Marvin said that there should be console releases more often with smaller jumps in abilities between each generation.
I pointed out that that's no easier on our wallets but costs us in terms of graphics.
I was also taking into consideration the cost of games but now that I see some of the prices of the Wii games, maybe it doesn't hold up any more. I remember going to my second hand games store and they had loads of Gamecube game for about £5-10. PS2 and XBox games used to stay between £10-£20.
I've looked at some of the Wii console prices too and they are much higher than I thought. Considering the XBox360 is only £280, a Wii at £200 is a very bad deal. The PS3s are just coming out here too and damn, they are around £500 with one game. I read somewhere they'd be around £325. I suspect they'll come down a fair bit over the next couple of months as the popularity increases though.
I was also taking into consideration the cost of games but now that I see some of the prices of the Wii games, maybe it doesn't hold up any more. I remember going to my second hand games store and they had loads of Gamecube game for about £5-10. PS2 and XBox games used to stay between £10-£20.
I've looked at some of the Wii console prices too and they are much higher than I thought. Considering the XBox360 is only £280, a Wii at £200 is a very bad deal. The PS3s are just coming out here too and damn, they are around £500 with one game. I read somewhere they'd be around £325. I suspect they'll come down a fair bit over the next couple of months as the popularity increases though.
Yeah, the price of the PS3 is ridiculous in the UK—all of the games stores have marked it up way over the already expensive MSRP.
But, they're still sold out of them, so I guess it's a smart move.
But that'll definitely come down to more in line with what we pay in the US after the initial rush is over.
The Wii Virtual Console is really expensive. I was looking into getting the Wii mainly so I could throw out all my old systems, but the prices are about four times what I would pay in a used store for the games. Also, they don't have all the titles I'd want (some, like GoldenEye, due to licensing issues), and I don't think they'd even all fit on the 512 MB that comes with the system.
The market also bears witness to the PS2 selling three times what the Wii is selling. What's your point?
That you just proved the point of all the people that are saying price is a larger concern for the majority of buyers than the number of polygons a console can push.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat
I've never said the Wii wasn't fun, nor said anything negative about the control scheme. I just said it was way too expensive for me, in terms of bang for buck.
That's fair. It just seems the majority of the console buying public doesn't agree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat
Are the Wii's graphics photoreleastic? No.
Things like more polygons; sharper, more varied textures; and HDR lighting improve graphics on all TVs, HD or no. People with SD TVs will still greatly benefit from the XBOX 360 and the PS3. The fact that they go that high is just icing on the cake.
That may be true, but the perception of most people that I've talked to is that hooking it up to a SDTV is a waste.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat
In the US, the Wii only has about 1.8x the install base as the PS3. You're including European sales?where the PS3 hasn't yet been released (but is sold out of pre-orders). Even then, though, you're wrong?it has about a 2.8x lead in install base.
By my math the ratio is 3.1 Wiis to every PS3. Somehow I doubt Europe will double worldwide PS3 shipments (even if it did, the PS3 would still trail the Wii). The gap will also only continue to widen as the Wii is still outselling the PS3.
That you just proved the point of all the people that are saying price is a larger concern for the majority of buyers than the number of polygons a console can push.
No, people buy cheap systems. Two years from now when the XBOX and the PS3 both cost $250, what's the Wii going to do to maintain it's edge at $150?
Quote:
That's fair. It just seems the majority of the console buying public doesn't agree.
No, the majority of console buyers this year didn't agree. What do you think will happen when the PS3 has (a) games, and (b) a better price?
Quote:
That may be true, but the perception of most people that I've talked to is that hooking it up to a SDTV is a waste.
That's still nonsense. Was a PS2 useless without a better screen? What about a Nintendo 64? The high resolution is a bonus.
Besides, in a few years, the majority of Americans will have HDTVs. That will still be somewhat early on in this generation.
Quote:
OMG a .2 difference. Wow I was way off.
No, you said greater than 3x. It's less than 3x. That's a significant difference.
Nexgenwars is known to be dubious, and is also heavily biased towards Microsoft. VGCharts.org is generally regarded as much more accurate.
Quote:
By my math the ratio is 3.1 Wiis to every PS3. Somehow I doubt Europe will double worldwide PS3 shipments (even if it did, the PS3 would still trail the Wii). The gap will also only continue to widen as the Wii is still outselling the PS3.
No, but it will bring Europe close to the same ratio that the US is at after a few months.
Also, there's no really strong titles for the PS3, other than Resistance: Fall of Man. The Wii already sold what'll likely be it's top exclusive for the next few years?Zelda. The PS3 still has exclusives like FFXIII and MGS4 coming, AAA non-exclusives like GTA, and other exciting games like Little Big Planet coming.
Considering the number of cons the PS3 has?the huge price tag, and the lack of any strong Japanese exclusive title, I'm honestly surprised it has sold as well as it did. This doesn't mean that it won't be dominating next Christmas.
PS3 is an over engineered product and the time and money costs associated with the hardware/engineering really put them in a defensive position compared to the 360 and the Wii.
Think about it, Unless games show a significant difference in visuals and gameplay compared to the 360 which already has a 10 million unit user base and has a much lower starting price VS the PS3, things are going to look bleak for Sony.
Most games are going to be 360 ports on the PS3 and consumers will just pick a 360 or the Wii over the PS3. I see them at third place this time around, they had a great cash cow going with the gaming division only to screw it by trying to push Blueray to the market via the PS3.
Think about it, Unless games show a significant difference in visuals and gameplay compared to the 360 which already has a 10 million unit user base and has a much lower starting price VS the PS3, things are going to look bleak for Sony.
