Anyone want to buy a PS3 for $.99? Well you’re too late, someone already did:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Playstation-3-PS3-60-GB-Console-Free-2yr-WARRANTY_W0QQitemZ280051645657QQihZ018QQcategoryZ62054QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
[quote]Kuz wrote:
Love that game and playing a ton myself. I think one of the most interesting aspects is the add-ons they offer for purchase and download. I mean, if you love a game, why wouldn’t you download more content for a few bucks to extend it?
I keep wondering if console games will go the route of some PC games with full-on expansion packs for purchase with new missions or whatever.[/quote]
That’s a good point… This is the first generation of gaming consoles that it’s possible for them to really do that with because of the expandable hard drive slots. So we’ll see.
[quote]JokerFMJ wrote:
That’s a good point… This is the first generation of gaming consoles that it’s possible for them to really do that with because of the expandable hard drive slots. So we’ll see.[/quote]
We already had this on the original Xbox. Project Gotham Racing 2 had two packs you could buy on Xbox Live that gave you additional courses and cars; Halo2 had quite a few multiplayer maps available. Crimson Skies offered more planes, etc.
The content was often free, but I don’t think we’ll see much more of that…
The downside is that game publishers will be able to “rush out” games, knowing they can patch them later on. We can probably look forward to more buggy games than what we were used too on the older consoles.
[quote]pookie wrote:
JokerFMJ wrote:
That’s a good point… This is the first generation of gaming consoles that it’s possible for them to really do that with because of the expandable hard drive slots. So we’ll see.
We already had this on the original Xbox. Project Gotham Racing 2 had two packs you could buy on Xbox Live that gave you additional courses and cars; Halo2 had quite a few multiplayer maps available. Crimson Skies offered more planes, etc.
The content was often free, but I don’t think we’ll see much more of that…
The downside is that game publishers will be able to “rush out” games, knowing they can patch them later on. We can probably look forward to more buggy games than what we were used too on the older consoles.
[/quote]
I was thinking more along the lines of PC expansion packs, which are almost standalone games, as compared to a few extra maps/courses here and there.
[quote]pookie wrote:
The downside is that game publishers will be able to “rush out” games, knowing they can patch them later on. We can probably look forward to more buggy games than what we were used too on the older consoles.
[/quote]
Were already seeing it with certain games. What sucks is most of the gaming demographic are somewhat computer savvy and are aware of updates and patches etc. What about people who buy these consoles for their children, or may not be connected to live for game patches and mandatory updates etc? They get a buggy game that can be borderline unplayable and now what? Not everyone has time to scour gaming forums to see the latest bug reports to know if they should hold off on buying a game right away.
[quote]Cthulhu wrote:
Dirty Tiger wrote:
Get an Xbox 360.
I play Oblivion on mine almost every day.
It seems that most really good games come out of both platforms eventually.
It looks to me like the ps3 is gonna have stupid games.
The x box 360 already has awesome games coming out or are already out:
Call of duty 2 and 3,Halo 3,gears of war,oblivion.
Lots of great games already coming out.[/quote]
The Playstation is going to be a turd compared to the 360.
The cell processor is a piece of crap, and the GPU was slapped on at the last minute thanks to nVidia. That and its based on DX9 hardware (geforce 7 series)… compared to a DX10 unit by Ati for the xbox 360.
I would explain further… but you should do your own research. I did. I was revolted by what I found. I was really looking forward to the PS3… not anymore. Alot of it was really good marketing thanks to Sony. But they delivered sub-par hardware. Just like the PS2. That did not live up to the hype either.
Good console. But NOT what they claimed it was.
If you can. Find the comparison shots of Ridge Racer 6 (360) & Ridge Racer 7 (PS3). Also the tiger woods game that is on both consoles.
Also check out what kinds of average ratings you see for PS3 games on gamings sites. Not good. All the release games blow according to them. Check out multiple sites if you don’t believe one.
Fuck the PS3. Too damn expensive & I expect some DAMN good games at $600. Not games that look & play worse than a 360 which is HALF the price.
I’m getting a Wii. Or a 360 when they slash prices again.
[quote]brucevangeorge wrote:
The cell processor is a piece of crap,[/quote]
Actually, the Cell is a very interesting CPU design. IBM’s engineers are definitely not idiots; the Cell is designed to clear hurdles that have been plaguing current CPU designs for years.
Two things appear to be problematic, though:
-
The Cell is very new and while it’s number crunching ability is very high, it remains to be seen whether that potential power can be efficiently applied to video games, as opposed to scientific number crunching.
-
The PS3 has very little memory, and what little it has is split in two separate regions. Add to that the the Cell’s SPEs cannot access it directly, and you have a very odd configuration for a gaming machine, especially one that was hyped as being able to run a game on dual 1080p displays. (With 256MB of graphic RAM? Good luck with that…)
That’s not very accurate, but yes, the Xbox’s GPU is a lot more impressive than the PS3’s RSX.
