[QUOTE="3picuri3"][QUOTE="NinjaMunkey01"]the online is lag free and easy to useFirstDiscoverythat's a total lie. PS3 uses P2P as much as MS, hence the server stability if often hinged on the users. when i played Warhawk / R1 back when I had a PS3 I had lag just as much as the 360. I DONT get lag on my PC when using dedicated servers, so it's certainly not an issue with my connection. hell, disagree with me? google PS3 lag and check out the many threads on the official boards. Actually those two games you mentioned are fantastic examples of console MP, and Sony did it right with them. With that said, XBL is overall a smoother service when it comes to client-based online gaming they were excellent fun when i could find a stable server, but they also had some terrible moments. along with TF2, COD4, SOCOM, etc, etc. i'm just saying it's a myth that the PS3 is 'lag-free'.
Further Proof the PS3 is Done. (article)
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="NinjaMunkey01"]the online is lag free and easy to use3picuri3that's a total lie. PS3 uses P2P as much as MS, hence the server stability if often hinged on the users. when i played Warhawk / R1 back when I had a PS3 I had lag just as much as the 360. I DONT get lag on my PC when using dedicated servers, so it's certainly not an issue with my connection. hell, disagree with me? google PS3 lag and check out the many threads on the official boards.
I have played many PS3 games online with no lag even once. When I owned a 360 about a third of my games lagged when I played online. The 360 gets RRoD too and PS3 doesn't.
The funny thing is that probably in the end Sony will be laughing at all of this. lusitanogamerThey shouldn't. They have completely bungled their way through this generation so far. They should be ashamed of themselves. They have a superior product a ton of good will from the last generation and fantastic first party developers, yet all they have done is coast on that instead of making the proper moves to maintain their market presence.
I don't think anybody could've beat Nintendo this gen, but they could have certainly done a lot better than what they have been doing. The management of the PS3 has been TERRIBLE. If they sit back and laugh at this, then they have learned nothing and you can expect the same lackluster nonsense in the future.
[QUOTE="3picuri3"][QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]Done in what sense? Its done in that it won't be the industry leader, but I don't think for a second that its done in the sense of being a good and compelling system.SpruceCaboosei think if it was good & compelling enough it would be selling better. problem is most people already have a current gen console, so that takes multiplats out of the equation for the most part. what are you left with? sequels to PS2 games that don't interest everybody, and LBP. i'm not being a fanboy when I say only 2 exclusives on the system interest me, it's the truth. i think it holds true for many gamers... if not, then tell me why PS3 software sells so poorly, and why the hardware continues to lag despite it being 'good & compelling'. Good and compelling to me. Your dislike of the PS3 and its software is well known, so I don't think anything beyond free PS3s would appeal to you. well that's exactly what someone who's ignorant of my stance would say. i've said openly many times i'm looking forward to buying one again when the price drops. i lined up for 12 hours to get one at launch mate, i sold it after a year of disappointment because i owned all 3 consoles and the PS3 was just collecting dust. i am dying to play VC, and LBP, and The Agency (mind you i'll get that on PC i think). so yeah, thanks for the pigeon-hole. want me to peg you? think i could do it better than you, and more accurately.
[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]Done in what sense? Its done in that it won't be the industry leader, but I don't think for a second that its done in the sense of being a good and compelling system.3picuri3i think if it was good & compelling enough it would be selling better. problem is most people already have a current gen console, so that takes multiplats out of the equation for the most part. what are you left with? sequels to PS2 games that don't interest everybody, and LBP. i'm not being a fanboy when I say only 2 exclusives on the system interest me, it's the truth. i think it holds true for many gamers... if not, then tell me why PS3 software sells so poorly, and why the hardware continues to lag despite it being 'good & compelling'.
the software selling poorly is as bad as a lie as the ps3 doesnt use p2p networking for alot of games. while its not as great with mulitplats like COD or GTA4 they still sell really well on the playstation wasnt it like 4 million COD4 copies sold on ps3 and 6-7 million on 360.... while the 360 version obviously sold more...its not like the ps3 version had a hard time breaking a million...and same thing can be said about gta4
but sony can do alot more marketing for thier exclusives...alot more
that's a total lie. PS3 uses P2P as much as MS, hence the server stability if often hinged on the users. when i played Warhawk / R1 back when I had a PS3 I had lag just as much as the 360. I DONT get lag on my PC when using dedicated servers, so it's certainly not an issue with my connection. hell, disagree with me? google PS3 lag and check out the many threads on the official boards.[QUOTE="3picuri3"][QUOTE="NinjaMunkey01"]the online is lag free and easy to usepatriots7672
I have played many PS3 games online with no lag even once. When I owned a 360 about a third of my games lagged when I played online. The 360 gets RRoD too and PS3 doesn't.
please don't make this more complicated than it is already. i said it's a lie that the PS3 is lag-free. that's a fact. i don't care about other consoles, because relative comparison doesn't make the lag disappear. /argument. thanks.i think if it was good & compelling enough it would be selling better. problem is most people already have a current gen console, so that takes multiplats out of the equation for the most part. what are you left with? sequels to PS2 games that don't interest everybody, and LBP. i'm not being a fanboy when I say only 2 exclusives on the system interest me, it's the truth. i think it holds true for many gamers... if not, then tell me why PS3 software sells so poorly, and why the hardware continues to lag despite it being 'good & compelling'.[QUOTE="3picuri3"][QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]Done in what sense? Its done in that it won't be the industry leader, but I don't think for a second that its done in the sense of being a good and compelling system.hyperboy152000
the software selling poorly is as bad as a lie as the ps3 doesnt use p2p networking for alot of games. while its not as great with mulitplats like COD or GTA4 they still sell really well on the playstation wasnt it like 4 million COD4 copies sold on ps3 and 6-7 million on 360.... while the 360 version obviously sold more...its not like the ps3 version had a hard time breaking a million...and same thing can be said about gta4
but sony can do alot more marketing for thier exclusives...alot more
might want to grab a sales chart mate. take a look at Sony 1st party sales, and exclusives, then get back to me ;). there are some exceptions as you noted, but in general the sales for the PS3 pale in comparison to other consoles given the adjustments of install base, etc.
