Playstation 3: A Console Review

Recommended Videos

MrBrightside919

New member
Oct 2, 2008
1,625
0
0
Back in 2005, Microsoft beat everyone to the punch by releasing their next generation console, Xbox 360. The console was well received by many with a mildly strong launch line up of games like Call of Duty 2 and Condemned: Criminal Origins. For a while, Microsoft ruled the console world. In 2006, Sony finally released their much anticipated next generation console, Playstation 3. Ever since it's release, the PS3 has struggled to find it's place in the console line up. It has sat back at the end of the pack since it's launch. Does that mean that the Playstation 3 is a bad console?

Since this is a console review, things will be a little different in this review so be ready to adjust accordingly.

The Hardware

When talking about the Playstation 3, one cannot go a second without talking about the incredible engine underneith that sleak black shell. The PS3 is packing a powerful Cell Broadband Engine that can deliver some of the best looking graphics and sound that any console has ever seen before. Instead of regular DVD disks like the 360 and Wii use, Sony has created a new type of media called Blu Ray. Not only is Blu Ray more powerful than a standard DVD, but it can hold way more information than a DVD, meaning that there won't be anymore multiple disk game releases.

Blu Ray is Sony's answer to high definition for both games and movies. Games that utilize Blu Ray have a much larger space to store content, which means that games can be much larger than they would be on other consoles. The PS3 versions of multi platform games wouldn't ever need to go to extra disks because the storage space is so much bigger than a DVD. That just makes me wonder how many disks Final Fantasy XIII will be on the 360.

Wow, I really don't want to think about that.

"To enter this store, please insert disk # 12"

Blu Ray isn't just for games either. Blu Ray is also used for high definition movies as well. Blu Ray movies sport some of the best visuals out there. Colors are more vivid, blacks are better and whites seem brighter. You really need a large television to appriciate Blu Ray. Blu Ray also does a better job of separating sound into different channels for better surround sound. Even though you'll have the visuals of Blu Ray, you'll really need a sound system to get the most out of the movie you are watching. After watching Iron Man on Blu Ray, I can safely say that Blu Ray is awesome for movies. After playing Metal Gear Solid 4, I can safely say that Blu Ray is awesome for games as well.

The Playstation 3 was released with a new controller modeled after the Dualshock controllers of the past. Inside the new controller was something called "Sixaxis". The new technology was not put to very good use and quickly became a gimick to gamers who didn't want to thrust their controllers violently to play Lair. Sixaxis was quickly thrown away as the main selling point of the controller when Sony announced the new Dualshock 3 controller, which is now standard for the PS3. The dualshock 3 features rumble and sixaxis control, which is what gamers wanted to begin with.

Both the Console and the Controller are very well made. The console is sleak looking and looks very cool. The controller is almost identical to the Dualshock 2 controller, with the exception of the L2 and R2 buttons. These two buttons didn't push down like they used to on the dualshock 2. It's really difficult to explain how they work. You will have to experience it to understand. Anyways, the Dualshock 3 is very well made and feels very sturdy in your hands.

The Playstation 3 is one of the best looking consoles out there, both physically and graphically. Blu Ray is just so much better than DVD. It really makes the games look


"Say what you will about the PS3, just don't say it doesn't look damn good"

Software

Here is where the PS3 starts to faulter a bit. The Playstation 3 launched with a horrible line up of games with only one of them, Resistance, being any good. Genji: Days of the Blade, Untold Legends and Gundam were some of the worst games to be released in 2006. With the exception of Resistance: Fall of Man, no launch title really took advantage of the PS3's power. Gundam looked like a PS2 game and played like a PSOne game. Genji was slow, clunky and bugged up the ass. Untold Legends should have just been kept untold. Not only was the launch lineup lackluster, but Sony has also been losing many of it's exclusives to multiplatform like Tekken, Final Fantasy and Grand Theft Auto.

That being said, Sony has really struggled with it's software lineup, until now. 2007 and 2008 have been much better to the PS3 with games like Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, Warhawk and Metal Gear Solid 4. The games have gotten much better and for every exclusive they've lost, they have gained a brand new IP like Infamous, Resistance and Motorstorm. Plus, they've still got plenty of other exclusives like SOCOM (which has fallen on hard times lately), Killzone, God of War, Ratchet and Clank and many more.

