bit-gamer.net

PS3 has become a 'whipping boy'

PS3 has become a 'whipping boy'

Ted Price of Insominiac Games feels that the PS3 will undergo a massive boom in sales come Christmas.

It's true that the PlayStation 3 has had a tough time of late, whether sacrificing goats to the God of War or upsetting the monotheistic Godhead of the Church of England, it seems that the media is always out to get Sony's latest mega-console.

And some people are a little upset about that.

Ted Price, of Insomniac Games, believes that the PS3 has become "the whipping boy for the press" according to GameDaily.biz, mainly because he thinks "it's human nature to want to take down the guy on top."

Insomniac Games was in the news earlier this year for annoying the Church of England with Resistance: Fall of Man, which featured an alien/human gunfight in Manchester Cathedral.

"I think everyone just wants to fill it full of arrows because Sony's had some pretty amazing success over the years," Price says. "And it's easy to overlook that it's been, I think, the fastest-selling PlayStation console. I think it's human nature to want to take down the guy on top, and Sony has definitely gotten its share of...mud."

Price is of the opinion that the console will undergo a massive boom in sales when Christmas hits, though we're sceptical that it'll happen without a substantial drop in price.

Got PS3, or are you more of a Wii or 360 gamer? Let us know your opinions in our community forums.

52 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
yakyb 2nd July 2007, 11:59 Quote
hmm my girlfriend has a Wii my brother a PS3 whilst the Wii is fun ill take My PC anyday :->
Darkedge 2nd July 2007, 12:28 Quote
whipping boy or just whining boy.. I think the latter ;)
Dr. Strangelove 2nd July 2007, 12:35 Quote
while I agree that it's often that people like to try to take down who or what ever is on top (call it human nature or what ever). I think that in many cases Sony has brought the bad press on it self.
Question has the PS3 really been the fastest selling PS console? is that because the other just sold really slowly?
Joeymac 2nd July 2007, 12:43 Quote
The majority of the Sony hate started after two things... The rootkit and Killzone 3 trailer.
Both of which they have themselves to blame for.
Then it snowballed with the PS3 delays, the cost... adding DRM to DVDs so they wouldn't play on some DVD players... the lack-luster showing of games.. the crappy first round of Blu-Ray releases... and a general arrogance that the PS3 is the greatest and best thing the human race has had the privilege to witness.
But their phone and TV divisions are doing ok... and everyone likes those ads with the exploding paint and bouncy balls.
So to "defend the honour of" or "hate" a faceless corporation is completely pointless.
d4v3 2nd July 2007, 12:56 Quote
I've had both of the previous Playstations, and the PS3 has kinda passed me by. At the moment, I see it as an expensive box that can do very little for me compared to Microsoft's less expensive box. The PS3 is lacking exclusives that I want to play, therefore why buy one when I have a 360? That said, given time, I think the PS3 could turn into a real gem, but until then, I'll stick with a 360.
M_D_K 2nd July 2007, 13:36 Quote
Im gonna sit on the fence on this one, its taken alot of stick but then tbh it deserved it with all the delays and the fact its really expensive. Yes it has a shed load of hardware in there but then if you just want to play games there are 2 very good rival consoles that the PS3 with its price alone can't compete with. When the price comes down to what the xbox is then i'll add it to my shelf and when there are some exclusive games that really use all the hardware inside the big black box. Until the price shifts by £200 Im still very happy with my Xbox and content with my Wii
Blademrk 2nd July 2007, 14:23 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joeymac
The majority of the Sony hate started after two things... The rootkit and Killzone 3 trailer.
Both of which they have themselves to blame for.
Then it snowballed with the PS3 delays, the cost... adding DRM to DVDs so they wouldn't play on some DVD players... the lack-luster showing of games.. the crappy first round of Blu-Ray releases... and a general arrogance that the PS3 is the greatest and best thing the human race has had the privilege to witness.
But their phone and TV divisions are doing ok... and everyone likes those ads with the exploding paint and bouncy balls.
So to "defend the honour of" or "hate" a faceless corporation is completely pointless.

you forgot the killing off of Lik-Sang. :'(
atanum141 2nd July 2007, 14:30 Quote
Did anyone mention Exploding Lappy batteries?
Either way Its rather clear that they have lost this round. But should be seen is that its such a huge loss on both to the consumer and the company. Just look at the cooperate backlash they have been getting by both developers and market analysis.
Also loosing alot of A* titles to the other brands must be trully a kick in the balls.

