Why do so many gamers hate Sony?

Indeed it is. Because I've discovered other arrogant companies.

They make every fuckin' thing ever. Especially stuff that I own. Electronic and nonelectronic alike. Narcissistic pricks.

Except perhaps Charles Shaw vineyards. $3.39 a bottle, hombre, and $34.00 per case. There are exceptions to every rule, I suppose.
 
We dont really have to fictionalize a backstory behind the arrogance theory as much as we can just read literal quotes from executives from that time period.
 
I love sony. I bought a PS2 some 5 years ago because it played DVDs out of the box (as opposed to the xbox) and I have over a year of top notch titles still waiting to be played on it before I need to buy anything new. If I had gone with the xbox I would have lost use for it years ago. I liked Halo a lot, Halo 2 was decent and I would have liked to play the kotors, but then I would have been done. Also, I wouldn't pay a monthly fee for online gaming, which I don't have the time to do now anyway since I like to play for a half hour here and there.

PS2=best game lineup of 2007 for me
 
You can't hate Sony since they delivered with the PS2.

I've got over 2 dozen Genesis games on my PS2, a handful of SNES games, I can play all the best PS1 games, and the PS2 library is superb.

The "triple" is a big yawn honestly, and the fact that Sony acted like they won this console war before it even started had everyone rallying against them.

You don't want your customer base itching for a reason to abandon your product.

I think Blu-Ray might be working out for them, I'm going to stick with my PS2 though, PS3 doesn't appeal to me that much (same for the Wii and 360).
 
All companies do things that can be considered arrogant.. Nintendo "quality vs quantity. BS excuse to not have games on the 64. Still waiting on my Robotech Crystal Dreams - [the game that could have saved gametek] :(

Sony with their "rumble is last gen," excuse for not having rumble, then the ken kutaragi, "PS3 will instill discipline" or the "PS3 will sell even if it didn't have games"

MS with them making people who don't pay for live wait to download things.. (bad example maybe)..

buy you guys get the point..
 
I hate sony because of the hardware problems I had with my first ps2. I don't even want to go into how frustrating that system became after the disc read errors started. Sony couldnt fix it and I ended trading it in when the pstwo came out. I don't think I could ever be a big Sony guy again even though I still play my ps2 and psp. If they didn't have Metal Gear, they wouldn't have much, not much at all.
 
[quote name='whoknows']My mistake :p

And that just shows that before the 360 wasn't always BC.

Besides, someone can't really complain about the 40gb not being BC when there are 3 other models that are.[/quote]

You're wrong, I know someone who's not buying the PS3 this holiday for their son because they are only willing to spend $400 on it and the 40 GB version doesn't play PS2 games. I can imagine there are tons of people like this. BC is a huge selling point for many people.
 
I disagree with the point of BC being a huge factor outside of being a nice bullet point on the box.

It didnt even exist until the PS2, and we got along fine. I think if the research done by Microsoft and Sony on the matter (and surely they HAVE looked into it) indicated that it was a big factor, I think they wouldve put significantly more work into it than they have.

The singular thing that Thomas and I agree on is that Sony's most pressing problem is the price, from which all other problems stem. Where we differ is probably that I think that fixing the problem doesnt help once the problem is started because of timing. Developer and consumer momentum is very dificult to turn around once it gets rolling.
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']I disagree with the point of BC being a huge factor outside of being a nice bullet point on the box.

It didnt even exist until the PS2, and we got along fine. I think if the research done by Microsoft and Sony on the matter (and surely they HAVE looked into it) indicated that it was a big factor, I think they wouldve put significantly more work into it than they have.

The singular thing that Thomas and I agree on is that Sony's most pressing problem is the price, from which all other problems stem. Where we differ is probably that I think that fixing the problem doesnt help once the problem is started because of timing. Developer and consumer momentum is very dificult to turn around once it gets rolling.[/quote]

Didn't the GBA come out before the PS2? And the GBA played Gameboy games right.
 
everyone just loves to hate them cause they won last gens war.
you always hate the "favorite" and now theyre theyre not winning it, everyone loves to bash on them.

the press uses smoke n mirrors to make the ps3 seem like a failure, we never hear any praise of the ps3.
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']I disagree with the point of BC being a huge factor outside of being a nice bullet point on the box.

It didnt even exist until the PS2, and we got along fine. I think if the research done by Microsoft and Sony on the matter (and surely they HAVE looked into it) indicated that it was a big factor, I think they wouldve put significantly more work into it than they have.

[/quote]

That was the past. The PS3 doesn't have fancy 16-bit graphics like the Genesis did. BC is a huge selling point for the GBA, PS2, and many other consoles. I have heard many people buy these new consoles because not only would they be able to play their shiny new games on it, but their large collection of old ones too.
 
[quote name='Mr. Roper']I hate sony because of the hardware problems I had with my first ps2. I don't even want to go into how frustrating that system became after the disc read errors started. Sony couldnt fix it and I ended trading it in when the pstwo came out. I don't think I could ever be a big Sony guy again even though I still play my ps2 and psp. If they didn't have Metal Gear, they wouldn't have much, not much at all.[/QUOTE]



Ah come on get over it
 
Not to pick nits, but the original GBA was BC with GBC titles, but the GBA SP was not, am I correct? The Micro was not either, though I could be wrong... So in a sense, BC is becoming less of a focus even on handhelds... (the DS doesn't play GBC games, to be sure...)

I think BC is becoming less and less of a factor for every company, and we'll see less emphasis on it next time around. Sony made a big deal out of it on the PS2 because they were only on their 2nd generation console... they needed an edge to keep the cycle going, but that's purely speculation on my part.

Sony got bit on the price this go-round. They misread the market's ability to see their console as "entertainment system" rather than "game console w/DVD/blu-ray capability" and thus, we have the price backlash. People spend oodles of money to get AV receivers that do 11.1 supposisound and smellovision, but they won't (or don't want to specifically) spend $600 or $500 on a game console, albeit a nice one, built very solidly (a first for Sony) and capable of more than just games. Sony didn't get that until now. :) Hence the $400 PS3.