I know what you are thinking. The software lineup has been pretty thin when it comes to good games. Good PS3 games don't come very often, unfortunately. It is software that Sony has needed to improve in and that is what they have been doing in 2008. People have been saying that 2008 was the year of the PS3. It's unfortunate that they still have a ways to go in the future. But that's why gamers have the Playstation Network.


"The only people who would ever say that Metal Gear Solid 4 was a bad game are people who have never played it"

Playstation Network

The Playstation Network is Sony's answers to Xbox Live. This FREE service provided by Sony allows players to game with others around the world through many different online enabled games released since launch. Players create an account and their gaming stats are tracked through the PSN feature on the XMB. When I say that the game stats are tracked, I mean Trophies.

Trophies are Sony's answer to Microsoft's Achievements. By completing various tasks in games, players are rewarded with Trophies that mark these tasks for everyone to see. While Achievements have been just for show on the 360, Sony has been hinting at an expanded experience with trophies. Not only will Tropies be manditory in games for the PS3 come 2009, but they may serve more of a purpose like giving players access to exclusive game betas or even extra free content for games. Only the future will be able to tell what is made of Trophies on the PS3.

Another feature of the PSN is the Playstation Store. The Playstation Store gives players the option to purchase exclusive content for games they own. Not only that, but gamers can download exclusive games straight from the service like Pixel Junk Eden, Siren: Blood Curse and Lumines Supernova. Unlike the Xbox Live Marketplace, the Playstation Store uses real money for transactions rather than imaginary points that you can buy to download stuff. I never really liked having to buy points for the Xbox Live Marketplace. I always questioned whether or not the content they were offering was really worth the point amount that was given. If they wanted to use point values, why not just do what the WII has done and made each dollar worth 10 points.

I can't talk about the Playstation Store without mentioning the fact that it is really difficult finding certain content. The store is just badly arranged and Sony really needs to take note on that. There aren't really that many tabs to choose from, but once you get into those tabs, there will be many more tabs to navigate through and so on. Xbox Live Marketplace is so much easier to navigate through that it just blows the playstation store out of the water.

I think the point i'm trying to make is that the Playstation Store has some nice features and some great content. It is just no where near as good as Xbox Live Marketplace. If they make things easier to find, then the store would be so much better than it is now.


"While not as good as Xbox Live, The Playstation Network does an admirable job of providing great online features for gamers to spend hours with. And did I mention, it's free?"

Playstation Home

Something that gamers have been excited for is Playstation Home, a social space where people can chat, play games and socialize with other gamers. Players create an avatar with limited selections of clothing, faces, etc. The avatars are then thrust into the world that is Home and can travel to different locations like The Mall, The Theater and The Bowling Alley.

The Mall is where people can buy various clothing for their avatar and furniture for their personal space. The problem with the buying is that players need to use REAL money to buy the various items. For a program that is completely free to play, the idea that gamers need to use real money to buy things to fully enjoy the program is obsurd to say the least. I absolutely hate the fact that I can't upgrade my personal space or avatar because i'm too cheap to pay for the stuff.

The Theater lets people come together and watch various cinema, whether it be music videos or parts of movies like the first 10 minutes of Resident Evil Degeneration.

The Bowling Alley is where you'll spend most of your time because you can play various arcade games created for Home, bowling and pool. The bowling and pool are both hard to control and lose a lot of their fun because of it. The arcade games are better, but you'll have trouble playing them because the machines are usually occupied by others.

Developers like Naughty Dog and Ubi Soft have created specific game related spaces like Uncharted's Sully's Bar and Far Cry 2's Train Station. These spaces are nice to look at, but there isn't much to do in them.

Overall, I enjoyed Home. I guess I just had fun running around in Home and chatting with people. I can see why people don't like Home. There just isn't much to do. I know that Sony will be working with Home through out the next year so lets hope for some more changes. Maybe if everyone complains, they might make everything free.


"I enjoyed Home, but I can see why people wouldn't like it"

Final Thoughts

Playstaion 3 is an amazing piece of technology. It is easily the most powerful console of any console. For the people who disagree, I can just say "Go fuck yourselves!" I'm trying to be as unbiased as I can be with this review. I do infact own an Xbox 360 and a Wii. After playing all three consoles, I found that the PS3 is in fact the most powerful system out there. That doesn't mean it is the best though. In this generation of consoles, there really isn't a better console because they all do things very differently. It really comes down to which console will be the most popular, like a giant popularity contest. Unfortunately for Sony, it isn't them.

The fact of the matter is that the PS3 is just so damn expensive and with the other consoles being $250 or less, it's tough to make the decision to buy a $400 console. The PS3 has a very thin library of great games. That thin library does happen to be filled with Grade A titles, but it just isn't enough to trump the competition. The price and game library are the biggest draw backs for the PS3. Everything else is great. I have no complaints with my PS3. The HD graphics look breathtaking, the sound of the games is great and the console is filled with enough features to keep me happy for a long time.

Another fact of the matter is that every console has it's drawbacks. Microsoft makes you pay for their online service and the Wii doesn't really have an online service to begin with while the PS3 lets you play online, surf the internet and access a store for free. Honestly, i'm not going to make comparisons like that anymore because that would come down as being biased and I don't think anyone else should either. I think the people who buy a PS3 will be very satisfied with what they get, like the people who bought a Dreamcast, Gamecube or any console...well maybe not those who bought a Jaguar or a Lynx.

In my opinion, the Playstation 3 is a great system and it shouldn't be counted out of the race too quickly. Who knows what Sony is cooking up for the future. Sure, it might not ever make it up to 1st place, but that doesn't mean it won't go down without a fight.

I give the Playstation 3 Nine thumbs up out of Ten, the same score i'd give the 360.


"I love my Playstation 3"
 

n3w2nj

New member
Dec 5, 2008
11
0
0
ps3 is an awesome system and as you said - the flaw is in the games

i've found this console generation is really lackluster in terms of games. Coming from the PS2 were you had so many games that you'd never have a dull moment to this its abysmal. My 360 sat on a shelf for the better part of 2008 simply because nothing really good came out. I got my ps3 a few months back only because since the launch, few games were able to grab my attention.

that said - the consoles may vary in power but it all comes down to games. So far, they're all not up to par in my honest opinion. here's to hoping that 2009 showers us with goodness =)

pps - forgot to mention, well written review. thumbs up!
 

MrBrightside919

New member
Oct 2, 2008
1,625
0
0
n3w2nj said:
ps3 is an awesome system and as you said - the flaw is in the games

i've found this console generation is really lackluster in terms of games. Coming from the PS2 were you had so many games that you'd never have a dull moment to this its abysmal. My 360 sat on a shelf for the better part of 2008 simply because nothing really good came out. I got my ps3 a few months back only because since the launch, few games were able to grab my attention.

that said - the consoles may vary in power but it all comes down to games. So far, they're all not up to par in my honest opinion. here's to hoping that 2009 showers us with goodness =)

pps - forgot to mention, well written review. thumbs up!
nine thumbs up?
 

n3w2nj

New member
Dec 5, 2008
11
0
0
MrBrightside919 said:
nine thumbs up?
maybe 9 thumbs up for 2009 but thats a big maybe. then again, the way things are looking with final fantasy and killzone 2 it might just warrant all 10 thumbs!!!
 

runtheplacered

New member
Oct 31, 2007
1,472
0
0
MrBrightside919 said:
The fact of the matter is that the PS3 is just so damn expensive and with the other consoles being $250 or less, it's tough to make the decision to buy a $400 console.
Great review, it was fun to read and I have to say I agreed with the majority of it. This is the only part I had a problem with. You didn't mention that the PS3 comes with everything you will need to get going (wireless controller, HDMI cable, wireless network adapter, won't have to pay for XBL) and that will add up to be roughly the same price for an Xbox of equal gigabytes. And it comes pretty natural that the Wii better not cost anywhere near what a Ps3 costs, because of the underwhelming hardware that's inside of it. It's sort of like comparing an E-machines to an Alienware product (although not exactly a great comparison, it was the first one to come to my mind.)

I realize you did mention the fact that PSN is free, but it should be factored into the cost comparison of Xbox and PS3. While obviously not every single person in the world that buys an Xbox and PS3 will go online with it, the majority of them will, so it is relevant.

Great reading material. Thanks for the post.
 

sneakypenguin

Elite Member
Legacy
Jul 31, 2008
2,804
0
41
Country
usa
Only thing I disagree with is the+ of blu ray
Slower read speeds plus added cost, just doesn't work for me but a lot of people dont use digital distribution for movies so they could use it. Me I just rather pocket the extra change.
Good review, not really interesting to read though, I suppose because all that is known about it is already out there.

runtheplacered said:
MrBrightside919 said:
The fact of the matter is that the PS3 is just so damn expensive and with the other consoles being $250 or less, it's tough to make the decision to buy a $400 console.
Great review, it was fun to read and I have to say I agreed with the majority of it. This is the only part I had a problem with. You didn't mention that the PS3 comes with everything you will need to get going (wireless controller, HDMI cable, wireless network adapter, won't have to pay for XBL) and that will add up to be roughly the same price for an Xbox of equal gigabytes. And it comes pretty natural that the Wii better not cost anywhere near what a Ps3 costs, because of the underwhelming hardware that's inside of it. It's sort of like comparing an E-machines to an Alienware product (although not exactly a great comparison, it was the first one to come to my mind.)

I realize you did mention the fact that PSN is free, but it should be factored into the cost comparison of Xbox and PS3. While obviously not every single person in the world that buys an Xbox and PS3 will go online with it, the majority of them will, so it is relevant.

Great reading material. Thanks for the post.
Comparing the online is sorta weird, with MS you get exclusive downloads(cause they spend loads of money) and there are free versions of live be it xbconnect, Xlink etc. Or you have free across the board but mildly less refined PSN.
Also I've looked at a few ps3s and I can't find one with HDMI cables(MGS4 pack 40 gb and 80 gb) I know comparing the prices on these things is a bit janky but bottom line if you wanna play fallout 3 or COD or whatever it's 100$ cheaper on 360.
 

Avatar Roku

New member
Jul 9, 2008
6,169
0
0
Well, it's nice to see a review of the PS3 that isn't saying "oh, it sucks, all the people at Sony should be killed" or "its the best thing since Jesus." Whether I agree or disagree, a review written like this earns my respect, at the very least. [/holier-than-thou attitude]
 

Zetona

New member
Dec 20, 2008
846
0
0
sneakypenguin said:
Also I've looked at a few ps3s and I can't find one with HDMI cables(MGS4 pack 40 gb and 80 gb) I know comparing the prices on these things is a bit janky but bottom line if you wanna play fallout 3 or COD or whatever it's 100$ cheaper on 360.
PS3s still don't come with HDMI cables. HDMI cables range from $3 (available on Amazon.com) to $60+ (if you're tricked into believing that Monster brand HDMI cables provide better image quality).
 

joystickjunki3

New member
Nov 2, 2008
1,887
0
0
I realize that reviews are supposed to be subjective, but it seems like you started out in this review w/ a bias. I do believe that the PS3 is a great piece of hardware, but that BluRay is more powerful than DVD? Higher quality? Yes. More storage? Yes. But more power? I'm not so sure that those were the correct words to use. There are just certain nit-picky things that irked me when reading this. All in all, though, it wasn't a bad review. Just things that could be improved upon.

And honestly, I really didn't think MGS4 was that good; it wasn't bad, just not that good. I know I'm a 360 owner so I fall into one of those 2 categories, but whatever.
 

Janus Vesta

New member
Mar 25, 2008
550
0
0
"Sony has created a new type of media called Blu Ray."

One of the reasons it's failing. Sony keeps trying to force through awkward and incompatible technologies. Look at the PSP and UMDs.

"Not only is Blu Ray more powerful than a standard DVD"

More space =/= more power. BluRay is slow as shit.

"You really need a large television to appriciate Blu Ray."

Sadly many people (me for example) aren't willing yo buy a 600Euro console AND a new TV on top of that just to enjoy the few games it has.

"Even though you'll have the visuals of Blu Ray, you'll really need a sound system to get the most out of the movie you are watching."

And they don't want to buy a new sound system on top of that too.

"Blu Ray is just so much better than DVD."

And BetaMax was FAR better than Video Tape. But Video Tape still won. The faster, more established system usually wins. And more space doesn't make it better, DVD can ad more layers to increase space, BluRay can't.

"This FREE service"

Except the one-time payment of 600Euro. And the payment of what ever little peice of crap you want to buy. (The second bit isn't Sony's fault though)


Don't get me wrong, I like the PS3. I'd get one if I could afford it. It's just that if Sony wants to make any headway they'll need to either cut their losses and abandon the PS3, or cut the price and suffer heavy financial losses (which is hitting them pretty hard already).

Sony are too far ahead of the time. The technology they're using isn't developed enough to be made cheaply enough. And with the power of the PS3 they have to throw their money away to make them. Sad really, last generation they were the big dog, while Microsoft lost billions to catch up and Nintendo were sort of there, but not really. Now Nintendo have all the money, Microsft are doing pretty well and Sony are wondering what the hell happened.
 

CZTM

New member
Dec 20, 2008
40
0
0
Excellent points regarding the PS3. And you're right about the games as well. Out of all the next-gen consoles in the household, my family uses it probably the least. In fact, the only game that my parents or sister play on it is Guitar Hero or LBP, while I have like.... 2-3 games I've actually bought for it, not counting the PS2/PS games I have for it. If the PS3 didn't have MGS4 or the couple of good 360 crossover titles (Bioshock, Assassin's Creed, ect), it'd be a dead duck by now.

Although... The graphics are relly nice, and I love it for the DVD function, especially seeing as the Wii doesn't play DVD's. :mad:
 

MrBrightside919

New member
Oct 2, 2008
1,625
0
0
runtheplacered said:
MrBrightside919 said:
The fact of the matter is that the PS3 is just so damn expensive and with the other consoles being $250 or less, it's tough to make the decision to buy a $400 console.
You didn't mention that the PS3 comes with everything you will need to get going (wireless controller, HDMI cable, wireless network adapter, won't have to pay for XBL)

Great reading material. Thanks for the post.
The PS3 doesn't come with an HDMI cable, atleast mine didn't.

Janus Vesta said:
"Sony has created a new type of media called Blu Ray."

One of the reasons it's failing. Sony keeps trying to force through awkward and incompatible technologies. Look at the PSP and UMDs.

"Not only is Blu Ray more powerful than a standard DVD"

More space =/= more power. BluRay is slow as shit.

"You really need a large television to appriciate Blu Ray."

Sadly many people (me for example) aren't willing yo buy a 600Euro console AND a new TV on top of that just to enjoy the few games it has.

"Even though you'll have the visuals of Blu Ray, you'll really need a sound system to get the most out of the movie you are watching."

And they don't want to buy a new sound system on top of that too.

"Blu Ray is just so much better than DVD."

And BetaMax was FAR better than Video Tape. But Video Tape still won. The faster, more established system usually wins. And more space doesn't make it better, DVD can ad more layers to increase space, BluRay can't.

"This FREE service"

Except the one-time payment of 600Euro. And the payment of what ever little peice of crap you want to buy. (The second bit isn't Sony's fault though)


Don't get me wrong, I like the PS3. I'd get one if I could afford it. It's just that if Sony wants to make any headway they'll need to either cut their losses and abandon the PS3, or cut the price and suffer heavy financial losses (which is hitting them pretty hard already).

Sony are too far ahead of the time. The technology they're using isn't developed enough to be made cheaply enough. And with the power of the PS3 they have to throw their money away to make them. Sad really, last generation they were the big dog, while Microsoft lost billions to catch up and Nintendo were sort of there, but not really. Now Nintendo have all the money, Microsft are doing pretty well and Sony are wondering what the hell happened.
I could summarize that entire statement in one phrase...

"Fanboy jargen"
 

9of9

New member
Feb 14, 2008
199
0
0
Hmm, it's an okay review. The style seemed a bit odd to me - very, very many short sentences. At least part of it, I think, reads almost like a list. And, like the poster above me, I have to agree that the technological specifications and advantages/disadvantages aren't really gone into as far as the actual hardware is concerned (conversely, does the Blu-Ray really need two paragraphs of saying that it's better than the DVD).

On the other hand, the reviewer does point out the major flaws of the console and, for the most part, the objective tone works well. I think the review would better if it did not pretend to be as objective as it seems to think itself to be - there's a lot here which is just the reviewer's opinion. I've no problem with that and I'd like to hear it, but I think it needs to say when statements are opinions - as it stands, a lot of it is worded as if it were facts.

The console war in general is an interesting topic. Something that none of the reviews or rants I've read so far seem to remark on, is that this generation of consoles seem to be diverging by playstyle - the Wii is catering to the casual market, the X360 to the mainstream multiplayer and the PS3 to the singleplayer and the less mainstream. The effect is subtle, but it's present, I think, as far as both the console services go and as far as the games go, though there's notable exceptions on both sides.

The X360 has a subscription-based but, from what I hear, excellent Live service. The major 'advangtage' that it has over the PS3 is the multiplayer experience - which is coupled with the fact that it has exclusivity over most of the major multiplayer titles of the past few years: Halo 3, Gears of War 2 etc. Now there's a lot of people that play these and love them and... for all of its own merits, the PS3 neither has these titles nor is its online support as good as the X360's (though it is free). Surely this makes it a loser in the contest?

Personally, I wouldn't want an X360 even if someone offered it to me for free/cheap (which someone did, because they did not want it either). Partly because I think playing shooters on a console is painful, partly because I think I outgrew shooters about six years ago - and I've never been much of a fan of heading out online to tussle with all the swearing, tussling, teabagging morons that accompany your average multiplayer match.

My decision may be skewed because I have a good PC, but the PS3 has always been the more attractive option to me. Its lineup of games may be smaller, but it is different from the X360 and I think it caters to a different kind of gamer altogether. Outside of the major releases (which seem to launch simultaneously on every platform from the current gen consoles to, like, the Commodore 64), the PS3 hasn't had many big multiplayer titles of its own anyway. Where it does shine is in good singleplayer and roleplaying games - particularly as it gets a lot of the Japanese output exclusively. There's also much more emphasis on more the more artistic and less mainstream titles - like LittleBigPlanet, for example and Heavy Rain, which will be coming out next year (of course, the X360 does have Braid, for which I'm deeply envious - there's exceptions everywhere).

Now, it's questionable as to how far this separation (spectralisation?) of the consoles will last into the future, let alone the next generation (if there even is one) - many publishers are realising the detriments of releasing exclusive titles, so there's a lot of cross-pollination, now that even Final Fantasy XIII has been promised for the X360. But I think this is the best way to view the PS3 vs X360 debate - this is also why the X360 is more popular, since the PS3 is slipping out of the mainstream.
 

Untamed Waters

New member
Dec 12, 2008
306
0
0
"The only people who would ever say that Metal Gear Solid 4 was a bad game are people who have never played it...or 360 owners, maybe"

I stopped reading here. The reason I don't like MGS is not because I'm a 360 owner, it's becuase I don't want a game that takes twenty minutes to start!


When I play a game, I don't want to watch a movie simultaneously.
 

Jumplion

New member
Mar 10, 2008
7,873
0
0
Untamed Waters said:
"The only people who would ever say that Metal Gear Solid 4 was a bad game are people who have never played it...or 360 owners, maybe"

I stopped reading here. The reason I don't like MGS is not because I'm a 360 owner, it's becuase I don't want a game that takes twenty minutes to start!


When I play a game, I don't want to watch a movie simultaneously.
Oh please, plenty of games take 20 minutes to actually begin the game, wether it's through cutscenes or a particularly long tutorial with as many cutscenes or not that much action. Bioshock takes, what, 10 minutes before you pick up a gun let alone shoot it at an enemy, and Half-Life could take just aslong. I'd name more, but I don't want to dwell off topic.

But anyway, surprisingly this review wasn't one of those "It sucks!" or "OMG AMAZUNG!" that most reviews of consoles or a company are.

Thumbs up (how many is for you to decide!)
 

Tich

New member
Aug 13, 2008
159
0
0
Purely out of completeness, Blu-TRay was invented by Sony and Phillips (and some more companies), and isn't an exclusive right of Sony, they just happen to use the technology in their console.

Secondly the Blu-Ray player operates at 36 Mbits per second. Which is roughly 4MB/s. Which is slower then a normal DVD maximum speed (22MB/s at 16-speed reader) which makes loading from a DVD much faster. But this is all because Blu-Ray is fairly new to the consumer industry, it needs to go through a huge process of making it faster, making the reading faster.

Personally, I wouldn't buy one, because of the fact I'm not very rich and I'm happy with the fact that my console plays more games. Including Fable and Halo 3. And mostly because most PC games are also offered for 360 thankfully due to Microsoft making a good move for once.