13 controllers in total via USB

Interesting read about some PS3 stuff. Most interestingly he says that although th PS3 can only handle 7 wireless controllers it can support more by USB. this makes me think that the controller must have a USB port on it as well.

The question is... why? Completely pointless if you ask me. Split screen that many times is just stupid even with a huge big screen. Also even if all the characters are on the screen at once like in a sports game, that' s still too many people and it' s an odd number of players. I think Sony just wanted to say " We have more ports than the other 2 consoles combined making us twice as powerful! Muhahahahaha!"

Sony is just trying to pack every single little doohicky they can into that George Foreman(it' s not a game console mind you) and they don' t even care how functional it is as long as it has big numbers.

I agree 13 is silly although 8 I could see. NOt split screen mind you, but perhaps in games like mario party(or the PS3 equiv if they make one.) Also if they are trying to make this friendly to everybody, perhaps this machine along with the x-box360 and revolution will usher in a new genre of game that will utilize more controllers. To expand to a broader audience, I could see party games like Taboo, Scategories, Cranium, and Trivial Pursuit being adapted for home consoles, and taking advantage of multiple controllers. That' s one possible app anyways.

Being that the PS3 hardware isn' t finalized I wouldn' t expect this feature to make it into final design. If anything it creates more problems than solutions.

4 player split screen should be illegal. It sucks horribly. And even when it is not split screen, I have a hard time keeping track of who' s who in 4 player single screen action like Monkey Fight (in Super Monkey Ball). It is insane.

Also, these are videogamers we are talking about. No video gamer has 12 friends that actually want to hang around him/her.

There should never be more than 4 controller ports on consoles since gamers in general don' t have that many friends to begin with

I think currently my two closest friends are my imaginary pal, Penelope. AND one of the many voices in my head, who I have gotten pretty close to recently. Really enjoyed all those late night talks we had.

good luck fitting that many people around one TV. Even fitting four people around one 36 inch TV sux.
At least sony is actually having more than 2 controller ports this time. They ripped people off so bad with PS2. I thought 4 ports was standard after N64 and DC had 4.

Clearly you all pretty stupid. Any trained monkey worth his banana knows that you can only take gaming to the next level when you create more sophisticated controls. That’s right, one in each hand and one in each foot. Don' t you want to play Grand Turismo 5 where you have a different controller controlling each wheel on your car?!?!?!?

Granted most monkeys will have the advantage in the beginning, but I' ll be dammed if we can' t put them on the ropes with a little practice.

Bring the monkeys on. I think they' ll be easy to beat though. The bannana shape of the controller will make it to tempting to eat. How are you supposed to hold onto the PS3 controller anyways? I have never seen any pictures or video of anyone holding that thing. Wouldn' t the 30 inch ends jab into your tummy?

Well, at least to me it' s clear that all these ports are not intended for plugging in controllers. The usb ports should be used for stuff like cameras, keyboards/mice, specialized controllers and/or external drives, while the bluetooth adapters handle wireless peripherals, the standard controllers and smartphones.

Some of the functions are bound to overlap, but I don' t think that the designers count on more than four controllers being used at any one time. I' m not very knowledgeable as far as tech specs go, but I think that current technology allows up to seven bluetooth devices to be connected simultaneously to a single hub, hence the number of adapters.

It MAY be possible to connect up to 13 controllers, but that' s all it is, just a technical possibility, not an intended feature.

Saturn Bomberman allowed 10 players simultaneously.

I agree dismiss, I' m not saying that Sony is telling companies out there to make 13 player games, just that it is possible. And since it' s possible, you know somebody will do it. If you' re making the next worms game, and you have to set a player limit, why not limit it? Set it for as many as possible even if there' s only a remote chance it' ll ever be taken advantage of. With Worms, the more players the better.

True, but...

The more players on one screen the more confusion, that is why there is system link and the best thing ever created for a videogame console online multiplayer.

Now if sony plays its cards right it won' t suck like it does now. You can only get so much for free online play. Like Lagg, cheaters, glitches, and lost connections(and small children kicking your but all over the game from all over the world.)

I hope this time around you can play with people in japan(the people that speak english that is so we can get the heads up on what is comming out next before it hits the U.S.

So just remember more is better on seperate screens but verybad on one screen.

Perfect example trying to beat your friend in a game. Nearly impossible since your friend will always know what your doing and were your going.

Multiplayer on one screen should be a last resort for the unfortunate people with out broadband internet connection.

I hope the ps3 dosen' t support 56k, ISDN and all that other slow crap.

It should only support Cable/DSL and Up. only!!!

I think we' re still thinking about Multiplayer games mostly as FPS. There' s tonnes of other way where the more players the better, and they don' t all have to be onscreen at once. Worms as I suggested above. How a bout golf games where you' d like to have you and 7 buds play a round. Party games have a tonne of options. NOt to mention all the types of games the real geniuses could come up with. Somebody tell Shigiru Myamoto to come up with a game that utilizes 12 players all on screen at once, and I bet he' d come up with a freakin' amazing game.

Lol a friend of mine told me that if he ever got mad at his game, hed throw his boomerang-shaped PS3 controller, and itll come whirling right back toward him.

ORIGINAL: mxpx182

I think we' re still thinking about Multiplayer games mostly as FPS. There' s tonnes of other way where the more players the better, and they don' t all have to be onscreen at once. Worms as I suggested above. How a bout golf games where you' d like to have you and 7 buds play a round. Party games have a tonne of options. NOt to mention all the types of games the real geniuses could come up with. Somebody tell Shigiru Myamoto to come up with a game that utilizes 12 players all on screen at once, and I bet he' d come up with a freakin' amazing game.

Well said, online is great and all, but in some cases it feels too... detached. Fighting games for example are very enjoyable online as they are highly competitive, but it' s much better when you can actually see your opponent' s reactions. Plus, " important" matches tend to hinge on tiny details, so even the possibility of lag tends to lead to disputes.

I' ve never heard anybody say that they' ve had a good experience playing fighting fames online. Just the smallest lag, and all your timeing would be off. The wrestling topic however gave me another great idea for a pile of controllers. I' m not a wrestling fan in any way, but I know people who are, and I know they' d go crazy over being able to invite a pile of guys over and simulate a real royal rumble on the big screen. Even Ihave to admit that' d probably be pretty fun.

I actually never thought of it that way lol. It would indeed be nice to have all my friends over and playing in the same match. even 6 man tag matches would be fun, elimination chamber matches.

but eh, sony is way too commercial for me. Thats why im leaning toward Microsoft' s setup.