Cheap model PS3 a better value.

If that PS3 comes out in the US for $400-450 Xbox360 is dead.

We might see that price for the holidays... in 2007. By then, though, the 360 will still be $50-100 cheaper.

Right.

This is the first thread I' ve made here in like 2 years, pal. I' m not saying the opposite of anything, in this thread all I' m saying is that PS3 is superior to X360 and that it is now undeniable due to the cheap model having HDMI.

Some of you have a problem accepting reality and create 16 pages of jibberish. And yes I' m talking about you. You are a troll. This topic is about PS3' s superiority over the inferior X360 not about your retarded wanna-be psychoanalysis.

So please guys, if you' re not going to stick to the subject stop replying, dont be trolls. And don' t think I wont report your trolling to Adam. Consider yourselves warned.

But you see the 360 isnt inferior, its superior in some cases. And isnt just a trojan for a blu-ray format that has a good chance of failing just like everything else Sony does. The drives as so young they probably have loads of kiddy diseases. It' s sad when you think of it, calling everyone else fanboys, when infact your the biggest one of all time.

Dear Evil Man,

This is my first and last direct reply to your comments before I block you.

You are a waste of natural resources. Nobody here likes you. Your feeble mind clearly lacks the intelligence needed to understand what a forum troll is. So I' m here to school you:

This is trolling
This is trolling
This is trolling
This is trolling
This is trolling
This is trolling
This is trolling
This is trolling
This is trolling
This is trolling

I could go on and on, but if you don' t have the mental capacity to realize what trolling is by now, it' s obviously far beyond your comprehension. Your reasons for trolling could be anything from trying to compensate for something (no friends, small dick, traumatic childhood, etc) to simply the inability to communicate like normal people do (mental/social disability). Quite frankly, nobody cares. We all just laugh at you because we know you' ll never realize how stupid you look in the eyes of others.

I know you' ll reply back with your famous and " extensive" vocabulary of " Fuck" , " Retard" , " Homo" and " Pussy" regardless of what I type here. Please go ahead so we can all laugh at you some more. You' ll prove to everyone that you don' t know when it is you' re pissing into the wind.

Ok, enough guys, it' s a valid topic and he' s making a valid argument.

in this thread all I' m saying is that PS3 is superior to X360 and that it is now undeniable due to the cheap model having HDMI.

And you have a point. As far as " value" is concerned, when you factor in the Blu-Ray drive and the cost of dedicated Blu-Ray players, and you factor in the HDMI out, ...the console does represent better value than Xbox 360.

What you' re missing is that some don' t want to be forced to buy into a next-gen DVD format, especially when it' s not clear which format will come out on top, ...and you' re also disregarding the fact that in many areas Xbox 360 is the " more powerful" games console.

As a media hub, which is what both companies are gearing their platforms towards becoming, Sony has the advantage of having; a larger HDD, memorystick/SD card support, wi-fi connectivity with PSP, Bluetooth, a fully functioning web-browser and a console that' s technologically geared towards things like video playback and data streaming. If they don' t cut back on any of the functions [read: if all of them are present and functioning at launch] then Sony come out way ahead as a media hub.

As a games console, technologically, 360 > PS3. That' s factual. Graphically, 360 is capable of a lot more, and Microsoft are working hard to secure new IP' s and franchises. The pad is more ergonomically designed and the console design is either great or terrible depending on your personal taste, and they have a solid [read: kickass] online service. The only problem with that is the supscription fee.

But you initial point of PS3 representing " better value" is correct. It just depends what you want from it.

Evil Man gets what he deserves, he spends so much time trolling that even his valid threads should just be ignored.

ORIGINAL: Vx Chemical

Evil Man gets what he deserves, he spends so much time trolling that even his valid threads should just be ignored.

He forces his opinion as fact. It' s annoying, but then how can you expect him to fall into line if people constantly post rebuttals?!

I asked him if he remembered Barto from the Gamerweb days and he replied normally.

ORIGINAL: Vx Chemical

Right.