HD Blu-ray pron will save PS3.Master-Thief-09Argh. Costs too much, especially when it has a built in internet browser w/ flash.
[QUOTE="3picuri3"][QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"] But it would have a been a totally different machine for that price, or Sony really would have gone bankrupt.blue_hazy_basiccould have dropped bluray. it's more of a necessity for next gen imo, not this. we haven't seen anything that 'needed' it (disk swapping is still fine for the majority of people). of course it's nice to be able to watch BRD films, but it would have been nicer not shelling out 800$ when I bought my launch PS3 :). and a larger install base would mean more games... I totally agree BR was not a clever move for the PS3, it was there simply to win the HD war. There you have it. Im willing to bet they thought they could not only win the HD war but the console war as well. However, I do believe they justified the gamble of it all by thinking that if they at least won the HD war then it was worth the risk. If BR continues to become the adopted format like DVD and VHS before it....$$. As gamers however, and more importantly Playstation fans, this has to be slightly dissapointing.
[QUOTE="hyperboy152000"][QUOTE="3picuri3"] that's a total lie. PS3 uses P2P as much as MS, hence the server stability if often hinged on the users. when i played Warhawk / R1 back when I had a PS3 I had lag just as much as the 360. I DONT get lag on my PC when using dedicated servers, so it's certainly not an issue with my connection. hell, disagree with me? google PS3 lag and check out the many threads on the official boards. 3picuri3
im not disagreeing with you....the socom servers used to be horrible even though they are dedicated, worse then COD4 was hen that game as laggy....but the r2 servers are smooth as butter when ever im on...even in full 60 player matches, but doesnt MS use P2p even with first party games?
it's up to the developers I think - you can google and find a list of P2P vs Dedicated server games for both consoles. used to be a chart floating around here. i'm not saying MS is lag free, i know it isn't because i've owned both consoles this gen. i'm just saying calling it 'lag-free' is an outright lie.well yea...thats a physical imopossiblity until we find a way of sending information faster then then the speed of light
The ps3 was finished in 2007 with that horrible price tag. I completely agree with the writer of that blog.Gh0st_Of_0nyxi ... just ... loled... the ps3 gets better every year. so you must be one cofused lemming.
[QUOTE="3picuri3"][QUOTE="hyperboy152000"]it's up to the developers I think - you can google and find a list of P2P vs Dedicated server games for both consoles. used to be a chart floating around here. i'm not saying MS is lag free, i know it isn't because i've owned both consoles this gen. i'm just saying calling it 'lag-free' is an outright lie.im not disagreeing with you....the socom servers used to be horrible even though they are dedicated, worse then COD4 was hen that game as laggy....but the r2 servers are smooth as butter when ever im on...even in full 60 player matches, but doesnt MS use P2p even with first party games?
hyperboy152000
well yea...thats a physical imopossiblity until we find a way of sending information faster then then the speed of light
or with dedicated servers in every city across the world :) that just costs an insane amount of coin though. i find building a good friends list of people that aren't idiots (i.e. play while downloading, streaming, over open wireless, etc) makes for a far more stable online experience on all consoles including PC ;). pub matches are just a way of asking for lag and a poor experience imho.
[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]Good and compelling to me. Your dislike of the PS3 and its software is well known, so I don't think anything beyond free PS3s would appeal to you.3picuri3well that's exactly what someone who's ignorant of my stance would say. i've said openly many times i'm looking forward to buying one again when the price drops. i lined up for 12 hours to get one at launch mate, i sold it after a year of disappointment because i owned all 3 consoles and the PS3 was just collecting dust. i am dying to play VC, and LBP, and The Agency (mind you i'll get that on PC i think). so yeah, thanks for the pigeon-hole. want me to peg you? think i could do it better than you, and more accurately.
Sorry, when you have dogged everything related to the PS3 in many many threads over the last few months, it comes off as you are anti-PS3. If you are not knee-jerk hating on the PS3, perhaps you could try aiming at more balance in your posting history.
And call me what you want. I make no qualms about what system I prefer, and in what order I would personally rank them.
Right now for me, its 360 > PS3 > PSP > DS > Wii, and I have not been a fan of PC gaming for a very long time. Those are my opinions, and I have held them for a while, but they are very mobile, and can and will change as games are released.
problem is most people already have a current gen console3picuri3Current generation consoles sales are still very far from reaching the numbers of the previous generations. The PS2 alone has sold more than 140 million consoles and it's still selling. How many current generation consoles have been sold? Believe me, there's still A LOT of consoles to be sold this generation.
[QUOTE="Master-Thief-09"]HD Blu-ray pron will save PS3.angelkimneArgh. Costs too much, especially when it has a built in internet browser w/ flash. Most of those sites have copyrighted material (i.e. illegal) and are sub HD. Still a good point though.
