Why is the PS3 a fail?

[Rinoah]

Y'know i was suprised how stable the PS3 was. I mean a few months before launch i was hearing stories of 80% failure rates on the chips and such.

While i personally wouldn't own one i gotta give them credit for making a more stable console than the 360.

 

[Skaw]

I've never heard about 80% Failure rate on all processors. There was pretty much a guarantee that 1 of the 8 would be dead though. Kind of like an inverted Russian Roullette, where 1 every 6 had all 8 operable while the remaining 5 only had 7.

 

[Marajade]

Does a Level detect motion?

Yes or no.

Thats all a tilt sensor is. If you hold both a level and a tilt sensor steady, in their neutral positions, and spin it in a circle, it isn't going to respond.

I guess spin is a bad word, move it in a circle would be better. As in, move around with it in an O shaped path, not spin it on one fixed spot, without rotating the controller, so that it's constantly pointing in the same direction.

Motion sensing would pick up that movement, where as a tilt sensor wouldn't.

I'm going to have to disagree with Tag though, a tilt sensor can detect how fast the controller has moved in it's detectable range.

An easy example of both in action. Planets spinning on their axis is tilt sensing. Planets rotating around a larger body(sun) is motion sensing. Motion sensors can do everything a tilt sensor can, but more.

In CoD3, you hold the controller flat and turn it left right (keeping flat, why i hated it) to steer vehicles.

MLB 3 detects a push forward or pull backwards to controll batting speed.

 

[Tagrineth]

Sounds like a shitty implementation then if CoD3 was that awkward. What happens if you actually "tilt" the controller then while steering in that?

 

[Marajade]

Sounds like a shitty implementation then if CoD3 was that awkward. What happens if you actually "tilt" the controller then while steering in that?

The steering became more severe. The implementation in CoD was terrible, but I used it to show that the SixaxiS can indeed sense when you turn it in one spot and that it detects push/pull/up/down. I didn't say that CoD3 did it right. Motorstorm did it right by not caring what angle you held it at.

 

[Firestreak]

Interview with a developer from EA about how great the wii controls work with the new scarface

So a guy who works for EA likes the Wii controls?

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2006/08/xbox_gamers02.html

Well now that we've established EA as a credible source of information, to the point that a developer enjoying the control scheme means we should follow suit and enjoy the control scheme too, it would be presumptuous to think that their 30-50% failure rate claim is anything except 25-45% off.




And as far as the Six-axis is concerned... You can move the controller up and down, and it detects it is in fact being moved up and down. I do this sometimes in Godfather to pull people up or push them down when I'm grabbing them. It's doesn't just detect tilt because all it takes to activate it is vertical motion.

If somehow EA has managed to create a hypnosis ray and brainwash me to think that I'm moving it up and down when my hand is actually tilting the controller, kudos to them, cause they really deserve that 60 bucks for that.

 

[Rinoah]

I've never heard about 80% Failure rate on all processors. There was pretty much a guarantee that 1 of the 8 would be dead though. Kind of like an inverted Russian Roullette, where 1 every 6 had all 8 operable while the remaining 5 only had 7.

Yeah that is more or less it, only i heard it was like 10%ish had 8 20%ish had 7 and the rest had 6 or 5. But yeah i'm suprised at how reliable it is as i've not really heard alot about them breaking.

 

[TheOsyris]

Off topic but I don't care lol. Fire or anyone who may know... is there a place to get my PSNid in my sig like I can for Xboxlive. Thanks.

 

[Antor]

Just a quick question to kill my curiousirty bug but what exactly makes a Sony "fantool" information more viable than say, a Nintendo "fantool"?

Here's the thing: I like and respect all three consoles and look at the facts as facts. Kind of like many companies, such as EA. Baja, on the other hand, is a fantool who thinks Sony raped his mother and killed his father, as Firestreak pointed out earlier. I have a Nintendo Wii. Hell, I'd love to program a game for the Nintendo Wii (my school has a Gamecube Dev kit that we're given access to, which is exactly the same as the Wii Dev kit). I honestly don't own an XBox 360, but it's the next one on my list to get. Probably around November or something is when I'll pick one up - hell, possibly even the Elite version.

//EDIT: As the topic name implies, people think the PS3 is a failure. I'm simply here to try and show people that thinking that is plain stupid.

