PS3 Information [Archive] - Team17 Forum

PDA

View Full Version : PS3 Information

Akuryou13
7 Nov 2006, 05:34
"Not only does the PLAYSTATION 3 look like a Victorian waffle iron, it also heats up like one. Fact: The Sony behemoth hoovers up 380 watts of power. Play the console for 4 hours a day and add US $80 to your annual electricity bill. The console needs eight (yes, eight) times the power the PS2 need to propel its gaming goodness as well as twice the Xbox 360's hot hot 160 watts. And the 360 can cook eggs! Meaning? The PS3 can melt floors or something."
http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/ps3/ps3-like-the-360-but-twice-the-heat-211225.php
"Gotta love Sony's multi purpose machine, lets see, what is the count up to now...
- I can play PS3 games
- I can play PS2 games
- I can play PS1 games
- I can watch movies
- I can watch super amazingly beautifully clear Blu-ray movies that I won't buy on my over-priced HDTV I don't have
- I can browse the web
- pron !
- I can provide enough heat for my apartment
- I can bake Thanksgiving dinner
- I can boil water for delicious Sony coffee to go with my Sony Bacon and Eggs (part of a balanced Kutaragi breakfast)
- If I open it up, I can probably weld stuff together, I don't know how that could be helpful, but hey, it's welding, when is that NOT totally badass?
Wow, that $600 is really starting to justify itself, now if they can only make that kitchen sink attatchment........."

Pigbuster
7 Nov 2006, 05:44
Well, to their credit, a PC uses 300-400 watts.
And lots of people leave those on 6+ hours a day.
By the way, are you Wernstar?
You'd better be, because if you aren't, you just quoted someone without using quotes.
That's punishable by death in many countries.

Xinos
7 Nov 2006, 11:51
Here are the technical specs.
CPU type: 65c816 (16-bit)
CPU speed: 2.68 and 3.58 Mhz (change able)
RAM memory: 1 Mbit (128 Kbyte)
Picture Proc. Unit: 16-bit
Video RAM: 0.5 Mbit (64 Kbyte)
Max resolution: 512 x 448 pixels
Colors Available: 32 768 colors
Max colors at once: 256 colors
Max sprite size: 64 x 64 pixels
Max sprites: 128 sprites
Min/Max Cart Size: 2 Mbit - 48 Mbit
Sound chip: 8-bit Sony SPC700
Sound channels: 8

AndrewTaylor
7 Nov 2006, 12:33
Well, to their credit, a PC uses 300-400 watts.
Well, to their credit, a chemical laser uses 1000000 watts.
What's your point?

pinoocho
7 Nov 2006, 13:58
WOW... then, if I have it, I can cook my food AND play my favorites games all at the same time?? :eek:
It must have a giant cooler or something...

Akuryou13
7 Nov 2006, 14:06
By the way, are you Wernstar?
You'd better be, because if you aren't, you just quoted someone without using quotes.
That's punishable by death in many countries.oh, oops. lemme go fix that.

Pigbuster
7 Nov 2006, 22:17
Well, to their credit, a chemical laser uses 1000000 watts.
What's your point?
That a lot of these people are getting on Sony's case for this when they use more than that amount of electricity on their PC's already.
It seems silly to whine about something using so much electricity when the device they're typing the comment on uses the same amount.
After all, if they played the PS3 they probably wouldn't use their computer at the same time, so they'd pay the same $80 even if they just used the computers all the time.
And there may very well be a hole in this argument that can be taken advantage of to hilarious results, I'm sure.

Plasma
7 Nov 2006, 22:25
Well, to their credit, a chemical laser uses 1000000 watts.
What's your point?
That's-a spicey meatball!
Sorry, couldn't resist.

Akuryou13
8 Nov 2006, 04:21
That a lot of these people are getting on Sony's case for this when they use more than that amount of electricity on their PC's already.
It seems silly to whine about something using so much electricity when the device they're typing the comment on uses the same amount.
After all, if they played the PS3 they probably wouldn't use their computer at the same time, so they'd pay the same $80 even if they just used the computers all the time.
And there may very well be a hole in this argument that can be taken advantage of to hilarious results, I'm sure.where the dollar amount isn't that much for the reasons you listed, look at the design differences. a computer is large with tons of open space and air-flow. the PS3 is small and cramped. the differences here mean that whereas your computer just gets hot to the touch on the inside in a couple of spots, the PS3 will get hot all over the place and the chances of it bursting into flames are much higher than with other consoles. the other difference is that a top-end PS3 game will probably look as good as computer games do now. the physics involved in those games won't be up to the same mark as the physics on computers because console games have to accomodate the PS3, the 360 and the Wii. chances are QUITE good that the PS3's full power will actually never be tapped, and as such the added power will just go to waste. even if that DOESN'T happen, you're still paying $60+ for games, when you could buy the superior PC versions for $10 less and use the money saved after buying a few games to go out and buy an adapter to plug into your computer that lets you use a Dual Shock controller on your PC, thereby negating any and all advantages of having the PS3 and its high risk of fire.
and for those that ARE complaining about the price tag on the power, keep in mind that it's not the $80 a year that's getting complained about, it's the $80 a year tacked on top of the $600 you're paying for the system, $60 per game, probably (haven't looked it up) $20-30 per memory card if they're ever used, $30-40 or so for the controllers, and all the other fees you have to cough up for a system that is no more useful than a CD/DVD drive.

Xinos
8 Nov 2006, 10:48
lol, computers don't burst into flames. They automaticly shut down as soon as they get close to the temperatures that could harm the hardware. And I can't imagine the PS3 being any different.

SupSuper
8 Nov 2006, 12:03
Well, to their credit, a PC uses 300-400 watts.
And lots of people leave those on 6+ hours a day.That might be because PCs do a whole lot more than a PS3, have a whole lot more reasons to keep them on 6+ hours a day than a PS3, and have to be able to support a lot more hardware than a PS3.

AndrewTaylor
8 Nov 2006, 12:33
That a lot of these people are getting on Sony's case for this when they use more than that amount of electricity on their PC's already.
Yes, but they use even more to cook their food or have warm showers, or fire chemical lasers at things, but that doesn't make it a useful comparison. The PS3 will never, ever be in competition with PCs and a comparison between the two is pointless. It's a console, and should be compared to other consoles. I'm, pretty cerrain the Wii consumes less power than the PS3 because it's so small that 350W would probably explode the poor thing (from what I hear it damn near explodes PS3s), and I expect the X Box 360 uses less as well because we'd have heard about it if it didn't.
I don't know if this is Sony being rubbish or just everyone else being good, but the fact is that if you buy a PS3 you'll probably pay $30 more on electricity than if you buy a Wii. The reason that doesn't matter is not because you're already paying $90 to run your PC, it's because you've already paid $550 more than you had to on the console in the first place and so clearly have more money than sense.

MrBunsy
8 Nov 2006, 17:12
lol, computers don't burst into flames. They automaticly shut down as soon as they get close to the temperatures that could harm the hardware. And I can't imagine the PS3 being any different.
Well, they do occasionally, I've got the charred power supply to proove it. But not very often, I'll admit.
$60 a game? What's the sterling price for a game going to be?

Alien King
8 Nov 2006, 17:17
$60 a game? What's the sterling price for a game going to be?
£50. Everything in America is cheaper :D.
This is by no means accurate. Do not take this seriously

*Splinter*
8 Nov 2006, 18:01
Well I cant wait! My heating is broken at the moment and Im sitting here at about -5 celsius, the sooner i can get psthreeter* the better! :)
*three-heater, my im clever :rolleyes:

Pigbuster
8 Nov 2006, 22:04
Yeah... I kinda saw what was wrong with my argument.
But I wanted to argue anyway. :p

Star Worms
9 Nov 2006, 00:13
...the Xbox 360's hot hot 160 watts. And the 360 can cook eggs! Meaning?My iron is 2000 watts... imagine what that could do to an egg. I'm tempted but I don't want to try...

Paul.Power
9 Nov 2006, 00:18
Looks like the Wii's going to win the eco-friendly market too :p.

Akuryou13
9 Nov 2006, 02:08
lol, computers don't burst into flames. They automaticly shut down as soon as they get close to the temperatures that could harm the hardware. And I can't imagine the PS3 being any different.consoles are known for being more prone to fires than PCs. PCs are meant to be on for long times, which is why they're designed as they are. consoles aren't. the design isn't made to be very heat-efficient, and the amount of heat present in the PS3 means that it is far more likely to burst into flames than others are. not saying that if you buy a PS3 your room is going to explode and kill your family, I'm just saying that the chances of that happening is more likely with the PS3 than with the Wii or the 360.

wormthingy
9 Nov 2006, 15:11
erm.. what about the magical words "fan" and "liquid-cooling" ?
you can blow up anything that uses electricity and have cooling techniques to prevent them from blowing up...
maybe half of that 380 watt is used for pumping the cooling-liquid and running the fans

AndrewTaylor
9 Nov 2006, 15:15
the PS3 ... is far more likely to ... explode and kill your family
I hope Sony's PR boys enjoy a challenge.

Xinos
12 Nov 2006, 20:12
The PlayStation3 also cures cancer.

M3ntal
13 Nov 2006, 04:46
My iron is 2000 watts... imagine what that could do to an egg. I'm tempted but I don't want to try...
Do it! DOOOO IT!!!!

Cisken1
13 Nov 2006, 08:38
Do it! DOOOO IT!!!!
I second that, also: BUY A PS3 AND BAKE PANCAKES!

Xinos
13 Nov 2006, 10:33
I second that, also: BUY A PS3 AND BAKE PANCAKES!
I think the part that actually get's hot is too small to fit a whole pancake. Plus youd need to open the PS3 to get at it.

M3ntal
13 Nov 2006, 12:03
I saw a vid clip of someone cooking an egg on an Athlon CPU once. He made a tin-foil dish for the egg which sat on some copper coins on the CPU. Took a while, but it cooked.

KRD
13 Nov 2006, 13:08
Incidentally, the PS3 pre-release testers report the thing to be silent and cool. Yes, in the temperature sense.
Fanboys!

Akuryou13
13 Nov 2006, 14:28
Incidentally, the PS3 pre-release testers report the thing to be silent and cool. Yes, in the temperature sense.
Fanboys!I'll wait to find that one out for sure, myself, but it's good to know that it won't burn down people's houses :p

Star Worms
13 Nov 2006, 15:50
Incidentally, the PS3 pre-release testers report the thing to be silent and cool. Yes, in the temperature sense.
Fanboys!
Well it is winter (in the northern hemisphere anyway)...

Pigbuster
14 Nov 2006, 06:36
Winter doesn't make something not hot.
Unless winter somehow makes heat not hot. And it does not.
So if they say the PS3 is cool, then it probably is. Not "stuff-your-baby-inside-for-hilarious-novelty-pictures!" cool, but cool enough.

AndrewTaylor
14 Nov 2006, 10:34
Winter doesn't make something not hot.
Unless winter somehow makes heat not hot. And it does not.
So if they say the PS3 is cool, then it probably is. Not "stuff-your-baby-inside-for-hilarious-novelty-pictures!" cool, but cool enough.
My computer overheats more in summer than in winter. Winter actually does "make heat not hot", by dissipating it more rapidly.

Star Worms
14 Nov 2006, 10:51
Winter doesn't make something not hot.
Unless winter somehow makes heat not hot. And it does not.
So if they say the PS3 is cool, then it probably is. Not "stuff-your-baby-inside-for-hilarious-novelty-pictures!" cool, but cool enough.
Winter = colder
Therefore in winter things cool down quicker.

franpa
14 Nov 2006, 12:06
and take longer to heat up and start off at a colder temperature.

Pigbuster
15 Nov 2006, 06:24
It is winter.
I touch my computer.
It is hot.
Therefore, if the testers say that the PS3 is cool to the touch, and they weren't playing in a place with freezing temperatures (and why would they do that?), then it is.
(And the testers also could've been in one of the states in which it ever get cold.)
I meant that Winter doesn't make something so very cold that it doesn't generate any heat at all. If something is cool to the touch, even in winter, then it probably doesn't generate enough heat to cause problems.

AndrewTaylor
15 Nov 2006, 10:34
I meant that Winter doesn't make something so very cold that it doesn't generate any heat at all. If something is cool to the touch, even in winter, then it probably doesn't generate enough heat to cause problems.
You mean, the parts they touched didn't generate enough heat to cause problems. My computer can run at 70 degrees and be cool to the touch. That doesn't mean it's not damaging the processor and it doesn't mean it's safe.
If the PS3 runs hot it will die faster. Same goes for the other consoles.

Paul.Power
15 Nov 2006, 22:00
You mean, the parts they touched didn't generate enough heat to cause problems. My computer can run at 70 degrees and be cool to the touch. That doesn't mean it's not damaging the processor and it doesn't mean it's safe.
If the PS3 runs hot it will die faster. Same goes for the other consoles.Mmm. Think about building a computer into a vacuum flask...

AndrewTaylor
16 Nov 2006, 10:24
You mean, so it can't dissipate heat at all? Nice plan. Let me know how that goes.

