TheSterls' forum posts

Avatar image for TheSterls
TheSterls

3117

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 TheSterls
Member since 2009 • 3117 Posts

[QUOTE="22Toothpicks"][QUOTE="dercoo"]

Hmm, my prediction of moderatly better PS3 seems to be coming true.

Not really surprised as nintendo always sells at a profit (good profit) and would likely launch at 300-350

dercoo

WTF are you people smoking? This takes a dump all over the PS3 :/ Especially the GPU.

Its better, but not the "OMGWTFBBQ 4-6X the Ps3!!!" that Sheep hyped it to be.

Seems doulble at most in some areas

For next gen thats just sad, like the wii was this gen

Its more powerful then the PS3 no doubt but the PS4 will dump all over Nintendos console most likely.

Avatar image for TheSterls
TheSterls

3117

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 TheSterls
Member since 2009 • 3117 Posts

1. Nintendo never reveals official specs. 2. Numbers mean nothing, as teh Cell has proven greatly. Numbers on paper look nice, but if developers can't use them, then what is the point? As long as it makes a jump over the capabilities of the 360/PS3 (i.e. DirectX 10 or 11 compatible and full 1080p @ 60fps), then it will be enough. Being "top-of-the-line" as history has so gloriously shown, is a formula for failure.foxhound_fox

Yes they do , the only time they didnt was on the Wii because they were far lower then the competition.

Avatar image for TheSterls
TheSterls

3117

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 TheSterls
Member since 2009 • 3117 Posts

[QUOTE="TheSterls"]

Thats the hermit list , but no im going to have to disagree.

soulitane

What would you change?

I would take out metro, Shogun and Arma 2.

Avatar image for TheSterls
TheSterls

3117

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 TheSterls
Member since 2009 • 3117 Posts

[QUOTE="ocstew"]Completely wrong? Who voted that and why?DragonfireXZ95
7 people did actually, probably jealous consolites. lol

Look how rabid it makes the hermits lmao. The PS3 keeps getting the awards though.

Avatar image for TheSterls
TheSterls

3117

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 TheSterls
Member since 2009 • 3117 Posts

Thats the hermit list , but no im going to have to disagree.

Avatar image for TheSterls
TheSterls

3117

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 TheSterls
Member since 2009 • 3117 Posts

[QUOTE="TheSterls"]

[QUOTE="InfinityMugen"] You weren't specific about the subjective notion of quality, which is another topic altogether. Since you implied 3rd parties weren't successful on Wii, I had to interject. Maybe in terms of games you liked, but they didn't kill anything compared to 3rd party sales on Wii, where it sold the most. Since the PS2 era, a lot of the smaller to mid tier developers went under/ coudnt develop PS3/360 games. Factor 5 and Free Radical come to mind. To me this entrie gen felt it lacked the variety compared to previous ones. The HD consoles are for the big pubs and pc devs looking to make an extra buck. The comment about playing safe with shooters has merit because atm that's mostly what developers are focused on right now. It's this gens jrpg.

InfinityMugen

Um but 3rd parties are not succesful on the wii. It has sold more 3rd party games only for the pure fact it has had for more 3rd party titles come out for it( mostly trash shovelware that nobody knows about). As for blockbuster titles that have actually made 3rd pary companies money the Wii has been by far the worst console of the 3. Nobody would dare rely on the Wii to make profit for them on a 3rd party title.

Like I said before, I was talking purely numbers, not the actual quality of the games. If nobody dared to rely on Wii to make profit from 3rd party titles, doesnt make sense for that platform to have the most.

Of course it does as game devlopment is far cheaper. It cost as much to make a wii game as it did to make last gen games.Let me give you an example. If the Wii sales 3 miley Cirus games a Barbie game and a dance game , each selling 100k a peace, that doesnt really hold a candle to say SF4 that goes and sells 3 million. So yes the Wii may have more 3rd party sales due to the fact it has lots of cheap games sell but you can count the 3rd party titles on 1 hand that broke the 2million mark.

Avatar image for TheSterls
TheSterls

3117

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 TheSterls
Member since 2009 • 3117 Posts

I can name 3 huge multiplats that came out in the past 2 monthes that look better on PS3. Not to mention pretty much all the excluisves look a level above what I see on my 360. So No.

Avatar image for TheSterls
TheSterls

3117

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 TheSterls
Member since 2009 • 3117 Posts

[QUOTE="Giancar"][QUOTE="InfinityMugen"] Nintendo sold the most 3rd party games with Wii, what are you being sarcastic about?

InfinityMugen

you knew what I meant...I was talking about quality 3rd party games... 360 and ps3 destroyed, in every sense of the word, the wii in 3rd arty offerings I ask myself, why would be that? If huge development costs "killed so many" 3rd party games for the 360 and ps3?

You weren't specific about the subjective notion of quality, which is another topic altogether. Since you implied 3rd parties weren't successful on Wii, I had to interject. Maybe in terms of games you liked, but they didn't kill anything compared to 3rd party sales on Wii, where it sold the most. Since the PS2 era, a lot of the smaller to mid tier developers went under/ coudnt develop PS3/360 games. Factor 5 and Free Radical come to mind. To me this entrie gen felt it lacked the variety compared to previous ones. The HD consoles are for the big pubs and pc devs looking to make an extra buck. The comment about playing safe with shooters has merit because atm that's mostly what developers are focused on right now. It's this gens jrpg.

Um but 3rd parties are not succesful on the wii. It has sold more 3rd party games only for the pure fact it has had for more 3rd party titles come out for it( mostly trash shovelware that nobody knows about). As for blockbuster titles that have actually made 3rd pary companies money the Wii has been by far the worst console of the 3. Nobody would dare rely on the Wii to make profit for them on a 3rd party title.

Avatar image for TheSterls
TheSterls

3117

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 TheSterls
Member since 2009 • 3117 Posts

Probably a good idea. Not many people were thrilled about the $599 launch PS3sBPoole96

Considering faster Blu-Ray drives are about 4x cheaper then when they were released on the PS3 they could put a great gpu and cpu with some good ram and still be saving about 200 dollars per a console.

Avatar image for TheSterls
TheSterls

3117

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 TheSterls
Member since 2009 • 3117 Posts

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="TheSterls"]

Funny thing is when I see the Wticher 2 the first thing it reminds me of is GOW3 or UC2 its not visually far ahead of either from a asset standpoint. But to have those visuals on that scale is very impressive. Of course pc gamers will automatically act like its the second coming of christ due to the fact its a pc exclusive.

Frozzik

As a PS3 and PC gamer I can say this with all honesty: Witcher 2 blows anything on the PS3 away. Completely.

Same here. Nothing on PS3 comes close. The detail on the textures in TW2 is simply astounding. Has anybody noticed it's the same 2 or 3 people in every thread concerning TW2 saying it doesnt look as good as the rest of us claim?

I havent made any comments about the wticher in any thread. I think it looks great but its not mind boggling . If this is what the next gen of consoles came up with id be disapointed unless it was a launch title.

It does look outstanding though , and i think I may buy the game( curious how my GTX285 would run it.)