PS3 as blu-ray player: "for the money, it can't be beat" - CNNMoney review

[gebx]

Loud_Hot_White_Box said:

gebx said:

Loud_Hot_White_Box said:

goddog said:
when did people claim its a subpar blue ray player? i had always heard it was one of if not the best on the market.... and that was one reason the ps3 cost so much

 

most recent example was uber-fanboy kowenicki, here (and did the OP imply it, too?  failed to check..):

 

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=48843&page=1

 

He's not stating the PS3 is a subpar player, he's just stating new Blu Ray players coming out have better specs...

Nice attempted save after reading a bit further.

He said, "as there are many many blu ray players with better spec and output quality than the PS3".  Are there many many many many players out there, such that PS3 is behind many many of them but not subpar?  Nitpick that, nitpicker.

And, funny that you were in the original thread but failed to correct others that also thought kowenicki was claiming that PS3 wasn't a good blu-ray option even though in fact PS3 is consistently the best option or nearly so.  Yet, here, after making yourself look like an ass with your first post, now you want to say that kowenicki was being misinterpreted.  But he said there 1) ARE 2) MANY MANY blu-ray players with better spec and output quality than the PS3.  Sound right to you?  Does it sound like he's saying that new blu-ray players coming out have better specs?

Plus, when he said "entry level you meant to say" in his first post, he implied that the PS3 was entry-level quality.  Let me guess, entry level is not subpar?  Dig yourself deeper.

 

 

I never bothered correcting Kowenicki because I didn't interpret his comment as him saying the PS3 was a subpar Blu Ray player.

Unlike you I don't bother analysing his every word, adjective, adverb, etc...