This gen is too long for Xbox 360 due to its lack of future-proof technologies

Did you hear what EA's CEO said about regretting the fact that EA invested too much too early on Xbox 360 and PS3? What does this mean? It means that when next-generation starts, developers will be reluctant to invest in next gen.

Did you hear the top dogs at THQ and Epic both voicing their belief that next-generation won't start till at least between 2012 and 2018. What does this mean? It means that this generation will last at least 4 years from now, too long, for a soon to be outdated console. So why will this generation be too long for Xbox 360?

Look at the trends, which all vastly favor the PS3:

1. Game contents are getting bigger, needing more graphics and more sounds. Early on, developers spent too much time crafting game engines that they don't have the time to make lengthy, beautiful games. Xbox 360 uses space-limiting, last gen DVD, not Blu-ray.

2. Multiplayer numbers and the size of enemies and environments are getting bigger. It is evident that Xbox 360 can't handle such massive sizes. Think Resistance 2 and MAG. Think Killzone 2 whose mulitplayer graphics look just as good as single player's. Think about how there's nothing like them on the 360 even though the 360 has a 1 year head start.

3. HD TVs and Blu-ray movies are fast becoming mainstream. Gamers, you want the best looking games, right? So, do you also want the best looking movies? Don't look to the 360 for any help.

4. More and more casuals are gaming on their TVs. Why is Xbox 360 the worst choice for casuals? LIVE fees. Lack of Blu-ray features. Lack of intuitive controls. History of hardcore fanbase. Common sense says more PS2 and Wii owners will buy the PS3 more than the 360.

For those of you calling me a PS3 fanboy and accuse me of giving out opinions and not facts, keep the following in mind:

1) I had said Blu-ray will beat HD-DVD. I was right.

2) I am perhaps the only person in this forum to say Microsoft won't support Blu-ray this generation. I was right...so far. No Xbox 360 Blu-ray support announced at this year's E3.

3) I have been saying that the PS3 is more powerful and will have better looking, sounding games. There is enough evidence already that proves me right.

4) I had been saying this generation will last a lot longer than the last one. I am most likely right as the gaming top dogs also agree with me.

360 is fine...it'll last till 2012...then we'll get the Xbox3 or x720 or w/e.

Nothing is future-proof, but keep buying into Sony's marketing, they love it when people believe falsehoods.BioShockOwnz

Can you name some of Sony's falsehoods?

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]Nothing is future-proof, but keep buying into Sony's marketing, they love it when people believe falsehoods.dream431ca

Can you name some of Sony's falsehoods?

It's already stated in my post you quoted. Calling something "future proof" is a falsehood, much like their 120fps, yada yada BS.

1- Oblivion, Mass Effect, Fallout 3, Grand THeft Auto 4, etc big games that look great and are on one disc. At worst they will end up on multiple discs, which isn't that bad. Besides 360 will eventually get games that require HDD...

2- 360 is getting more MMOs, 360s xbox live has had better quality experiences with online mp games. PDZ was well over 30 players. Huxley is an MMOFPS with 100 vs 100 player action. The xbox alone ran a 40 player online game...so no it has nothing to do with horsepower but the design of the game in general.

3- Ok so the PS3 is a bluray player....but as far as games are concerned this does nothing.....It is not a factor of the system being future proof, as much as the system has an extra incentive. Its like the 360s soon big advantage for Netflix subscribers.

4- um The 360 gamepad has been received as a very good game pad. the only controller that is really casual oriented is the wiimote, because just about everybody can admit that six axis is just tacked on and useless motion to what was a good gamepad anyway.

and yet XBOX live sitll has a bigger community than PSN(a free service) What does that tell you? that eventually the quality service will get the cutstomers.
and the 360 has had better success with casual games like Madden,, Guiter Hero, ROck Band, and racing games like Forza(yes that is a casual genre)...and are offering more casual interests

Everybody said Bluray would win.
All you have done is put up opinions with no valid facts at all.
The PS3s best looking games aren't dramatic upgrades over 360s best games. Especially when a multiplat in RE 5 that is running primarely on 360 so far has looked just as good as MGS 4 or Killzone 2(although i would argue KZ 2 looks alittle big better)

We have seen that DVD 9 hasn't been the issue it was made out to be, and is automatically offset by the issue that the PS3 is a pain in the ass to develop for(Valve still won't develop for PS3)

We have seen Live isn't an issue as it is suppose to be because XBL community is growing and extremely successful for Microsoft.

The idea that 360 can't do "BIG GAMES" when in terms of scale all the big games have been on 360. GTA 4
Oblivion
Fallout 3
for FPS games Resistance 2s scale has only shown 1 big addition and that is a 300FT monster, in terms of overall scale and draw distance it is barely on par with Halo 3s scale....

