nightsurge said: Ok now I know MikeB is crazy... he thinks the Blu-Ray drive on the PS3 reads faster on average than a 360 DVD drive.... Lol, as his "proof" for the PS3 blu-ray drive being somehow faster, he provides a quote from himself with an awful lot of IMO's and no actual evidence.

 

The Blu-ray drive is the PS3 is substantially slower than the DVD drive in the 360. That's a simple fact, one that should have no debate. However, Sony has waged a successful campaign of misinformation on that issue, and has somehow managed to convince people otherwise. Most people just don't have the technical background to understand the issue, so when Sony compares transfer rates to "prove" the PS3's drive is just as fast, people eat it right up.

(The truth is that the transfer rates aren't the problem and never were; the problem is the seek time, aka random access time. The 360's drive has a seek time of a little over 100ms, while the PS3's drive has a seek time of well over 300ms. This is why the PS3 has so many games with mandatory installs: caching data to the hard drive isn't done to improve maximum transfer rates, it's done to improve seek times. It's also why some developers have used duplicated data on Blu-ray discs: it reduces the number of data seeks required to load a scene, minimizing the effect of the bottleneck.)

@MikeB

Why do you care so much about disc capacity and all this crap. I have seen you say the same things over and over now.

Also, while we are on the topic of you, which system did you favor in the last generation? Looking at your game collection it would appear that you only owned the ps2. You are always talking about how the ps3 is technically superior and how you like the more reliable system. However, last generation the tables were completly reversed. The Xbox was the more powerful and more reliable system while the ps2 was inferior and plagued with reliability issues. Has your view on gaming switched this generation to match Sony's philosophy?

@ gergroy

Like I said, I'm a tech enthusiast.



No I didn't own a PS2, but I bought some PS2 games which I thought were interesting for my PS3. I was mainly a PC gamer before this gen.



To me the original XBox was more like a cut down PC, as I already owned a much more powerful PC and I thought the XBox was very ugly the XBox was of no interest to me. IMO the specs the previous gen were a lot closer between consoles and they were all pretty weak.

Times have changed though, the PC has much more taken the backseat. Most games I was interested in in the past would usually hit the PC first, now they usually hit the consoles first or aren't even released for the PC at all.

MikeB said: @ MikeB Why do you care so much about disc capacity Like I said, I'm a tech enthusiast. Also, while we are on the topic of you, which system did you favor in the last generation? Looking at your game collection it would appear that you only owned the ps2. No I didn't own a PS2, but I bought some PS2 games which I thought were interesting for my PS3. I was mainly a PS3 gamer before this gen. The Xbox was the more powerful To me the original XBox was more like a cut down PC to me, as I already owned a much more powerful PC and I thought the XBox was very ugly the XBox was of no interest to me. IMO the specs the previous gen were a lot closer between consoles and they were all pretty weak. Times have changed though, the PC has much more taken the backseat. Most games I was interested in in the past would usually hit the PC first, now they usually hit the consoles first or aren't even released for the PC at all.

Ehm??? You had a PS3 before it came out??? xD

 

@ NiKKoM

Thanks, typo corrected.

"Times have changed though, the PC has much more taken the backseat. Most games I was interested in in the past would usually hit the PC first, now they usually hit the consoles first or aren't even released for the PC at all."

In the past PCs were leading, not always the IBM compatibles (which sucked at gaming and pretty much everything else as well during the 80s), there was also the Amiga.

Nowadays the PC is lagging behind with regard to common technology as well, namely Blu-Ray disc and heavy multi-processing (the Cell). Considering the support and large userbase, the PS3 has become by far the most interesting gaming solution to me.

Grown up with the Amiga, I always disliked the inefficiency of Windows, Windowa software development and legacy compatibility related trade-offs (such as MSDOS and x86).

A console provides the perfect oppertunity to lead frog and ignore such problems like Ken did, so that's also a reason why the PS3 is so interesting to me.

@ NiKKoM

Come to think of it, I was a 360 gamer last gen for a short while until it broke. So I put the 360 above the PS2, the currently still most widely used available games console.

IMO this gen really started with Killzone 2 from a technical perspective and regarding mass consumer sales this gen really starts with the release of a slimline PS3.

@ kowenicki

Calm down, I said only technically. One of my all-time favourites is Super Mario World on the Snes, I am not saying you can't create great impressive games with past technology. Great PS3 games like MGS4, Uncharted, LittleBigPlanet, Motorstorm: Pacific Rift, etc were all released before Killzone 2.

Take note of the winks.

MikeB said: @ NiKKoM Ehm??? You had a PS3 before it came out??? xD Come to think of it, I was a 360 gamer last gen for a short while until it broke. So I put the 360 above the PS2, the currently still most widely used available games console. IMO this gen really started with Killzone 2 from a technical perspective and regarding mass consumer sales this gen really starts with the release of a slimline PS3.

Lol.. by then the hardcore is already in the next gen... and 200 million current gen people have a Wii..

 

MikeB said: "Times have changed though, the PC has much more taken the backseat. Most games I was interested in in the past would usually hit the PC first, now they usually hit the consoles first or aren't even released for the PC at all." In the past PCs were leading, not always the IBM compatibles (which sucked at gaming and pretty much everything else as well during the 80s), there was also the Amiga. Nowadays the PC is lagging behind with regard to common technology as well, namely Blu-Ray disc and heavy multi-processing (the Cell). Considering the support and large userbase, the PS3 has become by far the most interesting gaming solution to me. Grown up with the Amiga, I always disliked the inefficiency of Windows, Windowa software development and legacy compatibility related trade-offs (such as MSDOS and x86). A console provides the perfect oppertunity to lead frog and ignore such problems like Ken did, so that's also a reason why the PS3 is so interesting to me.

Advances in living room technology also played part in this. For example great 7.1 channel audio (PC speaker sets, even those claiming to be 5.1 are really just 2.1 sets with additional speakers), large screen 1080p HDTVs, fast wireless Wi-Fi internet connection, being able to use many multiple wireless gamepads simultaneously, etc.

The PS3 serves my comfort desires much better than modern gaming PCs from such perspectives as well. I would never put a noisy high spec gaming PC in my living room. I do use my laptop in the living room, but that's no joy and pretty low spec for gaming.