[QUOTE="hyperboy152000"][QUOTE="3picuri3"] i think if it was good & compelling enough it would be selling better. problem is most people already have a current gen console, so that takes multiplats out of the equation for the most part. what are you left with? sequels to PS2 games that don't interest everybody, and LBP. i'm not being a fanboy when I say only 2 exclusives on the system interest me, it's the truth. i think it holds true for many gamers... if not, then tell me why PS3 software sells so poorly, and why the hardware continues to lag despite it being 'good & compelling'.3picuri3
the software selling poorly is as bad as a lie as the ps3 doesnt use p2p networking for alot of games. while its not as great with mulitplats like COD or GTA4 they still sell really well on the playstation wasnt it like 4 million COD4 copies sold on ps3 and 6-7 million on 360.... while the 360 version obviously sold more...its not like the ps3 version had a hard time breaking a million...and same thing can be said about gta4
but sony can do alot more marketing for thier exclusives...alot more
might want to grab a sales chart mate. take a look at Sony 1st party sales, and exclusives, then get back to me ;). there are some exceptions as you noted, but in general the sales for the PS3 pale in comparison to other consoles given the adjustments of install base, etc.well exclusives last year have done poorly LBP and resistance 2 being the biggest dissappointments but they still broke the million mark by the end of 08 hich is better then not selling a million its not like the WII where games struggle to make a million if it doesnt have the nintendo brand on it
plus its increasingly harder to track game sales since some games like warhawk or socom, the amount downloaded isnt tracked at all,
[QUOTE="FirstDiscovery"]Had it not been for the recession the PS3 wouldve been okay Sad really that a great console is suffering. Whats worse is that it could take down Sony with it. With that said, if the recession isnt too bad, itll hold steady, Sony will soon lower its costs (while they push the PSP and PS2) and eventually theyll break even on ithyperboy152000
sony wont die......at its worst it will just not make a console for a generation if they had to
If it gets too bad, then Sony will call quits on the PS3. There electronics are pricey, while yes they are the best and only a little but above everything else, these items are all luxuries, and Sony have a tag attached to them saying 'high priced' Itll be a sad day indeed if Sony were to go out of business, and if they were too, the PS3 would indeed be to blame for a large part of it. There games operations is huge part of their business yet all the PS3 has done is eat their money. To some extent its their fault, they underestimated the 360 GROSSLY and failed to deliver, on the other hand, MS provided a console right from launch with a good library of games even if the hardware is a little skimp when it comes to features (though that is now solved with 60gb HDDs and HDMI) MS simply played their cards right, something Sony brushed away. If Sony to quit the gaming business, they will have Blu-Ray royalties to live off and with push their players. Also their handheld market isnt too bad, and the PS2 still sells, so maybe those will be enough to get them through the next yearswell that's exactly what someone who's ignorant of my stance would say. i've said openly many times i'm looking forward to buying one again when the price drops. i lined up for 12 hours to get one at launch mate, i sold it after a year of disappointment because i owned all 3 consoles and the PS3 was just collecting dust. i am dying to play VC, and LBP, and The Agency (mind you i'll get that on PC i think). so yeah, thanks for the pigeon-hole. want me to peg you? think i could do it better than you, and more accurately.[QUOTE="3picuri3"][QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]Good and compelling to me. Your dislike of the PS3 and its software is well known, so I don't think anything beyond free PS3s would appeal to you.SpruceCaboose
Sorry, when you have dogged everything related to the PS3 in many many threads over the last few months, it comes off as you are anti-PS3. If you are not knee-jerk hating on the PS3, perhaps you could try aiming at more balance in your posting history.
And call me what you want. I make no qualms about what system I prefer, and in what order I would personally rank them.
Right now for me, its 360 > PS3 > PSP > DS > Wii, and I have not been a fan of PC gaming for a very long time. Those are my opinions, and I have held them for a while, but they are very mobile, and can and will change as games are released.
why use balance when I'm actually quite angry with Sony? i used to be a hardcore cow through PS1/PS2. this gen was INCREDIBLY disappointing for the first couple of years, arguably 2008 was the only really good year the system had depending on your preferences. so yeah, i won't aim for more balance - i'll react how i'll react to certain things based on my experience & disappointments. if it doesn't line-up with your views i apologize, but it's not my goal to be middle-of-the-road or status quo to please a few people that dislike my stance from time to time.
and i wouldn't try to peg you as anything, it was more of a rhetorical. i don't attack people for their views or opinions, i respect every opinion - unless it impedes on the rights & freedoms of others ;). i ask nothing more than the same from others.
just try to understand that Sony did string a lot of people along. they were very slow getting SDK out. they had very few games lined up for early adopters. they fell short on many promises. many games flopped in the first 2 years. it was not a happy year for Sony fans. i understand things are getting better, but i'm still bitter about shelling out the 1000$ i did with games & controllers at launch. i'm still sore over the way Sony has handled marketing & PR.