The idea Live can't handle mutliple players is automatically wrong when you see big MMO games being done on the 360 like Champions Online, Huxley, and APB.

The 360 gamepad is well received and probably only flawed in fighters.

I got some news for you, most gamers with any semblance of common sense will be quite pissed if Microsoft abandons the 360 early like they did with the Xbox. Trust me when I tell you that most will be fine with their 360 for the next few years as long as solid titles keep coming....and they will as long as Microsoft is still supporting the console. What, do you think that within the next 2 years or so that all 360's are just going to up and die, and all software support will just evaporate and gravitate exclusively to the PS3?:lol:

I myself have a 360 and PS3, and will be quite content with both for a few years to come, as I am in no hurry for the next gen. As for the 360, as it relates to this thread, it will be fine as long as Microsoft does not suddenly abandon it in a scenario ala the Xbox. That should really be a 360 owners only worry other than faulty hardware.

[QUOTE="dream431ca"]

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]Nothing is future-proof, but keep buying into Sony's marketing, they love it when people believe falsehoods.BioShockOwnz

Can you name some of Sony's falsehoods?

It's already stated in my post you quoted. Calling something "future proof" is a falsehood, much like their 120fps, yada yada BS.

How is futureproof a falsehood? 120Fps was pushing it, but futureproof?

Boy will i have fun picking this one apart

Did you hear what EA's CEO said about regretting the fact that EA invested too much too early on Xbox 360 and PS3? What does this mean? It means that when next-generation starts, developers will be reluctant to invest in next gen.

Did you hear the top dogs at THQ and Epic both voicing their belief that next-generation won't start till at least between 2012 and 2018. What does this mean? It means that this generation will last at least 4 years from now, too long, for a soon to be outdated console. So why will this generation be too long for Xbox 360?

Really? When did they say that? I gurantee the console manufacturers will start promoting their new hardware in the next couple of years. The next generation will start by 2012 at the very latest

Look at the trends, which all vastly favor the PS3:

1. Game contents are getting bigger, needing more graphics and more sounds. Early on, developers spent too much time crafting game engines that they don't have the time to make lengthy, beautiful games. Xbox 360 uses space-limiting, last gen DVD, not Blu-ray.

And yet, oblivion is a huge game. GTA IV is pretty big too. And if the odd game is on multiple discs, so what? Standing up to switch discs every 20 hours won't kill you

2. Multiplayer numbers and the size of enemies and environments are getting bigger. It is evident that Xbox 360 can't handle such massive sizes. Think Resistance 2 and MAG. Think Killzone 2 whose mulitplayer graphics look just as good as single player's. Think about how there's nothing like them on the 360 even thought the 360 has a 1 year head start.

How are you making this claim about killzone 2? Have you playd it online yet? How do you know the 360 can't handle games bigger than it currently is? Do you really think it's going to stop growing over the rest of the generation?

3. HD TVs and Blu-ray movies are fast becoming mainstream. Gamers, you want the best looking games, right? So, do you also want the best looking movies? Don't look to the 360 for any help.

What do blu-ray movies have to do with gaming?

4. More and more casuals are gaming on their TVs. Why is Xbox 360 the worst choice for casuals? LIVE fees. Lack of Blu-ray features. Lack of intuitive controls. History of hardcore fanbase. Common sense says more PS2 and Wii owners will buy the PS3 more than the 360.

Trust me. Casuals don't know about blu-ray features. The Xbox does have a hardcore fanbase. how are the controls un intuitive? Button placement isn't all that different from the ps3's. your common sense makes no sense what so eve. Live fees I'll give you.

For those of you calling me a PS3 fanboy and accuse me of giving out opinions and not facts, keep the following in mind:

1) I had said Blu-ray will beat HD-DVD. I was right.

2) I am perhaps the only person in this forum to say Microsoft won't support Blu-ray this generation. I was right...so far. No Xbox 360 Blu-ray support announced at this year's E3.

3) I have been saying that the PS3 is more powerful and will have better looking, sounding games. There is enough evidence already that proves me right.

4) I had been saying this generation will last a lot longer than the last one. I am most likely right as the gaming top dogs also agree with me.

none of those 4 make any of what you said fact rather than oppinion. :|Sihanouk

Yes. MS are really scared at the moment.. Wait no, that would be Sony.xsubtownerx

As they say, the your first instinct is usually right. Microsoft is the one who is scared right now. They lost money again this quarter while Sony finally makes some profits.

I'm curious to know how the PS3 is future proof. As more games start needing installs, PS3 owners will need to start upgrading their systems to be able to play games without having to repeatedly install and uninstall their software

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="dream431ca"]

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]Nothing is future-proof, but keep buying into Sony's marketing, they love it when people believe falsehoods.dream431ca

Can you name some of Sony's falsehoods?

It's already stated in my post you quoted. Calling something "future proof" is a falsehood, much like their 120fps, yada yada BS.

How is futureproof a falsehood? 120Fps was pushing it, but futureproof?

Yes, "future proof" - a falsehood. A bogus label to ensure confidence among potential customers.

[QUOTE="xsubtownerx"]Yes. MS are really scared at the moment.. Wait no, that would be Sony.Sihanouk

As they say, the your first instinct is usually right. Microsoft is the one who is scared right now. They lost money again this quarter while Sony finally makes some profits.

No they didn't.. lmao

As much space as Blu-Ray has it also has sever limitations for games such as slow read speed, horribly slow random access speeds.

Many PS3 games actually have the same texture on the disk many times so the PS3 doesnt have to access it way back on the drive when its needed.

[QUOTE="dream431ca"][QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="dream431ca"]

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]Nothing is future-proof, but keep buying into Sony's marketing, they love it when people believe falsehoods.BioShockOwnz

Can you name some of Sony's falsehoods?

It's already stated in my post you quoted. Calling something "future proof" is a falsehood, much like their 120fps, yada yada BS.

How is futureproof a falsehood? 120Fps was pushing it, but futureproof?

Yes, "future proof" - a falsehood. A bogus label to ensure confidence among potential customers.

It doesn't look bogus to me. The PS3 has technology in it that will do great in the future. Blu-ray and the Cell chip come to mind. It even says in your sig that LittleBigPlanet is your most anticipated game of 2008. LBP is one of the more "future proof" titles this gen, meaning it will probably be played well into the future.

[QUOTE="xsubtownerx"]Yes. MS are really scared at the moment.. Wait no, that would be Sony.Sihanouk

As they say, the your first instinct is usually right. Microsoft is the one who is scared right now. They lost money again this quarter while Sony finally makes some profits.

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="dream431ca"]

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]Nothing is future-proof, but keep buying into Sony's marketing, they love it when people believe falsehoods.dream431ca

Can you name some of Sony's falsehoods?

It's already stated in my post you quoted. Calling something "future proof" is a falsehood, much like their 120fps, yada yada BS.

How is futureproof a falsehood? 120Fps was pushing it, but futureproof?

No piece of technology is ever futureproof. Technology is always changing and evolving and software will continue to grow in line with evolving tech.

The PS3 is not futureproof. Not one console that has ever been produced is futureproof.

Anyone who believes that the term 'future-proof' can actually exist in the technological world needs to be drop-kicked.Verge_6

....off of the Empire State building, only to land in the back of a dump truck that is filled with gasoline and gun powder, which proceeds to drive full speed into a nitro glycerine plant.:D

It doesn't look bogus to me. The PS3 has technology in it that will do great in the future. Blu-ray and the Cell chip come to mind. It even says in your sig that LittleBigPlanet is your most anticipated game of 2008. LBP is one of the more "future proof" titles this gen, meaning it will probably be played well into the future. dream431ca

its slow read spead is casuing developers to give their games manditory installs. these installs are quickly filling up people's HDDs, forcing them to either upgrade or deal with deleting and reinstalling their games.

Doesn't sound future proof to me...

1. Game contents are getting bigger, needing more graphics and more sounds. Early on, developers spent too much time crafting game engines that they don't have the time to make lengthy, beautiful games. Xbox 360 uses space-limiting, last gen DVD, not Blu-ray.

Sihanouk

2. Multiplayer numbers and the size of enemies and environments are getting bigger. It is evident that Xbox 360 can't handle such massive sizes. Think Resistance 2 and MAG. Think Killzone 2 whose mulitplayer graphics look just as good as single player's. Think about how there's nothing like them on the 360 even though the 360 has a 1 year head start.

Sihanouk

3. HD TVs and Blu-ray movies are fast becoming mainstream. Gamers, you want the best looking games, right? So, do you also want the best looking movies? Don't look to the 360 for any help.

Sihanouk

MS can address this if needed. They could release an add-on, or a new Elite with a BD-drive for movies.

4. More and more casuals are gaming on their TVs. Why is Xbox 360 the worst choice for casuals? LIVE fees. Lack of Blu-ray features. Lack of intuitive controls. History of hardcore fanbase. Common sense says more PS2 and Wii owners will buy the PS3 more than the 360.

Sihanouk

Actually LIVE provides a simple, consistent, easy to use interface for online. Why wouldn't a casual like that?

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="dream431ca"][QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="dream431ca"]

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]Nothing is future-proof, but keep buying into Sony's marketing, they love it when people believe falsehoods.dream431ca

Can you name some of Sony's falsehoods?

It's already stated in my post you quoted. Calling something "future proof" is a falsehood, much like their 120fps, yada yada BS.