Does a Level detect motion?

Yes or no.

Thats all a tilt sensor is. If you hold both a level and a tilt sensor steady, in their neutral positions, and spin it in a circle, it isn't going to respond.

I guess spin is a bad word, move it in a circle would be better. As in, move around with it in an O shaped path, not spin it on one fixed spot, without rotating the controller, so that it's constantly pointing in the same direction.

Motion sensing would pick up that movement, where as a tilt sensor wouldn't.

I'm going to have to disagree with Tag though, a tilt sensor can detect how fast the controller has moved in it's detectable range.

An easy example of both in action. Planets spinning on their axis is tilt sensing. Planets rotating around a larger body(sun) is motion sensing. Motion sensors can do everything a tilt sensor can, but more.

No point in even arguing with you. You're just plain dumb, but since you insist:

tilt
–verb (used with object)
1. to cause to lean, incline, slope, or slant.
2. to rush at or charge, as in a joust.
3. to hold poised for attack, as a lance.
4. to move (a camera) up or down on its vertical axis for photographing or televising a moving character, object, or the like.
–verb (used without object)
5. to move into or assume a sloping position or direction.
6. to strike, thrust, or charge with a lance or the like (usually fol. by at).
7. to engage in a joust, tournament, or similar contest.
8. (of a camera) to move on its vertical axis: The camera tilts downward for an overhead shot.
9. to incline in opinion, feeling, etc.; lean: She's tilting toward the other candidate this year.
–noun
10. an act or instance of tilting.
11. the state of being tilted; a sloping position.
12. a slope.
13. a joust or any other contest.
14. a dispute; controversy.
15. a thrust of a weapon, as at a tilt or joust.
16. (in aerial photography) the angle formed by the direction of aim of a camera and a perpendicular to the surface of the earth.
—Idioms
17. (at) full tilt. full tilt.
18. tilt at windmills, to contend against imaginary opponents or injustices. Also, fight with windmills.

Definition four is what the SixAxis senses though it specifically uses a camera in the example. You tilt the SixAxis and the SixAxis notices THAT motion or movement. Notice the word "move?" Yeah, even you aren't that stupid I suppose. A tilt is a verb and a noun. What a level does is sense a pre-defined tilt. If you move the level mid-air it senses that motion, which, even though that's not what it's made for, is still a form of motion sensing.

Reply if you want. I'm a busy man and probably won't have time to respond to any more of your simplistic shit that a damn dictionary can prove wrong.

//EDIT: And Baja, just so you'll shut up about the whole damn thing, my point before about citing a Developer is that what to develop for is a very opinionated thing. You have some programmers and developers who love Microsoft (it's quite honestly just the best of all worlds; simple, easy programming with great results), Nintendo (old, easy programming and easy money), or Sony (extra work but quite possibly the best results: Kojima, for example). You'll be hard pressed to find an entire development team that exclusively likes a certain platform. Just for shits and giggles: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=24483.

 

[Firestreak]

Off topic but I don't care lol. Fire or anyone who may know... is there a place to get my PSNid in my sig like I can for Xboxlive. Thanks.

Can't you just type it in in your user CP?

 

[Bajaratt]

Here's the thing: I like and respect all three consoles and look at the facts as facts. Kind of like many companies, such as EA. Baja, on the other hand, is a fantool who thinks Sony raped his mother and killed his father, as Firestreak pointed out earlier. I have a Nintendo Wii. Hell, I'd love to program a game for the Nintendo Wii (my school has a Gamecube Dev kit that we're given access to, which is exactly the same as the Wii Dev kit). I honestly don't own an XBox 360, but it's the next one on my list to get. Probably around November or something is when I'll pick one up - hell, possibly even the Elite version.

//EDIT: As the topic name implies, people think the PS3 is a failure. I'm simply here to try and show people that thinking that is plain stupid.

Hard to believe, since based on your rhetoric, the Wii is worthless and the PS3 is the best thing since sliced bread. I love the double standard the sony fanboy's come up with,you're allowed to criticize a company or their console, but if someone else does the same thing(especially to the company you're figuratively creaming your jeans for) they're automatically a "fantool." You apply slanted logic to "prove your points" and conveniently ignore how the same logic applies to the PS3 as well. You're just as big a "fantool" as I am.

