Playstation 3 = Win - Page 2

Setari · 2006-05-11, 06:37 PM

From what I've seen, everything about Sony so far at E3 seems to be doing pretty poorly. Nintendo is fine, they have oodles of playable games down on the floor, their motion sensor is much more robust, and of course the price is lower. I'm not sure what console I will get, but right now I'm starting to lean towards the Wii.

Kikinchikin · 2006-05-11, 06:53 PM

Way too expensive. Not at all worth it.

And the Wii has to be the gayest console name ever.

PC>all.

Setari · 2006-05-11, 07:18 PM

http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/05/11/ni...thunder_at_e3/

A few minutes after the show opened, Nintendo estimated the wait to reach a game station at about four hours. By 10 am, the wait had increased to six hours. By our estimates, there were at least 1000 people in line waiting, especially for a first look at Ubisoft's Red Steel first person shooter.

I don't think the name decides the success of the console anyhow.

BUGGER · 2006-05-11, 10:23 PM

Yeah Sony did real bad this year i think, Nintendo is actually looking much better than when they had the GC debute, and microsoft gots halo3, so its all good.

Peacemaker · 2006-05-11, 11:20 PM

The game line up behind the Wii looked like a bunch of kid games. Red Steel looked like a horribly clunky game. The sword fighting did NOT look fluid at all. You could do the same thing with a analog stick. Oh and PS. The PS3 isnt 600 dollars. Its 600 for the 80gig HD. 20gig is gonna be 500. Why do you need a 60 gig HD?

The PS3 has more features than the Xbox 360. The advantage of the 360 is that it is out now. THe PS3 is going to have a HUGE game base to select from. Even months after the release the 360 game base isnt that big (its around 50 games or so), the PS 3 has 50+ games in development to go at launch.

The Wii controler looked clunky and unresponsive. Watch the guy in the sword fighting thing. He has to make the same move twice to get it to work sometimes. The Wii will hit its target audience. Casual gamers or people who dont game at all yet. Thats about it. Yes you will have die hards who will buy it for the Zelda title but really... the Wii is a Game Cube with a new controler. No inovative graphics, no processor power, no hints at online capability. Wii will have its market. The PS3 will have an even bigger one. Its out done the Xbox 360 by a long shot. Better graphics, physics, processor power, controler (the PS controler is probably the best controler ever), features, and game support. The only advantage the Xbox has is the 100$ less price tag. And if your going to go for a gaming system that will get you the most "bang for your buck" you should be going with the PS3.

Im suprised I say this really. I was a die hard Xbox fan, but the 360 pales in comparison to the PS3, and the Wii is targeting a totaly diffrent market with totaly diffrent games (Armored Core 4 vs Mario Galaxy). Also I like the PSP hook up thing. Thats gonna be cool.

Kikinchikin · 2006-05-11, 11:23 PM

Originally Posted by Setari

http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/05/11/ni...thunder_at_e3/

I don't think the name decides the success of the console anyhow.

Perhaps not, but the majority of gamers are incredibly naive. Hype anything up enough and they'll flock to it like crackheads to a street corner.

But hey, who am I to determine how people spend their money? Just seems like a waste to me.

Electrofreak · 2006-05-12, 03:35 AM

Originally Posted by Peacemaker

The game line up behind the Wii looked like a bunch of kid games. Red Steel looked like a horribly clunky game. The sword fighting did NOT look fluid at all. You could do the same thing with a analog stick. Oh and PS. The PS3 isnt 600 dollars. Its 600 for the 80gig HD. 20gig is gonna be 500. Why do you need a 60 gig HD?

Actually, the 20 gig won't have Wi-Fi, the ability to read flash memory cards, or HDMI output capability (for High Def video).

Still not a big deal for most people, but important to note. Not sure if you will be able to upgrade a 20 gig with these features, but I'm assuming so.

Source: http://money.cnn.com/2006/05/11/tech...ex.htm?cnn=yes

PS: The Wii looks fucking retarded. All the games they showed for it looked like they were for 4-year olds, the graphics looked outdated (seriously, the Wii games I saw all paled in to comparison of the 360 and the PS3), and if you watched the Nintendo E3 Press conference you can see just how desperate they are to market to the "old ladys, moms, and kids" crowd, not hardcore gamers. Long story short? The Wii is lame. If I'm going to spend my money on a console I better be getting some bang for my buck. I'll most likely be getting a PS3 as well as a 360 eventually.

Setari · 2006-05-12, 08:14 AM

You know, you can stop comparing the Wii's graphics to the others. Nintendo made it official that they weren't trying to compete in that department. E3 can work like a huge beta test as well. They still have several months to clean up bugs. That goes for Nintendo and Sony. I guess all I'm trying to say is that personally, I'll play whichever one I end up liking the most. I probably won't buy a console until next summer if at all. I'd like to see some original content in their games though. That's the only thing that matters to me.

BlackDrop · 2006-05-12, 08:39 AM

Originally Posted by Setari

I probably won't buy a console until next summer if at all. I'd like to see some original content in their games though. That's the only thing that matters to me.

Great point. I grew up a console gamer and only gravitated to PC recently. The reason the switch? I was bored of playing the same type of games. Team based MMOs really brought the excitement back to video games for me.

Kikinchikin · 2006-05-12, 12:00 PM

Originally Posted by BlackDrop

Great point. I grew up a console gamer and only gravitated to PC recently. The reason the switch? I was bored of playing the same type of games. Team based MMOs really brought the excitement back to video games for me.

Same here, although I just became bored playing any game that isn't multiplayer. Anyone can beat a single player game if they put enough time into it. Playing against other people is where real fun is.

Ivan · 2006-05-12, 03:46 PM

I started out a PC'er and even then only played online games with a few signal player RTS's here and there.

When I got into consoles I still preferred PC's because I loved playing online. To me consoles where for when I had a friend over and we both wanted to play a game we just played some split screen game or something cause I didn't have more then one PC at that time.

But now with consoles with online abilities, I like the ease of use, the "plug and play" ability consoles offer to play online.

That's one reason I preferred XBox with Live over PS2. Don't get me wrong I love PS2 but the ease of use Live was even with the subscription fees was nice and easy to set up and use. So I played Xbox more then PS2 then, but PS more than both.

But it looks like PS3 is going to "take the cake" as far as online ease of use is concerned, but I'm sure I'll still prefer PC over consoles.

Ivan · 2006-05-12, 03:50 PM

Double post, sorry.

Please don't ban me!

Mag-Mower · 2006-05-12, 04:10 PM

Also, PS3 access will be included in SOEs Station Access pass, which seems like an awesome deal, I mean you get all this for $25/month:

-Planetside
-EQ/EQ2/EQOA
-MxO
-SWG
-Vanguard
-Station Access games
-Exclusive Privelages on PS3 Online.

Thats one hell of a deal.

OneManArmy · 2006-05-12, 04:22 PM

so I could pay 25 bucks a month to play with their shit. or I could play with my own shit and save 25 bucks.... hmmm

Ivan · 2006-05-12, 05:03 PM

You play with yourself too much you need to leave it along for a little bit or it'll fall off.