Slick
16 Nov 2006, 20:25
It is winter.
I touch my computer.
It is hot.
Well it is a crap. Sorry, I ment to say Mac. :)
*hides from Thomsp*

Paul.Power
17 Nov 2006, 10:58
You mean, so it can't dissipate heat at all? Nice plan. Let me know how that goes.I know, I was pointing out that a computer that doesn't feel hot is kind of a bad idea.

Shockdude
17 Nov 2006, 21:45
...
well, the ps3 was released today in the us, canada, and china...
it was released last week on 11-7-06 in japan...
and people in europe, new zealand, and austrailia have to wait until 3-7-07:p

Star Worms
17 Nov 2006, 21:57
and people in europe, new zealand, and austrailia have to wait until 3-7-07:pSony's loss, not ours.

Pigbuster
17 Nov 2006, 22:22
Well it is a crap. Sorry, I ment to say Mac. :)
*hides from Thomsp*
Ugh.
Both computers have merits.
Both computers have craps.
So they BOTH CRAP.

Akuryou13
18 Nov 2006, 03:12
Ugh.
Both computers have merits.
Both computers have craps.
So they BOTH CRAP.yep, and I doubt anyone will argue on that one :p

Akuryou13
18 Nov 2006, 04:10
NEW INFORMATION!!
PS3 RELEASE!! :D
Launch Titles:
http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/929232.asp
http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/932329.asp
http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3155336
Product Features:
http://kotaku.com/gaming/rumor/rumor-no-20-gb-ps3s-coming-215234.php
http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/gizmodo/one-mans-ps3-hdmi-issues-215190.php
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/746/746282p1.html
Customer Service:
http://blog.wired.com/games/2006/11/scea_vp_on_back.html
my friends, I do believe the people at Sony are geniuses, and should be commended on their completely successful and amazing launch of the most perfect video gaming console ever created. :D

Pigbuster
18 Nov 2006, 04:10
SOMEone's been reading Penny Arcade. :p
And why did they keep the Spiderman font?
Yeah, that's an old issue, but still... the PS2 got a rather pretty graphic on the front.
><(((x> <x)))>< ><(((x> <x)))>< ><(((x> <x)))>< ><(((x> <x)))><
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/11/17/violence-escalates-during-ps3-launch/
:eek:

MtlAngelus
18 Nov 2006, 07:32
So at what price is it selling already?

Slick
18 Nov 2006, 08:37
So at what price is it selling already?
$500-$600 retail, and people are paying up to $9,000 on E-Bay - if not more.
This is rediculous...all of it.
They say that Sony is loosing about $200 per console because all the stuff in it, costs more than they are selling it for. That doesnt even go for the wires, controlers, and the labor involved. Sony is going down fast.
I also read somewhere that they predicted the Xbox360 to be in first place this generation followed by the PS3 and then the Wii. *I doubt that*
Unless you want a few games that are PS3 exclusive, I really don't see a point to getting one. 360 has just as good graphics from the looks of it. And the Wii kicks it's ass with the motion controll. The PS3's controller also lacks rumble. And that's just bad. :p All controlers need the rumble feature. :p

Shockdude
18 Nov 2006, 14:41
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/11/17/violence-escalates-during-ps3-launch/ah, yes. the ps3 shooting incident.
:p
camping playstation gamers robbed at gunpoint (http://www.kmtr.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=006518A0-7413-4424-AD12-A235C95257D7)
four people shot while waiting for playstation console (http://www.wkyt.com/news/headlines/4661551.html)
playstation crowd gets more than it bargained for in tysons (http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=600&sid=978347)
man hurt in game race. wal-mart manager reportedly made buyers run to get a playstation 3 (http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=532046)
two people arrested in playstation frenzy (http://www.kmph.com/home/4674536.html?skipthumb=Y)
gunmen rob local game store for ps3s (http://cbs13.com/local/local_story_320195924.html)
i was bored:pSo, at what price is it selling already?the link for all your price needs:p (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3#Release_data_and_pricing)

Fliez
18 Nov 2006, 21:44
My Efriend got the PS3. He has been waiting years and years for this.

MrBunsy
18 Nov 2006, 21:51
My Efriend got the PS3. He has been waiting years and years for this.Most people wait years and years for their funeral too, doesn't mean it was worth looking forward to.

kikumbob
19 Nov 2006, 17:39
My, arn't we all a load of PS3 haters? Look on the brightside. At least it can play games...can it? In fact, has anyone actually bothered to talk about the quality of the games it actually plays in this thread or were we all too worried about the console keeping us all nice and toasty?

Slick
19 Nov 2006, 18:18
Ok, lets look on the brightside. It sure does do a nice job of taking up space. :)

MrBunsy
19 Nov 2006, 18:19
My, arn't we all a load of PS3 haters? Look on the brightside. At least it can play games...can it? In fact, has anyone actually bothered to talk about the quality of the games it actually plays in this thread or were we all too worried about the console keeping us all nice and toasty?I thought the quality of the games was somehting against the PS3.

Plasma
19 Nov 2006, 18:23
My, arn't we all a load of PS3 haters? Look on the brightside. At least it can play games...can it? In fact, has anyone actually bothered to talk about the quality of the games it actually plays in this thread or were we all too worried about the console keeping us all nice and toasty?
We aleady had that discussion in another thread. I think it wa an Xbox360 thread.

Star Worms
19 Nov 2006, 19:02
http://www.vgcats.com/comics/images/061012.jpg

*Splinter*
19 Nov 2006, 20:38
Most people wait years and years for their funeral too, doesn't mean it was worth looking forward to.
That could possible be the stupidest thing i ever heard, congratulations :) I'd give you a badge or something but you'd only choke on it.
:)

MrBunsy
19 Nov 2006, 20:47
That could possiblY be the stupidest thing i ever heard, congratulations :) I'd give you a badge or something but you'd only choke on it.
:)
Why, exactly?

Melon
19 Nov 2006, 21:09
Star Worms, that comic is brilliant! Not just because it's funny, but because it's so true. I laughed so much...

Akuryou13
20 Nov 2006, 05:50
My, arn't we all a load of PS3 haters? Look on the brightside. At least it can play games...can it? In fact, has anyone actually bothered to talk about the quality of the games it actually plays in this thread or were we all too worried about the console keeping us all nice and toasty?actually watched a couple games played while waiting on the Wii. watched MBA something-or-other 07. the graphics WERE pretty good, but the texture detail was very low. the best part of the graphics in the game was the fact that you can see the sweat on the players as they run around the court. that feature is on the 360, but due to a low amount of texture memory on the PS3, it is not available there. instead, the people look like they've been made from wet clay.
also saw a dirt-bike racing game that made use of the six-axis. the game was good, and seemed to be quite fun, the problem came in that when trying to get off the starting line, the 3 people I saw play all had the same problem. the six-axis is too sensitive, so instead of turning smoothly or starting off the line in a straight line, they often had to fiddle around for 30 seconds or so before actually finally manage to NOT make only 180 turns.
another problem is that after 36 minutes of us being inside playing the system, it overheated and froze up. we could then no longer play. the employees in line with us as well as those opening the store at that time all said that they've had that same problem every time the PS3 is played. it plays fine for about 30-40 minutes and then it locks up and you have to wait a while before playing again.
in all, I'm not saying the PS3 is the devil or that it's going to rape your kids or anything, but right now, it's a complete waste of money. there's only 1 good game on it and the current systems are extremely buggy and need to be completely rebuilt to actually solve the problem (the overheating is caused by a tiny heatsink that doesn't actually do enough for the power the processor has. the result is that the PS3 freezes after a half hour).
now, I'm not going off of random facts I saw online, I'm not bashing Sony, I'm just saying what I saw and what the employees at best buy told me. based on reviews and posts online, I would have to say that such problems are common though.
MY VERDICT: it's a PS2 all over again, it's GOING to be awesome. right now though, if you're wasting $600 on a system that doesn't work and that has no games worth playing on you're a fool. wait a while for the price to go down, the games to be released and the system to be tweaked and you'll have yourself a nice gaming system worthy of the money spent.

Pigbuster
20 Nov 2006, 06:17
They say that Sony is loosing about $200 per console because all the stuff in it, costs more than they are selling it for. That doesnt even go for the wires, controlers, and the labor involved. Sony is going down fast.
Actually, most consoles have been sold at a loss, if I recall correctly. The Wii isn't, though.
They make up for it with games. Essentially $60 for a CD.
Also, it's worth mentioning that the Wii's opening line-up wasn't all that great, either. One great, others mediocre.
(Though if the Metal Slug anthology was a launch title, then one great, one AWESOME. Metal slug 5 and 6!)

MrBunsy
20 Nov 2006, 09:07
but due to a low amount of texture memory on the PS3, it is not available there. instead, the people look like they've been made from wet clay.You've got to be joking, the PS3 that claims to have almighty graphics, has low quality textures? Textures being probably the most important part of good graphics, prehaps second to models?
Now you've got me curious.

Paul.Power
20 Nov 2006, 14:29
Actually, most consoles have been sold at a loss, if I recall correctly. The Wii isn't, though.
They make up for it with games. Essentially $60 for a CD.Indeed, in the same way that Epson are in the business of selling printer cartridges...

SupSuper
20 Nov 2006, 18:50
ah, yes. the ps3 shooting incident.
:p
camping playstation gamers robbed at gunpoint (http://www.kmtr.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=006518A0-7413-4424-AD12-A235C95257D7)
four people shot while waiting for playstation console (http://www.wkyt.com/news/headlines/4661551.html)
playstation crowd gets more than it bargained for in tysons (http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=600&sid=978347)
man hurt in game race. wal-mart manager reportedly made buyers run to get a playstation 3 (http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=532046)
two people arrested in playstation frenzy (http://www.kmph.com/home/4674536.html?skipthumb=Y)
gunmen rob local game store for ps3s (http://cbs13.com/local/local_story_320195924.html)
i was bored:pHey, let's not forget suspect sought in ps3 robbery (http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=nation_world&id=4771040)!

*Splinter*
20 Nov 2006, 20:19
actually watched a couple games played while waiting on the Wii. watched MBA something-or-other 07. the graphics WERE pretty good, but the texture detail was very low. the best part of the graphics in the game was the fact that you can see the sweat on the players as they run around the court. that feature is on the 360, but due to a low amount of texture memory on the PS3, it is not available there. instead, the people look like they've been made from wet clay.
also saw a dirt-bike racing game that made use of the six-axis. the game was good, and seemed to be quite fun, the problem came in that when trying to get off the starting line, the 3 people I saw play all had the same problem. the six-axis is too sensitive, so instead of turning smoothly or starting off the line in a straight line, they often had to fiddle around for 30 seconds or so before actually finally manage to NOT make only 180 turns.
another problem is that after 36 minutes of us being inside playing the system, it overheated and froze up. we could then no longer play. the employees in line with us as well as those opening the store at that time all said that they've had that same problem every time the PS3 is played. it plays fine for about 30-40 minutes and then it locks up and you have to wait a while before playing again.
in all, I'm not saying the PS3 is the devil or that it's going to rape your kids or anything, but right now, it's a complete waste of money. there's only 1 good game on it and the current systems are extremely buggy and need to be completely rebuilt to actually solve the problem (the overheating is caused by a tiny heatsink that doesn't actually do enough for the power the processor has. the result is that the PS3 freezes after a half hour).
now, I'm not going off of random facts I saw online, I'm not bashing Sony, I'm just saying what I saw and what the employees at best buy told me. based on reviews and posts online, I would have to say that such problems are common though.
MY VERDICT: it's a PS2 all over again, it's GOING to be awesome. right now though, if you're wasting $600 on a system that doesn't work and that has no games worth playing on you're a fool. wait a while for the price to go down, the games to be released and the system to be tweaked and you'll have yourself a nice gaming system worthy of the money spent.
Ah shoot, Im going to have to do some research before I choose then :\
'system to be tweaked'
Do they really do that after the console has been released? (without bringing out a whole new version, slimline, pink, etc.). If so (and if its true :() Im praying it will be fixed by the time it is out in March :confused:

Plasma
20 Nov 2006, 21:00
'system to be tweaked'
Do they really do that after the console has been released? (without bringing out a whole new version, slimline, pink, etc.). If so (and if its true :() Im praying it will be fixed by the time it is out in March :confused:
I'd say Sony would try to 'tweak' it for when it comes out here.

kikumbob
20 Nov 2006, 23:18
What needs to happen is for nintendo, sony, and microsoft to merge their consoles into one, taking all the best bits from the xbox, wii and PS3 and slapping them together to make one motherload of a console.
What you will end up with is a Nintendo Wii. I have no point.

Alien King
22 Nov 2006, 17:54
What needs to happen is for nintendo, sony, and microsoft to merge their consoles into one, taking all the best bits from the xbox, wii and PS3 and slapping them together to make one motherload of a console.
You know, my Dad sad something very similar. Unfortunatly there is not way that will happen.
Although, all you will get is a slightly beefed up Wii.

Plasma
22 Nov 2006, 18:05
What needs to happen is for nintendo, sony, and microsoft to merge their consoles into one, taking all the best bits from the xbox, wii and PS3 and slapping them together to make one motherload of a console.
Do you really want Microsoft and Sony to form one company/product/whatever you had in mind for this to work, and with a monopoly too?