TBH i wouldn't be surprised that Sony would dissapear for the next gen and suddenly come back with something amazing the following gen.
Cthippo 2nd July 2007, 14:30 Quote
I think this falls in teh same category of "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you". TBH, I think some of the bad press is deserved, some is not, and a good chunk of it is deserved less on the merits of the console but rather on who makes it. The PS3 might be a decent, if overproced, bit of kit, but Sony deserves to die.
Flibblebot 2nd July 2007, 14:36 Quote
Isn't God of War 2 a PS2 game? Added to which the whole furore was mis-reported, so shouldn't really be used as an example of Sony's behaviour.

PS3 may have become a whipping boy, but as others have noted, it's entirely justified. Sony's attitude during the pre-release phase of PS3, the comparatively high price of the console, and Sony's insistence that the console is selling well (despite evidence to the contrary) all lead to the slant of the reporting of Sony & the PS3. They've got no one else to blame other than themselves.
atanum141 2nd July 2007, 14:42 Quote
Another insult to injury is the whole job of developers tuning back the games built for the PS3, They all run 60fps for the 360 but they have been limited to 30fps for the PS3.
And its not the small Dev's its brands like EA.
iwog 2nd July 2007, 15:40 Quote
I think one of the best quotes i heard from Sony and truly sums them up is "We had better 2nd week sales than Microsoft and Nintendo combined"

Well of course you did, they both sold out in the first week as their consoles we so popular.
Bluephoenix 2nd July 2007, 17:50 Quote
PC > console any day

and Xbox 360 + Wii > PS3
Lucidity 2nd July 2007, 18:33 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by iwog
I think one of the best quotes i heard from Sony and truly sums them up is "We had better 2nd week sales than Microsoft and Nintendo combined"

Well of course you did, they both sold out in the first week as their consoles we so popular.

LOL!!!! Not to mention you can't take Sony's numbers for real considering the number of people that only bought a system in hopes to sell it on ebay. I work retail and we had a third of the PS3s we sold come back unopened. It took 5 weeks to get rid of those. The other store in our area got a second shipment in after the holidays and the 64 units managed to stretch almost 3 months.
sandys 2nd July 2007, 18:51 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by atanum141
Another insult to injury is the whole job of developers tuning back the games built for the PS3, They all run 60fps for the 360 but they have been limited to 30fps for the PS3.
And its not the small Dev's its brands like EA.

Thats not tuning back the games thats the devs not putting the effort in to optimize the game for different hardware, PS3 a different machine to X360 and needs to be developed for rather than have code ported from Xbox360 to it, if lazy ports from X360 play like arse on a high end PC why would it play any better on a PS3, consoles can't match a highend PC for power but you wouldn't know it with some of the shite that comes out from X360 land to PC, the PS3 is having the same problem.

Sony has been a bit of a whipping boy, some of the press is justified but a lot of it is just to generate page hits on web sites, Sony bashing has become a pastime bit like bashing MS on the OS side and people like to read it.
iwog 2nd July 2007, 19:02 Quote
LOL, 64 units over 3 months thats awful. It also doesnt help sony's case that they claim they're winning the "high def war" as blue ray has sold more than HD-DVD. This is only after you take into account all the copies of blueray films they bundled with the PS3. Remember, pride becomes a fall.
devdevil85 2nd July 2007, 19:25 Quote
sandys, I agree that the Sony bashing has been very misinterpreted and/or non-justified to some respect lately, but at the same time Sony has kind of put it on themselves, but as a company in general really. With that said, why are people associating the PS3 to issues that other Sony departments have created such as the rootkit bug, the battery problem or even the PS2 game GOWII goat thing? I bet you if the PS3 was USD$100 cheaper and had atleast 3-4 great/must-have titles we would all love the PS3 and it would be Sony XXX Corp. that we would actually hate/want gone, but because the PS3 is out of reach for most people, like myself (especially in the EU), they are annoyed and because they feel "out of the Sony crowd" they would rather bash Sony and rejoice the 360/Wii even though the more advanced console that offers the most in terms of futureproofing is the PS3 (of course you have to pay USD$120 more for it over the Elite here in the US). And in regards to the exclusives being lost: who gives a crap! As long as the best games reach the consoles and all consoles are able to show off their stuff, we the consumers win, isn't that what matters? Then, you, the consumer can make the decision as to whether or not the 360, PS3, or Wii is worth the price over any of the other consoles. Just like Phil Harrison stated in the latest GameInformer: he only cares about getting the best games to the PS3, he doesn't care if they go to the other consoles (to a certain extent I would still guess), just as long as the most technologically advanced games get to their consoles, that's all that matters. Frankly, I would venture to say that the PS3 is going to have much better games coming in the next few months considering Sony's own Game Development Studios will be developing most of them. After seeing LittleBigPlanet, it's also hard for me to argue that 3rd parties are having a tough time developing for the PS3. After playing Motorstorm on a 1080p LCD at my local Nebraska Furniture Mart, the PS3 really has a lot more to show in the coming year(s) considering it was a title that debuted with it last November.

