[Macros]

Sorry obdigore, I dont remember mentioning PS3 exclusivity, I jsut said Xbox didnt have any I wanted.
Thast being said, uncharted was great, and I will be getting the sequal to waste my holidays on.

People who think the ps3 controller is tiny must have freakishly large hands, or a complete lack of dexterity because it think its perfect in plastic form.

[cerveza_fiesta]

hmm...I got used to it, but xbox controllers are just way more comfortable. I wish I could somehow use one on my PS3.

Getting back to the OP though,

I was a PC gamer forever and now that I have a console I'd never go back. So much better being able to kick back on the couch and murder zombies/nazis/dragons from afar rather than being hunched over the KB/Mouse, 10 inches from the monitor.

[Obdigore]

Macros, on 03 December 2009 - 05:29 PM, said:

Sorry obdigore, I dont remember mentioning PS3 exclusivity, I jsut said Xbox didnt have any I wanted.
Thast being said, uncharted was great, and I will be getting the sequal to waste my holidays on.

People who think the ps3 controller is tiny must have freakishly large hands, or a complete lack of dexterity because it think its perfect in plastic form.

But... your logic has failed. If a certain system has games you want, and the other does not, that is exclusivity. Now, however, you say you aren't speaking about exclusivity. So your only point in favor of the PS3 is that 'It has a smaller game library, is more expensive, and all your friends have one, so it must be better?'.

It is a proven fact (lol!) that the 360 controllers are better than the sony controllers. And don't even talk to me about madcatz.

[Raymond Luxury Yacht]

He speaks the troof. PS3 controllers are just not as good.

[Cause]

I dont understand, Why if they can make them thin backwards compatible dont they? Thats just silly.

[Raymond Luxury Yacht]

They can make them cheaper if they aren't backwards compatible, savings which may or may not be passed along to the consumer.

[cerveza_fiesta]

Cause, on 04 December 2009 - 09:44 AM, said:

I dont understand, Why if they can make them thin backwards compatible dont they? Thats just silly.

The PS3 works on a whole different level with a competely different chipset, operating system and architecture than the PS2.

With respect to the original hardware 100% back-compatible 60Gb PS3 -- I remember some talk when it was phased out about removing the back compatibility to preserve circuit board real-estate. Adding the back-compatibility necessitated physically building a mini PS2 into a PS3's circuitry just to satisfy a minority of fans that wanted to play their PS2 stuff on the PS3. The hardware back-compatibility was surely dropped after a quick cost-benefit analysis.

With the software emulation, it always had problems with certain games. In the end about 95% of PS2 titles ran perfectly and the remaining 5% worked to varying degrees...with a small number totally unusable. They released a lot of PS2 game fixes as the patches came out and got all the really huge titles working perfectly, but a couple of the FF games, (iirc) god of war didn't ever work right...which caused much whining in the masses.

It would not surprise me to find out they dropped the idea of back-compatibility simply to cut development costs. If you think about it, why support an obselete system when most of the market for PS2 games is in 2nd hand sales (zero money for Sony) rather than new game sales? Sony's reasoning would be that you really need a PS2 fix, you can find the console in any pawn shop for less than 50 bucks and even buy a new one for about 100 bucks. If you shift the dwindling number of PS2 users toward the older systems you save development costs, stop fans whining about titles not working in your emulator, and sell the occasional PS2 system to make a bit of extra money on the side.

my $0.02 on the matter.

No idea about Xbox, not having read about their back-compatibility issues. I would imagine similar reasoning.

[lobo the wolfman]

My personal recondition would be the PS3, I like most of the exclusive games that you can get for it, and the blu-ray player is fantastic. Plus most of the games l would like to play on the xbox 360 are on the PC anyway.

An idea Cause would be to hire one with a few games that would seem to tickle your fancy over a weekend, then try the other one. Then you might get a better idea what they can both offer you and which on you prefer.

[A friendly Jaghut]

Games-wise, there's no competition really.

The PlayStation 3 offers more AAA titles, which surpass anything the 360 offers. It has a wide range of exclusive awesome games now (Uncharted 2, Killzone 2, LittleBigPlanet, etc) as well as a heap of upcoming titles such as God of War III, Gran Turismo 5 and MAG. Sony's exclusive titles span every genre, and numbers-wise, the 360 can't compete. Although a few notable multi=platform older games used to run better on the 360, patches have mostly fixed the problems, and free online gaming makes up for a slightly worse texture in some stupid comparison video.

Although the PS3 is usually more expensive than the 360, its features like free online gaming, a blu-ray player and built-in wireless capability make it the far better value.

Online community wise, the global numbers for both are very close, so its best to see what your friends have to make sure you can play online with them.

Having a decent PC and a PS3 means to me that I get the best that gaming has to offer, and at a good price.

[dktorode]

If i had to go out and buy one today...it would be the Playstation 3
There are many pros and cons to both machines....but only one is also a blue ray player... players here by themselves cost what a playstation costs.

And the whole Online gaming argument for us here in SA is irrelivant as our broadband is absolutely shit and probably wont work for the for seeable future (without paying through your ass).

All you need after getting your PlayStation is a great HD tele and a nice sound system and you wont ever have to leave the house.

[Obdigore]

A friendly Jaghut, on 07 December 2009 - 10:13 AM, said:

Games-wise, there's no competition really.