This is the first thread I' ve made here in like 2 years, pal. I' m not saying the opposite of anything, in this thread all I' m saying is that PS3 is superior to X360 and that it is now undeniable due to the cheap model having HDMI.

Some of you have a problem accepting reality and create 16 pages of jibberish. And yes I' m talking about you. You are a troll. This topic is about PS3' s superiority over the inferior X360 not about your retarded wanna-be psychoanalysis.

So please guys, if you' re not going to stick to the subject stop replying, dont be trolls. And don' t think I wont report your trolling to Adam. Consider yourselves warned.

But you see the 360 isnt inferior, its superior in some cases. And isnt just a trojan for a blu-ray format that has a good chance of failing just like everything else Sony does. The drives as so young they probably have loads of kiddy diseases. It' s sad when you think of it, calling everyone else fanboys, when infact your the biggest one of all time.

How am I a fanboy?

I don' t like PS3, it' s just that its my ONLY option. I' ve said it before, I don' t want a LAST-GEN console (Wii) and X360 has failed to delivered, what else can I do? I have no choice, real gamers around the world have no choice, PS3 is our only option.

UnluckyOne - That' s pretty freaky that you stalk me accross these forums, you sound like a bored 15 year old nerd that can' t get laid and takes out his frustration on people in gaming forums.

I have no choice, real gamers around the world have no choice, PS3 is our only option.

If technical benchmarks are what you' re going by, a PC which you can upgrade periodically is the best option.

you sound like a bored 15 year old nerd that can' t get laid and takes out his frustration on people in gaming forums.

Good one, that' s the pot calling the kettle black right there!

You' re right, I just added him to my ignore list he' s pretty useless, just comes to talk shit and doesnt debate the argument we' re talking about.

How am I a fanboy?

I don' t like PS3, it' s just that its my ONLY option. I' ve said it before, I don' t want a LAST-GEN console (Wii) and X360 has failed to delivered, what else can I do? I have no choice, real gamers around the world have no choice, PS3 is our only option.

And you think the PS3 will instantly deliver super top notch titles for you? You cant argue with majik when he tells you with numbers that the Xbox is infact just as powerful as the PS3. So why should it have inferior multi platform titles, inferior ports as you call them, when in fact all the games thats Multiplatform titles to be released are actually just ports from the 360 games already availeble.

Most of the games released for the PS3 currently look like crap, even MGS4 though i kinda hope some of it will change. And games like VF5 and Virtua Tennis wont have any online capabilities making them crippled from the box, because Sony cant really figure out how their " Playstation Hub" is going to work. You not like the 360 for some reason most of us cant see, but it' s still your best bet for next gen gaming untill atleast this time next year, when the PS3 might or might not have caught up, depending on what the developers learn to do with cell and RSX

For me PS3 looks like it' s going to be the next-gen console of choice. VF5, DMC4, MGS4, NG Sonic, Ninja Gaiden Sigma and visually the best version of VT3. Plus no doubt the bulk of Japanese developed games.

I do own a 360, but I' m left really dissapointed with it games wise, graphically nothing bar Lost Planet, Just Cause or NG Sonic have impressed me. With seemingly only a few games to look forward to. Ultimately it' s all about the games, and so far 360 hasn' t delivered. It doesn' t help that western devs could care less about 60fps for their games either, though a big well done to Avalanche with Just Cause.

Maybe once more Jap devs realise that to make enough money to recoup from rising dev costs they' ll think about producing more 360 exclusive content. Until then I see Wii and PS3 providing most of my gaming experiences. Of course if a game looks better on 360 than PS3 then I' ll gladly opt for the 360 version.

The only thing which really sucks about PS3 having most of the games I' ll want is that has-been controller, the 360 pad is so much better.

Your moving to fast Kyo.k you have no idea whether the PS3 will deliver more than the Xbox 360 has, it will be just as many months before quality stuff starts arriving as is it with every new console launch MGS4 currently looks like crap, DMC4 i havent seen yet. NG Sonic plays like crap and is released on the 360 nothing points to it being better on the PS3, NG Sigma is simply NG for the PS3. VT5 has no multiplayer (online) and graphic wise it isnt impressive.