As for the PC > console, I totally agree. I myself am I total PC gamer and I would take a PC over a console anyday. You may pay more for hardware, but you will be playing the newest games at excellent FPS for 1-2 years and you can upgrade whenever needed. The PC is the essence of "360" considering people use it for anything and everything.
Furymouse 2nd July 2007, 20:39 Quote
I agree that the PS3 is a nice piece of hardware. But I have a high end pc that can play any games that I want at ridiculous fps. I even got that pc for less than a PS3 ( desperate college students;)) I am completely content with that and my wii for now. Once the price goes down on PS3s I may just have to get one. So I think that the reason Sony has become our " whipping boy " is because we don't like people telling us that their product is what we want and need. Like that cocky little kid yelling that hes going to own you, and how great he is. Cockiness is rewarded with a cap in the face.
sandys 2nd July 2007, 20:41 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by devdevil85
As for the PC > console, I totally agree. I myself am I total PC gamer and I would take a PC over a console anyday. You may pay more for hardware, but you will be playing the newest games at excellent FPS for 1-2 years and you can upgrade whenever needed. The PC is the essence of "360" considering people use it for anything and everything.

I would love to agree with the PC > Console agrument but as Microsoft seems to be throwing the biggest spanner in the works for PC games at the moment (Vista) so I have to disagree, you have games which are coming from the 360 onto PC and playing like arse because it cost so much to do seperate develoment paths for different hardware and so something has to suffer, this is typically the PC as devs fear rampant piracy and think they get more coin off of Console, do you think MS gives two hoots about PC gaming if they can push you to their console its all gravy for them, MS is pushing people to Vista to make money with token gestures like games for windows etc. passing off the illusion that they care about gaming on the PC, selling you a vision of the PC and Console in perfect harmony but the company itself see its future in digital distribution and centralized software servers, the future is everyone paying a subscription to use the OS and software on an MS closed box (the nexbox probably) the Xbox is the foot in the door, people are bashing Sony but not looking at the MS long game.

As for PC hardware costs and value a 8800GTX isn't going to last 2 years the card is already struggling in recent DX10 benches ( lost planet. CoH, CoJ ) to do more than 60fps at HD resolutions, in 12 months you'll be wanting something better, you could buy a PS3/Xbox for the price of one of those cards and it will last more than 2 years and the games will always work, no waiting 9 months for drivers, patches, no disappointment when you put your £2k windows box on to play R6V and get 20fps or something equally wank, theres something to be said for the current generation of consoles, enough grunt to look good and play well from the off and as developers become more familiar with the hardware will only get better, will your PC software get better without major hardware spend, it hasn't in the 25 years or so that I've been PC gaming, its unlikely to start now, tis very sad.

I am fortunate enough to have all consoles and a decent PC and apart from cranking up a few race sims I have found it hard to justify my PC cost, I use a cheap lappy for web stuff as it doesn't consume 300w idle or make noise like my games PC and have been getting my fill of gaming via the Consoles and its suprising my games PC hasn't been on much since Jan (when I picked up the 360)

Oooh, I'm rambling and ranting now, probably making no sense and right off topic :o
Neogumbercules 2nd July 2007, 20:45 Quote
I'll agree that Sony has become the internet whipping boy. Unfortunately I think it's probably about 80% Sony's fault.
D3s3rt_F0x 2nd July 2007, 21:14 Quote
I would say Sony and the PS3 has become a whipping boy, fair enough Sony made some mistakes but I am not willing to put down a console based on what Sony have done its based on the quality of the content and games and Ive got to say if I wanted a Blu Ray DVD player the PS3 would be an attractive proposition to me.