*Splinter*
22 Nov 2006, 18:33
What needs to happen is for nintendo, sony, and microsoft to merge their consoles into one, taking all the best bits from the xbox, wii and PS3 and slapping them together to make one motherload of a console.
What you will end up with is a Nintendo Wii. I have no point.
Yeah... It would be a Wii...
Obviously, after all it would have the improved power and graphics of the PS3, the motion sensing from the Wii (although... PS3 has that too) and the g00d Network stuff of the 360 (oh wait... doesnt PS3 have that too?)
Indeed

Plasma
22 Nov 2006, 18:42
g00d Network stuff of the 360 (oh wait... doesnt PS3 have that too?)
lol
graphics of the PS3
ROFL
The PS3, graphically, is very close to that of a Trouser Press!
, the motion sensing from the Wii (although... PS3 has that too)
Oh god stop, you're killing me!

SupSuper
22 Nov 2006, 20:45
What needs to happen is for nintendo, sony, and microsoft to merge their consoles into one, taking all the best bits from the xbox, wii and PS3 and slapping them together to make one motherload of a console.
What you will end up with is a Nintendo Wii. I have no point.The only flaw with that plan is that the biggest monopolies don't like sharing their profit. ;)
Still, we are in the age where everything keeps merging with everything. AMD and ATI, Adobe and Macromedia, Corel and Jasc, etc.

Alien King
22 Nov 2006, 23:25
AMD and ATI
How the Hell did I not know that!?

AndrewTaylor
23 Nov 2006, 12:00
lol
ROFL
The PS3, graphically, is very close to that of a Trouser Press!
Oh god stop, you're killing me!
Even though this post is rubbish, I'm forced to agree with the sentiment.
The PS3 has the graphics, motion sensing, and network capabilities of the other consoles, however, they all work properly on the other consoles and the PS3's versions are at best untested and at worst rubbish.
XBL has been around for ages and works well. The PS3's network system hasn't been publicly tested. (Nor has the Wii's, granted.) Similarly, the PS3's graphics capabilities are known, and they're generally agreed, last I heard, to be a bit pants. And the PS3's motion sensors were added in hurriedly just after Nintendo announced theirs, by a company that had said it was impossible to include motion sensing until Nintendo announced they'd done it.
I want a Wii, and I'd quite like an X Box 360, but if a shop in town was giving away PS3s for free I'm not sure I'd bother picking one up.

Star Worms
23 Nov 2006, 13:03
I want a Wii, and I'd quite like an X Box 360, but if a shop in town was giving away PS3s for free I'm not sure I'd bother picking one up.I certainly would - You could make a nice profit on Ebay.

*Splinter*
23 Nov 2006, 17:32
Even though this post is rubbish, I'm forced to agree with the sentiment.
The PS3 has the graphics, motion sensing, and network capabilities of the other consoles, however, they all work properly on the other consoles and the PS3's versions are at best untested and at worst rubbish.
XBL has been around for ages and works well. The PS3's network system hasn't been publicly tested. (Nor has the Wii's, granted.) Similarly, the PS3's graphics capabilities are known, and they're generally agreed, last I heard, to be a bit pants. And the PS3's motion sensors were added in hurriedly just after Nintendo announced theirs, by a company that had said it was impossible to include motion sensing until Nintendo announced they'd done it.
I want a Wii, and I'd quite like an X Box 360, but if a shop in town was giving away PS3s for free I'm not sure I'd bother picking one up.
I wasnt saying PS3 was best in that last post, I was just saying it was equal to the others and so saying combining all three would = Wii is just more pointless fanboyism :\

kikumbob
23 Nov 2006, 18:27
What needs to happen is for nintendo, sony, and microsoft to merge their consoles into one, taking all the best bits from the xbox, wii and PS3 and slapping them together to make one motherload of a console.
What you will end up with is a Nintendo Wii. I have no point.The only flaw with that plan is that the biggest monopolies don't like sharing their profit. ;)
Still, we are in the age where everything keeps merging with everything. AMD and ATI, Adobe and Macromedia, Corel and Jasc, etc. Please raise your hands if you did not understand how much of a joke I was trying to make.

SupSuper
23 Nov 2006, 22:19
How the Hell did I not know that!?I find out when I go to one website and end up on another. Try it.
Please raise your hands if you did not understand how much of a joke I was trying to make.Since when has that stopped me?

Xinos
23 Nov 2006, 22:24
I am still not convinced the Wii is that great.. I will not make up my mind untill I get to try it out for a bit.

Alien King
23 Nov 2006, 22:42
I find out when I go to one website and end up on another. Try it.
Ah. Good advice.

kikumbob
24 Nov 2006, 20:20
I am still not convinced the Wii is that great.. I will not make up my mind untill I get to try it out for a bit. Its definatly unlike any console there has been before. It will revolutionise gaming into a more...sad state. Thats my opinion. No matter how hard you try there will be a broken vase by next year because someone hit it with a wiimote.

Xinos
26 Nov 2006, 17:27
Well, aslong as nobody tries to prohibit motionless gaming It's not that bad.
Just wait untill there is a portable equiviland of the wii, so people cramped onto airplanes can wave their arms around and cause destruction.

Alien King
26 Nov 2006, 18:06
No matter how hard you try there will be a broken vase by next year because someone hit it with a wiimote.
The person who does that would have to be bloody stupid though. A vase next to your console and tv?

kikumbob
26 Nov 2006, 20:26
The person who does that would have to be bloody stupid though. A vase next to your console and tv? "Darling, where shall we put this priceless ming vase? I'm not sure about the living room, I'm scared someone will knock it over."
"Put it next to that TV and wee console thing of our son's. All people will be doing there is sitting and gawping at the bloody screen. No one will move a muscle let alone knock something over."
"Good idea. This highly unstable three legged dresser next to the wee console thingy looks like an extremly nice spot to place a priceless ming vase. And no one will knock it over! No one!"
Its a common mistake.

Alien King
26 Nov 2006, 23:11
This highly unstable three legged dresser
Tables and such with 3 legs are more stable than those with 4. They don't move as much.

Star Worms
27 Nov 2006, 00:56
Tables and such with 3 legs are more stable than those with 4. They don't move as much.Surely not? With a 3 legged chair the centre of gravity would be nearer to the "edges" (ie if you drew a line from leg to leg), which would mean it would be easier to knock over. More legs makes things more stable, right?
Wow we've gone from PS3 discussion to 3 legged chair discussion:p

Bolton
27 Nov 2006, 06:22
The PS3 will lose! LOSE I TELLS YA!!! On a lighter note, the Wii or Xbox 360 will win the console wars. (Yes I own a 360)

AndrewTaylor
27 Nov 2006, 10:52
Surely not? With a 3 legged chair the centre of gravity would be nearer to the "edges" (ie if you drew a line from leg to leg), which would mean it would be easier to knock over. More legs makes things more stable, right?
Wow we've gone from PS3 discussion to 3 legged chair discussion:p
Three legs are more stable on an arbitrary surface as they will always all touch the floor. In the specific case of a horizontal plane floor (which most living rooms have) then (assuming all legs are equally long) the key factor is not number of legs but the "radius" of the shape they form. Now everyone stop discussing tables.

GrimOswald
27 Nov 2006, 11:08
Now everyone stop discussing tables.
I suggest you edit that pretty darn quickly...

bonz
27 Nov 2006, 12:25
the "radius" of the shape they form
The radius of the shape?
You can build two tables with 3 and 4 legs respectively where the distance from the center of mass to each leg is the same.
The base area of a 3-legged table is an equilateral triangle, where the orthogonal distance from one side to the center is smaller than in a square (the base area of a 4-legged table).
So I'd say a 3-legged device will tilt easier as the center of mass can move over one of the triangles sides sooner.
In a (hypothetical) 2-legged table, the orthogonal distance from the center of mass to one of the "sides" of the base area is zero, thus the table has an extremly high probability to tilt immediately.
While the other extreme is a table with infinite legs, resulting in being a continuous, circular "leg", where the orthogonal distance from the center of mass to one side of the base area is the same as the radius from the center of mass to "each leg". Such a table has the least probability to tilt.

AndrewTaylor
27 Nov 2006, 12:43
"Radius" is the shorthand I used for "orthogonal distance from one side to the center" because I didn't expect anyone to care this much. In fact, I rather hoped that would be the last we heard of the subject.
And the "radius" depends on the arrangement of the legs, not the number of them. There's a table in here with six legs arranged in a rectanlge. No more stable than one with four, just stronger.
But well done on not mentioning beer this time. I think that's a first.

Apocalypse
27 Nov 2006, 13:28
But well done on not mentioning beer this time. I think that's a first.Now you've done it..
By the time the PS3 comes to Europe, it will be tweaked (I hope) and most problems will be fixed.:)

Xinos
27 Nov 2006, 13:45
Now you've done it..
By the time the PS3 comes to Europe, it will be tweaked (I hope) and most problems will be fixed.:)
Tweaked? Not powerfull enough? And what are theese problems you speak of?
It's also very strange that Andrew would turn down an effortless receiving of $600 (more if you know how to use ebay). You must be very rich indeed.

AndrewTaylor
27 Nov 2006, 14:53
And what are theese problems you speak of?
Off the top of my head? You can't put anything on top of it, it could heat a small room, it costs £500, the graphics are sub-par, the pad can't rumble, the blu-ray laser diode is expensive and time-consuming to produce, the back-compatibility doesn't work, the HD support isn't as good as the X Box 360's, and it's ugly.
It's also very strange that Andrew would turn down an effortless receiving of $600 (more if you know how to use ebay). You must be very rich indeed.
Yes, well, obviously I meant if money was not a consideration. The point was that I don't want to own a PS3, even if I don't have to pay for it.

MtlAngelus
27 Nov 2006, 16:48
Off the top of my head? You can't put anything on top of it, it could heat a small room, it costs £500, the graphics are sub-par, the pad can't rumble, the blu-ray laser diode is expensive and time-consuming to produce, the back-compatibility doesn't work, the HD support isn't as good as the X Box 360's, and it's ugly.
Huh, first, why exactly do you need to put something on top of it?
You couldn't put anything on top of the SNES, yet it was a great console.
Of what I hear in reviews and such, it runs rather cool, so I can't see how it will be heating a small room.
Yes expensive.
Sub-par graphics? I tought it was suposed to have the best specs out of the 3 consoles? O.o
I should assume back compatibility should work at least with some classic ps2 titles, the same way as the Xbox360 back-compatibility only works with some titles...
HD support doesn't concern me, and ugly? It's not like I'm gonna marry it or something...

Alien King
27 Nov 2006, 16:52
Huh, first, why exactly do you need to put something on top of it?
Because my desk is very small. There are things on top of my TV, Desk, Scanner, PC and sometimes GameCube.

MtlAngelus
27 Nov 2006, 16:57
Because my desk is very small. There are things on top of my TV, Desk, Scanner, PC and sometimes GameCube.
Well if you seriously need to put something on top of it, you could easily construct a wooden case to slip it in, and put things on top of that...

kikumbob
27 Nov 2006, 19:30
Or get a three legged dresser.

Apocalypse
27 Nov 2006, 20:32
I got stuff piled up too.. like vid/dvd player and satteliteTVbox/dvd recorder...
Same with old stuff... 3 things piled up takes less place than a wooden construct, besides, ergonomics(sp?) play a role in designing cases too!
Some people don't want to go through the trouble of making something themselves.

*Splinter*
27 Nov 2006, 21:02
Sub-par graphics? I tought it was suposed to have the best specs out of the 3 consoles? O.o
Ah yes, but you forget, this is a Nintendo/Not-Sony/NotMicrosoft Fanboy forum :) or is this the team17 one? I always get those mixed up...
I should assume back compatibility should work at least with some classic ps2 titles, the same way as the Xbox360 back-compatibility only works with some titles...
Ive seen nothing to support or even suggest this, to be honest I think he was making it up :confused:

Alien King
27 Nov 2006, 21:31
Or get a three legged dresser.
Ah, of course! How could I not think of such a logical solution!

Xinos
27 Nov 2006, 21:33
Off the top of my head? You can't put anything on top of it
Okay.. obviously you either live in a tiny Japanese tube hotel where stacking things is critical to your survival, or you have a warped LEGO obsession and start crying as soon as things don't fit neatly onto each other..
It's not a big deal. Seriously. Are you boycotting TFT monitors aswell since CRT's are better stacking devices?

SupSuper
27 Nov 2006, 22:47
It's not a big deal. Seriously. Are you boycotting TFT monitors aswell since CRT's are better stacking devices?I know I am! :)

Xinos
27 Nov 2006, 23:33
There is only one reason as far as I'm concerned to stick with CRT's, and thats because sterovision glasses sadly won't work with TFT monitors.
Anyone with a crt and a nvidia graphics card is obligated to order a pair from here:
http://www.edimensional.com/
Luckily however Philips has made 3D Display flatscreens. I eagerly await the day theese will be afordable:
http://www.inition.co.uk/inition/product.php?URL_=product_stereovis_philips&SubCatID_=0

MtlAngelus
28 Nov 2006, 08:20
I got stuff piled up too.. like vid/dvd player and satteliteTVbox/dvd recorder...
Same with old stuff... 3 things piled up takes less place than a wooden construct, besides, ergonomics(sp?) play a role in designing cases too!
Some people don't want to go through the trouble of making something themselves.
Well you can just stack all the big stuff you want and just place it on the very top. Problem solved!
Point is, it's a machine built for playing games, watching movies, listening to music, and crap like that. It's not a lego block.

