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

Forums - Sony - Solid proof the PS3 is a better system

Alic0004 on 11 April 2009

Finally they've unearthed the sony fanboy reeducation videos. You just need to record someone reading it quickly and dub that over disturbing pictures of 360s blowing up and household pets impaled by wiimotes and you'll have the complete experience.



 

Around the Network
Domicinator on 11 April 2009

If anything, recent news stories from actual game developers (not fanboys) have shown that all things considered, the two consoles are pretty equally powered.




Alic0004 on 11 April 2009
Domicinator said:
If anything, recent news stories from actual game developers (not fanboys) have shown that all things considered, the two consoles are pretty equally powered.

 

   If you're talking past couple months recently, it seems like there's been a lot of the opposite going on.  Killzone 2 being released, CryEngine looking a bit better on PS3...  CryEngine developers saying things would run a bit better on PS3, I think.  I can't remember any developers recently saying there's pretty much no difference?

 

    Of course, it could all just be a temporary leap forward which Microsoft or a third party will quickly match.  I wouldn't presume to guess.



 

Infinity on 12 April 2009

Ganbare_Goemon said:
This is just a big, ridiculous joke. I prefer to think this way.

I think the PS3 is, actually, one of the *worst* consoles ever. I have some "proofs":

- It was released one year after the 360, with the promise to bring graphics that no one could even imagine. More than 2 years later, it still didn't show anything better than 360 could do. And if your opinion says some games couldn't run on the 360, you must admit the difference is almost null. I think just this reason is enough.

Killzone 2

 

- It is very expensive, just because of a Blu-Ray drive wich still doesn't make ANY difference for games.

You get what you pay for. I do not like swapping discs!

 

- It has been losing most of its exclusive titles for 360 and even the Wii.

I have dozens of games and the majority are PS3 exclusives.

 

- The so called High Definition gaming is translated into a just a few games that can run 1080p.

Your point? Zero 360 and Wii titles run at 1080p. Some running at 1080p on PS3 is better than none.

 

- It managed to instantly ruin Sony's gaming division, coming from a record-breaking market share to what we can consider a failure (judging by sales difference).

Irrelevent. Some of the best consoles ever made were not the best selling.

 

Now, Sony Fanboys still dream that someday the PS3 will use its "full power". All I can say is: wouldn't it have been better if it showed more power from the beginning? I mean, when (and if) it reaches its "full potential", Pc gaming will be so much powerful (already is, PS3 was never better) it won't even be noticed, except for some people who will say :"Wow, if only the PS3 launch titles were like this". For me, the will to see producers making use of PS3's full power two or three years from now seems as exciting as if I somehow discovered gold on the moon and someone told me I would be able to go there and get it when I'm 70 yr old.

I mean, wasn't the PS3 all about the graphical power? Well, there has always been something better on PC. Does anyone think the PS3 would be able to run Crysis?

Why not?

 

 



Infinity on 12 April 2009
richardhutnik said:
Infinity said:
numonex said:
The same nonsense has been made up all the time by different people for the past three years.

To most people PS3 looks equal to X360 in regards to game graphics.

Anyway the author of the article has to justify his/her extra money they forked out for PS3 which plays 90% of the games library on the XBox 360.

I'm not the author, but only 44% of the games in my PS3 library are also available on the 360. The majority are simply not available on 360.

 

Yes, you can hit the weak point for maximum damage on the PS3. I do assume you are excluding Live Community games from your comments also.

What matters is WHAT games are played that people want to play, not sheer numbers. The fact that the 360 has more exclusives than the PS3 due to Community Games, doesn't mean these games are a deciding factor in which system to get.

 

 

I'm not sure what you mean, I said that most of my library were PS3 exclusives, not 360 multiplatform games. I was including games available on XBox Live in that figure though. Even including downloadables, the majority are PS3 exclusives.



Around the Network
Infinity on 12 April 2009
CAL4M1TY said:
Infinity said:
numonex said:
The same nonsense has been made up all the time by different people for the past three years.

To most people PS3 looks equal to X360 in regards to game graphics.

Anyway the author of the article has to justify his/her extra money they forked out for PS3 which plays 90% of the games library on the XBox 360.

I'm not the author, but only 44% of the games in my PS3 library are also available on the 360. The majority are simply not available on 360.

 

 

and a even lower percentage of the games in the Wii library are also available on the PS3. Wii is more powerful than PS3 confirmed?

I don't get your point.

Does that mean that Halo 3, Ninja Gaiden II, Halo Wars, Forza, Gears of War 1 and 2 aren't possible on the PS3?

Also, nice use of the in MY ps3 library.


Hell, if I owned just uncharted, I could say that 100% of my library is not available on the 360.

 

The point is that most of the PS3's best games are exclusives. numonex was arguing that you could play the best games on 360 also, so having a PS3 is a waste of money. This is simply not true.



WarmachineX on 12 April 2009

thank you dr. vaio for that very informative article.

now, what are you thoughts on global warming? and can the ps3 help in anyway?





Official member of the Xbox 360 Squad

Squilliam on 12 April 2009
Wii_R2_Hardcore said:
haxxiy said:
Wii_R2_Hardcore said:
Better=More expensive?

 

 Wii is more expensive than the X360. PS3 is more expensive than both. My PC, for example, was more expensive than the three consoles combined. Thus, I think the "Better=More expensive" statement is right.

I will correct myself:

More stuff=more expensive (This is what this guy is saying)

The Ps3 may have more things and according to your logic, you are correct when you state that the system which you can stuff more things, and therefor is better, is the PC.

But...

More stuff =/= better

The Wii is better FOR ME and my family (please do not start another fan battle over my opinion) because gives me EXACTLY what I need and want. No more, no less. I don't need most of the things Sony is trying to sell me along with the PS3. And I certainly don't need another class of technological elitism in the name of fun.

If I won a free PS3 on some lottery, I would probably keep it. But then my wife and kid won't use it. So is 400 dollars devoted only to my entertainment. The Wii was 250/3= 83.33 for every person in my house.

So for me (again just an opinion) and my family the Wii is the best because...

(Not more stuff) Better is = More fun for more people in exchange of less money

That I would call it solid proof.

 

 

 

 

 

LIES! You said you have a wife and kids, thats a minimum of four!!!

 



Tease.

JRPG on 12 April 2009

Troll topic, flame bait, etc



Squilliam on 12 April 2009
Infinity said:

Ganbare_Goemon said:
This is just a big, ridiculous joke. I prefer to think this way.

I think the PS3 is, actually, one of the *worst* consoles ever. I have some "proofs":

- It was released one year after the 360, with the promise to bring graphics that no one could even imagine. More than 2 years later, it still didn't show anything better than 360 could do. And if your opinion says some games couldn't run on the 360, you must admit the difference is almost null. I think just this reason is enough.

Killzone 2

And the PS3 cannot run Kameo, so its moot.

 

- It is very expensive, just because of a Blu-Ray drive wich still doesn't make ANY difference for games.

You get what you pay for. I do not like swapping discs!

Get a PC, do a no disc crack for all your games. It will make you very happy. Also get rid of the DVD/CD collection and use a media centre PC.

 

- It has been losing most of its exclusive titles for 360 and even the Wii.

I have dozens of games and the majority are PS3 exclusives.

 There are over a dozen exclusives worth owning? You must have a lot of games.

- The so called High Definition gaming is translated into a just a few games that can run 1080p.

Your point? Zero 360 and Wii titles run at 1080p. Some running at 1080p on PS3 is better than none.

Very few titles on the PS3 actually run at 1920/1080. 90% of those are PSN games...

 

- It managed to instantly ruin Sony's gaming division, coming from a record-breaking market share to what we can consider a failure (judging by sales difference).

Irrelevent. Some of the best consoles ever made were not the best selling.

Market share = game library

 

Now, Sony Fanboys still dream that someday the PS3 will use its "full power". All I can say is: wouldn't it have been better if it showed more power from the beginning? I mean, when (and if) it reaches its "full potential", Pc gaming will be so much powerful (already is, PS3 was never better) it won't even be noticed, except for some people who will say :"Wow, if only the PS3 launch titles were like this". For me, the will to see producers making use of PS3's full power two or three years from now seems as exciting as if I somehow discovered gold on the moon and someone told me I would be able to go there and get it when I'm 70 yr old.

I mean, wasn't the PS3 all about the graphical power? Well, there has always been something better on PC. Does anyone think the PS3 would be able to run Crysis?

Why not?

512 MB ram total, low spec GPU?

 

 

 

 



Tease.