By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
richardhutnik on 05 March 2013
Edit Thread
Kyuu said:
richardhutnik said:
Kyuu said:
Wright said:
Kyuu said:


X360 had an entire year headstart and cost less so what did you expect? MS was too desperate that they released an incomplete X360 (No wifi, no HDMI out, no mandatory HDD) just to compete. And let's not speak about the embarrassing failure rate at the first few years.


But isn't that double-edged? Sony released an overprice console that were supossed to sell based only on the name. It was not until some price cuts and additions when they started winning market share. Both parts did horrible when releasing their consoles.


The PS3 never added/removed anything important. It cost much because it had a built in BluRay drive. And they were selling at great losses so you should be grateful.

Backwards compatibility and number of USB ports is not important?  Did you just seriously write that?

It would also be nice if companies game out t-shirts to individuals obsessing over what place their console of choice showed up in the end as far as sales.  This way, they would get something of value for their useless harping and obsessing.

If you bought your PS3 at launch. You get a FULL console, you don't have to pay once in a while for a different add on. That never was Microsoft's way, they stealth-milk their customers (at least I felt so as an X360 owner) and I found it hard to appreicate.

Do you honestly believe that MS weren't aware of the hardware issues like RROD? Do you think they didn't know that at one point in time, HDMI, wifi, and Hardrive will be needed? I personally see Microsoft are more obsessed with money, they don't even allow custom HDDs to work on their console so you can buy their own accessories (the wireless network adapter cost 200 dollars in Australia back in 2008) And they charge you for online gaming.

The Xbox 360 was released incomplete, deal with it. You're kidding yourself if you think removing 2 USB ports is equivalent to Microsoft's changes. Sony did make huge mistakes by pricing the console too high and giving it too many features including PS2 compatibility. They were over confident. But they tried everything they can to keep their customers satisfied, even through serious financial crisis. I don't believe that was the case with Microsoft as they knew very well what they were doing from the beginning. And they got the money yet their greed is unmatched.

I'm not stopping you from believing whatever you wish so why are you upset? I'm anything you want me to be, good sir.

Seriously guy, you said NO important features were removed.  Yes they were.  If you want to run 4 controllers on the PS4, only 2 USB ports is an issue here, with recharging and so on.  And for some backwards compatibility IS an issue.  It was removed.  Stop saying that they aren't, when the are for some.

The fact you mention the XBox 360 in response to what I wrote, means you have console partisan mindness in mind, and took what I said and turned in into a fanboy war.  You had to bring in the XBox 360 and its "incomplete features" to make the removal of features on the PS3 look important.  You did this, not I.  You see this as a PS3 vs 360 issue, when it isn't.  It is two sore points about it.  Actually, for me, I did go out and buy a 60 GB backwards compatible PS3 when it was at $500, because backwards compatibility mattered to me, and allowed me to get rid of my PS2.  it was important.  Just like now, the PS4 not being able to play PS3 games native has me thinking of not getting a PS3 again.  I got rid of the PS3 because I needed money and went and got a PS2.

 My last line, by the way, was in general about this thread, and rather than stick it in another post, I posted it here.