I still remember sony saying the PS2 would be near-impossible to mod prior to launch
Go on then, one last Sony Vs 360 thread from me :p
As soon as Blu Ray-R or whatever the hell they call it becomes available, you can be sure that piracy and modchips will follow. In fact, with the HDD as standard, its possible that modchip makers would bypass the blu-ray drive entirely heh. Many people in the PS2 modchip scene just play the ISO's directly from the HDD anyway.
I still remember sony saying the PS2 would be near-impossible to mod prior to launch
I still remember sony saying the PS2 would be near-impossible to mod prior to launch
[quote="GONNAFISTYA"]You might as well have complained about the Mona Lisa right after Michelangelo painted the first two strokes of his brush.[/quote]
Re: Go on then, one last Sony Vs 360 thread from me :p
So you're the jealous xbot who made that crap up eh?o'dium wrote:Assasins Creed, that game many people are creaming over, well its true that its coming out on 360. Not only is it true, but the UbiSoft presentation of the Game at E3 that was claimed to be the PS3 footage was actually... Dumb da da... Running on an xbox with a standard USB pad. Funny that.
Second, Gran Turismo HD. Now while this game lacks any serious punch as it is (Because its a HD port), thats not the problem. However the problem is that, amazingly, this wasn't even running on a PS3. It was running on PC, using Beta code... Again, funny that.
Did you actually read that article?o'dium wrote:One last thing. This is to put an end to the "spec wars", and finally make you all see that the price of a PS3 over the 360 is indeed pointless. I mean first of all, the price to make a BluRay player is ONLY $100. Thats a HUGE mark upSecond, take a look at this spec comparison between the two consoles:
http://uk.xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p1.html
Well, it says they are both pretty much the same but the 360 takes a slight lead in GRAPHICS, which most normal people know.
We decided to put this Microsoft-provided information up undigested. Thus, enclosed is a Microsoft-made comparitive analysis. We have not altered, added, or tinkered with the data. We have not interpreted the specs. We have cut and pasted this information from the email into our site and formatted it. Make of it what you will, but be clear we know Microsoft has clearly slanted this info, and we're not endorsing it, just printing their version. There is a difference.
If the 1st-gen PS3 games do look almost the same as the 2nd-gen X360 games, I think that actually bodes pretty well for the PS3.
Also, unless MS lowers the price of the X360, the premium package with the HD-DVD add-on probably won't be cheaper than the PS3 (I don't see MS selling the HD-DVD add-on at $100 or lower), and it has a much smaller HDD than the $600 PS3 SKU.
Btw, I came across this yesterday: http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2006M ... 036216.htm :icon30:
That's exactly how I fee about MGS, toobrisk wrote:I'm probably in the minority, but I actually care more for the MGS storyline than I do the actual gameplay. Not that I think its lacking in gameplay either, but i've always thought of the MGS games as interactive movies heh.
Its a big franchise. Big enough to swing the "which system should I buy" vote for many people, including myself.
-
K-mart Shopper
- Posts: 93
- Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2002 8:00 am
So you're saying during Sony's press conference when the guy was showcasing GT HD's impressive load times... when the guy was going extremely slow through the menus to allow it to pre-cache (I can only assume)... that it was actually running on a PC?
Well, that's one way to demonstrate propietary hardware when their emphasis is on the PS3's sheer power.
Anyone see the guy playing Warhawk waving the controller around like he'd never played a game in his life? Yeah that was interesting, and absolutely oozed potential uses - they gave away rumble in exchange for crazy monkey movement.
Well, that's one way to demonstrate propietary hardware when their emphasis is on the PS3's sheer power.
Anyone see the guy playing Warhawk waving the controller around like he'd never played a game in his life? Yeah that was interesting, and absolutely oozed potential uses - they gave away rumble in exchange for crazy monkey movement.
Re: Go on then, one last Sony Vs 360 thread from me :p
Um, where have you seen that?zewulf wrote:If the 1st-gen PS3 games do look almost the same as the 2nd-gen X360 games, I think that actually bodes pretty well for the PS3.
lol, in other news:
Sony Executive Recommends Wii as Compliment to PS3
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2332
Get an PS3 for the Blu-ray player, and a Wii for the gaming.
Sony Executive Recommends Wii as Compliment to PS3
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2332
Get an PS3 for the Blu-ray player, and a Wii for the gaming.
You actually believe what odium posts, especially when it comes to Sony and the PlayStation?K-mart Shopper wrote:So you're saying during Sony's press conference when the guy was showcasing GT HD's impressive load times... when the guy was going extremely slow through the menus to allow it to pre-cache (I can only assume)... that it was actually running on a PC?
Well, that's one way to demonstrate propietary hardware when their emphasis is on the PS3's sheer power.
Anyone see the guy playing Warhawk waving the controller around like he'd never played a game in his life? Yeah that was interesting, and absolutely oozed potential uses - they gave away rumble in exchange for crazy monkey movement.
Word has it that the real reason Sony remove the rumble feature from the PS3 controller is because of the patent infringement lawsuit (filed by Immersion) that they lost. Saying having the tilt sensors means no more rumble motors is just a much nicer excuse.
The general consensus at this year's E3 is that graphically X360 and PS3 games look similar (i.e., one doesn't really look better than the other). But the thing is that most X360 games on display are 2nd-gen titles whereas the PS3 games on display are 1st-gen/launch titles.Grudge wrote:Um, where have you seen that?zewulf wrote:If the 1st-gen PS3 games do look almost the same as the 2nd-gen X360 games, I think that actually bodes pretty well for the PS3.
Although the X360 is smaller than the PS3, an X360 with the HD-DVD add-on will probably end up taking up more space than the PS3, so MS would be wise to integrate the HD-DVD drive into the system. But they'll be fragmenting their userbase either way.Grudge wrote:Imagine this: A new, slimmer and cooler running 360 with an integrated HD-DVD player bundeled with a HD-DVD version of Halo 3 featuring a ton of extra material being released in mid 2007. You can probably expect that being announced well in time for before the holiday season this year.
Dude... Your looking at it wrong.
Instead of saying "second wave and first wave" titles, you need to look at it like this.
In order to make the SECOND batch of 360 games, they ahve had the SAME time as the FIRST wave of PS3 games. In other words, they have been making Gears Of War for as long as they have been making Metal Gear 4.
Its unfair to compare, say, The Outfit (360) to MGS4 (PS3), when the outfit was VERY quick to make, comapred ot MGS4, which has been in development for a few years +1 for the delayed PS3 release.
So, Sony's "first gen" games SHOULD look nice, or the same. Simply because they have had much, much longer to work on them.
BTW, 360 games thus far released are still only using 13% of the power inside the 360. Its been said that games such as metal gear and Unreal Tourney 2007 are using upward of 70% (SEVENTY).
That, and the fact its waaaaay hard to code for (Even gives carmack head aches).
In other words, it just proves that both consoles are still gonna have the abbility to produce the same looking games. Simple as that. The gaps much much shorter than the PS2/Xbox gap. Its going to be so close you wont EVER notice it.
Instead of saying "second wave and first wave" titles, you need to look at it like this.
In order to make the SECOND batch of 360 games, they ahve had the SAME time as the FIRST wave of PS3 games. In other words, they have been making Gears Of War for as long as they have been making Metal Gear 4.
Its unfair to compare, say, The Outfit (360) to MGS4 (PS3), when the outfit was VERY quick to make, comapred ot MGS4, which has been in development for a few years +1 for the delayed PS3 release.
So, Sony's "first gen" games SHOULD look nice, or the same. Simply because they have had much, much longer to work on them.
BTW, 360 games thus far released are still only using 13% of the power inside the 360. Its been said that games such as metal gear and Unreal Tourney 2007 are using upward of 70% (SEVENTY).
That, and the fact its waaaaay hard to code for (Even gives carmack head aches).
In other words, it just proves that both consoles are still gonna have the abbility to produce the same looking games. Simple as that. The gaps much much shorter than the PS2/Xbox gap. Its going to be so close you wont EVER notice it.
Sure, MGS4 will most likely end up being a 2nd or even 3rd gen title on the PS3 (even though it'll be Kojima Production's first PS3 title), if it's released on schedule, but 1st and 2nd wave comparison is still quite valid, because X360's final dev kit has been out longer than the final PS3 dev kit. Final PS3 dev kits were not delivered to developers until only a few months ago.
It doesn't matter how long your game has been in development if you have no final hardware to really test how it runs, and X360 developers have had the advantage of testing their games on final hardware way before the PS3 developers could.
You can say MGS4 has been in development for as long as Gears of War has, or vice versa, but Epic has had the luxury of testing Gears of War on final X360 hardware since last summer (and it shows), while Kojima Production couldn't get MSG4 running on final PS3 hardware until only a few months ago.
It doesn't matter how long your game has been in development if you have no final hardware to really test how it runs, and X360 developers have had the advantage of testing their games on final hardware way before the PS3 developers could.
You can say MGS4 has been in development for as long as Gears of War has, or vice versa, but Epic has had the luxury of testing Gears of War on final X360 hardware since last summer (and it shows), while Kojima Production couldn't get MSG4 running on final PS3 hardware until only a few months ago.
-
+JuggerNaut+
- Posts: 22175
- Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 7:00 am
Re: Go on then, one last Sony Vs 360 thread from me :p
[quote="o'dium"][/quote]
Re: Go on then, one last Sony Vs 360 thread from me :p
o'dium wrote:Keep in mind that this thread is by "ME", so if your going to read it and then flame me for reading it, you have been warned...
Well, something happened at E3 that a few people dont want the public to know about. Check your local gaming sites for it, but...
Assasins Creed, that game many people are creaming over, well its true that its coming out on 360. Not only is it true, but the UbiSoft presentation of the Game at E3 that was claimed to be the PS3 footage was actually... Dumb da da... Running on an xbox with a standard USB pad. Funny that.
Second, Gran Turismo HD. Now while this game lacks any serious punch as it is (Because its a HD port), thats not the problem. However the problem is that, amazingly, this wasn't even running on a PS3. It was running on PC, using Beta code... Again, funny that.
One last thing. This is to put an end to the "spec wars", and finally make you all see that the price of a PS3 over the 360 is indeed pointless. I mean first of all, the price to make a BluRay player is ONLY $100. Thats a HUGE mark up
http://uk.xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p1.html
Well, it says they are both pretty much the same but the 360 takes a slight lead in GRAPHICS, which most normal people know.
Anyways, thats it, last thread i promise
Odium, you're a retard.