Ten reasons not to get a PS3

[Erdrick Holmes]

Disclaimer: These are not my words, they were written and used with permission by a friend of mine.


--------
10 Reasons Not to Buy The PS3


Echo Evolution from our forums has dug up this post from IGN on the to 10 reasons you should not buy the PS3:


I was looking on the Xbox 360 forum and I spotted a topic by a IGN user
called Zeylon, and the topic name is Ten 10 reasons why you shouldn't
get the PS3, even if the PS3 was out today. And this is what Zeylon had
to say:

I don't think the PS3 sucks, but since IGN was stupid
enough to publish some trash with crappy reasons not to get an Xbox
360... all bets are off. http://ps3.ign.com/articles/668/668446p1.html.

1. No Live! In fact, sony came out and recently announced that they're not even going to bother to build an answer to Xbox Live.

Sony, you can keep your ability to plug in 7 controllers. I'll take being
able to play with 63 other players on live in a fps over 7 controllers
any day of the week.

2. The 36.5 megabits per second blu ray drive that Sony is squeezing into the PS3.

The BD-Rom drive that's going to be used in the PS3 has a speed of 36.5
MBits per second. 36.5megaBITS per second, not megaBYTES.
8bits=1byte=4.5megaBYTES per second. http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/

This is because the technology for the drives will still be in it's infancy when the ps3 is being launched.

That means in order to fill the 256MB cache (to load a decent sized race on
GT4 let's say) will take about 56 seconds of waiting.

To fill the same 256MB cache on the xbox 360's 12x DVD drive read at 15.75MB/s (megabytes) = 15 seconds

I know you know your math.

If you want an idea of how long a minute is, try staring at a clock for a minute and see how bored you get.

I'm not going to stand for huge loading times next gen as well. Long load
times are meant to be a thing of the past. But Sony is making sure
that's not the case by insisting on using Blu Ray drives when the
technology (and their read speeds) are still so early.

On top of this, Playstation 3 Blu Ray drive will cost Gamers $100+ per console. http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25901

And within 1 year, once blu-ray movies actually start coming out, the same
$100 would probably buy you a far faster 4x or 8x blu-ray player that
functions a lot better (compare watching dvds on a standalone player
vs. on the original ps2). And do you really think that, if blu-ray does
come out on top, that the 360 won't release with a version that can
play bluray versions as well? Legally, as long as MS pays the same
small fees that other blu ray player manufacterers pay to use sony's
tech, Sony can't stop MS from putting blu ray drives in their 360s. And
by then, the drives will likely be a lot cheaper, and a lot faster than
the once found on the launch PS3s.

3. Opting for 8 USB ports and multiple memory card readers over a HDD.

There's no reason to put in like 8 usb ports and all these freaking memory card
reader and all these other ports that no one wants. We can buy a memory
card adapter if we want.

We don't need 3 ethernet ports, one will be more than plenty. JUST INCLUDE 4 USB 2.O PORTS, 1 ETHERNET PORT,
SUPPORT FOR SONY MEMORY STICK DUOS (since that's what psp uses and
that's what makes Sony the most money) AND THE STUFF TO CONNECT TO
ANALOG AND HDTVS.

USE THE MANUFACTURING COSTS YOU SAVE TO THROW
IN A CHEAP 5GB HDD so developers can make games like Blinx or FFXI or
use the HDD to reduce load times and stuff.

IF A SMALL HDD IS INCLUDED IN EVERY SYSTEM, EVERY DEVELOPER WILL USE IT TO REDUCE LOAD
TIMES. Don't you guys want developers to use the hdd to reduce
loadtimes, to make games like FFXI that require a HDD? wouldn't that be
better than a bunch of useless ports that no one will use that you can
just buy an adapter for if you really need?

SELL THE ADAPTER TO CONNECT OLD PS2 AND PS1 GAMES SEPERATELY FOR LIKE $10 AND YOU'LL MAKE
ENOUGH TO COMPENSATE FOR THE HDD. Once we transfer all our old saves
over to the HDD, we can just sell it on ebay or something and it's one
less ugly port we have to look at.

HDD = Custom soundtracks, downloadable content, FFXI style mmorpgs, faster load times.

Multiple seperate Memory Card Readers Built in = Worthless

4. Sony disabling the ability to have LAN parties (without getting wired
controllers) by insisting on using bluetooth controllers over Infrared
ones.

"Bain admitted that the wireless signal could be interfered
with by another nearby PlayStation 3 console and in those instances
where many consoles would be close by, such as at a LAN party, it would
be necessary to default to using wired controllers"

5. The Cell.

Not only is the cell processor going to jack up the price of the PS3 quite
a bit. It's greatly bottlenecked by the 512 MBs of L2 Cache (the 360
has twice that much L2 Cache).

For all the hype about the cell. Guess what, the processor means jack when it comes to gaming. 3 3.2 ghz
cores vs. 1 3.2 ghz core and 7 PPEs mean nothing. What matters for
gaming is the GPU. And most reports (anandtech etc.) state that the
360's graphics card is almost a generation more advanced. This makes
sense, ATI built the card from the ground up with technology that won't
make it's way into PC cards for atleast an year or so. The NVIDEA card
in the PS3 is identical to the card as what'll be available for the PC
in a month or two. The only thing that the cpu will actually matter for
is the AI. And AI is more depenedent on L2 cache (this is what
ultimately determines the number of simultanous algorithms you can run
at any one time) than on processing speed. And guess what, the 360's
has twice the L2 cache of the PS3's Cell!