Sadly most people on this forum seem to have a fairly one sided opinion from what I've seen in the past.

btw this is from a 360 console owner like I say aint even played the PS3 ;)
devdevil85 2nd July 2007, 22:45 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by D3s3rt_F0x
like I say aint even played the PS3 ;)
First off, nice grammar! ;) Secondly, you haven't played the PS3 yet? Dude, go down to your local tech store and play it, especially Motorstorm. That game really showcases what the PS3 can handle. The physics, graphics and gameplay are really topknotch...
mattthegamer463 3rd July 2007, 01:07 Quote
Quote:
And it's easy to overlook that it's been, I think, the fastest-selling PlayStation console.

Didn't the PS2 sell 125,000 consoles in two hours through only the internet? "I think" doesn't really qualify something as a fact.

The reason the PS3 has been getting flak is because its a piece of crap, not because its just been in the wrong place at the wrong time and fallen into the crosshairs of major organizations all around the world. Sony needs to seriously get out of the web-papers before they permanently loose whats left of their respectability and status.
knuck 3rd July 2007, 01:22 Quote
the exact same thing happened to nintendo when they were on top and released the 64

what is sony complaining about...
Bladestorm 3rd July 2007, 04:40 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandys
As for PC hardware costs and value a 8800GTX isn't going to last 2 years the card is already struggling in recent DX10 benches ( lost planet. CoH, CoJ ) to do more than 60fps at HD resolutions, in 12 months you'll be wanting something better, you could buy a PS3/Xbox for the price of one of those cards and it will last more than 2 years and the games will always work, no waiting 9 months for drivers, patches, no disappointment when you put your £2k windows box on to play R6V and get 20fps or something equally wank, theres something to be said for the current generation of consoles, enough grunt to look good and play well from the off and as developers become more familiar with the hardware will only get better, will your PC software get better without major hardware spend, it hasn't in the 25 years or so that I've been PC gaming, its unlikely to start now, tis very sad.

There are two types of "DX10" games.

The first is a DX9 engine with some DX10 features slapped on top, this tends to cause a fairly large performance hit as you are just giving more to do without taking advantage of any performance improvements.

The second is an engine built around DX10 from the ground up, these apparently offer massive performance improvements and/or allow for better features to be turned on without suffering the same hit as you would with the DX9+ engine.

All of the "DX10" games out so far fall into the former category so aren't really good games to judge anything by (other than slapping DX10 features onto a DX9 engine isn't the hottest idea in the world) There is also the fact as reported repeatedly here by Bit-Tech's own Tim, that DX10 drivers still have a ways to go untill they are up to the same standard as the DX9 ones have managed in the what 4-5 years they've been around ?

Oh on the topic of losing exclusives and such, I was happy to read yesterday that haze is also coming to PC :) I'm looking forward to that one.
Aankhen 3rd July 2007, 05:25 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cthippo
The PS3 might be a decent, if overproced, bit of kit, but Sony deserves to die.
No more than Microsoft or Nintendo.
Amon 3rd July 2007, 05:34 Quote
This reminds me of when Vista sold only 244 copies in the Rep. of China.
Iago 3rd July 2007, 10:27 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Furymouse
I agree that the PS3 is a nice piece of hardware. But I have a high end pc that can play any games that I want at ridiculous fps. I even got that pc for less than a PS3 ( desperate college students;)) I am completely content with that and my wii for now. Once the price goes down on PS3s I may just have to get one. So I think that the reason Sony has become our " whipping boy " is because we don't like people telling us that their product is what we want and need. Like that cocky little kid yelling that hes going to own you, and how great he is. Cockiness is rewarded with a cap in the face.

With due respect mate, there's no 600€ PC that can play games at more than 1 FPS. Unless your idea of "games" is Tetris and Bejeweled. That you may have found a nice offer from a desperate friend doesn't mean that a high-end PC is better gaming value than a PS3 (or X360 for that matter).

Regarding the PS3 I agree completely with the Insomniac guys. Bashing the PS3 is the new family sport. The amount of crap it's getting is simply mind-blowing. It's no more expensive than PS2 or PS at launch time. It's a much more open console than Microsoft's (Hey MS, 120€ for a 120Gb Hdd? :|). It's a helluva media center (specially with the new firmware updates). Unlike the X360 it doesn't break once a week and twice on Sundays nor does it sound like a 747. And it's shiny. And the same people that are spending 600€ on an iPhone and should be drooling over one are bashing it because some rootkit Sony used once and giving MS a free pass despite having a sub-par console (from a manufacturing point of view) and despite their business practices being traditionally worse.