Microsoft entered the market for one reason only... to get into the living rooms. They want to be the entertainment hub just like Sony... and these two behemoths are going to duke it out for quite a while... because neither MS nor Sony realize that there can be _more_ than one entertainment center... and unlike the 'one true OS' or 'one true Movie format', we can have multiple players in the living room. MS wants to leverage their OS dominance into a living room "hub" of activity so that if you want to buy a movie, rent a movie, play a song, or play a game, you go through them, and they get a cut of the action (I think the iPod still gives Bill Gates ulcers.)

Sony, by the same token, wants to leverage their extensive A/V experience (and stable of movie and music studios) into a cohesive tie-in that puts your TV, stereo, internet, and games in one shiny black box.... and if you want to record TV, watch movies, rent movies, and surf the internet, you do so through their shiny black box... Or white if you live in Japan. :) Whether or not you agree with Sony's A/V experience being good or bad, they've been around for a long time... (So I'm not handing the crown to them or anything, I'm just framing the argument.)

So, in answer to the OP's original question... it's Sony's turn to be the bad guy. It's been Sega, Nintendo, MS, 3DO, Atari, Coleco, Magnavox, RCA, and so on...... so they drew the "bad guy" card this time.

Next time, it'll probably be Nintendo for "killing the hardcore gamer" or some such nonsense. :)
 
[quote name='Puffa469']I freakin love Maddox, lol :lol:



I believe SP's are back compat with GB & GBC games. Its only the micro and the DS/DSL that arent.[/QUOTE]

thanks for the clarification... I have a micro and a DS (and sold my original GBA way back when...) but skipped the SP... (I can see why the micro wouldn't have it... the GBC carts are bigger than the unit itself... heh.)
 
[quote name='Mechafenris']thanks for the clarification... I have a micro and a DS (and sold my original GBA way back when...) but skipped the SP... (I can see why the micro wouldn't have it... the GBC carts are bigger than the unit itself... heh.)[/quote]

Thats the same reason the DS/DSL dont have it, space. The DS would have to be physically bigger to keep that compatibility. I think orig GB & GBC games run off a different power spec than GBA & DS games, thus they need a seperate power converter in addition to whatever chipset they require.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']'tis now the Arcade.

And it comes with a memory card, so yes, it is BC.[/QUOTE]
What?

You need a hard drive for BC...
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']I disagree with the point of BC being a huge factor outside of being a nice bullet point on the box.

It didnt even exist until the PS2, and we got along fine.[/quote]
6lsdj7m.jpg


This was the first backward compatible console. BC didn't help it against the NES, of course.
 
[quote name='elmyra']
6lsdj7m.jpg


This was the first backward compatible console. BC didn't help it against the NES, of course.[/QUOTE]


someone should go back in time and say "hey Atari.... don't worry about that BC"
 
I don't understand why people can't just pick and choose what systems they own and not look at the brand names, I myself own a DS lite, PSP and xbox 360 so what does that make me a commie? I am blind when it comes to the name, My system choice is purely based on the quality of games that populate that particular machine.
 
[quote name='Neo']Sony is a cancer to the industry.[/quote]

Any company that goes without competition becomes a cancer to its industry. Sony got cocky with the PS2. Thankfully the 360 was there to step in and provide that much needed competition.

But even though I prefer the PS3, I in no way want the 360 to fail, just like I don't want the PS3 to fail. Just like Sony, MS has shown it can get lethargic and start dropping the quality on a product that it has dominance in.

Those here who actually want either company to fail are fools. Choice and competition is the best thing for us consumers, the closer the two competitors are, the better it becomes for us as we can pick and choose the games we want to play, and the quality of such games and systems go up and prices go down.
 
Hate's a strong word. Sony just hasn't delivered the best product. The PS3 is over priced. It hasn't done anything to differentiate itself from the 360. A lot of the system's exclusive games also tend to be a little too Japanese-y for my taste (this how I feel....it's not necessarily true though, the 360 actually gets alot of Japense-y support these days).

The market hates Sony though, in the sense that its sales suck, cause of price. Most people just will not spend over $200 for a game system, end of story. By starting at such a high point and including hardware that's going to make it hard to move down in price (blu-ray & HD), it's going to be hard for Sony to ever get market love, long term, for the PS3. Microsoft will evetually be selling 360's in the sub $200 range at a profit, while Sony will have a tough time breaking even at $300 any time soon.
 
[quote name='Pucker']Hate's a strong word. Sony just hasn't delivered the best product. The PS3 is over priced. It hasn't done anything to differentiate itself from the 360. A lot of the system's exclusive games also tend to be a little too Japanese-y for my taste (this how I feel....it's not necessarily true though, the 360 actually gets alot of Japense-y support these days).

The market hates Sony though, in the sense that its sales suck, cause of price. Most people just will not spend over $200 for a game system, end of story. By starting at such a high point and including hardware that's going to make it hard to move down in price (blu-ray & HD), it's going to be hard for Sony to ever get market love, long term, for the PS3. Microsoft will evetually be selling 360's in the sub $200 range at a profit, while Sony will have a tough time breaking even at $300 any time soon.[/QUOTE]



you don't own a PS3.... there's big difference between overprice, and just plain expensive. PS3 is expensive, but its not overpriced. The PS3 package, went from 600 to 400 in one year. [even though it took a new model to do it] Those 40gb models next year should drop to 300 dollars.

I see that you got some quarrels w/ the PS3, and that's fine, but you have to give it some credit, for being willing to put everything into one box.[60gb at launch] I mean you got the card readers, 4 usb ports, easy to switch(upgrade) hard drive, blu ray, hdmi, 1080p, bluetooth, wireless connectivity. [and you can use it as a personal computer - running linux] - most of what I just listed, either can't be done on 360, or you have to pay extra for it, and if you were to pay extra you'd be over the 600 dollar mark easily.
 