Apocalypse
28 Nov 2006, 08:50
It's not a lego block.Lego blocks fit into boxes easier. If you design the case like a lego block, you save up space for transport, meaning you have more room for more consoles, meaning you need less trucks (or w/e) to transport a set amount of consloes, meaning you need to pay less $$ for transport, meaning your profit will be higher, meaning.. more $$ XD
"It's the little things in life that move you"

Paul.Power
28 Nov 2006, 09:51
Okay.. obviously you either live in a tiny Japanese tube hotel where stacking things is critical to your survival, or you have a warped LEGO obsession and start crying as soon as things don't fit neatly onto each other..
It's not a big deal. Seriously. Are you boycotting TFT monitors aswell since CRT's are better stacking devices?Or, you know, he could be like pretty much everyone I know and already have at least three things (SkyBox, video recorder, DVD player in my case) stacked under his telly to begin with.

Xinos
28 Nov 2006, 09:57
Then you put the PS3 on top.
Besides, the PS3 can stand vertically, which means it takes up less space and get's a flat surface on top.

AndrewTaylor
28 Nov 2006, 10:12
Then you put the PS3 on top.
That works once. What if I have a SNES on top of the pile already? Or if that's where I like to keep my remote controls.
The stacking thing isn't a majorly big deal, no, but frankly I'm running out of space as it is, and all Sony would have to do to allow stacking would be to put a flat top on their console. It's not exactly a massive technical hurdle.
Unless they've made it unstackable on purpose to protect the poor device atop it from bursting into flames when the console overheats, that is.

MtlAngelus
28 Nov 2006, 10:40
I'm quite sure I could put a snes in top of a ps3 and it wouldn't fall easily.

Xinos
28 Nov 2006, 12:10
I wouldn't want to put anything on my PS3 anyway since there is a risk it will scratch that shiny plastic.

AndrewTaylor
28 Nov 2006, 13:15
I wouldn't want to put anything on my PS3 anyway since there is a risk it will scratch that shiny plastic.
In today's lesson we learn about putting form over function.

Star Worms
28 Nov 2006, 13:53
What's so difficult about stacking them vertically next to each other?

Xinos
28 Nov 2006, 15:25
In today's lesson we learn about putting form over function.
And if the subject was anything else than a Sony product you obviously would have no objections. :rolleyes:

AndrewTaylor
28 Nov 2006, 15:30
What's so difficult about stacking them vertically next to each other?
It's not a major problem. Please stop acting as if I consider it a major flaw with the PS3. It's a very minor problem, but it's a very minor problem that could have been avoided by slightly changing the shape of one bit of plastic at no extra cost to anyone.
Although that said, if you want to balance my DVD player on its end you can buy me a new one when it breaks.

kikumbob
28 Nov 2006, 18:45
That works once. What if I have a SNES on top of the pile already? Or if that's where I like to keep my remote controls.
The stacking thing isn't a majorly big deal, no, but frankly I'm running out of space as it is, and all Sony would have to do to allow stacking would be to put a flat top on their console. It's not exactly a massive technical hurdle.
Unless they've made it unstackable on purpose to protect the poor device atop it from bursting into flames when the console overheats, that is. Buy two PS3's, turn one upside down, swivell it around and place it on top of the other. You now have a flat surface as well as two fully functional PS3's.
Huzzah.
It's not a major problem. Please stop acting as if I consider it a major flaw with the PS3. It's a very minor problem, but it's a very minor problem that could have been avoided by slightly changing the shape of one bit of plastic at no extra cost to anyone.
Although that said, if you want to balance my DVD player on its end you can buy me a new one when it breaks. Theres an unwritten law in these forums that means you have to take every minor joke someone says extremely seriously and pick it to pieces until theres nothing left of it but a very annoyed member and a lot of offtopic posts.

Muzer
3 Dec 2006, 10:37
But seriously, the PS3 is crap. Anyone who doesn't think so should read this thread
End of discussion.

Xinos
3 Dec 2006, 18:49
But seriously, the PS3 is great. Anyone who doesn't think so should read this thread
End of discussion.

kikumbob
3 Dec 2006, 18:58
What the....

AndrewTaylor
4 Dec 2006, 00:15
What the....
You think you're confused..?

Pigbuster
4 Dec 2006, 06:50
You know, I HATE the PS3. Seriously.
You know that commercial with the baby? Yeah. I tried it. My 5 month old baby girl. That thing didn't do ANYTHING. The commercial said that PS3 would float. DID IT? NO.
And there's also that one with a rubix cube. I have been trying to solve one of those for 13 years already. That commercial insults my intelligence, and I just won't stand for that. NO!
Also, the system just can't hold up for anything. I ran over it with my SUV and it BROKE. WHAT!? WHAT!?
And I could never play any games. I just don't get the controller. There's, like, TWO buttons on the thing, and it's damn HUGE! And the decision to put the game CD in the controller is ridiculous, too. I don't even know how to hook it up to the TV, or anything. I've heard that it can detect movements or something, but geez, it's HEAVY. It's BIG. How can I easily move that thing around? And I don't even know where my hands go! It's like, SQUARE-ISH. WHAT THE HELL, SONY!?
And geez, the GAMES? Wow. Kingdom Hearts ONE? Didn't that come out, like, YEARS ago? And all of those Jak and Daxter games and all that crap, those were for the OLD system! Why are they for this one? They're all I see at the store! And there's this game, Zelda: Twilight Princess. I put that in the controller thing, and it DIDN'T READ IT! The same thing happened when I tried Gears of War. WHAT THE HELL? Way to make your own games not WORK, Sony! I thought you had backwards compatability!
Geez, to think I waited in line for this steaming pile.
I give the PS3 -10/10. Bad move, Sony.

AndrewTaylor
4 Dec 2006, 10:47
The sad thing is that that was one of the less insane posts.

Plasma
4 Dec 2006, 17:56
You know, I HATE the PS3. Seriously.
You know that commercial with the baby? Yeah. I tried it. My 5 month old baby girl. That thing didn't do ANYTHING. The commercial said that PS3 would float. DID IT? NO.
So what? Pepsi said their product brings your ancestors back from the grave!

kikumbob
4 Dec 2006, 21:07
You know, I HATE the PS3. Seriously.
You know that commercial with the baby? Yeah. I tried it. My 5 month old baby girl. That thing didn't do ANYTHING. The commercial said that PS3 would float. DID IT? NO.
And there's also that one with a rubix cube. I have been trying to solve one of those for 13 years already. That commercial insults my intelligence, and I just won't stand for that. NO!
Also, the system just can't hold up for anything. I ran over it with my SUV and it BROKE. WHAT!? WHAT!?
And I could never play any games. I just don't get the controller. There's, like, TWO buttons on the thing, and it's damn HUGE! And the decision to put the game CD in the controller is ridiculous, too. I don't even know how to hook it up to the TV, or anything. I've heard that it can detect movements or something, but geez, it's HEAVY. It's BIG. How can I easily move that thing around? And I don't even know where my hands go! It's like, SQUARE-ISH. WHAT THE HELL, SONY!?
And geez, the GAMES? Wow. Kingdom Hearts ONE? Didn't that come out, like, YEARS ago? And all of those Jak and Daxter games and all that crap, those were for the OLD system! Why are they for this one? They're all I see at the store! And there's this game, Zelda: Twilight Princess. I put that in the controller thing, and it DIDN'T READ IT! The same thing happened when I tried Gears of War. WHAT THE HELL? Way to make your own games not WORK, Sony! I thought you had backwards compatability!
Geez, to think I waited in line for this steaming pile.
I give the PS3 -10/10. Bad move, Sony. I think thats best post I've ever read on games consoles for a long time.

*Splinter*
4 Dec 2006, 21:41
Mythbusters!
#1: The PS3 does NOT get hot. It gets to about the temperature of a phone charger but only after about 24 hours and only at one end.
#2: The PS3 does NOT take ages to load games. The beta games take about as long as PS2 games do (on PS2) but this will probably be quicker in the final versions of the games :)
There was a third... I forget...

kikumbob
4 Dec 2006, 22:20
Mythbusters!
#1: The PS3 does NOT get hot. It gets to about the temperature of a phone charger but only after about 24 hours and only at one end.
#2: The PS3 does NOT take ages to load games. The beta games take about as long as PS2 games do (on PS2) but this will probably be quicker in the final versions of the games :)
There was a third... I forget... Burnout Revenge's party crash game took about thrity seconds to load on the PS2. Its race took a bit more. Its good going for a game, considering battle for middle earth II took about five minutes to load ony my computer.
(Sadly, my computer made its last beep several months back. I tried to build a new computer and failed miserably. It beeps at me, telling me theres something wrong with the RAM I am putting in but Ive tried two different types and there are four RAM seats so they could not have all completly failed. Just a small appeal for help. PM me if you think of something.)

Akuryou13
5 Dec 2006, 04:08
#1: The PS3 does NOT get hot. It gets to about the temperature of a phone charger but only after about 24 hours and only at one end.on the outside, this is true. the melting stuff and heating a room statements are nonsense. I'll give sony that one, they at least stopped it from overheating the surroundings. unfortunately, this isnt' the case on the inside. it takes a little more than 30 minutes for a PS3 to overheat and crash itsself. the system WON'T overheat and melt your shelf, but it may well melt its insides :p
as for Xinos saying the PS3 is awesome, I would like to hear your reasons why. so far all I've seen is a system that overheats after playing 30 minutes worth of games that are repeats of older games and sub-par graphically compared to other games being released right now. not to say the graphics look bad by ANY means. the graphics are QUITE good on the system. it definitely has next gen graphics, but when compared to other games being released right now for computers and (from what little I've seen) Xbox360, the games on the PS3 either pale in comparison or rank exactly equal. hardly worth anything NEAR the price being charged for the system.
so far, the only reason I've heard for the PS3 being awesome is that it's the PS3 and because PS2 owned microsoft and nintendo last gen it must therefore do the same this time around, and that's simply not true. so far the PS3 combines things that both the 360 and the Wii have, but what it gains from one it trades off for its ability to use the other (translation, it has the awesome graphics of the 360, but they're not quite up to par. instead, it has the motion sensing of the Wii, but it's also not quite up to par. the PS3 is the middle child), and when you can get both of the others for less than the middle-child I fail to see any reason why the PS3 would be good at all, much less awesome.

AndrewTaylor
5 Dec 2006, 10:38
When did Aruryou become the voice of reason?

kikumbob
5 Dec 2006, 18:09
on the outside, this is true. the melting stuff and heating a room statements are nonsense. I'll give sony that one, they at least stopped it from overheating the surroundings. unfortunately, this isnt' the case on the inside. it takes a little more than 30 minutes for a PS3 to overheat and crash itsself. the system WON'T overheat and melt your shelf, but it may well melt its insides Be serious for a minute here. I do agree that companies are evil but they arn't stupid. If the PS3 really does overheat and crash in half an hour they will have surely noticed it and tried to fix the problem. Maybe they will sacrifice other factors to stop it from crashing but they would not release a console to the public that crashed like that. You are exaggerating at the least. I wouldn't be as suprised, for example, if it overheated to an alarming core temperature after a couple of hours. All they might do then is to stick a little warning label on telling you not to play for more than a couple of hours and leave the hardcore gamers to figure out how they are going to live their lives now.
I want proof for once aku. Reference your reasoning.

Paul.Power
5 Dec 2006, 18:32
So what? Pepsi said their product brings your ancestors back from the grave!That was Coke.
Coke Adds Life.

MtlAngelus
5 Dec 2006, 18:51
The only flaw in the PS3 is that currently, there's not a game that justifies buying it both in gameplay and graphics, but it'll most likely produce some of the best games in the years to come, as it happened with the PS2.
It has more capacity graphically speaking than the Xbox360, and the same capacity for Gameplay as both Wii and Xbox360, it just needs more time.
I really have read trough this whole thread and haven't found a reason for it to suck other than it not being Nintendo, and Akuryou having seen one of them crash on a store after 30 mins.(If they were all doing that, I'm sure I'd seen that announced everywhere in the system reviews...)

kikumbob
5 Dec 2006, 19:07
....and Akuryou having seen one of them crash on a store after 30 mins.(If they were all doing that, I'm sure I'd seen that announced everywhere in the system reviews...) And I doubt they will all do that.

Plasma
5 Dec 2006, 19:20
That was Coke.
Coke Adds Life.
No, it's definately the English-to-Chinese mistranslation of PepsiCo's slogan "Come alive! You're the Pepsi generation!"
Coke also had an English-to-Chinese mistranslation too: Coca-Cola came out as "Bite the Wax Tadpole" for some shops.

Akuryou13
6 Dec 2006, 06:29
Be serious for a minute here. I do agree that companies are evil but they arn't stupid. If the PS3 really does overheat and crash in half an hour they will have surely noticed it and tried to fix the problem. Maybe they will sacrifice other factors to stop it from crashing but they would not release a console to the public that crashed like that. You are exaggerating at the least. I wouldn't be as suprised, for example, if it overheated to an alarming core temperature after a couple of hours. All they might do then is to stick a little warning label on telling you not to play for more than a couple of hours and leave the hardcore gamers to figure out how they are going to live their lives now.
I want proof for once aku. Reference your reasoning.personal experience, the ones in the local stores here seem to crash every 30-45 minutes or so. they COULD be, for some reason, isolated to this area, but I doubt that.
as for Xinos, I've seen 2 sites that report the same issues happening to many people. granted, I don't know how reliable those sites are, I just know they were linked by Penny Arcade so I don't imagine they're COMPLETELY retarded.
and as for the gameplay being on par with the wii, that's just not true. nothing against the 6-axis, but if for no other reason than the shape it can't be used as some of the things the wiimote will be used for. assuming the things I've heard are false and the sensing IS equally accurate and pin-point as the wiimote, then the shape would still prohibit the sensible use of the PS3 controller in the ways the wiimote is used. sure, they COULD program Red Steel for the PS3 (and actually make it NOT look like ass), but it just wouldn't handle as well.
for your comment about it making some of the best games of the year, that's yet to be seen. there's no telling how well the PS3 is going to do against the 360 and the Wii. it may well be as good as the PS2, but so far it's not looking like it. so far, the only reason the PS3 has gotten any sales, from what I've seen, heard, and read is that it's a sequel to the PS2, and therefore everyone wants one. once everyone sees that the PS3 really has no real advantage over the 360 as far as hardware (source (http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p1.html)), and that the Wii has more versatility in play-styles, people may well shift to one of those two consoles instead. as of right now, there's no telling. it's anybody's race at the moment. each of the consoles have factors working against them. Nintendo is the underdog because of its bad rep with the GameCube. Microsoft is the new kid and it's earning a reputation but it's got some tough work to do that. Sony has all the hype they could ask for and the system is selling itsself (it would have to, I mean look at those commercials), but that may or may not hold out for them. developers are having a hard time programming for the PS3 from what I understand, and that may drag them down.

MtlAngelus
6 Dec 2006, 07:27
Well, even if you add an innovative controler doesn't mean it has better potential for gameplay value. Gameplay is more to do with the developer of the game than the console it's made on, and has more to do with creativity. Given that, all 3 consoles have the same potential for gameplay.
About the power of the PS3 versus the Xbox360, I really don't know anymore. I'm not knowledgeable in the aspect of being able to tell from the raw specs of the systems which is better, but I wouldn't trust that article to it's fullest.
As for telling it will have some of the best games, well, it's gonna have Assasin's Creed(tough that's out on Xbox360 too), plus the whole lineup of awesome games like FF, GTA, Katamari, etc that made the PS2 such a great console. Plus new stuff. It really is on par with the other consoles as to possibilities, so you can't really say it's worse.

Akuryou13
6 Dec 2006, 07:41
Well, even if you add an innovative controler doesn't mean it has better potential for gameplay value. Gameplay is more to do with the developer of the game than the console it's made on, and has more to do with creativity. Given that, all 3 consoles have the same potential for gameplay.fair point, hadn't actually thought of it like that. guess I misinterpreted your post.
About the power of the PS3 versus the Xbox360, I really don't know anymore. I'm not knowledgeable in the aspect of being able to tell from the raw specs of the systems which is better, but I wouldn't trust that article to it's fullest.
As for telling it will have some of the best games, well, it's gonna have Assasin's Creed(tough that's out on Xbox360 too), plus the whole lineup of awesome games like FF, GTA, Katamari, etc that made the PS2 such a great console. Plus new stuff. It really is on par with the other consoles as to possibilities, so you can't really say it's worse.if they fix the issues it has (which I would imagine they will), then no, I can't really say it's worse. the thing is, I also can't say it's better. and the difference between the consoles, even if the 360 and the PS3 are equally powerful and just as good at doing what they do, is about $200 and that's quite a bit of money to spend just to get a different name tag.
as far as the article goes, news sites such as IGN, 1up and GameSpot can't post false information. they would be flamed and/or sued by the fanboys/companies if they did. the information could be very slightly off, granted, but if it were to a point that it was no longer the truth then they would have to repost the article or appologize. so chances are good that the article is, in fact, the truth.

MtlAngelus
6 Dec 2006, 07:52
It's not much an article as it is them posting some piece of information they received from Microsoft, it's also probably quite outdated.
I also looked at a couple of site's reviews on the PS3 and they all seem to agree that it is more powerfull than the X360, so it's a bit confusing. Ah, if only K^2 were here to sort this out... :p

Akuryou13
6 Dec 2006, 07:55
It's not much an article as it is them posting some piece of information they received from Microsoft, it's also probably quite outdated.
I also looked at a couple of site's reviews on the PS3 and they all seem to agree that it is more powerfull than the X360, so it's a bit confusing. Ah, if only K^2 were here to sort this out... :pah, crap. didn't notice it was information from microsoft. ok, that link is useless :p I'll go see if I can find some stats information.

MtlAngelus
6 Dec 2006, 08:17
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/xbox360_vs_ps3.asp
Can't really say it's the most reliable source, but I really can't tell which is better anyway, except that the PS3 wins in most of those in terms of quantities :P

Akuryou13
6 Dec 2006, 08:38
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/xbox360_vs_ps3.asp
Can't really say it's the most reliable source, but I really can't tell which is better anyway, except that the PS3 wins in most of those in terms of quantities :Pit appears to have the information right as far as I can tell.
the thing I was talking about with the graphics on the PS3 is this:
Video RAM:
360: Up to 512 MB GDDR3 system RAM (700 MHz) plus 10 MB embedded DRAM (eDRAM) frame buffer
PS3: 256MB GDDR3 (700MHz)
so where the processing power of the PS3 wins in just about every way, when it comes to processing graphics rather than information, the PS3 is actually slower. think about playing a new game on a PC. install a Conroe and 4GB of RAM in that PC and then put a 256MB video card. the graphics are gunna be pretty good. you'll probably run the game on high. put a 512MB video card in that computer, though, and everything will be on ultra high with absolutely amazing graphics. the two systems have very similar power ratios in every other area with the PS3 being on top by a little ways. when it comes to how the games will look (which is what all that power is for in the first place) the 360 will out-perform the PS3. it won't be a big difference by any means, but it will be a difference. basically the PS3 is kinda the same as the PSP is. it's more of a media center than a gaming console. both the PS3 and the PSP are amazing gadgets to have around, but their primary purpose is to play media of different kinds rather than to play games at their best quality. now, the two systems ARE quite good at playing video games as well, but there are other alternatives that work out better for simply gaming, IMO.
edit: and btw, good god the wii is a weak little console!

AndrewTaylor
6 Dec 2006, 11:43
Well, even if you add an innovative controler doesn't mean it has better potential for gameplay value. Gameplay is more to do with the developer of the game than the console it's made on, and has more to do with creativity. Given that, all 3 consoles have the same potential for gameplay.
That's not really true, though, is it?
I mean, the XBox has more potential for online gameplay because XBox live is so well supported by ISPs and so accepted and supposedly linking into Vista, and the Wii has more potential for different play styles because it has at least two different control pads and the Wiimote one can be used in at least a dozen different ways, and the PS3 has more potential for... er... drunken party gaming because apparently after half an hour's play you can open it up and make a drunken fry-up on the red-hot components. Sorry. Couldn't think of anything nice to say about it.
How much of each manchine's potential will be realised is down to developers, but to say they all have the same potential is misleading at best.

kikumbob
6 Dec 2006, 18:41
I wouldnt think of one having more potential than the other either. Its just each console's potential goes off in different directions. E.g. xbox has xbox live, wii has its wiimote and PS3 has...fry-up power...

Muzer
6 Dec 2006, 19:06
Name ONE THING (Except graphics, because quite frankly, they don't matter as long as the gameplay's good and they're not like, 8-bit or something) that's better with the PS3 than any other console.
That may create a challenge, or then again there might be something obvious that I've missed :o

Plasma
6 Dec 2006, 19:57
Name ONE THING (Except graphics, because quite frankly, they don't matter as long as the gameplay's good and they're not like, 8-bit or something) that's better with the PS3 than any other console.
As far as I can tell, these are the top 3 reasons.
1: The blu-ray player. (yeah, stupid but true)
2: Getting other carbon-based dolts to like you. (Mostly males though)
3: For the PS3-exclusive games.

MrBunsy
6 Dec 2006, 21:30
As far as I can tell, these are the top 3 reasons.
1: The blu-ray player. (yeah, stupid but true)
2: Getting other carbon-based dolts to like you. (Mostly males though)
3: For the PS3-exclusive games.
I think this shows Muzer's point quite nicely.

*Splinter*
6 Dec 2006, 21:44
and as for the gameplay being on par with the wii, that's just not true. nothing against the 6-axis, but if for no other reason than the shape it can't be used as some of the things the wiimote will be used for. assuming the things I've heard are false and the sensing IS equally accurate and pin-point as the wiimote, then the shape would still prohibit the sensible use of the PS3 controller in the ways the wiimote is used. sure, they COULD program Red Steel for the PS3 (and actually make it NOT look like ass), but it just wouldn't handle as well.
Looking at the controllers, Id say the Wii is doomed to endless sword fighting games, whereas the PS3 is doomed to driving games.
Hmm, not a great fan of either but driving games can be good :)

*Splinter*
6 Dec 2006, 21:45
edit: and btw, good god the wii is a weak little console!
Is it any more powerful that the Gamecube? It didnt look it from what I played (looked worse actually, but I assume it wasnt living up to its full potential from one game :))
EDIT: Somewhere someone said something about the SIXAXIS not being accurate enough (even though they have never tried it :)), but when I tried the Wii it didnt seem hugely accurate? More of an apporximation of your movements along fixed rails...

Plasma
6 Dec 2006, 23:55
Looking at the controllers, Id say the Wii is doomed to endless sword fighting games, whereas the PS3 is doomed to driving games.
Err...
Wait, do you really think that two of the three main consoles are going to be mainly limited to one genre of game each?

Akuryou13
7 Dec 2006, 00:22
Is it any more powerful that the Gamecube? It didnt look it from what I played (looked worse actually, but I assume it wasnt living up to its full potential from one game :))it's two or three or so times as powerful as the GC was. it's not all that huge an improvement, but the improvement IS there. however, none of the launch titles use graphics that couldn't be displayed on the GC. what game did you play?
EDIT: Somewhere someone said something about the SIXAXIS not being accurate enough (even though they have never tried it :)), but when I tried the Wii it didnt seem hugely accurate? More of an apporximation of your movements along fixed rails...I think that was me, and I was saying that from what I heard the sixaxis wasn't nearly as accurate as the wiimote. and I don't know what cracked out game you've been playing on the wii, but I own Wii Sports, Rayman and Zelda, and all 3 of those games display completely accurate wiimote controls. wii sports was programmed a bit wonky, but the problem in that game is the controller is a bit TOO accurate at times, and that makes for some moves that you didn't intend to do (very minor movements can sometimes cause the player to do things in wii sports, where that isn't a problem in rayman or zelda)

MtlAngelus
7 Dec 2006, 09:02
That's not really true, though, is it?
I mean, the XBox has more potential for online gameplay because XBox live is so well supported by ISPs and so accepted and supposedly linking into Vista, and the Wii has more potential for different play styles because it has at least two different control pads and the Wiimote one can be used in at least a dozen different ways, and the PS3 has more potential for... er... drunken party gaming because apparently after half an hour's play you can open it up and make a drunken fry-up on the red-hot components. Sorry. Couldn't think of anything nice to say about it.
How much of each manchine's potential will be realised is down to developers, but to say they all have the same potential is misleading at best.
Gamestyle /= Gameplay
Technically speaking, all 3 have around equal potential for online play because they all have the abbility to connect, if a game is shoddily coded for online play it will produce crapy online play even on Xbox live, whereas it's still possible to produce great online play on the PS3 and the Wii.
Equally, the Wii is open to new possibilities for new gamestyles, but if it's not used right it will lead to a crappy gameplay experience, whereas if a developer pulls out their best, they can make a great game that can have excelent gameplay in either PS3 or Xbox360 even lacking the innovative controler.
Whereas it is easier to make good online play on Xbox 360 or easier to make new, fun gameplay on the wii is an entirely different thing, but it always comes down to the developer wheter it has good online or good gameplay.
And even if this arguement doesn't satisfy you as to why all three have the same potential, then you could also say that what the Wii has for innovative controler, the PS3 and Xbox have for processing and graphical power, which can be used to, say, code excelent AI or have a much more inmersive world than the Wii games.