Hell, you're demonizing me because I'm poking holes through your arguments; since you can't actually prove your points you're just trying to write me off. If it wasn't for all the sony fanboys going on about how their console is the best just because it looks better or because they can play movies on it; I wouldn't give a fuck about most of the failings of the console(I might even feel sorry for sony). At this point, the only reason I'd want the console to fail would be to shut you sony fanboys up. I don't give a shit about blu-ray movies, I don't plan on buying a new TV until my current ones die out, which will be a few years at least; so the biggest selling point of the console is of no use to me. The only I care about in terms of which console I buy is the games, and that's where Sony is severely lacking. I don't give a fuck about MGS4, I didn't care before Kojima confirmed it would be PS3 only and I definitely don't care about it now. Sony has all of 3 games that I want that I can't get anywhere else, and they're not worth the $750 price tag it'd take to actually play them. You like the games, fine, but stop acting like everyone else wants exactly what you do.

And before you reply with "oh you're just a nintendo fantool," or some other equally moronic and unresponsive reply, I am at least willing to admit that the Wii and Nintendo have faults; so far I have yet to hear any PS3 owners even agree that an obvious problem was a problem. The fact that it took sony 5 months to bring in rumble? That's an obvious problem, it's something they should have fixed; but firestreak wouldn't even admit that, instead he just went on about how nintendo should have had internet multiplayer from the start too. That's what makes a sony fanboy more annoying than the nintendo/microsoft fanboys, is that they won't even admit the obvious just because it's a negative for the PS3. I agreed with firestreak that nintendo should have had internet from the start, because he was right; I have yet to hear anything like that from any of the sony fanboys. Back when being a Nintendo fan was considered a bad thing by some people, most of the Nintendo fanboys still weren't nearly as rabid as the sony fanboys today.

I'll even go a step further, I think that the Wii has a considerable problem with the lack of disk space available to download new content for the games. I'd love to get those new marvel: ultimate alliance characters for the Wii version, but I doubt it'll be available for download due to the small storage inside the Wii; and I can only think that will happen more and it will hold the console back.

You're right, the people who say the PS3 is a failure without any reasoning are stupid, but most people actually have a reason. The games suck, it's too expensive, blu-ray is worthless without HDtv's, there's several reasons why someone would consider the PS3 a failure to them. To me, the PS3 is a failure, because it's expensive and offers me nothing over a 360 or even a PS2 at this point and it doesn't look like that is going to change in the next 2 years.

//EDIT: And Baja, just so you'll shut up about the whole damn thing, my point before about citing a Developer is that what to develop for is a very opinionated thing. You have some programmers and developers who love Microsoft (it's quite honestly just the best of all worlds; simple, easy programming with great results), Nintendo (old, easy programming and easy money), or Sony (extra work but quite possibly the best results: Kojima, for example). You'll be hard pressed to find an entire development team that exclusively likes a certain platform. Just for shits and giggles: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=24483.

So now that you've had proof thrown in your face, you morph what you were saying to divert away from how wrong you were. The point was that developers were interested in the Wii for the motion controls, not only because it was cheap to develop for. There was no talk at all about how not everyone on the development team might like the Wii; no reason to because that's entirely meaningless to the argument. You're trying to weasel your way out of an argument you lost, just accept it.

Just for shits and giggles: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=24483.

Wait another year and a half for the console to possibly be considered worth getting, yeah I'm going to pass. Based on the rate of sales, the PS3 will be even further behind and even more companies are going to be jumping off the sony exclusive ship. Even looking that far in advance, there's almost nothing that really interests me in getting a PS3. It's not hard to believe that other people will come to the same conclusion and that while the console might not fail, it won't be capturing the #1 slot again.

 

[Skaw]

Definition four is what the SixAxis senses though it specifically uses a camera in the example. You tilt the SixAxis and the SixAxis notices THAT motion or movement. Notice the word "move?" Yeah, even you aren't that stupid I suppose. A tilt is a verb and a noun. What a level does is sense a pre-defined tilt. If you move the level mid-air it senses that motion, which, even though that's not what it's made for, is still a form of motion sensing.

Reply if you want. I'm a busy man and probably won't have time to respond to any more of your simplistic shit that a damn dictionary can prove wrong.

