This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="LegatoSkyheart"]
The PS3 GOT Multiplats. Whether they were good or not, They STILL got them.
Haziqonfire
So disregard the quality of the ports, as long as they got them?
How come this was never said when the Wii got terrible ports of HD games then? lol.
name the really terrible PS3 multiplats...how much 5, 6? Do you know the amount quality PS3 multiplats. And the Wii didn't get like 90% of multiplats =/
name the really terrible PS3 multiplats...how much 5, 6? Do you know the amount quality PS3 multiplats. And the Wii didn't get like 90% of multiplats =/Giancar
Most of them are always better on the 360, and most of the 360 versions are worse than the PC version.
The 360 and PS3 versions always got gimped, suffering from various performance issues, yet they get a free pass because console games know no better.
[QUOTE="Giancar"]name the really terrible PS3 multiplats...how much 5, 6? Do you know the amount quality PS3 multiplats. And the Wii didn't get like 90% of multiplats =/Haziqonfire
Most of them are always better on the 360, and most of the 360 versions are worse than the PC version.
The 360 and PS3 versions always got gimped, suffering from various performance issues, yet they get a free pass because console games know no better.
gimped? unplayable? between 360 and ps3 90% of the time is pixel counting stuff, nothing to brag about. There are noticeable differences in like 5 or so games. And while PC versions are usually better, due performances and mods, the HD games are just great. It really feels the jump from last gen. And sometimes PC multi are ports from HD versions. That's the problem of Wii multi, those are really dumbed down. And not just from the graphics sense. So comparing Wii multi to HD multis leaves so much to desire. Heck don't make me talk about the online component. =/
Every consumer base got shafted in some way. Nintendo lessening their focus on hardcore gamers while not getting any multiplats and bad ports, Sony with the terrible launch of PS3 and Microsoft completely disregarding their fanbase for the casuals in the recent years.
gimped? unplayable? between 360 and ps3 90% of the time is pixel counting stuff, nothing to brag about. There are noticeable differences in like 5 or so games. And while PC versions are usually better, due performances and mods, the HD games are just great. It really feels the jump from last gen. And sometimes PC multi are ports from HD versions. That's the problem of Wii multi, those are really dumbed down. And not just from the graphics sense. So comparing Wii multi to HD multis leaves so much to desire. Heck don't make me talk about the online component. =/Giancar
The PS3 is always worse in suffering from things like frame rate issues or lighting. Also, console games in general barely manage to keep up with 30 FPS and it's kind of embarrassing. You can look up various performance tests of games like Deus Ex Human Revolution on YouTube and see for yourself. I own that game on the 360 but if I had a gaming PC, I'd most definitely get that version - at least that way it wouldn't struggle to remain 30 FPS locked.
I'm not denying that the Wii multiplatform titles are dumbed down or bad ports, but I don't see why PS3/360 get a free pass and Wii doesn't. If you're going to be fair, then you ought to give them all a free pass. It's obvious all three of those consoles do a poor job of handling those ports compared to the PC.
I don't see how anyone who is heavily invested in gaming only owns a one platform. Most people who are heavily invested in gaming own at least two, if not all three. I find that if people bring up that the Wii missed out on multiplats, then the people who didn't own a Wii missed out on exclusive content that was critically acclaimed as well.Wii gamers missed a huge amount of awesome mUlitplats like Assasin's Creed, Burnout, Dark Souls, Streetfighter IV series, Mvc series and so much more.
EPaul
I'm not denying that the Wii multiplatform titles are dumbed down or bad ports, but I don't see why PS3/360 get a free pass and Wii doesn't. HaziqonfireBecause, wii misses like 90% of them. No Batman, No Dark Souls, No Skyrim, No ME, No AC, No De Ex and so on =/
I won't even comment the performance issues with you if you are still believing that PS3 always suffer great problems. It's a dead end here. [QUOTE="Haziqonfire"]I'm not denying that the Wii multiplatform titles are dumbed down or bad ports, but I don't see why PS3/360 get a free pass and Wii doesn't. GiancarBecause, wii misses like 90% of them. No Batman, No Dark Souls, No Skyrim, No ME, No AC, No De Ex and so on =/
Most of the cases, it does. That being said - I also mentioned that the 360 is no saint either, they're both awful compared to PC gaming.