[quote name='Vanigan']Any company that goes without competition becomes a cancer to its industry. Sony got cocky with the PS2. Thankfully the 360 was there to step in and provide that much needed competition.
[/QUOTE]

I definitely have to agree with that, I like the fact that Sony threw everything they could into the PS3, but expecting it to sell like hotcakes was stupid, and most of all it was unfair to the consumer. You release a system at 600 dollars, there's no way avg consumer can afford that. Games are supposed to be for everyone, not just for the rich and famous. Defeinitely, got to give the 360 some credit for providing an affordable, high quality graphics, HD, machine. IMO its Nintendo, that trying to sell nothing for something.
 
[quote name='Barnolde']What?

You need a hard drive for BC...[/QUOTE]

Nope, just a memory device that will hold the tiny lil' driver for the individual Xbox game. A memory card works as fine as a HDD.

Don't get me wrong: only bastards and morons own a 360 with no HDD at all. That's my opinion. But, if those bastards and morons want to play Shenmue II (if they have a hankerin' for a game of "Lucky Hit"), they can do so.
 
[quote name='Thomas96']you don't own a PS3.... there's big difference between overprice, and just plain expensive. PS3 is expensive, but its not overpriced. The PS3 package, went from 600 to 400 in one year. [even though it took a new model to do it] Those 40gb models next year should drop to 300 dollars.

I see that you got some quarrels w/ the PS3, and that's fine, but you have to give it some credit, for being willing to put everything into one box.[60gb at launch] I mean you got the card readers, 4 usb ports, easy to switch(upgrade) hard drive, blu ray, hdmi, 1080p, bluetooth, wireless connectivity. [and you can use it as a personal computer - running linux] - most of what I just listed, either can't be done on 360, or you have to pay extra for it, and if you were to pay extra you'd be over the 600 dollar mark easily.[/QUOTE]

I think your selectively using information to make a point. Most of the things that you list are optional on the 360 and somebody just wanting to play games may not want all the things you mentioned.

Do most people care about card readers, usb ports, bluetooth? They just want their systems to work and the technology behind it doesn't matter to most people. Sony's dropping the price and components from the lower SKu's some of what you mentioned may not be there in a year or so. They cut the USB ports in half with the 40GB SKU.

Do you really expect to use your PS3 as a computer? If so my condolences as you must have spent all your money on a PS3 and therefore can't afford a decent computer.

My issues with the PS3:

- Not all the SKU's are backwards compatible. Even to confuse the situation more the systems have different levels of BC depending on the hardware. The 360 provides the same level of BC for all SKU's. Is the level of BC listed on the box even for when parents are in the store? That's deceptive IMO if the info is not there as full BC is something Sony has preached in the past.

= Online service - Yes the PSN network is free but you get what you pay for. XBOX Live is a vastly superior service for which the grumbling in the gaming community has subsided as gamers have been exposed to what Sony and Nintendo have to offer as an online experience..

- Does every gamer need Blu-Ray? Am I buying a gaming console or a movie player because I'm not sure Sony really knows what they are selling from their marketing campaign. That's probably why they swithed advertising companies recently to the Deutsch.

- Yes the 360 has HDMI and 1080 capability on newer modesls so what's your point? If your going to rip MS for adding this functionality to later units you should also mention Sony is removing functionality from the PS3's to cut price.

- Do you read the gamng news at all? Sony's practices just reak of someone that expects to ship a console and everyone will just run out and buy it because it says SONY. In most cases, game exclusivity is a thing of the past which helped Sony prevail over the other consoles in years past, except for the annoying timed exclusives.

- Where are the games beyond Ratchet & Clank and Uncharted?

- Let's take the lack of rumble in the PS3 controller for instance as Sony didn't want to settle a lawsuit with Immersion and considered rumble so "last gen". Gamers demand rumble and Sony settles. They brand the new controller with Dual Shock 3 and have some gaming journalists, "I use the word journalists loosely", touting Sony and their rumble functionality. One of the staffers at 1UP even goes on to say the he can feel how rumble is specific so the game as his colleagues call BS! Rumble is rumble people!

- Their perceived unwillingness to assist third-party developers in creating games for the PS3. That's probably how we ended up with the crappy SixAxis controls of Lair and the framerate differences in the sports games like Madden.

I probably could go on but I'll cut it off there.
 
I wish I had a PS3, cos if I did I'd be playin the hell outta some Uncharted: Drakes Fortune.

I wouldnt call it a system seller, but Im still jealous of everyone who's getting to play it.



Sonys initial strategy was to give you everything you could ever need in one box. Card readers, USB, Bluray, HDD, Back Compat, etc. You got everything but the cable. And that made the system expensive. Its a strategy that didnt work out as well as they had hoped, and now they are releasing lower cost models with alot of those features cut.

Microsoft had the opposite strategy. Release a console as cheap and bare bones as possible, and then offer 'premium' versions, or nickel and dime you to death for all the extras like play n charge kits, HD dvd drives, hdd's, memory cards, wireless headsets, whatever. This strategy has its own set of problems as I believe that making the HDD optional was a huge mistake on Microsofts part.


Im glad Sony is losing ground to Microsoft, but I dont want Sony to fail. Competition breeds innovation, and brings out the best in any company, thats why fanboyishness is soo stupid. If Sony failed the 360 owners would be worse off for it, and vice versa.
 
[quote name='joserjerr']I think your selectively using information to make a point. Most of the things that you list are optional on the 360 and somebody just wanting to play games may not want all the things you mentioned.

Do most people care about card readers, usb ports, bluetooth? They just want their systems to work and the technology behind it doesn't matter to most people. Sony's dropping the price and components from the lower SKu's some of what you mentioned may not be there in a year or so. They cut the USB ports in half with the 40GB SKU.[/QUOTE]
USB ports are pretty important nowadays. Especially for peripherals such as the guncon, guitar, 3rd party accessories.