Holy fucking shit. Are you serious? You're aiming to be a programmer and you can't tell the difference between tilting an object and the camera view term "tilt?" God, I wouldn't want to play any of your games. Whoever the fuck hires you is even more of a retard. It specifically states camera, because it's a camera-specific term, dumbfuck. A dictionary can prove anything wrong if you use the wrong definition. Go back to Middle School, you're a joke.

And no, simply moving the level wouldn't yield any results. The only reason it responds is because of a change in balance due to a force. That force is gravity(pulling on the liquid.) Not movement. Ideally, if you went into 0-G and moved a level around, it wouldn't do anything. If you went into space and played Wii, you'd still have results(Gyroscopes do not require gravity to work.) However, in actuality, the level would still move, but due to the airbubbles being pushed around by the liquid and casing(Body in motion stays in motion.) That would produce entirely different results compared to using it on earth.

 

[Firestreak]

Hard to believe, since based on your rhetoric, the Wii is worthless and the PS3 is the best thing since sliced bread. I love the double standard the sony fanboy's come up with,you're allowed to criticize a company or their console, but if someone else does the same thing(especially to the company you're figuratively creaming your jeans for) they're automatically a "fantool." You apply slanted logic to "prove your points" and conveniently ignore how the same logic applies to the PS3 as well. You're just as big a "fantool" as I am.

You criticize Sony already with your wallet, by not buying the product. By them adding a feature that makes the system theoretically more appealing, a statement such as, "this should have been available at the start," is irrelevant. Every single one of the consoles is missing features that should have been available to the start to justify their price tag.

The belief that the features will be added, or the games that will come out is the reason to be an early adopter of technology. If everyone only bought technology based on immediate benefit, then there wouldn't be any new technology. There wouldn't be DVDs if people didn't assume your DVDs would come out when they were buying the first DVD players. There wouldn't be color television if early adopters didn't believe there'd be more channels in color coming. There'd be no Xbox 360 if the people sitting in April 2006 didn't believe they'd have more games coming, just like the people with a PS3 believe now there will be more games coming.

It's not like Sony is putting fake games on the shelves then when we go to buy them it turns out the box is just cardboard with some titles spraypainted on. We know what's out there.

Also for all your positioning, I've never said that PS3 is better than Xbox 360 as a total package. I've never said I have no intention to buy an Xbox 360. I've actually purchased a Wii.

The only time I defend PS3 is when dipshits like you come in and attack it.

But please... continue.

Hell, you're demonizing me because I'm poking holes through your arguments; since you can't actually prove your points you're just trying to write me off.

I'll demonize you for hanging around a PS3 board with no real interest in a PS3 except to tell owners you don't think it's worth buying.

If it wasn't for all the sony fanboys going on about how their console is the best just because it looks better or because they can play movies on it; I wouldn't give a fuck about most of the failings of the console(I might even feel sorry for sony).

Save your pity for people with real problems. I don't recall anyone saying that PS3 is the best in the first place. I've mentioned that I like playing movies on it.

I've got a HD TV.
It's got a blu-ray player.

Why the fuck shouldn't I appreciate that function? Are you so dense you get offended by the fact that I've got a more expensive TV than you that allows me to see movies in a higher resolution than you? Honestly it sounds like jealousy more than anything, but that's just my opinion.

At this point, the only reason I'd want the console to fail would be to shut you sony fanboys up.

A true sign of maturity. If you wish for the PS3 to fail because you don't wish to read about the PS3, let me save you the trouble.

Get the fuck off the PS3 board, you dumb shit.

You won't hear anything more about the PS3, problem solved.

As long as there's a Playstation 3 board, we have the right to talk about our console, there's a Wii board and a 360 board, have fun there.

I don't give a shit about blu-ray movies,

Then don't buy any, why do I give a fuck?

I don't plan on buying a new TV until my current ones die out, which will be a few years at least; so the biggest selling point of the console is of no use to me.

Then don't buy a PS3, yet again, I don't give a fuck.

The only I care about in terms of which console I buy is the games, and that's where Sony is severely lacking. I don't give a fuck about MGS4, I didn't care before Kojima confirmed it would be PS3 only and I definitely don't care about it now. Sony has all of 3 games that I want that I can't get anywhere else, and they're not worth the $750 price tag it'd take to actually play them. You like the games, fine, but stop acting like everyone else wants exactly what you do.

Since when have any of us gone on about how you all want the PS3 games? I find it humorous how the Xbox 360 population seems to be that a game is only good if it's getting ported over and if it's not then it's "gay."

And before you reply with "oh you're just a nintendo fantool," or some other equally moronic and unresponsive reply,

At this point for all I care you could be an Atari fanboy, I don't really care at this point.

I am at least willing to admit that the Wii and Nintendo have faults; so far I have yet to hear any PS3 owners even agree that an obvious problem was a problem. The fact that it took sony 5 months to bring in rumble? That's an obvious problem, it's something they should have fixed; but firestreak wouldn't even admit that, instead he just went on about how nintendo should have had internet multiplayer from the start too. That's what makes a sony fanboy more annoying than the nintendo/microsoft fanboys, is that they won't even admit the obvious just because it's a negative for the PS3. I agreed with firestreak that nintendo should have had internet from the start, because he was right;

You made sure it was known you don't care at all about online multiplayer, as you post on a board for an online MMORPG that you play.

I have yet to hear anything like that from any of the sony fanboys. Back when being a Nintendo fan was considered a bad thing by some people, most of the Nintendo fanboys still weren't nearly as rabid as the sony fanboys today.

No console has ever gotten as much shit as the PS3 gets, period. PS3 owners are bitchy for a reason, because every PS3 board on the internet is a warground infested with people like you, who have no interest in buying the system and yet come to argue about it. PS3 owners don't want to argue about which console is better. PS3 owners want to talk about PS3 games and PS3 features. When you distract us with your bullshit, we will dislike you.

I'll even go a step further, I think that the Wii has a considerable problem with the lack of disk space available to download new content for the games. I'd love to get those new marvel: ultimate alliance characters for the Wii version, but I doubt it'll be available for download due to the small storage inside the Wii; and I can only think that will happen more and it will hold the console back.

Yaya, the wii is held back by inferior hardware, you're admitting something we don't already know.

You're right, the people who say the PS3 is a failure without any reasoning are stupid, but most people actually have a reason.

No, the people who say the PS3 is a failure are just stupid all around because it's not a failure. They're either comparing it to a system that's been out three times as long or against a system that's a wild success that would make a perfectly fine system look bad in comparison.

The people who say the PS3 is a failure to PS3 fans on PS3 boards are just assholes. Know anyone like that?

The games suck, it's too expensive, blu-ray is worthless without HDtv's,

Oh... oh... I found someone, I found someone!

there's several reasons why someone would consider the PS3 a failure to them. To me, the PS3 is a failure, because it's expensive and offers me nothing over a 360 or even a PS2 at this point and it doesn't look like that is going to change in the next 2 years.

Thanks for your opinion, duly noted.

So now that you've had proof thrown in your face, you morph what you were saying to divert away from how wrong you were.

Proof and opinion certainly do have a fine line...oh wait a second... they don't!

It's not hard to believe that other people will come to the same conclusion and that while the console might not fail, it won't be capturing the #1 slot again.

Here's the kicker. In your opinion it's #1 slot or a failure because as you despise Sony and love Nintendo... you simultaneously hold Sony up to the standard of "#1 or failure!" Nintendo was in last place with gamecube, I never once called it a failure. Rather I bought the system instead....

Funny I don't recall tons of people all over the internet infesting every gamecube board saying they disliked it.

 

[TheOsyris]

playing resistance, man far better gameplay overall then GeoW. just some GeoW movie feelings are so cool and the graphic detail due to shading i miss.. Resistance is freakin sweet tho. they only gave this 8.8? ;;

 

[Elemmire]

Maybe they didn't like the talking and pictures instead of fully video clips? XD Not a big deal though.. lol.

 

[Firestreak]

Just to throw out there, I don't care at all about which company makes which game system or publishes what games. I've bought every Nintendo home console, I've bought several Microsoft PC accessories, as well as every version of windows since 3.1 and skipped the original Xbox only because I didn't consider Halo to be a compelling enough system seller for my tastes.

I bought the Wii and returned it after being unable to find any games that hold my interest and finding the control structure to be no more fun to me than the six-axis. I however gave it a chance because I always give Nintendo a chance. I didn't buy the 360 because by the time there were any games of interest out I was already aware that it was plagued with hardware problems and I've been waiting on the 65 nm chipset.