I also understand that the Wii misses out on multiplats, but like I mentioned earlier, the PS3/360 never got the same first party titles nor did it get third party exclusives like Little King's Story, Muramasa, Bit. Trip, etc.
It works both ways - I don't see how it's any different beyond the quantity of titles missed, which honestly depends on the player, not everyone has the same taste in games.
As much as Sony and Microsoft did their part shafting their customers, they still had 3rd party support. Nintendo fans got the worst of it imo. Sure the 1st party was great, but a market leading console shouldn't have to miss out on Street Fighter, Marvel vs Capcom 3, Final Fantasy, Metal Gear, etc.
I traded in my flaky PS2 and a handful of games for a PS3 at launch, got $150 trade-in value and have used it as my primary movie player since 2007. So I basically traded in my PS2 and controllers for a PS2, PS3, and Blu-Ray player. I haven't spent an additional dime on accessories (except a new controller) or online. I'm quite content with that.
[QUOTE="DireOwl"]
Wii owners overall. PS3 owners at the beginning of the gen. 360 owners the last 2 years or so.
xhawk27
Really. The last two years XBL has gotten much better and now Kinect you have the full spectrum of gaming.
O.K. better XBOX Live in exchange exclusives? Yeah that seems fair. Also, Kinect is still pretty much unproven.
Whaa...?[QUOTE="LegatoSkyheart"]
The Nintendo Wii didn't even get mentioned and when the Wii finally gets a game from a 3rd Party it gets turned into some Onrail crap that doesn't even have it's place in the Series.
nintendoboy16
The only third party on-rail games in those categories the Wii ever had was Resident Evil Chronicles and Dead Space Extraction. Heck I remember YOU acknowledging other third party games that aren't on rails like Goldeneye (FPS), Tatsunoko vs Capcom (Fighting), and Sonic Colors (Platformer).
Which came out after Sonic and the Secret Rngs, Olympic games, and Sonic and the black Knight which were all on rails.No option for PC players. We got console port after console port. On former pc exclusives like the Crysis and BF series...
We also got a ton of games that typically would have been console exclusives in the past, and Steam really took off. Overall, PC is the best gaming platform, so it's hard to say PC gamers got shafted more than somebody who games on any one console.No option for PC players. We got console port after console port. On former pc exclusives like the Crysis and BF series...
blues35301
Wii owners by far. The 3rd party line up was worse then the Gamecube and the first party games were simplified versions of past games for the most part. Plus no new IP from Nintendo that was not a party game. Nintendo is dead to me.
No option for PC players. We got console port after console port. On former pc exclusives like the Crysis and BF series...
blues35301
I disagree, I think PC has grown to be the best platform this gen. Steam, the flourishing indie scene, lots of games that would have been console exclusive in previous gens, not as much upgrading, relatively cheaper than it used to be, driver updates and whatnot are no longer experience breaking issues and consoles leeching the FPS market has opened up many genres on the PC that wouldn't have existed before.
Wii owners
so people are trying to argue that PS3's $600 launch price was somehow giving consumers the shaft???? really? other than listing the price what is their argumentare you guys giving to make it a"shaft"?
Let's take a look at what PS3 launched with out the box for it's requested price...
