+1Vilham wrote:
Its a $100 loss, which is less than the original xbox lost on each unit. As many have said before in support of the xbox, the profit is made from game contracts and gaming equipment, the same applies to the PS3, we won't have any fucking double standards here, it just makes you look stupid.TheDarkRaven wrote:
For the love of...[BAC]Gunfire wrote:
F*ck Xbox ! PLAYSTATION OWNS ! No further comment .
PS3 had got an blue-ray disc laser and you can get it from 500 euro's so if ypu know a normal blue-ray discreaders costs about 1000 - 1200 euro you don't need any furhter comment.
Greetz Gunny
Let me EDUCATE you a bit.
The PS3 is selling at roughly a $500 loss. The Blu-Ray in the PS3 is incomparable to stand-alone players (it's practically useless - please get a stand-alone if you even LIKE Blu-Ray). Also, Blu-Ray is definitely inferior and more expensive than HD-DVD (hell, DVD may survive these two formats) and thus will fail. Sony just can't market new products well anymore...it's a shame. They WERE a good company but they've lost it all. I can see them going bankrupt within the next decade and with what they're doing at the moment, I can't really say I'll miss them.
So did the 360 on release. Jesus are all you people microsft fanboys?Kmarion wrote:
Need more..lol Most these have even the Wii beating it in terms of fun and gameplayd3v1ldr1v3r13 wrote:
pffft...lets all listen to a Xbox bias site...
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/20/arts/ … mp;emc=rss
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/gaming/200 … -war_x.htm
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/12/06/ny-ti … 0-holiday/
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/11/20/ny-ti … hat-great/
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,12805 … ticle.html
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3155480
I think it will get better for the PS3.. it's just for all the hype it falls short ATM.
How about, let ME educate YOU.TheDarkRaven wrote:
Let me EDUCATE you a bit.
It's around $800 for Sony to make a PS3 with costs being reduced once the emulation software is finalized (so Sony can remove the PS2 chips) and round $600 to make a 360. Both companies are losing money on their hardware and hope to make it up via games and other things.The PS3 is selling at roughly a $500 loss
A common misconception about PS3 haters is that Blu-Ray is just being used for movies. WRONG. PS3 uses Blu-Ray for games too, with Resistance being around 22gb (more than twice the size of two DVD9 discs, which the 360 uses - 360 can ONLY play DVD's and wont be using HD-DVD for games) and ALL BUT ONE major movie thingy (word slipped from my head) have endorsed Blu-Ray disc.he Blu-Ray in the PS3 is incomparable to stand-alone players (it's practically useless - please get a stand-alone if you even LIKE Blu-Ray). Also, Blu-Ray is definitely inferior and more expensive than HD-DVD
Quite a lot of devs have said they are preferring BRD because it offers a lot more space to that of DVD9 discs.
Get your facts right first mate instead of making yourself look an idiot.
Last edited by E7IX3R (2006-12-10 13:10:03)
http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php? … p;type=wmv
check this out
check this out
All of the multi-plat games out atm (madden, nfs etc) were ported from 360 to PS3, most of them shoddy, rushed ports (what do you expect from EA?) which is why they really look as good. I can see 1 of 3 things happening with multiplat games.herrr_smity wrote:
http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=15368&type=wmv
check this out
1. Devs will use 360 as base, then port to the other consoles (due to the DVD constraints compared to Blu-Ray)
2. Devs will use PS3 as base, utilizing the Cell and Blu-Ray capacity, then squeezing it down to fit on a standard DVD9 disc for 360 and whatever the Wii uses
3. Game companies will have two teams, one to work on ps3 version and one to work on 360 version.
To be honest, I'd see option 1 as a more viable option, because if they use option 2, the ports wouldnt be so good, time consuming and result in poor sales on 360 and Wii. Option 3 would cost a lot of money.
I'd much rather see option 2 happen though because the Cell processor is a revolution and once Devs manage to unlock what it can really do, we will really see what next gen gaming is about. Someone from EA recently said their dev teams are unlocking around 20% of what PS3 can do in their current titles.
Microsoft has recently reduced the development costs of the Xbox 360. They actually are making a profit off of console sales. I would expect a price drop some time in spring/summer.
Exactly why i'll also be picking one up after the price drop. I actually had the chance to play Motorstorm for PS3 yesterday, and let me say, not at all impressed. It was on an HDTV too, but yet looked only slightly better than a game I purchased for my XBOX nearly 3 years ago (Rally Sport Challenge).Fancy_Pollux wrote:
Microsoft has recently reduced the development costs of the Xbox 360. They actually are making a profit off of console sales. I would expect a price drop some time in spring/summer.
Yes the NYtimes, USAtoday, Joystiq, PCworld, and 1up are all MS fanboys..lolgolgoj4 wrote:
So did the 360 on release. Jesus are all you people microsft fanboys?Kmarion wrote:
Need more..lol Most these have even the Wii beating it in terms of fun and gameplayd3v1ldr1v3r13 wrote:
pffft...lets all listen to a Xbox bias site...
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/20/arts/ … mp;emc=rss
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/gaming/200 … -war_x.htm
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/12/06/ny-ti … 0-holiday/
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/11/20/ny-ti … hat-great/
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,12805 … ticle.html
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3155480
I think it will get better for the PS3.. it's just for all the hype it falls short ATM.
Joystiq.com wrote:
"If you are anything other than a complete Sony fanboy (that's Internet lingo for an obsessed, myopic groupie) go ahead and forget about the PlayStation 3 this year." He goes on to say that the "overhyped PS3" doesn't deliver with its $599 price (plus accessories).
Xbone Stormsurgezz
LolJbrar wrote:
Exactly why i'll also be picking one up after the price drop. I actually had the chance to play Motorstorm for PS3 yesterday, and let me say, not at all impressed. It was on an HDTV too, but yet looked only slightly better than a game I purchased for my XBOX nearly 3 years ago (Rally Sport Challenge).Fancy_Pollux wrote:
Microsoft has recently reduced the development costs of the Xbox 360. They actually are making a profit off of console sales. I would expect a price drop some time in spring/summer.
youre comparing this
to this?
Good job M$ fanboy
It's not me but every other Media outlet on the net. Your not looking at apples to apples. Try looking at the link in the OP. Or reading any of the other ones.E7IX3R wrote:
LolJbrar wrote:
Exactly why i'll also be picking one up after the price drop. I actually had the chance to play Motorstorm for PS3 yesterday, and let me say, not at all impressed. It was on an HDTV too, but yet looked only slightly better than a game I purchased for my XBOX nearly 3 years ago (Rally Sport Challenge).Fancy_Pollux wrote:
Microsoft has recently reduced the development costs of the Xbox 360. They actually are making a profit off of console sales. I would expect a price drop some time in spring/summer.
youre comparing this
http://gamescreenshots.gamesurf.tiscali … torm_5.jpg
to this?
http://www.videogamesindonesia.com/labs … arise4.jpg
Good job M$ fanboy
Xbone Stormsurgezz
So launch games usually have the best graphics? I learn something new everyday.
btw: Motorstorm is better than any racing game right now. That is, until F1 comes out
btw: Motorstorm is better than any racing game right now. That is, until F1 comes out
Ofcourse the PS3 is currently up to scratch, thats pointing out the fucking obvious. For my degree im programming MIPS processors, thats the kind in phones, now that is hard enough so I doubt you realise that a totally new processing system is going to take the better half of a year to get up to its potential.
Listen this is just interesting, that is why the post. We have yet to see the next gen stuff. The point is to poke fun at the people dropping thousands of dollars and spending weeks in line waiting to get a console that has a way to go before it is worth it. Why not wait and buy when there is a good amount of quality titles out?xX[Elangbam]Xx wrote:
So launch games usually have the best graphics? I learn something new everyday.
btw: Motorstorm is better than any racing game right now. That is, until F1 comes out
PS3 is just hype.... for now.
People must have a tough time reading complete paragraphs .
I said this in the opening post. But like they said "The real graphics battle will likely come next year."
Xbone Stormsurgezz
It's not a $100 loss fool. Sony, IBM and someto other company spent billions developing the Cell. What's the cell? The PS3 processor. Also, BluRay does cost alot if you haven't noticed which is why they're low on production at the moment. This add up to something way over you r head.golgoj4 wrote:
+1Vilham wrote:
Its a $100 loss, which is less than the original xbox lost on each unit. As many have said before in support of the xbox, the profit is made from game contracts and gaming equipment, the same applies to the PS3, we won't have any fucking double standards here, it just makes you look stupid.TheDarkRaven wrote:
For the love of...
Let me EDUCATE you a bit.
The PS3 is selling at roughly a $500 loss. The Blu-Ray in the PS3 is incomparable to stand-alone players (it's practically useless - please get a stand-alone if you even LIKE Blu-Ray). Also, Blu-Ray is definitely inferior and more expensive than HD-DVD (hell, DVD may survive these two formats) and thus will fail. Sony just can't market new products well anymore...it's a shame. They WERE a good company but they've lost it all. I can see them going bankrupt within the next decade and with what they're doing at the moment, I can't really say I'll miss them.
That amount of money they will earn back from the development of the cell from the PS3 in the years to come and future consoles and PC processors will easily ofcome that. They were probably sponsored in their research by some very large companys that were interested in this idea. A company will do nothing if it doesn't bring in a profit.xX[Elangbam]Xx wrote:
It's not a $100 loss fool. Sony, IBM and someto other company spent billions developing the Cell. What's the cell? The PS3 processor. Also, BluRay does cost alot if you haven't noticed which is why they're low on production at the moment. This add up to something way over you r head.golgoj4 wrote:
+1Vilham wrote:
Its a $100 loss, which is less than the original xbox lost on each unit. As many have said before in support of the xbox, the profit is made from game contracts and gaming equipment, the same applies to the PS3, we won't have any fucking double standards here, it just makes you look stupid.
OOH!!! blueray... *rolls eyes*[BAC]Gunfire wrote:
F*ck Xbox ! PLAYSTATION OWNS ! No further comment .
PS3 had got an blue-ray disc laser and you can get it from 500 euro's so if ypu know a normal blue-ray discreaders costs about 1000 - 1200 euro you don't need any furhter comment.
Greetz Gunny
People said that about CD's...Heavy_Guns_91 wrote:
OOH!!! blueray... *rolls eyes*[BAC]Gunfire wrote:
F*ck Xbox ! PLAYSTATION OWNS ! No further comment .
PS3 had got an blue-ray disc laser and you can get it from 500 euro's so if ypu know a normal blue-ray discreaders costs about 1000 - 1200 euro you don't need any furhter comment.
Greetz Gunny
People said that about phone's....
People said that about electricity....
What does that tell you about people? We can't predict the future surprise surprise...
Vilham wrote:
People said that about electricity....
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Lol that episode is so good.Kmarion wrote:
Vilham wrote:
People said that about electricity....
Even better
WTF happened there... hope this has sorted it. OMG what is this shit... Lol dont think you can quote a youtube thing then post your own one...
Last edited by Vilham (2006-12-10 18:08:17)
Code:
[youtube]http://youryoutubelink.com[/youtube]
Xbone Stormsurgezz
fucking right, shit, ps3 had like 12 fps throughout all the games i played. made me want to go home and put my settings on all high, 16aa and 18af just to relive the ps3 failure.Kmarion wrote:
but the Xbox 360 games generally offered better framerates too.
Add me on Origin for Battlefield 4 fun: DesKmal
As of now I should note.. the hopes are in time the developers will learn to cater to the PS3.Des.Kmal wrote:
fucking right, shit, ps3 had like 12 fps throughout all the games i played. made me want to go home and put my settings on all high, 16aa and 18af just to relive the ps3 failure.Kmarion wrote:
but the Xbox 360 games generally offered better framerates too.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
i know, i can read.Kmarion wrote:
As of now I should note.. the hopes are in time the developers will learn to cater to the PS3.Des.Kmal wrote:
fucking right, shit, ps3 had like 12 fps throughout all the games i played. made me want to go home and put my settings on all high, 16aa and 18af just to relive the ps3 failure.Kmarion wrote:
but the Xbox 360 games generally offered better framerates too.
they damn better, as of now, im not buying a ps3.
... made me want to punch babies or something... damn shitty fps.
Last edited by Des.Kmal (2006-12-10 19:53:00)
Add me on Origin for Battlefield 4 fun: DesKmal
nice, I have one, you need xbox live, trust meFancy_Pollux wrote:
I plan on getting an Xbox 360 and HDTV this summer.