Do you really expect to use your PS3 as a computer? If so my condolences as you must have spent all your money on a PS3 and therefore can't afford a decent computer.
Click to expand...
I don't, I expect it to be a gaming system and it has met my expectations easily.

My issues with the PS3:

- Not all the SKU's are backwards compatible. Even to confuse the situation more the systems have different levels of BC depending on the hardware. The 360 provides the same level of BC for all SKU's. Is the level of BC listed on the box even for when parents are in the store? That's deceptive IMO if the info is not there as full BC is something Sony has preached in the past.
Click to expand...
Do you not need a HDD for BC with the 360? Besides that, 360 BC is pretty much garbage. Just about every PS1/PS2 game works with the PS3 and it upscales them.

= Online service - Yes the PSN network is free but you get what you pay for. XBOX Live is a vastly superior service for which the grumbling in the gaming community has subsided as gamers have been exposed to what Sony and Nintendo have to offer as an online experience..
Click to expand...
PSN may not be as good as LIVE, but it works well. People (like you) make it sound a lot worse than it really is.

- Does every gamer need Blu-Ray? Am I buying a gaming console or a movie player because I'm not sure Sony really knows what they are selling from their marketing campaign. That's probably why they swithed advertising companies recently to the Deutsch.
Click to expand...
As far as gaming, we'll see in the future how much blu-ray will make a difference, otherwise the PS3 is a cheap blu-ray player and people bought it just for that reason.

- Yes the 360 has HDMI and 1080 capability on newer modesls so what's your point? If your going to rip MS for adding this functionality to later units you should also mention Sony is removing functionality from the PS3's to cut price.
Click to expand...
Only 1 SKU with the PS3 had features removed and it is the cheapest version, can't expect everything when you buy the cheapest model. If someone can afford $400 for the 40gb they might as well just pay $500 for twice the amount of HDD space and BC. And don't forget howMS slapped silver users in the face by making them wait for content.

- Do you read the gamng news at all? Sony's practices just reak of someone that expects to ship a console and everyone will just run out and buy it because it says SONY. In most cases, game exclusivity is a thing of the past which helped Sony prevail over the other consoles in years past, except for the annoying timed exclusives.

- Where are the games beyond Ratchet & Clank and Uncharted?[\QUOTE]

Considering that the PS3 had more big exclusives for the fall/winter than the 360, you should be asking "what's after mass effect and halo?" because that's all the 360 had while the PS3 had Heavenly Sword, Ratchet, Uncharted, Time Crisis 4, and Unreal Tournament 3 this week.

- Let's take the lack of rumble in the PS3 controller for instance as Sony didn't want to settle a lawsuit with Immersion and considered rumble so "last gen". Gamers demand rumble and Sony settles. They brand the new controller with Dual Shock 3 and have some gaming journalists, "I use the word journalists loosely", touting Sony and their rumble functionality. One of the staffers at 1UP even goes on to say the he can feel how rumble is specific so the game as his colleagues call BS! Rumble is rumble people![\QUOTE]

Yes, rumble is rumble and I could care less about it. People care, I don't. I honestly don't see the appeal with rumble. If it's there cool, if not I don't give a shit.

- Their perceived unwillingness to assist third-party developers in creating games for the PS3. That's probably how we ended up with the crappy SixAxis controls of Lair and the framerate differences in the sports games like Madden.
Click to expand...
LAIR was 1st party I believe, and the developers of LAIR wanted the Sixaxis controls.

I probably could go on but I'll cut it off there.
Click to expand...
Good choice.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='Puffa469']I wish I had a PS3, cos if I did I'd be playin the hell outta some Uncharted: Drakes Fortune.

I wouldnt call it a system seller, but Im still jealous of everyone who's getting to play it.
[/QUOTE]

Don't worry.

6 hours later and they're in the same boat as you.
 
I'm not going to go back and forth in this thread, but I would like to chime in again, if only for a moment.

[quote name='joserjerr']My issues with the PS3:

- Not all the SKU's are backwards compatible. Even to confuse the situation more the systems have different levels of BC depending on the hardware. The 360 provides the same level of BC for all SKU's. Is the level of BC listed on the box even for when parents are in the store? That's deceptive IMO if the info is not there as full BC is something Sony has preached in the past.[/quote]

The information is on the box, yes. Additionally, as a consumer, you know which systems offer which levels of BC; so if it matters, or does not matter, to you, then you buy the one that matters accordingly. It isn't perfect, but the information is available to the public ahead of time - why blame Sony if someone isn't sharp enough to do research before buying anything, let alone a $400-500 console? Is it MS' fault if I want an Xbox 360 and buy a Core/Arcade, thinking that I can't wait to play all the arcade titles on it? Or watch an HD DVD film? Or download a 6GB movie from XBLM? I can't really do either (the former much, of course, but the latter two at all) on the system - but is that my fault for buying a 360 without a hard drive, or MS' fault for all the SKUs?

Is it my fault if I don't support free trade/globalization and the effect on the American economy, but I buy Nike shoes without looking on the box to see if it says "Made in Indonesia," a shirt at WM without looking to see if it says "Made in China," and so on? Of course it is. That information is there, and it's a matter of degrees. When that information is there, and available, you can't claim the consumer is a victim because they won't look things up before buying something.

= Online service - Yes the PSN network is free but you get what you pay for. XBOX Live is a vastly superior service for which the grumbling in the gaming community has subsided as gamers have been exposed to what Sony and Nintendo have to offer as an online experience..
Click to expand...

You aren't really saying much here. What differences are there in PSN and XBL for games that are on both systems? Few, if any. In game friend list invites are, IMO, the major difference. That's significant, and something PSN should offer. Nevertheless, since you're only playing with 4-16 (give or take) people at a time, what's the larger population of online gamers matter? If you can demonstrate that there are PS3 online communities that are "dead" while the same game is still thriving on the 360, then you have a point. I doubt you can do that, however. Far fewer people play COD4 on the PS3, but you'll never be left waiting. It's a moot point, I'm afraid.