[QUOTE="hyperboy152000"][QUOTE="3picuri3"] it's up to the developers I think - you can google and find a list of P2P vs Dedicated server games for both consoles. used to be a chart floating around here. i'm not saying MS is lag free, i know it isn't because i've owned both consoles this gen. i'm just saying calling it 'lag-free' is an outright lie.3picuri3
well yea...thats a physical imopossiblity until we find a way of sending information faster then then the speed of light
or with dedicated servers in every city across the world :) that just costs an insane amount of coin though. i find building a good friends list of people that aren't idiots (i.e. play while downloading, streaming, over open wireless, etc) makes for a far more stable online experience on all consoles including PC ;). pub matches are just a way of asking for lag and a poor experience imho.true, i cant stand playing public matches unless a friend is over and wants to check out a game...other then that i stick to clan/party matches..... sept when i played COD4, sure it had bad lag at times but it was much easier to get back into a different game in COD then just about any other game ive played and occationally ill play competative R2 in a public room....but thats about it
[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]Done in what sense? Its done in that it won't be the industry leader, but I don't think for a second that its done in the sense of being a good and compelling system.3picuri3i think if it was good & compelling enough it would be selling better. problem is most people already have a current gen console, so that takes multiplats out of the equation for the most part. what are you left with? sequels to PS2 games that don't interest everybody, and LBP. i'm not being a fanboy when I say only 2 exclusives on the system interest me, it's the truth. i think it holds true for many gamers... if not, then tell me why PS3 software sells so poorly, and why the hardware continues to lag despite it being 'good & compelling'.
the only thing not compelling about the PS 3 is it's price tag to say it's the games would have been a good argument in 2006, but that argument died already and are you saying MGS 4 don't interest anyone or Uncharted or Killzone 2 you really need to take your fan boy goggles off.
If it was about the merchandise then when the PS 3 had it's price cut it would not have been able to outsell the 360 for 8 months forcing the 360 to have a price cut and if it was not doing good m$ would have had a much bigger lead then the 8 million it had from that 1 year head start.
the truth is the PS 3 is not finished it's just beginning sony made a gamble and they will stick with it till the end it's going to be a tough fight for m$ especially after the price cut.
i think if it was good & compelling enough it would be selling better. problem is most people already have a current gen console, so that takes multiplats out of the equation for the most part. what are you left with? sequels to PS2 games that don't interest everybody, and LBP. i'm not being a fanboy when I say only 2 exclusives on the system interest me, it's the truth. i think it holds true for many gamers... if not, then tell me why PS3 software sells so poorly, and why the hardware continues to lag despite it being 'good & compelling'.[QUOTE="3picuri3"][QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]Done in what sense? Its done in that it won't be the industry leader, but I don't think for a second that its done in the sense of being a good and compelling system.tek91
the only thing not compelling about the PS 3 is it's price tag to say it's the games would have been a good argument in 2006, but that argument died already and are you saying MGS 4 don't interest anyone or Uncharted or Killzone 2 you really need to take your fan boy goggles off.
If it was about the merchandise then when the PS 3 had it's price cut it would not have been able to outsell the 360 for 8 months forcing the 360 to have a price cut and if it was not doing good m$ would have had a much bigger lead then the 8 million it had from that 1 year head start.
the truth is the PS 3 is not finished it's just beginning sony made a gamble and they will stick with it till the end it's going to be a tough fight for m$ especially after the price cut.
i'd argue the fanboy is the person that thinks those games have to appeal to everyone.i can say with all honesty that i gave MGS4 / Uncharted many chances. i never felt compelled to finish either. and i was a huge fan of MGS1, so take that as you will. Uncharted just felt like tomb raider meets gears, and i've never really liked either to be honest.
and KZ2? seriously? if we've had anything shoved down our gullets this gen it's been FPS. i'm sick to death of them right now.
LBP, and VC interest me the most. almost enough to make me buy the system again. but with a rumored price cut i'll wait.
so yeah. deal with it i guess. my opinion / taste differs from yours.
[QUOTE="hyperboy152000"][QUOTE="FirstDiscovery"]Had it not been for the recession the PS3 wouldve been okay Sad really that a great console is suffering. Whats worse is that it could take down Sony with it. With that said, if the recession isnt too bad, itll hold steady, Sony will soon lower its costs (while they push the PSP and PS2) and eventually theyll break even on itFirstDiscovery
sony wont die......at its worst it will just not make a console for a generation if they had to
If it gets too bad, then Sony will call quits on the PS3. There electronics are pricey, while yes they are the best and only a little but above everything else, these items are all luxuries, and Sony have a tag attached to them saying 'high priced' Itll be a sad day indeed if Sony were to go out of business, and if they were too, the PS3 would indeed be to blame for a large part of it. There games operations is huge part of their business yet all the PS3 has done is eat their money. To some extent its their fault, they underestimated the 360 GROSSLY and failed to deliver, on the other hand, MS provided a console right from launch with a good library of games even if the hardware is a little skimp when it comes to features (though that is now solved with 60gb HDDs and HDMI) MS simply played their cards right, something Sony brushed away. If Sony to quit the gaming business, they will have Blu-Ray royalties to live off and with push their players. Also their handheld market isnt too bad, and the PS2 still sells, so maybe those will be enough to get them through the next yearsi think if nintendo can survive and come back from the gamecube when they have always been a game/console maker, anything can happen
[QUOTE="Master-Thief-09"]HD Blu-ray pron will save PS3.angelkimneArgh. Costs too much, especially when it has a built in internet browser w/ flash. :lol: So true, so very, very true. :lol:
I can see where you are coming from, and I was actually not a Sony fan from the PS2 era (DREs), and I got the system in 2007, so my experience has been quite pleasant. But to each their own. And yes, Sony made some terrible decisions this generation, and they are paying for it, but to me, the PS3 has been a very good system, and I have about 20 titles that I have thoroughly enjoyed, so I have been pleased.why use balance when I'm actually quite angry with Sony? i used to be a hardcore cow through PS1/PS2. this gen was INCREDIBLY disappointing for the first couple of years, arguably 2008 was the only really good year the system had depending on your preferences. so yeah, i won't aim for more balance - i'll react how i'll react to certain things based on my experience & disappointments. if it doesn't line-up with your views i apologize, but it's not my goal to be middle-of-the-road or status quo to please a few people that dislike my stance from time to time.
and i wouldn't try to peg you as anything, it was more of a rhetorical. i don't attack people for their views or opinions, i respect every opinion - unless it impedes on the rights & freedoms of others ;). i ask nothing more than the same from others.
just try to understand that Sony did string a lot of people along. they were very slow getting SDK out. they had very few games lined up for early adopters. they fell short on many promises. many games flopped in the first 2 years. it was not a happy year for Sony fans. i understand things are getting better, but i'm still bitter about shelling out the 1000$ i did with games & controllers at launch. i'm still sore over the way Sony has handled marketing & PR.
3picuri3
Sonys only saving grace is that this generation of consoles will most likely last longer than previous generations. They still have a chance to get their act together.heretrixyou speak wise words. All hope is not lost, but time is running out. they need to get those exclusives out the gate fast and drop the price asap, and advertise properly, if they can manage to do all this, Sony will be in a very good and comfortable position.
[QUOTE="FirstDiscovery"][QUOTE="hyperboy152000"]If it gets too bad, then Sony will call quits on the PS3. There electronics are pricey, while yes they are the best and only a little but above everything else, these items are all luxuries, and Sony have a tag attached to them saying 'high priced' Itll be a sad day indeed if Sony were to go out of business, and if they were too, the PS3 would indeed be to blame for a large part of it. There games operations is huge part of their business yet all the PS3 has done is eat their money. To some extent its their fault, they underestimated the 360 GROSSLY and failed to deliver, on the other hand, MS provided a console right from launch with a good library of games even if the hardware is a little skimp when it comes to features (though that is now solved with 60gb HDDs and HDMI) MS simply played their cards right, something Sony brushed away. If Sony to quit the gaming business, they will have Blu-Ray royalties to live off and with push their players. Also their handheld market isnt too bad, and the PS2 still sells, so maybe those will be enough to get them through the next yearssony wont die......at its worst it will just not make a console for a generation if they had to
hyperboy152000
i think if nintendo can survive and come back from the gamecube when they have always been a game/console maker, anything can happen
Nintendo made a profit off the GC, and had the GBA and DS to back them up. Also, the Wii caters to the commons, the PS3 does not. Sony on the other hand have NO reliable source of revenue WHATSOEVER MS have got a price advantage as well their software side where demand will never fluctuate regardless of economic conditions
Done, done !! How can the PS3 be done when Sony has yet to tell us this gen has even started ? :P
Anyway, If the PS3 was the MS console this gen then all okay because they had nowhere to go but up but that's not the case and Sony, with the PS3 this gen has hardly any hope of seeing even half the success they enjoyed last gen so both publications & gamers alike are seeing it as Failure.
Yes but Sony have achieved one of their goals and that is get Blu-Ray to win Also, it doesnt matter how many units they sell, long as they make money. Do you really think MS are concerned where their userbase will end up given as it is theyve achieved almost all their goals? The only one remaining is Japan, and to get a greater market presence in EUDone, done !! How can the PS3 be done when Sony has yet to tell us this gen has even started ? :P
Anyway, If the PS3 was the MS console this gen then all okay because they had nowhere to go but up but that's not the case and Sony, with the PS3 this gen has hardly any hope of seeing even half the success they enjoyed last gen so both publications & gamers alike are seeing it as Failure.
SecretPolice
[QUOTE="tek91"][QUOTE="3picuri3"] i think if it was good & compelling enough it would be selling better. problem is most people already have a current gen console, so that takes multiplats out of the equation for the most part. what are you left with? sequels to PS2 games that don't interest everybody, and LBP. i'm not being a fanboy when I say only 2 exclusives on the system interest me, it's the truth. i think it holds true for many gamers... if not, then tell me why PS3 software sells so poorly, and why the hardware continues to lag despite it being 'good & compelling'.3picuri3
the only thing not compelling about the PS 3 is it's price tag to say it's the games would have been a good argument in 2006, but that argument died already and are you saying MGS 4 don't interest anyone or Uncharted or Killzone 2 you really need to take your fan boy goggles off.
If it was about the merchandise then when the PS 3 had it's price cut it would not have been able to outsell the 360 for 8 months forcing the 360 to have a price cut and if it was not doing good m$ would have had a much bigger lead then the 8 million it had from that 1 year head start.
the truth is the PS 3 is not finished it's just beginning sony made a gamble and they will stick with it till the end it's going to be a tough fight for m$ especially after the price cut.
i'd argue the fanboy is the person that thinks those games have to appeal to everyone.i can say with all honesty that i gave MGS4 / Uncharted many chances. i never felt compelled to finish either. and i was a huge fan of MGS1, so take that as you will. Uncharted just felt like tomb raider meets gears, and i've never really liked either to be honest.
and KZ2? seriously? if we've had anything shoved down our gullets this gen it's been FPS. i'm sick to death of them right now.
LBP, and VC interest me the most. almost enough to make me buy the system again. but with a rumored price cut i'll wait.
so yeah. deal with it i guess. my opinion / taste differs from yours.
Dude everything you said was I this and I that, you don't speak for everyoneyou may not like those games but millions find them compelling.
I personally played Halo and Gears on my pc and find them to be genetic shooters to try to make you feel bad ass which is a genre that's been done to death and love Little Big Planet and MGS 4 way better.
[QUOTE="hyperboy152000"][QUOTE="FirstDiscovery"]If it gets too bad, then Sony will call quits on the PS3. There electronics are pricey, while yes they are the best and only a little but above everything else, these items are all luxuries, and Sony have a tag attached to them saying 'high priced' Itll be a sad day indeed if Sony were to go out of business, and if they were too, the PS3 would indeed be to blame for a large part of it. There games operations is huge part of their business yet all the PS3 has done is eat their money. To some extent its their fault, they underestimated the 360 GROSSLY and failed to deliver, on the other hand, MS provided a console right from launch with a good library of games even if the hardware is a little skimp when it comes to features (though that is now solved with 60gb HDDs and HDMI) MS simply played their cards right, something Sony brushed away. If Sony to quit the gaming business, they will have Blu-Ray royalties to live off and with push their players. Also their handheld market isnt too bad, and the PS2 still sells, so maybe those will be enough to get them through the next yearsFirstDiscovery
i think if nintendo can survive and come back from the gamecube when they have always been a game/console maker, anything can happen
Nintendo made a profit off the GC, and had the GBA and DS to back them up. Also, the Wii caters to the commons, the PS3 does not. Sony on the other hand have NO reliable source of revenue WHATSOEVER MS have got a price advantage as well their software side where demand will never fluctuate regardless of economic conditionsim pretty sure every division of sony makes a profit sept their gaming devsion which coincidently costs them more then what they are making in other divisions, and i never said anything about nintendo not making a profit so you dont need to get into a little fit because it was still in last place last gen but now nintendo is undisputably in the lead with the most consoles sold not to mention the DS which could very well float nintendo even without the wii
[QUOTE="FirstDiscovery"][QUOTE="hyperboy152000"]Nintendo made a profit off the GC, and had the GBA and DS to back them up. Also, the Wii caters to the commons, the PS3 does not. Sony on the other hand have NO reliable source of revenue WHATSOEVER MS have got a price advantage as well their software side where demand will never fluctuate regardless of economic conditionsi think if nintendo can survive and come back from the gamecube when they have always been a game/console maker, anything can happen
hyperboy152000
im pretty sure every division of sony makes a profit sept their gaming devsion which coincidently costs them more then what they are making in other divisions, and i never said anything about nintendo not making a profit so you dont need to get into a little fit because it was still in last place last gen but now nintendo is undisputably in the lead with the most consoles sold not to mention the DS which could very well float nintendo even without the wii
I got into a fit because i said Nintendo makes money off the GC, GBA and DS:? And as ive said, their electronics are luxury items, it people feel the pinch, they wont really care about getting the latest HDTV let alone the best brand.Why has everyone waited till just before a great run of games for PS3 to start saying this stuff? when things are actually looking the best in the consoles life people spew this garbage.Brainkiller05Because Sonys business as a whole is suffering and i dont know about you, but the PS3 actually sold less than it would in the last few months with MS making a big come back Cause for concern? Nah...
[QUOTE="SecretPolice"]Yes but Sony have achieved one of their goals and that is get Blu-Ray to win Also, it doesnt matter how many units they sell, long as they make money. Do you really think MS are concerned where their userbase will end up given as it is theyve achieved almost all their goals? The only one remaining is Japan, and to get a greater market presence in EUMaybe you missed my point. Sony had a boat load of past success in the VG market to live up to where MS, not so much. As far as B.R. - me thinks if Sony knew yesterday what it knows today, They would have launched a machine in 2005 without Cell or B.R. and absolutely trounced the competition which is no small matter, VG business is these days is truly Big business and some may say, ( including me :P ) bigger then the B.R. format being won by Sony.Done, done !! How can the PS3 be done when Sony has yet to tell us this gen has even started ? :P
Anyway, If the PS3 was the MS console this gen then all okay because they had nowhere to go but up but that's not the case and Sony, with the PS3 this gen has hardly any hope of seeing even half the success they enjoyed last gen so both publications & gamers alike are seeing it as Failure.
FirstDiscovery
[QUOTE="hyperboy152000"][QUOTE="FirstDiscovery"] Nintendo made a profit off the GC, and had the GBA and DS to back them up. Also, the Wii caters to the commons, the PS3 does not. Sony on the other hand have NO reliable source of revenue WHATSOEVER MS have got a price advantage as well their software side where demand will never fluctuate regardless of economic conditions FirstDiscovery
im pretty sure every division of sony makes a profit sept their gaming devsion which coincidently costs them more then what they are making in other divisions, and i never said anything about nintendo not making a profit so you dont need to get into a little fit because it was still in last place last gen but now nintendo is undisputably in the lead with the most consoles sold not to mention the DS which could very well float nintendo even without the wii
I got into a fit because i said Nintendo makes money off the GC, GBA and DS:? And as ive said, their electronics are luxury items, it people feel the pinch, they wont really care about getting the latest HDTV let alone the best brand.nah i was more making a referance to people that get into a fit when anyone talk "bad" about nintendo....i should have articulated that but it wasnt against you, just a general statement, besides didnt sony say at some point late last year that they ere finally making a profit off of the gaming division?
[QUOTE="FirstDiscovery"][QUOTE="SecretPolice"]Yes but Sony have achieved one of their goals and that is get Blu-Ray to win Also, it doesnt matter how many units they sell, long as they make money. Do you really think MS are concerned where their userbase will end up given as it is theyve achieved almost all their goals? The only one remaining is Japan, and to get a greater market presence in EUMaybe you missed my point. Sony had a boat load of past success in the VG market to live up to where MS, not so much. As far as B.R. - me thinks if Sony knew yesterday what it knows today, They would have launched a machine in 2005 without Cell or B.R. and absolutely trounced the competition which is no small matter, VG business is these days is truly Big business and some may say, ( including me :P ) bigger then the B.R. format being won by Sony.Done, done !! How can the PS3 be done when Sony has yet to tell us this gen has even started ? :P
Anyway, If the PS3 was the MS console this gen then all okay because they had nowhere to go but up but that's not the case and Sony, with the PS3 this gen has hardly any hope of seeing even half the success they enjoyed last gen so both publications & gamers alike are seeing it as Failure.
SecretPolice
you know if the cell wasnt developed then MS would have had a different CPU as well, the whole "game" would have changed
Done, done !! How can the PS3 be done when Sony has yet to tell us this gen has even started ? :P
Anyway, If the PS3 was the MS console this gen then all okay because they had nowhere to go but up but that's not the case and Sony, with the PS3 this gen has hardly any hope of seeing even half the success they enjoyed last gen so both publications & gamers alike are seeing it as Failure.
Yes but Sony have achieved one of their goals and that is get Blu-Ray to win Also, it doesnt matter how many units they sell, long as they make money. Do you really think MS are concerned where their userbase will end up given as it is theyve achieved almost all their goals? The only one remaining is Japan, and to get a greater market presence in EUMaybe you missed my point. Sony had a boat load of past success in the VG market to live up to where MS, not so much. As far as B.R. - me thinks if Sony knew yesterday what it knows today, They would have launched a machine in 2005 without Cell or B.R. and absolutely trounced the competition which is no small matter, VG business is these days is truly Big business and some may say, ( including me :P ) bigger then the B.R. format being won by Sony. I don't know if they would have released differently. IThe format war has a serious long term payout that may rival the VG industry. Also, I don't think the PS3 is out by any means. I just don't think it will take 2nd place...but still turn a profit at some point and be a huge component in their format war victory strategy.[QUOTE="3picuri3"]I can see where you are coming from, and I was actually not a Sony fan from the PS2 era (DREs), and I got the system in 2007, so my experience has been quite pleasant. But to each their own. And yes, Sony made some terrible decisions this generation, and they are paying for it, but to me, the PS3 has been a very good system, and I have about 20 titles that I have thoroughly enjoyed, so I have been pleased. well i'm glad you had a better experience, and i fully admit things have been getting progressively better since I ditched mine - am looking forward to picking one up when the price drops, just hope Sony makes some killer announcements before then ;)why use balance when I'm actually quite angry with Sony? i used to be a hardcore cow through PS1/PS2. this gen was INCREDIBLY disappointing for the first couple of years, arguably 2008 was the only really good year the system had depending on your preferences. so yeah, i won't aim for more balance - i'll react how i'll react to certain things based on my experience & disappointments. if it doesn't line-up with your views i apologize, but it's not my goal to be middle-of-the-road or status quo to please a few people that dislike my stance from time to time.
and i wouldn't try to peg you as anything, it was more of a rhetorical. i don't attack people for their views or opinions, i respect every opinion - unless it impedes on the rights & freedoms of others ;). i ask nothing more than the same from others.
just try to understand that Sony did string a lot of people along. they were very slow getting SDK out. they had very few games lined up for early adopters. they fell short on many promises. many games flopped in the first 2 years. it was not a happy year for Sony fans. i understand things are getting better, but i'm still bitter about shelling out the 1000$ i did with games & controllers at launch. i'm still sore over the way Sony has handled marketing & PR.
SpruceCaboose
[QUOTE="3picuri3"][QUOTE="tek91"]i'd argue the fanboy is the person that thinks those games have to appeal to everyone.the only thing not compelling about the PS 3 is it's price tag to say it's the games would have been a good argument in 2006, but that argument died already and are you saying MGS 4 don't interest anyone or Uncharted or Killzone 2 you really need to take your fan boy goggles off.
If it was about the merchandise then when the PS 3 had it's price cut it would not have been able to outsell the 360 for 8 months forcing the 360 to have a price cut and if it was not doing good m$ would have had a much bigger lead then the 8 million it had from that 1 year head start.
the truth is the PS 3 is not finished it's just beginning sony made a gamble and they will stick with it till the end it's going to be a tough fight for m$ especially after the price cut.
tek91
i can say with all honesty that i gave MGS4 / Uncharted many chances. i never felt compelled to finish either. and i was a huge fan of MGS1, so take that as you will. Uncharted just felt like tomb raider meets gears, and i've never really liked either to be honest.
and KZ2? seriously? if we've had anything shoved down our gullets this gen it's been FPS. i'm sick to death of them right now.
LBP, and VC interest me the most. almost enough to make me buy the system again. but with a rumored price cut i'll wait.
so yeah. deal with it i guess. my opinion / taste differs from yours.
Dude everything you said was I this and I that, you don't speak for everyoneyou may not like those games but millions find them compelling.
I personally played Halo and Gears on my pc and find them to be genetic shooters to try to make you feel bad ass which is a genre that's been done to death and love Little Big Planet and MGS 4 way better.
right, i'm talking about my opinion. get it? mine. i have a feeling others share it, or the PS3 wouldn't be in third with slumping exclusive sales. kthx.and oh, might want to re-read your posts. you're the one that started reference to the individual, and not the masses ;) again, thx. see the 'you's? and 'yours'? thats reference to the individual. did you want me to reply as if i was everyone? the alpha & omega? :P next time i'll pretend i'm a god or something and we'll see if you like my reply.
[QUOTE="FirstDiscovery"][QUOTE="hyperboy152000"]I got into a fit because i said Nintendo makes money off the GC, GBA and DS:? And as ive said, their electronics are luxury items, it people feel the pinch, they wont really care about getting the latest HDTV let alone the best brand.im pretty sure every division of sony makes a profit sept their gaming devsion which coincidently costs them more then what they are making in other divisions, and i never said anything about nintendo not making a profit so you dont need to get into a little fit because it was still in last place last gen but now nintendo is undisputably in the lead with the most consoles sold not to mention the DS which could very well float nintendo even without the wii
hyperboy152000
nah i was more making a referance to people that get into a fit when anyone talk "bad" about nintendo....i should have articulated that but it wasnt against you, just a general statement, besides didnt sony say at some point late last year that they ere finally making a profit off of the gaming division?
Hmm okay if you say so They might be making a profit, but that is only because of the PSP and PS2, as we know, the PS2 is dieing each year, and the PS3 is eating up that money. Im pretty sure last quarter was a loss for them though
imo sony deserve every bad thing coming their way. they should look up the word "hubris"dthach614
Lol...yes. In a world full of MS, Sony deserves "every bad thing" because only they display hubris? That is laughably ironic.
[QUOTE="hyperboy152000"][QUOTE="FirstDiscovery"]I got into a fit because i said Nintendo makes money off the GC, GBA and DS:? And as ive said, their electronics are luxury items, it people feel the pinch, they wont really care about getting the latest HDTV let alone the best brand.FirstDiscovery
nah i was more making a referance to people that get into a fit when anyone talk "bad" about nintendo....i should have articulated that but it wasnt against you, just a general statement, besides didnt sony say at some point late last year that they ere finally making a profit off of the gaming division?
Hmm okay if you say so They might be making a profit, but that is only because of the PSP and PS2, as we know, the PS2 is dieing each year, and the PS3 is eating up that money. Im pretty sure last quarter was a loss for them thoughyea any gains that they have made were negated last quarte, but i guess sony is broke even on manufactering the ps3 now that costs have been cut, and i guess they newest revision of the motherboard cuts the size almost in half so they are saving money doing that too.... but i dont think that will have a positive effect on them for awhile if they cant sell more systems
that's a total lie. PS3 uses P2P as much as MS, hence the server stability if often hinged on the users. when i played Warhawk / R1 back when I had a PS3 I had lag just as much as the 360. I DONT get lag on my PC when using dedicated servers, so it's certainly not an issue with my connection. hell, disagree with me? google PS3 lag and check out the many threads on the official boards.[QUOTE="3picuri3"][QUOTE="NinjaMunkey01"]the online is lag free and easy to usepatriots7672
I have played many PS3 games online with no lag even once. When I owned a 360 about a third of my games lagged when I played online. The 360 gets RRoD too and PS3 doesn't.
Lol dme lying? Sorry but I have both games mate. I play warhawk most days so i know what I mean. Warahawk very nearly has NO lag at all, plus theres the option for ps3 users to make their ps3 a dedicated server which helps loads. R1 never had lag, in fact all the exclusive games I play online are very good. And lol using google. Well yeah thats all good and well mate, but then there are millions of ps3 users, and of course you will get lag sometimes. I mean say you get 1000 threads like that right? well even if that thread has many posters its a small percentage of the entire user base. Type in "man setting himself on fire" on youtube and Im sure you'll get loads of videos pop up, by your logic then, that means all of us have done that before... You see where the whole "search it" thjing fails now? ALSO you see I never mentioned the 360, said its online was bad at all. im sure its just as good, to be honest i dont care I dont use gold as gaming online on PSN os free and everything else on XBL is free... So stop making assumptions based on nothing.[QUOTE="dthach614"]imo sony deserve every bad thing coming their way. they should look up the word "hubris"ZIMdoom
Lol...yes. In a world full of MS, Sony deserves "every bad thing" because only they display hubris? That is laughably ironic.
the irony would lie in you thinking he implied MS had clean hands ;) ahhhh assumptions. and in the gaming world Sony has done more harm than MS to their consumers / other companies arguably...[QUOTE="patriots7672"][QUOTE="3picuri3"] that's a total lie. PS3 uses P2P as much as MS, hence the server stability if often hinged on the users. when i played Warhawk / R1 back when I had a PS3 I had lag just as much as the 360. I DONT get lag on my PC when using dedicated servers, so it's certainly not an issue with my connection. hell, disagree with me? google PS3 lag and check out the many threads on the official boards. NinjaMunkey01
I have played many PS3 games online with no lag even once. When I owned a 360 about a third of my games lagged when I played online. The 360 gets RRoD too and PS3 doesn't.
Lol dme lying? Sorry but I have both games mate. I play warhawk most days so i know what I mean. Warahawk very nearly has NO lag at all, plus theres the option for ps3 users to make their ps3 a dedicated server which helps loads. R1 never had lag, in fact all the exclusive games I play online are very good. And lol using google. Well yeah thats all good and well mate, but then there are millions of ps3 users, and of course you will get lag sometimes. I mean say you get 1000 threads like that right? well even if that thread has many posters its a small percentage of the entire user base. Type in "man setting himself on fire" on youtube and Im sure you'll get loads of videos pop up, by your logic then, that means all of us have done that before... You see where the whole "search it" thjing fails now? ALSO you see I never mentioned the 360, said its online was bad at all. im sure its just as good, to be honest i dont care I dont use gold as gaming online on PSN os free and everything else on XBL is free... So stop making assumptions based on nothing. was based on your ridiculous statement that PS3 has no lag ;) simple stuff mate, you're just trying to stretch this to make it look like you didn't outright lie, which you obviously did.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment