|
|
Post by slapshot63 on Dec 27, 2006 11:43:49 GMT -5
Congrats dude. NHL2K is my favorite PS3 game, coming in second would be NBA2K7 followed by Resistance. Yeah, NHL 2K7 is pretty hard but so much damn fun. I love the crease and pressure control functions. Resistance is great as well. Online is a blast. |
|
|
|
Post by malicious32dll on Feb 25, 2007 14:32:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by slapshot63 on Feb 27, 2007 22:05:20 GMT -5
Wow. The PS3 isn't that expensive. It's $100 than the 360 is and you get A LOT more. If you were to buy all the accesories for the 360 that come with the 60GB PS3, it's cost you OVER $1150! And the PS3 is selling better than the 360. No, it hasn't sold more units yet but compared to the same time frame from the 360 launch, the PS3 is kicking its ass up and down the block. And yes, the Wii IS a novelty. It's only going to be used for gimmicks from games besides first-party titles. I'm not a PS3 fanboy, I play videogames, I just prefer the games on one console over another.
|
|
|
|
Post by malicious32dll on Feb 27, 2007 22:18:25 GMT -5
Wow. The PS3 isn't that expensive. It's $100 than the 360 is and you get A LOT more. If you were to buy all the accesories for the 360 that come with the 60GB PS3, it's cost you OVER $1150! And the PS3 is selling better than the 360. No, it hasn't sold more units yet but compared to the same time frame from the 360 launch, the PS3 is kicking its ass up and down the block. And yes, the Wii IS a novelty. It's only going to be used for gimmicks from games besides first-party titles. I'm not a PS3 fanboy, I play videogames, I just prefer the games on one console over another. Meh, technically I dont really play consoles at all, just pc. Therefore I'm not 100% aware of most of the reasons people like one console over the other but seriously. The PS3 is outta hand, (No I dont mean the cost I spent a couple thousand building a comp) They have taken soooo many risks with that console... I dont even know why. ex: blueray. HA, 7 symetrical cpus! That still cracks me up, and the promise of really deep online play, that sounds like more jargon sony spit out at e3 05' that they failed to deliver on like most other aspects. And no, im not a "fanboy" even though I'm grievously against the term. |
|
|
|
Post by slapshot63 on Feb 28, 2007 22:43:04 GMT -5
You HAVE to take risks. If you don't, you end up being behind. Sony takes risks and more often than not, they pay off in spades. Blu-Ray is necessary to Next-Gen. Hell, MGS4 needs MORE than 50GB, so there's proof right there. And the PS2 was notoriously hard to program for at first, but look at games that came out! The reason the 360 is so easy to develop for is because it isn't much more than an Xbox on steroids, just like the Wii is a souped up GCN with an IR remote. How exactly is the PS3 "outta hand?" It is selling very well (better than the PS2 did at this point and that is the best selling system ever). And they never said AMAZING online play at launch. Live wasn't too great when it first came out either and since the PS3 has only been out three months, I'd give it time before calling the online aspect a failure. I really don't get why it is fashionable to bash the PS3 these days. Oh that's right, people are mad if they can't afford one even though they'll buy a $100 less 360 with enough accessories to make the PS3's price seem amazing! Gotcha.
|
|
|
|
Post by malicious32dll on Mar 1, 2007 10:46:22 GMT -5
I agree with you that it does seem fashionable these days to bash Sony; however, it is not the cost that keeps me away. It’s their hardware choices. I always dread Sony’s press conferences, like their e3 2005 one, because they play their shit up so much... Ex) The “realtime” *cough* cg *cough* Killzone 2 trailer. The over the top NVIDIA power points… My point being I feel that if I had to buy a console I would go with the 360 due to the fact that the games you see appearing on the console is directly related to how easy it is to develop for. The 360’s kit is quite a bit more plausible. Blu-Ray is necessary to Next-Gen. Hell, MGS4 needs MORE than 50GB.  It's rediculous to assume that developers are going to catch on and learn in a year how to code a game running at an acceptable frame rate on 7 cpu core's above 30fps... |
|
|
|
Post by slapshot63 on Mar 1, 2007 15:37:02 GMT -5
MGS4 does that. Kojima's team knows how to use each console effectively and won't release a game until they are 1000% happy with it. Plus, Sony never said that those videos were real time. Others made the rumor up about it even though Sony only said they were TARGET renders. They were never meant for the public anyways (even though they knew they'd see them). They were to show what the PS3 is capable up (not fully) and never said the games would look EXACTLY like that. Sure, it's going to take time to really harness the PS3's power but devs are doing a great job thus far. Then again, the 360 has been out over a year, that's probably over two years of screwing with the hardware to get games where they are now. Give the PS3 time and amazing games will appear. As I said, remember that the PS2 was very difficult to program for at the beginning.
|
|
|
|
Post by malicious32dll on Mar 1, 2007 22:36:50 GMT -5
Yea, I suppose your right, I just did a little more research that has brought down my skepticism about the 7 cpu cores... Apparently they are threaded muuuccchh differently than a PC's, I was just thinking about it in terms of dual/quad core pc cpu... Anyways, I'm still quite concerned about how its going to turn out because I do like the console, and its predecessors. Its interesting actually making parallels between the launch of the original xbox and the ps2... Whereas the ps3 is kinda these days in the same seat the xbox was in all of those years ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by slapshot63 on Mar 3, 2007 8:53:40 GMT -5
Yea, I suppose your right, I just did a little more research that has brought down my skepticism about the 7 cpu cores... Apparently they are threaded muuuccchh differently than a PC's, I was just thinking about it in terms of dual/quad core pc cpu... Anyways, I'm still quite concerned about how its going to turn out because I do like the console, and its predecessors. Its interesting actually making parallels between the launch of the original xbox and the ps2... Whereas the ps3 is kinda these days in the same seat the xbox was in all of those years ago. Except that the PS3 has a built in fanbase of epic proportions. The Xbox, not so much. Most PS fans are waiting for a price drop. |
|
|
|
Post by malicious32dll on Apr 17, 2007 11:02:19 GMT -5
Just figured I'd ressurect this thread... with the new terrible news that sony's cutting the 20gb model... Well, there goes the sliver of a chance that I'd ever pick this up...
|
|
|
|
Post by eatawiiner on Apr 17, 2007 11:25:55 GMT -5
Depending on just how good Socom 4 is, I prolly will never buy a PS3. For the price' i'd rather get another computer since thats all it would be to me. People have always loved Sony but every since the PS1 was grouped with the 64, I knew i'd be on Nintendo's side till the day I dizzie.
|
|
|
|
Post by malicious32dll on Apr 17, 2007 12:11:04 GMT -5
yea, the only reason I was ever going to even think about or consider getting one is because I really want metal gear solid IV guns of the patriots
|
|
|
|
Post by eatawiiner on Apr 17, 2007 13:00:36 GMT -5
That game will be amazing im sure, but not worth the $600 price of admission for me. I'm sure ill be stuck at a buddies once THEY pick it up.
|
|
|
|
Post by slapshot63 on Apr 17, 2007 20:46:04 GMT -5
Just figured I'd ressurect this thread... with the new terrible news that sony's cutting the 20gb model... Well, there goes the sliver of a chance that I'd ever pick this up... The 20GB model was a waste of cash. Seriously, for what you get with the 60GB model, $100 more isn't that much. |
|
|
|
Post by malicious32dll on Apr 18, 2007 8:19:29 GMT -5
Yes it is. Most people it wont really be too nice shelling out 700 bucks for more space than they'll ever fill + controllers, games, etc... You could buy a pretty amazing computer at that cost.
|
|
|
|
Post by slapshot63 on Apr 19, 2007 11:23:33 GMT -5
Yes it is. Most people it wont really be too nice shelling out 700 bucks for more space than they'll ever fill + controllers, games, etc... You could buy a pretty amazing computer at that cost. The 60GB was outselling the 20GB 10:1. You can't deny that most people weren't interested in the 20GB. |
|
|
|
Post by malicious32dll on Apr 19, 2007 11:44:34 GMT -5
Thats probably because most people don't even know what a gigabyte is...
|
|
|
|
Post by slapshot63 on Apr 19, 2007 20:45:15 GMT -5
Thats probably because most people don't even know what a gigabyte is... Even if that was the case, they still know what an extra $100 is and seeing that people were willing to pay the extra cash for the 60GB model means that people realized that the 60GB model was a better deal. |
|