1. Full backward compatablity with PS1 and PS2 libraries
2. HDMI out the box
3. Region free coding to play games from other countries with no modding
4. Blue-tooth compatibility
5. web browser
6. WiFI out the box
7. SD Memory Card,CompactFlash Card,Memory Sticke
8. Playable media types BD-ROM, CD-ROM, DVD-ROM (blu-ray player in 2006 alonecost betweern $500-$2000)
9. Online game service freefor all users out the box.
10. open platform design enablingconsumers to use 3rd party accessories to be used with the pS3 like off brand blue-tooth headsets or lap-top hard drives to upgrade the HDD (up to 500gig)
lets see what xbox360 for a $400 launch price gave consumers out the box...
1. Playable media types...DvD9, CD-ROM
2.madatory $50 annual fee in order to play games on-line...now that price has been increased to $60.
3. Battery powered controllers that require frequent change out.
4. virtually non-existent backward compatibility capability
5. closed platform design, requiring consumers to pay extreme propitiatory prices for all accessories (ex $100 for a 20 gig hdd)
hmmm
It's also curious that those people are also only listing $600...there were 2 versions the 60 gig and the 20 gig the 20 gig was only $500.
FYI:
there are things people can probably argue for consumers getting the shaft with the PS3 in general (not so sure about that when compaired to others) but PS3's launch price is not one of them.
The xbox360 is much more of a shaft for launching at $400 than PS3 is for launching at $600.
EDIT:
more info for the idiotic argument some people are trying to make using the PS3's launch price as a platform...
"CNET's "Best of CES 2006". The player is top of the line and truly lives up to the name "Elite" with features such as 1080p output via HDMI, upconversion of DVDs to 1080i/1080p and networking features for playback of HD video. The player is scheduled for US release in May 2006 and will retail for about $1,800. Please note that this price isn't representative of a standard Blu-ray player, it's an Elite-brand player which usually costs at least two times what a standard version does. Pioneer also displayed their BD/DVD writer (BDR-101A), which is scheduled for US release Q1 2006 and will retail for about $1,000."
http://www.blu-ray.com/ces2006/
long story short. A blu-ray player alone in 2006 cost between $500 and $2000, ALONE! When people bought a PS3 for $500 or $600 they were investing in a tangible value...and that value did not deminishas long asthey still have the hardware today.
"It's also curious that those people are also only listing $600...there were 2 versions the 60 gig and the 20 gig the 20 gig was only $500."
Only 500 bucks.
Jesus.
To be honest, the most important thing is that we all got screwed this gen. Arguing about who got screwed over the most is like arguing about how much s**t you were forced to eat.
Bottom line, you were eating s**t.
By chance are your parents related?so people are trying to argue that PS3's $600 launch price was somehow giving consumers the shaft???? really? other than listing the price what is their argumentare you guys giving to make it a"shaft"?
Let's take a look at what PS3 launched with out the box for it's requested price...
1. Full backward compatablity with PS1 and PS2 libraries
2. HDMI out the box
3. Region free coding to play games from other countries with no modding
4. Blue-tooth compatibility
5. web browser
6. WiFI out the box
7. SD Memory Card,CompactFlash Card,Memory Sticke
8. Playable media types BD-ROM, CD-ROM, DVD-ROM
9. Online game service freefor all users out the box.
10. open platform design enablingconsumers to use 3rd party accessories to be used with the pS3 like off brand blue-tooth headsets or lap-top hard drives to upgrade the HDD (up to 500gig)
lets see what xbox360 for a $400 launch price gave consumers out the box...
1. Playable media types...DvD9, CD-ROM
2.madatory $50 annual fee in order to play games on-line...now that price has been increased to $60.
3. Battery powered controllers that require frequent change out.
4. virtually non-existent backward compatibility capability
5. closed platform design, requiring consumers to pay extreme propitiatory prices for all accessories (ex $100 for a 20 gig hdd)
hmmm
It's also curious that those people are also only listing $600...there were 2 versions the 60 gig and the 20 gig the 20 gig was only $500.
FYI:
there are things people can probably argue for consumers getting the shaft with the PS3 in general (not so sure about that when compaired to others) but PS3's launch price is not one of them.
