I know that MGS 5, Gears 2, GTA 5, Halo 4, andthe sequel to SMG will be bad, I already klnew.WhenTheTwoFace

FF13, Gears 2, Banjo Nuts and Bolts,Star Ocean 4, Fable 2, Alan Wake.blitzkid1

It's certainly possible, but we know how nationalistic they are...TenP

OK when the 360 launched, when it first came out, it showed some games that demonstrated it's power right off the bat! It rivalled some of the best PC graphics for a very short while. That for me was an achievement for the console but it did so at the cost of having RROD.

Now the Cell is now to benefit from the new Zego programming technique, right? Well, I'm sorry but it's just too late. All this waiting for minor graphical optimisations means that even now the PS3 is getting going, it is so far behind it will never hold the title of graphics king. For a console so hyped on it's technical abilities,let me say it again, the PS3 will never be the graphics king because right now, PC gaming is so far ahead in performance their is no contest.

Look at any multiplat, look at pc exclusives such as stalker, crysis and world in conflict. These games represent a bar that the PS3 will never reach and more specifically at HD resolutions it will definitely not meet.

By the time Zego does start to yeild performance gains, i.e. in a few more years then even more advances in cpu's and gpu's will have put pc gaming yet another generation ahead and also there will no doubt be a new Xbox of sorts to contend with, with shiney new hardware introducing a new generation of console.

So by the time you see the ps3 reach it's potential, who will it be competing against?

My point is that Sony made a big mistake of doing 2 things. They have taken their time to develop a 10 year console that will yield incremental improvements in performance over time but at the same time hyped the console to be a graphical powerhouse. You just cant do that! You can't have both, especially if you're late to the table. If it had launched the same time as the 360 then maybe, but they were too late with almost everything this generation.

A 10 year console the PS3 may well be, but the graphics king, it will never be!

DAZZER7

[QUOTE="Fart_Storm"][QUOTE="VulcanMage119"][QUOTE="Fart_Storm"]

One thing that people forget is that the PS3 is a 10 year console. As we have seen with the PS1 and PS2, Sony keeps supporting their consoles for 10 years after they are released. The PS2 released in 2006, and will be a viable, current-gen platform until at least 2016 (or possibly longer due to the further unlocking of the Cell processor).

The 360? I will be replaced in 2010, making it a 4 year console. And we all know how M$ treats its old, obsolete consoles: no support.

I think that since 10/4= 2.5, that the PS3 is at least 2.5 times more valuable than the 360, and with the combined power of the Cell, blu-ray, free HDD, free online, wireless, bluetooth, XMB, Playstation Network, and classic games, the PS3 will be more than powerful enough in 2016. Reason? It is future-proof.

angelkimne

You are Incorrect sir. The 360 will not be cut off after the next gen, as it will still be making profit this time around. That only happened to the original xbox because it was a money pit. And the ps3 is already outdated compared to high end pcs (no I'm not a pc gamer, it's just rather obvious) so for it to wait 10 yrs would be retarded. And it would make the 360 a 5 yr console btw depending on launch date.

Sony said that the PS1 would be a 10 year console. What happened?

Sony said that the PS2 would be a 10 year console. What happened?

Sony said that the PS3 would be a 10 year console. Why won't this happen?

Sony is a Japanese company, and I understand Japan and its culture better than most people on system wars. When they say something, they mean it. There are no exaggerations, and word is honor. Japan uses a form of honor that we americans have no idea about.

PS3 WILL be here for 10 years, I have no doubt about it. The Cell will make sure of that.

So far Ps3 isn't.