Originally posted by ubooze
If everybody agrees then everybody goes to xbox live then all the games are for xbox yay!
im gunna get a nintendo, just cuz i feel bad for them, and i love them deeply.
After i get a 360.
-
Yes.
If everybody agrees then everybody goes to xbox live then all the games are for xbox yay!
im gunna get a nintendo, just cuz i feel bad for them, and i love them deeply.
After i get a 360. -
I wonder why'd they'd even advertise the SACD support when Sony is dumping that format?Originally posted by davidbHmm.. according to the site linked up a few posts back, the PS3 will support SACD playback. That would be interesting if it turns out to be true - the unit lacks 5.1 analog outputs, barring the unlikely event that they put them on the side or front. The only connection that it has capable of passing SACD audio is (and I'm assuming it has this) firewire. I say interesting because I don't know of any surround sound reciever with a firewire input that doesn't cost at least around $1,500-2,000 - slightly out of the range that most gamers would be willing to spend on a reciever. Makes me wonder what next year's models have in store.. Hopefully it won't just be sony recievers coming with firewire (or iLink as Sony calls it) at a reasonable price, because Sony recievers have a strong tendency to suck.
Needless to say I'm more interested in audio equipment than I am in gaming consoles.
I'll buy a 360 defiantely, and possible the Sony depending on the games they have. Right now I have an Xbox, and I have never felt the need to buy a playstation, based upon the games it has. On a side note, I also have a gamecube for my kids, since Nintendo does a much better job of making titles for kids.Comment
-
oh yeah! deffinently go sony!Originally posted by trains are bad
boooo MS i hate MS
MS SUCKS
Comment
-
Originally posted by anonymousbill123
hmmmm look at intel and amd .....i think ive said enough
oh yeah MS SUCKS!Comment
-
^ He had to post twice to get somebody to agreeComment
-
so you agree then? lol naw ppl do agree... anyways the only bad thing i see about the ps3 is when i first got the n64 which i loved deeply i got perfect dark best game EVER
and now theyre finally coming out with a prequel PerfectDarkZero but its for the 360
Comment
-
You're going to see alot of games go both ways, i think. Games are so involved now, there is SO much art involved to render characters at the current level of detail, that developers will be forced to sell on both consoles to recoup losses.
With each generation, you have less games. More of them are quality, but less of them are innovative. In the NES days, anything could be a game...development costs were basically zero. No one wants to take a chance on $100 million doallr games, and no one wants to buy an xbox 360 game, no matter how innovative, if the graphics are crap.
Its a vicious cycle...prebuilt engines and, eventually many prerendered objects shared between companies, will help, but the unique stuff still has to be rendered in excruciating detail from sktech to model.
Game development takes too long and costs too much, stifling innovation. Don't look ofrward to any "new" games, just graphics overhauls.Comment
-
Why the hell does this have to degenerate into a "Microsoft sucks" rant? The Xbox is a kick-butt system, and IMHO blows the playstation 2 out of the water. I could care less how many teraflops the PS3 cranks out, or how much more powerful it is than the Xbox 360. The proof is in the pudding, as they say, and we will have to wait to get our hands on them and play them before passing judgement.
That having been said, I expect to get more for my money with the 360. MS has been selling the Xbox at a loss ever since it came out, since their business model involves obtaining profits from royalties on game sales, not sales of the actual machine. I'm not sure if Sony does the same thing, but I doubt it, since the game division of Sony is the only profitable one, and they can't siphon profits from other divisions to cover a loss, like MS does.
And I saw the demo for Killzone 2, and that does not look like actual realtime gameplay, no matter what anyone says. If the game actually ends up playing like that, however, I would be very interested in it.Comment
-
I dont get people saying the games on the 360 didnt look that good, IMO the new ghost recon game and whatever other game they showed during the MTV thing looked amazing to me.
mcveighr--You think caffeine rocks you should try cocaine.Comment
-
They did to me too. The one neat thing Sony did was that whole 2-screen thing. As unrealistic as it is, it would be awesome to hook up 2 60-70" tvs that way.Comment
-
Heres the Nintendo Revolution..and man is it small....there prolly sacraficing graphics for size unfortuantly.....But atleast nintendo finally went to damn normal disk.