The xbox360 is much more of a shaft for launching at $400 than PS3 is for launching at $600.
casharmy
The Xbox 360 actually had good games its first year. The PS3 was available for $300 by the time it actually got a decent library. That is why early adopters were screwed.so people are trying to argue that PS3's $600 launch price was somehow giving consumers the shaft???? really? other than listing the price what is their argumentare you guys giving to make it a"shaft"?
Let's take a look at what PS3 launched with out the box for it's requested price...
1. Full backward compatablity with PS1 and PS2 libraries
2. HDMI out the box
3. Region free coding to play games from other countries with no modding
4. Blue-tooth compatibility
5. web browser
6. WiFI out the box
7. SD Memory Card,CompactFlash Card,Memory Sticke
8. Playable media types BD-ROM, CD-ROM, DVD-ROM
9. Online game service freefor all users out the box.
10. open platform design enablingconsumers to use 3rd party accessories to be used with the pS3 like off brand blue-tooth headsets or lap-top hard drives to upgrade the HDD (up to 500gig)
lets see what xbox360 for a $400 launch price gave consumers out the box...
1. Playable media types...DvD9, CD-ROM
2.madatory $50 annual fee in order to play games on-line...now that price has been increased to $60.
3. Battery powered controllers that require frequent change out.
4. virtually non-existent backward compatibility capability
5. closed platform design, requiring consumers to pay extreme propitiatory prices for all accessories (ex $100 for a 20 gig hdd)
hmmm
It's also curious that those people are also only listing $600...there were 2 versions the 60 gig and the 20 gig the 20 gig was only $500.
FYI:
there are things people can probably argue for consumers getting the shaft with the PS3 in general (not so sure about that when compaired to others) but PS3's launch price is not one of them.
The xbox360 is much more of a shaft for launching at $400 than PS3 is for launching at $600.
casharmy
[QUOTE="casharmy"]By chance are your parents related?so people are trying to argue that PS3's $600 launch price was somehow giving consumers the shaft???? really? other than listing the price what is their argumentare you guys giving to make it a"shaft"?
Let's take a look at what PS3 launched with out the box for it's requested price...
1. Full backward compatablity with PS1 and PS2 libraries
2. HDMI out the box
3. Region free coding to play games from other countries with no modding
4. Blue-tooth compatibility
5. web browser
6. WiFI out the box
7. SD Memory Card,CompactFlash Card,Memory Sticke
8. Playable media types BD-ROM, CD-ROM, DVD-ROM
9. Online game service freefor all users out the box.
10. open platform design enablingconsumers to use 3rd party accessories to be used with the pS3 like off brand blue-tooth headsets or lap-top hard drives to upgrade the HDD (up to 500gig)
lets see what xbox360 for a $400 launch price gave consumers out the box...
1. Playable media types...DvD9, CD-ROM
2.madatory $50 annual fee in order to play games on-line...now that price has been increased to $60.
3. Battery powered controllers that require frequent change out.
4. virtually non-existent backward compatibility capability
5. closed platform design, requiring consumers to pay extreme propitiatory prices for all accessories (ex $100 for a 20 gig hdd)
hmmm
It's also curious that those people are also only listing $600...there were 2 versions the 60 gig and the 20 gig the 20 gig was only $500.
FYI:
there are things people can probably argue for consumers getting the shaft with the PS3 in general (not so sure about that when compaired to others) but PS3's launch price is not one of them.
The xbox360 is much more of a shaft for launching at $400 than PS3 is for launching at $600.
clone01
That's it?Lemmings swear up and down it's the cows that are the worst fanboys...lol you are pathetic. Did my post hurt your feeling or something? I guess this is the best a simpleton can do. if you can't come up with a logical counter argument just STFU.
[QUOTE="clone01"]By chance are your parents related?casharmy
That's it?Lemmings swear up and down it's the cows that are the worst fanboys...lol you are pathetic. Did my post hurt your feeling or something? I guess this is the best a simpleton can do. if you can't come up with a logical counter argument just STFU.
[QUOTE="casharmy"]The Xbox 360 actually had good games its first year. The PS3 was available for $300 by the time it actually got a decent library. That is why early adopters were screwed.so people are trying to argue that PS3's $600 launch price was somehow giving consumers the shaft???? really? other than listing the price what is their argumentare you guys giving to make it a"shaft"?
Let's take a look at what PS3 launched with out the box for it's requested price...
1. Full backward compatablity with PS1 and PS2 libraries
2. HDMI out the box
3. Region free coding to play games from other countries with no modding
4. Blue-tooth compatibility
5. web browser
6. WiFI out the box
7. SD Memory Card,CompactFlash Card,Memory Sticke
8. Playable media types BD-ROM, CD-ROM, DVD-ROM
9. Online game service freefor all users out the box.
10. open platform design enablingconsumers to use 3rd party accessories to be used with the pS3 like off brand blue-tooth headsets or lap-top hard drives to upgrade the HDD (up to 500gig)
lets see what xbox360 for a $400 launch price gave consumers out the box...
1. Playable media types...DvD9, CD-ROM
2.madatory $50 annual fee in order to play games on-line...now that price has been increased to $60.
3. Battery powered controllers that require frequent change out.
4. virtually non-existent backward compatibility capability
5. closed platform design, requiring consumers to pay extreme propitiatory prices for all accessories (ex $100 for a 20 gig hdd)
hmmm
It's also curious that those people are also only listing $600...there were 2 versions the 60 gig and the 20 gig the 20 gig was only $500.
FYI:
there are things people can probably argue for consumers getting the shaft with the PS3 in general (not so sure about that when compaired to others) but PS3's launch price is not one of them.
The xbox360 is much more of a shaft for launching at $400 than PS3 is for launching at $600.
PurpleMan5000
PurpleMan5000: "The Xbox 360 actually had good games its first year."
:? So did the PS3....
PurpleMan5000: "The PS3 was available for $300 by the time it actually got a decent library"
That's your opinion...many disagree.
PurpleMan5000: "That is why early adopters were screwed"
The title of the thread I entered says: "Which consumer base got shafted the most this gen?"
[QUOTE="casharmy"]By chance are your parents related?so people are trying to argue that PS3's $600 launch price was somehow giving consumers the shaft???? really? other than listing the price what is their argumentare you guys giving to make it a"shaft"?
Let's take a look at what PS3 launched with out the box for it's requested price...
1. Full backward compatablity with PS1 and PS2 libraries
2. HDMI out the box
3. Region free coding to play games from other countries with no modding
4. Blue-tooth compatibility
5. web browser
6. WiFI out the box
7. SD Memory Card,CompactFlash Card,Memory Sticke
8. Playable media types BD-ROM, CD-ROM, DVD-ROM
9. Online game service freefor all users out the box.
10. open platform design enablingconsumers to use 3rd party accessories to be used with the pS3 like off brand blue-tooth headsets or lap-top hard drives to upgrade the HDD (up to 500gig)
lets see what xbox360 for a $400 launch price gave consumers out the box...
1. Playable media types...DvD9, CD-ROM
2.madatory $50 annual fee in order to play games on-line...now that price has been increased to $60.
3. Battery powered controllers that require frequent change out.
4. virtually non-existent backward compatibility capability
5. closed platform design, requiring consumers to pay extreme propitiatory prices for all accessories (ex $100 for a 20 gig hdd)
hmmm
It's also curious that those people are also only listing $600...there were 2 versions the 60 gig and the 20 gig the 20 gig was only $500.
FYI:
there are things people can probably argue for consumers getting the shaft with the PS3 in general (not so sure about that when compaired to others) but PS3's launch price is not one of them.
The xbox360 is much more of a shaft for launching at $400 than PS3 is for launching at $600.
clone01
well, that's one explanation.
:lol:
The PS3 had games that were worthy of a 500/600 dollar price tag in it's first year?PurpleMan5000: "The Xbox 360 actually had good games its first year."
:? So did the PS3....
casharmy
Damn, that attack for massive damage must have knocked the s**t out of you.
The Xbox 360 actually had good games its first year. The PS3 was available for $300 by the time it actually got a decent library. That is why early adopters were screwed.[QUOTE="PurpleMan5000"][QUOTE="casharmy"]
so people are trying to argue that PS3's $600 launch price was somehow giving consumers the shaft???? really? other than listing the price what is their argumentare you guys giving to make it a"shaft"?
Let's take a look at what PS3 launched with out the box for it's requested price...
1. Full backward compatablity with PS1 and PS2 libraries
2. HDMI out the box
3. Region free coding to play games from other countries with no modding
4. Blue-tooth compatibility
5. web browser
6. WiFI out the box
7. SD Memory Card,CompactFlash Card,Memory Sticke
8. Playable media types BD-ROM, CD-ROM, DVD-ROM
9. Online game service freefor all users out the box.
10. open platform design enablingconsumers to use 3rd party accessories to be used with the pS3 like off brand blue-tooth headsets or lap-top hard drives to upgrade the HDD (up to 500gig)
lets see what xbox360 for a $400 launch price gave consumers out the box...
1. Playable media types...DvD9, CD-ROM
2.madatory $50 annual fee in order to play games on-line...now that price has been increased to $60.
3. Battery powered controllers that require frequent change out.
4. virtually non-existent backward compatibility capability
5. closed platform design, requiring consumers to pay extreme propitiatory prices for all accessories (ex $100 for a 20 gig hdd)
hmmm
It's also curious that those people are also only listing $600...there were 2 versions the 60 gig and the 20 gig the 20 gig was only $500.
FYI:
there are things people can probably argue for consumers getting the shaft with the PS3 in general (not so sure about that when compaired to others) but PS3's launch price is not one of them.
The xbox360 is much more of a shaft for launching at $400 than PS3 is for launching at $600.
casharmy
PurpleMan5000: "The Xbox 360 actually had good games its first year."
:? So did the PS3....
PurpleMan5000: "The PS3 was available for $300 by the time it actually got a decent library"
That's your opinion...many disagree.
PurpleMan5000: "That is why early adopters were screwed"
The title of the thread I entered says: "Which consumer base got shafted the most this gen?"
The PS3 ended up being the best console of the gen. If you were buying a console at release, it also would have been the worst buy.By chance are your parents related?[QUOTE="clone01"][QUOTE="casharmy"]
so people are trying to argue that PS3's $600 launch price was somehow giving consumers the shaft???? really? other than listing the price what is their argumentare you guys giving to make it a"shaft"?
Let's take a look at what PS3 launched with out the box for it's requested price...
1. Full backward compatablity with PS1 and PS2 libraries
2. HDMI out the box
3. Region free coding to play games from other countries with no modding
4. Blue-tooth compatibility
5. web browser
6. WiFI out the box
7. SD Memory Card,CompactFlash Card,Memory Sticke
8. Playable media types BD-ROM, CD-ROM, DVD-ROM
9. Online game service freefor all users out the box.
10. open platform design enablingconsumers to use 3rd party accessories to be used with the pS3 like off brand blue-tooth headsets or lap-top hard drives to upgrade the HDD (up to 500gig)
lets see what xbox360 for a $400 launch price gave consumers out the box...
1. Playable media types...DvD9, CD-ROM
2.madatory $50 annual fee in order to play games on-line...now that price has been increased to $60.
3. Battery powered controllers that require frequent change out.
4. virtually non-existent backward compatibility capability
5. closed platform design, requiring consumers to pay extreme propitiatory prices for all accessories (ex $100 for a 20 gig hdd)
hmmm
It's also curious that those people are also only listing $600...there were 2 versions the 60 gig and the 20 gig the 20 gig was only $500.
FYI:
there are things people can probably argue for consumers getting the shaft with the PS3 in general (not so sure about that when compaired to others) but PS3's launch price is not one of them.
The xbox360 is much more of a shaft for launching at $400 than PS3 is for launching at $600.
KarateeeChop
well, that's one explanation.
:lol:
collective stupidity...I've never seen it so vibrantly demonstrated as what some of you lemmings have shown here on this little web site.
Go ahead and pull out some more of those pointless one-liners that have absolutely nothing to do with the topic or my post.It so clearly demonstrate your complete lack of any intelligence and logic...it is what I have come to expect.
at least there was one lemming who at least tried to give some reason to rebut my post, but the likes of you, clone 1, Waltefmoney, and sts106mat are about the most idiotic fanboys on the site,that have absolutely 0 argument skill. All you guys do is run behind each others ass andtry your best insult phrases form your book of dummies until the other person gets tired of replying to your stupidity. You are a waste of space.
I can understand being disappointed with the PS3. People had really high expectations for it, some of which were unrealistic such as "The Power of the Cell" or just didn't meet dev's wishes(Jak and Daxter PS3 game, FFVsXIII, KH3). Okay, the fact that the games I were anticipating didn't come out was definitely the biggest disappointment, but ND had no intention of making a PS3 Jak game unfortunately, and SE decided to ignore its fans and do as it pleased, making games such as XIII and KH spinoffs that didn't make most fans happy. I can't blame Sony for that, however. Still, those games were my reason for buying the PS3 in the first place.:(On the bright side, the PS3 did deliver. New games came about that I would've never expected including LittleBigPlanet, which quickly became a new favorite for me. Uncharted was also good, Resistance started out well then I didn't care about it after the disappointment of Resistance 2. Tools of Destruction was kind of disappointing, but I really liked A Crack in Time. There were other great games too. So at the beginning of the gen, the 360 cause of RRoD. I think overall PS3 owners got shafted because of the high, unrealistic expectations that people had of it and that didn't meet dev's wishes. I'm still happy I own a PS3. I like its games and its blu-ray, but I'm kind of disappointed that the games I was anticipating never came out.NYrockinlegend
if you were/are a lemming that would be a breath of freash air...congrats on making one of the firstreal arguments of how some people could have been shafted by getting a PS3.
idk about gamers but for me personally it was the ps3.
i got it a few months after launch and the thing quite literally sat there and gathered dust for over 2 years.
all i used it for in the early days was warhawk and the bluray player.
i also had to pay $110 to replace two suxasses controllers with two dualshock3s so that was kinda a bummer too.
[QUOTE="NYrockinlegend"]I can understand being disappointed with the PS3. People had really high expectations for it, some of which were unrealistic such as "The Power of the Cell" or just didn't meet dev's wishes(Jak and Daxter PS3 game, FFVsXIII, KH3). Okay, the fact that the games I were anticipating didn't come out was definitely the biggest disappointment, but ND had no intention of making a PS3 Jak game unfortunately, and SE decided to ignore its fans and do as it pleased, making games such as XIII and KH spinoffs that didn't make most fans happy. I can't blame Sony for that, however. Still, those games were my reason for buying the PS3 in the first place.:(On the bright side, the PS3 did deliver. New games came about that I would've never expected including LittleBigPlanet, which quickly became a new favorite for me. Uncharted was also good, Resistance started out well then I didn't care about it after the disappointment of Resistance 2. Tools of Destruction was kind of disappointing, but I really liked A Crack in Time. There were other great games too. So at the beginning of the gen, the 360 cause of RRoD. I think overall PS3 owners got shafted because of the high, unrealistic expectations that people had of it and that didn't meet dev's wishes. I'm still happy I own a PS3. I like its games and its blu-ray, but I'm kind of disappointed that the games I was anticipating never came out.casharmy
if you were/are a lemming that would be a breath of freash air...congrats on making one of the firstreal arguments of how some people could have been shafted by getting a PS3.
Not a lemming, but not a blind cow either. I play games, but I do listen to the details of the companies business-wise.
Over all the bottom line is that the 360 has been from the get go a bootleg PS3. They rushed it to the Market so people who didn't want to wait for a PS3 could get a bootleg PS3 early. That's why it had the highest fail rate of all time.
Problem is the 360 is a ripoff that never ends. First you get no bluray so you're stuck with 1997 era dvd. Then the controllers have batteries so you gotta buy a charge pack or buy new batteries every few days. Then you gotta pay $100 for a hard drive (lol) then you gotta pay $60 a year just to play multiplats online.
I can understand why Xbots feel they need to defend their investment. What are they gonna say? "Duurrr I pay more money for an inferior product"?
The PS3 had games that were worthy of a 500/600 dollar price tag in it's first year?[QUOTE="casharmy"]
PurpleMan5000: "The Xbox 360 actually had good games its first year."
:? So did the PS3....
heretrix
Damn, that attack for massive damage must have knocked the s**t out of you.
*sigh*
let me throw your comment back at you to see if you can see why its totally laughable and has nothing to do with what I'm saying....
"So you are saying that new Toshiba 56' glasses free3d,3,840 x 2,160 quad HD TV has moviesworth it's price tag its first year?"
Damn,you talk about some silly damage knocking the s**t out of me...yet before you do, you make a brain dead comment as if you don't even have one.
:| I am betting you still don't realize why your comment is stupid and irrelevant...even with my example.
BTW:
While you butted in trying to be a smart ass do you even know what my argument is? You obviously do not...and why do you guys keep on harping on the first year like idiots? this thread is not about the first year it's about the entire gen.
Wii60. PS3 has done great this gen; especially since they're in last place in sales. They've really had to step up their game and match nintendo in exclusives and MS in features, and beat them at both those things IMO. (blu-ray and exclusives like MGS4, DS, UC2, LBP etc)
[QUOTE="Giancar"]gimped? unplayable? between 360 and ps3 90% of the time is pixel counting stuff, nothing to brag about. There are noticeable differences in like 5 or so games. And while PC versions are usually better, due performances and mods, the HD games are just great. It really feels the jump from last gen. And sometimes PC multi are ports from HD versions. That's the problem of Wii multi, those are really dumbed down. And not just from the graphics sense. So comparing Wii multi to HD multis leaves so much to desire. Heck don't make me talk about the online component. =/Haziqonfire
The PS3 is always worse in suffering from things like frame rate issues or lighting. Also, console games in general barely manage to keep up with 30 FPS and it's kind of embarrassing. You can look up various performance tests of games like Deus Ex Human Revolution on YouTube and see for yourself. I own that game on the 360 but if I had a gaming PC, I'd most definitely get that version - at least that way it wouldn't struggle to remain 30 FPS locked.
I'm not denying that the Wii multiplatform titles are dumbed down or bad ports, but I don't see why PS3/360 get a free pass and Wii doesn't. If you're going to be fair, then you ought to give them all a free pass. It's obvious all three of those consoles do a poor job of handling those ports compared to the PC.
Speaking of Deus Ex, I loved that game enough to get all 3 versions :) Deus Ex for me was PC>PS3>360 This is because on the 360 it had UNGODLY loading times. Even when installed to the hard drive, it had like 1 minute loading times while the PS3 had 20-30 second loading times and PC with 5-10 second loading times. As for this thread, PS3 gamers got shafted early on with that ridiculous price, no games and inferior multiplats. 360 gamers as of recent years with M$ abandoning the core gamer, RROD and online fees and Wii gamers got pretty shafted overall with the majority of the games being shovelware, nintendos reach for the casual market and few albeit good games (overall librarys).Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment