whats with the increased hate of the playstation and sony recently?

[QUOTE="KevinnButlerNPK"]

You realize MS took care of the modded systems a year and a half ago, right?

ChubbyGuy40

Still no exclusives. So it goes back to the point of the first post.

Haters gonna hate.

Wut? There's not a day where I don't see at least a few 360 hate threads on the first page, versus all the praise the Sony gets here.

It's the circle of life around SW. Don't take it personal each console has its moments were they get tons of hate. Hell if you think this is bad you should have been around here in 06, 07 this is tame in comparison.

SW nature. When one console is getting a stream of good games released the haters come out in full force. Its just a cycle TC.

Bloody Glitchspot, have to change quotes...

[QUOTE="Giancar"]survive? It's not like the PS3 has 0 3rd party developers or have sold only a couple of millions. for a "last" place it has sold way more than other systems in other gens...I has sold more than enough to attract 3rd party developersAnnoyedDragon

If Sony didn't fund the development of those exclusives, why would people have purchased the PS3 at all? They paid considerably more for PS3 than 360 because of its promised potential. If that potential was never demonstrated, people wouldn't have continued adopting it. Remember, there was a significant amount of pessimism regarding the PS3 in the first year or so. If that had continued, who knows. No install base, no 3rd party support.

If Sony were to stop funding development right now they would have a install base for 3rd party support, but the hardware would still pose problems that could make the 360 look better; as we have seen.

"so using 1st party devs to demonstrate a marginal difference in graphics is bad
what do you rather show a 3rd party game or a game that you want to sell because it will bring you an extra cash flow?"

Read what I said.

"It's not just a matter of adding to their line-up that shows off their platform, it IS their line-up that shows off their platform."

I didn't say using 1st party development to demonstrate your platform is bad, I said needing 1st party development to do it is bad. Anyone can utilize 360, were as only Sony's in house development has managed to demonstrate PS3.

"And by doing so, they have made extra cash in software, attract more consumers and make their fanbase happy. Great way to do it so."

In today's high cost environment, where developers are expanding their audience cross platform to cover the higher expenses, it doesn't seem like the best way to differentiate your platform. As costs continue to rise and Sony keeps these games exclusive, they will be facing greater risk of not breaking even. Exclusive development from the 1st party may turn into marketing costs, a necessary expense to stand out.

"Anyways, the PS3 launch was a big mistake, that's sure. The 600$ pricetag almost killed them.
But software and hardware are not mutually exclusive bussiness in this industry. They go hand to hand.
Why not have a strong 1st party devs, make money, build fanbase, get more consumers
It is an extra value that they are selling. Basic economics.
Why sell just ice cream, if you can sell ice cream with oreos to outdo the competition?"

As I said above, console companies are shouldering the costs of modern big budget development; while restricting themselves to one platforms audience. I don't see how that could possibly be sustainable in the long term, developers went cross platform for a reason. A platform needs to be able to survive independent from 1st party expenditure, not reliant on it. Big budget 1st party exclusives are of course a good thing for a console, but for it to be the platforms sole means of differentiating itself; is going to become increasingly costly.

What if they try this same tactic next gen, when AAA development costs are expected to double? I'd hope they would have something else planned for then, and don't make the same mistake twice.

no thats not true at all there is still a lot of things make the ps3 is the best choice beside the exclusives : free online blue-ray with space over 50 GB reliable hardware no one can deny that and i can't ever say the same about the 360shadi2020

You said that wasn't true, but then went on to list things that aren't relevant to what I said.

Probably because of all the douchebag moves that they've pulled on Geohotz, GrafChokolo, and the other hackers.

I think TC might be new here to SW...

@Annoyed Dragon I don't understand how you can call a system a failure when if the 360 and PS3 came out at the same time and date PS3 would have outsold the 360. How can Sony be a failure when they have sold over 150 million PS2 and are still selling them. I know you will say that it is irrelevant to what you said but this is facts. While we are on the topic of spending money Microsoft has the richest man in the world backing them so money is not a option. That is why the can get timed exclusives such as GT4 Ballad of Gay Tony which they paid 50 million for. And Call of duty mapacks first. All I am saying is I don't consider the PS3 a failure with over 47 million Consoles sold. But you have your opinion and I have mine GOD Bless and Happy Gaming!!

BillyLee912

You are right, I don't see how sales figures (especially PS2) are relevant to the arguments I was making. PS3 being launched the same time as 360, and beating it in sales, wouldn't change my argument. PS3 could have sold four times as much as it has now, and it still wouldn't be relevant to what I was saying. Hell, if Sony was suicidal and multiplied their spending; it probably could achieve four times the sales. But when those sales are being funded by massive losses, who could call that a success?