The PlayStation 3 offers more AAA titles, which surpass anything the 360 offers. It has a wide range of exclusive awesome games now (Uncharted 2, Killzone 2, LittleBigPlanet, etc) as well as a heap of upcoming titles such as God of War III, Gran Turismo 5 and MAG. Sony's exclusive titles span every genre, and numbers-wise, the 360 can't compete. Although a few notable multi=platform older games used to run better on the 360, patches have mostly fixed the problems, and free online gaming makes up for a slightly worse texture in some stupid comparison video.

Although the PS3 is usually more expensive than the 360, its features like free online gaming, a blu-ray player and built-in wireless capability make it the far better value.

Online community wise, the global numbers for both are very close, so its best to see what your friends have to make sure you can play online with them.

Having a decent PC and a PS3 means to me that I get the best that gaming has to offer, and at a good price.

Are you kididng?

Mass Effect beats every one of those games. Fable 1 and 2 are time-wasters, if you enjoy them. Lost Odyssey is the best Jap-RPG released on the current consoles. Too Human is increadibly entertaining. Lets not forget Gears of War 1 and 2.
Oh, and Forza Motorsport 3 is the best Racing game in the world right now.


PS - the Halo series is better than Killzone, as much as it pains me to say it, and I don't play Halo anymore.

BlueRay is useless unless you have a giant HD tv.

The simple fact of the matter is that the 360 offers more games. Better games, a better online experience, and a more comfortable controller. What else could you want?

[Jusentantaka]

Obdigore, on 07 December 2009 - 03:55 PM, said:

Too Human is increadibly entertaining.

No NO NO NO. Too Human is the biggest pile of crap to ever be packaged as a game. Ever. Just mentioning that Carnivale de Shit in a positive light means your argument is utterly invalidated, even if every other non-post scripted point was solid. Crap game had about as much depth as your average porn star, without even a fraction of the replay value.

[Tarcanus]

Obdigore, on 07 December 2009 - 03:55 PM, said:

The simple fact of the matter is that the 360 offers more games. Better games, a better online experience, and a more comfortable controller. What else could you want?

I'm pretty sure that we can all agree that the answer to this is, "not a Wii".


Now that we have common ground, isn't it possible that everyone has different tastes? Why do these discussions always get a little heated?

[drinksinbars]

Jusentantaka, on 07 December 2009 - 04:09 PM, said:

about as much depth as your average porn star

trying so hard not to make a crude joke, i will instead be suggestive of the mere possibility and let imaginations do the rest.

[drinksinbars]

Tarcanus, on 07 December 2009 - 04:11 PM, said:

Obdigore, on 07 December 2009 - 03:55 PM, said:

The simple fact of the matter is that the 360 offers more games. Better games, a better online experience, and a more comfortable controller. What else could you want?

I'm pretty sure that we can all agree that the answer to this is, "not a Wii".


Now that we have common ground, isn't it possible that everyone has different tastes? Why do these discussions always get a little heated?

the answer is by both you cheap bastards

[Obdigore]

Jusentantaka, on 07 December 2009 - 04:09 PM, said:

Obdigore, on 07 December 2009 - 03:55 PM, said:

Too Human is increadibly entertaining.

No NO NO NO. Too Human is the biggest pile of crap to ever be packaged as a game. Ever. Just mentioning that Carnivale de Shit in a positive light means your argument is utterly invalidated, even if every other non-post scripted point was solid. Crap game had about as much depth as your average porn star, without even a fraction of the replay value.

And I enjoyed it. Much more than I liked any MGS game. Especially playing it with a friend while drunk.

[Jusentantaka]

The ol' drunk defense huh? Not going to work in this case, because the game is so short you'd finish it before you sobered up. Since it is about two hours long.

[Obdigore]

Jusentantaka, on 07 December 2009 - 04:19 PM, said:

The ol' drunk defense huh? Not going to work in this case, because the game is so short you'd finish it before you sobered up. Since it is about two hours long.

Stop the nerdrage and step away from the hyperbole. You are incorrect.

[Jusentantaka]

Obdigore, on 07 December 2009 - 04:29 PM, said:

Jusentantaka, on 07 December 2009 - 04:19 PM, said:

The ol' drunk defense huh? Not going to work in this case, because the game is so short you'd finish it before you sobered up. Since it is about two hours long.

Stop the nerdrage and step away from the hyperbole. You are incorrect.

NUH UH!!! well, ok, hyperbole, sure. I did finish that game in less than 5 hours though. Mindless, dull, repetitive as all hell, and so unworthy of the price of a rental that, well, it was just obscene.

[Obdigore]

Jusentantaka, on 07 December 2009 - 04:36 PM, said:

Obdigore, on 07 December 2009 - 04:29 PM, said:

Jusentantaka, on 07 December 2009 - 04:19 PM, said:

The ol' drunk defense huh? Not going to work in this case, because the game is so short you'd finish it before you sobered up. Since it is about two hours long.

Stop the nerdrage and step away from the hyperbole. You are incorrect.

NUH UH!!! well, ok, hyperbole, sure. I did finish that game in less than 5 hours though. Mindless, dull, repetitive as all hell, and so unworthy of the price of a rental that, well, it was just obscene.

I finished the COD:MW2 campaign in less than 5 hours.

anyway, I enjoyed it, and I too, rented it.

So I have been trying to find the name of the game I played that I enjoyed... and I can't figure it out. Blah! Did anyone play it? Top-down view, you used the wasd or arrows as control, flew around in your space ship and could shoot like an arcade game, but had to build up fleets and send them on patrol duty or attack or w/e... hrm... I can't remember it, and no it isn't star command.