The Playstation Loses.. To the Playstation
- Thread starter Khazoth
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Why? The PS2 is an amazing system and probably was my favorite as I had and played more PS2 games during that console generation. Most of my xbox playing was Morrowind, while others I generally lost interest in. The PS2 is way better than the PS3.
(I am a 360 gamer for the record)
(I am a 360 gamer for the record)
Ok, I'd like to step in if I may...Just to say a few words on Sony's behave *adjusts glasses*
I am in what we in the "biz" like to call...."the biz"
. And by that I of course mean gaming business. I have learned certain things about the PS3 that may bring light to the average gamer's point-of-view.
1: Backwards Compatibility - PS3 is also a Blue Ray player. Therefore the laser it uses to play the discs is a blue ray laser. These lasers cannot read normal PS2 games properly. There is, however certain programming and hardware they could use (and did use) to make the PS3 play PS2 games. Problem is that hardware costs roughly 400-500 dollars (by itself, not counting everything else it takes to make a PS3) Which...obviously explains why the PS3 was around 800 dollars when it first came out. Even with that hardware, it didn't play PS2 games in good quality. So, they sacrifice backwards compatibility to lower the price. The only actual way to bring it back were to basically PUT a PS2 into the PS3.
2: Extras - I'll hand it Microsoft...they know how to make money. Once you buy a PS3, mostly everything you need is included, Wireless capability, blue tooth, Blue Ray Player, Internal Battery inside the controller so you don't have to buy batteries, free online registration. The list goes on. Now...when you buy a Xbox 360...some people (specially in some regions) buy the arcade, its cheap it's simple. They get to go home and play Madden, or whatever they want to play right away all for a 200 dollar price tag, until of course, they want extra stuff. Xbox Live, Bigger Hard drive (if they bought a lower model) continuous purchasing of batteries, or buying of a charger pack/rechargeable batteries, The Intercooling System, No matter which way you slice it, to get the best out of Xbox you're gonna spend roughly around 500 dollars in the long-run (and always pay for online play) And you don't even get a Blue Ray Player. Nintendo...Well...the Wii is cheap, easy, fun to use, good for families. Wii Fit, good to get active, fun to use, good for families. Mario Kart, EA Active. They know how to keep people buying stuff that they'll play for 2 weeks and probably play on-and-off for month at a time but not really commit to. But, as long as they make the sales, who cares?
3: Programming - The average Xbox360 game runs on (I believe) 2 different coding layers. PS3 usually needs to be written out in (once again, I believe) 4 lines of code. You can see where some programmers may not be interested in making PS3 games. Also, I've been told its harder to make games into blue ray discs. I'm not sure why cause I haven't officially MADE MY OWN YEP. But I'll find out.
4: Recession - $130 PS2, with MILLIONS of games, ability to buy used games for cheap, or just cheap games. Or a $500 dollar system with each game ranging from $40-$60.
5: In The Long-Run: Ok, in the long run. The Xbox360 makes better sales...programmers see this, and the games are easier to make on that system, therefore, programmers make more games for the Xbox360, it makes better sales, rinse, repeat. In it's CORE the PS3 is the best overall electronic device I'm sorry, it is. But we all know that's not what gamers care about. GAMES!!! Is what we care about. the PS3 just doesn't have enough "push" when it comes to games that jump out at people. But I think if game designers really push, and the consumers listen It could easily pick up. I, myself am an ATLUS/NIS America whore, and when I saw Disgaea 3 on the PS3 I immediately latched onto it. But, I don't regret it one bit .
I just hope this gives you guys some insight into the PS3 Flame me if you want, call me a fanboy. I do have a Xbox360 and a PS3. (I couldn't resist the lovely Left 4 Dead exclusive.) I just wanted to throw some info into the pool to let you guys know ^_^. Peace
I am in what we in the "biz" like to call...."the biz"
. And by that I of course mean gaming business. I have learned certain things about the PS3 that may bring light to the average gamer's point-of-view.1: Backwards Compatibility - PS3 is also a Blue Ray player. Therefore the laser it uses to play the discs is a blue ray laser. These lasers cannot read normal PS2 games properly. There is, however certain programming and hardware they could use (and did use) to make the PS3 play PS2 games. Problem is that hardware costs roughly 400-500 dollars (by itself, not counting everything else it takes to make a PS3) Which...obviously explains why the PS3 was around 800 dollars when it first came out. Even with that hardware, it didn't play PS2 games in good quality. So, they sacrifice backwards compatibility to lower the price. The only actual way to bring it back were to basically PUT a PS2 into the PS3.
