Why are the PS3 and PS2 grouped together? It's not backwards compatible so they're two separate consoles. Anyway it would be the PC, followed by the PS3, followed by the Wii, for me. That's out of what I have so it's not like I think the 360 sucks.
Get ready to pay $3000 every year if you want to play the latest games.
imprezawrx500
loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool I would not even have spent that much over 5 years yet it can still run pretty much any new game on high on my 2.5 year old gpu. Yeah really. I paid $800 for my laptop that'll run just about everything.
There's a few instances where this service might be beneficial Unfortunately most of us on this site are not in them. lol I'm a part of the founding member's program and I definitely won't be renewing my subscription. There's just no reason for me to use it when I can purchase any game on there for my PC or PS3. At least on those platforms I can own the game (likely cheaper since OnLive shouldn't be having too many sales), keep it forever, play at a higher quality, skip out on OnLive's monthly fee, save my bandwidth, and not need a consistent internet connection to play. Since I'm guessing most people on this site are in a similar position, of course it seems silly.
I use to stick to only consoles the past few generations but I finally got into PC gaming this past year I already own more games on STEAM than my Wii, PS3, and DS combined
its not 2008-2009, you guys didnt get anyone better, Artest is garbage. Ariza was decent. Magic switched Hedo for Carter which is at least reasonable.mischa_barton
Artest has done a lot more in the playoffs than Carter has done, or did.. [spoiler] And I'm a Magic fan :cry: [/spoiler]
You implied that USC's punishment was unreasonably harsh. I'd call it a relative slap on the wrist.QuistisTrepe_
Yeah our different insight over this case doesn't illustrate our historic background one way or the other, especially when we both agree the NCAA usually gives harsh punishments. I've taken the liberty of expanding upon my stance though, so you can see I don't believe it's unreasonably harsh, per say, more like I believe it could better target those supposedly responsible.
I think this is absolutely appropriate. About time the NCAA took serious actions against one of their moneymaker schools.nocoolnamejim
Unfortunately this punishes the kids just as much, if not more, than those responsible actually responsible for the allegations. Not only are there innocent players that will be stripped of past accomplishments, but players NOW will also be punished. Sure attack the University, I'm cool with that, but this hurts as many innocent as it does guilty, which shouldn't be the goal of any effective form of punishment.
[QUOTE="FL_Lloyd"]Not surprising, the NCAA has a prominent history of giving unreasonably harsh punishments. USC will undoubtedly appeal though so we'll see what happens.QuistisTrepe_
Um, what? Oh my, someone needs a history lesson. The "death penalty" was so strong against SMU that it aided in the collapse of an entire conference as well as SMU football. It took the SMU football program 20 years to recover from the scandals. USC is getting off easy by comparison. Now we know why Pete Carroll jumped ship.
I need a history lesson because I said the NCAA has a harsh history, which you proved even more so?
Not surprising, the NCAA has a prominent history of giving unreasonably harsh punishments. USC will undoubtedly appeal though so we'll see what happens.
Log in to comment