How is futureproof a falsehood? 120Fps was pushing it, but futureproof?

Yes, "future proof" - a falsehood. A bogus label to ensure confidence among potential customers.

It doesn't look bogus to me. The PS3 has technology in it that will do great in the future. Blu-ray and the Cell chip come to mind. It even says in your sig that LittleBigPlanet is your most anticipated game of 2008. LBP is one of the more "future proof" titles this gen, meaning it will probably be played well into the future.

The perception that LBP will have a longer lifespan than the adverage game does in no way equate to futureproof.

[QUOTE="dream431ca"]It doesn't look bogus to me. The PS3 has technology in it that will do great in the future. Blu-ray and the Cell chip come to mind. It even says in your sig that LittleBigPlanet is your most anticipated game of 2008. LBP is one of the more "future proof" titles this gen, meaning it will probably be played well into the future. BuryMe

its slow read spead is casuing developers to give their games manditory installs. these installs are quickly filling up people's HDDs, forcing them to either upgrade or deal with deleting and reinstalling their games.

Doesn't sound future proof to me...

I was pertaining more to the techology itself rather than it's useage for games. Look at Uncharted, no install and the game runs just as good as the games that have to install. Installs are a developer option. It really doesn't have anything to do with the speed of the Blu-ray drive.

The perception that LBP will have a longer lifespan than the adverage game does in no way equate to futureproof.

poptart

Why not?

[QUOTE="BuryMe"]

[QUOTE="dream431ca"]It doesn't look bogus to me. The PS3 has technology in it that will do great in the future. Blu-ray and the Cell chip come to mind. It even says in your sig that LittleBigPlanet is your most anticipated game of 2008. LBP is one of the more "future proof" titles this gen, meaning it will probably be played well into the future. dream431ca

its slow read spead is casuing developers to give their games manditory installs. these installs are quickly filling up people's HDDs, forcing them to either upgrade or deal with deleting and reinstalling their games.

Doesn't sound future proof to me...

I was pertaining more to the techology itself rather than it's useage for games. Look at Uncharted, no install and the game runs just as good as the games that have to install. Installs are a developer option. It really doesn't have anything to do with the speed of the Blu-ray drive.

Lol, actually it 100% has to do with that.

[QUOTE="dream431ca"][QUOTE="BuryMe"]

[QUOTE="dream431ca"]It doesn't look bogus to me. The PS3 has technology in it that will do great in the future. Blu-ray and the Cell chip come to mind. It even says in your sig that LittleBigPlanet is your most anticipated game of 2008. LBP is one of the more "future proof" titles this gen, meaning it will probably be played well into the future. Cali3350

its slow read spead is casuing developers to give their games manditory installs. these installs are quickly filling up people's HDDs, forcing them to either upgrade or deal with deleting and reinstalling their games.

Doesn't sound future proof to me...

I was pertaining more to the techology itself rather than it's useage for games. Look at Uncharted, no install and the game runs just as good as the games that have to install. Installs are a developer option. It really doesn't have anything to do with the speed of the Blu-ray drive.

Lol, actually it 100% has to do with that.

Can you find me a link to anything discussing that issue?

Boy will i have fun picking this one apart

Well, I don't have too much fun teaching people how to think, though.

[QUOTE="Sihanouk"]Did you hear what EA's CEO said about regretting the fact that EA invested too much too early on Xbox 360 and PS3? What does this mean? It means that when next-generation starts, developers will be reluctant to invest in next gen.

Did you hear the top dogs at THQ and Epic both voicing their belief that next-generation won't start till at least between 2012 and 2018. What does this mean? It means that this generation will last at least 4 years from now, too long, for a soon to be outdated console. So why will this generation be too long for Xbox 360?

Really? When did they say that? I gurantee the console manufacturers will start promoting their new hardware in the next couple of years. The next generation will start by 2012 at the very latest

Do a Yahoo news search on Forbe's PS4 article. Don't guarantee something unless you have enough wisdom to back it up.

Look at the trends, which all vastly favor the PS3:

1. Game contents are getting bigger, needing more graphics and more sounds. Early on, developers spent too much time crafting game engines that they don't have the time to make lengthy, beautiful games. Xbox 360 uses space-limiting, last gen DVD, not Blu-ray.

And yet, oblivion is a huge game. GTA IV is pretty big too. And if the odd game is on multiple discs, so what? Standing up to switch discs every 20 hours won't kill you

Oblivion is huge, but its graphics aren't that good now, and can be quite repetative. GTA graphics suck. For free-roaming games like GTA4 and for racing games, switching disks will not be practical.