So my issues are...

The 360 isn't stable enough yet for me.
The Wii doesn't have a game out yet that I want to play.(I will probably get it again when "The Bigs" comes out this summer, since I can imagine wanting to play that.)
The 360 hasn't upgraded to the 65 nm chipset that most theorize will increase its stability.

Seeing as the PS3 has several games I like, with FF13 and MGS3 coming, it was an easy purchase.

Now working against it.. the 360 is going to charge me for online multiplayer, which is somewhat redundant, as on the multiplatforms I could play for PS3 for free, making gold rather pointless. So I'd have to purchase a 360 on the strength of Xbox live silver on all its exclusives.

Which leaves Dead Rising, Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey. Hopefully the 65 nm chipset will be out by the time Lost Odyssey is out, so... PS3 is fine to wait. I'm getting a steady stream of games to play, even if some of them are 360 ports, like Enchanted Arms, Oblivian, the 360's version of Godfather, and F.E.A.R. upcoming... and those lead us to the summer where plenty of stuff is coming out.

So honestly... don't see how I'm a fanboy in the slightest. I reasoned out a timeline for all my purchases. I have no real biases for or against any companies, only values I place on different features and games. I've been unemotional, only very calculating.

 

[Bajaratt]

You don't own a PS3 or like it, blah blah blah fanboy, etc

So according to you I can't have an opinion or argue for it. Yes, the Sony(and microsoft, actually) way, just steamroll over any dissension and deny any legitmate opposition; glad to see the fans have adopted that too.

I'll demonize you for hanging around a PS3 board with no real interest in a PS3 except to tell owners you don't think it's worth buying.

Or I want to actually stay informed about what's happening, since I don't care to spout off unsubstantiated crap like antor. I'm also paying attention in case there is something that would make me want a PS3. I'm going to buy either a 360 or a PS3 in the next couple years, apparently it's wrong to bother trying to stay informed about what each is doing and making an informed decision. I guess you're right, I'll just go to a store, toss a coin and that will be the console I buy.

You made sure it was known you don't care at all about online multiplayer, as you post on a board for an online MMORPG that you play.

Yes, because playing a game that can only be played online and games that have both offline single-player content and offline multiplayer are exactly the same thing. I don't care about being able to play counter-strike 2 online, but I want to play half-life 2; is that really so hard to understand? I owned SOCOM for the PS2, never once tried to play it online despite owning the network adaptor, same with all of my console games with an online multi-player option.

No, the people who say the PS3 is a failure are just stupid all around because it's not a failure. They're either comparing it to a system that's been out three times as long or against a system that's a wild success that would make a perfectly fine system look bad in comparison.

The people who say the PS3 is a failure to PS3 fans on PS3 boards are just assholes. Know anyone like that

The PS3 failed to live up to the hype, I had big hopes for the system(as meeze pointed out in the other thread), but as it grew closer to launch and even more so after the launch; they don't seem to be doing much to regain ground. It's not like the game developers aren't going to take a look at the sales numbers before they choose which system to develop a game for, oh wait. Yeah, most will go multi-platform, but unless PS3 has comparable numbers to the competition, it'll be a lot cheaper and easier for Microsoft to pay for exclusivity.

Here's the kicker. In your opinion it's #1 slot or a failure because as you despise Sony and love Nintendo... you simultaneously hold Sony up to the standard of "#1 or failure!" Nintendo was in last place with gamecube, I never once called it a failure. Rather I bought the system instead....

Funny I don't recall tons of people all over the internet infesting every gamecube board saying they disliked it.

And more idiotic assumptions. I never said or even implied a retarded "first or failure" standard to anything, stop pulling other people's opinions out of your ass, especially when they're obviously wrong. The PS3 fails to deliver for me, just like the xbox 1 did; but obviously other people actually care for some of the features. The sony fanboys seem to think PS3 will just rocket to the #1 slot as soon as MGS4 and FF13 come out, ignoring how unlikely that is.

I don't know who's going to take the #1 slot this time, but PS3 has a lot of work to do to make sure that it's not going to end up #3.

 

[Firestreak]

So according to you I can't have an opinion or argue for it. Yes, the Sony(and microsoft, actually) way, just steamroll over any dissension and deny any legitmate opposition; glad to see the fans have adopted that too.

