ask a question in here

[BLT]

Originally Posted by NVR 20

i have a easy questiion, wat color ps3 is the best? haha lets see how u guys fight that over. (personally i dont like any)

thats an opinion based question and if you cant figure that out for yourself then heres some tips. if you want it to fit into your set up then pick the colour that matches all your other stuff. if you want it to stand out then buy a colour that doesnt match your already existing equipment. but this is pointless because as of right now only black is going to be available.

[BLT]

anymore questions?

[Eazy_D]

Whats the capital of Trinidad?

[Enola Bomber]

BLT, i agree with everything you've said, which is funnyt because it seems like a weird thing to argue against. why are people mad that their 360 cant do what a ps3 can? BLT never stated 360 sucks, and neither do I. I love my 360, cant wait till it evolves and new great games are made, but i am also excited for the ps3. why is a browser and hd dvd player a bad thing? more electronics are good? its like a free pc! I bet anyone complaining would be on these same forums commenting on how much better 360 is than ps3 if it were the other way around and our 360s had this many features. theres nothing wrong with defending our $400 investments, but it doesnt make sense bashing something for having more. PS3 isnt an exclusive club, you can all have one, and im sure we all will in time. till then, CHEERS everyone, and lets love every minute of our 360's instead of peaking over to see what ps3 is doing and spiting them. they are making it for us afterall...

[Scotracer]

Originally Posted by BLT

miss rumble then you can purchase third party controllers with rumble.

Not meaning to bash or anything, but that is most definetely not true. The rumble system has to have an algorithm encoded in the game for it to function, and if the PS3's first party controllers do not feature rumble, why implement it?

This is more of point, than a question but current 360 games are just about, or just over 5Gb in total. Now a DVD-9 disk has 9.4Gb of storage, can you really see games in the next 3 years requiring this extra space, or having to develop better functioning compression techniques?
As for Sony, they are unlikely to use the large capacity (45Gb etc) Blu-ray disks, most likely 15Gb, too keep costs as low as possible.

As for the performance of the PS3, yes Sony has stated gleefully that it has 2 teraflops of floating point performance. Now this is in terms of total arithemetic data processing, which is not key for gaming. Not only this but many sources have claimed that the system is many times more powerful than the Xbox 360. This is an unjustifiable claim, as the performance for which they speak is not relevant to gaming. Now, heat is a major issue (or, displacement of is) with this new generation of gaming. With the current PS3 dev kits overheating, even in a larger casing than the final production model is likely to have. Please, explain to me how they are going to alleviate this problem, as this could be a major downfall of the console. This is further increased by the suspected low chip yields on the Cell.

Trying to justify the PS3's worth, by its other uses it completely irrelevant as its purpose is gaming. The average gamer is not going to think, "Why would I spend an extra £145 ($220) on a PS3?". They are not going to try and justify the purchase (or the parents for that matter) by saying, "ah, but it has added functionality". They then realise they have a home PC with a better interface for all those functions and why need they spend the extra cash on something they already own? Most people don't have HDTV, let alone a 1080p panel, they are not going to be coined into the system by those terms and figures.

Now, these added function aren't even that important anyway. Yes the Wifi internet built-in could be useful, but I don't even have a wireless network in my home (also the lower SKU of the PS3 doesn't even have WiFi built in). As for bluetooth, the 360 also has that, in terms of its controllers and who knows what else they may implement using the tech.
Yes, in theory having all the functionality in one system is great, but not when almost everyone already has a PC for most of this. Yes, no one owns a HD movie player right now, and the PS3 may sell well as one of those but trying to justify it's quite frankly terrible price tag (in the UK, bundles are only being sold in the first few shipments at £545. This is over $1000) is another issue. So, taking that $1000 into account, you could buy a stand-alone better quality HD DVD player which would look better and not have the constant whirring of many fans that the PS3 is likely to have. Then you could buy a 360 for the rest of the functionality with the money that is left over.

I have a comparison, not too far from the same thing as the PS3 vs 360 debate. Look at the DS vs PSP. The PSP is by far the more powerful console with more multimedia capabilities but it is quite comprehensively outsold by the DS (2 to 1 in some cases). This could be down to a number of factors, but I assume that the price has a significant influence in this.

This is not trying to bash the PS3 itself as I would do the same for any other business/economic blunder, but I would like some justification for the quite ridiculous price-tag of the PS3.

[camwilson04]

xbox greeen :P

[BLT]

Originally Posted by ScotRacer

Not meaning to bash or anything, but that is most definetely not true. The rumble system has to have an algorithm encoded in the game for it to function, and if the PS3's first party controllers do not feature rumble, why implement it?

This is more of point, than a question but current 360 games are just about, or just over 5Gb in total. Now a DVD-9 disk has 9.4Gb of storage, can you really see games in the next 3 years requiring this extra space, or having to develop better functioning compression techniques?
As for Sony, they are unlikely to use the large capacity (45Gb etc) Blu-ray disks, most likely 15Gb, too keep costs as low as possible.

As for the performance of the PS3, yes Sony has stated gleefully that it has 2 teraflops of floating point performance. Now this is in terms of total arithemetic data processing, which is not key for gaming. Not only this but many sources have claimed that the system is many times more powerful than the Xbox 360. This is an unjustifiable claim, as the performance for which they speak is not relevant to gaming. Now, heat is a major issue (or, displacement of is) with this new generation of gaming. With the current PS3 dev kits overheating, even in a larger casing than the final production model is likely to have. Please, explain to me how they are going to alleviate this problem, as this could be a major downfall of the console. This is further increased by the suspected low chip yields on the Cell.

Trying to justify the PS3's worth, by its other uses it completely irrelevant as its purpose is gaming. The average gamer is not going to think, "Why would I spend an extra £145 ($220) on a PS3?". They are not going to try and justify the purchase (or the parents for that matter) by saying, "ah, but it has added functionality". They then realise they have a home PC with a better interface for all those functions and why need they spend the extra cash on something they already own? Most people don't have HDTV, let alone a 1080p panel, they are not going to be coined into the system by those terms and figures.

Now, these added function aren't even that important anyway. Yes the Wifi internet built-in could be useful, but I don't even have a wireless network in my home (also the lower SKU of the PS3 doesn't even have WiFi built in). As for bluetooth, the 360 also has that, in terms of its controllers and who knows what else they may implement using the tech.
Yes, in theory having all the functionality in one system is great, but not when almost everyone already has a PC for most of this. Yes, no one owns a HD movie player right now, and the PS3 may sell well as one of those but trying to justify it's quite frankly terrible price tag (in the UK, bundles are only being sold in the first few shipments at £545. This is over $1000) is another issue. So, taking that $1000 into account, you could buy a stand-alone better quality HD DVD player which would look better and not have the constant whirring of many fans that the PS3 is likely to have. Then you could buy a 360 for the rest of the functionality with the money that is left over.

I have a comparison, not too far from the same thing as the PS3 vs 360 debate. Look at the DS vs PSP. The PSP is by far the more powerful console with more multimedia capabilities but it is quite comprehensively outsold by the DS (2 to 1 in some cases). This could be down to a number of factors, but I assume that the price has a significant influence in this.

This is not trying to bash the PS3 itself as I would do the same for any other business/economic blunder, but I would like some justification for the quite ridiculous price-tag of the PS3.

your first statement is definately true and it was something i overlooked. but your statement saying that ps3 is just for gamming is untrue. sony have stated that ps3 is i think they call it a computer entertainment system, but if not its something along those lines. and 360 deos not have bluetooth, but instead wifi for their controllers and other stuff. and about the funtionallity being useless that is only your opinion. i could use these features everyday. think about what your saying, i cannot make you desire these features, i am not a sony sales man. i just put them out there. dont complain about features that may not be important to you. i didnt complain when I read about universal remotes and learned that they control your tv but many things on top of that. i just said to myself that the price wasnt justified for me personally. the rason it has those features is so that people who want them can...................well purchase them if they wish.

[Scotracer]

Sony has always called it's games consoles computer gaming systems, which is also what games consoles are referred to in the UK. Even their gaming devisions are referred to in terms of computers; SCEE (Sony Computer Entertainment Europe) as an example, this term has been around since the days of Crash bandicoot on the PS1. So, this is no new term for Sony as they have made no attempt to justify the ludicious price.

They are relying on tech heads and Sony fan-boys to sell the product, and they can sell it at such a price because they know it will sell for the fanboys because it is a PS3 and for the tech heads because it has alot of new developments in it. This is all good, but these groups are minorities and won't help much for the PS3 selling in the mainstream and I will say again parents that see the price of the PS3 will not be swayed by a little added functionality.

[Enola Bomber]

i think ps3 if headed into some big time troubles. i like the games for it, and maybe it'll a damn good system in the end, but the facts are, that right now sony are in trouble, and i think they know it. with sonys extremely low profits right now from all markets they are involved with, to setting themselves up to lose millions on the ps3 (which they are hoping will be their saving grace), im not even sure they will last long enough to see the ps3 take off and see some bank for the company.

[X360 Master]

I'll ask a question about the PS3-Is it really, I mean, REALLY worth it? The
PS3 base price happens to be 500 smackers.. thats almost double the Xbox360 Base. It might be nice, but I think it's overpriced. -hey that rhymed.

Edit- Sony has been in fiancial trouble recently, and I heard that they are borrowing money to produce and market the PS3. If Sony is really going to lay down a risk that might get them bankrupt... then go for it. Don't get me wrong, I like Sony, and I personally love the games... but if they crash, who will take their legacy? Microsoft? Playstation won't be the same anymore.

[Grindstone]

Off-topic response to X360 Master:

Well, I think that if Sony does go under, they will sell off the Playstation brand to a fellow competitor, such as Toshiba or Samsung.

Granted, we are speculating on something that could be nothing at all. But if we align all the things we have heard or know: Sony isn't profitable right now, borrowing money, negative press on the PS3, lawsuits, exclusive titles being lost, then yes, the magic 8 ball is predicting an end to an empire. This isn't good for gamers as a whole -- savvy gamers realize competition is a good thing.

But since the PS brand is a globally recognized product, I am sure it would not die with Sony. It would be auctioned off to the highest bidder in an attempt to salvage costs for bankruptcy. Just as MGM, and other Sony subsidies.

[Jacksmith28]

Are people gonna actually buy the P$3?

[X360 Master]

Originally Posted by Grindstone

Off-topic response to X360 Master:

Well, I think that if Sony does go under, they will sell off the Playstation brand to a fellow competitor, such as Toshiba or Samsung.

Granted, we are speculating on something that could be nothing at all. But if we align all the things we have heard or know: Sony isn't profitable right now, borrowing money, negative press on the PS3, lawsuits, exclusive titles being lost, then yes, the magic 8 ball is predicting an end to an empire. This isn't good for gamers as a whole -- savvy gamers realize competition is a good thing.

But since the PS brand is a globally recognized product, I am sure it would not die with Sony. It would be auctioned off to the highest bidder in an attempt to salvage costs for bankruptcy. Just as MGM, and other Sony subsidies.

I see. Well, I believe that the PS legacy will survive, for sure. But the some of the game producers and studios will not work with the new owner of the PS francise. Samsung, a profitable Japanese hardware company, is know mostly for the computers they make. If they 'inherit' the PS, so to speak, they will most likely clash with some other company. The immediate future of the PS doesn't look too bright. But you never know, Sony might pull through, because the PS3 may be a bit overpriced, but Sony is huge. The PS2 sold millions more than the Xbox, you know. Maybe it will be the same again.
By the way, thanks for your opinion, Grindstone.

[BLT]

Originally Posted by Enola Bomber

i think ps3 if headed into some big time troubles. i like the games for it, and maybe it'll a damn good system in the end, but the facts are, that right now sony are in trouble, and i think they know it. with sonys extremely low profits right now from all markets they are involved with, to setting themselves up to lose millions on the ps3 (which they are hoping will be their saving grace), im not even sure they will last long enough to see the ps3 take off and see some bank for the company.

this is a thread for asking questions, no offence

[BLT]

Originally Posted by X360 Master

I'll ask a question about the PS3-Is it really, I mean, REALLY worth it? The
PS3 base price happens to be 500 smackers.. thats almost double the Xbox360 Base. It might be nice, but I think it's overpriced. -hey that rhymed.

Edit- Sony has been in fiancial trouble recently, and I heard that they are borrowing money to produce and market the PS3. If Sony is really going to lay down a risk that might get them bankrupt... then go for it. Don't get me wrong, I like Sony, and I personally love the games... but if they crash, who will take their legacy? Microsoft? Playstation won't be the same anymore.

you cant compare the base prices of the base prices of each system
what can the base model of the 360 do. you cant save you cant dowload anything you, cant really do anything but play games. and the controllers are wired. so the base ps3 is worth much more.

[BLT]

Originally Posted by Grindstone

Off-topic response to X360 Master:

Well, I think that if Sony does go under, they will sell off the Playstation brand to a fellow competitor, such as Toshiba or Samsung.

Granted, we are speculating on something that could be nothing at all. But if we align all the things we have heard or know: Sony isn't profitable right now, borrowing money, negative press on the PS3, lawsuits, exclusive titles being lost, then yes, the magic 8 ball is predicting an end to an empire. This isn't good for gamers as a whole -- savvy gamers realize competition is a good thing.

But since the PS brand is a globally recognized product, I am sure it would not die with Sony. It would be auctioned off to the highest bidder in an attempt to salvage costs for bankruptcy. Just as MGM, and other Sony subsidies.

please ask questions

[BLT]

Originally Posted by Jacksmith28

Are people gonna actually buy the P$3?

yeah actually i heard people already are having trouble finding a store to pre order it. but dont quote me cus that was just what some people were saying on a forum i was on.

[Grindstone]

Originally Posted by BLT

please ask questions

Yessir.

And please do not bump your own thread.

Nevertheless, since you seem bored: How do you think the undustry shares will pan out? Meaning; Sony 40% of the market, Msoft & Nintendo 30% <-- that is merely an example. Please support your conclusion as best possible.

[BLT]

Originally Posted by Grindstone

Yessir.

And please do not bump your own thread.

Nevertheless, since you seem bored: How do you think the undustry shares will pan out? Meaning; Sony 40% of the market, Msoft & Nintendo 30% <-- that is merely an example. Please support your conclusion as best possible.

sorry man, im not a very good judge of that. i dont even know what the share percentages are right now.

[KH0RNE]

Originally Posted by BLT

please ask questions

how wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?

i must know!!!