Wii will start a Revolution

[cmatt]

You mean $100 more. The high end 360 is comparable to the 20 GB PS3. The only mistake Sony made was having their lower end system with roughly the same specs (the main difference is Blu-Ray) as the high end 360, therefore making people think that the PS3 is $200 more for a comparable system, which just isn't the case. For the extra $100, you get the extra 40 GB and the built in wi-fi adapter. If you have no need for the extra space or the wi-fi adapter, then the 20 GB model is the exact same system.

If you are a fan of the 360 over the PS3 because you have no interest in HD movies and therefore you don't want to pay the $100 extra, then I have no problem with that at all. However, if you're going to compare the prices of BOTH of the high end systems, then you have to add on the wireless adapter to the price of the 360, which nobody ever talks about.

PS3 $499 system (20 GB) is comparable to the $399 X-Box 360 Premium System.

dont make me quote figures again :lookaroun

ps3 is off for me - my dvd player fried in my home av setup just forked out £300 for a new denon with decent hdmi cable (i prefer to keep things seperate :king: )

seeming as you can now rent hd movies on xbox live in the states and also get the hd drive - seemingly dude your fighting the ps3's case and not realising the full potential of the 360. Wifi is completely hopeless untill wireless n standards are finally sorted out... so there isnt much point - id rather have an excellent cat5 running through my cavity wall and out to a socket then to the 360 :wave:

And im already streaming hd videos from my pc to my 360! (lost mainly)

 

[cmatt]

I believe a microsoft exec said a few months before the wii launch something like ' I don't see why anyone would buy a ps3. For that price you could have the ultimate gaming solution, an xbox 360 and a nintendo wii.'
Probably not the exact quote but it's somewhere along those lines. I'm thinking about picking up a used 360 sometime soon.

get it and join the cool gang :sohappy:

 

[dxwwf3]

dont make me quote figures again :lookaroun

Yeah please don't :lol:

Wifi is completely hopeless untill wireless n standards are finally sorted out..

It works great for me. The only time I ever get any lag time is when I play someone else with a low connection speed. For example, on Madden you can see a 3 bar graphic that shows what kind of connection your opponent has.


Also I'm not selling the 360 short. I was down on the system before it came out, but after seeing it in action, I was impressed. It was a huge step up from the original X-Box and Microsoft has a winner on their hands. But when you add the things on to the 360, you can spend more on that system than you would on the PS3. That's my whole pet peeve: pricing. Microsoft did make the items separate so you could buy what you want, but you could also spend more money than you would on the PS3 very easily. That's all.

And I'm sure Sony getting the system late to Europe has nothing to do with your opinion either, eh?

 

[cmatt]

Yeah please don't :lol:



It works great for me. The only time I ever get any lag time is when I play someone else with a low connection speed. For example, on Madden you can see a 3 bar graphic that shows what kind of connection your opponent has.


Also I'm not selling the 360 short. I was down on the system before it came out, but after seeing it in action, I was impressed. It was a huge step up from the original X-Box and Microsoft has a winner on their hands. But when you add the things on to the 360, you can spend more on that system than you would on the PS3. That's my whole pet peeve: pricing. Microsoft did make the items separate so you could buy what you want, but you could also spend more money than you would on the PS3 very easily. That's all.

And I'm sure Sony getting the system late to Europe has nothing to do with your opinion either, eh?

i havent actually talked down the ps3 that much - just blu ray... and the consortium of tw..s that invented it :drevil:

i like the ps3 kinda :lookaroun but as i said my dvd player has gone so i had to get a new one (my tv has been out after my sky dish blew off new years eve - good thing i ordered cable... on the 2nd...) so my erm.... downloads have been huuuuge! catching up on new years tv as we speak (watching the vicar of dibley as we speak)

IMHO i think microsoft actually thought out the 360, and realised that alot of things the ps3 has it doesnt need... wireless is great dont get me wrong - but you dont actually connect at 54mbps - its more like 40 odd at best (this is on any format mind) and its not ideal for gameplay or media streaming over a network...

 

[dxwwf3]

i havent actually talked down the ps3 that much - just blu ray... and the consortium of tw..s that invented it :drevil:

Ok that's fine. I think it will end up winning the format war (if indeed one of the two current formats win. I'm hoping something totally different wins or players that play both discs become the norm) because of the movie studios behind it. Universal is the only major studio that is HD DVD only, but Blu Ray has Disney on its side and that's where you make or break home video distribution.

wireless is great dont get me wrong - but you dont actually connect at 54mbps - its more like 40 odd at best (this is on any format mind) and its not ideal for gameplay or media streaming over a network...

I know it's not as good as a direct connection, but that just wasn't possible with my situation. And I'm beginning to wonder if the occasional lag game on Madden has more to do with EA Sports than the PS3 connection itself. Reason being, I've NEVER had anything less than perfect as far as online gaming for Resistance.

 

[cmatt]

Ok that's fine. I think it will end up winning the format war (if indeed one of the two current formats win. I'm hoping something totally different wins or players that play both discs become the norm) because of the movie studios behind it. Universal is the only major studio that is HD DVD only, but Blu Ray has Disney on its side and that's where you make or break home video distribution.



I know it's not as good as a direct connection, but that just wasn't possible with my situation. And I'm beginning to wonder if the occasional lag game on Madden has more to do with EA Sports than the PS3 connection itself. Reason being, I've NEVER had anything less than perfect as far as online gaming for Resistance.

free service after all :lol: im waiting a year for the ps3 as i did for the 360 :sohappy:

 

[dxwwf3]

free service after all :lol:

That's right. And it's not bad enough to complain either. Usually when I start a game that lags, I stop it and reconnect with someone else with a better connect and it works perfectly. The free online service isn't as good as Live, but the actual gaming is the same, you just don't get the bells and whistles. And that's all I wanted with online gaming. Having it for free was a HUGE deal maker for me when choosing the PS3 and I've been pleased so far.

 

[CaptainMichael]

I was at Wal-Mart today and they had 2 PS3's on the shelf. I looked at my sister and said, "oh how the mighty have fallen."

 

[dxwwf3]

I was at Wal-Mart today and they had 2 PS3's on the shelf. I looked at my sister and said, "oh how the mighty have fallen."

:lol:

I think it's a little early to be putting nails in any coffin. Considering all the media had told us was that don't expect to get any PS3's until March, I'd say that many people have given up looking for them for a while. Remember, not everyone keeps up with this stuff all the time on the internet. Sony has done a good job on getting more systems out than expected. If this time next year the PS3 is the number 3 system, then "oh how the mighty have fallen" would be accurate. Now, it just sounds funny

 

[cmatt]

That's right. And it's not bad enough to complain either. Usually when I start a game that lags, I stop it and reconnect with someone else with a better connect and it works perfectly. The free online service isn't as good as Live, but the actual gaming is the same, you just don't get the bells and whistles. And that's all I wanted with online gaming. Having it for free was a HUGE deal maker for me when choosing the PS3 and I've been pleased so far.

nahh £40 a year for a stable service gets my vote i remember the ps2's free service for battle front *shudder*

 

[dxwwf3]

nahh £40 a year for a stable service gets my vote i remember the ps2's free service for battle front *shudder*

That's understandable. I think that eventually the PS3 service will be just as stable, but Live does have more user based "stuff" that would be worth the money if that is what you are interested in. Personally, I just care about playing the games online and the keeping of stats doesn't interest me.

To be honest, I am surprised how good the free service has been so far. Resistance and Tiger Woods have been perfect and Madden has an occasional laggy game. But I'm not sure if it's EA, Sony, or the other user that causes that. Heck sometimes my wireless connection might experience some drops, but as I said before, I can't do a wired connection in my situation.

 

[imagineer99]

While it's certainly too early to count big ole' Sony out, you can't deny they've made a bunch of mistakes.

First, they rip off Nintendo (again) with the six-axis controller--an afterthought trying to compete with the wiimote (sans-rumble!)

Then, they show us pre-rendered videos of how amazing their system looks. (Hi, Killzone, where are you?) and pass it off as gameplay. That's the thing that really gets me. As a gamer, they duped me. They straight out lied to me! They put down the 360, yet at launch, 360 games looks superior. And, Gears of War looks better than Resistance. Sorry, it just does. The result feels duplicitous any way you look at it.

Then, they go on and on about how much technology the PS3 has. Well, last time I checked, a high-end PC is still more powerful than the PS3's cell processor. Believe me both the 360 and PS3 will be eclipsed by PC's by the end of the year in terms of raw power. So, the argument of graphics or processing speeds are mute. Then there's the bluray situation. It's far too early to call a victor here, but Sony's obsession with their proprietary formats (minidisks, memory sticks, beta) doesn't bode well for bluray--even if it can hold 50gb of data.

Then they only provide 200,000 systems at launch! For a population of 300 million? F-YOU SONY! The part that makes me laugh is that they just aren't selling. I can't find a Wii ANYWHERE (believe me, I've tried), but the local best buy has a stack of 60gb behemoths just collecting dust.

Explain to me why I can't find nintendo's "gimmick" (Sony's words) at any store, but I can walk into my local e-bay games and find the "coveted" "I'm gonna shoot people for it" PS3? Things don't add up.

 

[cmatt]

That's understandable. I think that eventually the PS3 service will be just as stable, but Live does have more user based "stuff" that would be worth the money if that is what you are interested in. Personally, I just care about playing the games online and the keeping of stats doesn't interest me.

To be honest, I am surprised how good the free service has been so far. Resistance and Tiger Woods have been perfect and Madden has an occasional laggy game. But I'm not sure if it's EA, Sony, or the other user that causes that. Heck sometimes my wireless connection might experience some drops, but as I said before, I can't do a wired connection in my situation.

the latency will start when they have more users i guess.... :lookaroun

 

[CaptainMichael]

While it's certainly too early to count big ole' Sony out, you can't deny they've made a bunch of mistakes.

First, they rip off Nintendo (again) with the six-axis controller--an afterthought trying to compete with the wiimote (sans-rumble!)

Then, they show us pre-rendered videos of how amazing their system looks. (Hi, Killzone, where are you?) and pass it off as gameplay. That's the thing that really gets me. As a gamer, they duped me. They straight out lied to me! They put down the 360, yet at launch, 360 games looks superior. And, Gears of War looks better than Resistance. Sorry, it just does. The result feels duplicitous any way you look at it.

Then, they go on and on about how much technology the PS3 has. Well, last time I checked, a high-end PC is still more powerful than the PS3's cell processor. Believe me both the 360 and PS3 will be eclipsed by PC's by the end of the year in terms of raw power. So, the argument of graphics or processing speeds are mute. Then there's the bluray situation. It's far too early to call a victor here, but Sony's obsession with their proprietary formats (minidisks, memory sticks, beta) doesn't bode well for bluray--even if it can hold 50gb of data.

Then they only provide 200,000 systems at launch! For a population of 300 million? F-YOU SONY! The part that makes me laugh is that they just aren't selling. I can't find a Wii ANYWHERE (believe me, I've tried), but the local best buy has a stack of 60gb behemoths just collecting dust.

Explain to me why I can't find nintendo's "gimmick" (Sony's words) at any store, but I can walk into my local e-bay games and find the "coveted" "I'm gonna shoot people for it" PS3? Things don't add up.

And Sony had an extra year to make their system better than the 360 at launch.

I'm an XBOX 360 owner, and will seriously consider getting a Wii when the price eventually drops because I'm curious about it. PS3 just makes me laugh.

As for Bluray, Walmart had at least 2 PS3's and only 1 XBOX HD DVD Drive...hmmmmm.

 

[dxwwf3]

They put down the 360, yet at launch, 360 games looks superior. And, Gears of War looks better than Resistance. Sorry, it just does. The result feels duplicitous any way you look at it.

GoW does seem to look slightly better than Resistance, so I'll give you that. However it is still a 2nd generation 360 game vs a launch PS3. If the graphics do not improve by this time next year, then Sony will lose.

Then, they go on and on about how much technology the PS3 has. Well, last time I checked, a high-end PC is still more powerful than the PS3's cell processor. Believe me both the 360 and PS3 will be eclipsed by PC's by the end of the year in terms of raw power. So, the argument of graphics or processing speeds are mute. Then there's the bluray situation. It's far too early to call a victor here, but Sony's obsession with their proprietary formats (minidisks, memory sticks, beta) doesn't bode well for bluray--even if it can hold 50gb of data.

PC's have always had more power than consoles. But it's an apples/oranges debate.

Then they only provide 200,000 systems at launch! For a population of 300 million? F-YOU SONY! The part that makes me laugh is that they just aren't selling. I can't find a Wii ANYWHERE (believe me, I've tried), but the local best buy has a stack of 60gb behemoths just collecting dust.

Explain to me why I can't find nintendo's "gimmick" (Sony's words) at any store, but I can walk into my local e-bay games and find the "coveted" "I'm gonna shoot people for it" PS3? Things don't add up.

It's like I said before, it's all about perception RIGHT NOW. We all thought Wii's would be readily available now and PS3's wouldn't be available. That's what the media was telling everyone before the launches. Now there weren't as many Wii's as they thought and there are more PS3's than originally believed. I think it's all marketing at this point. Sony wanted less at the start for more media attention and Nintendo has pulled back a tad right now to make the Wii the "must have" item. If I had not got a PS3 bundle online, I probably wouldn't have a system right now and I wanted one more than just about anyone. The reason is I would have stopped looking right now because they weren't supposed to be available and it's tough spending a lot of time going from store to store and try to track one down.

Things aren't going all perfect for Sony right now, I'm not blind. But it's WAY too early to be crowing anything.

 

[MAF]

:lol:

I think it's a little early to be putting nails in any coffin. Considering all the media had told us was that don't expect to get any PS3's until March, I'd say that many people have given up looking for them for a while. Remember, not everyone keeps up with this stuff all the time on the internet. Sony has done a good job on getting more systems out than expected. If this time next year the PS3 is the number 3 system, then "oh how the mighty have fallen" would be accurate. Now, it just sounds funny

Yes that HAS to be it....people just "stopped looking" for the PS3's.....:lookaroun

 

[dxwwf3]

Yes that HAS to be it....people just "stopped looking" for the PS3's.....:lookaroun

Not the only reason, but if you had tried to get one in stores after launch, it was a very frustrating thing. If you're someone that doesn't keep up to date with these things, you would pretty much think that you would be getting one until March. Also I'm sure that the systems in the stores do eventually sell. If they stay on the shelves for more than 2 or 3 days however, then it becomes a problem for Sony. Getting a system this close after launch in a store requires a lot of luck. Just because they are available in one area, doesn't mean they are available everywhere. I have personally seen Wii's in the stores in my area. They were on the shelves, but they didn't stay there long. I just think that the people trying to come up with anything against Sony are getting a little too anxious so far. Like I said before, launches do not make systems successful or not.

The next holiday season is the one that will more than likely decide it. And we will get official reports to tell us how things are going as well.

 

[wdwishes2005]

My local EBgames had more ps3's in stock yesterday than copies of twilight princess for wii. They were also out of wiimotes, classic controllers, nunchuks, wiipoints, some other wii games, and wiis.

 

[dxwwf3]

Ok can Sony win here? If there aren't any PS3's available, then they are blammed for not getting enough in the market. If they are availabile in stores, then that must mean demand is low. If Sony was selling less PS3's than they are now, would they be better off now because you can't find the "stuff" in the stores?

And in Nintendo's defense, if Wii's were readily available (like the media said they would be) would that mean that it is losing the battle and demand is low?

 

[wdwishes2005]

I'm just saying that there are less ps3s, and more wiis, but more ps3s on the shelf, and no wiis. I understand why there weren't alot at launch, I never complained about that. I'm just saying that even though the ps3 is in stock now, it's not flying off the shelves like the wii is.