It's not my job to defend the PS3, although I think it's unhealthy for the system to have every piece of news get a negative piece of spin added to it.

Or I want to actually stay informed about what's happening, since I don't care to spout off unsubstantiated crap like antor.

You have no interest on new information. You ask no questions of PS3 owners, rather come here to explain to us what you know about a system that you don't own. Your contributions seem to be adding negative spin towards any relevant piece of news, or citing how particular features have no interest to you.

Take for example Metal Gear Solid 4. There are many Xbox 360 exclusive games that don't interest me... for example, Crackdown holds no interest to me. However, being someone with the maturity greater than a 10 year old, I don't go out of my way when Crackdown is being discussed to say, "Crackdown has no interest to me." This is because... well, it has the interest to a lot of people, and that means the particular way it was made was fine for its purpose of entertaining thousands of people. I don't expect every single game to interest me, and it's impossible for any game to interest everyone.

However Metal Gear Solid 4 isn't held up to that standard, while I am interested in the game, by you not being interested, you assume I give a shit. Every single PS3 game doesn't need to interest you. Killzone 2 doesn't need to. Lair doesn't need to. Motorstorm doesn't need to. Resistance doesn't need to. Warhawk doesn't need to. Calling all Cars doesn't need to. Littlebigplanet doesn't need to. FF13 doesn't need to. MGS4 doesn't need to.

Fact of the matter is, I don't care to convince you that those games are fun. It's very easy to stay informed without giving an opinion that's obviously intended to draw an argument.

I'm also paying attention in case there is something that would make me want a PS3. I'm going to buy either a 360 or a PS3 in the next couple years, apparently it's wrong to bother trying to stay informed about what each is doing and making an informed decision. I guess you're right, I'll just go to a store, toss a coin and that will be the console I buy.

But that's not what you're doing here.

Yes, because playing a game that can only be played online and games that have both offline single-player content and offline multiplayer are exactly the same thing.

You either enjoy playing online with others or not. If online content of single player games has no interest, I don't see how you can devote yourself to a game that's entirely online.

The only thing I guess you could say is... you have no interest in online versus, which is all that's really available for online next gen... until Monster Hunter 3 comes out.(high hopes there) In which case... a lot of the 360 games will probably disappoint you as I talked about in my thread above, analyzing 360 games "worth buying" without xbox live gold. The PS3 seems to be more oriented towards offline content, for example... Gears of War - 6 levels, Resistance - 30 levels.

I don't know who's going to take the #1 slot this time, but PS3 has a lot of work to do to make sure that it's not going to end up #3.

First place or last place has never been what I care about in a console purchase. The PS3 will get enough of an install base that the only 360 exclusives will be ones that Microsoft paid to be that way. Already we're getting ports in our infancy, with several games this last week announcing PS3 versions. Microsoft's Gaming Studios focus is on first person shooter type games while Sony is publishing games that have more interest to me.

Haters whine about having to buy a 8 dollar cord, while PS3 is the only system with wired and wireless built in, even compared to the $480 Xbox. Maybe you won't have a HD TV for 3 years, but 2 years down the line that won't be far away, and when those blu-ray movies aren't more expensive than the regular dvds, you might find yourself hoping to buy the blu-ray version so your movies will be high def when you switch over.

Hell when your PS2 starts to die, you might start to look at the PS3 as a reasonable alternative to buying another PS2. The BC alone going to be a compelling sales argument for years down the line to the hundreds of millions with PS1/2 collections. This is compelling in a way that the Wii's VC isn't really comparable. I don't think people are going to buy the Wii so they can buy retro games, rather buy retro games cause they're down in impulse buy price. People already own PS1 and PS2 games, they're going to want a system that'll play them... and the PS3 does it with the sixaxis and built in memory cards so you need absolutely nothing. A few years down the line when the PS3 hits the $300 mark... this'll be very important.

 

[Bajaratt]

It's not my job to defend the PS3, although I think it's unhealthy for the system to have every piece of news get a negative piece of spin added to it.

And I'm not spinning every bit of news to the negative, a lot of the news I don't even mention. Lately, the only news I've commented on has been that they should have had rumble from day 1. That's not negative spin.

You have no interest on new information. You ask no questions of PS3 owners, rather come here to explain to us what you know about a system that you don't own. Your contributions seem to be adding negative spin towards any relevant piece of news, or citing how particular features have no interest to you.

