PS3 officially 'pwnt'?

**Ninti the Mad** · 04-18-2007, 01:04 AM

http://www.ps3center.net/story-394.h...dbccea5054cf35

**Vietnamese Crippler** · 04-18-2007, 01:10 AM

Good, good

**Splaya** · 04-18-2007, 01:46 AM

AND THEY ARE GOING TO GO TO THE WII POSSIBLY

**Silent** · 04-18-2007, 03:31 AM

I'm selling my PS3.

**Bad Company** · 04-18-2007, 03:36 AM

Hardware wise, the PS3 is still 2x what the xbox360 is, and 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000x what the wii is.
It'll be ok.

**What Would Kevin Do?** · 04-18-2007, 03:49 AM

Doesn't bother me. If they would have said it was leaving PS3 for another console, I would care.

**Blitz** · 04-18-2007, 03:58 AM

Leaning closer to getting a 360 instead by the moment.

At this point, the only thing on PS3 I'm looking forward to is Suikoden and God of War (well, and MGS, but that will almost surely go to the 360).

**Dave Youell** · 04-18-2007, 04:15 AM

I can get a 360 free with a mobile phone deal, V tempted as it seems like most games are going to be available on both consoles

**What Would Kevin Do?** · 04-18-2007, 04:16 AM

PS3 needs a Katamari Damacy game.

**What Would Kevin Do?** · 04-18-2007, 04:18 AM

Also, Playstation Home could be amazing... Of course it could flop...

I was just thinking it'd be fucking awesome to watch movie's w/ peeps on it off of their playstation.

**St. Jimmy** · 04-18-2007, 04:28 AM

PS3 still has MGS4. All that matters.

**darkpower** · 04-18-2007, 05:10 AM

The main reason why SE had done this is because FFXI, the MMO of theirs, is also on the 360 and is doing relativley well on that platform, so why not release the others on the 360, too.

Remember that they also used to release the FF games on the PC after a while, and there's also no mention on when the game will come out for what system. Sony may still get it first, with the 360 somewhere down the road.

Somewhat of some bad news for Sony fanboys, but not nearly as shocking as many are claiming it to be when knowing the history of FF on other platforms, and the very possible reasoning behind this move (not to mention that Square had a TON of history with Nintendo).

G · 04-18-2007, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by St. Jimmy

PS3 still has MGS4. All that matters.

It will be on the 360 as well.

So no, that does not matter.

**tucsonspeed6** · 04-18-2007, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by What Would Kevin Do?

PS3 needs a Katamari Damacy game.

"Beautiful Katamari" due out in October I think.

But yeah... the fanboys around the world will rejoice at this news. It means nothing. Did anyone worry about if Okami was going to be PS2 exclusive? Did anyone worry that the original Katamari was going to be PS2 exclusive? What about Shadow of the Colossus?

No. Because nobody even knew that those games existed or were going to exist. PS3 will have its own new original hits that are just as awesome as these franchises that are going to other systems.

**Kane Knight** · 04-18-2007, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G

It will be on the 360 as well.

So no, that does not matter.

Come on, let him have his (false) justification for spending like twice as much on a system with no worthwile exclusives.

**ClockShot** · 04-18-2007, 10:22 AM

No big deal to me. However, I just figured out this morning that Xbox360 just grabbed Ace Combat 6. Exclusive to them as of right now. I haven't heard anything from camp Sony as of late.

**Kane Knight** · 04-18-2007, 10:29 AM

I don't really care that AC6 isn't coming to PS3, but I'm happy it's coming to 360.

EDIY: I meant "anytime soon." I know it's a "timed" exclusive.

**What Would Kevin Do?** · 04-18-2007, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tucsonspeed6

"Beautiful Katamari" due out in October I think.

But yeah... the fanboys around the world will rejoice at this news. It means nothing. Did anyone worry about if Okami was going to be PS2 exclusive? Did anyone worry that the original Katamari was going to be PS2 exclusive? What about Shadow of the Colossus?

No. Because nobody even knew that those games existed or were going to exist. PS3 will have its own new original hits that are just as awesome as these franchises that are going to other systems.

Best fucking news I've heard all day.

Apparently it's going to be on 360 too.

Anyway, I don't know about other people, but I don't need "Justification" for buying the more expsensive PS3 over the 360. If I had to do it again, I would. I prefer the PS3, I trust Sony more, and I've yet to have a game I've really wanted be only on the 360.

**Apocolyptik1** · 04-19-2007, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bad Company

Hardware wise, the PS3 is still 2x what the xbox360 is, and 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000x what the wii is.
It'll be ok.

This should stop any argument as far as this is concerned. If you have the money, buy the ps3.

It is better hardware. The machine itself is better then what the 360 can do. Yea, down the line, microsoft will continue to put things out that cost money that you have to buy to make it like the ps3.

So games will be on both machines. That doesnt mean that the 360 will be able to do what the ps3 can do.

**Kane Knight** · 04-19-2007, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apocolyptik1

This should stop any argument as far as this is concerned.

No.

Hardware also brings problems. Such as the fact that the system is hard to program for.

This is like buying a top-of-the line computer, only to play Pac Man.

Why buy more expensive hardware that won't be used until after the system itself is outdated?

By the way, in terms of what "will be fine" (More what Bad Company said than you), the Dreamcast was super powerful...

Usually, the most powerful system flounders.

**Gerard** · 04-20-2007, 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bad Company

Hardware wise, the PS3 is still 2x what the xbox360 is,

And you honestly believe that? I suppose you don't know that the ps3 graphics chip was a tossed in at the last minute addition as sony thought the cell was so powerful it could do both the cpu and gpu functions? They realised the crack pipe was empty and went running to nvidia for a solution, and all they got was a downclocked geforce 7800.

The ps3 has an edge in its cpu but the 360 has an edge in graphics seeing as its a unified pipeline chip, the ps3 chip is still using fixed function pipelines and is nowhere near as flexible.

**Apocolyptik1** · 04-20-2007, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kane Knight

No.

Hardware also brings problems. Such as the fact that the system is hard to program for.

This is like buying a top-of-the line computer, only to play Pac Man.

Why buy more expensive hardware that won't be used until after the system itself is outdated?

By the way, in terms of what "will be fine" (More what Bad Company said than you), the Dreamcast was super powerful...

Usually, the most powerful system flounders.

I agree with everything you said, but with the machine being as good as it is (hardware wise), it shouldnt be outdated technology for 4 to 5 years or even longer. Yes by then microsoft will probably have put out another system that is as good (or most likely better) then the ps3, but who knows what they themselves would even charge for that system.

It seems to me that from now on, we will be paying for these machines like you would a computer. The more money, the better the pc right? With faster hardware you run into problems like over-heating and other issues along the same lines. Yea, sony definetly shoot themselves in the foot with the machine, but it will be better someday. Whether you want to pay for it now or not, thats up to the consumer. However, I have seen plenty of the same issues with both machines.

I am probably beating a dead horse, but I am under some good pain pills because I dislocated my thumb yesterday, and probably dont (and havent) made sense.

A side note, I wish the dreamcast did better then it did. I still have mine with marvel vs capcom 2, and still go back and play it every once and a while.

**Funky Fly** · 04-20-2007, 03:28 PM

PS3 will have to come up with some spectacular exclusives for me to show any interest. They've always managed to do come up with the exclusives, but most of their big name and sleeper titles are now multiplatform, so it'll be up to their first party titles to keep my interest.

Fuck being a fanboy, I don't support any system. The real question is what are these bastards doing FOR ME?

**Kane Knight** · 04-20-2007, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apocolyptik1

I agree with everything you said, but with the machine being as good as it is (hardware wise), it shouldnt be outdated technology for 4 to 5 years or even longer.

I honestly disagree. I mean, yes. It's powerful, and will sta powerful for the next few years. But better technology will come out in the next couple of years, and by the next generation be cheaper. It might be competitive, but at that point, we'll be looking at it as competitive because it's now much cheaper to produce.

And even then, it will be seen as the "last gen" system.

This is not including factors like the success or failure of Blu Ray.

Quote:

Yes by then microsoft will probably have put out another system that is as good (or most likely better) then the ps3, but who knows what they themselves would even charge for that system.

In 5 years, "better" will probably be comparable in cost to the PS3.

Quote:

It seems to me that from now on, we will be paying for these machines like you would a computer. The more money, the better the pc right?

Actually, the Gamecube was better than the PS2.

But that aside, the major difference between a game system and a computer is that spending more money doesn't equal a better experience.

First, you actually have to get games built to use the difference. This happens with PCs; it doesn't seem to happen with video games. It's also bad marketing; one of the appeals to console gaming is a security that can't be found in the PC world.