To hell with all those jumping the "bashSony" bandwagon. I'm getting one this afternoon :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bladestorm

The second is an engine built around DX10 from the ground up, these apparently offer massive performance improvements and/or allow for better features to be turned on without suffering the same hit as you would with the DX9+ engine.

Had to chime in here ;)

Nobody knows yet. If I had to, I'd bet one monthly wage that it's just hype. DX10 will bring a massive performance hit, DX10 parts or not. There'll be Crysis at 1900x1080@30FPS with anything else than SLI'ed 8800GTX or worse...
Dr. Strangelove 3rd July 2007, 10:50 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iago
And it's shiny.
And that is as good a reason as any to get one :D
devdevil85 3rd July 2007, 16:43 Quote
For the $120 more than what the Elite costs, you get the ability (over the 360) to use the PS3 with a wireless keyboard and mouse, as a wireless media server, an upscalable DVD player (1080p for regular DVDs), a native 1080p DVD Player, a dual screen setup w/ both screens at 1080p (thanks to the 2 digital video outputs on the back), and the ability to upgrade the HD w/ any SATA interfaced HD. Not too shabby huh? Sadly, as of right now, not many people will be able to use the PS3 to it's full potential and the next big reason why it's not selling: no must-have titles, but I must say that $120 over the Elite really isn't bad in the big picture if you have the money, but you're better off waiting until Xmas when more titles debut and who knows.....rumble maybe by then?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Strangelove
And that is as good a reason as any to get one :D
Well it looks a whole lot better than that boring beige or off-black 360 (especially when it's sitting in your Home Theater setup). It's also got heat-sensitive controls which is also pretty sweet when they're all lit up at night.
sandys 3rd July 2007, 17:17 Quote
Theres only 1 HDMI, the second HDMI was dropped once v1.3 was specced as it has adequate bandwith for the HD Audio and Video, shame really as its a PITA to split the signal for an amp and TV with out Passthrough, I really wish it had two HDMI.
Bladestorm 3rd July 2007, 17:23 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iago
Had to chime in here ;)

Nobody knows yet. If I had to, I'd bet one monthly wage that it's just hype. DX10 will bring a massive performance hit, DX10 parts or not. There'll be Crysis at 1900x1080@30FPS with anything else than SLI'ed 8800GTX or worse...

We've had the software developers, hardware developers and multiple big-league game developers all saying the same thing, and the technical articles seem to make a lot of sense in backing it up, so I'd be very surprised if it was just hype.
devdevil85 3rd July 2007, 17:25 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandys
Theres only 1 HDMI, the second HDMI was dropped once v1.3 was specced as it has adequate bandwith for the HD Audio and Video, shame really as its a PITA to split the signal for an amp and TV with out Passthrough, I really wish it had two HDMI.
Holy crap you're right sandys. Like I've said before, I don't own a PS3 and I remember reading that it did, but on Sony's website it shows (1) HDMI 1.3 output. Well, 1.3 does offer multiple advantages over 2.0 so I guess it was worth it considering 2% of all PS3 owners could afford/understand how to use a dual monitor/screen setup. I also forgot to include backwards compatibility for PS1 and PS2 games (Full/native in North America + Half-assed/emulated in the EU) on the list, too, which is also a biggie to me considering I have like 50 PS1 and 40 PS2 games.
sandys 3rd July 2007, 17:36 Quote
EU emulation isn't so half assed anymore, I use it all the time, PS1 is supposed to be perfect, and from what I have played PS2 is pretty bloody good.
sandys 3rd July 2007, 17:42 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bladestorm
We've had the software developers, hardware developers and multiple big-league game developers all saying the same thing, and the technical articles seem to make a lot of sense in backing it up, so I'd be very surprised if it was just hype.

Why would you not be suprised? they are all trying to sell you something, they are not going to tell you yes, its going to be crap until our next release of hardware as you won't buy anything, Everyone wants to tell you it will be fine, Hardware manufacturers want to assure you that your new cards will be fine for the next gen DX10 games because you won't buy anything otherwise, if you buy it and these performance gains don't come, not their problem, it supports DX10 we never said how fast, you have to upgrade.

The game devs will tell you that the game will runs fine with almost anything you throw at it because they want you to buy the game, if it doesn't work well when you've bought it tough, turn the options down or you'll be expected to upgrade.

Vista didn't just come out yesterday, the RC was out what 18 months ago and was pretty solid, so hardware manufacturers have had more than 6 months to come up with something.
iwog 3rd July 2007, 18:38 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by devdevil85
I also forgot to include backwards compatibility for PS1 and PS2 games (Full/native in North America + Half-assed/emulated in the EU) on the list, too, which is also a biggie to me considering I have like 50 PS1 and 40 PS2 games.

Which is part of the reason Europe doesnt like the PS3, we feel we got cheated when they removed full backward compatibility and didn't reduce the price enough to compensate.
devdevil85 3rd July 2007, 18:52 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandys
EU emulation isn't so half assed anymore, I use it all the time, PS1 is supposed to be perfect, and from what I have played PS2 is pretty bloody good.
I was just saying that sandys because I personally don't own a PS3 and I live in the US so I don't know how the EU emulation compares to what everyone else is saying (which usually isn't good at all). From what titles I have seen that are supported, I personally don't think it's that bad, but some of the newest PS2 titles aren't supported so I can understand why others think it's "crap", but I personally don't think so....it's a HECK of a lot better than the 360's especially when you consider the emulator can support 1500+ titles (and growing) vs. the 150 or so on the 360 which 20 or so of them are also 360 games.....
Tim S 3rd July 2007, 19:07 Quote
I think the problem that many of us Europeans have (at least this is my perspective, but I don't think I'm in a minority) is the fact that Sony advertised 100 percent backwards compatibility on every PS3 yet when the PS3 arrived in Europe, it was no longer 100 percent backwards compatible. Microsoft never said backwards compatibility would be 100 percent so it's not so much of an issue, although of course I'm sure many Xbox/Xbox 360 gamers would love better backwards compatibility on their new console.
Bladestorm 3rd July 2007, 19:41 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandys
Why would you not be suprised? they are all trying to sell you something, they are not going to tell you yes, its going to be crap until our next release of hardware as you won't buy anything, Everyone wants to tell you it will be fine, Hardware manufacturers want to assure you that your new cards will be fine for the next gen DX10 games because you won't buy anything otherwise, if you buy it and these performance gains don't come, not their problem, it supports DX10 we never said how fast, you have to upgrade.

The game devs will tell you that the game will runs fine with almost anything you throw at it because they want you to buy the game, if it doesn't work well when you've bought it tough, turn the options down or you'll be expected to upgrade.

Vista didn't just come out yesterday, the RC was out what 18 months ago and was pretty solid, so hardware manufacturers have had more than 6 months to come up with something.

At least one of the developers that comes to mind is CCP games, developers of eve-online, who think DX10 is so big a "Paradigm shift" that it was worth hiring a lot of new graphics devs and making a whole new engine for from the ground up, they think its going to be something special and there is no extra money in it for them specifically, nor will they stop supporting the old engine (which still looks pretty good today, even though it was made 7 years ago)

Its in there interest to introduce new and improved graphics to attract and keep players, but if they didn't think it was going to be something special they'd only have bothered going with a new DX9 engine which would have a lot more potential customers.

Age of Conan is also doing DX10 from the ground up and if its just going to make the game harder to run it would be commercial suicide, since it would put a big limit on how many people can realistically play the game and thus subscribe.

Its groups like that which really have me convinced, not nvida or ati or microsoft or any of the FPS who often go on and on about graphics to the exclusion of gameplay anyhow.
devdevil85 3rd July 2007, 20:14 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim S
Microsoft never said backwards compatibility would be 100 percent so it's not so much of an issue, although of course I'm sure many Xbox/Xbox 360 gamers would love better backwards compatibility on their new console.
Which is sad Tim because as much as the 360 costs it doesn't offer much of any BC even when considering it's still using a normal DVD player and the Xbox games were DVDs. Honestly, in North America I guess, this gives the PS3 a huge advantage over the 360 because of it's lacking it. I understand again that M$ didn't say anything about it and that it's ok that it didn't come with it, but it seriously should've been there for the price you have to pay and considering Sony did it with their Blu-Ray drive, it's shouldn't have been that hard to include it with the 360, so I would assume.
Flibblebot 3rd July 2007, 20:50 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by devdevil85
...an upscalable DVD player (1080p for regular DVDs), a native 1080p DVD Player...
Unfortunately, recent research suggests that most console owners don't use their consoles for movie playback - only 13% of US owners said that they use their machines to watch movies. Worse still, only 30% of owners even knew their consoles could play movies. While Sony is touting the fact that PS3 is also a Blu-Ray player, current data suggests that PS3 owners buy considerably fewer movies than owners of dedicated players.
Flibblebot 3rd July 2007, 20:55 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by devdevil85
Which is sad Tim because as much as the 360 costs it doesn't offer much of any BC even when considering it's still using a normal DVD player and the Xbox games were DVDs. Honestly, in North America I guess, this gives the PS3 a huge advantage over the 360 because of it's lacking it. I understand again that M$ didn't say anything about it and that it's ok that it didn't come with it, but it seriously should've been there for the price you have to pay and considering Sony did it with their Blu-Ray drive, it's shouldn't have been that hard to include it with the 360, so I would assume.
But backwards compatibility has absolutely nothing to do with what optical drives the consoles use, and everything to do with the processors that they use.