Yeah, because QCDN is the only place I can go to get information or ask questions about the PS3, am I right?

Take for example Metal Gear Solid 4. There are many Xbox 360 exclusive games that don't interest me... for example, Crackdown holds no interest to me. However, being someone with the maturity greater than a 10 year old, I don't go out of my way when Crackdown is being discussed to say, "Crackdown has no interest to me." This is because... well, it has the interest to a lot of people, and that means the particular way it was made was fine for its purpose of entertaining thousands of people. I don't expect every single game to interest me, and it's impossible for any game to interest everyone.

However Metal Gear Solid 4 isn't held up to that standard, while I am interested in the game, by you not being interested, you assume I give a shit. Every single PS3 game doesn't need to interest you. Killzone 2 doesn't need to. Lair doesn't need to. Motorstorm doesn't need to. Resistance doesn't need to. Warhawk doesn't need to. Calling all Cars doesn't need to. Littlebigplanet doesn't need to. FF13 doesn't need to. MGS4 doesn't need to.

Fact of the matter is, I don't care to convince you that those games are fun. It's very easy to stay informed without giving an opinion that's obviously intended to draw an argument.

And yet, it's always the PS3 fans who keep saying how great MGS4 will be and how it will sell systems by itself, like they expect everyone to go nuts over MGS4. They are the ones trying to shove the reasons to buy the console down others' throat, when it sounds a lot like they're just trying to convince themselves.

But that's not what you're doing here.

In this thread, no. But it's not the only PS3 thread and it's not the only thread I've read.

You either enjoy playing online with others or not. If online content of single player games has no interest, I don't see how you can devote yourself to a game that's entirely online.

The only thing I guess you could say is... you have no interest in online versus, which is all that's really available for online next gen... until Monster Hunter 3 comes out.(high hopes there) In which case... a lot of the 360 games will probably disappoint you as I talked about in my thread above, analyzing 360 games "worth buying" without xbox live gold. The PS3 seems to be more oriented towards offline content, for example... Gears of War - 6 levels, Resistance - 30 levels.

I still like multiplayer(although co-op is infinitely more fun than versus), I just don't care about doing it online. It's significantly more fun to play against friends you're sitting next to than some random player somewhere around the world. I'm also not that impressed the off line content of the PS3 games, so the online content definitely has no appeal to me.

First place or last place has never been what I care about in a console purchase. The PS3 will get enough of an install base that the only 360 exclusives will be ones that Microsoft paid to be that way. Already we're getting ports in our infancy, with several games this last week announcing PS3 versions. Microsoft's Gaming Studios focus is on first person shooter type games while Sony is publishing games that have more interest to me.

Sony typically does have more games in the genres that interest me, but Microsoft has finally pulled their head out of their ass and has more than just halo to offer; they're branching out into new genres and the games look good. Even looking into the next year-year and a half of announced PS3 games, there's very little that actually interests me.

Haters whine about having to buy a 8 dollar cord, while PS3 is the only system with wired and wireless built in, even compared to the $480 Xbox. Maybe you won't have a HD TV for 3 years, but 2 years down the line that won't be far away, and when those blu-ray movies aren't more expensive than the regular dvds, you might find yourself hoping to buy the blu-ray version so your movies will be high def when you switch over.

I have a wireless router, it's not much slower than wired; I don't really care that they have 2 options when I have the better option(aesthetics and ease of setup-wise) already available to me. I don't want cables strewn everywhere in my apartment, go figure.

The movies are still dependent on the blu-ray actually taking off, which probably won't happen for a few years. And yes, I know it's actually selling now, but at a miniscule fraction of normal DVD, because there's barely any market for HD movies right now. It's also not a compelling argument to pick up a PS3 now, if anything I'd wait until I could actually watch blu-ray movies and then buy all of the movies for cheap since they'd been out for months.

Hell when your PS2 starts to die, you might start to look at the PS3 as a reasonable alternative to buying another PS2. The BC alone going to be a compelling sales argument for years down the line to the hundreds of millions with PS1/2 collections.

Actually, I'd be looking for another fat PS2 unless there's a HDL for PS3. Sony is still producing the PS2 too, so why would I pay $600 to play my PS2 games when I could play them for $150?