I guess the thought of Japaneese games is a sickness most gamers who started out playing consoles have attracted, so ill just not comment on that.

So you might say games like Blue Dragon, LO, Lost Planet, RE5, GTA4, Trusty Bell, Tri-Ace, Halo 3, GoW, Mass Effect, Too Human, Splinter Cell, The Darkness (better texture on the 360 version) is nothing to look forward to. But truth be told, there will be better 360 titles, 2nd gen 360 titles on the market the day PS3 releases its batch of launch titles which looks very dissapointing.

You may cross your fingers have hope for a brigther future but most of you have clearly forgotten that the PS2 had the saddest launch of all time, and the PS3 IMO is lookign to follow with nothing but ports and mediocre titles!

Sony' s first year won' t be as great as it' s second. That' s a given for any console in any generation. When you look at 2007 and see the games that are set for release on 360, it' s hard to discount it as a serious contender for the " crown" .

PS3 will be the only choice for those that want a certain type of game. It' s going to be about personal taste, just as it was in the previous generation, in that if you want many Japanese developed titles, game like Devil May Cry, Monster Hunter, Metal Gear Solid, Tekken etc, then Sony' s machine is your only choice.

Whether or not you feel that Microsoft has failed to deliver in it' s first year or not, doesn' t mean you should just pass on the machine and completely write it off. This generation is set to last longer than the average 5 year period so obviously the best has yet to come. 360' s initial year on the market has been mastly boring, with only a handful of really good games, but those few titles have been/are absolutely awesome.

Titles like Fight Night, GRAW, CoD2, Battlefield 2, Condemned, Kameo, Table Tennis etc all kick ass, and yeah, PS3 is getting an improved version of Fight Night Round 3, and will possibly get an improved version of GRAW, but those improvements aren' t down to the console being technically superior, but rather extended development time.

There' s nothing that PS3 will have next year that will be able to compare to what will be on 360. That' s obvious. Mass Effect, Gears of War, Huxley, Alan Wake, DoAX2, Pro Evolution 6, Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey, Bioshock, Forza 2, Fable 2, GTR, Kane & Lynch, Lost Planet, Ninja Gaiden 2 (?), and ofcourse Halo 3.

Then there are the multi-platform games like Assassins Creed, Rainbow Six: Vegas, Splinter Cell: Double Agent, The Club, The Darkness, the Outsider, Half Life 2, Stranglehold, Stuntman 2, Resident Evil 5, BiA3, MoH: Airborne, CoD3, Project Offset, GTAIV (if it' s your thing), Evleon, Sonic, Virtua Tennis 3 etc.

PS3 is getting a nicer version of Virtua Tennis 3, that' s what SEGA said, but it' s got more to do with Hitmaker developing the PS3 version and Sumo Digital developing the 360 version than it does the actual hardware.

But if you want games like Virtua Fighter 5, the only console it' s going to be available on is PS3 and so that' s the console you' ll want.

Again, it' s about taste.

Yeah, what Majik said.

I just think its naive to count on PS3 delivering better titles this year, time will tell if it delivers better titles all in all, i wouldnt count on it since PS2 didnt, but maybe if you get lucky!

I didn' t mean my post to sound like I' ve written MS off, I though it was clear that my reason for favoring the PS3 potentially was due to the games I like. I do play most others also, but just to see how good they are for customers benefit. For example I don' t particulary enjoy playing Ghost Recon, but I still can appreciate how good it is with regards to physics, realism and how polished overall it is. So I would consider it to be well worth getting if you like that kind of thing.

So you might say games like Blue Dragon, LO, Lost Planet, RE5, GTA4, Trusty Bell, Tri-Ace, Halo 3, GoW, Mass Effect, Too Human, Splinter Cell, The Darkness (better texture on the 360 version) is nothing to look forward to. But truth be told, there will be better 360 titles, 2nd gen 360 titles on the market the day PS3 releases its batch of launch titles which looks very dissapointing

I' ll take all the games you mention except the likes of GTA4, RB6, Splinter Cell, Gears Of War and Huxley. Oh, and I did mention before that I' ll take the 360 version if it looks better. Lost Planet is perhaps my most anticipated game outside of VF5.

I was simply going by what support the first Xbox had overall, and what 360 has had so far, in which there was very little for me overall. Things do look much better with 360 than with the first XB.

VT5 has no multiplayer (online) and graphic wise it isnt impressive.

If you mean Virtua Fighter 5, then not only does it look stunning (though has slightly more jaggies than the Lindberg version), but according to Yu Suzuki may never have online play until no lag can be guaranteed. With VF a split seconds lag can destroy even the slightest of timings.

If you mean Virtua Fighter 5, then not only does it look stunning (though has slightly more jaggies than the Lindberg version), but according to Yu Suzuki may never have online play until no lag can be guaranteed. With VF a split seconds lag can destroy even the slightest of timings.

Nah not stunning it looks okay. Having no online play is simply lazy, you may excuse it anyway you want, but its the same reason that VT3 doesnt have online play, Sony hasnt delivered enough info to make it work!

Thoguh what i really want to hear is do you really think the PS3 first year will be better? Do you remember the PS2´s first year?

ORIGINAL: Vx Chemical

If you mean Virtua Fighter 5, then not only does it look stunning (though has slightly more jaggies than the Lindberg version), but according to Yu Suzuki may never have online play until no lag can be guaranteed. With VF a split seconds lag can destroy even the slightest of timings.

Nah not stunning it looks okay. Having no online play is simply lazy, you may excuse it anyway you want, but its the same reason that VT3 doesnt have online play, Sony hasnt delivered enough info to make it work!

Sony' s online will be a farce. They have no clue and are simply trying to match Microsoft' s features.

Sony' s online will be a farce. They have no clue and are simply trying to match Microsoft' s features.

Ohh and it will be free, so the thought of paying what it takes to make it work probably probably isnt in their thoughts, since Sony is loosing enough money as it is, i dont think they´ll wanna spend millions and millions of dollars on it. I quite understand why MS takes money for XBL

Xbox Live has already cost Microsoft 4+ billion dollars. It isn' t cheap. That' s why Sony want developers to use their own servers. It' s going to be a joke.

Nah not stunning it looks okay. Having no online play is simply lazy, you may excuse it anyway you want, but its the same reason that VT3 doesnt have online play, Sony hasnt delivered enough info to make it work!

About VF5 online, don' t take my word for it. Go to virtuafighter.com and some of the high level players will tell you the same thing, that you simply cannot have any lag all at for VF to work properly online. It really is an issue of precise timing.

With VT3 however and other PS3 titles not online, I totally agree with you. Sony' s online service will suck, and in the end I' m willing to bet publishers will start charging us for a more stable service which MS does for all games at a single £40 fee. No excuses for Sony here.

As for PS2' s 1st year it was pretty good, but was eclipsed by the games the Dreamcast had coming out. Though I will say that Tekken Tag, Ridge V, SSX, Onimusha, GT3 and Capcom vs SNK 2 were very good first year games. MGS2 and DMC at the end of the first year too.

As for PS2' s 1st year it was pretty good, but was eclipsed by the games the Dreamcast had coming out. Though I will say that Tekken Tag, Ridge V, SSX, Onimusha, GT3 and Capcom vs SNK 2 were very good first year games. MGS2 and DMC at the end of the first year too.

No, now you' re being cheeky. Playstation 2 didn' t have a worldwide launch like 360, but developers worldwide did have the devkits at around the same time, which meaning that since the US launch was 7 months after the Japanese launch, western studios had an additional 7 months to craft their titles. It was released in Japan in March, the US in October and Europe a month later than that. You are British meaning that titles for your first year with the console had an extra 8 months development time.