Non-European PS3 achieved such high rates of backwards compatibility because they contained additional hardware (essentially a cut-down PS2) to enable them to do so; European models don't contain this hardware, so the emulation is done entirely in software (as it is with Xbox360)
sandys 3rd July 2007, 21:33 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flibblebot
Unfortunately, recent research suggests that most console owners don't use their consoles for movie playback - only 13% of US owners said that they use their machines to watch movies. Worse still, only 30% of owners even knew their consoles could play movies. While Sony is touting the fact that PS3 is also a Blu-Ray player, current data suggests that PS3 owners buy considerably fewer movies than owners of dedicated players.

Yup there is a distinct lack of information on what the PS3 can do unless you go an look for it, Sony would do themselves some favors by doing an educational ad rather than the abstract BS they have been putting out, sure it can play games people expect that, but half wouldn't understand what upscaling is let alone bluray and going online to buy games is voodoo to people like my brother, he came to me to build him a PC for games etc. a quick demo of my gentoo install doing all the stuff he needs and he is happily using his new PS3 as a fully fledged computer and games machine, using Ubuntu this time as its quicker to install and fine for web/email/msn and downloads, no worries about whether games will work etc and he can still get music for his mp3 player.

A lot of consumers don't get Hidef and don't understand why their flash LCDTV looks pants compared to there old TV with DVD/old consoles etc. so selling a tech heavy piece of kit like this to your average Joe is going to be difficult, consumers need some education to get it, thats what Sonys PR should be doing, the new promos for Bluray (5 free films etc) and hopefully some more good games after E3 will help push it further but they need to advertise its features, they'd probably sell a few bravias in the process :D , it is a machine to take you through the next 5-10 years of gaming and HD entertainment and has everything they'll come to appreciate, if they ever figure it out :D
devdevil85 3rd July 2007, 21:48 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flibblebot
But backwards compatibility has absolutely nothing to do with what optical drives the consoles use, and everything to do with the processors that they use.
Please explain further........because if Xbox games were DVD formatted and 360 games are DVD formatted how could the 360 not play the games?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flibblebot
Non-European PS3 achieved such high rates of backwards compatibility because they contained additional hardware (essentially a cut-down PS2) to enable them to do so; European models don't contain this hardware, so the emulation is done entirely in software (as it is with Xbox360)
And why are you repeating something that we already know.....?
devdevil85 3rd July 2007, 21:55 Quote
O yeah! Thanks sandys. Another thing to add to that list of things the PS3 can do over and beyond what the 360 Elite will allow and/or comes with in-box: You can use the PS3 as a computer (when you install a Linux OS); something you can't do on the 360 (legally I guess), so another plus, which I find to be freaking awesome when considering Ubuntu is FREE!
themax 3rd July 2007, 22:26 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flibblebot
But backwards compatibility has absolutely nothing to do with what optical drives the consoles use, and everything to do with the processors that they use.

Non-European PS3 achieved such high rates of backwards compatibility because they contained additional hardware (essentially a cut-down PS2) to enable them to do so; European models don't contain this hardware, so the emulation is done entirely in software (as it is with Xbox360)


My beef with everyone's sudden interest in BC with the PS3 is the fact that switching over to a software platform enables them to cut back on production costs; and also that over 60% of available PS2 titles work with the PS3 from the get go, but people just chose to listen to blind reporting anyway. It's not 100% of course, but they are working up to that. For the most part they made sure the top sellers on the system did work. They can get to the niche titles most don't play later; and who can blame them? Atleast they aren't getting Barbie to work first over bigger selling titles like MS did. They also rolled out their software emulation platform with a very strong BC list. But most, if not all, misreported that the new emulation meant most PS2 games wouldn't work, which was untrue; but people still ran with it. People still do today despite the Firmware updates that enable more games to work. They have probably made more headway into reaching that 100% than MS did getting to 50%.
devdevil85 3rd July 2007, 22:59 Quote
I seriously need to stop my PS3 praising because I know it's probably getting on people's nerves (and mine, too), but I must agree with sandys that Sony needs to try to do some explaining on what their system can do other than just assuming the consumer knows because at the price it is right now and with what the average consumer understands it will be very hard to sell the console without extrememly good games to outweigh the consumer's misunderstanding of everything else it does.
automagsrock 4th July 2007, 04:22 Quote
I own a PS3. I have a lot of great games for it. Most are ports of other titles, but then the titles like Resistance and Motorstorm really make me happy to own it. Both are great games and are a lot of fun single and multi-player wise as well.

I owned a 360. For 17 hours. In that time it stopped reading discs and also ran way too hot to be normal. I own a Wii and with those two consoles I have more then enough ways to entertain friends when they come over (Mario Party 8 anyone :) ). As an owner of a PS3 I laugh every time I read or hear someone who doesn't own one or has never played one bash on them. Most of the time it's pure ignorance that comes out of their mouths (no one here, you guys are all great. You guys actually know what you talking about. The dbag at gamestop makes me resent buying games there...) and all I can do is say "Do you own one?" When they say "Well, no, but..." I simply say "Well then what gives you the right to talk about a system you know nothing about?" I've never received more blank stares in my life.

I do agree. Sony does deserve a lot of what it receives in the form of criticism. They talked a big game and when it came down to it, they were below the bar. They could've been a little less cocky, I'll admit, but there's a lot to uncover with the PS3 still. Anyone remember the 360s launch? Anyone remember the Nintendo 64s launch? There's never been a "perfect" launch of a console (save maybe the Wii, that little rectangle is simply amazing) and yet people still pretend like one console did while another (or others) didn't.

I'm more then happy to be a proud PS3 owner and I will say it any day of the week. I love my system. It's great not only as a game machine (it's also been fun re-playing some of my PS2 and PS1 games since I don't wanna buy the memory card adapter) but I use it as a DVD player and Blu-Ray as well and I am more then happy with it in those respects as well.



So that's my rant. Sorry for length. Just throwing my $0.02 into the discussion :)
DougEdey 4th July 2007, 08:24 Quote
Whilst you have many valid points automagsrock, the problem is that here in the UK, we have been consistently insulted by Sony, and we don't like it when we get insulted.
Flibblebot 4th July 2007, 11:10 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by devdevil85
Please explain further........because if Xbox games were DVD formatted and 360 games are DVD formatted how could the 360 not play the games?
Because they use entirely different processors. The DVD is just a medium for storing the game code and data. PS2 games are also stored on DVD, that doesn't mean you can put them in a Xbox and play them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by devdevil85
And why are you repeating something that we already know.....?
I'm trying to explain part of the reason why Sony were able to achieve such high levels of backwards compatibility. I also imagine that Sony have built the emulation code into the console's firmware, something which (for whatever reason) Microsoft decided not to do.
completemadness 4th July 2007, 23:40 Quote
i have to agree with some of the members here, i don't think Sony is being attacked because its on top, but because of the number of crap things they've done, that have pissed off a lot of people

Personally, none of the consoles interest me, and the PS3 least of all (though i would probably say I'm most loyal to Sony of all 3) due to the high price tag
Ill stick with my PC thanks, there is nothing any of the consoles offer that the PC doesn't, whereas the PC offers much more then all the consoles combined
devdevil85 5th July 2007, 17:00 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by completemadness
Ill stick with my PC thanks, there is nothing any of the consoles offer that the PC doesn't, whereas the PC offers much more then all the consoles combined
Consoles offer more variety in games than PC, there is no need to upgrade for 3+ years just to play the newest titles and it's easier to play with friends and to take the console to friends' houses. Those things are pretty much the only things that consoles offer over PC gaming. PC gaming comes at it's price, but atleast you can be a year or two over what the consoles can do and make your console friends jealous when they see that DX10 game maxed out on a massive 30" monitor, and of course, if you do your homework and strategize in what you buy you could get a rig that could last 2-3 years easy for just under $1200 (and let's not go into everything else that PC's offer over consoles in terms of usability).
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums