21. Once again. I'll have to state the obvious.

Just because it's free doesn't mean it's better. Poop is free. That doesn't mean it's better than gold. Sony doesn't charge directly for their service, because if they did, gamers would revolt and scoff at the notion of paying for something so substandard.

As for Sony not matching up "yet." That implies that they may one day match up. That's possible but not on the PS3.

Every game made on the 360 is designed to use xbox 360s built in system for accepting games invites and using chat. This is a core architecture that you cannot build in later. If you did try to build it later, all the initial games would not be compatible, which means you are left with what is definitively NOT a standard.

Because of this, every game ps3 has will use mechanisms of varying usability and performance, with varying UI, which basically leaves ps3 online gaming in a very hit and miss type of situation.

There is no "yet" for ps3. It's just about what they will manage to pull off for ps4. And by then... well, do you think Microsoft is sitting on their hands? Do you think the future of games is going to be less online than it is today? Do you think Sony will somehow manage to create a more compelling experience than Microsoft when Microsft will have been doing for years what sony has never even once accomplished?

And please, don't act as if you don't wish the ps3 had features like consistent multiplayer game invites across games, and global audio chat that works across games (even between different games), and gamer profile scoring and all the rest of the rich stuff that XBL does.

Hell, i wish the PS3 had those things. Maybe then I'd want to buy one. And I'll bet my last dollar if PS3 DID have those things, you'd be singing it's praises and saying how better implemented they are than the XBL way. Give me a break.

How can you call yourself a gamer? The only way to make the PS4 better is to let sony know that you expect more from them. But, no...you'll make excuses for them, sending them the clear message that they can release crap like the sofware they are now, in the future gens too. gg.

Posted at 12:17PM on Nov 21st 2006 by meh 0 stars

22. I meant to say failed medium... I was trying to say that Blu-Ray won't last as a popular format like the previous mediums I named... that's as articulate as I can get at 4am. :)

Posted at 12:35PM on Nov 21st 2006 by Joe 0 stars

23. "Every game made on the 360 is designed to use xbox 360s built in system for accepting games invites and using chat. This is a core architecture that you cannot build in later. "

you sir... are truly one of the larger idiots that has ever posted here. if you dont know, dont just make it up as you go along. sonys online service, just like xbl, is software... something VERY EASY to update. from there, its server side... something that has nothing to do with your ps3 or 360.

and man... please learn to read. i didnt state it was better. in fact, i stated the exact opposite in agreement with you. from there, as to what they plan with it later, there is no telling. neither you nor i have a roadmap of their future, and its guessing... just like you proclaiming it will never happen. you truly are clueless.

how can i call myself a gamer? pretty easily. i dont. im just a guy that knows what he likes, and thats all there is to it. i ENJOY playing the games the ps2/ps3 offers. (even what is out right now). thats all its about to me... i enjoy the games. i dont carry blind loyalty like yourself. is my opinion wrong? i beg you to show your stupidity even further by saying it is.

if you would read around, i have criticized sony. that was one of the first things i stated when i turned the system on. not up to par with xbl, and the marketplace is somewhat bare. but things will get better over time im sure. it needs work though. past that, my only other complaint so far is the usb cable on the controller... pretty flaky. other than that, i have no complaints. i love the way it is now. sure... there are things i personally would like to see (like a 200gb hdd standard, dual drives, dual hdmi outs, etc) but i am in the small small fraction of the minority on that one, and its just not feasible.



"And please, don't act as if you don't wish the ps3 had features like consistent multiplayer game invites across games, and global audio chat that works across games (even between different games), and gamer profile scoring and all the rest of the rich stuff that XBL does."

maybe you missed the part that i said i DONT play online that much. i could give two shits about invites, buddy lists, etc. to me, that is fucking BLOAT on the 360. but, some people use it. i personally dont use it... didnt with the 360 either. but again... what fucking part of I AGREE WITH YOU.. XBL > SONY ONLINE arent you fucking getting man? sonys online service needs work. thats the third or fourth time ive said it in this thread, and about the fifth on this site. please... for the love of fuck... READ YOU DUMBSHIT READ.

Posted at 12:46PM on Nov 21st 2006 by Microdot 0 stars

24. I think what is missed is the perspective from which the review was written. The New York Times has a specific target audience, and the review was written for them. It was not written for Sony fanboys, or gaming junkies - it was written for the average Joe. To that end, the review is probably accurate.

--*Rob

Posted at 1:36PM on Nov 21st 2006 by Rob Usdin 0 stars

25. Wow I can't believe the amount of misinformation about the competition being thrown around here. Then some of you PS3 fanboys dare call others uninformed?


This is sad...

Posted at 2:47PM on Nov 21st 2006 by BklynKid 0 stars

26. @Harry
Wow, you obviously have no clue. First mistake, as many others pointed out, all 360 games are on DVD9's, 9.4GB of space, not 4.7GB...
Second, you can have all the space in the world on a disc, but if you can only access it at half the speed as your competitor, it just means longer loading times. So incase you didnt know, Blu-Ray has HORRIBLE access times...so that 50GB dual layer BRD, waste of space, because you cant access it fast enough to pack it tight.
Third, 360 does not need a remote to play DVD's, it plays them right out of the box using the controller...sorry, but you loose there.
Also, as far as a web browser on my console...why would I want one? and if I did, I could just use the MCE Web Browser plugin with my MCE remote...plus I can stream music, movies, video, tv, etc from my PC to my 360 in the living room, can your PS3 do that?
and then we have the "linux" thing on PS3, which is useless, no access to the GPU (graphics processing unit for the uneducated) which means that there is no hope for anything beyond sprite animated homebrew games, where as on the 360 come December 11th, XNA Arcade opens up and the homebrew community is going crazy over it already!
So yes, while the PS3 has more computing horsepower, Sony has failed to bring any of the promises of being the killer console for the season. I'd wrather have a Wii than a PS3, because its innovative and new. The PS3 is just my PC in a smaller box, with a crappy interface and a horrible excuse for a browser. Talk to me in a year when Sony releases a decent OS and then maybe me and many others will concider the PS3 a decent console, until then, its just a pretty brick on your shelf. So name one thing that PS3 has done that the 360 hasnt done better? (and if you say a broswer, I swear I'll die of laughter)

Oh yeah, and your precious Blu-Ray has already been smacked for lower quality video:

High Def Digest reviewer Peter M. Bracke gave the definitive nod to the HD DVD:


"In our first head-to-head comparison, we found the HD DVD to be superior. The unfortunate cropping of the Blu-ray image, coupled with more noticeable compression artifacts and an overall darker cast, can't compete with the more consistently pleasing presentation of the HD DVD ... I must say, our first Blu-ray versus HD DVD comparisons continue to yield surprises. I wasn't expecting to see much difference in video quality between the two formats with 'Rumor Has It...', yet the two discs did bear noticeable differences, with the HD DVD boasting better detail and a more film-like look."
Bracke used the Samsung BD-P1000 Blu-ray player and a Toshiba HD-XA1 HD DVD player for the comparison, and said the Blu-ray version had more compression artifacts in the single-layer Training Day disc, was less bright, and was cropped on the sides, giving HD DVD the nod for superior picture quality. In the dual-layer Kiss Kiss Bang Bang disc, it was harder to tell the difference between the two formats, although the reviewer still gave a nod to HD DVD quality, as he did with the third title, Rumor Has It. So, round 1 goes to HD DVD. – Charlie White

So what now PS3? Oh whats that, the 360 HD-DVD also plugs into my PC? so I dont have to buy a HD-DVD drive for both systems, I can simply unplug it and plug it into my pc to use it there? Oh and my laptop too? Can the PS3 take its BRD out and plug it into my laptop for my next trip? NOPE, too bad...shame...

Posted at 8:53AM on Nov 21st 2006 by Seiggy 0 stars

27. Seiggy: "So what now PS3? Oh whats that, the 360 HD-DVD also plugs into my PC? so I dont have to buy a HD-DVD drive for both systems, I can simply unplug it and plug it into my pc to use it there? Oh and my laptop too? Can the PS3 take its BRD out and plug it into my laptop for my next trip? NOPE, too bad...shame..."


ummmm... no. why would i want to when i can share it out, and not have to tote it anywhere? no unplugging, no toting it around.


Seiggy: "plus I can stream music, movies, video, tv, etc from my PC to my 360 in the living room, can your PS3 do that?"

umm... yes. and run a web server. and run a mail server. and an ftp. and an office suite. and video editing. and nintendo, sega, etc emulators. and a graphics editor. and blogging tools. etc. the best part is... i dont have to hack my ps3 to do any of this. sony enabled this from the get go, and built in a nice tidy little tool for me to install whatever i wish.

you idiots are clueless. seriously. you have absolutely no idea WHAT you are talking about... and are now just making shit up as you go along. and my bet is youve never even laid hands on a ps3. all of your information is third party guessing, or just blatantly false. get a clue.

Posted at 3:36PM on Nov 21st 2006 by Microdot 0 stars

28. Wii is an arcade game. If you like to have fun, buy the wii. Wii actually has something new unlike PS#. Ps3 can't do anything more than the PS2. You can't bennifit from PS3 unless you have a 1080i tv. I think xbox 360 is the safest choice because it alsp has 1080i def, but cheaper, better online. There's no way to tell if blu-ray or HD-DVD will win. If HD-DVD wins, you will own a system that will not play movies, unless sony keeps making them just to satisfy ps3 owners. I have a ps3 and it is currently on ebay. When I played it, I thought I still owned a ps2. After 10 minutes of playtime, I turned it off and packed it into the box. I have a Wii, and cannot get enough. Nintendo knows what games are about. All ps3 is trying to do is get better graphics and really, who cares about better graphics. It may be a goal for them, but it's more fun to play games with cartoons, than real people. ALso, nintendos games are more fun and you actually move around. Ps3 doesn't have any innovation! The ps3 is just a PC with a blu-ray. It's not fun to play. Just get a Ps2 there's no difference in game play. XBox 360 and Wii are the only competetors. PS3 is competing with media center pc's, not game systms.

Posted at 1:07PM on Nov 21st 2006 by Jess 0 stars

29. yet one more drooling shitforbrains stating his/her opinion as fact. i fear for the future of this country... i really do.

Jess: "Wii actually has something new unlike PS#. Ps3 can't do anything more than the PS2. You can't bennifit from PS3 unless you have a 1080i tv."

making that up as you went along i see?

wii has something new? really? whats that exactly.... please.... PLEASE.. tell me what is new on that system. i owned the equivalent of the proc and gpu over 5 years ago. i owned the concept of the controller almost 10 years ago. dvd isnt new... sd cards arent new... what the hell else is there? or are you just another mindless follower, wallowing in the happiness that you are one of the "cool kids" now cause all the l33t guys have one? (and yes... i own one. purchased for my son for xmas)

what you meant to imply, but screwed up in the process, was that unless you have a 1080p tv, its useless. it would still be false, but you would look like you actually knew what you were talking about then. if you dont have an hdtv... guess what? ALL THREE SYSTEMS LOOK THE SAME, with the exception of the wii and its super spectacular shell shading.

Jess: "If HD-DVD wins, you will own a system that will not play movies, unless sony keeps making them just to satisfy ps3 owners."

again with the movies. heres a news flash... first and foremost, the ps3 is a gaming system. to achieve more room, higher def graphics, with the longer games that will be ahead, the developers need the space. and its being used. i would much rather get everything out of the game that the creator intended, than suffice with only what they were able to fit onto the disc (which is what is happening now... cod2 is the poster child for this argument) - the fact that it could play movies as well, is a bonus. if you bought one ONLY to play movies... you are an idiot.


Jess: "Nintendo knows what games are about."

that explains why they have sold so well for the last 8-10 years, and been so popular with the hardcore gaming group.

oh... wait. nevermind.



Jess: "All ps3 is trying to do is get better graphics and really, who cares about better graphics."

umm... me. every other person that bought a ps3 to play. 7 million people that bought a 360. the few hundred million that purchased the ps2. every gamer thats ever bought a newer, bigger, better video card for their computer. every person thats ever purchased an hdtv. etc. the mass population wants bigger and better. if they didnt... we would all be using 486 computers, and watching black and white tv's. sure... its fun to be nostalgic and sit down with the old 2600 or nes and play a few rounds... but its not my typical bag. but, its understood... not EVERYONE wants bigger and better. my granddad is like that. i can relate. he can afford a new car, but he likes his 79 model caddy. you may not want better graphics... thats fine. stick with your wii and be happy. just realize you arent necessarily the majority here. :)



Jess: "It may be a goal for them, but it's more fun to play games with cartoons, than real people."

more opinion stated as fact. i outgrew cartoons about 20 years ago. thanks though.



Jess: "ALso, nintendos games are more fun and you actually move around."

when i want to move around... i go outside. :)



Jess: "The ps3 is just a PC with a blu-ray. It's not fun to play. Just get a Ps2 there's no difference in game play."

just a pc with blu-ray.... interesting. pretty close. i'll let that one slide. no difference in gameplay over the ps2??? hahahahaha now i know that you are full of shit. you havent touched a ps3... admit it. if you had, you would know there was a difference. the most immediate noticeable difference being the implementation of the sixaxis. but if you are trying to get broad with that statement.... why not. all of them plug into your tv, and you interact with it and the picture changes on the tv. its been done before. its soooo not a new idea. why buy any of them? /dumb



so... are you done with your opinions now? you like the games on the wii. good for you. you found one that works for you. enjoy. i however, dont like the wii. to me, it doesnt offer what i want out of a console, or even come close to it. but then moving into the games... it doesnt even brush the surface of what i would like to play. i want to play final fantasy... can the wii give me that? how about lair? got that? metal gear solid? no? hmm... how about something simple like a 20 player deathmatch in resistance... or hell... ANY fps? anything? no?

again... these are all opinions. the wii works for you. good. it doesnt for me. doesnt for my group of friends (who are scattered between ps3's and 360's... we all had 360's, but about half of us got tired of the constant hardware problems, and ditched them) and the ps3 DOES have what i want to play, and has what i want from a console. so thats what i bought.

Posted at 4:42PM on Nov 21st 2006 by Microdot 0 stars

30. Jesus Christ you Sony fanboys are naive!! Haven't you learned that it isn't the hardware that decides which system is #1.. but the software, developers, and most importantly.. the consumers???? Xbox was a superior machine to playstation 2.. did consumers decide it was the number console...NO!!!

You wanna run your mouths about all the bells and whistles the PS3 has and how inferior a system like the Wii is when the fact of the matter is this.. if a system only appeals to Hardcore Gamers and is not assessible by the general public.. what the hell good is it??

Who gives a rats ass about surfing the internet or playing $30 Blu-ray discs that haven't even caught on with the general public. In addition.. discussion from developers are clear that it is a misconception in the public's eyes that ps3 is more powerful than xbox 360. From the stand point of developers, both machines are equal as far as hardware needed to make great next-gen titles. It all boils down to what developers are able to utilize out of each machine. To say that Sony will win because you are a hardcore gamer that bought into the hype doesn't mean that the mass consumers (which are mainly made up of CASUAL GAMERS) will adopt your theories.

PS 2 was a game console and a dvd player when the average household didn't have one. Plus being able to play playstation 1 titles... they had a huge library of games to start. Things are not so cut and dry this time. This time you are dealing with NEW technology that is FACT that most comsumers have not even adopted movies that resolute high definition and are content with dvd's (the average household doesn't even own HD televisions yet).

Second.. Sony is trying to have an all-in-one system (play games, surf the net, play blu-ray movies) nobody cares about all this shit.. bottom line.. we just want to play games. Most everyone has access to a computer.. home, work, school, library.. etc.. why would I need a ps3. Blu-ray movies are a gamble... does anyone care??? Just get me the games.. Hence the term VIDEO GAME CONSOLE!!!

Wii, may not have all the bells and whistles.. but you can't deny that it has MASS appeal geared toward the GENERAL PUBLIC!! Xbox 360 was designed to be FLEXIBLE and give us options!! How dare you say your over priced piece of crap ps3 is the standard... not from where most people stand!! (CASUAL GAMERS!!!!)

If you watch the news at all.. then you know that the majority of people that bought one were only looking to capitalize on making a profit on ebay. Wake up!! No one is jealous or concerned about your beloved PS3!! It sucks!! Have fun with your cross platform launch titles, I've already beaten a good portion of them on my 360. Yes I am a fanboy of xbox and nintendo.....because if you're talking PS3....I know junk when I see it!!