Was your research done on sites that have the technical expertise to be able to evaluate the various architectures? You sound more like the various fanboys that can be found in just about every gaming forum.
With over 100 million systems sold, thousands of games, etc. I think the PS2 did pretty well for itself. Microsoft and Nintendo only wish they could fail as miserably as Sony did with the PS2.
The PS2 is still outselling all new-gen systems combined. It’ll probably be the winner for this holiday season.
They never are. Are you angry at Sony because you bought the hype?
In any case, we’ll have a better comparison for the holiday 2007 season, when the PS3 and Wii have had a year to mature.
If you compare the best reviewed game, Resistance: Fall of Man, and compare screens with, say, Gears of War, the PS3 appears to be able to hold its own. I’d give a slight advantage to GoW, but Epic had a lot more time to polish their game on the 360 than Insomniac did on the PS3.
Not all. Most.
Look on the bright side: The PS3 is nearly silent, while the 360 sounds like a goddamn leaf blower. The PS3 is also lacking that giant ugly brick of a power supply. The PS3 also includes a BluRay disc player. Not that it matters much for games.
I’m planning on renting a Wii to try it out and see how the family likes it. The “wiimote” looks a bit gimmicky to me. Though I give Nintendo credit for trying something new.
[quote]pookie wrote:
Actually, the Cell is a very interesting CPU design. IBM’s engineers are definitely not idiots; the Cell is designed to clear hurdles that have been plaguing current CPU designs for years. [/quote]
I know they are not idiots. On paper… the thing looks damn good. But Sony’s implementation is dirt.
http://www.ps3focus.com/archives/45
The PS3 comes with 8 SPEs. However due to manufacturing problems… SONY is only using 7. To allow for one defect one. Not only that but the Operating System uses a dedicated SPE. Always.
So the PS3 is using 6 out of 8 SPEs available when playing games.
[quote]
Two things appear to be problematic, though:
- The Cell is very new and while it’s number crunching ability is very high, it remains to be seen whether that potential power can be efficiently applied to video games, as opposed to scientific number crunching.[/quote]
Agree there.
[quote]
2. The PS3 has very little memory, and what little it has is split in two separate regions. Add to that the the Cell’s SPEs cannot access it directly, and you have a very odd configuration for a gaming machine, especially one that was hyped as being able to run a game on dual 1080p displays. (With 256MB of graphic RAM? Good luck with that…)[/quote]
Not only that but the OS on the box takes a good chunk of that away. It uses something like 96MB of the total memory. 32 from GPU and 64 from CPU memories.
The 360 uses somewhere around 3. Megabytes. Or so I’ve read.
http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=2
The PS3 doesn’t look too spectacular.
[quote]
Was your research done on sites that have the technical expertise to be able to evaluate the various architectures? You sound more like the various fanboys that can be found in just about every gaming forum.[/quote]
No. First I looked at side by side comapison shots of various games on both systems. I didn’t like what I saw. I thought maybe the games were rushed or something to get them to the deadline.
Guess not.
So I did further reseach into the architecture of both systems.
I know. They had alot of great games on the PS2. That’s why they sold so well. And the fact that they kept slashing costs on the unit. Its around $100 now. Anyone can buy one. Its not even a matter if you can afford it or not.
[quote]
They never are. Are you angry at Sony because you bought the hype?
In any case, we’ll have a better comparison for the holiday 2007 season, when the PS3 and Wii have had a year to mature.[/quote]
No. I’m just saying that its all hype. Which is why I suggested to the OP to do his own research and make a decision based on that.
And not go by what SONY’s marketing division is touting. Or any other marketing division for that matter.
Actually I did that. I wasn’t impressed by Resistance. I think GOW looked alot better. But its a matter of preference.
Resistance also displays in 720p. I guess that’s less than what SONY was touting a year ago. “Dual 1080p diplay capability on the PS3!!!” Gimme a break.
[quote]
Look on the bright side: The PS3 is nearly silent, while the 360 sounds like a goddamn leaf blower. The PS3 is also lacking that giant ugly brick of a power supply. The PS3 also includes a BluRay disc player. Not that it matters much for games.[/quote]
True. And the 360 has overheating problems sometimes. But that should all be fixed when they release a new unit in Q1 2007. Something about using smaller dies (65nm) to help dissipate the heat better.
And you know what? FUCK BluRay.
I don’t want to buy two units just so I can enjoy movies. Goddamn SONY and their format war. They did this with Betamax before.
And lets not get started about how they are shafting the consumers more… Grand Turismo HD subscription service?!! You have to BUY tracks and cars online and download to PS3 because the game disc does not include any!
That and the external HDDVD drive for the 360 can be hooked up to your PC. With some drivers off the net… you can watch HD content on your XP Computer. Or on a Mac.
Don’t forget the Wii nunchucks. Those actually look like alot of fun.
Man…I miss the days when video games systems were just that, video game systems not flippin entertainment systems that cost an arm and a leg. I miss the snes days!!
