Playstation has always been tarnished in my eyes. The release of the first generation PS1 systems that overheated (which made me put off Sony for the rest of my life). The DVD drive problems of the first generation PS2. They have failed to show me a quality system.
WereKitten said:
While most past multiplatform games have been proven to perform better on the 360 when you compare them side-to-side, they are usually so close as to offer the same experience to the gamer if you just happen to play them on their own. The end line is always that exclusives make all the difference, and given their quality I bet that exclusives make for much more than 10% of most PS3 owners. I for one only own exclusives, though I could grab a used copy of RE5 in the future. And not because I don't buy multiplatforms, but simply because the lineup of exclusive games was the best for my tastes and - I bet - for those of many others. I'd be glad if Capcom made a better effort with their engine on the PS3, but meanwhile I can live with slightly worse shadows in RE5, but playing Uncharted, MGS4 and LBP. Because i can't do that on the 360, it makes the PS3 100% worthwhile, you see. And for my $400 I got wireless, HDD, free online gaming and a top-tier Blu-Ray player, so it was also cost-effective against building up the setup I wanted on a 360. As you see, what is worthwhile and what is redundant is all a matter of perspective. By the way, I'd be curious to know how exactly half of PS3's exclusives could be considered terrible. The only one that comes to mind is Lair, really. Back to OP: In a sense, yes, that's the whole point of MS' adventuring into the console market, and they accomplished their goal. The utter dominance that Sony had last generation ended, and we're back to what has always been true, ie that there are several big players in the field. I wonder how young is anybody who finds Sony not being the end-all brand for a console so baffling. Sony was not a big name in gaming a few generations ago. |
I agree I am 40 and remeber the Atari (that was total domiance), Nintendo (SNES and super SNES) and then Sony (PS1, PS2). I guess for me I thought Sony would finally pull off the trifecta with the PS3.
PS3, WII and 360 all great systems depends on what type of console player you are.
Currently playing Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2, Fallout 3, Halo ODST and Dragon Age Origins is next game
Xbox live:mywiferocks
| xman said: Let me start by saying I do not want to start a PS3 bashing thread especially since I am going to be taking the plunge and buying a PS3 in the next few weeks (come on PRICE CUT or maybe a nice KZ2 bundle in America). We all know both MS and Sony made mistakes this generation and I would argue that Sony made more and bigger ones but I think the bigeest issue for Sony long term is now is not just prices, its image. At the start of the generation all my fruends and me said we are getting a PS3, I have watched as more and more peeled away from the PS3 to either xbox (most) and WII (many). Even in the last 12 months if you would have asked a 100 people which system they would want I would say 60% would have said PS3. This was to do with perception, people thought it was better and would have the better games at some stage. I do think the PS3 is finally hitting stride this year hence why I will get one once the price cut comes. My argument is at one time the Playstation brand was untouchable, and after these past three years I have watched in go from reverance down to on par with the Xbox. Do you think long term the mistakes the PS made will hurt them next gen? I prsonally do! I think next gen people will not say like I did this gen, "I am getting a PS4" they will say lets look to see what xbox and Nintendo will look like cause the PS brand is no longer what it was? Your thoughts?
|
If you mean moved from ps2 to x360/wii, then I'd agree but the way this is worded sound like people bought ps3s then sold them to get 360s/wiis instead which I'd have to disagree with.
The gen was totally unpredictable. Only nintendo would really benefit from preassumers becasue thats still the only machine they'd be playing mario and zelda on and they'll probably still be leading the casual movement.
"Dr. Tenma, according to you, lives are equal. That's why I live today. But you must have realised it by now...the only thing people are equal in is death"---Johann Liebert (MONSTER)
"WAR is a racket. It always has been.
It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives"---Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler
| perpride said: I generally think this is the last generation that I bought all the consoles on launch. Why? Four letters: RROD. I fail to see what the OP is getting at. I think the best thing to happen to Nintendo is the "tarnishing" of the PS brand...but I fail to see how MS has capitalized on this at all (in comparison to Nintendo). They managed to snatch some exclusives and make some go multiplat - fair enough - but it is Nintendo that is truly reaping the benifits here. The PS brand remains strong and could make a comeback for all we know. Don't forget that Nintendo is dominating right now after N64 and Cube being under 20% market share. |
Though I agree Nintendo has captilized on the sucess I would say MS benefited more. Nintendo has always had a VERY STRONG brand and recognition even with the gamecube....LOL. I think the WII would be successful even without Sony's mistakes. I think if Sony had not made those mistakes they probanly would have dominated the hardcore and HD market and fbeat the Xbox enough that this would have been its last generation. Hence my orginal posting that MS benefited the most.
PS3, WII and 360 all great systems depends on what type of console player you are.
Currently playing Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2, Fallout 3, Halo ODST and Dragon Age Origins is next game
Xbox live:mywiferocks
Pristine20 said:
If you mean moved from ps2 to x360/wii, then I'd agree but the way this is worded sound like people bought ps3s then sold them to get 360s/wiis instead which I'd have to disagree with. The gen was totally unpredictable. Only nintendo would really benefit from preassumers becasue thats still the only machine they'd be playing mario and zelda on and they'll probably still be leading the casual movement.
|
Yes to the above I meant from PS2 to Xbox 360/WII. I do not mean selling there PS3's for the 360. I agree this gen was unpredicatable but if you asked me three years ago I would have said PS3, Ninetendo and MS far behind.
PS3, WII and 360 all great systems depends on what type of console player you are.
Currently playing Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2, Fallout 3, Halo ODST and Dragon Age Origins is next game
Xbox live:mywiferocks
antfromtashkent said:
Sony has only been losing 3 years out of 9... Sorry just a bit of a correction there |
If you want to get technical then Nintendo didn't lose all of the 90s either.
Er tanrish ? The PS2 is at what 120-130 million , PSP at 45 million and PS3 at 21 million.
That's combined sales of as much as 196 million playstation consoles , I mention the PS2 because it is still a somewhat relevant console.
Playstation boasts some of the best 1st party exclusives of any consoles ,God Of War , GT5 , Killzone ... I can't even be bothered but you get the idea.
If you have said "limit" , or "slow growth" then i'd agree but do you even understand the meaning of tarnish ? basicaly it's to destroy or to take it's virtue or goodness away , that just hasn't happened to the playstation brand.
| WereKitten said: hile most past multiplatform games have been proven to perform better on the 360 when you compare them side-to-side, they are usually so close as to offer the same experience to the gamer if you just happen to play them on their own. |
Past and present. Doesn't matter now, all people will know is that by the end of this gen, if the game is multiplatform it will run better on Xbox consoles (a 10 year truth) , it's all in word of mouth. There's really no logical reason to buy the PS3 version because it's inferior, thus there's really no reason to buy a PS3 for a multiplatform game when it will run better on the cheaper Xbox.
| WereKitten said: The end line is always that exclusives make all the difference, |
Not really, there isn't a PS3 exclusive as "big" as Assassins Creed, GTAIV or CoD4 or CoD: WaW, let alone numerous enough to really make a difference.
WereKitten said:
I for one only own exclusives, |
And there's the crux of problem, people buy 360s for exclusives and multiplatform games, PS3 only for exclusives. Xbox 360 has replaced the PS3 as the "go to" console for HD games, there's no distinction whether it's exclusive or not. PS3 is the console to get for HD games that aren't on 360, which are few.
| WereKitten said: I'd be glad if Capcom made a better effort with their engine on the PS3 |
You can only take the PS3 tech so far before it hits the wall, you can't pour a 5 gallon game into 4 gallons of hardware without losing something.
| WereKitten said:
but meanwhile I can live with slightly worse shadows in RE5, but playing Uncharted, MGS4 and LBP. |
Meanwhile Xbox 360 owners can play RE5 at full graphics power and play Gears of War 2, PGR4 and Halo 3.
| WereKitten said:
Because i can't do that on the 360, it makes the PS3 100% worthwhile, you see |
But you can't play those 360 games on PS3 or a superior copy of RE5, so since the 360 can that makes it 200% worthwhile and at costing haf the price of a PS3, really makes it 400% worthwhile.
| WereKitten said:
And for my $400 I got wireless, HDD, free online gaming and a top-tier Blu-Ray player, so it was also cost-effective against building up the setup I wanted on a 360. |
Perhaps for you, but then you don't speak for everyone, if you did PS3 exclusives would sell systems, but they don't, not nearly as well as the annual CoD sells Xbox's. The market knows what it wants and most of the time, it isn't exclusive to PS3.
| WereKitten said:
As you see, what is worthwhile and what is redundant is all a matter of perspective. |
If you have an extremely narrow view, if you look at the broadly - like the market does - Uncharted 2 won't mean **** next to the best version of Madden 2010.
| WereKitten said:
By the way, I'd be curious to know how exactly half of PS3's exclusives could be considered terrible. The only one that comes to mind is Lair, really. |
Easy, take every PS3 exclusive currently out. (Retail games only)
Arrange them by aggregate review score/sales (sales more favourably)
Remove the bottom 50%, they are worthless.
The next 40% are forgettable
The remaining 10% are the only games that could affect console sales.
at the guy who bought the 60gb, i have a 20 (upgraded to 250 :D) and it has full BC
Currently own:
Currently playing: Witcher 3, Walking Dead S1/2, GTA5, Dying Light, Tomb Raider Remaster, MGS Ground Zeros
I don't think the PS brand has been tarnished. Except to a very select few who take the time to read internet forums.
Honestly if Sony could get it's marketing up to par with Nintendo and Microsoft then we wouldn't be having this thread. Sony only made one mistake they hadn't made before.*Everything else is true of all of their systems so far,**it's simply that Microsoft and Nintendo have done far more and better advertising this generation.
*Price tag
** Exception the PS3 being reliable
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
