu yes there is one for the PS3 were you can choose from talking to your buddies, see what game they are on, go to the online store, watch movies, play music, view photos, etc... As for browsing the internet there is a reason that people have wireless keyboards. Its because there are people who would like to browse the internet on the couch and those people can now enjoy that while on their big screen TV. What you fail to understand and wont comment on is that the PS3 has alot of things standard that the 360 struggles to do with add ons. The PS3 can also upgrade the HDD so as for downloading HD movies, if your HDD gets slim you can upgrade to a larger one on your own and save money instead of waiting for MS to come out with one that is overpriced. The 360 cant do much out of the box and takes alot of money to invest in it to get it to run where the PS3 runs standard. People wanna customize its appearance not have to pay extra to add on features that are standard in another console. Oh and as for the PS3 download and game at the same time, a firmware in march is gonna fix that. The 360 had the same situation when it launched, it couldnt multitask as well and took six months I believe before the firmware came out. SO again tell me what the 360 has over the PS3 that insures its future proof??Javy03
No need to get to upset, I'm just being very honest with you. I'm just asking questions. It's beginning to get very difficult to take your posts seriously, based on how the tone has gotten more hostile. I will, however, continue.
Can you access this universal menu in game? Can you stream media to the TV from your computer through the PS3, including pictures, music, and photos? Can the music be played during a game?
My discussion on computer connectivity was merely an illustration of the capabilities of the 360. The 360 is set up so that the HD doesn't need to be upgraded. That is how I feel it is best used. I buy all sorts of content online or offline, and it get put onto my computer. It is the hub of my media. Thusly, the 360 is a perfect addition to my media center.
I believe putting all your eggs in Sony's proprietary basket is silly, and Sony missed the mark on this one. I can't believe I'm about to say this, but M$ seems to be headed in the right direction.
How does one transfer movies to a friend's house if purchased on a PS3, without actually taking the PS3 over? Doesn't it make more sense to put media on a device that is more mobile? These are practical questions that the PS3 does not seem to answer.
edit- inccorect spacingÂ
[QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="Javy03"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]Why would it take longer. Devs already have said its easier to dev for then the PS2, and Sony have been making better tools to make it easier to make games for the PS3. Yes the PS2 aged well over time but games like MGS2, and SOTC that are hardly knew are still very beautiful. The PS3 is gonna improve overtime just fine. As for delayed games, thats a little silly. The PS2 and Xbox shared ports and they came out at the same time and the Xbox was alot easier to dev for then the PS2. Games are only delayed now because the PS3 is new and the devs had less time with a final PS3 dev kit. By summer or a little later you will see games released at the same time like GTA and others.[QUOTE="Javy03"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]360 and Wii, the PS3 is too damn hard to develope for, if it took the devs 6 years to use the PS2 to the fullest,(Just look at GoW2, best looking game on the PS2) it will take devs longer to use the PS3, the fact the PS3 is harder to make games for, means the Wii and 360 will have games out on time/early while the PS3's will be delayed.Javy03
 WTH are you talking about, the Cell is kicking devs asses, the Cell is a pain in the arse to develope for, thats going to cause problems in the long run this gen.
Says who??? So far Oblivion is coming out just fine for the PS3 with plenty of perks and runs better. The Cell takes some learning but I have yet to see devs say they cant make a game for the PS3 because of the Cell.That is a horrible example cnsidering everything in Oblivion was already in place, all they had to do was tweak it.
Look at games like FFXIII, MGS4, they were all delayed.
So was Halo 3. Delays happen every gen. for every game. Zelda was delayed for the gamecube when the Wii one was ready was that because the Gamecube is too difficult to work with. Delays happen for various reasons, devs wanna add more, devs want a larger fanbase, devs wanna launch in a strategic day. Its not all because of the hardware. Those are poor examples. WTF...TP was delayed because they wanted both versions to launch around the same time, you do know the Wii version of TP was a port from the GC?
I believe the question is which console is more prepared for the long term and not which console is more user friendly...asmallchildUser friendly? I'm talking versitility. I believe more practical functionality combined with a solid gaming library will give a system the edge. Based on those two factors, the 360 is currently rocking the house.
Easily the 360.