The platform is dependant on Sony's funding to be successful. Take away the funding, and there wouldn't be a single PS3 hardware utilizing game. It would be the $600 console producing the same, often worse at launch, results as it's cheaper competitor. If Sony wasn't willing to make losses in their PS3 division year after year, the PS3 would have flopped and been discontinued in the first few years of this gen.

It is 2011, and where any developer can utilize 360; the PS3 is still reliant on Sony's in house development to demonstrate any of the (exaggerated) capabilities they promised it would have. 3rd party development is still either around 360 level, or worse. The only thing that has changed since launch is the install base, the problems are still the same.

That to me says it was a failure. The fans won't see it so long as Sony continues to pump money into exclusives, but PS3's approach was a mistake. The day the console can sell and be popular WITHOUT significant 1st party funding on Sony's part, as well as be tapped by 3rd party developers, you can say the platform is a success; as it can compete without considerable supplementation. But the hardware and launch marketing would still be a mistake, they could have avoided a lot of costs and headaches if they used something more accessible.

out of the 3 consoles they actually have decent exclusives (notice the plural) coming this year

[QUOTE="BillyLee912"]

@Annoyed Dragon I don't understand how you can call a system a failure when if the 360 and PS3 came out at the same time and date PS3 would have outsold the 360. How can Sony be a failure when they have sold over 150 million PS2 and are still selling them. I know you will say that it is irrelevant to what you said but this is facts. While we are on the topic of spending money Microsoft has the richest man in the world backing them so money is not a option. That is why the can get timed exclusives such as GT4 Ballad of Gay Tony which they paid 50 million for. And Call of duty mapacks first. All I am saying is I don't consider the PS3 a failure with over 47 million Consoles sold. But you have your opinion and I have mine GOD Bless and Happy Gaming!!

AnnoyedDragon

You are right, I don't see how sales figures (especially PS2) are relevant to the arguments I was making. PS3 being launched the same time as 360, and beating it in sales, wouldn't change my argument. PS3 could have sold four times as much as it has now, and it still wouldn't be relevant to what I was saying. Hell, if Sony was suicidal and multiplied their spending; it probably could achieve four times the sales. But when those sales are being funded by massive losses, who could call that a success?

The platform is dependant on Sony's funding to be successful. Take away the funding, and there wouldn't be a single PS3 hardware utilizing game. It would be the $600 console producing the same, often worse at launch, results as it's cheaper competitor. If Sony wasn't willing to make losses in their PS3 division year after year, the PS3 would have flopped and been discontinued in the first few years of this gen.

It is 2011, and where any developer can utilize 360; the PS3 is still reliant on Sony's in house development to demonstrate any of the (exaggerated) capabilities they promised it would have. 3rd party development is still either around 360 level, or worse. The only thing that has changed since launch is the install base, the problems are still the same.

That to me says it was a failure. The fans won't see it so long as Sony continues to pump money into exclusives, but PS3's approach was a mistake. The day the console can sell and be popular WITHOUT significant 1st party funding on Sony's part, as well as be tapped by 3rd party developers, you can say the platform is a success; as it can compete without considerable supplementation. But the hardware and launch marketing would still be a mistake, they could have avoided a lot of costs and headaches if they used something more accessible.

well, judging by the games coming out for the ps3, i'd say that.

[QUOTE="chicagodon"]

yes that gears and forza for the year. the ps3 has had lbp2 and killzone in the first two months. the show comes out on the 8th. the ps3 just does not stop. the box owners are mainstream gamers.

KevinnButlerNPK

Just like you people claiming you need someone elses PS3ID to unban your own? Well it's that i can't give program names or link to the site but i can tell you there is a program out there and it opens the lv2 protection of the PS3 and automatically changes your PS3ID so you can unban your own console. :lol: at people saying the hackers couldn't do it.

As for MS they haven't stopped anything either if you have the right modchip and the right tools they won't detect you online either.

that's because the ps3 is owning this year exclusive wise, as far as consoles go. the 360 is getting as much hate if not more for lack thereof.

If that is the case Xbox would be dead in the water you got to spend money sometimes to make money and do you realize how much Microsoft lost on the original Xbox and how much money they spent just to get timed exclusives and big 3rd party support for the 360 it would blow your mind. I will give you the link to the website soon. it will show how much Microsoft had to spend on the 360 to be what you would call a successful system. True Sony sunk a lot of money into the PS3 and it seemed like they were failing at first but this year they are starting to turn a profit and the future looks bright for PS3 and also for 360 for that matter with Gears of War 3 along is enough to make it a system seller. I agree with you that at first the PS3 was too expensive and overpriced all I am saying is now today PS3 is making money and will make more in the future.

BillyLee912

The first Xbox is not relevant to what I'm talking about. It was a new system trying to penetrate a crowded market, it is expected to have high costs. PS3 was launching from a position of dominance last generation, completely different circumstances.