2. Multiplayer numbers and the size of enemies and environments are getting bigger. It is evident that Xbox 360 can't handle such massive sizes. Think Resistance 2 and MAG. Think Killzone 2 whose mulitplayer graphics look just as good as single player's. Think about how there's nothing like them on the 360 even thought the 360 has a 1 year head start.

How are you making this claim about killzone 2? Have you playd it online yet? How do you know the 360 can't handle games bigger than it currently is? Do you really think it's going to stop growing over the rest of the generation?

The developers themselves make this claim. If the 360 can handle such games while maintaining graphics integrity, it would have already been made. Why would Microsoft not try to make such games? Sony's been claiming larger multiplayers since launch. All this time, Microsoft can't come up with such games? Because the 360 is not powerful enough.

3. HD TVs and Blu-ray movies are fast becoming mainstream. Gamers, you want the best looking games, right? So, do you also want the best looking movies? Don't look to the 360 for any help.

What do blu-ray movies have to do with gaming? Blu-ray movies has to do with the fact that gamers also like movies. And since gamers care about graphics, they will also care about movie resolutions.

4. More and more casuals are gaming on their TVs. Why is Xbox 360 the worst choice for casuals? LIVE fees. Lack of Blu-ray features. Lack of intuitive controls. History of hardcore fanbase. Common sense says more PS2 and Wii owners will buy the PS3 more than the 360.

Trust me. Casuals don't know about blu-ray features. The Xbox does have a hardcore fanbase. how are the controls un intuitive? Button placement isn't all that different from the ps3's. your common sense makes no sense what so eve. Live fees I'll give you.

LOL. They don't?LOL again. Causals who will spend more than 300 dollars will take the time to learn a thing or two about the products they buy, especially in these hard economic times. The 360's control isn't as intuitive as the Wii's. I am saying the PS3's controls are more intuitive than the 360's. I am just saying the 360 really has nothing compelling for the casuals while the PS3 at least has free PSN and Blu-ray.

For those of you calling me a PS3 fanboy and accuse me of giving out opinions and not facts, keep the following in mind:

1) I had said Blu-ray will beat HD-DVD. I was right.

2) I am perhaps the only person in this forum to say Microsoft won't support Blu-ray this generation. I was right...so far. No Xbox 360 Blu-ray support announced at this year's E3.

3) I have been saying that the PS3 is more powerful and will have better looking, sounding games. There is enough evidence already that proves me right.

4) I had been saying this generation will last a lot longer than the last one. I am most likely right as the gaming top dogs also agree with me.

none of those 4 make any of what you said fact rather than oppinion. :|

These 4 should give more credibility to my opinion. Do you feel wiser now?

BuryMe

[QUOTE="Cali3350"][QUOTE="dream431ca"][QUOTE="BuryMe"]

[QUOTE="dream431ca"]It doesn't look bogus to me. The PS3 has technology in it that will do great in the future. Blu-ray and the Cell chip come to mind. It even says in your sig that LittleBigPlanet is your most anticipated game of 2008. LBP is one of the more "future proof" titles this gen, meaning it will probably be played well into the future. dream431ca

its slow read spead is casuing developers to give their games manditory installs. these installs are quickly filling up people's HDDs, forcing them to either upgrade or deal with deleting and reinstalling their games.

Doesn't sound future proof to me...

I was pertaining more to the techology itself rather than it's useage for games. Look at Uncharted, no install and the game runs just as good as the games that have to install. Installs are a developer option. It really doesn't have anything to do with the speed of the Blu-ray drive.

Lol, actually it 100% has to do with that.

Can you find me a link to anything discussing that issue?

Better idea. Since im right, give me ANY link that contradicts it. Itll be a long night for you.

The only reason to install to the HDD is to improve load times. Thats the only advantage. That would be relevent to a slow speed drive.

Better idea. Since im right, give me ANY link that contradicts it. Itll be a long night for you.

The only reason to install to the HDD is to improve load times. Thats the only advantage. That would be relevent to a slow speed drive.

Cali3350

So, you didn't find a link (or didn't even try) and your claming your right. Typical responce for system wars :roll:

[QUOTE="Cali3350"]

Better idea. Since im right, give me ANY link that contradicts it. Itll be a long night for you.

The only reason to install to the HDD is to improve load times. Thats the only advantage. That would be relevent to a slow speed drive.

dream431ca

So, you didn't find a link and your claming your right. Typical responce for system wars :roll:

The only thing typical here is ignorance of hardware and business. That would be you showing them.

I tire of educating people on subjects they dont care about.

Can you find me a link to anything discussing that issue?

dream431ca

http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20080619/153537

Not looking good for the PS3.

[QUOTE="dream431ca"]

Can you find me a link to anything discussing that issue?

xsubtownerx

http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20080619/153537

Not looking good for the PS3.

That article has nothing to do with the PS3. Keep trying.

[QUOTE="dream431ca"][QUOTE="Cali3350"]

Better idea. Since im right, give me ANY link that contradicts it. Itll be a long night for you.

The only reason to install to the HDD is to improve load times. Thats the only advantage. That would be relevent to a slow speed drive.

Cali3350

So, you didn't find a link and your claming your right. Typical responce for system wars :roll:

The only thing typical here is ignorance of hardware and business. That would be you showing them.

I tire of educating people on subjects they dont care about.

You still didn't prove your arguement.

The Blu-Ray in the Playstation 3 is more-or-less future proof, as far as playing movies go. Thanks to firmware updates it supports profile updates like BD-Live. The drive speed is a bit slow, however, and like all technologies the Playstation 3 will someday become outdated. That said, many fun games will never need technology greater than the Playstation 3 offers, and an off-on gamer looking to complete his/her HD setup will probably never need another system.

[QUOTE="BuryMe"]

Boy will i have fun picking this one apart

Well, I don't have too much fun teaching people how to think, though.

[QUOTE="Sihanouk"]Did you hear what EA's CEO said about regretting the fact that EA invested too much too early on Xbox 360 and PS3? What does this mean? It means that when next-generation starts, developers will be reluctant to invest in next gen.

Did you hear the top dogs at THQ and Epic both voicing their belief that next-generation won't start till at least between 2012 and 2018. What does this mean? It means that this generation will last at least 4 years from now, too long, for a soon to be outdated console. So why will this generation be too long for Xbox 360?

Really? When did they say that? I gurantee the console manufacturers will start promoting their new hardware in the next couple of years. The next generation will start by 2012 at the very latest

Do a Yahoo news search on Forbe's PS4 article. Don't guarantee something unless you have enough wisdom to back it up.

It's your responsibility to give evidence of your claims. Don't expect me to do your research.

Look at the trends, which all vastly favor the PS3:

1. Game contents are getting bigger, needing more graphics and more sounds. Early on, developers spent too much time crafting game engines that they don't have the time to make lengthy, beautiful games. Xbox 360 uses space-limiting, last gen DVD, not Blu-ray.

And yet, oblivion is a huge game. GTA IV is pretty big too. And if the odd game is on multiple discs, so what? Standing up to switch discs every 20 hours won't kill you

Oblivion is huge, but its graphics aren't that good now, and can be quite repetative. GTA graphics suck. For free-roaming games like GTA4 and for racing games, switching disks will not be practical.

GTA could easily be split up by putting the world information of each discs and only splitting the mission info. Racing gmes aren't the ones that are filling up dvds.

2. Multiplayer numbers and the size of enemies and environments are getting bigger. It is evident that Xbox 360 can't handle such massive sizes. Think Resistance 2 and MAG. Think Killzone 2 whose mulitplayer graphics look just as good as single player's. Think about how there's nothing like them on the 360 even thought the 360 has a 1 year head start.

How are you making this claim about killzone 2? Have you playd it online yet? How do you know the 360 can't handle games bigger than it currently is? Do you really think it's going to stop growing over the rest of the generation?

The developers themselves make this claim. If the 360 can handle such games while maintaining graphics integrity, it would have already been made. Why would Microsoft not try to make such games? Sony's been claiming larger multiplayers since launch. All this time, Microsoft can't come up with such games? Because the 360 is not powerful enough.

Link to developers making the claim? Dedicated servers could solve the problem.

3. HD TVs and Blu-ray movies are fast becoming mainstream. Gamers, you want the best looking games, right? So, do you also want the best looking movies? Don't look to the 360 for any help.

What do blu-ray movies have to do with gaming? Blu-ray movies has to do with the fact that gamers also like movies. And since gamers care about graphics, they will also care about movie resolutions.

But movies and games are two separate things. Don't assume that a lot of gamers suddenly want blu-ray when a lot are happy to rent DD movies

4. More and more casuals are gaming on their TVs. Why is Xbox 360 the worst choice for casuals? LIVE fees. Lack of Blu-ray features. Lack of intuitive controls. History of hardcore fanbase. Common sense says more PS2 and Wii owners will buy the PS3 more than the 360.

Trust me. Casuals don't know about blu-ray features. The Xbox does have a hardcore fanbase. how are the controls un intuitive? Button placement isn't all that different from the ps3's. your common sense makes no sense what so eve. Live fees I'll give you.

LOL. They don't?LOL again. Causals who will spend more than 300 dollars will take the time to learn a thing or two about the products they buy, especially in these hard economic times. The 360's control isn't as intuitive as the Wii's. I am saying the PS3's controls are more intuitive than the 360's. I am just saying the 360 really has nothing compelling for the casuals while the PS3 at least has free PSN and Blu-ray.

You'd actually be surprised how few people knowor understand the PS3's blu-ray capabilities. I still don't understand what you're saying about the control. How is it less intuitive than the ps3's control? And the 360 doesn't have anything compelling for casuals? :lol: Just mention Halo or Gears and they're all over it.

For those of you calling me a PS3 fanboy and accuse me of giving out opinions and not facts, keep the following in mind:

1) I had said Blu-ray will beat HD-DVD. I was right.

2) I am perhaps the only person in this forum to say Microsoft won't support Blu-ray this generation. I was right...so far. No Xbox 360 Blu-ray support announced at this year's E3.

3) I have been saying that the PS3 is more powerful and will have better looking, sounding games. There is enough evidence already that proves me right.

4) I had been saying this generation will last a lot longer than the last one. I am most likely right as the gaming top dogs also agree with me.

none of those 4 make any of what you said fact rather than oppinion. :|

These 4 should give more credibility to my opinion. Do you feel wiser now?

Trust me. Being rightin the past doesn't suddenly make you a credible source for the future.

Sihanouk

[QUOTE="xsubtownerx"][QUOTE="dream431ca"]

Can you find me a link to anything discussing that issue?

dream431ca

http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20080619/153537

Not looking good for the PS3.

That article has nothing to do with the PS3. Keep trying.

It shows you how obsolete the PS3's blu-ray player will be in a few years.

[QUOTE="BuryMe"]

Boy will i have fun picking this one apart

Well, I don't have too much fun teaching people how to think, though.

[QUOTE="Sihanouk"]Did you hear what EA's CEO said about regretting the fact that EA invested too much too early on Xbox 360 and PS3? What does this mean? It means that when next-generation starts, developers will be reluctant to invest in next gen.

Did you hear the top dogs at THQ and Epic both voicing their belief that next-generation won't start till at least between 2012 and 2018. What does this mean? It means that this generation will last at least 4 years from now, too long, for a soon to be outdated console. So why will this generation be too long for Xbox 360?

Really? When did they say that? I gurantee the console manufacturers will start promoting their new hardware in the next couple of years. The next generation will start by 2012 at the very latest

Do a Yahoo news search on Forbe's PS4 article. Don't guarantee something unless you have enough wisdom to back it up.

Look at the trends, which all vastly favor the PS3:

1. Game contents are getting bigger, needing more graphics and more sounds. Early on, developers spent too much time crafting game engines that they don't have the time to make lengthy, beautiful games. Xbox 360 uses space-limiting, last gen DVD, not Blu-ray.

And yet, oblivion is a huge game. GTA IV is pretty big too. And if the odd game is on multiple discs, so what? Standing up to switch discs every 20 hours won't kill you

Oblivion is huge, but its graphics aren't that good now, and can be quite repetative. GTA graphics suck. For free-roaming games like GTA4 and for racing games, switching disks will not be practical.

2. Multiplayer numbers and the size of enemies and environments are getting bigger. It is evident that Xbox 360 can't handle such massive sizes. Think Resistance 2 and MAG. Think Killzone 2 whose mulitplayer graphics look just as good as single player's. Think about how there's nothing like them on the 360 even thought the 360 has a 1 year head start.

How are you making this claim about killzone 2? Have you playd it online yet? How do you know the 360 can't handle games bigger than it currently is? Do you really think it's going to stop growing over the rest of the generation?

The developers themselves make this claim. If the 360 can handle such games while maintaining graphics integrity, it would have already been made. Why would Microsoft not try to make such games? Sony's been claiming larger multiplayers since launch. All this time, Microsoft can't come up with such games? Because the 360 is not powerful enough.

3. HD TVs and Blu-ray movies are fast becoming mainstream. Gamers, you want the best looking games, right? So, do you also want the best looking movies? Don't look to the 360 for any help.

What do blu-ray movies have to do with gaming? Blu-ray movies has to do with the fact that gamers also like movies. And since gamers care about graphics, they will also care about movie resolutions.

4. More and more casuals are gaming on their TVs. Why is Xbox 360 the worst choice for casuals? LIVE fees. Lack of Blu-ray features. Lack of intuitive controls. History of hardcore fanbase. Common sense says more PS2 and Wii owners will buy the PS3 more than the 360.

Trust me. Casuals don't know about blu-ray features. The Xbox does have a hardcore fanbase. how are the controls un intuitive? Button placement isn't all that different from the ps3's. your common sense makes no sense what so eve. Live fees I'll give you.

LOL. They don't?LOL again. Causals who will spend more than 300 dollars will take the time to learn a thing or two about the products they buy, especially in these hard economic times. The 360's control isn't as intuitive as the Wii's. I am saying the PS3's controls are more intuitive than the 360's. I am just saying the 360 really has nothing compelling for the casuals while the PS3 at least has free PSN and Blu-ray.

For those of you calling me a PS3 fanboy and accuse me of giving out opinions and not facts, keep the following in mind:

1) I had said Blu-ray will beat HD-DVD. I was right.

2) I am perhaps the only person in this forum to say Microsoft won't support Blu-ray this generation. I was right...so far. No Xbox 360 Blu-ray support announced at this year's E3.

3) I have been saying that the PS3 is more powerful and will have better looking, sounding games. There is enough evidence already that proves me right.

4) I had been saying this generation will last a lot longer than the last one. I am most likely right as the gaming top dogs also agree with me.

none of those 4 make any of what you said fact rather than oppinion. :|

These 4 should give more credibility to my opinion. Do you feel wiser now?

Sihanouk

It's funny how, even with all of that hyperbole in your reply, you have yet to present any factual evidence to support your claims besides your own opinions and what youthink developers and consumers are thinking regarding the Xbox 360 and PS3.

me a link to anything discussing that issue? dream431ca

http://blog.wired.com/games/2008/04/solving-the-mys.html

1. The real biggest limitation to games is not storage space, it's memory bandwidth. Want big old World of Warcraft levels with Gears of War graphics? You need to be able to quickly move lots of data. More storage space is good, yes, but hard drive / disc loading speeds are lightyears slower than basic RAM. The 360 and PS3 both have similar memory bandwidth.

2. Graphics fidelity (anisiostrophic, anti-aliasing, higher resolutions, bigger textures, better rendering techniques) need better GPUs. In a six year console lifespan GPU "power" increases sixteen-fold. While the real-world changes of one GPU cycle might be minimal, after 3 ~ 4 years the difference becomes extremely noticeable, after 6 years you have the jump from the Gamecube to the Xbox 360, essentially.

3. The biggest limitation to number of players in a game is server capability and host bandwidth. If you want 100 players on a server, you need better servers, tighter netcode, and careful client design. A game like WoW can run on the simplest PC, but the servers running WoW are massively powerful, not to mention expensive to run.

-

So, why can't consoles be future proof? Well - because adding memory anticipating future usage is expensive - you need bandwidth so you want fast memory, but lots of fast memory would make your console cost a great deal. Adding the high speed RAM needed for loads of AA and such would make the console prohibitively expensive, so you go with the amount you need for the current graphics standard.

You can't make a console have a GPU from six years in the future - and making it have the top-of-the-line for the time would even be too expensive. There's nothing you can do here - you're stuck with a weak GPU after a few years.

Server limitations come about because you want to release lots of new console games, and people aren't keen to pay a monthly fee on top of a consoles price and game prices. If people won't pay to play, you can't have the number of servers you have on the PC world. On consoles you also can't let people have the ability to host their own servers under the current model, because of fears of piracy, hacking, and other security compromises. So, out of fear, the model remains closed, and few games have dedicated servers.

-

You just can't "future proof" a console. You can bet on emerging technologies, but that's a big risk, and if you're wrong you lose, and if you're right, you don't guarantee new technology won't come around.

[QUOTE="dream431ca"][QUOTE="xsubtownerx"][QUOTE="dream431ca"]

Can you find me a link to anything discussing that issue?

xsubtownerx

http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20080619/153537

Not looking good for the PS3.

That article has nothing to do with the PS3. Keep trying.

It shows you how obsolete the PS3's blu-ray player will be in a few years.

The Blu-ray player won't be obselete, the disk speed might be though. But here's a link to back up my point (which nobody opposing my argument provided)

This is important to note because each of DVD's X ratings have a minimum and a maximum read speed and the advertised read speed is taken from the maximum, consequently a DVD drives maximum read speed is almost never realized. On the other hand Blu-ray's only has one constant read speed:

At 2x Blu-ray can read as fast as 12x DVD's minimum read speed.

http://www.maxconsole.net/?mode=news&newsid=6060

[QUOTE="dream431ca"][QUOTE="xsubtownerx"][QUOTE="dream431ca"]

Can you find me a link to anything discussing that issue?

xsubtownerx

http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20080619/153537

Not looking good for the PS3.

That article has nothing to do with the PS3. Keep trying.

It shows you how obsolete the PS3's blu-ray player will be in a few years.

That is simply not true.

Not to mention the fact that article is more in line with recording, which no one expects a console to do.

The Blu Ray player in PS3 is superior to almost every stand alone player on the market now and for the rest of the year. Just as good picture quality with faster loading.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080118-new-nlu-ray-2-0-spec-makes-ps3-the-most-future-proof-player.html

http://kotaku.com/340668/ps3-is-still-the-blu+ray-player-to-buy

http://www.hometheatermag.com/discplayers/508sonyps3/

It's not going to be "obsolete" for quite some time.