Plasma
7 Dec 2006, 18:41
Gamestyle /= Gameplay
Technically speaking, all 3 have around equal potential for online play because they all have the abbility to connect, if a game is shoddily coded for online play it will produce crapy online play even on Xbox live, whereas it's still possible to produce great online play on the PS3 and the Wii.
Equally, the Wii is open to new possibilities for new gamestyles, but if it's not used right it will lead to a crappy gameplay experience, whereas if a developer pulls out their best, they can make a great game that can have excelent gameplay in either PS3 or Xbox360 even lacking the innovative controler.
Whereas it is easier to make good online play on Xbox 360 or easier to make new, fun gameplay on the wii is an entirely different thing, but it always comes down to the developer wheter it has good online or good gameplay.
And even if this arguement doesn't satisfy you as to why all three have the same potential, then you could also say that what the Wii has for innovative controler, the PS3 and Xbox have for processing and graphical power, which can be used to, say, code excelent AI or have a much more inmersive world than the Wii games.
There's a big difference between 'could' and 'does'.

AndrewTaylor
7 Dec 2006, 22:27
Gamestyle /= Gameplay
That's not the point. I'm not saying that the best possible game on the Wii could be better than the best possible game on the 360 or vice versa. I'm saying that X-Box Live is a very nice system that runs across all online X-Box and X-Box 360 games and that nothing developers can do would replicate that on PS3, unless Sony's online system is as good as Live, which I doubt.
Similarly, if I get a Wii then I am buying a machine that has the potential to include light-gun games, conventional-pad games, steering wheel games, swordplay games, golf-swing games, and so on and so forth ad nauseum, whereas all I can ever expect out of the X-Box would be things I can do with the game pad. It simply isn't possible to make a golf sim on the X-Box as good as one on the Wii, at least, not without releasing a specially designed controller, which I think would be cheating.
It's insane to say they all have the same potential. Clearly, they do not. The Wii, for example, obviously has more potential for variety, simply because it has so much more versatile an input method, but it equally obviously has less potential for graphics because it's nothing like as powerful as the 360. Which has the most potential is simply a matter of which factors are most important to you.
They only have the same potential for awful games: EA will probably release on all three.

kikumbob
7 Dec 2006, 23:01
1: The blu-ray player. (yeah, stupid but true)
That is actually one factor that people keep glancing over. I THINK i read somewhere that the blu-ray is faster than its rival, the HDD player. And I THINK (no expert in much, really) that this would effect the loading times.
Not much of an advantage, but its still something.

AndrewTaylor
7 Dec 2006, 23:38
And I THINK (no expert in much, really) that this would effect the loading times.
Well, it inevitably will.
But since Blu-Ray has so much more capacity I suspect the loading times will be roughly even, because there'll be more to load.

Plasma
7 Dec 2006, 23:38
I THINK i read somewhere that the blu-ray is faster than its rival, the HDD player.
Surely that must be false? Otherwise, why wouldn't computers be made out of this stuff?

AndrewTaylor
7 Dec 2006, 23:41
Surely that must be false? Otherwise, why wouldn't computers be made out of this stuff?
Because if they were computers would still not be out in Europe and would cost £5000. Blu-Ray is recent, expensive, difficult to produce, in short supply, and not widely adopted or supported. So why put it in a computer when DVD is so cheap and ubiquitous?

MtlAngelus
7 Dec 2006, 23:59
That's not the point. I'm not saying that the best possible game on the Wii could be better than the best possible game on the 360 or vice versa. I'm saying that X-Box Live is a very nice system that runs across all online X-Box and X-Box 360 games and that nothing developers can do would replicate that on PS3, unless Sony's online system is as good as Live, which I doubt.
Similarly, if I get a Wii then I am buying a machine that has the potential to include light-gun games, conventional-pad games, steering wheel games, swordplay games, golf-swing games, and so on and so forth ad nauseum, whereas all I can ever expect out of the X-Box would be things I can do with the game pad. It simply isn't possible to make a golf sim on the X-Box as good as one on the Wii, at least, not without releasing a specially designed controller, which I think would be cheating.
It's insane to say they all have the same potential. Clearly, they do not. The Wii, for example, obviously has more potential for variety, simply because it has so much more versatile an input method, but it equally obviously has less potential for graphics because it's nothing like as powerful as the 360. Which has the most potential is simply a matter of which factors are most important to you.
They only have the same potential for awful games: EA will probably release on all three.
Variety/=Gameplay.
By Gameplay I mean all 3 have the same potential to be FUN to play, to not be tiring, to be interesting. Equally all 3 have the same potential to have great online play, even if the Xbox 360 has a much more workable or reliable network.
They can't have the same stuff, obviously, but I never said they could, just that all 3 consoles are equally good enough source for entertainment, and you can't call one worse than the another. You can pick which one you like, but you can't bash the other one and call it a failure unless it has already failed.
If in 1 or 2 years the PS3 line up is still as bad as it is right now then it might be safe to say it's worse, but right now you can't really say much other than it's expensive.(which really depends on which light you see it under, because over here people are paying more than the PS3 is actually worth for the Wii, just saw it being sold at around $500-$600 equivalent, and the clerk actually says the price will be rising... oh the joys of living in Mexico...)
And Plasma, potential is all about "can" and "could". It has potential means it can or it could do or achieve something.

AndrewTaylor
8 Dec 2006, 00:40
I never said they could, just that all 3 consoles are equally good enough source for entertainment, and you can't call one worse than the another.
Everything in the above quote is a lie.
Of course I can call one worse than the another [sic]; watch me: the PS3 is significantly worse than the Nintendo Wii. This is because its pad is uncomfortable, it's supposedly prone to overheating, the motion sensors aren't coupled with a position sensor vastly limiting their functionality, it costs a lot more, it's not out yet, and it basically offers nothing at all I can't do on my PC. That was easy.
Face facts: there are three consoles, and they are all different. Therefore, logically, one of them must be the best and one of them must be the worst. I fail to see what chopp'd logic has deluded you into thinking otherwise.
Edit: People here are paying more than the PS3 is worth for a Wii. They're paying £170.

MtlAngelus
8 Dec 2006, 01:34
Everything in the above quote is a lie.
Of course I can call one worse than the another [sic]; watch me: the PS3 is significantly worse than the Nintendo Wii. This is because its pad is uncomfortable, it's supposedly prone to overheating, the motion sensors aren't coupled with a position sensor vastly limiting their functionality, it costs a lot more, it's not out yet, and it basically offers nothing at all I can't do on my PC. That was easy.
Face facts: there are three consoles, and they are all different. Therefore, logically, one of them must be the best and one of them must be the worst. I fail to see what chopp'd logic has deluded you into thinking otherwise.
Edit: People here are paying more than the PS3 is worth for a Wii. They're paying £170.
You CAN say whatever you want, that was poorly worded by me, but you can't prove it, and saying it's worse makes you sound like a fanboy who is angry at sony for whatever reason.
You haven't even played the damn thing(and you probably never will), yet you go around flaming it as if it had ruined your life or something.
If the pad is uncomfortable, you can buy a different controler, if it's prone to overheating it may get fixed in future releases of the console, if the motion sensor is limited, what the hell it doesn't mean it cannot have great games, it costs a lot, well yeah it has a blu-ray player in it, thing is none of this factors define the product as worse, just not perfect, different or not suited for you. What defines a product as worse? When it doesn't do what it's suposed to, which the PS3 is perfectly capable of.
If someone was to say the Wii is worse than the PS3 because of the specs, because they find having to wave their hands annoying/tiring/dull, because they think it's a childish console, they would be about as right as you are calling the PS3 worse, because they have, as you do, their own reasons to hate it. But you wouldn't just sit back and let them bash the Wii now would you? You would probably think they are being unbiased and attack them with you classical sarcastic comments and make they seem like mindless 10yr old brats who can't tell for their lives what's good and what's not... so how can you really tell what's better and what's worse?
You can decide which one is best for you and which one is worst for you, but you cannot decide the fate of the product by saying it's overall the worse console just because YOU don't like it.
Also, har-har-hardy har. I meant they are paying more than the PS3 is selling at in US, not what you think it's worth. I meant also that they are paying an exhorbitant amount of money for something that isn't worth it hardware-wise, so why not pay the same for something that is worth it hardware wise?
Finally, yes one has to be the best, and one has to be the worst, but you can't really go ahead and choose which one is worst so soon and witouth even trying them. I honestly tought the Gamecube was gonna be the best when it came out, turns out, the PS2 was the best. Of course not speaking form experience, but do speaking by general consense(sp?).
I also want to note that yes, I am contradicting myself a lot considering the ammount of bashing I used to do for the Xbox, but in my defence, I say most of this things witouth actually feeling it and am usually just trying to annoy people because I happen to find that funny.^^

AndrewTaylor
8 Dec 2006, 10:33
You CAN say whatever you want, that was poorly worded by me, but you can't prove it, and saying it's worse makes you sound like a fanboy who is angry at sony for whatever reason.
...I am a fan, and I do hate Sony. I have a rather long list of reasons for hating Sony that I expect you could find you you search this forum. You can't discount my opinions on the grounds that I hold opinions.
And I have played the PS1 and I have played the PS2, so I think playing the PS3 is something of a redundant step here. I know what playing a PS3 is like: it's like playing the PS2. The pad is basically the same again. The games are basically much the same again. I don't see why I should go and taste the four-finger Kit-Kat if I hated the two-finger one. I'm sure I'll play it at some stage, because someone I know is bound to. I might play it in a shop tomorrow -- I can't see it being busy. I could have played it yesterday in Game, but I went and played one of their DSes instead. Let that give you some idea how much faith I have in it.
I am deciding which is "best" based on my own opinions; based on what is imortant to me in a games console: fun, value for money, something I can do with my mates, and the like. I know it's subjective, but that's opinions for you. I am treating these as gaming platforms, not money-making machines. I'm not talking about which is best based on profit margins for the manufacturers.
If the pad is uncomfortable, you can buy a different controler, if it's prone to overheating it may get fixed in future releases of the console, if the motion sensor is limited, what the hell it doesn't mean it cannot have great games, it costs a lot, well yeah it has a blu-ray player in it, thing is none of this factors define the product as worse
Of course they do. Not having a position sensor is intrinsically worse than having one is. Being expensive is intrinsically worse than being cheap. I don't want to buy third-party pads because games are designed for the official one.
I never said it couldn't have good games. I just said there exists an infinity of potential games that the Wii could play but the PS3 could not. That alone, by definition, proves that the Wii and the PS3 do not have the same potential -- clearly those games represent some potential that the Wii has but the PS3 does not have. It doesn't make the Wii better but it makes their potential very different.
Personally, I don't want a blu-ray player. I really hope HD-DVD wins this battle as it's cheaper and has better protection for consumers' rights. And because Sony don't control it and I don't like Sony. But I do want to play a wide variety of games instead of ten racing games five fighting games and an FPS. "Genre" is just another word for "cliché". So for me the Wii will be better.
They are not the same. They do not have the same potential. They have different potential. I am not saying that any one is objectively better than any other one. But their potential is different and I think you might be insane.

Pigbuster
12 Dec 2006, 04:38
Nintendo is the underdog because of its bad rep with the GameCube.
I feel like I just have to mention this somewhere, so...
Nintendo is third in sales, behind Microsoft and Sony.
However, they're #1 in profits.
Sony and Microsoft are so busy trying to one-up each other by offering high-end technology for low prices that they're in a sort of arms race.
Nintendo doesn't really care about being number one in sales, so they don't worry about making expensive systems, and they sell the Wii at a profit.
And because they're third in sales, everyone says that they did the worst last generation,
but they're actually making more money than either Sony or Microsoft's game division. They have a better financial strategy.
BIZARRO WORLD.

Akuryou13
12 Dec 2006, 06:06
I feel like I just have to mention this somewhere, so...
Nintendo is third in sales, behind Microsoft and Sony.
However, they're #1 in profits.
Sony and Microsoft are so busy trying to one-up each other by offering high-end technology for low prices that they're in a sort of arms race.
Nintendo doesn't really care about being number one in sales, so they don't worry about making expensive systems, and they sell the Wii at a profit.
And because they're third in sales, everyone says that they did the worst last generation,
but they're actually making more money than either Sony or Microsoft's game division. They have a better financial strategy.
BIZARRO WORLD.did they use the same strategy last gen? I actually didn't realize that.....heh, go them then. either way, as far as popularity and sales goes they're the underdog, but they'll always thrive, no doubt about that one.

kikumbob
12 Dec 2006, 19:38
I've always thought of the Playstations and Xboxs as hardcore gaming systems and Nintendo's alternatives a load of relaxed, childish fun. The mario games put that across really well and the invention of the wiimote is really just that. Alternative gaming.

AndrewTaylor
12 Dec 2006, 23:07
I've always thought of the Playstations and Xboxs as hardcore gaming systems and Nintendo's alternatives a load of relaxed, childish fun.
That's more or less what I think, except you appear to have added the word "childish" for some reason. I assume it was a typo.