Quote:

With faster hardware you run into problems like over-heating and other issues along the same lines. Yea, sony definetly shoot themselves in the foot with the machine, but it will be better someday. Whether you want to pay for it now or not, thats up to the consumer. However, I have seen plenty of the same issues with both machines.

I'm on my Third 360, so I'm not arguing that they have problems. Microsoft skimped, Sony went with known problems. Both are bad, I agree. Even the Wii has some flawed models. No big there.

The problem is, developers are jumping ship. Nobody wants to program for it. It's hard to believe it will be "better someday" with that kind of issue. Sony sad themselves that it's likely the Cell's potential will never be released, and they've made it a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Quote:

I am probably beating a dead horse, but I am under some good pain pills because I dislocated my thumb yesterday, and probably dont (and havent) made sense.

A side note, I wish the dreamcast did better then it did. I still have mine with marvel vs capcom 2, and still go back and play it every once and a while.

No, y9ou made sense. I just don't quite agree. that's all.

The Dreamcast was a phenomenal machine, but it had many flaws. One, it was easy to pirate. Two, it was too advanced to survive in its time. Three, nobody had faith in Sega at that point.

What Sony has going for it is that it's not flawed in sense 1. It's not completely flawed in sense three, either. But it does have those problems.

Skies of Arcadia's one of my favorite RPGs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sir Funk

PS3 will have to come up with some spectacular exclusives for me to show any interest. They've always managed to do come up with the exclusives, but most of their big name and sleeper titles are now multiplatform, so it'll be up to their first party titles to keep my interest.

Fuck being a fanboy, I don't support any system. The real question is what are these bastards doing FOR ME?

I agree.

I didn't buy a Box last time, because it looked like a clear loser. I mean, it had Halo, and Star Wars, but neither really "did it." Well, for me.

I bought the GCN, because it had wrestling games I thought wouldn't suck. I was wrong there, but I got the Rogue Squadron games, Some okay wrestlers, a couple of ports, etc. It was worth my money.

I bought a PS2, because I knew it would kick ass. It had all sorts of exlcusives lined up at launch (not out at launch, but announced), and it really sold me.

This time around, I went for a Wii (Retro gaming and the novelty games are enough for me, and I'll probably get some good games otherwise) and a 360, because I see Sony's venture as a failure and see no games I want.

My criticism of the PS3 comes mostly from 2 things:

I don't want it to be the future of gaming. Not because of the label, but because of the price tag, and the idea of overly compicated, tricked out machines. The 360 is bad enough.

And then there's the hubris involved.

**darkpower** · 04-20-2007, 05:35 PM

We do have to consider the games that will be hitting the PS3 that were on other platforms, as well. For instance, the Tecmo games will be heading to PS3, like ninja gaiden and MAYBE DOA.

We have to accept the ENTIRE analogy.

**Kane Knight** · 04-20-2007, 05:47 PM

And many of them are already starting to redirect.

If you want a whole analogy, the fly hitting the windshield actually acts with as much force as the windshield hitting the ly. PS3 is hemmoraging exclusives and titles. 360 is losing some.

I didn't mention it because it's not important to my statement. Sony IS alienating developers. Sony's pushed away a lot of them, and others have been lured by the 360's appeal.

Next time, I'll be more careful to mention that the fly got a shot in, too.

**Apocolyptik1** · 04-21-2007, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kane Knight

This time around, I went for a Wii (Retro gaming and the novelty games are enough for me, and I'll probably get some good games otherwise) and a 360, because I see Sony's venture as a failure and see no games I want.
.

See I bought a Wii for almost the exact same reason. It was different. The feel of the machine is nothing we have ever experience before.

On top of that, I think multiplayer wise, Nintendo will always be on top of that. Not necessarily dealing with internet, but just inside the home. It appeals to more people. I have seen more 35+ aged people have fun playing the Wii then any other system. Now I am just waiting for some more games.

SMASH BRO'S HOO!! (sticks right thumb in the air while holding cardboard 2x4)

**Kane Knight** · 04-21-2007, 05:56 PM

I want some kickass swordfighting games for the Wii. Wii Sports is some of the best fun I've had i nages on a game.

Nintendo's finally got their marketing machien in gear, for the first time since like the SNES. Even though I think the Wiimote is a gimmick, I think it is one that could have some real substance.

Unfortunately, like the other new systems Nintendo's put out, we have to sit through the requisite novelty games.