Bleak as in it's already outselling the 360? Right.
Quote:
Most games are going to be 360 ports on the PS3 and consumers will just pick a 360 or the Wii over the PS3. I see them at third place this time around, they had a great cash cow going with the gaming division only to screw it by trying to push Blueray to the market via the PS3.
The Blu-ray doesn't add significantly to the cost of the PS3?blue-violet lasers are more complicated than red lasers, but this is like $20 more worth of complications. The other extra costs go to the larger hard drive, better processor, and HDMI connectivity. In other words, all the costs directly benefit the consumer.
The thing most people are basing the PS3's future on and the reason they are confident in it's success is that they don't have good games yet...
But...I still havn't seen one game that interests me that is coming out anytime soon that isn't on the 360, or has a better counterpart on the 360... So....what games are you talking about?
I was one that also thought the price of the PS3 was crazy when first released.This past month though was at Target & saw a 60GB in stock & decided what the heck,bought it & have been using it 80% as a Blue Ray Disc player.I do wish more cool games were available but think its just a matter of time,say 1 year.BTW the XBox 360 & Wii never entered my mind in thinking about purchasing.
The thing most people are basing the PS3's future on and the reason they are confident in it's success is that they don't have good games yet...
But...I still havn't seen one game that interests me that is coming out anytime soon that isn't on the 360, or has a better counterpart on the 360... So....what games are you talking about?
I'm waiting on MGS4, Final Fantasy XIII, and now, Little Big Planet.
The game I'm really excited for is Grand Theft Auto IV, which isn't exclusive. Historically, Rockstar has taken the time to really take advantage of each console's strengths—the XBOX version is way better graphically than the PS2 version. Given the PS3's better processing power, the opposite will be true this time around
I'm waiting on MGS4, Final Fantasy XIII, and now, Little Big Planet.
The game I'm really excited for is Grand Theft Auto IV, which isn't exclusive. Historically, Rockstar has taken the time to really take advantage of each console's strengths?the XBOX version is way better graphically than the PS2 version. Given the PS3's better processing power, the opposite will be true this time around
MGS series is ok...personally I prefer SC though.
Don't get me started on FFXIII....the first 8 were good but this is going way to far.
Personally I can't see myself ever using Little Big Planet...though I will admit I can easily see other people loving it.
Yah GTA4 will be pretty cool. Though I don't think the graphics or fps on either will be much different. A little different here and there, better in some, worse in some, but overall I'd say it will be a stalemate.
Right now I'm looking forward to Halo 3, TES:IV Expansion, GRAW2 (yah Ik...it's out already...havn't gotten around to buying it yet), Mass Effect, GTA4, Forza 2, and Fable 2.
Well, finally in my city a friggin' demo unit showed up, it was a PS3 hooked up to at least 720p high-def, and demoing some racing game. You know, maybe the game was not that great, but, you know, I was not impressed.
I just *don't* get console gaming. A Core2Duo overclocked 2+ghz to 3ghz, running 1280x1024 off a 7950GT or X1950XT level card, with DVI/ HDCP/ component out/ blah blah blah on a computer screen or big-ass plasma, that'll do.
UT2007 engine based games with 4xAA 16xAF HDR etc etc etc -- I'll stick to a PC for now, consoles are cool, but PCs have the GPU power ready to slot in as we go on, and in about a year when the GPUs are at 65nm and more sensible, even better. Pity about the titles available for the PC, but, good enough for now.
Again, I *don't* get this PS3 craze. Well, just me feeling at the moment....
I feel the same assuming you mean Splinter Cell. I liked the first MGS game and then MGS2 had two levels. MGS3 Snake Eater just sucks IMO. It takes too long to get anything done. Even though SC is about stealth, I can still get through the levels at a good pace and there is enough variety in the levels to keep the game interesting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008
I just *don't* get console gaming. A Core2Duo overclocked 2+ghz to 3ghz, running 1280x1024 off a 7950GT or X1950XT level card, with DVI/ HDCP/ component out/ blah blah blah on a computer screen or big-ass plasma, that'll do.
Cost, reliability and efficiency. It is not efficient to have to install 2GB+ of data for every game. Windows is not reliable - some games run fine one day and then BAM, DirectX error. My PS2 has crashed about 3 times ever and that's over a period of a good few years. Consoles have far fewer compatibility issues than any PC because the games can be optimized and tested thoroughly for the target machine. Finally there's no way you could get a Core 2 Duo PC with a X1950XT for under £400.
I still prefer the PC myself though because I can use a keyboard and mouse with it - I really hate console FPS games. Also, I can cheat easily. If I get stuck, I can download a savegame or level skip cheat very quickly. The one and only reason I would consider a PS3 is there was a report saying you'd be able to use a keyboard and mouse.
I feel the same assuming you mean Splinter Cell. I liked the first MGS game and then MGS2 had two levels. MGS3 Snake Eater just sucks IMO. It takes too long to get anything done. Even though SC is about stealth, I can still get through the levels at a good pace and there is enough variety in the levels to keep the game interesting.
Cost, reliability and efficiency. It is not efficient to have to install 2GB+ of data for every game. Windows is not reliable - some games run fine one day and then BAM, DirectX error. My PS2 has crashed about 3 times ever and that's over a period of a good few years. Consoles have far fewer compatibility issues than any PC because the games can be optimized and tested thoroughly for the target machine. Finally there's no way you could get a Core 2 Duo PC with a X1950XT for under £400.
