By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - PS3: It Only does Disappointment

PS3/Sony hate articles and threads seems to be popping up almost on a daily basis =/



You are the answer to every prayer I've offered.

You are a song, a dream, a whisper, and I don't know how I could have lived without you for as long as I have.

Around the Network

This guy is a dumbie.iam a proud ps3 owner and will own a ps4.



VITA 32 GIG CARD.250 GIG SLIM & 160 GIG PHAT PS3

There were many problems with ps3 version of Skyrim, but I would say that the amount of enjoyment greatly outweighed the frustration, so looking back, I don't see it as a very big problem, because I still got a couple hundred hours of enjoyment out of the game.



 Been away for a bit, but sneaking back in.

Gaming on: PS4, PC, 3DS. Got a Switch! Mainly to play Smash

kowenicki said:
It's just some guy and his opinion. Who cares.

You can bet if his conclusion had been the opposite though then this thread would be very different.

Nah, he should've just trashed the Wii U instead and it would've been 6 pages already.



So if I understand this correctly.. if windows crash on my PC.. its my PC's fault? K Got it!



Around the Network

I can understand this article's claims being made during the beginning of this generation, but to be saying such today is downright false. I went through a major conflict with myself 2 years ago, due to being an owner of both, deciding which console I wanted to be my primary for multiplatform titles. SR2, GTA4, RSV2, GRAW2, Endwar, COD: WoW, COD4, Dead Space, Battlefield: BC, Fallout 3, Fallout: New Vegas, RE5, AC, I played both versions of many titles, and it has taught me that there are minor differences between the two, none of which clarify better or worse. The most common difference that I spotted was the PS3 versions typically have more detailed textures, while the Xbox 360 version has better AA. Decide for yourself which of the two is more important to you. But this article was clearly bias, especially considering Xbox 360 was doing a far better job with exclusives earlier this generation than they have been recently, and the PS3 is doing far better with exclusives today than they were earlier this generation.



Kresnik said:
DraconianAC said:

Honestly, I do understand your frustration, de-activating systems just to add new ones is frustrating.  But look at it objectively.  Allowing account sharing between 2 consoles is still 1 more than either of the competition allows.  And when the limit was 5 (which is used to be), it was mayhem with 5 people just pooling their resources into one account and sharing the game between them.  The system in place now may be annoying compared to what it used to be, but it's still objectively fairer than anything else and it makes a lot more sense.


I'm not upset about de-activating all my systems. I'm upset that Sony limited the applications too. Do you really think it's right for Sony to say that you can only have the youtube, skype, etc. on two hand held consoles? Limiting the downloading of games is fine, I get it; however, you don't want to minimize the experience to the customer by passing harsh limits. This should be especially true when you are trying to sell a new console(piece of hardware). You want people to be pleased with the experience, not get pissed of from little policies like these.



Its a somewhat one sided view on this article.

Sony can hardly be blamed for the way developers seem to make their games for the 360 and port them to the PS3 with issues (same thing applies to the Wii U). They are to blame on the architecture they chose, but thats a critique that should be left to developers and shouldnt be transfered to consumers.
With that said, he forgets an important aspect. Microsoft is making you bleed money every year on Xbox live, and Sony offers you free games for the same fee, besides not blocking online gaming. That alone trumps all other minor issues the console might have with ports. A bit of frame rate loss never killed anyone. For example KOTOR on XBOX always had terrible frame-rate dips, yet it was a brilliant game.

 

So its occasinal frame rate loss VS Not having to pay a yearly fee to play online OR Paying a fee and getting periodic free games.

 

I know wich one im going for. Only Nintendo presents an option to me. Microsoft can go to hell with their Live fee for all i care. Never gave them one dime for online play, and never will. I will  most probably not buy the next Xbox cause of it.



@thismeintiel

Yeah you got me with that last comment. I am obviously not a team player. I know it is probably going to be a tough concept for you to grasp, but I don't follow orders, or take my lead from the crowd. I speak my mind, and I stand up for the truth as I see it. I am not some kind of bit player in your proxy pseudo console war. I am actually a person that speaks his own mind whether it is the popular thing to do or not. The truth is my only agenda.

I would like to compliment you on side stepping my point, and going for a change of subject. I would like to, but I won't. It was painfully transparent, and frankly it was a bit disappointing. Granted you didn't have much of a point to begin with, but to double down on a point that was already discredited. That is just plain sad.

As for the authors article. Your right I do think it was well written. It was a structurally sound work. Overall the narrative was cohesive, logical, factual, thoughtful, and wasn't hyperbolic in its presentation. Not agreeing with the argument he put forth. Doesn't justify dismissing the way he made his case. You need to learn a little bit about respecting other people. Even if you do not respect their point of view. You can attack the argument that he laid out, but that doesn't mean it is right to attack the man.

There was nothing particularly obscene about this article. Had it been any other subject. I am reasonably certain that a lot of people here would have treated him with more respect. It wasn't even as if he were promoting some kind of dark ideology, or adopting a terrifying stance. He said he was going with this brand, and these are his own reasons for doing so. The way some here were acting you would think he was promoting the idea of launching cute little kittens out of a catapult.

There is something to be said for being dispassionate when presenting a argument. The obscenity is in your head. We need to stop feeding into this whole zealot mindset on these forums. There is a actually a difference between light banter, and trying to inflict serious harm. Nobody rushing to his defense isn't a cue to you to give into your baser instincts. Your still accountable for your own behavior. Even if nobody is calling you on it.

He obviously put a lot of time, effort, and careful thought into what he was saying. The least you can do is pay him the respect he deserves for putting himself out there. Like I said you don't have to agree with the argument he made, but you should practice a little courtesy when considering or debating the points he made. Do you like to be treated like you were a joke. I think you probably wouldn't care for it. So why treat someone else like that.

If nobody else has the decency to defend the man. I sure as well will. I don't like bullies, and I sure as hell don't like lynch mobs.



I own a 360 but the only really good ones are the slim



<:::::[]=