Posted at 7:11PM on Nov 21st 2006 by People\'s voice 0 stars

31. will there be a ps3 wireless adaptor

Posted at 7:55PM on Nov 21st 2006 by bs6268d 0 stars

32. Guess what people's voice? Go to metacritic and see Gears of Wars and Resistance scores. I'm not talking about the paid by Microsoft reviews, I'm talking about the PEOPLES VOICE. Users have rated resistance a whole lot better than Gears. Could it be because you can't even perform a simple action like "jumping" on Gears of War? Could it be because Gears of War is nothing more than beautiful graphics? Or perhaps because Resistance's online gameplay is much better than any other game that graced any Xbox console? Yeah, 40 players at the same time. I'm not going to say "better storyline" because that's about choice, but there's no question that Resistance with its wide variety of weapons, even if not "like gears" but still great graphics, and immense multiplayer scenarios (not to mention a longer campaign) give it the edge. People's voice FTW!!

Just for the record, Metacritic is owned by C-Net, the same site that owns Gamespot; you know, the site that gave 9.8 to Gears, 9.6 to GTA: San Andreas despite, in their own words, "Archaic Gameplay", and 8.8 to Zelda. LOL. Trust the people, not C-net, much less Gamespot.

Microdot, FTW

You know why would you want to buy a PS3 before a 360? Let's start: The HDD doesn't fail, as it doesn't have to be propietary. The HDD is much bigger. The mandatory HDD allows for a better gaming experience, same thing with blu-ray. The extra dough for the system is well worth it as you can do anything that the 360 does right now, and a lot more; don't listen to NY Times, as they evidently don't know anything about "backwards compatibility", "Linux" or "firmware updates". You can do it all NOW. Everything NYTimes whines about is not only about the least necessary features of a barely released console, but it doesn't go on to the features that are lacking (and will always be) on a 360.

Again, it's all the games, right? PS2 and PS1 games are compatible, both own everything the 360 has to offer. PS3 games? I just told you why Resistance is better. Don't listen to the press that has been already paid for to inflate grades; play the game yourself, listen to other gamers (the ones that voted C-net wrong), and know why Resistance is already better than anything 360 has to offer.

In the close future, the upcoming PS3 titles are about variety, while Xbox 360 is again gathering the same types of games as the first Xbox. A little action here and there, a few Western RPGs (yawn), too many FPS. Only hope is Lost Odyssey and Blue Dragon. If you want a bunch of games like that though, you'll have to buy a PS3.

Game over, Xbox fanboys. Go play Prey, Alan Wake, Halo, Lost Planet and Gears of War. Shooters. lol. Oh, and some more western RPGs, like Fable 2 and Mass Effect, yay!

Posted at 12:20AM on Nov 22nd 2006 by lol 0 stars

33. "Howard Stringer, you have a problem. Your company's new video game system just isn't that great. Sony blithely insisted that the PS3 would leapfrog all competition to deliver an unsurpassed level of fun. Put bluntly, Sony has failed to deliver on that promise."

how is it possible to leapfrog all the competition when everyone is reusing the same old tired ass gameplay. i have come to the conclusion that people who make games dont play games. they are a bunch of programers who are told how to tweak gameplay based on a survey of random 12 year olds.

i certainly havent seen anything that makes me think that spending hundreds of dollars on a console is worth it. the uniformity imposed on you with a console limits what you can do to fix the gameplay. you can just do more with a pc (not that there are any good games on the horizon for the PC either, does anyone know what blizzard is up to?)

Posted at 1:15AM on Nov 21st 2006 by doglet 0 stars

34. Microdot,

If the PS3 is so much fun to play and so awesome, what are you doing spending so much time on here engaging in meaningless fanboy pedantry? Get gaming!

Posted at 5:01AM on Nov 22nd 2006 by Dirk Dorkelson 0 stars

35. Dirk: "If the PS3 is so much fun to play and so awesome, what are you doing spending so much time on here engaging in meaningless fanboy pedantry? Get gaming!"

this week, i have put roughly 48 hours on it already. i do have to come to work at some point.

Posted at 9:24AM on Nov 22nd 2006 by Microdot 0 stars

36. Why are these posts so emotional? People act like it is impossible to like more than one console or format. Any rational person can find something to like about any console. Unless you have a really tight budget why not get all three consoles and be happy for this whole generation of gaming. If you are on a budget you should be out MAKING MORE MONEY instead of playing games and posting. I've been gaming on every console since NES & Master system. Just because a system doesn't sell the most doesn't mean it isn't fun or worth the money. Games are about the fun or challenge you get playing them but some of you guys are way too angry about what everyone else is playing to see that.

Posted at 10:45AM on Nov 22nd 2006 by Boxkutta 0 stars