The 360 already has a superior Next Gen Gpu which will keep the games looking sweet for a long time. Added to that is the better memory architecture. The 360 will be around along time.
The developers support is much better than the first xbox console with the best development tools available. The 360 now has the multiplatform games made on it and then they are ported to the PS3. It used to be the other away around.
The software and services that only MS can deliver are making the 360 the best console on the market. Services like IPTV, Xbox Live and cross platform gaming to name a few. Sony can't compete on the software side.
Games being on one disc or multiple discs will not be a problem. That is the only advantage that the PS3 has and it is no big deal. It won't stop developers making games and it wont stop gamers from buying it.
Cows always say wait until PS3 devs can harness the power of the cell. But the fact is there is a long way to go before the full power of the 360 's cpu is fully utilised. They both have processors that can handle multiple threads of code. So there will be no noticeable difference in game play. And no the cell can't make games look better, so the 360 will always have the best graphics
There is a lot more to come from both machines.
wow....if this isn't a bias question created by a cow....:lol:Nedemis
a bias question?
I didn't even say MY opinion.
:?
I agree. My research has led me to the same conclusions. Hence, I got a 360. I'm not sure how you can honestly argue some of the points you and I have made...Easily the 360.
The 360 already has a superior Next Gen Gpu which will keep the games looking sweet for a long time. Added to that is the better memory architecture. The 360 will be around along time.
The developers support is much better than the first xbox console with the best development tools available. The 360 now has the multiplatform games made on it and then they are ported to the PS3. It used to be the other away around.
The software and services that only MS can deliver are making the 360 the best console on the market. Services like IPTV, Xbox Live and cross platform gaming to name a few. Sony can't compete on the software side.
Games being on one disc or multiple discs will not be a problem. That is the only advantage that the PS3 has and it is no big deal. It won't stop developers making games and it wont stop gamers from buying it.
Cows always say wait until PS3 devs can harness the power of the cell. But the fact is there is a long way to go before the full power of the 360 's cpu is fully utilised. They both have processors that can handle multiple threads of code. So there will be no noticeable difference in game play. And no the cell can't make games look better, so the 360 will always have the best graphics
There is a lot more to come from both machines.
lazerluke
First off, they are inegrating into the living room, as not only a gaming system, but a media center in addition. You can stream music and video to you TV from your computer. Imagine watching you favorite online vids on your living room TV. The 360 also holds a ton of music, with customizeable playlists, and very nice sound quality. You're HD ready out of the Box, with an integrated scaler chip, and HD capable composites. Then, once your tired of that, you can watch IPTV, browse the marketplace for On-Demand forbidden>
replying to the op's original post...
ps3 BY FAR. and im a 360 nut.
first lets talk wii... too far underpowered graphically. 5 or 6 years from now when God of War 3 comes out with graphics that will make your eyes explode wii games will probably be up to, in a realistic sense, F.E.A.R. for the PC running at 480p
ok next the 360. the physical hardware, for a whole lot of people, is absolute garbage. what i mean is it breaks. then what can you do with it? paper weight? the graphics are where they should be imo. its truely a next gen system but the dang thing gets so hot. i leave the heat off when i'm playing the system. saves a couple of bucks on oil. and lastly, the 20gb hard drive. microsoft wasn't thinking ahead when they made this the standard. now they're out with HD movies that are 5 gb a pop.
the PS3 was designed, it seems, with time (and the f****** blu-ray) in mind (since price obviously wasn't). first off the quality... the build quality is much better imo. its alot quieter than the 360 for one thing and it doesn't have a powerbrick to make things more problematic. next the graphics. they're pretty good. i think they'll be getting a lot better over time though. sure the system is da*n hard to develop for (showing that sony doesn't care about the developers) but that means that better looking games will come out over time since developers will be learning the hardware. the hard drive... 60gb and support for external harddrives. nuff said. finally the blu-ray. yea i hate it. it's only there because sony wants to shove their format down our throats. but you have to admit that games will need more space in the future and blu-ray it perfect for that. yea i don't mind switching disks but a few years from now games may get so big that it requires bigger packaging to store multiple disks which is bad for manufactering costs.
im not going to buy a ps3 for awhile though... $500-$600?! sony needs to put down the crack pipe.