Comment
-
1. XBOX 360 is being released about 6 months before PS3.
2. Unless you have a HD TV capable of 1080pi, the graphics difference will not be noticable.
3. You can play the new XBOX Live for free on the Silver Membership.
4. PS3 can support up to 7 controlers in one console. Would you like to share the average sized TV with 6 other people?
5. PS3 could cost around $400.
6. Halo 3 (you know, part of that little franchise about some cyborg-super-soldier-something that was the biggest entertainment event in history, which also has a fairly sizable following) is being released on the same day as PS3."A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death"-Albert EinsteinComment
-
My best bet is the 360 going to do better this round than the PS3. It now has alot of good things going for them after learning from their past mistakes in the Xbox. They figured out that size of the console down which matters in Japan and better looking component in the entertainment center. They realized hardware isn't always everything which they kept to a medium yet capable to go toe to toe with the new Cell processor in exchange for better game content which they have been working alot with frist, second and third party developers through a network of communications. This is in the complete opposite direction that the PS3 has gone in going with a uber hardware system with probably a huge price tag and which the developers are worried about making games for due to the complexity of the new processor. and not having Sony work with any of them on how to handle it.
In terms of processor, the new Cell processor may have 7 cores, but it looks like the PS3 will have a less capable graphics card compared to the 360's 48 shader/pixel pipelines. Compare this to what is now out on the market for PCs 20 pipeline graphics card and looking at HL2 on highest settings, this will produce AMAZING graphics. and having more cores necessarily doesn't mean you will have better graphics. Multicore processors are just better at handling more than 1 application. Seeing how a game is just one application, I don't see why having more than one core is gonna help except in the processing of more objects in a set 3d enviroment by dividing up the duties for objects. The 3 core PowerPC based processor that is going into the 360 will be capable of handling what the Cell can do. Also neither the 360 or PS3 has a dedicated physics processor so you won't have those realistic feel as future PC gamers are gonna have in a year or so with dedicated cards just for phyiscs. Imagine having not just simulated trees blowing in the wind but the actual drawing and movement of leaves on the tree moving in a game, or how characters move have an effect on the 3d enviroment itself. I was highly disappointed that the next gen consoles won't have that feature.
There is one thing that MS got right and that is online play. Look how the PS2 and Gamecube tried to play off online capabilities with a lackluster effort while the MS and Xbox fully embraced online with constant effort in developing it. Live is amazing and Sony and Nintentdo are gonna have to play catch up with MS as it will further enhance it with the Marketplace, chatting, and other features. Live has set the bar for console online gaming for the next gen consoles and games.
My vote goes for the 360 as the best balance between improvement and future capabilites. I will get one probably when the price drops a bit because everyone knows that PC gaming is where its at
Comment
-
The 360 is a non-issue tto me. The graphics might be comparable, but I'm not sold on their promise of backwards compatablility for "best selling" games. Microsofts royalty structure with Nvidea is well know, so I doubt it will be all the games, and I seriously doubt it will be free.
Ps3 is going to have a HD dvd player, and the first hd dvd players in Japan are seling for over 1000.00. Even if the Ps3 is 200.00 more expensive, its still a better deal. xbox is getting the jump on the release, but its inferior technology, and whats more, microsoft knows it. Their party line has become "the games are the most important part of the system". Weren't they the ones selling the xbox on the basis of its awsome computing power in the face of a substandard game library?
Comment
-
Xbox 360 can play high defintion games and PS3 is suppose to be able to as well not sure about the nintendo rev. (they will play high defintion if you tv can...and also dolby digital sound or whatever.)
Magmanlee you said "Unless you have a HD TV capable of 1080pi, the graphics difference will not be noticable."
do you know what tvs have this...do plasmas more specifically do sony plasmas.....mmm guess i could try and find the owners manual thingy.Comment
Comment