I still prefer the PC myself though because I can use a keyboard and mouse with it - I really hate console FPS games. Also, I can cheat easily. If I get stuck, I can download a savegame or level skip cheat very quickly. The one and only reason I would consider a PS3 is there was a report saying you'd be able to use a keyboard and mouse.
Yah I'm talking about Splinter Cell.
I really don't understand PC gaming. Ok yah I can dish out 30,000 on some mostly unknown site for the top of the line gaming pc....and in 3 months spend another 5000 to keep it top of the line...and again...and again...
Personally I love the controller. That might just be my generation though because most people I know can't stand mice and keyboard. Too many buttons to remember...if you are playing 10 games no way you will remember alll those things (and yes i do play ~10 console games at once). Also talking online with the 360 is extremely easy and nice.
...I still prefer the PC myself though because I can use a keyboard and mouse with it - I really hate console FPS games. Also, I can cheat easily. If I get stuck, I can download a savegame or level skip cheat very quickly. The one and only reason I would consider a PS3 is there was a report saying you'd be able to use a keyboard and mouse...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Slayer 26
I really don't understand PC gaming. Ok yah I can dish out 30,000 on some mostly unknown site for the top of the line gaming pc....and in 3 months spend another 5000 to keep it top of the line...and again...and again...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Slayer 26
Personally I love the controller. That might just be my generation though because most people I know can't stand mice and keyboard. Too many buttons to remember...if you are playing 10 games no way you will remember alll those things (and yes i do play ~10 console games at once). Also talking online with the 360 is extremely easy and nice...
Heh. Yeah, different strokes (wow, pun unintended) for different folks. From the days of Doom (OMFG shooting stuff with only the KEYBOARD!) through to *serious* training in CounterStrike and UT2004, StarCraft, WarCraft, Command&Conquer:Generals, LOTR:BattleForMiddleEarth2, StarWars:KnightsOldRepulbic2, I cannot, cannot, do shooting or RTS'ing or RPG'ing (rarely RPG though) without my trusty keyboard and mouse. I live and die, literally virtually, by W,A,S,D, CTRL (crouch), SPACE (jump) and the 360deg of a good mouse.
PC gaming costs basically have to do with the level of detail and visual richness you desire at a certain stage. My 1.5+ year old AMD64 2ghz 1gbRAM 7200rpm SATA rig is fine for most games. It's mainly the GPU upgrades that will set you back $200US to $500US depending on how rich the visual experience you want. Just as people pine for an upgradeable mid-tower Mac, so to do I enjoy the flexibility that my PC rig offers. Core2Duo, not even a major issue now. 6600GT, X1600, liveable for good titles like FPS genre's flagships HL2 and FEAR, etc. A $500 GPU will bring the rig up to par with current PS3 title visuals (dare I say??) ... 2 years from now, a $200 GPU will make the PS3 look like a PSP.
You can talk online with the 360 controller??? Sorry, it boggles my mind, just my "training" as well. Jumping to cover, crouching, spin180deg, blowing away someone in UT2004 and then typing "ha ha ha u suck" ... wow. I would be stuck at how to even move forward with a console controller. Also my favourite move in UT2004-ONSTorlanMap, the "Manta chuck" (fly a Manta right into the power node, jump off the Manta and "chuck" it into the power node, slicing up a few unfortunate peoples there... muah ha ha....) ... Again, mouse and keyboard.
Back to the days of late 90's racing games and stuff, even WingCommander (without joystick), now with NFS:Most Wanted, It's all up-down-left-right arrows, space for braking, CTRL/SHIFT for gearing up down, it's like second nature.
PS, the PS3 is coming down in price by $100 this summer. That means the complete version will cost $499, will have HDMI, 60GB Disk, WiFi, support for up to 7 wireless controllers, Playstation Home and a Blu-Ray move player, not bad.
PS, the PS3 is coming down in price by $100 this summer. That means the complete version will cost $499, will have HDMI, 60GB Disk, WiFi, support for up to 7 wireless controllers, Playstation Home and a Blu-Ray move player, not bad.
Yah yah Little Big Planet, not interested. Besides I don't trust sony at all anymore. They make things out bigger than they really are. I won't believe they will drop the price by 100 until I go to the store and see that dropped price.
Home has potential but, again, I want to see it in person and use the final version before I make any judgements.
About blu-ray...no one can say whose going to win for sure. What if blu-ray loses? Then what is the point of my PS3 playing blu-ray movies? And with the PS3 failing right now I can see blu-ray losing.
Don't have an HDTV...HDMI doesn't interest me and, at least for me, the gains in quality are minimal (at least from what I've seen at stores. I havn't had a chance to do a A-B quality check on it yet at a high quality A/V store yet...only places which are subject to mess up when they set the TV's up).
I have ethernet cables going to my HT set-up right now...don't need WiFi built in. 60 gbs is more than i need. I think i've used 3 gigs in a year so far on my 360.
Now I have a question for you...why would you EVER want seven controllers?
On another note Little Big Planet and Home aren't really get-in-the-action games. I'd much rather spend my time talking and such while playing...CoD3 than in Home. Home just reminds me of the Sims Online with a little bit more thrown in.
About blu-ray...no one can say whose going to win for sure. What if blu-ray loses? Then what is the point of my PS3 playing blu-ray movies? And with the PS3 failing right now I can see blu-ray losing.
Blu-ray is now outselling HD-DVD by more than 4:1. For every 23 HD-DVDs sold, 100 Blu-ray discs are sold. As in, Blu-ray has an 82% market share. And it's growing. I think we all know who won. For sure.
Quote:
Now I have a question for you...why would you EVER want seven controllers?
Do you have friends? When I have friends over, and we play video games, one or two people are ALWAYS relegated to just watching. Besides, as the number of players increases in most games, so does the amount of fun. I don't know at what points that stops, but I'm sure it's not four.
Now, I've said a nasty thing or two about the Wii, but if the Wii had options for seven controllers, I'd already have them all bought and be counting down the days until Mario Kart Wii. I hope the PS3 comes out with some fun multiplayer games. Online multiplayer really doesn't do it for me.
Quote:
On another note Little Big Planet and Home aren't really get-in-the-action games. I'd much rather spend my time talking and such while playing...CoD3 than in Home. Home just reminds me of the Sims Online with a little bit more thrown in.
Home seems more like Second Life to me, but how is "Little Big Planet" not a get in the action game? It looks hella fun, not to mention cute.
Interesting article about the Wii and how it's attracting people who otherwise wouldn't play video games...Link.
Quote:
Until two weeks ago, Ruth Ebert never had the slightest interest in the video games favored by her one and only granddaughter.
"I'm 82 years old, so I missed that part of our culture. Soap operas, yes. Video games, no," chirped Ebert, who recently started playing a tennis game on Nintendo Co. Ltd.'s (7974.OS) new Wii video game console at the Virginia retirement community she calls home.
Quote:
That $250 console has been stealing the show from Microsoft Corp.'s Xbox 360 and Sony Corp.'s PlayStation 3, higher-powered consoles that are much more expensive than the Wii.
While those rivals focused on cutting-edge graphics and high-tech bells and whistles, Nintendo focused on making game play easier, more intuitive and more appealing to a mass market.
That bet paid off.
The Wii outsold the new Microsoft and Sony consoles in January and February and is generating its own buzz with everyone from nuns to cancer patients to toddlers.
That said, I'll still wait for the first price drop to get a Wii. I've never paid more than $200 for any console I've owned, even the PS2. I personally can't justify paying ~$500 or more for fixed hardware. That is also one of the reasons I don't have a HDTV yet, so buying a 360 or PS3 would be a waste of money for me in any case without an HDTV. And that way, you know if the console is going to hang on, or pull a Jaguar/3DO(yeah, I had one!)/Dreamcast. You'd also have a better selection of games to pick from, rather than waiting months for the good new releases to come out.
Blu-ray is now outselling HD-DVD by more than 4:1. For every 23 HD-DVDs sold, 100 Blu-ray discs are sold. As in, Blu-ray has an 82% market share. And it's growing. I think we all know who won. For sure.
Do you have friends? When I have friends over, and we play video games, one or two people are ALWAYS relegated to just watching. Besides, as the number of players increases in most games, so does the amount of fun. I don't know at what points that stops, but I'm sure it's not four.
Now, I've said a nasty thing or two about the Wii, but if the Wii had options for seven controllers, I'd already have them all bought and be counting down the days until Mario Kart Wii. I hope the PS3 comes out with some fun multiplayer games. Online multiplayer really doesn't do it for me.
Home seems more like Second Life to me, but how is "Little Big Planet" not a get in the action game? It looks hella fun, not to mention cute.
Really? I didn't know that about blu-ray. Havn't really been following anymore. Ok so the PS3 has blu-ray. Still I don't have an HDTV (as mentioned before) so it's lost on me personally.
Yah I do play with my friends all the times. And, to a point, it is more fun with more players. However when the screens get so small you can barely play...well then it's pretty useless. Maybe...maybe, if it supported 8 it would be ok on extremely large tvs or projectors, but having an odd number would just mess up the size of one of the screens. 4 players for me is more than enough. If I'm planning on playing with more I have a friend bring over an xbox and I'll get another tv hooked up for system link.
I can actually see about 6 people on the Wii still being fun...Nintendo has a way of making something work well when it wouldn't seem like it. For example on double dash with 8 people...4 karts, 2 people per kart. Might work out then. Same size screen as usual.
Little Big Planet is one of those games that I would enjoy for ~10 minutes a week. It would be very fun for a short amount of time but it's not like...Halo (if you are a "true" fps fan than Halo won't hold up...but for me it's hella fun with 12 people on system link) where you can play for hours upon hours. If I had money to throw out and had a PS3, I would get Little Big Planet. But I don't have either so i'll use my money on buying a game like Oblivion which has lasted me a good 200 hours or so.
Yah I do play with my friends all the times. And, to a point, it is more fun with more players. However when the screens get so small you can barely play...well then it's pretty useless. Maybe...maybe, if it supported 8 it would be ok on extremely large tvs or projectors, but having an odd number would just mess up the size of one of the screens. 4 players for me is more than enough. If I'm planning on playing with more I have a friend bring over an xbox and I'll get another tv hooked up for system link.
I can actually see about 6 people on the Wii still being fun...Nintendo has a way of making something work well when it wouldn't seem like it. For example on double dash with 8 people...4 karts, 2 people per kart. Might work out then. Same size screen as usual.
This is where HDTV becomes useful
With 1080p and 6 players, each player gets 640 x 540 resolution. That's more resolution than the Wii can output total.
(I don't know how 7 players will be laid out, each player will get either 360 x 540 or more likely 640 x 320).
However, because any good HDTV is progressive, the Wii WILL still look a lot better on an HDTV. I played Mario Kart 64 on a 720p HDTV, and while it was funny how blocky everything looked, it was much easier to play on than an interlaced SDTV.
Quote:
Little Big Planet is one of those games that I would enjoy for ~10 minutes a week. It would be very fun for a short amount of time but it's not like...Halo (if you are a "true" fps fan than Halo won't hold up...but for me it's hella fun with 12 people on system link) where you can play for hours upon hours. If I had money to throw out and had a PS3, I would get Little Big Planet. But I don't have either so i'll use my money on buying a game like Oblivion which has lasted me a good 200 hours or so.
Oh man, don't get me started on how much I hate Oblivion
Comments
Marvin said that there should be console releases more often with smaller jumps in abilities between each generation.
I pointed out that that's no easier on our wallets but costs us in terms of graphics.
I was also taking into consideration the cost of games but now that I see some of the prices of the Wii games, maybe it doesn't hold up any more. I remember going to my second hand games store and they had loads of Gamecube game for about £5-10. PS2 and XBox games used to stay between £10-£20.
I've looked at some of the Wii console prices too and they are much higher than I thought. Considering the XBox360 is only £280, a Wii at £200 is a very bad deal. The PS3s are just coming out here too and damn, they are around £500 with one game. I read somewhere they'd be around £325. I suspect they'll come down a fair bit over the next couple of months as the popularity increases though.
I was also taking into consideration the cost of games but now that I see some of the prices of the Wii games, maybe it doesn't hold up any more. I remember going to my second hand games store and they had loads of Gamecube game for about £5-10. PS2 and XBox games used to stay between £10-£20.
I've looked at some of the Wii console prices too and they are much higher than I thought. Considering the XBox360 is only £280, a Wii at £200 is a very bad deal. The PS3s are just coming out here too and damn, they are around £500 with one game. I read somewhere they'd be around £325. I suspect they'll come down a fair bit over the next couple of months as the popularity increases though.
Yeah, the price of the PS3 is ridiculous in the UK—all of the games stores have marked it up way over the already expensive MSRP.
But, they're still sold out of them, so I guess it's a smart move.
But that'll definitely come down to more in line with what we pay in the US after the initial rush is over.
The Wii Virtual Console is really expensive. I was looking into getting the Wii mainly so I could throw out all my old systems, but the prices are about four times what I would pay in a used store for the games. Also, they don't have all the titles I'd want (some, like GoldenEye, due to licensing issues), and I don't think they'd even all fit on the 512 MB that comes with the system.
The market also bears witness to the PS2 selling three times what the Wii is selling. What's your point?
That you just proved the point of all the people that are saying price is a larger concern for the majority of buyers than the number of polygons a console can push.
I've never said the Wii wasn't fun, nor said anything negative about the control scheme. I just said it was way too expensive for me, in terms of bang for buck.
That's fair. It just seems the majority of the console buying public doesn't agree.
Are the Wii's graphics photoreleastic? No.
Things like more polygons; sharper, more varied textures; and HDR lighting improve graphics on all TVs, HD or no. People with SD TVs will still greatly benefit from the XBOX 360 and the PS3. The fact that they go that high is just icing on the cake.
That may be true, but the perception of most people that I've talked to is that hooking it up to a SDTV is a waste.
In the US, the Wii only has about 1.8x the install base as the PS3. You're including European sales?where the PS3 hasn't yet been released (but is sold out of pre-orders). Even then, though, you're wrong?it has about a 2.8x lead in install base.
OMG a .2 difference. Wow I was way off.
Only you are the one that is wrong.
http://nexgenwars.com/
By my math the ratio is 3.1 Wiis to every PS3. Somehow I doubt Europe will double worldwide PS3 shipments (even if it did, the PS3 would still trail the Wii). The gap will also only continue to widen as the Wii is still outselling the PS3.
That you just proved the point of all the people that are saying price is a larger concern for the majority of buyers than the number of polygons a console can push.
No, people buy cheap systems. Two years from now when the XBOX and the PS3 both cost $250, what's the Wii going to do to maintain it's edge at $150?
That's fair. It just seems the majority of the console buying public doesn't agree.
No, the majority of console buyers this year didn't agree. What do you think will happen when the PS3 has (a) games, and (b) a better price?
That may be true, but the perception of most people that I've talked to is that hooking it up to a SDTV is a waste.
That's still nonsense. Was a PS2 useless without a better screen? What about a Nintendo 64? The high resolution is a bonus.
Besides, in a few years, the majority of Americans will have HDTVs. That will still be somewhat early on in this generation.
OMG a .2 difference. Wow I was way off.
No, you said greater than 3x. It's less than 3x. That's a significant difference.
Only you are the one that is wrong.
http://nexgenwars.com/
Nexgenwars is known to be dubious, and is also heavily biased towards Microsoft. VGCharts.org is generally regarded as much more accurate.
By my math the ratio is 3.1 Wiis to every PS3. Somehow I doubt Europe will double worldwide PS3 shipments (even if it did, the PS3 would still trail the Wii). The gap will also only continue to widen as the Wii is still outselling the PS3.
No, but it will bring Europe close to the same ratio that the US is at after a few months.
Also, there's no really strong titles for the PS3, other than Resistance: Fall of Man. The Wii already sold what'll likely be it's top exclusive for the next few years?Zelda. The PS3 still has exclusives like FFXIII and MGS4 coming, AAA non-exclusives like GTA, and other exciting games like Little Big Planet coming.
Considering the number of cons the PS3 has?the huge price tag, and the lack of any strong Japanese exclusive title, I'm honestly surprised it has sold as well as it did. This doesn't mean that it won't be dominating next Christmas.
Think about it, Unless games show a significant difference in visuals and gameplay compared to the 360 which already has a 10 million unit user base and has a much lower starting price VS the PS3, things are going to look bleak for Sony.
Most games are going to be 360 ports on the PS3 and consumers will just pick a 360 or the Wii over the PS3. I see them at third place this time around, they had a great cash cow going with the gaming division only to screw it by trying to push Blueray to the market via the PS3.
Think about it, Unless games show a significant difference in visuals and gameplay compared to the 360 which already has a 10 million unit user base and has a much lower starting price VS the PS3, things are going to look bleak for Sony.
Bleak as in it's already outselling the 360? Right.
Most games are going to be 360 ports on the PS3 and consumers will just pick a 360 or the Wii over the PS3. I see them at third place this time around, they had a great cash cow going with the gaming division only to screw it by trying to push Blueray to the market via the PS3.
The Blu-ray doesn't add significantly to the cost of the PS3?blue-violet lasers are more complicated than red lasers, but this is like $20 more worth of complications. The other extra costs go to the larger hard drive, better processor, and HDMI connectivity. In other words, all the costs directly benefit the consumer.
But...I still havn't seen one game that interests me that is coming out anytime soon that isn't on the 360, or has a better counterpart on the 360...
The thing most people are basing the PS3's future on and the reason they are confident in it's success is that they don't have good games yet...
But...I still havn't seen one game that interests me that is coming out anytime soon that isn't on the 360, or has a better counterpart on the 360...
I'm waiting on MGS4, Final Fantasy XIII, and now, Little Big Planet.
The game I'm really excited for is Grand Theft Auto IV, which isn't exclusive. Historically, Rockstar has taken the time to really take advantage of each console's strengths—the XBOX version is way better graphically than the PS2 version. Given the PS3's better processing power, the opposite will be true this time around
I'm waiting on MGS4, Final Fantasy XIII, and now, Little Big Planet.
The game I'm really excited for is Grand Theft Auto IV, which isn't exclusive. Historically, Rockstar has taken the time to really take advantage of each console's strengths?the XBOX version is way better graphically than the PS2 version. Given the PS3's better processing power, the opposite will be true this time around
MGS series is ok...personally I prefer SC though.
Don't get me started on FFXIII....the first 8 were good but this is going way to far.
Personally I can't see myself ever using Little Big Planet...though I will admit I can easily see other people loving it.
Yah GTA4 will be pretty cool. Though I don't think the graphics or fps on either will be much different. A little different here and there, better in some, worse in some, but overall I'd say it will be a stalemate.
Right now I'm looking forward to Halo 3, TES:IV Expansion, GRAW2 (yah Ik...it's out already...havn't gotten around to buying it yet), Mass Effect, GTA4, Forza 2, and Fable 2.
I just *don't* get console gaming. A Core2Duo overclocked 2+ghz to 3ghz, running 1280x1024 off a 7950GT or X1950XT level card, with DVI/ HDCP/ component out/ blah blah blah on a computer screen or big-ass plasma, that'll do.
UT2007 engine based games with 4xAA 16xAF HDR etc etc etc -- I'll stick to a PC for now, consoles are cool, but PCs have the GPU power ready to slot in as we go on, and in about a year when the GPUs are at 65nm and more sensible, even better. Pity about the titles available for the PC, but, good enough for now.
Again, I *don't* get this PS3 craze.
MGS series is ok...personally I prefer SC though.
I feel the same assuming you mean Splinter Cell. I liked the first MGS game and then MGS2 had two levels. MGS3 Snake Eater just sucks IMO. It takes too long to get anything done. Even though SC is about stealth, I can still get through the levels at a good pace and there is enough variety in the levels to keep the game interesting.
I just *don't* get console gaming. A Core2Duo overclocked 2+ghz to 3ghz, running 1280x1024 off a 7950GT or X1950XT level card, with DVI/ HDCP/ component out/ blah blah blah on a computer screen or big-ass plasma, that'll do.
Cost, reliability and efficiency. It is not efficient to have to install 2GB+ of data for every game. Windows is not reliable - some games run fine one day and then BAM, DirectX error. My PS2 has crashed about 3 times ever and that's over a period of a good few years. Consoles have far fewer compatibility issues than any PC because the games can be optimized and tested thoroughly for the target machine. Finally there's no way you could get a Core 2 Duo PC with a X1950XT for under £400.
I still prefer the PC myself though because I can use a keyboard and mouse with it - I really hate console FPS games. Also, I can cheat easily. If I get stuck, I can download a savegame or level skip cheat very quickly. The one and only reason I would consider a PS3 is there was a report saying you'd be able to use a keyboard and mouse.
I feel the same assuming you mean Splinter Cell. I liked the first MGS game and then MGS2 had two levels. MGS3 Snake Eater just sucks IMO. It takes too long to get anything done. Even though SC is about stealth, I can still get through the levels at a good pace and there is enough variety in the levels to keep the game interesting.
Cost, reliability and efficiency. It is not efficient to have to install 2GB+ of data for every game. Windows is not reliable - some games run fine one day and then BAM, DirectX error. My PS2 has crashed about 3 times ever and that's over a period of a good few years. Consoles have far fewer compatibility issues than any PC because the games can be optimized and tested thoroughly for the target machine. Finally there's no way you could get a Core 2 Duo PC with a X1950XT for under £400.
I still prefer the PC myself though because I can use a keyboard and mouse with it - I really hate console FPS games. Also, I can cheat easily. If I get stuck, I can download a savegame or level skip cheat very quickly. The one and only reason I would consider a PS3 is there was a report saying you'd be able to use a keyboard and mouse.
Yah I'm talking about Splinter Cell.
I really don't understand PC gaming. Ok yah I can dish out 30,000 on some mostly unknown site for the top of the line gaming pc....and in 3 months spend another 5000 to keep it top of the line...and again...and again...
Personally I love the controller. That might just be my generation though because most people I know can't stand mice and keyboard. Too many buttons to remember...if you are playing 10 games no way you will remember alll those things (and yes i do play ~10 console games at once). Also talking online with the 360 is extremely easy and nice.
...I still prefer the PC myself though because I can use a keyboard and mouse with it - I really hate console FPS games. Also, I can cheat easily. If I get stuck, I can download a savegame or level skip cheat very quickly. The one and only reason I would consider a PS3 is there was a report saying you'd be able to use a keyboard and mouse...
I really don't understand PC gaming. Ok yah I can dish out 30,000 on some mostly unknown site for the top of the line gaming pc....and in 3 months spend another 5000 to keep it top of the line...and again...and again...
Personally I love the controller. That might just be my generation though because most people I know can't stand mice and keyboard. Too many buttons to remember...if you are playing 10 games no way you will remember alll those things (and yes i do play ~10 console games at once). Also talking online with the 360 is extremely easy and nice...
Heh. Yeah, different strokes (wow, pun unintended) for different folks. From the days of Doom (OMFG shooting stuff with only the KEYBOARD!) through to *serious* training
PC gaming costs basically have to do with the level of detail and visual richness you desire at a certain stage. My 1.5+ year old AMD64 2ghz 1gbRAM 7200rpm SATA rig is fine for most games. It's mainly the GPU upgrades that will set you back $200US to $500US depending on how rich the visual experience you want. Just as people pine for an upgradeable mid-tower Mac, so to do I enjoy the flexibility that my PC rig offers. Core2Duo, not even a major issue now. 6600GT, X1600, liveable for good titles like FPS genre's flagships HL2 and FEAR, etc. A $500 GPU will bring the rig up to par with current PS3 title visuals (dare I say??) ... 2 years from now, a $200 GPU will make the PS3 look like a PSP.
You can talk online with the 360 controller??? Sorry, it boggles my mind, just my "training" as well. Jumping to cover, crouching, spin180deg, blowing away someone in UT2004 and then typing "ha ha ha u suck" ... wow. I would be stuck at how to even move forward with a console controller. Also my favourite move in UT2004-ONSTorlanMap, the "Manta chuck" (fly a Manta right into the power node, jump off the Manta and "chuck" it into the power node, slicing up a few unfortunate peoples there... muah ha ha....) ... Again, mouse and keyboard.
Back to the days of late 90's racing games and stuff, even WingCommander (without joystick), now with NFS:Most Wanted, It's all up-down-left-right arrows, space for braking, CTRL/SHIFT for gearing up down, it's like second nature.
The thing most people are basing the PS3's future on and the reason they are confident in it's success is that they don't have good games yet...
But...I still havn't seen one game that interests me...
I take it you missed Little Big Planet then.
Here's some reviews of the demo shown at Sony's recent event:
BBC
1up
Kotaku
IGN
Wired
Slashdot
Here's two videos of it:
"1"
"2"
PS, the PS3 is coming down in price by $100 this summer. That means the complete version will cost $499, will have HDMI, 60GB Disk, WiFi, support for up to 7 wireless controllers, Playstation Home and a Blu-Ray move player, not bad.
I take it you missed Little Big Planet then.
Here's some reviews of the demo shown at Sony's recent event:
BBC
1up
Kotaku
IGN
Wired
Slashdot
Here's two videos of it:
"1"
"2"
PS, the PS3 is coming down in price by $100 this summer. That means the complete version will cost $499, will have HDMI, 60GB Disk, WiFi, support for up to 7 wireless controllers, Playstation Home and a Blu-Ray move player, not bad.
Yah yah Little Big Planet, not interested. Besides I don't trust sony at all anymore. They make things out bigger than they really are. I won't believe they will drop the price by 100 until I go to the store and see that dropped price.
Home has potential but, again, I want to see it in person and use the final version before I make any judgements.
About blu-ray...no one can say whose going to win for sure. What if blu-ray loses? Then what is the point of my PS3 playing blu-ray movies? And with the PS3 failing right now I can see blu-ray losing.
Don't have an HDTV...HDMI doesn't interest me and, at least for me, the gains in quality are minimal (at least from what I've seen at stores. I havn't had a chance to do a A-B quality check on it yet at a high quality A/V store yet...only places which are subject to mess up when they set the TV's up).
I have ethernet cables going to my HT set-up right now...don't need WiFi built in. 60 gbs is more than i need. I think i've used 3 gigs in a year so far on my 360.
Now I have a question for you...why would you EVER want seven controllers?
On another note Little Big Planet and Home aren't really get-in-the-action games. I'd much rather spend my time talking and such while playing...CoD3 than in Home. Home just reminds me of the Sims Online with a little bit more thrown in.
About blu-ray...no one can say whose going to win for sure. What if blu-ray loses? Then what is the point of my PS3 playing blu-ray movies? And with the PS3 failing right now I can see blu-ray losing.
Blu-ray is now outselling HD-DVD by more than 4:1. For every 23 HD-DVDs sold, 100 Blu-ray discs are sold. As in, Blu-ray has an 82% market share. And it's growing. I think we all know who won. For sure.
Now I have a question for you...why would you EVER want seven controllers?
Do you have friends? When I have friends over, and we play video games, one or two people are ALWAYS relegated to just watching. Besides, as the number of players increases in most games, so does the amount of fun. I don't know at what points that stops, but I'm sure it's not four.
Now, I've said a nasty thing or two about the Wii, but if the Wii had options for seven controllers, I'd already have them all bought and be counting down the days until Mario Kart Wii. I hope the PS3 comes out with some fun multiplayer games. Online multiplayer really doesn't do it for me.
On another note Little Big Planet and Home aren't really get-in-the-action games. I'd much rather spend my time talking and such while playing...CoD3 than in Home. Home just reminds me of the Sims Online with a little bit more thrown in.
Home seems more like Second Life to me, but how is "Little Big Planet" not a get in the action game? It looks hella fun, not to mention cute.
Until two weeks ago, Ruth Ebert never had the slightest interest in the video games favored by her one and only granddaughter.
"I'm 82 years old, so I missed that part of our culture. Soap operas, yes. Video games, no," chirped Ebert, who recently started playing a tennis game on Nintendo Co. Ltd.'s (7974.OS) new Wii video game console at the Virginia retirement community she calls home.
That $250 console has been stealing the show from Microsoft Corp.'s Xbox 360 and Sony Corp.'s PlayStation 3, higher-powered consoles that are much more expensive than the Wii.
While those rivals focused on cutting-edge graphics and high-tech bells and whistles, Nintendo focused on making game play easier, more intuitive and more appealing to a mass market.
That bet paid off.
The Wii outsold the new Microsoft and Sony consoles in January and February and is generating its own buzz with everyone from nuns to cancer patients to toddlers.
That said, I'll still wait for the first price drop to get a Wii. I've never paid more than $200 for any console I've owned, even the PS2. I personally can't justify paying ~$500 or more for fixed hardware. That is also one of the reasons I don't have a HDTV yet, so buying a 360 or PS3 would be a waste of money for me in any case without an HDTV. And that way, you know if the console is going to hang on, or pull a Jaguar/3DO(yeah, I had one!)/Dreamcast. You'd also have a better selection of games to pick from, rather than waiting months for the good new releases to come out.
Blu-ray is now outselling HD-DVD by more than 4:1. For every 23 HD-DVDs sold, 100 Blu-ray discs are sold. As in, Blu-ray has an 82% market share. And it's growing. I think we all know who won. For sure.
Do you have friends? When I have friends over, and we play video games, one or two people are ALWAYS relegated to just watching. Besides, as the number of players increases in most games, so does the amount of fun. I don't know at what points that stops, but I'm sure it's not four.
Now, I've said a nasty thing or two about the Wii, but if the Wii had options for seven controllers, I'd already have them all bought and be counting down the days until Mario Kart Wii. I hope the PS3 comes out with some fun multiplayer games. Online multiplayer really doesn't do it for me.
Home seems more like Second Life to me, but how is "Little Big Planet" not a get in the action game? It looks hella fun, not to mention cute.
Really? I didn't know that about blu-ray. Havn't really been following anymore. Ok so the PS3 has blu-ray. Still I don't have an HDTV (as mentioned before) so it's lost on me personally.
Yah I do play with my friends all the times. And, to a point, it is more fun with more players. However when the screens get so small you can barely play...well then it's pretty useless. Maybe...maybe, if it supported 8 it would be ok on extremely large tvs or projectors, but having an odd number would just mess up the size of one of the screens. 4 players for me is more than enough. If I'm planning on playing with more I have a friend bring over an xbox and I'll get another tv hooked up for system link.
I can actually see about 6 people on the Wii still being fun...Nintendo has a way of making something work well when it wouldn't seem like it. For example on double dash with 8 people...4 karts, 2 people per kart. Might work out then. Same size screen as usual.
Little Big Planet is one of those games that I would enjoy for ~10 minutes a week. It would be very fun for a short amount of time but it's not like...Halo (if you are a "true" fps fan than Halo won't hold up...but for me it's hella fun with 12 people on system link) where you can play for hours upon hours. If I had money to throw out and had a PS3, I would get Little Big Planet. But I don't have either so i'll use my money on buying a game like Oblivion which has lasted me a good 200 hours or so.
Shadow
Yah I do play with my friends all the times. And, to a point, it is more fun with more players. However when the screens get so small you can barely play...well then it's pretty useless. Maybe...maybe, if it supported 8 it would be ok on extremely large tvs or projectors, but having an odd number would just mess up the size of one of the screens. 4 players for me is more than enough. If I'm planning on playing with more I have a friend bring over an xbox and I'll get another tv hooked up for system link.
I can actually see about 6 people on the Wii still being fun...Nintendo has a way of making something work well when it wouldn't seem like it. For example on double dash with 8 people...4 karts, 2 people per kart. Might work out then. Same size screen as usual.
This is where HDTV becomes useful
With 1080p and 6 players, each player gets 640 x 540 resolution. That's more resolution than the Wii can output total.
(I don't know how 7 players will be laid out, each player will get either 360 x 540 or more likely 640 x 320).
However, because any good HDTV is progressive, the Wii WILL still look a lot better on an HDTV. I played Mario Kart 64 on a 720p HDTV, and while it was funny how blocky everything looked, it was much easier to play on than an interlaced SDTV.
Little Big Planet is one of those games that I would enjoy for ~10 minutes a week. It would be very fun for a short amount of time but it's not like...Halo (if you are a "true" fps fan than Halo won't hold up...but for me it's hella fun with 12 people on system link) where you can play for hours upon hours. If I had money to throw out and had a PS3, I would get Little Big Planet. But I don't have either so i'll use my money on buying a game like Oblivion which has lasted me a good 200 hours or so.
Oh man, don't get me started on how much I hate Oblivion