I'm not sure why this means it will last longer... :?replying to the op's original post...
ps3 BY FAR. and im a 360 nut.
first lets talk wii... too far underpowered graphically. 5 or 6 years from now when God of War 3 comes out with graphics that will make your eyes explode wii games will probably be up to, in a realistic sense, F.E.A.R. for the PC running at 480p
ok next the 360. the physical hardware, for a whole lot of people, is absolute garbage. what i mean is it breaks. then what can you do with it? paper weight? the graphics are where they should be imo. its truely a next gen system but the dang thing gets so hot. i leave the heat off when i'm playing the system. saves a couple of bucks on oil. and lastly, the 20gb hard drive. microsoft wasn't thinging ahead when they made this the standard. now they're out with HD movies that are 5 gb a pop.
the PS3 was designed, it seems, with time (and the f****** blu-ray) in mind (since price obviously wasn't). first off the quality... the build quality is much better imo. its alot quieter than the 360 for one thing and it doesn't have a powerbrick to make things more problematic. next the graphics. they're pretty good. i think they'll be getting a lot better over time though. sure the system is da*n hard to develop for (showing that sony doesn't care about the developers) but that means that better looking games will come out over time since developers will be learning the hardware. the hard drive... 60gb and support for external harddrives. nuff said. finally the blu-ray. yea i hate it. it's only there because sony wants to shove their format down our throats. but you have to admit that games will need more space in the future and blu-ray it perfect for that. yea i don't mind switching disks but a few years from now games may get so big that it requires bigger packaging to store multiple disks which is bad for manufactering costs.
im not going to buy a ps3 for awhile though... $500-$600?! sony needs to put down the crack pipe.
Rev2221
[QUOTE="Rev2221"]I'm not sure why this means it will last longer... :?replying to the op's original post...
ps3 BY FAR. and im a 360 nut.
first lets talk wii... too far underpowered graphically. 5 or 6 years from now when God of War 3 comes out with graphics that will make your eyes explode wii games will probably be up to, in a realistic sense, F.E.A.R. for the PC running at 480p
ok next the 360. the physical hardware, for a whole lot of people, is absolute garbage. what i mean is it breaks. then what can you do with it? paper weight? the graphics are where they should be imo. its truely a next gen system but the dang thing gets so hot. i leave the heat off when i'm playing the system. saves a couple of bucks on oil. and lastly, the 20gb hard drive. microsoft wasn't thinging ahead when they made this the standard. now they're out with HD movies that are 5 gb a pop.
the PS3 was designed, it seems, with time (and the f****** blu-ray) in mind (since price obviously wasn't). first off the quality... the build quality is much better imo. its alot quieter than the 360 for one thing and it doesn't have a powerbrick to make things more problematic. next the graphics. they're pretty good. i think they'll be getting a lot better over time though. sure the system is da*n hard to develop for (showing that sony doesn't care about the developers) but that means that better looking games will come out over time since developers will be learning the hardware. the hard drive... 60gb and support for external harddrives. nuff said. finally the blu-ray. yea i hate it. it's only there because sony wants to shove their format down our throats. but you have to admit that games will need more space in the future and blu-ray it perfect for that. yea i don't mind switching disks but a few years from now games may get so big that it requires bigger packaging to store multiple disks which is bad for manufactering costs.
im not going to buy a ps3 for awhile though... $500-$600?! sony needs to put down the crack pipe.
musicalmac
that's not what I'm asking.
where in my topic does it ask which console will last longer?
[QUOTE="Rev2221"]I'm not sure why this means it will last longer... :?replying to the op's original post...
ps3 BY FAR. and im a 360 nut.
first lets talk wii... too far underpowered graphically. 5 or 6 years from now when God of War 3 comes out with graphics that will make your eyes explode wii games will probably be up to, in a realistic sense, F.E.A.R. for the PC running at 480p
ok next the 360. the physical hardware, for a whole lot of people, is absolute garbage. what i mean is it breaks. then what can you do with it? paper weight? the graphics are where they should be imo. its truely a next gen system but the dang thing gets so hot. i leave the heat off when i'm playing the system. saves a couple of bucks on oil. and lastly, the 20gb hard drive. microsoft wasn't thinging ahead when they made this the standard. now they're out with HD movies that are 5 gb a pop.