[quote]pookie wrote:
The downside is that game publishers will be able to “rush out” games, knowing they can patch them later on. We can probably look forward to more buggy games than what we were used too on the older consoles.
[/quote]
That’s sort of my fear, but then it’s really just putting things on par with PC games (not sure if that is a good thing or not).
My hope is that good games will enjoy an extended life with additional micro-transactions… we’ll see.
In the meantime, I am giving the 10 day free trial of World of Warcraft a run on my PC. Not bad at all.
An example of what might be possible if developers learn to use the PS3’s Cell/RSX combo properly:
http://www.gamebrink.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12053
Of course, the 60fps claim can’t be verified in pictures, but damn, those screenshots almost look like photos.
Of course, Polyphony Digital isn’t developing a cross-platform game, so they can afford to optimize to the max for the PS3.
[quote]pookie wrote:
An example of what might be possible if developers learn to use the PS3’s Cell/RSX combo properly:
http://www.gamebrink.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12053
Of course, the 60fps claim can’t be verified in pictures, but damn, those screenshots almost look like photos.
Of course, Polyphony Digital isn’t developing a cross-platform game, so they can afford to optimize to the max for the PS3.
[/quote]
So far I’m biased towards the 360 since its more affordable. Also has best bang for the buck.
So far it doesn’t look good for SONY. But if they can achieve that kind of realism (in the pics), I’ll buy the expensive brick.
But you never know. Microsoft is coming out with Forza 2.
[quote]brucevangeorge wrote:
So far I’m biased towards the 360 since its more affordable. Also has best bang for the buck.
So far it doesn’t look good for SONY. But if they can achieve that kind of realism (in the pics), I’ll buy the expensive brick.
But you never know. Microsoft is coming out with Forza 2.[/quote]
I’m leaning towards the 360 myself, especially if they can quiet it down with the next revision. I’m also quite attached to the rumbling function, so Sony taking it out pisses me off quite a bit.
I’d still rather see a close race for quality games rather than have Sony do a “Dreamcast” with its PS3. More choice for us, more competition to keep developers pushing the envelope.
As for Forza 2, yup, it’s looking pretty good too: http://screenshots.teamxbox.com/gallery/1476/Forza-Motorsport-2/p1/
[quote]pookie wrote:
I’d still rather see a close race for quality games rather than have Sony do a “Dreamcast” with its PS3. More choice for us, more competition to keep developers pushing the envelope.
[/quote]
Same here. I just want a console that delivers the “next generation” of entertaining games.
And if its the Xbox 1.5, I mean 360… then so be it.
Xbox360 is presently offering a 100$ rebate apparently. Fuckers. I paid full price.
Just coming back to my own post. 2 things I’m wondering about.
I know many people have been saying that the PS3 and 360 are the same spec wise, but how can this be true when there’s a year difference between release dates. I mean if you bought a computer at the time the 360 came out and bought a computer just last month the one bought last month is clearly going to be superior in almost every way. Just a thought. Maybe I don’t know enough about computers and stuff like that.
Secondly, I know many people are switching to 360 because of Gears of War and other games because there’s a limited selection right now for PS3 but 360 has been out for a year and more which of course is going to mean more game selection.
I had my doubts for a little while but I’m sticking with Sony. Might also have something to do with a 50 inch HD TV coming my way for Christmas.
[quote]beebuddy wrote:
Xbox360 is presently offering a 100$ rebate apparently. Fuckers. I paid full price.[/quote]
Where did you hear this?
[quote]brucevangeorge wrote:
But that should all be fixed when they release a new unit in Q1 2007. Something about using smaller dies (65nm) to help dissipate the heat better.
[/quote]
Where did you heat this? This would really fuck my plans of buying one for XMas.
I believe it depends completely on the type of games one believes they will play on a frequent basis. I, for example, am an avid Halo and Halo2 player, and now have become an avid Gears of War player (when I get a little peace in the house). If you look at the graphics detail of Gears of War, you will be utterly amazed by what this machine can do.
The XBox 360 was touted as only supporting graphics up to 720p; however recently MS has indicated that the machine can indeed do better, all the way up to 1080p which is the territory that PS3 is hovering around. Really now, 720p versus 1080p doesn’t look that different unless you have very very discerning eyesight.
PS3 does have a shooter called Resistance which looked good…but I prefer Gears of War graphics and gameplay over that game. Just a preference; nothing more.
[quote]GaMeOvEr305 wrote:
beebuddy wrote:
Xbox360 is presently offering a 100$ rebate apparently. Fuckers. I paid full price.
Where did you hear this?
[/quote]
I got a flyer in the mail from these assholes.
Apparently it’s an in-store deal with a mail-in rebate. It’s effective 11/15 - 12/03 of this year.
I don’t know how they got my name because I’ve never even heard of this store, but apparently there is a store in Fairfax, VA which is close by.
Oh and I was wrong, it’s microcenter that is offering the rebate, not Microsoft.