2: Extras - I'll hand it Microsoft...they know how to make money. Once you buy a PS3, mostly everything you need is included, Wireless capability, blue tooth, Blue Ray Player, Internal Battery inside the controller so you don't have to buy batteries, free online registration. The list goes on. Now...when you buy a Xbox 360...some people (specially in some regions) buy the arcade, its cheap it's simple. They get to go home and play Madden, or whatever they want to play right away all for a 200 dollar price tag, until of course, they want extra stuff. Xbox Live, Bigger Hard drive (if they bought a lower model) continuous purchasing of batteries, or buying of a charger pack/rechargeable batteries, The Intercooling System, No matter which way you slice it, to get the best out of Xbox you're gonna spend roughly around 500 dollars in the long-run (and always pay for online play) And you don't even get a Blue Ray Player
. Nintendo...Well...the Wii is cheap, easy, fun to use, good for families. Wii Fit, good to get active, fun to use, good for families. Mario Kart, EA Active. They know how to keep people buying stuff that they'll play for 2 weeks and probably play on-and-off for month at a time but not really commit to. But, as long as they make the sales, who cares?3: Programming - The average Xbox360 game runs on (I believe) 2 different coding layers. PS3 usually needs to be written out in (once again, I believe) 4 lines of code. You can see where some programmers may not be interested in making PS3 games. Also, I've been told its harder to make games into blue ray discs. I'm not sure why cause I haven't officially MADE MY OWN YEP
. But I'll find out. 4: Recession - $130 PS2, with MILLIONS of games, ability to buy used games for cheap, or just cheap games. Or a $500 dollar system with each game ranging from $40-$60.
5: In The Long-Run: Ok, in the long run. The Xbox360 makes better sales...programmers see this, and the games are easier to make on that system, therefore, programmers make more games for the Xbox360, it makes better sales, rinse, repeat. In it's CORE the PS3 is the best overall electronic device
I'm sorry, it is. But we all know that's not what gamers care about. GAMES!!! Is what we care about. the PS3 just doesn't have enough "push" when it comes to games that jump out at people. But I think if game designers really push, and the consumers listen It could easily pick up. I, myself am an ATLUS/NIS America whore, and when I saw Disgaea 3 on the PS3 I immediately latched onto it. But, I don't regret it one bit .I just hope this gives you guys some insight into the PS3
Flame me if you want, call me a fanboy. I do have a Xbox360 and a PS3. (I couldn't resist the lovely Left 4 Dead exclusive.) I just wanted to throw some info into the pool to let you guys know ^_^. Peace
The PS3 is in the doldrums due to Sony's own arrogance and contempt for consumers. They seriously believed that they could give Microsoft a 2 year head start and then bring out a console twice as expensive as the 360 with no standout games and their loyal fanbase would be queueing up to be ripped off.
They compound this arrogance by pulling stunts like charging you 25 quid to playtest their multiplayer beta for Gran Turismo (think about it, that's effectively what they did) and still, however many years on, where is the killer app that will make people buy one?
If you look back, consoles have always had those one or two titles to hook people in. The SNES had Super Mario World and F Zero at launch, PS1 had Ridge Racer and Tekken. The N64 was considered a failure yet it had Goldeneye, Mario 64 and Perfect Dark. The game that made me buy a PS2 was GTA III, although the copy of ICO that came bundled with it is a modern classic.
What has PS3 come up with to make it a must buy? There is a slew of titles that are also available on 360 which has better support in terms of DLC and a larger online player base. And that leaves what, Killzone? Metal Gear? (yawn)I dont think that the Master Chief or Marcus Fenix are quaking in their heavy boots just yet.