the PS3 was designed, it seems, with time (and the f****** blu-ray) in mind (since price obviously wasn't). first off the quality... the build quality is much better imo. its alot quieter than the 360 for one thing and it doesn't have a powerbrick to make things more problematic. next the graphics. they're pretty good. i think they'll be getting a lot better over time though. sure the system is da*n hard to develop for (showing that sony doesn't care about the developers) but that means that better looking games will come out over time since developers will be learning the hardware. the hard drive... 60gb and support for external harddrives. nuff said. finally the blu-ray. yea i hate it. it's only there because sony wants to shove their format down our throats. but you have to admit that games will need more space in the future and blu-ray it perfect for that. yea i don't mind switching disks but a few years from now games may get so big that it requires bigger packaging to store multiple disks which is bad for manufactering costs.
im not going to buy a ps3 for awhile though... $500-$600?! sony needs to put down the crack pipe.
musicalmac
Uhh...the HD is too small. It's not "future proof"
Uhh...the hardware fails. Not particularly related to "future proofing". But it isn't a good thing anyway. See signature:
Depends on who wins the HD format war. If blu-ray fails then the PS3 is left with a dud.cakeorrdeathYAY!! ps3 wins.
Trading_Zoner
that's not what I'm asking.
where in my topic does it ask which console will last longer?
In the title: "Which Console is more prepared for the long term?"
I explained why a huge HD wasn't neccessary earlier. Hardware failures are universal. By that logic, nothing is ready for the future. And I never really said the 360 was "future proof". I just said it had more longevity.
Uhh...the HD is too small. It's not "future proof"
Uhh...the hardware fails. Not particularly related to "future proofing". But it isn't a good thing anyway. See signature:
asmallchild
EDIT: Whoops. Butchered the quotes... I think you get the idea, anypoo.
Depends on who wins the HD format war. If blu-ray fails then the PS3 is left with a dud.cakeorrdeath
True, if Blu-Ray sinks, it may just take the PS3 with it, at least in the media department. Other than that the PS3 looks like it can hold up for at least 5 more solid years, maybe even 7, the 360 may become obsolete in 4-5 years.
[QUOTE="cakeorrdeath"]Depends on who wins the HD format war. If blu-ray fails then the PS3 is left with a dud.FlamingFlamingo
True, if Blu-Ray sinks, it may just take the PS3 with it, at least in the media department. Other than that the PS3 looks like it can hold up for at least 5 more solid years, maybe even 7, the 360 may become obsolete in 4-5 years.
 Doubtfull, there are too many factors that will beat the PS3 in the dirt, I'm no firtune teller, this is just a guess, but the PS3 is a horribly put together game console. If Bluray fails, than it probably will take the PS3 with it, the 360 on the other hand, doesn't have to worry about that, its not betting on a next gen format like the PS3 is.
 I think that everyone Is also forgetting about digital distribution, and if this happens neither physical formats will matter, MS is aware of this and I believe best prepared.
[QUOTE="Javy03"] A reflection of my understanding??? If I recall you were bragging about how your mac can hook up to your 360 and stream movies, music and photos for about two paragraphs?? As for a universal menu yes there is one for the PS3 were you can choose from talking to your buddies, see what game they are on, go to the online store, watch movies, play music, view photos, etc... As for browsing the internet there is a reason that people have wireless keyboards. Its because there are people who would like to browse the internet on the couch and those people can now enjoy that while on their big screen TV. What you fail to understand and wont comment on is that the PS3 has alot of things standard that the 360 struggles to do with add ons. The PS3 can also upgrade the HDD so as for downloading HD movies, if your HDD gets slim you can upgrade to a larger one on your own and save money instead of waiting for MS to come out with one that is overpriced. The 360 cant do much out of the box and takes alot of money to invest in it to get it to run where the PS3 runs standard. People wanna customize its appearance not have to pay extra to add on features that are standard in another console. Oh and as for the PS3 download and game at the same time, a firmware in march is gonna fix that. The 360 had the same situation when it launched, it couldnt multitask as well and took six months I believe before the firmware came out. SO again tell me what the 360 has over the PS3 that insures its future proof??musicalmac
No need to get to upset, I'm just being very honest with you. I'm just asking questions. It's beginning to get very difficult to take your posts seriously, based on how the tone has gotten more hostile. I will, however, continue.