6. No requirement to make developers use 720p.

People make the ps3s 1080i sound like it's going to be standard. All that sony
said was the the PS3 supports aka. can theoretically output 1080i.

Guess what, the original xbox "supports" 720p (identical to how the ps3 will "support" 1080i).

Want to guess how many xbox games actually came out offering 720p? I'll give you one guess.

Want to take a guess how many ps3 games wil actually offer 1080i (Or the
even more useless dual monitor output) esp. considering how much extra
work it'll be to render everything at that resolution for two monitors
- as if the PS3's measily 512 L2 Cache isn't already enough of a
bottleneck?

The cool thing about the 360 is that all the games
are required to support 720p, and considering that's a MUCH MUCH MUCH
higher resolution than dvds, it's more than enough.

7. Accessible cost

Blu-ray wont be cheap! Cell won't be cheap! Odds are, when the PS3 finally does
come out, MS will lower the price a bit and the PS3 will cost a small
fortune by comparison. The discs cost a small fortune to manufacture,
don't expect games under $70 atleast for an year or so, and if then you
consider the development costs who knows!

8.The Games.

Well this one is kind of a toss up. The Xbox 360's Kameo, Enchant Arm,
Perfect Dark (drool), RE5, Gears of War, Blue Dragon, Oblivion, FPS,
Racers (Forza, PGR), DoA etc. vs. GTA 4 and whatever sequels Sony has
planned. What is true is the the 360s gaming library will get a one
year headstart, and the PS3's will probably take a long time to catch
up, if ever.

9. The Design.

Well this is personal opinion too. But who came with the brilliant idea to model it after a building
anyways? Fire them and make it look next gen. My old Atari Jaguar looks
less crappy. YOU CALL THAT A NEXT GEN DESIGN!? There is really no
symmetry to it at all. Put the drive in the middle, get rid of the
weird ridges and make it actually look smooth in the front and back and
well. Then you have a nextgen looking consoles.

IT REALLY WOULDN'T TAKE MANY ALTERATIONS TO MAKE THE CONSOLE LOOK AWESOME, GET
RID OF THE RIDGES SO ITS LOOKS PERFECTLY SMOOTH ON THE FRONT AND THE
BACK, MOVE THE CD TRAY TO THE MIDDLE TO MAKE THE CONSOLE SYMMETRICAL.
IT WOULD LOOK AWESOME.

10. Developer Hell.

No one has any experience working with the Cell. 7 PPEs, seriously, you think any
developer is going to have any idea how to utilize them? Just making a
game that uses dual processors takes a 50% larger budget. Meanwhile,
developers are already raving about how much easier Microsoft's
standards and XNA development kits are making it to develop 360 games.
And it's a heck of a lot cheaper to manufacture the discs too. Even
small developers with just $100,000 can make their own game and sell it
via Xbox Live marketplace.

And as already mentioned the L2 cache
of the PS3's cell in miniscule. Most PC processors and the 360's
processor have twice the cache. To make a processor with half the cache
and expect it to be shared among 7 PPEs is just asking for developers
to curse Sony day and night.

On top of all this, by the time the
PS3 launches, developers will have had loads of experience of utilizing
the 360. Expect the 2nd generation 360 games using much smaller budgets
to blow the first generation PS3 games out of the water graphically.

[Luara]

one reason to buy one...
- FINAL FANTASYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
:love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love:

[Shoden]

Even so PS3 > XB360.


Xbox don't have FF or DMC, Mixrosoft's only game worth getting is Halo, and the that HDD adapter for older games is b/s!

[Raistlin]

Good thing I don't care about most of that crap. I'll stick with Playstation and its superior gaming library, especially in the RPG category.

[KuRt]

Total rubbish, I say. xbox 360 having better graphics? sheeeeeeesh...

[Erdrick Holmes]

Even so PS3 > XB360.


Xbox don't have FF or DMC, Mixrosoft's only game worth getting is Halo, and the that HDD adapter for older games is b/s!


Final Fantasy is a tired warhorse that needs a longo verdue hiatus, Devil May cry was only good with DMC1, and the 360 has more than just Halo.

[Raistlin]

How about Suikoden, Star Ocean, Breath of Fire, Dragon Quest, and Xenosaga?

[Psychotic]

11) It makes Mario and whoever the hell the Halo guy is (Master Chef?) sad when you buy one.

[Erdrick Holmes]

Suikoden is theo nly one sonly exclusive. The others can easily go to Microsoft of Nintendo if they wanted to.

[Raistlin]

"If they wanted to," though they won't.

[MecaKane]

Joel, here's a tip for your "friend":
If you want to sound smart and have people actually believe the bull/xxx.gif/xxx.gif/xxx.gif/xxx.gif** you're saying IT WOULDN'T BE A GOOD IDEA TO TALK LIKE THIS IT REALLY MAKES YOU LOOK LIKE A WHINEY INTERNET BRAT WHEN YOU HAVE ENTIRE PARAGRAPHS LIKE THIS :)

And you can still play online games without having an idiot-proof user interface. Also, unless something's changed recently. The PS3 is supposed to come with a HDD, but the Xbox 360 doesn't come with a harddive either. Just because Xbox didn't have much support for HDTVs doesn't mean the PS3 won't even though they're not forcing developers to. HDTV is going to be a lot more widespread in the next few years than it was in the past Xbox years. Hmm, what else. Oh! A FAST Blu-ray/HD-DVD player for $100? Haha, that's funny. Maybe he should remember how much god-awful DVD players cost for their first few years of production.


**Bull/xxx.gif/xxx.gif/xxx.gif/xxx.gif I mentioned above:
The discs cost a small fortune to manufacture, don't expect games under $70 atleast for an year or so
The disks cost something like 10% more than DVDs to produce As mentioned here (http://www.eyesonff.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1369519&postcount=36)

[Luara]

ff for playstation 3 ... :choc2: :choc2: :choc2:

[Destai]

Console fanboys are fucking idiots. I dont need to read an article to tell me that.

[Shoden]

All those titles are avalible on PS2 aswell, DMC 3 was a masterpiece, PS3 has better graphics and sony has a reputation for superior games and quality.


I played on an xbox and the controller is extremely exagurated, you can hardly grip it or keep hold of it. It has script changes of games that are also on other systems.


We all know the 360 will cost more than PS3 for some reason.

[Erdrick Holmes]

I played on an xbox and the controller is extremely exagurated, you can hardly grip it or keep hold of it. It has script changes of games that are also on other systems.


We all know the 360 will cost more than PS3 for some reason.

The origional XBox controller sucked, the 360 controller is better and easier to handle.

And as stated before, the Estimated price of a PS3 will be 500-600 dollars. A 360 now costs 399 (299 without the extra features.)

[XxSephirothxX]

This is just as stupid as the "10 Reasons to Wait for a PS3" article and the Revolution one. What's with the mass flux of fanboy threads recently?

[Shaun]

Grr, we don't know ANYTHING about the PS3. Not enough to judge it! Why do such morons exist!?

[MecaKane]

Fanboys go wild at important launch dates, the wars of the Advent Children forum were pretty bad. But wait untill its actual american release, or the armageddon soon to come of the FFXII release.

And no, estimates do not put the PRICE of a PS3 at $500-600. They put the PRODUCTION COSTS at around $500. So unless Sony wants to be a freak and actually make money on selling consoles it'll probably cost around $400 at launch. All this Xbox is ahead on the pricing crap you're hearing is based off the fact that Microsoft will drop the price of the 360 at PS3's launch putting a realitivly big gap between them.

[Erdrick Holmes]

And no, estimates do not put the PRICE of a PS3 at $500-600.

Look at all of the stuff going into the production of the console. New graphics engine, blu ray readers, etc. This stuff has hardly ever been used (if not, almost never) and it's still new. This will make the console very expensive. While sony has much higher specs than the 360 it's still going to be expensive.

As the link stated, Blu Ray readers cost abourt an extra 100 dollars so if Sony wants to make a profit, they'll have to make it 500 or so. It's called Supply and Demand.

Also, it's pretty much in the air that the PS3 won't have any online capabilities.

The only real advantage Sony has over Microsoft is the PS3 will have more backwards compatability, being able to play the thousands of PS1 and PS2 games while the 360 can only play a list of over 300 XBox games.

[Slothy]

And as stated before, the Estimated price of a PS3 will be 500-600 dollars. A 360 now costs 399 (299 without the extra features.)

You know, you've said this in other threads as well, and the fact is, no one knows how much the PS3 will cost because Sony hasn't said what it will cost yet. Let's look at the facts: any estimations have basically been based on manufacturing costs which as I recall are just over the $400 U.S. mark, and these estimates seem to assume Sony will sell the PS3 at a profit. I'm 99% certain that Sony never made a profit off of their PS2's until maybe recently during the later stages of it's life cycle. The fact is they make enough on games to more than make up for it. The idea that Sony would come in $100-200 dollars above the price of their admittedly comparable competition is ludicrous. It would essentially be suicide for them to try, and if you really think they don't know it, you're dreaming. If they actually do it, I'll be happy to say I was wrong and they're crazy, but I doubt it will happen.

If you want some articles giving the most concrete information on Sony's price strategy available, check out my post about half way down this page: http://forums.eyesonff.com/showthread.php?p=1369590#post1369590 . Both of those articles show that Sony was no where near deciding on a price strategy several months ago, and has even considered a reasonable PSX/PS2 level launch price.

Also, the PS3 supports up to 1080p, not just 1080i. It may be splitting hairs, but it does make a difference. And saying that it not being required is a bad thing is rediculous. The main reason Nintendo isn't supporting HD at all is because it drives up development costs, and they don't want to scare away smaller developers. By offering the option to not go HD, Sony isn't forcing developers to spend more to make the same game. Would it be nice if every developer used HD? Yes, but I'd say it's better to let those who can actually afford the added costs use it and those who can't can save some money.

And as for the development side of things; numerous developers early on complained that the PS2 was overly difficult to develop for. Now let me think, which console came out on top this last generation? Not to mention how Sony has sub-licensing agreements for the Unreal 3 engine, Havok Physics engine, and other tools designed to make development easier built right into the dev kit.

And also for the record, I saw an article recently that specifically stated the PS3's GPU is more powerful than even the most recent GeForce cards. It's not simply technology that will be available in a few months.

Yeah I managed to rant quite a bit there, but what do you expect when most of those arguments against the PS3 are either garbage or opinion.

[Dreddz]

one reason to buy one...
- FINAL FANTASYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
:love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love:

[MecaKane]

Look at all of the stuff going into the production of the console. New graphics engine, blu ray readers, etc. This stuff has hardly ever been used (if not, almost never) and it's still new. This will make the console very expensive. While sony has much higher specs than the 360 it's still going to be expensive.

As the link stated, Blu Ray readers cost abourt an extra 100 dollars so if Sony wants to make a profit, they'll have to make it 500 or so. It's called Supply and Demand.

Also, it's pretty much in the air that the PS3 won't have any online capabilities.

The only real advantage Sony has over Microsoft is the PS3 will have more backwards compatability, being able to play the thousands of PS1 and PS2 games while the 360 can only play a list of over 300 XBox games.
Supply and Demand has nothing to do with charging higher because something costs more to make. Supply and demand is charging more money simply because people will pay, nothing to do with making up for production costs. It's supply and demand when sony and mircosoft don't send as many of their consoles out in order to drive the demand for it so people will pay the $400, and get extra games and accessories or else they'll have to wait too long.

Now, I am looking into all the stuff going into the production of the console. But the thing is. I don't know /xxx.gif/xxx.gif/xxx.gif/xxx.gif about most of it, and neither do you, and neither does the guy who wrote this "article." What I do know is how to put some words into google and press enter to see that people who actually do know what they're talking and they say the production costs are around $500 and that it will most likely cost around $400. And Soney doesn't want to make a profit on their systems. No one makes profits on their systems. They make it on the royalties or whatever from the games.

And it's not up in the air about PS3 not having ANY online capiblities. This stupid article even mentions it has ethernet ports. Not having a main interface isn't the smartest thing, but no online games at all would be suicide.

[Dreddz]

The PS3 will have online, its just the companys will have to go by it themselves to supply it ....

[Yew-Yevon]

Thats quite the fanboyism in your post Jole...E3's demos of PS3 games ran in realtime on alfa and bata hardware...making the 360 look like a child... heres some antedote http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?section_name=pub&aid=8834


not to menchin that lots of 360's are already crashing on ppl.

[DMKA]

Good thing I don't care about most of that crap. I'll stick with Playstation and its superior gaming library, especially in the RPG category.
Precisely. Why is it that now it seems like people are concerned about everything BUT the games?

[Vyk]

Jeesh. I support the 360 more than PS3. But I'd never pull a stunt like this. People will like what they like. I think FF and its kin have grown old and stale. Lots of people think they're just reaching they're prime. So PS3 is good for them. Now I'm not all into FPS, Racing, and Sports crap that X-Box kinda likes to tote around. But MistWalker and BioWare are with Microsoft and that's all I'm interested in. Mature RPGs that branched off where FF left off. Its not all about Halo. But none of this means crap to players dedicated to other teams. They like their teams. You like yours. You wouldn't appreciate them trying to persuade you to get a PS3 I would suppose. It's a two-way street.

[Shoden]

The PS3 one is extremely fanish, the 360 one seemed to be accurate and very fanish too.


It's mad.


I would prefer a revolution over 360.

[Tifa's Real Lover(really]

umm........didnt ign do tht "10 reason to wait for a ps3"?

[Sephex]

These fanboy threads are getting redundant.

[edczxcvbnm]

These fanboy threads are getting redundant.

Fixed!

[nik0tine]

I'll buy the PS3. Why? Well, I don't care much about specs, but I do care about quality games, and Sony has consistently supplied me with quality games. Microsoft, however, fails HARD when it comes to games. I haven't played the 360, but I have yet to play a good game on the origional Xbox. Halo was a joke, and the amount of hype behind it was almost offensive.

And with that said, I think this thread deserves a big, fat LOL.

[Sephex]

Fixed!

Damn. This is the only time I'll agree with someone ****ing with my wording online.

[Vyk]

I re-iterate, Halo wasn't all X-Box had. Though I guess most of its excellent games were also on PC. But my PC doesn't do games. So X-Box was for me, with KOTOR, and Fable and stuff.

[Samuraid]

Let's review the facts...


5. The Cell.

Not only is the cell processor going to jack up the price of the PS3 quite
a bit. It's greatly bottlenecked by the 512 MBs of L2 Cache (the 360
has twice that much L2 Cache).
There is no way any console has a 512MB L2 cache. That amount of SRAM would cause the console to use more power than a small microwave (over 800Watts). 512KB is the actual amount of L2 cache in the Cell. Also, each of the 7 vector units contains an additional 256KB cache.
The 360 contains 1MB of L2 cache overall.

What matters for gaming is the GPU. And most reports (anandtech etc.) state that the
360's graphics card is almost a generation more advanced. This makes
sense, ATI built the card from the ground up with technology that won't
make it's way into PC cards for atleast an year or so. The NVIDEA card
in the PS3 is identical to the card as what'll be available for the PC
in a month or two.
Let's take a look at the specs. The Xbox 360 uses an Ati R500 GPU at 500MHz with 10MB of framebuffer running at 500MHz, and 512MB of GDDR3 at 700MHz shared between the CPU and GPU.
The PS3 uses an Nvidia (not Nvidea) RSX GPU at 550MHz using a dedicated 256MB GDDR3 cache.
Both systems have a 22.4GB per second memory bus bandwidth to the GDDR3; however, the Xbox 360 GPU shares this with the CPU while the PS3 GPU gets the full dedicated 22.4GB bandwidth.


The only thing that the cpu will actually matter for
is the AI. And AI is more depenedent on L2 cache (this is what
ultimately determines the number of simultanous algorithms you can run
at any one time) than on processing speed. And guess what, the 360's
has twice the L2 cache of the PS3's Cell!
Please tell me how L2 cache specifically enhances AI calculations. Any computer architecture student could tell you that L2 is simply a slower and larger-capacity abstraction of L1 cache, used to cache instructions and data to reduce the extreme latency of fetching words from main computer memory. Now it's true that a larger L2 cache increases the frequency of cache hits, decreasing memory access latency and increasing overall system performance; however, this affects the system on a much larger scale, not specifically for "AI".


Anyway, the conculsion is...this "top 10" had some good points, some of which are definitely true, but some of it just sounds like misinformed fanboy banter.

[Lindy]

Next topic in the fanboy series; why Joel should never be allowed to post about Sony or their products, ever.

[Erdrick Holmes]

Why, because I freaking refuse to accept your stupid little console?

Just wait till it gets released. I'm pretty sure the thing will have a bigger pricetag than 400 dollars, long loading times, and more expensive games for a short while. Have fun blowing your dough on this sucker.

[XxSephirothxX]

To go slighlty off topic, Samuraid, I find it absolutely fascinating when you do breakdowns of the console specs, seeing as how, before explanations, all the MHZ and Gigabytes don't mean much to me. I'd love to see a fully detailed, side-by-side comparison of every aspect of the two, but, of course, the PS3 hasn't been released yet. :D

[Lindy]

Yeah, as soon as I don't agree with you suddenly it's "my" console, when in these stupid fanboy wars I've stayed as goddamned objective as I possibly can, I have no stance on which console is "better", it's stupid and entirely down to the games available.

You refuse to accept y'know, evidence and logic to the contrary of your own "facts" on the PS3, that's why, every single topic on this subject involving you is the exactly the same.

You post some garbage, people prove you wrong, you post some more garbage, a few thinly veiled insults and whine a bit here and there.

I don't even see the point of topics like this, why decide what you're going to buy or what's going to happen BEFORE THE CONSOLE IS EVEN OUT?

It makes at least a million times more sense to wait for it to actually be released and see what happens rather than assume "lolz wil cost fortuun an sux!!111", which you're purely doing because you don't like Sony for some god-awful, unknown (and most likely) petty reason.

[Samuraid]

To go slighlty off topic, Samuraid, I find it absolutely fascinating when you do breakdowns of the console specs, seeing as how, before explanations, all the MHZ and Gigabytes don't mean much to me. I'd love to see a fully detailed, side-by-side comparison of every aspect of the two, but, of course, the PS3 hasn't been released yet. :D

I would if I knew more (only an undergraduate student, so there's still a lot to learn) and if both companies released better specifications. Of course there are some things one cannot compare without performing tests and other things which just can't be evaluated at all. :(

It will be interesting to see how the three consoles actually fare against each other when they all hit the market. :)

[MecaKane]

more expensive games for a short while.
Ok Joel. You won't read the facts I've posted so here's something new:
It does cost more to make Blu-ray disks than DVDs.
You know what also costs more to make than DVDs? 2 DVDs!
Xenosaga episode II had two DVDs, yet it was in the same price range as every other PS2 game. Tons of GameCube games use more than one of those little retard disks, yet I don't see them costing anything out of the ordinary. Four disk PSX games cost the same as one disk games.
So here's something you should figure out by my example: The media a game is made on has nothing to do with its price.

And he doesn't like Sony because his 2D games that look like ass don't want to be on PS2.

[Lindy]

Yeah, I figured it was fighting games.

What a shame about all those 2D King of Fighters, Street Fighter and Guilty Gear games being released on the PS2, eh?

[Azure Chrysanthemum]

Just a friendly reminder to everyone that personal attacks will not be tolerated, and this thread will be closed if it continues.

Also note that continued personal attacks will result in banning.

[edczxcvbnm]

Now I will dismantel this whole arguement.

1) No PS3 live? Who cares. Can I still go online and play games? Yes. Can I play 30297 players online on the PS3 or XBox? That is up to the DEVELOPERS! It has nothing to do with live.

2) Load times will probably go away for the most part with the advent of streaming or having filler type stuff mask load times. Not a big deal and we will probably not notice it. How many games have bad load times now? Very few because most stuff is streamed to get rid of that. We will be fine.

Also the consumer will not pay the price on price. Sony will take the huge hit on the price to remain competitive. Thinking otherwise is insanely ignorant.

3) 360 does not come standard with an HDD either. It is a $100 extra option essentially. You lose this one instantaniously.

4) Legit arguement but it could be solved by the time PS3 rolls out.

5) Same thing was said about the PS2 and the emotion engine. Where is PS2? On top. It will just take developers some time to get to know the new hardware. Also the Cube had the easiest to develop for console last time...where are they? I rest my case that the ease of code use means nothing.

6) Considering how few people have HD TVs let alone HDTVs that do true 720p this isn't much of an arguement. Watch me throw this one back in your face. By requireing this of all game you limit developers by forcing them to use processing power to get the games to run at that resolution.

7) This is yet another baseless claim. People will not pay it and thus it will not be. The PS3 will cost as much as 360 or inbetween. The games will be priced about the same as 360.

8) This is opinion but Perfect Dark Zero sucks. The multiplayer is so slow and clunky. Terrible!

9) Your running out of ideas if this is #9. I can see the controller arguement but they did that because of patent violations and other things. I say they should have payed the patent holders to keep the other controller design but what ever.

10) Look to number 6. This one is redundant...like threads on a message board.

Wow...1 legit arguement in the whole non-sensical rambling.

[Del Murder]

Boy, you guys sure are passionate about your gaming systems. I'll buy a PS3 if it has some games I really want to play (like Square games). I don't really care about online games or FPS. Playstation has the best RPGs and Nintendo makes awesome games, so Microsoft systems will always be third on my list. I don't have much time for games these days anyway.

If FFXIII comes out for PS3 I will buy one.

[BatChao]

I'm sad because I have a BS in Computer Engineering and this post confuses me... :( I've totally forgotten anything about computer architecture to make a valid point about any of the technical stuff... but what Samuraid says looks about right... heehee.

Anyway... one thing that I have been hearing about are bottlenecks, which might be true. But developers will probably be able to overcome them with due time.

Another valid point made is the fact that the 360's standards will help with streamlining the whole certification process, which right now sometime holds up a game from being released for quite a while. I work at a game publisher and the 360 standards have been spoken about on a few occasions, and it sounds pretty sweet. I'll see if it's really all it's cracked up to be when I get to work on a 360 title.

Anyway, the bottom line is that the general public will not care about processing speed, GPUs, cache, and all that jazz. They will mostly care about things like if the system is the 'hip' system to get or if the games are cool. And no matter what anyone says, sports games are a HUGE draw to the mainstream US audience.

No matter what, Sony has a HUGE battle ahead of itself. The 360 will be out for a good half year or so by the time the PS3 launches, which is a HUGE gap. By that time, many people will have already gotten the 360...be it because they are tired of waiting or they might not even know about the PS3. They'll just know that the 360 is the 'cool' thing right now and they'll get it. Also, the 360 hasn't gotten off to a bad start. The launch lineup is solid, though there aren't any killer apps, and the new Live service is amazing. I also believe that price is still a factor... I read an interview where Sony stated that the PS3 will not be targeted at the average household's income... whatever that means. I take it to mean that the PS3 will cost more than the Xbox360. But I could be wrong...

As for me... I'm sticking with the Revolution. That controller is too damn crazy awesome not to get. As for my second console, I'll have to factor in price and quality of games before I decide.

[fantasyjunkie]

Me? I'm going to get both systems, 360 and the PS3. I have both xbox and ps2 and i'm happy with each of them :)

[Loony BoB]

The only reason I can see myself playing an XBox 360 is Mistwalker. I'll undoubtedly go for a PS3 first, though.

[Flying Mullet]

As was mentioned before, gaming hardware has nothing to do with the superiority of a gaming system, it's the games. See Genesis vs. Nintendo (not Super Nintendo), N64 vs. Playstation, XBox vs. PS2 and just about every other Sega system that came out with superior system performance a year or two early.

[Raistlin]

Samuraid, Kane, and ed get kudos for pointing out the bull/xxx.gif/xxx.gif/xxx.gif/xxx.gif.

The fact of the matter that Sony has consistently had the best games. No matter what kind of games you like, the Playstation will have a ton of them. XBox has failed to have a good gaming library. Thus, the PS3 is the superior choice. The only other future console I would even consider getting is Nintendo's, because that's a guaranteed three or four games that I want to play (Mario, Zelda, etc.), but I probably won't because I don't even play all the games I want to play right now for the PS2, the only console of that generation that I own.

[edczxcvbnm]

I will say that the PS2 controller is the worst system if you want to play a good FPS game. The controller sucks for it. Plain and simple it sucks at FPS games. The analog sticks are not placed well enough to make it easy to use both of them at the same time all the time. That is one aspect where the X-Box is unbeaten. The 360 controller will probably be the best this generation.

[Zante]

I don't care which console is better, I prefer the one that has the better games. For me, that's sony. I don't quite get what the point of all this fanboism is. You don't like a console? You don't buy it. It's as simple as that, no point in proving how much either of them suck, imho.

And also:
one reason to buy one...
- FINAL FANTASYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Quoted for truth. :)

[Russielloyd]

I did know webpages with every single spec to the consoles.

I'll try and find it for the people who can bitch and moan about compairing the the two....

EDIT:

Here's the PS3:

Product name: PlayStation 3
Logo: PLAYSTATION(R)3

CPU

Cell Processor
PowerPC-base Core @3.2GHz
1 VMX vector unit per core
512KB L2 cache
7 x SPE @3.2GHz
7 x 128b 128 SIMD GPRs
7 x 256KB SRAM for SPE
* 1 of 8 SPEs reserved for redundancy
total floating point performance: 218 GFLOPS

GPU

RSX @550MHz
1.8 TFLOPS floating point performance
Full HD (up to 1080p) x 2 channels
Multi-way programmable parallel floating point shader pipelines

Sound

Dolby 5.1ch, DTS, LPCM, etc. (Cell- base processing)

Memory

256MB XDR Main RAM @3.2GHz 256MB GDDR3 VRAM @700MHz
System Bandwidth
Main RAM 25.6GB/s
VRAM 22.4GB/s
RSX 20GB/s (write) + 15GB/s (read)
SB< 2.5GB/s (write) + 2.5GB/s (read)
System Floating Point Performance
2 TFLOPS

Storage

Detachable 2.5" HDD slot x 1
I/O
USB Front x 4, Rear x 2 (USB2.0)
Memory Stick standard/Duo, PRO x 1
SD standard/mini x 1
CompactFlash (Type I, II) x 1
Communication
Ethernet (10BASE-T, 100BASE-TX, 1000BASE-T) x 3 (input x 1 + output x 2)
Wi-Fi IEEE 802.11 b/g
Bluetooth 2.0 (EDR)

Controller

Bluetooth (up to 7)
USB 2.0 (wired)
Wi-Fi (PSP)
Network (over IP)

AV Output

Screen size: 480i, 480p, 720p, 1080i, 1080p
HDMI: HDMI out x 2
Analog: AV MULTI OUT x 1
Digital audio: DIGITAL OUT (OPTICAL) x 1

Disc Media

CD: PlayStation CD-ROM, PlayStation 2 CD-ROM, CD-DA, CD-DA (ROM), CD-R, CD-RW, SACD, SACD Hybrid (CD layer), SACD HD, DualDisc, DualDisc (audio side), DualDisc (DVD side)
DVD : PlayStation 2 DVD-ROM, PlayStation 3 DVD-ROM, DVD-Video, DVD-ROM, DVD-R, DVD-RW, DVD+R, DVD+RW
Blu-ray Disc: PlayStation 3 BD-ROM, BD-Video, BD-ROM, BD-R, BD-RE

I cant find anythig on the XBOX as detailed as that, so ill just post the PS3 specs for now.

[Shoden]

The controller of the PS3 is the best thing about it! it doubles as a weapon!


When you're playing games and sister walks in, pause game and threaten them with the controller!

[Samuraid]

I cant find anythig on the XBOX as detailed as that, so ill just post the PS3 specs for now.

Wikipedia is your friend. It has the complete and updated specs for both systems. :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ps3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox360

[Slothy]

I will say that the PS2 controller is the worst system if you want to play a good FPS game. The controller sucks for it. Plain and simple it sucks at FPS games. The analog sticks are not placed well enough to make it easy to use both of them at the same time all the time. That is one aspect where the X-Box is unbeaten. The 360 controller will probably be the best this generation.

It's all opinion, and differences in hand size basically. I've never had trouble using both PS2 sticks at once, and I personally didn't like the Xbox control stick placement very much on either controller. That said, FPS games are always slow and innaccurate because of anaolog sticks compared to a keyboard and mouse in my opinion. Since my PC is fairly new, I've got no problem playing any FPS's currently on the market, so I'll stick with that. That said, I'm hoping companies include keyboard and mouse support for PS3 and 360 FPS games. With those USB ports there, there's no real reason not to.

[Pouring Rain]

*is still gonna buy PS3* *total sony fan*

[Russielloyd]

I wonder if the PS3 controller will act as an Boomerang aswell. Throw it at someones head and it comes back so you can continue playing your game.

That would be cool.

[Miriel]

I don't get it. Why not just have both? :confused:

[Lindy]

Because of fanpersons.

[Yew-Yevon]

I will say that the PS2 controller is the worst system if you want to play a good FPS game. The controller sucks for it. Plain and simple it sucks at FPS games. The analog sticks are not placed well enough to make it easy to use both of them at the same time all the time. That is one aspect where the X-Box is unbeaten. The 360 controller will probably be the best this generation.
sorry but i'd rather have both stiks in thumbs reach and side by side then have a stick on one side, the dpad on the next and a stick above the dpad:confused: :confused: sorry but the xbox configeration dosent exactly fit FPS...controler S isnt much diff exept for the size ....which looks more organized to you?

[Flying Mullet]

I don't get it. Why not just have both? :confused:
Fence-sitting is strictly prohibited when discussing gaming systems. :grover:

[KuRt]

Also, it's pretty much in the air that the PS3 won't have any online capabilities.
For some reason I don´t quite believe in that.. PS2 even had online playing capabilities so why wouldn´t 3?

[Samuraid]

If the PS3 will not have any sort of online capabilities why does it have 3 Gigabit ethernet ports and IPv6 in the SDK?

Centralized online services (similar to Xbox Live) won't be provided by Sony but can and will be provided by individual game publishers. That is hardly a "PS3 won't have any online capabilities". Please research before making claims.

[Yrkoon]

The PC will always own consoles so just buy what ever console has the games you want to play and i can sit with my PC and PS2 untill games come out that i want for the consoles then i will buy one :)

btw theres faster graphics cards for pc when compared to the console ones just came out/coming out 750mhz core and memory well over 1000 mhz

so just to shut up fan boys PC owns consoles :)

[edczxcvbnm]

sorry but i'd rather have both stiks in thumbs reach and side by side then have a stick on one side, the dpad on the next and a stick above the dpad:confused: :confused: sorry but the xbox configeration dosent exactly fit FPS...controler S isnt much diff exept for the size ....which looks more organized to you?

Control Type S. Sony has /xxx.gif/xxx.gif/xxx.gif/xxx.gifty analog sticks and it shows. That is why the d-pad is still where the analog stick should be. Everyone else has learned. Sony is the only one not getting with the program on that one. Cube, 360, XBox and Dreamcast all do it. Hell I argue that the N64 had it also considering the dpad wasn't used for 80% of the games.

And yes. FPS games are better on the PC...but I like playing games with my friends in the room so everyone getting on Halo is tons more fun then if they were not in your direct presence.

[Winter Nights]

Control Type S. Sony has /xxx.gif/xxx.gif/xxx.gif/xxx.gifty analog sticks and it shows. That is why the d-pad is still where the analog stick should be. Everyone else has learned. Sony is the only one not getting with the program on that one. Cube, 360, XBox and Dreamcast all do it. Hell I argue that the N64 had it also considering the dpad wasn't used for 80% of the games.

As much as I prefer the Sony Controller to the others, I have to agree on this point. Having the more often used analog stick in an awkward place can get quite aggravating.

On the other hand, other controllers tend to be a bit clunky, so... If Sony would have just switched the analog stick and the D-pad, they'd have the perfect controller.

[Yrkoon]

just put more than 1 pc in the room since a comp that could run halo at max settings is pretty cheap now especially if you build it :)

btw i love the dualshock 2 tho i hardly use the analogue functions and stick with the d-pad 90% of the time
besides the normal d-pad is analogue its pressure sensitive remember as are the buttons :) i most notice the effect on granturismo 3 eg. light foot on the gas and turning the wheel lightly or just push down harder and get the button giving u full acceleration ect btw mgs 2 supports pressure sensitive d-pad and buttons as well :)

[Slothy]

As much as I prefer the Sony Controller to the others, I have to agree on this point. Having the more often used analog stick in an awkward place can get quite aggravating.

I may be in the minority on this, but I prefer the Dpad/analog stick placement on the Dual Shock. I've never found it awkward to use the analog sticks, however, once you switch it with the Dpad (as on the GC controller), the Dpad becomes extremely awkward to use since it's essentially flat making it harder to press down. Some people may have no problem with this, and I do in fact use the stick 90% of the time, but I still use the Dpad for fighting games, and I doubt I'll ever switch to be honest. An analog stick is much easier to use in that position than a dpad if you ask me.

[Tifa's Real Lover(really]

tht how artlice thing is wrong

[Loony BoB]

The Dpat/Analog stick is down to the style of game. Dpad is generally better for fighting games, while the stick is better for FPS. I use both, but Dpad more often. I find it's nicer as it's rather flat, which is good for comfort and allows for a faster change from left to right etc (you only have to change where you apply pressure rather than having to move your entire thumb) and because it's more precise when you need to go exactly up or something. Analog is better when it's not a strictly 'press up or down or left or right' scenario, though, hence the usefulness in FPS. It's notable that when navigating in FF games, I use both for different environments. Dpad is better when you're in a square-ish building environment, while analog is better when you're walking around natural environments such as mountains.

[Lionx]

I just found it funny how this had so many supporters compared to the Revolution vs 360 thread and more fun stuff in it. I love fanbois ;o

[Flying Mullet]

http://xcast.ytmnd.com/

[Yew-Yevon]

http://xcast.ytmnd.com/


that pretty much says it all:kaocheer:

[Madame Adequate]

that pretty much says it all:kaocheer:

Definately tells me I want a 360. DC rocked.

[Spammerman]

about number 9, they talk about modeling it after a building, yet they wont say anythig about the x-box 360 im not the best at math but 360 is a perfect cirle and a box is usually a square. I have never heard of a circualr square.

[Lionx]

Dreamcast is way better than Xbox..seriously...wth.

[FFX_fanatiq]

[QUOTE=Shoden]Even so PS3 > XB360.
[QUOTE]

[KentaRawr!]

o_O Oh my goshness! The X-Box 360 is... the Dreamcast! DC! You are out there, and you are ALIIIIIIVE!!!

(Rushes out the door)

A'm comin' DC!!

>_>

[Yew-Yevon]

Halo3 http://maj.com/gallery/nopaka/halo/halo3.gif

[Chrno]

I dont really see what this /xxx.gif/xxx.gif/xxx.gif/xxx.gif is all about, you people schould stop writing this /xxx.gif/xxx.gif/xxx.gif/xxx.gif, because sony´s PS3 is far from beeing released, wich means we can say /xxx.gif/xxx.gif/xxx.gif/xxx.gif about it.
And i wont buy any console just because of Graphics and stuff, but for Good Quality Games (RPG`S :P) in wich i have the best experiences with sonys playstation.

[Lady Selphie]

one reason to buy one...
- FINAL FANTASYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
:love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love:

Not only FF, but re and dmc too.