Akuryou13
13 Dec 2006, 02:36
I've always thought of the Playstations and Xboxs as hardcore gaming systems and Nintendo's alternatives a load of relaxed, childish fun. The mario games put that across really well and the invention of the wiimote is really just that. Alternative gaming.yeah, I guess I kinda agree with that as well. my computer is for the hardcore gaming, but I have a DS and a Wii to play around and just plain have fun. Nintendo has kept the core of gaming in tact, so I still love em :D
though I'm with andrew, childish isn't a word to describe nintendo. whimsical works, but childish it is not.

Pigbuster
13 Dec 2006, 02:39
Plus, whimsical is a fun word.

MtlAngelus
13 Dec 2006, 08:15
though I'm with thomas, childish isn't a blah blah stuff
I think you're getting your user mods messed up.
Also, do they have any snes games for it on the virtual console thingy yet?
As soon as they release SMRPG, DKC2 and Top Gear in it, I'm storming out to buy the stuff, screw the price.
Edit: Oh right, this isn't the wii thread :P

Akuryou13
13 Dec 2006, 08:41
I think you're getting your user mods messed up.I have NO idea what you're talking about :rolleyes:
Also, do they have any snes games for it on the virtual console thingy yet?
As soon as they release SMRPG, DKC2 and Top Gear in it, I'm storming out to buy the stuff, screw the price.
Edit: Oh right, this isn't the wii thread :Pgood job there angelus :p

Paul.Power
13 Dec 2006, 09:03
Plus, whimsical is a fun word.Indeed, it's a whimsical word.
Hardcore is a rubbish definition anyway. Why class the PSs and Xboxes for hardcore gaming, but not Nintendo's stuff? If I pick up TOCA every once in a while to randomly play a few tracks mindlessly, but then spend 200+ hours on Advance Wars: Dual Strike, then I think I know which one I'm hardcore at.

SupSuper
13 Dec 2006, 15:47
I don't like the word hardcore.

Xinos
13 Dec 2006, 16:13
I don't like the word hardcore.
That's because you aint!

MrBunsy
13 Dec 2006, 17:32
It's a good word to describe the PS3 and Xboxes,you can put them under the tarmac to make roads :p

Plasma
13 Dec 2006, 17:46
It's a good word to describe the PS3 and Xboxes,you can put them under the tarmac to make roads :p
What? Be reasonable here, there's no way that a Palystation would act as a support for something; it breaks way too easily!

MrBunsy
13 Dec 2006, 17:58
What? Be reasonable here, there's no way that a Palystation would act as a support for something; it breaks way too easily!
You smash them into rubble first.

Plasma
13 Dec 2006, 18:04
You smash them into rubble first.
With the hollow heart of a Sony product, the PS3 isn't going to produce much rubble.

MrBunsy
13 Dec 2006, 18:39
With the hollow heart of a Sony product, the PS3 isn't going to produce much rubble.
Then you'll need to smash lots of them. What a pity.

kikumbob
13 Dec 2006, 19:33
Indeed, it's a whimsical word.
Hardcore is a rubbish definition anyway. Why class the PSs and Xboxes for hardcore gaming, but not Nintendo's stuff? If I pick up TOCA every once in a while to randomly play a few tracks mindlessly, but then spend 200+ hours on Advance Wars: Dual Strike, then I think I know which one I'm hardcore at. I didn't take hardcore to mean extenisve gaming. I took it to mean "serious" gaming. As opposed to just plain relaxin fun. besides, your looking into my wording too much. The general essense of what I mean is still there.
Maybe childish wasn't the right word, however. When i said that, i was thinking of Yoshi, kirby and all those cute lovable characters that come with the nintendo trademark.

*Splinter*
13 Dec 2006, 20:31
Also, do they have any snes games for it on the virtual console thingy yet?
As soon as they release SMRPG, DKC2 and Top Gear in it, I'm storming out to buy the stuff, screw the price.
Why? (http://www.rom-world.com/)
.......

Plasma
13 Dec 2006, 22:43
Why? (http://www.rom-world.com/)
.......
Because it's the best legal way of getting them.

MtlAngelus
14 Dec 2006, 08:20
And it'll probably be rid of the usual graphical/sound glitches present in almost all roms, if not to say all. And I can play WITH A SNES CONTROLER(there's gotta be classic snes controlers for the Wii, right? O_o )

Paul.Power
14 Dec 2006, 21:54
I didn't take hardcore to mean extenisve gaming. I took it to mean "serious" gaming. As opposed to just plain relaxin fun. besides, your looking into my wording too much. The general essense of what I mean is still there.
Maybe childish wasn't the right word, however. When i said that, i was thinking of Yoshi, kirby and all those cute lovable characters that come with the nintendo trademark.
Just because the characters are cute and loveable doesn't meant the gameplay can't be serious.

Akuryou13
15 Dec 2006, 03:45
And I can play WITH A SNES CONTROLER(there's gotta be classic snes controlers for the Wii, right? O_o )well the "classic controller" add-on thing does kinda resemble the SNES controller, so it's close enough.

*Splinter*
15 Dec 2006, 18:21
And it'll probably be rid of the usual graphical/sound glitches present in almost all roms, if not to say all.
I havent seen any?
Btw: do you have to pay anything to get these games?

*Splinter*
15 Dec 2006, 18:35
I feel like I just have to mention this somewhere, so...
Nintendo is third in sales, behind Microsoft and Sony.
However, they're #1 in profits.
Sony and Microsoft are so busy trying to one-up each other by offering high-end technology for low prices that they're in a sort of arms race.
Nintendo doesn't really care about being number one in sales, so they don't worry about making expensive systems, and they sell the Wii at a profit.
And because they're third in sales, everyone says that they did the worst last generation,
but they're actually making more money than either Sony or Microsoft's game division. They have a better financial strategy.
BIZARRO WORLD.
Even more interestingly, if it were the other way round 80% of the people here would say thats because nintendo tries to please people and sony/microsoft are just trying to get your money :)
But its the other way round so nintendo has good 'financial strategy' :rolleyes: (though this seems to be why everyone hates microsoft?)

SupSuper
15 Dec 2006, 18:38
I havent seen any?
Btw: do you have to pay anything to get these games?Well DUH!

MrBunsy
15 Dec 2006, 20:16
Even more interestingly, if it were the other way round 80% of the people here would say thats because nintendo tries to please people and sony/microsoft are just trying to get your money :)
But its the other way round so nintendo has good 'financial strategy' :rolleyes: (though this seems to be why everyone hates microsoft?)
But this is £180 vs £300 odd, if nitendo were selling at at £300 like the Xbox used to, then people'd be saying somehting different.

Paul.Power
15 Dec 2006, 22:10
But this is £180 vs £300 odd, if nitendo were selling at at £300 like the Xbox used to, then people'd be saying somehting different.
That, and trying to please people isn't always the best course of action in the long run. The USA were trying to please people when they stalled entering World War II. Tabloids try to please people. Shadow the ****ing Hedgehog was trying to please people.
(Although, equally, so are JK Rowling, Terry Pratchett and Russell T Davies. But they're pleasing the right people :p)
Jay: "People are smart"
Kay: "No, a person is smart. People are dumb, panicky animals and you know it"
(Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones, Men in Black

Akuryou13
15 Dec 2006, 23:46
Even more interestingly, if it were the other way round 80% of the people here would say thats because nintendo tries to please people and sony/microsoft are just trying to get your money :)
But its the other way round so nintendo has good 'financial strategy' :rolleyes: (though this seems to be why everyone hates microsoft?)no, people hate microsoft because their business strategy includes them taking tons of shortcuts to get things done cheaper than it should be done. this causes the product to be crappy.
nintendo, regardless of how much money they're making, provide good products that satisfy users of said products and as such they are praised regardless of how much money they're making.
microsoft and sony and tons of other companies want to make money above all else and they do so in a way that makes them the most money, but a few companies (like nintendo) try to make money the best way that they can but in doing so they also strive to make the best product they can as well. it's just different business plans, but the latter tends to make people happier.

Plasma
15 Dec 2006, 23:53
microsoft and sony and tons of other companies want to make money above all else and they do so in a way that makes them the most money, but a few companies (like nintendo) try to make money the best way that they can but in doing so they also strive to make the best product they can as well. it's just different business plans, but the latter tends to make people happier.
Do you actually have anything to show it, or is it just your gut instinct?

Paul.Power
16 Dec 2006, 08:17
Do you actually have anything to show it, or is it just your gut instinct?Well, it's the difference between a book by Jeffrey Archer and one by Terry Pratchett.
Neither is looking to produce something of great artistic worth (although as Douglas Adams points out, beware of anyone who is), they both want to make money, but Terry Pratchett's approach to this is refreshing.

MtlAngelus
16 Dec 2006, 09:02
I havent seen any?
That's because you haven't played the original versions perhaps. The rom of SMRPG has several sounds changed compared to the original I have played in the SNES. The ROM of Sim Ants crashed for me when I was less than 40% done, and several games have glitches(the edges of the screen get glitchy very often when scrolling), run slower for some reason, or the music sounds bad quality(gets jumpy, noises, etc...).
Plus doing 2 players on the same computer is not the same as in a console.
The same goes for N64 games, which is another reason I want the Wii, never had a N64, only borrowed my aunt's a couple of times(never got to finish OoT T_T).
And of course Gamecube games, never even touched the thing.
Of course the games will cost money, but it's quite worth it. ^^
well the "classic controller" add-on thing does kinda resemble the SNES controller, so it's close enough.
Oh yeah I have seen the thing. They have controllers for the wii everywhere but no one has the console, how fun is that? :P

AndrewTaylor
16 Dec 2006, 18:19
Do you actually have anything to show it, or is it just your gut instinct?
What?
The X-Box is a PC. The PSP doesn't work. The PS3 doesn't exist. Meanwhile, Nintendo have sold an enormous amount of Wiis on the cunning basis of making it much, much cheaper than they really needed to. They could have sold that thing at double the price they're asking, but they chose not to. Now, less than a month after the ludicrously cheap console launched, they're sending out stronger wriststraps for free because people asked them to -- compare this to Ken Kutaragi's response when people pointed out that the square buttons on the PSP didn't work very well, which is to say, to climb atop his high horse and explain to the general public that they ought to be grateful for being allowed to play something as utterly beautiful as a PSP in the first place. Nintendo have always been more cooperative and more customer-friendly than Microsoft or Sony, and no, I haven't got any proof, but then you shouldn't need any. Proving things that are obvious wastes everyone's time.

Slick
16 Dec 2006, 20:51
Nintendo have always been more cooperative and more customer-friendly than Microsoft or Sony, and no, I haven't got any proof, but then you shouldn't need any.
Well I'll be happy to back you up. One time back when me and my friends would play the Nintendo 64, my friend took a game over in his pocket. What we didnt know, was that there was tin foil in his pocket from gum, that got inside the games bottom slot thing. Needless to say, this shorted out my Nintendo. It would turn on, but nothing would happen. Anyways, I called Nintendo, and they were VERY helpfull about the problem. I didnt tell them exactly what happend, and no I didn't have a warenty; But after a few days and a few phone calls, they set up to have my Nintendo fixed for free. They told me the address and all that, we took it over there, and they found the problem and fixed it. The shop told me that it was about a $50-$100 repair too. But Nintendo picked up the bill. :)

Iguana
16 Dec 2006, 22:01
Why is everyone discussing the Wii and Nintendo in a thread about the PS3?
Nintendo have always been more cooperative and more customer-friendly than Microsoft or Sony, and no, I haven't got any proof, but then you shouldn't need any. Proving things that are obvious wastes everyone's time.
Ken Kutaragi is terribly obnoxious and annoying. But at the same time, both Nintendo and Microsoft have their own useless PR dolts.
At least they fixed the PSP's problems eventually, unlike what Nintendo did back in the GBA days. Releasing a more expensive, backlit alternative to their old, dark-screened piece of hardware, years after all the complaints from Nintendo fans losing their eye sight doesn't seem much worse than the stuff Sony did.
Personally, I've learnt to stop caring about which company made the most mistakes and just enjoy the games.

Pigbuster
17 Dec 2006, 01:20
Why is everyone discussing the Wii and Nintendo in a thread about the PS3?
We might just need a general 7th-generation console discussion thread.

Xinos
17 Dec 2006, 01:26
Proving things that are obvious wastes everyone's time.
You'd make a wonderfull judge.. :p

Paul.Power
17 Dec 2006, 02:19
Why is everyone discussing the Wii and Nintendo in a thread about the PS3?How long have you been here now?

Akuryou13
17 Dec 2006, 03:21
At least they fixed the PSP's problems eventually, unlike what Nintendo did back in the GBA days. Releasing a more expensive, backlit alternative to their old, dark-screened piece of hardware, years after all the complaints from Nintendo fans losing their eye sight doesn't seem much worse than the stuff Sony did. hmmmm, you do really have a point. but, it all worked out anyway because the SP was a heck of a lot better than the normal GBA. not the point, I realize, but at least if they're going to screw us over they're going to do so in such a way that we're happy about it :p

farazparsa
17 Dec 2006, 04:13
Are you suggesting a PSPSP?

MtlAngelus
17 Dec 2006, 07:19
Why is everyone discussing the Wii and Nintendo in a thread about the PS3?
There's not much to talk about the PS3 right now, really. Barely anyone owns it here(does anyone actually?).

kikumbob
17 Dec 2006, 11:34
What?
The PSP doesn't work. (+ massive wordy paragraph in which i finally drowned in) What?
My brother has had a PSP for about a year now and its still in near-perfect condition. granted, pixel death is like a disease for the device, finally spreading over the whole screen until you're staring at a completly white surface...but that hasn't happened. Yet.

AndrewTaylor
17 Dec 2006, 13:01
What?
My brother has had a PSP for about a year now and its still in near-perfect condition.
Oh, sure, some of them work. Most of them, even. But a quite unacceptable amount of them didn't. It's just not good customer relations -- especially when so many people pre-order them and then find there aren't anything like enough functional ones to go round.
Like when I said the PS3 didn't exist -- obviously some of them do, but compared to the number Sony promised us (especially in Europe) an alarming amount of them failed to materialise.
At least they fixed the PSP's problems eventually, unlike what Nintendo did back in the GBA days. Releasing a more expensive, backlit alternative to their old, dark-screened piece of hardware, years after all the complaints from Nintendo fans losing their eye sight doesn't seem much worse than the stuff Sony did.
Well there are a few key differences, to my mind. First, the GBA had a problem, yes, but it was the lack of a feature, rather than an advertised feature that didn't work. Nobody ever said the GBA would have a backlit screen. Secondly, while Nintendo did nothing to fix the problem until the next iteration of the hardware, Sony actually made a public statement to the effect that people should shut the hell up and stop whinging. Thirdly, the lack of a backlight on the GBA meant it was inconvenient. If a button doesn't work on a console that makes it unplayable.
Oh, and nobody ever lost their eyesight over the GBA. That just didn't happen.

Paul.Power
17 Dec 2006, 15:11
The weird part about moving to backlit screens was that suddenly sitting in the sun was the worst place to play your handheld, rather than the best. Took a while to get used to that.
(Was also a bit of a shame, since sitting in the sun playing Advance Wars 2 was a nice way to pass the time)

Iguana
17 Dec 2006, 16:30
Oh, and nobody ever lost their eyesight over the GBA. That just didn't happen.
That was a silly exaggeration on my part. Still, spending ages trying to find that right angle is pretty frustrating, especially in games with dark colors such as A Link to the Past's first dungeon. I could barely see anything there.
The weird part about moving to backlit screens was that suddenly sitting in the sun was the worst place to play your handheld, rather than the best. Took a while to get used to that.
Couldn't you turn off the backlight on an SP? That's what I do with my DS when I'm outside.
Back on topic... oh look, It's an actual decent launch title. (http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/action/insomniacshooter/index.html?tag=topten;_title;1) I still think it'll take about a year for the really good next-gens to come out, though.

Paul.Power
17 Dec 2006, 17:02
Couldn't you turn off the backlight on an SP? That's what I do with my DS when I'm outside.I don't have an SP: I went straight to DS (come on, keep up)
Thing is, turning off the backlight doesn't really seem to help: it's still tricky to see the DS screens in sunlight.

Metal Alex
17 Dec 2006, 22:37
Maybe childish wasn't the right word, however. When i said that, i was thinking of Yoshi, kirby and all those cute lovable characters that come with the nintendo trademark.
If you look at "red steel" (for wii), you feel better then?

farazparsa
17 Dec 2006, 22:48
Red Steel was panned by critics. Get Call of Duty 3. It's only slightly better, but that's makes some difference.

MrBunsy
17 Dec 2006, 23:18
Does COD3 suck as badly as COD2?

Iguana
17 Dec 2006, 23:25
Maybe childish wasn't the right word, however. When i said that, i was thinking of Yoshi, kirby and all those cute lovable characters that come with the nintendo trademark.
I'll give you Yoshi, but Kirby's always been quite badass. I'd like to see Tommy Vercetti take down a whole battlefleet, get out alive and battle a dark entity bent on destroying the world, all while shamelessly exposing his sexual orientation. (http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/4751/ohnoesky4.png)
Take that, Rockstar.

Akuryou13
18 Dec 2006, 03:47
If you look at "red steel" (for wii), you feel better then?Red Steel is a horrible example of a good game on the Wii. the graphics suck, the controls are twitchy and the gameplay is bland.
btw iguana, is kirby super star ON the wii? if so I am SO downloading it (my net on the wii doesn't work yet so I can't check for myself)

Iguana
18 Dec 2006, 04:34
btw iguana, is kirby super star ON the wii? if so I am SO downloading it (my net on the wii doesn't work yet so I can't check for myself)
Back where you live, yes. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Virtual_Console_titles_%28North_America%29 ) Europe is being left out, as always. :p

MtlAngelus
18 Dec 2006, 06:33
*looks at future releases on the list*
*spots SMRPG*
*runs out to buy the wii*
*stops*
DAMN IT'S MIDNIGHT! D:
Damnit I really don't want to pay over $450 on the Wii T_T

Apocalypse
18 Dec 2006, 09:12
Europe is being left out, as always. Ahem, down here, we have tv-spots for the Wii, we're getting to it now... WE'RE CATCHING UP...eventually

wormthingy
18 Dec 2006, 14:05
the comercials just started yeah.. stupid country!
I still wanna move to the UK.

kikumbob
18 Dec 2006, 18:29
I'm confused. What country are you in now?

wormthingy
18 Dec 2006, 19:41
I'm confused. What country are you in now?
netherlands, just like apoc.
according to the previous version of dA he lives less then 200 metres from my place :p
http://wormthingy.deviantart.com/near/

Apocalypse
18 Dec 2006, 21:30
netherlands, just like apoc.
according to the previous version of dA he lives less then 200 metres from my place :p
http://wormthingy.deviantart.com/near/Where did you find that o_O
all i get to see is that you're near me...(i think it was a 5km radius...)

Pigbuster
19 Dec 2006, 05:25
Back where you live, yes. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Virtual_Console_titles_%28North_America%29 )
Kirby Superstar is wonderful. I'll have to get that one.
But where the hell is my Earthbound?

wigwam the
19 Dec 2006, 08:03
the comercials just started yeah.. stupid country!
I still wanna move to the UK.
no, there's about as much coverage here as there. sometimes I worry about this country.

*Splinter*
19 Dec 2006, 11:04
*looks at future releases on the list*
*spots SMRPG*
*runs out to buy the wii*
*stops*
DAMN IT'S MIDNIGHT! D:
Damnit I really don't want to pay over $450 on the Wii T_T
Whats SMRPG?

Iguana
19 Dec 2006, 11:26
Whats SMRPG?
Super Mario RPG. Nothing much, just one of Square's most innovative games of all time that's actually focused on fun, engaging gameplay and a great battle system instead of making up a silly plot with tons of 'controversial' religious imagery, mostly about hammering the "attack" and "magic" options through every battle.
It also predates FF7 by one year. :p

Metal Alex
19 Dec 2006, 14:04
Red Steel is a horrible example of a good game on the Wii. the graphics suck, the controls are twitchy and the gameplay is bland.
btw iguana, is kirby super star ON the wii? if so I am SO downloading it (my net on the wii doesn't work yet so I can't check for myself)
1- I meant that red steel is not childish... or maybe children around there go swinging katanas, and stuff...
2- KIRBY SUPER STAR!! I loved that game... must download... Hope it is there, or it gets soon.

*Splinter*
19 Dec 2006, 15:41
Super Mario RPG. Nothing much, just one of Square's most innovative games of all time that's actually focused on fun, engaging gameplay and a great battle system instead of making up a silly plot with tons of 'controversial' religious imagery, mostly about hammering the "attack" and "magic" options through every battle.
It also predates FF7 by one year. :p
Oh, I see (http://www.npower.nl/pafiles/index.php?act=view&id=87)
....

wormthingy
19 Dec 2006, 18:01
Where did you find that o_O
all i get to see is that you're near me...(i think it was a 5km radius...)
Previous dA version offered more detail on the distances (mm, could have been someone else within 200m.. )
1- I meant that red steel is not childish... or maybe children around there go swinging katanas, and stuff...
mm, some kids do swing katanas over here |:/

Iguana
19 Dec 2006, 19:59
Oh, I see (http://www.npower.nl/pafiles/index.php?act=view&id=87)
....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ROM_image#Legal_status_of_ROMs
:(

Akuryou13
20 Dec 2006, 08:07
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ROM_image#Legal_status_of_ROMs
:(yes because everyone knows people who download ROMS are VERY worried about the legal status of them :p

MtlAngelus
20 Dec 2006, 19:53
Well they should if they can't stop themselves from posting links to them on a game developer forum.:p

MtlAngelus
23 Dec 2006, 09:17
And so it begins http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LKMmlkLv_Y
Looks great IMO.

Akuryou13
23 Dec 2006, 14:43
And so it begins http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LKMmlkLv_Y
Looks great IMO.:eek: hooooooly crap that looks good. that combat system looks just awesome, and major kudos to them on the graphics. that just looks awesome in general.

Iguana
23 Dec 2006, 15:43
While the idea of a medieval character controlling some huge knight mecha thing seems... silly, it sounds pretty damn fun. It might end up like Xenogears, without so many brain-raping deeper meanings.

Paul.Power
23 Dec 2006, 16:00
I appreciate it's not exactly my cup of tea, but I don't see what all the fuss is about. The combat sequence looked a bit stilted for the most part, and giant robots have been waaay overdone. And the script (though admittedly hurriedly translated) felt clunky.
It looks quite pretty, but Sonic the Hedgehog looked quite pretty, and that was 15 years ago.

MtlAngelus
23 Dec 2006, 16:07
I just hope they make an english version with the japanese voices and subtitles, that would rock.

Iguana
23 Dec 2006, 20:40
This might be a little offtopic, but at least it's related to Sony. I just got a cheap PS2 and We <3 Katamari. Though I haven't actually managed to run it yet, I'm inclined to believe the controller wasn't designed for normal human beings. It might be my inner fanboy speaking, but it feels a bit too small.
However, the games are the most important thing, and Katamari seems pretty good. I'll probably get Disgaea if I manage to find an european online store that didn't (rightfully) ban Romania. :p

TintinWorm
24 Dec 2006, 05:03
White Knight Story looks pretty good, and Level-5 is a pretty good developer. Jeanne d'Arc for PSP is actually a really good SRPG.
But I think Level-5 likes robot/mecha things too much. In White Knight Story, OK. But having Joan of Arc transform into this armor-mech superwarrior is a bit too much for me.

Iguana
24 Dec 2006, 07:38
As much as Keita Takahashi (Katamari's creator) hates sequels, I'd really like to see a next-gen PS3 Katamari, with a huge world and a sandbox mode where you just go around rolling everything up for hours with certain objectives.

MtlAngelus
24 Dec 2006, 11:32
I would like to see how well a GTA sequel would do on a PS3. :p

Akuryou13
6 Jan 2007, 03:21
I would like to see how well a GTA sequel would do on a PS3. :pwell if sales keep up you won't see anything on the PS3 :p
I heard earlier today that despite good sales upon release, the rush has ended for the PS3. stores all over are apparently now stocked up with PS3s, and are having no problem keeping them in stock. apparently people have realize just how much of a waste of money it is right now. the way that people are, I doubt anyone will realize that it still has potential for later on so it's looking like Sony needs to pull out something special if they want to stay afloat.

Iguana
6 Jan 2007, 03:38
It'll own both Wii and 360 once it gets FFXIII.
All the "cloudxsephirothfangurl69876"s of the world desperately need their bishie fix.

MtlAngelus
6 Jan 2007, 10:20
well if sales keep up you won't see anything on the PS3 :p
I heard earlier today that despite good sales upon release, the rush has ended for the PS3. stores all over are apparently now stocked up with PS3s, and are having no problem keeping them in stock. apparently people have realize just how much of a waste of money it is right now. the way that people are, I doubt anyone will realize that it still has potential for later on so it's looking like Sony needs to pull out something special if they want to stay afloat.
Just wait for the cool RPG's to start comming out. :p

Plasma
6 Jan 2007, 12:08
well if sales keep up you won't see anything on the PS3 :p
Well let's see...
1: It's still relatively new, and hasn't got any good games yet.
2: It's not even being sold in Europe yet!

Akuryou13
6 Jan 2007, 14:02
1: It's still relatively new, and hasn't got any good games yet.neither has the Wii. both the Wii and the PS3 have 1 good game that's basically carrying the system. the difference is that the wii's mediocre games don't suck quite as bad for whatever reason.
2: It's not even being sold in Europe yet your point? I was only referring to the american market. the PS3 is sitting on store shelves all across america, apparently. this close to release that just shouldn't happen, regardless of the quality of games. I'm not saying the system is going to fail, just that if things aren't changed that it's a sinking ship.

Slick
6 Jan 2007, 19:43
your point? I was only referring to the american market. the PS3 is sitting on store shelves all across america, apparently. this close to release that just shouldn't happen, regardless of the quality of games. I'm not saying the system is going to fail, just that if things aren't changed that it's a sinking ship.
I had a someone who worked at Best Buy come up to me and ask if I wanted a PS3. Needless to say I laughed at him and continued playing Guitar Hero II, and impressed ALL the sweet honeys. :D

vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.