Can you access this universal menu in game? Can you stream media to the TV from your computer through the PS3, including pictures, music, and photos? Can the music be played during a game?
My discussion on computer connectivity was merely an illustration of the capabilities of the 360. The 360 is set up so that the HD doesn't need to be upgraded. That is how I feel it is best used. I buy all sorts of content online or offline, and it get put onto my computer. It is the hub of my media. Thusly, the 360 is a perfect addition to my media center.
I believe putting all your eggs in Sony's proprietary basket is silly, and Sony missed the mark on this one. I can't believe I'm about to say this, but M$ seems to be headed in the right direction.
How does one transfer movies to a friend's house if purchased on a PS3, without actually taking the PS3 over? Doesn't it make more sense to put media on a device that is more mobile? These are practical questions that the PS3 does not seem to answer.
edit- inccorect spacing
Actually I think my conduct has been quite civil. If I recall you were the one who took personal stabs at me attacking my ability to understand your statements, I never insulted your intelleginces but it doesnt matter. You seem to be quickly changing your tone. FIrst you say that streaming videos and music from your computer to a console is pointless because your computer can do it better but then you say say that this helps 360 become future proof. You say that being able to back your console downloads are a plus but it seems to be more of a hassle. The reason computers have big harddrives these days because people are downloading music and videos. Now consoles are falling into the same situation except the PS3 allows you to back up your downloads on the computer or for the convienience of many, buy a bigger cheaper HDD and keep all your stuff on your console so its not a constant hassle to bring stuff from the computer to the console and visa versa over and over. You seem to be associating the fact you can use the menu and game at the same time (multitasking) as future proof which is far from the case. These are perks but the only multitasking that is a must is background dowloading which in Mid March both will have. Multitasking doesnt make up for hardware that is so limited it needs add ons and a media format that is alot smaller then its competition. But of course the fact you can put things on your computer and on the console means thats future proof. Not a console with free online, HDMI, HD movie playback, upgradable hardware....no no it has to be minor multitasking. The PS3 can transfer info from one PS3 to another via a memory stick or any USB capable HDD like an mp3 player. YOu dont need to toat the console around. MS is far from headed in the right direction and with rumors of a new console it seems more and more that the 360 is trying to play catch up. I think your knowledge of the PS3 is lacking and thats cool but your doing alot of assuming with such little knowledge on the competition.[QUOTE="Javy03"][QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="Javy03"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]Why would it take longer. Devs already have said its easier to dev for then the PS2, and Sony have been making better tools to make it easier to make games for the PS3. Yes the PS2 aged well over time but games like MGS2, and SOTC that are hardly knew are still very beautiful. The PS3 is gonna improve overtime just fine. As for delayed games, thats a little silly. The PS2 and Xbox shared ports and they came out at the same time and the Xbox was alot easier to dev for then the PS2. Games are only delayed now because the PS3 is new and the devs had less time with a final PS3 dev kit. By summer or a little later you will see games released at the same time like GTA and others.[QUOTE="Javy03"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]360 and Wii, the PS3 is too damn hard to develope for, if it took the devs 6 years to use the PS2 to the fullest,(Just look at GoW2, best looking game on the PS2) it will take devs longer to use the PS3, the fact the PS3 is harder to make games for, means the Wii and 360 will have games out on time/early while the PS3's will be delayed.Nagidar
WTH are you talking about, the Cell is kicking devs asses, the Cell is a pain in the arse to develope for, thats going to cause problems in the long run this gen.
Says who??? So far Oblivion is coming out just fine for the PS3 with plenty of perks and runs better. The Cell takes some learning but I have yet to see devs say they cant make a game for the PS3 because of the Cell.That is a horrible example cnsidering everything in Oblivion was already in place, all they had to do was tweak it.
Look at games like FFXIII, MGS4, they were all delayed.
So was Halo 3. Delays happen every gen. for every game. Zelda was delayed for the gamecube when the Wii one was ready was that because the Gamecube is too difficult to work with. Delays happen for various reasons, devs wanna add more, devs want a larger fanbase, devs wanna launch in a strategic day. Its not all because of the hardware. Those are poor examples.WTF...TP was delayed because they wanted both versions to launch around the same time, you do know the Wii version of TP was a port from the GC?
Yes and you do know the Wii version came out well before the GC version. If you understand my post its that games get delayed all the time and its not because of the console but devs situation or strategy. YOu seem to blame PS3 delays on the Cell but what about Halo 3 and other games that were delayed.wow....if this isn't a bias question created by a cow....:lol:Nedemis
How so? I believe this is a valid question that people buying a console should think about.
Sony wouldn't have any plans to release PS4 for another 5 or so years. Wii 2 [working title] would kill PS3 sales. There would be no excuse not to buy it. Someone posted today, maybe not in this thread, but it was something along the lines of, "Nintendo has been a company longer than Microsoft and/or Sony. They may JUST be a video company, but they absolutely know how to run a business. They've been doing it for a century."
I just can't wait to see how it all rolls out.
The emphasis in future consoles I think will be on backwards compatability. If a console can be released every 5 years with upgraded specs at a reasonable price and can play everything its predesser could, then that console will dominate. Perhaps the argument could be said that "People won't buy new consoles over and over", but really the counter arguement is that "People won't buy new expensive consoles over and over." Besides, PC owners already do this.
This is the path most consoles seem to be going right now, sans the reasonable price bit. The PS transistioned to the PS2 quite well, however the transistion from the PS2 to the PS3 is shakey, if practically non-existant. Nintendo sunk most of it's dollars into the Wiimote, which is a piece of technology that will outlive the Wii itself. If Nintendo releases a relatively cheap "WiiTwo" which is nothing more but an upgraded Wii with HD capabilities then people will transistion over to the new system quite seamlessly. I truely believe that people would have transistioned over to the PS3 from the PS2 in high numbers had the price of the PS3 was in the $200-400 range.
[QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="Javy03"][QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="Javy03"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]Why would it take longer. Devs already have said its easier to dev for then the PS2, and Sony have been making better tools to make it easier to make games for the PS3. Yes the PS2 aged well over time but games like MGS2, and SOTC that are hardly knew are still very beautiful. The PS3 is gonna improve overtime just fine. As for delayed games, thats a little silly. The PS2 and Xbox shared ports and they came out at the same time and the Xbox was alot easier to dev for then the PS2. Games are only delayed now because the PS3 is new and the devs had less time with a final PS3 dev kit. By summer or a little later you will see games released at the same time like GTA and others.[QUOTE="Javy03"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]360 and Wii, the PS3 is too damn hard to develope for, if it took the devs 6 years to use the PS2 to the fullest,(Just look at GoW2, best looking game on the PS2) it will take devs longer to use the PS3, the fact the PS3 is harder to make games for, means the Wii and 360 will have games out on time/early while the PS3's will be delayed.Javy03
WTH are you talking about, the Cell is kicking devs asses, the Cell is a pain in the arse to develope for, thats going to cause problems in the long run this gen.
Says who??? So far Oblivion is coming out just fine for the PS3 with plenty of perks and runs better. The Cell takes some learning but I have yet to see devs say they cant make a game for the PS3 because of the Cell.That is a horrible example cnsidering everything in Oblivion was already in place, all they had to do was tweak it.
Look at games like FFXIII, MGS4, they were all delayed.
So was Halo 3. Delays happen every gen. for every game. Zelda was delayed for the gamecube when the Wii one was ready was that because the Gamecube is too difficult to work with. Delays happen for various reasons, devs wanna add more, devs want a larger fanbase, devs wanna launch in a strategic day. Its not all because of the hardware. Those are poor examples.WTF...TP was delayed because they wanted both versions to launch around the same time, you do know the Wii version of TP was a port from the GC?
Yes and you do know the Wii version came out well before the GC version. If you understand my post its that games get delayed all the time and its not because of the console but devs situation or strategy. YOu seem to blame PS3 delays on the Cell but what about Halo 3 and other games that were delayed.Halo 3 was delayed to launch beside the movie:
Halo 3 delay.
I understand what you are saying, but its a fact, the Cell is kicking devs asses, and that will cause more delays for the PS3 than other consoles games.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment