Poll: Best reason to get a PS3

[Cid Silverwing]

Hardcore graphics, Blu-Ray, PSN store and free Internet gameplay.

 

[ThePlasmatizer]

Don't take this the wrong way, but my Local Internet Cafe has COD 4 on all PC's, and.... well, lets just say the Graphics remind me oddly the 5th generation.

While I agree that Call of Duty 4 is no Crysis Warhead when it comes to looks, you might want to get your eyes checked if you think it's reminiscent of the 5th generation. The lighting, shadow, and motion blur effects and techniques used in COD4 were definitely not found in any of the games in the 5th generation.

No, you misunderstand me. I also have said game at home on my Ps3, and there the graphics look beautiful - shadow effects, natural movement of the body, what have you. The graphical issues seem to be on the PC.

If you want to look at its true potential, look at its exclusives. Like Wipeout HD.

Getting such a graphically limited game like Wipeout HD to run at 1080p is not something one should be bragging about for any platform.

Look at Audiosurf running at 1080p!

I knew I shoiuld have gone with my other choices. Ok, Gran Turismo 5, Killzone 2, Heavy Rain. Pick any of the above.

If you think graphics are somehow a test of how great a console is you're wrong otherwise the Wii wouldn't be outselling other consoles.

It doesn't matter how powerful a console is, how advanced the graphics are that you can see a bees privates or how many ridiculous add on features it has like blu ray, it's all about the gaming experience anything else is a bonus.

 

[Gedo]

Little Big Planet is the only reason that makes me want a PS3. Other than that, the PS3 is hardly superior to the Xbox 360. The PS3 has less games, suckier network (eventhough it IS for free. Wait, it is free, right?), is more expensive (both the games and the actual PS3) and.. Did I say less games yet? Plus, I really don't like the controller, but that's personal preference.

First, the PS3 has about just as many games as the 360.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Xbox_360_games - 360 games | 554
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_3_games - PS3 games | 532

Wow, and the 360 was released one year BEFORE the PS3? Now don't tell me that the PS3 doesn't have any games.

Second, suckier network? As above says, I really don't see why PSN is bad. Oh, and yes, it is free.

Third, the games for both the consoles are just as expensive. Oh, and the 360 lacks wi-fi.

The controller thing is, as you say, a personal preference in terms of comfort, but it does have SixAxis, while the 360 uses batteries.


- Gedo

 

[Jumplion]

Hmm, i put HD gaming one but this is not my belief. It is give and take with the best HD gaming, but may i point out that while some xbox 'exclusives' may end up on PC, this never occurs (as far as i know) from PS3 to PC. So if you want to have true exclusives the PS3 is the way to go. Bit annoyed gears 2 didnt end up on PC but hey ho we push on.

I find the "HD gaming at its best" option hilarious.

That may somewhat explain it, but I would still like the OP to explain why he put that option in the poll...

Because people find a convinient source of HD displays to watch Blu-Ray movies with their buddies right out of the box more appealing than doing research for 1080p+ HD PC gaming that is pretty much a niche for most games and only available to one person at a time because they had enough money to upgrade to 1080p+ but their friend didn't and now their friend is going to start mooching off of your PC/Blu-ray player but you're sick of his mooching?

I dunno, I always thought that people like easy to use sort of stuff that's right ouf of the box, no matter if that COD game is actually 720p or if that Pearl Harbor movie in Blu-ray is actually upscaled to 1080p (whatever that means) (also, the explosions were pretty)

But HOLD ON THERE COWBOY! We're starting a flame-war, which was inevitable anyway.

Put that gun away Maverick, I ain't startin' nothin'.

I was just asking for an explanation why the OP put that option on the poll since it isn't true. So basically I'm just asking why he's lying, that's all.

Lyin'? Hell, I nevah even knew that there wus a resolootion high-r 'n 1080p until, like, a few months ago![/country accent]

Ps3 being an HD console is mostly common knowledge by now, PCs supporting resolutions higher than 1080p is not unless you're a computer engineer or something.

It was an honest to goodness mistake, not everyone is as computer technical as the PC guys here. You're making a mountain out of a molehill, seriously.

I thought 720p was average visuals? Looks decent enough to me, if it's true 1080p then woo-hoo for me I get to see slightly curvier faces and boobs, but it doesn't really matter to me that much until console games start progressively getting the 1080p treatment.

Do you understand what 720p and 1080p denote?

But when all console games are true 1080p, you PC gamers will all be like "HO HO HO! We've had 1080p for years you console-douchebag-tards!" and when console games go higher than 1080p you Pc gamers will be all like "HO HO HO HO! We've had 1080p+ for years you console-retards!"

But hang on a sec! Have you forgotten my Grade School analogy already? Do I have to say it again? I will say it again if I have to, I'll even PM it to you if I have to. There's nothing wrong with consoles being sub-1080 or whatever, and consoles have to be different enough from PCs because otherwise they are PCs and they're not supposed to.

Consoles are PCs; they're just running extremely closed OS's and have software/hardware which you can't expand or modify without breaking the EULA. At least, not to the degree compared to a PC. It's like all the people denying that Macs are any different from PCs.

I just wish we could stop trying to put lipstick on a pig and call it HD gaming.

I believe 720p/1080p is how many pixels are on the screen at once or something like that? The p is progressive, but I always forget what that means. Oh well.

I view the restricted modifying as somewhat a good thing, for developers anyway. I've said before, since all consoles have identical specs it allows developers to squeeze more juice out of whatever it is they're using but how much resources they use is up to them, development costs n' all. PCs always have something new and rarely let developers utilize individual parts to its fullest unless they dump a whole workforce on it (ala Crysis) but then you're isolating everyone who doesn't have that particular PC part.

I don't see anything wrong with consoles being "dumbed down" version of PCs, it's easier access for the actual consumer and if you refuse to buy a console because it "doesn't have true 1080p visuals!" then fine, just stop complaining about it and go on with your life.

 

[Jumplion]

Let's try this again with COD4:

According to Sony staff, the Nvidia RSX GPU is about equivalent to the Nvidia GeForce 7800 graphics card.

Where does the highest version of that card (7800GTX) end up when playing COD4 at actual 1080p and with all the graphics settings turned up?

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-charts-q3-2008/Call-of-Duty-4-v1-6,746.html

Oh.

Hmm.

21.3 frames per second.

That must be one beautiful slide show.

Looked fine to me, never chopped up at all, very smooth all around.

 

[Lvl 64 Klutz]

Eggo, you make decent enough arguments for PC gaming, but you really need to tone them down a bit. You're starting to sound slightly condescending.

As for me, I don't care how good or bad my games look, otherwise I wouldn't still be playing my N64 every once in a while. I plan on getting a 360 first, simply because I like the games coming out for it slightly better. That being said, I'd ideally like to own both consoles, but that won't be for a while.

 

[Jumplion]

Ps3 being an HD console is mostly common knowledge by now, PCs supporting resolutions higher than 1080p is not unless you're a computer engineer or something.

Do you think everyone who uses a 30" monitor is a computer engineer or something?

That was exactly my point. Not everyone is a computer engineer, so the knowledge of 1080p+ resolutions arn't as well known as the PS3 being an HD console.

I don't see anything wrong with consoles being "dumbed down" version of PCs, it's easier access for the actual consumer and if you refuse to buy a console because it "doesn't have true 1080p visuals!" then fine, just stop complaining about it and go on with your life.

I don't see anything wrong with it; I just wish people were more honest.

Look above, you can't lie if you don't even know.

 

[Jumplion]

Let's try this again with COD4:

According to Sony staff, the Nvidia RSX GPU is about equivalent to the Nvidia GeForce 7800 graphics card.

Where does the highest version of that card (7800GTX) end up when playing COD4 at actual 1080p and with all the graphics settings turned up?

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-charts-q3-2008/Call-of-Duty-4-v1-6,746.html

Oh.

Hmm.

21.3 frames per second.

That must be one beautiful slide show.

Looked fine to me, never chopped up at all, very smooth all around.

...That's because the console versions of the games aren't rendering at 1080p and probably don't have all the settings at max.

Guess how much of a difference in pixels there is between 600p and 1080p.

2,073,176.

At 1024x600, I could get my girlfriend's 4 year old laptop to play COD4.

(I'm probably going to word this question wrong) How big are those pixels? Or more importantly, how many of the are actually being put to use for any game really?

 

[Spartan Bannana]

Little Big Planet is the only reason that makes me want a PS3. Other than that, the PS3 is hardly superior to the Xbox 360. The PS3 has less games, suckier network (eventhough it IS for free. Wait, it is free, right?), is more expensive (both the games and the actual PS3) and.. Did I say less games yet? Plus, I really don't like the controller, but that's personal preference.

When 360 owners say that the PS3 has a worse online network they never say why. Can you give some reasons please?

I've found that PS3 online seems a bit slower and I don't know, it just doesn't seem as good for unexplainable reasons
I also see no real tangible reason to buy a PS3 other than it's wider range of memory, that's what bugs me about my 360, I got the 20G version, but it's not quite enough storage, whereas the 120G version just has too much storage. Otherwise, the PS3 really isn't at all better than the 360(imo), aside from barely better graphics and internet, but I still find the browser on the PS3 to be fairly shitty

 

[Jumplion]

That was exactly my point. Not everyone is a computer engineer, so the knowledge of 1080p+ resolutions arn't as well known as the PS3 being an HD console.

Dell and Apple don't cater their 30" monitors to computer engineers or those who know a lot about computers.

Look above, you can't lie if you don't even know.

You're right; I should reword what I said. I wish more people were more honest/less ignorant.

The computer engineers was referential to how smart people are with computers.

There we go! "I wish more people were more honest/less ignorant." Now just take out "more honest" part, and we can teach people to make them become less ignorant! What a world we live in when we can actually teach people that there's a higher resolution than what the PS3 can do, and move on with our lives.

 

[Jumplion]

...All of them? Try playing Call of Duty 4 or whatever game you want at 640x480 and then try playing it at 1920x1080.

There's a massive shift in quality and playability.

I knew I worded that wrong, the question's in my head but I don't know how to ask it. Just ignore that, nevermind.

 

[Bob_F_It]

If PSN is free, then a PS3 costs $50/$40/AU$80 less every year.