I may still buy a PS3 one day. But Sony need to try much harder on the games. When companies like Square start jumping ship you know the rot is setting in. They left Nintendo for dead when Sony started their period of market dominance and they appear to be making a similar move now...
They compound this arrogance by pulling stunts like charging you 25 quid to playtest their multiplayer beta for Gran Turismo (think about it, that's effectively what they did) and still, however many years on, where is the killer app that will make people buy one?
If you look back, consoles have always had those one or two titles to hook people in. The SNES had Super Mario World and F Zero at launch, PS1 had Ridge Racer and Tekken. The N64 was considered a failure yet it had Goldeneye, Mario 64 and Perfect Dark. The game that made me buy a PS2 was GTA III, although the copy of ICO that came bundled with it is a modern classic.
What has PS3 come up with to make it a must buy? There is a slew of titles that are also available on 360 which has better support in terms of DLC and a larger online player base. And that leaves what, Killzone? Metal Gear? (yawn)I dont think that the Master Chief or Marcus Fenix are quaking in their heavy boots just yet.
I may still buy a PS3 one day. But Sony need to try much harder on the games. When companies like Square start jumping ship you know the rot is setting in. They left Nintendo for dead when Sony started their period of market dominance and they appear to be making a similar move now...
I'm with you man. Best console ever made. Fuck the PS3 *pulls on his Pyro suit*Wouldukindly said:
Err... the DS has more games that I actually play on it, and is less expensive to do what it does well... *pulls on Pyro suit*SomeBritishDude said:
Dude, too many Pyro's. If there's a Pryo, be a Demoman or something, close range is covered. Jesus...NewGeekPhilosopher said:
But anyway, I have no battle with you. DS is the best handheld console. Fuck the PSP! *Pulls on second Pyro suit*
The game's for the Wii does look better,
and don't get pissy just because Nintendo grasped the fact that backwards compatibility is important,- The major reason i bought one was the Virtual Console.
(The GC does'nt have that)
I love not having to keep my NES, SNES, SEGA and N64 out in my living room,
working through cable-hell each time i want to play a different game.
Thankyou.
Hey, who's getting pissy? Nintendo have pulled off the greatest interactive media coup in history, by throwing away the "more power" "better graphics" dynamic of every previous generation of console war and doing something completely different. Hats off to them. They had their traditional territory stolen by Sony in the last gen and did something new - and it worked.Datsle said:
It is ironic that the quicker, faster, most powerful console is at the bottom of the next gen pile, isn't it? Proof that it's games not specs that sell consoles....
Microsoft shouldn't be too happy either, the figures aren't there but the 360's April sales were only three thousand or so more than the PS2.
Xbox 360 -175,00
PlayStation 2 - 172,00
Playstation 3 - 127,000
Source: http://www.gamestooge.com/2009/05/14/npd-console-sales-for-april-2009/
That's completely pathetic for both parties, when your console is barely competing with a 10year old system you really need to rethink the strategy. Neither Microsoft nor Sony can be particularly pleased with sales figures like that.
Xbox 360 -175,00
PlayStation 2 - 172,00
Playstation 3 - 127,000
Source: http://www.gamestooge.com/2009/05/14/npd-console-sales-for-april-2009/
That's completely pathetic for both parties, when your console is barely competing with a 10year old system you really need to rethink the strategy. Neither Microsoft nor Sony can be particularly pleased with sales figures like that.
It's not actually suprising that the PS3 has come behind the PS2 in terms of widespread popularity, the PS2 was about as common and prolific as a DVD player (in fact, it was a DVD player) and most people who have a games console would probably have owned a PS2 at one point.
Then we go to the PS3 which is second only to the cutting edge, top of the line gaming PCs in terms of hardcore tech and dire costs, is it that suprising that there's been a sharp drop in owners?
Then we go to the PS3 which is second only to the cutting edge, top of the line gaming PCs in terms of hardcore tech and dire costs, is it that suprising that there's been a sharp drop in owners?