Now, on the content front, Sony's paltry offerings leaves a great deal to be desired compared to the 360. There is room for improvement on that front.

- Does every gamer need Blu-Ray? Am I buying a gaming console or a movie player because I'm not sure Sony really knows what they are selling from their marketing campaign. That's probably why they swithed advertising companies recently to the Deutsch.
Click to expand...

Why don't you decide if you're buying a gaming console or a movie player? You can do both or just one, or neither, if you so choose. If the capacity and advantage of BR doesn't prove itself in every game disc out there, it's not a huge problem. If it shows it off in some (Uncharted) and not others (Assassin's Creed? Just a guess - substitute with any other multiplatform title), it's not the end of the world. Those that do need the space are not inherently better or worse - they just need more space.

At some point, you'll find that BR's advantages will show themselves quite clearly. If not, let me respond to your question with both an answer and another question.
Answer: *every* gamer? Of course not.
Question: Does every gamer looking to buy a PS2 need DVD? If you think so, defend your position.

- Yes the 360 has HDMI and 1080 capability on newer modesls so what's your point? If your going to rip MS for adding this functionality to later units you should also mention Sony is removing functionality from the PS3's to cut price.
Click to expand...

The functionality (BC/USB ports) aren't entirely gone. They're there if you want them, and they aren't if you don't need them. Allow me to ask you this: does *EVERY* gamer need BC? ;) Or does your "does every gamer need _____" question only fly when it supports your preconceived notions of disliking Sony and/or the PS3?

Want 'em? Buy a 60/80GB. Don't want 'em? Buy a 40GB. Where's the problem?

- Do you read the gamng news at all? Sony's practices just reak of someone that expects to ship a console and everyone will just run out and buy it because it says SONY. In most cases, game exclusivity is a thing of the past which helped Sony prevail over the other consoles in years past, except for the annoying timed exclusives.
Click to expand...

heh. I don't get why people take what Sony say so personally. But they do, I suppose. If we're going to be offended by company presentations and PR, and dare single out one company over the others, I think that's pretty indicative of pretty righteous bias. Poor Perrin Kaplan never gets her due for being a numbskull, and the sheer narcissism of Nintendo's E3 keynote is left by the wayside, whereas "you'll have to work overtime to buy a PS3" is remembered. Are they all obnoxious and cocksure? Oh yes. No doubt about it.

- Where are the games beyond Ratchet & Clank and Uncharted?
Click to expand...

Oh, that's right. There are none. At all. Warhawk? Not a game. Heavenly Sword? Not a game either. Tekken Online? Nope. Eye of Judgment? Unreal Tournament III? Haze? Lawd 'amighty, kid - you have to TRY to avoid PS3 news/reports if you really think there is nothing worth owning on the system. A sort of "LALALAICANTHEARYOU" approach. Notice I'm not saying "this other system or that system has fewer good games than the PS3," I'm saying "The PS3 has good games period." If you want to argue against that, well, I'm sure you have a lot of cognitive dissonance to repair in remaining determined that Sony is going to come to your house and burn your Xbox because they're so arrogant and pointed directly at you.

- Let's take the lack of rumble in the PS3 controller for instance as Sony didn't want to settle a lawsuit with Immersion and considered rumble so "last gen". Gamers demand rumble and Sony settles. They brand the new controller with Dual Shock 3 and have some gaming journalists, "I use the word journalists loosely", touting Sony and their rumble functionality. One of the staffers at 1UP even goes on to say the he can feel how rumble is specific so the game as his colleagues call BS! Rumble is rumble people!
Click to expand...

1) Rumble is not "just" rumble.
2) Corporate spin is corporate spin, ever since well before your grandparents were in diapers. Don't be afraid when it's so transparent (e.g., rumble is "last-gen") - be afraid of when you can't see it.

Remember how we all had a great big gut-busting guffaw over how Sony insisted that 1080p was "true HD"? What a joke that was, right? Or was it just a joke when Sony said it, and then it became an awesome update to the 360 when they added 1080p functionality to their system?

- Their perceived unwillingness to assist third-party developers in creating games for the PS3. That's probably how we ended up with the crappy SixAxis controls of Lair and the framerate differences in the sports games like Madden.

I probably could go on but I'll cut it off there.
Click to expand...

You are making attributions incorrectly, when it's quite clear that, in the case of Madden, EA had 1.5-2+ years of working with the 360's hardware advantage over the PS3. Sony should have gotten it into their hands sooner, but they didn't. We'll see if these differences remain next year, or if EA and other developers take advantage of the PS3's architecture the same way they do with the Wii.

Also, you're really going to complain about 30/60FPS as if it's significant? The PS3 sure has some sharp knees, doesn't it, pal? :lol:

LAIR...well, it's terrible, and I would chalk it up to the developer not allowing for sixaxis control to be turned off. Whether that is Sony's call or Factor 5's, I don't know. Lair is quite the anomaly, and not representive of the quality of PS3 games on the whole, despite the willingness of people like you to say that it is.
 
[quote name='joserjerr']I think your selectively using information to make a point. Most of the things that you list are optional on the 360 and somebody just wanting to play games may not want all the things you mentioned

Do most people care about card readers, usb ports, bluetooth? They just want their systems to work and the technology behind it doesn't matter to most people. Sony's dropping the price and components from the lower SKu's some of what you mentioned may not be there in a year or so. They cut the USB ports in half with the 40GB SKU.

[/QUOTE]


~ [thomas96] people do like card readers, make life a little easier. That's why they're included with ever decent laptop available nowadays. Sony made a barebones PS3.. but would you have rather have the 399 40gb barebones ps3, and then release the "better 600 dollar version" later? Its better to put out the best skus first, rather than trying to make better skus [xbox elite with PS3 HDMI that should have been included initially] because some people want the best version.

[quote name='joserjerr']
Do you really expect to use your PS3 as a computer? If so my condolences as you must have spent all your money on a PS3 and therefore can't afford a decent computer.
[/QUOTE]

~[thomas 96] why not use it if its available.. the reason I don't, because I'm too lazy to back up my drive and partition my hard drive. Otherwise, I'd use the linux at least for homebrew.. but even if most don't, at least those who want to... CAN.

[quote name='joserjerr']
My issues with the PS3:

- Not all the SKU's are backwards compatible. Even to confuse the situation more the systems have different levels of BC depending on the hardware. The 360 provides the same level of BC for all SKU's. Is the level of BC listed on the box even for when parents are in the store? That's deceptive IMO if the info is not there as full BC is something Sony has preached in the past.

[/QUOTE]

~[thomas 96] why do you care about what certain skus have - pick the one that suits your specific needs. Also, you know its unrealistic to have all the games that are compatible listed on the box. The best anyone can do is have the information available on the website.

[quote name='joserjerr']
= Online service - Yes the PSN network is free but you get what you pay for. XBOX Live is a vastly superior service for which the grumbling in the gaming community has subsided as gamers have been exposed to what Sony and Nintendo have to offer as an online experience..

[/QUOTE]


~[thomas96] you know... list out the features of xbox live and psn, and you'll see what you're paying doesn't really give you THAT much more.


[quote name='joserjerr']
- Does every gamer need Blu-Ray? Am I buying a gaming console or a movie player because I'm not sure Sony really knows what they are selling from their marketing campaign. That's probably why they swithed advertising companies recently to the Deutsch.

[/QUOTE]

~[thomas96] you're buying an entertainment box... something that does everyting, andyou know that if PS3 didn't have upscale you'd have an issue with that, however, now that it 1ups the 360 w/ blu ray included its "does every game need blu ray" and my answer would be yes... for HD gaming. The HD bus is moving, hop on...


[quote name='joserjerr']
- Yes the 360 has HDMI and 1080 capability on newer modesls so what's your point? If your going to rip MS for adding this functionality to later units you should also mention Sony is removing functionality from the PS3's to cut price.

[/QUOTE]


~[thomas96] do you think it was fair to the early 360 adopters to release a better version... there were some who probably wanted the better machine from day one, but they missed out because MS was trying to keep up with PS3 instead of making it available from day one.


[quote name='joserjerr']
- Do you read the gamng news at all? Sony's practices just reak of someone that expects to ship a console and everyone will just run out and buy it because it says SONY. In most cases, game exclusivity is a thing of the past which helped Sony prevail over the other consoles in years past, except for the annoying timed exclusives.
[/QUOTE]



~[thomas96] say what you will about Sony, but they put together an impressive piece of hardware, and they were the ones were rushing to market, they were the ones who we though would have faulty machines. Almost every launch xbox is dead now... RROD.

[quote name='joserjerr']
- Where are the games beyond Ratchet & Clank and Uncharted?
[/QUOTE]



~[thomas96]
[please check the PS3 upcoming release forum] and Unreal Tournament 3 comes out on Tuesday.


[quote name='joserjerr']
- Let's take the lack of rumble in the PS3 controller for instance as Sony didn't want to settle a lawsuit with Immersion and considered rumble so "last gen". Gamers demand rumble and Sony settles. They brand the new controller with Dual Shock 3 and have some gaming journalists, "I use the word journalists loosely", touting Sony and their rumble functionality. One of the staffers at 1UP even goes on to say the he can feel how rumble is specific so the game as his colleagues call BS! Rumble is rumble people!
[/QUOTE]

~[thomas96] So one journalist says something positive about the DS3, and Cheapy [celebrated 360 fan.err.. boy] says something negative. I'll see for myself when I buy my own.



[quote name='joserjerr']
- Their perceived unwillingness to assist third-party developers in creating games for the PS3. That's probably how we ended up with the crappy SixAxis controls of Lair and the framerate differences in the sports games like Madden.
[/QUOTE]

~[thomas96] I played Lair, I don't think you have.. Lair is not crappy... its not popular, but its controls are actually pretty good. I rented the game, cause I want my own opinion, and I don't want to echo what I've read. So in my own true opinion Lair played well, the bad thing about that game is that Factor 5 made it too similar to Rogue Squadron, which is not the fault of Sony not helping, them, rather a testiment to how lazy some dev teams can be.


[quote name='joserjerr']
I probably could go on but I'll cut it off there.

[/QUOTE]



~[thomas96] Honestly, are these your opinions or are you just voicing the opinions of others. Most of these arguments are tired, and played out and we've moved on.
 
I was a big PS1 and PS2 fan, and don't give a shit about PS3. I even like my PSP. I blame Blu-Ray, High Prices, Shitty Online, and Lack of games/Crappy ports.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']
You are making attributions incorrectly, when it's quite clear that, in the case of Madden, EA had 1.5-2+ years of working with the 360's hardware advantage over the PS3. Sony should have gotten it into their hands sooner, but they didn't. We'll see if these differences remain next year, or if EA and other developers take advantage of the PS3's architecture the same way they do with the Wii.[/QUOTE]

I'm going to cry foul on this one. Everyone forgets that the PS3 was slated to launch alongside the 360 in '05. Developers had system specs to go off of to start developing in early '05. So in fact developers have already had 2.5 years with the PS3, same as 360. They may not have had a final dev kit in hand but if they were planning to launch in '05, games would have already been in development before then.

So in fact, Sony developers had an entire extra year of development for launch. PS3 launch titles should have been comparable to Gears of War. Considering the extra year, it also boggles the mind why PSN is so lacking compared to Live. All they had to do was crib features from a launch 360 and incorporate them into the PS3 over the next year before the PS3 was released.

[quote name='Strell']Don't worry.

6 hours later and they're in the same boat as you.[/QUOTE]

Ouch. I think it's closer to 10 hours though. ;)
 
[quote name='jer7583']I was a big PS1 and PS2 fan, and don't give a shit about PS3. I even like my PSP. I blame Blu-Ray, High Prices, Shitty Online, and Lack of games/Crappy ports.[/quote]
Is this, like, supposed to be a bad thing, or just a poor attempt at gaining that illustrious Sony street cred? :lol:

I don't even want to get involved, but if I were a lesser man, this thread would make me feel shame about owning a PS3. Kind of like a person who would knowingly pay someone to buy ammo to shoot kittens with. Yet here I am, happy as can be, I still haven't thrown it out, sold it to some blind kid ("yeah kid, I swear it's a 360 Core!"), or given it to Goodwill.

Blu-Ray hasn't hurt anyone (I even hear it's selling well), the console's prices have dropped, the online is eons ahead of the Wii's (and that's my Ninny-loving friend's opinion, not mine. Actually after he showed me the Wii channel stuff, I now share his opinion), and the system's only been out for 13 months so did you expect an instant gaming renaissance? The 360 has recently gotten its act together, and it has a few years on Sony.

Everyone has an opinion, I support that. It's just that some of the arguments here are so personal, it makes me think the money you spent on a console is better spent on a therapist. You'd think Sony went to your house, stole your bike, kicked your dog, and fondled your sister. Unless you personally own stock in the company, why do you care so much? If half of you Negative Nelsons even owned a PS3, then you might have a reason to complain (I do, and I don't). Yet so many of you are in the Sony forum. You're either trolling or closet Sonysexuals.

This thread is quite retarded, as it seems to be a haven for several bashing-lurker types who act like flies that only come out when they smell poop. But my shame lies more towards those who like the console, and continue to post in defence here of the PS3. It's those to whom I plead with now: Ignore this thread before you become a tag at the bottom of some :censored: admin's sig.

Now I'm off to use my crappy overpriced non-console to play one of those nonexistent online games and have loads of non-fun. Because that's how we PS3 users ROLL.
 
[quote name='Cthulhu8u']Is this, like, supposed to be a bad thing, or just a poor attempt at gaining that illustrious Sony street cred? :lol:

I don't even want to get involved, but if I were a lesser man, this thread would make me feel shame about owning a PS3. Kind of like a person who would knowingly pay someone to buy ammo to shoot kittens with. Yet here I am, happy as can be, I still haven't thrown it out, sold it to some blind kid ("yeah kid, I swear it's a 360 Core!"), or given it to Goodwill.

Blu-Ray hasn't hurt anyone (I even hear it's selling well), the console's prices have dropped, the online is eons ahead of the Wii's (and that's my Ninny-loving friend's opinion, not mine. Actually after he showed me the Wii channel stuff, I now share his opinion), and the system's only been out for 13 months so did you expect an instant gaming renaissance? The 360 has recently gotten its act together, and it has a few years on Sony.

Everyone has an opinion, I support that. It's just that some of the arguments here are so personal, it makes me think the money you spent on a console is better spent on a therapist. You'd think Sony went to your house, stole your bike, kicked your dog, and fondled your sister. Unless you personally own stock in the company, why do you care so much? If half of you Negative Nelsons even owned a PS3, then you might have a reason to complain (I do, and I don't). Yet so many of you are in the Sony forum. You're either trolling or closet Sonysexuals.

This thread is quite retarded, as it seems to be a haven for several bashing-lurker types who act like flies that only come out when they smell poop. But my shame lies more towards those who like the console, and continue to post in defence here of the PS3. It's those to whom I plead with now: Ignore this thread before you become a tag at the bottom of some :censored: admin's sig.

Now I'm off to use my crappy overpriced non-console to play one of those nonexistent online games and have loads of non-fun. Because that's how we PS3 users ROLL.[/QUOTE]
Amen, brother.
 
[quote name='Corvin']I'm going to cry foul on this one. Everyone forgets that the PS3 was slated to launch alongside the 360 in '05. Developers had system specs to go off of to start developing in early '05. So in fact developers have already had 2.5 years with the PS3, same as 360. They may not have had a final dev kit in hand but if they were planning to launch in '05, games would have already been in development before then.

So in fact, Sony developers had an entire extra year of development for launch. PS3 launch titles should have been comparable to Gears of War. Considering the extra year, it also boggles the mind why PSN is so lacking compared to Live. All they had to do was crib features from a launch 360 and incorporate them into the PS3 over the next year before the PS3 was released.[/quote]

To be fair, though, having the specs =/= having dev kits and the tools on hand, so it's a pretty apples to oranges comparison.

As for PSN, while I am by no means going to defend (much) of it, it's incorrect to say it had an extra year on Live, which has been around for 5 years. XBL is very well integrated overall, and I don't see any shortcomings in the online gaming side (save for in-game friends lists and invites, which, while a huge omission, aren't a critical blow to the PSN's functionality - though they should have been fucking added by now) of the PSN.

I see a huge imbalance in content that makes PSN pale in comparison, but that's something different from the online gaming side. And, also, something Sony should be busting ass trying to reconcile.
 
[quote name='whoknows']
Considering that the PS3 had more big exclusives for the fall/winter than the 360, you should be asking "what's after mass effect and halo?" because that's all the 360 had while the PS3 had Heavenly Sword, Ratchet, Uncharted, Time Crisis 4, and Unreal Tournament 3 this week.[/quote]

I see that you consider Heavenly Sword and Time Crisis 4 to be big seasonal exclusives, despite unspectacular reviews (79 and 62 at Metacritic) and tepid domestic sales. If those count, then why did you leave out Ace Combat 6, Naruto and PGR4 on the 360?
 
[quote name='mykevermin']To be fair, though, having the specs =/= having dev kits and the tools on hand, so it's a pretty apples to oranges comparison.

As for PSN, while I am by no means going to defend (much) of it, it's incorrect to say it had an extra year on Live, which has been around for 5 years. XBL is very well integrated overall, and I don't see any shortcomings in the online gaming side (save for in-game friends lists and invites, which, while a huge omission, aren't a critical blow to the PSN's functionality - though they should have been fucking added by now) of the PSN.

I see a huge imbalance in content that makes PSN pale in comparison, but that's something different from the online gaming side. And, also, something Sony should be busting ass trying to reconcile.[/QUOTE]


Sony [bmg] has more content available on XBL, than they do on PSN. Sony as a whole can't even work together right. I'd love to be able to download music videos, and some movies.
 
I like playing Virtua Fighter 5 online
I like getting the better version of orange box over a month earlier
I like tracking my stats on bungie.net and xbox.com
I like having friends lists that work on all my games
I like using my computer monitor for HD gaming
I like how achivements add value and longevity to my games

Just trying to keep my additions to this thread positive, rather than negative. Those aren't reasons why I hate Sony, they're just reasons why I'll never buy a PS3.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Nope, just a memory device that will hold the tiny lil' driver for the individual Xbox game. A memory card works as fine as a HDD.

Don't get me wrong: only bastards and morons own a 360 with no HDD at all. That's my opinion. But, if those bastards and morons want to play Shenmue II (if they have a hankerin' for a game of "Lucky Hit"), they can do so.[/quote]

You sir, are halfway to convincing me to get a 360. If I wanted to play Halo 3 online, could I still do that without the hard drive? Yes I'm cheap bastard and would get a hdd later but umm yea. Damnit I want my fix of lucky hit.
 
I have a PS3 and owned a PS every generation. I like the PS3, but it's the weakest of the three systems (not technically).

Reasons people probably hate Sony (not a detailed list):

1. Arrogance on Sony's part during their initial marketing campaign.

2. Poor price structure.

3. De-evolution of the PS3 since it came out (old 20 and 60 gigs are superior to the current 40 and 80 gig versions).

4. Poor selection of games.

5. No rumble for the original PS3 controller.

6. One of the two main parties responsible for the current format war between BR and HD-DVD.

7. Uncertain and murky future.

There may be others.
 
Personally I may have held some negative will toward Sony due to their percieved arrogance at the start of this gen, but that's subsiding now.

I think that PS3 was expensive at $600 and initially didn't have enough games out to justify that price, but you can pick one up a lot cheaper now and the really good exclusives are starting to appear, so it looks much more appealing.

I remember in the PS1 days everyone loved Sony, they had bought gaming more into the main stream and we had budget games and fancy 3d graphics. I think with a few more good decisions they could get back to being more popular in gamers eyes.

I don't think it really helps anyone for one company to be completely dominant in the industry. I love my 360 but I want it to have some good competition. I suspect MS could end up evem more arrogant than Sony was if the 360 wins this gen by a long way.
 
[quote name='jer7583']I like playing Virtua Fighter 5 online
I like getting the better version of orange box over a month earlier
I like tracking my stats on bungie.net and xbox.com
I like having friends lists that work on all my games
I like using my computer monitor for HD gaming
I like how achivements add value and longevity to my games

Just trying to keep my additions to this thread positive, rather than negative. Those aren't reasons why I hate Sony, they're just reasons why I'll never buy a PS3.[/QUOTE]

What factual basis do you use to claim that Orange Box is better on the 360? What meangingful, substantive differences are there between the two versions? Do tell indeed.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']What factual basis do you use to claim that Orange Box is better on the 360? What meangingful, substantive differences are there between the two versions? Do tell indeed.[/QUOTE]

I believe the frame rate is the issue, as it's been stated in a few podcasts. No reviews yet.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']What factual basis do you use to claim that Orange Box is better on the 360? What meangingful, substantive differences are there between the two versions? Do tell indeed.[/quote]

News stories picked up on early builds of the Orange Box for the PS3 having nigh unplayable framerate issues with HL2.. and I think some of the other ones..?: http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/action/halflife2episode2/news.html?sid=6183470

Also, Valve outsourced the development of the PS3 version, because they got sick of trying to get it to run well on the PS3. Valve doesn't give two shits about the quality of the PS3 version. EA is finishing it up:
http://www.joystiq.com/2007/11/25/ps3-version-of-orange-box-might-be-downright-unplayable/

As the PC and Xbox 360 versions have no framerate issues, one COULD say it is superior to the PS3 version.
 
I'll wait for reviews and personal opinions of the final released version, thanks, instead of taking the word of a preview build as gospel truth.

Though better frame rate is better frame rate indeed, I wonder how many of you tended to buy each and every multiplatform title on the Xbox last generation, given the tendency to have progressive scan/HD output (back when 480p was "HD"), and the reduced load times due to HDD cacheing. Very few of you, I bet, given that the PS2 versions of most games sold like free sex on a plate when compared to the Xbox/GC counterparts - even when the Xbox counterparts were demonstrably better.

Y'all ever buy a PS2 Splinter Cell? Yowza. Now there's a world of difference: the content of the game is different because of the technology. It makes this "frame rate" nonsense look like you're just searching for something to hate about the PS3, and the best you can come up with is "nyah nyah 30FPS!"

If HL2 is unplayable, I'll make a half concession, but not a full one. Some of you (not BattleChicken and Corvin) bring up Madden 08's 30FPS like it's the new Genesis Mortal Kombat, and not the same fuckin' game running at a decent FPS, the differences in which are only noticeable when you pair the exact same frames side by side and run them in slow motion. At which point you're no longer a gamer and, instead, just a twat. :lol:
 
[quote name='mykevermin']To be fair, though, having the specs =/= having dev kits and the tools on hand, so it's a pretty apples to oranges comparison.

[/QUOTE]

I'm aware that they are different. All I'm saying is that there had to be some games in development in early '05 at that point to make a fall launch. So by the time dev kits finally rolled around, all that would be needed was some tweaking and polish to go with the final specs. So those games in dev. '05 had an extra year to be perfected for launch. Same with the hardware. It's not like Sony was sitting on their asses that first year the 360 was out. It was a bonus year to perfect things.

Oh well, not a huge issue, just one I always get hung up on. :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top