As for the costs of the 360, I did say earlier that I wasn't denying that all 1st parties invest in their own platforms. The difference being the PS3 needs 1st party development to demonstrate the capabilities that justified the high price tag, were as anyone can develop for 360. Sony is spending far more on 1st party exclusive development than Microsoft, because they need to.

Really? Because I've been seeing countless "Xbox 360 has nothing for 2011" treads for quite a whlie.lamprey263

is that hate or truth?

OKAY!! THEN PLEASE BREAK IT DOWN TO ME WHAT ARE YOU SAYINING EXACTLY? ARE YOU SAYING THE PS3 IS DEAD AND 360 IS BETTER OR ARE YOU JUST SIMPILY SAYING THE PS3 IS A FAILURE BECAUSE IF THAT IS SO THAT IS YOUR OPINION AND I CANNOT KNOCK THAT BUT I JUST THINK DIFFERENTLY THAT'S ALL.

BillyLee912

I have made my views clear on several occasions. Nevertheless, here's the original post.

Clearly we have different definitions of success.

To me the PS3 is a failed system that was repeatedly jolted back to life with billion dollar investments, buffing out its exclusive line-up were the 3rd party weren't willing to fill.

If it wasn't for Sony willing to put the Playstation division billions into the red, there wouldn't be any games on PS3 that do anything useful with its hardware, not one. No Killzone, no God of War, no Heavy Rain, No Uncharted... nothing.

The PS3 would have probably been discontinued by now; if Sony didn't start massively spending from their own reserves to make the platform desirable. That to me looks like propping up a failed product.

AnnoyedDragon

My response to someone saying the PS3 is a success. I think the product itself is a failure, and the only reason it is still around today is because Sony continues to invest massively in the PS3's exclusive line-up. The 3rd party are incapable of taking advantage of the platforms claimed hardware benefits, despite the PS3's hardware performance making up its entire marketing campaign.

How could it be called anything but a mistake? Sony has to make do with it until next gen.

[QUOTE="BillyLee912"]

OKAY!! THEN PLEASE BREAK IT DOWN TO ME WHAT ARE YOU SAYINING EXACTLY? ARE YOU SAYING THE PS3 IS DEAD AND 360 IS BETTER OR ARE YOU JUST SIMPILY SAYING THE PS3 IS A FAILURE BECAUSE IF THAT IS SO THAT IS YOUR OPINION AND I CANNOT KNOCK THAT BUT I JUST THINK DIFFERENTLY THAT'S ALL.

AnnoyedDragon

I have made my views clear on several occasions. Nevertheless, here's the original post.

Clearly we have different definitions of success.

To me the PS3 is a failed system that was repeatedly jolted back to life with billion dollar investments, buffing out its exclusive line-up were the 3rd party weren't willing to fill.

If it wasn't for Sony willing to put the Playstation division billions into the red, there wouldn't be any games on PS3 that do anything useful with its hardware, not one. No Killzone, no God of War, no Heavy Rain, No Uncharted... nothing.

The PS3 would have probably been discontinued by now; if Sony didn't start massively spending from their own reserves to make the platform desirable. That to me looks like propping up a failed product.

AnnoyedDragon

My response to someone saying the PS3 is a success. I think the product itself is a failure, and the only reason it is still around today is because Sony continues to invest massively in the PS3's exclusive line-up. The 3rd party are incapable of taking advantage of the platforms claimed hardware benefits, despite the PS3's hardware performance making up its entire marketing campaign.

How could it be called anything but a mistake? Sony has to make do with it until next gen.

is it just me or is there topics being started none stop about how its failing and how its not providing a good gaming experience because a fwe games on cod are hacked and there exclusives ' suck' because they dont get 9s :S

dont get it at all

rawrB

Well that is your opinion my friend

BillyLee912

Some people hide behind their opinion like it is a shield that protects their views from criticism, in thise case you are using it in a effort to discredit what I have said; as if it is "just your opinion".

Sony's PS3 department was $4.7 billion in the red in 2009, FACT.

Nearly, if not all, of the games that apparently demonstrate the PS3's hardware capabilities was either developed or publisher by Sony. Fact.

If you can find any fault with the above, anything that comes entirely from opinion and has no stake in the real world, please do point it out.

I haven't noticed.

I haven't noticed.

RoOodriGowW

I dunno, maybe it has sumthing to do with the fact that ps3 fanboys will hype the ps3's exclusives to hell and get in everyone's face about it, and then when it comes out less than spectacular *cough* Killzone 3 *cough* xbox fanboys shove the scores in the ps3 fanboy's face to make up for the fact that the xbox has a weaker lineup than the ps3, then frustrated and raging ps3 fansboy who have been trying to validate their purchase of the ps3 since its in last place, will go into sony defence force mode and spawn threads like killzone is better than reach and "the essence of killzone" (why?), which incurs further wrath, and it all just turns into a chain reaction of Fail

When will this thread die? Here's the answer... THIS IS SW! People always hate on something, and it's the PS3's turn now.