Going back to console gaming. Which system?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
So now Kojima is thinking about money, and not action... lol If you ever heard a conversation or an inteview of Kojima, you would know that he is one of the most passionate devs when it comes to the direction of the games.[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="princeofshapeir"] See, what Kojima realized is that the hardcore, realistic stealth aspect doesn't sell as well as the shooty-shooty-blang-blang. So he gave you both ways to play in MGS4, which both give you the same outcome in the end. princeofshapeir
Is that why he made a 30-minute ending in which Big Boss tells Snake everything about the story before he hunkers over and dies?
Why wouldnt Big Boss tell what happened in the previous MGS? A lot of people havent played all of the MGS. It was better (and more of a plot twist) than to have Big Boss dead from the start of MGS4.[QUOTE="fastr"][QUOTE="gaming25"]If we are being non biast, and if you like action and stealth, then definitely get a PS3. UC2, MGS4, and GOW3 are the best of that genre and KZ2 is the best action for MP. The PS3 is the greatest immersion game system ever.DragonfireXZ95splinter cell conviction is a much better stealth game then MGS4, which is mostly a movie. Gears and halo are both better then the dead community for kz2. GOW is an overrated series that frankly gets very repetitive. Conviction is not a better stealth game than MGS4. Chaos Theory was a better stealth game than MGS4, but not Conviction. Conviction is so actiony it doesn't really have much stealth at all. Gears 2 sucked and Halo 3 is bleh, I'd rather play the other good games on PS3, like Infamous, Demon's Souls, etc. This is coming from someone who actually owned both consoles and the games, and not from someone who is obviously just biased towards one system without even owning or playing the other. I also own both systems. Infamous? demons souls? both hyped and big let downs.. pretty much what you get with the ps3 as i'm learning with each exclusive I play. Conviction is a much better game then MGS4, hands down. I dunno, you sound pretty biased. The gears series is one of the best new IP's this gen, and I guess it's just dumb luck halo 3 is one of the best selling games this gen?
[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"][QUOTE="fastr"] splinter cell conviction is a much better stealth game then MGS4, which is mostly a movie. Gears and halo are both better then the dead community for kz2. GOW is an overrated series that frankly gets very repetitive. fastrConviction is not a better stealth game than MGS4. Chaos Theory was a better stealth game than MGS4, but not Conviction. Conviction is so actiony it doesn't really have much stealth at all. Gears 2 sucked and Halo 3 is bleh, I'd rather play the other good games on PS3, like Infamous, Demon's Souls, etc. This is coming from someone who actually owned both consoles and the games, and not from someone who is obviously just biased towards one system without even owning or playing the other. I also own both systems. Infamous? demons souls? both hyped and big let downs.. pretty much what you get with the ps3 as i'm learning with each exclusive I play. Conviction is a much better game then MGS4, hands down. I dunno, you sound pretty biased. The gears series is one of the best new IP's this gen, and I guess it's just dumb luck halo 3 is one of the best selling games this gen?
Actually, Gears and Halo 3 were only marketed to death. MW2 is ahead of both of them in sales, so apparently according to you, that makes MW2 a better game than both? How much marketing did MW2 have?
And did you ever play Chaos Theory? Conviction only has a thread of the stealth that was involved in Chaos Theory.
Infamous and Demon's Souls were unique. Gears and Halo are just TPS and FPS, both of which I'm comparing to shooters I've played on PC, which are much much better than the console shooters that come out.
However, there aren't many games like the PS3 exclusives that come out on other platforms nor are they as common as shooters.
The only game that really interests me on the 360 right now is Alan Wake. The rest, I could really do without.
I wouldnt use Craigslist as a basis to how well the console is doing.
Anyways, its hard to recommend one without knowing your gaming tastes. Naturally, Im going to recommend you look at both consoles Exclusives, and probaly weigh your decision heavily on that.
