[insane_cobra]

Now that I think about it, there's also a minuscule possibility PS3 would turn out

4) cheap with many features almost no one will use and with Sony taking a huge finantial blow with every console sold.

Maybe that would be the best outcome - we'd get a great console for little dough and Sony would be punished for their stupidity.

Really, what does "winning the console war round" mean? Selling the most consoles or making the most profit? Console manufacturers make money from games, not hardware (except for Nintendo, that is) so if Sony would lose, say, $200 per every PS3 sold and they sold around 100 million... It would take a whole lotta games just to cover the losses.

[SoccerDude28]

Originally Posted by insane_cobra

Now that I think about it, there's also a minuscule possibility PS3 would turn out

4) cheap with many features almost no one will use and with Sony taking a huge finantial blow with every console sold.

Maybe that would be the best outcome - we'd get a great console for little dough and Sony would be punished for their stupidity.

Really, what does "winning the console war round" mean? Selling the most consoles or making the most profit? Console manufacturers make money from games, not hardware (except for Nintendo, that is) so if Sony would lose, say, $200 per every PS3 sold and they sold around 100 million... It would take a whole lotta games just to cover the losses.

Why does the PS3 piss you off so much? If you really think it is that stupid don't buy it I personally can't wait playing Okami on a PS3, and seeing a new Ratchet and Clank, and what the Colossus team has in store. All the rest is marketting mumbo jumbo, but if there is one thing I like about the PS brand, is the number of good games for the system. Just check GDC this year and look at the candidates for game of the year. How many are PS exclusive. Sony is a great publisher of games IMO.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

I want my 360 first, but would plan on getting a PS3 perhaps next year if I'm inclined. Yes, there are marvelous games currently for the Sony consoles, but I can't possibly overwhelm myself with two consoles at once, even if I could afford it.

[tabacco]

I only bought my ps2 for Katamari.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Am I surprised?

[SoccerDude28]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

I want my 360 first, but would plan on getting a PS3 perhaps next year if I'm inclined. Yes, there are marvelous games currently for the Sony consoles, but I can't possibly overwhelm myself with two consoles at once, even if I could afford it.

That's the attitude. MS also has some great exclusives as well with those Bioware exclusives and possibly Gears of War. I personally am planning to get all 3 eventually, but I think 360 and PS3 first.

[SoccerDude28]

Originally Posted by tabacco

I only bought my ps2 for Katamari.

You should try guitar Hero. That game rocks.

[tabacco]

Originally Posted by SoccerDude28

You should try guitar Hero. That game rocks.

I know, I know. First I've got to work through the massive backlog of to-play games for other systems, though (they've had more time to build up backlogs).

[avatar_58]

My current backlog of games is pretty big Damn Oblivion.....

[insane_cobra]

Originally Posted by SoccerDude28

Why does the PS3 piss you off so much?

What pisses me off is Sony's attitude ("PS3 is not a games machine") and their cockiness ("yes, that's real ingame footage", and when it was proven that they lied they were like "so what?"). Another thing that gets on my nerves is the fact that PS3 is so blown out of proportion. And I don't mean overhyped, I mean stuffed with useless things that just add to the price. I don't want a gaming machine that tries to be everything, I only want to play games!

All the rest is marketting mumbo jumbo, but if there is one thing I like about the PS brand, is the number of good games for the system.

True, there are loads, but just because PS2 is the most widesprerad platform. If we're talking about percentages, things don't look thet swell. I think the numbers could be a lot more even this time around, with Sony taking just a slight lead (except in Japan, of course) so we might see more good games on other platforms as well.

All that said, Sony's own studios are without a doubt responsible for some purely amazing games.

Just check GDC this year and look at the candidates for game of the year. How many are PS exclusive.

Um, how many? Exactly none left that much of an impression on me, if we ignore some PS2 games which are in production for some time now (i.e. Okami).

[SoccerDude28]

Originally Posted by insane_cobra

What pisses me off is Sony's attitude ("PS3 is not a games machine") and their cockiness ("yes, that's real ingame footage", and when it was proven that they lied they were like "so what?"). Another thing that gets on my nerves is the fact that PS3 is so blown out of proportion. And I don't mean overhyped, I mean stuffed with useless things that just add to the price. I don't want a gaming machine that tries to be everything, I only want to play games!

Well technically it is not solely a game machine. It can play movies, and according to what we know about their online, you can download movies, music etc... so it offers more than just games.
As far as the Killzone footage, everyone in the universe knows it was footage but who cares? E3 is all fake, and all about creating buzz. I would hold my judgement on the console till when it is releaesed, not based on Sony's marketting.
As far as the cost, You don't even know how much it's gonna cost and you are ranting about it. How about we wait till we see how much it is actually going to cost

Originally Posted by insane_cobra

Um, how many? Exactly none left that much of an impression on me, if we ignore some PS2 games which are in production for some time now (i.e. Okami).

God of War, Guitar Hero, and Shadow of the Colossus, with the last one taking almost every award out there. And if Resident Evil was there, it would have been nominated as well (although that is not an exclusive).

[jjacob]

Originally Posted by SoccerDude28

Well technically it is not solely a game machine. It can play movies, and according to what we know about their online, you can download movies, music etc... so it offers more than just games.
As far as the Killzone footage, everyone in the universe knows it was footage but who cares? E3 is all fake, and all about creating buzz. I would hold my judgement on the console till when it is releaesed, not based on Sony's marketting.
As far as the cost, You don't even know how much it's gonna cost and you are ranting about it. How about we wait till we see how much it is actually going to cost

€599 at most (meaning anywhere from €499-€599) according to Sony France Which means I'll be waiting atleast one or two years before I get one, when it'd be about half that price, with less technical issues and perhaps a slimmer design. Don't know what this will mean for the US price, but experience tells us that euros roughly translate to dollars in these matters, meaning $500-$600 (d'oh! you lucky sobs! ).

[SoccerDude28]

Originally Posted by jjacob

€599 at most (meaning anywhere from €499-€599) according to Sony France Which means I'll be waiting atleast one or two years before I get one, when it'd be about half that price, with less technical issues and perhaps a slimmer design. Don't know what this will mean for the US price, but experience tells us that euros roughly translate to dollars in these matters, meaning $500-$600 (d'oh! you lucky sobs! ).

I think 500 sounds like the magic number right now.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

$500? F*** that! I'd rather shell out just $400 for an Xbox 360 now.

[jjacob]

Especially with Xboxes priced a mere €100 right now Anyway, I'm guessing they're going to release two versions, but more traditional than with the 360; 500 for the vanilla edition, with one controller, no game and 600 for a premium edition with two controllers and one game, or something.

[insane_cobra]

Originally Posted by SoccerDude28

As far as the Killzone footage, everyone in the universe knows it was footage but who cares? E3 is all fake, and all about creating buzz.

I care and so should you. Showing fake footage is one thing and lying to people's faces when specifically asked about it something completely different.

As far as the cost, You don't even know how much it's gonna cost and you are ranting about it. How about we wait till we see how much it is actually going to cost

You're missing the point. Whatever the final price, it would've been lower were it not for those questionable additions.

God of War, Guitar Hero, and Shadow of the Colossus, with the last one taking almost every award out there. And if Resident Evil was there, it would have been nominated as well (although that is not an exclusive).

Oh, those, you're right.
All awesome, I just somehow forgot about them, placed them in the previous year.
What I really wanted to say was none of the announced (PS3) games seem that interesting to me, sans the next gen Ratchet & Clank.

Anyway, the whole price thing was just a case of poor translation.

[SoccerDude28]

Originally Posted by insane_cobra

I care and so should you. Showing fake footage is one thing and lying to people's faces when specifically asked about it something completely different.

From what I understood from Sony, they said that they are striving for these graphics. They didn't even have a devkit in E3, and they were showing Unreal 3 on a dual SLI PC setup. MS was doing that also in their booth.

I'm honestly glad that it won't look as good as the footage, so we can finally lay off the graphics debate and bickering between these 2 companies and concentrate on what really matters, gameplay.

I am more excited about the PS3 because of the games I played on the PS2 rather than how many pixels it is going to push on my screen. Having a 1500+ library of games available for it at launch is a huge plus. I can just sell my PS2 and buy a PS3. With the 360, sell the XBOX, and you'll be left with some gems of XBOX games that are unplayable on the new console. If it is 500, c'est la vie. I already think 400 is a lot for a console, so I'll just wait like I did this gen.

Originally Posted by insane_cobra

You're missing the point. Whatever the final price, it would've been lower were it not for those questionable additions

Blu-ray maybe, but then it might be a good deal if the drive becomes the standard. Japanese developers especially really care about it and weren't too enthusiastic that Microsoft excluded an HD capable drive, and Microsoft might have to accomodate it somehow with an extension drive a few years from now. That will be just pushing the price to the future.

As far as the cell goes, well that's the architecture they went with, and I am not a hardware guy to tell you if that is a good decision or not. I believe it might have been a mistake, because they chose brute force over practicality and ease of programming, but the PS2 was a bitch to program for and it still has the biggest library of games of all 3 consoles. With everyone and their mother adopting the unreal engine that is going to run on both consoles, it shouldn't be much of a problem to do multi-platform development.

[insane_cobra]

Originally Posted by SoccerDude28

From what I understood from Sony, they said that they are striving for these graphics.

Yes, but only after it was proven those videos were prerendered. Here's a video of SCEA's Executive Vice President claiming Killzone footage is real gameplay and not smoke and mirrors.

I am more excited about the PS3 because of the games I played on the PS2 rather than how many pixels it is going to push on my screen. Having a 1500+ library of games available for it at launch is a huge plus.

Not really, you can get a PS2 for the (presumed) price of two PS3 games. While Sony's certainly to be applauded for making PS3 mostly - not totally - backwards compatible, that's hardly a selling point.

That will be just pushing the price to the future.

...when everything's cheaper, better, and it's clear who's winning the format war. Plus, people who have no need for a next gen video player (like me and others who are still perfectly happy with their DVDs) don't have to spend any money on it.

As far as the cell goes, well that's the architecture they went with, and I am not a hardware guy to tell you if that is a good decision or not. I believe it might have been a mistake, because they chose brute force over practicality and ease of programming, but the PS2 was a bitch to program for and it still has the biggest library of games of all 3 consoles.

I already stated my opinion on why that was so.

With everyone and their mother adopting the unreal engine that is going to run on both consoles, it shouldn't be much of a problem to do multi-platform development.

True, as far as graphic routines are concerned, but stuff running on CPUs, not GPUs, will be a bit more challenging to port. I do agree we'll see more multiplatform games in this generation, however. As development costs rise, companies will want to squeeze their games for every penny. But Sony is the biggest loser in that situation, PS2 had far more exclusives than both Xbox and GC. If we come to see more ports in the next few years, PS3 won't enjoy that advantage.

There are other hardly useful things that unnecessarily add to PS3's cost, but I already mentioned them.