However, you threw a wild card at me by saying you have a PC, which I assume is up to snuff to play atleast most of the new stuff well. you have to keep in mind that, while 360 does get exclusives that arent on PC like Gears of War and Halo, it also has alot of "Exclusives" that are also on PC. And more then likely theyll be better on PC. So that makes it a little hard for me.
You also might want to condier how much your going to be online, and how seemless you want that experience to be. Regardless of what you might hear on here, Live is still better and more seemless then PSN. This could change, but for right now, this is the case. So if your going to be a heavy online gamer, this may be a point in favor of getting a 360.
Also, Controller could be a big factor. IMO 360 is one of the best controllers ive had. Its better IMO for shooter then the PS3 pad, but Ive honestly gotten to the point where I can play shooters on both just fine. while on the other gand, for Sports games and fighting games, PS3 pad is better, particularly for fighting games. But really, you should be using a arcade stick, not a D pad for your fighting games. See which you like better.
Also, while this is probaly not going to sway your decision, alot of times the 360 gets the better looking.running version of a multiplatform game. Athough its obviously a game by game basis, Most times theyre better on 360. Of course, unless you have both consoles, your not going to care about this probaly.
You also might wanna look at what Rewards syestem you like more, Acheivments or Trophies. You might not even care, but this could be something to consider, although it should not heavily weigh in on your decision.
Anyway, these are things to consider. Good luck.
The PS3 has far better exclusive games, and like you said it has blu-ray, free online play, and upgrading to a larger HDD is much cheaper. So yeah, I recommend the PS3.
The PS3 has far better exclusive games, and like you said it has blu-ray, free online play, and upgrading to a larger HDD is much cheaper. So yeah, I recommend the PS3.
Sserv
you know whats funny? people who usually own both consoles say get a 360 or something. You fascinate me.
How is Live more seemless than PSN? I understand that Live has more features but I don't understand how it can be more seemlessI wouldnt sue Craigslist as a basis to how well the console is doing.
Anyways, its hard to recommend one without knowing your gaming tastes. Naturally, Im going to recommend you look at both consoles Exclusives, and probaly weigh your decision heavily on that.
However, you threw a wild card at me by saying you have a PC, which I assume is up to snuff to play atleast most of the new stuff well. you have to keep in mind that, while 360 does get exclusives that arent on PC like Gears of War and Halo, it also has alot of "Exclusives" that are also on PC. And more then likely theyll be better on PC. So that makes it a little hard for me.
You also might want to condier how much your going to be online, and how seemless you want that experience to be. Regardless of what you might hear on here, Live is still better and more seemless then PSN. This could change, but for right now, this is the case. So if your going to be a heavy online gamer, this may be a point in favor of getting a 360.
Also, Controller could be a big factor. IMO 360 is one of the best controllers ive had. Its better IMO for shooter then the PS3 pad, but Ive honestly gotten to the point where I can play shooters on both just fine. while on the other gand, for Sports games and fighting games, PS3 pad is better, particularly for fighting games. But really, you should be using a arcade stick, not a D pad for your fighting games. See which you like better.
Also, while this is probaly not going to sway your decision, alot of times the 360 gets the better looking.running version of a multiplatform game. Athough its obviously a game by game basis, Most times theyre better on 360. Of course, unless you have both consoles, your not going to care about this probaly.
You also might wanna look at what Rewards syestem you like more, Acheivments or Trophies. You might not even care, but this could be something to consider, although it should not heavily weigh in on your decision.
Anyway, these are things to consider. Good luck.
XboximusPrime
[QUOTE="XboximusPrime"]How is Live more seemless than PSN? I understand that Live has more features but I don't understand how it can be more seemlessI wouldnt sue Craigslist as a basis to how well the console is doing.
Anyways, its hard to recommend one without knowing your gaming tastes. Naturally, Im going to recommend you look at both consoles Exclusives, and probaly weigh your decision heavily on that.
However, you threw a wild card at me by saying you have a PC, which I assume is up to snuff to play atleast most of the new stuff well. you have to keep in mind that, while 360 does get exclusives that arent on PC like Gears of War and Halo, it also has alot of "Exclusives" that are also on PC. And more then likely theyll be better on PC. So that makes it a little hard for me.
You also might want to condier how much your going to be online, and how seemless you want that experience to be. Regardless of what you might hear on here, Live is still better and more seemless then PSN. This could change, but for right now, this is the case. So if your going to be a heavy online gamer, this may be a point in favor of getting a 360.
Also, Controller could be a big factor. IMO 360 is one of the best controllers ive had. Its better IMO for shooter then the PS3 pad, but Ive honestly gotten to the point where I can play shooters on both just fine. while on the other gand, for Sports games and fighting games, PS3 pad is better, particularly for fighting games. But really, you should be using a arcade stick, not a D pad for your fighting games. See which you like better.
Also, while this is probaly not going to sway your decision, alot of times the 360 gets the better looking.running version of a multiplatform game. Athough its obviously a game by game basis, Most times theyre better on 360. Of course, unless you have both consoles, your not going to care about this probaly.
You also might wanna look at what Rewards syestem you like more, Acheivments or Trophies. You might not even care, but this could be something to consider, although it should not heavily weigh in on your decision.
Anyway, these are things to consider. Good luck.
Tyrant156
Those features are what makes live more seemless. ill try to explain what I think as best i can. If I want to play a game with a buddy, all I need to do is send a invite, party up, and hes in the game in under 2 minutes. On PSN, I cant get him in a party, cross game invite isnt even with every game I dont think, and chances are that buddy isnt going to have a mic. Plus, with cross game chat, even if hes in a different game taht im palying, I can still talk to him. i cant do that on PSN. and overall, its just a more smooth service. Plus, the time ive spent with online games on PSn has been laggy and theyre wasnt even taht many people online. With Live, you have a potential over 10 million people to game with online. With PSN being free, who knows how many people are actually going to paly online?
Yet you fear Yellow lights, errors, things that burn your ps3 (upgrades) and you have to pay for it, the drive burning out. How can anyone trust a system that can NOT handle a simple date change? (leap year was fun). Stick with your PC these days consoles have as much problems as them and the games are more expensive than anything.Hush. The PS3 is a really reliable system and I think most of the GameSpot community knows that.[QUOTE="beinss"]I have both and Honestly Unless you have a ton of friends on xbox live that you want to play with get a PS3. Its a better system with better games in my opinion. And I dont fear red rings every time I turn on my PS3. But I play xbox because I want to play with friends, everyone has it. IWKYB
rmongjoco, it sounds like the PS3 is the system for you. All the genres your interested in will be well nurtured but I would also consider some the stuff for the 360 as well. Forza 3 is an excellent racer and Bayonetta, one of the best action games of the generation, is best played on the 360. Just some things to think about.
[QUOTE="Sserv"]
The PS3 has far better exclusive games, and like you said it has blu-ray, free online play, and upgrading to a larger HDD is much cheaper. So yeah, I recommend the PS3.
XboximusPrime
you know whats funny? people who usually own both consoles say get a 360 or something. You fascinate me.
Well I'm glad you find me so interesting. :)honestly, at the end of the day, im probaly going to just recommend getting the both.
[QUOTE="Sserv"]
The PS3 has far better exclusive games, and like you said it has blu-ray, free online play, and upgrading to a larger HDD is much cheaper. So yeah, I recommend the PS3.
XboximusPrime
you know whats funny? people who usually own both consoles say get a 360 or something. You fascinate me.
I see people say that all the time. In fact, I say it. My 360 RROD'd a while ago on me, but I had both at the same time and I said PS3. :PHow is Live more seemless than PSN? I understand that Live has more features but I don't understand how it can be more seemless[QUOTE="Tyrant156"][QUOTE="XboximusPrime"]
I wouldnt sue Craigslist as a basis to how well the console is doing.
Anyways, its hard to recommend one without knowing your gaming tastes. Naturally, Im going to recommend you look at both consoles Exclusives, and probaly weigh your decision heavily on that.
However, you threw a wild card at me by saying you have a PC, which I assume is up to snuff to play atleast most of the new stuff well. you have to keep in mind that, while 360 does get exclusives that arent on PC like Gears of War and Halo, it also has alot of "Exclusives" that are also on PC. And more then likely theyll be better on PC. So that makes it a little hard for me.
You also might want to condier how much your going to be online, and how seemless you want that experience to be. Regardless of what you might hear on here, Live is still better and more seemless then PSN. This could change, but for right now, this is the case. So if your going to be a heavy online gamer, this may be a point in favor of getting a 360.
Also, Controller could be a big factor. IMO 360 is one of the best controllers ive had. Its better IMO for shooter then the PS3 pad, but Ive honestly gotten to the point where I can play shooters on both just fine. while on the other gand, for Sports games and fighting games, PS3 pad is better, particularly for fighting games. But really, you should be using a arcade stick, not a D pad for your fighting games. See which you like better.
Also, while this is probaly not going to sway your decision, alot of times the 360 gets the better looking.running version of a multiplatform game. Athough its obviously a game by game basis, Most times theyre better on 360. Of course, unless you have both consoles, your not going to care about this probaly.
You also might wanna look at what Rewards syestem you like more, Acheivments or Trophies. You might not even care, but this could be something to consider, although it should not heavily weigh in on your decision.
Anyway, these are things to consider. Good luck.
XboximusPrime
Those features are what makes live more seemless. ill try to explain what I think as best i can. If I want to play a game with a buddy, all I need to do is send a invite, party up, and hes in the game in under 2 minutes. On PSN, I cant get him in a party, cross game invite isnt even with every game I dont think, and chances are that buddy isnt going to have a mic. Plus, with cross game chat, even if hes in a different game taht im palying, I can still talk to him. i cant do that on PSN. and overall, its just a more smooth service. Plus, the time ive spent with online games on PSn has been laggy and theyre wasnt even taht many people online. With Live, you have a potential over 10 million people to game with online. With PSN being free, who knows how many people are actually going to paly online?
On PSN if you want to invite a friend you just send a text message, or you can call him on voice chat, or you can all be in a chat room and send multiple invites or you can game launch from Home. If you are playing a different game on LIve you still have to change the disc to start the online game. On PSN you change the disc, start it and the invite is on the game menu that takes you right to the online game. That's hardly much of a seamless difference, I just think people aren't familiar with PSN's features. You can't voice message anyone at anytime on PSN but you can send a text to anyone no matter what they are doing and sometimes this is much simpler.[QUOTE="XboximusPrime"][QUOTE="Tyrant156"] How is Live more seemless than PSN? I understand that Live has more features but I don't understand how it can be more seemlessTyrant156
Those features are what makes live more seemless. ill try to explain what I think as best i can. If I want to play a game with a buddy, all I need to do is send a invite, party up, and hes in the game in under 2 minutes. On PSN, I cant get him in a party, cross game invite isnt even with every game I dont think, and chances are that buddy isnt going to have a mic. Plus, with cross game chat, even if hes in a different game taht im palying, I can still talk to him. i cant do that on PSN. and overall, its just a more smooth service. Plus, the time ive spent with online games on PSn has been laggy and theyre wasnt even taht many people online. With Live, you have a potential over 10 million people to game with online. With PSN being free, who knows how many people are actually going to paly online?
On PSN if you want to invite a friend you just send a text message, or you can call him on voice chat, or you can all be in a chat room and send multiple invites or you can game launch from Home. If you are playing a different game on LIve you still have to change the disc to start the online game. On PSN you change the disc, start it and the invite is on the game menu that takes you right to the online game. That's hardly much of a seamless difference, I just think people aren't familiar with PSN's features. You can't voice message anyone at anytime on PSN but you can send a text to anyone no matter what they are doing and sometimes this is much simpler.Voice is a better way to go at it, and from what you explained, its still more complicated then Live.
[QUOTE="XboximusPrime"][QUOTE="Tyrant156"] How is Live more seemless than PSN? I understand that Live has more features but I don't understand how it can be more seemlessTyrant156
Those features are what makes live more seemless. ill try to explain what I think as best i can. If I want to play a game with a buddy, all I need to do is send a invite, party up, and hes in the game in under 2 minutes. On PSN, I cant get him in a party, cross game invite isnt even with every game I dont think, and chances are that buddy isnt going to have a mic. Plus, with cross game chat, even if hes in a different game taht im palying, I can still talk to him. i cant do that on PSN. and overall, its just a more smooth service. Plus, the time ive spent with online games on PSn has been laggy and theyre wasnt even taht many people online. With Live, you have a potential over 10 million people to game with online. With PSN being free, who knows how many people are actually going to paly online?
On PSN if you want to invite a friend you just send a text message, or you can call him on voice chat, or you can all be in a chat room and send multiple invites or you can game launch from Home. If you are playing a different game on LIve you still have to change the disc to start the online game. On PSN you change the disc, start it and the invite is on the game menu that takes you right to the online game. That's hardly much of a seamless difference, I just think people aren't familiar with PSN's features. You can't voice message anyone at anytime on PSN but you can send a text to anyone no matter what they are doing and sometimes this is much simpler.Although I do agree that PSN is better simply because it's free. The text sending thing is horridly slow, I hate using it, and I really wish they did have a party chat, but usually my friends and I just start up a 360 party chat and then play a PS3 game because we keep our 360's close to our PS3's. I also don't have to pay to use party chat on 360, so I get the best of both worlds. ;)
One thing that did make it easier though was hooking up a keyboard to my PS3, makes the text sending not as bad. Not sure if you can hook up a keyboard to 360 or not to just type.
On PSN if you want to invite a friend you just send a text message, or you can call him on voice chat, or you can all be in a chat room and send multiple invites or you can game launch from Home. If you are playing a different game on LIve you still have to change the disc to start the online game. On PSN you change the disc, start it and the invite is on the game menu that takes you right to the online game. That's hardly much of a seamless difference, I just think people aren't familiar with PSN's features. You can't voice message anyone at anytime on PSN but you can send a text to anyone no matter what they are doing and sometimes this is much simpler.[QUOTE="Tyrant156"][QUOTE="XboximusPrime"]
Those features are what makes live more seemless. ill try to explain what I think as best i can. If I want to play a game with a buddy, all I need to do is send a invite, party up, and hes in the game in under 2 minutes. On PSN, I cant get him in a party, cross game invite isnt even with every game I dont think, and chances are that buddy isnt going to have a mic. Plus, with cross game chat, even if hes in a different game taht im palying, I can still talk to him. i cant do that on PSN. and overall, its just a more smooth service. Plus, the time ive spent with online games on PSn has been laggy and theyre wasnt even taht many people online. With Live, you have a potential over 10 million people to game with online. With PSN being free, who knows how many people are actually going to paly online?
DragonfireXZ95
Although I do agree that PSN is better simply because it's free. The text sending thing is horridly slow, I hate using it, and I really wish they did have a party chat, but usually my friends and I just start up a 360 party chat and then play a PS3 game because we keep our 360's close to our PS3's. I also don't have to pay to use party chat on 360, so I get the best of both worlds. ;)
One thing that did make it easier though was hooking up a keyboard to my PS3, makes the text sending not as bad. Not sure if you can hook up a keyboard to 360 or not to just type.
I jsut think taht way of doing it makes it not as seemless as Live.
.
Voice is a better way to go at it, and from what you explained, its still more complicated then Live.
It's not complicated at all, I thought the NXE was complicated, it's not. I was just use to PS3's XMB. You can voice chat all day long in Home if that's your pleasure. But to ask someone if they want to play a game online can be done with a simple invite or a text message. Plus if you stay in touch with the people on your friends list you pretty much know what games they plan on getting and if you're buying the same ones to play online together.I also own both systems. Infamous? demons souls? both hyped and big let downs.. pretty much what you get with the ps3 as i'm learning with each exclusive I play. Conviction is a much better game then MGS4, hands down. I dunno, you sound pretty biased. The gears series is one of the best new IP's this gen, and I guess it's just dumb luck halo 3 is one of the best selling games this gen?[QUOTE="fastr"][QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"] Conviction is not a better stealth game than MGS4. Chaos Theory was a better stealth game than MGS4, but not Conviction. Conviction is so actiony it doesn't really have much stealth at all. Gears 2 sucked and Halo 3 is bleh, I'd rather play the other good games on PS3, like Infamous, Demon's Souls, etc. This is coming from someone who actually owned both consoles and the games, and not from someone who is obviously just biased towards one system without even owning or playing the other.DragonfireXZ95
Actually, Gears and Halo 3 were only marketed to death. MW2 is ahead of both of them in sales, so apparently according to you, that makes MW2 a better game than both? How much marketing did MW2 have?
And did you ever play Chaos Theory? Conviction only has a thread of the stealth that was involved in Chaos Theory.
Infamous and Demon's Souls were unique. Gears and Halo are just TPS and FPS, both of which I'm comparing to shooters I've played on PC, which are much much better than the console shooters that come out.
However, there aren't many games like the PS3 exclusives that come out on other platforms nor are they as common as shooters.
The only game that really interests me on the 360 right now is Alan Wake. The rest, I could really do without.
MW2 is also multiplat, where halo is exclusive. Yet still it has huge sales numbers.. look at that? I've played every splinter cell except Chaos Theory actually, sure conviction isn't as stealth oriented, but it's still a MUCH better game then MGS4, which isn't very stealth oriented either.
[QUOTE="Sserv"]
The PS3 has far better exclusive games, and like you said it has blu-ray, free online play, and upgrading to a larger HDD is much cheaper. So yeah, I recommend the PS3.
XboximusPrime
you know whats funny? people who usually own both consoles say get a 360 or something. You fascinate me.
No they don't...
[QUOTE="IWKYB"][QUOTE="beinss"]I have both and Honestly Unless you have a ton of friends on xbox live that you want to play with get a PS3. Its a better system with better games in my opinion. And I dont fear red rings every time I turn on my PS3. But I play xbox because I want to play with friends, everyone has it. gaming25Yet you fear Yellow lights, errors, things that burn your ps3 (upgrades) and you have to pay for it, the drive burning out. How can anyone trust a system that can NOT handle a simple date change? (leap year was fun). Stick with your PC these days consoles have as much problems as them and the games are more expensive. Oh please stop it. The PS3 is really good when it comes to reliability.
no, it is not. the Wii is.
TC wait for the E3 and then make up your mind.
Oh please stop it. The PS3 is really good when it comes to reliability.[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="IWKYB"] Yet you fear Yellow lights, errors, things that burn your ps3 (upgrades) and you have to pay for it, the drive burning out. How can anyone trust a system that can NOT handle a simple date change? (leap year was fun). Stick with your PC these days consoles have as much problems as them and the games are more expensive.aia89
no, it is not. the Wii is.
TC wait for the E3 and then make up your mind.
Stop lying, your on a gaming forum where tons of people own PS3's, who exactly do you think your tricking?honestly, once you start doing alot of gaming on pc it can be hard to go console. Some people have no issue doing it, but I certainly cant switch to console.
On PSN if you want to invite a friend you just send a text message, or you can call him on voice chat, or you can all be in a chat room and send multiple invites or you can game launch from Home. If you are playing a different game on LIve you still have to change the disc to start the online game. On PSN you change the disc, start it and the invite is on the game menu that takes you right to the online game. That's hardly much of a seamless difference, I just think people aren't familiar with PSN's features. You can't voice message anyone at anytime on PSN but you can send a text to anyone no matter what they are doing and sometimes this is much simpler.[QUOTE="Tyrant156"][QUOTE="XboximusPrime"]
Those features are what makes live more seemless. ill try to explain what I think as best i can. If I want to play a game with a buddy, all I need to do is send a invite, party up, and hes in the game in under 2 minutes. On PSN, I cant get him in a party, cross game invite isnt even with every game I dont think, and chances are that buddy isnt going to have a mic. Plus, with cross game chat, even if hes in a different game taht im palying, I can still talk to him. i cant do that on PSN. and overall, its just a more smooth service. Plus, the time ive spent with online games on PSn has been laggy and theyre wasnt even taht many people online. With Live, you have a potential over 10 million people to game with online. With PSN being free, who knows how many people are actually going to paly online?
DragonfireXZ95
Although I do agree that PSN is better simply because it's free. The text sending thing is horridly slow, I hate using it, and I really wish they did have a party chat, but usually my friends and I just start up a 360 party chat and then play a PS3 game because we keep our 360's close to our PS3's. I also don't have to pay to use party chat on 360, so I get the best of both worlds. ;)
One thing that did make it easier though was hooking up a keyboard to my PS3, makes the text sending not as bad. Not sure if you can hook up a keyboard to 360 or not to just type.
why not just use a cell phone or a laptop lol.
Where did you play MGS4 and Uncharted 2 on your friends PS3. I think you already made up your mind, nothing in the post indicates you even want a 360 it looks like your way of bashing the 360 and praising the PS3, that's what i get from reading it anyway.
Just stick with your PS3
for all of the pc only gamers trying to convince him to stick with a pc please get a grip. He has decided to go back to console gaming ad is looking for advice on whether to get a 360 or ps3. All of your "consoles are pointless if you have a gaming pc" posts are irrelevant in this thread.
I would go for the 360 a I prefer the pad and the selection of online shooters. My ps3 is downstairs in the sitting room with the big tv so i can watch blu rays and play GOW3. Take your time deciding though :)
Oh please stop it. The PS3 is really good when it comes to reliability.[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="IWKYB"] Yet you fear Yellow lights, errors, things that burn your ps3 (upgrades) and you have to pay for it, the drive burning out. How can anyone trust a system that can NOT handle a simple date change? (leap year was fun). Stick with your PC these days consoles have as much problems as them and the games are more expensive.aia89
no, it is not. the Wii is.
TC wait for the E3 and then make up your mind.
Hmmm .... I've almost forgot about that. I guess that (waiting for E3) is sensible.Have you only been playing Wow? SAGE_OF_FIREFor the past 4 years ... yes. I've played the PS2 and XBOX on prev gen. But I've heard that a lot has changed this gen ... (i.e. XBOX has done a good job getting 3rd party support ... which i felt was an issue on prev gen)
Although I do agree that PSN is better simply because it's free. The text sending thing is horridly slow, I hate using it, and I really wish they did have a party chat, but usually my friends and I just start up a 360 party chat and then play a PS3 game because we keep our 360's close to our PS3's. I also don't have to pay to use party chat on 360, so I get the best of both worlds. ;)
One thing that did make it easier though was hooking up a keyboard to my PS3, makes the text sending not as bad. Not sure if you can hook up a keyboard to 360 or not to just type.
I guess I'm just not a party chat person, on PSN if everyone is on the same game then they can all talk on mic. I don't see why I would ever need to talk to someone playing a different game as me. I can't even talk on the phone and game at the same time, it's just too much useless conversation. This is probably why I prefer to text over making a phone call. Oh, and you can by keypads to text on PSN instead of buying a keyboard which takes up a lot of space.Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment